For Torath Mosheh Jews Only: Who is Hashem?

[rosends]

So then does that mean that Jews just do what they are told by what they believe is this 'thing' that is supposed to be the Source of Reality and that's basically it? Or in other words, it's just kind of like blind obedience or they are just following cultural tradition?

Jews do what they are taught and commanded. Naaseh vnishma. If you want to call it blind obedience you can though that oversimplifies the process of learning, questioning and applying ideas.

 

[David Davidovich]

Jews do what they are taught and commanded. Naaseh vnishma. If you want to call it blind obedience you can though that oversimplifies the process of learning, questioning and applying ideas.

But I was trying to go deeper that. Therefore, perhaps you or someone else who is Jewish and who knows Hebrew proficiently can tell me what the wording and meaning of Deuteronomy 6:5 is in Hebrew:

5 You shall love Yahweh your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might.

 

[rosends]

But I was trying to go deeper that. Therefore, perhaps you or someone else who is Jewish and who knows Hebrew proficiently can tell me what the wording and meaning of Deuteronomy 6:5 is in Hebrew:

What is your question about the verse? Have you looked at any commentary? What are you trying to figure out?

 

[David Davidovich]

What is your question about the verse?

About what it says.

Have you looked at any commentary?

Well, no. Because if I felt that I could just look up things in commentaries and then get the answers, then I wouldn't be asking questions in this forum.

What are you trying to figure out?

What it means for Torath Mosheh Jew/Conservative Jews to "love" Hashem... and "with all your heart and with all your soul, and with all your means." And what exactly does the word "love" mean in Hebrew and is it translated the same way for Jews the way it is for Christians in English and non-Hebrew scriptures..

 

[rosends]

What it means for Torath Mosheh Jew/Conservative Jews to "love" Hashem... and "with all your heart and with all your soul, and with all your means." And what exactly does the word "love" mean in Hebrew and is it translated the same way for Jews the way it is for Christians in English and non-Hebrew scriptures..

Here is some basic commentary:
AND THOU SHALT LOVE [THE LORD] — Fulfil His commands out of love, for one who acts out of love is not like him (is on a higher plane than one) who acts out of fear. He who serves his master out of fear, if he (the master) troubles him overmuch, leaves him and goes away (Sifrei Devarim 32:1).

[THOU SHALT LOVE THE LORD] WITH ALL THY HEART — The form of the noun with two ב instead of the usual form לבך suggests: Love Him with thy two inclinations (the יצר הטוב and the יצר הרע) (Sifrei Devarim 32:3; Berakhot 54a). Another explanation of בכל לבבך, with all thy heart, is that thy heart should not be at variance (i.e. divided, not whole) with the Omnipresent God (Sifrei Devarim 32:4).

AND WITH ALL THY SOUL — even though He take thy soul (even though you have to suffer martyrdom to show your love of God) (Sifrei Devarim 32:5; Berakhot 54a, Berakhot 61b)

AND WITH ALL THY MIGHT, i.e. with all thy property. You have people whose property is dearer to them than their bodies (life), and it is on this account that there is added, “and with all thy property" (Sifrei Devarim 32:6). — Another explanation of ובכל מאדך is: — Thou shalt love Him whatever measure (מדה) it may be that He metes out to thee, whether it be the measure of good or the measure of calamity.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Love is love in any language.

That is actually not true. People in the same langauge can define love and how it is physically recognized as two different things. There are people who hurt people they claim to love and there are people who claim to love themselves and do things that harm themselves.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

That was a really good post and I really liked the information in it... However, the question that I'm about to ask is similar to the one that I asked in the Science and Religion thread, which I haven't had the time to look at yet, however, I did not include Job 38:7 with that question. But in context, I would like to ask about Job 38:4-7:

With Iyov (Job), you have to ask some questions of:

1. Who is the author?
2. Why was it written?

For example, there is a view that Mosheh ben-Amram (Moses) wrote Iyov (Job). The purpose was to address his request of Hashem where he was told he would see the back of Hashem and not the front. In order to enter Iyov (Job) you have to address that some make it to be like a midrash.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

And I know that the Jewish belief is that the word malach, which is translated as "angel" in English Bibles is referring to non-intelligent, non-sentient creatures that are extensions of Hashem and who are not really individual beings.

