Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed - Rabbi Dr. David Gottlieb

[Music] this evening's effort is to create a square circle the rum's guide is one of the greatest works of philosophy ever produced anywhere by anyone everybody agrees to that not only did it have a major impact on Jewish thinking does to the present day but it was translated into Latin and it was read in Europe and it had a strong influence on the development of Christian religious thinkers a couple of years ago I spent a year going through through it with a Kusa now of course it's written in Arabic so we are at the mercy of translations and we were working with five different translations our assumption was what the rights has to make sense so if a certain translation rendered in such a way it didn't make sense we look for another translation see if it made more sense obviously I can't comment on the original Arabic um but uh it is a g gigantic Masterpiece a gigantic Masterpiece it doesn't need my saying so just been to it a number of times I wrote a philosophical index to the to the motor which can get online anyway um what I would like to do is just give you a couple of thoughts about the comant and then take you through the first two chapters as best I can to give you taste of what the does I remember when I was in secular High School um reading history they had a list of 12 people in the history of the world each of whom mastered everything his culture had to teach they simply learned everything there was to learn in their culture and was one of them even recognized by go um his encyclopedic knowledge and his power of of analysis and his originality to take the entire T and organize it in his own original way including all the laws that aren't practiced by which other Ron were very uh sparse and to pasan them all and to set them up in a brand new format in addition to writing the parnas and and the Mur and sister sematic essays on important topics um then some works on medicine I mean and he says you should sleep seven or eight hours a night I don't know if he took his own advice but if he did you know fact that he could could could accomplish what he accomplished in his in one lifetime is is just astonishing now um theim is addressed to a particular person particular student and others like him who studied personally with the RAM and then had to go away so they said I fill in with the missing material with with a book and the student was not adequately prepared why was he not adequately prepared because he hadn't studied physics that is to say the physics of 900 years ago because he wasn't adequately trained in natural science so he wasn't ready to receive the rambam's teaching even so the ram wrote the book for him but he says the introduction you're handicapped because you didn't know that so it's interesting to know that knowing how the physical world works one word or another is a perquisite of getting what the wants to teach the first 50 chapters are devoted to someone who's seriously worried about whether or not God has a body and he goes through all of the terms the major terms in the tanak which seem to indicate whether that God has a body and he explains how they should be understood his methodology is very strict you can only say a word means X on any occasion if there are some occasions in which the word clearly means X in the text that you are dealing with the text is the and for example a heart is a pump that pumps a liquid to various destinations you can have a heart made of Flesh you can have a heart made of steel you can have a heart made of rubber but you going talk about a heart for so you and you say oh well there of course it doesn't mean pH doesn't mean something physical you can't just say that can't wave your hands and say it's not physical you have to find a place where the word heart is used for something that's not physical clearly and then you can say here too it's used for something that's not physical otherwise you can't do that now there's a p that talks about the heart of the heavens and that's not talking about a pump there are no pumps in the heavens that pump liquids around so obviously means the center most important fundamental and then that can be borrowed for for other things as well he at the end of the first book he has a review of the major streams of Arabic philosophy that existed in his time and he points out what their goals are and how their arguments work and their serious shortcomings and explains how his efforts are going to be different from theirs he argues for the existence of God on two grounds either the world has a beginning or it doesn't if the world is a beginning then there has to be something that gave it the beginning and you get to God quick and easy but as he says the Arabic philosophers thought they could produce a good argument the world has a beginning and he said their arguments are weak and that's where you stop you haven't got any more strength for your conclusion than your the strength for your argument that the world is a beginning and those arguments are very weak so he said I'm going to prove God exists even if the world has no beginning now of course if it has no beginning then we're not talking about Creator talking about a Creator but there's something that's responsible for how it operates and and it's the laws that govern it and how things grow and develop and the way in which it it's developing what it's going to develop into and that thing from that point of view can also be called God so either way you get into argum for God he says that several times in the in the mor and says that's what he was doing in the Miss Tor as well um though he's been misunderstood and people say that he's artian when he says explicitly he's not an aristan and he he rejects Aristotle over and over again and in some places he says I'm going to tell you what Aristotle said I'm going tell you what's written in the T tell you what said so that we can distinguish the parts of Aristotle that are acceptable because they agree with the T and the and the parts of have to be rejected because they don't