Rambam as the template for Ramchal

(my notes, written a while back, for an article I didn’t write)

See later, article: "Mysticism and cosmology are usually thought of as different from ethical self-development (self-growth, character improvement), relationships, and the achievement of joy, but in Jewish mysticism they are the same. Subtopic: Ramchal followed the teachings hidden in Rambam"

AR: The closest term to chasidus in chumash is perhaps: "Vezos HaBrocho": , תֻּמֶּיךָ וְאוּרֶיךָ לְאִישׁ חֲסִידֶךָ, וּלְלֵוִי אָמַר where chasidecha is referring to hashem or to m rabenu...Of course it appears many times in thilim, and also in Micha Yirmiyahu Shmuel (Shmuel:urim vetumim?)...

Below: 1. Dovid HaMelech, 2. Rambam & 3. Ramchal

1.The mekubel Dovid HaMelech contrasts or differentiates between tzadik & chosid, and associates them to 'derech' vs 'maaseh': “Tzadik h bechol derochov vechosid bechol maasov”. [So “Derech h” is for tzadik, and “Maaseh h” is for chosid?]

2.Rambam in beginning of Hilchos De'os (from etz ha'da'as?) quotes the mekubal Dovid HaMelech: . Rambam contrasts tzadik, chochom & chosid, and uses the terms ‘de’os’&'derech':

Chochom, Tzadik, Chosid:

כענין שנאמר טוב מעט לצדיק ולא יקפוץ ידו ביותר ולא יפזר ממונו אלא נותן צדקה כפי מסת ידו ומלוה כראוי למי שצריך ולא יהא מהולל ושוחק ולא עצב ואונן אלא שמח כל ימיו בנחת בסבר פנים יפות וכן שאר דעותיו ודרך זו היא דרך החכמים כל אדם שדעותיו דעות בינונית ממוצעות נקרא חכם:

ה. ומי שהוא מדקדק על עצמו ביותר ויתרחק מדעה בינונית מעט לצד זה או לצד זה נקרא חסיד. כיצד מי שיתרחק מגובה הלב עד הקצה האחרון ויהיה שפל רוח ביותר נקרא חסיד וזו היא מדת חסידות ואם נתרחק עד האמצע בלבד ויהיה עניו נקרא חכם וזו היא מדת חכמה ועל דרך זו שאר כל הדעות וחסידים הראשונים היו מטין דעות שלהן מדרך האמצעית כנגד שתי הקצוות יש דעה שמטין אותה כנגד הקצה האחרון ויש דעה שמטין אותה כנגד הקצה הראשון וזהו לפנים משורת הדין ומצווין אנו ללכת בדרכים האלו הבינונים והם הדרכים הטובים והישרים שנאמר והלכת בדרכיו:

The acrostic is pointed out by the Kesef mishne (R Yosak Karo) in his commentary, but as a speculation - does this mean it was unknown before, not marked as such in Rambam’s manuscript?

Who started idea of YHV – H as acrostic? What does Rambam mean to tells us by starting with that? That he is dealing in mysticism? That there are hidden aspects in his writings (as he mentions in intro to M Nevuchim) Was it commonly used before/during/after the time of Rambam?

['akrostikon' :https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%A7%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%98%D7%99%D7%9B%D7%95%D7%

Rambam lists the first few mitzvos, and the 13 principles: 13 Yesodot. And the yesod hayesodot is….

Is there a connotation to ‘yesod’ related to ‘sod’ or ‘yesod’ of the seffirot? Not difficult to make a connection to ‘yesod’: eg etz ha’da’at, bonding to God, man and woman etc.

Was the word Yesod used in earlier treatises other than Zohar (which is indeterminate in time source etc).

Tzadik (and Chochom) vs Chosid: Yesod is Yosef who overcame it, and it is the Tzadik, which in chasidus is a figure of the highest not just like noach ish tzadik, fulfilling the mitzvos so maybe indeed Rambam used Yesod as a sign of the kabalistic intent. Is ‘chasid’ related to ‘chesed’ as ‘Yesod’ is related to ‘sod’?

3. Ramchal uses the same ‘Akostrikon’, and starts off with the same word. How common was the use of this Akostrikon? Wiki:

If it was unusual to use this, can it be that Ramchal is hinting that he follows Rambam, in sod?

