What Do We Know About Creation? - - Part III

Before we move on to the more distant origins of the universe, let’s look again at words and thought.

Words are necessary only when communicating with something outside of yourself. Words are revealed. Thought is for yourself, remaining inside and concealed.

G-d’s words are revealed to us. What they create we can see. We see grass, sky, water, stars etc. G-d’s thoughts are mysterious. We can’t see what He is thinking and we don’t understand what His thoughts create: suffering, death, evil, galus (exile.) These we don’t understand. Why? What is He thinking?

So we know what is happening but we don’t know why. Only with great effort and sensitive feelings can we learn something of His thoughts as stated in Torah, Chassidus, Kabbalah, Midrash.

One other distinction between words and thoughts: everything has both mass and energy. The energy of words is the meaning that they convey or what they tell you about the speaker. If the words reveal the speaker a lot, as when they come from the heart, you can feel the energy. But this energy is distributed into many words made of even more letters, and vocalized through the five organs of sound: lips, tongue, teeth, etc. This is why the world, created through words, has so many creatures so different from one another - a world of countless little beings all separated by their individual properties. Just like words.

Thought, on the other hand, is more inclusive. We think in general pictures, not in
pixels. Maybe this explains the difficulty in concentrating. Thought sees the whole picture without its minute details and can get impatient with the little pieces of the puzzle.

So the universe in G-d’s thought is much more beautiful, peaceful, and whole.

More to come…


Send Page To a Friend

Full article...

q&a: Omniscience

CBC asked:
"G d is the knower, the object of knowledge, and the knowledge itself. So He knows all, past , future, present. He can't help but know. And yet we have some limited degree of free will. And yet because He is the knower, of course He knows what we will choose. And we often choose wrongly. It all breaks down for me about here. Is it that G d knows what we will choose and yet hopes he is wrong? It sounds ridiculous."

Dear CBC,

I love a thoughtful question. Thank you.

First, G-d’s knowledge extends to all existence, past, present, and future. This is because all existence derives from G-d’s personal attention. Hence if He is constantly creating everything He must also be aware of it.

Secondly, past, present and future are all part of what He creates. He is creating the future or has already created the future.

Now, if you say that He knows the future, you don’t mean that He is predicting the future like some soothsayer. Rather, that He knows the future. How can He know the future if it hasn’t happened yet? There is nothing to know! So knowing the future assumes that a future exists, has already happened and that this is something to know. He already knows it. We won’t know until we get there.

In other words: He doesn’t know what will happen, He sees the future already ‘happened’. He knows what you will choose only because you have already made your choice. He sees you choosing it and it is your free choice that He is observing – He knows your choice now because you have already chosen – in the future, which is for Him, the same as the past.

Your choice, therefore, does not come from His knowledge; His knowledge comes from your choice.

Thanks again for the question

RMF

Send Page To a Friend

Full article...

What Do We Know About Creation? - - Part II

Of the three garments of the soul - thought, speech and action - only thought is continuous. There is "a time to speak and a time to refrain from speaking" but never a time to not think. Thought is constant.
This is because thought is closer to the soul and the soul never stops.

What does a soul do? (Not the G-dly soul, just a soul of any kind). A soul knows and feels - intelligence and emotions make up the soul's faculties. Thought is the conscious awareness of what is going on in the soul. You are aware of the soul's emotions (love, fear, etc.) and the soul's store of knowledge. If you don't know when you are frightened or that you are in love, that is an unhealthy thought function or malfunction of thought.

So the power behind thought is the emotion that produces it. The emotion of the heart excites the thoughts just as the thoughts excite the words. You can see this on the face of a person when his feelings flood into his thoughts even before he utters a word.

Thus the universe originates, not in speech or thought; it already exists in G-d's kindness, severity, compassion, etc. The six days of creation are the results of six attributes within G-d. G-d felt generous - this created the thoughts and words of the first day. G-d felt judgmental - this created the thoughts and words of the second day, and so on.

So now, where does light come from? Divine kindness. The world begins in His kindness.

But where do emotions get their power? What creates kindness? What is their origin?



Share this post with a friend

Full article...

