Rabbi David Wolpe was ordained as a Conservative Rabbi at The Jewish Theological Seminary, and has taught at the University of Judaism (Los Angeles), The Jewish Theological Seminary (New York) and Hunter College (New York). He is the author of three other books on Jewish spirituality: In Speech and In Silence,Teaching Our Children About God and, most recently, Why Be Jewish? Wolpe is Senior Rabbi of Sinai Temple in Los Angeles.
INTRODUCTION
Rabbi David Wolpe's wonderful book explores some of the richest metaphors used in the Jewish tradition to think about God.
Wolpe reminds us that there is no single, philosophical term in the rabbinic literature that attempts to define God. Rather, our tradition "uses the language of poetry, storytelling, parable and homily to suggest ways in which we may think about our relationship with God."
The word relationship is the key. There is a certain paradox in talking about a relationship. You can talk about someone with whom you have a relationship (in the third person) only as long as you are not in the presence of the person, who cannot be contained by mere words.
All the more so when speaking about God. As Martin Buber wrote: "God cannot be expressed, only addressed."
Still, each of us has some idea about what we mean when we use the word "God," though probably no two perceptions are exactly alike. A discussion of this book should be conducted in a way which encourages participants to share the experiences, or ideas, which have been helpful as each of us seeks to deepen or explore our own relationship to God.
Wolpe presents the classic rabbinic teaching that everyone who stood at Sinai heard a unique message, "in accordance with their own striving, their own capacities, their own heart." The Sinai event, in Judaism, stands for the moment of self-revelation, when God reveals God's own true nature to the entire people of Israel.
QUESTIONS:
Do you agree that every Jew can have different ways of imagining or understanding God? Why or why not?
Are there certain ideas about God that you would consider unacceptable? What might these be?
Wolpe infers from this teaching that the Voice which speaks to us is both a personal one and a commanding one. God is a personal and universal God, both sovereign in the universe and occupied with each individual person.
The author concedes, however, that many modern seekers "can no more summon up faith in God than in any mythological creation that once captured their youth." (20).
His book is based on the hope that "lack of faith" can sometimes turn out to be a false assessment, which may only be the result of a poverty of religious language.
When our ideas about God are too narrow, inflexible or unrealistic, we are likely to reject faith altogether.
SOME NAMES OF GOD
This book offers a selection of some of the ways in which the Jewish tradition has envisioned God, including the following:
The One Who Can be Experienced in Silence (p. 26)
The One Who Remembers All That is Forgotten (Zokher Kol Ha-nishkachot): a universal memory in which no soul can ever truly disappear (37)
A Personal God who is a source of guidance, comfort and governance (51)
Searcher of Hearts (Bohen Levatot ) (Genesis Rabba 67:8)
A Listening Ear (56)
Compassionate One (Rahmana) and God of Consolation (Ketubot 8b)
God of History (86)
Friend (62)
Divine Parent (66)
Lover (70)
The "Place" of the World (Hamakom): (The Ground of Being, granting some sense of never truly being in exile) (135)
The One Who Stands Accused of Inaction (142-144)
The One Who Weeps and Suffers
El Shaddai: The One Who Said "Enough." (The One who did not solve everything, but was trusting enough to leave us room for achievement and mistakes) (156)
Healer of Shattered Hearts (160)
QUESTIONS:
Did any of these images startle or disturb you?
Which of these images was the most intellectually appealing to you?
Can you share the reason why?
You may want to find out which of these ideas most interests your group as a point of departure for your discussion.
GOD AS FRIEND:
Wolpe relates the talmudic story (63) about a group of rabbis who are arguing a point of law. Citing God's own words of Torah, they firmly overrule a voice from heaven. And what was God's reaction to being ignored? God laughed with joy, saying, "My children have defeated me, my children have defeated me."
The rabbis' certainty that God will take pleasure in their "butting him out" demonstrates their assurance of God's friendship.
QUESTIONS:
The story implies equality between humans and God in determining how the Torah should be understood. What do you think about this idea? Shouldn't God be a greater authority on questions of Jewish law?
Besides collegiality, what else do we expect from a friend that might also apply to our relationship with God?
NEAR AND FAR
Many biblical descriptions speak about a God who is both "near" and far." Judaism affirms that these ideas are inextricably linked. Wolpe points out that we actually formalize this idea in our beracha formula.
Remind the group how Judaism insists we utter a grammatically incorrect sentence every time we make a blessing in order to affirm this idea:
The "Baruch Ata Adonai " part of a blessing is addressed to God (in the second person). It means, "Blessed are You."
The "Asher Kidshanu B'mitzvotav" part of a blessing is a statement about God (in the third person). It means "the one who has sanctified us with His mitzvot."
The Hebrew should actually be translated as: "We praise You, Adonai, Sovereign Ruler of the Universe, the One who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to?."
Why do you think the rabbis felt it was necessary to include both aspects of God in the blessing?