Ramchal continues the akostrikon differently, however, the letters of the words 'Yesodos' and 'chasidus' are so similar [just the chet of chasidus is left out, chasidut without chet!? (it leaves SDT, like ‘sodot’…)]

Comparison/contrast to Rambam: The difference between chochom, tzadik, chosid is an important distinction in Ramchal as well Rambam. Rambam starts with ‘yesod’ and so does ramchal. But Rambam says ‘yesod hayesodos’ and Ramchal stresses ‘hachasidus’. But the fact that Rambam stress ‘the same difference’ means to me that Ramchal is giving a more open perush on what Rambam was writing in a hidden way.

Explain more why ‘chasidut’ specifically, as opposed to Tzidkut (eg Noach was a tzadik). [re use of term chosid: see re R Yehuda HaChosid Sefer HaChasidim (1100 Europe)].

…………….

Some notes:

A. Clarify relation (I can make one up, but I want to know if there's an established accepted link) between:

1. chesed and chasidus:

2. Yesod and sod

B. See Rambam, Yesodei haTorah? What is ‘shem’ in “yir’as hashem”. 1. the name of God is a thing on its own; or 2: ‘the Name’ means God.

C.yesod appears only shmos/vayikra, not in breishis, it is always 'yesod hamizbe'ach'. Then in Chabakuk & Yeshayahu, in another meaning

…………………

Parallel between the structure of Yah Hachazakah (Mado) and Mesillas Yesharim

Rambam analyses the yesodei hatorah from a rational intellectual perspective, ie philosophy/metaphysics, and this type of analyses is exactly what Ramchal speaks about as necessary in the introduction to MY, but he focuses mostly on the equivalent of Hilchos De’os. And maybe in Derech Hashem he focuses on H Yesodei haTorah..

Ramchal builds the intro and therefore all of MY on the pasuk “le’ahava oso, leyiroh, ledavka, laleches bidrachov, ulkayem ….” etc and this is what Rambam does, in constructing the list of the mitzvos - in the intro to the Yad, ie right before Yesodei HaTorah, Rambam list the mitzvos:

Yesodei HaTorah List of Mitzvos H. De’os

1. there’s a God, 1

2. not to think there’s another God,

3. to ‘unify’ God, 2

4. to Love, 3 3 D leehov es re’im; 4 D is leehov gerim)

5. to Fear, 4

Lehispallel 5 (avodah)

Ledovko 6 2 D

Lehishova bishmo 7

Lehidamos bidrochov hatovim 8 1 D

Lekadesh es shmo 9

Kriyas shma twice daily 10

Lilmod torah 11

6. lekadesh shmo

In H ahYesodei HaT he will be speaking of 6 of the first mitzvos, plus 4 others, total 10.

So Ramchal’s list, from the pasuk, is the same as Rambam’s.

H Yesodei HaTorah:

perek 1: en od milvado (Rambam says this explicitly). All exists due to God’s existence, not independently, and God can exist w/o them but not v.v

The truth of God’s existence is not dependent on anything, and so “H’ elokechem emes [= only God is the true existence,]”.

God is unity not one (since God is incorporeal etc, God cannot be ;’divided’ etc, so God is unity, not ‘one’), H elokenu H echad.

And God is beyond time and space and attributes. Dibro torah bilshon beneodom, moshol, mer’eh ne’vu’ah umachazeh.

……..

Perek 2:

Le’ohovoi ul’yir’ah oso

At the end Rambam mentions ‘derech hashem’. Ramchal names his sefer this.

And he uses the word yida’ativ re God about Avraham, so maybe it is because of the name of the book, de’os.

…..

De’os: Ch 3, b: all focus is on “yichaven libo vechol maasov leyda es hashem”

6:2: u’bo tidbok: is re God, but human cannot cling to God (ksuvos, and sifri) so must cling to talmidei chachamim etc.

………….

Article:

Mysticism and cosmology are usually thought of as different from ethical self-development (self-growth, character improvement), relationships, and the achievement of joy, but in Jewish mysticism they are the same.

Subtopic: Ramchal followed the teachings hidden in Rambam:

Ramchal: When you look further into the matter, you will see that only union with God constitutes true perfection, as King David said (Psalms 73:28), "But as for me, the nearness of God is my good," and (Psalms 27:4), "I asked one thing from God; that will I seek - to dwell in God's house all the days of my life..."

