Will, Wisdom,
and the
Self Justifying Universe
Excerpt from “The Retroactive
Universe”
Introduction
Most of the phenomena of the
physical realm are categorizable as being the result of the operation of one or
more of a very few basic laws of nature. Many scientists believe that
eventually all will be seen to result from one fundamental 'law of everything'.
To some, the universe as a result has been seen as reflecting the underlying
unity of the creator.
From the perspective of science,
all occurs as a result of the laws of nature, the constants of nature (the
speed of light, etc), the initial conditions of the universe, and its
fundamental features such as its four-dimensionality. The question has been
raised as to whether or not there is a connection between all these - so that
perhaps a universe with the dimensionality of our own must necessarily have a
constant speed of light, and with the value it has in our own universe, or even
if perhaps the only universe which can exist is one with all the
characteristics of our universe. Einstein phrased the question thus:
" What I wonder is whether
God had any choice in creating the universe as it is". [INSERT EXACT QUOTE]
In ancient times, a form of this
question was raised as well, and was given extensive expression by Aristotle
(350BCE-xxxBCE INSERT), whose
theories reigned supreme for hundreds of years, and were later rediscovered in
the middle ages. Aristotle felt that God had no choice in creation at all -
that the universe is actually a necessary byproduct of the existence of God's
very existence. Rambam on the other hand stated that it was a basic tenet of
Jewish belief that the universe was created by God as a deliberate act, in
order to accomplish some divine purpose.
We shall investigate an
important philosophical difference between Rambam (11xx -12xx) and Aristotle on
the fundamental issue of whether or not human logic can be applied to God, and
a few important metaphysical areas where their differing conceptions on this
issue led to disagreement: whether the universe was created as the result of a
choice on God's part or if it exists necessarily; whether the universe has a
purpose or not; and whether the universe has been in existence for an infinite
amount of time or was created a finite amount of time ago.
All these metaphysical issues
were related to a central question - in the language of Aristotle and Rambam,
the question of whether God created the universe via the divine Wisdom or the
divine Will.
We will find that Rambam's
resolution of the questions involves intentional paradox and contradiction, and
these will point us back to our central themes: the nature of free will, the
purpose of existence, the connection between free-will and emergence of the
universe into existence, and the connection of all these to the creation and
I: The Existence of the Universe: Necessity or Choice
In ancient times the
manifestations of God in the universe were considered to follow from specific
divine attributes. Two of these attributes - the main ones?? - were those of
the divine Wisdom, or rational thought, and that of the divine Will.
According to Aristotle, if the
existence of the universe is the result of divine Will, one can say that since
the existence of the universe is dependent on God's Will that it exist, and
this Will is a matter of choice, God could have decided that the universe
should not come into existence.
However, if the existence of the
universe is the result of divine Wisdom, then this means that it is wiser to
create than not create. Since God is necessarily as wise as can be, God always
takes the wiser course of action, and therefore it is necessarily true that the
universe would be created. Effectively, the universe would be a necessary
byproduct of the very existence of God.
However, if the universe exists
necessarily, as a byproduct of the Wisdom of God, one cannot say that the
universe is a product of God's creation. Rather than God creating the universe,
Aristotle claimed that if the universe was a product of God's Wisdom, it would
be more correct to say that the universe exists due to the fact that God
exists.
The Age of the Universe: eternal?
Imagine
God and time co-exist; there is no existence of God when there is no time. If
God is infinite and eternal and time always co-existed with God then time past
is infinite.
Also, assume that the universe
is not eternally co-existent with God as is time; i.e. the universe was created
by God at a certain time. One could then ask why God chose to create the
universe at that time rather than at another. Did God suddenly decide to create
a universe? Did something happen to make God take this decision?
If God is eternal then from any
given point of time God's existence stretches back an infinite time past, and
ahead an infinite time into the future. Therefore from the point in time that
the universe was created an infinite amount of time stretches to the past. This
means that an infinite amount of time passed before God created the universe.
Why would God wait an infinite time to create the universe? Was the creation of
a universe so difficult a task to God that it necessitated a very long time to
plan and execute? If God is infinitely-powerful the creation of the universe
should be accomplishable instantly.
If the universe is a necessary
byproduct of the very existence of God, there would never be a time when God
would exist but the universe would not. Since God is eternal, and has existed
already for an infinite amount of time and will exist in the future to
infinity, the universe would necessarily have existed already for an infinite
time and will exist to eternity.
