# The Story of the Indwelling of God — As Told by Rabbi Joseph Gikatilla in the *Gates of Light* > [!info] Sefaria on Rabbi Joseph Gikatilla and his work *The Gates of Light* > Joseph ben Abraham Gikatilla (1248 – 1305 CE) was a Spanish rabbi and kabbalist. He was a student of Rabbi Abraham Abulafia and, like his teacher, focused on mystical combinations of letters, numbers, and divine names. > > Sha'arei Orah is Joseph Gikatilla's most influential work. It discusses 300 ‎names of God and is organized into ten chapters, one for each sefirah. Each sefirah has one main ‎name but may have many others. Some names are associated with more than one sefirah. The ‎Arizal called it "a key to understanding the mystical studies." The Vilna Gaon and Zundel Salant ‎recommended that their students study it.‎ ![[P 1]] **Comments and Questions** >**...the arrangement of all the creatures was according to their levels – those that are upper corresponding to those that are upper, and those that are lower corresponding to those that are lower.** The medievals imagined the universe as a great globe, with the earth in the center and the heavens all around. This cosmic globe was a delicate interconnected web, a metaphysical ecosystem. The heavens consisted of various levels of pure consciousness (without matter of any kind) that were called by the Jewish philosophers *sekhalim* / שכלים / intelligences. These intelligences caused transparent spheres to circle around the earth. In the spheres were embedded the planets and stars. Their circular motion around the earth caused the four elements that make up the earth (earth, wind, water and fire) to take the forms of humans, plants and animals. Thus, the intelligences and turning spheres filled the earth with light, life and consciousness. Here is how ChaptGPT and I imagine it: ![[cosmic globe.png | center | 500]] When Gikatilla says, "the arrangement of all the creatures was according to their levels – those that are upper corresponding to those that are upper, and those that are lower corresponding to those that are lower", he means that this cosmic ecosystem was whole and unbroken, so that the world was beautiful and illuminated. In this state, all things were permeated by the presence of God. And thus it was that: >**...the Indwelling Presence of _HaShem_ - יהו״ה (_Shechinah_-שכינה) dwelt in the lower worlds.** The *Shekhinah* dwelling in the lower worlds means that God's presence was not limited to the upper realms, but permeated the earth with its four elements, plants, animals and humans. This would have been a grand time to be alive. ![[P 2]] > **...the heavens and the earth were as one...in a manner of perfect completion...** > [!tip] Imagination Needed > Rabbi Gikatilla is evoking a period of perfection, a vision of the world in which everything is complete. In order to really feel what he's talking about, we need to put your imagination to work. Take a moment with your *hevruta* and brainstorm: What would a perfect world look like in your eyes? How would society be organized? What would people do with their time? What would education look like? What would your personal life be like? > > [!example] Midrash: And the heavens and the earth and all their hosts were finished (Breshit 2:1) > For Rabbi Gikatilla, the perfection of the universe is achieved when the delicate cosmic ecosystem is fully intertwined, interdependent and harmonious. He finds a hint of this state in the verb used in *Breshit* to describe the completion of creation. How exactly does his midrash work? > > Note from Markel and Markel (English Translation of Shaarei Orah on Sefaria): > The word “intermingled-_Nishtaklelu_-נשתכללו” is of the same root as “finished-_Vayechulu_-ויכלו". > > Note from Shaiya: I'm not sure that Markel and Markel are correct that this is the same root. One seems to be כלה and the other כלל. But they look similar, and share two letters, and often that is enough for the midrash. > **...a drawing down of influence from Above to below...