Photo by Nava Crispe 2013

There are many ways in which we can map a personality, image a psyche and structure a soul for the purpose of analysis. We can look at a high res scan and get a glimpse of the fine detail or we can settle for more of a course-grained approach which will grant us a sense of the basic features, key elements and general lines of force. If we opt for the latter, then we may come to find in the Hebrew the expression for the anatomy or structure of the soul– “mivneh ha’nefesh” [מבנה הנפש]–the picture in broad brush strokes. The word “mivneh” relates to the word “boneh” (to build) and “binah” (to conceptually understand). As such, any conceptual understanding of the soul entails some degree of constructivism. The dynamics of the soul and the genesis of our inner experience are built out of fundamental elements which lead to the emergence of more complex patterns and subtle textures of our sense of self.

Looking closely at the word “mivneh” (structure) we see that it is composed of four Hebrew letters: Mem-Beit-Nun-Hei. Accordingly, two of the letters Beit-Nun form the inside of the word which spells Ban [ב”ן] while the two outside letters (the book ends) are Mem-Hei which spell Mah [מ”ה]. As we have mentioned earlier in our series, Mah and Ban correspond to the Sabbath and the weekday periods of time as well as to the human (the one who questions) and the animal (the unquestioning state of conforming to one’s nature). We might add to this list and point out that the relationship of Mah to Ban in Kabbalah can also be rendered as the relationship of the heavens to the earth.

Graphically, we often depict this as the ground or earth as the solid center which is surrounded by a relatively intangible atmosphere. Consequently, this new information can aid in our explanation for why the animality of the soul is placed hyper-literally at the center of the word (in the mindset of the kabbalist this is a decidedly non-random feature of the word which is fair game for bringing our interpretive focus to bear upon it).   All this suggests that the position of centrality within our consciousness is that of our natural animality (the prevalence of the mundane which anchors our sense of self and grounds our psyche). The solidity of the animal-earth provides a base which is wrapped in the envelope of the human-heavens.

Here the human continually seeks to blast off, to transcend the animal-earth and the limited natural conditions of existence. Metaphorically the heavens denote an abstraction which could be taken to signify transcendence while the concrete earth marks the domain of immanence. With the human (Mah) straddling the animal (Ban), the animal is directed and uplifted. Reframed in terms of the transcendent/immanent pairing, this would imply that the transcendent ‘rides’ upon the immanent. So too, the Sabbath ‘rides’ upon the weekdays. Rest ‘rides’ upon work. With the consideration of the interinclusion of these two aspects, we could formulate the weekday within the Sabbath as the immanent within the transcendent and, at the same time, the Sabbath within the weekday would amount to the the transcendent within the immanent. Earth ascends to heaven (dematerialization) and heaven descends to earth (an ‘immanent transcendence’ or the materialization of the ‘beyond’ in the ‘below’). The mundane becomes Holy and the natural turns miraculous while the supernatural simultaneously turns into the natural. We go out and beyond by going within.

With the soul being structured in terms of the union of Mah and Ban (which we said before equal 45 and 52 respectively and which collectively add up to 97 which is the equivalent of the word zeman or ‘time’), we will move on to examine how these features are built up layer upon latter with another mathematical allusion. In Kabbalah, there is a concept known as mispar kidmi (literally the preceding numbers or the numbers in front of a given number as if one were counting up to that number using gematria) which is taking the triangular value of a word. Let’s cite a simple example: if we take the letter Hei in Hebrew it has a numerical value of 5 but in order to reach 5 we had to pass through 1,2,3,4 first (which are represented by the letters Alef, Beit, Gimel and Dalet). Thus the triangular value of Hei would be the sum of all the letters from Alef to Hei or the numbers from 1 to 5 which equals 15. The trick is when we count letters after Yud (10) such as Kaf, Lamed, Mem…. They don’t continue the series as 11, 12 and 13 but rather are counted as 20, 30, and 40. With all of this in mind we might ask why this process is relevant? The response is that it demonstrates the hishtalshelut form (evolutionary development) of a given term or number.

Granting all of these mathematical manipulations, what is the ultimate evolution of our terms Mah and Ban? Or, to put it differently, what is the end result of marrying the process of becoming-human (represented by layers of the triangle or pyramid) with the process of becoming-animal? What does the progressive build up of transcendence and immanence look like when it is complete?

Photo by Nava Crispe 2013

The response lies buried in the mispar kidmi or triangular value of the words Mah and Ban. Mah is written Mem-Hei so all of the letters up until Mem are Alef, Beit, Gimel, Dalet, Hei, Vav, Zayin, Chet, Tet, Yud, Kaf, Lamed, Mem which represent the numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,20,30,40 and whose sum is 145 plus all of the letters up until the letter Hei which are Alef, Beit, Gimel, Dalet, Hei or 1,2,3,4,5 respectively and which equal to 15. In total 145 plus 15 gives us 160 as the triangular value of the name Mah. Now, let’s perform that same operation on the name Ban which is written Beit-Nun. Beit is easy–it’s simply Alef, Beit or 1,2 which gives us 3. Then Nun is just one more letter past Mem. Since we already know that all the letters up until Mem equal 145, we can simply add another 50 for the Nun itself for a total of 195. Altogether the sum of 3 and 195 is 198 as the triangular value of the name Ban.

Before we addressed the addition of Mah and Ban in their simple form (we said that combined they equal 97) but now we are adding their combined triangular values or 160 plus 198 which gives us 358. 358 is primarily known in Kabbalah as the numerical equivalent of Moshiach [משיח] or the Messiah. The esoteric tradition employs this form of short hand to illustrate a lengthy and elaborate idea. The messianic or redemptive notion of reality is the cumulative process of integrating these two terms, of joining the spiritual and the physical, human and animal, Sabbath and weekday, rest and work, heavens and earth, transcendent and immanent, the supernatural and the natural. Messianic reality comes to disclose the true spirit of automation–where the good, which appears to be beyond the natural world, will in fact appear through the natural world. Subsequently, we are left with a thought which promises that spiritual and technological processes may yet learn to proceed hand in hand.

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-spirit-of-automation-part-4/

Or is it?

Cannot life be conceived and experienced otherwise? The domestication of existence acclimatizes me to living naturally. Being comes automatically, instinctually, spontaneously, fluidly. The lubrication of reality permits a flow of interactive experiences paving over the cobblestones of our adventures and thus reducing the amount of fiction we encounter. I am at peace with who I am or more specifically with the fact that I am. This alternative to the unrefined coarse characterization of reality produces the quantum leap into the existential state of rest embodied as the Sabbath. As opposed to the tedium of life, this orientation towards reality derives energy and joy from life. It is as simple and natural (in the manner of coming free and easy of its own) as anything we could imagine.

This broad ontological reframing of the profane and the sacred amounts to thinking of the former as a confining finitude which squeezes and slowly drains me away while the latter opens the world and self to infinite possibilities that are upbuilding. In the first instance, we are born and spend the entirety of our lives dying. Its all down hill. Life kills. In the second attitude, life breads more life. It fills me. It is one long ascent.

