close
The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20120525103321/http://reblaura.com:80/category/philosophy/

Omer Crow

BERJAYA29th Avenue, between Main and James:

Wooden privacy fences mark off small green yards, their landscapes exploding with sweet spring beauty.

On one fence, a crow caws angrily, wings outstretched, settled, outstretched, settled.

Another crow flies up from a nearby tree, but lands in place again – a half-hearted response, at best.

Crow-on-the-fence continues to bristle and flap.

Along a perpendicular rim of the fence walks a small black cat. Cat is raven-black, just like Crow, and about the same size.

Black Crow stands his ground in his safe corner and yells.

Black Cat, unfazed, walks forward and waits. She does not crouch. She does not fluff her tail. No defense, no offence. She simply waits.

Black Crow is beside himself. From his position he calls out threats.

But his crow friends merely look on from their treetop.

Slowly, Black Crow advances along the fence, to the corner where his narrow rim intersects Black Cat’s. Black Cat calmly walks on, crossing Black Crow’s fence-rim, on into the next yard, vanishing among the tall green cedars.

It’s not unusual to see a crow in such distress, but it is odd to see his friends watch without swooping down to help. Perhaps a family nest sits high in the tree, and Black Crow dances defensively down low to confuse Black Cat.

Black Cat, it seems, is on to Black Crow and his tricks. She shows no interest in the imaginary nest or the false theatrical display.

Black Crow and Black Cat: so similar in size and color, so different in temperament. One fusses frantically as the other pauses in stillness.

Each is absolutely beautiful. And each is fully entitled, by the laws of his or species, to hunt and gather on this shared land.

Each is a revelation of the energy of our natural world. And each is a revelation of the energies of our inner world.

Black Crow and Black Cat appear to me during this season of Sefirat Ha’Omer. Forty-nine days to make an accounting of the sefirot, God’s spiritual attributes, as they show themselves in my consciousness.

The sefirot have grand names: Love, Strength, Beauty, Victory/Eternity, Splendor/Gratitude, Foundation, Royalty.

The names suggest perfection, as does Black Cat’s dignified stillness. They direct us to walk purposefully as we trace a clear spiritual path.

They suggest that Black Crow’s expression is a mere theatrical display – a diversion of energy into an imaginary dead end.

I am tempted by this suggestion. How beautiful to believe that Strength is my true essence, God’s precious gift to me. How inspirational to know that a moment of weakness shows me how to jump back to strength. How comforting to know what is Real and True, and set my GPS to those coordinates.

Sometimes I adopt this as my theology. Divinity is expressed in my thoughts and feelings as Love. God is expressed through my loving actions, not my angry, envious, or confused impulses. Negative impulses should remind me to turn towards the Inner Good. Famous modern Jewish theologians have said God appears to them in this guise, rather than as a world controller, and I teach their ideas with respect.

Sometimes I challenge this theology. In my metaphysical vision, the entire world is an expression of Divine energy. That makes me a monist and a monotheist who believes that distress and stillness have the same Source. Sharing a source does not make two things equal in every way; prolonged stillness is healthier, more socially harmonious, and more enjoyable. But stillness is not more real. Distress is not simply a wrong turn.

If pressed, I could not define “real” or “true” or tell you the attributes of real and true things. I could not tell you exactly how to be with distress. But I could tell you that the idealized tree of the sefirot does not tell the full story.

Right now I am wandering and wondering my way through the Omer count.

Black Crow and Black Cat are my real guides.

Image: A question suggested by this beautiful image: Should Black Cat harness Black Crow? Image by Cyra R. Cancel, www.ebsqart.com.

Rabbi Without Borders: Who, Me?


BERJAYAAt the final meeting of our Rabbis Without Borders group, our teachers asked, “What is a Rabbi Without Borders?”

I am a Rabbi without Borders.

Seven years since leaving academia to become a congregational rabbi; seven years since moving to Canada; seven months since beginning my hybrid medical-naturopathic treatment; seven weeks since my mother entered a U.S. hospital. Any way you count to seven, I have crossed many borders.

Now I know that I am a spiritual teacher. On a given day, I may talk to God, dream about God, write about God, sit with someone in the Presence of God. To convey spirituality, I don’t have to do anything more than be aware of my own thoughts, feelings, and perceptions as I work.

