Judaism Free will in theology

1 judaism

1.1 free , creation
1.2 paradox of free will
1.3 alternate approaches
1.4 kabbalistic thought

judaism

the belief in free (hebrew: bechirah chofshit בחירה חפשית, bechirah בחירה) axiomatic in jewish thought, , closely linked concept of reward , punishment, based on torah itself: [god] have set before life , death, blessing , curse: therefore choose life ( deuteronomy 30:19).

free therefore discussed @ length in jewish philosophy, firstly regards god s purpose in creation, , secondly regards closely related, resultant, paradox. topic discussed in connection negative theology, divine simplicity , divine providence, jewish principles of faith in general.

free , creation

the traditional teaching regarding purpose of creation, particularly influenced jewish mysticism, world corridor world come . man created sole purpose of rejoicing in god, , deriving pleasure splendor of presence… place joy may derived world come, expressly created provide it; path object of our desires world... free required god s justice, “otherwise, man not given or denied actions on had no control”.

it further understood in order man have true free choice, must not have inner free will, environment in choice between obedience , disobedience exists. god created world such both , evil can operate freely, meaning of rabbinic maxim, in hands of heaven except fear of heaven .

according maimonides,

free granted every man. if desires incline towards way , righteous, has power so; , if desires incline towards unrighteous way , wicked man, has power so. give no place in minds asserted many of ignorant: namely holy one, blessed he, decrees man birth should either righteous or wicked. since power of doing or evil in our own hands, , since wicked deeds have committed have been committed our full consciousness, befits turn in penitence , forsake our evil deed.

the paradox of free will

in rabbinic literature, there discussion apparent contradiction between god s omniscience , free will. representative view foreseen; yet free given . based on understanding, problem formally described paradox, beyond our understanding.

the holy one, blessed he, knows happen before has happened. know whether particular person righteous or wicked, or not? if know, impossible person not righteous. if knows righteous possible him wicked, not know has created. ...[t]he holy one, blessed he, not have temperaments , outside such realms, unlike people, selves , temperaments 2 separate things. god , temperaments one, , god s existence beyond comprehension of man… [thus] not have capabilities comprehend how holy one, blessed he, knows creations , events. [nevertheless] know without doubt people want without holy one, blessed he, forcing or decreeing upon them so... has been said because of man judged according actions.

the paradox explained, not resolved, observing god exists outside of time, , therefore, knowledge of future same knowledge of past , present. knowledge of past not interfere man s free will, neither knowledge of future. distinction, between foreknowledge , predestination, in fact discussed maimonides critic abraham ibn daud.

one analogy here of time travel. time traveller, having returned future, knows in advance x do, while knows x do, knowledge not cause x so: x had free will, while time traveller had foreknowledge. 1 objection raised against analogy – , ibn daud’s distinction – if x has free will, may choose act otherwise when event in question comes pass, , therefore time traveller (or god) merely has knowledge of possible event: having seen event, there no way know certainty x do; see view of gersonides below. further, presence of time traveller, may have had chaotic effect on x s circumstances , choice, absent when event comes pass in present.)

alternate approaches

although above discussion of paradox represents majority rabbinic view, there several major thinkers resolve issue explicitly excluding human action divine foreknowledge.

both saadia gaon , judah ha-levi hold decisions of man precede god s knowledge . gersonides holds god knows, beforehand, choices open each individual, not know choice individual, in freedom, make. isaiah horowitz takes view god cannot know moral choices people make, that, nevertheless, not impair perfection.

in line thinking, teaching pirkei avoth above, read as: observed (while - , no matter - happens), , (since actor unaware of being observed) free given .

kabbalistic thought

the existence of free will, , paradox above (as addressed either approach), closely linked concept of tzimtzum. tzimtzum entails idea god constricted infinite essence, allow existence of conceptual space in finite, independent world exist. constriction made free possible, , hence potential earn world come.

further, according first approach, understood free-will omniscience paradox provides temporal parallel paradox inherent within tzimtzum. in granting free will, god has somehow constricted foreknowledge, allow man s independent action; has foreknowledge , yet free exists. in case of tzimtzum, god has constricted essence allow man s independent existence; immanent , yet transcendent.