agree with our sources very simple and by the way I was thrilled to find that the St for encyclopedia philosophy Which online is a very very good source for the Contemporary positions in philosophy and all across the field and they have an article on the rum um and the art author of that article who is a secular philosopher happens to be Jewish um writes that the r was not an aristan I was very happy to see that means that somebody took the care to get it right and then he rate that the end of the first book is a review and the second book beginning second book is that demonstration then he deals with Divine Providence and great length going through five different theories that are found in the Ancients and in in the modern philosophers and he points out what's wrong with them and exactly how the Jewish view Works um as as of the Book of Job what's what's to be learned from The Book of Job beginning of the third book he does an analysis of the Book of Ezekiel what's called in in literature the account of The Chariot and he writes uh I've discover he writes this I don't know what it means I I have no tradition as to what it means our traditions on this matter were lost Exile and persecution caused to lose a great deal of what was part of je ancient Jewish wisdom I've studied it and I I think I have understanding of it I had no teacher I could be wrong he writes R's humility comes out many times in the m i could be wrong but if I just let it die with me then I will not fulfill my obligation of passing on to others what could be the real teaching other you're not allowed to teach it in in in in the open other places say you can't do that so I'm going to explain the first several chapters of the Book of Ezekiel and you may very well as you read what I write think that I'm just saying over what is he says I'm just repeating the words that there in the book that's right you might very well think that that's what I think I've read it I don't know a dozen times I'm going to clue what he wants I'm going to clue what he's hidden in there he's hidden something in there it's too too too hidden for me to pick out he's the way he did it he's giving away all the secrets but only for a person who can penetrate to see that the secrets are there I'm not one of those people the second half of the third book is his account systematic account of the reasons for the Commandments um and he goes to a an encyclopedic review of The Commandments in several places he says I don't know how this one works I don't know what the reason for that is some places he speculates he say I've had find any sources I my guess is that it works this way and for the vast majority he has well worked out reasons for the Commandments this is the basic outline of the of the guide although there I've left out quite a number of things now though is very careful about language very careful about tanak very careful about what counts an interpretation what doesn't the difference between the the prophets and the Books of Moses uh and he has well articulated principles fors throughout he has scattered remarks about science and many of them are very up to dat uh the picture that the medievals were full of superstitions and had no sense of objectivity is simply I don't know all the other medievals but was certainly wrong um and he his principles of how to treat treat science in scientific terms are are in the text now um also a considerable amount of mus that means ethical instruction is present both in the way in which he interprets Commandments or the way in which he interprets verses but also his own methodology and that's something we're going to see this evening so I'm going to take you through the key points for this purpose in the first two chapters of the the guide and if you're going to look up the guide in English uh there are two standard translations one is by by fell Freelander who taught at Jews College in London and I think the first divition came out 1894 and the second divition came out 1904 1907 it's free on the on the net because there's a limit to copyrights that's the better translation the more modern one celebrated from the uh univers of Chicago press came came out in the 60s and written by a professor of the Hebrew University with a long introduction by Leo Strauss is much worse much worse so if you're going to look at it in English U you can get this free on that or or it's it's in print it's in print and bound bound fashion and uh this is the one that uh that you should use the first point he makes in the book is the the word selum the famous verse in Genesis says that God created us in his sellum some people are misled to think that the word cellum has something to do with pictures in fact the modern Hebrew word for camera is a mat which means a machine that makes and tellum there is obviously picture but that is simply a mistake in the Biblical Hebrew tum has no visual connotations you will not find a single verse in the entire T where refers to a picture another word that's used in describing how we are related to God is Deus says Deus comes with the word do which means similar similar means sharing any quality whatsoever could be essential quality or toally inessential quality quotes a p fromi says I am like do to a pelican in the wilderness say the prophet does not have feathers and doesn't stand at one leg doesn't eat fish you know doesn't fly with wings he's lonely like a pelican in the wilderness Sol Wilderness is solid solitary and lonely and then love he saying I'm lonely also to say that we are we have a Dion we're do to God means there's something we have in common so has nothing to do with the physical form s means something essential something essential something which is crucially important something which helps Define the nature of a thing but again it has absolutely no visual connotations so when it says that God made us with his form it had nothing to do with a visual connotation the ra says that for the human being sellum is intelligence because now I'm going to put in some words which I'm elaborates on part one chapter 54 later on in the book