From this perspective then, if
the universe is a product of God's Wisdom, the universe is not created, and
does not have a certain age, but rather it exists as a necessary byproduct of
God's existence, has existed an infinite amount of time, and is eternal into
the future[1]. Indeed, this was the perspective adopted by
Aristotle.
It is interesting that these
philosophical questions also arise in the discussions of kabbalists, and indeed
Rambam considers all the matters connected to creation to be part of the
secrets of Torah.
Rambam's View
According to Rambam human logic
cannot be applied to God's actions, thoughts or reasons, and conclusions based
on such considerations are invalid[2]. He therefore rejected the validity of those of
Aristotle's arguments which led to the conclusion that God had not created the
universe by choice, and that the universe is eternal.
Furthermore,
according to Rambam not only is logic opposed to such an argument, but also it
is a basic tenet of Biblical belief that the universe was created according to
the will of God. Indeed this is implied quite clearly in the creation account,
where the various created entities result from commands of God such as 'let there
be...', and are generally followed with a statement that 'and God saw that it
was good' which implies that had it not been so, it would have been remade.
According to Rambam one cannot
apply rules of human logic etc. to God - God is beyond our comprehension. Thus,
we cannot decide the issue of whether God created using Will or Wisdom, or
whether the universe is eternal or created, by using human logic applied to
God's actions or method of operating, as Aristotle attempted to do. Furthermore
God is above time, and our conceptions of God's actions as they relate to time
are faulty.
As opposed to Aristotle then,
Rambam held that the universe was a creation of God, created by choice rather
than being a necessary byproduct of God's existence, and that it was not
eternal.
Modern Conceptions
If God
is beyond time, and created time along with the universe, then there is no
meaning to 'before the universe was created', and therefore no meaning to the
question 'why did God not create the universe "immediately" so that
it would be co-eternal with God', or 'why did God wait before creating the
universe'.
It is
also not obvious that the concept of an infinite being or of eternity is
meaningful.
The
universe exists only because God willed that it exist, and it exists according
to the design of God, and so God is logically prior to the existence of the
universe, not temporally prior. God is also the source of the existence of
time, and so God is 'beyond' time, or 'logically prior' to time, though not
'temporally prior' to time.
How does
a being beyond time create time? How does such a being experience the time of
historical events, or intervene within time? These are old philosophical
conundrums, and it is not entirely clear that any of it is actually meaningful
- it is inevitable that we enter into paradox and contradiction when dealing
with this subject since the terms are not well-defined, and are perhaps even
meaningless.
Is the Universe Eternal?
Rambam states that[3]:
"There
is no other difference of opinion as regards any portion of the universe,
except that the philosophers believe in the eternity of the universe and we
believe in the Creation. Note
this."
Rambam
also points out that the creation account clearly implies that the universe
began at some time rather than having always existed. (He also notes that it
does not directly imply anything about whether it can continue to exist to
eternity in the future) . Nevertheless, Rambam continues, if there was proof of
the fact that the universe had existed for an infinite amount of time already
rather than having been created some finite amount of time ago, this proof
could be accepted, since the creation account may be allegorical. However, as
Rambam felt that the prevailing proofs of the eternity of the universe were not
convincing, he felt that one should accept the traditional understanding of the
creation account as implying a created rather than eternal universe.
II: The Universe: Purpose vs. Purposeless
As
a result of his position that the universe exists as an eternal byproduct of
the divine Wisdom, a necessary side effect of the existence of God rather than
being a creation of God's Will, Aristotle believed that the universe was not
created by choice, and therefore that there can be no ultimate purpose to the
creation and to the universe as a whole.
Aristotle admitted that even
though the universe considered as a whole does not have a purpose, events
within the universe can have a purpose. He postulated that only a finite amount
of steps or historical events would be necessary to achieve any purpose of any
event within the universe, and that these would therefore take only a finite
amount of time to occur from the onset of the existence of the universe. Since
the universe has already existed for an eternity the purpose of those events
would have been already reached, and thus events occurring now could not be
considered purposive .
