Hubbry Logo
Godhead in JudaismGodhead in JudaismMain
Open search
Godhead in Judaism
Community hub
Godhead in Judaism
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Godhead in Judaism
Godhead in Judaism
Godhead in Judaism
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Godhead refers to the aspect or substratum of God that lies behind God's actions or properties (i.e., it is the essence of God), and its nature has been the subject of long debate in every major religion.

Terminology

[edit]

The closest corresponding term in the classical and modern languages of Jewish scholarship is אלוהות (elohút), meaning deity (essential nature of a god) or divinity.[citation needed] Max Kadushin notes that "The plural 'Elohim, gods, must not be confused with 'Elohut, Godhead. The latter is used with reference to God".[1]

Conceptions

[edit]

Neoplatonic

[edit]

The leading Jewish Neoplatonic writer was Solomon ibn Gabirol. In his Fons Vitae, Gabirol's position is that everything that exists may be reduced to three categories: the first substance (God), matter and form (the world), with the will as intermediary. Gabirol derives matter and form from absolute being. In the Godhead he seems to differentiate essentia (being) from proprietas (attribute), designating by proprietas the will, wisdom, creative word ("voluntas, sapientia, verbum agens"). He thinks of the Godhead as being and as will or wisdom, regarding the will as identical with the divine nature. This position is implicit in the doctrine of Gabirol, who teaches that God's existence is knowable, but not His being or constitution, no attribute being predicable of God save that of existence.

Kaufmann holds that Gabirol was an opponent of the doctrine of divine attributes. While there are passages in the Fons Vitae, in the Ethics, and even in the Keter Malkut (from which Sachs deduces Gabirol's acceptance of the theory of the doctrine of divine attributes) which seem to support this assumption, a minute examination of the questions bearing on this, such as has been made by Kaufmann (in Gesch. der Attributenlehre), proves very clearly that will and wisdom are spoken of not as attributes of the divine, but with reference to an aspect of the divine, the creative aspect; so that the will is not to be looked upon as intermediary between God and substance and form. Matter or substance proceeds from the being of God, and form from God as will, matter corresponding to the first substance and form to the will; but there is no thought in the mind of Gabirol of substance and will as separate entities, or of will as an attribute of substance. Will is neither attribute nor substance, Gabirol being so pure a monotheist that he can not brook the thought of any attribute of God lest it mar the purity of monotheism. In this Gabirol follows strictly in the line of Hebrew tradition.

Rationalistic

[edit]

In the philosophy of Maimonides and other Jewish-rationalistic philosophers, there is little which can be predicated about the God other than his "existence", and even this can only be asserted equivocally.

How then can a relation be represented between Him and what is other than He when there is no notion comprising in any respect both of the two, inasmuch as existence is, in our opinion, affirmed of Him, may He be exalted, and of what is other than He merely by way of absolute equivocation. There is, in truth, no relation in any respect between Him and any of His creatures.

— Maimonides, Moreh Nevuchim (Pines 1963)

Kabbalistic

[edit]
Main article: Ein Sof

In Jewish mystical thought (Kabbalah), the term "Godhead" usually refers[citation needed] to the concept of Ein Sof (אין סוף), the aspect of God that lies beyond the emanations (sefirot). The "knowability" of the Godhead in Kabbalistic thought is no better than what is conceived by rationalist thinkers. As Jacobs (1973) puts it: "Of God as He is in Himself—Ein Sof—nothing can be said at all, and no thought can reach there."

Ein Sof is a place to which forgetting and oblivion pertain. Why? Because concerning all the sefirot, one can search out their reality from the depth of supernal wisdom. From there it is possible to understand one thing from another. However, concerning Ein Sof, there is no aspect anywhere to search or probe; nothing can be known of it, for it is hidden and concealed in the mystery of absolute nothingness.

— David ben Judah Hehasid, Matt (1990)

There is a divergence of opinion among the kabbalists concerning the relation of the sefirot to the Ein Sof. Azriel (commentary on the Sefer Yetzirah, p. 27b) and, after him, Menahem Recanati (Ṭa'ame ha-Miẓwot, passim) considered the sefirot to be totally different from the Divine Being. The "Ma'areket" group took the sefirot to be identical in their totality with the En Sof, each sefirah representing merely a certain view of the Infinite ("Ma'areket", p. 8b). The Zohar clearly implies that they are the names of the deity, and gives for each of them a corresponding name of God and of the hosts of angels mentioned in the Bible. Luria and Cordovero, without regarding them as instruments, do not identify them with the essence of the deity. They argue that the "Absolute One" is immanent in all the sefirot and reveals himself through them, but does not dwell in them; the sefirot can never include the Infinite. Each sefirah has a well-known name, but the Holy One has no definite name (Pardes Rimmonim, pp. 21–23).


