Judaism 101 - Free Will Part 2

2:21 It's like you win a championship and then you're holding the trophy and then what do you say? Now what? Why do you say that? Because it's over. What was amazing? The game is more amazing than holding the trophy afterwards. Holding the trophy, the pleasure. You know what I'm talking about? Holding that trophy, the pleasure is like we won. You go home that night. How was it? We won. In the middle of the game, though, how do you feel? Everything is amazing because that's the battle. That's good for when the reward occurs.

2:52 What this basically means is as follows: If we had to look at who you are and evaluate you as a person, people always want to know who am I. What would the answer to that question be? Who am I? Logically, based on what we're saying, what would the answer be? You are the effort that you expend to make the various choices that you're making in your life. That's how your life is defined. At the end of this year, there's going to be two types of guys in yeshiva, guys that talk about how much they grew, but other guys in yeshiva will be like, really? And then the guys that actually exerted massive amounts of effort. What's the difference? The difference is, one guy is living in this olam adimyon, in this world of imagination, where he says, yeah, I did it. But did he actually do it? Did he actually exert the effort to make the choice that would be in sync with the best version of himself? Maybe yes, maybe no. Help what I'm saying?

3:48 Make sense? If a test is too easy, doesn't mean anything. You guys remember those little tikes basketball hoops that they had when you were kids? You remember when you were just old enough, like if you had that basketball hoop on the back of your door, where you could just get to the stage where you could just dunk? You're like eight or nine years old, right? Some of your friends can dunk, some of your friends can't dunk. What would happen if a seventeen-year-old walked into the room and played that game against his eight-year-old brother, and posts up his eight-year-old brother, and dunks on him, and stands over him like Shaq? That's my brother. So we call that bullying. Why? Because there's no challenge in that. That's pathetic. I knew a kid who was an unbelievable basketball player. He grew up in the Five Towns, and had he played on his high school team, he would have been the best player not in his team, but in the entire league. Unbelievable basketball player.

4:42 But he refused to play, so I said to him, "I was his like tutor, like he would come to learn this when I was still living in America. He would come to learn in DRS with me at night. He didn't go to DRS, but he would come to learn in DRS with me at night." So I said to him, "You are the biggest balgiver in the world. Isn't you massive balgiver? You could dominate the league, and you're not playing, and you're like I'm too cool to play in yeshiva league. Like I'm too cool to play in yeshiva league." He goes, "It's really not that. I am a balgiver, but that's really not it." I said, "What is it?" He goes, "It's pathetic." It'd be like me playing peewee ball, so I said to him, that's even more guybo. But the truth is, he's right. It's not fun to play when you're the best. It's fun to play right when you step up and you're like, now I'm competing, right? You have these kids that dominate in college, right? Then they come to the NBA and all of a sudden they're going up against bigger boys, right? Everyone wants to know how Zion Williamson gonna do in the NBA. If he ever gets healthy, how's he gonna do in the NBA? Why are we talking about Zion Williamson in the NBA? Cause easy to dunk over these kids when they're like.

5:40 Skinny little freshman coming out of Kentucky, right? Try dunking on Dandre Ayton like that, right? Try dunking on what's that center for the Jazz, Rudy Gobert, right? Can you do it against those guys? How do I know that? I'm the most relevant Rebbe in the shul. Kushner knows all. The Harry Kushner over here. So the game is only exciting if you keep moving. Should you be upset if your challenges are getting harder? Not at all. What does that mean? You're getting better. Means you leveled up. So guys, all the time come, they're like, 'Rebbe, it's just so hard.' What did you expect? Do you realize how illogical that is, Rebbe? It's so hard. Can you imagine somebody like playing basketball, like and just dribbling on the side and being like, 'No, it's like so hard. These, they're very good.' Like, yeah. You're in a game. What did you think was gonna happen? Like, no tzedekol. I think this is what people want. You don't have to dribble. It's okay. Just go. Everybody, could you move out of the way? My tzedekol over here needs to take a layup. That's not the way it works. In fact, you don't even want it to be that way because the as hard as the game is, that's what makes the game awesome. If you're not exerting effort, you feel pathetic, right? Makes sense.