Aristotelians did however consider all
events as expressions of an immanent purposiveness, and saw the world from a
teleological point of view [4]. Events were considered to be teleological in the
sense that events were 'caused' by their eventual effects, and therefore the
'purpose' of events was to bring about that which occurred. (However they
denied overall purpose to events in the universe and certainly to the universe
itself[5].)
Aristotle also posed a challenge
to those who believed that the universe was indeed created, and created as a
result of a choice: the challenge to determine what was the purpose of this
creation[6].
Rambam: Creation as an Act of Will
Rambam claimed that creationists did not have
to produce a reason for God to have created the universe. Indeed according to
Rambam it is logically impossible for us
to do so, as the Divine reason to create is necessarily beyond human
comprehension. [7]
Rambam also concluded that
creation was via the divine Will - the creation was willed - rather than the
automatically existent universe which is implied by the operation of divine
Wisdom as per Aristotle.
The question of why God created
the universe is a meaningless one because it cannot have an answer - it is
logically impossible for us to understand whether or not God had a reason to
create. Of course Rambam could have postulated that there was a reason, just
that it was beyond human comprehension, but he preferred to rule out reason
based on the following argument. All reasons we can devise to explain the
Divine decision to create, will give rise to an infinite regress of reasons,
and reasons for the reasons and so on: if the purpose of creation is X, what is
the purpose of X? If it is Y, what is
purpose of Y ?... etc. etc. ad infinitum.
Rambam then states that the only answer to the
question of why God created the universe is "it is the Will of God".
It is problematic to apply human concepts such as reason and will to God, but
nevertheless for two reasona Rambam concluded that creation results from God's
Will rather than from some reason or purpose. The positive reason: the
universe's existence was not automatic. The negative reason: creation via
Wisdom implies a reason for creation, which is not possible.
In the
language of ancient and Medieval philosophy, the universe is a result of
"the divine Will" rather than "the divine Wisdom" - and
Rambam quotes the Rabbis as being in support of this view.
III: The Eternity of the
Universe vs. Creation: Metaphysical Reasoning[8]
In addition to the issues of
whether or not the universe was a product of a creation, a choice, and whether
there was a purpose to creation, there was yet another central issue on which
Rambam disagreed with Aristotle. As we mentioned previously, according to
Aristotle the universe is eternal, whereas according to Rambam, it began a
finite amount of time ago.
Aristotle felt that he had
proved this, while Rambam felt that these proofs were unconvincing, as outlined
below.
The Unchanging Nature of God Implies
the Eternity of the Universe
According to Aristotle, if creation is the
result of God's Will, the universe must be eternal, and he reasoned as follows.
God is not affected by anything
outside Himself, and so the cause of the Will to create the universe is inside
God. Since God is eternal and unchanging, therefore God's Will is unchanging.
According to Aristotle, the fact that the universe exists now implies that God
wishes that it exist, and if God now wishes that it exist, then since God knows
all and therefore doesn't change his mind, the will that the universe exist
must always have existed in God's mind (and would always exist). Since there is
no obstacle to God, God always can act on his wishes, and therefore God would
have created the universe as soon as this was his wish, but since this must
always have been his wish, the universe must always have existed; it would be
coexistent with God eternally rather than created.
Alternately, if creation is the
result of God's Reason, or equivalently, of the divine Wisdom, then this
implies that there was a good reason to create the universe. However God knows
all and nothing is new knowledge to God. Therefore, if it was ever true that
there was a compelling reason to create, the reason to create could not be the
product of previously unknown information. Therefore, if a reason to create
ever existed, that same reason would always have been valid, and would always
be so. Therefore the universe would
always exist. That is, the universe would be co-eternal with God, rather than
created.
Thus Aristotle arrived at the conclusion
that irrespective of whether the universe was created via divine Will or divine
Wisdom, the universe would necessarily be eternal, rather than created[9]. According to Aristotle therefore, God is not the
'creator' of the universe: since however the universe exists only due to God's
existence, God is the 'ground of existence' of the universe[10].
The Eternity of the Universe:
Another Proof
According to Aristotle,
reasoning - which is the basis of wisdom - is a chain of logic, so that for
each link in the chain, there is a prior
link which is its cause. Each link leads necessarily to the next link in a
logically necessary way.
