For Torath Mosheh Jews Only: Who is Hashem?

[dybmh]

No, because Hashem established from the start that if Am Yisrael return to the right path it is automatic in the reality created that the benifit of keeping the Torah would automatically follow. Hashem didn't change, we did. This is why in Ha'azinu Hashem already explained what would happen in the future and how things would turn out.

The people in story are making the same argument you seem to be making. And the prophet is correcting them. Again, just because HaShem doesn't break a promise, that doesn't mean HaShem is not effected. The prophet is saying that, but that is being ignored. Context

 

[Ehav4Ever]

The people in story are making the same argument you seem to be making.

Not true. There is nothing stated by the Navi from the people of that generation that is remotely what I have written as you can see below.

Can you please quote, in Hebrew, where they make a clear statement of:

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Bilaam wasn't wrong about those things.

That is my point. Bil'am was not wrong about the statement he made because if you look at the peshat you see how he came to make such a statement and why Hashem commanded that Mosheh Rabbeinu place that information in the Torah.

I.e. Bil'am didn't decide on the statement and Bil'am didn't include it in the Torah. Hashem commanded Mosheh Rabbeinu to include in the Torah.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

You have a point about s'micha. But reinterpretation is precisely what's happening if a person ignores the prohibition against foreign influence, following the practices of the other nations.

We are not talking about interpretation. We are talking about the ability to trace what is done through a mesoreth. There are a number of Mesorti rulings that completely go against every single proven mesoreth from literally every ancient Jewish community.

 

[dybmh]

Not true. There is nothing stated by the Navi from the people of that generation that is remotely what I have written as you can see below.

It's right there ^^ Clearly, the prophet is saying HaShem IS effected by their sin. The people ask, "?הֲיִקְבַּ֨ע אָדָ֜ם אֱלֹהִ֗ים" That is the same thing as saying, "How can I effect HaShem?" Then the prophet corrects them and says what you have bracketed in red and green. The prophet is telling them that the actions of the people DO effect HaShem. Otherwise, who cares if the ma'aser and terumah are offered or not. If HaShem isn't effected, doesn't care, has no feelings, then the people are correct, and their argument is valid.

Can you please quote, in Hebrew, where they make a clear statement of:

First of all, who said this? Is this more Rambam? When was this written? Is it *actually* ancient?

Second, does the justification for this assertion make any sense at all? What does Psalms 24 have to do with HaShem's emotive capability?

Third, you want another example, something clear, besides what Mosheh says?

Bartenura comments on Pikei Avot 3:10

... רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶן דּוֹסָא אוֹמֵר
כָּל שֶׁרוּחַ הַבְּרִיּוֹת נוֹחָה הֵימֶנּוּ, רוּחַ הַמָּקוֹם נוֹחָה הֵימֶנּוּ. וְכָל שֶׁאֵין רוּחַ הַבְּרִיּוֹת נוֹחָה הֵימֶנּוּ, אֵין רוּחַ הַמָּקוֹם נוֹחָה הֵימֶנּוּ

:ברטנורא

כָּל שֶׁרוּחַ הַבְּרִיּוֹת נוֹחָה הֵימֶנּוּ. כָּל מִי שֶׁאָהוּב לְמַטָּה בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁהוּא אָהוּב לְמַעְלָה
​

Or...

Tomer Devorah 1:8-9

הד' - לשארית נחלתו - הִנֵּה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מִתְנַהֵג עִם יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּדֶרֶךְ זֶה לוֹמַר מַה אֶעֱשֶׂה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל וְהֵם קְרוֹבָי שְׁאֵר בָּשָׂר יֵשׁ לִי עִמָּהֶם שֶׁהֵם בַּת זוּג לְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא וְקוֹרֵא לָהּ בִּתִּי, אֲחוֹתִי, אִמִּי. כְּדְפֵרְשׁוּ ז"ל וּכְתִיב יִשְׂרָאֵל עַם קְרוֹבוֹ מַמָּשׁ קֻרְבָה יֵשׁ לוֹ עִמָּהֶם וּבָנָיו הֵם. וְהַיְנוּ לִשְׁאֵרִית נַחֲלָתוֹ לָשׁוֹן שְׁאֵר בָּשָׂר וְסוֹף סוֹף הֵם נַחֲלָתוֹ. וּמַה אֹמַר, אִם אַעֲנִישֵׁם הֲרֵי הַכְּאֵב עָלַי כְּדִכְתִיב (יְשַׁעְיָה סג, ט) בְּכָל צָרָתָם לוֹ צָר. כְּתִיב בְּ'אַלֶף' לוֹמַר שֶׁצַּעֲרָם מַגִּיעַ לְפֶלֶא הָעֶלְיוֹן וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן לְדוּ פַּרְצוּפִין שֶׁבָּהֶן עִיקָר הַהַנְהָגָה וְקָרֵינַן בְּ'וָאו' לוֹ צָר. וּכְתִיב (שֹׁפְטִים, ז) וַתִּקְצַר נַפְשִׁי בַּעֲמַל יִשְׂרָאֵל לְפִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ סוֹבֵל צַעֲרָם וּקְלוֹנָם מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵם שְׁאֵרִית נַחֲלָתוֹ.

