Torah and Jewish Idea > Torah and Jewish Idea

the "holy spirit"

<< < (3/4) > >>

muman613:
http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/parkoff/archives/tazria71.htm

Rav Chaim Volozhin, in his sefer Nefesh HaChaim elaborates on the basic precept in the foundation of the world: the position of Man in G-d's Creation. The possuk says: "God created Man in His own image, in the image of God He created him" (Bereishis 1:27); "…for in the image of God He made man" (Bereishis 9:6). What is the meaning of "in the image of Hashem"? Do we really look like Him? Or does He look like us? That, we know, is utterly absurd. He has no image. And anyone who ascribes a material image to the Almighty is guilty of the heresy of anthropomorphism. Hashem is totally spiritual, and has no material form. All characteristics associated to Hashem are metaphors and figures of speech for our benefit to enable us to relate to Him. The commentaries tell us that all we can know about HaKadosh Baruch Hu are the attributes with which He relates to us, such as lovingkindness, mercy, justice, etc. But we can have absolutely no concept of Him Himself. He is beyond that. So what is this image of God?

The Nefesh HaChaim explains that the term used to denote Hashem in that possuk is Elokim. This term indicates Hashem's total control of the universe. He is the ultimate power ruling over millions upon millions of forces that influence every detail of this world. When He created Man, God gave him the ability to rule (so to speak) over those millions of forces. Man controls the world together with Hashem. By his good deeds, the world is influenced toward good; by his bad deeds toward the opposite. Thus, Man has been made a partner (so to speak) with Hashem. And therefore, Man was the only creature given free will. It is this quality of freedom of choice that enables Man to spiritually improve himself or lower himself. Angels and animals are compelled by their nature and cannot decide anything based upon free will; Man is the only creation with this ability. And because Man is partner with Hashem, through his actions he controls the world to add or detract from its spiritual perfection.

Why does the Creator need us to be His partner? Hashem is perfection and requires nothing. What purpose is there in His making Man His partner? What can man do for God? Why should Hashem need man? Rav Ezriel Tauber explained this with a moshol. First, however, we must make a disclaimer: the ultimate purpose of Creation is unknown to us. Only the Ribono Shel Olam Himself knows the ultimate reason why the universe was created. We are not yet ready to understand. After Moshiach comes and the whole world is filled with a new wisdom, Hashem will reveal to us the secrets of the Universe: why we were here and what we have really accomplished in our lifetimes. Right now, our knowledge is limited to whatever will help us understand our job in this world, how we have to behave, and what we have to do with this world.

edu:
Zenith stated the following:

--- Quote --- I don't know who Radak and Ibn Ezra are, but I'll tell you how I understand this verse:


Quote from: Psalm 139.7-8
7. Where shall I go from Your spirit, and where shall I flee from Your presence?
8. If I ascend to the heavens, there You are, and if I make my bed in the grave, behold, You are there.
the first sentence (about "Your Spirit") is the same thing as the second (about "Your presence"). And "Your presence"/"Your Spirit" = "You are there" (G-d is there). The whole psalm talks about G-d (even here, where it's said about His Spirit/His presence. It doesn't say "where shall I go from your wrath" or something. It says, where I should go from You.
--- End quote ---
I believe Zenith attempts to use these 2 verses as support for the Christian concept of trinity, equating "your spirit" in verse 7 with "you are there". Radak and Ibn Ezra on the other hand hold that this is not the intention of the Psalmist. The intention of the Psalmist is that you can't escape from G-d. One, because, we don't have the ability to do anything without G-d's help (their explanation of your spirit). And point two, even if we got around that problem of the lack of ability to do things without G-d's help, there is no place that is void of G-d's presence The literal hebrew word is "your face", but since G-d lacks a body, it is anthromorphic term, which the translator that you quoted interpreted as the term, your presence.
In any case without backing or rejecting for the time being this interpretation of "my face", we will now go to verse 8.
 Verse 8 as I understand it (because Radak and Ibn Ezra don't spell it all out) is an expansion or a deeper explanation of point two. Namely, there is no destination one can run or escape to "to get away for G-d.

edu:
Zenith stated the following:

--- Quote ---In the view of Metzudat Dovid, he understands the words as how can I hide (or go away) from your ruach of anger.
I don't remember to have ever read in the Tanakh "G-d's spirit of wrath". Please give me a verse if you know it. I know that in the Tanakh only men are described with spirits of X.
--- End quote ---
For the sake of saving time I am using now the translation of "The Pentateuch and Rashi's commentary, A Linear translation into English" by Rabbi Abraham Ben Isaiah and Rabbi Benjamin Sharfman
In the song celebrating, the miracle of the parting of the sea (which took place after the 10 plagues) it says in Hebrew
Shmot/Exodus 15:8
וברוח אפיך  נערמו מים
translated as: And with the blast of thy nostrils (the) waters were piled up.
Rashi (the most famous of all Jewish commentaries) states on the word And with the blast of Thy nostrils
(the blast) that goes forth from the two nostrils of the nose. Scripture speaks as if this were possible of the Divine Presence in the way of a king of flesh and blood, (only) in order to let the ears of people hear in accordance to what usually happens, in order that they shall be able to understand the matter. When one is in anger, wind goes forth from his nostrils; and similarly (Psalms 18:9): "Smoke arose up in His nostrils"; and similarly (Job 4:9) And by the blast of his anger are they consumed.
Rashi continues more in depth to explain the symbolic images but I hope this is sufficient.
In Exodus 15:8 the Hebrew is "and with your Ruach"
In Job 4:9 the Hebrew is "and from the Ruach"
I have already provided above how the translator interpreted Ruach in those contexts.
Given these precedents it is perfectly legitimate for Metzudat Dovid to interpret the word Ruach in Psalms 139 as G-d's Ruach of anger

Zenith:

--- Quote from: muman613 ---Zenith,

I will try once again to explain to you these Jewish concepts. But often it seems to me you are trying to approach this from a very non-Jewish, and even from a Christian perspective. In that case you will absolutely not be able to make sense of what we write concerning the Ruach HaKodesh and the Shekinah.
--- End quote ---

A few points here:
1. I am not a Jew, did not grow in a Jewish environment, so it is quite obvious that I cannot approach things from a Jewish perspective (to approach things from a Jewish perspective means to know the Jewish perspective regarding the subject, and I can't know it unless you explain it to me; And I cannot agree with it unless you give me good logic for it). I approach things from my perspective. I don't quite care if it is a Christian perspective (or a specific Christian Orthodox perspective or a Catholic perspective or other) or a Jewish perspective or an Islamic perspective as I care what the Tanakh itself specifies about it.

2. Please tell me what "Shekinah" means. I'm learning Hebrew, it lasts a long time, I don't know what this particular word means. I know that Ruach means "spirit", "breath", "wind". Please tell me what "Shekinah" literally means, and perhaps a verse where I can find it in the Tanakh.

3. I'm curios of something. It seems that "Kodesh" means "holyness" while "Kadosh" means "holy". So "Ruach HaKodesh" should mean "Spirit of holyness" and in Psalm 51.13 it seems to be literally translated as "Spirit of Thy holyness" (i.e. "Ruach Kodshekha", unless I've transliterated wrong). Am I right?

4. You said "In that case you will absolutely not be able to make sense of what we write concerning the Ruach HaKodesh". Can you not show me the Jewish perspective, from the Tanakh? Shouldn't the correct perspective be found from the Tanakh? Otherwise how can it be known that it is the correct perspective? I guess even the sages have derived their views from the Tanakh.


--- Quote ---First, you are aware that Jews believe that G-d, Hashem our L-rd, is not corporeal, that Hashem has no body, no manifestation in this world. Hashem is eternal, infinite, and we are not able to even begin to understand what Hashem 'Is'.
...
We call this Anthropomorphism, the attribution of human characteristics to something which is not human. The Torah is replete with statements like "Hashems strong arm" and "Hashem Spoke" when we know that Hashem has no Arm, and he has no mouth to speak. Obviously these anthropomorphisms must be understood in a way that is cognizant of the fact that Hashem has no body, no corporeality.
--- End quote ---

I am not very certain about how/what G-d is, exactly. And I am not quite certain about what you intended to tell me.

1. You mean that G-d did not speak to His prophets, but they only imagined? Or that they were very religious and so whatever they've been thinking about should be considered as from G-d? I'd appreciate if you tell me your view on the "divine inspiration".
2. I know that in the Tanakh it is spoken "G-d's arm"/"G-d's hand" and it means "G-d's power". But about speaking, that does seem to contradict all the Tanakh: You seem to 'transform' G-d into a "force" of the Universe, fearing that otherwise it would sound "anthropomorphic". We know that "reason"/"thinking" is a human attribute, so do you believe that G-d has this attribute too?

Now, my view:
Gen 1.26 "And G-d said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness". That is both "image" and "likeness". And in Gen 3.22 it is written that "Behold man has become like one of us, having the ability of knowing good and evil". Didn't G-d make man similar to Him? I mean, things like having reason, memory, conscience, etc.?
You quoted:

--- Quote ---What is the meaning of "in the image of Hashem"? Do we really look like Him? Or does He look like us? That, we know, is utterly absurd. He has no image.
--- End quote ---
If G-d did not assume a form/an image so that He could be seen by His angels (hosts of heaven), then tell me, why is it written "in our image, after our likeness"? (both image and likeness - anyone can tell a difference between them)

Then, could G-d not assume a form/an image so that He would be 'seen' by His angels? I mean, they can see one another, but G-d to be invisible to them?

