Faces in this room
- Name and pronouns
- Geography
- One short question you have about relationships (not to be answered now), just to ask.
(18) G!d said, “It is not good for the earthling to be alone; I will make a fitting helper for him.” (19) And G!d formed out of the earth all the wild beasts and all the birds of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that would be its name. (20) And the man gave names to all the cattle and to the birds of the sky and to all the wild beasts; but for Adam no fitting helper was found. (21) So G!d cast a deep sleep upon the man; and, while he slept, G!d took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that spot. (22) And G!d fashioned the rib that had taken from the man into a woman; and G!d brought her to the man. (23) Then the man said, “This one at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. This one shall be called 'Woman,' for from man was she taken.” (24) Hence a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, so that they become one flesh.
(א) ויאמר אלקים נעשה אדם בצלמנו כדמותנו. אמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר: בשעה שברא הקדוש ברוך הוא את אדם הראשון, אנדרוגינוס בראו, הדא הוא דכתיב: זכר ונקבה בראם. אמר רבי שמואל בר נחמן: בשעה שברא הקב"ה את אדם הראשון, דיו פרצופים בראו ונסרו ועשאו גביים, גב לכאן וגב לכאן. איתיבון ליה, והכתיב: ויקח אחת מצלעותיו?! אמר להון: מתרין סטרוהי.
(1) Rabbi Yirmiyah son of Elazar said, when G!d created the first earthling, it was created an androgninus [intersex]; thus is it written, "male and female did G!d create them."
Rabbi Shmuel son of Nachman said, when G!d created the first earthling, G!d created him with two faces, one on each side, and G!d [later] split him along the middle, forming two backs. They [other rabbis] challenged him: saying but is it not written, "And G!d took one of his mitzalotav [ribs]!" Shmuel replied saying, mitzalotav doesn't mean rib, but rather one of its sides.
Rabbi Margaret Wenig
Men, women, and every possibility in between were created simultaneously. “...this verse is a merism, a figure of speech in which a totality is expressed by two contrasting parts (e.g. “young and old,” “thick and thin,” “near and far.”)... God created male and female and every combination in between.”
The Nesirah Myth in Lurainic Kabbalah - based on the writings of Ohad Mizrahi
Lurianic Kabbalah (Sfat, 16th century) speaks, in its unique symbolic language, about a process of transformation between masculine and feminine energies. These energies and process are seen reflected historically, interpersonally, intrapsychically, and within the Divine.
The cutting myth is a description of a process that takes place between the major symbols of the masculine [zeir anpin] and the feminine [shechinah]. The cutting process has many details, but in summary, there are four stages to it:
1) The first stage is when masculine and feminine do not face each other. Their backs are fused to each other - like adjoined twins sharing the same back. They literally have each other's back, perpetually in a protective stance, but unable to see each other. In this stage, the feminine is smaller than the masculine and she lacks the ability to share her own light.
2) The second stage is when things are changing: the masculine falls asleep, apathetic, unaware, unconscious, and numb. Meanwhile the feminine is growing.
3) In this stage, feminine and masculine separate from each other. The feminine grows to the same size as the masculine and they each grow their own back where they once were fused. This stage is often marked with Din - sharp judgement necessary for the cutting.
4) The final stage is where they awaken as two complete beings. They no longer need Din, and the two turn around to face each other. They meet again, but now they are equal. They are separate and independent beings, discovering that each of them is different, yet equal to the other. They can look eye-to-eye, face-to-face, soul-to-soul.
