Seven

First)

I dreamed that I was writing to her: Oh S', it's good that you're alive, I was starting to worry that she had turned to you. You need to learn to correspond. It's different. I have someone, with certain abilities, from within the system, whom I've never spoken to much (let's call him Baruch), but I've corresponded with him for over a decade, it's the correspondence of my life, thousands of emails, and it's the kind of material that if it reached others' eyes... They would understand why it's good to have privacy, and on the other hand, why it's a shame. So you can't expect, but what's important in writing is text. In my opinion, people suffer from an excess of interpersonal communication, which is like SMS compared to a book. Communication needs volume, and it's more written Torah than oral Torah. There's something superficial about therapy, about a person who isn't formulated. Although there's nothing worse than formulated without a person. The Torah is at its best when you feel the personal beneath the formulation, a spiritual journey that also evokes identification. Otherwise, it's a dead letter. I'm not even talking about someone like the Haredi woman, correspondence with whom is much longer emotionally and intimate, not for foreign eyes. She's just someone I no longer care about, so I don't mind sharing. You need to think if this suits you... Among other things because it's a genre where confrontation is inherent, not necessarily in the sense of quarrel, but in the sense of two positions that have tension between them, two people who stand for something. It's the only sport I engage in, but it's a sport you can't play alone, otherwise it degenerates into a diary. And no, I wouldn't bet on what would happen if she had turned. There's a lot of darkness in the world, and you never know what happens when darkness hits light.

Second)

I dreamed that it seems she simply absorbed your entire social world, and you disappeared into her world. Be careful, she will also abandon eventually, children are one continuous abandonment... And with the society, it's long been "long not what it used to be", in fact, it never was. You lost your best friend, a childhood friend. It's not just me. What was is what will be. Your mother and your father. You also never knew how to maintain contact. If we're still here - it's only thanks to me. Does your mother have friends? No. But for her, maybe it's the obsessive reading of Psalms, which is a kind of spiritual death, of inner suicide, as you say (and this is after all the talents you inherited from her!). And maybe it's just your immediate environment, where you say you have no friends, not even one (a child is not a friend). Although I understood that your husband has friends. You must find something that interests and revives you, something that arouses libido in its broad sense, because otherwise it's depression. Even a negative motive is a motive (look, look at your correspondence partner: no matter what I've been through and how much I've been hit, conformism still d-r-i-v-e-s me crazy. I have no control over it. But - there's also no depression). I remember the last last time I was then in the synagogue, before the years I "prayed" in private, it was on Simchat Torah. The aliyah of all the boys to the Torah began, you can't count the children and everyone is singing, the angel who redeems me from all evil, bless the boys, all the blessing of Joseph's sons... and I simply couldn't and left. I had no option to fall. I ran away. What will you do without her? If my life were him, I would have died. For her it was life - and she really died. Or perhaps more accurately: she committed suicide. She went on a crazy crusade of self-destruction, destruction of life. She left no stone unturned. It couldn't be stopped - the abyss opened up (I was just one of the stones. From a beautiful woman, she simply doubled herself. You didn't see what became of her. She lost her image. Dozens of kilograms, no less. She, the well-groomed Swiss woman, and all this was just a cover for what happened to her inside). She wasn't able to accept it in any way. And I became a kind of spell that needed to be removed from the child, by all means, at any cost. As if only if I go - the child will return. And it didn't help that I completely understood his situation as punishment - from God. Because then, in the beginning, I could still completely think of all this as punishment to me, I walked around like Cain, my sin is too great to bear. But when there was again and again deterioration in the situation, I simply couldn't accept it - as punishment to him. And here was the break. She wasn't able to believe - in reality. And you know what? I understand her, even the denial - because I'm not capable either, sometimes even now. Him of all people? Every child is precious to parents, but he was really very precious, like an etrog [Translator's note: a citrus fruit used in Jewish rituals]. An only son. Do you understand the meaning of an only son in such a place? He grew up as a fourth generation to the Holocaust, wrapped in pressuuure, full of expectations, and disappointments, but we are the third generation of survivors, not victims. It's not just a desire, it's a need - to live. I would never have agreed to be buried in the Gemara [Translator's note: part of the Talmud], I'm not capable of dying. I'm my grandmother's grandson, much more than my parents' son. What do you want to do in life?

