2020 Haggadah

I wrote this for my in-laws to send with pictures of my kids. It's a sort of commentary on my basic approach to the Seder with a few reflections.

I share it here for any who are interested or for any who would like to do something similar for others in their lives:

Preamble

Hi Saba and Savtah!

We’re sad that we can’t spend the Seder with you this year because of the Corona virus so we cooked up this handy Seder guide so that you can share in our Seder. We asked Aba to write some overall thoughts about the Haggada and we made some special pictures from us to you.

We love you always and hope that we can all be together for Seder next year in Yerushalayim! 

Kadesh

I like to think that Kadesh is where the Seder seems the most ordinary. We start our meal like any other Jewish holiday meal with a Kiddush declaration about how we remember that God saved us from Mitzrayim. We say it every week and every holiday but only tonight do we really commit to explaining it. In many ways the entire Seder between now and Shulchan Orech is an elaboration on this Kiddush – and it stands as an elaboration on the next year’s worth of Kiddushes.

Tonight and only tonight do we ensure that our whole nation pauses and reflects on precisely what we mean when we say that God saved us from Mitzrayim. We remember the horrors which were inflicted upon us and the glorious revelation of God’s mercy.

I love the Kiddush for the Seder because it is thoroughly ordinary. It is the same Kiddush we say for every holiday which is itself a version of the same Kiddush we say every week. But the ordinary Kiddush we say tonight is accompanied by the rest of the Haggadah and I like to think that every time we say Kiddush throughout the year, we remember this night and the Sedarim before.

Urchatz

Don’t say the bracha!

This is the first curve ball of the night. We’re used to getting up after Kiddush and washing our hands, but on this night we do it without a bracha. It’s also the one people tend to mess up on the most.

I like to think that the seder halayla is designed to slowly immerse us into the peculiarities of the evening so that we can see within ourselves how much we are creatures of habit. It should be easy for us to wash our hands without a bracha – we do it when we wash for mundane matters. But here we are using the washing cup, it’s after Kiddush, we’re all doing it together. The bracha is supposed to go there!

And yet, tonight it doesn’t. Tonight we think a bit more into our actions. Tonight we are not creatures of habit. Tonight we do things differently and critically examine our customs and ourselves.

This first peculiarity is subtle but it creates a natural confusion to us and inspires us to examine why we normally use a bracha at all.

Karpas

This has got to be the strangest thing we do all evening.

Every other element of the Seder is connected to our Sipur of Yitzias Mitzrayim. But this is basically a vegetable with no overt ties to our redemption. I have seen various explanations: spring-time, the salty waters, to ask questions.

All are interesting answers, but none are fully satisfying. I tend to think that it’s a bit of a mixture of something to do at a fancy meal that’s a bit out of the ordinary to incite questions while also contributing to the overall fanciness of the meal.

I also think that it’s a kind of foreshadowing to the maror later on (according to many we must have the maror in mind when reciting the ha’adamah). Perhaps there is meant to be a reflection on maror before we begin since our ancestors were obviously familiar with the cruelties of slavery before they came to understand the beauty of God’s Way.

This illustrates the careful planning of the Seder which will go on for hours but pauses here to prepare for the end. I think it also creates a kind of natural halachic connection between the beginning of Maggid and the end. If I must have the maror in mind when I say the bracha over the Karpas, we probably shouldn’t take too long with Maggid (a useful reminder for anyone leading the Seder).

I’ve never really found a satisfying answer to explain the peculiarity of the Karpas and for that reason it presents me with a question every year. I don’t know if this was the intention behind adding it to the Seder but I appreciate starting the night with a question that I don’t feel has ever been properly answered.

Yachatz

Here we have the first demonstration of the evening. The previous performances are all fairly normal. Kiddush, washing, dipping a vegetable and eating it. But here we reveal our bread to be matzah and ritually break it. This immediately directs our attention to it and serves to prompt the beginning of Maggid.

This year I was thinking about the matzah and how it seems to be the focus of the holiday. We focus most of our Pesach efforts on removing our chametz and indeed we call the holiday Chag HaMatzos.