7:09 I think everything else we covered. So far, so good. Let's get to the meat and potatoes now. Take a look at the bottom of the first page. Free will versus foreknowledge. For those of you that don't have sheets, come get here in the front. Free will versus foreknowledge. Let's state the problem. We have two things that are absolutely true. Two things that are absolutely true, and this paradox is going to be a problem for us. Position number one: God is above the limitations of time. Time is a creation. So if God is above the limitations of time, what does that mean? It means that the present is as real to God as the future. We live within time, so for us, time is sequential. So we do not know the future.

8:07 But God is infinite, and because God is infinite, He's above the realm of time and space, and therefore the future is as real to God as the present. So far, so good. Makes sense. Position number two: We have free will. A human being has free will, as evidenced by the notion of reward and punishment. Those two positions clash. Why? The question goes like this. Because if God is above the limit, you'll see why I'm spelling out the question. Because each one of the shiitas that we're going to do attacks from a different perspective. If God is above the limitations of time, which means that God knows what I'm going to do in the future, how can I have free will to choose? Because whatever I'm going to choose, God already knew that I was going to choose that. If God already knew that I was going to choose that, did I really have free choice? Now I'm putting this in right now, so you get this already at the forefront.

9:05 The feeling of free choice is not free choice. Ben Shapiro, facts don't care about your feelings, but I feel like I have free choice. Your feeling is not free choice. Just because you're living in the world of make believe where you think you have free choice doesn't mean you have free choice. Does everyone understand the question? The question is not if God knows what I'm going to do. So then, how do I have free choice? That's not the question. It's much bigger than that. It's if God is above the limitations of time, and the future is as real to Him as the present, which means that He knows what I'm going to choose. How can I be said to have free choice when I can't choose anything other than the thing God knows that I'm going to choose? Don't attempt to answer the question yet. It's I don't. For sure. It's just the same as saying not even about free choice, just choice in general for anything. Like there, then there would be no free choice.

9:58 Which means that there's no such thing as reward and punishment. Which means there's no such thing as building yourself as a person because there's no true effort. Because I was always going to choose that anyway. So the question is, then there's no choice. In other words, remember. Let's start from the basic premise. I hope you have this by now. The whole air arena of free choice we said yesterday is only in the area of morality. It's all focused on will I become the person that I'm capable and meant to become? That's the quest of humanity. Clear? Now. If I am not really exerting any effort because I was always going to choose that, then it doesn't make a difference if I choose it or not. If God already knew that I was going to choose it, therefore, how can you say that I have free will? Got it? Everything clear? Mikey, Moshe, Sam, Kushner, Pasha, okay.

10:54 Now there's two areas that you're going to want to attack this in. I set this up very logically on the sheets. Page two. You're either going to say that there's a deficiency in God's knowledge of the future, or that free choice is only an illusion. Why are both of those bad? Remember how we set up earlier in the year for those that were with me that you can't ask questions that go against logic. Like, what happens when the immovable object meets the unstoppable force? The question itself does not have the language to succeed as a normative question. So here we have a problem. I can't diminish God, in any way, shape, or form, because then we're not talking about God anymore.

11:47 But I can't diminish free choice because we already posited that the whole point is to create a certain moral quest for me to become a particular type of person. So which one is true? You understand the problem? So you're going to fail on either side. If you try to attack either side, you're going to fail. And it seems that the Mishnah in Avos, chapter three, fifteen, was aware of this because look at the words of the Mishnah: Hakol Tzafui, the Harishus Nesuna. What is the Mishnah saying? Everything is foreseen, and you have free choice. So it's like if you could put this Mishnah as a question, what would the Mishnah be saying? In other words, the Mishnah is saying there's a paradox. We believe in this, and we believe in that. The question is, how do both exist at once? So far so good. We're gonna start off going in chronological order. We're gonna start off with Rosh Hashanah. Guys have heard of Rosh Hashanah.

