Emotions, Third installment

Gettin’ the drift? Feelin’ the breeze? Ridin’ the wave? Whatever man.

Netzach is expansion in relation to others. In other words: once he recognizes that there actually is another, as opposed to Chessed, to whom everyone is but an extension of himself. Being that Netzach recognizes another, yet still tries to expand, that expansion is inevitably at the expense of the other. The basic example for this would be competition. The player recognizes the opponent, and tries to win, but at his expense (the loser doesn’t win. doh). A good Netzach will succeed phenomenally. He will be highly respected, but not necessarily loved.

Quite the opposite is the Hod. He reduces (contracts) himself in a social environment. That means he has more room in his heart for you than for himself. He is kind, soft-spoken quiet, and listens well. Everyone loves him. But here’s something to chew over: without a good dose of Chessed, Hod will have a hard time loving back.

So that pretty much covers the rights and lefts of emotions. On with the program.

Society

Did you know that Judaism doesn’t place any restrictions on children? Don’t you think that’s phenomenal?

In our society, you must be 18 or older to do certain things. Is it morally correct for an 18 year old to do them, but not morally correct for a 12 year old? How can something be right just because you’re older? The reason there’s this age thing, then, is because a younger person, due to his age, “cannot make proper choices”. But an adult, due to his age, can make improper choices?!

Why can’t a child smoke? Why can’t a child drink? Is it unhealthy only if you’re under the age of 18 or 21? Or is it because adults are allowed to make improper choices, but children are unable make proper choices? Explain that one to me.

In Judaism it’s perfectly opposite. Whereas an adult is not allowed to make improper choices, such as violate the written law, a child is. And even when there are restrictions placed upon children, it's solely for educational purposes. In other words, a child is prohibited to do only the things prohibited to an adult too. Phenomenal, eh?

Know it, love it.

Pickle

Did you realize that I didn’t include “good and bad” in my list of opposites a while back? Do you have any idea why? I didn’t know exactly why either. Until now*.

You see, good and bad cannot be characterized in terms of right and left. It just doesn’t work. You see, bad really has nothing to do with anything besides itself. Hashem, in His infinite wisdom, deemed it proper to command that certain actions should not be done, and that when a person does such an action, that will be called “bad”.

Bad is in the realm of doing. Doing is in the realm of choice. You can ask if doing is right or left. You can ask if choice is right or left. But you can’t ask if bad is right or left. The definition of bad is: a certain action based on a conscious decision. Is that right or left? It depends what the action is! It depends what the decision was! And even then: it's the nature of the action or decision which can be categorized, not the "badness" of it.

Take the action of killing, for example. Killing is not bad unless it's done to another human being. Then it's bad. But it's the exact same action whether it's killing an animal for food, or killing a man out of revenge. The action is the same. And we could categorize the action if we were knowledgable enough. But just because you added the word "bad" to it due to a circumstantial change (person as opposed to animal), that doesn't alter the nature of the action. The action is what's being characterized, not the badness of it. Hey! I just said that at the end of the previous paragraph.

Don’t you see? Bad is not based in any type of color or flavor. It is dry as a wrung out pickle. It’s as hypothetical as your dog scratching it’s ear (if you don’t own a dog (or if the dog you own doesn’t have ears)). It is nothing until it happens. And even then it’s nothing. Just plain bad.

I can’t explain myself any more than I already haven’t. So long.


*edit: work in progress.

Emotions, Part 2

So you can see that things aren’t always as they seem. A Chessed may be very gracious, but did you notice he’s not considerate? A Chessed would make for a great friend, but he’s not very friendly. Basically, what I’m trying to say is I wasn’t in an explaining-things-mode yesterday.

But back to the issue at hand: Chessed is on the right because it is expanding my world. I go over to you and shake your hand. You were just added to my contact list. My contact list is my world. The bigger it is, the bigger my world is. So I shook your hand. Now I pull out a ten dollar bill and hand it to you. Not only are you on my list, but your family is on my list. Your mortgage is my mortgage, and so on. Your world is my world. On to the next person. I shake your hand and smile. You have just been added to my ever-growing world. Chessed. The personal emotion of expansion.

Gevurah is precisely the opposite. It is on the left for it’s contraction. It puts up barriers between my world and yours. And the barriers form a territory as small as I can handle without going insane. I want only the things I need. And even then, they should be in order. I don’t want a big, messy, world. I’m organized, clean, and neat. I’m just trying to make my own little space feel perfect. After that’s done, maybe I’ll be available for your community projects. Gevurah is the personal emotion of contraction.

Emotions, Part 1

Don’t read this post.

Now let’s tackle the emotional qualities:
There are two types of emotional qualities:
1) Personal/Emotional -how one feels regardless of social interactivity
2) Reactive/Functional -how one feels in reaction to or in relation with social interactivity

On the Personal/Emotional level, there are:
Chessed- commonly translated as ‘kindness’ or ‘attraction’ on the right, and
Gevurah- commonly translated as ‘severity’ or ‘rejection’ on the left.

And on the Reactive/Functional level, we have:
Netzach- commonly translated as ‘victory’ or ‘competitive’ on the right, with
Hod- commonly translated as ‘submissive’ or ‘devoted’ on the left.

Example: A person who gives tzedakah out of the kindness of his heart is acting upon a personal emotion, Chessed. One who lays a kind hand on the shoulder of his friend and comforts him is acting upon a reactive (socially interactive) emotion, Hod.
Or: Someone who secludes himself for a period of time and meditates is acting upon a personal emotion, Gevurah. One who creates division/seclusion by maintaining an elite-ness about himself as opposed to others, is acting upon an interactive or functional emotion, Netzach.

Break for coffee.

Hors d'oeuvres

The universe was created a combination of two things: right and left. Everything you can think of, falls relative to these opposites; either it’s on the right side, or the left side (or the middle, I guess).
For example, let’s look at Creation: Day One is right. Day Two is left.
Or we can regress a step to before Creation and examine the elements: G-d would be right, and absence of G-d (our perception of existence) would be left.

And what is the nature of right and left? When it comes down to it, the two elements the universe is made of are Expansion (right) and Contraction (left).

On the first day G-d created light. Light expands one’s vision, expands one’s perception of the world around him; right. On the second day, there was division. As a rule, division always contracts the divided. It sets boundaries for each; left.
G-d represents expansion. In fact, if anyone were to exist singularly, it would be expansion; right. Absence of G-d, and consequently existence, contracts that singularity; left.

Everthing around us either expands or contracts.
Categorize: Day and Night. Male and Female. Inside and Outside. Fire and Water. Square and Circle.
Answer this question: Why do people refer to boats or ships in the feminine?
Or answer this question: How many T's are in this entry?
Or don't.

Food for Thought

If personalities could be divided into categories according to the 7 Kabbalistic emotional qualities, criminals would probably be Chessed.
Eat that.