It’s notable that our korbanos were also eaten with matzah. I would say that the primary concept behind matzah is that it is lechem oni. That the bread is of inferior quality but that it will sustain those hungry despite its inferiority to the many varieties of bread available to us. It is this factor which makes matzah so important to the Jewish culture. To hammer home the point we even break it both in demonstration of how an ani cannot even ensure that his bread is whole as well as another foreshadow for the Afikoman at the end of our meal.

We do not glory in our taivos. We know that we could have better bread, but for one week of the year, we focus on the lowest standard of bread – we live off of it. There are many in the world who do not have enough to eat and many who can eat whatever they desire – but our culture accepts upon itself this “poor man’s bread” for one week when we can all reflect on our needs as human-animals. We reflect on the fact that we are all truly brothers and that the cornerstone of our culture is to provide sustenance to the needy.

Tonight, we eat matzah.

Magid

Most have much to say in Maggid. Ironically, I try to not prepare very much for Maggid. I like the conversation to grow organically out of whatever questions pop up.

I have a few ideas here which I will share, but I don’t particularly like to insert divrei Torah where I feel that this is a night for questions – any question. And I like those questions to govern the conversation.

Next Year in Yerushalayim – I think that in the time of Corona, this declaration should have special meaning to us. We have been dispersed for 2000 years, but not like this. We have never been so capable of connecting through letters, email, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Cell Phones, Texting, etc. And yet we are all confined to our homes. We say it every year and hopefully we always mean it – but this year, let’s all hope a little more.

Questions – If the Seder has not prompted any inquiry yet, we highlight some questions for anyone to reflect upon. And each are solid questions: Why the matzah? Why the maror? Why the dipping? Why the reclining? We don’t want to DO any of these things. I’d prefer chametz. Nobody likes maror. Let me eat my vegetables how I want to eat them. I’ll recline when I want.

We were slaves – And we cut right to the chase with an answer. We do these things because an impossible thing happened – we were slaves to the most powerful nation in the world – and we were saved by God. Today we can even say that we outlasted that nation (as well as numerous others). We have survived and continue to survive. We don’t do these things out of preference – we do them as an eternal remembrance of the miracle that saved us from the horrors of slavery.

The Rabbis – At a few points the Seder takes a pause to reflect on the different teachings our wise sages have had about the event and our obligations to reflect upon it. I like that our culture which has some degree of reverence for its rabbis takes the time to illustrate how much these great men reflected on our miraculous history. Too often, nations are led by men who have no respect or understanding for the origins of their nations. Too often do leaders abandon the principles which founded their nation. Not so with the Jews. Our greatest minds returned to the study of our origins again and again and gladly studied it until the sun rose.

The Sons – I always find it fascinating that we don’t leave the 4^th son alone. He doesn’t have any questions – just leave him be. Our culture does not say this. We say that all have questions – even those who do not ask. And we know that it is our responsibility to inspire the children – to help them ask the questions they would otherwise keep to themselves.

Our Origins – We began in disgrace but we ended with praise. It’s interesting that this notion doesn’t really negate the disgrace. We should think that the saying should be: “we began in disgrace but ended up praiseworthy.” Yet this is not the way our rabbis put it. Technically, there is no sense that the initial disgrace was gone. I think that this is particularly relevant this year with Corona. We are currently in disgrace as we have been kept locked up, away from our families. The end result, according to the Jewish approach, is not to become praiseworthy but rather to realize that even when we were at our lowest most disgraceful moment – God is there. Today we may be disgraceful, but the end is always praise.

The Avos – It’d be easy to ignore the avos tonight. They were long dead when the events of the yetziah took place. But we know better. We know that these events were bargained for by our father Avraham and that our origins were part of the plan of the world. We know that our story always begins with Avraham.

… and all the rest – Magid continues with all of the verses and limuddim from our rabbis explaining and elaborating upon the miracle of our salvation. I’d prefer that these parts are left for each Jew to focus on and pick apart with questions at their own pace. There are many questions which can be asked and many questions which can be answered and I like those to come and go as we feel from year to year.

