JUDAISM: Revelation

Reference: Judaism

[NOTE: In color are Vinaire’s comments.]

Revelation refers to a new step in the evolution of Mankind that brought about a sense of Oneness and Responsibility.

We have followed the Jews in their interpretation of the major areas of human experience and found them arriving at a more profound grasp of meaning than any of their Mediterranean neighbors; indeed, a grasp that in its essentials has not been surpassed. This raises the question: What produced this achievement? Was it an accident? Did the Jews simply stumble by chance on this cache of insight? If they had struck profundity in one or two areas, this thesis might be plausible; but as they rose to genius on every basic question, it seems inadequate. Is the alternative, then, that the Jews were innately wiser than other peoples? The Jewish doctrine that humanity constitutes a single family—symbolically announced in the story of Adam and Eve—expressly precludes such a notion. The Jews’ own answer is that they did not reach these insights on their own. They were revealed to them.

The Jewish doctrine that humanity constitutes a single family—symbolically announced in the story of Adam and Eve—shows a more profound grasp of human experience than any of their Mediterranean neighbors.

Revelation means disclosure. When someone says, “It came as a revelation to me,” the meaning is that something hitherto obscure becomes clear. A veil has lifted, and what was concealed is now revealed. As a theological concept revelation shares this basic meaning, while focusing on disclosure of a specific sort: God’s nature and will for humankind.

According to the Jews’, they did not reach these insights on their own. The insights were revealed to them.

As the record of these disclosures is in a book, there has been a tendency to approach revelation as if it were primarily a verbal phenomenon; to think of it as what God said either to the prophets or to other biblical writers. This, however, puts the cart before the horse. For the Jews God revealed himself first and foremost in actions—not words but deeds. This comes out clearly in Moses’ instruction to his people. “When your children ask you in time to come, ‘What is the meaning of the testimonies and the statutes and the ordinances that the Lord our God has commanded you?’ then you shall say to your son, ‘We were Pharaoh’s slaves in Egypt, but the Lord brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand’”(Deuteronomy 6:21–22). The Exodus, that incredible event in which God liberated an unorganized, enslaved people from the mightiest power of the age, was not only the event that launched the Israelites as a nation. It was also the first clear act by which Yahweh’s character was made known to them.

For the Jews, God revealed himself first and foremost in deeds, not words. God’s decisive action was bringing an unorganized, enslaved people out of Egypt.

It is true that Genesis describes a number of divine revelations that preceded the Exodus, but the accounts of them were written later in the light of the decisive Exodus event. That God was a direct party to their escape from Pharaoh, the Jews did not doubt. “By every known sociological law,” writes Carl Mayer, “the Jews should have perished long ago.” The biblical writers would have gone further, contending that by every known sociological law the Jews should not have become a distinct people in the first place. Yet here was the fact: a tiny, loosely related group of people, who had no real collective identity and were in servitude to the great power of the day, had succeeded in making their getaway, eluding the chariots of their pursuers. As acutely aware of their own weakness as of Egypt’s strength, it seemed to the Jews impossible that their liberation was their own doing. It was a miracle. “By the grace of God, Israel was saved from death and delivered from the power of the Egyptians” (Exodus 12:50).

It was a miracle that a tiny, loosely related group of people, who had no real collective identity and were in servitude to the great power of the day, had succeeded in making their getaway, eluding the chariots of their pursuers.

Vividly cognizant of God’s saving power in the Exodus, the Jews proceeded to review their earlier history in the light of this divine intervention. As their liberation had obviously been engineered by God, what of the sequence that led up to it? Had it been mere chance? The Jews saw God’s initiative at work in every step of their corporate existence. It was no vagabond impulse that prompted Abraham to leave his home in Ur and assume the long, uncharted trek toward Canaan. Yahweh had called him to father a people of destiny. So it had been throughout: Isaac and Jacob had been providentially protected and Joseph exalted in Egypt for the express purpose of preserving God’s people from famine. From the perspective of the Exodus, everything fell into place. From the beginning God had been leading, protecting, and shaping his people for the decisive Exodus event that made of the Israelites a nation.

From the beginning God had been leading, protecting, and shaping his people for the decisive Exodus event that made of the Israelites a nation.

The Exodus, we are saying, was more than a historical divide that turned a people into a nation. It was an episode in which this people became overwhelmingly aware of God’s reality and character. But to put it this way, saying that the Jews perceived God’s character, is again to put the matter backward. As God took the initiative, it was God who showed the Jews his nature. God should be the subject of the assertion, not its object.

The Exodus could be a much more ancient episode when man first became aware of his intelligence and spread outwards from the African continent.