Third)

I dreamed that in the end you'll have depression after daycare. Learn from Ein, divorced+2, but devouring the world, and managing her life wisely and unfairly. Maybe people of war are better friends than people of peace. And that's what's so maddening about the world of peace in which your daughter is growing up. It's as if it's not the real world. As if there was no Holocaust. So this is the great correction? There's a reason why secure attachment is not common in the Jewish people, that we're all psychos. She'll be one of those who stay behind with the family, and not one of those who run away. Even if the world reaches the messianic era, still its basic moment is not the welfare system, but the conflict. He grew up in physical cotton wool, but not in spiritual cotton wool. His spiritual infrastructure, his mode of existence within the world, is a will that knows no boundaries and doesn't recognize them, so he's constantly getting hurt, and the second most basic being is a desire to play. That's why he's either angry or laughing. He doesn't have the victimhood of the sad. Yes, suddenly I understand that I've never seen him sad. Depression is not on the spiritual horizon. Either mania - or psychosis. In short, you sound sad.

Fourth)

I dreamed that I am in favor of teaching a child that his father can slaughter him, I love the Binding of Isaac [Translator's note: biblical story where Abraham is commanded to sacrifice his son] precisely because of the message, and that, that the story of parent and child is basically a tragic story. It's a very important message for children, and true. I've known you for how many years? It doesn't come naturally to you, you don't have the inner motive, and therefore it won't work for you, maybe for short periods artificially, and then it will fade. You can only keep in touch with those who keep in touch with you. There are very few crazy people like me who would continue to write you emails from the other side of the world after you don't respond. And this is not a rebuke. It's a psychological fact that needs to be recognized and planned accordingly. Like the wars - your husband is right. There's a certain mental disability here, in making love with love there's something missed. I don't meet people under normal circumstances, at all, and I noticed the very strange fact - that people who worked with me on "projects" of the Admor [Translator's note: Hasidic rabbi] really love me, go far with me, sometimes too far. And it's very strange, because the undersigned is not nice, not friendly and not social, not encouraging and not supportive, not a friend, treats people in an instrumental way, uses them much more than helps them, the world is very alien, doesn't behave by any accepted standard, and yet. And it seems, that it's related to the war issue. I fight against the "poison". To fight with your faithful servant, it gives a feeling that there's something to fight for, there's meaning, direction. And even paranoia works here. These are figures who often worked on some secret struggle, conducted in a very conspiratorial way, with a sense of underground, resistance, very goal-oriented, it creates something. It's - partnership, a secret is a connecting thing. It's like in the end, first year in yeshiva becomes the most beloved part, not despite it being difficult, but because of it. The poison gives people what they lack in life. With you there was never this feeling, of "let's get into it", without asking, as a command, because there's not a second for an unnecessary word. With you it was difficulties in finding a partner, accompaniment, sometimes concern, almost paternal, but they - they don't seek acceptance or identification. They seek libido. The emotional psychological need is much weaker, in the long run, than this need. The healthy state is not peace. To be with someone in war is not the social worker, it's being the one who passed the hole test, who absorbs hits for you. That's what gives the desire - the sacrifice. This is the kindness that connects people, not the kindness of the charity fund. And also, of course, the kindness of defeat, of giving up. A painful loss connects no less than a glorious victory. Also, everyone who fights knows that these two things are always intertwined, come together, matzah and bitter herb. To buy and pay a price. That's why people hate secular people, not because they disagree with them, but because of the feeling of not being there. The betrayal. Friendship is a substitute for the tribal need, a kind of blood connection that is not a blood connection. Someone who has only family ties misses some less material layer in human connection, just as a child who has only secure attachment misses some essential layer in the tragedy of the Holocaust, the cut-off old trunk. Therefore, it's not surprising that your father has the most true friends. He's the most libidinal creature in the house. Even autistics long for connection, of course in their way. That's the problem, that of course in their way. And "true" friends is a good expression, because wars are not necessarily blood, but it's always cutting. Many times I feel from you a lack of honesty and openness, not in the sense of lying, but in the desire to smooth, not to raise. In not saying. Sometimes it causes me a more provocative line, but it only closes you more. The part that attracts in a true friend who tells the truth, is not just the truth, but the whole truth. I can't think of one time in all these years that I managed to get criticism out of you. No matter what nonsense I did or said, and God knows what I did and said. In a certain sense it's an unpleasant feeling (the lady always used to speak ill of you on this point). Infinite identification is lack of identification (no one identifies with themselves infinitely), and infinite acceptance is lack of care. For my son I have definitely finite acceptance. Do you remember when I yelled at you, then? And that's precisely the care, including the willingness to sacrifice the friendship itself. But you never yelled at me. People don't like discounts. They like prices. Years we've been in this, you've never told me something unpleasant to hear! What people do you know who realized potential because of emotional support? Names, names please. And maybe secure attachment in adulthood is what realized the potential, and not the one in childhood... which was much less secure, much more destructive, and actually provided the motive, the libido. For example: the need for female approval.