See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Godhead in Judaism

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
In Judaism, the refers to the singular, indivisible essence of , who is the transcendent, infinite creator of the , beyond human comprehension and representation. This monotheistic conception emphasizes 's absolute unity, prohibiting any division or plurality in the divine nature, as articulated in core texts like the prayer: "Hear, O : The Lord our , the Lord is one." is described with attributes such as , , , justice, mercy, and holiness, yet these are understood as approximations limited by human language, with the divine essence remaining unknowable and incorporeal to avoid . Judaism's theological tradition, spanning biblical, rabbinic, philosophical, and mystical sources, consistently affirms God's sovereignty over creation and history while rejecting or . In philosophical strands, particularly Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, is a perfect unity without parts, body, or emotions, existing necessarily and eternally as the . This rationalist approach contrasts with more experiential depictions in prophetic literature, where interacts dynamically with humanity through covenants, such as the revelation at Sinai. In Kabbalistic mysticism, which emerged in the 12th-13th centuries, the Godhead is elaborated as ("Without End"), the boundless and hidden infinite aspect of divinity that precedes and transcends all manifestation. From emanate the ten sefirot, dynamic attributes or channels (such as wisdom, understanding, and compassion) that form the structure of the divine realm, enabling creation and interaction with the world while preserving God's ultimate unity. This theosophical framework, central to works like the , integrates mystical contemplation and ethical action to achieve harmony within the Godhead, influencing Hasidic and later Jewish thought. Throughout , the Godhead's conception has evolved to address philosophical challenges, such as the and human suffering, often portraying as both transcendent (distant and absolute) and immanent (present in ethical demands and communal life). Modern , from to Orthodox perspectives, continues to grapple with these ideas, sometimes incorporating or feminist reinterpretations, yet always rooted in the unchanging commitment to .

Foundational Concepts

Biblical Origins

The concept of the Godhead in Judaism originates in the , where the idea of a singular, unified divine entity developed amid the polytheistic religions of the , including Mesopotamian, Egyptian, and Canaanite traditions that venerated multiple gods and goddesses. Archaeological and textual evidence indicates that early Israelite religion incorporated elements of or , focusing worship on while acknowledging other deities, but transitioned toward exclusive by the late monarchy period (eighth to sixth centuries BCE), particularly during the Babylonian exile, as reflected in prophetic writings that denounced polytheistic practices. A pivotal expression of divine oneness appears in the , declared in Deuteronomy 6:4: "Hear, O : The LORD our , the LORD is one." This verse encapsulates the theological cornerstone of Jewish , affirming God's indivisible unity and singularity against the multiplicity of deities in surrounding cultures, and carries profound liturgical weight as the opening of Judaism's central , recited daily to reinforce communal devotion and identity. The Ten Commandments further delineate God's transcendence and uniqueness, commencing in Exodus 20:2-3 with: "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me." This inaugural command establishes Yahweh's exclusive sovereignty, prohibiting the worship of rival deities and, in the subsequent verse, the creation of images, which implies divine incorporeality and elevates God beyond physical representation or human-like form. Biblical texts attribute to God essential qualities that underscore this unitary essence without suggesting internal divisions or multiplicity. As creator, God initiates existence in Genesis 1:1: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth," portraying a sovereign act of origination from nothingness. Eternity defines God's timeless being in Psalm 90:2: "Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever Thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting Thou art God." Omnipotence is evoked in Isaiah 40:28: "Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard that the everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary?" These attributes collectively emphasize a singular, self-sufficient divinity.