AR: Why do we need these psukim? On the one hand they are not very specific, they do not openly unequivocally say what Ramchal is quoting them for, and on the other hand, Ramchal’s point is well-taken without a pasuk as source, so why is it needed? Answer: Ramchal is treating K David. as a mystic, after all, he was constantly drawing near to God via action and song. His writings are therefore to be seen as teachings of deep mystical secrets, not just poetry and history. Ramchal may have been in the line of tradition from KD and before him, passing on the inner meanings of all of tanach.Ramchal is telling us that nothing in this book is new, we all know it, he is simply spelling it out so that we can read it and apply ourselves to doing it. So this is all part of the inner teachings of the torah, and the sources are Tradition, but are encoded in the psukim of tanach. This was what KD actually meant, what he taught to his disciples, this is what his disciples understood these passages to be referring to.

Topic: The chain of mesorah (kaboloh): Breishis (creation Eden), chumash.neviim, pirkei ovos (3 dvorim haolam omed) etc, P ben Yair, Rambam, Ramchal etc

AR: Rambam’s order of material follows breishis and eden, first is ma’aseh breishis = rambam spheres etc, hilchos yesodei hatorah; then GanEden account = ethical (good/evil) = eg hilchos deos.

The basic idea is that cosmogony and ethics are interelated. And this also forms the basis of Ramchal.

Moral self-development. Ramchal ties it to cosmogony, world to come etc, but it is also self-interest because it is the path to greatest ability to partake of the joy of God’s splendour etc. Pirkei ovos ties it to mesorah?

Confucianism ties it to society and family and good family and social order, but also to ‘heaven’ and ‘the way’ and what is right an proper and not shameful;. And it denigrates Buddhist idea of anything other than this life, and masking self - interest in this way by calling it karma etc.

Breishis sets up a cosmogony and free will moral responsibility etc but it is all this-worldly. That’s why Ramchal and others quote gemoro re the world to come, prozdor etc.

God says in chumash that he tells Avraham re Sdom ‘in order that Avraham will teach his children rightousness etc’. So this is a combination of father-son, nation, social justice, God etc. Also to Kayin re ‘lapetach chatos rovets’ etc. Then against ‘chomos’ before flood. This and other places in chumash is God’s systematization of human duty, self-growth etc.

Avraham avinu(AA) says ‘hashofet kol haaretz lo yaaseh mishpat?’ which is a very interesting twist of God telling us via MosheRabenu(MR) of a human (AA) having such an absolute sense of morality that he holds God accountable to it. And that is what God intended re what AAshould teach his children!

MR in Dvarim says “Ma Hashem elokecha doresh …” etc, this is a first systematization by a human.

I think Rambam in commentary to Pirkei Avos quotes Dovid HaMelech as the source for the same type of ideas which Ramchal writes about in MYesharim (so this is a literary source for Ramchal).

Iyov, Koheles, Misheli are Biblical systematizations of ethics and self-development, and philosophy/cosmogony (God tells Iyov he can’t understand justice).

Pirkei Avos is a later systematization or at least a compendium.

Rambam in Hilchos Ysodei HaTorah ties cosmogony to social duties, mitzvoth etc,.

Pirkei Avos is deep in the sense that it does what the first two stories in chumash do, and what rambam and ramchal do, tying mystical concept of universe to ethical development: starts with Moshe Kibel Torah MiSinai etc, this is mystical, MR didn’t eat drink etc for 40 days, he was in a mystical state and received teachings to be transmitted, but the teachings in PA are mostly ethical self-development. So the mesorah is a kabbalah, and this includes what is today referred to as ‘the kabbalah’ in addition to the regular ‘oral torah’ as in the gemoro etc. (of course the gmoro also contains sod). And the Path is through what Rambam calls hilchos de’os, and what Ramchal explains.

Rambam writes on Pirkei Avos, and talks of the chain of tradition, he specifies, enumerates the links, and places emphasis on Achiya HaShiloni. Ra’avad disagrees with something about Achiya, but this just serves to places emphasis on him (A HaS), and on the whole transmission of tradition. So maybe Rambam is talking of ‘kabboloh’ here.

[Read more about Achiyah HaShiloni, and about Pilgash of Ur lawgiver? Before Hammurabi the Babylonian.]

Who was the mekubel who traveelled from Bovel in times of geonim (850) to Italy and transmitted his learning there. Read about him, Who did he teach so early in Europe?