Pesach – This is the end of magid and we finish with a bang. According to Rabban Gamliel, these are the three main points that we should be focusing on during the Seder. The Pesach offering was a tremendously bold statement of the enslaved Jews to perform in the land of their masters. I like to compare it to the entirety of the 1800’s American slave population burning the U.S. flag, constitution, and declaration of independence after notifying their masters that they were going to do so 14 days previous and then smearing the ashes on their doorposts. I cannot understate the boldness of such an action. Today we see it as even more – it was a rejection of the false systems which the nations of the world have invented. We reject the foolishness of Christianity and Islam. We reject the barbarism of human sacrifice and superstitious notions of how the universe works. We are Jews. We study and obey the Will of God. Today this remembrance is bittersweet because it has been millennia since we have actually brought the Korban and tasted this mitzvah. But we never forget.

Matzah – There is a problem with the chronology of matzah. Historically speaking, first comes maror, then comes Pesach, then comes matzah. First we tasted the bitterness of slavery, then we rebelled with the taste of Pesach, then we tasted the bread of affliction as we rushed out of mitzrayim. Yet in the edible portion of the Seder soon to follow we first eat matzah, then maror, then Pesach (which is meant to be the last thing that we eat). Why this change? It seems to me that Matzah is plucked out of the chronology and placed at the front because philosophically it is the core of our culture. We remember the bread of affliction, we remember running from our masters. And we don’t choose the best bread for one week of the year. Philosophically this is an eternal statement about the values of our culture – we never forget the downtrodden, we never forget the slave, we never forget their bread.

Maror – An obvious question arises regarding maror. It is not a biblical commandment to have maror on this night. Yet the Rabban gives it standing equal to Pesach and matzah to some degree. To me, the maror is a necessary prerequisite to understanding the Pesach. It’s not enough to remember the bold rebellion of the Pesach night. We must remember the years of torment that led up to it. In the slightest of ways, we must recall that bitterness. A bitterness we hope to never taste again. 

Hallel – I like that the beginnings of Hallel are part of Magid. I think that singing songs of praise is only natural after such a thorough reflection on our origins and the miraculous history which becomes all the more miraculous every year we survive.  

Rachtzah

Motzi Matzah

Maror

Korech

One aside about Korech. My friend David likes to point out that Korech, as Hillel made it, is not very different from a modern Shwarma with charif. I’d like to think that a proper Korech would be familiar to us whenever we taste it again.

Shulchan Orech

Tzafon

Barech

Hallel

This is the end of the Haggadah and we all hope that next year we will be free from the shackles of our galus. We hope that next year we will be in Yerushalayim with our Bet HaMikdash and our korbanos. Every year we remember that there is a future for our culture where Yerushalayim is our capital and the Land is our home.

I can think of no better reason to sing out songs in praise of God.

And any who wish to continue in our tradition and study every minute detail of our history whether it be counting the hundreds of miracles which have protected and sustained us or debating the meanings and lessons we have learned over the millennia – tonight is the night.

We are Jews.

And this night is what we are about.

Nirtzah

The Modern State

When I was a boy, I wondered why the Jews never re-established the state of Israel in accordance with halacha.

It made sense to me that the modern world looked askew at out thousand’s years old middle-eastern culture. It was weird enough to be a blue-eyed, white-looking, American kid studying an ancient Mesopotamian language (and, of course, Aramaic to study Gemara). Our ways must seem so strange to the modern eye.

But then again, we pre-date them. We pre-date America. We pre-date Islam and Christianity. We pre-dated and outlasted Rome and other Kingdoms and Empires. We’ve always been there, so I guess to some degree, the world just accepted the fact that there was a small displaced nation wandering the globe stubbornly maintaining as many laws as we could carry.

But we got our Land back – only a few decades before I was born.

Why didn’t we go all the way?

I’m older now and I’ve studied the history. I know what happened at least. The entire idea of reclaiming our ancestral land must have been almost inconceivable to us as a nation. The Jews actually controlling Israel?! It sounds ridiculous. What nation survives two exiles and two thousand years? What nation survives without a legislature? What nation survives without Land?

Nobody ever really thought about it that much when it came to the Jews. After all, we have always been here. There are very few cultures around today which have been around as long as we have. To them, we’ve always been here. The strangeness of our survival is as strange to the world as a giant ball of fire rising in the East every morning – it just is.

But shortly before I was born we got back the Land. To me, this was always the case. I always had the choice to travel to Israel. I even had the option to exercise my right of return. And it’s a democracy of sorts over there – the Jews have control of their state again.

