God’s Perfection - שלמות

The topic of God’s Perfection, שלמות, seems to have eluded philosophical treatment by the classic Jewish mystics and philosophers. It’s as if it were simply an accepted given, maybe even axiomatic. At times it was referred to as an idea lingering in the philosophical background. An example of this is Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto’s "The Way of God" where he mentions God is Perfect. Then based on this assertion builds his argument that God's benevolent giving must also be Perfect, for the Perfect One behaves perfectly. However, he never goes through the steps to prove that God is Perfect. Quite to the contrary, he uses it as the foundational axiom for what he’s trying to prove.

Surprisingly it seems like God’s Perfection was treated as even more axiomatic than other sensitive topics, such as His Oneness. Honestly, when I first realized this I found it quite puzzling. In truth, I cannot claim to have encountered every available page of holy texts dealing with the “Big Questions” nor can I claim memory of all that I have already read. Yet, somehow I am left with the general impression that God's Perfection has been simply assumed. If you, my reader, happen to discover a holy text where it’s proven, please let me know either via email or comment to this essay (on my blog).

Perhaps, the classic Jewish sages beheld an attitude of reverence that only Perfection truly befits God’s Holy Majesty. Still, even the most sentimental of attitudes bear a latent logic. Isn’t this part of what keeps the psychology profession busy?

It's possible that in the past when everyone identified with a religion of one sort or another, the Jewish sages felt no need to explain why God is considered Perfect. Nobody would imagine that they worshiped One less than Perfect. Among the masses, this attitude may have not been entirely driven by reverence. There may have been personal pride mixed in there too, as if their choice of worship reflected back on their own self image.

Yet, since there was universal agreement, there was no need for the idea to be proven. It was safe to philosophically let go of. Plus, if necessary, the ideas stood ripe to serve as the very basis of a theological argument – like Rabbi Luzzatto did. In contrast, there was a need to explain an idea like the Jewish version of God's Oneness. Both neighboring faiths were hawking their Jewish populations - seeking to wrest converts. The Christians tried to draw Jews towards their notion of a trinity and in Muslims countries the Jews had to demonstrate that they were on at least equal monotheistic footing. In such cultural climates, Jews needed to be well informed about their notion monotheism and trained to argue for it.

Today, we are no longer live in an age of universal religious affiliation. Accordingly, there’s not necessarily an automatic reverence for God’s Perfection. Perhaps, it’s time has to unpack the latent logic underlying the reverent assumption of God's Perfection.

The mystic in me asks, "Faith is so beautiful and precious. It often engages the highest and brightest of what it means to be a soulful human being. Why engage in the work of transforming a precious matter of faith into logic?"

There are two related reasons why. The first I heard from Rabbi Leibel Shapiro of Miami Beach, Florida. God wants us to serve Him with all of our faculties. This includes our minds as well. Therefore, we are encouraged to engage our minds in His service whenever possible to.

The second reason is because the mind is a vessel to receive illumination from the soul.  The more the mind is engaged in spiritual thought, the more illumination from the soul comes streaming into contact with the biological organism - fostering deeper contact and union between the spiritual and the physical.

One need not worry. The reservoir of faith will never be depleted by the transformation of cherished beliefs into concrete logic. It's not like a species in danger of extinction. If anything answers lead to more questions which bring humans face to face with new areas of faith, never before considered. So, paradoxically answering “Big Questions” can actually enlarge the reservoir of faith.

It's with this spirit that I engage in attempting to explain logically why God is Perfect. Reality is designed in a way that everything seems to have a polar opposite. Examples of such include male/female, day/night, light/dark, work/rest, proton/electron, matter/anti-matter, good/evil...I think you get the idea. Similarly, as part of this sweeping overall pattern, imperfection needs to have its opposite too - Perfection.

Since "Perfection is not of this world", one must conclude that flawless existence is elsewhere.  What we have in this world is, at best, a series of cause and effect events designed to compensate for flaws.   However, to immediately identify God as that "Perfect opposite" might be too fast of a jump.

So, let's slow down and consider a different question first. Is God Infinite? The standard answer for a believer is, "Yes". However, as Rabbi Moshe Schatz shared with me that there were some classical Kabbalists who felt uncomfortable calling God, “Infinite”. They felt that even such an expansive term for God might be inadequate because He is then being referred to as the opposite of something else, namely finite reality. And how can He ever be compared to anything else!

However, even some of these Kabbalists occasionally referred to God as Infinite.

What might have they meant? I do not think they were making reluctant concessions to the conventions of language. I think what they meant was that God is "at least Infinite", if not so much more than that. Another way to say this is that while Infinity might not necessarily be Him, it certainly is "of Him".

Similarly, to say that God is Perfect might run into the same problem as saying He's Infinite. At least, the word Infinity bears a silver lining, as it's not directly descriptive. The word Infinite means, “Not finite". It's pointing to God by way of elimination; stating who He's not rather than Who He is.

In contrast, the word Perfect, and its Hebrew corollary שלמות, are direct descriptions. One could in theory substitute the Perfect for Flawless – i.e. not flawed. However, it does not follow with the Hebrew word, שלמות, which the sages used.

In conclusion, my thoughts are that by the principle of opposites, imperfection has a polar opposite, Perfection, somewhere in reality. Is it God? I think that God is "at least Perfect", if not so much more than that. In other words, Perfection is "of God". However, for simplicity's sake conventional believers proclaim, "God is Perfect!"

---------------------O-------------------