Aristotle argued that if God
created the universe as a result of Divine reasoning - the 'Divine Wisdom' -
then each link in the chain of logical reasoning leading to the decision to
create implies a prior link. Therefore
the chain of logic could not have a beginning, since the beginning - by
definition - means there is no prior cause, and if there is no prior cause to
some link, then by definition that link arose without cause, and something which
arises without cause is obviously not the result of reasoning.
Therefore, since the chain of
reasoning cannot have a beginning, the chain is infinite in length, so that
the initial links in the decision to
create existed an infinite time ago. Since God can do as he wishes, as soon as
he decides to create, this would occur. That is, the actual creation would have
occurred a finite amount of time after the decision to create.
Since the beginning of the chain
of reasoning to create was an infinite time ago while the creation was a finite
time after this, the creation was therefore also an infinite time ago. [If
something is infinitely far away, and then moves a finite amount closer, it is
still an infinite distance away - and similarly for time.] Since creation was
an infinite time ago, the universe has existed for an infinite time, that is,
it is eternal.[Eternal back and forth in time from now, assuming that it will
always exist - which is the case according to Aristotle if God doesn't change
his mind, which is indeed the case in Aristotle's philosophy according to which
God's Mind is unchanging ªas explained previously).]
As we saw, Aristotle reached the
same conclusion regarding a universe created via the attribute of the 'divine
Will'. Aristotle reasoned further that if God created the universe not as a
result of reasoning, but rather as the result of a caprice, then there could be
no reason for this caprice to arise at one time more than at any other time.
Therefore, since God is eternal, and there is equal chance of the choice having
been made at any time, there is an infinitesimal chance of the caprice having
occurred during any finite interval of time. Therefore it did not occur a
finite time ago. Therefore since the caprice-decision must have occurred an
infinite time ago, the universe must be eternal.
Aristotle therefore reached the
conclusion that irrespective of whether creation was via divine Wisdom or
divine Will, the universe is necessarily eternal, with God its ground of being
rather than its creator.
Rambam's Response to Aristotle
Regarding
creation via the 'divine Will': Although Aristotle had argued that God's Will
is eternal and unchanging, so that if God Willed creation at one time, then it
would always have been willed, Rambam stated that even though God is indeed
beyond time, nevertheless it is wrong to say that this implies a limitation on
God - that is, God can create 'in
time'. God's Will to create need not always have existed
in the sense which implies that the universe would then always have existed.
Rather, the Will to create the universe could have been acted on a finite time
ago - the Will to create can take effect at some specific 'time' and need not
be eternal.
Similarly if creation is the result of the
Divine Wisdom, Rambam stated that God's Wisdom can take effect at some specific
time and therefore something created in accordance with the divine Wisdom need
not be eternal.
Furthermore Rambam stated, even if creation is
the result of Wisdom, then even if this means that it is wiser to create than
not create, it is not true that the universe exists as a necessary byproduct of
the Wisdom of God rather than as a product of God's creation. That is, it is possible for the universe to be a
creation rather than a necessary byproduct of God's existence.
Therefore since he believed that one cannot
apply human logic to God, Rambam rejected the Aristotelian view of the logical
necessity of concluding that the universe must be eternal, and this opened the
possibility that the universe is created rather than eternal. Since now Rambam
had shown that logic was not conclusive one way or the other, he declared that
tradition is the proper guide, and according to tradition, the universe is not
eternal and there was indeed a creation.
............
The
arguments of Aristotle and Rambam seem to imply the existence of time during
God's existence
.........
The
creation account relates that it was six days to indicate that it was not a
long time, and that it was IN time...
........
IV: The Contradiction in Rambam
Introduction
Although Rambam stated that God
employed the divine Will in creating the universe and that the Rabbis supported
this view, at a different juncture Rambam states that God used Wisdom in
creating, along with Will, and states that the Rabbis supported this view that
creation involved both Will and Wisdom.
"...the creation was not
the exclusive result of God's Will, but rather the divine Wisdom made the
actual existence of the universe necessary. Our sages frequently express this
idea." [Guide:III:25.]
"...The Jewish
Sages....clearly stated that it was not logical necessity that determined the
existence of all things, but rather it was the action of the divine Will."
[Guide:III:13.]
Thus
Rambam contradicts himself, and by bringing the Rabbis as being in support of
both views, he seems to involve the Rabbis in the same contradiction.
In
addition, whereas previously Rambam stated that it is meaningless to discuss
the reason for creation, as any possible reason would be beyond us, Rambam
himself later provides a reason for God's creation of the universe.
