Mana Lore

This paper was written in answer to the following question. This was my Judaism section paper in my Seminar in Sacred Sources class. I thought I had come to an interesting conclusion and felt it was worth publishing.

"It can be argued that the Jewish concept of God is at least partially encapsulated in the tension or oscillation between divine transcendence and immanence.  Write an essay that summarizes the Jewish concept of God, with a focus on this key tension."

            The Jewish concept of God is described throughout all the holy scriptures of the tradition in a dynamic and sometimes inconsistent fashion. There are many issues that arise when contemplating the nature of the divine, most noticeably anthropomorphism: the tendency to relate God to man’s image and psychology. Is God transcendent, immanent, or both? If described as a person, wouldn’t God be immanent, permeating the world? If he is infinitely greater than us, how could he step down into our profane existence? How could we even fathom the form of God, if God had a form, or even contemplate the idea that God has an infinite form? The reason for this imagery can be found throughout Jewish sacred texts. One example comes from the primary sourcebook during the biblical period, The Pentateuch. In Genesis it is written,

 

“This is the written account of Adam's line.

When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God.”

“When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth.” (Gen. 5:1-3)

 

This statement implies that there is a likeness of God for man to be created. Likeness is sometimes referred to as image and can mean many things. It is evidence of God’s immanence in the world. It can portray how God conceptualized mankind, or it could represent a copy or similarity of the Holy One itself. The parallel between Adam having a son in his own likeness and image, right after stating that God created man in a similar fashion would imply that Adam was another variation of God’s image just like a child is a variation of the image between two parents. The main difference, however, is that Adam was birthed or created by a being of unity, not duality.

            However, my assumption of creation or birth through unity can be argued within the following excerpt:

“Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.’

So God created man in his own image,
 in the image of God he created him;
 male and female he created them.” (Gen. 1:26-27)

Here it clearly states that Man was created in the image of a being referring to itself through plurality. Rationally, it does not make sense for a unified being to give offspring which would be a variation of its own form, because its form has no variation, and has infinite variation at once to logically maintain unity. But God is considered to be the one and only one God, so how can this be? How can a unified being generate dualistic creation? One explanation is mentioned in Steven Katz’s section on Torah, suggesting that it was God and the Torah that made man (Tanh. Pekudei, 3).[i]

            Discussing immanence and transcendence, it is interesting to note the implications of the above statement of Torah and God. The Torah appears to be immanent and transcendent in the same form which God is commonly described. Katz quotes Eleazar ben Shammua saying: “‘Were it not for the Torah, heaven and earth would not continue to exist.’ God himself was said to study the Torah daily (Av. Zar. 3b, et al.).”[ii] The Torah was often believed to have existed before creation. Where would the Torah exist before such a period? It is believed to have remained a divine thought preexisting creation and manifesting during and after creation.[iii] Rabbi Shim’on proclaims:

“So this story of Torah is the garment of Torah.

Whoever thinks that the garment is the real Torah

And not something else-may his spirit deflate!

He will have no portion in the world that is coming.

That is why David said:

‘Open my eyes, so I can see wonders out of your Torah,’

What is under the garment of Torah” (Zohar 3:152a)[iv]

 

In the Zohar Torah is seen as something beyond words and stories. The Torah is constantly mentioned as transcending the material. Being an instrument sent to Israel by God, one could argue for God’s dual state as immanent and transcendent. God is able to communicate, utilize, and create with the Torah in both the physical and immaterial worlds. It has existed with God since before creation and time, of which as Abraham Ibn Ezra explains: “time is merely an accident of motion and since there was no motion before creation, the Torah could not have preceded the world by even a moment.”[v] I would argue that the Torah is a construct of God, before creation and time, by which God is able to overcome its own infinitude and construct something other than itself, and yet remain within that construct. Torah is man’s link to God on earth and in heaven. It is a tool by which immanence and transcendence can coexist without paradox.

In the Babylonian Talmud there is another method toward dealing with the paradox of an immanent and transcendent God. It is that God does not fully reveal itself to creation but allows itself to dwell on the fringes of the dividing line between heaven and earth:

             “And we have learned in another Boraitha: R. Jose said that the Shekhina never descended, and Moses and Elijah never ascended the heaven. As it is written [Psalms, cxv. 16]: "The heavens are the heavens of the Lord, but the earth hath he given to the children of man"; but is it not written [Ex. xix. 20]: "And the Lord came down upon Mount Sinai"? And the answer is, that He did not come down lower than ten spans from the ground.” (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sukkah, 5a)

 

In this example God descends partially. God is able to communicate with man and display immanence while yet retaining transcendence. What has always been interesting to me is God’s intent in purposefully limiting himself. In a way, it makes sense because if God were not to limit itself there would be nothing but itself as described in Lurianic Kabbalah’s Etz Chayyim:

           

“…before the emanations were emanated and the creations created, a most supreme, simple light filled the whole of existence. There was no vacant place, no aspect of empty space or void, but everything was filled by that simple light of the Infinite.”[vi]

            “There remained an empty place between the light that was inside the space and the light of the Infinite that encircles it. If this had not been the case, it would have returned to what it had been, and the light inside the space would have returned and rejoined the infinite just as it was in the beginning”[vii] 

           

            Although the above passages come from a 16^th century mystical Jewish text it logically explains the reason God would limit itself. There must always be a boundary between creation and its creator. However, even Lurianic Kabbalah proposes a divine ray of light which emanates divine will into creation, effectively establishing an immanent yet limited aspect of the Supreme Being within our world.[viii]

            Focusing again on anthropomorphism, the concept is consistently under scrutiny. In Katz’s section on anthropomorphism, he claims that opposition to anthropomorphism is clearly shown in the Decalogue.[ix] There are various expressions which promote that “nothing can be compared to God, who has no form or shape, cannot be seen, is eternal and without end.”[x] The Torah is rife with contradicting statements when describing the nature of God. In the following excerpts God is proclaimed to be not like man, yet afterwards is attributed the human emotion of grief. God is portrayed as having both an emotional and physical heart, as well as the capability to feel pain.

