Take Me Higher

We looked at a few levels and aspects of the Rav Kook.

In his eulogy for Herzl, we saw a homily of messianic scriptures and sources, like the precursors of Zionism, in regards to the new Jewish state on the way.

Then we reviewed some milestones in his lifetime, observing that he is one who is always on the move, active, and caught between different forces which considers to be complimentary and paradoxical not opposite.

Then we mentioned a few principles of his worldview, of his spiritualism and writing unction since he came to Israel, and how that is Israel versus Exile, a prophetic and messianic status of a different nature; also that there is a divine Kabbalistic style root of good in all things, including the seculars and everything, and they should be discerned and embraced; and that there is a historical process of progressive divine ordination, peaking at the messianic era, that they / we are at the footsteps of, including WWI and the Balfour declaration, etc.

On all the above there is a higher level of added meaning, that has to do with everything so far, I mean everything so far in the posts about the Rav, and also I mean the previous posts of Jewish mysticism and messianism.

Secret Righteous Once Again

It is that same line of Kabbalistic messianic harbinger Sphere of Yesod (firmament) like Rashby, Moses, Elijah, Luria, and the Ba’al Shem Tov, and so forth. 

The role of the harbinger overlaps partially with the traditional role of the Messiah. But it is not THE messiah, though typically messianic complementary, or even generational small messiah, or even Messiah Son of Joseph.

It is Kabbalistic, it is the Sphere of Yesod is the masculine line through which the divine abundance flows forth down into the vessel of this world, which is Malkhut (Kingdom), the feminine vessel - the former associated mostly with Joseph, the latter with David.

So was the Rav, though many did not know this, it was hidden mostly from the public: his close disciples in charge of editing and publishing, including his son Zvi Yehuda, apparently knew this and apparently softened the tone of this matter through small edits and by selectively releasing texts. 

They, as the conservative force around, toned down the idea of seculars being divinely spiritually inspired, and also they distorted the degree of his high self-consciousness, as a righteous one, a Tsaddik, or even Tsaddik Yesod Olam (potential). But that is how he was recognized by his closer disciples! Namely Ya’akov-Moshe cHarlap and the Nazirite Rabbi David ha’Cohen. 

Rarely Accountable

Through rare accounts from his disciples we know that they together experienced ecstatic mystical things that were associated with the Rav and his great Kabbalistic stature as a Tsaddik, and then when we return to the collection of paragraphs he penned as raw material (not the published stuff) it is subtle but pointing to this high consciousness as such…

He writes and apparently is speaking of himself in third person when he mentions the Tsaddik, in other words, he talks about the Tsaddik and his role, and you at first would just assume he speaks of whoever that might be whenever, but upon second reading and assuming he is speaking of himself, then it gets profound.

He talks a lot about the Tsaddik, particularly during the war. He also talks about Tsaddikim, in plural. He talks so much about it, that as a reader, if you think about it, he is talking about what it feels like, the existential experience of Tsaddik Yesod Olam like a poet or someone who is sharing a feeling from experience.

Also, sometimes it seems as though he was living and experiencing things parallel to his writing and the ideas or descriptions of the Tsaddik, as if the writings of the Tsaddik correlate with his life experience - which is deep and interesting and also strengthens the notion that his work can be read as speaking of himself, at least in part. 

Scholars are not unanimous on this interpretive notion, this hermeneutic.

Should it be the main lens through which to read all of the paragraphs, or just a secondary added value? Well, either way, it is agreed that this is what is happening there, at least somewhat, at least among other things.

Scholars are influenced, remember this - by a couple generations of reading the conservative published versions, not the raw material, until recently.

Also remember, that such a special reading is not so far-fetched, it is quite like Rebbe Nachman of Breslev, who would speak of the Tsaddik in third person, and seemingly is on the one hand writing about him as someone else or some figure, and at times on the other hand speaks of himself, or potentially, as the Tsaddik. 

If we read the Rav in this manner, his entire career and words bring on an additional higher and deeper level of meaning, as spiritualist, mystic, and the messianic Tsaddik.

When he died, his disciples cried over him, not just sadness of losing their beloved rabbi, but an anxious cry of the mystical vacuum created in his absence like when the Rashbi passed - now who will stand in the gap, who will hold together the universe?