** For many medieval thinkers, almost everything that happens on earth is the result of heavenly forces descending from above to do their thing in our world. When Rabbi Gikatilla talks about "drawing down of [divine] influence from Above to below", he undoubtedly is referring to things that you have experienced. For example, the very fact that you are alive and conscious is "a drawing down of influence" from the cosmic forces of Life and Consciousness. From this perspective, things we experience all the time, like being motivated to help someone in need or create something beautiful, are moments in which we find ourselves under the "influence" of divine forces. Looking at things this way emphasizes the phenomenon of "consciousness" or "desire for the good" more than my particular consciousness or desire, as if I am just one instance of a phenomenon more general. I don't think this way of thinking is less rational than the way we think today, just different. What do you think? > [!tip] Imagination Needed > Consider the activities in your life which seem most important, whether they be social justice organizing, playing music, creative writing, loving other people or whatever else comes to your mind. Is there a way it makes sense to view these activities as expressions of a higher spirit for which you serve as a vessel? If so, does it feel different to imagine that when you engage in these activities you are channeling a higher power that moves through you? Might this be a difference between "secular" versus "religious" ways of thinking? > [!example] Midrash: The heavens are My throne and the earth is My footrest (Isaiah 66:1) > Take a look at this verse in context. What is its simple meaning? How is Rabbi Gikatilla reading it? > **We thus find that _HaShem_-יהו״ה, blessed is S/He, dwelt in equal harmony amongst the upper and lower beings.** > [!tip] Imagination Needed > For religious thinkers like Rabbi Gikatilla, the idea that God is present - that the world is filled with divinity - carries a powerful visceral meaning. "The presence of God" is a quality that they feel in body and spirit. This often involves experiences of awe, transcendence or ecstasy; and/or powerful feelings of meaning or mission. What do you think the presence of God feels like for those who feel it? Do you ever feel it? > > Another question: Is belief in "God" necessary for experiences of awe or transcendence, or for a deep feeling of meaning and purpose? If these things are called "the indwelling of God" for Gikatilla, what might an atheist call them? ![[P 3]] > **However, when Adam sinned the lines were ruined, the conduits were broken, the pools-_Breichot_-בריכות ceased...** Humanity sinned, and the delicate cosmic ecosystem was destroyed. What was the sin? A long standing Jewish tradition interprets the sin of Adam/humanity in the Garden as the paradigm for all sin: Whatever you think is fundamentally wrong with humanity, so you interpret what went wrong in Gan Eden. So how about it? What is our biggest flaw as a species? Why do we break and exile ourselves? For best results, plug your answer into the story. Notice Gikatilla's liquid metaphors here: The cosmic web is pictured as a complex array of pools of divine presence which flow through conduits from up above and down to the earth, where they water the Garden and give life to humanity and all living things. Humanity's sins break the conduits so the supernal divine pools no longer flow down into the earth, leaving it parched and lifeless. > [!tip] The Personal and the Political > In the text so far, we have encountered two paradigms. The first is the world in harmony and completion, in which pools of divine presence gather in the heavens and then flow down through intricate conduits into the world, filing it with blessings. The second is a broken world, bereft of divine presence, in which sin has shattered the connecting conduits so that no divine presence can flow down onto the earth. > > This dynamic feels very real to me. It seems to me that my own personal life is characterized by both experiences of harmony and flow, well captured by Gikatilla's liquid metaphors, and also by brokenness and bareness. Being cut off from a flow of energy from above seem like a pretty good way of expressing what that brokenness feels like to me. Furthermore, when I look out on the reality in Israel-Palestine, the metaphor of a cosmic web come undone, or of broken conduits spilling divine overflow into the abyss instead of into the Land, seems like it captures something important. > > That is to say, Gikatilla's Kabbalistic interpretation of the story of the Shekhinah resonates true form, both on the level of the personal and the level of the political. How about you? Does this tale of wholeness/brokenness resonate with your personal life? With your view of politics? > > **...the Indwelling Presence of _HaShem_-יהו״ה was withdrawn and the bundle unraveled.