Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: HaShem Has No Physicality At All

I got a text from my son-in-law one day asking what I had possibly said to my granddaughter that had her asking about the balloons in her body.  (Note: my kids had no doubt that anything crazy their children said like that could surely be traced to their grandfather.)  I told him that we had been discussing the circulatory system and I had explained lungs to her as a type of balloon.  (Yes; I know the lungs are part of the respiratory system, but she was only five and I didn't want to confuse the issue.)  A few weeks later they sent me a picture of a stick figure my little budding physician had drawn of her (then pregnant) mother; complete with two sets of balloon lungs, one for her and one for the fetus.

I have been listening to a series of shiurim on "Intro to Judaism", by R' Aharon Lopiansky, that (judging from the content) he gave to not-frum-but-definitely-interested-and-receptive college aged boys.  One reason I am listening to them is to learn better how to answer questions.  But I am also listening to them because I didn't grow up frum and I am always looking to fill gaps in my education and mistakes in my outlook.

A critical belief of Torah Judaism, of course, is that the Creator is incorporeal.  It is precisely that central belief, in fact, that is at the core of our deep disagreement with Christianity (much wider and deeper than with Islam) and our general nervousness about any movement within Orthodox Judaism that puts too much emphasis on any spiritual leader (yes, this is a thinly veiled reference to the rebbi, a"h).  Of course, on the heels of any such statement, one must deal with the obvious and frequent anthropomorphic statements in Tanach that refer to the Hand, Arm, Countenance and so forth of HaShem.  How does one, after all, say that HaShem is incorporeal when the Torah HaK'dosha itself, as we quote each day, that HaShem took us out of Egypt with an outstretched arm and strong hand?

There are two basic approaches (which are really two sides of the same coin).  The Rambam says that since we have no experience with anything but corporeal, those anthropomorphisms are the only way we can process anything about the way in which HaShem chooses to interact with us.  This is something like describing colors to someone who is blind from birth; you might tell him blue looks cool, red warm, green energizing, etc.  The words don't fit, but the feelings they evoke are similar.  The Zohar looks from the other side, so to speak.  HaShem has Hands, Arms, Countenance, etc, but it is we who do not have those things.  Therefore HaShem gave us things that are something like the real thing so we can experience something like what hands, arms, and countenances really are.  This is something like using iron filings to visualize lines of magnetic field or isobars on weather maps to help visualize pressure zones and storm fronts.  Not the real deal, imparts something about how the real deal operates.

It is worth noting that the incorporeality of the Creator goes beyond the physical.  Any concept that we can express is automatically not the actual concept associated with the Creator.  That is why the mystical texts refer to the Creator simply as אין סוף -- literally: no end/boundary.  To me, the most poignant example of that is the love one feels for a new born infant.  How much does that infant's concept of my love for him reflect the reality and depth of my feelings?  Essentially none.  Yet that infant's nearly non-existent concept of my real feelings for him are infinitely more accurate than my concept of  the Reality and Depth of the Love that the Creator has for me.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction. ...

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Sha...

Thought for the Day: Why Halacha Has "b'di'avad"

There was this Jew who knew every "b'di'avad" (aka, "Biddy Eved", the old spinster librarian) in the book.  When ever he was called on something, his reply was invariably, "biddy eved, it's fine".  When he finally left this world and was welcomed to Olam Haba, he was shown to a little, damp closet with a bare 40W bulb hanging from the ceiling.  He couldn't believe his eyes and said in astonishment, "This is Olam Haba!?!"  "Yes, Reb Biddy Eved,  for you this is Olam Haba." b'di'avad gets used like that; f you don't feel like doing something the best way, do it the next (or less) best way.  But Chazal tell us that "kol ha'omer HaShem vatran, m'vater al chayav" -- anyone who thinks HaShem gives partial credit is fooling himself to death (free translation.  Ok, really, really free translation; but its still true).  HaShem created us and this entire reality for one and only one purpose: for use...