And what was the nature of the God that the Exodus disclosed? First, Yahweh was powerful—able to outdo the mightiest power of the time and whatever gods might be backing it. But equally, Yahweh was a God of goodness and love. Though this might be less obvious to outsiders, it was overwhelmingly evident to the Jews who were its direct recipients. Repeatedly, their gratitude burst forth in song: “Happy are you, O Israel; who is like you—a people saved by Yahweh?” (Deuteronomy 33:29). Had they themselves done anything to deserve this miraculous release? Not as far as they could see. Freedom had come to them as an act of sheer, unmerited grace, a clear instance of Yahweh’s unanticipated and astonishing love for them. It is of small moment whether the Jews recognized at once that this love was for all humanity, not just for themselves. Once the realization of God’s love had taken root, the Jews soon came to see it as extended to everyone. By the eighth century B.C.E. the Jews would be hearing God saying, “Are you not like the Ethiopians to me?” But the fact of God’s love had to be grasped before its range could be explored, and it was in the Exodus that this fact was brought home to them.

This could have been a step in evolution for man. “Freedom had come to them as an act of sheer, unmerited grace, a clear instance of Yahweh’s unanticipated and astonishing love for them.” 

Besides God’s power and love, the Exodus disclosed a God who was intensely concerned with human affairs. Whereas the surrounding gods were primarily nature deities, reifications of the numinous awe that people feel for nature’s grand phenomena, the Israelites’ God had come to them not through sun or storm or fertility but in a historical event. The difference in religious meaning was decisive.

This was the dawn of the awareness of oneness of nature.

The God that the Exodus disclosed cared enough about a human situation to step in and do something about it. That realization changed Israel’s religious agenda forever. No longer would the Jews be party to cajoling nature’s forces. They would rivet their attention on discerning Yahweh’s will and trying to enact it.

Jews were the first recipient of this awareness of oneness. The “Egyptian power” may refer to man’s earlier shackled mode of thinking.

Given these three basic disclosures of the Exodus—of God’s power, goodness, and concern for history—the Jews’ other insights into God’s nature followed readily. From the goodness of that nature it followed that God would want people to be good as well; hence Mount Sinai, where the Ten Commandments were established as the Exodus’s immediate corollary. The prophets’ demand for justice extended God’s requirements for virtue to the social sphere—institutional structures, too, are accountable. Finally, suffering must carry significance because it was unthinkable that a God who had miraculously saved his people would ever abandon them completely.

What followed was a sense of responsibility. “The prophets’ demand for justice extended God’s requirements for virtue to the social sphere—institutional structures, too, are accountable.”

The entire gestalt, when it burst upon the Jews, took shape around the idea of the covenant. A covenant is a contract, but more. Whereas a contract (to build a house, for example) concerns only a part of the lives of those who enter into it, a covenant (such as marriage) involves the pledging of total selves. Another difference is that a contract usually has a termination date, whereas a covenant lasts till death. To the Jews, God’s self-disclosure in the Exodus was the invitation to a covenant. Yahweh would continue to bless the Israelites if they, for their part, would honor the laws they had been given.

You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagle’s wings and brought you to myself. Now therefore, if you obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession out of all the peoples. Indeed, the whole earth is mine, but you shall be for me a priestly kingdom and a holy nation. (Exodus 19:4–6)

It was this evolution toward the deep sense of oneness and responsibility that made Jewish people special.

Once the covenant relation was clearly formulated at Sinai, those who wrote the Bible saw the Abraham epic in its light as well. In the last days of the Sumerian universal state, from all the peoples of the Euphrates, God called Abraham and entered into covenant with him. If Abraham would be faithful to God’s will, God would not only give him a goodly land as inheritance but would cause his descendants to be numbered as the sands of the sea.

The sense of oneness and responsibility lead to the rewards of survival with abundance.

We entered this chapter via the Jewish passion for meaning. As our understanding of the religion deepened, however, we came to see that the key had to be recast. Meaning was secured, but from the Jewish perspective, not because they sought it exceptionally. It was revealed to them—not told to them but shown to them through Yahweh’s amazing actions. The sequence began with the Exodus-disclosure of Yahweh’s power, goodness, and concern. From those we can understand how the rest followed.

This new step in evolution applied to all forward looking people.

But why was this disclosure made to the Jews? Their own answer has been: Because we were chosen. This sounds so simple as to seem ingenuous. Clearly, the answer needs scrutiny.

.