12:46 So Rashiagon answers as follows, and this will be explained in greater depth later. It's just a good first dip our toe into the water before we get to the Rambam. The Rambam is the main sheet that we're going to do, and next we will pick up going through the other sheetas. This is the way Rashiagon puts it. Ready? God knows in advance what you are going to freely choose. You see how he danced between two poles over here? God knows in advance what you are going to freely choose. In other words, God's knowledge is not a force. God's knowledge is not forcing what's going to happen. God's knowledge is predicated on what you are going to do. Pinsky. So it's more like a retroactive kind of thing, where you do something and then God retroactively wills it that it happened. He doesn't. It's not. It's not that God wills it. He knows it.

13:45 He knows what you are going to freely choose. In other words, God's knowledge of the future is because of what you are going to freely choose. In other words, if that's what you meant by retroactive. God knows, right? He doesn't will it. God knows that on whatever date in the future, this is what you are going to freely choose. Why does He know that? Because of the free choice that you have in the future. Now we can say that now, at our point in time, God knows what you are going to freely choose. Then, but God does not impact your free choice. Kushner, that's not the question. You're just saying, how can God know you're going to choose if you actually, if it's actually your choice? What's and how's he answering that question? At least have the subtlety of it, and how's he answering that question? Because God's knowledge is coming. God's knowledge now comes from when.

14:40 Comes from my free choice in the future. Guys, you have to appreciate if you want to really appreciate the move that we're going to see from the Rambam and the Albag and the Rivash on the Ravid. You're going to have to be able to appreciate these moves. Every move here is subtle. These are not just language games. Price, how we do it? You getting this? I'm doing great. The question is that if God, regardless of his free choice, God knows what the end game will be. What's the point of creating a person with a certain code that ends up as a good or bad person? Regardless of his free choice, if he knows it's going to end up good, you say there, but you're going to see it's an excellent question you're asking because when we get to the Ralbag, I believe it is, he's going to address that point. So you're right on target because if God knows, so who's the revelation for? If He already knew. But remember that in this perspective, we'll get to the Ralbag. He's going to address it more clearly. But from this perspective, why does God have the revelation?

15:36 It's because of what I'm going to do in the future, so in a certain way, it is being revealed to God. It's being revealed to God now, based on what I'm going to do in the future. It's being revealed by your every really free choice. Good. It's totally free. God knows what I'm going to freely choose. God is above time. That's exactly right. And as God is above time, therefore His knowledge of the future is as real as His knowledge in the present. But His knowledge of what I'm going to do in the future is because of what I'm going to freely choose in the future. It's not that His knowledge is causing what I do. His knowledge is the response to what I do. So it's like foreseen. So then, what's the issue? And by the way, that's what the Mishnah says. Hakol tsafui. I God sees into the future what I'm going to do, and it doesn't affect that.

16:22 Because the knowledge that he has is because of the choice that I'm going to make. My choice causes his knowledge. Does that diminish Hashem's power? Because it would say if we made that choice, Hashem wouldn't have the knowledge. We're going to be very good. I don't think so. But when we get to they're going to be sheets. Does that address every? I want to highlight for you what Abe just did. If you are on target right now, I think I'm looking around. I see about sixty seventy percent of you are on target. If you're on target right now, you're going to start to ask questions exactly like Price and exactly like Abe have been asking. You're going to say, "Whoa, one second." So, how does that? All the factors are here. Every single one of these factors is going to be played with. There's not one factor at the end that we're going to be looking at and going like, "Yeah, we didn't play with that one." Every single one of these things. Right now, all we're saying is like this: God's knowledge is a function of our choice, which we're going to freely choose in the future. Simple.