** > [!tip] A World Without Shekhinah What does the world look like when the Indwelling Presence is gone? What does it mean that "the bundle unraveled"? Give some concrete examples. If above we needed your imagination to envision global utopia, now – in order to feel Rabbi Gikatilla's story – we need to imagine what dystopia looks like. ![[P 4]] > **...thus drawing down the Indwelling Presence of _HaShem_-יהו"ה to a degree, by making their bodies into seats for the Indwelling Presence** In this section, R. Gikatilla continued his discussion of the exact physical location of the presence of God. There is something counter-intuitive about this line of thinking. How could something as abstract and transcendent be located in a particular place?! And on people's bodies, no less!? As a medieval mystic, Gikatilla thought differently than we do. Even as a philosophically sophisticated thinker, I believe his mindset was more imaginative and mythical than ours. But perhaps he is also on to something. If I think about all the things in which "the spirit of God" can be said to be present, like love, beauty, creativity and the pursuit of justice, they are all bound up with something very physical and spatially situated: human bodies. While up in my head it might seem like my highest values transcend material objects, in truth most things I care about are tied to my own body or the bodies of people I care about. When I think about things this way, I wonder more about the other places the spirit of God is said to dwell. I understand how it dwells in the living bodies of people I love, but how can it be present in the Tabernacle of Moshe or in the earth itself? What do you think? Where in the world does it make sense to expect to find the divine spirit? > [!tip] Human Bodies as the *merkavah* (chariot/vehicle) of God > In the text above, Gikatilla teaches that the patriarchs themselves, physically, were the chariot of God. This is based on an idea he develops in the Introduction to the Gates of Light. There he teaches that each limb of the human body can be made to act as a vessel for the divine presence. This is why the Tanakh refers to the eyes of God, the hand of God and so forth. While God does not really have eyes, if one uses their eyes for good and holy things, then their eyes become the eyes of God. All the limbs of the body become vessels for God when they are used for the good. One's whole body, when consecrated to God, becomes a map of divine powers. That is why the sefirot, which map out divinity for the Kabbalists, are often presented in the shape of a human being. > > All of this is true in regard to all people, but the patriarchs are said to have fully realized their divine potential. Avraham came to embody divine love (חסד). Yitskhak came to embody divine justice (גבורה\דין). Yaakov came to embody beauty and compassion (תפארת ורחמים). Those three divine attributes form a triad, a triangle, at the heart of the sefirotic system, which function as a kind of *merkavah* or vehicle/chariot for the presence of God. Thus the Kabbalists teach that the three patriarchs themselves, physically, became a *merkavah* for God. The image of the chariot is drawn from the vision of Ezequiel. > > Can you imagine individual organs, or the human body as a whole, as vehicles for God? Is this how you understand the Tanakh when it talks about the eyes or hands of God? > [!example] Midrash > R. Gikatilla focuses above on interpreting two verses regarding Avraham and Yaakov. How exactly is he reading the verses? Is this their simple meaning when read in context? > **However, from this we find that, in their times, the *Shechinah*-שכינה hovered in the air and did not finding a resting place for the soles of her feet in the earth, as it was at the beginning of creation.** > [!tip] Her Feet On Earth > I find this image very striking. I'm sorry there is no place for Her feet on earth! What would have to be different for the *Shekhinah's* feet to be firmly planted in the world? How would things look different if they were? ![[P 5]] > **They made the Tabernacle (*Mishkan*-משכן) and its vessels, they repaired the damaged conduits, rearranged the lines in their proper order, fixed the pools-_Breichot_-בריכות and drew forth living waters from the place they are drawn from thus returning the Shechinah-שכינה, the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו״ה, to dwell in the lower worlds.