This video was an authentic tour de force. IMHO many people struggle with religion (and Judaism) today because it seems most instructions are filled with dos and don’ts. For that, we have the Misha Torah and shelves of books. I feel the attraction for the Guide of the Perplexed is the baffling issue of what is ‘God.’ Perhaps the first to be ‘perplexed’ was Emperor Pompey. As Josephus relates: “in the sanctuary stood nothing whatever.” The Ramban tackles this issue directly. One must elevate his level of theological thoughts to adjust to an idea not easy to grasp. Maimonides took some 20 years to write a guide on that task. As Zevi ‘seeks’ to explain, it is not an easy path, but it has value in just trying to master the ideas of getting closer to it. Zevi, thanks for your hard work.
I have just finished reading 'Descenders to the Chariot:The People Behind the Hekhalot Literature' by James R. Davila as part of my preparation of studying 'Guide to the Perplexed'. Your whole series on Rambam has enlightened me and this last class has given me added insight into understanding the Guide. Thank you so much for your insight, clarity and inclusiveness in presenting this difficult and beautiful material.
Loved this episode, thank you Zevi for bringing this to light in such an articulate way. & love what you said about him taking that step to put this out there, because if it wasn’t shared it wouldn’t get to benefit anyone. Thank you 🙏🏻✨
Wow. Zevi. This is by far one of the most useful 1 hrs of my life. Thank you brother. My familiars have tried to explain something very similar to your conclusion. This is why I became an engineer and wanted to get a PhD in Physics as a result. But there's a piece missing. How to marry our expanding perception of science with the traces and intentions of the hand of G-d. This has been my question for over 20 years. If you could shine some light into this, I'd be eternally grateful. Thank you again.
I also find your re constructing of paths section interesting. But like Abulafia, he created a great system that no one follows. He was even marked as a heretic by many Jews.
Thank you for a very insightful and amazing series of lectures which to me as a Christian was extremely helpful in understanding the amazing and wonderful roots of our believes.
Zevi..amazing analysis...an amazing sage he surely was. An example for modern times. Recently I watched Deeper into the Weeds video with Vervake Peterson and Pageau..I feel this video of yours might be of relevance to the contemporary problem of rationality and ontology that they explore there...hope you one day you get to talk to Peterson. This whole series is so important I hope you get the recognition it deserves.
Terrific video. Brighten up many questions that were in the back of my mind since I read the Guide then Sitrei Torah (that remains a paralising mistery to me).
The lost secrets start at 34mins and everything before this is preamble. Also, the father of the mishna was Rabbi Akiva who was later martyred by the Romans. His project was continued by his pupils until Judah Ha Nasi took over and completed the task. The first part of these laws was the Baraita of 32 Rules (just like the sefer yetzirah 32 paths of enlightenment). These were the basis of the Modern Mishna.
Great video as always, I was wondering if you could do one on Alchemy, it's a subject that has aroused my curiosity ever since I got into mysticism and esotericism, however after months of research, I can't for the life of me find a source that concretely and clearly gives full understanding of the allegorical meaning all the symbolism in it represent, from the sun to all the metals and alchemical procesesses, I think it would be a great topic for you to cover, since Alchemy is a huge cornerstone in the history of mysticism and esoterica.
Thank you Adam. I’m glad you enjoyed it. I’m not much of an expert on alchemy. Have you checked out the videos from my friend Dr. Justin Sledge over @Esoterica ?
@@SeekersofUnity oh I certainly have, and have learned alot from Dr. Sledge, however his videos have a more historical approach to Alchemy, not so much as an in depth discussion of the principles themselves and details of symbolism and their allegorical significance, I understand it's not your area of expertise, thought it would be interesting to see it discussed from your viewpoint. Also if you ever have any questions about the Druze let me know, I'm not fully intiaited (i.e. not a father/sage) however I'll share with you as much as I know and was told (which tbf isn't alot) , especially on the history of it and it's links to Freemasonry. Cheers!
Has anyone who expounds upon maimonides or written books about him, have any one of them ever claimed to have decoded his lost knowledge? Have you for example?