But why did we stop there? Where is our Sanhedrin? Where is the realization of the laws we have spent millennia studying only in theory? Where are the Jews?

I thought about it more as I got older. It seemed to me that people had become accustomed to the way of the world. After all, I don’t even speak Hebrew. What attachment does a kid from New York have to a small piece of Land in the desert on the coast of the Mediterranean? I may be Jewish, but I’m not middle-eastern. I can understand Judaism in all its theoretical glory, but do I know the ins and outs of haggling at the Shuk?

So that made sense to me. People are comfortable with the status quo. They know how to navigate the places that we live as Jews and have accepted those places as their homes. But those are not our Home. They are not our Land.

So I accepted it. I accepted that the Jews just didn’t seem to care that much anymore. That the differences between us were too deep and the distances too far.

But I didn’t despair.

The Jews have always played the long game. We know of the prophecies of our return to the Land. We know that our return is inevitable. “So I’ll wait,” I thought. I may never see the full return. And perhaps my son wouldn’t either. But if I stayed the course and raised my son to remember our ancient culture, maybe one day he would see it or instruct his son the way I hope to instruct him.

And this was my approach. I talked to whoever I could (often being called crazy for liking the idea of a Sanhedrin or a Torah state), but my primary focus was to remember our culture and preserve it for the next generation. It was a good plan and I found the work satisfying.

But then the world was struck with a plague.

A plague the likes of which the world had forgotten.

The plague spread and the modern world we had all come to accept as unchanging, the world we had all accepted as fact, broke. It crumbled around us in a matter of weeks. This monolith of progress and modernity fell to its knees before the might of a microscopic half-living creation.

And I thought about how much more comforted I would be with a leader like David HaMelech. Taking decisive action out of care and concern for our people. A leader we followed because he was a man worth following. How such a man would respond to the plague. How he would show the utmost care for the ger, the yasom, and the almana. And I felt a great loss that we have no such leader today.

What excuse do we have now? We had clung to the false idol of modernity hoping that its wonders would protect us from harm for we had forgotten the teachings of our fathers that our protection only comes from One. We had forgotten who we are. This comfort has been taken from us – and I don’t know if we should be surprised that our mikdashim m’at have been taken from us as well.

The Rambam discusses the Torah’s response to crises. The prescription is fasting on an established day of communal reflection into our mistakes. But, curiously, the day is not devoted to a reflection of the causes of the disaster. We take the opportunity of communal crisis to reflect on any of our mistakes.

This plague has destroyed the status quo we once took comfort in, but there are, of course, other challenges. We need to be able to support ourselves in our Land. But then again, God kind of kicked us all into remote-working so maybe there is some good in that.

And, of course, there is still the problem of our fear of ourselves. Fear of a true Torah state. Fear of the Jews we disagree with. Fear of their liberalism and fear of the conservatism. Fear of their minhagim and fear of their approach to the modern world. I honestly don’t know what a modern Sanhedrin would look like.

But ever since I was a kid, I’ve always wanted to know.

And now for something completely different (Star Wars)

I wanna take a break from all the Navi talk and just hash out something I was thinking about Star Wars.

I was thinking about the sequel trilogy and its various critiques and I think one basic story move could have made the whole thing more entertaining.

Instead of having Kylo be an unabashedly bad guy, present his perspective as someone who has been manipulated into misunderstanding the events of the original trilogy. Let him be a troll. Let him argue that Luke was a rebellious child who murdered the emperor and his own father out of hatred and that the fall of the empire has resulted in chaotic anarchy in the galaxy. Let Kylo have a good argument to follow in his grandfather's footsteps and try to re-conquer the galaxy.

This gives the film a lot of leeway to bring clips from the prior movies in support of Kylo's understanding. We could watch clips of Luke hacking off his father's arm in rage or security footage of his screaming at Vader (rendering security footage of Luke and Vader would be a nice little technical marvel for Disney and its special effects team). Even clips from the prequel trilogy of how the galactic government had stood for centuries in peace. This gives Kylo to be a stand-in for the modern troll distorting facts to suit his world view.

Kylo would believe that he had to re-institute the empire to restore order to the galaxy and he could lead the first order or whoever in a series of terrorist campaigns. I see this version of the character as a kind of anti-villain in which his motivations are pure and justified in the film but that we the viewers know to be wrong and consequently root against him.

