Pemikiran Yahudi Yesaya 40:25: Akeidat Yitzchak, Duties & Guide for the Perplexed

Some early philosophers in denying G-d’s attributes, insist that G-d knows only Himself, that this is the extent of His awareness. They take this position in order to preserve the uniqueness and unity of G-d, but forget that by doing so, far from according Him greatness, they denigrate Him, since His knowledge would be inferior to the lowliest of His creatures, who perceive things all around them. "Does not even the ox know his owner?" is the cry of Isaiah in chapter one. This proves that knowledge, awareness is considered a positive attribute. Its absence then is undoubtedly a shortcoming. How can one attribute shortcomings to the most perfect Being? Others ascribe to G-d only awareness of things immutable, never changing, as well as general principles. They deny that G-d has knowledge of personal experiences that change from day to day. Concerning such foolishness, David says (Psalms 94,8) "consider, you who are devoid of sense among the people! Fools!, when will you smarten up? Do you not realise that He who implants the ear should be able to hear, that He who shapes the eye is able to see?" We, who believe in the truth of the Torah that Moses has handed down to us, believe, of course, that He is omniscient. We can therefore attribute to G-d all faculties such as patience, kindness etc., without in the least diminishing our image of Him as unique, as "ONE." The four lettered name of G-d testifies to His Oneness; all other names indicate attributes that became noticeable as this universe was created. This is why it says in Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer chapter 3, "until He created the universe, He and His name existed alone." Details of this concept have been explained in chapter twenty one. Therefore, one must be careful. Remember the words of Isaiah 40,25, "To whom can you compare Me, to whom can I be compared, says the Holy One?" This has G-d saying "How can My specific uniqueness serve as basis for comparison to things which are not unique! The word "tedamyuni"refers to the quality of My existence, whereas the word "ve-eshveh" refers to the quantity of My existence. Since I do not conform to either, how can you compare Me to anything or anyone? Whenever our sages employ attributes used in our language, they do not thereby mean to compare G-d to something or someone whom we know, but they use such attributes to prevent misunderstandings. When G-d is described as "first," the meaning is not that He is first relative to somebody who is "second" or "third," but it is a statement that says NO ONE preceded Him. When we talk about His existence, we are not trying to define this in our terms, but we merely state that He is not missing or absent. This is the meaning of the verse in Exodus 33,23, "when I remove My hand, you will see My rear, but My face will not be visible." "Face" is an expression signifying something that is visible. "Rear" is an expression signifying the negative, the opposite of face. In gaining knowledge about ME, you will know what I AM NOT. As long as man is part of an earthly shell, i.e. alive, all knowledge about the essence of G-d is restricted to such negative definitions. Our perception increases through a process of elimination. By means of a continuous process of elimination, one can establish a semblance of the nature of what one wants to define.

And it is written "To whom will you liken to G-d? What likeness will you compare to Him?" (Isaiah 40:18), and "to Whom will you liken Me that I will be equal to, says the Holy One" (ibid 40:25)

WE have already, on several occasions, shown in this treatise that everything that implies corporeality or passiveness, is to be negatived in reference to God, for all passiveness implies change: and the agent producing that state is undoubtedly different from the object affected by it; and if God could be affected in any way whatever, another being beside Him would act on Him and cause change in Him. All kinds of non-existence must likewise be negatived in reference to Him: no perfection whatever can therefore be imagined to be at one time absent from Him, and at another present in Him: for if this were the case, He would [at a certain time] only be potentially perfect. Potentiality always implies non-existence, and when anything has to pass from potentiality into reality, another thing that exists in reality is required to effect that transition. Hence it follows that all perfections must really exist in God, and none of them must in any way be a mere potentiality. Another thing likewise to be denied in reference to God, is similarity to any existing being. This has been generally accepted, and is also mentioned in the books of the Prophets: e.g., “To whom, then, will you liken me?” (Isa. 40:25); “To whom, then, will you liken God?” (ib. 18); “There is none like unto Thee” (Jer. 10:6). Instances of this kind are frequent.