Parashat Bo (5760)

With God’s help, on the eve of the holy Sabbath of Parashat Bo, 5760

Two Time Axes

In our parashah the ‘historical’ part of the Torah comes to an end and the section of commandments begins (see our remarks

on Parashat Bereishit). The first commandment we are given is ‘This month shall be for you the beginning of months’ (Exodus 12:2),

the commandment concerning sanctifying the month and intercalating the year. We are commanded to shape the calendar for ourselves.

There are two dimensions of time in the Torah: the seven days of the week, established by the Holy One, blessed be He, during the six days of

creation, and the months and years determined by the court, that is, by human beings.[1]

Two types of appointed times follow from this: the Sabbath, which is determined on the first plane of time (by the Holy One, blessed be He),

and the other festivals and new moons, which are determined on the second plane of time by the court.[2]

In modern philosophy there is a prevalent conception, rooted in the thought of the German philosopher of the

eighteenth century, Immanuel Kant, according to which time and space are not entities that exist in the world in themselves, but rather

human forms of perceiving the world. It is the human being who defines space and time in order to arrange

and organize the events and phenomena he experiences in the world.[3]

In the Torah, as noted, there are two planes of time, one of them Kantian (that is, determined by man),

and it is its determination that we are commanded about in our parashah, and the second ‘objective,’ with the Holy One, blessed be He as the one who defines

and determines it. Interestingly, a conception of two parallel time axes is also found in the philosophy

of this century. McTaggart, a well-known philosopher of time, argued for the existence of two parallel time axes

one of which ‘flows’ over the other. McTaggart’s reasons are intricate and subject to

dispute, but there is another argument that can substantiate such a view.

We have a sense that time ‘flows.’ It is constantly moving, to the point that there is a feeling of despair at

the fact that its flow cannot be stopped. It is worth noticing that the statement ‘time flows,’ despite

being very intelligible and highly intuitive to us all, is paradoxical in its essence.

‘To flow’ generally means to change over time. Flowing water is water that changes its

location/state over time. At different moments it is located in a different place. To say that a certain body

moves means to say that it changes its position as time passes. At one moment it is found

in place X, whereas at some later moment it is found in place Y.

If we apply this interpretation to the statement that time passes, or flows, we will obtain a

absurd picture in which time itself, at different moments, looks different or is found in another place/state.

In this sentence, time serves both as the frame of reference and as the thing described. It is both the thing that flows and the axis along which

the flow takes place.

If we nevertheless wish to be able to make the claim that time flows, and to give it meaning,

we are forced to conclude that there are indeed two time axes. Perhaps one is the human,

subjective time axis, and it flows over another, objective, time axis.

My teacher and friend Professor Larry Horwitz of the Department of Physics at Tel Aviv and Bar-

Ilan Universities, together with my friend Nadav Shnerb, Avshalom Elitzur, and others who conducted research under his supervision, developed

this statement into a mathematical theory regarding the meaning of time in Einstein’s theory of

relativity. They too arrived at the conclusion that the existence of two time axes is a necessary conclusion

for the solution of many paradoxes with which modern physics struggles, and in addition this is also

a conclusion called for by Einstein’s theory of relativity.

Perhaps there is here a different interpretation of the Sages’ statement: “For this is your wisdom and your understanding in the eyes of

the peoples” (Deuteronomy 4:6) — “this refers to the calculation of seasons and constellations” (Shabbat 75a). Usually it is understood that knowledge of the heavenly bodies

and their changes over time is the wisdom in which the people of Israel excel in the eyes of the nations. In light of what has been said here,

perhaps precisely the conception of time that holds that it is within our power to control one of these time axes is

this special wisdom.

Have a peaceful Sabbath

This may be deposited in a sacred-text repository in any synagogue or religious academy. Comments will be welcomed.

———————–

[1] There is a very puzzling conception that takes this position to an extreme, maintaining that

physiological phenomena in the human body change with the court’s determination. The bodily characteristics of a girl of three

are different from those of a girl older than that age. There are commentators who understand (following Tosafot in tractate

Sanhedrin) that if a court intercalates the year, the bodily characteristics of such a girl also change

accordingly, and she acquires the characteristics of a girl younger than three. This is a strange conception, and in my humble

opinion it seems that it does not necessarily appear in the aforementioned Tosafot either. It seems to me that Tosafot intend only

our relation to reality and not reality itself. In any event, this extreme position

attests to the depth of the Torah-halakhic conception that time (and what is within it) is not an

objective entity, but lies under human control and is defined by man.

[2] Even in the Sabbath there are human aspects: we are commanded to sanctify it at its entrance and at its departure, but

this determines only the character of the Sabbath and not its timing. The addition that we are commanded to add to the Sabbath

at its entrance and departure indeed belongs to the second plane of time, which is determined by human beings.

[3] R. Shem Tov Gefen, in his book “Dimensions, Prophecy, and Earth-Science (= Geology),” argues in light of

this conception that the question how old the world is today is devoid of any meaning whatsoever, for before man was created

there was no time at all, so what sense is there in asking how much time before the creation of man the world was created (see

also the article by Professor Hugo Bergmann printed at the end of the aforementioned book). There is a clear error

in this argument, and I invite the reader to find it.

Biton20.doc