Now that we have outlined the four basic modes of being that range from the solitude of no relation to the fullness of an immersive relation wherein one is fully committed, we can overlay another set of possibilities which will serve as an additional thought filter with which to ripen our understanding. Beginning with the deceptively simplistic assessment that all fours have something in common–namely their ‘four-ness’–we may  look for ‘information architectures’ in Kabbalah that will be useful for correlating this quantity irrespective of our preliminary feeling of any qualitative interconnection. One of the classic models that is most commonly deployed to tackle such fourfold phenomenon is the system of Four Worlds. The precision of the parallels that can be drawn between these worlds and our perception of ‘the other’/Other’ casts these relationships within a broader spiritual consciousness which both situates them better with respect to each other and enhances our prognosis for positive interpersonal ‘alterations.’

The Biblical source text for our multiplex of worlds comes straight out of Yeshiyahu/Isaiah 43:7: “Everything is called by My name, for My glory, I have created it, I have formed it, and I have made it.” Pouring these words into a exegetical distillery, we can canvass this verse in terms of a general principle (“Everything is called by My name”) and the parsing out of that principle in terms of four distinct categories (“for My glory, I have created it, I have formed it, and I have made it.”) In Kabbalah, “My name” refers to the essential Divine name of the Tetragrammaton (Havayah) which means ‘Being’ or ‘Reality.’ “Everything is called by My Name” therefore implies that there is a universal application of the Divine name when modeling anything in existence. Why? Because this name actually represents Existence as a whole. All beings are enveloped within Being. My being, your being–our ontic condition–is derivative of Being with a capital B. Whenever we say that anything ‘exists’ we are already in a certain veiled sense calling it by “My Name” or evoking the Tetragrammaton.

Taking up the detailing of this Divine name (which is often referenced in kabbalistic literature as the ‘Name of four [letters],’ we see that there are four other descriptions tacked onto the opening declaration of “Everything” being called by “My name.” These connote four modes of Being or four dimensions of Reality. In our present discussion, they would express four ways of ‘Being-with-the-other’ or ‘relationship Realities.’ Since the Tetragrammaton has four letters, it follows that each letter is a sign for a different mode of Being. Different signs denote different designations both because of the particular letter which is used and the relative position of that letter in the group. Permutations of these letters carry over into new configurations of relationships which we must reevaluate. For now we will only work our way through the ‘standard model’ which progresses linearly from the ‘top-down’–that is from what is generally regarded as the most advantageous relationship to subsidiary ones.

The quick rundown goes like this: “My glory” is code for the world of Emanation or Atzilut. Atzilut comes from the root ‘etzel’ which has the twofold sense of ‘proximity’ and ‘royalty.’ To be in the King’s inner circle, to enter in one’s consciousness into a close relationship with the Divine, results in our being overawed by Divinity. Thus, the world of Emanation with this ‘proximity’ to the ‘Glory’ of the King registers in our consciousness as a forgetting of ourselves, a transcending of the ego and a complete attachment to Divinity. In sum, it is a world which is exclusively conscious of the Divine. Etzel (Alef-Tzadik-Lamed [אצל]) can be read Alef tzel (Tzadik-Lamed [א צל]) which might be rendered as the ‘shadow’ (tzel) or the ‘Master of the World’ (Alefo shel Olam). Alef can mean ‘chief’ and is also numerically equal to one. Hence, to enter the world of Emanation means living in the ‘shadow’ of the One (here meant in the sense of unity as opposed to just the numerical sense). ‘Shadowing’ implies total devotion where a person has given himself or herself over to service of the King. To ‘Shadow’ can idiomatically mean ‘to emulate.’ When we strive to emulate the Divine Other with our entire being, we may be said to have ascended into the world of Emanation.

The next three worlds are much easier to tag with their references lying much closer to the surface meaning of the text. “I have created it” marks the world of Creation, “I have formed it” equates with the world of Formation and finally “and even I made it” corresponds to the world of Action. As a group, these three are all termed ‘lower worlds’ due to their initial diminished capacity to reveal the fullness of Divinity (“My Glory”). In fact, one of the primary functions of the lower worlds is obscuring Divinity. From the standpoint of Creation, Formation and Action, the ultimate Other seems somewhat unrelatable, withdrawn and recondite. Between each of these worlds there are contractions or reductions of expressivity (tzimtzumim) which strain and threaten to break the relationship as it degenerates.

The big shift from the Oneness and unity of the world of Emanation occurs when we make the jump into the world of Creation. Creation introduces a dual consciousness (me and the Other) with competing interests in that the word Beriyah (Creation) in its root ‘bara’ can be pulled apart into ‘bar’ (outside) plus ‘Alef’ (the One or the Chief). While I am totally consumed by my relationship with the Divine in the world of Emanation, in the world of Creation I begin to acquire more of a sense of independence within the relationship. By way of an aside, just the fact that most of the narrative of the Torah, according to its plain meaning, is an address between us and God, means that it is primarily communicating the perspective of the world of Creation. The distance between self and Divine Other is realized in the manner of directional communication (God talks to us, we talk to God). This is why the Arizal emphasizes that the Torah, as we currently study it, is reflective of the Torah of the world of Creation but in the future a new higher dimension will be revealed from within the self-same Torah which will show a much closer relationship that is evident in the world of Emanation (a topic to be addressed at length another time).

Once the (seeming) break up of the original unity with the Divine occurs, then it only becomes a question of how much perceived separation we are dealing with (which in turn will place us in one of the three lower worlds). The world of Formation and Action merely intensify the self-other (Other) divide that began to be noticeable in the world of Creation.

Returning to our original set of relationships then, we start with the optimal relationship where a person is selflessly devoted to the other called “lo” (to or for him). This clearly links up with the world of Emanation which achieves true unity of self and other (Other). When I descend down into the world of Creation, then I have my own independent interests which separate me somewhat from experiencing complete unity but I manage to partially compensate for this by making up a ‘social contract’ conditioned by mutual benefits. This is because my life in ‘Creation’ is really ‘outside’ that of my significant other who is now only ‘part’ of ‘my’ life (in the world of Emanation the other/Other becomes the ‘whole’ of my life). In the world Formation (Yetzirah), I am riddled with positive and negative ‘drives’ and ‘inclinations’ called ‘yetzerim’ (which derives from the same root). These drives and inclinations are ‘formative’ of my personality but they are also a cause of continued conflict in my relationship with others. Oppositional relations therefore fall into the world of Formation.

Finally, the nuanced statement “and even I made it” adds in a break as a qualifier which is not part of the descriptions for the first three worlds (Emanation, Creation and Formation). The reason for this is that the world of Action is broken off from the other worlds in the worst way. Action could be likened to ‘billiard ball’ causal collisions. Nothing ever gets inside me. It all bounces off. Only external forces act upon me while my inner person remains untouched and untouchable. In short, I am alone. I act alone. I turn into an ab/solute object (where ab-solute means unattached i.e. the absence of relations or ‘relativity’). The deified self, which the Torah explicitly states is the most negative condition, is cut off feeling existentially isolated (there is no other or at least no relatable other ‘beside me’.)

In Part Six, we will continue to color in our rethinking of self-other relationships in terms of the system of worlds.

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/relationship-differences-fusion-and-defusion-part-6/

http://www.interinclusion.org/inspirations/relationship-differences-fusion-and-defusion-part-4/

Print PDF