In the extreme, pure mundane time and the events that populate it cannot reach beyond themselves. They have nothing outside themselves to appeal to, no greater intention, no place in a bigger picture. Their perceived disconnected limitation spoils them particularly when they are pulled from the historical soil within which they were planted. This state of existence is the domain of animality. Do not consider it a condition of animals alone. It is also the animal side of the ‘human animal.’ The animal is not seeking personal transformation nor the alteration of its world. It clings to reality as it is initially disclosed to it. We might suppose that the animality within us is in touch with the ground of existence. It identifies with and is identified by the way things are. Six ‘work’ days are the yoke of the animality of time.

By contrast, the humanity of the human-animal interplay of interior forces represents our aptitude for transcendence. Never content to leave things the way they are, the human desires more. We dream of supernatural abilities. We want to become a reflection of abstract essences which are eternal and detached from present reality. Our contemplation of these essences (what is essentially true, good, just, loving, compassionate, etc…) cause us to question ourselves and the world we live in. Can we not make it better? Can we elevate our nature? Our heads launch us off the ground and soaring into the heavens, our flights of thought hold the promise of something better even if it is not yet reflected on the earth. This takes us outside of our present history and cuts the causal chain of eventualities. It’s a Sabbath state, a break with the mundane, an end to entropy and the separation of the Holy.

In the works of the kabbalists and the chassidic masters, this experience refers to a filling in of the Divine name Havayah which means ‘Being’ or ‘Reality.’ While there are many ‘fillings’ or modes of Being, the two that are the most commonly used are known as Mah and Ban. Mah is spelled with the letters Mem-Hei (40+5) which equals Adam (45) in Hebrew (Adam signifies the universal human condition). Likewise, Ban is spelled Beit-Nun (2+50) which adds up to the word beheimah or ‘animal’ (52). In this way, Mah may be regarded as the Sabbath, the heavens, the idealization of reality in abstract essences, the timeless reverberating in time. Similarly, Ban denotes the six days, the finitude of existence, the migrations of reality in all directions (six days are, once again, likened to the six extremities of space) without a center (Sabbath) to anchor them, to tie them together.

The unification of Mah and Ban is one of the most important concepts in all of Kabbalah.  It completes the archetype of the week (shavuah) which also means an ‘oath’ or promise. Adding time together (45) Mah plus (52) Ban yields 97 which the Arizal equates with zeman (Zayin [7] + Mem [40] + Nun [50]) or ‘time.’ This suggests that time itself is a marriage of the ideal (Adam/human) and the real (animal). Altogether the week organizes temporality by harnessing the real with the ideal. Simply put–the response of the Human which questions (Mah means a ‘what’ and is the form of a question) to an unquestioning animal is in the form of a challenge. The animal side says ‘that’s not the way things are’ to which the human insists that ‘this is how they should be.’

If our two time zones are the six week days (animal) and the Sabbath (Adam/human) then the elevating of the six into the seventh (automation) would be tantamount to a condition which we will call the naturally unnatural (the miracle or supernatural aspect of technology becomes commonplace). Nature (animal/six days) is transformed into miraculous states (automation) on the seventh. Increasingly we are sensing the utterly miraculousness of nature itself and this miracle of nature is a ‘Sabbath.’ The human is riding the animal in this configuration of time.

Finally, as we move in the other direction and bring the Sabbath into the mundane then everything is unnaturally natural. This describes our experience of flow. Creative flow in all of our work gives us a miraculous sense of how natural it feels. It’s uncanny how I am outside and beyond my ordinary self, almost as though I have lost myself or the self consciousness and ascend above my own limited nature to accomplish things that I shouldn’t be capable of. In this arrangement, the animal starts speaking and acting like a human being. It is imbued with anthropomorphic qualities.

In Part Five we will continue to uncover additional dynamics of these two modes of Being known as Mah and Ban.

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-spirit-of-automation-part-3/

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-spirit-of-automation-part-5/

That being said, the essentialized or absolutized nature of work requires the continuous exertion of effort. Specific to the human sphere (as compared with deployment of machinery), we must involve and occupy ourselves with the task at hand. Our work is our occupation. It keeps us preoccupied. Yet, is there not another possibility? When we assemble systems of support that automate our work, are we not mimicking the autonomic nervous system that functions below the level of consciousness, where it’s there all along quietly humming in the background and ideally unnoticed? What would be the ultimate achievement of automation then? When we see a finished product (cakes, shoes, cars, computers, etc…) our first impression is not that these things made themselves, and yet nonetheless, we are waking up to the nascent stages of the self-assembly revolution. Things which naturally occur, hands-free assemblages without our consistent interference, seem to make themselves. The work then shifts to the setup. Subsequently the algorithms can run on their own.

The ‘party rock’ notion of ‘everybody working for the weekend’ doesn’t really do justice to the configuration of time into six days of work (the setup and assembly process) and one day of rest (the Sabbath as the automated run). Our extensive preparedness eventually allows us to sit back and ‘eat’ whilst resting. A practical example of work pushing forward until it transitions into rest would be the formulation of synthetic compounds such as self-healing paint or cement which when cracked ‘regrow’ themselves over the damaged region by means of naturally occurring reactions (yes–these already do exist!). This kind of autopoiesis would be akin to the kabbalistic notion of the weekdays becoming elevated as they enter into the Sabbath. Not that they shuttle our activities to the doorstep of the Sabbath and then dissolve but that they actually penetrate into the reality of the Sabbath. A set of six days is ‘consumed’ on the Sabbath which reproduces all of the previous time but with an additional dimension which strips away the ‘work’ of work and replaces it with work as rest.

The six week days are likened to six spatial extremities throughout which we are always on the move. When we are finished going though the motions (a series of performance instructions) then we can take the contents of this creative work with us as we ascend to an automated system. If the Sabbath is observed fully, then it means that it works so well (the six days) that the convergence point in the seventh (the node which binds and unifies the other six) happens all by itself. Sometimes the Sabbath is associated with reflected light (ohr chozer) in Jewish mystical texts which is similar to the idea of recursion in a complex system. It keep goings through successive iterations without the need for continual input due to the self-fertilizing quality of its reproduction.

In order to understand this, just imagine a 3D printer which can print gazillions of objects including another 3D printer like itself and then that 3D printer can itself beget even more offspring like itself with the same self-replicative capacity (this too has been done). Another popular example (still theoretical for now) would be a robot which once assembled could build another robot just like itself which could in turn repeat this same process ad infinitum if assured unlimited access to the requisite building materials. Surely, the impact of such an innovation would rewrite the economic textbooks and have far reaching implications which boggle the mind.

Consequently, the unification of the weekdays or ‘work’ days (mundane temporality) with  the Sabbath (Sacred time) retroactively reinscribes the build up to automation with new significance. It means that everything we do is part of a process. We aren’t merely working but working towards something and that something incorporates all of the previous work without having to rework it. For instance, once we figure out how to make a new device such as an iPad, each copy of that device ideally follows an identical process. Thus, if it has a fixed set of instructions and the end product is identical, then it can be automated.

