Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: Digory Kirke

What is complete repentance [teshuva]? A person who confronts the same situation in which he sinned when he has the potential to commit [the sin again], and, nevertheless, abstains and does not commit it because of his teshuvah alone and not because of fear or a lack of strength.

(Maimonides Mishneh Torah, Laws of Repentance 2:1)

Maimonides in his magnum opus defines one who has achieved full repentance. Namely, it is one who finds themselves in the same exact situation in which he once fell prey to sin and this time holds back. 

I think this type of repentance was achieved by Digory Kirke. Recall, that upon visiting the world of Charn, Digory and Polly enter a hall of figures sitting in rows of chairs. In the middle of the room was a bell which promised danger to the one who rang it, but unrelenting curiosity to the one who did not. Polly was not interested in the danger and was ready to leave. But Digory exclaimed, "We can't get out of it now. We shall always be wondering what else would have happened if we had struck the bell. I'm not going home to be driven mad by always thinking of that," and physically restrained her.  

We all know what happened next. Digory did ring the bell awakening the Queen Jadis who, in Narnia, was to become the White Witch. Of course, Aslan turned the situation into a positive one. The same witch was to bring King Frank into Narnia and Aslan would eventually sacrifice himself to save Narnia. But what about Digory himself?

Unlike the Edmond who betrayed his family requiring Aslan's sacrifice, Aslan arranged a different (better?) means of repentance. Digory is given a task - to retrieve an apple from a faraway garden. With Polly and Fledge he reaches the garden only to find the same witch urging yet again. For, as we know, the apple is "the apple of youth, the apple of life," and all Digory has to do is take it, give it to his mother who is now laying on her death bed, and all will be well. " 'Oh!' gasped Digory as if he had been hurt, and put his hand to his head. For he now knew that the most terrible choice lay before him." 

A terrible choice, but perhaps one that he's seen before. Carry on with his mission or wonder forever whether things could have been different. The same situation, the same stakes (if not higher). But this time Digory holds back. He escapes and returns to Alsan.

Throughout the Chronicles, Aslan is reticent to let characters know what might have been. But this time he actually says so quite clearly. "Understand, then, that it would have healed her; but not to your joy or hers. The day would have come when both you and she would have looked back and said it would havebeen better to die in that illness." Why would Aslan reveal to Digory the might have been, but not to anyone else?

Perhaps because, at least in this way, Digory stands above them all. He is a true repentant, the one who faced sin knowing he had previously lost, but overcame. He deserves to know that his decision was right, not only morally, but on all planes. 

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: Uncle Andrew

 Ours, my boy, is a high and lonely destiny
(The Magician's Nephew)

There are few characters in the Chronicles of Narnia as detestable as Digory's uncle Andrew. His arrogance reigns supreme through the beginning of "The Magician's Nephew," climaxing in the above statement that enables him to trick a young girl into travelling to an unknown world. Upon meeting the Witch he becomes a sickening sycophant allowing her to ruin him financially. And when he enters Narnia he becomes a heartless entrepenuer willing to sell all of Narnia to make a buck. His mind and soul are so closed to God and spirituality that he hears Aslan's songs as a lion's roars, the kind words of the talking beasts as yelps and barks. 

Yet, by the end of the book, "Uncle Andrew never tried any Magic again as long as he lived. He had learned his lesson, and in his old age he became a nicer and less selfish old man than he had ever been before." After all the hardships he suffered he reevaluated, he changed. True he did not become a great man, maybe not even a good one, but he improved, he changed direction towards the light. 

Well, at least to a point... He still had one connection to that magician past:

But he always liked to get visitors alone in the billiard-room and tell them stories about a mysterious lady, a foreign royalty, with whom he had driven about London. "A devilish temper she had," he would say. "But she was a dem fine woman, sir, a dem fine woman."

Does this matter? Is looking back at the evil witch with some semblence of nostalgia reasonable or should he look back at that time only in horror and embarrassment? 

On the one hand this reminds us of the lizard on the shoulder of the ghost in The Great Divorce who promises sweet, fresh, innocent dreams. And Uncle Andrew is still left with that, his daydream that the Witch actually liked him. He cannot fully face that she was evil and he sinned, and therefore he cannot be fully forgiven. 

On the other hand, maybe in this world we just need a coping mechanism. Can we ever fully understand the evil of our ways? Would it not stymie us from being able to move forward. Perhaps Uncle Andrew was just being realistic. He knows what he did was wrong, but cannot face the ultimate truth, so he "harmlessly" whitewashes the situation. No one is hurt by a story of foreign royalty, Uncle Andrew gets some respect and interest from his listeners and everyone just goes on with their day. 

Clearly the first option seems more just. But at times, it is sin that is used as a stepping stone to finally come to God - our Sages at times have sins transformed into merits. 

I think this needs another post to further consider. 

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: Dr. Cornelius

My apologies for the long break from posting. Thank God all is well, and it was simply other things that other things got in the way. Chief amongst them is an article I'm attempting to write on the relationships used in Jewish liturgy to describe the relationship between God and Israel. But, let's return to Narnia... 

