Talk:Microcosm–macrocosm analogy in Jewish philosophy

Keeping this article temporarily.

Dear all,

Would like to keep this article temporarily. Add some info to it. Once this is done, then we can decide upon moving info to microcosm.

This is a complicated article, due to complexity of sources as well as concept. I would appreciate any assistance that can be given,

Blessings,

Yaakov W. Yaakov Wa. (talk) 02:37, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

p.s. Am requesting that others add sourcing from Talmud and Midrashim. Yaakov Wa. (talk) 02:45, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Am first working on gathering sources, then adding info. Would appreciate it if others can add sources to the article or talk page.

Dear Yaakov Wa.,

First of all, please remember to sign all your posts on talk pages by adding four tildes (~~~~). If you want to notify other editors, you can ping them by typing {{u|username}}, e.g. {{u|Warshy}} would ping Warshy (I believe this is what you wanted to do?).

Second, please understand that Wikipedia needs to be based on reliable (which in this case means: scholarly), secondary sources. Primary sources are only used to illustrate things or to establish basic and simple facts for which no interpretation/translation/etc. is needed. So literally quoting from Talmud and Midrashim is fine if it can help the reader understand how things were historically formulated, but any interpretation of their meaning (or anything we write about them really) should be backed up by a modern academic scholar discussing the relevant texts. If you are willing to look for a modern scholarly source (you know, something published by a university press) on this subject, that would be great.

Sincerely, Apaugasma (talk|contribs) 03:31, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Dear Apaugasma,

Only have knowledge of this concept in regards to Tanya and some chassidic, as well as kabbalistic sources. I do not possess the time to wade through and understand highly refined texts on this extremely complex and delicate subject. I will only be able to contribute partially, and only in regards to explaining some details of how this concept is found in some Chassidic texts. If you can find some expert on this. Although, they are probably extremely rare, that would be fantastic! If you are an expert, and are willing to go through some texts, I can give you some pointers if you are going in the right direction.

Blessings,

Yaakov W. Yaakov Wa. (talk) 04:38, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Dear Yaakov Wa., as a researcher, I do generally work on this kind of topic, and if I ever plan to do original research on the Jewish sources, I will be sure to contact you. However, you should know that this is absolutely not what Wikipedia is for: here, we should only even try to work on an article if we have good secondary sources at hand. Since that is not the case here, it is probably best to let the article be deleted. Blessings, Apaugasma (talk|contribs) 10:45, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

While I am not a subject expert on this particular concept, it certainly appears in many areas of Jewish thought. Nefesh HaChaim touches on the parallels between the universe, the tabernacle and the human form. Secondary sources are available (JE 1906, EJ). I will therefore contest the PROD. JFW | T@lk 08:08, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Yaakov Wa.: Keep for a little while to work on sourcing, and then merge into microcosm. There were at least enough references here to help me get started researching this: Mishna Sanhedrin 4.5. I have heard this concept discussed in conversations with Jewish friends - it is very commonly used in Jewish philosophy - but I never knew where it came until this article. So I am very grateful that the article was here to teach me that. I'll ask my teacher next week in class for some sources on this, and I'm sure he'll know several.Jaredscribe (talk) 23:37, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Dear Jaredscribe,

There is a discussion going on at articles for deletion, and you might rather want to !vote there. Please note though that I've just written a draft proposal for rewriting the article in such a way that we could keep it, and you might want to take a look at that first. (EDIT: After receiving some support, I've boldly rewritten the article according to my draft, so you can just take a look at the article itself. I've also changed my !vote at AfD to keep and rename. Apaugasma (talk|contribs) 14:59, 15 April 2021 (UTC))