we don't don't talk about God we can't understand anything about God we only have how he relates to us how he presents himself to us in our world and the key essential element that he presents in the world is that of an intelligence so we also have intelligence and that's not just a Dion but it is AUM because it is essential to us and and it is the heart of the image that he projects into the World by which we know him or maybe the word image isn't right the representation that he projects into the World by which we know him so when it says that God made us in his that means that he gave us intelligence that's basically part of chapter one that I wanted now chapter two starts as follows some years ago a learned man asked me a question of great importance in the Hebrew the Hebrew translation the word is the problem and the solution which we gave in our reply deserve the closest attention before however entering upon this problem at solution I must premise just throwing something you need to know now when the something like that you know the red lights start to light up I'm just throwing something in R doesn't just throw anything in he puts this premise in it means it's absolutely crucial and as you'll see this premise thrown in casually at the beginning is is necessary to defend himself against an objection which would otherwise would have crushed his argument every Hebrew that is to say every speaker of the Hebrew language knows that the term Elohim as a honm it has several different meanings it can refer to God it can refer to Angels it can refer to the judges and rulers of countries and Ulus from whom we have the Aramaic translation of the Torah he was a Roman convert to Judaism and the rambam has gigantic respect foras he writes about him several times in the guide with the greatest of of honor the greatest of praise and in one place where he can't follow what unus is doing he writes to his student please check the manuscripts you have in your place maybe my manuscripts are wrong maybe we've got the wrong translation and then the problem will go away and if not it says God should enlighten me I don't know what he meant he does not say that he's wrong and is not shy doesn't like what somebody says no hesitation in saying that he's wrong but for Uncle he has the highest the highest regard and he says the prite the G the convert explained in the true and correct manner by taking Elohim in the sentence and you shall be like Elohim this is what the snake said TOA and that I'm going to modify as we go on as you'll see what the snake said TOA you shall be like Elohim OAS translated that you shall be like rulers not like God but like rulers or princes okay that's just you should know the word Elohim has has three different usages and in that verse when the snake says to you'll be like Elohim it means rules or princes having pointed out the homity of the term Elohim we return to the question under consideration here's the claim that this critic made this wise man it would at First Sight said the objector appear from scripture that man was originally intended to be perfectly equal to the rest of the animal creation look at the verses that describe man's creation it looks like he's no better than a dog or a cow he's the equal of the animal creation why which is not endowed with intellect reason or the power of distinguish good and evil because what does he say to him don't eat from the Tree of knowledge good and evil meaning you don't have that knowledge only eating for the tree gives him that knowledge so when he's created he doesn't have the knowledge of Good and Evil then he's like a cow like a horse and Adam's Disobedience to the command gave him that great Perfection which is unique of man the power of distinguishing between good and evil the noblest of all faculties of our nature the essential characteristic of the human race it does appears strange that the punishment for rebelliousness should be the means of elevating man to a pacle of perfection to which he had not attained previously this was the subject of the question that he asked though not the exact words that he used okay now think of the verses it does say he was created and it is don't eat from the tree because that tree gives the knowledge of Good and Evil which does imply that he didn't have the knowledge of Good and Evil and our more sense of what's right and wrong what's good and evil just and unjust is definitely a key element that distinguishes us from animal so this objector took it straight and said it seems that man was created equivalent to the animals and only by the result of his Rebellion does he get this great distinction of being able to know moral Concepts and qualities Mark our reply which was as follows you appear to have studied the matter superficially and nevertheless you imagine that you can understand a book which has been the guide of the past and present Generations when you for a moment withdraw from your lusts and appetites your orgies for a moment you withdraw from your orgies and glance over its contents as if you were reading historical work or some poetical composition collect your thoughts and examine the matter carefully for it is not to be understood as you first think but as you'll find after to doe deliberation he's ranking this guy out he's shoving his face in the mud why is he doing that he calls him wise learn it the Hebrew that the Hebrew translation says you're and and I'm telling you you're so addicted to your lusts to your desires that you can't read something seriously you're wise you're smart you're educated and you can't read something seriously because you're addicted to your lusts and appetites why does say that and is he giving us a hint as to who should read his book chapter 2 who should read the rest of the book who be qualified to read the rest of the book what's the truth the intellect which is granted to man as a highest endowment was bestowed upon him before his disobedience how do we know that that's what he said in chapter one he said in chapter one that man was created in God's tum tum he says has nothing to do with