[Dean's World] Naftali: Non-Materialism

[notify at powerblogs.com]

Posted by Naftali:
Non-Materialism
http://www.deanesmay.com/posts/1191347860.shtml


   In the comment section to the post chained to this one, I stated that
   I am soldier in the army of G-d.

   In response Tim Kindred stated that, he "will never recognise anyone
   as a soldier who does not represent a recognised government, or
   political movement and wear upon their person a distinctive mark of
   that government so as to permit them to be recognised as such," and
   that "Religions are not recognised as lawful governments, therefor[e]
   they cannot have "soldiers"."

   Answering, Daniel Harr, one of Dean's World's most erudite
   contributers, stated that one may draw an analogy between being a
   soldier in the US army and being a soldier for G-d without equating
   the two entities in a simplistic fashion. (See the attached post for
   more context.)

   Indeed, I agree with Daniel that one may draw such analogies in the
   way he described, but at the same time I wish to offer a response
   going in the opposite direction.

   Generally, when we observe and describe the world we tend to look
   deeply at entities, abstracting the concepts and dynamics from the
   material instance in which they are embodied. Once we have abstracted
   the concepts and dynamics from the instance that is their material
   shell, we then classify material entities, comparing and contrasting
   as we go along.

   Accordingly, one can certainly abstract what he sees as the conceptual
   structure embodied within an entity like, say, an army or a soldier,
   and find its twin in, say, a religious group serving G-d or any group
   'fighting' to further a certain goal. And, conversely, someone else is
   able to disagree with the identification, pointing out what he sees as
   critical differences between said entities.

   The question I am posing, or trying to answer really, is what is the
   [1]ontological status of those abstract concepts and dynamics; and,
   relatedly, what is the ontological status of the various entity
   classifications we base on them.

   An ardent [2]materialist would argue, I think, that since materialism
   is an approach that "regards matter and its motions as constituting
   the universe, and all phenomena, including those of mind, as due to
   material agencies[,]" all conceptual underpinnings underlying material
   entities are no more than tools created by and in the minds of men to
   relate to their material surroundings, possessing no real existence
   outside of the mind.

   The Torah, though, sees the world as a material manifestation of
   spiritual worlds, the lowest level of which being the conceptual
   structure underlying and embodied within it. Accordingly, not only do
   the conceptual underpinnings of the material exist outside of the
   mind, but also they are truly the main element of existence, material
   being only their physical manifestation.

   These spiritual underpinnings are the issues as they are defined in
   Torah. This idea is one of those that are encapsulated in the Talmudic
   phrases " The Torah precedes the world" and "the holy one blessed be
   he looked in the Torah and created the world."

   Indeed the Torah sees our duty as bringing the material world to fully
   and perfectly reflect its true character, namely , the way it exists
   in G-d's mind (so to speak) or , to say it differently, the Torah.

   For example, Torah sees material kingship as the reflection of the
   kingship of G-d himself, with the awaited Davidic monarch its most
   perfect material manifestation. This is indeed why Jews are required,
   upon seeing any real king, even that of another nation , to make a
   declaration blessing G-d for bestowing his kingship upon humanity.
   Similarly, in the presence of a sage we bless G-d for placing his
   wisdom upon humanity, and so on and so forth.

   Accordingly, and finally, when I stated that Jews are the army of
   Hashem and that I am soldier in it, I meant it in the utmost.

References

   1. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ontological
   2. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=materialism