0

The doctrine of tzimtzum teaches that HaShem contracted Himself to create a space within which to create creation. "Prior to Creation, there was only the infinite Or Ein Sof filling all existence. When it arose in G-d's Will to create worlds and emanate the emanated ... He contracted (in Hebrew "tzimtzum") Himself in the point at the center, in the very center of His light. He restricted that light, distancing it to the sides surrounding the central point, so that there remained a void, a hollow empty space, away from the central point ... After this tzimtzum ... He drew down from the Or Ein Sof a single straight line [of light] from His light surrounding [the void] from above to below [into the void], and it chained down descending into that void. ... In the space of that void He emanated, created, formed and made all the worlds. — Etz Chaim, Arizal, Heichal A"K, anaf 2".

This teaching directly contradicts Malachi 3.6 which states that "HaShem does not change." That is, before creation all there was was HaShem. Since creation all there is is HaShem (Ayn Od Milvado); that is, HaShem is Eternally the same at all times and in all places. There is also the passuk (verse) Tehillin 90.1 "A Prayer of Moses the man of G-D. Lord, Thou hast been our dwelling-place in all generations."

Shlomo Elyashiv writes: "I have also seen some very strange things in the words of some contemporary kabbalists who explain things deeply. They say that all of existence is only an illusion and appearance, and does not truly exist. This is to say that the ein sof didn't change at all in itself and its necessary true existence and it is now still exactly the same as it was before creation, and there is no space empty of Him, as is known (see Nefesh Ha-Chaim Shaar 3)."

Improve this question
8
  • most kabbalists explain tzimtzum metaphorically...
    – wfb
    Aug 12, 2021 at 0:20
  • 2
    Surely not all mekubalim are apikorsim?
    – pcoz
    Aug 12, 2021 at 0:43
  • Actually, the “doctrine of tzimtzum” doesn’t teach what you are suggesting at all, meaning that the Holy One, blessed be He changes. Your difficulty is derived from the idea that you are trying to understand something in English translation. There is a distinction between G-d and His name, even though we learn explicitly that they are one. The doctrine of tzimtzum pertains to G-d’s name only.
    – Yaacov Deane
    Aug 12, 2021 at 0:46
  • 5
    The details of the English translation presented in the question are factually inaccurate and incorrect. Based upon the question title, the consequence of these inaccurate and incorrect translations, whether with intent or by accident, is aimed at creating division and hatred among the Jewish people. This is clearly not in keeping with the guidelines of this site.
    – Yaacov Deane
    Aug 12, 2021 at 0:58
  • judaism.stackexchange.com/a/718/14850
    – Joel K
    Aug 12, 2021 at 5:22

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
1

First, the Tzimtzum is a mere expounding of Midrash Temura 1.5 that tries to explain the wording of the blessing "ברוך כבוד ה׳ ממקומו" - what does it mean "from His place"?

"אנשי לשכת הגזית קוראין אותו מקומו של עולם ולא העולם מקומו"
([Members of the Sanhedrin] call Him "in which the world is placed" and not "placed IN the world".

So what does it mean "God is where the world is placed"?

The early Platonic and Aristotelian idea of God's omnipresence (c.400BCE), pronounced in Rambam's Yesodey Hatora (c.1200CE), goes beyond the classic Biblical idea of God being simultaneously everywhere, as described in Psalms: "If I ascend to heaven, you are there; If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there.", and sees God as a transcendental entity that "permeated everywhere before the world was created".

That posed a question of where could our world be created if God is one and "infinite"? The Tzimtzum approach provides a theory - God "created a hole in Himself" that became our "space".

To your question, the Tzimtzum approach does not contradict any of Rambam's principles of faith, because a "hole" in God does not hinder His unity or oneness.

Improve this answer
3
  • Al Berko: Your answer only confirms my assertion that the doctrine of tzimtzum teaches that HaShem changed (created a space in G-D's Self). This teaching was rejected by Rabbi Yihya Qafih. He also rejects the teaching of "zeir anpin" and the "sephiroth" as being heresy and idolatry.
    – Yochanan Mauritz Hummasti
    Aug 12, 2021 at 14:45
  • 2
    If Rav Qafih wanted to outlaw this idea in his own community of for himself, fine, but it is no small matter to contradict generations of sages from various communities. You can't resolve this difference. By framing it as a binary heresy/not, you are trying to force a side when it should be viewed as an open machloket.
    – Mike
    Aug 12, 2021 at 17:09
  • 1
    @YochananMauritzHummasti Let's not forget that there is substantial debate among modern poskim about whether or not R' Yihyah Kafih espouses apikorsus.
    – Yehuda
    Aug 13, 2021 at 2:14
1

This is a loaded question and I don't think I have enough time to write out the entire debate so I will just give references:

Tzimtzum is to be understood literally; Rav Amnuel Chai Ricki - Yosher Levav (Bayis Rishon, Cheder Rishon, 13-20/ Bayis Sheni, Cheder Rishon, 5). Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv - Leshem Shevo V'achaloma (Chelek Ha'biurim, Derushei Igulim V'yosher, Intro, 2).

Tzimtzum is a metaphor for concealment; Rav Avraham Ben Ha'Rambam - Commentary on Chumash (Yisro, 20, 3). Rabeinu Bachya - Commentary on Chumash (Bereishis, 1, 1). Rav Yosef Irgas - Shomer Emunim Hakadmon (Vikuach Sheni). Rav Moshe Chayim Luzzato - Klach Pischei Chochmah (24). Rav Shneur Zalman of Liadi - Tanya (Shaar Hayichud V'emunah, 7). Rav Chayim of Volozhin - Nefesh Ha'chayim (3,8).

Books I found helpful on this subject are; Understanding Emunah - Rabbi Yehuda Cahn. Moreh Ohr - Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan.

Improve this answer
0

The Nefesh Hachayim explains that the word tzimtzum does not mean contraction, for the reasons you cited. Instead, it means a veil; that is, G-d concealed his presence in order for people to be perceive the world but not G-d's presence.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .