4

Are there any instances, ideally in Tanakh, where God's physical manifestation of Himself is present in two separate locations at once? Or more poignantly, are there instances of God speaking/prophesying to two separate people in two different places at once?

As an example to flesh out what I'm trying to get at here, in reading the account of the Egel Hazahav (the Golden Calf), I was struck by how God seems to discuss the ongoing crisis only from afar to Moshe, but never says anything while it's ongoing to Aaron (who is a prophet in his own right) as if He was present on Har Sinai but not in the camp (which of course does not theologically fit with God's omnipresence)(and I understand this is not the only possible reading). Got me wondering if there's any instances of the opposite- where God is clearly speaking/prophesying to two people separately (like two different conversations) but simultaneously, or barring that clearly in two places doing two different things at once.

20
  • 2
    Every Egyptian's house at midnight?
    – Double AA
    Commented Jun 26 at 13:28
  • 2
    If Aharon was sinning, is it so surprising that God didn't want to talk directly to him then?
    – Double AA
    Commented Jun 26 at 13:28
  • 1
    @DoubleAA Aharon was sinning!? Chas Veshalom
    – Rabbi Kaii
    Commented Jun 26 at 13:39
  • 2
    Can you explain the purpose of this question? The instinct is to answer that Hashem is beyond time, beyond space, and unlimited, as can be demonstrated in countless ways. What are you specifically getting at or trying to prove/solve with this question?
    – Rabbi Kaii
    Commented Jun 26 at 14:02
  • 2
    I saw a very good explaination WHY NOT because if it was one would think there are two Gdly biengs Chas VeShalom Commented Jun 27 at 10:05

4 Answers 4

1

Yes, and no.

Answering the title and the first sentence specifically, the Shechina, Hashem's dwelling in the spiritual and physical worlds, can certainly be in multiple places at once.

Avot 3:6 demonstrates that Hashem will be present among every gathering of 10 Jews*, and even 5, 3 and 1 Jew(s), and brings pasukim to source these claims. Shemot 20:21 is the most striking:

בכל המקום אשר אזכיר את שמי אבא אליך וברכתיך

In every place where I cause My Name to be mentioned I will come unto you and bless you

Which Sforno, Ohr HaChaim and others explain means that Hashem, when He promised to "dwell among us" (Shemot 25:8), initially meant dwell in more places than just between the Keruvim, such as within every Jew.

There is also the concept that Hashem's Presence sits among 3 judges when they judge. This is also brought in Avot 3:6, with a source in Tehillim.

That's the yes. The no is brought by Rabban Gamliel to a כופר in Sanhedrin 39a:

א"ל כופר לר"ג אמריתו כל בי עשרה שכינתא שריא כמה שכינתא איכא קרייה לשמעיה מחא ביה באפתקא א"ל אמאי על שמשא בביתיה דכופר א"ל שמשא אכולי עלמא ניחא ומה שמשא דחד מן אלף אלפי רבוא שמשי דקמי קודשא בריך הוא ניחא לכולי עלמא שכינתא דקב"ה על אחת כמה וכמה

The emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: You say that the Divine Presence (Shechina) dwells in any place where there are ten adult male Jews. He asked, sarcastically: How many Shechinas are there? Rabban Gamliel summoned the servant of the emperor and hit him on his neck [be’appatka]. Rabban Gamliel said to him: Why did you allow the sun to enter the house of the emperor? The emperor said to him: The sun rests upon all the world; no one can prevent it from shining. Rabban Gamliel said to him: And if the sun, which is one of ten thousand attendants that are before the Holy One, Blessed be He, rests upon all the world, the Divine Presence of the Holy One, Blessed be He, all the more so rests upon the world. [Steinsaltz trans. and commentary]

So, it's not actually true that He's in multiple places at once, in the sense that He splits up into multiple parts, chas veshalom, but that does not preclude Him from shining the Light of His Presence, as it were, into wherever is zoche, and desirable to Him.


* See also Tanya Iggeret HaKodesh 23. Also brought in halacha, e.g. Shulchan Aruch HaRav. Related is that the Shechina rests on the hands of Cohanim during Birchat HaCohanim. There are many examples like this.