What Do We Know About Creation? - - Part I

Ask anybody, "How was the world created?" They will tell you, "The world was created by the word of G-d." G-d said "Let there be light" and there was light. But what does the word 'light' mean? Or what did it mean when it was first spoken? Since light had not yet existed, the word was meaningless.

We must understand these words to be not only names, but formulas.
Something like, H2O produces water. (O.K., it doesn't produce water; it just describes its makeup).

Rabbi Schneur Zalman, the Alter Rebbe, explains in the Tanya that words are composed of letters, each letter having creative energy. Arrange the letters one way and you get one type of creation. Arranged differently you get another creation. Aleph-vov-reish is the 'formula' for light. Aleph-bais-nun is the 'formula' for stones.
Aleph-reish-yud is the 'formula' for lions, etc.

Where do letters get this power?

Speech means revelation. You reveal what is on your mind or in your heart by speaking. Words convey to others what is hidden in your thoughts. Thought has more energy than word because it is closer to the soul. This explains why speaking can bring relief from troubling thoughts. Thoughts are the soul of the words you speak; hence thoughtful words feel alive while thoughtless words feel hollow. Thus the energy behind the 'word' is the thought.

When you are searching for the origins of the universe you will want to get to the earliest beginnings of existence. You will, therefore, ask, "Where did the word of G-d come from?" The answer will be from His thoughts. He thought about creation before creating, thus the universe already existed in His mind before He spoke it into being.

Incidentally, during the week G-d creates the world with words, but on Shabbat He creates with thought alone. The world is holier on Shabbat because of this.

But... What produces thoughts?

We'll get to that tomorrow, G-d willing.


Send Page To a Friend

Full article...

What Do We Know About Creation?

The problem with evolution is that it traces existence back to a primitive state but then gets stuck, because sooner of later you have to deal with the fact that before there was something there was nothing. And how do you get something from nothing?

Next week, we’ll do a series on creation, or as it’s recently been popularized, “Intelligent Design.” The Chabad insights into this subject are fascinating, but not very well known.

In the meantime, have a wonderful Shabbos and keep in touch.

Full article...

Response to “Unsure”

Dear "Unsure",

You are torturing yourself unnecessarily. As a fifteen year-old, why would you expect to ‘know for sure’ all the truths of Torah? How are you supposed to ‘know’ who created the world?!

You don’t how an airplane flies or how an antibiotic works. You’ve never seen a germ or a virus, and probably don’t know where your spleen is or what it looks like. Does any of this matter? No, you live your life based on knowledge received from the past without need to reinvent the wheel.

G-d created the world and gave the Torah on Mt. Sinai unless you have witnesses to the contrary.

The best and wisest minds among our sages, every one of them smarter than Einstein, studied the Talmud for three thousand years without doubt of its origin and you are not sure!

So you feel guilty as if you are responsible to prove or confirm cosmic truths! Get real. Relax. It’s not your job. Your job is to elevate yourself to a more productive, noble, respectful life every day.

Work on that. I guarantee you won’t regret it!

Full article...

Toxic Thought

“Have you ever stopped to think – and forgot to start again?”

Have you ever had someone ask you a question and you try to answer but they don’t seem to be available to your response? Sometimes, people ask philosophical questions but before you can give the answer you first have to help them think. They were not brought up to think; they were never taught to think.

A healthy mind can consider any subject objectively, unless one has been bribed. Then, those who can see clearly become blind and the righteous become twisted.

Tanya says, “The mind governs the heart by nature.” The mind can disagree with its own heart and rule against the heart’s desire.

The mind can disagree with its heart! That’s a good description of a healthy person. But a toxic person has toxic thinking as the addicted person has addictive thinking.

In toxic thinking, though, the mind can be defied in a number of ways. Let’s use this scenario: A woman is told, "The man is old enough to be your father. He has been married four times. He abuses women. He has no job and will take all your money!”

Toxin A - Will vs. thought:

“I don’t care. I want to marry him!” In this instance the mind is silenced by the will.

A willful person is governed by his will, and “nothing can stand in the way of will.” Our will is a dictator, a bulldozer. It does not tolerate interference, not even the interference of thoughtful logic.

Toxin B - Opinion vs. thought: “The man is old enough to be your father, he’s been married four times etc.”

