Book of Mercy #8-10

[lazariuk]

So the enemies greet each other with tears. Don’t we wish it could be so! Peace.

When Leonard wrote "you gave me tears to greet my enemy" do you think he might be suggesting tears of repentance? It did seem like Jacob felt that he had done his brother wrong and was trying to make it better with a lot of gifts.

[DBCohen]

Simon,

Thanks for the reference. Sometimes we can’t see things that are right there in front of our eyes; I scrolled through the first pages of the thread, knowing it must be there, but still missed it. Thanks also for your wonderful contribution.

Meanwhile I realized that another allusion may be relevant here.

Who can tell of your glory, who can number your forms, who dares expound the interior life of god?

This line, and the crown mentioned in the earlier line, lead me to a famous Hebrew poetical and philosophical work, which is also quoted in the Prayer Book, called Keter Malkhut (“Royal Crown”; the first word means “crown” and the second means “kingdom”, which bring us back both to the first and tenth Sefirot of the Kabbalah, and to the “numberless worlds between the crown and the kingdom” of I.6). It was written by the 11th century Spanish-Jewish poet and philosopher Solomon ibn Gabirol, one of the greatest Hebrew poets of all times (and part of what we call the “Golden Age” of Hebrew literature in Moslem Spain). The poem exalts God’s greatness, and compares it with man’s insignificance, but maintains hope for everlasting life for those who really know God and walk in his ways. Keter Malkhut is several hundreds of lines long, divided into 40 sections of various lengths; sections 10-32 each begin with the words “Who can…tell/know/understand etc.”, different verb each time, describing God’s creation of each part of the universe, including the Heavens, and man’s soul and body. The gist of his philosophy (or one of its aspects, expressed in his philosophical writings and hinted at in the poem) is that it is possible to know the existence of God, but not more than that; all the attributes used for God do not describe his real being (and this also fits the quote above). He also argued that the will is the force mediating between God and the world of matter.

I am quite certain that LC is aware of this poem, and may had it in mind more than once while writing BoM. It sometimes takes me a while to identify his allusions, because I know them mainly in Hebrew, while he knows them mainly in English translation. Sometimes the Hebrew original jumps out clearly from the text, but sometimes the allusions are more obscure. I never read Keter Malkhut fully in English, although I know such translations exist, but not on the Internet, unfortunately.

[DBCohen]

Jack,

Tears of repentance? Maybe, but maybe more of relief, realizing that his brother is not going to kill him after all. Jacob is described in Genesis as a rather crafty fellow, while Esau is the emotional, uncalculating type. Later on Jacob is punished with “measure for measure”: when he gets too emotional about his son Joseph, he loses him. But it all ends well when they are reunited again; interestingly, at that time only Joseph cries (Genesis 46:29). Maybe Jacob has seen too much already.

So greeting your enemy with tears can have all kinds of meanings, but I’d sure like to believe in reconciliation, and hope for that unique moment when people realize that they have more in common than the other way around.

[tomsakic]

“…dance with a broken knee” – LC said somewhere – Tom would have the reference – that he no longer could sit at Zen meditation because of damage to his knees. And once again something is broken: the broken hill, the broken Hallelujah… But still he dances!

Hi Doron, I believe you remembered it from Wolfson's article "The New Jerusalem Glowing" The Kabbalah Journal, 2006, Page 127.

In the beautifully melodic ‘If It Be Your Will’ from the same album, Cohen similarly demarcates the place of brokenness as the fount of all prayer:

If it be your will
that a voice be true
from this broken hill
I will sing to you
From this broken hill
all your praises they shall ring
if it be your will
to let me sing