Beyond the ingress of work into rest (when we are no longer ‘occupied’ with production), there is the reverse situation where the rest of the Sabbath descends into the weekdays. In this case, there is a residual effect of having achieved inner attunement or rest that is carried forth into the mundane realm. This top-down unification converts the Sabbath into the soul of the six days of the week which are the relative body. An inner sense of rest vitalizes and inspires all of our expanding activities. When I feel comfortable with some tool or instrument then it becomes part of my extended body (the tennis racket is an extension of my arm or my computer an extension of my brain). When we become fluent enough in an action, then we don’t have to think about its performance in the same way as we once did when we started learning about it. Along these lines–once we acquire the skills, we do not need to look at the keyboard when we are typing or playing the piano. It’s almost like our fingers have developed an instinctual sense of where they need to be placed and then go there automatically. These are ‘weekday Sabbath’ activities (weekday activities inspired by the Sabbath) as opposed to ‘Sabbath weekday’ activities (where the work of the week is lifted into Sabbath automation mode).

Even more varied creative tasks such as writing an essay or solving a math problem may start to flow out of me with minimal resistance. Once we enter the ‘zone’ (Sabbath) then everything starts to flow (weekday work is ‘discontinuous’ and broken up [six days] while Sabbath states are continuous  and unified [one day]). Taking that elevated sense of flow and introducing it into the daily grind is like a fuel injection. Suddenly, the pain of work is gone and I am being super-productive. Ideas keep coming to me. I am writing as fast as I can and can’t keep up with the fountain of new thoughts. Tasks which once required weeks or days now somehow get compressed into hours and minutes. I’m working in the groove. I’m flying. Outwardly I may appear to be sprinting but inwardly I am at peace with the game. It’s play time. I am ‘being at home’ (psycho-spiritually) within the work itself. As such, I am no longer aliened by my labor which has now become sweetened.

Now that we have introduced work within rest (automation) and rest within work (flow) we will go on to show these states in a broader existential context in Part Four.

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-spirit-of-automation-part-4/

When it comes to the role of labor on a macrocosmic level, we know by experience that we have inherited a world with some assembly required. On the one hand, we need to piece together an understanding of the diverse elements of our world, while on the other hand, we must figure out how to employ this knowledge to harness nature–to take all of the naturally provided raw materials and combine them in order to build a better world. Thus there are two types of assembly. One is a theoretical model while the other is an applied science in order to make repairs and advancements. Both seek some kind of unified picture.

In the Torah, these pursuits are embodied in the portable sanctuary or Tabernacle (Mishkan) whose architectural details were intended to encode all of the design details of the cosmos. This structure was a multi-dimensional map replete with clues to the hidden mysteries of Creation that even fascinated the likes of Isaac Newton who felt that if he could delve deeply enough into its description in the original Hebrew he could derive insight into the laws of the natural sciences. When its construction was complete it was said to function as a model of all of the worlds from the spiritual to the physical. The esoteric tradition even professes that if it is studied properly one might come to acquire the essential information required for deriving a Grand Unified Theory (GUT) of the universe. Furthermore, as with science progressing into technology, once we have the theoretical grasp, it can be translated into a multitude of practical applications.

For those familiar with the notion of prohibited work on the Jewish Sabbath, the question arises in the Talmud as to what constitutes work. Without reproducing the details of the argument, we will simply consider the Talmud’s conclusion which maintains that prohibited work on the Sabbath is limited to the context of 39 types of creative activities all related to the Tabernacle. Once completed, its continued function was permitted to keep running all by itself even on the Sabbath. In the mystical tradition this speaks to the ‘work’ of history itself. All of the events since the beginning of time have been unpacking and assembling more and more complex realities. At a certain point, these realities converge and unify. When all of the pieces of Creation properly ‘fit’ together, then the resultant unity removes the ‘work’ factor. With the difficulties all lying in the assembly process, once we get our ‘act’ together the ‘rest’ is relatively easy.

To reframe this in a contemporary context, we spend so much time doing things that we don’t want to do in order to have time to do the things that we really want to do. Clearing  some time to pursue that which we love usually comes at the price of plowing through all kinds of ‘busy work’–the things we have to do but would desperately like to get out of doing. After putting in enough time with the ‘hard’ tasks we may reach a place where we no longer have to be concerned with exerting ourselves in that manner any more. For instance, plowing a field may have once put the farmer on the same level as a horse but then gave way to elevating the farmer above the horse whilst riding on the back of a vehicle of human invention. With greater sophistication, the wagon and plow become a motorized tractor which now lets the horse ‘rest’ as well. Finally, recent developments have demonstrated that it’s possible to have the entire operation become robotized as we are starting to see autonomous farming vehicles which plow, plant, irrigate and harvest the field and then plug themselves in at the end of the day.

This form of automation shows the path to ‘hands’ free production in virtually every industry. Yet, it only became possible once enough knowledge was ‘assembled’ and sufficient effort and resources were committed to realize such a project. Hence, the work involved was principally to reach the ‘end’ of work. This follows the idea of working to transcend work in the Zohar (I 115a) which is called “higher [level] action (asiyah ila’ah).” Here, the two planes of action are distinguished by the introduction of the intellect. Unskilled and uneducated work ‘forces’ are all about brute strength. To act upon the world as an excise in power is connected with the dimension of malchut or ‘kingdom.’ This is action pure and simple. It gets the job done and thus demonstrates ‘sovereignty’ over some domain of reality. By contrast, action becomes elevated when it’s throughly understood. Bringing scientific knowledge and technological skill to bear upon an activity has the potential to mitigate the hardship of our labor. Thus, ‘higher action’ entails malchut (kingdom) ascending to binah (understanding) in the phraseology of Kabbalah. We are then moving beyond affecting external reality with the limited abilities of our hands and feet towards a situation where we can get things done with the power of thought. The entire technological push follows this path. The more thinking takes over doing, the less work seems like work.

Once the technology is in place, once it has been assembled and constructed (like the assembly of the Tabernacle), then it can enter into a Sabbath state. One of the symbolic qualities of the ‘Sabbath’ (beyond a mere cessation of work) is that of automation. The Talmud (Shabbat 117b) reflects upon this by asserting that technology/automation derives from “wisdom [higher level innovative intelligence] and [therefore] is not considered as work [prohibited on the Sabbath].” If we simply replace the word ‘Sabbath’ with the idea of ‘rest,’ then there is a type of work which does not disrupt my rest.

Even more importantly, the rest of the Sabbath is associated with pleasure (oneg Shabbat) which means that I can experience a type of work which is not work in that it does not alienate me within myself but rather comes naturally. I enjoy doing it. The inner serenity and pleasure of doing something because it is me (it brings me closer to a state of self actualization and puts me at peace with myself) and not because it is a ‘foreign’ service thrust upon me be the exigencies of a harsh world, removes it from the category of prohibited work. Moreover, prohibitions or issurim in Hebrew relate to the work assur which means to be ‘chained’ or ‘imprisoned.’ Consequently, the mundane form of work (work as work) is experienced as confining and limiting whereas the elevated type of work (work as restful play and enjoyment) actually makes me feel liberated and spiritually expansive.