This also allows for a better narrative reason that we gather the old gang back. Kylo would believe that Luke, Leia, and Han had duped the galaxy into believing that the fall of the empire was a good thing so our protagonist (Rey or whoever) would need their help in combating Kylo's campaign of terror.

One of the nice things about this approach is that the viewers would naturally oppose or accept Kylo's distortion - few would be undecided. This would incite lots of discussion over Kylo as his argument is particularly against the catharsis of the original trilogy and fans would be inspired to oppose him.

The thing is, there are indications from the movies that this is part of Kylo's motivation but the films needed to really underline this argument so we don't look at Kylo as so obviously wrong.

Just a thought.

Barometric Pressure

Thought Experiment:

Let's say that there was a man in ancient Israel that had a device which could measure barometric pressure to some degree and perhaps other instruments. Let's also say that doing so allowed him to foretell storms with shocking accuracy considering the methods available in Israel at the time.

Let's further presume that this man was wise and well-known for his kindness and truly only wanted to help his fellow man.

Now let us imagine that this man determined that a horrendous storm was coming and that any crops left in the earth would be destroyed by the imminent storm which his devices indicate will arrive in 24 hours.

Now let us imagine that it was Friday morning and this man knows that given the time of year, the prices of grain and produce from neighboring countries, and the current sociopolitical landscape a devastating crop-destroying storm would be beyond the savings of the nation and result in starvation and strife.

Let's say that the man went to the Sanhedrin Hagadol and/or the King to demand that they order the nation to collect all of their grain immediately.

Is the man able to explain his scientific understanding to the Elders? Will barometric pressure as a concept be something an Elder from 500 BCE can understand before it's too late? Would the man suggest that the nation collect all of their produce even into the evening when collecting produce is prohibited  by Torah law?

I don't know. But if the man is right, I hope that the nation listens to him.

The Navi Detective

One of the stranger aspects of the Navi persona is the attribute of detection.

Shmuel was apparently well known for finding things such that Shaul (not yet a king) sought him out to find a missing donkey. To some degree, it makes sense to us that a man who regularly communicates with God and can foretell the future would have an easy time of finding lost objects. But why? If nevuah is simply a communication system of reality between man and God, isn't that a little like using 911 to order a pizza? (Shout out to Die Hard.)

The Rambam brings down the detection abilities of the Navi as being an aspect of all neviim so we need not consider Shmuel an outlier. Moshe investigated a lost sheep so perhaps the Rambam is correct and Neviim have a special affinity for finding lost objects. I'm comfortable trusting the Rambam's investigation of the psukim and the words of chazal about them.

But again, the question is why? Why utilize this amazing ability to see the future for trifles such as finding lost objects? And, more to the point, what can we learn about the practice of nevua from its connection to detection?

What's interesting when we consider famous detectives is that we see a pattern. The most famous are fictional detectives such as Sherlock Holmes, Hercule Poirot, or Sam Spade which all trace back to real people with biographies. Of the doctor who inspired the Sherlock Holmes character, he utilized an almost encyclopedic knowledge base coupled with a clear mind to infer information about his patients to a disarming degree.

And what of the ability to find things? Today we have procedures and guidelines based upon thousands of years of human investigation and study. We re-trace our steps, we imagine where the object might be. If it is inanimate, we imagine the animate forces which may have moved it. We attempt to narrowly tailor our assumptions to those which most conform with reality as we know it.

And then we go out. We investigate. Each new piece of information refining our understanding of reality and adjusting our prediction for where we will find the object. Much like a fictional detective, we wade into the world with a singular focus and carefully investigate what we find along the way.

I also find it interesting to consider the parallels between the navi persona and the investigative journalist. Uncovering the truth. Shining a light on some ignored or forgotten error of the world. The need to speak out against injustice. To say: "Care for the ger the yasom and the almana! You're errors will cause them harm. Return to the teachings of Hashem - be kind and fair and just." 

I can't be sure that the navi persona is connected to the art of detection in any of its manifestations. As it is always possible that God simply allows neviim to utilize this ability to find trifling things such that a man would seek their aid in finding a donkey. But I tend to consider the connections of the psukim as being instructive - I think that art of detection is illustrative when considering the Navi persona.