Rambam: Contradictions as pointers
to 'Hidden Matters'
In his introduction to the "Guide for the
Perplexed", Rambam writes that it contains contradictions within it which
are a result of the need to hide certain esoteric religious secrets[11]. Since
these contradictions are deliberately contrived to obscure the true meaning, it
is easier to get to Rambam's true meaning by comparing what he says in all the
places where the matter is dealt with[12]. One example is the contradiction between the two
chapters discussing the issue above - whether God created the universe by
employing the Divine Will alone or with both the Divine Will and the Divine
Wisdom[13].
Rambam: Creation as Both Wisdom and Will
According to the Rambam, it is important to
attribute the creation to both God's Wisdom and God's Will. Creation via Will
alone without Wisdom would imply creation as an act of caprice - senseless ,
purposeless and vain - and it is
impossible to assume that God acts in such a manner.
On the other hand, creation via Wisdom without
Will implies that since Will was not involved, the creation was not an
expression of God's Will to create - instead, the universe exists because it
had to exist, and God could not have chosen not to create. This conclusion
however seems to imply that God is
limited in his freedom to act, which is not possible.
Thus, Wisdom alone or Will alone could not
have been the source of creation - the only possible resolution must involve a
combination of both Will and Wisdom.
However, some religious
philosophers had indeed proposed creation via Will alone. Rambam states that
the reason these religious philosophers attribute God's act of creation to a
pure act of Will without the purposefulness of Wisdom behind it is because they
fear that if they claimed that the creation involved Wisdom, then they would be
forced by Aristotle's reasoning to conclude that the universe is eternal rather
than created. In their view, this would not only contradict the Biblical
teaching of the creation, but even more importantly, as we have shown above, it
would lead to the idea of the purposelessness of the universe as a whole[14].
However, as we saw above, Rambam
rejected the conclusion that the involvement of the divine Wisdom implied the
eternity of the universe as opposed to creation, and therefore Rambam showed
that the universe could be created via the divine Wisdom. Furthermore as we
have seen above, Rambam showed that creation via Wisdom did not imply the
necessity for determining a reason for creation - which would be impossible
for humans to do - precisely because
such a determination is impossible .
Thus Rambam did not feel
constrained to state that creation was via Will exclusively - as had other
religious thinkers - since he rejected the logical consequences of the divine
Wisdom stated by Aristotle, and therefore Rambam felt free to conclude that
there was an element of divine Wisdom involved in creation in addition to the
divine Will.
The Purpose of Creation According to
Rambam
As we saw above, postulating that the universe
exists of necessity - via the divine Wisdom -
obviated the troubling question
of the "Purpose" of the universe, and this was a polemic advantage
which the Aristoteleans claimed, since they demanded of the creationists - who
proposed creation via the divine Will - to come up with some reason for why
God created the universe .
Rambam of course had claimed
that creationists did not have to since the divine reason to create is beyond
human comprehension, and speculation into the Purpose of creation leads to an
infinite regress, and so the only answer to the question of why God created the
universe is "it is the Will of God".
Despite this, later
(Guide:III:25) Rambam says that it is nonsense to believe that God created the
universe without any Purpose, through caprice of the divine Will. Instead, Rambam says, there is a very good
reason why God created the universe: because existence is a good in of
itself! Thus, since God wanted to do
good and existence is a good, God gave existence to the universe[15].
By providing a reason for
creation, Rambam has allowed for the divine Wisdom to have played a part, which
removes any problem of caprice or purposelessness. By involving the divine
Will, a willed creation of the universe is possible. Therefore by postulating a
combination of the divine Will and Wisdom, it is possible to propose that the
universe is the product of a purposeful willed creation.
Rambam then states that the
Rabbinical sage support his view that the universe is a product of both divine
Will and Wisdom. However this view of Rambam's
seems to contradict what he says earlier (Guide:III:13), that creation
is a result solely of the divine Will - where
Rambam also claims that the sages back him up !
The Resolution of the Contradiction
There is however one instance in which the
problem of infinite regress or its flip side, caprice, is resolved - if
existence is a good in of itself relative to that which exists. In such a case,
when the universe does not exist, there is no necessity or reason that it
should exist. However, once the universe does exist, the good of existence is
the reason for God to provide it with continued existence, and its existence
provides a good reason for the universe to have been created. Thus the decision
to create is free, but is not caprice, since creation leads to existence, which
according to Reason is a good.