"k'rovo mamash" + "sh'air bashar" = HaShem is effected, HaShem cares, HaShem has emotions.

This is completely irrelevant to whether or not HaShem has emotions, nor whether nor not HaShem is effected by our actions.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

It's right there ^^ Clearly, the prophet is saying HaShem IS effected by their sin. The people ask, "?הֲיִקְבַּ֨ע אָדָ֜ם אֱלֹהִ֗ים" That is the same thing as saying, "How can I effect HaShem?".

Not even remotely addressing what I wrote. Again, show me where in the Hebrew text the people said:

 

[Ehav4Ever]

First of all, who said this? Is this more Rambam? When was this written? Is it *actually* ancient?

I wrote this yesterday. It is a summary of what I have been saying the whole time. You claimed that the people the Navi was speaking about were saying what I wrote - I am showing that this incorrect. So, like mentioned. Please show me in Hebrew where they said same statement I am been stating.

This of course knowing that in English emotions are defined as:

While in modern Hebrew (רגש) often translated into English as emotions is defined as:

While descriptions of ancient and mishnaic Hebrew state:

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Second, does the justification for this assertion make any sense at all? What does Psalms 24 have to do with HaShem's emotive capability?

Because if you are going to use the English word "emotion" you have to know what the word means in English. If Hashem is not human, and beyond humanity in every way, and if Hashem is not physical like a human being the English definition of "emotion" does not fit. You would have to find a Hebrew statement in Tanakh that states (להשם יש לו רגשות פיסי וגופני כמו בן אדם).

Below are some of the prominent ways that emotions are described.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

This is completely irrelevant to whether or not HaShem has emotions, nor whether nor not HaShem is effected by our actions.

Emotions weren't the only being discussed here. Whether Hashem changed was also brought up. Thus, the Navi simply says something that was already on the table from the start. Also, if you go back to what the Rambam wrote whether Hashem changes or not is connected to his arguement on whether Hashem has emotional changes like people do or better yet the way that it can be defined with people.

 

[dybmh]

Not even remotely addressing what I wrote. Again, show me where in the Hebrew text the people said:

Of course it addresses the point. The people claim HaShem isn't effected, the prophet corrects them.

Again, I ask, what does Dvarim 30 have to do with emotions? What does Psalms 24 have to do with emotions? Posting seemingly random Hebrew doesn't accomplish anything.

 

[dybmh]

I wrote this yesterday. It is a summary of what I have been saying the whole time. You claimed that the people the Navi was speaking about were saying what I wrote - I am showing that this incorrect. So, like mentioned. Please show me in Hebrew where they said same statement I am been stating.

Ahhh, so you wrote something, attempted to justify it with Psalms even though it is completely irrelevant. It's not ancient, it's as modern as it can be... written yesterday.

This of course knowing that in English emotions are defined as:

While in modern Hebrew (רגש) often translated into English as emotions is defined as:

While descriptions of ancient and mishnaic Hebrew state:

And that's the problem with trying to mix science with the Torah, you end up with something that makes no sense.

Would you please quote an ancient source in Hebrew or Aramaic that claims HaShem is not effected, or doesn't care about human activity?

 

[dybmh]

Because if you are going to use the English word "emotion" you have to know what the word means in English. If Hashem is not human, and beyond humanity in every way, and if Hashem is not physical like a human being the English definition of "emotion" does not fit. You would have to find a Hebrew statement in Tanakh that states (להשם יש לו רגשות פיסי וגופני כמו בן אדם).

Below are some of the prominent ways that emotions are described.

View attachment 71968

View attachment 71970
View attachment 71969
View attachment 71971
View attachment 71972

View attachment 71973

View attachment 71974

I noticed you didn't respond to the quotes I brought in Hebrew which literally, clearly stated that HaShem is NOT beyond humanity in everyway.

K'rovo mamash is the opposite of beyond humanity in everyway.