The Spectrum of Substance (old-3)

Please see The Spectrum of Substance

Reference: The Physics Book

The substance appears to made up of

  1. Nuclear “particles”
  2. Electronic “fluid”
  3. Electromagnetic “vapor”
  4. Gravitational “field”

The  “material particles” appears to consist of all the above components. The nuclear “particles” have very high mass density. They exist within the continuum of electronic “fluid.” 

The electronic “fluid” has much smaller mass density by several magnitudes. It exists within the continuum of electromagnetic “vapor”. 

The electromagnetic “vapor” has still smaller mass density by several magnitudes. It exists within the continuum of gravitational “field.”

The gravitational “field” has infinitesimal mass density and it fades into the void.

Finally, the void is absence of substance and, therefore, it cannot be sensed.

From nuclear mass to void, there is a spectrum of substance of decreasing mass density.

.

The Structure of Substance

The stability of proton and electron depends on certain equilibrium of mass between these two states. This is equivalent to stability between solid ice and liquid water existing together in equilibrium. The ice-water equilibrium is marked by a certain temperature. Similarly, we may postulate that the equilibrium between the nuclear and electronic mass densities is marked by a certain “temperature” that is maintained within an atom.

Within the electronic region, there are distinct energy levels (stationary states) that are visible in atomic spectra. These levels also seem to indicate steps in the gradient of mass density that are also in equilibrium. There are finer steps within these steps which are called “fine structure.”

Similarly within the electromagnetic region we have different areas that have been categorized as follows:

  1. Gamma radiation
  2. X-ray radiation
  3. Ultraviolet radiation
  4. Visible radiation
  5. Infrared radiation
  6. Terahertz radiation
  7. Microwave radiation
  8. Radio waves

These areas are distinctly different from each other in their properties. Most likely there is a gradient step in mass density where one area ends and another area begins.

The spectrum of substance is marked by steps in mass density that become smaller as mass density becomes smaller.

.

The Nature of Electron & Charge

Reference: The Physics Book

Within the hydrogen atom, the  mass of the surrounding electron is 1/1836 times the mass of the embedded proton, while the volume of the surrounding electron is about 9999 times the volume of the embedded proton. There appears to be a kind of inverse relationship between the mass and volume of subatomic structures.

We postulate that, at the quantum level, the volume is inversely proportional to mass.

We notice that the mass density of electrons is so small that they do not have centers of mass, and the laws of mechanics do not fully apply to them. This also means that the electrons may not exist as discrete “particles” because they cannot be differentiated from one another due to lack of centers of mass. Electrons are more like a “thick” fluid.

The electrons flow like fluids and their mass density appears as their “viscosity.”

The electrons have both mass and fluidity. This generates the idea of electrons being “particles” and “waves” at the same time. But this is an anomaly only if we assume the electrons to be “discrete particles.” 

Electrons are neither discrete particles nor made up of discrete particles.

.

The Position of Electron

Introduced first in 1927 by the German physicist Werner Heisenberg, the uncertainty principle states that the more precisely the position of some particle is determined, the less precisely its momentum can be predicted from initial conditions, and vice versa. There is further explanation available here.

Origins of Uncertainty principle – Possible Flaw

This principle has been applied to the location of an electron within an atom. But since the electrons are not discrete particles, instead they fill the atom like a fluid, they do not have locations. They simply have fluidity with certain viscosity. The quantum numbers assigned to electrons indicate patterns within their fluidity.

Not being discrete particles, the electrons do not have locations within the atom.

.

The Boundary and Charge

The interface between the nucleus and the surrounding electronic fluid comes closest to being the matter-void boundary. At this boundary there is a sudden drop in mass density. This sharp gradient in mass is the source of charge. The charge is a surface phenomenon.

Charge may be compared to the “surface tension” as it exists in drop-like free sub-atomic particles, such as, protons and electrons.

.

Substance and Mass

Reference: The Physics Book

Traditionally, matter is generalized as substance. We use the word SUBSTANCE as a broad category for things that are physically substantial enough to be sensed. This makes force the key characteristic of substance. 

SUBSTANCE is anything that is substantial enough to be sensed.

Matter may be categorized as a special kind of substance that contains mass (inertial force). The laws of mechanics apply to all material particles because they have a center of mass.

MATTER is a substance that has the property of a center of mass.

Today we know that light may not have mass but it has momentum (impact). This qualifies light as a substance. We feel gravity through every cell of our body; so it would be a substance too. 

LIGHT and GRAVITY are substances that do not have a center of mass.

This provides us with a more accurate definition of VOID.

VOID is that which cannot be sensed.

The Structure of Atom

Hydrogen is the lightest material substance. The hydrogen atom consists of a proton and an electron. The tiny proton forms the nucleus at the center of the atom. The old atomic model assumed the electron and proton to be “particles” separated by a void. The negatively charged electron revolves around the positively charged proton as it is attracted towards it. But this configuration cannot be stable because an accelerating charged particle loses energy. The loss of energy will make the revolving electron immediately spiral into the proton.