“You don’t know him. I know him. His previous wives didn’t understand him. I do. I know what I am doing!” The mind is fixed on an idea and can’t think further.

Toxin C - Love vs. thought: “The man is old enough to be your father, etc.”

“But I love him. I can’t live without him! My heart will break if I can’t marry him!” And tears flow copiously. Emotion overwhelms the mind.

Toxin D - Compassion vs. thought: “The man is old, etc.”

“I know, but he is so lonely. He has no one. Everyone judges him and rejects him. I’m the only one who can help him!” Here pity cancels logic.

In each case, when challenged, the response will be moral indignation:
“Are you telling me I can’t have what I want?!”
“Are you calling me stupid? Don’t you think I know that?!”
“How can you ignore my love? How can you be so insensitive?!”
“You don’t care about people like I do. You are too judgmental.”

And in each case the thinking has been shackled. The mind must agree with the demands of will and emotion or risk being dismissed altogether.

The mind can also be poisoned or drugged:
“There is nothing wrong with an older man – everyone gets old anyway.”
“He is not abusive – he hits women only when they deserve it.”
“He never hit his third wife - she hit him first.”
“He is not lazy. It’s just impossible to find a job under this corrupt government. We’re moving to Canada.”

Here the mind is not ignored: it is toxic. The mind is thrall to the bias of the heart, or addicted and inseparable from the feelings.

A healthy person should be able to think:
My heart tells me one thing but my mind does not agree.
I like this but should I do it?
I think I should, what do you think?
I want to go but maybe you don’t want to go.

This independence of mind from heart is what parents and teachers should be giving their children and students.

When a child says, “I don’t want to” and the mother says, “But you have to do what you have to do” she is helping the child free his mind from the immature emotions that govern a child’s behavior.

“You don’t feel like playing now but your friend is here and wants to play, so be nice.” The mother is showing the child that he can be bigger than his moods; that he can think beyond his impulse and actually consider another opinion, another’s option.

Without this training the child’s thinking will be addictive and toxic, and as an adult incapable of a relationship with a spouse.

By the way, we are all guilty of some toxic thinking. It’s just a matter of finding it in ourselves and detoxing.

Share this article with a friend

Full article...

Sedona, AZ

Retreat for Women in Sedona, AZ

with Rabbi Manis Friedman

March 7-12, 2006

Click here for details

Full article...

Do We Believe in G-d?

This article by Rabbi Friedman was originaly published on www.chabad.org.

Even the honest atheist will agree that a first cause, an original being, must have preceded the universe. This original cause or source is what so humbled Einstein, although he incorrectly described it as a religious experience. The questions of faith begin with how we understand this First Cause, its nature, and its relationship to us and to the universe.

The statement, "I believe there is a G-d" is meaningless. Faith is not the ability to imagine that which does not exist. Faith is finding relevance in that which is transcendent. To believe in G-d, then, means not that you're of the opinion that He exists, but that you have found relevance in Him. When a person says "I believe in G-d" what s/he really means is "G-d is significant in my life".

In discussing our relationship with G-d, the question we first need to ask, is, Who cares? In what way is He relevant?

For some people, G-d is relevant because they are concerned with the origins of existence. For others, G-d is relevant because they are concerned with the afterlife, and faith is a prerequisite for getting to heaven. Finally, for others, G-d is relevant because they believe that life has purpose.

In Judaism, particularly in Chassidism, the interest in G-d comes from the conviction that life has meaning. The recurring question in Chassidic thought is: Why is a soul sent into the world to suffer in a physical body, for 80, 90 years? We know there is a purpose, that G-d is the author of that purpose, and we want to know and understand it.

--------

Chabad Chassidism teaches that the mind is the soul's capacity to detect logic, the heart is the soul's capacity to respond negatively or positively. The respective functions of the mind, heart and soul are often confused.

One who lives by his heart exclusively, trusts only what he feels. One who lives by his mind exclusively, trusts only what fits. But neither of these tells you the truth. The mind demands that logic be trusted, the heart demands that the emotions be trusted. Yet both can be mistaken. They do not reveal inherent truth. For that, we turn to the soul, the neshamah. Because the soul is a part of the Divine -- and that is truth. When we have faith, when we find relevance in G-d, we are trusting that instinct in the soul that tells us that G-d is the purpose of life.