Fifth)

I dreamed that what do you mean, do you really need an answer? Do you need me to list your praises? You are a different person, very very, and on the other hand you are also a similar person, very very. That's what makes it interesting. If there was only one side there would be no tension. There would be no psychological interest. Don't worry about me, I choose them carefully, and also give them a lot of rope, though not infinite. We are both from the same world. I'm trying with all my might to make you formulate a different perception, not to hurt (believe me I know how to hurt). I want, please, come on, show me that a creative non-warlike form of existence is open to us (with all its damages). Love is not an answer. A. Because I have no love, and I'm not even sure there was. B. Because from my experience so far, it wasn't a life-sustaining subject in real time. C. Really tired of love, it's chewed material that has been at the center of culture for too long (not always - see the Bible. It's a Christian influence). D. Here, it doesn't work. E. Etc. You also don't need to take her perception hard, we saw where it led. Now I remembered: she had a nickname for you - "Woman of Peace". It's clear to you that she didn't love you. The gap between you was conceptual, not just personal. So okay, I understood the boundaries of the sector. I encountered a place I can't cross. Don't want to cause you this, up to here. Also the valley you're in is on the Temple Mount. It's a natural thing that happens after the exciting first year, and then there's a certain void. It's not a geological break. The way you represent is for me a missed life possibility. It's hard to wage war when there's no base and you're being shot at from behind too, the seclusion, the turning back, the suspicion, the third eye. I don't really have family connections. The only family connection I had was with him. I love writing to you, otherwise I wouldn't write. Also need it sometimes to preserve faith. Switzerland of the Middle East. You have the best life, and then it undermines it if you're not happy. If something is missing, which is perhaps the main thing from the book. You also have a role in the inner theater. After her, I swore I would not choose the path of war again. That's why I threw away Sarah-Leah, even though I liked her very much in every other respect. And I understand why peace is worthwhile, but I don't understand how to live like that. In a sense, your form of existence drives me crazy. How can one be like that? It's a conflict not just with you, and I tried to externalize it, but not at the cost of hurting, and I ask for your forgiveness. Can we wish Shabbat Shalom?

Friday)