Well done as always! “Know that the many sciences devoted to establishing the truth regarding these matters that have existed in our religious community have perished because of the length of the time that has passed, because of our being dominated by the pagan nations, and because, as we have made clear [cf. 1:34], it is not permitted to divulge these matters to all people. For the only thing it is permitted to divulge to all people are the texts of the books.... For you will not find with regard to them anything except slight indications and pointers occurring in the Talmud and the Midrashim. These are, as it were, a few grains belonging to the core, which are overlaid by many layers of rind, so that people were occupied with these layers of rind and thought that beneath them there was no core whatever” (Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed 1:71). “From that time [at Sinai] until now there has not been in Israel any generation that has not received מָסֹרֶת הַחָכְמָה (masoret ha-ḥokhmah), the tradition of wisdom, which is knowledge of the Name through the order of Kabbalah-the Oral Torah” (Rabbi Ezra of Gerona, Kitve Ramban, 2:478).
It is through the teaching in videos suck as this one that I am coming to realize the teachings known as Abrahamitic (hope I am describing this correctly), Christian. Muslim and Jewish. These are not at all what I thought they were and it is the historical research I have done that's led me to believe this. Zoroastrian appears to be a precursor to all three (this is just a thought I have) and the other really fundamental change in my understanding are these two ideas (again just my thoughts). 1. The number one cannot exist, there must be a method of discernment. 2. The word God = I Am (Atum). The attempt to describe God by what it is not seems absolutely perfect to me. Neti Neti (spelling?). I am now 56, why did it take so long to across this knowledge? Until age eight I was taken to a Southern Baptist Church in Chattanooga, TN and I don't remember any of these ideas. At the same time that I am disappointed it took so long I am also very happy to be here now.
Does GOD, The One, 'exists' IN All THAT 'IS' ('BECOMING') as ALL FORM 'in time': YIN? And 'ÍS' (synchronical and united) INVISIBLE as The One, All Mighty Wiilpower, SPIRIT: Yang?
I suppose that someone should examine this notion of truth, knowledge, love and divinity. From the get go we can rationalize divinity as an emergent property of human existent, along with truth and knowledge. To be exact science is the effort to obtain nascent knowledge. The process sorts through various hypotheses in order to find the hypothesis with the best evidence. Exterior to the storied evidence for god(s) no such evidence exist, except through evidence in various and sundry beliefs. Such beliefs often contradict each other, even within the same religion. The claim against god based on rational science is that god cannot be falsified. In its construction it may seem to make it impermeable to rational explanation. But it simultaneously reveals a weakness in god's ineffible armor and in Maimoides logic. What Maimoides believes about ancient lost wisdom and what historigraphical analysis has shown is that the Israelite religious system immistakably evolved from what we would call pagan near eastern religion. What these studies find that rather than Israelites marching out of a desert with a new found monotheism, were in fact abandoned in and about the year 1100 by the Egyptians toward the end of the Late Bronze Age Collapse. In the book of Judges we first encounter the Israelites following many gods, El Elyon, Anat, Anubis (or some version thereof), Ba'al (Hadat), Salem (Gid of the Dawn), and Yahweh. In total there were 70 gods in the Elohim, Yahweh appears to have been a latecommer. Note the original name of Bethlehem, Beth Lahmu, creates the possible Eblite version of Ea, Yah, was worshipped in Judea early on. Moreover there are numerous reference to neareastern religion within the text of the stories of the Torah, Job, Psalms that reaffirm polytheism and idolatry was ubiquitous in early Israel and archaeological evidence suggest it persisted until late antiquity. So what we see in religion is that the pursuit of objective knowledge has raised the bar on religion, and religion has responded by trying to purge old identities from itself trying to make itself appear less idolatrous and more spiritual and philosophical. But in the majority of religions there is always a tell, something that proves to the outsider that these are facades. For example in orthodoxy there are icons in the church, of course there is an apologetic to explain why they are not idols. But they serve the same function, to provide leverage to the lay, and to provide a mystical handle to the adepts. The same is true in Judaism, it says make no idol to wood or stone. And yet what we see at the wailing wall is people praying to stones, inserting their prayers in the stone as if it were the mouth of an idol. So on face religion scampers to be the god of the gaps, but scampers as the gaps are filled to find new holes of last resort, trying to remain philosophically revelant, all the while covering its idolatry. Maimoides solution is more or less the same, but we need to redress the truth to understand the flaws, not just in his approach but every appoach. Suppose i put a grain of sand in empty space. We all look at the grain