pictures tum has to do with some essential quality essentially important defining who you are and he said that that's the intellect so when the Torah said that it was that man was created with man tell him you're a wise person you're an educated person you're a smart person you should have been able to figure that out the man had intellect beforehand and therefore man couldn't possibly be on on a level of the animals and only attain his unique Greatness by virtue of Disobedience with reference to this gift the Bible states that man was created in the salum of God now second argument on account of this gift of intellect man was addressed by God and received his Commandments as it is said I sh the Lord God Comm commanded Adam for no Commandments are given to the brute creation or to those who are devoid of understanding notice says the r Commandments were only given to Adam no Commandments were given to to animals didn't you notice that you wise clever educated person you didn't notice that that didn't give you a clue that Adam isn't really On a par with the rest of animal creation now I'm going to go on because gets quite quite subtle from there but what the ra is saying to this guy is this I just showed you two obvious elements in the verses the verses you're commenting on the verses you're interpreting and inquiring about and you missed them why why and why did you miss them in this way that you thought the verses describe Adam as created equivalent to an animal can you figure out the answer what the is saying because you live like an animal you live like an animal so you project the way you live on Adam you can't see the most obvious elements in the verses which say that he wasn't like an animal because you're projecting yourself on him wisdom cleverness education can't protect you from your prejudices when they touch who you are and what you value he saying to him as long as you are prisoner of your desires and he says this another two times in the in the in the guide word for word as long as you are a prisoner of your desires you're not going to be able to understand what you read you won't be able to understand what you read about 20 years ago a professor of engineering Fromm Cornell visited Yeshiva he comes every six months he used to came at that time every six months to advise IDF on its technological projects for Warfare and his sister in law was a professor of biology at NYU was with him came the nobody else was around so they set up that should talk to them they're talking about prejudices against women I said the only explicit statement in the T comparing men's and women's intelligence is one statement that says that in a particular area of intelligence women's intelligence is superior to Men He says see that always putting down women so I turned to her and I said can you repeat the words that I just said she repeated them correctly I said to him look that you can't even hear the words I'm speaking you're so deeply prejudiced you can't even hear the words I'm speaking your sister-in-law who is the prim one to have troubles with this subject she heard me fine she heard what I said fine but you couldn't even hear it that's the saying to this guy if it touches something that you're deeply prejudiced about you'll make the grossest error the grossest mistake you weren't able to read straight okay now the ra goes on to explain however what is this about this tree that you eat from it you get the knowledge of Good and Evil which indeed aam didn't have beforehand and he didn't have the knowledge of Good and Evil so then how did he address him to uh to give him a command shouldn't by address a command shouldn't the one I address understand that there's a difference between obeying and disobeying that one is preferable to the other you have the Contex of Good and Evil how you do that so the rambam says that Adam had before he ate from the tree the concepts of emis and sheer and he writes those words in Hebrew in the text not in Arab that translated I in Hebrew am and she and sheer don't mean true and false and she don't mean true and false it's a long story which I will spare you but the crucial element to notice here is if you will take out a concordance you know what a concordance is list of all the words in the tanak with every place that they appear this was done by hand by fell mandle corn 1890s and go through every place EMS appears you'll find that very often Ms is a quality of action Ms is something you do you can't do truth actions are not true and false it's a wrong category and even when applied to speech Ms can be applied to the act of speaking not to the proposition that's spoken but to the act of speaking now they're related usually when you speak the words you speak should be true words if they aren't often something's gone wrong maybe something bad has happened but the word EMS refers to the action not to the words that's a long that's a long story any R the r says that they had the concept of em and Shea they didn't have the concept of true and false now and he had it perfectly completely right and wrong to and raah are not applied the way EMS and sheer are here the Arabic is difficult and the translation is very apparent relative truths not absolute and objective truths so he gives an example of EMS sheer um the heavens are spherical the heavens are spherical that's EMS not good you wouldn't say it was good you say it's EMS it's true and the Earth is flat he says is sheer it's false everybody knew the Earth was around it's sheer but it's not ra it's not bad it's sheer now the function of the intellect is to discriminate between EMS and sheer that's its job a distinction which is applicable to all objects of intellectual perception when Adam was yet in the state of innocence was guided solely by reflection and reason before he ate that's why it says you made him little lower than the angels He was not able to follow or understand the principles of to ra apparent relative truths an example of which was he didn't see any need for clothes after he disobeyed which I'm going to describe in a moment then he lost that