A Letter on Time

Igrot Kodesh, volume 2, letter 283. This excerpt also appears in Likkutei Sichot, volume 10, page 176 (there it is dated to 1946).

Ibid, volume 1, letter 156.

Chassidic master Rabbi Tzvi Hirsch of Zidichov, 1763-1831. A student of Rabbi Yaacov Yitzchak, the "Seer of Lublin", and a teacher of many of the prominent Chassidic leaders of his generation.

The full title of the work is Sur Me-rah v'Aseh Tov (trans.: "Turn From Evil and Do Good"). The Rebbe's custom is to avoid using the word rah (evil), so he here shortens the book's title.

Chapter 3, at the beginning. Concerning the words that conclude the first day of Creation, "and it was evening," Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Siman, points out that the words imply that the concept of evening did not have to be created — nowhere does it say, "Let there be evening". He derives from this that "the order of time" (seder zmanim) pre-existed.

Pesachim 54a.

A reference to the version of the liturgy as arranged by Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi (founder of Chabad Chassidism, 1745-1812) with a commentary composed of his thematic expositions.

There the author quotes Rabbi Dov Ber of Mezritch citing "the problem raised by philosophers," namely, "Why was the world created at the time it was created and not earlier?" Rabbi Dov Ber answers that there really is no question, since Time itself was also created, therefore there was no "earlier."

Maimonides' famed "Guide for the Perplexed", where the author discusses this statement of Rabbi Yehudah and rejects its literal interpretation. See note 17.

Of Rabbi Yoseph Ergas (1685-1730). R' Ergas cites the Eitz Chayim of Rabbi Chayim Vital (1543-1620), quoting in turn Rabbi Yitzchak Luria (the Ari Hakadosh, 1534-1572), who had asked the same question as Rabbi Dov Ber a hundred years earlier. The Ari, however, gave a quite different answer. He explained that this is how long it took to pass through the various tzimtzumim (contractions of light) of the entire progressive order of ontological realms (seder hishtalshelut) before arriving at this world.
Ergas then explains that the Ari certainly knew that Time begins with the first emanations of light. Even then, it was not true time but rather an "order of time" (as explained later in the letter) — until the worlds of creation came to be. If so, the Ari's question is simply, "Why were the worlds of creation not brought into being immediately with the first emanations?" On this, the Ari is answering that there had to be a long process of various higher realms before the created worlds could begin.

Of Rabbi Yosef Albo (circa 1380-1444) 2:18. See note 12.

Ibid, chapter 13, where he states clearly that Time is an event, an outcome of movement. Ipso facto, he explains, before there are objects that will move, there cannot be any time. "But concerning this that we say that G‑d was before the world was created — the word, ‘was' indicating Time — and similarly all that may be conceived of the continuum of His existence before the world was created — a continuum that has no end — all this is shiur zman [the original Arabic is takdir] or dmut zman…"
The Ephodi, a running commentary on Moreh Nevuchim, interprets the terms shiur zman and dmut zman as referring to an artifact of the human imagination: Since we cannot imagine the absence of Time, we are misha-er or m'dameh — we estimate or imagine — a kind of impossible time. Rabbi Yosef Albo, in his Sefer HaIkrim (ad loc), however, interprets this as a reference to the essential continuum of Time that cannot be measured, but can only be known in retrospect. Once there is a Creation, the change and movement that occurs results in a measurement of time — which is what we generally are referring to when we say the word, ‘time'. Time itself, however, is the thing that is being measured or manifest by this movement. This Essence of Time, he proposes, may be eternal just as G‑d is eternal.

The Rebbe explains further in Likkutei Sichot, volume 17, page 59: To say that measured time is a creation is superfluous. Many creations are beyond this sort of time-such as a logical dictum, which does not move or decay with time. Since these are also innovations of the Creator, what is novel in saying that the process of events is another innovation? Rather, the Maggid must be referring to the essential continuum of Time, which stands ontologically even beyond those creations that do not change.

The author is Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Lubavitch (1789-1866), the third Rebbe of the Chabad dynasty.

Where the author writes, "Even the continuum that is not measured by the movement of the cosmos within our time, even this did not exist. For, ultimately, it is also divisible to finite parts and perforce limited. If so, it also originated from the void."

Of master Kabbalist Rabbi Menachem Azariah of Fano (1548-1620), mentioned earlier. He writes there, "Even to speak [of G‑d's existence] in terms of an immeasurable continuum is a confused and untenable statement." The use of identical terminology indicates that he is referring to Albo's proposal. He continues by explaining that terms of "past, present and future" are not applicable to G‑d.

I.e. the converse of the doctrine of Creation, which was the assumption of those philosophers not influenced by the narrative of Genesis and particularly as articulated by Aristotle that the universe is eternal in time. In the cited passage from Moreh Nevuchim, Maimonides suggests that Rabbi Yehuda's view may be interpreted as leaning in this direction — and rejects this interpretation offhand. He alludes to an allegorical interpretation, but does not elaborate further.

Where Albo explains that Rabbi Yehuda is simply stating that even before the fourth day, when the sun, moon and stars were put in place, there was already movement — and therefore time.

Where R' Bachye compares this to another midrashic statement that the Torah predates the world by two thousand years: "These are days not like the days of humankind. Rather, a day from those days which form the years which are beyond comprehension." He seems to take a similar view to Albo, that there is a Divine form of Time which is eternal.

The Rebbe writes parenthetically that this is also understood from two of the major works of the Kabbalists, the Pardes of Rabbi Moshe of Cordovero and Avodat HaKodesh of Rabbi Meir Gabbai.

See the accompanying article, under the heading, "Time as Order".

Newton also made a distinction between what he termed "absolute time" and "relative, apparent and common time". Absolute time was considered to be eternal and a fundamental parameter of physics within which all events take place. Relative time is the time that we measure through change and motion. Although Immanuel Kant understood that absolute time is "not an empirical concept that has been derived from any experience" (Critique of Pure Reason), he nevertheless ensconced space and time as the most basic framework of human reason. This concept dominated scientific thought throughout most of the 19th century. However, towards the end of the 19th century, George Mach successfully promoted the view that only those phenomena that can be observed and measured should be included in a scientific theory. Therefore, when Einstein developed his theory to describe space, time, matter and energy in a unified form, he only related to the second concept of time, since this is all that can be measured. Nevertheless, absolute time remains an essential element in the field of cosmology, which deals with the universe as a whole.

The Rebbe may be referring to the notorious "twin paradox," which remains controversial despite a presented resolution. Or perhaps, more simply, to the notion that one twin can become older than the other. This would only be true if age were measured in relative time. However, in absolute time, no such phenomena would occur.
It is worth noting that Albo also deals with the concept of space (ibid, 2:17). He cites Aristotle's position, that time is an artifact of matter, disagreeing and proposing instead that space is that which contains matter. The two positions appear to parallel the two concepts of Time discussed here. Furthermore, relativity deals with space in terms similar to Aristotle, whereas space as Albo understands it would not be affected by the motion of objects within it.