In such a case, there is no chain of
reasoning to explain the reason for creation - the reasoning is of an acausal
type.
According to Rambam, indeed the
universe exists because existence is good in of itself, and God wished that
this good should be. Thus existence is self-causative in the theological sense;
the intrinsic good of existence is the cause of the universe's existence.
Although stating that creation
is a good in of itself does not solve the problem since one can then inquire as
to the reason for God to do good, a different formulation leads to a cleaner
resolution: "The purpose of existence is existence itself". Then in
human terms, as humans see things from the perspective of how their existence
is good for them, one can state that they and the rest of the universe exist
because 'existence is a good in of itself'[16]. As Rambam stated:
"We must be content and not
trouble our mind with seeking a certain final cause (purpose) for things that
have none, or have no other final cause but their own existence, which depends
on the Will of God, or if you prefer, on the Divine Wisdom."
Existence, Acausality and Free Will
This problem therefore involves
an acausality difficulty - the infinite chain of logic implied by creation via
reason, as well as a free-will type difficulty - will without reasoning is mere
caprice, yet reasoning is deterministic.
Where 'Will' is taken as meaning
caprice - randomness - Rambam cannot accept that God created the universe via
the divine aspect of 'Will' alone. Instead it would necessarily be via a combination
of 'Will' and 'Wisdom' tha thte universe was created. However, where 'Will'
means 'free will', then since free will involves reasoned choice, Rambam can
accept creation via 'Will' alone.
In essence though, Rambam's
approach is unambiguous - it is merely the terms that were in use in
philosophical discourse which were ambiguous, and it is the concept of free
will itself which introduces the difficulty. Free will is not discussed clearly
by Aristotle, and it is not entirely clear what he meant by 'will', and 'will'
could be synonymous with 'randomness'. For Rambam on the other hand the freedom
of the will is a major and basic tenet of Jewish belief, and 'will' generally
means 'free will', which by definition is not random but rather is reasoned -
free will is a combination therefore of will and wisdom. Therefore when Rambam
states that the universe was created via the divine 'Will', and that this was
the opinion of the Jewish Sages, this is not contradictory to his saying that
creation is the result of a conjunction of the divine 'Will' and 'Wisdom', and
that this too was the opinion of the sages.
For Rambam, all matters
pertaining to the creation of the universe involved secret knowledge which was
to be passed on from master to disciple in private tutelage, rather than
information which was accessible to the masses, and therefore he chose to deal
with these matters in a manner which involved apparent contradiction.
The Creation and
It
is interesting to note the connection of self-reference and acausality in
Rambam's resolution of the contradiction. Existence itself is an acausal
phenomenon, and its use here is in a self-referential context in that according
to Rambam although there is no reason to create existence, existence exists because after it already is a fact,
existence is good. [17]
In these discussions the
emergence of the universe into existence is via Will or Wisdom and involves the
issue of free will and causality. Of course in our approach free will is a
process closely connected with the bringing of the universe into retroactive
acausal existence at the moral being stage when man with will and wisdom
emerges.
One could also see the Biblical
description of creation as referring to these matters - the two accounts
representing different aspects of the divine. The creation account involves the
divine Will, however it is centered on clear logical construction of a
universe, and represents the action of the divine Wisdom, while the
Furthermore, by dealing with
matters related to creation in a veiled manner - deliberately employing
apparent contradictions - Rambam is also making a veiled comment about the
Biblical accounts which deal with the same matters. One could infer from
Rambam's method of discussion that the Bible itself used the method of apparent
contradiction in dealing with creation as a deliberate means of keeping secret
that which was not meant for the masses.
This then puts the creation and
NEED TO
EDIT THIS: MERGE? DELETE?
Thus one
can be the solution of the problem of the other (as in Joseph's dream-solving
in Egypt): Will is OK because it is only
after Wisdom decided that it would be good that Will chose to do this good,
i.e. it is not caprice; and Wisdom is OK because it is not forced on God
- rather Will still has to choose whether or not to do it. How choose?