intellectual F faculty that he possessed he lost his grasp on an sheer and then he was wholly absorbed in the study of what is proper and improper toen ra the ra is is painting a picture here either you have EMS and sheer or you have toen ra you can't have both you can't have both to the extent that you can't think about them you can't conceive them you can't relate to them now I don't read the Arabic and I'm sure I'm missing some nuances but I'll give you an analogy to what he may mean imagine that you meet someone who has never seen a moving Picture film video you say listen I have something to show you you know a new experience for you take them to a theater and you make sure the things is is you know it's going on buy the tickets you walk in and just as you come into the theater and see the screen on the screen you have a picture of a um herd of of wild horses stampeding towards the camera and you hear them pounding of the hoops and the dust and everything else he says get out of the way we're gonna be dead we're gonna take a trample you're gonna kill us you say listen this don't worry don't worry we're going to be dead in two minutes we're going to be dead let's get out of here it's only a film it's only a film you who know that it's a film can't take it seriously okay there are um automatic reactions that you can't control maybe your blood pressure goes up also maybe your your your respiration but maybe you start to sweat but you don't leave you paid for your ticket you're going to stay there till the end right he can't hear you he thinks he's in moral danger right he can't hear where you're coming from and you can't experience what he's experiencing because you know too much you see it from a much more realistic point of view something like that is going on here Ms means that which is ultim Ely real ultimately real Eternal fixed God's will fixed in God's existence sha means something which is only an illusion something which will naturally fall over naturally dissipate naturally be lost that's what em em and sheer are to and ra take very seriously how the events affect people in their own terms it's bad to hurt people why because you can't cause pain to people period it's bad to do that it's wrong to do that it's wrong to take other people's property why because it's their property and it's their property they have no business touching it because they have rights and you have no right you can't trample on their rights it's wrong to trample on their rights all of this takes human being as he is human society as it is and makes it into an independent reality and that reality determines what you should and should not do I'm guessing that one it's the best I can do having read it so many times and spoken about it with many others if you are rooted in emson sheer you're rooted in God's point of view you're rooted in how it relates to the Creator if you ever have a p a perception how it relates to the Creator nothing else counts nothing else is relevant Nothing Else Matters a person gets hurt or it doesn't get hurt it loses property it doesn't lose property so what so what I'm looking at it from the point of view of the infinite Eternal Creator who's responsible for all existence who's bringing it to the best possible end how can what happens to a person be relevant to that if you are taking on the contrary the human reality seriously if you're taking the human reality as the thing that determines what's right and wrong what's good and evil then you must not be seeing it from God's point of view you can't be seeing it from God's point of view because if you were you wouldn't take it seriously you couldn't take it seriously would be like taking the movie picture [Music] seriously what happened when they ate from the tree is that they lost the perception of Emison sheer and were reduced to the perception of toven RA that was a gigantic loss it's a gigantic loss they no longer could have a grasp of Emerson she that's what the r writes now I want to just offer a comment the r has used Ms uh Ms in this in this paragraph in two different ways on the one hand he's used it as a sign of the intellect which qualifies one to have Commandments go back to what I said 8 minutes ago okay it's a joke I'm how many minutes it was that the EMS in the tanak is a quality of action that's one of the reasons why you can't take it's just true EMS is a quality of action so if he grasped EMS and Checker he could also grasp of actions which ones are the actions to be done and which one the actions not to be done EMS applies to that an action can be EMS can't be true but it can be EMS he also applied Ms to facts like the heavens are spherical and the Earth is not flat sounds to me like Ms is a very broad term it has very broad application it can apply to facts it can apply to actions indeed that which is rooted in God's will will be EMS and everything is rooted ultimately in God's will so look what's happened we still can apply EMS and sheer to fact we're able to do that we ever lost that competence he traded on that competence by giving us the examples of the heavens and the Earth but we've lost the ability to apply it to actions when it comes to actions we're hypnotized by the human context that's what determines for us whether an action is right or wrong and that's why it's only relative it's only apparent some translations right conventional it's not essential where we look at what's Good and Evil is not essential we can't see actions the way we still see facts the fact that the heavens are SP spherical and the Earth is not flat that has nothing to do with us if there were no people it would still be that way not relative to us it's an absolute fact some actions are absolute in that sense we've lost that we've lost that ability to understand it that's what happened when they ate they suffered a gigantic theemotion gigantic step down and that's that's the truth about the the eating of of the sh are we together so far how does how would Ms possibly have action so I don't know if I can answer you because that's what we' lost the fact that we're we're fluent in to