In pragmatic terms, the mind, the heart and the soul must each fulfill their function: when we know all that can be known, when we come to the edge of knowledge and logic itself tells us that we have reached its outer limits and it cannot handle what lay beyond this point, faith enters. Where the mind is no longer adequate, the soul responds to truth. This is faith.

-------

This faith, this soul response, is necessary in the fulfillment of that category of mitzvot known as chukim, supra-rational laws, laws that do not subscribe to reason.

If someone has difficulties with these particular commandments, that is an indication that they may be relying on the mind and heart at the expense of their own capacity to react to truth -- the expression of their soul. When a Jew fulfills a mitzvah before they've fully intellectualized it, they are allowing their neshamah to respond to truth.

It is an ability that often needs to be cultivated. The sixth Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn (1880-1950), recounts in his memoirs that as a small child, he once asked his father to explain to him why we follow a particular custom with regard to the saying of Modeh Ani upon waking in the morning. Instead of giving the answer, the Rebbe's father led him to an elderly, simple Jew, and asked the Jew, "Why do you say Modeh Ani in this particular way?" To which the man responded, "Because that's how my father taught me to do it." The Rebbe's father might have just as easily given him the rational reason for the custom. Instead, he saw it as an opportunity to exercise his ability to respond with faith.

This is why in Chabad-Lubavitch it is our approach to invite a Jew -- even one who claims not to believe -- to do a mitzvah, before we engage them in a discussion on faith. Because in consideration of the existence of the soul, we can assume that we don't have to convince people of life's Divine purpose. We just have to get them started, and with each mitzvah they do, their neshama asserts itself more, and questions become answered of themselves. By way of analogy, if a woman's maternal instinct appears to be absent, you don't argue the philosophy of motherhood with her. Just put the baby in her lap and her maternal response will emerge.

-------------

The relevance we find in Him will differ from person to person. Being that He is everything, people will experience G-d in every possible way. He is the G-d of Abraham and Isaac, of Benevolence and Might. And it is also true, as G-d says, "I am known according to my deeds." Some will know Him as a rewarding G-d, others as a G-d who punishes, who provides, who saves, who enlightens, who inspires, and so on and on..

In the beginning, G-d revealed Himself as the creator, master, king -- all very impersonal roles. In Halachah (Torah law) G-d reveals His laws, but doesn't allow His "personal feelings" to show. Later, in the Kabbalah, G-d makes Himself vulnerable; He shares imtimate details. He is humanized in a two-way relationship. So the Halachist has great respect for the wisdom of the commandments, while the mystic sees G-d as taking the mitzvot personally. When G-d says, "don't cut down fruit trees," if we were sensitive we would not only hear a commandment, but we'd see something about G-d. Kabbalah reveals that something. The halachot are the details; Kabbalah reads between the lines.

Kabbalah gives us a very different perspective on G-d's "anthropomorphic" behavior. It reminds us that Torah comes to teach us about G-d, and that expressions such as "G-d spoke," "G-d's hand," "G-d's anger," need to be considered from Torah's or G-d's perspective. We are not the reference point for G-d's behavior; G-d should serve as a reference for our behavior. He created the world. Speech, hand, anger, jealousy -- these are all His creations, these are all Divine rights. Our speech, our hand, our anger, our jealousy -- these are only metaphors for the real thing, not the other way around. When we read that "G-d raises His hand" and splits the sea, we need to measure our own hand against that. When we raise it, what happens? Nothing. We learn then that we are not quite as powerful as G-d. When we read that G-d gets angry and punishes because He created a world with a Divine purpose, and that purpose is frustrated, we ought to measure our own anger against that. What have we created? Nothing. We may not, therefore, get angry and punish as G-d does. Considering G-d's anger and other attributes in this way brings us to a humbling recognition. Only when our anger or jealousy is an expression of moral indignation does it reflect true, Divine qualities. Only then, may we exercise such expressions. Whatever truth there is in anything in us, it is the extent to which we embody what it is He tells us about Himself.

Full article...

Pet Peeves: Just Words?