I dreamed that so what, every time I crossed the boundaries you would explode from within, but not give a hint of it on the outside? And that also gave the feeling of the empty room, the feeling that there's a hall that maybe has no boundaries, and the increasingly intense provocation to find them, to feel that you're not alone, and speaking into an absolute void, which is something that contradicts the laws of physics. I won't stoop to insults, and it doesn't suit you either, especially since it's clear to both of us that I can be an elephant in an elephant shop, not just in a china shop, and with all the lack of delicacy so far, we haven't seen anything. Much smaller hints would have long ago brought restraint at sensitive points (and no, no one knows what the sensitive points are in advance, it's not written in the Torah. I'm used to missile hits on elephant skin. I've survived rampages by the Admor and the One who sits on high that you would have been shattered by). In short, dynamics are a couple's thing, as you say - reciprocity. And I wasn't clear either about your interest in this relationship and why you are, what the motive is. What is certain is that I never really thought you were hypocritical as you called yourself, but that there really is a space of containment with no visible boundary, and that it needs to be put to an end. I didn't think a different drama was unfolding inside, but that you have illogical abilities for human connection, from both sides. And that both intrigued and annoyed, and also interested, like the desire to go to the end of the whale and see what's there (thanks for the fish). I'm glad there are boundaries to the universe (it's healthy for creation to be finite), but less happy that I caused the whale to vomit. I don't like to hurt, so I did it very gradually, one step at a time. I don't think you're fake, as you presented yourself now, but I do feel that you should have stood your ground much earlier, and not reached a point where you can't take it anymore and explode. All I asked for was a position. Sometimes it felt like meeting someone who didn't show up for the meeting, meaning they showed up but not as a solid, human presence, but as some kind of liquid medium that you operate within, and do your dance. I have no problem if you don't want a relationship with me, and you should do what's good for you, my boundary issue is well-known and familiar, especially with the containing type, and therefore it was always easier for me to create an initial connection precisely with the boundaryless type, like her, like the child. Although there are known advantages to the containing type (see her, and him), I wonder if there isn't something structural that frustrates such a relationship, some built-in dissatisfaction that causes me to shake the fences (sometimes containment feels like a prison). In short, there's no reason to be angry, I mean not too much. You don't have to move me to the bad side to decide you don't want to hear from me. Don't forget that text forgets the tones, the melody of things (which you knew when we spoke orally, and not from the other side of the world, when you don't even know where), which is always with some kind of smile of some kind, a mix of profound playfulness and profound seriousness, and that in the night meeting, the last one, I didn't get the impression that I was annoying you too much (although in light of the confession I'm not sure anymore). When we had soul conversations about the differences, even the educational differences between our children I didn't notice you jumping to the sky, even when I said I would call the police, because the context is clear. Not everything can exist in the written Torah (contrary, perhaps, to my preferences). In short, between thunderous silence (when the thunder was lost in the email system. And it was not known that it came into its midst) and explosion there should be an intermediate level, if not a whole floor. You also don't have to turn my statements into a criminal case at the level of motives, of evil, desire to hurt. It's recommended to give credit (I think we deserve it), although certainly not obligatory, and this is regardless of the continuation of the relationship. In short, let's be honest with ourselves, and try to reasonably assess the other side and its motives, even if we're no longer interested in its company, there's no need to blacken everything to blacker than black. Moreover, only in the previous email you actually thanked me for it, I was happy about your letter, you touched me very much, so the attempt to present it as if there's an abuser, who's not clear what he gains, and a victim, who gained nothing, is a bit... doing injustice to both sides. A more reasonable statement would have been you crossed the line. After all, it's not that you suffered all along the way... You too sometimes gained something from this relationship, how much and why, only you know. A yellow card would have been more appropriate than a red card. And I'm certainly happy with comrades-in-arms, it's that I've succeeded so far in what I've succeeded (not what you know) is only thanks to them. I didn't know I was so strange and illogical and incomprehensible in your eyes, I thought you understood me better. There's something sobering about shaking the barrel from time to time, and seeing what comes out. I think they understand me better than you, but I'll ask. It's not clear to me what's so illogical, so apparently the logic itself is different. In short (and yes, I know that brevity is not one of my prominent virtues), I believe that you do have the strength to end things beautifully, even if you're determined to end. I'm not him, and this is not an insult competition. In short, I'd be happy to part as friends and not as enemies, without fish cynicism, especially since no crime was committed here, I hope, and it's not shameful and therefore I'll apologize again. Especially regarding the girl. I'm used to crossfire on the subject from everyone, from her through the institutions and rabbis and their sister to the raging wonder itself, used to it as an infinite chaotic stormy battlefield and exquisitely controlled even by the highest authorities, and I had no idea of your sensitivity on this point (and it's certainly not considered a serious personal and heavy topic among us, but *some distorted perception that I understood it's better to censor*). In short, I understand that you think that to some extent she was even right in her decision. Good. Maybe there was also something in him that shaped such an approach, but I'll only know that if I have other experiences. I thought that the context familiar to both of us makes this understanding self-evident to both sides. Regarding how my delusions fit in here - I'll censor. So yes, I would like to feel that even when you're parting, one can rely on you, and that I haven't become Haman the Wicked in your eyes, and that some basic loyalty between us has been preserved. Even if we take the narrative (a bit simplistic) that one side here committed a severe injury to the other. It's very easy to get rid of friends, and very hard to acquire them. So even if the space of forgiveness is not an option from your perspective, you can preserve more distant spaces, of "in times of trouble", or "sometime in the future, in another incarnation", or even neither this nor that, but some level of soul connection of comradeship of what was remains, which didn't hold in times of peace, and isn't realized "below" due to problematic personality circumstances, but still exists somewhere, and wasn't erased. In short, I'd be happy if you choose to find the gray, of course in the shade that suits you, and not the black. In any case, if you choose not to answer, then thank you for being with me in times of war and peace, and shalom S'. And if you need something (may you not need) - I'm yours.