In Book of Mercy, we happen upon the same motif: ‘You have sweetened your word on my lips. … You placed me in this mystery and you let me sing … You led me to this field where I can dance with a broken knee’. I note, parenthetically, that in the interview with Kurzweil, Cohen made the following comment: ‘It was only after studying with my old Zen teacher for many years, when I broke my knees and I couldn't practice in the mediation hall, that I began practicing Judaism’. Perhaps the reference to dancing in the field with a broken knee in Book of Mercy should be decoded as a hint to this actual event in Cohen’s spiritual odyssey. Be that as it may, the main issue is that, for Cohen, poeticizing takes shape within the matrix of suffering. I cite again from the Book of Mercy: ‘Broadcast your light through the apple of pain, radiant one, sourceless, source of light. … Broken in the unemployment of my soul, I have driven a wedge into your world, fallen on both sides of it. Count me back to your mercy with the measures of a bitter song, and do not separate me from my tears’. Cohen does not ask to be released from his pain; quite the contrary, he insists that he not be separated from his tears, for the tears are the rungs on the ladder that lead to compassion and light. ‘You let me sing, you lifted me up, you gave my soul a beam to travel on’, Cohen expresses his gratitude to God, ‘You gave the injury a tongue to heal itself’. The healing comes not in the suppression or adication of infliction, but in the agony that trickles from its core. ‘Blessed are you who speaks from the darkness, who gives form to desolation, You draw back the heart that is spilled in the world, you establish the borders of pain. Your mercy you make known to those who know your name, and your healing is discovered beneath the lifted cry. … The ruins signal your power; by your hand it is broken down, and all things crack that your throne be restored to the heart’.

Kurzweil interview which Wolfson cites is not the Matrix one, but from The Jewish Book News (1994), it's available at Speaking Cohen Archives: http://www.webheights.net/speakingcohen/jewish.htm

It was only after studying with my old Zen teacher for many years, when I broke my knees and I couldn't practice in the mediation hall, that I began practicing Judaism. I began laying tefillin every morning and going through the Shemoneh Esrai and really understanding that there were these eighteen steps and that they were a ladder and that these were a way of preparing yourself for the day if you really penetrated each of those paragraphs. It was like starting from a very low place; you could put your chin up on the window and actually see a world that you could affirm.

Obviously LC repeated "broken knee" story.

Btw, Arthur Kurzweil just published Kabbalah for Dummies - http://www.arthurkurzweil.com

[mat james]

DB wrote;

Song of Songs is in Hebrew shir hashirim (the best of all songs). The word shir can mean a song either recited or sang. In Modern Hebrew too shir can mean either a “poem” or a “song”; there is no distinction, which sometimes makes life difficult. Why were the songs (or poems) in this book were called shir and not mizmor? Weren’t they accompanied by music as well? They probably were. But perhaps the distinction between the mizmor (psalm) as a religious song used in the temple, and the shir (song) of more secular nature, existed already in biblical times.

Now, in this thread we got into the habit of calling each of the 50 chapters a “psalm” (I first used the word “section”, but later gave in to the common use), but did LC ever use this term in relation to his book? Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe he always talked about it as a book of prayers. I think this also may be the reason for the shape of the book: the text is not printed as verse, but as prose, which is the common way in the Jewish prayer book. Perhaps we too should use the word “prayer” for each section of BoM, rather than “psalm”.

Thanks for the info DB.
No wonder I was confused!!!

We all notice the time and energy you put into clarifying points of interest for us and I would like to congratulate you on your selfless efforts.

Enough of the complements. Lead on, gentlemen and ladies. (1.10 becons!)

[lazariuk]

I must say that trying to respond to 1.10 has had a very profound effect on me, a lot more than I thought I was going to get out of participating in this discussion. It seems to have shown me how wrong I have been in a lot of my thinking. Even the stuff I wrote myself were things that I had never thought about in quite the same way until I wrote it. Even I seem to be pointing out to me where I am wrong.

I'm really glad that I have this opportunity to learn about my mistakes.

[tomsakic]

It seems that we all were struck by #10. Even Doron and & I lost scholar basis for reading it (but at least Doron came back with some intertextual readings after 1 day of heavy thinking I guess:-). My writing was wandering around lines, only with feelings to catch with. Btw, thanks, Simon, I agree that the image of freely dreaming children is what's left. I wanted to add this morning that children are fee from whatever original, maybe from sin, maybe they're not realised yet they're in state of Fall from Eden... No need to pray yet?

Anyhow, let prayer #10 floats in the middle air for a while, and if nobody comes forth with something new, we can leave with the feeling we got, and what we learned from it, to #11.