** > [!example] Midrash In Shmot/Exodus 40:17-38, Moshe and the Israelites erect the Tabernacle, the tent in which the presence of God dwells. Read the description of the event there, and then compare it to Rabbi Gikatilla's description of the erection of the Tabernacle in the passage quoted above. Can you overlay these two descriptions on top of each other so that its clear which details in the Bible correspond to which details in Gikatilla's description? > [!tip] Imagination and Animation > Both the biblical description of the erection of the Tabernacle, with its cloud and presence of God, and Rabbi Gikatilla's description, with its pools and conduits, are quite dramatic. What would the animated movie version of these descriptions look like? Would the animated version of the Bible alone look different than Gikatilla's version? When will your film appear in cinemas? ![[P 6]] > **“Wherever the Jewish people go, I will go with them and dwell within them.”** The image of the Shekhinah accompanying the Jewish people into exile is one of the most powerful and popular in the tradition. It has played a significant role in keeping the Jewish people together in hard times. Does God go into exile? In this image, we carry with us the vehicle for God's presence; we just have to unpack its parts and set the sacred space up. Do you think that we or you have anything like that now? Do you have a set of pieces and tools create sacred space or time? > However, the _Shechinah_-שכינה was not affixed to a place of permanence...David was anguished over this and desired to establish a permanent place for the Indwelling Presence of _HaShem_-יהו״ה below. Why was David anguished over this? Did God also want a permanent place? Consider these questions as you move on to paragraph 7. ![[P 7]] > **Thus, because David wished to establish a dwelling place for the Indwelling Presence of _HaShem_-יהו״ה, the _Shechinah_-שכינה, and stated, _Psalms 132:8_ “Arise, _HaShem_-יהו״ה to Your resting place, You and the Ark of Your might,”...** Since the *Shekhinah* only had a temporary resting place, David wanted to build Her a permanent home. That this was David's intention Rabbi Gikatilla learns from the verse from Psalms. The image of David speaking to the Indwelling Presence of God and telling it to rise up and move into the house he wants to build is striking. Does it seem chutzpadik? Is it obvious that God would prefer the divine presence to be in a fixed Temple rather than a moving Tabernacle? Rabbi Gikatilla says that God was pleased by David's plan: > **his thoughts were deemed upright before the Indwelling Presence of _HaShem_-יהו״ה. Therefore, _HaShem_-יהו״ה, blessed is He, responded by sending His prophet Nathan and said to him...** Read again what Nathan said to David (quoted above). Does Nathan say that David's thoughts "were deemed upright before God?" There appears to be more complexity in the biblical narrative regarding the plan to build a Temple for God's spirit than would first appear from Rabbi Gikatilla's summary. ![[P 8]] > **Elsewhere it is written, _Chronicles II 6:8-9_ “Inasmuch as it has been in your heart to build a Temple for My Name, you have done well by having this in your heart. You, however, shall not build the Temple. Rather, your son...will build the Temple for My Name.”** If in the above section it wasn't so clear that God like David's plan to build a Temple, now Rabbi Gikatilla supplies a quote in which its clear that God has accepted David's plan. But not completely. Again Rabbi Gikatilla brings the bottom line but skips some of the biblical complexity. In another place, God makes clear why Solomon and not David will build the Temple: > [!example] Why David Cannot Build a Home for God's Spirit on Earth > **וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִיד לִשְׁלֹמֹה בנו [בְּנִי] אֲנִי הָיָה עִם־לְבָבִי לִבְנוֹת בַּיִת לְשֵׁם ה' אֱלֹהָי׃ וַיְהִי עָלַי דְּבַר־ה' לֵאמֹר דָּם לָרֹב שָׁפַכְתָּ וּמִלְחָמוֹת גְּדֹלוֹת עָשִׂיתָ לֹא־תִבְנֶה בַיִת לִשְׁמִי כִּי דָּמִים רַבִּים שָׁפַכְתָּ אַרְצָה לְפָנָי׃** > > **David said to Solomon, “My son, I wanted to build a House for the name of the LORD my God. But the word of the LORD came to me, saying,‘You have shed much blood and fought great battles; you shall not build a House for My name, for you have shed much blood on the earth in My sight.