1 Kings 22.19 states "I saw the Lord seated on His throne, and all the host of heaven were standing by Him on His right and on His left." - did he see an invisible G-d on an imaginary throne, and all the host of heavens (we should call them "angels") standing by the right and by the left of an infinitely big, invisible G-d (He fills the entire universe)? Please tell me, what did the prophet see?? I do believe that G-d does not have a "manifestation in this world" in such a way so that people would be able to find Him if they seek where they should (as people cannot find the heaven of G-d and the angels, no matter how much and where they seek). But that doesn't mean, for instance, that G-d cannot make a certain angel to be manifested in this world, so that people would see him.

We also read Exodus 33.19-23: did G-d trick Moses that he would see Him (v.23)? what did Moses see?


--- Quote ---In later Jewish literature, the “Holy Spirit” is connected to a spirit of Prophecy. But either way, there is no reason to make the assumption that, somehow, this Holy spirit of G-d is a separate entity. There is no support for the concept of the trinity in the Hebrew Scriptures.
--- End quote ---
I am curios of something: please tell me how you understand the Christian "Holy Trinity" and polytheism (many gods). I suppose, but I'm not sure, that you call the Christians "polytheists" (I know that muslims do that, so I suppose you do that too, though I'm not sure).


--- Quote from: edu ---The literal hebrew word is "your face", but since G-d lacks a body, it is anthromorphic term, which the translator that you quoted interpreted as the term, your presence.
--- End quote ---
I've read in a place "your face", but I thought that perhaps it is translated wrong. So I used the version of chabad.org. Anyway, I sincerely don't agree with "translation & interpretation" when the Tanakh is supposed to be translated into a language. I think it would have been correct to translate it as "your face", rather than "your presence", though it is understood that it means "you cannot hide away from G-d".


--- Quote ---
--- Quote from: Zenith ---I don't remember to have ever read in the Tanakh "G-d's spirit of wrath". Please give me a verse if you know it. I know that in the Tanakh only men are described with spirits of X.
--- End quote ---
...
In Exodus 15:8 the Hebrew is "and with your Ruach"
In Job 4:9 the Hebrew is "and from the Ruach"
I have already provided above how the translator interpreted Ruach in those contexts.
Given these precedents it is perfectly legitimate for Metzudat Dovid to interpret the word Ruach in Psalms 139 as G-d's Ruach of anger
--- End quote ---
First off, you've put from yourself in Psalm 139 "G-d's spirit of anger". It is not in the text. I am certain that in the Psalm 139 it is not spoken about "G-d's anger" - read the psalm and see that in it David glorifies G-d rather than saying "I obey you out of fear because your anger if everywhere!"

If these are the verses that can be claimed to contain "G-d's spirit of X", then it seems "G-d's spirit of X" is found nowhere in the Tanakh. In those instances, it should better be translated as "G-d's breath" rather than "G-d's Spirit". Moreover, it is not written "G-d's spirit of anger/mercy/etc.". If indeed "anger", "fear", etc. are spirits as it is depicted in 1 Kings 22.20-23 then it is impossible for G-d to be 'filled' with a spirit of "anger", or a spirit of "fear", because these spirits are His servants. And therefore, you should not be able to find in the Tanakh that "G-d is filled with a spirit of X", or "the Lord is filled with a spirit of X", or any similar thing.

Kahane-Was-Right BT:

--- Quote from: Zenith on April 17, 2011, 11:37:15 AM ---
If these are the verses that can be claimed to contain "G-d's spirit of X", then it seems "G-d's spirit of X" is found nowhere in the Tanakh. In those instances, it should better be translated as "G-d's breath" rather than "G-d's Spirit". Moreover, it is not written "G-d's spirit of anger/mercy/etc.". If indeed "anger", "fear", etc. are spirits as it is depicted in 1 Kings 22.20-23 then it is impossible for G-d to be 'filled' with a spirit of "anger", or a spirit of "fear", because these spirits are His servants. And therefore, you should not be able to find in the Tanakh that "G-d is filled with a spirit of X", or "the Lord is filled with a spirit of X", or any similar thing.


--- End quote ---

But ruach can mean either term, breath or spirit (or wind, really).   In either case, it's not meant literally but figuratively so what are you worried about?

Spirit DOES NOT mean a spirit as a separate physical entity.   (It does not mean "servants!")  Just like a person maybe "has happy spirit today," it has to do with that person's disposition, NOT with some physical entity flying around the person and doing things or this unknown thing being happy! It's about the person himself.  Obviously though, to attach or ascribe emotional expressions to G-d is a less than literal endeavor, but I use the example of a person for the same exact reason the tanakh in places makes these type of attributions to G-d (as edu has already pointed out here) - because it is easier to comprehend as an example.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page