Rabbinic Elaborations

, particularly the and , strongly affirms the absolute unity of the Godhead, building on the biblical declaration of the as the foundational text for . In the Babylonian Talmud, Berakhot 13b, the recitation of the Shema is emphasized as a moment of profound concentration on God's oneness, with the custom of covering one's eyes during the verse "Hear, O : The our , the is one" (Deuteronomy ) serving to block out distractions and focus solely on divine singularity, rejecting any notion of dualism or plurality in the divine realm. This practice underscores the rabbinic commitment to the Shema as a daily affirmation of God's indivisible essence, as taught by the Sages who prescribe its recitation twice daily to reinforce monotheistic belief against idolatrous influences. Early rabbinic texts further elaborate on God's incorporeality and invisibility to counter literal interpretations of anthropomorphic biblical descriptions, such as God's "hand" or "face." Rabbinic sources interpret the Sinai theophany, including verses like Exodus 20:21 where Moses approaches the "thick darkness" where God was, as indicating that the divine presence is formless and inaccessible to human sight, drawing on declarations like "you saw no form" (Deuteronomy 4:15) to prohibit any physical representation of God. This midrashic approach uses phrases like ke-be-khol ("as it were") to qualify seemingly corporeal language in Scripture, ensuring that descriptions of God are understood metaphorically rather than literally, thus preserving the transcendent, non-physical nature of the . Such interpretations in tannaitic sources reject corporealism, aligning with broader rabbinic efforts to safeguard from Hellenistic or pagan influences that might imply a bodily . Hints of early mysticism appear in the , which describes visionary ascents to the divine throne (merkavah) drawn from Ezekiel's prophecy, while striving to maintain 's absolute oneness amid controversial elements that suggest multiplicity, such as powerful angelic mediators like . These texts portray the throne as a symbol of divine majesty surrounded by angelic hosts, but emphasize that the enthroned is singular and incomparable, with the divine essence ultimately undivided despite debates over "two powers in heaven." The focus remains on the unity of the divine name and presence, using esoteric hymns and adjurations to evoke awe while avoiding any attribution of form or partners to , thus extending rabbinic anti-anthropomorphic principles into contemplative realms. The is also portrayed in rabbinic thought as relational through and the covenant, yet remains singular in its sustaining power. In 3:15, teaches that "the world is judged with goodness, and all depends on the abundance of merit," implying that creation is upheld by God's unified act of benevolence and oversight, binding in covenantal fidelity without compromising . This conception frames providence not as multiple forces but as the singular will of the one God who elects and sustains the world, reinforcing the relational aspect of the while upholding its indivisible unity.

Terminology

Traditional Terms

In traditional Jewish sources, the term (אֱלֹהִים), appearing in Genesis 1:1 as the subject of a singular verb, functions as a plural form denoting majesty and emphasizing God's singular essence and all-encompassing power, rather than implying multiplicity of deities. This usage highlights divine authority and creative might, as seen in contexts where conveys holiness and strength. In contrast, (יהוה), the , serves as God's personal name, evoking covenantal relationship, mercy, and eternal presence, often substituted in pronunciation with Adonai due to its sanctity. The abstract noun Elohut (אֱלֹהוּת) specifically denotes the divine essence or in , distinct from God's actions or attributes, and is not to be conflated with the plural referring to gods or powers. As articulated by Max Kadushin in his analysis of rabbinic thought, Elohut captures the intrinsic, unified nature of beyond manifestations. Aramaic terminology from biblical texts further enriches this lexicon, such as Atik Yomin (עֲתִיק יוֹמִין) in :9, translating to "" and symbolizing God's transcendent, eternal sovereignty beyond time and space. This term portrays the divine as an unchanging in heavenly visions, underscoring remoteness from creation while affirming ultimate authority. Traditional contexts prioritize these indigenous Hebrew and expressions for the , eschewing Greek loanwords to maintain linguistic purity and theological distinctiveness rooted in scripture and . Later philosophical adaptations occasionally incorporated external influences, but core rabbinic usage remained anchored in native terms.