 

[dybmh]

Below are some of the prominent ways that emotions are described.

The Malbim disagrees. Here are his comments on Deuteronomy 7:8, yet another Torath Mosheh describing HaShem's love:

אתכם היה מאהבת ה' אתכם, שהאהבה לא תהיה אלא בשוים ואיך יצויר אהבה שיאהב ה' אתכם הלא זה מצד שיש בהם אלהות היא נפשכם שהיא חלק אלוה ממעל שמצדה יאהב דומה לדומה

Maybe something from the Baal Shem Tov would help?

כל הרגשות של האדם אינו אלא מצד החיות שלו, כי הגוף אינו בעל הרגשה מצד עצמו, רק מצד החיות, והחיות הוא חלק אלהות, כי הנשמה חלק אלוה ממעל

So, emotions aren't physiological, not according to the Baal Shem Tov. They're spiritual.

Not even remotely addressing what I wrote. Again, show me where in the Hebrew text the people said:

Ignoring the misplaced reference to Psalms, Malbim says, "יאהב דומה לדומה", that is 100% opposite of what you're claiming above. Why does he say it? "נפשכם שהיא חלק אלוה".

So, not so different is it?

 

[dybmh]

That is my point. Bil'am was not wrong about the statement he made because if you look at the peshat you see how he came to make such a statement and why Hashem commanded that Mosheh Rabbeinu place that information in the Torah.

I.e. Bil'am didn't decide on the statement and Bil'am didn't include it in the Torah. Hashem commanded Mosheh Rabbeinu to include in the Torah.

Torath Moshe describes this as a mashal. It's not literally true. And that ignores that this is a message from a villian to a villian.

וַיִּשָּׂא מְשָׁלוֹ וַיֹּאמַר קוּם בָּלָק וּֽשְׁמָע הַֽאֲזִינָה עָדַי בְּנוֹ צִפֹּֽר׃

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Bartenura comments on Pikei Avot 3:10

... רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶן דּוֹסָא אוֹמֵר
כָּל שֶׁרוּחַ הַבְּרִיּוֹת נוֹחָה הֵימֶנּוּ, רוּחַ הַמָּקוֹם נוֹחָה הֵימֶנּוּ. וְכָל שֶׁאֵין רוּחַ הַבְּרִיּוֹת נוֹחָה הֵימֶנּוּ, אֵין רוּחַ הַמָּקוֹם נוֹחָה הֵימֶנּוּ

:ברטנורא

כָּל שֶׁרוּחַ הַבְּרִיּוֹת נוֹחָה הֵימֶנּוּ. כָּל מִי שֶׁאָהוּב לְמַטָּה בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁהוּא אָהוּב לְמַעְלָה​

משנה תורה - הילכול יסודי התורה א

​

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Torath Moshe describes this as a mashal. It's not literally true. And that ignores that this is a message from a villian to a villian.
וַיִּשָּׂא מְשָׁלוֹ וַיֹּאמַר קוּם בָּלָק וּֽשְׁמָע הַֽאֲזִינָה עָדַי בְּנוֹ צִפֹּֽר׃

Of course it is a Mashal. That is exactly what the Rambam stated. That is exactly the point. Any description you try to give of Hashem is a Mashal. Especially if you want to equate physical and physiological experiences and reactions to Hashem. Hashem is beyond human description and definiton thus we can only deal with a mashal. That is exactly the point.

​

 

[Ehav4Ever]

The Malbim disagrees. Here are his comments on

The Malbim didn't write in English. In English the definition of emotions is connected physiological realities that exist here on our physical world. The (רגש) in pre-modern Hebrew is not the same as "emotions" in modern English.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

The Malbim disagrees. Here are his comments on Deuteronomy 7:8, yet another Torath Mosheh describing HaShem's love:

אתכם היה מאהבת ה' אתכם, שהאהבה לא תהיה אלא בשוים ואיך יצויר אהבה שיאהב ה' אתכם הלא זה מצד שיש בהם אלהות היא נפשכם שהיא חלק אלוה ממעל שמצדה יאהב דומה לדומה

Maybe something from the Baal Shem Tov would help?

כל הרגשות של האדם אינו אלא מצד החיות שלו, כי הגוף אינו בעל הרגשה מצד עצמו, רק מצד החיות, והחיות הוא חלק אלהות, כי הנשמה חלק אלוה ממעל

Exactly, so like I said. You can't equate what the English word "emotions" even to what they wrote. It doesn't equate based on the definitons of the words in two seperate languages.