As for Sanhedrin 4, I think it's good that you quoted it, because that is the only way we can really use primary sources. However, I think that the part immediately preceding your quote is also relevant: For thus we find in the case of Cain, who killed his brother, that it is written: 'The bloods of your brother cry unto Me' (Genesis 4:10) — that is, his blood and the blood of his potential descendants.... Therefore was the first man, Adam, created alone, to teach us that whoever destroys a single life, the Bible considers it as if he destroyed an entire world. And whoever saves a single life, the Bible considers it as if he saved an entire world. ([1]). It appears to me that what is meant here is that to kill a man is like killing a whole world because, rather than just the man, you would also kill all of his descendants with him. This is also the interpretation given by Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz (see here: the verse ascribes him blame as if he destroyed an entire world, as Adam was one person, from whom the population of an entire world came forth). If this interpretation is correct, then this verse has nothing to do with microcosm-macrocosm analogy, because the "entire world" would be a metaphor for a man's descendants rather than an analogy between man and cosmos. Of course there may be others who do interpret the verse as a reference to the microcosm analogy, but I think this clearly shows why we would need a good secondary source to support that interpretation.

Sincerely, Apaugasma (talk|contribs) 02:46, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Apaugasma for collecting all this encyclopedic content and adding it to the article. Yes, the "human race" is a different definition of "macrocosm" than the universe. That should be noted, and the including the previous verse about cain and abel makes it a little more clear. (To research: in Jewish philosoph AFAIK, there are many "worlds"/"universes"/macrocosms. For example in the expression "Olamei HaOlamim" found in many liturgical poems and prayers such as Kaddish) I'm going to leave the quote from Sanhedrin 4.5 here for now, in case someone else wishes to research this. It would be best to have a secondary source discuss it. If editors choose to WP:USEPRIMARY, it must be with no analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis

Therefore was the first man, Adam, created alone, to teach us that whoever destroys a single life, the Bible considers it as if he destroyed an entire world. And whoever saves a single life, the Bible considers it as if he saved an entire world. Furthermore, only one man, Adam, was created for the sake of peace among men, so that no one should say to his fellow, 'My father was greater than yours.... Also, man [was created singly] to show the greatness of the Holy One, Blessed be He, for if a man strikes many coins from one mold, they all resemble one another, but the King of Kings, the Holy One, Blessed be He, made each man in the image of Adam, and yet not one of them resembles his fellow. Therefore every single person is obligated to say, 'The world was created for my sake." Sanhedrin 4:5 " The Oral Law: Talmud and Mishna. Jewish Virtual Library.

Thanks Yaakov Wa. for rescuing the article, and thanks everyone for helping to improve the encyclopedia! Jaredscribe (talk) 02:35, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Here's another source that was in the article prior to the rewrite. to research someday/maybe.

This concept is used to conceptualize concepts in G-dliness. Tanya, Part 3 Letter 15

Jaredscribe (talk) 02:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

November 2022 merge

Merging would be possible. I concede and am grateful that much effort and content has been poured in this article. But the content here is not sprawling enough to burden the microcosm-macrocosm analogy article with WP:WEIGHT issues if merged. FatalSubjectivities (talk) 16:55, 25 November 2022 (UTC)User:FatalSubjectivities

oh I see. It's supposed to be kmerged anyway . Let me help FatalSubjectivities (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

The actual 2021 discussion about what to do with this article can be found in this AfD (I rewrote the article from scratch during that Afd), where the consensus was to keep as rewritten rather than to merge.

That said, I personally do not disagree with the merge you just performed. The microcosm–macrocosm analogy looms sufficiently large in Jewish philosophy for the subject to deserve its own article, but only if the main article has grown too large to contain it. Since currently the main article is barely more than a stub, it's alright with me to place the content on the Jewish tradition there for a while. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 11:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

I see. Sorry about merging without adequate discussion. You can revert the edits, if you think that is better. I apologise; when I saw the This article was nominated for deletion on 12 April 2021. The result of the discussion was move on the top of this page, I thought 'this' referred to this article. FatalSubjectivities (talk) 02:37, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that can be confusing. What it meant was move (change the name of) Olam katan to Microcosm-macrocosm analogy in Jewish philosophy, which happened at the time. As I said, I don't disagree with the merge at this point though.

To be clear about what happened for posterity: on 25 November 2022 the content of this article (called Microcosm–macrocosm analogy in Jewish philosophy) was merged to Microcosm–macrocosm analogy. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 12:30, 30 November 2022 (UTC)