From the two contrasted states of work and rest, we will move on to explore four interincluded levels (work-rest-rest-work) in Part Three.

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-spirit-of-automation-part-3/

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-spirit-of-automation-part-1/

I recall how the people working there were interwoven with the machines. Human hands filled in gaps and were expected to perform as tirelessly and repetitiously as these hulking steel contraptions. I felt like I was staring in a remake of Charlie Chaplin’s Modern Times. Those weary eyes of the denizens of this foreign world always greeted me kindly and would emphasize how I should stay in school and apply myself at my studies so that I not end up where they were for the past 20 or 30 years. It worked. Nothing like spending 8 hours a day packing 15,000 eyeshadow containers into boxes 10 at a time as they came off the assembly line after having their labels stamped on them to make school attractive. My total range of motion for most of the day was often a step or two to the right or left. Mostly my arms would extend, hands facing upwards as this belt would drop the colored glossy vessels into them. Then with a 90° swivel of my hips, I would lay them in the shipping packaging in neat little rows. Repeat, Repeat. Repeat.

After a few 40 hour weeks of this my 16 year old brain began hallucinating in French. It was likely my first out of body experience. I was there and not there at the same time. Zombies may looks cool in horror flicks but turning into one in real life redefines boredom. I began contemplating what it means to work, to have a job, to pursue a career. Having been well acquainted with workaholics, I wondered what drives people and what keeps them going? Surely this kind of work was done out of pure necessity? Jobs were pitched to me as a means of survival. Hard work would enable a person to provide for self and family. It was both a personal and social responsibility.

This tough message made me want to flee for the outback and live in a tent or worse to retreat back into infancy and let others take care of me. Yet, I detected another message amidst the various parental broadcasts especially as college applications were starting to become a topic of conversation in our home. ‘What do you think you would like to do?’ Future choices revolved around more than the minimal considerations of food and shelter. I had to assess my aptitude for various career paths (forest ranger or philosopher? decision, decisions…) and along with that practical side, there was the question of my personal satisfaction or ‘wanting’ or such an occupation. The first inkling of an idea of self-actualization through creative expression was germinating within me and I sensed a fundamental tension between work as work and work as play. Certainly in the 1980’s there was no shortage of examples of people who got paid to do things which looked fun but would not have passed as work at all in a previous generation. It’s hard to imagine being a punk rock musician or street poet, indie filmmaker or amateur deep sea explorer in the same light as my summer coworkers in this factory.

One of the great arcs of the drama of humanity has involved our relationship with work. Hearkening back to the Genesis narrative, work is seen as a punishment for the eating of the Tree of Knowledge. Edenic existence meant all was provided for naturally which is perhaps just another way of saying that all of our daily needs were automated. After millennia of servitude to back breaking labor as an unavoidable fact of life for the super majority of people, we are beginning to realize that alternatives are possible. Increasingly, in an age of abundance that defines modernized societies, we are decoupling work from its original meaning of providing the basics. While by no means does this apply uniformly (although there is some evidence that the world is getting flatter) we are hearing more and more people say that they no longer need to work but rather choose to work. Yes–this can be for the simple reason of wanting to ‘keep busy’ but there is another more profound realization happening at the same time: we enjoy working.

Granted we have to find the right job, but for those who identify so strongly with what they creatively do, they could never see themselves doing anything else. If you are one of those with the good fortune to be able to say with all honesty that you love what you do and you would still do it even if you became unimaginably rich and never needed to collect another paycheck, then you have experienced the ‘end’ of work. My intention with the word ‘end’ is not the cessation of work or that one’s job becomes obsolete, but rather, the ‘goal’ or ‘higher calling’ within the work itself. In the classic of Jewish mysticism known as the Zohar there is an expression which usually applies to spiritual service, but which can be extended to cover all aspects of life: “there is no work like the work of love (lait pulchana k’pulchana d’rachimuta). In a more contemporary rephrasing, we all understand the significance of a ‘labor of love.’ To raise the stakes to a teleological level, perhaps the entire thrust of history is to take us from dreading our jobs under the weight of chains to the freedom of self-expression through activities that imbue our lives with great meaning and enjoyment. Whether our work defines us or not remains to be seen, but assuredly, we are redefining work.

For Part Two, we will tackle the dialectic of work and rest as they are embodied in the concepts of building the world and observing the Sabbath.

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-spirit-of-automation-part-2/

How is a rock different from a plant? At first glance, life seems to be the deciding factor. We normally learn that a rock is not alive and a plant is. Consequently they belong to two different orders of existence. Yet, this is not the entire story. Drilling down into the phenomena of a rock, we find it always remains equal to itself. In other words, if no outside force acts upon it, the rock will remains self-similar (we are not considering radioactive decay or long term internal processes that might occur within a rock which, to a human observer under ordinary conditions, appear to persist in its given state indefinitely). By contrast, the plant, while rooted in its place (unless transplanted by some outside force) is mostly known for continually growing in that place. To put it abstractly, the rock represents the purely static while the plant is relatively dynamic. More particularly, the rock is the static within the static and the plant is the dynamic within the static (it’s still somewhat static due to its rootedness).

What then is the advantage of the animal? Unlike the plant which can grow within its fixed position, the animal has mobility. Animals roam. They can be nomadic. This empowers them to grow within a multitude of environments. So, once again, relative to the rock and planet, the animal kingdom reflects even greater dynamic qualities. However, when compared to the human realm, the animal is still limited. In the hierarchical system of the Great Chain of Being, the human is often indicated by the term midaber which means a ‘speaker’ in Hebrew. The intention is not merely to celebrate our achievements in communication (which are considerable) and also do not sharply distinguish us from certain animals who have minimal speech capacity. Instead, what makes humanity as a ‘speaker’ more significant than animal communication lies in our ability to use language to reprogram reality.

We are constantly transforming our world through language which is a tool that comes in recognition of the linguistic character of reality. Our words do more than reveal a pre-existing world; they help to construct it as well. Hence, we don’t just have mobility within a predefined landscape, we can reshape that landscape. Moreover, the changes are not restricted to our external world but can be used to reprogram our own bodies and minds, natures and spirits. The animal never desires to transcend its own nature. It is content to follow its instincts, to conform to its original programming. On the flip side, that which is truly human constantly strives to outdo the self, to push beyond, to redefine what it means to be human.

Consequently, the animal is static with regards to its fixed nature or innate patterns of behavior (no matter how nomadic it is) which means that it is the relatively static within the dynamic. The purely dynamic or the level of the dynamic within the dynamic is reserved for the human who is made and remade through ‘speaking’–the infinite conversation between self and world that impacts both in the process. Perhaps, it would be better to say that the human kingdom is filled with those who know how to use the code. We speak the code–the programing language.