One of the views would be to state, instead of a "creature", is that a malakh is an element of reality that in the state of nevuah (loosely translated as prophecy) allows the Jewish Navi to understand a particular element of reality in a more human way. Like someone dreaming about Thermodynamics and their interaction with the concept is in the form a human being explaining when in reality Thermodynamics is not a human but an element of reality.

However, if that is true, are verses such as the above ones and others in the Hebrew text which describe myriads upon myriads of malach surrounding and praising Hashem, a form of self adulation?

One way of looking at it is like saying, "Myriads of the elements of reality - from the human perspective allude to draw attention to the fact that there is a Source of creation/reality." This ability to draw such a conclusion from reality itself was placed in the system so that it would make it apparent to humanity. I.e. it is for the benefit of humanity that the ability for such to exist does exist.

 

[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׃

 

[Ehav4Ever]

But I was trying to go deeper that. Therefore, perhaps you or someone else who is Jewish and who knows Hebrew proficiently can tell me what the wording and meaning of Deuteronomy 6:5 is in Hebrew:

The meaning of the statement goes like this. This entire part of the Torah is Mosheh ben-Amram (Moses) directing the entire Jewish nation that is about to enter into the land of Israel. Further, this is also his instruction for all generations of Jews. Put in simple terms, Mosheh is stating that the focus of a Jewish Torah based life is founded on loving Hashem with all elements of the Jewish existance.

For example, when a Torah based Jew wakes up in the morning or normal reaction is to praise Hashem for all the elements of reality that allow us to wake up. We protect our health out of love for the resources that Hashem gave us to maintain ourselves. We interact with our family with a focus on the mitzvoth of Hashem the healthy relationships we are able to build. Work, play, sleep, etc. all are predicated on our love for what Hashem has done for us in the past, does with us in the present, and will do in the future.

Thus, this section of the Torah addresses the healthy Torah based method of a Jewish Torah based life.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Reason about Hashem or reason with Hashem?

Kind of like how my ability to explain the processes that have historically taken place on Jupitor. I can see Jupitor from a distance in one way. I can see Jupitor through a telescope another way. We can send probes there. Yet, my ability to describe all the processes of Jupitor is limited by.

1. How long I have existed in comparison to Jupitor.
2. My size compared to the size of Jupitor.
3. The fact that I don't have the ability to travel to and within Jupitor.
4. The level of physical science I can apply to understand Jupitor.

Thus, there are some situations where I can only say Jupitor is not something because of my distance from its reality.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

I didn't understand any of the Hebrew in your other posts, but based on what you said above, I find it a bit sad that Hashem has to use fear, rage, and emotion concepts in order for the Jews to understand him and to believe in him.

It is about the difference in definions that exist in Hebrew and English. Also, the debate about the nature of Hashem among Torath Mosheh Jews is in the realm of "philosophy." The only way to address the heart of this issue is in Hebrew. Herbew words often don't translate well into English w/o lots of commentary.

Kind of like our discussion about the word "god" vs. "Elohim" W/o addressing the language differences one can come to some wrong conclusions. That in a nutshell is the issue. There are statements made by rabbis in Hebrew/Aramaic/Judea-Arabic/Yiddish/etc. that can misunderstood when translated into English.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

So, what is Hashem actually doing then? Because once again, it almost seems like he is functioning more like a ginormous computer or intelligence.

The computer anology is not adequate. The reason is because we humans created computers what created us can't be compared to what we create. In the universe you have to say that we humans are the computers. I.e. kind of like saying we humans are organic A.I. that Hashem created. By like token, a computer can only do what it does based on the programming that comes from humans. How A.I. interacts with the world is not the same as a person.

