Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
Is the Jewish view that everything in creation is a hidden manifestation of God, i.e. that God is enclothed so to speak, in every element of creation, similar to Panentheism.
Or is God "outside" of His creations, so to speak, guiding them from His "place".
Or perhaps a third possibility?
It depends on how you define Panentheism. You can take the word at face value, and then put anything into it that can fit that definition. That is what Wikipedia does, and it strikes me as very suspect. Certainly the inventor of the word didn't mean it that way - he meant to strike out a different religious philosophy different from Pantheism.
If you take the word at face value, it means:
This is distinct from Pantheism where All is G-d - in other words G-d is the sum of the universe and nothing else, which is more reminiscent of those that worship the dust of their feet that Rashi speaks about.
That idea of Panentheism (that it means what the word roots say) maps with the Medrash that Yahu explores here, using that expanded definition (as defined by Wikipedia).
However, that isn't what Panentheism really means. Panentheism, as Miriam-Webster so succinctly defines means:
That violates many doctrines of Judaism, including non-corporeality, G-d's Oneness, creation ex-nilo, etc.
However, to discuss the larger Wikipedia definition of Panentheism in a Jewish context, you could say that everyone that says the Tzimtzum is not literal (which emphatically includes the Ba'al HaTanya, but others as well - in fact some deny the Gr"a ever held differently, so they clearly don't hold that way, whatever the Gr"a held), which means that G-d transcends the world, and there is no place in the world where He is not present.
If you want to call that Panentheism, I guess you can, but it really bears no relationship to the philosophical/religious ideas that actively identify themselves with the word. Those ideas, from what I read (and see the links in this post) seem to all be about how the world is part of G-d, G-d is changed by the creation of the world, so in some way (apparently much like the Rambam describes the evolution of Avodah Zarah, each one comes along with a new twist) the world is part of an interactive system within G-d.
In the Tanya, the whole argument that G-d transcends the world is that G-d is unchanging and unchanged:
ועל כרחך אין ידיעתו אותם מוסיפה בו ריבוי וחידוש, מפני שיודע הכל בידיעת עצמו
and perforce His knowledge of them does not add plurality and innovation to Him, for He knows all by knowing Himself.
Were G‑d’s knowledge of created beings not to come from knowing Himself then it would be correct to say that this knowledge adds plurality and innovation to Him; previously He did not know them and now he does. However, since plurality and innovation cannot possibly apply to G‑d, He must perforce know them through His knowledge of Himself.
הרי כביכול מהותו ועצמותו ודעתו הכל אחד
Thus, as it were, His Essence and Being and His Knowledge of created beings are all one.
Since G‑d’s knowledge and Providence extend to this world, and since His knowledge is one with Him, it follows that G‑d Himself is to be found within this physical world. Unlike the king who sits in his palace and gazes beyond its walls, the King Himself is to be found wherever His Providence and knowledge are found.
True enough, it is only through divine service that this world may be transformed into a place in which G‑d is revealed. Nonetheless, G‑d is present in this lowly corporeal world, which feels itself to exist independently of Him, to the same degree as He is present within the higher spiritual worlds.
The third principle of Jewish Faith as codified by the Ramba"m states explicitly that the Creator "has no physical body and is not a force which resides within a physical body" (אינו גוף ולא כח בגוף). This statement precludes the basic tenet of Panentheism, i.e. that God resides actually within everything that exists.
Additionally, the Rasa"g (Rav Sa'adya Gaon) in his well-known work Emunoth Wa-Dhe`oth discusses ideas of how God created the universe as postulated by the various religions and philosophical schools. One of the twelve theories of creation discussed is Emanationism (i.e. the idea that God emanated his own essence into the lower forms of the creation).
The third theory is that of him that asserts that the Creator of physical bodies has created them out of His own essence... (Ma'amar Rishon, III)
He then goes on to refute this theory with 13 refutations. Emanationism requires a belief in Panentheism.
Judaism has always championed the belief in creatio ex nihilo (Creation from nothing) by a completely transcendent and non-physical God whom is completely removed from His creation.
Panentheism, although championed by many as the true view of the Torah, is certainly a mistake and an aberration.
There is much more which could be said on this subject, but this should be sufficient to answer your basic question.
Kol tuv.
Recent daf yomi tosafaos, top of taanis 11b, explaining the gemara there that one should IMAGINE that Hashem is in his stomach, but obviously not really there. Its not just chassidus that promotes these panentheistic views. Most popular kabbalistic works do too including mesilas yisharim. Torah shebaal peh explicitly says Hashem's shchina never comes lower than ten tephachim to the ground.
The way it was explained to me by R' Moshe Zeldman at Yeshivat Aish HaTorah is that the Creation is akin to a dream in HaShem's "mind". (No, HaShem does not have a physical mind and no He does not dream in a physical sense). As long as HaShem "dreams" (i.e. "desires") the Creation to exist it does. IIRC He made this statement in the name of HaRaMHa"L.
The crude analogy R' Zeldman gave us was to close our eyes and imagine a field with a boy in it. He then asked us if that boy continues to exist when we stop thinking about him (obviously not).
So too, R' Zeldman explained, HaShem is constantly "propping up" the Creation by desiring for it to continue. The crude analogy he gave was of holding up a cup. As long as a person holds up a cup, it stays elevated. As soon as the person lets go of the cup, the cup falls to the ground (obviously assuming gravity is at play).
Taking these ideas and crude analogies together, R' Zeldman explained that HaShem's Will comprises all of Creation (much like every blade of grass in the field/boy example above is "composed" of the dreamer's thoughts). Granted this leaves entirely unanswered the question of Free Will.
Seen in this light, one could technically say that all of Creation is "composed" of HaShem / HaShem's Will. But, that's obviously a very loose terminology since even in the human example, one would be hard-pressed to say the field/boy (see above) are "composed" of the dreamer. How much more so when discussing HaShem's "essence".
I hope this helps. It sat well with me.