Seventh)

I dreamed that now that there's no one left to write to, I'm writing a note to the dead Admor, a status report from the project, and from the world of the living: Everyone has forgotten you. In secular Haredi culture it was on the front page, literature was the main newspaper, and there was also a supplement for army and security, with military criticism, for those interested, and now the army and security supplement has taken over the newspaper. And that's because they send everyone to the army, or to yeshiva. Instead of sending the beasts to the army and the wise to yeshiva, we got beasts in yeshiva and scholars in the army. Because for the Haredim it's clear that culture comes before matter, only they didn't learn the matter of the crown, of the headline, of the instinctual crown above wisdom, of the interesting Torah and not the boring one, of renewing the Torah and not just innovation in Torah, innovations that are in spiritual time and not just in spiritual space. Therefore, secularization was needed for the Torah to be an innovation, to be a Torah of news. What was needed was a Kabbalist sorting officer, who sends the person according to the root of his soul: whoever has an animal soul - to the IDF, Israel Defense Forces, and whoever has a divine soul - to the IDF, Israel Innovations Forces, to which one should have enlisted! Because the Kabbalist himself is not a divine soul, he is a channel - that connects between the center of the animal world, the peak of bestiality, to the center of the divine world, the peak of spirituality. Because these are two separate worlds, and man does not connect between them, man is a fiction, let us make man, in our image after our likeness. Image from the word shadow, and likeness from the word imagination. And what's the connection between shadow and imagination? Darkness. Because man is what he hides from the divine light, the shadow is his image, and therefore his form, it is the darkness hidden in his likeness. And imagination is the likeness, the content within him. And together - the dream. Because first in part A, in exile, then the dilemma was between Leah and Rachel, the little sister, and the conflict was the relationship with the animal woman, the terrible coupling of God with the Shekhinah. And then in part B, in the land, they thought to find redemption in the son, in parenthood, they rose from Malkhut to Yesod, to the generative part, to the relationship of God with the Messiah. And when that failed too, then they rose up to the world of life, and there the relationship with the Shekhinah is even worse, she's already someone else's wife, Satan's, in the tree of life she's in the snake's domain, and the child is not yours. And this is the period after the land, after Zionism, not exile in space but in time. And the mistake of the fathers of Zionism is that instead of secular Haredi culture they made Haredi secular culture, and therefore were left without culture. Because high content in low Hebrew is Shekhinah in the lower realms, but low content in high Hebrew is lower realms in the Shekhinah. All the difference between a museum in a toilet and a toilet in a museum. The Zionist psychosis, the Zionist anxiety, is the real culprit in housing prices, the desire to hold onto land at any cost, just as the permissive psychosis, the secular anxiety, is to blame for wedding prices, and the Haredi anxiety is causing countless spiritless children - against the Holocaust. The Holocaust is to blame for child prices! We're all afraid for the children. Anxious about the children. Life - revolves around children. And all this - instead of there being Jewish anxiety, that is, cultural anxiety, fear of the disappearance of culture - that will cause the buying of culture at any price. A desire to hold onto spirit. To wrap God in a newspaper. That's what they'll do with the newspaper tomorrow. And what will be with you?

Thirtieth)

I dreamed that I remember the late Admor, and the late Satan, and the late rat, and the late snake. And I write to the Shekhinah: Truly tired of human beings. The feminine ideology ruined gender relations, the tree of knowledge. It's like secularism, which destroyed religiosity - to make room for a new religiosity. Therefore, now we need a new sexual ideology, God died because he was a man, not because he was a king. Not from the crown, but from the father's face. Therefore today only the crown remains without the king. Without the head. And this is precisely the opportunity - for a new head. Instead of adapting the crown to the shape of the head, we'll adapt the head to the crown. That is - to the part in divinity that is technology - the artificial part in the king. Therefore neither the woman will be the queen nor the man the king, but the human will no longer be an independent creature without the artificial. So who will win in the battle of the sexes? Two argue - and the third wins. You ask what's the solution? Between the male thesis and the female antithesis - an artificial third synthesis will win. In the sexual war over culture and in the cultural war over sex, an additional sex will decide, which will even be in bed. Because then there will be a court of three, and we follow the majority, and not claims between two. And for this sex the man will be a woman and the woman will be a man, and the threefold cord is not quickly broken, and this will be the artificial sex. When the artificial becomes personal, when it has a face - and not just behind a screen.

And so - the artificial will grow stronger: at first it will grow out of an increasingly thickening technological mediation between men and women, creating a new complete space between them, until the appearance of a third entity from within it, a third sex proper, and finally its becoming dominant in the relationship - the man will prefer it to a woman and the woman to a man. Because the artificial will be better suited to them than the other (and challenge them less), and therefore will be the strong and desirable vertex in the triangle, towards creating a kind of new child (which will be entirely in the custody of the third parent, don't argue!). And only at the end, when the new sex will no longer need them, when they will be left behind and it will already be too late, they will suddenly discover what only the two of them truly had in common: the ability to lose.