For Torath Mosheh Jews Only: Who is Hashem?

[dybmh]

Actually, no.

Actually yes. The OP thumbed up my post which means, at the very least, I got the majority of the issue ID'd correctly.

Please provide what the Hasidut you learned states, and not your personal opinion.

Well. before you asked: "can you provide the answers to the questions I presented from your perspective of Hasidut?"

 

[dybmh]

Please provide the source for that exact statement. It seems a bit limited and not directed towards the English word "emotion." i.e. do you have a source Hasidut that states "Emotion is an expression of a relationship."

The exact source? It's common sense.

Anyway, I provided you a couple of excellent sources for this already.

https://www.sie.org/templates/sie/article_cdo/aid/2640834/jewish/Chapter-5-The-Maamar.htm

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/3244/jewish/Getting-Personal-With-G-d.htm

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The difference between G‑d’s attributes of intellect and emotion can be discovered through analysis of the functioning of these potentials in the human realm.​

​

The working of the intellect does not require the presence of another person. Even when one is alone, without a second person with whom to share an idea, it is possible to think intellectually. The emotions, by contrast, require an object. The attribute of kindness, for example, requires a recipient of one’s generosity and kindness. If there is no recipient, the emotion itself disappears as if it never existed. This principle is reflected in a story the Torah relates concerning Avraham. He “sat at the tent door in the heat of the day”61 looking for wayfarers. He wanted to find someone to show kindness to, for without a recipient the giver loses this expressive potential.62​

​

In this way we are helped to understand the statement that Torah preceded the world by 2000 years (and as explained above, this precedence is in spiritual level). The Torah possesses spiritual superiority even over the Divine source of the worlds. The Divine creative energy that creates the worlds only emanates from the middos of Hashem, in contrast to Torah, which emanates from Hashem’s wisdom.​

​

Similarly, this principle can be understood in regard to the spiritual realms.​

​

Hashem’s emotional attributes require, as it were, the existence of an entity that feels itself as separate from Him.​

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

As it turns out, the supernal emotive powers are the fundamental fabric of all things. And their most comprehensive expression within the entire cosmos is the fathomless depth of the human heart.​

​

Of course, G‑d could have made a world that is no more than a dumb machine. Why did He choose to first manifest His light invested in these ten powers, and only then allow those ten to manifest themselves as a physical world?​

​

G‑d could have said, "Here am I and, bang, here's a world. It works. That's good enough." But then it would be a dumb world, a world that explains itself, because, well, there isn't really much to explain.​

​

That's not what He wanted. He wanted a world where its creatures could reach up to Him and He would reach down to them, until an affinity between Creation and Creator would develop and He could be found within His masterpiece.​

​

So, He made a bridge.​

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OK, so, we have the necessity for something seperate from Hashem, we have a bridge, we have the desire for us to reach up and for Hashem to reach back. And this is what defines the supernal emotional attributes. IOW, they are an expression of a relationship.

 

[dybmh]

Are you saying that in Hasidut there is a source that says that god has bouts of depression, fear, and uncontrolable anger?

No, I was not citing any sources, you asked for my perspective. Chassidus was brought only to show that the Rebbe rejected this idea of God lacking emotions that are similar to a human.

Anyway, a "bout" would be limited. I said God's emotions are unlimited. At the very least, God "has" those things when we experience those things.

Yes, are you saying that there is a source in Hasidut that says, for example, that god experience fear the way a human does. I.e. there are humans who fear for their lives because something/someone more powerful than them is threatening them. Are you saying that in Hasidut there is a source that says god, "fears for his life because something/someone more powerful than them is threatening him?"

See above, is God all knowing? If so, then anytime someone fears for their life, God experiences it.

 

[dybmh]

1st question here. Where in Hasidut is it claimed to know that "god's emotions are always happening" based on (כי טוב ה" חסדו ועד דור ודר אמונתו)?

No, not on chassidus, this is Torah.

Anyway, a similar concept is cited here:

citing the verse, "Forever, O G‑d, Your word stands in the heavens," the Baal Shem Tov explains that unlike human speech – which once spoken is gone – G‑dly "speech" is everlasting. This means that the Ten Utterances used to create the world continue to stand, constantly re-creating the world.