As a spiritual teacher, I speak out of my own experience. From the pulpit, or in one-on-one pastoral care, I only speak about what I know to be existentially true. I offer no theories about Divine or human nature that I have not explored or understood myself, no matter how many books reiterate them as core truths. If I don’t know the answer to a spiritual question, I don’t pretend; I affirm it as a deep existential question.

The Jewish wisdom tradition guides me. Our core texts express profound truths about human nature. Torah describes group and individual life in all its flawed beauty, and invites multiple interpretations of everything it explores. Our rituals provide guidance through times of challenge and transition. When people seek guidance from me, I use these rituals as resources rather than rules. When preparing a family for a funeral, for example, I don’t begin with an outline of the structure of the time of mourning. I listen, converse, learn about the family’s needs, questions, thoughts, and feelings. Only then do I explain how time set aside for coping (aninut), laying out of responsibilities (shiva), and gradual re-entry (sheloshim) can help them in their particular situation.

God’s love holds me. In all my work, I serve God, not any particular human being. Before entering a difficult situation, I pray, “Holy One, help me serve You.” I am not perfect. I cannot be everywhere at once, or know everything, or be completely purified of fear, anxiety or sadness. And now I know: no one expects me to be. This is love. This, honestly, is how I understand God’s love. We don’t have to be perfect to matter; we just have to accept that we are held. If you want to put Jewish metaphors to it, you can say: every human being has a yetzer hatov and a yetzer hara. We do some things out of our highest inclination, and some out of petty impulses. We are part earth and part Divine Spirit. As Aristotle might put it, through imperfection, we fully realize our human nature. Knowing that others love me in this human way affirms my mission as a congregational rabbi: to love the people I work with. As Carl Rogers might put it, I do my best to offer genuineness, acceptance and empathy.

BERJAYAI am always in transition.

I am a Jewish Renewal Rabbi and a Rabbi Without Borders.

Images: “Day and Night” by M.C. Escher, fusionanomaly.net; rabbiswithoutborders.org

Idol Worship

BERJAYASatisfaction.

Distraction.

I’ve been yearning for it.

Perhaps a new dress, a scarf, a pair of shoes could brighten me up. Or perhaps some entertainment, exhilaration, absorption in a story not my own. A movie, a novel, or a few episodes of “Breaking Bad” should set me soaring.

But no, poor me, I am graced with a dream instead.

I’m in New York City, in Queens, near the county courthouse in Kew Gardens. The grassy hill overlooks a bay, layered in clouds and mist. Moist greens and grays glow with heart-wrenching beauty. Three mythical animals come dancing by. They are big as buffalo, shaped like bear, and black as raven with shaggy cowls around their throats. They smile and bounce, clowning for the small crowd drawn by the mists. Three rainbows pop up from the grass.  With overwhelming joy I think, “This is my home!”

Charles and I drive away from the hill, along an old highway enclosed by brick walls. The road takes us to historic resort city on a narrow peninsula. Shining white buildings define narrow streets, right up to the water’s edge. Cold navy blue waves break delicately into white foam on the beach. We are visiting briefly, just to have lunch. The resort city is very beautiful. But compared to the hillside, it’s plain — an earthly, ordinary beauty.

Duh. Of course a scarf won’t satisfy my restless soul. Beautiful art might call to my spirit, but it won’t bring me home. Home is not a place of quick comfort. My dream teaches that it’s a place of mystery: deep waters covered in mist, adorned with myth, and exploding in surprises I could not have imagined. Compared to it, any known place of resort and refuge is narrow, cut off from the depths, worthy only of a short visit.

The peninsula reminds me of a stray philosophical detail, the losing side in a famous philosophical debate. In articulating his “ontological argument” for God’s existence, St. Anselm of Canterbury defines God as a “Being greater than which no being can be conceived.” Such a being, he argues, necessarily exists. His fellow monk Gaunilo objects: just because I say there is an island greater than any other doesn’t mean the island exists. But Gaunilo, of course, misses the point. To Anselm, God isn’t a thing, like an island.  God is the edge towards which we reach with all our spiritual and intellectual might. In my dream, Anselm’s God manifests on the hillside, hinted at in the play of light and the spontaneous appearance of impossible, mythical beings. Gaunilo’s island is like the peninsula: beautiful, but confined. His island has nothing to do with the God that Anselm has in mind.