of the sand at some distance, is it a grain or a long strait line. Each person reports what he sees, and through sharing perpsectives we can see its not a column of matter but a spheroid. In the same way each religion reflects its faith, desiring what they believe to be true. But in this case each perspective contradicts the other, are they looking at the divine from different perspectives or are there no truths. The central problem with faith is that we cannot see faith 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000 years ago. We can sequence DNA from 400,000 years ago, but we cannot know truely whats in the mind of the next person, let alone what Jesus believed or what Isaiah believed. We reconstruct beliefs based on text and religious items. And what we see is variation going back past the dawn of civilization. There was never a true religion. I can opine on this. There are categories of objectified ideas that were formative. Mystical experiences, natural experiences, legends, story craft, and just creative imaginings. All of these ingredients have one thing in common, they require the devotion and repetition of believers. So belief that something is divine and thus worthy of time forward carrying is essential. So in contrast to Maimoides a rational understanding of divine truths requires a prerequisite of belief not for its instantaneous credibility, but just to be carried forward. So the question is not really about the truth of the objects of faith, but the truth that the objects of faith were believed to be sufficiently worthy to be carrier by the carriers. Does a dog carry a toy because it has the wisdom of the universe, or because the toy has some emotional value to the dog. And so this aspect is common to belief. Moreover there is a notion in religion that the most pious have the ability to hear the requests of god, that they can channel gods voice. Once again we are talking about the exoeriential nature of esoteric mysticism. The truths of the divine are encapsulated by these notions of mind-soul-spirit, whether or not they are real, with a wrapper of idolatrous notions that surround them. Again, truth and faith are polemic notions. A truth is something that can be interrogated from many perspectives, and the description of truth is an object that compatible from many if not all perspectives. In the modern age the bar for truth in a quantum world often results in fuzzy statistical definitions that hold up with mass examinations. We did not lose truth, we gained better insights on the difficultly of acquiring the best models of truth, thus informing science on the fortitude required to create better models. The rise and fall of string theory is but one example. Faith neither needs or wants such structuring of perspectives, because its basis is in belief. Maimiodes is looking at divisions in a belief, cracks, and he is not trying to find rational truth, but to wittle off the 'suckers' as to strengthen the remaing core of his faith. Maimoides went after his fellow jewish mystics in a effort to prevent them from creating new cracks. The orthodox did the same thing with christianity. After a period of radiation, it eventually becomes apparent that the mystical notions of gnosticism, full preterism, epicureanism, etc were essentually a competition of an increasingly centralized ecclesia. So they banned books and cloistered mystics. But a major point of early movement was its mysticism, it may be christianity defined, but it is not the christology of the disciples. In the story of Moses at the burning bush, if so true, was it god in the bush, or was it god in Moses mind. Was Ezekial in the 3rd level of heaven or was the heaven in his mind. These mystical images are not unique or original to Judaism, they are storied to the beginning of near eastern civilization.
I can't believe no ody liked your comment buddy, it was epic! Better than this guy telling us what other people thought maimonides was thinking. There's nothing complicated about Maimonides except if your an intellectual. Regarding your comments, my observation is that you ignore the possibility that at least the hierarchy of the Jews had the same concept of the cosmos as we do today, one that is compatible with the rig Vedas explanation of the cosmos. Both of these cultures go back 20,000 BCE according to linguistics to the same ancestors so it's not surprising to see such shared ideas and symbolism. These elites had the same brains and logic faculties we have today but every society carries a larger proportion of its number who either can't or don't want to use that power. I would suggest you consider the idea that it was and always will be this element of society who will create the need for God's and idols no matter what. They dont want to figure anything out, some don't even want to think. To use your analogy of the wailing Wall, Moses said that prayers were for comfort only, maimonides said the same. That doesn't imply that they go to a God or that they do anything other than give comfort. To the unenlightened prayers are a way to ask God for something but in Judaism there has never been a God except for the element of people I mentioned earlier. Moses and Maimonides were both astronomers and that's it. The term God was just a label to use for the cosmos at a time when the masses could not understand that the earth revolved around the sun, it's as simple as that and it's still the same today.