** (Divrei Yamim / Chronicles 1:22:7-8) > > The God of the Bible is not exactly a pacifist. How do you understand God's refusal to let David build the Temple? ![[P 9]] > **Would God truly dwell on earth with man? Behold, the heavens and the heavens of the heavens cannot contain You; surely not this Temple that I have built.** Gikatilla quotes the biblical account of the dedication of Shlomo's temple at length. It seems that in spite of very physical way we've been talking about the presence of God, the idea of God entering the temple is not so simple. Is the problem here with God's spirit dwelling in the earth more generally, or it specifically a problem with the temple? (See God's discussion with David in paragraph 7 above). What arguments does Shlomo bring to induce God to enter the temple? ![[P 10]] > **Then all the conduits and drawings forth of influence returned to bestow beneficence and blessing in the Holy Temple.** At the beginning of the story of the *Shekhinah* as told above by R. Gikatilla, She dwelled on earth. All of creation was permeated by the spirit of God. Then humanity sinned, and God's presence was withdrawn. The People of Israel then began a long journey of gradually brining the presence of God back into the earth. But the *Shekhinah's* return was not exactly the same as Her original indwelling. The Tabernacle and Temple play a significant part in bringing God's presence back into the world. What do the Tabernacle and Temple signify? Why do we or the Shekhinah need them now? Tabernacles and Temples involve the chorography of sacred space, movement, rituals, music, fragrances and...sacrifices. Does your spiritual or religious life make use of elements such as these? Do they somehow facilitate your experience of the presence of God? > [!example] Midrash > Look up the verses R. Gikatilla quotes above. Compare their simple meaning with the way Gikatilla reads them. Pay special attention to the root בר"ך. Notice how it was used above (in paragraph 5, for example). And also: What is the role of "beauty" here? ![[P 11]] > [!tip] The Cosmic Web Repared Not only the Temple, but also the People and Land of Israel, play an important role in the *Shekhinah's* return, and in the manner in which Her blessings reach the world. Divine presence and blessings rain down on the Temple in the heart of Jerusalem, and these flow out from Israel to the seventy lands. I think this image deserves a few frames in the animated version of the Shekhinah's history. How would you visually represent the conduits drawing divine abundance from the Temple Mount to the nations, each with its own ministering angel? > [!example] Midrash > Check out Breshit/Genesis 12:3 in context. What does it mean there? How is R. Gikatilla reading it? (Keep your eye on the root בר"ך). > > Following Rabbi Gikatilla's reading, what is the mission of Israel in history? How will we accomplish it? ![[P 12]] > **Now, because Solomon knew the ways by which the bestowal of beneficence is drawn from Jerusalem to all places...[he] knew which vein was drawn to Cush (_Ethiopia_) and therefore planted peppers there, and the same is true of every direction and side.** What's up with the peppers? Let's get some help from the translators of Shaarei Orah at Sefaria: > [!example] Markel and Markel comment: > _See Rashi citing Tanchumah to Ecclesiastes 2:5 – “Shlomo with his wisdom recognized the veins of the earth, which vein goes to Cush, and there he planted peppers [which normally do not grow in the land of Israel]; which one goes to a land of carobs, and there he planted carob trees. For, all the veins of the earth come to Zion, from where the world was founded, as it states (Ps. 50:2), ‘Out of Zion, the consummate beauty.’ Therefore, it is stated, ‘every kind of fruit tree.’ This is found in Midrash Tanchumah.”_ > > How do Markel and Market, following Rashi, explain the pepper imagery in Gikatilla? Above, in paragraph 10, we read: > **We thus discover that the _Shechinah_ returned to rest in the earth, in its eternal dwelling. Then all the conduits and drawings forth of influence returned to bestow beneficence...** The story of the Indwelling of God, as told by R. Joseph Gikatilla in *Shaarei Orah* / The Gates of Light, can be read as the story of the meaning and purpose of the People Israel. I think it also comprises for him the meaning and purpose of human existence altogether. Where does this story, and its various elements, meet your own sense of meaning and purpose? Do you resonate with parts of Rabbi Gikatilla's way of thinking? Are there elements that arouse your opposition?