Idol worship, classically defined, seems a silly thing to worry about. Hebrew Bible talks about the worship of false Gods made of wood and stone. But no one confuses wooden statues representing gods with the natural powers those gods express. No one actually worships gods of wood and stone. Maybe in the most crass economic sense, people seek to be honoured for their wealth, and admired for the beautiful things they own. But Hebrew Bible criticizes that tendency directly. So, the caution against idol worship must point to something else.

Only a few days ago, I found myself seeking comfort in the experience of beauty. I hoped to consume fabric art, performing art, and literary art. But the dream reminded me: such beauty might be soul-stirring, but it is not soul-satisfying. It’s a way of placing hope in something very much like biblical idols, beautiful works of art crafted in fine media. Under emotional stress, I am easily distracted into that kind of hope.

Intellectually, big ideas and powerful metaphors set me soaring. I can be like Gaunilo, who used a physical analogy for God’s greatness, and then took it literally.  Each time I craft an elegant new metaphor to express my changing spiritual experience, I imagine I have come closer to God’s true nature.  In the thrall of intellectual exhilaration, I am easily distracted by the beauty of my own ideas.

Beauty is, without a doubt, a hint to God’s Presence. And God is present in the hints, clowning deliberately for those of us who gather to admire beauty. Yes, we should gather, and explore what appears using the tools of art and intellect. But we can’t pin God down in any of the appearances: forms shift between buffalo, bear, raven and more. Light springs up spontaneously and refracts in every direction.

No matter what you think you see, says my dream, you should take another look.

Image: raven-bear ring by walkergoldsmiths.com. “If I had this beautiful work of art on my hand, I would be reminded always of God’s true nature and I would be happy.” Please don’t take this statement too literally.

Open Soul Surgery

BERJAYAOpen-heart surgery is eXtreme medicine. It’s like extreme sports except you aren’t fit when you start. And you don’t soar with exhilaration at first success. When you wake up alive, you feel like absolute crap. You are confused, and not sure the journey was worth it.  You wonder, “This is why I consented to the battering?”

Of course it’s tricky, because your post-surgical condition isn’t the actual destination — health is. But in your confused state, you can’t really reason about that. The therapies are invasive and painful and they don’t inspire hope. And you are not in control.

You can’t move much, so you need help and a great deal of soothing. Ice on your forehead, sponge on your tongue, massage on your feet, hands on your hands. You can only hope that someone loves you as deeply as most people love their helpless babies. You hope they find their way to your side.

You need heavy sedation at first, so as not to stress your heart when it is still so fragile, so wounded. As the drugs leave your system, you may experience liminal moments on the way to consciousness. Perceptions, thoughts, and feelings that generally live just below the surface may come forward. “The people here…they are strange, cold…I am going to die…ginger ale, club soda, never again.”

I have a repertoire of responses for people in these kinds of moments, but I can’t access them when I’m with my own mother. Psychology and theology fly out the window. Only physical expressions of love seem to make sense.

The day before Mom’s surgery we spoke on the phone. A Catholic chaplain had come to visit her. She didn’t like the words he used when he prayed for her. So she asked me “If this religion is bunk, and that religion is bunk, what does that leave us?” I answered, even though I knew she was asking a rhetorical question. “God,” I said, “It leaves us God.” And then she said, “Well, I don’t believe.”

When I said, “It leaves us God,” I knew what I meant. Symbols aren’t God. Rituals aren’t God. Words aren’t God. Theologies aren’t God. And — forgive me for being edgy, but I have just been at the edge – most of what we think they point to isn’t God either.

It’s been a tough few weeks. And I am drawn into my mother’s despair. More and more I am thinking that the symbols of religious traditions are not “it.” From a certain perspective, they are completely beside the point. They are like shadows on the walls of Plato’s cave, strange and cold. In Plato’s allegory, prisoners of the cave hold prize contests to see who knows the most about these representations, which are mere shadows of sculptures of real things.

Can I try to say what the reality of God is? Perhaps: inner work done by real people at the real edges of life. Fears that blow us right to those edges. Love offered at the edge, without explanation and without eloquence.

At that edge, God is not some extra thing but is simply a miracle that holds us. But the word “miracle” isn’t right. Neither “force” nor “entity” would be right either. Words aren’t working well for me right now; I would do better if I could dip a sponge-on-a-stick into a cup of ice water and bring relief to someone’s lips.