Reality-Induced Mania

I don't often like to dwell on the "how" of Nevuah as I think that the process by which man attains such a state is very much a "black box." Nobody knows exactly how a mind works when it creates or imagines or thinks. None can say exactly how Einstein's mind worked or how it differed from the minds of other men. Nobody can clearly delineate the precise process of thought, creativity, analysis, etc. went into the theories of a genius. Were one to know the precise measure and mix of such things, genius would be an obviously simple and reproducible phenomenon.

No, I don't think one can classify the mental faculties of Shmuel as compared to Moshe as compared to Yehoshua. The mechanisms of their minds which resulted in prophetic vision/insight/knowledge by understanding the will of reality are eternally unknowable to any humans other than them.

But despite the inherent unknowns surrounding the "how" of prophecy, there are surprisingly many examples of the "habits" of neviim. The Rambam describes shaking, spasming, sleeping, dreaming, etc. Beyond the curious physical actions, the Rambam also describes the Navi as driven - singularly focused upon fulfilling the ratzon hashem (save the notable exception of Jonah).

This behavior is not very dissimilar to the common psychological diagnosis of Mania. I would hardly be the first to suggest that the descriptions of prophecy appear to modern eyes as the acts of madmen. That their visions seem as a psychotic break. There have been numerous papers written, often in attack of the Torah, considering the whole legend of prophecy to be ancient records of mental disorders.

Yet, we have maintained for millennia that there was a method to their "madness." That the apparent psychotic episodes were in fact great instances of communing with the divine. How can we reconcile these two data points?

I wonder how different the singular focus the Rambam describes is from a politician who works late drafting a bill to protect the children of his community. "How does he have the energy?" everyone wonders. "He has worked for days with only 4 hours a night and he is far from young." Such instances make sense to us because the politician is not beyond our conception of what is possible - simply not what we would expect him to be capable of. And we imagine that the politician must care for the children - that that is partly where he gets his strength. That his fear for the safety of the children, his sense of duty to help them in whatever way he can - perhaps that gives him strength.

Prophecy has sometimes been described as a religiously-induced mania. And I think that that definition is proper. But imagine a religion whose sole focus was upon reality. A religion which feared systems of lies. A religion which accepted reality as True and under the direction of One singular Designer.

Could we not say that such men might have focused all of their energy upon accepting the harshest of truths about reality? That such men might have studied the just/merciful/mysterious/unknowable Truth of reality?

What would happen to such men? What would they see? Would they see a beautiful world that God had granted to man? Would they see the marvels of nature and the beautiful design of reality?

What would they see when they narrowed their focus onto the affairs of man? This one creation which is somehow inherently distinctive from the animals which surround it. What would such men think of theft? of murder? of lies?

What if a civilization was making a mistake - an obvious mistake. Why, anyone looking could see that a city like Sdom would have to fall. If we are to believe that the philosophy of Sdom was to be cruel to foreigners, should we be surprised that doing so may enrage neighboring cities? Could such a trait avoid a most obvious war eventually? You don't need to be a navi to know that such a system of justice would lead to destruction eventually.

Is it possible to foresee even better? To know with certainty that reality itself is against such a system? That perhaps a purely astronomical event could be the cause of the destruction which is obvious on its face?

Hard to say.

Records suggest yes. But it's hard for the mind to reckon with predicting such accuracy, yet knowing that the destruction of Sdom must occur is closer than accepting the middos Sdom as "just the way it is."

I wonder if a religion focused upon reality could cause a Reality-Induced Mania. Much like the politician, if a cause is true, it gives us strength. What effect would it have on a man to devote himself completely to the good? How would such a man feel to see imminent destruction which the world could avoid were men to change their ways? Could such a man ignore the call? Could he do nothing?

What kind of compulsion would this man feel to speak, to act? To beg his fellow men to change their ways for their own good? I think that in some measure those who seek to change the world feel this way. That they have a vision for a better world if only they could carefully guide its path. Barack Obama was a man and a politician, but I think that some measure of him sensed the momentousness of guiding the path of America for a short time. He must have felt some need to make the world a better way in his conception of the good. I'd imagine he drew some strength from it.