I wanted to return to our long series of posts detailing Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva. For those who need a refresher, a Ba'al Teshuva is a returnee. One who was never loyal to his or her faith and God (or at some point had given it up) and has now decided to return. Narnia features a number of such returnees, most famously Edmund, Eustace, and Caspian. Each is unique, as are well all, thus each can teach us something in growing our own relationship with our faith and with God.   

An interesting case is that of Dr. Cornelius. We know little of Dr. Cornelius before his appointment as tutor for Prince Caspian. Yet, it is he who cements in the young prince's mind that the legends of Old Narnia are factual history. He then joins Caspian's rebellion against King Miraz and is appointed Caspian's Lord Chancellor. 

Who is Dr. Cornelius and why does he see fit to inspire the future king with the past glories of Narnia so long forgotten?

The answer is not a mystery, in fact, Dr. Cornelius explains it himself. He is in fact, a half-dwarf who has spent his life researching and searching for Old Narnia. He knows the truths of Narnia and, as he says to Caspian, "But never in all these years have we forgotten our own people and all the other happy creatures of Narnia, and the long-lost days of freedom." 

Except for one problem. If Cornelius is half-dwarf, he is also half-Telmarine. Why does he put so much stock into his half-dwarf part? He himself knows that true Old Narnians may not even accept him! "If any of my kindred, the true Dwarfs, are still alive anywhere in the world, doubtless they would despise me and call me a traitor." Why not just let bygones be bygones and follow his Telmarine half, why attempt to join a people who may no longer exist and are certainly not bound by history to ever reappear? 

Of course, we don't know - what was the attitude of Cornelius' parents? Did they encourage his pursuit into Old Narnia or try to persuade him otherwise? Was he inspired by the majestic history of Narnia which was known to so few, and he wanted to be part of it? Did he recognize that there must be a true King Who told the story of history, and that Narnia was the main character? 

What we do know is that not only does he join Old Narnia, he becomes the inspiration of its savior. But perhaps he did not need the dwarf's blood to get him there... 

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: the Lapsed Bear of Stormness

I am preparing to write a post or two about Aslan's warning to the Talking Beasts of Narnia not to return to the ways of the Dumb Beasts from which they were chosen. Hopefully that will happen soon, but it returned my thoughts to the Lapsed Bear of Stormness. So, let's take some time to talk about him.  

We know very little about the Lapsed Bear of Stornmness as he is mentioned at the end of "The Horse and His Boy" by way of demonstrating the boxing prowess of Prince Corin. The story is as follows:

That was how he got his name of Corin Thunder-Fist; and how he performed his great exploit against the Lapsed Bear of Stormness, which was really a Talking Bear but had gone back to Wild Bear habits. Corin climbed up to its lair on the Narnian side of Stormness one winter day when the snow was on the hills and boxed it without a time-keeper for thirty-three rounds. And at the end it couldn't see out of its eyes and became a reformed character.

Clearly the Lapsed Bear is one of Lewis' ba'alei teshuva (repentants) though, a priori, there's not much to glean from his story. However, bears are mentioned one other time in the Horse and His Boy when the Raven quotes an old saying, "See the bear in his own den before you judge of his conditions." And, indeed, this is exactly what Corin did. Rather than taking rumors at face value he went right up to the bear's lair and saw him for what he was. Not only did this allow him to see the truth about the bears behavior, but perhaps it demonstrated a way forward. 

What exactly did Corin see? Well, we don't really know, but Corin apparently perceived that the only way to get through to the bear was to box him. Now, this may sound rather barbaric and it's highly unlikely that this would be proper operating procedure for the sinners of our day, but perhaps surprisingly it worked for Corin. 

Why did boxing help reform the bears character? Because Corin took the time to look. Perhaps, the bear himself understood that Corin took the time to come to his lair to see his condition. Corin didn't make a public stand for Aslan and the ways of Narnia, but instead fought with no time-keeper. No one had to know what had happened and, perhaps, the bear himself realized Corin's sincerity in this. 

Bears. of course, have a quite a history in Narnia, including the Bulgy Bears later to be confirmed in his hereditary office of Marshal of the Lists, and we can continue to explore the Lapsed Bear of Stormness in light of these noble figures.   

The Gnomes of Bism

Prince Rilian is not the only one bewitched by the Lady of the Green Kirtle. The gnomes of Bism were also under her spell. Our first encounter with these gnomes is after our heroes, Eustace, Jill, and Puddleglum, fall down deep into the earth. The gnomes arrive to bring them to the Lady of the Green Kirtle and appear before our heroes, sad and gloomy. They appear so sad, in fact, that, rather than being afraid, Jill’s first reaction is to want to cheer them up. 

Of course, it turns out that the gnomes are not like that at all. Their true nature reawakens when they are freed from the witch’s enchantment, “leaping, turning cart-wheels, standing on their heads, playing leap-frog, and letting off huge crackers,” clearly a playful lot.

The story of the gnomes’ enchanting is not told by Lewis. Perhaps the Lady of the Green Kirtle entered Bism and overpowered the gnomes with her magic. Or perhaps, similar to her enchantment of Rilian, she enticed the gnomes of Bism with power and riches and then was able to seize control of them. Either way, Golg, the gnome who relates the gnomes' story to our heroes, succinctly summarizes the nature of the enchantment:

We didn't know who we were or where we belonged. We couldn't do anything, or think anything, except what she put into our heads.