Now if we transpose this system of four kingdoms on top of our previous discussion about networks and more specifically about the networked layers of interpretation within the text of the Torah, we bring into view an entire new set of correspondences. The plain  meaning of the text (which we likened to Domains on the web) produces meaning within a local context. On this level the text would appear rock-like in being reducible to such a finite immediate expression. Each section of text would also come across as self-contained and invariant. If we were speaking about paragraphs, sentences, phrases,  words or even letters, their meaning would be location based. Our efforts, given these circumstances, would be to situate the ‘rock’ within the close-at-hand textual nest and in doing so keep it from rolling or breaking apart.

With each node of our Web-text being designated as a rock, it is interesting to note how our plant lives and grows out of the soil which qualifies as the sediment of rocks and minerals. So too, our text becomes relatively more dynamic even as it is rooted in its place (context specific or at least tethered to its original context) and the allusions begin to grow out of it. Every hint that colors outside the lines of the text would be another sprouting of the calcified original. The implication being that the plain meaning of the composition was a decomposition of the allusive. The non-explicit reading between the lines with all of its twists and curls manifests like the thicket of tendrils only to collapse back into a fossilized state within the plain reading. We return the plants to the ground when we stop watering the rocks with our active readings of the ‘beyond,’ ‘behind,’ and ‘between.’ But if we reapply ourselves, our garden is sure to return. ‘Plain’ becomes beautiful and nuanced with Links.

All of the vegetation of the illusive level of interpretation is still just the dynamic within the static–an outgrowth of the plain meaning. True detachment involves cutting the cord.  Similar to an animal hunting for food, the abstracting of an idea from one textual context and allowing it freedom to roam until it migrates to another textual context and is able to run and feed and live there, is the net-effect of the homiletical Search process. To pick an object of comparison (with a fairly fixed nature and behavior) and allow it to move across the terrain of the book without obstructions, would be comparable to the animal traversing the verses (trans-versing). It growth is not limited to a specific context or feeding ground but rather dependent upon exploration of many different contexts. Despite this its self-similarity as a module of thought results in its only living up to the task of being the relatively static within the dynamic.

Coders know the real secret. The purely dynamic varies all of the terms. It can reprogram the terrain and the creature to travel upon it. The genesis of new meaning depends upon the human speaker whose speech-acts transcend nature (even the pre-defined textual nature). The future of the book rests upon our ability to get at the source code–the Programmability of the text. At the same time, the human sphere lives off the lower levels. We consume the animal who consumed the plant which grew out of (and consumed) the soil. Hence, the esoteric dimension of Kabbalah is dependent upon the homiletical animal and the allusive plants and the plain rocks.

Finally, if our networked knowledge is compared to the Internet, there is still one more dimension which we can bring out beyond Domains, Links, Search and Programmability. All of these four go into a project which is building a Website. In a certain respect we can distinguish the Domain from the Website itself in that the Domain is just clearing the ground upon which the Website will be built. What we have neglected to describe up until now is the ultimate intent of this undertaking. This would be considered to be the ‘crown’ (keter) of the entire affair. In the book of Ezra (6:3), we find a proclamation regarding the construction of the Temple in Jerusalem “…let the house be built, a place [atar] for the offering of sacrifices….” This place enables people to come close to one another within the house (Temple) which signifies global unity. In modern Hebrew it so happens that the aramaic word for ‘place’ (atar) has also come to mean a ‘Website.’

This particular word for a place or space or site carries an import allusion to the soul experiences associated with the crown (keter). The crown denotes the superconscious or unconscious root of the soul, it is the source of all of our drive and motivation for everything that we think, feel, say and do. Zooming into the superconscious, Kabbalah informs us that we can detect three ‘night’ lights that serve as beacons by which we are guided in the boat of our conscious states. Called faith (emunah), pleasure (ta’anug), and will (ratzon), these three parts of the crown inspire everything that flows from them. Thus, we might suggest that the faith, pleasure and will (what we believe, what we find meaningful or pleasurable, and what we want or desire) motivate our Website. They ‘crown’ the Domain once it is Linked, Searchable, and Programable. Remarkably, the three letters of the word for our Website or atar (Alef-Tav-Reish) form an acronym for faith (emunah which begins with an Alef), pleasure (ta’anug which begins with a Tav) and will (ratzon beings with a Reish).

If this is true with Websites on the Internet, then it is all the more essential to the interpretive strategies for reading the Torah. The entire process is meant to allow the superconscious lights of faith, pleasure and will to dwell within the text and enliven an inspired reading.

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-power-of-networks-part-11/

By contrast, the secret tradition of kabbalistic reading techniques and methodologies refashions us into ninja-like sentence flipping, word throwing, page tearing fearless warriors on a quest for meaning. While extreme reading is not yet a part of the X-Games, it does involve significant risk (it also risks significance).To be let in on this secret a little bit, we must begin by introducing a whole new set of reading directives–mandates which have to be carried out to the very end. Pulling back the unconscious veils we find that reading beyond the informational into reading as interpretation follows the same fourfold model as our science of networks.

Rabbinical exegesis starts not with the literal meaning but with something that is often confused with the literal–the plain meaning  or peshat of the text. The main difference between them revolves around our assumption of textual completeness in and of itself verses an incomplete text which requires our participation in order to actualize its potential significance. The plain meaning of the text solicits the aid of the reader who may have to dig into it, to question, to survey its context and compare it to other texts and contexts. It permits a multiplicity of plain meanings and strips us of our feeling of security brokered by the obvious. Much work must be done to earn our access to the plain meaning. With passive reading no longer being an option, we must gear up for an extensive trek as active surveyors of the literary landscape at hand.

When we stick to the immediate context within which a given text is presented (the plain meaning enjoins us to primarily consider words taken in context) we are concerned with Domains. Location, location, location–the words resonate against the adjacent contextual environment. The timbre of their ‘sound’ and significance reverberates off the walls of their nearby surroundings. Confining ourselves to ‘local’ reading can only go so far. All of the different contexts within the text of the ‘Torah’ (teaching) are in danger of becoming a patchwork of Domains, each with its own sovereign interpretation and with limited or no trade with other literary contexts (both within the Torah and without). All of the friction and contradiction ensues from the inability to connect one Domain to another. Practically speaking, an example of this might be an analysis of the story of Adam and Chava/Eve in the Garden of Eden with the Tree of Knowledge where we stop thinking through it at the conclusion of the episode in the linear narrative. What could these individuals and this tree have to do with events separated both in historical time and in pages and books such as the story of Purim with Queen Esther and Mordecai going up against the wicked Haman? The two contexts on a plain and simple level seem totally unrelated.