[lazariuk]

Who can tell of your glory, who can number your forms, who dares expound the interior life of god?

Seems to have the flavor of the following.

Isaiah 40 :12-14
Who has measured the waters in the hollow of his hand and meted out heaven with a span and gathered the dust of the earth in a measure and weighed the mountains in scales and the hills in a balance?
Who has directed the Spirit of the Lord or has been to him a counsellor?
With whom took he counsel, and who instructed him and made him to understand the path of justice and taught him knowledge and showed him the way of understanding?

The first time I ever really felt that the Bible had something to offer was when I read Isaiah 40. What was curious to me was that I didn't feel anything at all about Isaiah 39 and 38 etc. I found out years later that there were a few different Isaiahs and I could be wrong but I think that the second Isaiah starts with 40.

[lazariuk]

Seems to have the flavor of the following.

Writing that made me think of the first line in the prayer.

You have sweetened your word on my lips.

Made me think that Leonard as a Jew looking at Jesus and wondering about him might make the observation that there was one thing about him that was very sweet and that was that when Jesus expounded on the interior life of God that he said that none of the children would perish.

As a father myself I think that I can see from his point of view that would be important.

[mat james]

This is the way a mystic Eckhart, Jan van Ruysbroedk or maybe Buddha or Suzuki would interpret this (1.10) verse.
Maybe this poet too.

You led me to this field where I can dance with a broken knee. You led me safely to this night, you gave me a crown of darkness and light, and tears to greet my enemy.

In contrast to previous verses, Leonard is in a positive mood. He no longer feels inadequate and no longer mentions his women (soul) problems. (remember the soul is female and God is Male)

"You led me to this field where I can dance with a broken knee."

This is a koan creation of Leonard's. A paradox: For how can one dance with a broken knee!?
It is like the dance of Shiva, beyond the sensory world. The mystic goes through the "crown of darkness",( Ruysbroeck) like the cloud of unknowing....lost in the desert of darkness/unknowing and into the womb of God, which Eckhart would call Godhead (beyond Trinity), to complete "unknowing" lost in the unknowableness of God.....Then on to understanding, to Light (mystical knowing) and the mystic experience that brings tears to his eyes, tears that he will reflect on and acknowledge as proof, to "greet my enemy", which is doubt.
Leonard's soul is blending with the Soul of God. Leonard entered into/ introverted into, "mystical consciousness" in a very similar way that our mate Jack was talking about a few pages ago in his 2 examples (that he pseudo-denies are mystical experiences! But that denial is normal Jack for how can some ordinary guy really be a "Mystic"?.........!!!!!

Sleep, my son, my small daughter, sleep

On a worldly sentimental level Leonard may love his kids:
but on a mystical level he is referring to his innocent self as a little boy and his innocent soul as a little girl. Very original and beautiful !!!

"who dares expound the interior life of god?"

That he experienced the interior life of God (mystical union) through his innocent and unknowing (still) soul is suggested in this line and that this experience is un-explainable/ineffable is paradoxically proof of it's mystical nature, and thank god for the "tears" as they are the reminders, the traces of his experience, tracks from the Mystic that wash away his doubt, not just his doubts of the experience, but also his personal doubts relating to his God and his soul that he has alluded to in previous verses.

Eckhart would interpret this experience as "I live, yet not I but Christ liveth in me" But he, living in the 1300's didn't know about Zen satori or Buddha consciousness or Atman; or what Walter T. Stace calls "the introverted mystical consciousness" common to all major religions.

"And now you feed my household, you gather them to sleep, to dream, to dream freely, you surround them with the fence of all that I have seen. Sleep, my son, my small daughter, sleep –."

Leonard, on the other hand is well aware of these commonalities and in his "household", (his mind and his ideas, dreams, thoughts): his little soul and innocent little self now sleep happily as below, because of his personal experience of mystical union:

"this night, this mercy has no boundaries"

As San Juan de la Cruz would say, "in darkness and secure" Through my complete unknowing soul, through the stilling of my ignorant thoughts, God, in his mercy, has chosen to bless me with his infinite presence.