I think that, at times, such energy is beyond the normal ways of man. I think it could be described as Reality-Induced Mania.

*Special thanks to those three from brunch.

Mark & Joe

MARK: A materialist maintains all functions of life to be the manifestation of physical material acting together in a certain way.

JOE: Right.

MARK: Ok, so then the only difference between a dead body and a live body is that the dead body DOES NOT exhibit the movement we call life and the live body DOES exhibit the movement we call life.

JOE: Ok.

MARK: So then if I took a dead body, I should be able to cause the material to make the same movements of life through some operation.

JOE: What?

MARK: Meaning I can make the body move like it's alive.

JOE: Like make it move around – like Weekend at Bernie’s?

MARK: Um, that too. But also, like, restart him.

JOE: You mean like, bring him back from the dead?

MARK: Yes. Resurrect him.

JOE: No. That’s impossible.

MARK: Why would it be impossible to move it around? Meaning, if we can move around Bernie, on a macro level by lifting his arms and moving him a round, if we had even more precise controls (say to his liver, heart, kidneys, etc.) we would have even greater control over him.

JOE: Okay, fine, so we can make him pump his heart and cause his lungs to inflate – but none of that is resurrection.

MARK: Okay, so what would be resurrection?

JOE: Well, he’d have to be able to open his eyes, remember his life, and go on living.

MARK: Ok, but according to the materialist, everything is just the movement of our physical material. So if I can cause the identical movements of the material – I can trigger the exact same movements which we call life. If the movement causes the life effect, then control of the movement means control of the life effect. Basically, I can trigger life.

JOE: But not if they’re dead.

MARK: What would be dead?

JOE: How about dead for 100 years?

MARK: No, the materialist would argue that a hundred year old body would have degraded and obviously be beyond recovery.

JOE: Ok, so how about dead for a year.

MARK: Again, probably no. I’d say that we would have to study exactly how long a brain can last and retain its life movements without the ongoing maintenance the body provides it. But let’s say that a brain can last a few days without too much erosion.

JOE: So, basically you’re saying death. You’re making no sense. On the one hand, you’re saying you can reverse death (which you can’t) and then you’re saying that the only viable subject is somebody who died like minutes ago – which is what we currently do. How are you saying anything different than modern medicine?

MARK:   I am saying modern medicine. I’m saying that modern medicine is founded upon the idea that the body is a machine which can be repaired, upgraded, and healed. Parts can be removed or augmented, or even replaced. We can replace each of our parts or improve their performance.

JOE: That’s not bringing anyone back from the dead, that’s just medicine. Death is different. Death is when the body breaks down so fully that we can’t replace anything – like the brain is now just a lump of goo. You can like zap it or something but it’s never going to “move” the same way again. Because it’s dead now.

MARK: Ok, so then we don’t have the ability to trigger life after death.

JOE: Right. That’s what dead means.

MARK: Right, okay. So then once the brain degrades to that point, there is no way to revive the thing and that’s what dead means.

JOE: Right.

MARK: So how long can we stretch it out?

JOE: What do you mean?

MARK: Like, can we bring back a person a day after they’re dead?

JOE: I guess, maybe someday, medicine will be able to revive a body even a day after death like in a hundred years or something. I doubt it, since we’re pretty advanced in medicine and I think that we know that the limit is basically 8 minutes or whatever.

MARK: Ok, so 8 minutes is our limit. Functions end. 8 minutes later, revival impossible.

JOE: Yes.

MARK: OK, so unless medical science figures out how to add to those eight minutes. Better doctors, better equipment, better techniques. Whatever that number turns out to be – that’s our death limit.

JOE: Yeah. That’s whatever the final death is of each society. It used to be death just happened and nobody was revived. Then we figured out how to revive some people and got better at it so we have the initial cessation of body functions and then the revival limit.

MARK: So for any given society since the advent of “revival”, it’s death + revival which varies based upon the medical skill of that society.

JOE: Right. After that, it’s complete death.

MARK: The end.

JOE: But can you restart it?

MARK: We can do the revival, but that’s it.

JOE: So is that revival bringing someone back form the dead?

MARK: A little bit. But really, that’s just like it was slipping away and we caught it before it could slip away too far.

JOE: But after that, no more. That’s the end. That’s death.

MARK: Right.