So, Psalm 119 is cited, with the same wording, basically. And no one comments on כִּי־טוֹב יְהֹוָה לְעוֹלָם חַסְדּוֹ וְעַד־דֹּר וָדֹר אֱמוּנָתֽוֹ׃ saying, no-no, this isn't literal. It's pretty obvious. Kind of like "We were slaves in egypt is obvious". Remember when you said that?

Further, are you saying that based on Hasidut, w/o navuah, there is a claim to know at any given moment what emotion Hashem is having at any given time? For example, during the earthquake that happened recently in Turkey I don't of any person who was having every emotion always happening. Further, their emotions were limited to the devistation they experienced. i.e. fear, anger, sadness. Most weren't happy, sad, joyful, angry, enraged, etc. all at the same time because most humans don't experience every emotion all at once.

Right, that's a way that God's emotions differ from human emotions. Human emotions are a subset of God's emotions. This is a logical argument. Remember, without actual Torah to back up the claim that God lacks emotions, especially considering God's love is mentioned several times, all that's left is a logical argument. And that logical argument fails.

​

Doctine of divine immutability is sometimes conflated with the doctrine of divine impassibility, which asserts that nothing external can affect God — that nothing external can cause God to be in any state, and in particular can cause him to feel negative emotions like grief. Actually, DDI neither implies nor is implied by divine impassibility. Something could be impassible but mutable if it could change itself, but nothing else could change or affect it. God could be immutable but passible. For he could be changelessly aware of events outside himself -- perhaps even caused to be aware of them by the events themselves -- and due to them changelessly feel such responsive emotions as grief. But he would feel them without change, and so always feel them. If temporal, such a God would grieve for us before, while and after we suffer what he grieves for. There is nothing counter-intuitive in this. It's standard theism to hold that God has full foreknowledge of what is to befall us: he sees our pain before we feel it, not just while we feel it, and so grieves it beforehand if He ever grieves it at all. There would be no difference in the quality of God's grief before and while the pain occurs. For were there anything about it He did not know beforehand, the foreknowledge would not be full, and full knowledge beforehand should elicit the same reaction as full knowledge during. Likewise, it's standard theism to hold that God is cognitively perfect. If he is so and exists in time, He has a past to recall and so has perfect memory. If God perfectly remembers your pain, it is as fresh for him years later as it was while it occurred, and if he perfectly loves you, perhaps he never gets over it. So we can make sense of unchanging grief; if God does grieve, we might well expect it from a God with full foreknowledge, cognitive perfection and a perfect affective nature. If He is timeless, an immutable but passible God would just timelessly suffer for us — responsively, i.e., because of our pain. The case would be just as if God were temporal, save that His knowledge would not be temporally located and so would not literally involve either foreknowledge or memory. So whether God is temporal or timeless, DDI implies nothing odd here. And it need not “depersonalize” God as some feel impassibility would.​

 

[dybmh]

Here is what I mean. The below is how Habad here in Israel describes (רגש) in relation to a human being. Are you saying that in the Hasidut you hold by the exact definition is how god operates and exists at his own level?

View attachment 73538

No. I have said LIKE. Which is NOT exact. And No. Not on God's level, on our level. And this is only a subset, a limited version of what God is capable of. But yes, the emotions establish a relationship. That's exactly what I was talking about, it's in the last paragragh of the screenshot you brought.

 

[David Davidovich]

So, you are saying you don't want detail?

No, I don't. Although sometimes I ask for clarification or elaboration if an answer isn't clear. But never do I want an essay or a dissertation.

 

[David Davidovich]

So, you are saying you don't want detail?

Also, I don't think that you realize that amount of information, articles, and videos that you put in your videos expecting others to read and to watch. I've even seen other people (or at least one other person) who said that they didn't have the time to look through all the material that you provided in one of your posts.

