The mitzvah of dveikus, to cling to Hashem, appears five times in the Torah, all in Sefer Devarim. It is mentioned once in Parshas Va'eschanan, "But you who cleave to Hashem your God are alive, all of you, this day" (Devarim 4:4), and twice in Parshas Eikev, "You shall fear Hashem, your God, worship Him, and cleave to Him and swear by His Name" (Devarim 10:20), "For if you keep all these commandments which I command you to do them, to love the Lord, your God, to walk in all His ways, and to cleave to Him" (Devarim 11:22). It is then revisited in Parshas Re'eh, "You shall follow Hashem, your God, fear Him, keep His commandments, heed His voice, worship Him, and cleave to Him" (Devarim 13:5), and again in Parshas Nitzavim, "To love Hashem your God, to listen to His voice, and to cleave to Him" (Devarim 30:5).
From its repeated emphasis it seems that dveikus represents one of the central concepts and critical foundations of Judaism. If so, why does it only surface in the final book of the Torah and not at some earlier point? Moreover, the notion of dveikus is at times associated "fear of Hashem" and at other times with "love of Hashem," How can the same mitzvah encompass two complementary but at times contradictory impulses? Perhaps this indicates that authentic dveikus is unattainable in the initial stages of avodas Hashem, and is not limited to one theme or mitzvah in particular. Rather real dveikus is a mindset and awareness that emerges only after serving Hashem in all facets of life and at all times, and is therefore all-encompassing and materializes towards the end of the Torah, as the Ibn Ezra (Devarim 11:22) hints, "and cleave to him - in the end, and this is a great secret."
This is apparent from the Gemara (Kesubos 111b) which asserts, "is it possible to cleave to the Divine Presence? Isn't it written 'for Hashem your God is a devouring fire' (Devarim 4:24), rather, this verse teaches that anyone who marries his daughter to a Torah scholar … is considered as if he is cleaving to the Divine Presence." Similarly, the Gemara (Sotah 14a) states, "What is the meaning of that which is written: 'You shall follow Hashem (… and cleave to Him),' but is it actually possible for a person to follow the Divine Presence? Hasn't it already been stated: 'For Hashem your God is a devouring fire', rather the meaning is that one should follow the attributes of Hashem. Just as He clothes the naked … so too, should you clothe the naked. Just as He visits the sick ,.. so too, should you visit the sick."
According to Chazal, dveikus is manifested and expressed by imitating the ways of Hashem and by associating with accomplished Torah scholars. On the other hand, the Ramban (Devarim 11:22) depicts dveikus more literally when he writes, "that the term cleaving includes the obligation that you remember Hashem and His love always, that your thoughts should never be separated from Him ... to such a degree that during conversation with people ... your entire heart will not be with them, but instead will be directed towards Hashem." According to this formulation, dveikus is a contemplative state of dual consciousness, which requires dealing with human beings while simultaneously communing with Hashem and concentrating on the Divine. Why did Chazal avoid this obvious definition of dveikus and how could the Ramban abandon the guidance of Chazal?
We must distinguish between the activity of dveikus and the result. The goal of dveikus is certainly to arrive at a comprehensive and constant awareness of Hashem, where every thought and encounter is informed and suffused by the palpable presence of Hashem. Nonetheless, attempting to achieve this mindset directly through unguided and ungrounded meditative contemplation is presumptuous and elusive, as Chazal already wondered "is it possible to cleave to the Divine Presence?" How does one cultivate a relationship with an ineffable and transcendent Creator? This dilemma presumably prompted Chazal to channel and translate the raw quest for dveikus into an integrated approach that combines imitating and internalizing the revealed will and attributes of Hashem with clinging to appropriate role models who have already attained higher levels of dveikus themselves.[1]
In its pristine form, dveikus must be constant and complete, as the Mahral (Nesivos Olam, Nesiv Ha'avodah ch. 4) writes, "and if the dveikus is only occasional it is not considered dveikus at all." Therefore, full blown dveikus was traditionally viewed as the pinnacle of spiritual achievement, bordering on the prophetic (see Moreh Nevuchim III, 51). Indeed, throughout Kabbalistic literature dveikus is frequently mentioned as the loftiest ideal of the mystical life. For this reason, while dveikus was always pursued and practiced in the form of kavanah (intent) when performing mitzvos, it was not treated as a discreet objective or addressed by any specific independent activity, rather it was regarded as the natural culmination of a life of total religious commitment, and the likely consequence of sincere mitzvah performance animated by a robust affiliation to talmidei chachamim.