This is where the Jerusalem Talmud (Rosh Hashanah 17a) chimes in and makes an astonishing assertion: “Words of Torah are poor within their place and are rich in another place.” To paraphrase: delimiting the meaning of any words or statements in the Torah to their original context impoverishes them in their meaning, but when we uproot and transplant them into other contexts, the innovative juxtaposition engenders all kinds of novel associations and unanticipated meanings that enrich their significance. Keeping textual passages homebound, as if they are ineligible for a literary passport to visit and take up temporary residence in foreign contexts, depletes them of significance and prevents their realization of universal relevance on an intertextual plane. By giving up a little bit of their self-contained sovereignty within their immediate Domains, they may amass abundant wealth by trading on the non-local exchange.

In order to accomplish this, we have to introduce Links. In the multi-tiered interpretative strategy of the rabbinic tradition this level is termed the allusive meaning or remez. In everyday terms, allusions begin to appear as soon as we begin to read between the lines. ‘Reading between the lines’ does not imply that we jettison the plain meaning but rather that we are willing to venture out beyond it into the zones of ambiguity. We break with the oppression of the linear reading and open ourselves to a non-linear one. This bursting of the bubble of the local textual context supplies us with the runway for venturing off into other non-local contexts. Allusions forge Links. We can harvest from the textual field by driving through it from any direction we desire. The Talmud–perhaps the greatest ancient world hypertext project–constantly weaves diverse literary contexts together by highlighting the non-explicit and indirect connections between them. These hyperlinks end up characterizing the spirit of the Domains (text in context) that causes a tremendous flowering of significance.

The process hardly stops there. Our next move is to introduce the equivalent of Search on the Web into the reading process. This bring us to the level of interpretation known as the homiletic meaning or drash. While homiletics is a poor translation (it tends to have a negative association of moralizing or sermonizing), drash actually means to ‘seek,’ to ‘inquire,’ or even to ‘search.’ A traditional place of Torah study is called a Beit HaMidrash which can be rendered as a ‘House of Search.’ It is a space which is conducive to seeking meaning or understanding. It is an environment within which we can feel comfortable and be inspired to make inquires. Web based Search surfs along on the myriad of Links across the many Domains. Today too, our studying is all about making queries using Search engines (Google, Yahoo, Bing, Wolfram Alpha, etc…) that generates pages of Links to different Domains. Like the Talmud, many other rabbinic texts such as those which are classified as Midrash (also from the word drash) really amount to a compendium of Search results to different questions put to a body of texts.

Our fourth and highest interpretive level cannot be reached simply be using Search. Search only picks up on known or explicit Links and Domains. As anyone familiar with the limitations of even the best Search engines will tell you, they have not succeeded in having their spiders crawl through every page on the Web. Results are always incomplete because new content is going up all the time and it takes time to find and catalogue it. Therefore, the Programmable dimension of the Web bears witness to the continuous creation or re-creation of Web content and even the form and function of the Web itself. Thus, this kind of interpretation is not merely uncovering what already exists but innovating new potentials for all of the Searches, Links and Domains. It is referred to as the secret or sod–the non-explicit esoteric aspect of meaning. The secret of the text is the spontaneous emergence of something (some definite meaning) out of nothing (the indefinite, paradoxical, or aporetic). This is the level of kabbalistic reading which looks at systems of correspondence and parallels which can generate limitless new interpretations. It insures that our textual universe and the interpretations which populate it are continually expanding.

In Part Twelve we will examine how rocks, plants, animals and humans relate to our four-level interpretive schema. Additionally, we will try to distinguish the concept of Websites from that of Domains.

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-power-of-networks-part-12/

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-power-of-networks-part-10/

Where does the word ‘Domain’ come from? Etymologists trace it back through the Old French demeine (‘belonging to a lord’) to the Latin dominus or ‘lord’ or ‘master.’ In Hebrew, on account of the Tetragrammaton being unpronounceable outside of highly circumscribed conditions, the tradition has been to substitute this ineffable name for the name Ado-nai (also augmented in its pronunciation outside of a liturgical context and appears in variations such as Adni, Adnut, or Adokai etc…) which is commonly translated into english as “Lord.” When situating this name amongst other Divine names, it usually corresponds to the sefirah (channel of Divine self-expression) of malchut (kingdom). Of the four letters of the Tetragrammaton (Yud-Hei-Vav-Hei), this name and channel corresponds to the final Hei. In short, a kingdom is a Domain–a region with a master or control figure. In common parlance, the person who practically oversees the day to day functions of a Website is called a Webmaster. Each of us is master of our own Domain. We stand behind a name which helps to define our jurisdiction (where what we ‘say’ [dictio] is ‘law’ [jur]).

In Kabbalah, we often come across depictions of exile as the detachment of the final Hei from the other three letters (Yud-Hei-Vav). In our analysis of the science of networks, this would be comparable to having a patchwork of Domains that are carved up and independent of one another. Like the  walled city-states of Italy long ago, there would be a lack of overall unity due to all of the trade barriers. This results in chaos. Consequently, the immediate rectification would be the establishment of links (or diplomatic and economic relations if we are to continue with the city-state analogy).

While, the aspect of malchut (kingdom/Domains) is sometimes referred to as almah d’etgaliya which means the ‘revealed world’ (a world of appearances whose disclosure sets one surface apart from another)–the sewing together of these disconnected Domains (their inner and outer integration) is the function of the letter Vav. Even the graphic form of the Vav looks like a link. Grammatically, this letter often serves as the Vav ha’chibur or the conjunctive Vav (meaning ‘and’). Moreover, the name of the Vav means a ‘hook’ or ‘connector.’ While the Vav of the Tetragrammaton normally designates the six emotive spheres (and six spatial directions) they can also be encapsulated in the aspect of tiferet  or ‘beauty.’ Of all the synonyms in Hebrew which denote beauty, tiferet represents the intertwining of different colors in a harmonious fashion. It is the diversity of our character traits which combine into an attractive synthesis wherein each feature compliments all the others. Far from having a sense of self-contained beauty, the kabbalists insist that emotion be framed as a ‘light that shines unto others (ohr ha’meir l’zulato).’

Thus, we develop a feeling for the Domains of the Web (the site specificity or locality within Reality) through the emotional connections that characterize their interrelatedness. Because of this, the unification of tiferet and malchut as it is called in Kabbalah, effectively redeems Domains from their disconnected state similar to the idea of the ingathering of the exiles. Our primary work would then demand that we focus on the construction of as many Links as possible until every node (or Domain) on the network has at least one Link. In this way, complete unification is possible and only a limited number of steps are required in order to connect all Web content. According to a recent paper by Network theorist Albert-Laszló Barabái the internet contains in excess of 14 billion pages which can all by reached by just 19 clicks or less.

How can we understand this proposal from a kabbalistic perspective? In response we might propose that this may reflect the first inter-human emotive bond mentioned in the Torah which is between Adam and Chava/Eve. The mystics point out that the name Adam equals 45 and that this is the numerical value of the Tetragrammaton (Yud-Hei-Vav-Hei) when it is filled or spelled out as follows: Yud becomes Yud-Vav-Dalet (numerically 10+6+4), Hei becomes Hei-Alef (5+1), Vav turns into Vav-Alef-Vav (6+1+6) and finally, the last Hei is again Hei-Alef (5+1). These expansions of the letters act as a kind of code which reveal novel expressions of this Divine name. According to the Arizal and others, this particular expansion corresponds to the emotive dimensions or character attributes of the soul.