By using Wisdom! This is a full
circle - involving acausality , or self-causation . {THIS STILL INVOLVES REGRESS : i.e. WHY SHOULD GD WANT TO DO THIS etc]
________________________________________________________________________
* Perhaps we can resolve the contradiction
etc. and problem by recalling that free will involved an inherent
impossibility/paradox, i.e. the necessity that it be rational vs. necessty that
it be free. This is same problem: Maybe
with God it is two separate
faculties: the rational and the free = the Wisdom and the Will , and the
conflict is the same as the internal contradiction of human free will.[our
limited comprehension causes the appearance of
duality/opposition/conflict/paradox.
_____________________________
As we discussed earlier [section
X], the essence of paganism is the absence of a moral imperative, of moral
absolutes , and of a purpose to existence.
The Aristotelian system was a strange mixture of religion and science,
yet it remained thoroughly pagan.
Indeed, as the Rambam showed, although Aristotle believed in a God, he
believed that the universe existed simply as an automatic byproduct, or
side-effect of the very existence of this God.
As a result, the universe could not be considered to be existing for any
"purpose".* In
contrast, it is one of the most fundamental beliefs of Judaism that not only
does there exist a God who brought the universe into existence, but that He did
so as part of a Plan. Thus, in the
Jewish view, the existence of the universe is the result of an act of Divine Will,
rather than an automatic byproduct of God's existence, and the universe itself
exists in order to fulfil some Divine Purpose, rather than merely existing
because of logical necessity.
However, in order that it not
seem that God created the universe out of a caprice of his Will, (the) Rambam
stated that the world was also partially the result of God's Wisdom: God's
Wisdom declared that the universe should exist (must exist in order to achieve
the Purpose), and then God's Will that the universe exist brought it into
existence.
This is of course a parallel to
our scenario: man was created in
"the image of God" which is understood as meaning that man has a free
will (as does God). Man also attained
wisdom, i.e. an understanding of good/evil and of his free will. God's Wisdom and Will brought the universe to
potential existence, and man - created in the image of God brought the universe into actual existence
through his will and wisdom (the exercise of free will and the
understanding of its significance).
Man is the purpose of creation -
"Bishvili ... " - yet Rambam says "the major error...."
The resolution of the
contradiction can perhaps be along the following lines:
That
there exist parts of the universe which are useless to man - e.g. the distant
stars, etc. - means that they do not exist because of man. However, since all these parts exist only in
order that the universe be in a self-consistent big bang emergent state, and
the big bang is teleoderived from the state containing moral man, then all that
exists does exist because of man!
"Bishvili nivra ha'olam" of the Mishna Sanhedrin. That is, they exist because of man;
because it was desired/necessary to create man, they were created also. However, they were not created for
man: as the Rambam says:
"
...
[Gd's
Will was to create man, who possesses both will and wisdom.]
[Gd's
Wisdom dictated that it was necessary to create a big-bang-emergent universe -
so that when man uses his wisdom to seek his origins , the results should not
stifle his free will.]
Also,
Will and Wisdom are in essence the same thing since wisdom is the understanding
of the significance of free will, and one without the other is meaningless or
useless. [Consciousness is not
sufficient; self-consciousness, i.e. the
awareness that one is conscious, is also necessary.]
?* "Wisdom" in Rambam is
(translated as) "Chochma" but free will is related to "(the tree
of) knowledge"="da'at";
in Kabalah, Chochma, Bina, Da'ath are related. What is the relevance here, etc.? Did Rambam write of it in Mishne Torah (i.e.
using terms in Lashon hakodesh)?
The
connection drawn here between the instant universe concept and the ideas
expressed by the Rambam on this issue are related by another interesting
"coincidence": the discussion as to whether things were created for
man or for their own sake includes the following discussion.
Note: All evil is nonexistence: all existence is good: [
"Ubacharta
betov, vechai bahem" = choosing good = choosing existence.
Man's
awareness of the distinction between good and evil brought existence from
non-existence.
"All
the great evil which men cause to each other ... are ... due to non-existence;
because they originate in ignorance, which is absence of wisdom", p.267
Dover III:XI.
[1] From this point on we shall use the term 'eternal' to mean both that it has existed already for an infinite amount of time and that it will exist in the future to infinity.
[2] Ramabam felt that God could be described only using 'negative attributes', that is, saying that 'God is not unmerciful' rather than positive ones such as 'God is merciful' or "God had a reason'.