So, emotions aren't physiological, not according to the Baal Shem Tov. They're spiritual.

They did not write in English. They are talking about (רגש) and in the Hebrew they are talking about does not mean what "emotions" means in English as I showed earlier. These are two seperate langauges with two seperate reasonings of what the words mean. As I showed earlier. Besides neither one of them stated
(יש להש רגש כמו בן אדם)

Besides, you forgot to highlight the entire area relevant to what the Baal Shem Tove wrote.

הגוף אינו בעל הרגשה מצד עצמו

Because as he stated:

והחיות הוא חלק אלהות, כי הנשמה חלק אלוה ממעל

 

[dybmh]

View attachment 72005
View attachment 72003
View attachment 72004​

View attachment 72002
​

Well... Saadia Gaon didn't write in Hebrew. It clearly says this is a translation. By your own standards this isn't valid.

Also, Saadia Gaon was influenced by Greek and Muslim philosophy. Specifically Plato and Aristotle who claimed a perfect god cannot change.

Ignoring both of those issues, the first two paragraphs are completely irrelevant, nothing in there about emotions. The last one is ... meh... he cannot imagine a change occuring without a physical body. That's a personal limitation of the author. I'm not really sure that the verses quoted at the end really support the conclusion.

What hopefully you noticed is that Saadia Gaon did not cite any of the verses attempted by you and others. Bilaam is not quoted, Samuel is not quoted, Malachi is not quoted. This is probably because none of them in context have anything to do with a global limitation on a god who is claimed to be omnipotent. This shows there is nothing in Tanach which puts this sort of limit on HaShem. To the contrary there are plenty of verses which describe HaShem as changing. And plenty of verses that describe HaShem's emotive response. Rashi never once cautions the reader against the simple literal understanding of what Mosheh has written at HaShem's direction about HaShem's love for the Jewish people.

So, what's left is a logical argument which originates with Plato, is picked up by Aristotle, then is passed to Philo. See here: Immutability (theology) - Wikipedia

It's Greek, and it's the opposite of what Mosheh brings. When it comes to emotions, there is nothing logically preventing emotions even if HaShem is unchanging. See here, search for impassibility. It very clearly points out that Rambam's assertion about emotions is not logical, not even a little. Immutability (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).

But, a person might still inspite of this take Malachi's prophecy out of context. Gratefully the Baal Shem Tov again comes to help. A man who clearly is not influenced by foreign wisdom. Spending his time in seclusion cleaving to blessed holiness. He comments on this quote from Malachi:
​

ולמה נשתנה רצונו ית"ש מלא רוצה לרוצה, בעת שברא, ולא מקודם לזה, הרי הוא ית"ש אינו בעל שינויים, ע"ד דכתיב (מלאכי ג׳:ו׳, פסוק ו') אני ה' לא שניתי:
​

אף על פי כן התנגד רצונו ית"ש לידיעתו

ולכן עזב את הידיעה ונמשך אחר הרצון
​

So, HaShem's will can override HaShem's knowledge, and this allows for HaShem to have emotions, to be effected.

If you look up the quote you'll see that HaShem's wisdom is contrasted with human wisdom, but HaShem's emotive capabilities are not compromised by this.

משנה תורה - הילכול יסודי התורה א

View attachment 72006
View attachment 72007
​

We have already established Rambam's opinion; it's based on scripture taken out of context and Greek philosophy. Repeat posting the same passage doesn't accomplish anything.

I urge any non-Hebrew readers of this thread not to be fooled by these repeat posts as if they are individual distinct passages each adding support to the assertion that HaShem doesn't have emotions.

To the contrary, I am bringing additional sources, each one confirming that human love and HaShem's love are congruent, like-for-like.

 

[dybmh]

Of course it is a Mashal. That is exactly what the Rambam stated. That is exactly the point. Any description you try to give of Hashem is a Mashal. Especially if you want to equate physical and physiological experiences and reactions to Hashem. Hashem is beyond human description and definiton thus we can only deal with a mashal. That is exactly the point.

Good. Then Bilaam's speech is not proof that HaShem doesn't have emotions. At best it describes HaShem's relationship with a couple of villians. And Mosheh's relationship is clearly different.

View attachment 72010

View attachment 72017
View attachment 72013
View attachment 72014
View attachment 72015
View attachment 72016
​

Repeat posting... accomplishes nothing. Moshe teaches that HaShem's relationship with the Jewish people is parent-child. If you think that the love that exists between a parent and child begins and ends with neurochemicals that is sad. The neurochemicals are temporary. The love between parent and child are not locked into that.