@@SeekersofUnity would you ever do a multi part series on the Guide but inside and going through it from start to finish in depth? Like a weekly shiur on it
![Lord of Spirits - A Land of Giants [Ep. 7]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zjqchu-XUXE/mqdefault.jpg)
Watch the rest of the Maimonides and Mysticism series: ua-cam.com/video/w4ZgHJxQQVo/v-deo.html
This video was an authentic tour de force. IMHO many people struggle with religion (and Judaism) today because it seems most instructions are filled with dos and don’ts. For that, we have the Misha Torah and shelves of books. I feel the attraction for the Guide of the Perplexed is the baffling issue of what is ‘God.’ Perhaps the first to be ‘perplexed’ was Emperor Pompey. As Josephus relates: “in the sanctuary stood nothing whatever.” The Ramban tackles this issue directly. One must elevate his level of theological thoughts to adjust to an idea not easy to grasp. Maimonides took some 20 years to write a guide on that task. As Zevi ‘seeks’ to explain, it is not an easy path, but it has value in just trying to master the ideas of getting closer to it. Zevi, thanks for your hard work.
You’re most welcome Raphael. Thank you for your appreciation and support. It means a lot.
Very well stated 🙌
I have just finished reading 'Descenders to the Chariot:The People Behind the Hekhalot Literature' by James R. Davila as part of my preparation of studying 'Guide to the Perplexed'. Your whole series on Rambam has enlightened me and this last class has given me added insight into understanding the Guide. Thank you so much for your insight, clarity and inclusiveness in presenting this difficult and beautiful material.
You’re most welcome Richard. Glad i could be of service.
Wonderful! Moses Maimonides has always been a source of wisdom for me.
Maimonides reaches a part of my soul that no other has. God bless you, Zevi!
Loved this episode, thank you Zevi for bringing this to light in such an articulate way. & love what you said about him taking that step to put this out there, because if it wasn’t shared it wouldn’t get to benefit anyone. Thank you 🙏🏻✨
You’re most welcome my friend ☺️🙏🏼
Wow. Zevi. This is by far one of the most useful 1 hrs of my life. Thank you brother. My familiars have tried to explain something very similar to your conclusion. This is why I became an engineer and wanted to get a PhD in Physics as a result. But there's a piece missing. How to marry our expanding perception of science with the traces and intentions of the hand of G-d. This has been my question for over 20 years. If you could shine some light into this, I'd be eternally grateful. Thank you again.
You’re most welcome brother. I’m glad it was helpful. That’s a great question. I have some thought. We’ll have to discuss. Looking forward.
Dude man, your beard is on fire!
This is Zevi's magnus opus
His 3:51, leading us to gates of Gan Eden! Thank you.
I also find your re constructing of paths section interesting. But like Abulafia, he created a great system that no one follows. He was even marked as a heretic by many Jews.
Abulafia is alive and well today, growing each day.
Thank you for a very insightful and amazing series of lectures which to me as a Christian was extremely helpful in understanding the amazing and wonderful roots of our believes.
You’re most welcome James 🙏🏼
ooh la la! can't wait to get back home and listen... because you never disappoint!
Thank you Yosef :)
Zevi..amazing analysis...an amazing sage he surely was. An example for modern times.
Recently I watched Deeper into the Weeds video with Vervake Peterson and Pageau..I feel this video of yours might be of relevance to the contemporary problem of rationality and ontology that they explore there...hope you one day you get to talk to Peterson.
This whole series is so important I hope you get the recognition it deserves.
Thank you Ramya. You’re very kind. It means a lot. Thank you.
20:45 RAV SHAGAR!!! Love you even more Zevi
Always late watching this, but never to late, again a beautiful episode about maimonides!
Thnx Zevi!
