"A river flows from Eden to water the garden" (Gen. 2:10).
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Toldot: Reflections on Isaac, Finder of Gates
What could Genesis 26:12-13 possibly have to say about Internet-based communication among congregants and seekers of spirituality and Torah learning? Follow this week's vlog posting to find out!
Well Jonathan, Surely there are other ways to answer your request – this response is one where I will not have the honor of attending class this weekend and yet saw a thread. So, via social networking I can start class, early, and, feel like I’ve participated without being present. I can also construct a viewpoint that surely would have little chance of finding a reason for voicing live in class.
In the phasha there is a conversation about two levels of transformation; one as the product of what is and, the second is the value of what becomes. The argument is analogous to Aristotle’s Nichomeanean Ethics where he, Aristotle, moves from Plato’s idealized formations of the world to place of philosophical realism: From receiving the idealized blessing, to creating a God-centric rapprocher (French diplomatic word for bridge building understanding and consensus) between men.
The Hellenic posture of 2-300 B.C.E., attributed to Aristotle is one of moderation or balance, although its themes likely stood since earlier Biblical times.
In Ethics, Aristotle admonishes us to move beyond the contemplations of what things are in favor of a process of acting in order to be good: transformation. Good for Aristotle is not found in a matter of degrees, it is not the act of transforming from a little good to more good. Rather good is the transformation from a haphazard waking state of being, to purposefully being good. Good for Aristotle is the mean between two extremes,it is moderation and balance: Isaac and Abimelech are our phasha’s textbook examples of “good.”
In the case with Esau the father’s blessing, the act of obtaining the blessing is the primary goal -- moderation it's secondary, through Genesis 27:35. Either Esau obtains the blessing or he does not.
Aristotelian moderation confirms usurpation of the blessing provides no benefit of the blessing. Nevertheless, it does provide the act of the blessing: In Plato’s idealism Easu counts his given blessing, in contrast with Aristotle’s realism where there is no good, there is no blessing.
In immediate contrast with Esau are Isaac’s servants. We note with a special interest when the servants start digging a well as Abimelech, his companions are entering the camp. Confronted by a moderate Isaac we find Abimelech seeking to transform a relationship from hate to cooperation; suddenly, presto! a metaphorical new well in the desert is producing water: Hate transformed into a spirit of cooperation produces the desired results of allowing life to grow. Moderation enacted, progress identified, good is realized – but here with a distinctive Hebraic petios .
What we do not see, in our second-third, is the product of Easu’s trickery. While the father’s blessing is transforming to the family, for now we imagine there is no new water for Esau’s conduct, likely worse.
In Esau there is the father’s unearned blessing. The lineage of the blessing is subverted for the physical act of the blessing alone: At once the Platonic ideal is shattered, the Aristotelian balance tossed aside, and Socratic polemical skepticism is inserted in the family: Disaster. In its telling the story is not about idealism, realism and skepticism the old Greek philosophic triangulation, it is about God, water and survival as the blessing traditionally travels from father to son.
Quickly, here the three legs of Hellenism are each neatly refuted in the moral character and conduct of Esau. Without the monotheistic ideal as an eternal guidepost a new weakness is introduced into the family. Its outcome we can only guess, well… for this week.
I think the best way for you (or any congregation/clergy) to start this kind of conversation is to reach out to those who already use media this way. When that audience is the young students in the congregation, ask them how to reach their parents and other relatives. My son Evan likes getting an email directly from his rabbi -- feels a little cool and special. Invariably, it's about some homework assignment though -- but now the door is open for the clergy/the temple to reach out again on other topics.
I guess it's a question of reaching folks with the media they are already comfortable using (older adults: phone and mail, younger adults: email, college and 20's: facebook et al and teens:text, email, facebook.
Not a scientific answer, but roughly speaking, reach people with the media they are already using.
Well Jonathan, Surely there are other ways to answer your request – this response is one where I will not have the honor of attending class this weekend and yet saw a thread. So, via social networking I can start class, early, and, feel like I’ve participated without being present.
ReplyDeleteI can also construct a viewpoint that surely would have little chance of finding a reason for voicing live in class.
In the phasha there is a conversation about two levels of transformation; one as the product of what is and, the second is the value of what becomes. The argument is analogous to Aristotle’s Nichomeanean Ethics where he, Aristotle, moves from Plato’s idealized formations of the world to place of philosophical realism: From receiving the idealized blessing, to creating a God-centric rapprocher (French diplomatic word for bridge building understanding and consensus) between men.
The Hellenic posture of 2-300 B.C.E., attributed to Aristotle is one of moderation or balance, although its themes likely stood since earlier Biblical times.
In Ethics, Aristotle admonishes us to move beyond the contemplations of what things are in favor of a process of acting in order to be good: transformation. Good for Aristotle is not found in a matter of degrees, it is not the act of transforming from a little good to more good. Rather good is the transformation from a haphazard waking state of being, to purposefully being good. Good for Aristotle is the mean between two extremes,it is moderation and balance: Isaac and Abimelech are our phasha’s textbook examples of “good.”
In the case with Esau the father’s blessing, the act of obtaining the blessing is the primary goal -- moderation it's secondary, through Genesis 27:35. Either Esau obtains the blessing or he does not.
Aristotelian moderation confirms usurpation of the blessing provides no benefit of the blessing. Nevertheless, it does provide the act of the blessing: In Plato’s idealism Easu counts his given blessing, in contrast with Aristotle’s realism where there is no good, there is no blessing.
In immediate contrast with Esau are Isaac’s servants. We note with a special interest when the servants start digging a well as Abimelech, his companions are entering the camp. Confronted by a moderate Isaac we find Abimelech seeking to transform a relationship from hate to cooperation; suddenly, presto! a metaphorical new well in the desert is producing water: Hate transformed into a spirit of cooperation produces the desired results of allowing life to grow. Moderation enacted, progress identified, good is realized – but here with a distinctive Hebraic petios .
What we do not see, in our second-third, is the product of Easu’s trickery. While the father’s blessing is transforming to the family, for now we imagine there is no new water for Esau’s conduct, likely worse.
In Esau there is the father’s unearned blessing. The lineage of the blessing is subverted for the physical act of the blessing alone: At once the Platonic ideal is shattered, the Aristotelian balance tossed aside, and Socratic polemical skepticism is inserted in the family: Disaster. In its telling the story is not about idealism, realism and skepticism the old Greek philosophic triangulation, it is about God, water and survival as the blessing traditionally travels from father to son.
Quickly, here the three legs of Hellenism are each neatly refuted in the moral character and conduct of Esau. Without the monotheistic ideal as an eternal guidepost a new weakness is introduced into the family. Its outcome we can only guess, well… for this week.
Todah rabah,
Brian
I think the best way for you (or any congregation/clergy) to start this kind of conversation is to reach out to those who already use media this way. When that audience is the young students in the congregation, ask them how to reach their parents and other relatives. My son Evan likes getting an email directly from his rabbi -- feels a little cool and special. Invariably, it's about some homework assignment though -- but now the door is open for the clergy/the temple to reach out again on other topics.
ReplyDeleteI guess it's a question of reaching folks with the media they are already comfortable using (older adults: phone and mail, younger adults: email, college and 20's: facebook et al and teens:text, email, facebook.
Not a scientific answer, but roughly speaking, reach people with the media they are already using.
Ruth