His description teaches us something about becoming enchanted, and maybe even about becoming enamored or entranced.

The first symptom, or perhaps the first step, to being enchanted is not knowing oneself and one’s purpose. The spiritual danger of loss of self was already commented on by Screwtape (remember Screwtape is a devil, so everything is backwards), “As a preliminary to detaching him from the Enemy [God], you wanted to detach him from himself…” The midrash similarly states, “Just as their faces are unlike each other, so are they unlike in disposition. Rather each and every individual has his own individual disposition.” Loss of individuality dampens the “image of God” which imbues every human. Losing hold of oneself causes confusion in the knowledge of to Whom one truly belongs.

Each gnome looked different and unique, “some had tails and others not, some wore great beards and others had very round, smooth faces, big as pumpkins. There were long, pointed noses, and long, soft noses like small trunks, and great blobby noses. Several had single horns in the middle of their foreheads.” This diversity in appearance could have reflected a vibrance of thoughts and ideas, a multitude of strengths and talents with each individual using their uniqueness (and banding together to reflect a grand panoply) in the service of God. But it didn’t.

The gnomes’ lost identity and purpose allowed the Lady of the Green Kirtle to put into their heads whatever she wanted. She was not concerned with individuality and uniqueness and certainly not interested in the service of God, “But in one respect they [the gnomes] were all alike: every face in the whole hundred was as sad as a face could be.”  

Not surprisingly, the powerful and controlling prefer that the masses be the same and easy to control. To all fall to the lowest common denominator, to be sad and gloomy. Unlike God, Who wants individuals to be sons and serve Him from a sense of love, duty, and responsibility, human tyrants want slaves, with no individuality and no concept of God. Thus, she puts only "glum and gloomy things" there. 

We do not see that the gnomes of Bism recognize Aslan. But once freed and returned to themselves they have, once again, achieved the capacity to realize God.

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: Rilian (Part 2)

It's been too long since we started talking about Rilian and his return to Narnia. See here for our previous post. 

In Isaac Asimov’s Foundation series, we meet Hans Pritcher, a captain in the Foundation’s armed forces known for his incredible abilities and daring, but never promoted due to a streak of rebelliousness. As this was a time of Mayoral tyranny in the Foundation, Pritcher also secretly served the democratic underground. The assent of the Mule, a mutant with extraordinary mental powers, greatly interested Pritcher who immediately and correctly identified him as the greatest threat to the Foundation. Indeed, Terminus (the Foundation capital) is eventually taken by the Mule and Pritcher’s last attempt to assassinate the Mule is foiled. Pritcher is captured and “converted” by the Mule, under whom Pritcher becomes a general and the Mule’s most trusted advisor.

The Mule’s enchantment of Pritcher (unlike the Lady of the Green Kirtle’s enchantment of Rilian) was completely involuntary, and in fact was fought against to the very last. Yet, what happened when the enchantment wore off? What became of Pritcher when the Mule died? He did not return to the Foundation, but instead took over the Mule’s kingdom. He tried, and failed, to be the Mule’s successor to continue the work of his captor. Though Pritcher’s will was no longer bound by the enchantment, the enchantment still controlled him.

The Talmud states, "A man commits a transgression only if a spirit of folly enters him."  Note the Talmud's formulation. Sin occurs when someone is overtaken by something from the outside. The person becomes enchanted with another's spouse (as in the discussion of the Talmud), an object that belongs to someone else, or a foodstuff that does not fit dietary restrictions. No doubt this happens to all of us from time to time despite our best efforts to the contrary. the ultimate question then becomes, what to do when the enchantment wears off? 

Having fallen once do get up, admit to what we have done wrong and try to do better next time? Or do we stay under the enchantment even though it no longer has sway?

Rilian could have crawled back under the enchantment. His thought process would have been, OK, I’m free now, but being a prince (even in name only) with a beautiful Lady at my side isn’t all that bad, and I’ve grown pretty comfortable with it. Maybe we can swing a deal? After all, going back to Narnia will be a lot of work, I don’t know any of the latest fashions (a la Bree) or what's happened to my baseball team, maybe they won’t even want me. 

But he doesn’t do that. Despite his earlier failings Rilian remains true to Aslan and to his people.

In fact, even the one enticement he almost falls speaks to his loyalty.

“My father went to the world's end," said Rilian thoughtfully. "It would be a marvellous thing if his son went to the bottom of the world."

Even here he speaks of following in the footsteps of his father, not following a different path.

Thus, Rilian is a complete repentant and is welcome home to Narnia.

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: Rilian

Moving from Voyage of the Dawn Treader to The Silver Chair we find additional ba’alei teshuva, those who have returned to the true religion and teachings of God. For the sake of these posts, we are not considering those who have done some wrong and repent. From that perspective the entire story of the Silver Chair is one of repentance: Jill showing off and admitting her sin, Jill and Eustace failing the signs, eating the talking stag of Harfang, and much more. Rather, we are interested in individuals who have undergone a momentous change in their worldview, from one that is anti-God or ignorant of Him, to that of a true belief in the Divine.