You’re most welcome Art. Better late than never. Glad you enjoyed it :)
Terrific video. Brighten up many questions that were in the back of my mind since I read the Guide then Sitrei Torah (that remains a paralising mistery to me).
Thank you friend. I’m glad it was helpful.
Absolutely wonderful, this work is awe inspiring. Great work Zevi, you should be so proud of this.
Yes, what a life changing series!
Thank you so ☺️
What a wonderful series! Thank you so much!
You’re most welcome. Thank you.
So pretty! Reminded me throughout of Leonard Cohen.
Thank you Esther ☺️🙏🏼
The lost secrets start at 34mins and everything before this is preamble. Also, the father of the mishna was Rabbi Akiva who was later martyred by the Romans. His project was continued by his pupils until Judah Ha Nasi took over and completed the task. The first part of these laws was the Baraita of 32 Rules (just like the sefer yetzirah 32 paths of enlightenment). These were the basis of the Modern Mishna.
Great video as always, I was wondering if you could do one on Alchemy, it's a subject that has aroused my curiosity ever since I got into mysticism and esotericism, however after months of research, I can't for the life of me find a source that concretely and clearly gives full understanding of the allegorical meaning all the symbolism in it represent, from the sun to all the metals and alchemical procesesses, I think it would be a great topic for you to cover, since Alchemy is a huge cornerstone in the history of mysticism and esoterica.
Thank you Adam. I’m glad you enjoyed it. I’m not much of an expert on alchemy. Have you checked out the videos from my friend Dr. Justin Sledge over @Esoterica ?
@@SeekersofUnity oh I certainly have, and have learned alot from Dr. Sledge, however his videos have a more historical approach to Alchemy, not so much as an in depth discussion of the principles themselves and details of symbolism and their allegorical significance, I understand it's not your area of expertise, thought it would be interesting to see it discussed from your viewpoint. Also if you ever have any questions about the Druze let me know, I'm not fully intiaited (i.e. not a father/sage) however I'll share with you as much as I know and was told (which tbf isn't alot) , especially on the history of it and it's links to Freemasonry. Cheers!
To understand the Chariot, it helps to have an interpretive vehicle, preferably one that includes Ezekiel's measurements.
Thank you for sharing and for your time.
You’re most welcome 🙏🏼
Has anyone who expounds upon maimonides or written books about him, have any one of them ever claimed to have decoded his lost knowledge? Have you for example?
Wonderful videos, my sincerest regards and thanks.
Thank you for saying so Jason. You’re most welcome.
Well done as always!
“Know that the many sciences devoted to establishing the truth regarding these matters that have existed in our religious community have perished because of the length of the time that has passed, because of our being dominated by the pagan nations, and because, as we have made clear [cf. 1:34], it is not permitted to divulge these matters to all people. For the only thing it is permitted to divulge to all people are the texts of the books.... For you will not find with regard to them anything except slight indications and pointers occurring in the Talmud and the Midrashim. These are, as it were, a few grains belonging to the core, which are overlaid by many layers of rind, so that people were occupied with these layers of rind and thought that beneath them there was no core whatever” (Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed 1:71).
“From that time [at Sinai] until now there has not been in Israel any generation that has not received מָסֹרֶת הַחָכְמָה (masoret ha-ḥokhmah), the tradition of wisdom, which is knowledge of the Name through the order of Kabbalah-the Oral Torah” (Rabbi Ezra of Gerona, Kitve Ramban, 2:478).
Superb quotes. Definitely could have added them. Thank you for adding them here 🙏🏼
3:26 what can I say but, the ineffable: ‘Commune with my own heart upon my bed, and be still’. MM
Maimonides would have had a field day with today’s scientific understanding.
Thanks, that's an awesome video!
🙏🏼
Has anyone ever directly compared maimonides, Aquinas, and Spinoza?