Philosophical and Mystical Vocabulary

In Jewish philosophical and mystical traditions, the vocabulary for describing the expanded beyond biblical roots, incorporating terms influenced by Hellenistic, Arabic, and internal interpretive developments to articulate nuanced aspects of divine immanence and transcendence. The biblical term , denoting a multifaceted divine power, served as a foundational root for later elaborations. These terms often bridged literal and metaphorical understandings, allowing thinkers to navigate the tension between God's unknowable essence and perceptible manifestations. The concept of tzelem (image), drawn from Genesis 1:26, entered philosophical debates as a non-literal descriptor of the divine form imprinted in humanity, emphasizing intellectual and spiritual resemblance rather than physical likeness. (Ramban), in his commentary on Genesis 1:26, interprets tzelem as referring to the rational soul's capacity for wisdom, understanding, and , which distinguishes humans from other creatures and enables a connection to the divine without implying . This view aligns with broader medieval efforts to reconcile scriptural imagery with rational , portraying the tzelem as an abstract reflection of God's attributes in human and dominion over creation. Shekhinah, denoting the indwelling divine presence, emerged in as a term distinct from God's transcendent essence, signifying God's accompaniment in the world, particularly amid exile and suffering. In the Babylonian Talmud (Megillah 29a), it is stated that "wherever went into exile, the went with them," illustrating this presence as a comforting, immanent aspect of the that dwells among the people without compromising divine unity or otherness. This distinction allowed later philosophers and mystics to conceptualize the as a relational intermediary, enabling human encounter with the divine while preserving the inaccessibility of God's core being. Early mystical texts introduced kavod (glory) as a key term for the visible manifestation of the hidden , often depicted as a luminous, anthropomorphic figure that veils and reveals the divine simultaneously. In , such as Hekhalot Rabbati, the kavod appears as a radiant body of fire or light enthroned on the merkavah, serving as a protective screen that allows the mystic to glimpse God's presence without direct exposure to the transcendent essence, which could prove fatal. This terminology, rooted in Ezekiel's visions (Ezekiel 1:26-28), underscored the paradox of a concealed made partially accessible through glory, influencing subsequent merkavah and kabbalistic thought. During medieval transitions, Jewish philosophers adopted and adapted terms to distinguish between mahut (essence or ) and hawayah ( or being), facilitating precise discussions of the Godhead's amid Neoplatonic and Aristotelian influences. Mahut refers to the intrinsic "whatness" of , which remains unknowable and beyond human comprehension, while hawayah denotes the divine actuality or self-sustaining that underlies creation without implying composition or change. This binary, evident in thinkers like Levi ben Gerson and later kabbalists, marked a shift toward metaphysical , enabling articulations of 's and while avoiding corporeal implications in descriptions of the .

Medieval Philosophical Conceptions

Neoplatonic Perspectives

In medieval Jewish philosophy, Neoplatonism profoundly shaped conceptions of the Godhead, portraying it as the transcendent source of all existence through a process of emanation while preserving monotheistic principles. Solomon ibn Gabirol (c. 1021–1058), in his seminal work Fons Vitae (Fountain of Life, c. 1050), presents God as the supreme, indivisible Essence, utterly simple and beyond all multiplicity, from which all reality flows. This view draws heavily on Neoplatonic cosmology, adapting Plotinus's model of emanation—where the One overflows into intellect, soul, and matter—into a Jewish framework that emphasizes creation ex nihilo to avoid pantheistic implications, ensuring God's absolute transcendence and unity. In Fons Vitae, Gabirol posits that both universal matter and universal form derive directly from God, with the Divine Will serving as the crucial intermediary that bridges the ineffable divine Essence and the created order, sustaining the cosmos without compromising God's simplicity. Gabirol's theology rejects positive attributes ascribed to , arguing that such descriptions apply only analogically to His effects in creation, as the divine Essence remains unknowable to human reason, though 's existence can be demonstrated through rational contemplation of the world's order. This apophatic approach underscores the Godhead's inaccessibility, limiting knowledge to the emanated structures of will, wisdom, and substance, thereby harmonizing Neoplatonic hierarchy with scriptural . Unlike later rationalist thinkers such as , who emphasized Aristotelian negation, Gabirol's system prioritizes the dynamic emanative process as the key to understanding divine unity. Contemporary critics, including (c. 1075–1141), challenged this Neoplatonic infusion into Jewish thought as excessive , deeming it overly speculative and detached from the concrete, historical revelation central to Judaism. In his , Halevi critiques philosophical systems like Gabirol's for their abstract hierarchies and failure to ground theology in prophetic experience, favoring instead a more immanent tied to Israel's covenantal history. Despite such objections, Gabirol's adaptation of emanation theory influenced subsequent and philosophy, bridging pagan metaphysics with monotheistic doctrine.

