B”H
EMPIRICAL PROOFS, ASTRONOMY & ASTROLOGY – THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS ARE
LIGHT YEARS BEYOND THEM ALL
An
intelligent person posed the following challenge to me:
It
is of utmost importance that I subject any new idea to the same rigorous
standards of intellectual scrutiny and self-honesty as I would in any other
area of Torah learning, as well as philosophy or science, through the analysis
of evidential proofs of reference sources, and not to be drawn in to ideas that
may give me a sense of superficial intuitive satisfaction based to a large
degree upon emotion.
B"H
I answered:
You would submit the Scrolls to the same exacting standards of logic
and scientific proofs that you would what you have learned in yeshivot? SEFER
HAYETZIRAH and GINAT EGOZ, two pillars of Rabbinic pseudo-Kabbalah, speak about
seven heavenly bodies in our solar system, excluding the earth while including
our sun and the earth’s moon. With
the discovery of Neptune, Uranus, Pluto (which is considered a double planet
because its one known moon is more than half the size of the planet) and the respective
attending moons that orbit other planets in the solar system, those books are
defunct except among all those who cherish them because their sense of identity
would come apart if they were to admit the truth to themselves. The only
remaining value in the astronomical “data” in Gikatilia’s GINAT EGOZ is the
quaintness of ignorance past. For instance, Mars simply is not two-and-a-half
times bigger than earth. A work that is truly holy cannot be refuted by
empirical data based on a more advanced technology than that which existed at
the time it was written. SEFER HAYETZIRAH and GINAT EGOZ however entertaining
they may be to read, are not holy books.
You
will find no such nonsense in the Scrolls. In fact, there is nothing that I
have found in the Scrolls that can be refuted by empirical data based on
advanced technology.
An
important çìåó
to consider is this: ñôø = 340 = ùî.
Therefore, ùîéí will equal ñôøéí. The word ñôøéí can easily be seen to be comprised of ñôø + éí.
éí
is a çìåó
for äàãí.
Therefore:
ùîéí = ñôøéí = ñôø äàãí. That which we see in the sky is our own
understanding of our own Book.
Let
us take a look at the word ëåëá. Its gematria is 48, i.e, îç. The word äëåëá, then, would be çîä and äîç.
To the best of our knowledge today stars are suns (whatever those are),
thus çîä.
Returning to the fact that ëåëá = îç we understand that there is a connection
between stars and intelligence, but we do not know exactly what. The use of the
word îç
in the sense of ‘brain’ is post-Biblical. In ñôø
àéåá ëà:ëã the word îç is used in the sense of ‘bone marrow’.
Therefore, there is some connection between that which occurs within our bones
and the astronomical phenomena. We are not yet in a position to attempt
one-to-one correspondences between the astronomical phenomena we observe and
other data.
We
use much the same terminology when referring to astronomical phenomena as we do
to intelligence. An intelligent
person is “bright”, while a person of extreme intelligence is “brilliant”. Ideas are said to be “nebulous” until
they eventually become clear point by point. The nubulae that are the stellar
nurseries are described in similar ways. We talk about both consciousness and
the universe “expanding”. The examples of analogous terminology and description
go on.
When
we observe the sky, and the astronomical phenomena it appears to us to “contain”,
we are actually observing a physical representation of the processes of our own
intelligence and internal processes. As we learn more, more astronomical
phenomena are revealed to us and we rethink those phenomena that we thought we
were already familiar with, perceiving them differently. Thus, what we perceive
when we consider space is wholly dependent upon our own level of consciousness.
We think we are looking outward, but actually we are gazing within.
We
are now in a position to understand why astrology is òáåãä
æøä. We can only perceive
astronomical phenomena in accordance with our own level of conscious evolution.
We are not looking at astronomical phenomena as they are, in fact we do not
even know if they exist in and of themselves. We are looking at physical
representations of our own thought and physical processes, which are
continuously evolving. We are fashioning the astronomical phenomena with our
minds. The person who attributes
power to predict his or her future to the stars is doing the very same thing as
the person who fashions a statue with his or her own hands and expects it to be
an oracle. To attribute the power to help us foresee the future to that which
we fashion with our minds is actually a worse form of òáåãä
æøä than if we were to
believe in a statue to do the same.
In
îñëú òáåãä æøä ñ"ã òî' á we are taught that if we buy a statue from
a Gentile, the substance of which we intend to use to make use of, for instance
we intend to smelt the metal that a statue is made from and make something else
with it, we are to demand that the Gentile break the statue somehow. This is
done in order to make the Gentile prove that s/he attributes no powers to the
statue nor holds it in any veneration. We are unable to do this with the images
we fashion with our minds – the astronomical phenomena and the constellations
being the example par excellence of this. Thus, astrology is a worse form of òáåãä
æøä than making statues and
attributing powers to them. When we gaze at the stars are making úîåðåú with our minds. If we attribute anything to
the images we fashion with our minds, and this includes “science” as well as
pseudo-science, other than being very temporary, and ever changing,
representations of our own thought processes whatsoever we have crossed over
into the worst kind of òáåãä æøä.
Doreen
Ellen Bell-Dotan, Tzfat