and we we think that way naturally we agree on how to make these judgments means that we've lost that that connection um a lot of times it's hard to uh just see an action for what it is it is an action there's no connotation there's no bad or good about that action it just is water flows that's an action whether that's good or bad is how we perceive it to be correct isn't it talking about Human Action yeah I mean the water flows is not an action water flows is not an action even when a human being trips and falls that's not an action human being his eyes blink we don't say he blinks his eyes notless he first ofly blinks them but say his eyes are blinking because he's not doing it it's happening automatically right your temperature you know there autonomic nervous system make sure your temperature stays stays stays the same it happens in your body but you're not doing it an action is emotion that's caused by a will a will applied with understanding nothing less than that counts as an action and what I'm saying now I think is pretty common philosophy also the fact that your body moves doesn't make it an action um and and now the question is to evaluate the actions how do you evaluate them if we could see the unfolding of the creation if we could see where it's going see how each action fits into the goal that God wants to bring the creation to if we could see that so then that would be our our point of reference but we you know it's you know it's like it's like someone walking into into um a doctor's office and seen the doctor poking person with needles and it hurts and the person is saying he thinks it's a torture chamber because he's only seeing the surface seeing somebody getting stuck with needles that's all doesn't know that's being injected with a serum which will save his life he doesn't know that he can't he can't appreciate that so the the reality is hidden from us and we're falling back on a relative superficial picture what we see about the actions is true people get hurt they have property the property is misappropriated and so and so it's all true but it's like the truth of the movie picture there is the appearance of a herd of horses bearing down on us yes there that appearance is really there but of course it's only an appearance it's only an appearance it's not it's not real the horses aren't really there so [Music] um this this ties up with what he says in about the Book of Job and the book so and so and any rate we've lost that so to explain what it would mean um it would mean seeing that an action is correct the way you see that the heavens are spherical is correct the heaven are spherical is correct in and of itself you believe it you don't believe it you like it you don't like it you bet against it and you're worried you're going to lose the BET sorry sorry the heavens are spical period That's all there's nothing else to it nothing else to say about it something like that would be the picture of an action and say look this action does it it works right you like it you don't like it you promised him you didn't promise it the action does it that's all all the rest of the considerations that all the moralists and the ethicists and the philosophers and all the psychologists Tak to into account will be like commenting on the movie instead of commenting on the reality and it's very hard for us to do that when somebody does something which we regard to be unjust we are outraged when somebody does something that's unjust and then something happens to him and he suffers we think good yes he deserved to suffer look he did that terrible outrage we're caught up in the in the to perspective and that's because we we lost that that external perspective now the interesting question here is how did they do it okay after he describing the Disobedience the the breaking of the Mitzvah listen what it says when he began to give way to desires which had the source in his imagination and to the gratification of his bodily appetites talking about Adam he gave rise he gave in to bodily appetites H what did we say in the previous page about that wise man who was was debauched you know living with his orgies and couldn't read the Pim correctly is that now being applied to Adam also the first step is he became interested in his bodily desires as it said listen carefully we're talking about Adam Adam he gave way to his body as it is said as it says in the verse and the wife saw that the tree was good for food and delightful to the eyes do you hear what the was doing the words that are applied in the Torah to the wife he says are Adam's words they describe Adam State of Mind anybody who wants to make a distinction and say no it's just a woman you know how women are women are inferior and they are distracted and so for and so on Adam wouldn't be do that the ra is describing Adam's failure and uses the words that describe her to describe his failure and I want you to know that K lato does exactly the same thing the great calist the say that he uses these words to describe his State of Mind mind so this was a shared state of mind that they both had the reason the Torah said about her is an interesting question but it's clear from both of them and lato F follows the RBA many times dozens of times that itself is a whole story at any rate what did he do when he began to give way to desires that had Source in his imagination the gratification bodily appetites he was punished by the loss of the part of the intellectual faculty which he had prev possessed he lost the the grasp of Emison sheer and therefore transgressed the command which have been charged on the scous reason he then ate from the tree in other words it's a three-step process the first step was turning towards the body and the bodily desires that alone caused the loss of the grasp of Emison sheer then he ate from the tree and learned TOA and that confirmed it once you have to you can't get em sheer back after stage two you could conceivably have gotten it back he lost it it was empty an open block but now that open block been filled with to now he's finished so it's a very interesting description