17:18 I still think that's diminishing God's power. Why? Because it's implying that God doesn't have the power, doesn't have the knowledge of if I would choose the other thing. I won't choose the other thing. God knows I won't choose the other thing. You know why? Because in God's world, I already. But God could still know what would happen if I did. Remember, why does God have that knowledge? God is right here. Let's say at point A. If God has the knowledge based on something I did, that means that God's not God's knowledge isn't all powerful. It is. It spans the entirety of human existence in the sense that everything that we ever will choose, he already knows. But that means he doesn't know we didn't choose. He knows. He knows what we are going to choose. That means he doesn't know what would happen had we chosen the other thing. It's diminishing his power. Remember, you can't say that because he knows that you're not going to choose that because you didn't. Because you didn't choose that. But that means that if we did choose, he doesn't know what would happen. But think about what you're saying. You're saying, I'm at point A.

18:14 I know what's going to happen at point B, but what if you didn't choose what's going to happen at point B? He knows what happened at point B because you already chose point B in his world. Remember, he's above time, so to him, point B already happened. That's what it means. That's why his knowledge is truly absolute. But his knowledge shouldn't be based on us. Why not? Isn't that diminishing? Remember, you didn't do it yet. You didn't do it yet in your world. His knowledge is not basic. His knowledge is the unlimited knowledge of everything that will happen. And since he knows this is what's going to happen, his knowledge is not in any way limited. You're making it sound like God is living in the future and looking back at the past. He's living in everything. Remember, how when I asked the question, I didn't just say if God knows everything. I said if God is living beyond the realm of time, then the present is as real to him as the future.

19:08 Correct. So to him, Ha Yehovah V'Yeh. What was, is, and always will be, is exactly the same to him. There's no difference in any one of those points in time. And so, therefore, what we would perceive to be right now, he already knows what's going to happen in the future because in his world, we already did it. So his knowledge of what I'm going to freely choose is not in any way impacted. Because he had two time tables of if you have two decisions. Does he have two timetables of which one you can choose, which order it is? You set us up perfectly, because you're really hitting on a fundamental point, which is how are we even having this conversation? And for that, I point you to the Rambam in Hilchus Tshuva. Let's take a look at the next Rambam. I couldn't have set it up any better myself.

20:05 One might ask, I pasted the Rambam in English so that we can all go through it together. One might ask, since the Holy One, blessed be He, knows everything that will occur before it comes to pass, does He or does He not know whether a person will be righteous or wicked? If He knows that he'll be righteous, it appears impossible for Him not to be righteous. However, if one would say that, despite His knowledge that He would be righteous, it is possible for Him to be wicked. Then his knowledge would be incomplete. That's basically our question. You guys got that. If God knows that you're going to be righteous, then either one of two things: He'll have to be righteous, or God's knowledge is incomplete. Let's pause here for a second. What's the Rambam doing different than Rav Sadigon? Think. You're going to have to think. What's the Rambam doing different than Rav Sadigon?

21:03 Meaning, whereas the Rambam set it up as God's knowledge is not a force. God's knowledge of what's going to happen in the future is not causing me to act that way in the future. God knows what I'm going to freely choose. The Rambam's not setting it up that way. The Rambam is saying God's knowledge is a cause. God's knowledge is a cause. You guys get that move? That's big. What Rambam did is he avoided God's knowledge being a cause. God's knowledge is of what I will freely choose. The Rambam is not setting it up that way. The Rambam is saying God's knowledge of I if God knows something is going to be in the future, it either has to be that way, in which case I don't have free choice, or it won't be that way, in which case God's knowledge is diminished. So far, so good. Shy. He didn't really avoid it. He just questioned it. Say it. You're going to see that he's going to. I'm setting it up this way on purpose. Know that the resolution to this question can be described as its measure is longer than the Earth.

21:59 And broader than the sea, many great and fundamental principles and lofty concepts are dependent upon it. However, the statements that I will make must be known and understood as a basis for the comprehension of this matter. As explained in the second chapter of Hilchas Uso Dei Torah, the Holy One, Blessed Be He, does not know with a knowledge that is external from Him, as do men whose knowledge and selves are two different entities. Rather, He may His name be praised, and His knowledge are one. Human knowledge cannot comprehend this concept in its entirety, for just as it is beyond the potential of man to comprehend and conceive the essential nature of the Creator, as it states in the pasuk, "No man will perceive Me and live," so too it is beyond man's potential to comprehend and conceive the Creator's knowledge. This was the intent of the Prophet Isaiah's statement, "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor your ways My ways." Accordingly, we do not have the potential to conceive.