In the Silver Chair the central penitent is, of course, Prince Rilian. Once the slave and tool of the Lady of the Green Kirtle, Rilian returns to being a worthy prince, and then king, of Narnia. Now, one may quibble with characterizing Rilian as a penitent. After all, he was enchanted by the Lady of the Green Kirtle and forced to do her bidding. He was not responsible for his actions and thus never a sinner in the first place. Let us analyze this and see where the culpability lies. We might find our own experiences in Rilian’s story.

Prince Rilian is the only son of his father the great King Caspian the Seafarer and his mother the Queen, the Star’s daughter. While on a pleasure trip in the northern part of Narnia as a young knight, Rilian’s mother is killed by a huge venomous worm. He appears to have sworn vengeance against the worm and for days returns to the place of his mother’s death to hunt for it. 

However, after about a month Rilian started to change. Though he continued to ride out every day, it no longer seemed that he was tired and worn out from seeking the worm. Rilian takes into his confidence the Lord Drinian who rides with Rilian to the place of the Queen’s death. There he sees the most beautiful lady beckoning the young prince. The next day Rilian disappears, presumably having followed the lady into either unknown lands or to his death.

Of course, we know what actually happened. The lady was the Lady of Green Kirtle, Queen of the Underland. She casts an enchantment over Rilian such that he no longer remembers who he is - except for an hour every day and during that time he is bound to a magical Silver Chair. He remains under the enchantment until he is saved from the Silver Chair by Puddleglum, Eustace, and Jill.

With that as background, let us return to our question. Is Rilian a ba’al teshuva (a repentant)? Or is he someone who was forced against his will to forget the proper upbringing of his youth? It is true that he was under an enchantment, but the first move towards evil, the initial step away from God, was on his own volition.

How often do we experience this ourselves? How often does one wrong turn, one mistake in judgement lead inexorably down a steep slope of moral degeneracy that we feel unable to escape from? On that slide we lose our way and no longer remember who we are and what we are meant to represent. Still, even in that state, every once in a while, we wake up, we remember our true selves and what we ought to be. But we feel that our hands are tied, that we are unable to escape. Is it true? Are the bonds really that strong? Could we not free ourselves had we sincerely wanted to?

Rilian, as we know, cannot do it on his own, but he is sent help. Three saviors cut his cords, freeing him to return to himself. At that moment he still has a choice. By making the right choice he can become a loyal servant of Aslan, but the wrong choice will force him back under the enchantment.

We will return to this in our next.

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: Eustace (Part 4)

We’ve spent the past few posts discussing Eustace’s transformation from “an ass” to a hero of Narnia. The climax of this transformation is the undressing of his dragon shell by Aslan and his subsequent baptism in the mountain well. A priori, this scene is based on the verses in Ezekiel (11:19 and 36:26) in which God says he will remove the people’s hearts of stone and replace them with hearts of flesh. Only then will they be able to return to following in God’s ways. Similarly, Eustace the dragon cannot undress himself. Aslan must do it. Eustace recalls that Aslan first makes a tear, “so deep that I thought it had gone right into my heart,” and after his baptism Eustace transforms back into a boy.

There is, however, a reversal of chronology between Ezekiel and Eustace. In Ezekiel the people have sinned, they have not repented. God’s intervention enables the people to follow God’s ways and save His Name from desecration. The people themselves have no desire to repent, God must spur them to do so.

Perhaps surprisingly then, the actual parallel to God’s ‘heart transplant’ is not Eustace un-becoming a dragon, but Eustace becoming a dragon! As a dragon Eustace changes his ways. As a dragon Eustace perceives the wrong he has done. As a dragon Eustance follows the ways of a true repentant as outlined by Maimonides. Had Eustace been transformed back into a boy without meeting Aslan all evidence suggests he would have remained a penitent and, with the guidance of his cousins, Caspian, and Reepicheep, would have come to recognize Aslan. So, why have the meeting in the first place?

In our last post I suggested that perhaps this differentiated (Lewis’) Christianity and (my) Judaism. Lewis requires a repentant to have a direct encounter with God before full acceptance into the faith. I don’t believe Judaism has such a demand. Of course, one cannot be a religious Jew without recognizing God. However, the inspiration and path to becoming religious need not be a particularly direct revelation from God. Rather, the path may traverse tradition and history, or even nature and science.

Eustace's return was catalyzed by his transformation into a dragon. His subsequent path towards God was not due to direct revelation but by his understanding the good in helping others. He looked outwards from himself and eventually that would bring him back to God. Lewis provides Eustace with an (unnecessary in my mind) shortcut via revelation from Aslan. 

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: Eustace (Part 3)

Eustace’s transformation from a dragon back into a boy is, without question, a quintessential moment of spiritual cleansing modeled after the verse “And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh” (Ezekiel 36:26). However, it is as a dragon that Eustace becomes a repentant. True, he has not yet apologized for his misdeeds (a necessary step in attaining forgiveness for sins between man and his fellow), but already as a dragon his character changes significantly. “It was, however, clear to everyone that Eustace's character had been rather improved by becoming a dragon. He was anxious to help.”

