In a conversation regarding Tomar Devorah, by Rabbi Moses Cordovero, we came across a very disturbing passage regarding a method for removing pride:

"Now I have found a cure by which a man can accustom himself to these things little by little so that he may be cured of the disease of pride and enter the gates of humility. This ointment is made up of three balms. The first is that he accustom himself to flee honor as much as possible, for if he allows honor to be paid him he will become attuned to such matters of pride and his nature will find satisfaction in it and he will find it difficult to be cured. The second is that he should train his thoughts to appraise his own worthiness, saying: "What does it matter if people do not know how despicable I am, do I not know myself that I am despicable in this and that thing?" whether in lack of knowledge, or lack of power, the disgrace of eating and of excrement, and so forth, until he becomes despicable in his own eyes. The third is that he constantly think on his sins, desiring purity and rebuke and suffering. And he should say: "What are the best sufferings in the world, which will not deter me from God's service?' There are none better than that he be insulted, despised and railed against. For these will not withold his strength from him and he will not be sick. Nor will his food and clothing be witheld nor his life nor the lives of his sons. If so he should actually desire them saying: "Why should I fast and afflict by myself with sackcloth and flagellation which weaken my strength for God's service that I bring them upon myself? It is far better that I suffer men's contempt and insult that my strength does not depart and is not weakened.' In this way when insults are meted out to him he will rejoice in them and, on the contrary, desire them. From these three ingredients he should compound and ointment for the heart and accustom himself to this all his days (chapter 2 - Keter)."

For those used to Western ways of thinking, the idea of self-degradation seems quite dangerous. It might lead to things as extreme as self-mutilation or even suicide. How do we, as contemporary Jews, view a passage like this? Can we simply ignore this recommendation for removing pride, or is there a different way to read this passage? Someone suggested that the passage, being written in question form, never tells a person to personalize the answers. Merely asking the questions might be enough.

Personally, I have trouble with even asking the questions, for they can lead to answers, thus beginning the vicious cycle. However, it is part of our daily liturgy, for during the Korbanot part of the service, there is a paragraph which contains questions like, 'Who are we?' 'What are our lives?' The primary question is, can we pick and choose what we like from ethical works, or do we need to choose one path and see it through, even if it might go against modern conceptions of the human psyche?

Sometimes, the hardest thing in the world is to do what needs to be done. There is a famous quote, "Death is light as a feather. Duty, heavy as a mountain," attributed to Emperor Meiji of Japan (13th century). The things we must do are the hardest things to do because the motivation to perform the act is not the same as for something we want to do. We need to continuously attempt to work through our laziness because we can accomplish so much if we really apply ourselves. How does one do this? How does the perpetual lazy person wake up suddenly and become extremely productive? One suggestion I received was to break up the things we have to do into smaller tasks. I think this suggestion has value in all aspects of a person's life, whether intellectually, spiritually, or even physically (as in dieting). If we take things slowly, or look at things in smaller doses, we might feel more accomplished because we continuously fulfill our goals.

I have just finishing a very interesting work of Jewish philosophy/thought written by Rabbi Dr. Walter Wurzburger z"l, called God is Proof Enough. I found his work to be quite refreshing for someone who continuously wonders about faith and reason. Very often people attempt to argue for the need to prove a religious conviction. Unfortunately, most arguments given would fall under the framework of apologetics. I for one have issues with attempting to prove the existence of G-d or the revelation of Torah without belief, and once I believe it, then the reason becomes secondary.

Rabbi Wurzburger simply claims that one must continuously fight to have faith. The "proofs" exist to strengthen our faith, but not to supplant it. For a counter-argument to this, see the website run by Yeshiva Bnei Torah called Mesora.org. Among their claims is that Judaism does not believe in a "leap of faith (believing in something for no reason)." This is something that I had learned throughout high school, and even then found to be difficult, because why should one believe any proof if one doesnt believe the premise for the proof.

Another book that I started reading is, Models of Revelation, by Avery Cardinal Dulles, which presents various models for how to view revelation. His book's assumption is that revelation occured. His question is how do we understand the concept of revelation. More to come on this book after I get around to finishing it.