Matzah, the Microzation of Hokhmah and the Modern Theory of Vision

At this point in the hemshekh R. Shmuel returns to his initial theme—the genesis of redemption and the eating of matzah. There is strong Lurianic precedent for the association of matzah and hokhmah (aba), which is often linked to the Talmudic dictum, “the child does not know to call father (aba) until he tastes the taste of wheat.”1 The kind of knowledge that the child has when he calls father is in no way mediated by any understanding of the nature and significance of paternity. The axiomatic cry, “father!” is not burdened by theoretical intention or comprehension, but actually grasps the essence of paternity and sonship. Matzah, likewise, is not a mere symbol of our effacement before G‑d, by dint of being without taste and baked of unrisen dough. Matzah is the micro (qatnut) incarnation of hokhmah itself.2

In chassidic literature hokhmah is often correlated to seeing, the direct experience of vision. In a novel twist, R. Shmuel further develops this conception of matzah as the micro incarnation of hokhmah by specifically interpreting this correlation in light of the modern theory of vision:

The nature of physical sight is that the ball of the clear-sighted eye is dark in its rear, and when one looks at something the very thing that is seen is depicted in the organ of the eye, and thereby it is seen, as is known in books of anatomy and medicine … Accordingly we can understand the distinction between grasping the being [of a given object, through seeing it] and having knowledge of the existence [of a given object, through hearing of it] … We can also understand the significance of eating matzah. For though it is but the micro incarnation of hokhmah, it is nevertheless the very being of the divine, which cannot be comprehended at all.3

As the viewed object is captured within the eyeball by the retinal image, so does the matzah capture the very being of supernal hokhmah: “When you eat the matzah for the purpose of fulfilling G‑d’s command, you are sustained by this mitzvah. One’s physical body unites with the life of the soul so that physical life too is vivified by eating the matzah that contains the being of divinity.”4

The vividness of this analogy is all the more striking when juxtaposed with earlier discussions of vision in Chabad literature, and beyond. As the Mitteler Rebbe put it in a discourse delivered in 1817: “There is a question about this among the philosophers. There is an opinion that vision also brings the object closer to the viewer … But the truth is that vision through the organ of gaze is in the manner of extension from the self to the thing that is seen.”5 In contemporary terms these two theories of vision are respectively known as intromission (light extends from the seen object into the eye) and extramission (light extends from the eye to the seen object). The former position was advocated by Aristotle, the latter by Plato. Variations of these theories were assessed, debated and developed by Galen, Euclid, and many others after them. Like the Mitteler Rebbe, the Tzemach Tzedek cites both opinions, and even proposes a synthesis between them.6

R. Shmuel, in contrast, cites only the intermission theory: “The very thing that is seen is depicted in the organ of the eye, and thereby it is seen.” The thrust of his argument, moreover—that the matzah itself captures “the micro incarnation of hokhmah”— depends on the distinctly modern iteration of this theory, according to which a real optical image is projected within the eye. A micro projection of the seen object is formed by the focusing of rays on the surface of the retina.7

Earlier in the hemshekh, R. Shmuel compared the utter effacement of hokhmah to the holy madness of ecstatic prophecy. But his description of matzah as grasping the very being of hokhmah, albeit in its infant form (qatnut aba), brings him to an even more radical conclusion. The prophet too, unlike the scholar, has a direct grasp of the eternity and splendor of divine being (the sephirot netzah and hod of atzilut), but not of the ungraspable infinitude that is disclosed in hokhmah. It is exclusively in matzah that the very being of hokhmah, the face of effacement, is grasped. As R. Shmuel goes on to explain, the true nothingness of this reality, prevents us from experiencing and comprehending the true magnitude that eating matzah entails:

This cannot possibly be comprehended, for all comprehension is nothing more than knowledge of existence … and for this reason it [i.e. the being of hokhmah vested in matzah] has no taste (taam), for it transcends reason (taam) and understanding. And this [tastelessness] is the essence and being of the macro-hokhmah (gadlut aba)—which transcends reason and understanding, as explained above at length—through its microzation in the infant-hokhmah that is in the mitzvah of eating matzah on Passover8 … Moreover, this is greater than the visionary grasp of [divine] being experienced by the prophet as well … as it says [of Moses], ‘no man shall see me and live … and my face you shall not see,’9 which is not the case with matzah in which is the being of infant hokhmah. It achieves its impact to the degree that even as one lives upon the face of this earth, one’s [suprarational] faith is strengthened … Therefore, Moses too is commanded to eat matzah…10

Axiomatic faith is nourished, not through understanding, knowledge, or experience, but by ingesting a micro-projection of the very being of hokhmah, which in turn grasps the true being of G‑d.

R. Shmuel also applies this paradigm more broadly, to all the commandments of the Torah. In acting on the will of G‑d, the individual grasps and actualizes a micro incarnation of the very being of divine will, which resides in the intimate psyche of the divine self. Accordingly, the present discussion of the nature of being endows his earlier discussion of mitzvah performance as “making the will of G‑d” with new depth and dimension. Not only do our actions in the here and now have the cosmic power to inspire and initiate divine interest, satisfaction and will; our actions actually bring the very being of G‑d’s transcendent will into the here and now of terrestrial life.11

Yet this broader application does not take away from the unique significance of matzah. This provides us with an example of how R. Shmuel examines all the diverse elements of religious experience and activity within the context of a comprehensive system. All mitzvot grasp the transcendent being of divine will. The commandment to eat matzah exclusively grasps hokhmah’s sense of utter effacement as it faces the unfaceable ineffability of divine being. “The luminosity of the nothingness of hokhmah” is directly vested in matzah alone.

The mitzvot collectively embody the preformative and concrete incarnation and externalization of divine being. Other aspects of religious activity and experience, such as Torah study and return to G‑d (teshuvah) are more educational and experiential in spirit. These illuminate our mitzvah performance with edifying knowledge of G‑d, with an understanding of what we are doing and why, with spiritual meaning and ethical guidance. Thereby we sustain and internalize the axiomatic faith that derives from our concrete grasp of divine hokhmah through eating matzah.

In Hemshekh Vekakhah “the knowledge of divine existence” that these spiritual activities cultivate is given an even more significant dimension, for without Torah study and teshuva the cosmic gap between hokhmah and binah can never be bridged. The being of hokhmah may be grasped in the matzah, but without Torah and teshuva its luminous effacement is obscured. Hokhmah’s being can only be an antidote to man’s fundamental egotism when mediated, consciously assimilated, and deeply internalized, via our faculties of understanding and experience. These processes of internalization heal the cosmic rift on the conscious level, but only the actual performance of the commandments concretely grasps the actual being of divine transcendence.12 As R. Shmuel puts it, “asiyah le’eilah—action is uppermost.”13