How do the transcendental laws of existence mesh up with wave-particle duality (De Broglie, 1924), the Superposition of wave functions in the Schrödinger's cat wave in the box thought experiment (1935), and the extensions into "multiverse" and "M-Theory", circa the 1990's, and even the difference between countable objects where those objects are Bosons and Fermions (Satyendra Nath Bose circa 1923)?
Don't we say that NONE of the concepts we typically apply to THIS WORLD describe G-D in any way, because we declare that the Creator is OUTSIDE OF that which he created?!
Time is as best I understand, impossible to understand. That might just be me. However we can experience it. Who puts the sequence to things? That is, who creates the sense, the experience, we have of time?
There is a recent (circa 1950-1960) concept in mathematics called "idempotency". This is like a super identity operator, Seems perhaps related to the concept of "oneness".
Are the "transcendental laws of existence" those of the German Kant, circa mid 1700's? If so that would explain my ignorance as I've avoided that era's heavy German based "philosophy" based on a "bad smell" it has ever had to me.
English has "I am walking" and "I walk". There is a weaker inclusion of the person in the verb form, than Hebrew. For example "He walks", not "He walk". What effect does the state verb "am" and the gerund "walking" have different than the simple present "walk"? The simple present in English is an indication of the will. Sort of "I am walking because I will to be walking". That's is like, I think, to the Hebrew phrasing which G-d identified Himself to Moses, but then as Rabbi Kessin continues .. G-d MUST be. Is that volition or something else?
When you talk about the ESSENCE of things and that we CANNOT KNOW anything OUTSIDE of that - are you not referring to the experience you have in your mind as a result of PERCEPTION? IOW, we posit that G-D is outside of your apprehension of the world,and therefore, UNKNOWABLE by definition?
We are all figments of god’s imagination. If god was water, we would be ice. If god was a cloud, we would be shapes within a cloud
Bye-bye thank you for the teachers of Torah everything is through God and only to God and there is only one God a creator of the universe
Everything is God, there isn't anything that is not God.
We are part of HIM - and he has NO PARTS - is really not a problem, because that statement is from OUR POINT OF VIEW!
How do the transcendental laws of existence mesh up with wave-particle duality (De Broglie, 1924), the Superposition of wave functions in the Schrödinger's cat wave in the box thought experiment (1935), and the extensions into "multiverse" and "M-Theory", circa the 1990's, and even the difference between countable objects where those objects are Bosons and Fermions (Satyendra Nath Bose circa 1923)?
Don't we say that NONE of the concepts we typically apply to THIS WORLD describe G-D in any way, because we declare that the Creator is OUTSIDE OF that which he created?!
Time is as best I understand, impossible to understand. That might just be me. However we can experience it. Who puts the sequence to things? That is, who creates the sense, the experience, we have of time?
There is a recent (circa 1950-1960) concept in mathematics called "idempotency". This is like a super identity operator, Seems perhaps related to the concept of "oneness".
Are the "transcendental laws of existence" those of the German Kant, circa mid 1700's? If so that would explain my ignorance as I've avoided that era's heavy German based "philosophy" based on a "bad smell" it has ever had to me.
English has "I am walking" and "I walk". There is a weaker inclusion of the person in the verb form, than Hebrew. For example "He walks", not "He walk". What effect does the state verb "am" and the gerund "walking" have different than the simple present "walk"? The simple present in English is an indication of the will. Sort of "I am walking because I will to be walking". That's is like, I think, to the Hebrew phrasing which G-d identified Himself to Moses, but then as Rabbi Kessin continues .. G-d MUST be. Is that volition or something else?
When you talk about the ESSENCE of things and that we CANNOT KNOW anything OUTSIDE of that - are you not referring to the experience you have in your mind as a result of PERCEPTION?
IOW, we posit that G-D is outside of your apprehension of the world,and therefore, UNKNOWABLE by definition?