🤐🤐Magnificent 🤐🤐
🌷
It is through the teaching in videos suck as this one that I am coming to realize the teachings known as Abrahamitic (hope I am describing this correctly), Christian. Muslim and Jewish. These are not at all what I thought they were and it is the historical research I have done that's led me to believe this. Zoroastrian appears to be a precursor to all three (this is just a thought I have) and the other really fundamental change in my understanding are these two ideas (again just my thoughts). 1. The number one cannot exist, there must be a method of discernment. 2. The word God = I Am (Atum). The attempt to describe God by what it is not seems absolutely perfect to me. Neti Neti (spelling?). I am now 56, why did it take so long to across this knowledge? Until age eight I was taken to a Southern Baptist Church in Chattanooga, TN and I don't remember any of these ideas. At the same time that I am disappointed it took so long I am also very happy to be here now.
Change his name to El Segundo Mo. he might be more famous. Just a thought.
Does GOD, The One, 'exists' IN All THAT 'IS' ('BECOMING') as ALL FORM
'in time': YIN? And 'ÍS' (synchronical and united) INVISIBLE as The One, All Mighty Wiilpower, SPIRIT: Yang?
I suppose that someone should examine this notion of truth, knowledge, love and divinity.
From the get go we can rationalize divinity as an emergent property of human existent, along with truth and knowledge.
To be exact science is the effort to obtain nascent knowledge. The process sorts through various hypotheses in order to find the hypothesis with the best evidence. Exterior to the storied evidence for god(s) no such evidence exist, except through evidence in various and sundry beliefs. Such beliefs often contradict each other, even within the same religion.
The claim against god based on rational science is that god cannot be falsified. In its construction it may seem to make it impermeable to rational explanation. But it simultaneously reveals a weakness in god's ineffible armor and in Maimoides logic. What Maimoides believes about ancient lost wisdom and what historigraphical analysis has shown is that the Israelite religious system immistakably evolved from what we would call pagan near eastern religion. What these studies find that rather than Israelites marching out of a desert with a new found monotheism, were in fact abandoned in and about the year 1100 by the Egyptians toward the end of the Late Bronze Age Collapse. In the book of Judges we first encounter the Israelites following many gods, El Elyon, Anat, Anubis (or some version thereof), Ba'al (Hadat), Salem (Gid of the Dawn), and Yahweh. In total there were 70 gods in the Elohim, Yahweh appears to have been a latecommer. Note the original name of Bethlehem, Beth Lahmu, creates the possible Eblite version of Ea, Yah, was worshipped in Judea early on. Moreover there are numerous reference to neareastern religion within the text of the stories of the Torah, Job, Psalms that reaffirm polytheism and idolatry was ubiquitous in early Israel and archaeological evidence suggest it persisted until late antiquity.
So what we see in religion is that the pursuit of objective knowledge has raised the bar on religion, and religion has responded by trying to purge old identities from itself trying to make itself appear less idolatrous and more spiritual and philosophical. But in the majority of religions there is always a tell, something that proves to the outsider that these are facades. For example in orthodoxy there are icons in the church, of course there is an apologetic to explain why they are not idols. But they serve the same function, to provide leverage to the lay, and to provide a mystical handle to the adepts. The same is true in Judaism, it says make no idol to wood or stone. And yet what we see at the wailing wall is people praying to stones, inserting their prayers in the stone as if it were the mouth of an idol.
So on face religion scampers to be the god of the gaps, but scampers as the gaps are filled to find new holes of last resort, trying to remain philosophically revelant, all the while covering its idolatry.
Maimoides solution is more or less the same, but we need to redress the truth to understand the flaws, not just in his approach but every appoach.
Suppose i put a grain of sand in empty space. We all look at the grain of the sand at some distance, is it a grain or a long strait line. Each person reports what he sees, and through sharing perpsectives we can see its not a column of matter but a spheroid. In the same way each religion reflects its faith, desiring what they believe to be true. But in this case each perspective contradicts the other, are they looking at the divine from different perspectives or are there no truths.
The central problem with faith is that we cannot see faith 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000 years ago. We can sequence DNA from 400,000 years ago, but we cannot know truely whats in the mind of the next person, let alone what Jesus believed or what Isaiah believed. We reconstruct beliefs based on text and religious items. And what we see is variation going back past the dawn of civilization. There was never a true religion.