About ten years ago, I was deep into a philosophical project of tying theories to concrete experiences. In the light of certain experiences, I taught, theories make sense. When I feel my mind soaring because I am pushing at the boundaries of my understanding, God seems to be “that being greater than which no being can be conceived,” as Anselm of Canterbury says. When I feel held in my pain by the love of family and friends, I encounter God as lover, as Franz Rosenzweig says God was revealed on Mount Sinai. When all my training flies from my mind, and I join my mother in a liminal space, nothing makes sense at all except being together. That’s all there is left for God to be.

No, I’m not ready to junk all my words and symbols, not ready to declare defeat as a rabbi, or uselessness as a philosopher. On the other hand, I don’t know who am I trying to reassure with this statement. Potential readers who judge my commitment to Judaism? The younger academic in me who won prizes for teaching and writing philosophy? The child in me who stands at the edge of Mom’s bed and looks to her for a foundation, even when she is so weak?

There’s more to observe, more to untangle. More dimensions of the soul to explore. More foundations and more abysses. More prayers to offer for healing and clarity.

Mom, may you pass the swallow test and enjoy some ginger ale.

Image: http://kelleck.deviantart.com/

Rabbis, for Heaven’s Sake

BERJAYAThe question: At the Rabbis Without Borders meeting, we asked:

What is a machloket l’shem shamayim – a dispute for the sake of heaven?

Rabbi Irwin Kula offered a tentative definition: a dispute over a question, a tension, a duality that will not go away — because human living raises it.

The entire team of teachers at our third Rabbis Without Borders meeting pressed us to explore the definition.

Public policy: Journalist Steven Waldman spoke about an example of such a tension from American communal life, the principle of “separation of church and state.” Does the principle help religion flourish by limiting government interference? Or does it make religion wither by withdrawing governmental protection?

The USA’s “Founding Fathers” acted on the best answer they could find: religious diversity depends on freedom from legal structures. But they knew that unpredictable situations would raise the question again. For the last 236 years, legislative debate, case law, and journalism have grappled with it.

Behind the dispute lies a shared spiritual principle: it is good for human beings to reach towards God through religious practice. From this shared principle, we diverge as we argue passionately about its implementation. Could you have a clearer example of a dispute “for the sake of heaven?”

BERJAYASynagogue practice: Too often we forget the “heaven” for whose sake we invest our passions. We become attached to a solution specific to our time, place and employers. How can we look behind the partial answers on which we may have built our careers?

Rabbi Peter J. Rubenstein taught that it is possible to see the deeper questions even as one leads a large established synagogue. He shared his principles: (1) If it ain’t broke, break it and grow. (2) Try something before you veto it. (3) Recognize that you serve not just the narrow consensual circle of your members, but the entire Jewish people.

Self-reflection: Rabbi Rebecca Sirbu encouraged us to reflect on the source of our habits of political thinking. We spoke of our earliest political experiences, our upbringing, our education, and our work.

Rabbi Kula pressed us to try to look behind cherished partial answers. Choose a political position you disagree with and inhabit it, he said. What experiences and commitments make it plausible? Can you support it with a Jewish text, read against your grain? Can you dwell in the question, rather than in your habitual answer?

Philosophy: When it comes to machloket l’shem shamayin, the question expresses a deeper truth than any possible answer.

Rabbi Kula illustrated the idea with a Talmudic text (Eruvin 13b). Rabbi Meir’s name literally means “the enlightener,” because he could see forty arguments in support of every possible perspective. Beit Hillel wins every halachic dispute because they acknowledge the truth expressed in an opposite view.

I could not resist adding that Plato sees “truth” in the same way. Perfect truths, he writes, exist only in the realm of ideas. In our everyday lives, we grasp and implement truth imperfectly. Yet, guided by the ineffable ideas, we continually evaluate and update our implementation. Some students of philosophy imagine that Socratic method can discover perfect truth once and for all, but this is not Plato’s view. At the end of each of Plato’s masterpieces, (Republic and Symposium) an upstart with a story blows Socrates’ argument to pieces.

Homework: Why should we, Rabbis Without Borders, immerse ourselves in this teaching? Here are the first stirrings of my personal answer.

We live at the border between past, present, and future. The past is gone, the present is changing, and the future is unknown. As the social lives of Jews change, we truly do not know if our familiar answers will continue to make sense. We can prepare by learning to recognize the existential questions at the core of human community. If we can see through a debate to the spiritual question at its core, we will not go wrong.