Example: Government leaders who say, “We have the right to defend our citizens.” Is it really a ‘right’? Or do they mean ‘responsibility’? Every government is obligated to defend its citizens from threats domestic or foreign. Should a government feel that they are incapable of such defense, they must resign and let someone else govern. Is it just words? Or is it wrong-headed?

Example: Rabbis who equivocate, “We believe G-d spoke to our ancestors at Mt. Sinai.” We believe? Who’s we? Believe? Do you or don’t you know? It’s been 3,000 years and you still don’t know? And you’re a rabbi!

Did G-d create the world - yes or no? You believe he did? Maybe you should take up knitting! Is it just words or does it reveal a lack of conviction – the conviction that every Jew should have?

Example: Teachers who say, “G-d wants your Mitzvahs but doesn’t need them.” Let me understand this: G-d wants what he doesn’t need? He’s too perfect to need but not too perfect to want?

He wants every Jew to keep kosher yet not every Jew does; is He still perfect? He creates the world with a purpose – an important purpose – yet whether this purpose is achieved doesn’t matter to Him?! He doesn’t need it?

G-d says “I am a jealous G-d” but He is not really jealous?! He says non-kosher animals are an abomination, but thier not His abomination?!

We call Him “Father and King” but He doesn’t need His children or His people?! He doesn’t need Pharoah and the Egyptians to know Him – even as He gives that as His reason for ten plagues of human suffering?!

Wants. Needs. Is it just words or does it trivialize Him to claim that He demands what He does not need?

Example: Calling intimacy “Making love.” Does one ‘make’ love? Love is a feeling. Does one make feelings? Love means attraction. Does one make attraction? I know you can feel love; I don’t think you can make love.

Love is a very nice feeling and is often apropos to important relationships. But how can you compare it to intimacy? Love is personal; intimacy is interpersonal. Love can’t be regulated; intimacy must be regulated. Love can’t turn ugly; intimacy can. Love can not produce a baby; intimacy can.

So calling intimacy ‘love’ is degrading and vulgar. It reduces the sacred to a feeling; the spouse to an object of one’s mood; the baby to an intruder on a personal experience. Is it just words or we losing sight of all that is holy.

Example: People say “I doubt that”. Often they really know nothing at all about the subject. So what is doubt? What’s wrong with saying, “I really don’t know?”

“Do you think there is life on Mars?” “Nah, I doubt it”. Is that supposed to mean that you know something about Mars that makes you doubt it would support any kind of life?

How old do you think the world is? Do you think the Torah is Divine? Who do you think wrote the Zohar? Are you not sure or are you sure you don’t know? Is it just words or do we have a hard time being honest?

Full article...

All I Got Was Words

Speaking of words... here's a really old classic.

All I Got Was Words
by: unknown

When I was young and fancy free
My folks had no fine clothes for me
All I got was words:
Gott vet geben!
Gott tsu dankn!
Zoll mir nur leben un sein gezund.

When I was wont to travel far
They didn't provide me with a car
All I got was words:
Gay gezunt!
Fuhr pamelech!
Hob a glicklikhe reise!

I wanted to increase my knowledge
But they couldn't send me to college,
All I got was words:
Hob seichel!
Zei nit kein nahr!
Toire iz di beste schoire!

The years have flown. The world has turned.
Things I have forgotten, things I've learned,
Yet I remember:
Zog dem eemss!
Gib tsedakah!
Hob rachmaness!
Zei a mentsch!

Full article...

Mazal Tov!

Mazal Tov to Rabbi Friedman on the engagement of his son, Shmuely, to Rivky Alevsky of Cleveland, OH.

(This does explain the brief pause on this blog, but we will have a new post up shortly.)

Full article...

Pharaoh's G-d Complex

Never underestimate a story in Torah. For just as Torah itself is endless in meaning, so is every story. The characters in Torah must also be respected. Even the villagers. If Torah tells of them, and quotes them, there must be more to them than meets the eye. Pharaoh was no dummy (remember, crazy not stupid). He had a ‘G-d complex’ and wished to be worshiped as G-d is worshipped.