See Rashi which mentions Kabbala.

Mavo to the yad talks of what is torah sheb’al peh etc. Mitzva is oral tradition, an explication of Torah (yet then he list the mitzvos as commandments?).

Hilchos De’os, second perek of the Yad, is moral character development. So first chapter is a cosmogony etc, second is moral development, and only then are the mitzvos. But there are also principles, 13 of them (see the end of maseches Makos), the idea of principles goes all the way back……Dovid HaMelech etc also.

The chain to Ramchal is perhaps: God, AvrohomAvinu, MR, neviim, Dovid haMelech, Shlomo haMelech, etc, R Pinchas ben Yair and others, Pirkei Avos….

What did the geonim etc write as part of this chain, and between them and Rambam, and maybe the mechaber?

Was Ramchal the first to tie it all together in the way that he did?

Interesting how the mechaber kept mysticism out of the shulchan oruch, like Rambam kept philosophy out of Yad. Actually of course, neither one really did so hermetically….note that the mechaber writes of philosophy/cosmogony in the Kesef mishneh perush in the beginning of Hilchos Yesodei Hatorah.

………...…………..……….

Rambam was the great systematizer, organizing the subject matter of gemara, the bottom line of halacha in it, according to clear scheme, but he starts with metaphysics (sefer hamadah). His work is rational, but infused with ideas of mysticism but of the rational type, using mind to find truths and thus cleave to God, maaseh breishis and maaseh merkavah,

Ramchal talks of those who study science and philosophy but have ignored the idea that character development etc leads to connection to God. Rambam seems to be in the middle in that sense, Rambam says one should study phil/science, but to do so in order to have a greater belief in/connection to God). So really everything is done in order to increase relationship with God, there is no real ‘secular’ knowledge.

Why mesillas yesharim as title – what is yashar, why mesillah (he also write ‘derech hashem’ which is a phrase in chumash; how is derech different than mesilalh?

Ramchal: Via keeping the mitzvos and character development one becomes davek in God, and this then is the way to leverage up from this world to the next. Nefesh hachayim can be seen in a similar light, that by learning torah one is dovek bashem.

[Eliana said that by grappling with the text and davening to hashem for insight, one attains a deeper understanding of the meaning. I told her that this is interesting adaptation of the message of MYesharim to the text itself: Ramchal says all olam hazeh is struggle, obstacles, but the struggle is the means to the growth that leads to dvekus bashem, and so applying this to the text itself one obtains what she said.

And applying Nefesh Hacahyim idea of torah study as dvekus, to study of any torah text.]

...................

What is the origin of the idea that “we are created to achieve oneg” etc, ie for our pleasure? God says in chumash many times ‘vesamachata’, for chagim and also “when you come to the land and vesamachta bekol hatov” but it is always in the context of the mishkan/beis hamikdosh etc. And mar’eh kohen/YK was the greatest simcha?

Yodeah shor evus baalav…..konehu…

Moshe Rabenu presents the obligation to follow God’s commands not bec of cosmogony, but because of the relationship fashioned through delivery from slavery in Egypt, taking care of us in the desert, and there is a bond, ‘lechtech acharai bamidbar’, a fondness, and God says he want our love and also that he loved the forefathers (and us). So it is different than saying ‘obey me because I created the universe’.

….…….

Olam ha’bah as cause-effect rather than ‘reward/punishment’, and the purpose is relationship, which is its own reward: MYesharim: first perek: the few paragraphs after the first set up idea of mitzvos as the way to acquire in this world the path to the pleasure of the next. But that could by itself be interpreted as meaning that fulfilling mitzvos, which would make a person a tzadik, gives rise to reward of pleasure in olam habah. So the pleasure is given perhaps via great tasting food, wine etc, and it is a present, in reward for good behavior. But the first paragraph shows the context – that the goal is not being a tzadik but a chosid. So the next paragraphs make the further connection, that one must achieve dvekus ba’shem, and that will leverage one from this world to the next, where the extent of effort and overcoming of obstacles correlates there to the amount of connection to God which is the greatest pleasure. So (like Rambam) really everything in this world is done in order to increase relationship with God, and it is the relationship which is its own reward.

On second page MY jumps to shlemus etc (Rambam uses this term, sholem), where does this come in? Need to read the introduction to set things up.

………..