1

According to the Rambam, Hashem is incorporeal. Hashem cannot manifest physically at all, even in one location (Intro to Heleq):

היסוד השלישי שלילת הגשמות ממנו. וזהו שנאמין כי האחד הזה שזכרנו, אינו גוף ולא כוח בגוף, ולא ישיגוהו מאורעות הגופים כמו התנועה והמנוחה והמשכן, לא מצד עצמות ולא במקרה. ולכן שללו ממנו החכמים ז"ל החיבור והפירוד. ואמרו (חגיגה טו.) אין למעלה לא ישיבה ולא עמידה, לא עורף ולא עפוי. כלומר: לא פירוד ולא עורף. והוא חיבור "ולא עפוי" מלשון "ועפו בכתף פלשתים", כלומר ידחפו אותם בכתף להתחברם בהם. ואמר הנביא "ואל מי תדמיוני ואשוה יאמר קדוש". אילו היה גוף, היה דומה לגופים, וכל מה שבא בכתבי הקודש שמתארים אותו בתוארי הגופות, כמו ההליכה והעמידה והישיבה והדיבור וכיוצא בזה - הכל דרך השאלה. וכן אמרו ז"ל (ברכות לא ע"ב) "דיברה תורה כלשון בני אדם". וכבר דיברו החכמים בזה העניין הרבה. והיסוד השלישי הזה הוא מורה עליו מה שנאמר "כי לא ראיתם כל תמונה". כלומר: לא הישגתם אותו בעל תמונה, לפי שהוא, כמו שזכרנו, אינו גוף ולא כוח בגוף.

The Third Fundamental principle: We are to believe that he is incorporeal, that His unity is physical neither potentially nor actually. None of the attributes of matter can be predicated of Him, neither motion, nor rest for example. They cannot refer to Him accidentally or essentially. That is why our sages denied Him composition and separation, and said : “On high there is neither sitting nor standing, neither want nor weariness” (Hagigah 15a), i.e., neither composition nor separation, and said: “On High there is neither sitting nor standing, neither want nor weariness” (Hagigah 15a), i.e., neither composition nor separation, as the Biblical usage of these words attests. The prophet asked: “To whom can you compare God, whom might he resemble?” (Is. 40:18). If He were a body, He would be like other bodies. Whenever Scripture describes Him im corporeal terms like walking, standing, sitting, speaking, and the like, it speaks metaphorically. Thus our sages said: “The Torah speaks in human language” (Berakhot 31b). This third fundamental principle is taught in the Biblical verse: “You have seen no image” (Deut. 4:15). This verse means to say, one cannot conceive of Him as one would a Baal image, since, as we have shown, He has no body at all, actually or potentially.

This is not a limitation of Hashem, but a limit of our physical world.

5
  • 1
    I am aware. Rambam should take that up with the peshat of the Torah. In any event, rejecting the premise of the question is not a particularly helpful answer.
    – ezzi386
    Commented Jun 30 at 2:35
  • That's a heavy claim zaq, please source it so we can see if you'd explained it correctly. Also I agree that it's not good practice to reject the premise of the question - that's the kind of thing best left to comments
    – Rabbi Kaii
    Commented Jun 30 at 10:33
  • @ezzi386 "Rambam should take that up with the peshat of the Torah" he does... see how the Rambam describes the third fundamental of Jewish belief Commented Jun 30 at 23:47
  • @RabbiKaii explaining why the premise of a question is false seems to be an accepted variety of answer around here: judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4109/2394 Commented Jul 1 at 0:03
  • הרי מפרש בתורה ובנביאים שאין הקדוש ברוך הוא גוף וגויה שנאמר ( דברים ד לט יהושע ב יא) "כי ה' אלהיכם הוא אלהים בשמים ממעל ועל הארץ מתחת". והגוף לא יהיה בשני מקומות. ונאמר (דברים ד טו) "כי לא ראיתם כל תמונה". ונאמר (ישעיה מ כה) "ואל מי תדמיוני ואשוה". ואלו היה גוף היה דומה לשאר גופים Commented Jul 4 at 12:50
-1

I'd like to suggest a possible viewpoint that God is ALWAYS in two places at once. Because sometimes scripture gives the impression that God is somewhere or doing X, and you find out a few verses later that it's an Angel speaking on God's behalf. For example the Pillar of Fire by Night and Pillar of Cloud by Day was both God and not God? So I would argue that even when there's a manifestation of God, whether it's an Angel or some other form, God is also somewhere else in that moment.

-1

God is everywhere. He cannot be "in" any place at once, as that would require locality.

1
  • It's not good practice to reject the premise of the question in an answer - that's the kind of thing best left to comments
    – Rabbi Kaii
    Commented Jun 30 at 10:34

You must log in to answer this question.

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