Actually, it is as a dragon that Eustace follows the way of a repentant. In our last post on Eustace, we quoted the ways of repentance outlined by Maimonides. Here they are in his words (translated to English):

Among the ways of repentance are, for the penitent to continue to cry out in tearful supplication before the Name, to bestow alms according to his means, and to distance himself exceedingly from the thing wherein he sinned, to have his identity changed, as if saying: "I am now another person, and not that person who perpetrated those misdeeds", to completely change his conduct for the good and straight path, and to exile himself from his place of residence, for exile atones iniquity, because it leads him to submissiveness and to be meek and humble-spirited.

Let’s see how Eustace follows (more or less) these ways:

1. “Cry out in tearful supplication” - Eustace cries when first meeting his comrades as a dragon
2. “To bestow alms according to his means” - Eustace brings back many goat and swine carcasses as provisions for the ship
3. “To distance himself exceedingly from the thing wherein he sinned” - Eustace was ashamed to be with others against whom he had sinned
4. “To have his identity changed” - Eustace was transformed into a dragon
5. “Change his conduct for the good and straight path” - Eustace's character had been rather improved by becoming a dragon
6. “Exile himself from his place of residence” - Eustace is exiled from England into the world of Narnia

And so, partly via a change of heart and partly due to events that were outside of his control, Eustace follows Maimonides’ ways of repentance.

This leaves us a bit of a quandary. While a dragon Eustace is already acting like a penitent. Were the spell such that the moment Eustace repented he would be immediately transformed back into a boy, he would have transformed and become a different, and better, boy. But that’s not what happens, first Eustace needs to meet Aslan. Why?

I wonder if it is here that Judaism and Christianity part ways. Given that all of what we do depends on God's help. Still, how much direct intervention from God is necessary? Was Aslan's direct intervention necessary to change Eustace's heart? It doesn't appear that way. Eustace could have been an evil dragon. He could have sought revenge against Edmund, Caspian, and Reepicheep. But he doesn't because he realizes the error of his ways.

He could get even with Caspian and Edmund now. But the moment he thought this he realized that he didn't want to. He wanted to be friends. He wanted to get back among humans and talk and laugh and share things. He realized that he was a monster cut off from the whole human race. An appalling loneliness came over him. He began to see that the others had not really been fiends at all. He began to wonder if he himself had been such a nice person as he had always supposed.

All of this is done without direct intervention by Aslan.

In fact, in Ezekiel, God's intervention allows for a change of heart.  Aslan's direct intervention comes after Eustace's change of heart. 

We'll explore this further in our next post. 

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: Eustace (Part 2)

The conversion of Eustace comes on Dragon Island. It is there that Eusatce is transformed into a dragon and then de-dragonned by Aslan himself. However, we have a glimpse of an improved Eustace even before this fateful encounter.

The Dawn Treader lands on Dragon Island on the heels of almost two weeks of violent storms. The storms have left the Dawn Treader a “crippled discolored hulk” and already immediately upon landing a huge amount of work needed to be done. Eustace, of course, is not interested in participating and decides to sneak off to a place in the mountains to rest. The climb was not an easy one but he plugged away.

It is here that Lewis makes the following remark:

This showed, by the way, that his new life, little as he suspected it, had already done him some good; the old Eustace, Harold and Alberta's Eustace, would have given up the climb after about ten minutes.

In other words, Eustace’s process towards conversion had already begun. How? What was it that made him no longer the “old Eustace”?

Maimonides (Teshuva 2:4) (based on the Talmud) outlines the paths towards repentance. The last is that the repentant is exiled from his place. Maimonides explains that exile causes someone to be humble and low of spirit. Eustace was certainly exiled from his home to a land he could have even imagined. However, it does not appear he has been very humbled. In fact, his pride shows through even after the end of the storm when attempts to steal water.

Still, Eustace does undergo some humiliating experiences. He is publicly chastised by Caspian for stealing water, and is demonstrably not trusted by Caspian and the crew of the Dawn Treader. His hand is skewered by Reepicheep. He is offered as a slave and no one wants him (a scenario described as the final curse in the rebuke section of Deutoronomy 28:68). Perhaps these experiences left him with more humility and hence more resilience in the face of the obstacles.

Furthermore, Eustace has, if even by osmosis, been experiencing “the right kind of books.” He has heard stories of adventure and courage, of bravery and honor. Perhaps some of this has seeped into his unconscious. Or, perhaps it is simply the hardships he has suffered (and he has certainly suffered) that just gave him greater strength to overcome adversity.

In Screwtape Proposes a Toast, Screwtape (a senior demon) asserts, “The great (and tooth-some) sinners are made out of the very same material as those horrible phenomena, the great Saints.” In Eustace, the first step towards repentance is not, cannot be to make him a saint. The first step is to grow the material. True, the material can be used for sin (would the old Eustace have been brave enough to steal water in the first place?). But that material can be transformed for good. And the suffering, embarrassment, and environment experienced on the Dawn Treader moves begins this growth.

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: Eustace (Part 1)

There was a boy called Eustace Clarence Scrubb, and he almost deserved it

The second great penitent of the Narnian Chronicles is Eustace Clarence Scrubb. We are introduced to Eustace, the cousin of the four Pevensie children, at the very beginning of The Voyage of the Dawn Treader:

There was a boy called Eustace Clarence Scrubb, and he almost deserved it… He didn't call his Father and Mother "Father" and "Mother", but Harold and Alberta. They were very up-to-date and advanced people. They were vegetarians, non-smokers and teetotallers and wore a special kind of underclothes.