The Quantum mechanics model of the atom is quite different, but it is described mathematically only. Realistically, 99.99% of the volume of the hydrogen atom is the electron. The tiny proton occupies only 0.01% of the volume at the center of the atom. It is like a tiny marble immersed in a large pond. There is no void separating the electron from the proton. They are very much in contact with each other. 

The proton consists of 1836/1837 of the total mass of the atom. The mass of the surrounding electron is 1/1836 times the mass of the embedded proton. If the proton consists of “solid mass,” we may consider the electron to consist of “liquid mass.” Furthermore, the atom is embedded in a much larger but much less concentrated force field of light and gravity. We may consider that force field to consist of “gaseous mass.”

Here we have used the terms “solid, liquid, and gaseous,” in the context of mass, only to make the point that the concept of mass need not be confined to matter only. It is a concept inherent to all substance.

Consistent with Faraday’s hypothesis of “force field” the concept of mass may be applied to matter, light and gravity equally. The mass becomes much dilated in case of light and gravity. This allows us to explain better the idea of momentum associated with light.

.

Matter, Void & the Force Field

Reference: The Physics Book

The classical physics starts with the concepts of matter and void. These two concepts are connected in the sense that void is conceived as the absence of matter. 

Essentially, matter exists and moves within the void. 

Matter is conceived as the substance of the universe. It is concentrated in astronomical bodies. Such material bodies consist of material objects that can be broken down into smaller and smaller material particles. 

The smallest particle of matter is an atom this is considered to be infinitesimally small and spherical in shape. 

The laws of Newtonian mechanics apply to material bodies, objects and particles because they have a center of mass. Without a center of mass there is no material particle.

A material particle down to the atom is defined by a center of mass.

A material object consists of atoms. There is void among these atoms. As this void expands, the form of matter changes from solid to liquid to gaseous. 

All forms of matter—solid, liquid or gaseous—consist of atoms and a void among them.

There seems to exist a sharp boundary between matter and void at macroscopic level. Is that still the case at atomic level?

.

The Force Field

We observe that the astronomical bodies influence each other from great distances. Newton (1642 – 1726) determined that this influence depended upon the mass of the material bodies and the distance between them. It was described as the force of gravity, and identified as the property of matter. This force could barely be detected between two material objects. But it was postulated to exist between two material particles down to the atoms. 

It was postulated that matter extends itself as the force of gravity throughout the void.

Roger Boscovich (1711 – 1787) developed a concept of “impenetrability” as a property of hard bodies which explained their behavior in terms of force rather than matter. He found that the continuity of force is a necessary assumption for determinism. He, therefore, saw atoms as centers of force.

Michael Faraday (1791 – 1867) found that the concept of atoms as centers of force resolved the anomaly of electrical conduction in matter. He notes in his paper, Electrical Conduction & Nature of Matter, January 25, 1844:

“If we must assume at all, as indeed in a branch of knowledge like the present we can hardly help it, then the safest course appears to be to assume as little as possible, and in that respect the atoms of Boscovich appear to me to have a great advantage over the more usual notion. His atoms, if I understand aright, are mere centres of forces or powers, not particles of matter, in which the powers themselves reside.”

Faraday, thus, rejected the notion of “particles of matter surrounded by a system of powers.” He identified a “force field” as the basic substance that was concentrated in the atoms, and which filled the void among atoms.

Faraday defines matter to be essentially a “concentrated force field.”

Faraday further resolved the anomaly of light requiring an impossible ethereal medium by the concept of lines of force extending out from atoms. Essentially, matter, as a force field could thin out as lines of force to fill the void among material objects and bodies. This idea he presented in his paper, Thoughts on Ray Vibrations, April 15, 1846. 

Matter conceived as a force field that could thin out may explain the nature of light, and, possibly, the nature of gravity.

Faraday was convinced that the “conservation of force,” as in force field, could more than replace the principle of conservation of matter. He emphasized this with great intensity in his paper, On the Conservation of Force, February 27, 1857.

The force field may be able to substitute both matter and void as the sole substance of the universe.

Thus, we may look at matter, electricity, light, and heat as different concentrations of force field. Within an atom itself, the force field may exist on a gradient with maximum concentration at the center and least concentration at the periphery.

This hypothesis makes the void a very thinned out force field, and puts matter in continuum with that field while existing and moving within it.

The sharp boundary between matter and void, when looked closely, may be found to consist of a gradient of force.

.