Text by Sarah Schneider
׃ (כ) וְהָי֣וּ הַכְּרֻבִים֩ פֹּרְשֵׂ֨י כְנָפַ֜יִם לְמַ֗עְלָה סֹכְכִ֤ים בְּכַנְפֵיהֶם֙ עַל־הַכַּפֹּ֔רֶת וּפְנֵיהֶ֖ם אִ֣ישׁ אֶל־אָחִ֑יו אֶל־הַכַּפֹּ֔רֶת יִהְי֖וּ פְּנֵ֥י הַכְּרֻבִֽים׃ (כא) וְנָתַתָּ֧ אֶת־הַכַּפֹּ֛רֶת עַל־הָאָרֹ֖ן מִלְמָ֑עְלָה וְאֶל־הָ֣אָרֹ֔ן תִּתֵּן֙ אֶת־הָ֣עֵדֻ֔ת אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֶתֵּ֖ן אֵלֶֽיךָ׃ (כב) וְנוֹעַדְתִּ֣י לְךָ֮ שָׁם֒ וְדִבַּרְתִּ֨י אִתְּךָ֜ מֵעַ֣ל הַכַּפֹּ֗רֶת מִבֵּין֙ שְׁנֵ֣י הַכְּרֻבִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֖ר עַל־אֲרֹ֣ן הָעֵדֻ֑ת אֵ֣ת כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֧ר אֲצַוֶּ֛ה אוֹתְךָ֖ אֶל־בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ (פ)
(20) The cherubim shall have their wings spread out above, shielding the cover with their wings. They shall confront each other, the faces of the cherubim being turned toward the cover. (21) Place the cover on top of the Ark, after depositing inside the Ark the Pact that I will give you. (22) There I will meet with you, and I will impart to you—from above the cover, from between the two cherubim that are on top of the Ark of the Pact—all that I will command you concerning the Israelite people.
אמר רב קטינא בשעה שהיו ישראל עולין לרגל מגללין להם את הפרוכת ומראין להם את הכרובים שהיו מעורים זה בזה ואומרים להן ראו חבתכם לפני המקום כחבת זכר ונקבה
Rav Katina said: “When the Israelites would come to the Temple for the holiday the curtain would be pulled back for them and they would see the cherubs intertwined with each other. [The priests] would say to them: “Behold, the love of you before God is like the love of man and woman.”......
כיצד הן עומדין רבי יוחנן ור' אלעזר חד אמר פניהם איש אל אחיו וחד אמר פניהם לבית ולמ"ד פניהם איש אל אחיו הא כתיב (דברי הימים ב ג, יג) ופניהם לבית לא קשיא כאן בזמן שישראל עושין רצונו של מקום כאן בזמן שאין ישראל עושין רצונו של מקום
How were the cherubs standing? Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Elazar disagree about this. One says: Their faces were turned one toward the other. And one says: Their faces were turned toward the House, i.e., the Sanctuary. The Gemara asks: But according to the one who says that their faces were turned one toward the other, isn’t it written: “And their faces were toward the House” (II Chronicles 3:13)? How does he explain the meaning of this verse? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, as their faces miraculously changed directions in reflection of the Jewish people’s relationship to God. Here, when it states that the cherubs faced each other, it was when the Jewish people do the will of God. There, the verse that describes that the cherubs faced the Sanctuary and not toward each other, was when the Jewish people do not do the will of God.
I and Thou by Martin Buber
When I confront a human being as my You and speak the basic word I-You to him, then he is no thing among things nor does he consist of things.
He is no longer He or She, limited by other He’s and She’s, a dot in the world grid of space and time, nor a condition that can be experienced and described, a loose bundle of named qualities. Neighborless and seamless, he is You and fills the firmament. Not as if there were nothing but he; but everything else lives in his light.
Even as a melody is not composed of tones, nor a verse of words, nor a statue of lines–one must pull and tear to turn a unity into a multiplicity–so it is with the human being to whom I say You. I can abstract from him the color of his hair or the color of his speech or the color of his graciousness; I have to do this again and again; but immediately he is no longer You.
Levinas - Ethics and Infinity
The face is signification, and signification without context. I mean that the Other, in the rectitude of his face, is not a character within a context. Ordinarily one is a “character”: a professor at the Sorbonne, a Supreme Court justice, son of so-and-so, everything that is in one’s passport, the manner of dressing, of presenting oneself. And all signification in the usual sense of the term is relative to such a context: the meaning of something is in its relation to another thing. Here, to the contrary, the face is meaning all by its self. You are you. In this sense one can say that the face is not “seen”. It is what cannot become a content, which your thought would embrace; it is uncontainable, it leads you beyond.