Lewis’ disgust with Eustace and the environment in which he was raised is immediately obvious.

Continuing further in the first chapter we find that Eustace never read the right kind of books (he read books with information, not of adventure and fantasy), that deep-down he liked bullying people, and had little imagination. In The Silver Chair we learn that he would constantly curry favor and dance attendance for the school bullies.

Eustace’s behavior on the Dawn Treader reflects his upbringing and personality. He views himself as far superior to others, he is impossible to satisfy, and he is quick to point out what’s wrong in any situation but refuses any attempt to solve anything. Borrowing from our previous definitions, we would say he is the very opposite of valiant.

Despite these very negative characteristics it would be a stretch to say Eustace is evil. He is stuck-up, immature, a whiner (kvetch), and a spoiled brat, but not evil. In fact, in his own eyes he’s a pretty good guy. This point is underscored by contrasting Eustace with Edmund. In fact, it is Edmund himself who makes the contrast: “Between ourselves, you haven't been as bad as I was on my first trip to Narnia. You were only an ass, but I was a traitor.”

One might think being an ass rather than a traitor would make penitence easier for Eustace than it was for Edmund. Via Screwtape, Lewis tells us this is not so, “The great (and tooth- some) sinners are made out of the very same material as those horrible phenomena, the great Saints.” To turn from sinner to saint one needs a change of direction. But how does one create a saint from a soul that is small and flabby (paraphrasing Screwtape)? From those whose minds are so muddled they do not understand the source of character of the prohibitions they are breaking? And indeed, at the beginning of the Voyage of the Dawn Treader, Eustace considers himself a good person who tries to help others by showing them the facts.

How does one resurrect such a soul?

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: Trumpkin

An interesting twist of teshuva or religious renewal is when the subject that instigated the renewal is itself not a believer. For some, renewal is sparked by the beauty of the Heavens, the intensity of an experience, or the intricacies of logic. In these situations there need not be a sentient being in the renewal process. However, in other situations it is a fellow human who helps or sparks the renewal. What happens if that fellow loses, or never held, the beliefs or religion that he caused to flower?

The mishna in Ethics of the Fathers addresses this point stating, “One who brings many to righteousness will not come to sin.” The gmara explains, “Such that he should not be in Hell while his students are in Heaven.” Not surprisingly, the commentaries wrestle with how this can be accorded with the doctrine of free will, but that is not our issue at the moment.

Lewis may be attempting to contend with this issue in Prince Caspian. To review, Caspian has long been emotionally attached to the stories of Old Narnia told by his Nurse, and is surprised and delighted when they are verified by Doctor Cornelius, his tutor. However, he is not sure of the continued existence of Old Narnia until his sudden flight from the royal castle ends at the home of actual Old Narnians: Trufflehunter the Badger, Trumpkin the Red Dwarf, and Nikabrik the Black Dwarf. It is in their home where we are witness to the following exchange:

"Do you believe all those old stories?" asked Trumpkin.

"I tell you, we don't change, we beasts," said Trufflehunter. "We don't forget. I believe in the High King Peter and the rest that reigned at Cair Paravel, as firmly as I believe in Aslan himself."

"As firmly as that, I dare say," said Trumpkin. "But who believes in Aslan nowadays?"

"I do," said Caspian. "And if I hadn't believed in him before, I would now. Back there among the Humans the people who laughed at Aslan would have laughed at stories about Talking Beasts and Dwarfs. Sometimes I did wonder if there really was such a person as Aslan: but then sometimes I wondered if there were really people like you. Yet there you are."

To Caspian, the mere existence of Old Narnia proves the existence of Aslan. But Trumpkin (and Nikabrik) themselves do not believe in Aslan.

The story of Caspian’s revolt unfolds very differently for two non-believing dwarves. Despite his (unwilling) role in bringing Caspian to the truth of Aslan, Nikabrik is unable to himself recognize Aslan. His arrogance and thirst for power ensure that he cannot trust and could never blindly follow another. Had Caspian met only Nikabrik his momentary belief in Aslan would likely have dissipated. Nikabrik hated Caspian, could not see the good in him, and therefore could never be a true teacher. Nikabrik’s Old Narnians would be no better than the conquering Telmarines.

Yet, even for Nikabrik all is not lost, as Caspian says, “I am sorry for Nikabrik though he hated me from the first moment he saw me. He had gone sour inside from long suffering and hating. If we had won quickly he might have become a good Dwarf in the days of peace.” Thus, Peter allows Nikabrik to be buried with his people.

Trumpkin, however, swears loyalty to Caspian and proves a worthy subject even when he disagrees with the king. Hence, he is willing to travel to Cair Paravel to search for assistance that may be divinely sent even though he doubts the possibility of such an event. He explains, “You are my King. I know the difference between giving advice and taking orders. You've had my advice, and now it's the time for orders.”