I can opine on this. There are categories of objectified ideas that were formative. Mystical experiences, natural experiences, legends, story craft, and just creative imaginings. All of these ingredients have one thing in common, they require the devotion and repetition of believers. So belief that something is divine and thus worthy of time forward carrying is essential.
So in contrast to Maimoides a rational understanding of divine truths requires a prerequisite of belief not for its instantaneous credibility, but just to be carried forward. So the question is not really about the truth of the objects of faith, but the truth that the objects of faith were believed to be sufficiently worthy to be carrier by the carriers. Does a dog carry a toy because it has the wisdom of the universe, or because the toy has some emotional value to the dog.
And so this aspect is common to belief. Moreover there is a notion in religion that the most pious have the ability to hear the requests of god, that they can channel gods voice. Once again we are talking about the exoeriential nature of esoteric mysticism. The truths of the divine are encapsulated by these notions of mind-soul-spirit, whether or not they are real, with a wrapper of idolatrous notions that surround them.
Again, truth and faith are polemic notions. A truth is something that can be interrogated from many perspectives, and the description of truth is an object that compatible from many if not all perspectives. In the modern age the bar for truth in a quantum world often results in fuzzy statistical definitions that hold up with mass examinations. We did not lose truth, we gained better insights on the difficultly of acquiring the best models of truth, thus informing science on the fortitude required to create better models. The rise and fall of string theory is but one example.
Faith neither needs or wants such structuring of perspectives, because its basis is in belief.
Maimiodes is looking at divisions in a belief, cracks, and he is not trying to find rational truth, but to wittle off the 'suckers' as to strengthen the remaing core of his faith.
Maimoides went after his fellow jewish mystics in a effort to prevent them from creating new cracks. The orthodox did the same thing with christianity. After a period of radiation, it eventually becomes apparent that the mystical notions of gnosticism, full preterism, epicureanism, etc were essentually a competition of an increasingly centralized ecclesia. So they banned books and cloistered mystics. But a major point of early movement was its mysticism, it may be christianity defined, but it is not the christology of the disciples.
In the story of Moses at the burning bush, if so true, was it god in the bush, or was it god in Moses mind. Was Ezekial in the 3rd level of heaven or was the heaven in his mind. These mystical images are not unique or original to Judaism, they are storied to the beginning of near eastern civilization.
I can't believe no ody liked your comment buddy, it was epic! Better than this guy telling us what other people thought maimonides was thinking. There's nothing complicated about Maimonides except if your an intellectual. Regarding your comments, my observation is that you ignore the possibility that at least the hierarchy of the Jews had the same concept of the cosmos as we do today, one that is compatible with the rig Vedas explanation of the cosmos. Both of these cultures go back 20,000 BCE according to linguistics to the same ancestors so it's not surprising to see such shared ideas and symbolism. These elites had the same brains and logic faculties we have today but every society carries a larger proportion of its number who either can't or don't want to use that power. I would suggest you consider the idea that it was and always will be this element of society who will create the need for God's and idols no matter what. They dont want to figure anything out, some don't even want to think. To use your analogy of the wailing Wall, Moses said that prayers were for comfort only, maimonides said the same. That doesn't imply that they go to a God or that they do anything other than give comfort. To the unenlightened prayers are a way to ask God for something but in Judaism there has never been a God except for the element of people I mentioned earlier. Moses and Maimonides were both astronomers and that's it. The term God was just a label to use for the cosmos at a time when the masses could not understand that the earth revolved around the sun, it's as simple as that and it's still the same today.
Discussing the Guide without Abulafia's Sitrei Torah on it is negligent. Sounds like you know how to learn Abulafia...
We discussed it briefly in an earlier episode.
@@SeekersofUnity turns out the Guide is in its entirety a code mystical guide into the secrets of the chariot
Isn't religion in general magical thinking?
20:00 is
YESSSSSSSS!!!!!!
01:03:00 - 🤍🌟
@Seekers of Unity
Can we be chavrusos? Lol
Aren’t we? 😉
@@SeekersofUnity would you ever do a multi part series on the Guide but inside and going through it from start to finish in depth? Like a weekly shiur on it
I have to leave some work for others :)
@@SeekersofUnity
Love the channel 🙂
Love You