GOD AS PARENT:
Wolpe reminds us that "the image of [God as a parent] is sometimes cited to disparage religious feeling." Certainly, one often hears the claim that religious belief is "childish," a fantasy based on the desire to perpetuate the sense of security and protection we felt as small children.
But the parent-child relationship does not end in childhood-it continues for the rest of our lives.
Can you imagine God as an aging parent?
What are some aspects of the relationship between an adult and his/her parent?
How can this be a useful metaphor for us?
GOD AS LOVER
The expression "God Loves You" strikes many modern Jews as strange, and even causes a certain discomfort.
Does this expression make you uncomfortable? Why? Why not?
Can you find a way to restate the expression "God Loves You!" qualifying it or adding to it in ways that make it easier for you to affirm?
IMITATING GOD'S WAYS
Wolpe comments that, "It is the zenith of human aspiration to imitate God's ways as much as humanly possible and appropriate. But he also goes on to say that the ultimate expression of the love between man and God is found in the idea of Covenant, "a relationship of love formalized in law. It mandates obligations on both sides."
Is love really only about obligations and commitments?
What about the emotion of love, the attitude of love?
Consider the following affirmation:
"I express my awareness of God's unconditional love for me by opening my own heart to be full of unconditional yearning for the well-being of all beings, including the happiness of my enemies."
Does this sound "un-Jewish" to you? If so, why?
Did your Jewish teachers talk much about God's love? Why or why not?
GOD OF HISTORY
In his chapter on "Normal Mysticism," Wolpe discusses the prevalent image of God in the narratives of the Torah and Prophets-the God whose power and plan are made manifest in the outcome of human history. The God of history decides the fates of nations and individuals.
Wolpe acknowledges "such extravagant control is beyond what a modern reader can accept or desire." (88) Yet he tries to retain a vestige of this idea by suggesting "for God to be in history does not mean that God directs all events. God's presence may be in the slight nudging of the process, the murmured word in a human ear that can direct a life in the service of humanity."
QUESTIONS:
Would you agree with the statement: "Most Jews no longer believe in a God of history?"
How do you think God might influence history, if at all?
GOD SUFFERS AND WEEPS
"God weeps not only for the pain of his creatures, but for the insensitivity and inhumanity of his creatures. While God cries in sorrow for the persecuted, He weeps as well, in frustration and disappointment, for the persecution." (148)
These words describe perhaps the most startling image of God found in the book: a God who is either unable or unwilling to intervene to stop the suffering in the world, but who still "feels our pain."
If there is a limit on the ways in which God can intervene in human affairs, are there any ways in which God can ALWAYS act?
Does the "parent-child" metaphor help to explain how a person could be unable to help someone whom they love, but could still feel their sorrow intensely?
Does the idea of a God who is not all-powerful make any sense to you? Or does it undermine the whole basis of a God-centered religion?
Consider the following comment by Dr. Henry Slonimsky:
"The boldest, most far-reaching thought concerning God in the Midrash?is this: that God depends on man for his strength and for his failure, for his growth and for his retrogression. In a world in which both are growing or in process, it is man who by his acts increases or decreases the stature of God."
Does the idea of a "growing God" appeal to you?
HEALER OF SHATTERED HEARTS
Rabbi Wolpe calls his last chapter "Arrival, " indicating that this metaphor may be the most meaningful to him. At the outset he stated his conviction that "where anguish is greatest, the religious message is most significant. If God does not speak to suffering, to the shattered hearts of the Psalmists plea, then he must remain peripheral to our lives."
Do you agree that " Healer of Shattered Hearts" is the most compelling description of God for you?
Are there any other metaphors describing our relationship with God which are meaningful to you that are missing from this book?
NEW IMAGES
It has been said that we have outgrown many of the religious metaphors of the past (like "Sovereign" or "King") because they no longer correspond to our experience. Might the sense of freedom demonstrated by the rabbinic imagination encourage us to suggest some new, more personal images?
A few years ago there was a book with the title God is My Co-Pilot. Does that work as a good metaphor to describe our relationship with God?
How about "God is my Personal Trainer" Or "God is my Home Page?"
Encourage the group to share any images that they might find useful.
CLOSING PRAYER OR POEM
You may want to end the discussion by asking the group to take a moment of silence to collect their thoughts. Then close with a brief prayer, reading or poem.
Suggestion: from The Book of Hours by Rainer Maria Rilke
You, neighbor God, if sometimes in the night I rouse you with loud knocking, I do so only because I seldom hear you breathe and know: you are alone. And should you need a drink, no one is there to reach it to you, groping in the dark. Always I hearken. Give but a small sign. I am quite near.
Between us there is a narrow wall, and by sheer chance; for it would take merely a call from your lips or from mine to break it down, and that without a sound.
The wall is builded of your images.
They stand before you, hiding you like names, And when the light within me blazes high that in my inmost soul I know you by, their radiance is squandered on their frames.
And then my senses, which too soon grow lame, Exiled from you, must go their homeless ways.