It is no wonder that Trumpkin is one of only three ‘valiant’ characters in the Chronicles! His bravery, trust, and child-like willingness to jump into the unknown pays great dividends. He meets the Pevensie children and eventually Aslan himself. Trumpkin’s properly placed loyalty to an earthly king allows him to actuate loyalty to the True King. The unwitting teacher became the trusted student.

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: Caspian the Tenth

Prince Caspian (the second book of the Chronicles of Narnia, if one is following the proper order) contains a number of stories of spiritual renewal and teshuva. We will first quickly consider King Caspian the Tenth who is brought up in the darkness of Telmarine society, and awakens to its vacuity upon learning of the true origin and destiny of Narnia. Other such stories in Prince Caspian include that of Trumpkin the dwarf who repents his denial of the existence of Aslan, and even Susan repents for her initial doubts of Lucy’s visions.

While perhaps not enlightening concerning the characters themselves, we find it valuable to compare and contrast Caspian with the most outstanding repentant in the Voyage of the Dawn Treader, Eustace Clarence Scrubb. Both Caspian and Eustace are raised by skeptics. Caspian by his uncle Miraz and Eustace by his parents Harold and Alberta. Miraz outlawed the teaching of, and even the mention of, earlier Narnian history which by his time had retreated to myths and legends. He doubted the existence of lions and talking beasts and scoffed at the idea of a joint rule between brothers and sisters. Eustace, of course, is raised by Harold and Alberta who were “very up-to-date and advanced people.” So advanced and up to date that they leave Eustace with no imagination and little ability to dream.

There is, however, a major factor that differentiates the two. Caspian has a nurse who tells him stories of the olden days while Eustace has none. It appears that it is for this reason, that when confronted with Old Narnia, Caspian immediately is on board and supports them over his fellow Telmarines. When Eustace is confronted with Narnia he doesn’t know what to think. In fact, he’s quite sure it’s all a ruse and only a tortuous and painful procedure teaches him to think otherwise. We will return to Eustace later, but let’s spend a short amount of time on King Caspian the Seafarer, Tenth of that name.

How does Caspian, the boy everyone thought would be the next leader of the Telmarines in Narnina, morph into the champion of Old Narnia? What process allowed him to abandon his own people’s morality and ethics for that of (what is effectively) a foreign culture. The answer is, the stories of his nurse. Those stories made a far deeper impression on the young Caspian than all of his later studies in history, cosmography, and heraldry. Those stories remained alive within Caspian even as his nurse was dismissed and Dr. Cornelius took her place, and, under his tutelage the stories were transformed into history, ethics, and theology. Thus, it is the nurse and the tutor who gain the trust of the young Caspian and shape his worldview from that of a typical aristocratic Telmarine, into that of a savior for Old Narnia.

It is interesting to note a possible parallel between Caspian and Moses, the greatest of all prophets. Both were raised in the castle of the enemy of the Chosen People. Both were taught of the true worth of the downtrodden and what would be their glorious end: Caspian by his nurse and Moses either by his nursemaid (his genetic mother) or his adopted mother the daughter of the Pharaoh. Both run from the castle as they are likely to be sentenced for death, and reemerge as the champion for those downtrodden people they were taught to respect. Both initially doubted the success of their ultimate goal but were convinced to take on their leadership position. Finally, both were turned away from their Promised Land, Moses on the banks of the Jordan and Caspian at the edge of the Silver Sea.

What catalyzed Caspian? What propelled him to go to war with a band of woodland creatures against a great national power? The stories of his nurse. Stories are powerful, stories allow children to dream and adults to strive to reach those dreams. So, in our next post we will take a quick detour to explore the storyteller: Caspian’s nurse, or perhaps, C. S. Lewis.

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: Edmund (Part 3)

Edmund himself initiates his process of repentance. True he does so only when having found himself in a much worse scenario than he had expected. He had assumed he would be welcomed by the Queen of Narnia a son, but instead was worked as a slave. Certainly this situational repentance does not fit Maimonides' definition of a full repentant: one who finds himself in the exact situation of when he sinned and this time chooses against sin. Nonetheless, that first opening is vital as it allows God to expand His presence in a person's heart, as explained in the midrash in the name of R' Yassa:  

The Holy One Blessed be He said to Israel, my sons! Open to me in repentance even a doorway like the eye of a needle and I will open to you doorways that even wagons and carriages can pass through.

Summarizing, God promises that if one is willing to open their hearts to repentance even by the smallest of amounts, He will open their hearts the rest of the way. Edmund opened his heart slightly. First, he felt bad only for himself, but that emotion led him to differentiate between good (his siblings) and evil (the White Witch). Having identified evil, he began to sympathize, perhaps even empathize with the poor animals turned to stone by the White Witch. Finally, Aslan brings him the rest of the way,  to become a true repentant. 

Having achieved a full turnaround it is indeed not necessary for others to talk to Edmund about his past. This too is famously codified by Maimonides: 

It is, nevertheless, a grievous sin to say to the penitent: "Remember your erstwhile conduct", or to remind them in his presence so as to put him to shame, or to mention things and subjects similar to them so as to remind him of what he did.

Nonetheless, repentance of sins between man and his fellow is not achieved by talking even to God Himself. One must confront the person he sinned against and ask for forgiveness (Maimonides, Hilkhot Teshuva 2:9). Hence, despite Edmund's achievement of repentance and Aslan's assertion that there is no need to talk of the past, that is only with respect to the sins against Aslan. However, Edmund must still seek forgiveness from his sibling who he betrayed.  