Upon discovering, from Joseph, that G-d wants to make a home for Himself out of the material, physical world -‘a dwelling place in the lowest world’- Pharaoh enslaved the Jews, demanding that they build homes for him out of the lowest materials in the world: mud and straw.

He was no dummy; when you are G-d, you do as G-d does. G-d chose the children of Abraham, and so does Pharaoh. G-d gives them a mission, so does Pharaoh. G-d expects total devotion, so does Pharaoh. Nothing can change G-d’s mind, nothing can change Pharaoh’s mind (almost.)

Pharaoh is also a realist with good practical sense. When Moshe tells him that the Jews want to go into the desert to worship G-d, Pharaoh is horrified by the prospect. “You want to go out into the desert in search of G-d?! I can’t let you do that. It’s irresponsible. Don’t you know what happens to people who build compounds and gather followers to seek signs of G-d? Haven’t you heard of Waco? Jim Jones? ‘I see blood in your future if you follow in this path.’ (Kool-Aid maybe)”

When Pharaoh finally relents, he thinks “Let them take a ‘minyan’ of Jews into the desert for three days, ‘to get it out of their system’.” But Moshe says “With our young and old, our sons and our daughters we will go.” Pharaoh is shocked, “You really are crazy, I can’t let you do this.”

Pharaoh is also surprised at Moshe, who grew up in the palace. Of all people, Moshe should appreciate the great strides Egypt was making in all fields. Egypt was on the cutting edge of science, medicine, architecture, and even religion with all its G-d’s. Egypt was the future of civilization at its best. Egyptian culture will reign supreme forever! The Jews could be part of this historical development, and Moshe wants to take them into the barren desert to become nomads! Useless, irrelevant, and insignificant creatures! Useless to themselves and the world! Pharaoh won’t allow it. Jewish intelligence, talent, and resourcefulness are terrible things to waste.

So Pharaoh sounds like a mentch after all. His arguments will echo many times through history, you hear it even today.

So what was wrong with Pharaoh?

Pharaoh’s problem was he thought Moshe wanted to go in search of G-d, to find or invent religion. In fact it was G-d who was searching for the “nation from within a nation” because he needed them. Once Pharaoh realized this, he not only let the Jews go, he rushed them out of Egypt because, “You don’t keep G-d waiting.”

Pharaoh now understood that Judaism was not to be another religion and Jews would not be religious. This was something else. This divine project would in fact be more relevant through history than Egypt, and long after Egypt is consigned to the museums of the world.

Judaism is vital, alive, and making trouble as much as before, with no sings of its infirmity.

But we need to be reminded of this truth daily “in remembrance of the Exodus from Egypt.” Jewish leaders need to make decisions based on Torah and Jewish Law, not on the values of Western civilization! We all need to put G-d’s agenda before our own and teach our children Torah before any other subject. Only then will the Pharaoh’s of the world realize the truth and help us make it a reality.

Full article...

Road Trips 1-06

Recent events on the road with Rabbi Friedman...

In Merimack Valley, MA:

In Solon, OH:

Were you there?

Give us a report!!

Full article...

"Ism"s That Aren't

The following is from a talk given by Rabbi Manis Friedman shortly after 9/11. The print article first appeared on www.Chabad.org. Since then it has only become more and more relevant.

In this past few years, words have become very important. In truth, words are all we’ve ever had. But in light of the reactions and responses to what today is known simply as “9/11”, finding the right words has proven to be quite a challenge.

On that horrible morning we heard words like “criminals” and “madman”. Toward the end of the day, the attitude and language began to shift. The word “evil” was being used. That was a positive change.

The good news is that there is a moral nerve, a moral sensitivity that Americans are revealing that is real and strong.

On most subjects Americans are morally confused. However, when we see something that is clearly evil, America has no tolerance for it. By the same token, when we see something that is clearly good, America honors it. So when the word “evil” was introduced into the discussions of 9/11, that showed that we had moved toward something good—moral clarity.

That’s one word that was important to add.

There are other words that are important to delete. One example is the word “terrorism”.

If our response is to be a moral one, if we are to become better people, if something positive is to come of all this, then we mustn’t categorize it as terrorism. It’s the wrong word. There is no one in the world that teaches his or her children to believe in terrorism. In fact, there really is no such thing. There is communism. There is socialism. There are beliefs, religions, political systems, and philosophies. These are the “isms.” Terror is nothing more than a tool used to enforce them. This point was illustrated by the kinds of people and nations that joined the “Coalition against terror.” Even Arafat was “fighting terror.”

