Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

levite · 03-06-2008, 02:57 AM

I think a lot of people are proceeding on the assumption that was behind what the Rambam (Maimonides-- Rambam is his acronym in Hebrew, Rabbi Moshe Ben Maimon) was saying: that if the universe were truly infinite in both space and time, God could not be transcendent, but would inevitable have to be entirely "within" the universe and in no way "without."

A key philosophical problem has always been God's existence independent of the universe, and what that implies as to what might be "outside" the universe, or "outside" the scope of Time. Especially in the Rambam's day, there was a strong contingent of philosophers who maintained that all matter in the universe was eternal and uncreated. They felt strongly that to imply otherwise was both irrational and created many philosophical problems that were likely to be insoluble. The Rambam, whose raison d'etre was the attempt to fuse Jewish theology and philosophy with neo-Aristotelianism, was put in the difficult position of having to maintain that the universe was more or less eternal [as close to the neo-Aristotelian view as he could get], but that God created the universe ex nihilo [the position of the Jewish tradition]. By definition, then, God would have to be transcendent, with an existence independent of the universe, which means that there would have to be something "without," both in terms of space and time.

If I have correctly identified the passage you mean, in Hebrew, what Rambam says in Moreh Nevukhim (The Guide for the Perplexed) is that the universe is "ha-olam ha-nivrah olami hu, u'malkhut yotzro l'olam va-ed." "The created world is eternal [literally, 'is as long as the life of the world,' a common euphemism in classical Hebrew for eternality], but the rule [that is, the span or existence] of its Creator is beyond eternal." Or, to put it in more modern terms, the universe exists for or in what is to us, to all practical purposes, a nearly infinite amount of time, and in a nearly infinite amount of space; but for God, the finiteness of that space and time serves to accentuate His infinity and transcendence. (It would be damned handy at this juncture if I spoke Arabic, since that's what the Guide was originally written in, and all the Hebrew translations are known to have some idiomatic shifts....)

The problem with God being transcendent is that one either has to wonder whether God has to split himself up in order to get himself into the finite universe [which seems, in part, to be Christianity's trinitarian contention], or whether God is entirely outside of the universe [the theology of Rabbi Isaac Luria's neo-Zoharic Kabbalah], or if something in between, where is the "center" of God. The Rambam in part solves this by postulating God as an almost abstract Causa Prima, the ultimate agglomerated source of intelligibles; His presence in the universe is in the form of Shefa, outpoured radiance [probably what Rambam meant by this is mostly like primal lifeforce, basic energy]. In a way, Rambam's God is a little like a cross between the Hindu Brahman and The Force. To be honest, from my point of view, I find it a very unsatisfying theology for Judaism, but then, I'm not a rationalist.

I do actually think it rather makes our theological lives easier that it turns out the universe is not, in fact, infinite or eternal. Doesn't answer any questions, really, but it gives us a bit of breathing room. If the universe were infinite in space and time, but continuously expanding, as astronomy seems to indicate to us, we might be forced to ask, "where within the universe could we locate God? Or if not all of God, at least the 'center' of God?" And that is a deeply problematic question. Moreover, what would we do with the fact that an infinite and eternal universe that is continuously expanding, but contains a finite amount of created matter, is inevitably going to come to the point at which all matter is spread so thin that nothing complex can exist anymore. And since we postulate that God created the universe at least in part in order to sustain complex beings, what would God's purpose be in creating an infinite system that inevitably fails one of its prime purposes? If you raise the same question with a finite universe, saying that if a prime purpose of the universe is to sustain complex beings, and yet it will end altogether in another 15-20 billion years, one could respond by saying that a transcendent God-- unaffected by the demise of the created universe-- could well create another, which is a valid philosophical answer.

You see what I mean?

03-06-2008, 02:57 AM	#2 (permalink)
levite Minion of Joss Location: The Windy City	I think a lot of people are proceeding on the assumption that was behind what the Rambam (Maimonides-- Rambam is his acronym in Hebrew, Rabbi Moshe Ben Maimon) was saying: that if the universe were truly infinite in both space and time, God could not be transcendent, but would inevitable have to be entirely "within" the universe and in no way "without." A key philosophical problem has always been God's existence independent of the universe, and what that implies as to what might be "outside" the universe, or "outside" the scope of Time. Especially in the Rambam's day, there was a strong contingent of philosophers who maintained that all matter in the universe was eternal and uncreated. They felt strongly that to imply otherwise was both irrational and created many philosophical problems that were likely to be insoluble. The Rambam, whose raison d'etre was the attempt to fuse Jewish theology and philosophy with neo-Aristotelianism, was put in the difficult position of having to maintain that the universe was more or less eternal [as close to the neo-Aristotelian view as he could get], but that God created the universe ex nihilo [the position of the Jewish tradition]. By definition, then, God would have to be transcendent, with an existence independent of the universe, which means that there would have to be something "without," both in terms of space and time. If I have correctly identified the passage you mean, in Hebrew, what Rambam says in Moreh Nevukhim (The Guide for the Perplexed) is that the universe is "ha-olam ha-nivrah olami hu, u'malkhut yotzro l'olam va-ed." "The created world is eternal [literally, 'is as long as the life of the world,' a common euphemism in classical Hebrew for eternality], but the rule [that is, the span or existence] of its Creator is beyond eternal." Or, to put it in more modern terms, the universe exists for or in what is to us, to all practical purposes, a nearly infinite amount of time, and in a nearly infinite amount of space; but for God, the finiteness of that space and time serves to accentuate His infinity and transcendence. (It would be damned handy at this juncture if I spoke Arabic, since that's what the Guide was originally written in, and all the Hebrew translations are known to have some idiomatic shifts....) The problem with God being transcendent is that one either has to wonder whether God has to split himself up in order to get himself into the finite universe [which seems, in part, to be Christianity's trinitarian contention], or whether God is entirely outside of the universe [the theology of Rabbi Isaac Luria's neo-Zoharic Kabbalah], or if something in between, where is the "center" of God. The Rambam in part solves this by postulating God as an almost abstract Causa Prima, the ultimate agglomerated source of intelligibles; His presence in the universe is in the form of Shefa, outpoured radiance [probably what Rambam meant by this is mostly like primal lifeforce, basic energy]. In a way, Rambam's God is a little like a cross between the Hindu Brahman and The Force. To be honest, from my point of view, I find it a very unsatisfying theology for Judaism, but then, I'm not a rationalist. I do actually think it rather makes our theological lives easier that it turns out the universe is not, in fact, infinite or eternal. Doesn't answer any questions, really, but it gives us a bit of breathing room. If the universe were infinite in space and time, but continuously expanding, as astronomy seems to indicate to us, we might be forced to ask, "where within the universe could we locate God? Or if not all of God, at least the 'center' of God?" And that is a deeply problematic question. Moreover, what would we do with the fact that an infinite and eternal universe that is continuously expanding, but contains a finite amount of created matter, is inevitably going to come to the point at which all matter is spread so thin that nothing complex can exist anymore. And since we postulate that God created the universe at least in part in order to sustain complex beings, what would God's purpose be in creating an infinite system that inevitably fails one of its prime purposes? If you raise the same question with a finite universe, saying that if a prime purpose of the universe is to sustain complex beings, and yet it will end altogether in another 15-20 billion years, one could respond by saying that a transcendent God-- unaffected by the demise of the created universe-- could well create another, which is a valid philosophical answer. You see what I mean? __________________ Dull sublunary lovers love, Whose soul is sense, cannot admit Absence, because it doth remove That thing which elemented it. (From "A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning" by John Donne)