So too-but in an infinitely more perfect way-in G‑d's perfect oneness there is no wisdom, no understanding, no knowledge, no kindness, no strength, no nothing. But there, in that raw feeling or mental perspective, there are no words. Where did that word you spoke come from? Well, it arose out of a feeling you had, or some perspective of things you had in your mind. Same thing (almost) with a word of speech. The entity of the ray is entirely absorbed within that oneness.
So you ask it, "Let me see what you look like as you are in your source within the sun." So it takes you there (in your nuclear fusion resistant suit) and you look about and-hey, there's no ray here! But why? Doesn't the ray start here? Yet all there is here is one single source of light. So you ask this ray, "Where did you come from?" It answers, of course, that it came from the sun. Let's say you see a ray of light from the sun shining in through your window. Rather, G‑d cannot be predicated with any quality, even that of existence.Īlthough Maimonides himself notes that this is a matter that the human mind can never truly fathom, nevertheless Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi ("The Alter Rebbe") provides two helpful metaphors: One from the relationship of the sun and its light, another from the relationship of speech to the human psyche. We cannot say that G‑d exists-since that would imply that there are two things, G‑d forbid, about G‑d: That He is G‑d and that He exists. In fact, Maimonides went so far as to say that G‑d cannot even be said to have existence. But He cannot be described by any of them. to G‑d, what we mean is that He does not lack these qualities, since, after all, they also extend from Him-as does everything extend from Him. When we attribute strength, kindness, wisdom, etc. So Maimonides answered that G‑d really has no attributes. The same with wisdom and kindness-for us to have these qualities, they must first begin with G‑d. Like the psalmist rhetorically asks, "The one who implants the ear doesn't hear?" So if hearing exists in the creatures that He created, He must also have a quality of hearing. So to say that G‑d is kind, or G‑d is wise, or G‑d is strong-that's not going to work, since it implies dualities and multiplicities in G‑d.īut nevertheless, all these things-kindness, wisdom, strength and more-all come from G‑d, since He created all things.
A perfect oneness can't have any dualities. Maimonides realized that this could not apply to G‑d, since G‑d is a perfect oneness. And the same with everything else that exists: The qualities of a thing are not the thing itself-rather, the thing itself has qualities. But the water itself is not the flowingness of the water. So there is water, and there is this quality that it has to flow. But flowing is not water, blowing is not wind and heaviness is not rocks. Until then, there was (1) the thing itself and (2) its qualities, or predicates.įor example: Water flows. This was the way of thinking about things up until the time of Rene Descartes and the early rationalists who began to discuss matter as a measurable quality. In Aristotelian thought, everything is a duality. But I'll try to describe it here in short. Negative theology is much easier to understand if you are familiar with Aristotelian logic-which gave birth to the question to begin with. More than anyone, it was Maimonides who answered it with his "negative theology"-which was later adopted by Thomas D'Aquinas and became standard Roman Catholic theology, as well. Some attribute it to the Muslim thinker, Ibn Rushd (Averroes). It's a kind of paradox we face when dealing with the concept of an all-powerful being. This, in many different versions, is a very old question. (If you want to read a quick reply to this question, I recommend you read this article.)
0 kommentar(er)