In terms of what Hashem is actually doing. That is a big philosophical challenge. For example, Hashem is not affected by or subject to time. Hashem created time. I, as a human, am subject to time. Because I am subject to past, present, and future there is no way for me to quantify the workinds of "something" not subject to past, present, and future. Currently, in the best scenary I may live for 100+ years. Because of this limitation I can't quantify thousands of years, millions of years, and billions of years. I also don't have the ability to describe processes that are so small I can't see them or that happens in fractions of seconds.

The Response of a number of Torath Mosheh Jews is, "The Torah gives us a snapshot of the logic we need to develop in life. We take that and work with the reality as we have it. We receive what we receive from Hashem, even if we don't fully understand all the mechanics of how that works. Yet, we know - from Hashem - that he established a reality that we can excel in using the Torah." That connects all views of this philosophical issue.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

So then does that mean that Jews just do what they are told by what they believe is this 'thing' that is supposed to be the Source of Reality and that's basically it? Or in other words, it's just kind of like blind obedience or they are just following cultural tradition?

If it is proven to be the Source then yes. This of course was tested in previous generations and each generation brings their investigations, research, etc. of Torah to the picture of each subsequent generation.

With this being the circumstance each Jew can come to the reality in any of the following ways:

1. Through a lengthy thought out logic based process of reasoning.
2. Through blind obedience.
3. Just following cultural tradition.

All three methods are accetable realities within the entire Jewish people. Of course a person can incorporate all three and of course the entire Jewish people has survived for thousands of years on the back of all three.

Again, the baseline is that all three groups know that Hashem/The Source of reality gave the Torah at Mount Sinai to the Israeli/Jewish people. This baseline is also up for continous investigation or not.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

But isn't the Torah the result of Adam and Eve and their descendants developing the yetzer hara? And if so, what were Hashem's original motives?

Humanity didn't develop Yetzer Hara. It was already a part of the system. A way of looking at it is that - yetzer hara is your ability to work against your own interest. How that works can be described in a number of ways but these are linquistic tools.

One way of looking at what Hashem created can be summed up as options. I.e. the best for humanity can happen at the time humanity wants it to happen. It is already in place for it to happen at an appointed time in future history or whenever we desire it to happen. Those are the two basic options that are an umbrella for all the choices we make as groups and individuals.

The options that were present in the past were a part of Hashem's motives, the options available in the present are also a part of Hashem motives, and the options of the future are a part of Hashem motives. The ability for us to make choices is a part of the motive, if you want to call it that. What is made clear is that at some point a generation of Israelis will make a choice that changes everything into the possibility for humanity to reach the optimal circumstance for perform mitzvoth and gaining the full benefit Hashem will provide in this world.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

I think that is a good question. And perhaps I've been misunderstanding what @Ehav4Ever has been saying about Hashem, but his description sounds more as if Hashem's behavior toward humankind is perfunctory. And kind of like I had said previously about being more like a ginormous Artificial Intelligence, but not artificial.

No. More like we (humans) are the Artificial Intelligence and Hashem created us. Hashem is not a human, and like rosends stated our words to describe something beyond what we experience and know on this planet will always fail on some level. Thus, we use words we know and words we know that others will undrestand as metaphors for things that we can't fully quantify.

For example, you used A.I. but you used it in the wrong direction. If we are the A.I. and we create an A.I. that appears to have human like emotions most people would not consider the A.I. to be humn. The A.I. is something else and can never be "human." What it has is due to a human programming it and whatever it can develop on its own is the result of the human programming it. Now when it comes to A.I. we humans interact with it on the level that is a closer to ourselves. I.e. there is A.I. that is made to physically look human and there are attempts to make A.I. that can react to physical stimuls similar to how humans do.