Matj

[DBCohen]

Great interpretation, Mat! Very original indeed! I liked it a lot. Thanks also for the kind words earlier.

Tom,
Is it the text, or the people? I was surprised earlier this week by 2-3 days of quiet on this hitherto over-active room, until I realized everybody were having a party in another location, the offshoot on “Love”. Well, that’s fine, as I always was in favor of creating different threads for different subjects. But it’s true also the I.10 has a somewhat different feeling; the writing in this book is in different modes, and we’ll have to get used to changes in style etc.

Jack,
I also like Isaiah 40 (but then I “like” most everything else in the Bible, for one reason or the other); in the same spirit of the verses you quoted (there are several other themes in that chapter) is Job 38 (and Job 28 is also worthwhile, while you’re at it). But you may have had something else in mind.

[lizzytysh]

Speaking only for myself, I can tell you I'm still reading, though, Doron... and, presumably to me, so are others.

Thank you, again, to you and the rest of the contributors, for your scholarly concentration on this work.


~ Lizzy

[Simon]

I was surprised earlier this week by 2-3 days of quiet on this hitherto over-active room, until I realized everybody were having a party in another location.

I also noticed this. I thought everybody was just busy reading all the long articles that were brought up.

But it’s true also the I.10 has a somewhat different feeling; the writing in this book is in different modes, and we’ll have to get used to changes in style etc.

These mode (mood) and style changes still intrigue me. And again they make me wonder about the linearity of the work and the order arrangement of the psalms. Even if we suppose that there were only 50 original psalms written and not 100 or 150, the 50 we have may have been written in a spontanious linear way and then rearrange afterwards. Writers do that all the time. It might explain the mode swings. What would be interesting would be to try to develop as we go a typology of the different modes/styles.

[lazariuk]

Jack,
I also like Isaiah 40 (but then I “like” most everything else in the Bible, for one reason or the other); in the same spirit of the verses you quoted (there are several other themes in that chapter) is Job 38 (and Job 28 is also worthwhile, while you’re at it). But you may have had something else in mind.

What I had in mind is a little selfish. Leonard's question rolling around in my mind eventually brought me to looking at Isaiah 40 and feeling pretty comfortable about it fitting in there nicely, at least for me. It has always been a book that stood out for me and because I have never studied the Bible with others I have few ideas how others might see it. From some reading I have a bit of an idea of how Christians see it but I am a little more interested in how Jews see it. Leonard isn't around to ask him and so I was hoping you would say something about it that would help me understand why I am drawn to the voice of Isaiah 40 and the chapters after and not to Isaiah 39 and the chapters before. There seems to be a mode change.
But if you think I am way off track thinking about Leonard's writing in this way then please feel free to ignor what may seen to you to not be relevant to this discussion.

[DBCohen]

Simon,

I’m also often intrigued by this problem, but I don’t have a good solution yet. No doubt, like all other books by LC, this one was carefully structured. I don’t know yet if there is a linear development from beginning to end, but for the time being we can perhaps detect a grouping of certain prayers into “units”, or at least an associative connection. Very roughly sketched, perhaps we can detect the following picture: in I.1-3 the narrator is bewildered, disconnected, lost; in I.4 he started to reconnect, although he did not find his language yet; in I.5 he reconnects with his heritage, and in I.6 he seems to have found his place within it once again; in I.7, however, there is a step backward with the realization of sin; this leads to the fall in I.8, but he does not lose his confidence that there is someone who catches him and breaks his fall, and this is affirmed in I.9, although loneliness is also a theme here. Now come I.10-11, which I’ve called the “domestic” scenes, in which the narrator feels relatively in peace with the world and himself; and if in the first prayers we found him in the monastery, and later wondering aimlessly and carrying the shield of loneliness, now he is clearly at home. We’ll have to see where he goes next. Does this make any sense to you, or do you have a better idea?

Tom,

Since you seem to be fascinated by the cat, perhaps you’d like to introduce I.11?

Jack,

Traditional Jewish interpreters would not agree, but modern scholarship made a very good case about the book of Isaiah having been written by two (some even say three) prophets of different periods. Indeed, “Second Isaiah” begins with chapter 40.