However, Gershom Scholem argues that one of the most central elements of the Baal Shem Tov's teachings relates to the doctrine of dveikus, not only in terms of its meaning, but to its position and placement in the order of avodas Hashem. Scholem writes that in the thought of the Baal Shem Tov, "Dveikus is no longer an extreme ideal, to be realized by some rare and sublime spirits at the end of the path. It is no longer the last rung in the ladder of ascent, as in Kabbalism, but the first. Everything begins with man's decision to cleave to God. Dveikus is a starting point and not the end. Everyone is able to realize it instantaneously. All he has to do is take his faith seriously. It is, therefore, small wonder that the Baal Shem identifies faith (emunah) with dveikus ... God pervades everything … to be aware of this real omniprescence and immanence of God is already the realization of a state of dveikus."[2]
Democratizing dveikus, and identifying it primarily with emunah, is compelling, because it serves to provide every Jew, at every level, with an opportunity to fulfill this universal mitzvah and attain some measure of dveikus. This argument led the Mesech Chochmah (Parshas Eikev) and the Nesivos Shalom (Parshas Eikev) to conclude that just like faith and trust are not binary all-or-nothing propositions so too dveikus must possesses multiple degrees and tiers in order to accommodate everyone. The most intense modes of dveikus can still be an extreme and remote state of dual consciousness reserved for the spiritual elite, while at the same time, its more rudimentary forms, consisting of basic faith and trust in Hashem's presence and providence, can rightly be considered the focal point in the religious life of every Jew.
This approach also sees the mitzvos as an instrument for dveikus, and defines dveikus as the contemplative act (yichudim) by which man fixates his thoughts and mind on Hashem and binds himself to the core spiritual element (penimius) inherent in the Torah and mitzvos, instead of relating to the external aspects of the mitzvah exclusively.[3] The central thesis, that the root of every mitzvah is dveikus, was novel and could not have been held by the Kabbalists as long as they placed dveikus at the end of the path of avodas Hashem, following the performance of the essential mitzvah itself. In this context, where the focus of mitzvos is dveikus, and dveikus is defined as actualized emunah whose bottom rungs are easily accessible, the notion of pursuing the contemplative state of dveikus in the abstract becomes a realistic possibility.
Here we need to be mindful of the potential pitfalls involved with an independent pursuit of dveikus outside of the realm of formal Torah and mitzvos. The efficacy and track record of spontaneous dveikisdeke ruach in promoting sustained and substantive religious growth is long and undeniable, and these kinds of events should be encouraged and promoted. However, we must be careful not to confuse the experiences of kosher entertainment with genuine methods for achieving dveikus. It is true that kosher media and entertainment occupies an important space and provides an essential service, but it is critical that it be classified and catalogued accurately so that we can allocate and direct our religious energy and spiritual passion properly. Similarly, slogans and hashtags of emunah and bittachon might be helpful cues on the road towards actual dveikus, but they should never be mistaken as a substitute for the spiritual work needed to acquire the real thing.
It is instructive to reflect upon the words of Rabbi Dr. Menachem M. Brayer, the late father of the Boyaner Rebbe shlit"a, who wrote in 1968 about the possibility of using narcotics and hallucinogens to trigger authentic dveikus: "Religious experience in its true sense is from within. It is the fervor of the soul - the divine spark - to unite itself with the eternal flame. Such mystic fervor which one sees in the Hasidic ecstasy aroused by tefilah … can hardly be compared to a drug experience. One the one hand, the experience is the climax of hirhur teshuva and cheshbon hanefesh. In the latter case, it is the experience of a person lacking discipline. In the former, it is the result of a total orientation of the self toward accepting a certain mode of life. In the hippie, it is the result of a haphazard attempt to escape the reality of a purposeless existence … Mystical experience is no doubt a part of Judaism, and it may be the summum bonum of religious experience, but it must arise from the involvement of man in the real world, and it must enable him to return to it. It is the final rung in the ladder whose legs are resting on the ground. One doesn't fly to the top, one climbs."[4]
[1] For Rav Soloveitchik's approach to dveikus see, Rabbi Soloveitchik, And from There You Shall Seek, Toras Horav Foundation, 2008, as well as Rabbi Shalom Carmy, On Cleaving as Identification: R. Soloveitchik's Account of Devekut In U-vikashtem Mi-sham, Tradition 41:2, 2008.
[2] Gershom Scholem, The Messianic Idea in Judaism: Devekut, Or Communion with God, Schocken Books, 1971, page 208.
[3] The illegitimacy of compromising the external performance of a mitzvah in order to maximize dveikus, as well as the unique role of Talmud Torah as a vehicle for dveikus, is discussed at length by Rav Chaim Volozhiner in his Nefesh Hachaim. Rav Chaim clearly has a different view on the innate cosmic character of mitzvos and their relationship with dveikus.
[4] Rabbi Menachem M. Brayer, LSD: A Jewish View, Tradition 10:1, 1968.