Make a chart of the key terms. What is chasidut, what is the literary context that Ramchal depends on for his reader to be thinking of for this term?

He seems to include it in other terms or v.v. , a little confusing.

Find all the applicable psukim in chumash, and see if some are excluded, if the ones he uses are the most likely a priori.

What is in Nach on this topic?

Compare to Sumerian and other codes of morality. Confucianism (authority, society, wisdom, grandfather-father-son) is later [but it is built on traditions earlier than Confucious the person?]. Make the point that the chumash clearly shows that many non-J’s were inspired, had nevua, revelation etc, there is no reason to deny the possibility that Confucious and Buddha and others were divinely inspired. And Rambam says this basically even of Aristotle (but not quite; eg; Aristo had the potential, but it depends on H’ to actualize the communicaiton).

[See Luzatto re Platonic ideas and re Solon lawgiver etc. Use for attitude to prophets of the non-Jews having divine guidance:The Philosopher-King in Medieval and Renaissance Jewish Political Thought By Abraham Melamed]

………….

Sefer Tomer Devorah: speaks of effect of human action on universe, we can redeem it. Ramchal speak so this in first perek.( Look at Derech Hashem and Daas Tevunos to get an idea of the progression etc.)

…

‘Etzel ha’adam’: why need this? Etzel = atzilus? Like mentions yesod…?

…..

Ramchal: categorize the difference between his Kabbalistic-based ideas and nonK ideas, eg like Rambam’s etc, Sadya Gaon emunot vedeot etc. [see Aryeh Kaplan intro to Derech Hashem]

……

Look up the earliest printed use of the word ‘sphirot’, and what they refered to. Relate this to Rambam’s use of it, to galgalim etc. [I remember that I had thought of a great relationship of a name or a word from chumash? and its root, but I don’t remember which!]

..

AR: what are the truly essential aspects of 'kabbalah' appearing in Mesillat Yesharim, or underlying it, which are absent in any form in Rambam's writings.

………..

Article:

Rambam and Kabblah

I'm convinced the Rambam knew the essence of Torah and therefore the essence of the level of Sod, which today we refer to as 'Kabbalah'.

I am not concerned with whether or not he knew of the sfirot since at my level of ignorance I don’t consider that the essence, and in any case I'm sure Rambam would feel that the idea of 10 sfirot is a deep idea that only involved the number 10 and the idea of 'sfirot' in an allegorical manner, just as for example "the 7 days of creation" is a deep secret and does not limit God to numbers or to completing actions within the dimension of time etc. He does write a lot about the sfirot of the heavens, the galgalim, Aristotle's cosmology etc, and I think all this is meant at the level of both pshat and sod. [see later section, below, re 10 sfirot]

My attitude is that if Rambam did not know something alleged to be part of Torah knowledge, it isn't really part of the mesorah!

I think his hilchot 'yesodei hatorah' is meant as 'sodei hatorah', and yesod is deliberate, and the YHW - H of the first words also indicates by the 'large' yud that the rest of the word 'sodei' is meant, where yud is of course hashem, so it is sodei hashem etc. And hilchot "de'ot" is about the secrets in the etz ha-"da'at" story. He writes so much about Breishit (and ma'aseh merkavah) as mystical secrets, but doesn't tell the secrets.

I think that the first two accounts in Breishit, creation and Eden, contain all that is essential in Kabbalah, in Torah, and that Rambam's preoccupation with these accounts, trying to get at their essence by eliminating what he felt is not the essence, is a result of his knowledge of the deepest levels of Torah.

In the same way that the Torah itself does not openly mention olam habah, schar ve’onesh in after-life, techiyas hamesim etc, only in allusion, so too Rambam. The creation and Eden accounts are mystical, allegorical, and so are deep secrets, rather than literal which would make them into just history. Nach has more, and Rambam follows this, and uses psukim. And gemoro has strange things (and mishna has secrets too according to YR), and Rambam’s Yad is perhaps a means of separating, combining hints to the meanings of the agadata etc from all over shas into the opening parts of sefer Hamada, and then the halacha parts in the rest. So he sets the stage, as was done in Chumash, first the mystical since it is the fundamental, then halacha, which is the Way to attain the goal etc set out in the mystical.