22:58 How the Holy One, blessed be He, knows all the creation and their deeds. However, this is known without any doubt that man's actions are in his own hands, and the Holy One, blessed be He, does not lead him in a particular direction or decree that he do anything. This matter is known not only as a tradition of faith, but also through clear proof from the words of wisdom. Consequently, the prophets taught that a person is judged for his deeds, according to his deeds, whether good or bad. This is a fundamental principle on which is dependent all the words of prophecy. Show of hands, how many people think they understand the Rambam? Baruch Hashem, I have one, two, three. I would love to hear what you believe the Rambam is saying. Go.

23:46 Therefore, the question itself is the fooliest question. We're never going to get it because we cannot. We can't operate on that. So the Rambam is saying we don't know. The Rambam is saying we can't know. There's a reason we can't know. So this is what you're suggesting the Rambam did, which, by the way, I think a lot of people did understand the Rambam this way. You're suggesting that the Rambam raised the question. One might ask. He raises the question, and the Rambam says. At the end of the day, God's knowledge is not like human knowledge. Which needs to be explored. What exactly that means, and as a result of that, we just know two things to be true: God knows everything, and in no way do I not have free will. And I don't understand how it works. One might criticize the Rambam, and say, "Well, then why did you ask the question?" Who's criticism is that? The Ravid asked that kasha on the Rambam. Many understood the Rambam the way you understood it, which is the Rambam was saying, "We don't know."

24:44 I think might be asking like kind of the classic case of a we're living in the two dimensional world while he's living in the three dimensional. You can't you just don't have that point of you don't have that perspective and therefore what he does doesn't necessarily make sense to you because you just like your mind can't wrap around. I feel like you're Kawhi Leonard, and the ball is bouncing on the rim, and I'm just waiting to see if it'll bounce in, and then it bounced out. You were so close. You just derailed the last ten seconds. You were almost there. I was exceptionally impressed. Then the last ten seconds had. That's a lot farther than I got when I was your age in this rambum. Take a look at the words of the rambum.

25:39 Jake. I think the Rambam's trying to make a big cop out. That's what he's arguing. He's saying, yeah, the Rambam just said, both have to be true. We can't comprehend how it's happening, but if we understand that God's above time, then that's all we can, as humans, understand. And therefore, go much further. So how did Rambam answer the question? He basically just said, we're trying to go a step further, but we can't get there. We just got to stop. So how did Rambam answer the question? Jake is going to say here and say that's a cop out. Question. Reward and punishment. He's saying reward and punishment is true. By the way, I'll bring you a proof that the Rambam is not copping out, because the Rambam says many great and fundamental principles and lofty concepts are dependent upon it. However, the statements that I will make must be known and understood as a basis for the comprehension of this matter. Why is the Rambam saying that? Clearly, the Rambam believes that he's doing what? He's answering the question. And in fact, I alluded earlier in the shiur to a way of understanding this Rambam, and I did it on purpose to see if anyone would catch it. See if you can figure it out. Let's take ten seconds for station identification and figure this out. What is the Rambam's answer?

27:09 You want me to walk you there? One last shot. It's overtime. Let's see if you get it this time. Is it that we only have the illusion of free will? No! You're violating one of the principles we said in the very beginning of the shiur. What did we say? The illusion of free will. The feeling that I have free will is not free will. You need to actually have free will in order to have free will. Just that I believe and feel like I have free will cannot be enough. I'm gonna take a shot at it. That's okay. This is why I love you. You take those shots. You have the guts.