We live in an everyday world, trying to guide ourselves by an eternal truth. We stand in a stream of time as we serve the Holy One of Blessing. We do not know the situations in which we will be called to serve. As Moshe says in Shemot 10:26: v’anachnu lo neida ma na’avod et HaShem ad bo’einu shama. We do not know how we will serve God until we get there.

Photos: by Laura Duhan Kaplan (1) Torahs at Central Synagogue, New York City; (2) Our rabbinic fellows in the sanctuary at Central Synagogue, home of Rabbi Rubenstein.

Belief

BERJAYAWhat does it mean to “believe” in God? or in an afterlife?

Is it like agreeing with a statement? Where you have an idea that seems to be verified by logic or experience or an expert teacher?

Or is it more like an affective state, where a strong feeling overtakes your body? Where the presence of something is so integrated into your experience that no questioning is possible?

Today it seems to me to be neither of the above.

Today I dreamed:

In my role as rabbi, I am visiting an elder in the hospital. The unit is a wide room with many beds. I notice my father and an old friend of his lying in a nearby bed. The next day, I come back to the hospital to join my father for a special event in the auditorium. He is alert, sitting between two friends. One friend is wearing a diving mask and snorkel. My father glances at his friend and playfully rolls his eyes at me. I am ecstatically happy that my father has moved to Vancouver and that he is in the company of two close friends.

I woke from the dream into predawn darkness, too uplifted to fall back asleep.

It seems I had dreamed of heaven. Though my father has been dead for eleven years, I dreamed that he is happy, he is loved, and all is right with the world.

I’ve just one nagging doubt: I don’t believe in heaven. At least, not in the way that one agrees with a statement.

I do believe that heaven is a metaphor used by prophets and psalmists to describe the awesome power of God in nature — vast, beautiful, part of our world and yet beyond it. And I do believe affectively in this power when it overtakes my body and fills my experience. “Heaven” seems a good word for this power, because it evokes a sky so blue it hurts to look.

But I don’t believe that people’s bodies or souls go to a beautiful place called “heaven” after they die. I don’t believe in that statement.

In fact, I don’t often think about this kind of heaven at all. It isn’t part of the basic vocabulary that shapes my thinking. It isn’t an image that holds my personal longings and wonderings about death.

And yet, the dream came into my thinking, fulfilling my longing and soothing my wondering. Heaven – a place of love, comfort, and happiness so bright it hurts to feel – is just the right word for what I saw in this dream.

Of course I know the dream offers a reflection of my own self. My father has appeared to remind me that I am loved, so that I can be happy, and feel – even for one pre-dawn moment – that everything is right with the world.

For one moment, I believed in heaven in the affective way.

Now I know that I “believe in” heaven in a third way, a way that isn’t quite cognitive and isn’t quite affective.

Heaven, I now see, is a metaphor that shapes my thinking. It is an image that can hold my personal longings and wonderings.

I “believe in” heaven the way academic scholars of religion speak of believing in a “myth.” For them (us), a myth is neither true nor false; it’s just very, very basic. A myth is a story so foundational to a person’s thought that it shapes the very categories in which thought appears.

The myth of heaven certainly shaped my dream, and made it possible for me to represent and access the comfort I needed.

Thank you to prophet and psalmist, and to the theologians whose own teachings were shaped by the myths you taught them.

Image: your-nursing-guide.com

Learning Compassion

BERJAYAThe Buddha’s insecure students sometimes asked him if his enlightenment was truly the result of years of inner work. After all, if the master had grown through patient self-cultivation, they too could grow.

Of course, the master answered “yes.” Still, some students worried. “Master, are you sure you don’t have a special gift that sets you apart? a quality that has been with you since infancy? Do you remember your childhood consciousness?”

And the Buddha would tell a story that would both answer them and reassure them.

“When I was only five years old, my father took me to a farming ceremony in the early spring. With a great party, we celebrated the plowing of the fields before the first planting. But the adult fun didn’t mean much to me, so I sat under a tree and played in the grass. But my game came to a sudden end when I noticed some shoots of grass accidentally torn up by a sloppy plow. I saw that the tiny insects clinging to the grass had been killed. And I felt a terrible pang of grief, as if my own family had been killed. And I entered a state of altered consciousness.