And I don’t believe Rambam only learned sod in his old age, too late to write about it. I find the whole idea almost heretical and offensive. I think people simply don't understand how deep science is, how close to the secrets of creation the mind can come to when contemplating nature, and so they don't understand the writings of a mind like Rambam, or why he was so impressed with Aristotle etc.

The Moreh Nevuchim was first and foremost to demonstrate that one need not accept Aristotle’s conclusion that the universe is eternal. Why is this so important to refute? Because Aristotle was at the level of a novi (in potential; and Rambam counts “not to listen to the nevuiim of the goyim” as a mitzva?) and because if the universe is eternal then it coexists with God, and God exists in time etc, and this is exactly what Rambam negates in hilchos y hatorah, the foundation of en od milvado. So the Moreh is all about en od milvado, and of course it is about maaseh breishis etc, which he states explicitly is mysticism, and that he doesn’t explain the secrets.

So he has a mesorah of secrets, and that they have to be kept as secrets – but of course this is also in the gemara. The gemara and also the mishna (according to Yehoshua Rochman). (Does kabbalah talk a lot about maaseh merkava? And as being like maaseh breishis?)

I think Ramchal is patterned partly after Rambam and means in various ways to indicate that he is following Rambam, for example by using the YHW-H in the beginning of Mesillat yesharim, like Rambam in the Yad. And his sefer is a development of hilchos de'ot plus pirkei avot (on which Rambam wrote) plus.... etc. And of course there sfarim of the ge'onim as well, some of whom are also said to have 'lacked the mesorah' or were 'ignorant of the kabbalah'.

….……

Ramchal: “If you look more deeply into the matter, you will see that the world was created for man's use.” [AR: Is this meant to counter Rambam in the Moreh who ridicules some aspect of this idea? Or perhaps one can say he is agreeing, but in the deeper sense of what type of ‘use’ is meant.]

………………………………..

M Yesharim:

“For all the affairs of the world, whether for the good or for the bad, are trials to a man”:

AR: note the ‘for good’: he now explains: Poverty on the one hand and wealth on the other, as Solomon said (Proverbs 30:9), "Lest I become satiated and deny, saying, `Who is God?' or lest I become impoverished and steal..." Serenity on the one hand and suffering on the other; so that the battle rages against him to the fore and to the rear. If he is valorous, and victorious on all sides, he will be the "Whole Man," who will succeed in uniting himself with his Creator, and he will leave the corridor to enter into the Palace, to glow in the light of life. [AR: this sounds like it can be achieved in this life, just that the achieving of it leads to the soul departing for the world to come where it is truly united. So this is the missing last chapter of the book? That he dies in order to truly be eternally alive?]

AR: Our essence is the breath of God as told in Breishis. So we become a “Whole Man," only when we unite with God. And Ranchal says God our Creator since he is stressing that we were ‘created’ ‘bara’, we are at essence God’s spirit, create in the God;s image.

AR: “ to glow in the light of life”, ie eternal life rather than transient, olam habah, and this is perhaps the meaning of the last stage ‘tchiyat hametim;, that we die in the physical world only to achieve true life, in olam habah...

To the extent that he has subdued his evil inclination and his desires, and withdrawn from those factors which draw him further from the good, and exerted himself to become united with it, to that extent will he attain it and rejoice in it. [AR: Not reward and punishment but cause effect of appropriate preparation. Like moshol of tzadikim and reshoim at round table]

AR: overall/background: The wise people of all cultures have recognized that pleasures of this world, power, wealth, fame, sex, even knowledge, do not lead I themselves to the goal that is sought – happiness or contentment and usually not even to sustained pleasure. Except perhaps for very very few, one in a million. For all the rest, what leads to the desired result is some human relationships, connection to community, and to God. Inner growth of self, compassion and chesed for others.

But maybe we are here to suffer? To serve Earthly masters? Maybe we do not deserve happiness and shouldn’t even seek it? No, he says. We were created to attain joy and pleasure, but it is that which is found in union with God, in the world to come. But the way to attain that is in this world, and only via this world, only via meeting life’s challenges (and following the mitzvoth).

So the bottom line is that we want joy and we are attracted by our instincts and by societal pressures instead to pleasures, and to the wrong joy/pleasures and sources of joy. We do indeed deserve joy, were created in fact to attain joy, but it is to be found by overcoming the instincts, not to be led by them, and the joy is in the world to come not in this one. And it is the joy of being connected to one’s essence, source, the soul, Hashem.

….…