Rationalist Views

In rationalist , particularly influenced by Aristotelian thought, the Godhead is understood through a method of negation and equivocation, emphasizing divine to avoid or limiting to human categories. This approach posits that positive attributes applied to do not describe inherent qualities but rather serve to negate their opposites, preserving 's transcendence. For instance, describing as "living" negates the notion of death or inertness, without implying biological life as in creatures. Moses , in his seminal work Guide for the Perplexed (c. ), articulates this framework systematically, arguing that only 's can be affirmed, and even that equivocally, as it differs fundamentally from contingent in the created world. He asserts that is the necessary existent, entirely unrelated to creatures, devoid of any composition, multiplicity, or potentiality, thereby ensuring divine unity and simplicity. warns against interpreting scriptural anthropomorphisms literally, instead advocating a via negativa where all affirmative predicates are stripped away to approach the divine essence indirectly. This rationalist conception profoundly influenced subsequent thinkers, such as Levi ben Gershon () in his Wars of the Lord (c. 1320s), who built upon by emphasizing the limits of human intellectual apprehension of the . Gersonides maintained the negation of corporeal attributes but introduced a more optimistic view of prophetic knowledge as the highest attainable insight into divine actions, rejecting mystical union in favor of rational comprehension through . Unlike Neoplatonic approaches that posit intermediary wills in emanative hierarchies, rationalists like these prioritize strict logical negation to safeguard .

Mystical Conceptions

Kabbalistic Frameworks

In Kabbalistic theology, the Godhead is fundamentally understood as , the infinite and boundless essence that eludes all human comprehension and description. Attributed to the 13th-century mystic , is portrayed as "hidden, without end or limit, unfathomable, and there is nothing outside Him," emphasizing its absolute transcendence beyond any predicates, attributes, or limitations. This conception underscores the divine as an undifferentiated unity, prior to and encompassing all manifestation, where even the act of naming or conceptualizing it risks imposing false boundaries on the infinite. The , the foundational text of compiled around 1280 CE, elaborates on as the primordial source that withdraws or contracts its infinite light to enable creation, serving as a precursor to the later Lurianic doctrine of . In this process, the overwhelming divine radiance diminishes to form a structured realm, yet nothing substantive can be predicated of itself, preserving its ineffable nature beyond duality or form. This withdrawal allows the infinite to interact with the finite without compromising its essential oneness, framing creation as an emanation rather than a separation. At the heart of this framework lie the ten , dynamic potencies or attributes through which Ein Sof manifests in a comprehensible configuration, rather than as independent entities or hypostases that would imply divine fragmentation. For instance, Keter embodies of pure will and supernal thought, while Malkhut represents the kingdom and the , the immanent that interfaces with the world—echoing earlier rabbinic notions of the as God's indwelling aspect. The function as instruments or vessels channeling the infinite light, creating an apparent multiplicity that ultimately reveals the underlying unity of the Godhead. As explored by Daniel Matt, this structure illustrates illusions of differentiation within Ein Sof's seamless wholeness, where the are not divisions but modalities of the singular divine reality.

Hasidic Extensions

Hasidism, emerging in the under the leadership of Israel ben , known as the (c. 1698–1760), extended Kabbalistic conceptions of the by emphasizing divine and personal devotion, making mystical union accessible to all through everyday rather than esoteric study alone. The taught that the fills all reality, embodying a panentheistic worldview where the universe has no independent existence but is contained within God, with divine light pervading every aspect of creation. This underscores that God's presence is not distant but actively present in and human psyche, enabling worship through corporeal actions and joyful service. Central to this extension is the reinterpretation of , the divine contraction described in , as a deliberate concealment rather than a literal withdrawal, allowing space for human purpose and while maintaining God's . The and his successor, the of Mezritch, illustrated through analogies like a father using simplified speech to connect with a , emphasizing that this veiling serves to draw humanity closer to the divine through revelation and attachment. In this framework, the —the ten emanations or inner lights of the —are viewed as dynamic divine attributes accessible via , the cleaving or mystical union with God achieved through fervent prayer, contemplation, and emotional devotion. These represent not only cosmic structures but psychological modes within the soul, where the transcendent indwells as sparks of divinity, redeemable through personal righteousness. Influenced by post-Lurianic Kabbalah, Hasidic thought integrates the concept of tikkun, or cosmic repair, portraying human actions—especially those of the zaddik (righteous leader)—as elevating scattered divine sparks from material exile to restore unity to the Godhead. This process democratizes redemption, as every individual can participate in mending the divine through acts of piety, shifting focus from intellectual mastery to heartfelt engagement with the indwelling divine presence in all things. Hasidism critiques excessive intellectualism and rational analysis, as seen in oppositions to the Haskalah (Jewish Enlightenment), arguing that true connection to the Godhead transcends reason and requires faith-driven emotional union over scholarly dissection. Leaders like Rabbi Zevi Elimelech of Dinov subordinated Talmudic study to devekut, prioritizing the soul's intuitive bond with the immanent divine.