As an adult, I now have words to speak about this experience. I now know that this moment of empathy took me out of myself.  I felt a release of mind, and this release led to a profound feeling of joy.

You too can have joy by developing compassion.”

Par’oh’s story, as told in Parshat Va’era, is a shadow side of the Buddha’s story. Par’oh has no empathy for fish, frogs, insects, wild animals, domestic animals, human beings, or plants. Through all the seven plagues that strike these groups, Par’oh experiences no release of mind. In fact he experiences the opposite. His lev – his heart, or as it can also be translated, his mind – grows ever harder.

Obviously, he lacks good habits of feeling. But he also lacks habits of noble behavior that might compensate for his failure of feeling. He cannot even keep a simple promise. Seven times he agrees to let the Israelites go on a three-day journey; and seven times he changes his mind.

Without compassionate feelings and without habits of ethical behavior Par’oh is, according to the Hassidic classic Tanya, the absolute archetype of the rasha, the wicked person.

Into this stark portrait of a villain, Torah weaves philosophical hints about a path to goodness.

As Parshat Va’era opens, Moshe is having a crisis of faith in his leadership. He has done everything God has asked, and the result is more oppression for the Israelites.  “Why?” he asks God. “Why did you make things worse for these people? Why did you send me if this was to be the result?”

God answers:

“Because I am yod-hey-vav-hey [YHWH]. I appeared to your ancestors as El Shaddai and I didn’t make known to them my name yod-hey-vav-hey. Look, I intend to uphold the covenant I made with your ancestors. I have heard the groans of the Israelites and I will remember my covenant. So tell them, I am yod-hey-vav-hey and I am going to save them. I will take you to be my people and I will be your God and you will know that I am yod-hey-vav-hey. I will take you to the land I promised your ancestors, I am yod-hey-vav-hey.”

Edit out the yod-hey-vav-heys and you have an answer: Do not despair. We have a relationship and I am going to come through for you.

So why are the five yod-hey-vav-heys part of the answer? A key rabbinic principle of Torah interpretation insists that no word of Torah is superfluous. So, what do the yod-hey-vav-heys add to the answer?

Read the full essay…

Image: wakinglot.us

Occupy Shabbat

BERJAYA“Occupy Shabbat” is an activity organized by Noam Dolgin.

The activity itself is very simple. A group meets in the meditation tent at the Occupy Vancouver site.  For 30 minutes, we sing the Kabbalat Shabbat/ma’ariv service, and for 30 minutes we discuss a Jewish text connecting Shabbat with justice. Approximately 30 people participate.

We do not stand on the steps of the Art Gallery. We do not use the PA system. We do not make a speech. We do not announce our presence. We do not round up people from the site to join us. We do not name our employers as sponsors or supporters.

We do explore what it means to “occupy,” that is, really “dwell” in Shabbat, the way the Torah does. In Torah’s world, Shabbat is fair labor legislation, environmental protection and a model for economic regulation. (Read about it briefly here.) The kaleidoscope of issues raised by the Occupy movement brings us back to this very literal reading of Torah.

Why go down to the site itself?

Nonviolent direct action can take many forms, including “symbolic protest” and “civil disobedience.”

A symbolic protest calls attention to a specific issue without breaking any laws. It’s most effective if the symbolism is easy to read.

In Vancouver, public economic dialogue has focused recently on homelessness and on the cost of middle-class housing.

A tent city in a space that is Vancouver’s protest space, expressive arts space, celebration space, and high-end tourist space clearly calls attention to our city’s most pressing economic issues.

Originally, the tent city was meant to show support for Occupy Wall Street, where a key message is, “this world belongs to us as well as to you, and we will bear witness until regulations and systems help protect us too.”

But Vancouver is a different city, located in a different country, where regulation is less of an issue. Here, the tent city takes on its own local meaning.

On Saturday, a young homeless woman died at the site, possibly from a drug overdose.

A medic volunteering at the site says he hopes this death will not shut down the site.

Some protestors say the loss calls attention to the problems of homelessness and addiction.

Homelessness and addiction knock on Or Shalom’s door, too. Occasionally someone spends the night in the green space of our garden. More often, someone comes to the door seeking food, money, a spiritual moment, and a respectful welcome. Rarely, someone with a drug-induced hallucination wanders into the lane, and we call a medic to help them.

Recently, we have improved Or Shalom’s gates, locks, and lights.