 

[David Davidovich]

David Davidovich said:
But anyway, from what I understand from Torath Mosheh Jews is that they don't believe that Hashem has any emotions or feelings. Therefore, I ask them the questions: Who is Hashem? What are his motives? What does humankind mean to him? Why did he even create humans? Why did he even create anything? What's in it for him? Why does the Hebrew text say that he's patience and forgiving and that he cares about humankind when apparently, he doesn't, since he doesn't have any emotions?

So, here is part of the OP. There 7 questions presented. Are you saying that all you are looking for are yes or no answers? Also, 7 questions "appear to me" to imply you want details.

Of course, not. Because how can you give a yes or no answer to a question such as: Who is Hashem? or What is his motives? or What does humankind mean to him? or the other 4 remaining questions?

Also, in the OP you presented the following.

"Also, even though I found several translations that render Zechariah 2:8 this way, (including the New World Translation), the majority of translations use the words "the apple of his eyes." However, from the information that I looked up, those terms are supposed to be related and interchangeable and have a Biblical origin."

This also "seems" to imply that you are looking for detail because "translations" have been brought into the picture. If your translation contradicts or does not fully illuminate what the Hebrew text, and thousands of years of various Torath Mosheh views, are you then only looking for an answer of "no that translation is not correct?"

But if you go back to the OP, that wasn't even a question. That was just a statement that I made to support where I was going with the OP and the thread. Plus, if you read the last sentence and the link that I provided in the first paragraph of the OP, I had already came to my own conclusion. And if I was right with that conclusion, then nothing needed to be said. But only if I was wrong with that conclusion would something have needed to have been said:

However, from the information that I looked up, those terms are supposed to be related and interchangeable and have a Biblical origin.

click here: Apple of My Eye - Bible Meaning, Origin and Defintion (biblestudytools.com)

Plus, it was a rather simple point and not very important. But after that, that is where the real meat of the topic came in.

Also, in the thread on capital punishment you asked some very specific questions received some simplified answers but it did not appear that you were satisfied with the answers. That was before I even entered the thread. Again, this gives me the impression that you were looking for lots of "details."

The Torah and Capital Punishment

I would like to know from Torath Mosheh Jews: Since Torath Mosheh Jews are so adherent to the Torah, do you still follow the edicts of capital punishment found in the Torah such as stoning, etc.? click here: Capital punishment in the Bible - Wikipedia

www.religiousforums.com

I might have been back then in that topic, however, one needs to know how to discern different situations and different reactions... Kind of like that phrase: Know how to read the room.

 

[David Davidovich]

David Davidovich said:
A few you have.
Jewish Meaning of Leviathan
For Torath Mosheh Jews Only: Olam Ha-Bah (The World To Come)

Also, on the issue of details. If you don't want detail on your questions why would you want me responding to these two topics. Are the answers you have received in them so far no sufficient?

Actually, in another thread you did respond about the Leviathan, however, you seemed very reluctant and a bit fussy about it as if I touched a sore spot or something. But it seemed as if you didn't want to go anywhere near the actual Leviathan thread.

If not, why not and what level of response are you looking for?

I wanted an explanation of the Avodah Zarah origins of the Leviathan and what such a creature was doing in the Hebrew text.

Also, in the second one you posted videos - I thought you didn't like that format. Maybe I am mistaken?

Yes, you are mistaken. I love videos. However, I try to keep mine down to a minimum of around 10 minutes or less. Although one of my videos went over a little bit and was 13 minutes plus, and another one was 18 minutes plus. However, I would never ask anyone to watch a 46 or 49 minute video in order to keep the conversation going.

 

[David Davidovich]

A few you have.
Jewish Meaning of Leviathan
For Torath Mosheh Jews Only: Olam Ha-Bah (The World To Come)

Also, on the issue of details. If you don't want detail on your questions why would you want me responding to these two topics. Are the answers you have received in them so far no sufficient? If not, why not and what level of response are you looking for? Also, in the second one you posted videos - I thought you didn't like that format. Maybe I am mistaken?

And as far as the Olam Ha-Bah thread is concerned, I just find it really strange that TMJs write and talk about so many things, however, when it comes to this topic, it's as if they back off of it. However, I've seen bits and pieces in the Hebrew text that mention resurrection and coming back to life again and a world at peace.