Given this formulation, how much is the value of the filling (the added letters to the basic four of Yud-Hei-Vav-Hei which equal 26 by themselves)? The math is simple: 45-26 gives us the remainder of 19 which is the numerical value of Chava/Eve in Hebrew. Adam and Chava/Eve are the archetypal marriage pair (linked, or more specifically inter-linked, with the connection being part of the value of the name Adam (45) itself). As we explained above, the Tetragrammaton is normally substituted with the name Ado-nai which alludes to Domains (‘Lord’), so on a subtle level an Adam (representing the universal human condition) would be a ‘connector of Domains’ or alternatively all Domains (all of Being or Reality which is hinted at by the number 26 denoting the Divine name by itself) become linked up via 19 (Chava/Eve) steps (or degrees of separation). It should be stressed that this is only one possible approach and that there exists a multitude of parallels between any proposed models in science and the conceptual machinery in Jewish mysticism. Our intent is merely to explore, through a gentle force of reading, the possible types of associations and the generative meanings they may bring forth.

Beyond the Links and Domains, we also require Search to complete our ability to confidently navigate the Web. This brings us to the first Hei of the Tetragrammaton which marks the place of binah or ‘understanding.’ Understanding entails learning ‘one thing from out of another (mai’vin davar m’tok davar).’ This is precisely what Search tools accomplish. They are constantly combing through existing Web content and trying to derive new Links and Domains for us to visit in accordance with our specified requirements.

In the Zohar, binah (understanding) is also called ‘mother’ which suggests (in the context of our discussion) that the Search process begets (to reveal the concealed or to actualize potential) our awareness of Links and Domains. They are the legitimate offspring of a Search query. Additionally, Zoharic literature confers upon binah (understanding) the role of intelligence which is connected to the relative ‘heart’ within the brain. Hence, we encounter expressions such as ‘binah leba’ or the ‘understanding heart.’ It is specifically in the heart that we Search as we find in Psalms (119:10) “With my whole heart, I have sought You….” Seeking God (in this instance) would certify our capacity to inquire after anything within God. If we can seek after Being or Reality, how much more approachable our Search for finite components of Creation must be. Our understanding is the Google inside us, our own personal search engine.

Lastly, with the other three letters already taken, the Yud of the Tetragrammaton must relate to the Programmability of the Web. In Kabbalah, the Yud is the seed of ‘father’ or the source inspiration which appears in coded form–the kernel out of which everything else is unfolded. In the soul, this level is affiliated with chochmah or ‘intuition/wisdom.’ Once again quoting from Psalms (104:24) we read that “…You made them [Creations] all with wisdom [chochmah]…” from which we learn that chochmah is the programming language which bring all things into being.

When added to the other three letters (Hei-Vav-Hei) the Yud transforms the Tetragrammaton into a word which means hithavut or that which continually ‘brings [everything] into being.’ From this we may conclude that the Web of life is not static but ever growing and constantly being renewed. Furthermore, the Sages say that the Torah itself derives from wisdom (chochmah) and that it is not only the blueprint for Creation but is also its programming language. In this manner, the Zohar contends that when we produce innovative insights (chochmah can also be rendered as ‘insight’) into the Torah (chidushei Torah) we becomes co-creators and manifest new heavens and new earth. In other words, we discover that all of the Network of Creation is programmable. Lastly, prayer is perhaps the best example of our attempt at reprogramming reality of all. Since prayer exists and is incumbent upon each of us, it underscores the need for everyone to become somewhat proficient with the programmability of the Web.

For Part Eleven we will run through this set of four modes once again, only now we will build in additional conceptual dimensions that connect with the four levels of Torah exegesis.

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-power-of-networks-part-11/

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-power-of-networks-part-9/

Returning to the original verse which states (Shemot/Exodus 27:4) “….and upon the network (reshet) you will make four copper rings at its four edges” we can now inquire after the hidden significance of these rings. In Hebrew, the word for rings is tabaot which  comes from the same root as the word teva meaning ‘nature.’ The ring symbolizes some of the fundamental features of nature. In general, the geometry of the ring is a circle which brings to mind the idea of the cyclical in nature (repeating patterns of self similarity). Four rings would then be likened to a fourfold nature that is mounted upon the network. All of the dynamics of this network are carried (we all have to connect via a network ‘carrier’ today as well) by means of these four rings or interface modalities.

In his commentary on the above passage, Rabbi Yitzchak Isaac of Zidichov (1805-1873) in his work Likutei Maharya (p. 162a) associates the four rings ‘upon the network’ with the four letters of the Divine name (Yud-Hei-Vav-Hei). Each letter the would then be a distinct natural mode that makes the network (and the altar) move. Bringing all of this into a modern day context, we can look at the Internet as the greatest example of a network in world history.

The information created in the world (and largely ported through the Internet) was a staggering 1.8 zettabytes in 2011. In order to get a sense of the scale we have to imagine that a gigabyte is roughly equal to 10 meters of shelved books. One terabyte or 1000 gigabytes would store enough text that if printed out, would require the paper from 50,000 trees. A thousand terabytes would be a petabyte (200 petabytes would hold all printed material world wide). A thousand petabytes is an exabyte or around 50,000 years of HD video streaming continuously. According to Eric Schmidt at Google: “From the dawn of civilization until 2003, humankind generated five exabytes of data.” He goes on to say that “Right now, in the year 2010, the human race is generating five exabytes of information every two days. By the year 2013, the number will be five exabytes produced every ten minutes….” A 1000 exabytes jumps us up to the zettabyte level. If in all of 2011 1.8 zettabytes of information were thought of in terms of HD video, it would amount to 90,000,000 years of continuous playback. [A note on sources: most of these factoids are either spread on the web or in books such as Smolan and Erwitt’s The Human Face of Big Data (also a cool iPad app), Börner’s Atlas of Science: Visualizing What We Know, and Diamandis and Kotler’s Abundance: The Future is Better Than You Think.] Needless to say, we are in the forecast flood of information (which, as we explained previously, is mentioned in the Zohar). Staying afloat within this flood makes our familiarity with the science of networks all the more critical.

So what are the prime movers of the Internet (which we will attempt to correspond to the  rings that attach to the network of the altar)? Since we said that they relate to the letters of the Tetragrammaton (Havayah which means “Being”) they have the status of naturally occurring information ontologies. To start, we will simply list them and then reflect upon each one in greater detail with the parallels to the letters of the Divine name put in play. The Internet has:

1. Domains (Websites).
2. Links (Hyperlinks)
3. Search
4. Programability

What are domains? When we think of the earth and landowning we understand the concept of territory. Owning a domain means that I am given mastery over it. I govern it.  You have your domain and I have mine. Whenever we enter into unsettled and ownerless land, we have to find a way to divide up the territory. Once divided we assign names to the various locations in order to tell them apart. Within the digital world, we merely transferred this same thinking. We purchase a Web Domain which entails having  a Domain Name plus Web Hosting for that Domain. Hosting a Domain is a ‘housing’ problem. Once we have a host we can build something within that Domain–namely a Website. Thus, the virtual earth of the World Wide Web its divided up into cyber states and digital zones.