27:40 I guess he's like, picture because saving my life in the movie, and God. Of course, that's where we went. God saved the movie already, in the sense that I made the movie myself. I directed, wrote, acted for the whole thing. And at some point, the movie finishes, and maybe God got a bootleg early copy, and he saw the whole thing already. I made choices throughout the whole storyline. That's a sadu go. By the way, that's an amazing analogy for a sadu go. That's not the wrong one though. Because the Rambam's not saying that. Reshad, you go and said exactly that. He said the Rambam has a vision of the entirety of the movie. Just because I've seen the movie doesn't mean the actors are going to make different choices. The actors already made those choices. It's a perfect analogy for Reshad, you go. Just not what the Rambam's saying. Last shot, Bryce. Saying that God knows what's happening because He operates on a different plane than us. It's not human knowledge. Us when we humans, you either know or you don't know.

28:37 Idea, so just so he could know without it actually being enforced behind those actions, because by us you know what's happening. I was watching it bouncing. And beat is sitting there, and the whole stadium is waiting, and all of Canada is disappointed. I gotta take. We have seven minutes left. I gotta take a shot. I have you, Tyler. Just because you're begging me, I'll give you one last shot. Is it that? We talked to me in the class that we define free will as morality as making a moral decision. If we, meaning in that, like God, God's knowledge of if making a moral decision is how we define free will, and God's knowledge doesn't impede on our ability to make that moral decision that moment. That Rabosei, I have to. That's why I'm going to explain. You'll be like one of those kids afterwards. That's what I was going to say. Ready? It probably was. Moshih, ready? The Rambam makes a statement. It's a famous Rambam in Hilchot Yisodeh Torah, "Who is Hamada and who is Yodah? God and His knowledge are one." So, for example, when I say Adam is thinking.

30:00 Is Adam his thoughts? No. Why not? Because there's Adam, and then there's Adam as a thinker. He's employing thoughts. Make sense? Can you say that about God? If you say God is one, can you say God thinks? God is. That is. You would have to say the following, and this is not something that any human being can comprehend because we can't comprehend God. We can't comprehend the following statement, which is, God and his thoughts are one. We could say it, but we have no idea what that means. Because from an experiential perspective, you only know yourself, and then you know yourself as thinking. Can you take the muscle of yourself and apply that to God? You cannot. God's thoughts are fundamentally different than any human thought. Now let's look at the question. What's the question? The question is: If I knew in the future what Moshe was absolutely going to do.

30:55 Then of course, if my knowledge was absolute, would Moshe have any free choice to make any decision other than the one that I know he's going to make? Of course not. Again, if I know that Moshe is going to choose X, and I absolutely know that, then you can't say that Moshe has free will to choose Y, because otherwise my knowledge is not absolute. What does your knowing have to do with him doing? Good, but say that. But one second, let's assume that as a let's assume that right, because the Rambam is saying that more knowledge is a force for free will, right? It removes free will. So if I know Moshe is going to raise his hand right now. As I absolutely know that, and then he doesn't, then my knowledge is not absolute. Of course, I'm not saying I'm God. I'm just saying, of course, you rose your hand. Wasn't going to say. Let me finish, and then I'll let you all attack me. Just give me thirty seconds to finish. Therefore, the Rambam says as follows. He's not copping out like the Ravid says. The Rambam is saying as follows. Ready for it? Remember, guys, we said earlier in today's shir that you can't ask the question, "What happens when an immovable object meets an unstoppable force?"

31:54 Why not? Because the question itself breaks down. You guys remember the famous question we did earlier in the year for the guys that were with me earlier in the year. You remember the famous question, can God make a rock that He can't lift? It's a silly question. Why? Because there's no language to actually express an answer to that question. Can God limit Himself? That's what you're really asking. If you say that God can't, then aren't you limiting God? If you say that He can, then aren't you limiting God? The question falls apart because the language—you have to be able to express these concepts in actual language in order for the question to be meaningful. What's the Rambam saying? The Rambam is saying as follows: You're going to ask the question, "What happens when God knows what you're going to do in the future?" And then you still say that you have free will. What's the Rambam saying?