The difference between Hashem (The Source) and us (the A.I.) is WAY bigger and way more vast than the difference between humans and the A.I. we create. Thus, even if you want to apply words like love to Hashem you can't quantify this because you are not in a position to take that love and place it completely in a human framework. You would have to conclude that a Hashem type of love is magnitudes of levels above any kind of love you can ever experience from a human. It would thus not be similar to human love and thus if you were to ever experience it you be overwhelmed. Kind of like how when the Israeli/Jewish people received the ten commands from happen they were overwhelmed. Only Mosheh ben-Amram (Moses) was able to stand in place and take it. Thus, there response was that Mosheh go and talk directly to Hashem and then tell the people what was said.

Thus, this is the middle ground between both points of view.

1. Hashem is beyond humanity and can't quantified and limited to human language and understanding. We can only give metaphors in the best of our language.
2. Hashem can be defined using our language, for our own purposes of understanding, BUT we have to accept that any approximation we make Hashem in reality is way BEYOND what we can verbalize and experience in the limits of human existance.

To use a metaphor, Hashem is the Source, the Creator, and the Programmer we humans are the A.I. Thus, we are the ones that can appear to be cold and perfunctory because we are a work in progress and we have a far distance from our creator. Yet, we have been given tools to help with this interaction between our A.I. and our Source. Torah for Jews, 7 mitzvoth for non-Jews, prayer, development, etc.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

So, Hashem had always planned for humankind to develop yetzer hara and for humanity to have pain, suffering, selfishness, hate, murder, crime, sickness and disease, etc.?

Not a plan, as you may understand one. More like an option that humans can chose if humanity wants it.

No different than how a human can chose to use nuclear power to create energy to power a city or to create a bomb to destroy a city. Humans at times chose one, the other, or both even when it is 100% illogical to create such a bomb.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Thank you for your answer, but if I am being honest with you, I have always despised the 'because he chose to' answer. Also, Christians may have copied this answer from Jews, but I've always hated when Christians resorted to that answer... Just being honest.

You can hate it, but that doesn't mean that it isn't a rational answer. If something has nothing controlling it and placing bounderies on what it can and can't do then it boils down to a choice. You may look for answer and find one that fits for you. You may look and never feel satisfied with what you find. At the end of the day only a concept of a god posits that said god must make things the way its followers think they want things.

If some created something and had/has complete freedom in what it will do then it is, "becaue it chose so." Besides, who is to say that if you were given an answer that you have the mental storage capacity to understand the answer? If your own personal storage capacity and A.I. advancement is less than 0.000000000000000000000001% of what is needed to understand the answer it would stand to reason that you may not be able to even understand the answer if it were given to you.

 

[dybmh]

That is actually not true. People in the same langauge can define love and how it is physically recognized as two different things. There are people who hurt people they claim to love and there are people who claim to love themselves and do things that harm themselves.

People who hurt themseves and others while at the same time claiming to love the ones they are hurting sound like sick demented people. Do I really need to explicitly omit those types of people when discussing what love means to the vast majority of people?

View attachment 72195
View attachment 72196
View attachment 72197
View attachment 72198

View attachment 72199

View attachment 72213
View attachment 72212
View attachment 72211

What does any of this have to do with the repeated claims of a language barrier preventing discussing love? If anything, a physiological source for love shows that it is universal, and everyone has the same basic experience. If it's science then it's predicatable and reproducible. That means that the language (english, french, dutch, hebrew... ) used to describe it is irrelevant.

 

[dybmh]

View attachment 72202

View attachment 72200

#1) What is your source for the first quote you have attrubuted to Saadia Gaon? I can't find anything where he *actually* commented on Numbers 23. It's not that I don't understand what's written here, but, if you want it to be an additional source supporting your idea that Bilaam's words are somehow relevant to a Jewish person's relationship with HaShem, then there needs to be some confirmation that this is actually and truly the words of Saadia Gaon.

#2) Both of the Ramban quotes above confirm that the Bilaam did not have a prophetic relationship with HaShem. This confirms that the quotes are not literally true. And that's the point of saying that the Torah decribes the words as a "mashal" a "parable". So now we have 2 sources, Ramban and the Torah itself reminding us not to read these verses literally. What was the point in posting this?