Book of Mercy #27-28

[DBCohen]

Doron,

This passage is rich in mystical/kabbalistic imagery. The gates he is referring to,
are those beyond most conceptions of conventional religious practice. They are
entre' into depths of experience that aren't ordinarily sought or acknowledged as
desirable or God-given. The yetzer hora (evil inclination) and yetzer tov (good
inclination) are mystically both valid pathways towards holiness and Leonard
reveals knowledge of this with the light/dark contrasts that are pervasive in
this verse. This is esoteric ground and I don't feel competent to expand much
on it and misunderstandings that can arise could be disadvantageous/dangerous
to anyone that might want to incorporate this stuff into personal religious practice.
So, I'll maybe just leave this observation at the level of acknowledgement.

Steven,

I very much appreciate your observation that this piece has to do with the double inclination that human beings are blessed – or cursed – with. Lines like “… where even my sins fall short of the mark” seem very much to the point. However, I’m not sure that you must regard it on the mystical level, because the idea first came from the very rational deliberations of the Talmudic sages. I’ve mentioned this concept very early in our discussion, apropos the ape in #2 (BoM #1-5 thread, p. 3), and I’ll quote from there:

In traditional Judaism any person is thought to have two impulses or inclinations: a good inclination (yetzer hatov) and an evil inclination (yetzer har’a). Both are necessary for human existence, because ambition, sexual drive and even the creative drive are parts of the evil inclination, and without it there will be no human life. However the evil inclination constantly pushes us towards sin, and our duty is to use the good inclination to subdue the evil one, and not allow it to go out of control (this is somewhat similar to Freud’s concepts of the “id” versus the “super-ego”, with the "ego" mediating between them). It seems to me that this ape can be the yetzer har’a running wild.

Still, I don’t deny that a mystical subtext can also be found here (and certainly in Kabbalistic thinking the word is divided between good and evil), and you are right about it being a delicate and perhaps even dangerous concept, but I don’t think we should be too intimidated to discuss it. Please go ahead and say whatever else you have in mind which may be relevant to this prayer.

[DBCohen]

Mat,

I found your interpretation very beautifully written, and loyal as ever to your understanding of this book. I admit that in this specific prayer the notion of the soul seeking its reunion with the ultimate is forcefully expressed, and not for the first time.

What it is your opinion of the line: “direct my heart from the fiction of secrecy”?

[mat james]

What it is your opinion of the line: “direct my heart from the fiction of secrecy”?

...DB Cohen.

My Opinion

Seize my heart from the fiction of secrecy,

Leonard is suggesting that ultimately there is no “secret”, there is only ignorance of God's presence.
And, mercifully (BOM), God causes us to long for His Love.
The “fiction” is that “we” are doing the longing of our own accord.
The reality (non-fiction) is Unity, the Omni-present spiritual wedding.

As I see it, he leads us to this perspective through the following lines:

(…you who know the secrets of every heart,
whose mercy is to be the secret of longing.

Let every heart declare its secret,
let every song disclose your love,

…arouse the secret from obscurity.)

To me, this is the theme of Leonard’s song, “ Lover, lover, lover, come back to me”.
The secret and the fiction are that longing and love emanate from us. But, both Longing and Love emanate from God, "mercifully" and hence this verse is directly related to the title of this book, The Book of Mercy.
Or you could say;
Mercifully, God causes us to long for His Love.

The “fiction” is that “we” are doing the longing of our own accord.
The “non fiction” or reality according to Leonard is that God in his mercy, blesses us with His “Longing”.
And this “longing” is our desire to find God, to love God.
This “love/union” is infused and ever-present and intrinsic to existence and it is our ignorance (ignorance of this mutual love) that fictionalizes “separation”. (Separation from God and God’s Love.)

Hence, I think Leonard is suggesting that ultimately there is no “secret knowledge”, this is fiction, there is only “ignorance of Gods presence”, and that God:

Is the cause of our longing
Is always within us
And perhaps there is even the sub-plot that God “longs” for us to long.

"Lover, lover, lover, come back to Me." Leonard Cohen.

Matj

[DBCohen]

Mat,

Thanks for this interpretation. I think you are probably right about LC’s intention in this place.

I also think you are one of the most devoted Platonists ever to come across my way, if you don’t mind me getting personal.

[lazariuk]

Thank you for your kind words. No apology is needed, though I appreciate your
saying what you did.

Hi Steven

I was glad to see you respond this way. There was a question you raised that i would like to respond to. You wrote:

But, Deir Yassin as relevant here?

I think so, but I have more than my thought to judge by.
In 1999 Dr. Bill Friend, a member of The American Council for Judaism gave a talk at East Meadow Jewish Community Center, which is a traditional Conservative synagogue in New York.
He spoke about holy land being stolen and he spoke mainly about Deir Yassin. At the end of his talk he took out this book that we are discussing here and turned to the page titled Israel and read the entire passage. So along with my thought, I see that a member of the American Council for Judaism thinks it is relevant to connect the two together.
Not only did he think it was relevant but he was willing and did stand in front of a synagogue full of Jews and read it out to them as being so.
Do you know of anyone else who has demonstrated such a confidence in a relational value to any other situation?

