The Psychology of Tzimtzum: Self, Other and God

by Mordechai Rotenberg

Western psychology often describes relationships – between parent and child, individual and society, man’s physical and spiritual urges – as a complex set of conflicts, an ongoing struggle for dominance. In The Psychology of Tzimtzum, Professor Mordechai Rotenberg seeks to establish an alternative: a Jewish psychology, based on the kabbalistic concept of Tzimtzum (self-contraction). God’s primordial act of Creation, contracting Himself to make room for the world, becomes for Rotenberg a model for all human interaction. When the self contracts to make room for the other, the resulting relations are ones of dialogue rather than conflict, self-effacement rather than self-assertion, a desire to give rather than a desire to destroy.

Genres: Psychology, Jewish

158 pages, Kindle Edition

Published April 12, 2016

Reviews

[Yitzchok · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was disappointed in this book as I was hoping for a deeper exploration. I enjoyed part of the book and its efforts to meld psychology with Jewish sources. Overall, it had some interesting points but not anything I got too excited about. The following are some of my favorite excerpts of the book:

The Besht (Baal Shem Tov) demands that the tsaddik looks into the mirror and learn from what he sees, while dealing with the sinner. He requires that the tzaddik see himself in the sinner:

“If you see a sin being committed or hear about a sin having been committed, you must admit to yourself that you also have traces of that sin and you must resolve to correct your behavior… By recognizing the sinner as your brother, you can help him correct his ways. Furthermore, by recognizing him as your brother, you are in effect saying that we are all part of the same family, you are promoting unity and you are turning evil into good” – Page 37
-------------------------------------------------------

Certain Hasidic groups did not accept the Besht’s principle. The rationalist worldview of Chabad Hasidim, according to which one must banish – that is, repress – alien thoughts, is a case in point. Yet despite the fact that the Besht’s position is not shared within the entire spectrum of Hasidim, it nevertheless serves us as a helpful model. The following parable, which is described in the Besht’s writings, explains how one must confront the urge to commit adultery and how it is possible to transform that yetzer hara into a helpful tool in the worship of G-d:

“…If you have thoughts of adultery, you must bring those thoughts to their source, which is the love of G-d… and you must tell yourself that adultery is part of the world of love… If you suddenly see a beautiful woman, you should ponder what is the source of her beauty? After all, if she was dead, she would not have such a lovely face… Therefore you must conclude that her beauty comes to her from the power of G-d that is flourishing inside her… The source of her beauty is the power of G-d. Therefore, you should ask yourself, “Why should I long for part of this divine beauty when I can embrace the source and the fundamental element of all worlds where all beauty is located?” - page 49.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

PARDES
The acronym PaRDeS is derived from the Hebrew word pardes, orchard, which in Persian denotes paradise. In early Jewish mysticism, pardes referred not only to the biblical paradise, the Garden of Eden, but also metaphorically to the worlds we can discover through mystical experiences and spiritual elevation. The 13th century Jewish mystic Rabbi Moses de Leon, in his book The Wise Soul, was the first to use the term as an acronym for four possible interpretations of a text: peshat (literal meaning), remez (symbolic or allegorical reading of the text), derash, (homiletical interpretation), and sod (mystical interpretation). – page 99
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dimming of the light (Imum HaOr) – The willingness of the self-contracting entity to reveal itself to another, but only in accordance with the latter’s capacity to receive (that is, the capacity of the latter’s “vessels”) – not in accordance with the former’s aspirations. – page 114

[Laura · Rating 4 out of 5]

What can I say I am just really into the topic

[Gary · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am still digesting this and will be for some time. I really like the model presented here. Based on the Lurianic creation and the idea od Tzimtzum, or contraction, that God had to make space within itself in order to bring creation into being. The idea that we must make room within ourselves for the Other, for dialog with another, is brilliant, and makes much more sense than the Freudian model. I also like the idea of Alter centrism as opposed to either ego centrism or altruism: that the focus on dialog is much more important than focus simply on the self or other, that each of us has something we want to give, and have received - well this hits the nail on the head for me. The book is very well structured and logical and covers the subject from several angles. Recommended.