The idea of this project appeared many years ago when I just emigrated from the former Soviet Union with my family and had my first visit to the University of Pennsylvania. At that time I was applying to the graduate school to receive my Ph.D. in Russian Literature and I also had a very deep interest in philosophical approaches to art and life. All that predisposed - and now I use this term in a very precise meaning as the opposite of fate or chance - my meeting with a great man, a brilliant thinker who possessed a curiosity of a child, a mind of a wise man, and a vision of a genius. Aron Katsenelinboigen, one of the most sparkling minds of Wharton's professors, became my teacher, and later my colleague and a Dear Friend.

That first meeting was held in a Chinese Restaurant on campus, and the choice of food, the atmosphere, and the like seemed quite exotic for a recent émigré. But the most exotic part of the lunch was a conversation that put the beginning to our friendship and mutual work. So, what was it that amazed both of us? For me, it was Aron's unique concept of a developing god. It was nothing religious about that discussion. We discussed the Torah as a literary text, not a religious one, and we did it mainly to analyze what was behind the mentality of those who wrote and translated the Torah.

The first three questions that Aron discussed that day were the following:

1)      Why didn't God create the universe instantly? Why did it take six days?

2)      Why didn't God state in detail his plan or program for the creation of the universe, if it is a prolonged process?

3)      Why did God act in stages, every time announcing the purpose of each stage?

Aron's main point was that God had no program while He started the creation.

Otherwise, He would do everything at once, and, besides, he would not need to evaluate his every step, making sure that it was good (beautiful). Indeed, you would not need that if you have a complete and consistent program that you simply apply to the entire process of creation. Later, in his book, 18 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CONCERNING THE TORAH, Aron increased the numbers of questions, elaborating his concept of an indeterministic developing God. The answers given in the book suggested that as a creator God used a method that Aron proposed to call predispositioning. According to Aron's concept, a predispositioning as a method refers to an intermediate stage between two extremes - a complete chaos and a complete order. It signifies a semi-order in its various degrees. This concept was based on the analysis of styles and methods in the game of chess and successfully applied to business, economics, biology, and psychology. By that that time Aron already published more than ten books on his Predispositioning Theory, developing it in different fields of knowledge.

Needless to say, I was absolutely fascinated by his way of thinking, especially because, at that time, I had my own questions regarding the Creation, but it was only owing to his concept that I could see the answers clearer and continue working on them. So, my questions were the following. First of all, I questioned the traditional interpretation of the ban. Indeed, if Adam was created as a ploughman then why God asked him to perform the action that only He Himself could do? Naming of creatures and plants was a procedure that required intellect, knowledge and creativity. At some point, it was equal to the process of creation. Thus, on the one hand, God prepared Adam to creativity and curiosity. On the other hand, he forbade him to touch the Fruit. Moreover, He planted the Tree in the middle of Eden to expose it to Adam! Did He try to tempt Adam indirectly? If so then He must have His reasons. What were they? Aron liked those questions very much.

So, my main statement was that God needed his creation to be able to develop, and for that, all programs and bans should have been violated. At the same time, the violation of the rules should not have turned the system to chaos. Adam, however, appeared to be too obedient and merely fulfilled God's orders unquestioningly. If God expected from Adam a different behavior then He must nave been disappointed because any creator develops through his creation and if this does not happen then he must create something new. So Eve appeared.

The creation of Eve, at this, point, could be interpreted as God's another attempt to create a human being who would be more predisposed to exploring the surrounding world.

But who were angels in that scheme? As is known, no myth about creation of Angels exists. So, it's still unclear how those winged creatures appeared and when. Aron's Predispositioning Theory, however, gave me an idea about how to approach this "dark spot" in the genesis of divinities.

As known, in mythology angels are God's helpers and messengers. They never discuss with God His intentions. Nor do they debate or criticize Him. Those who did had immediately become fallen. Thus, we can mainly see two types of angels which signify two extremes - a complete order and a complete disorder. Extremes, however, don't develop.

So, if to assume that God wanted to develop through his creations then angels could be viewed as God's first unsuccessful attempt to create intellectual creatures. Any attempt to move beyond God's will caused their "breakage" and so they turned to fallen ones. That seemed to be the reason why God made another attempt to create something less programmed than his winged first-born. So he created human beings, increasing the degree of their freedom from Adam to Eve. 

This myth of the creation of angels became the basis form my book "About Angels, About God, About Poetry," published years later with our dialogue (Livingston, 2002). The story in the book is told by a scholar who wants to receive his Master's in "whatever field of study." This adds the humorous tone to his pseudo-scientific research of the world of divinities. The tone that we tried to preserve for the film is a synthesis of arts and pseaudo-science.

The film is dedicated to the memory of Aron Katsenelinboigen who unfortunately did not have a chance to see the completed project.

Vera Zubarev (V. Ulea)

University of Pennsylvania