The Kingdom and Temple Without and Within

[LAGoff]

I have been inspired by the NT to make a 'Kingdom' and 'Temple' for God WITHIN.
My question is: Where can I get inspiration in the OT to do this, as it seems to be concentrated on building up a Kingdom and Temple WITHOUT.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I have been inspired by the NT to make a 'Kingdom' and 'Temple' for God WITHIN.
My question is: Where can I get inspiration in the OT to do this, as it seems to be concentrated on building up a Kingdom and Temple WITHOUT.

You have noticed one of the big contradictions. Take it to heart.

 

[dybmh]

I have been inspired by the NT to make a 'Kingdom' and 'Temple' for God WITHIN.
My question is: Where can I get inspiration in the OT to do this, as it seems to be concentrated on building up a Kingdom and Temple WITHOUT.

You're asking how to actualize something in yourself that comes from the NT? in the Judaism DIR?

 

[Harel13]

I have been inspired by the NT to make a 'Kingdom' and 'Temple' for God WITHIN.
My question is: Where can I get inspiration in the OT to do this, as it seems to be concentrated on building up a Kingdom and Temple WITHOUT.

Uhhhh...seconding what's already been said here by @IndigoChild5559 and @dybmh. I also feel it's not right to refer to the Tanach as the "OT" in this DIR...

I'll add that there's a piyut by Rabbi Elazar ben Moshe Azkiri (who also wrote Yedid Nefesh) that includes the line "בתוך לבי משכן אבנה לזיוו, קרבן תקריב לו נפשי היחידה" - "In my heart I'll build a Tabernacle for His glory, my only soul will give Him a sacrifice". Based on this line, Rabbi Yitzchak Hutner wrote a song that's pretty well-known in Israel, called בלבבי משכן אבנה - In My Heart I'll Build a Tabernacle:

בלבבי משכן אבנה להדר כבודו
ולמשכן מזבח אשים לקרני הודו
ולנר תמיד אקח לי את אש העקדה
ולקרבן אקריב לו את נפשי, את נפשי היחידה

Translation:

In my heart I'll build a Tabernacle for His awesome honor
And in this Tabernacle I'll place an altar for His rays of glory
And as an eternal light I shall take the fire of the Binding*
And for a sacrifice I shall give to Him my own soul, my only soul.

*the Binding of Yitzchak (the Akedah).

Here's a cover of the song:

Now, hold on. Before you go on thinking: Oh, look, Rabbi Azkiri and Rabbi Hutner were closeted Messianic Jews ch"v, let's first understand the deeper meaning of the song, as it opposes the Christian notions of the Temple. Christianity had to think up of reasons for invalidating practical mitzvot. For the Temple, they explained that there's no need to build an actual Temple. Rather, Christians should "build a temple within themselves".

This song says nothing of the sort. The song says two things, one explicitly and the other implicitly. Explicitly: Our worship of Hashem may and perhaps should be likened to the workings of the Tabernacle/Temple. We should feel this worship with every fiber of our being.
Implicitly: The song says nothing of doing this instead of the Temple. Therefore, we see that this concept is an important idea that must be followed together with the work of the Temple. The Temple can give us notions of higher forms of internal worship of Hashem, but neither replaces the other. The opposite, they complete one another.

 

[LAGoff]

You have noticed one of the big contradictions. Take it to heart.

To what [contradiction] are you referring to? Take what to heart?
Do you mean that the Tora (and the rest of Tanakh) just seems to emphasize the 'outward', but really emphasizes the 'inward'? (and vice-versa for the Christian Scriptures?)

 

[LAGoff]

You're asking how to actualize something in yourself that comes from the NT? in the Judaism DIR?

What do you mean by: that I am asking how to actualize something in myself that comes from the NT? Do you mean that since humans are in God's image and likeness; and God breathed His neshama into humans, that humans don't need much of the 'within' stuff because humans are born with all the 'within' they need? If not, then can you rephrase your sentence?
The second part of the 'sentence' ("in the Judaism DIR?") I think I understand. Let-me-say that a few verses in the NT allowed me to see what seems [at first glance] to be an imbalance in Tanakh. The rest of the NT (and hopefully those few verses too) is just a misinterpretation of the Written and Oral 'Torahs' that makes taking the NT program seriously impossible for a learned Jew. (which I hope to one day become)

 

[LAGoff]

I suppose because we (ALL humans) are in the image and likeness of God and have the neshama breathed into us, the Tora (and the rest of Tanakh) had great hope, respect and faith in our ability to -- as you ('Harel13') say -- complete the external and internal worship of Hashem.

"Make Me a Dwelling Place, and I will dwell WITHIN you." (Ex. 25:8)

 

[rosends]

I suppose because we (ALL humans) are in the image and likeness of God and have the neshama breathed into us, the Tora (and the rest of Tanakh) had great hope, respect and faith in our ability to -- as you ('Harel13') say -- complete the external and internal worship of Hashem.

