{24/10/2016}
Even approaching the approaching of this thing requires consideration.
{24/10/2016}
The goal is a proper study.
The means is to know how to study.
The precursor is to wonder how to know how to study.
More premises:
The subject of the goal is an Aleph. (#Borges)
A premise of the means is that the value of a study can vary.
A fundamental question within wondering is, how is a personal insight to be characterised?
Some hypotheticals:
If the Aleph is benevolent, then any approach should approach the ideal.
However, the mortal coil is limited.
But any benevolent Aleph (with more particular premises incorporated here) might include idiosyncratic arches to ideality.
However free will is presumed to always be endorsed, and surrounding literature describes scarred/scarring visions.
A difference could be made between that which is insightful by way of the Aleph.
And that which is insightful to the way to the Aleph.
“This helps me understand that,” whereas, “That helps me understand this.”
I must presume (at this moment) that the second must be tested rigorously.
But in any case the implication:
Personal insight should be classified as “insight by way of the Aleph that applies to an understanding of a form/concept”.
I presume:
The study of the form/concept of the Aleph, should itself be considered separately.
And this is by way of the expression/reception of the Aleph.
Thus I tentatively elaborate:
The study is in two ways:
Primary – by way of its expression and reception.
Secondary – by way of insight.
Each of these is in two ways:
A primary that is primary – that explains the substrate.
Primary that is secondary – that explains the approaching to the substrate.
Secondary that is primary – that enlightens some matter.
Secondary that is secondary – that serves for testing that approach to the substrate.
A specific example of this elaboration:
Re. 7I-1I-4III in Vayikra re. Korban Kapara.
E.g. primary – Rashi re. Keshet.
E.g. secondary – Adam on Isha
E.g. primary/primary – a facet of what Aharon can do.
E.g. primary/secondary – set of homologies and logic (nb. both present and absent)
E.g. secondary/primary – on the matter of partnership in the cosmic effort
E.g. secondary/secondary – set of homologies and logic (nb. both present and absent)
Can add:
Primary/primary/secondary – that enlightens some matter that is part of, but can be considered separately, from a substrate
E.g. (re. above) – enlightens the matter of kapara, or the matter of keshet, etc
One could continue in this way ad nauseam, e.g.
1/2/1 for primary explicit statements on laws of reception; 1/2/2 for those insighted
2/2/1&2 are rarer and more convoluted, and likely almost identical to instances of 1/2/1.
1/2/1/1v2 for what is explicit, versus what can be derived from those explications by insight.
&c.
{24/10/2016}
A chapter yet to be written:
Insights from molecular biology for a hermeneutics of infinite literature.
with a sub-chapter:
Molecular biology as an allegory for Talmudic study.
{05/01/2017}
Can add a third way, still not understood in details, which is that taught in Zohar Bamidbar 150a.
{18/01/2017}
How can one learn kabbala?
Goals:
- Familiarity with mapped terrain
- Capacity to explore the terrain
The difficulty is unique for this level of pardes, since the ideas are metaphorical due to metaphysics (and not due to epistemology, cf. drash). Thus the possibility of solutions to any conceived constellation may be endless. Like the student whose capacity for proving the pure and impure alluded to his excision from the line to Sinai.
There are a few suggestible intermediate steps, but there is only one solution to this problem, without admitting absolute solipsism:
Partnering ideas with someone who is Other and more qualified.
Until then… I danger myself by the hairs of chochma.
As for the first goal, want to accumulate the following:
- Annotations on map
- Study of annotations vs landmarks
- This should have been done much earlier. This is the obvious first step to finding the wisdom of kabbalistic exploration. Learning how to think, like the Talmud teaches at the Mishna.
- Here can use previously considered approaches:
- For any “part” of teaching, can find smaller parts that are conceived with flexible perspective once removed from the narrative they were in
- Gaining an appreciation for connections – informally labelling to see if any useful labels are noticed
Parallel to this would be wanted:
- An understanding of how comprehension is wanted
- Where is hitbonenut valuable, where metaphors, where lamed etc
- Familiarity vs flexibility etc
{18/01/2017}
“There is, however, a possibility for negative consequences even within Torah study. Since the Torah is enclothed in worldly affairs and operates with the framework of human logic, it is possible that a person will look at it as no more than a system of wisdom, forgetting about G‑d, the Giver of the Torah. When the Torah is studied with such an approach, it can become “a potion of death,” encouraging a person’s self-concern. Instead of serving as a tool to bring about the refinement of the world and the person studying, the study of the Torah can inflate the person’s ego and cause him to become more materially oriented.”[1]
The mundane fruits of Torah can mislead.
Perhaps K teaches psychology that is practical, but better to have seen those MoA’s in the Infinite, since the chaining down from the highest sphere of the patterns of comprehension would achieve the same without self-direction…
My idea: there are a time and place for each, but remember what Yissaschar is good for.
[1] The Tree of Life – Kuntres Eitz HaChayim
