The Divine Image (1)

 

The Kuzari and the Rambam

 

At the end of the section discussing the divine attributes [2:2], Rihal mentions two specific attributes: "wise of heart" and "courageous in power" (Job, 9,4).  Courageous in power is clearly a description of action.  "Wise of heart," Rihal claims, demonstrates that "intellect is His essence."

 

     It seems that a similar belief is to be found in the Rambam's writings.  Indeed, the first chapter of section one in the Guide For the Perplexed is dedicated to the clarification of the concept of the "divine image."  However, as we shall see below, there is a fundamental difference between Rihal and the Rambam.  Loyal to his theory of divine names, the Rambam negates even this similarity and accepts the definition only after interpretation and qualification.

 

     The Rambam begins by clarifying a point which is clear to us all in our day; that the term "divine image" does not refer to man's physical form, but to his essence, which is the intellect.  Man is in the image of God because he has an intellect.  It would seem that this approach fits in well with Rihal's attitude.  However, the Rambam continues to elaborate on this idea.  He  writes:

 

Man was made unique in an area in which he is very strange, which cannot be found in any other creature under the moon; I refer to the intellectual perception which does not make use of any sense or action of the body or of hand or foot.  [God] made him similar to the perception of the Creator which does not go through a medium, and if this is not a true similarity, it nevertheless appears so to the mind at first.

 

     This comment of the Rambam's comes to help us avoid a mistake.  It would seem that the concept of the "divine image" means that there is a similarity between man and God.  However, here the Rambam puts up a warning sign.  God's perception is not like man's perception and there is a tremendous gulf between the two.  The philosophers' tendency was to compare the two essences and speak of God in the image of man's perception.  Although they did assume that there was a distance between them, they understood that God's mind was merely a more complete form of man's mind, in quantity or quality.  This is the rationalist philosophy.  The Rambam claimed that between man and God there is an essential and fundamental difference and that they are not to be compared at all.  There is a similarity, but this similarity can only be described by a process of elimination.  What characterizes the human mind?  It is unique in the world.  The human mind is something completely different from all other things that exist "under the moon."  It is strange and foreign in this world.  Man and God share this strangeness.  They are similar in their very uniqueness and difference from everything else!  There is but a weak analogy between man and God, which allows us to compare them only through negative aspects.  Both are different from all other existing things.  This negative similarity touches the limit of what we are permitted to say.  It is interesting therefore to state, that according to what we read in the first chapter of the Guide For The Perplexed, the Rambam did not accept Rihal's opinion that the "intellect is the essence" of God.  Perhaps here we are faced with one of the places that are sidetracks in Rihal's thought; perhaps these are even the remnants of what could be termed his philosophical first drafts.

 

The Uniqueness Of The Intellect

 

What is unique about the human mind, which makes it so very different from everything else that exists in the world?  Many people simply deny this uniqueness.  Their immediate reaction is to claim that the intellect is merely a conglomeration of processes that take place in the human brain.  The Rambam from his perspective can easily attack this claim and prove that the actions of the intellect cannot be explained through the actions of the brain.  In our times, we can describe this through a simple example: we cannot explain the telephone operator through the central operating station, or the engineer through the computer, despite the fact that they use them.  The reality of the intellect is a totally different reality; it is an abstract reality.  The human intellect is self-contained and creates a reality inside itself.  It constitutes, according to the Rambam, a kind of wondrous camera which does not need film to record images.

 

     The uniqueness of man lies also in the immortality of the soul.  Someone could destroy the telephone switchboard, or cut the wires and leave the operator with no connection on the outside, yet unhurt.  Before us is a totally independent reality which does not rely on physical, chemical or biological implements, as the Rambam says: "which does not make use of any sense or action of the body or of hand or foot."  This abstract quality, not an attribute in its own right, but in essence a common lack of a particular attribute, is what man and God share.

 

The Garden Of Eden

 

     In the first chapter of the Guide For The Perplexed [1:1], the Rambam discusses the issue of the "Garden Of Eden."  This interpretation is important not only because of the importance of the subject, but also because it is an example of a philosophical interpretation of the Scriptures. 

 

     Our starting point will be a legend from the world of Greek mythology, the story of the discovery of fire.  Prometheus is a Titan, a cross between a man and a god.  He feels sorry for the humans, and steals fire from the gods to give it to the people.  The world of the humans is cold, hard and dark until Prometheus brings the redeeming fire from the heavens.  The idea of this legend is that in giving the fire, Prometheus peforms an action which is against the will of the gods, and he is therefore punished.  The gods are "jealous," they don't "give the people a break."  They keep the fire for themselves, because they don't want the people to enjoy it as they do.  For us, fire is the basic tool and the classic symbol of human technology.  And perhaps it is not their jealousy, but their fear which guides them.  Perhaps, the gods feared that people might be able to use their technology to enter the sphere of the gods, and demote them from their status.  According to this, science and technology are a provocation to the gods.