[3] III:25 (last lines).
[4] See "Guide" (III:13)
[5] [ERASE?] That is, the universe had to exist, since God exists, but although it thus had no real purpose in existing, nevertheless once it is already existent, events in the universe occurred in a teleological manner
[6]Thus, postulating that the universe exists of
necessity obviated the troubling
question of the "Purpose" of the universe, and this was a good
reason to suppose that indeed the universe was created via Wisdom rather than
via Will. This was a polemic advantage to the Aristoteleans because the
creationists still had to come up with some reason for why God created the universe
.
[7] As we have seen above, Rambam rejected Aristotle's
conclusions regarding the necessary existence and eternity of the universe,
because they were based on human logic as applied to God's Wisdom or Will, and
this is not a valid form of reasoning.
Rambam says God cannot do that which is logically impossible, such as making a circle which is square, so he does apply logic to God at leas tin this negative sense. Also (Rambam says:?) intuition developed by analyzing events in one context cannot be applied to another; eg intuition developed by analyzing events in th euniverse cannot be applied to God.
[8] See J. Guttman page 196-198
[9] The doctrine of the eternity of the universe had earlier been taught by Aristotle's teacher, Plato.
[10] According to Crescas, the traditional Biblical belief in creation is compatible with the idea that rather than being crreator, God is instead the ground of being of an eternal universe in which was created our world and man.
[11] According
to tradition - as recorded in the Talmud - the esoteric doctrines of Judaism
are contained in two parts of the Torah - the creation account and the account
of the chariot in Ezekiel. [In the Hebrew original one can see also many
linguistic/terminological parallels between the account of the chariot and the
The creation account is traditionally accepted as being the repository of deep secrets. [see for example Ramban.(Nachmanides)], but in addition to its inner secret meanings, it has a surface meaning (pshat). The inner meaning is partially recorded in the works of the.Kabbalah. However according to traditional belief these are written in a type of code, and are accessible only to those who have received the 'key' via oral transmission from a master. The one thing one knows upn reading a coded message is that the meaning of the message is not the surface one, but rather the surface message may be entirely false, deliberately misleading, or just totally irrelevant in that it is designed not to provide a message but rather to encode the true message.
[12] See R. Kapakh's introduction to his Hebrew translation of the "Guide" (p.29). Kapach provides cross-referenced notes, but states that he does not explain the matter any further out of respect for Rambam's wishes that these matters remain unexplained.
[13] III:13 and III:25 . See e.g. Kapakh's note # 18 on Rambam's statement in the introduction .
[14]
According to the Aristotelian belief that the universe is a necessary
side effect of the existence of God, the universe is not a creation of Gd's
Will. As a result there can be no ultimate purpose to the creation and to
the universe as a whole. In addition , even if the events within the
universe had a purpose which the universe
as a whole did not have, since the universe is eternal, this would have
been already reached and thus events occurring now could not be considered
purposive .
[15] Rambam says that it is not true that all things were created for man's use, because for example most of the stars serve no human purpose, therefore it is clear that they exist for their own sake, and do so because existence is good in of itself.
[16] Indeed, one of the secrets of existence is that happiness is dependent not on external circumstances, but is rather a state of mind - although the realization of the fact may depend on self-development, it is a truth that existence by itself is good.
[17] MERGE WITH ABOVE: Free will transcends both determinism
and randomness : it involves decisions which are rational yet
non-determined , free yet non-random.
Free will is essentially a self-causative phenomenon , as is the universe - the
universe exists , yet could not have been caused .[Time is coexistent with the
universe, and there could be no 'time' when the universe did not exist. (see
Rambam) - since 'cause' implies temporal order , therefore 'cause' is
impossible when the universe did not exist
, and therefore the universe could not have emerged from non-existence
to existence via 'cause'.Therefore the universe is acausal , or self-caused.]
A close parallel
exists between this reasoning and Rambam's view on the issue of God's
reason/motive for creating the universe.
That
is, reasons involve infinite regress , i.e. causal deterministic chains of
reasons, whereas the lack of reasons implies the randomness of caprice.
To
circumvent this difficulty, Rambam employs a concept related to self-causation:
the way to avoid infinite regress is via acausality : existence is the reason
for existence - existence is an intrinsic good , and therefore God gave the
universe existence.
* see Guttmann p. 196 for references.