Contemporary Interpretations

Liberal Perspectives

In liberal Jewish thought from the 19th to 21st centuries, the Godhead has been reimagined to harmonize with modern scientific understandings, ethical , and evolving social values, shifting away from personifications toward dynamic, immanent forces that inspire human progress. This reconceptualization maintains the traditional affirmation of divine unity, as echoed in the Shema's declaration of oneness, while adapting it to contemporary contexts. Pioneered in movements like Reconstructionism, , and , these perspectives emphasize the Godhead not as an omnipotent intervener but as an emergent reality intertwined with natural processes and moral striving. Mordecai Kaplan, founder of in the 1930s, articulated a naturalistic view of the as an evolving cosmic process or force that fosters and human fulfillment, explicitly rejecting personal supernatural attributes. In Kaplan's framework, God is the "Power that makes for ," manifesting through natural laws and communal experiences rather than transcendent miracles, allowing to align with empirical and democratic ideals. This approach influenced subsequent liberal theologies by framing the as integral to the universe's creative unfolding, where divine reality emerges from collective human efforts toward justice and well-being. Conservative Judaism, while affirming traditional , incorporates modern scholarship and allows for a range of views on the as a felt presence that is both transcendent and immanent. As a core value, belief in emphasizes divine actions in creation and history, experienced through and ethical life, without rigid supernaturalism, bridging ancient texts with contemporary historical-critical analysis. Reform Judaism further developed this through ethical monotheism, portraying the Godhead as both transcendent and immanent, actively present in human ethical endeavors and social repair. The 1999 Statement of Principles for Reform Judaism, adopted at its Pittsburgh gathering, affirms God's oneness while recognizing diverse interpretations, emphasizing divine presence in acts of compassion, justice, and tikkun olam (world repair), where humans partner with the divine through moral striving. This platform updates earlier Reform documents by integrating immanence into everyday life, viewing the Godhead as a source of inspiration for progressive causes without requiring literal belief in supernatural intervention. Feminist reinterpretations within liberal Judaism, notably by Judith Plaskow, incorporate feminine dimensions of the divine, such as the —the indwelling presence from mystical traditions—while preserving monotheistic unity. Plaskow's works critique patriarchal God-language and advocate for multifaceted imagery, including as a relational, nurturing aspect that complements rather than divides the singular , fostering inclusive that addresses gender inequities. This approach enriches the Godhead's conceptual breadth, drawing on historical sources to emphasize and partnership in creation. Post-1960s adaptations in liberal Judaism have drawn from , reconceiving the as a persuasive rather than coercive power that lures the universe toward greater complexity and goodness. Influenced by thinkers like Bradley Shavit Artson, this perspective views God as dynamically relational, learning and evolving alongside creation, aligning Jewish thought with evolutionary and addressing by attributing suffering to contingency rather than divine will. In this model, the operates through subtle influence in natural and human processes, empowering ethical action without overriding , thus bridging ancient with modern relational ontologies.

Orthodox and Academic Developments

In the 20th century, articulated a conception of the as profoundly personal yet ineffable, emphasizing an encounter rooted in wonder and divine rather than abstract . In his seminal work God in Search of Man: A Philosophy of , Heschel describes God not as a distant metaphysical entity but as an active, sympathetic presence seeking human response, evoking awe through the pathos of divine involvement in and creation. This view counters modern by insisting that the Godhead reveals itself through radical amazement and ethical sympathy, preserving the mystery of transcendence while affirming relational intimacy. Academic scholarship has revived negative theology in Jewish thought, drawing on medieval precedents like to address postmodern skepticism about divine representation. Michael Fagenblat's edited volume Negative Theology as Jewish Modernity (2017) explores how apophatic approaches—describing God by what God is not—resonate with contemporary doubts, positioning the as an unknowable absolute beyond anthropomorphic language or idolatrous images. This revival underscores the 's radical otherness, echoing Maimonidean via negativa while adapting it to modern philosophical challenges, such as and the limits of theological discourse. Orthodox thinkers have responded to scientific advancements by integrating Kabbalistic insights with , reaffirming the Godhead's unchanging unity amid empirical discoveries. , a and , exemplifies this synthesis in works like his commentary on the age of the , where he harmonizes Kabbalistic cosmology—such as the concept of cyclical creation—with Big Bang theory and , portraying the as the eternal, unified source underlying physical laws. Kaplan's approach maintains traditional by viewing scientific revelations as glimpses into divine structure, without compromising the Godhead's transcendence. Recent scholarship highlights the historical diversity in conceptions of the Kabbalistic Godhead, tracing its evolution from biblical roots through medieval and modern developments. In The Cambridge Companion to Jewish Theology (2020), Elliot R. Wolfson's chapter "The Mystical Theology of Kabbalah: From God to Godhead" examines how the Godhead shifted from a more unified biblical portrayal to the dynamic, sefirotic structures in Kabbalah, revealing layers of theological innovation while preserving core monotheistic tenets. More recently, David Novak's 2024 book God-Talk: The Heart of Judaism encourages renewed theological engagement with the Godhead through divine revelation and covenantal purpose, critiquing secularism and drawing on rabbinic traditions to affirm God's active role in Jewish life and ethics. This work underscores the Godhead's adaptability in Jewish tradition, informed by philosophical, mystical, and cultural influences over centuries.

