Теология «скрытых параметров» vs «Копенгагенская интерпретация» Б-га Завета
Изначально мне хотелось попытаться начать «с начала». Но тут я вдруг осознал что если некоторые вещи могут сойти в устной беседе, когда видишь собеседника и можно передать мысль размахиванием рук, то в письменном виде эти вещи выглядят подозрительно и непонятно. Также оказалось что многое из того что я когда-то неплохо знал мне теперь как минимум
( Read more... )
а не устраивают "скрытые параметры" по многим причинам:
1. КМ демонстрирует что по крайней мере в определеных случаях это порочный подход.
2. понятийный аппарат "скрытых параметров" "устарел"
3. мне чисто по человечески кажется не правильным "заглядывать за ширму" и строить механизм (параметры) Его Души
4. в текстах и традициях есть много указаний на то что это (заглядывание, копание) не совсем правильное занятие.
кстати, Черняк обращал внимание на то что единственное святое писание содержит в себе дискуссию о том что происходит там, за кулисами - это Иов. в отличие от греческих мифов где всегда упоминается откуда и почему являются боги людям, у нас Б*г является нам а откуда и почему не известно.
Раши даже как-то удивляется первым стихам Берейшит - мол, ма питом? почему нам это сообщается? его ответ интересн, но я лишь замечу что даже тут нам ничего не говорится о том что у Б*га в"в мыслях" - просто описывается как (им) строятся отношения нашего мира с Ним. т.е. даже это не совсем "закулисная история".
Reply
или Дина предназналась Эйсаву, и Яков это понимал, но жалко стало девочку и он ее спрятал. То есть, нам известно, какая была воля изначально (идеальный тиккун Эйсава через Дину и еврейские потомки). И как человек вмешался, и как этот тиккун пошел потом (Дина все равно выходит замуж плохо, но с Эйсавом хотя бы была возможность для легального брака, еврейских потомков в этой жизни и т.д.).
то есть, в Танахе мы видим и "Его мысли" (идеальный путь развития) и то, как все преломилось через людей.
если коротко, своим пунктом 3, ты перечеркнул всю Каббалу и много-много мидрашим :)
Reply
there is no problem with having "destiny" of some sort (though we are rather strongly discouraged from inquiring into it too much, right?). but the point is that it is not covering our Brit. remember the old midrash about G*d taking Avraham "out" ? this is exactly my point. to me "hidden parameters" is strongly associated with "astrology" and "paganism".
if you want - sorry, a scientific analogy again, but this is a "science and religion" thread of sorts - the language of "pre-destiny" is kind of like classical physics. it may still "work" in many cases quite well. but we know that it is "wrong"! in the sense that it is a wrong way of thinking about the world if we want to try understanding its "nature" better (or at least more adequately).
Reply
but it's a Jewish thing nonetheless, and it's all about those concealed parameters.
as far as "predestiny" there are lots of allusions to it. for example, Bat Sheva was destined for David.
Cozby was destined for Zimry from six days of creation. etc, etc (which explains Moshe's passivity, because he saw something that Pinchas didn't).
i agree that we, as simple beings, shouldn't inquire into it too much, we should try to do what is right. but we should also accept that it exists, and it's perfectly aligned with one's soul (its holiness and its impurities).
Reply
there is a nice book "what's bothering Rashi?" which reading Rashi's commentary does not try to take them directly, but rather tries to understand what was his question/problem. this approach is exactly what is needed. just reading an old text without understanding its (and the modern reader's - different!) context is likely to be misleading.
2. above I did not dismiss pre-destiny. I put it in the context. there is also a midrash that Avram was not destined to have children, and so HaShem had to change his name to "cheat" pre-destiny (this trick is often re-used till our time - e.g., Steinzaltz to Even-Israel). I have little problem with pre-destiny that can be so cheated ;)
my point was that there is a fundamental limit to (and perhaps even danger in) pursuing the pre-destiny approach too far.
3. it is not an issue of us as simple beings! (the "hidden parameters" in physics are not talking about "simple beings" either - that's why I like that example). there are lots of base intuitions which we use without thinking. (in QM this is equivalent to making a measurement assuming that that does not affect the measured object). so a much more careful analysis of these intuitions is required for proper understanding. I use QM here as a good guide and example. not much more.
Reply
so i'll just be short:
1. Kabbalah, should be viewed with care, I agree, but dismissing it should be done with even more care :)
2. Going back to Moses and his pleading with Ha Shem, there is a commentary that the entire threat was a test for Moses, and I was alluding to that commentary
3. Predestiny is non cheated easily just by changing letters. The letters (and destiny) are changed in reflection to the changes of the soul. Similarly, to how Jacob's soul was changed after certain events and he acquired a new name of Israel (and an additional wife). So, these changes from above are not "cheating" they are reflections of changes from below.
4. we are simple in the sense that we don't have nivua, so there is no point in playing with pre-destiny (and letters). Moshe did, however, and he changed the name of Yeshua ben Nun.
sorry, i cannot support meaningful discussion about QM
Reply
1. I said nothing about dismissing. but quoting it at a face value in a context of a discussion challenging neo-platonic conceptual framework is problematic, since K is developed in that framework (but is not equivalent to it!). furthermore, if I am not mistaken, K peals a few more "levels" above our world, but still leaves the top level opaque. if you'd like transfer the focus of my discussion there, and treat the rest of the levels as classical physics before it gets to the relativistic or QM domain of Keter. ;)
2. as I noted in the main body of the post, hidden parameters can explain quite a lot of phenomena (and in religious domain I am not sure I have the equivalent of QM where they provably fail). and test or no test, the way Moshe past it is important. and without it the relationship would not be the same.
3. I was not talking about ease of cheating. it is not all that easy to cheat hidden parameters model either, btw. even today the situation is a bit more complex than I sketched - and there is a possibility that the proofs are not conclusive at all. this is not the point.
4. nivua is a more direct way of interacting with G*d. I would be rather careful about reading much more into it (I know that some commentaries do, but they too need to be read in their contexts, and we know that there are many commentaries/midrashim that directly contradict each other and yet all are "true" in some sense - they need to be seen as making a point not as prima face "absolute and ultimate truth"). even with Moshe G*d did not show him His face (despite that they talked face to face), never mind his underwear.
Reply
Leave a comment