Next we have to connect all of these disconnected Domains. If we were dealing with the real world of cities, towns and villages, the roads, bridges and waterways would function as the links. The dematerialized equivalent to wireless connections would be the paths of planes flying in the sky. Moreover, Domains without traffic remain poor. On some level the riches of a Website are dependent on the multitude of Links to other sites. We find that the Links grow the site and in a certain way characterize the type of site that it is. Moreover, these links are twofold: there are internal Links which connect the site within itself (in Web parlance this is referred to as the navigation on the site which situates all of the site content while allowing the user to move from page to page, picture to picture, video to video) and there are external Links which allow us to move from site to site. We have local roads in town and interstates.

Domains with all their Links are still not user friendly without Search. Today, it is difficult to remember life before Google. With billions of searches a day, artificial intelligence is placing more and more relevant information at our fingertips (that is–if it is not being retrieved via voice command). For those who perceive the true power of Search, they know it is more than just sorting and organizing existing content. The way in which we ask a question influences the type of answer we will get. On account of this, Search continuously synthesizes new information. Any aggregator has to apply some sort of rational judgement about the available content (how to prioritize that content, how to make it ‘mashable,’ how to formulate travel plans that will move us through the Links to the Sites). The larger matrix becomes revealed in the Search features which gives birth to the map and the landscape. It not only finds, it creates (something from something) by recombining the raw materials of the Web as it currently exists.

Finally, the Web is programmable. If it weren’t it would be static. The ability to continuously introduce new content onto the Web (with such simple examples as ‘posting’) and reconfigure the Web’s architecture on both a micro (website or webpage) and macro level (overall software applications of the entire Internet) is of paramount importance. Programability allows us to transform the reality of the Web and to constantly innovate. It can affect each of the first three modalities of Domains, Links, and Search and bring about change in all of them.

For Part Ten we will work our way through the four modes again and make explicit their correspondence with the four letters of the Tetragrammaton.

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-power-of-networks-part-10/

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-power-of-networks-part-8/

These relationships are not limited to the human sphere but also include our relationship with the Divine. On some level, these two types of relation are intertwined and interdependent. All of the design features of the altar hold mystical significance for the production of improvements and transformations within the intersubjective realm as well as human-Divine encounters. Each detail signifies another ingredient that is integral to this process. Once such feature is mentioned in Shemot/Exodus (27:4) “Make for it [the altar] a net (mikbar) of copper meshwork (reshet) and upon the network (reshet) you will make four copper rings at its four edges.” Two words stand out in this verse that are particular to our discussion of networks. The first one is reshet (network or netting) which appears twice while the second is mikbar which means something akin to a ‘net,’  ‘grate’ or ‘sieve.’ In the next verse (Shemot/Exodus 27:5), we learn about its position: “You shall place it under the surrounding border of the altar from below, and the meshwork (reshet) shall go to the midpoint of the altar.”

From this we see that a network is needed which surrounds or encompasses the altar  (which is itself the space for working on social-spiritual closeness). This informs us that we are all connected. Moreover, it is a source for a ‘social network’ in the Torah–an all inclusive network which defines our ability to come close. Next we find that it is extended downward and reaches the middle (there is some difference of opinion as to if it belongs to the top half, middle or bottom half of the height of the altar which we cannot go into right now). Let us simply say that it has a mediating quality between the top and bottom halves of the altar (which themselves would receive the ‘blood’ of different sacrifices depending on the type of repair being made).

The key interpretation for this in the Talmud (Zevachim 53a) maintains that the Torah is introducing a divider “to distinguish between the higher bloods and the lower bloods.” Higher and lower bloods may represent two types of vitality that have to be offered. Why have a network in the form of a copper sieve to reinforce this distinction? Looking closely at the word damim or “bloods” [דמים] we might suggest that the expression strongly resembles another fundamental distinction in the Torah which is between the higher and lower waters where mayim (waters [מים]) is literally inside the word for “bloods.” This idea is further strengthened by the transformation of water into blood in the first of the Ten Plagues in Egypt. The higher and lower waters are a reference to the twofold source of the flood in the times of Noach/Noah as we mentioned previously. Once again, the lower waters relate to the outpouring of the natural sciences (chochmat ha’teva) which includes all of science and technology, while the higher waters are a manifestation of the inner dimensions of the Torah. Another way of putting it might be to understand the water sources as Divine (transcendent and revealed from on High) and immanent (given over to human intellect which uncovers them within Creation).

Given all of this, we can now comprehend why this divider is a kind of filter (sieve) and extends from the top down. If the vitality (higher bloods) is for the Torah in the formal sense, then it is meant to descend down into our vitality (lower bloods) which is for science (natural wisdom). For a proper interaction we require a filtering mechanism or membrane which both distinguishes them and allows them to come together (the network both separates and unites in that everyone is assigned their own domain (reshut from reshit “network”) which distances us one from the next and yet links up between those domains effectively collapsing that distance). If the network affect were extended from the bottom up, this would be like saying that science should determine Torah (which would be highly problematic in that the Torah is whole and complete while science is always partial and incomplete). Therefore, we are instructed to work top-down in order to emphasize how the Torah is supposed to influence and inspire science but from a privileged position within the relationship. Thus, Torah comes down to science while science has to work its way up to the Torah. The interactions are then networked via the filtering system which is positioned in the middle as a kind of mediator.

From this we can surmise that the altar brings closeness to distanced and estranged ideas as well as people. There is a whole society of ideas which suffers from the same damaged relations to the point where one idea cannot relate to another idea. The fire on the altar may also serve to deconstruct the coarseness of unrefined ideas and create new synergies as a result. On an even deeper level, the Torah in the broadest sense can be found to encompass a more restricted sense of Torah with that of science (the idea of a meta-Torah which bridges both) and the allusion to this as a final objective of the copper meshwork interface is found in the words of the verse itself (Shemot/Exodus 27:4) in that “make for it [the altar] a net (mikbar)of copper meshwork (reshet)” which in Hebrew is “v’asita lo mikbar ma’esh reshet nachoshet” with the last letters of the first four words being Tav, Vav, Reish, Hei which spells out the word Torah (Sefer Ha’Remezim L’Rabbeinu Yoel p.316). In sum, the whole purpose of the Torah is to make peace (just as that altar embodies that same objective). Since the ‘final letters’ of the description of network on the altar are intended to hint at the Torah and its goal of bring unity into all of reality, we may subsequently look to the Torah for the ability to link everything (distant and close, high and low) together.

In Part Nine, we will move on to explain the meaning of the four rings which were mounted on top of the network of the altar in order to transport it.

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-power-of-networks-part-9/

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/the-power-of-networks-part-7/