 

     As we have seen before, there is a system which has made Prometheus its symbol: Marxism.  Prometheus appears there as a symbol of the man who reaches his goal through struggle and rebellion against the gods and against religion.  From their perspective, the provocation was positive, the symbol of man conquering nature.  This is the same Prometheus who proved himself in the atomic reactor in Chernobyl.

 

     In light of this approach, we can understand the symbolic significance of fire in Jewish law and lore.  The Friday night candle is the symbol of holiness, joy and spirituality.  In contrast, fire is the symbol of human technology.  The prohibition against kindling a fire ends on Saturday night in a blessing over a kind of torch, over fire and technology.  The blessing of Saturday night means that man does not steal the fire.  He makes a blessing over it every Saturday night because God gave it to man in His benevolence.

 

     It is impossible to explain the story of the Garden Of Eden as a description of divine jealousy.  However, it is accepted to interpret it as hinting at the danger and pain that originate from wisdom.  Many people have read the text in this way.  This interpretation follows us to this day: is science a dangerous treasure?  We live in a period of genetic discoveries - is this activity positive or will it create a new  danger to second the atom bomb?  Genetic engineering can be dangerous not only because of its biological results but also because - and here we get into science fiction - it can create a way for despots to transform humanity into a flock of slaves.  Is the alternative to live in a paradise of fools, where the central condition is really not to know?  Or perhaps we must understand the account of the Garden Of Eden differently.  The sentence upon the world of science and technology therefore lies in one's explanation of the story.

 

     The Rambam suggests a different interpretation.  He believed in the basic covenant between Torah and intellect.  Man was created in the divine image, and this means that his intellect did not come into being as a result of the sin.  The Rambam developed his enlightening interpretation in the Guide For The Perplexed, particularly in the second chapter of the first section.  He writes as follows:

 

Many years ago a learned man asked me a wonderful question, and it is worthwhile to look at the question and its answer.  It seems from a simple reading of the text that the original intention was that man should be like the other animals without a mind or an intellect and would not be able to differentiate between good and evil, and when he rebelled ... his rebellion brought him perfection.

 

     This questioner assumed that the gift of the intellect was a result of the sin. 

 

The Rambam refused to accept the questioner's perception.  He explained the "divine image" as referring to the intellect.  Man is the only creature who has a dialogue with God.  This dialogue takes place based on the assumption that man is free and has an intellect.  Man faces the conflict and choice between the divine command and the snake.  The very fact that man faces the test, means that the possibility of sin exists, and therefore so does logic and freedom.  He can decide and he must decide.

 

     The Rambam is teaching us a basic principle in biblical exegesis.  We must not read the Scriptures in the same way that we read a story or a poem.  We must look more deeply into it.  The tree of knowledge of good and evil did not grant man his intellect.  In order to understand this, we must distinguish between two types of evil.  We must distinguish between the "knowledge of good and evil" and the "knowledge of truth and falsehood."  What is the difference between them?  We must search for a solution in the Scriptures.  Truth and falsehood were realities in man's consciousness even before the sin.  But what is the good and evil that they discover?  This we must learn from the rest of the story.  Man discovers the meaning of shame.

 

     The Rambam teaches us that the knowledge of truth and falsehood refers to objective knowledge, such as mathematical knowledge.  In contrast, in other areas, such as esthetics, there is no such objective reality.  The first knowledge, that of the Garden of Eden, was in the area of objective knowledge.  After the sin, man fell to the area of subjectivity.  This is the meaning of the eating of the fruit.  The consumption of the forbidden fruit taints our world view with subjectivity and our vision becomes distorted.  The Mussar teachers explain this taint of subjectivity with a pithy example.  If we place a small coin over our eye it can hide the supplicant's face.  Our interests are represented by the Tree of Knowledge.

 

     We must realize that wisdom and science are constantly in danger of falling under the snake's influence, and are in danger of being guided by personal desires and selfish interests.  Only when man overcomes these and reaches an objective viewpoint, can he discover the truth and free himself.  Knowledge is freedom; however, there is a different kind of knowledge, a subjective knowledge that endangers both man and the world.

 

 

(This lecture was translated by Gila Weinberg.)