Difference between revisions of "Philosophy:Anthropomorphism/2"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This topic has not yet undergone editorial review
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
<approaches> | <approaches> | ||
− | <category>Hashem Can Be Corporeal | + | <category>Hashem Can Be Corporeal<fn>R. Saadia quotes "some people" who say that Hashem takes on a physical but not a human form, suggesting that he is either fire, air, space, or the like.</fn> |
<mekorot><multilink><a href="MerkavahShelemahShiurKomah" data-aht="source">Merkavah Shelemah Shiur Komah</a><a href="MerkavahShelemahShiurKomah" data-aht="source">Merkavah Shelemah Shiur Komah</a></multilink>,<fn>It is disputed already by the Geonim if Shiur Komah holds authentic citations of R. Yishmael and R. Akiva or this was a later work attributed to them to gain popularity.  See <multilink><a href="TeshuvotHaGeonimShaareiTeshuvah122" data-aht="source">Shaarei Teshuvah</a><a href="TeshuvotHaGeonimShaareiTeshuvah122" data-aht="source">Teshuvot HaGeonim Shaarei Teshuvah 122</a></multilink> where R. Sherira Gaon and R. Hai Gaon say the work is original but we just don't understand it, and on the other hand the <multilink><a href="ShutHaRambam117" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="ShutHaRambam117" data-aht="source">Shut HaRambam 117</a></multilink> who says they did not write it.</fn> <multilink><a href="RashiShemot7-4" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiShemot7-4" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:4</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>,<fn>Rashi's stance on the issue is unclear.  See</fn> <multilink><a href="RMosheTakuKetavTamimprintedinOtzarNechmad" data-aht="source">R. Moshe Taku</a><a href="RMosheTakuKetavTamimprintedinOtzarNechmad" data-aht="source">Ketav Tamim (printed in Otzar Nechmad)</a></multilink>, scholars cited by <multilink><a href="RaavadHilkhotTeshuvah3-7" data-aht="source">Raavad</a><a href="RaavadHilkhotTeshuvah3-7" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Teshuvah 3:7</a><a href="R. Avraham b. David (Raavad)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham b. David</a></multilink>, scholars cited by <multilink><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamMilchamotHaShampp48-75" data-aht="source">R. Avraham b. HaRambam</a><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamMilchamotHaShampp48-75" data-aht="source">Milchamot HaSham pp. 48-75</a><a href="R. Avraham Maimonides" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Maimonides</a></multilink></mekorot> | <mekorot><multilink><a href="MerkavahShelemahShiurKomah" data-aht="source">Merkavah Shelemah Shiur Komah</a><a href="MerkavahShelemahShiurKomah" data-aht="source">Merkavah Shelemah Shiur Komah</a></multilink>,<fn>It is disputed already by the Geonim if Shiur Komah holds authentic citations of R. Yishmael and R. Akiva or this was a later work attributed to them to gain popularity.  See <multilink><a href="TeshuvotHaGeonimShaareiTeshuvah122" data-aht="source">Shaarei Teshuvah</a><a href="TeshuvotHaGeonimShaareiTeshuvah122" data-aht="source">Teshuvot HaGeonim Shaarei Teshuvah 122</a></multilink> where R. Sherira Gaon and R. Hai Gaon say the work is original but we just don't understand it, and on the other hand the <multilink><a href="ShutHaRambam117" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="ShutHaRambam117" data-aht="source">Shut HaRambam 117</a></multilink> who says they did not write it.</fn> <multilink><a href="RashiShemot7-4" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiShemot7-4" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:4</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>,<fn>Rashi's stance on the issue is unclear.  See</fn> <multilink><a href="RMosheTakuKetavTamimprintedinOtzarNechmad" data-aht="source">R. Moshe Taku</a><a href="RMosheTakuKetavTamimprintedinOtzarNechmad" data-aht="source">Ketav Tamim (printed in Otzar Nechmad)</a></multilink>, scholars cited by <multilink><a href="RaavadHilkhotTeshuvah3-7" data-aht="source">Raavad</a><a href="RaavadHilkhotTeshuvah3-7" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Teshuvah 3:7</a><a href="R. Avraham b. David (Raavad)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham b. David</a></multilink>, scholars cited by <multilink><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamMilchamotHaShampp48-75" data-aht="source">R. Avraham b. HaRambam</a><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamMilchamotHaShampp48-75" data-aht="source">Milchamot HaSham pp. 48-75</a><a href="R. Avraham Maimonides" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Maimonides</a></multilink></mekorot> | ||
<point><b>Anthropomorphic verses</b> – According to this approach it is expected that Tanakh should talk about Hashem as if he has a body.</point> | <point><b>Anthropomorphic verses</b> – According to this approach it is expected that Tanakh should talk about Hashem as if he has a body.</point> | ||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
<point><b>Bereshit 1:26-27</b> – The commentators suggest multiple ways of rereading these verses as not to imply that Hashem has an equivalent to a human body:<br/> | <point><b>Bereshit 1:26-27</b> – The commentators suggest multiple ways of rereading these verses as not to imply that Hashem has an equivalent to a human body:<br/> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
− | <li></li> | + | <li> –</li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
</category> | </category> |
Version as of 11:37, 4 April 2017
Anthropomorphism
Exegetical Approaches
Hashem Can Be Corporeal1
Sources:Merkavah Shelemah Shiur Komah,2 Rashi,3 R. Moshe Taku, scholars cited by Raavad, scholars cited by R. Avraham b. HaRambam
Anthropomorphic verses – According to this approach it is expected that Tanakh should talk about Hashem as if he has a body.
Hashem is limited
"וְאֶל מִי תְדַמְּיוּנִי"
Seeing Hashem
Bereshit 1:26-27 – R. Moshe Taku cites these verses a proof that Hashem has a body.
Hashem Is Not Corporeal
Sources:R. Saadia Gaon, R. Sherira Gaon, R. Hai Gaon, R. Yehuda HaLevi, Ibn Ezra, R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, Rambam
Anthropomorphic verses – Rasag, Rambam and R. Yosef Albo all explain these verses as a figure of speech. They render the purpose of using such language, as to simplify for the nation so they will be able to relate more easily to Hashem.
Seeing Hashem
- Hashem's glory – R. Saadia. All the prophets who saw Hashem just saw a bright light from where they heard Hashem. Moshe, who was on a different level, saw a larger light.
- Intellectual vision – R. Chananel. The prophets did not see any physical vision, rather "saw" Hashem in their hearts.
Bereshit 1:26-27 – The commentators suggest multiple ways of rereading these verses as not to imply that Hashem has an equivalent to a human body:
- –