This also allows us to understand when Aslan himself brings up Edmund's past, urging Lucy to go on and heal others by rebuking, "Must more people die for Edmund?" Aslan himself does not hold a grudge having accepted Edmund's repentance completely. However, Edmund still owes an apology and must ask for forgiveness from each individual whose life was lost, or even made more difficult, due to his treacherous actions.  

Can Edmund ever hope to achieve such forgiveness? How can one who directly harms hundreds or thousands of unnamed individuals find every single one of them and beg for absolution his sin? The answer, of course, is that he cannot. Yet, perhaps there is another way. One who has harmed a society can, achieve repentance by improving that society. Hence, Edmund becomes King Edmund the Just, "great in council and judgement." In this way, by contributing to society and to any part of society who approaches him, can Edmund achieve full repentance.  

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: Edmund (Part 2)

In our last post, we listed a few questions with respect to the repentance experienced by Edmund and suggested that perhaps a Jewish perspective on teshuva would help us interpret the story. In this post, we start that interpretation.

The Talmud (Pesachim 54a) tells us that there are seven ideas or concepts that precede Creation. These are: Torah, Repentance (Teshuva), the Garden of Eden, Hell, God’s Throne of Honor, the Temple and the name of the Messiah. All of these are integral to God’s plan for the universe. A universe in which humans have guidance from God but free will enables reward and punishment. However, none of these concepts arise from cosmology and the laws of nature.

The White Witch understood the laws of nature. Not just the physical laws, but she also understood the principles of sociology and civilization. A traitor, one who rebels against his master or his clan, must be expelled. What other option is there? How could anyone look such a person in the eye and again accept him as a fellow? How could a civilization take the risk of not punishing such a breach?

God, however, peers back before Creation where He has formulated the concept of repentance, teshuva. A regretted action can be nullified and the breach can be repaired as if it never occurred. The Stone Table, the tablets on which the laws of nature are recorded, cracks under the divine mandate: man’s ability to violate the arrow of time, to go back and erase an action.

Edmund experienced all of this. His sin was wiped away so thoroughly that he did not even comprehend that the discussion of the traitor centered on him. But he clearly had help: he was saved from the clutches of the White Witch by Aslan’s search and rescue party and was then brought to understanding via a conversation with Aslan himself. However, this too has its sources in Jewish lore as we will discuss in our next.

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva: Edmund

The first character in the Chronicles to experience spiritual renewal is Edmund. Having been saved from the White Witch and after a talk with Aslan, Edmund utterly rejected his former ways so much so that Aslan asserted, there was no further need to talk about the past. 

Yet, the unmerciful, non-spiritual, world is not so easily appeased. The White Witch demands that Edmund be killed as a traitor, and, by law, she is correct. One who has sinned cannot escape justice and punishment simply due to a change of heart. Only because the White Witch is willing to accept a replacement is Edmund saved. The trade, of course, is for Aslan himself and his subsequent murder is clearly symbolic of the Christian worldview that the death of God’s Son achieves Grace for humanity. For it is only through this willing sacrifice that man can rise from the carnal and achieve salvation.

Edmund himself recognizes the truth of this and later describes Aslan to Eustace saying, “He is the great Lion, the son of the Emperor-beyond-the-Sea, who saved me and saved Narnia.” 

There are, however, some points to note: 

1. Though salvation only comes to Edmund due to the sacrifice of Aslan, Edmund himself already showed signs of remorse before this. Upon reaching the palace of the White Witch and having betrayed his siblings, Edmund is finally confronted with the true evil of the White Witch. He is filled with remorse, and looks back at his former actions as the lie that they truly are. Would Aslan have saved Edmund without this penitence? Would the sacrifice have been made for one not worthy of Grace?

2. Despite Aslan’s statement that there is no need to talk to Edmund about the past, Edmund apologizes to all of his siblings, and his apology is accepted. Is this part of achieving Grace or simply an act of politeness? 

3. Aslan pressures Lucy into visiting others of the wounded by rhetorically asking, “Must more people die for Edmund?” This clearly invokes the past even though there is no need to speak to Edmund about it. 

4. Edmund grows up to become King Edmund the Just, “great in council and judgement.” How much of this growth can be attributed to his experience as a traitor and a returnee?

While not able to address all of these issues, perhaps the Jewish view of teshuva, repentance, can shed light on the salvation of Edmund.

Narnian Ba'alei Teshuva

My apologies for not posting recently as it's been a busy summer. 

Some quick topics for discussion as we approach the Days of Awe with their emphasis on teshuva (returning to worship of God and the fulfillment of his commandments). The Chronicles of Narnia feature many ba'alei teshuva (those experience this spiritual renewal): main characters such as Edmund, Trumpkin, Eustace, Shasta, and Aravis, and more minor characters like Puzzle and the lapsed bear of Stormness. Each comes with a different story and each can teach us something about renewing our relationship with God. 

How to their stories differ, how are they the same?

What can we learn from each story? 

What role (if any) does Aslan play in each return? 

Think about it, we'll discuss soon.