 

“He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a man, that he should change his mind." (I Sam. 15:29)

 

“The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain.” (Gen 6:6)

 

Kabbalah tries to explain this paradox of anthropomorphism, whether God has a body or not, by proposing that the paradox exists because God is infinite, and beyond the corporeal understanding of human beings. God has both existences because God does not bind to our form of logic or our form of existence. This is the essence of transcendence, to be so great that one can be anything including immanent. The beginning of the ‘Idra Zutta describes in detailed formulation, this concept:

 

“The Holy Ancient One, the Most Concealed of all the Concealed, who is separated from everything and yet not separated, for everything is connected to Him and He is connected to everything. He is everything; the Ancient of Ancients, the Concealed of the Concealed, who has shape and yet has no shape. He has shape in order to maintain the universe, and yet has no shape because He does not exist. When He assumed shape, He produced nine blazing lights from His shape, and these lights shine out of Him and spread continuously on all sides, like a lamp from which light spreads on all sides; but when one approaches these lights in order to know them, there is nothing there but the lamp alone. Thus, the holy ancient one: He is a mystical lamp, Concealed of all the Concealed, knowable only through those lights which spread out from him, reveal, and instantly conceal again. And these lights are called the Holy Name of God, and that is why everything is one.” (Zohar, III, 228a)[xi]

 

            The concept described above is quite paradoxical and requires a person to accept the understanding of the unknowable nature of God. Even so, there are further Kabbalistic texts that take anthropomorphism to another level entirely, ignoring the incomprehensibility of God and attempting a description through human measurement. In the Shi’ur Komah, God is described in extremely large measurements (millions of parsa’ot), from his fingers to his body.[xii] The numbers are outrageous but, when written and discussed, perform a different function than one would think. The calculations, despite being anthropomorphic in nature, do nothing to enhance man’s comprehension of the divine body. In fact, they establish the realization of how incomprehensible God really is. Especially during the period in which it was written, there was no way a human being could fathom a being of such huge and almost infinite proportions. It elevates and distances God from man’s realm of comprehension.[xiii]

            Aside from Kabbalah, the Torah attributes obvious anthropomorphic traits to God. At times, it even refers to the hidden traits in the same passage.  I have noticed however that there seems to be a tendency toward anthropomorphism of the earth, inanimate creatures, and societies as a whole when applying the paradigm to God. It is possible that when speaking in anthropomorphic terms entire passages should be taken metaphorically…similarly to the garment that was previously quoted. God’s anthropomorphic traits, as well as other objects’ anthropomorphic traits, can be found in the following passage:

 

“And a brightness appeareth as the light; rays hath He at His side; and there is the hiding of His power. Before him goeth the pestilence, and fiery bolts go forth at His feet. He standeth and shaketh the earth, He beholdeth and maketh the nations to tremble; and the everlasting mountains are dashed in pieces, the ancient hills do bow, His goings are as of old.” (Habakuk 3:4)

 

            What does all of this say about the Jewish Concept of God? That God is ineffable. He is so beyond our way of thinking all we can do is hopelessly and philosophically try and make sense of the concepts portrayed in the sacred texts. His law and word has been sent to humanity in the form of the Torah. It is a reflection of the transcendent divine manual which God manifested and used to create the earth. Hence, Torah law is beyond our comprehension, yet worthy of our allegiance and obedience. Scholars and mystics will forever attempt to comprehend God’s nature in order to establish and remember humanity’s purpose on earth. Divine creativity will always continue to manifest itself on earth through the contemplation, dedication, and openness of its divinely appointed hosts

References

 

Dan, Joseph. The Ancient Jewish Mysticism. Israel: MOD Books, 1993

Holy Bible, New International Version. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible

Society. from website http://www.biblegateway.com/

Katz, Steven. Jewish Ideas and Concepts. New York: Schocken Books,1977.

Matt, Daniel C. The Essential Kabbalah: The Heart of Jewish Mysticism. New York:

HarperSanFrancisco ,1995.

Matt, Daniel C. The Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Volume 1, Stanford: Stanford University Press,

2004.

Menzi, Donald W. and Zwe Padeh. The Tree of Life: Chayyim Vital’s Introduction to the

Kabbalah of Isaac Luria – The Palace of Adam Kadmon. New Jersey: Jason Aronson

Inc., 1999.

Rodkinson, Michael L. (trans.). Babylonian Talmud. from website http://www.sacred-  

            texts.com/jud/t09/zar03

Scholem, Gershom. On the Mystical Shape of The Godhead: Basic Concepts in the Kabbalah.

New York: Schocken Books, 1991