those who are familiar with the Muslim movement and how much they stressed self-control and focus and the spiritual over the physical this book was with 900 years ago but it's quite clearly here and it's several other times in the book explicitly anyone who's a prisoner his Bly desires can't understand my book can't understand the subject of the book can't understand what I write so it's definitely here so then then and the result of it is knowing good and evil now he says the eyes of both of them were opened and they knew they were naked the eyes were open says the r what does it mean opening the eyes what does opening the eyes refer to says refers to intellectual grasp after all they weren't blind before they were naked they knew very well that they were naked right he says the Torah doesn't write the eyes are open and they saw that they were naked it writes the the eyes were open and they knew that they were naked and then the word knowledge there is ladas which means an ex an understanding of the reality usually refers to experiential knowledge understanding the reality in depth and he says that's what always means always means intellectual understanding and he brings a proof which bothered me for years because I thought the proof that he's bringing says the opposite when when at Abraham expels Hagar and DMO from the house he says them out with a jug of water and they wander and they in the the desert they lose up the water and she thinks he's going to die and she throws him under one of the bushes and she wanders away he's crying God says to her I've heard the voice of the child crying not your voice his voice um you're not going to die I have plans for you when him and I promised you before and then it says God opened her eyes and she saw a well so I thought to myself hey that see with the retina with the optic nerve you know that see how could the r bring this as a proof that this opening of the eyes is an intellectual grasp I realized the of course it doesn't need my confirmation the was of course 100% right you know very well it's happened to everyone in this room happens quite often you looking for something and it's right there you just don't see it you just don't see it he says look it's right there so missed it there's such a thing as focusing on and and analyzing the scene in front of you you ask three people to describe what they see you get often three different different descriptions not that they contradict but some will catch one person's attention other people will catch another person's attention she saw the scene her retina was fine her optic nerve was fine she wasn't interpreting it correctly she didn't pick up on the cues in the scene that's intellectual analysis he speaks about opening the eyes in in the future to see the reality of God and understand the reality of God in the Torah that's an intellectual understanding that's not it's not it's not Vision the verse that talks about those who have eyes and yet don't see we're not talking about neurological problem in the optic center of the brain which which cancels visual experience to about the fact that the everything's in front of them and they don't understand it this is what happened to Adam as a result of the of the of eating from the Tree of knowledge of Good and Evil yes he acquired the tree good knowledge of Good and Evil and is rums you that people are born with the basic knowledge of Good and Evil and the way he describes it I don't think it makes any difference whether you're Jewish not Jewish everyone has a basic understanding of Good and Evil and that you have before the Torah commands you anything to the extent that in the guide I'm man says any mitah that's logical and a person performs it he'll be rewarded even if no Prophet commanded it and every any prohibition that's logical and a person violates it will be punished even though no Prophet commanded it says it twice there are certain things which you your mind is is created in such a way that you know spontaneously and he quotes a verse page 19 Verse 22 so the English which is not wrong reading sort of more or less where Rashi reads it verse 22 in the middle of the of the of the page God said behold man this is after he ate from the tree behold man has become like the unique one Among Us comma knowing good and bad Rah doesn't translate it that way the Rah translate this behold man has become unique Kama without the among us next word in Hebrew is menu knowing from himself good and evil his knowledge of e good comes from himself the TR doesn't make that yes the TR doesn't make it that way butas translates it that way so someone who's uh diseased with the modern academic Prejudice oh the r up a philosopher you know medieval Spanish philosopher so he was going to take it that way butas wasn't the medieval Spanish philosopher unas was a Roman convert a thousand years before the RBA and that's exactly what the whatas writes to can read it's the middle of the column ofas man has become unique in The worldish Knowing good and evil from himself I know R is not alone I have a dozen references in that people know on their own the basics of Good and Evil so what he what he what happened to him when the a of the tree was a change in the nature of of humanity we're born with this and the application of emson sheer to action is lost and I don't know that he writes that it will ever be recovered I'm not aware of any place where he writes that it will be recovered so that's that's a picture of what happened there and the the muser is any rate the Ram's work here is work that's comprehensive and it works on all levels as and the great Rivas learned it and studied it and some even quoted it his ques and on the same page he quotes the Z I know two two great contemporary rash one who was LIF a few years ago one was still alive who had in the can't say who because I heard him somebody but and their attitude was if my Mones wrote it there must be a way of serving God in it and they wanted to know what that way of serving God is to they want to find it plummet deps uh it's an it's an absolute Masterwork [Music]