References

  1. https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/about-god-in-judaism/
  2. https://www.jtsa.edu/torah/a-new-conception-of-god/
  3. https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/god-101/
  4. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/ein-sof
  5. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-companion-to-jewish-theology/mystical-theology-of-kabbalah-from-god-to-godhead/CE2F57A1AFEDF4BB1DD5F34B14A5D118
  6. https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/modern-jewish-views-of-god/
  7. https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/bible-interpretation/when-did-monotheism-emerge-in-ancient-israel/
  8. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119362500.ch25
  9. https://www.brandeis.edu/jewish-experience/holidays-religious-traditions/2022/may/shema-explained-kimelman.html
  10. https://www.jerusalemperspective.com/2619/
  11. https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/9881/jewish/Chapter-20.htm
  12. https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1047775/jewish/Why-Do-We-Cover-Our-Eyes-for-Shema.htm
  13. https://booksof.louisjacobs.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Principles-of-the-Jewish-Faith.pdf
  14. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1510120
  15. https://www.marquette.edu/maqom/ideo88.html
  16. https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/oneness-of-god-the-meaning-of-elohim
  17. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-name-of-god
  18. https://books.google.ca/books?id=FbF-3HngabQC&printsec=copyright
  19. https://outorah.org/p/3361/
  20. https://www.sefaria.org/Genesis.1.26?with=Ramban&lang=bi
  21. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24658014
  22. https://www.marquette.edu/maqom/definition.pdf
  23. https://brill.com/display/book/9789004449343/BP000003.pdf
  24. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ibn-gabirol/
  25. https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/biographical/halevi-judah-before-1075-1141/v-1/sections/the-kuzari-idea-and-embodiment
  26. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24216352
  27. https://supress.sites-pro.stanford.edu/sites/supress/files/media/file/introduction_by_daniel_matt.pdf
  28. https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/jewish-concepts-of-divine-oneness/ED78F8050E2DE71628813AD15CBBC62F
  29. https://academic.oup.com/book/50260/chapter/422704589
  30. https://www.saet.ac.uk/Judaism/Hasidism.pdf
  31. https://booksof.louisjacobs.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Their-Heads-in-Heaven-web.pdf
  32. https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/mordecai-kaplan-founder-of-reconstructionist-judaism/
  33. https://www.religion-online.org/article/mordecai-m-kaplan-and-process-theology-metaphysical-and-pragmatic-perspectives/
  34. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-core-values-of-conservative-judaism
  35. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/reform-judaism-modern-statement-of-principles-1999
  36. https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-feminist-critique-of-god-language/
  37. https://www.reconstructingjudaism.org/files/resources/document/tspitzer_why_we_need_process_theology.pdf
  38. https://reformjudaism.org/blog/partners-god-creation-look-process-theology
  39. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/heschel-abraham-joshua
  40. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/33527628.pdf
  41. https://iupress.org/9780253024879/negative-theology-as-jewish-modernity/
  42. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rirt.13223
  43. https://brill.com/display/book/edcoll/9789004428140/BP000025.pdf
  44. https://www.simpletoremember.com/faqs/Kaplan-SimpleToRemember.com.pdf
  45. https://www.firstthings.com/article/2025/06/the-return-of-jewish-theology
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.