כְּמוֹ שֶׁמְּבֹאָר בְּדִבְרֵי רַבֵּנוּ זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה (בְּמָקוֹם אַחֵר בְּלִקּוּטֵי תִּנְיָנָא סִימָן מֵ"ם). נִמְצָא, שֶׁעִקַּר קְדֻשַּׁת אֶרֶץ-יִשְׂרָאֵל נִתְגַּלֶּה בְּרֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה. וְזֶה בְּחִינַת כַּוָּנוֹת כָּל הַמִּצְווֹת וְהַתְּפִלּוֹת שֶׁל רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה, כִּי מְבֹאָר בְּכִתְבֵי הָאֲרִ"י זַ"ל שֶׁבְּרֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה מַתְחֶלֶת הַנְּסִירָה שֶׁמְּנַסְּרִין בְּחִינַת מַלְכוּת מֵרֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה עַד יוֹם כִּפּוּר. וְאַחַר כָּךְ בְּאַרְבָּעָה יָמִים שֶׁבֵּין יוֹם כִּפּוּר לְסֻכּוֹת. וּבְסֻכּוֹת נִמְשָׁכִין כָּל הַחֲסָדִים פְּנִימִים וּמַקִּיפִים. וְעַל-יְדֵי כָּל זֶה זוֹכִין בִּשְׁמִינִי עֲצֶרֶת שֶׁנִּתְחַבֵּר כְּנֶסֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל, שֶׁהִיא בְּחִינַת מַלְכוּת, עִם דּוֹדָהּ בְּאַהֲבָה וְאָז הוּא עִקַּר שִׂמְחָתָן שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל... הַכֹּל כְּדֵי לִבְנוֹת וּלְנַסֵּר בְּחִינַת מַלְכוּת בִּשְׁלֵמוּת כְּדֵי לְהַחֲזִירָהּ פָּנִים בְּפָנִים שֶׁשְּׁלֵמוּת.
All of the mitzvot and tefillot of Rosh Hashanah are explained by the Arizal. On Rosh Hashanah the Nesirah begins the cutting of Malchut [that lasts] from Rosh Hashanah until Yom Kippur. And afterwards for the four days between Rosh Hashanah and Sukkot. And on Sukkot all of the chasadim (love forces) flow - internal ones and external ones. By means of all this [the world] merits on Shmini Etzeret that Keneset Yisrael (with the quality of Malchut) joins with her beloved in Love. And this is the joy of Israel.
Everything (from Rosh Hashanah until Yom Kippur) is in order to build and to do nesirah of Malchut in order for her to turn face to face in wholeness.
Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. —Letter From The Birmingham Jail
All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality. It gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority. Segregation, to use the terminology of the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber, substitutes an “I it” relationship for an “I thou” relationship and ends up relegating persons to the status of things. Hence segregation is not only politically, economically and sociologically unsound, it is morally wrong and sinful. Paul Tillich has said that sin is separation. Is not segregation an existential expression of man’s tragic separation, his awful estrangement, his terrible sinfulness? Thus it is that I can urge men to obey the 1954 decision of the Supreme Court, for it is morally right; and I can urge them to disobey segregation ordinances, for they are morally wrong.
(18) He said, “Oh, let me behold Your Presence!” (19) And G!d answered, “I will make all My goodness pass before you, and I will proclaim before you the name YHVH, and the grace that I grant and the compassion that I show. (20) But,” He said, “you cannot see My face, for man may not see Me and live.” (21) And YHVH said, “See, there is a place near Me. Station yourself on the rock (22) and, as My Presence passes by, I will put you in a cleft of the rock and shield you with My hand until I have passed by. (23) Then I will take My hand away and you will see My back; but My face must not be seen.”