"Make Me a Dwelling Place, and I will dwell WITHIN you." (Ex. 25:8)

That translation is very wrong.

TRY "and they shall make for me a sanctuary and I will dwell in their midst"

 

[dybmh]

What do you mean by: that I am asking how to actualize something in myself that comes from the NT? Do you mean that since humans are in God's image and likeness; and God breathed His neshama into humans, that humans don't need much of the 'within' stuff because humans are born with all the 'within' they need? If not, then can you rephrase your sentence?
The second part of the 'sentence' ("in the Judaism DIR?") I think I understand. Let-me-say that a few verses in the NT allowed me to see what seems [at first glance] to be an imbalance in Tanakh. The rest of the NT (and hopefully those few verses too) is just a misinterpretation of the Written and Oral 'Torahs' that makes taking the NT program seriously impossible for a learned Jew. (which I hope to one day become)

Even if I knew the answer, I wouldn't share it. The process / mechanism for making one-self into a temple from Christian theology is, imo, like making oneself into a golem, then filling it with their version of a god. Why would I help someone do this to themselves?

 

[dybmh]

I suppose because we (ALL humans) are in the image and likeness of God and have the neshama breathed into us

If you're still in contact with your local Chabad, this would be a good in person question for a Chabad Rabbi. The nature and scope of the neshama is the subject of debate and controversey.

 

[LAGoff]

I've been thinking about my OP.
I've discovered that Tanakh really isn't 'spiritual'. (at least, not in the 'mystery religion', Christian, 'gnostic', 'New Age' spirituality sense)
Most Scriptures are what I call 'spiritually-soaked', which is just another way of saying, spiritually manic. One way this mania manifests is through a morbid concern with the post-mortem (and often pre-birth) disposition of one's soul. Another manifestation of this mania is the exciting and faithless surrender to the animal logic that assumes Godhood. (e.g. Gn 3:4)
Yes, Genesis chapter 1 says we are in God's image and likeness; and yes, chapter 2 says our souls were breathed into us by God, but that is there mainly to teach us that we have [the power of] free will (chapter 4:6-7) to carry out Hashem's desire to establish -- 'brick by brick' -- His kingdom on earth.
And when -- late at night -- I hear the tempting, 'spiritually-soaked' siren-song of the NT, (e.g. "you are Gods"; "God is Love"-- Jn 10:34; 1 Jn 4:8,16) I won't feel I am missing out because, early on in Genesis, Hashem has put spiritual hubris in its place (chapter 3) after creating / breathing His image / neshama into us that gives us all we need to materialize His plan using 'brick and mortar' (Ex 25:8) and love. (Lv. 19:18,34)

 

[Harel13]

I've discovered that Tanakh really isn't 'spiritual'. (at least, not in the 'mystery religion', Christian, 'gnostic', 'New Age' spirituality sense)

That's true. It's much more grounded, at least on the face of things.

 

[LAGoff]

That's true. It's much more grounded, at least on the face of things.

So you hold that its just on the face of things, but...?
And, of course, there is Kabbalah. Seems like according to it, the seeming 'non-'spirituality'' (on the face of things?) is just the face, but underneath... seems like it tries to outdo all the other spiritually soaked religions.
On the face of things, it seems Judaism has been taken over by a massive injection of 'spirituality' by means of Kabbalah.
Then there is [the rare appearance of] a 'holy spirit' in Tanakh; but not sure what that means, and its importance/implications.
And of course, there are many miracles and several 'merkavas' (Jaccobs Ladder?;Isaiah 6; Ezekiel; perhaps Daniel 7) in Tanakh.
So... well, any response would be appreciated.

 

[Harel13]

So you hold that its just on the face of things, but...?

It was here on RF that I discovered the term "Deed Versus Creed" as an attempt to explain the difference between Judaism and Christianity with a short, concise, catchy slogan. On the face of things, that's true - it seems Judaism is much more about the avodah, following an immense number of commandments, whilst Christianity is much more about the spiritual aspect, faith, etc. As I said - it only seems like that. To a person on the inside, you'll find that in Judaism there are infinite heights of faith and spirituality to be reached. However, the commandments are still important - a branch of Judaism that died off were the Alexandrian Hellenists who thought that once they discovered the deeper philosophical meaning of each commandment, there was no need to actually keep it. Well, they died off. The commandments keep you tethered to earth be a crucial part of Judaism is also your duty to fix this world.

On the face of things, it seems Judaism has been taken over by a massive injection of 'spirituality' by means of Kabbalah.

I don't know what you mean by this. I think forms of Sod (סוד) always existed. During some periods of time, it was an aspect of Torah that was more apparent, and in other periods - less apparent. But it's not a new thing that came out of nowhere over the last couple of centuries. Nor do I think the Zohar was written in the 13th century.