The truth is that this has been a catastrophe in the waiting for the past 2,000 years. We have acquired too many “isms”. And many people with many “isms” will inevitably cause a war. The bigger the numbers, the bigger the war.
We all heard interviews with representatives of Moslem groups. We heard them condemn what happened. But when asked, “Are the people who did this going to Heaven or Hell?” They couldn’t answer.

As long as we are labeling what happened as “terrorism,” anyone can condemn—even those who agreed with the perpetrators.

There is another word that needs to go—“Fanatics”. And by the same token, “extremist”. Both very useless words. If your cause is just, if you are on the right side, what is wrong with being an extremist? Is there really too much of a good thing? Have you had too much of a good thing lately?

If something is good, how does more make it bad? More should be better. Do we spoil our children with too much love? (Sometimes we use the phrase “too much love” when we mean “not enough discipline.” Actually, inadequate discipline is usually a sign of not enough love.) How about too much money? A lot of money is only bad if that’s all you have.

So why are we condemning fanaticism? That which is wrong in big scale is wrong in the small scale. It may not be as detrimental but it is equally wrong. We need to get to the root of the problem, to the moral issue that separates the good from the bad.
Since World War II we have not been faced with such a monumental issue of morality on which the world was divided. Just as President Bush said, “You are either with us or with them. There are two sides to this issue. And G-d is not neutral on the subject.”
So let’s not talk about “terrorism”—there is no such ism. Let’s not condemn “fanatics” and “extremists”, that serves only to distract us from the heart of the matter. Rather, let’s talk about the root, the subtle beginnings of this evil.

The subtle beginning of this evil is the belief that when you die you go to a better place. That is Evil. It may sound noble, spiritual, heavenly, religious and comforting. It also causes these believers to fly airplanes into large buildings.
What about the virtues of martyrdom? Isn’t this a noble act?

Of course this was not noble and it was not martyrdom. When I trade in my old car for a newer model, is that an act of self-sacrifice? If you give up your life because you believe that you will get a better one, is that martyrdom or just plain narcissism? Or perhaps the worst possible form of narcissism.

True martyrdom is when you give up your life precisely because life on earth is important enough and necessary enough to give up your own life for it. Is Heaven a better place? The answer must be “No.” Easier? Yes. Better? No.

We want to remain on earth because this is where we serve G-d. This is where we make a difference. The belief that heaven is a better place is an evil and it leads to unthinkable horrors.

G-d wants a world of people diverse in culture, in style, in appetite, in opinion—maybe even in religion; but not in morality. There cannot and may not be two moralities. This is what we mean when we say, “G-d is one.”

We’ve all had such a moment of clarity on September 11. Look how easily and spontaneously the word “G-d” came to everyone’s lips. Would you have expected this? In this secular, materialistic, assimilated community, the word G-d came most naturally to our lips. Not any religion-specific deity, savior or prophet, but simply G-d. And why did that happen? Because we saw beyond “religion” and “secularism.” We weren’t thinking about heaven, but about good and evil.

You can have two of everything else and it’s okay. Have two religions or five or fifty. Have sixty different versions of heaven. Pray twice a day or five times. On a carpet, on your knees, standing up. Whatever. But when it comes to morality there is only one G-d.

You don’t want to eat fish on Friday or work on Sunday? Gezunterheit. As long as the diversity doesn’t include differences of opinion on “Thou shall not kill.”
When we all agree on the definition of that one commandment, then and only then will there be peace in the world.

So just at the point in history when we thought that G-d and faith had finally become irrelevant, it turns out that the non-believers are unimportant (or not pertinent). Because if you believe that G-d wants you to kill, then your are one of the bad guys. If you believe that G-d doesn’t want you to kill, then you are one of the good guys. If you don’t believe you don’t make a difference.

Now, that we realize that commandments are indispensable, we should take another look at them all. Is honoring my parents negotiable? Is giving charity optional? Or are they essential to civilization itself?

Full article...