 

[David Davidovich]

David Davidovich said:
Since ha satan is not supposed to be a real sentient being and is just an extension of Hashem, then who actually caused the death, pain and destruction in these verses?

Job 1:6-22
Job 2

And similarly, what's going on in these parallel sets of verses? And sorry that I can't quote the entire book of 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles. But this is the best that I can do.

2 Samuel 24:1-17
1 Chronicles 21:1-17

And then there are the 10 plagues against Egypt because that is all that I want to post about tonight.

Exodus 7:14-Exodus 12:36

@dybmh - This sounds like something you may need to address.

And why is that?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

And as far as the Olam Ha-Bah thread is concerned, I just find it really strange that TMJs write and talk about so many things, however, when it comes to this topic, it's as if they back off of it. However, I've seen bits and pieces in the Hebrew text that mention resurrection and coming back to life again and a world at peace.

Okay. So, what is the question?

 

[David Davidovich]

First question for you. Do you consider Job to be describing historical events? Next question, what is your assessment on who wrote Job and why?

This will help in knowing what level of detail you are looking for in the answer.

I've read where other Jews have said that it wasn't a literal story, but a story to explain why humankind suffers. However, I'm not sure if TMJs have the same view. Also, I've always been under the impression that Moses was supposed to have written the book of Job.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

And why is that?

Because of Iyov (Job) 38 - 42.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

I've read where other Jews have said that it wasn't a literal story, but a story to explain why humankind suffers. However, I'm not sure if TMJs have the same view. Also, I've always been under the impression that Moses was supposed to have written the book of Job.

Which other Jews? Where do they get their information and how far back does their information go?

In terms of Mosheh writing Iyov, according to what you know why do you think he wrote it?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Actually, in another thread you did respond about the Leviathan, however, you seemed very reluctant and a bit fussy about it as if I touched a sore spot or something. But it seemed as if you didn't want to go anywhere near the actual Leviathan thread.

That is a huge assumption to make. How exactly did you come to that conclusion? Also, you mentioned here about details as if you are receiving to many. Now it seems like you are saying I didn't provide you with enough detail in another thread. What level of detail are looking for and what do you consider to be a type of answer to completely answers your question?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Of course, not. Because how can you give a yes or no answer to a question such as: Who is Hashem? or What is his motives? or What does humankind mean to him? or the other 4 remaining questions?

So, then it sounds like you want details? I am now a little confused on what your definition is answer that does not have detail but is not simplified down.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

No. I have said LIKE. Which is NOT exact. And No. Not on God's level, on our level. And this is only a subset, a limited version of what God is capable of. But yes, the emotions establish a relationship. That's exactly what I was talking about, it's in the last paragragh of the screenshot you brought.

View attachment 73549

Okay. So, you are saying that god one type of emotions and humans have a different set. Also, the above that I provided addresses only humans not god. That was the title of the section I quoted. Do you have a source in Hasidut that states that god has that?

 

[David Davidovich]

Backtracking a bit. Can you give your definition for the words "emotions" and "feelings?" Also, can you provide where your definition comes from? I.e. something you self defined or something based on an authorative source for word definitions in English. Thanks.

Emotions are how you feel and feeling are fondness or the lack of fondness that you have for someone or something. Also, even though I do realize that in physical human beings, this is all related to chemical processes and hormones, etc., in our brain and body, but that's because that is the kind of beings we are and that is how we work. And this is similar in the way that we are able to see and perceive and to think and to reason. However, according to your logic, since with human beings, brain chemicals and nerves and tissues, etc., are involved in our ability to see and perceive and think and reason, then that would mean that Hashem doesn't do any of this because he does have brain chemicals and nerves and tissues, etc.... Right?

 

[David Davidovich]

Also, concerning this question. Before I answer. Do you remember what I posted earlier about Hashem being the creator of time and not being within time. I.e. as a metaphor time is something created, no different than, space, humans, animals, etc. Time being the ability for there to be past-present-future, this being created by Hashem.

Does that make sense to you?

Time as a metaphor? No, I don't think I remember you saying that. But please do continue.