But when people’s needs shine brightly, the least we can do is contribute to the citywide effort to provide better services. We can lend ourselves to drives and donations, and use our communication skills to help make needs known.

Speaking only for myself: that is why I have responded positively to Occupy Vancouver’s symbolic protest — even knowing that some of the protestors read the symbols differently.

On Friday afternoon, however, just a few hours before Shabbat, the status of the protest was not clear. Was it still a symbolic protest?

The Vancouver Sun reported that the protestors were gradually complying with the fire department’s request to remove large tarps and unoccupied tents. CTV, on the other hand, reported that a spokesperson for the protestors called the tent city an autonomous zone, not bound by fire department regulations or directives.

If CTV had been correct, the protest would have become an act of “civil disobedience,” in which protestors purposefully break laws they consider unjust.

Noam and I agreed that if the protest had indeed become illegal, we would move the Shabbat service.

When we arrived, however, all the tarps had been removed, the space was organized, the mood was peaceful, and police officers were hugging protestors.

So we slipped into the tent to welcome Shabbat, in the fullness of all its meanings.

Photo: Vancouver Sun, Nov 6, 2011.

 

Dreams of the Future

BERJAYALast week I dreamed that a group of people entered my home on Sophia Street. They filed in, one by one, and sat in my living room. They represented various ages, economic classes and ability levels. They did not say why they were there. They did not say anything. They just waited, quietly.

One sat down on the floor and made a pile of the dust. I went to my broom closet but could not find a suitable broom. 

I looked out the large window and saw a man skateboarding through the sky in a graceful arc. A rainbow trailed from the back of his skateboard. He landed in the street and vanished.

No one spoke. They just waited, quietly.

***

One could say a great deal about this silent group that visited me last week. Inner tribunal? Inner witnesses? Thoughts and feelings present to me, hinting that I should be present to them?

This week, one aspect of the dream continues to surprise me. It turns out that many of the dream’s images depict future events, events that happened in the days after the dream. A person waiting for me unannounced, a utility closet containing all the wrong brooms for the job, a rainbow landing right on Sophia Street.

This is not unique; I have had other notable dreams showing future scenes, with a high level of literal detail. Two especially stand out in my mind.

The first dream came as I was beginning to look for work as a part-time university teacher of philosophy (1987). In the dream, I was asked to teach a psychology course. I tried, and the result was disastrous. In waking life, the day after the dream I received a phone call inviting me to an interview. At the interview, a week later, they asked if I could also teach psychology. My interviewer was a nun, so I told her about the dream. She agreed it would be wise to decline the second course.

The second dream came three months before I decided to apply for a full-time rabbinic position (2003). In the first scene, I sold my home filled with memorabilia; in the next scene, I looked out at a city on a bay; in the final scene, I attended a Jewish Renewal event. In waking life, eight months later, our family decided to sell our home, move to Vancouver, and become part of Or Shalom. We drove across the Lions Gate Bridge, looking out at the city from my dream.

Experiences like this make people wonder about the nature of time. Is the time we experience only linear, as clocks and calendars represent it? Clearly it’s not, and we don’t need special dreams to tell us this. In any given day, our consciousness shifts between past, present and future. Memories of the past pop up to colour our experience of the present; our present leads us to project a future; our hopes for the future change our grasp of the past; and so it goes, on and on, in a 3-way round robin.

Experiences like this also make people wonder about the nature of the human mind. How far past our immediate perceptions does the mind reach? Quite far, clearly, as we are always using our immediate experience to make general rules about life, people, and everything. Sometimes the generalizations are verified, and sometimes they are not — just like dream images of possible futures.

My own burning question is really about the nature of dreams. What does it mean if a dream turns out to be filled with images of future events? Is there any one “thing” it means?

The two older, powerful dreams marked inner openings that made it possible to walk new professional paths. Big changes into new futures were unfolding. When, in the course of time, the waking life version of the dream scene presented itself, I recognized it instantly, all at once.

But this dream is more of a teaser. Its imagery appears in waking life only bit by bit. Slowly, the dream draws me into future realities. Something is changing, I don’t know what, except that it comes in small increments.

“Don’t forget to keep me close,” the dream seems to say. “You will need my wisdom as life unfolds before you.”

– Image: Sophia Street rainbow, photo taken today by Laura Duhan Kaplan

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 48 other followers