What is being asked for regarding Deir Yassin is not something very big. There is not a big call for the land to be given back. What is being asked for is just a simple recognition of what happened as having happened.

[Manna]

The right for history to exist?

[lazariuk]

II.27
Because you do not wrestle with your angel.

That is kind of an optimistic statement. What makes him so sure that our angel is willing to wrestle with us? He seems really sure that a lot is within our grasp.

[Manna]

Someone once told me, "The address is always there, but we aren't always there." He was talking about God, but it might work for angels too.

[lazariuk]

Someone once told me, "The address is always there, but we aren't always there." He was talking about God, but it might work for angels too.

Earlier someone commented on the number of this prayer being 27 and the words from a Cohen song that went:

And twenty-seven angels from the great beyond
They tied me to this table right here
In the tower of song

Pretty tough angels to wrestle with especially if they have us tied to a table. Maybe that is what makes him so sure because they are going to wrestle with us if we like it or not.

[Steven]

Hi Jack,

That America, France, Russia and Poland are also mentioned in the poem leads
me to the conclusion that Israel wasn't isolated in condemnation as having
fallen short in standards of holiness. Also, it is to be noted that not America, France,
Russia or Poland have ever had control/governance/authority over the land of Israel
(though the Crusades drew their rampagers from among most of these countries).
Anyone can hijack a poem to advance a political agenda.-- I don't know the
group you referenced but their use of the poem as you related it, does appear
to me to be consistent with this. I don't know fellow you spoke of that addressed
the synagogue, nor have I ever heard of the group you said that he is a member of.
Irregardless, lots of people say all kinds of things for all kinds of reasons.

[lazariuk]

it is to be noted that not America, France,
Russia or Poland have ever had control/governance/authority over the land of Israel

Thats not quite true. What put Palestine in the position to be given away was the The Treaty of Versailles in 1919. Very major players in that treaty were America, Russia and France. Poland was also a major player in that they fought hard to have the treaty specify that they would not be occupied or annexed. Something that they were willing to have happen to another country. In 1919 the land that is now called Israel was totally under the control of countries like America Russia and France. The Treaty of Versailles might be the last major time that we let kings decide the fate of the world.
Also maybe worth being noted is that America especially was given control for deciding the fate of the land that is now called Israel. When the recommodations of the Anglo American Committee were made they were accepted and it was declared that they would be carried out and all this became conditional upon America being willing to go along with it. How Harry Truman was forced to go against his own better judgement is now studied in universities as an example of the power of lobbying.

Anyone can hijack a poem to advance a political agenda

That is a fair thing to say Steven but if they are willing to stand by how they use it sooner or later their agenda will become obvious and the poem will probably help in that.

[Steven]

Hi Jack,

There was no Palestine as a nation and the players of The Treaty didn't give it
away via their influence and whatever influence they had wasn't enough to
stop the chaos that followed the eventual vote for partition. Again, I don't
want to rehash versions of history, but will note that it is said that a haberdasher
of Truman exercised some influence on Truman's support of Israel, not a "forcing"
by any lobby group. Anyway, as I said, this can go on and on. But, I'd rather
not.

[lazariuk]

but will note that it is said that a haberdasher
of Truman exercised some influence on Truman's support of Israel, not a "forcing"
by any lobby group.

Harry Truman is quoted as saying : “I am sorry gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism. I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents.”

He seemed like a pretty straight forward guy.

[mat james]

I also think you are one of the most devoted Platonists ever to come across my way, if you don’t mind me getting personal.

...DB Cohen
It is true DB, I am very fond of that Old Greek

You may like to take a look at this site below.(They could check their spelling more often??)
My friends Plato and Plotinus may be off on a tangent, but they are not alone; and the Einsteinian view !

I particularly enjoyed the work of Walter T. Stace and his book, "The Teachings of the Mystics". (I pointed this out on another thread of this forum today. I was about to be burnt at the stake. It goes with the turf. )
http://www.bodysoulandspirit.net/mystic ... tace.shtml
http://www.bodysoulandspirit.net/mystic ... fine.shtml

[lazariuk]

The right for history to exist?

It doesn't seem to go away. While looking at this piece of history in question I am aware that it is other people's history and maybe that makes it easier to look at but while doing so I did get this uncanny feeling that it was preparing me to look at a part of my own personal history. Then it happened. I found that there was something that I did one time that I know was very wrong and that it caused a number of people a lot of pain. I have all kinds of excuses for doing it and in fact it was something that I have often bragged of doing, even to my son. I have probably done worse things but what is bothersome about this is that until now I don't think I ever really felt that it was wrong. I am sure I knew it but I just never wanted to acknowledge it. I ran away from home when I was 15 years old without even a goodbye to my parents and sister and without money went to Vancouver from Montreal.
Now that I am a father of a 15 year old boy it is sinking in what that must have been like for my parents. I spoke to my sister about it today and did get a sense that it was something that I was forgiven for. Still the fact that I had left this wrong unacknowledged for so long makes me wonder if it is the tip of the iceburg.
I am not one to promote the idea of public confessions to things but in the case of it being something that I have bragged about so often it is such a relief to acknowledge it in a way that is more appropiate. It is probably a sin that falls short of the mark.