32:44 You can't ask the question because that's predicated on human knowledge. You understand? Make sure you understand this point before you attack. Make sure you understand this point. That question is built on if I knew what Moshe was going to choose with my human knowledge of the future, right? Then of course Moshe would have no free choice. But we don't have the foggiest clue of how God's knowledge works because I don't know God. And I don't know how God's knowledge works because God and His knowledge are one. Therefore, the entire question falls apart. Far from being a cop out, the Rambam dismantled the entire question. Now you can attack him. This was an attack on this. This was a like just on before you were saying if God has foreknowledge, you can't call foreknowledge if God is above time. That's exactly right. That's what the Rambam is saying. The Rambam is saying, how are you even having this conversation? You're saying yeah, but it's not. That's the point. Is yours right? You're saying.

33:40 The reason we have the question is because I'm standing at point A in time, and I know that in point B, Moshe is going to do something different. B'seder—that's called foreknowledge. And in the world of foreknowledge, how could he then have free will? But you can't start with foreknowledge because it's not foreknowledge. It's unlike any knowledge that any human being could ever possess. The entire question breaks down. How does God know what's going to happen in the future? What does the word 'no' mean? How does the word 'know' even operate here? So the Rambam has the most brilliant answer to this question. He dismantled the entirety of the question. It doesn't even make any sense. I think that the question still stands. How? Because the answer to it would be, he does like we don't understand his knowledge, but let's say I'm standing at a crossroads. I can go A and I can go B. God knows the route that leads to it. Past A and past B. Doesn't mean know.

34:33 Because what you just did is you applied human knowledge, and you took your human knowledge and applied it to the situation. We only know what we choose. We don't know everything else. God knows what it will. It just broke down. How do you know what God knows? I don't. That's exactly the Ramallah's answer. But He knows more than I do. I only know the path I chose. He knows both. That's the point. You're saying God knows both. We don't know what the word God knows means.

35:04 If you say that God doesn't know everything, God is everything. But again, I don't know what that means. I can't understand God. What is the answer? The fact that He's so vast is the answer. Meaning, He's beyond comprehension. What we can understand is know, but it's everything. That doesn't mean anything to me because when I know, there's the me, and then there's me knowing. With God, there's no separation between the me and the knowing. He is the knowledge, he is the known, he is the knower. So I can't talk at all at any intelligent level about God's knowledge, because in order for me to ask the question, I have to say God knows. And once you say God knows, the whole question falls apart. What do you mean God knows? God knows what? What does it God knows mean? This is a larger comment than the first time around. The reason why I'm saying is this: that the first time, at least, he said, "All right, like."

35:59 It's a legitimate question, at least if you're asking the person to break it and interpret it. I just don't know the answer. And I'm going with you: just the answer I'm going to give. The deal now is kind of like, what's the answer to this question? It's a bad question in the first place. Let's not even bother with it. Wait a second. That's a legitimate philosophical tactic. You have to ask yourself whenever you're answering a question: the first thing you have to do is you have to measure the parameters of the question. We have to establish: is this a question that we have language to answer? If there's no language to answer the question, then we have to acknowledge that we don't have the language to answer the question. So I understand what you're saying that you feel like you'd rather there be a question and get an answer. But there is a legitimate philosophical tactic, as we showed before. You have to know whether or not there's language that's capable of answering such a question. If you're starting off with the supposition that you're saying something, I know something about God, ergo I have a question. Maybe the thing that you think you know about God, you don't really know. And since the Ramam has a principle that God and His knowledge are one, because God is one.

36:54 Infinitely, so therefore the entire question falls apart. That's a legitimate philosophical tactic. No. Again, every question has you have to be able to answer. For a question to be legitimate, it has to have language that you can answer, right? So we have to know. The first thing we have to ask ourselves is: Is it possible for a human being to have language to answer this question? So the Rambam is not avoiding the question. He's telling you it's there. There cannot possibly be a meaningful answer to the question because a human being could not develop the language to answer such a question. By definition, we're living in a finite world. We can't understand the nature of the infinite. And therefore I can, and therefore all I know is two things. This how the Rambam would leave it. I think this what the Rambam means. The Torah tells us that God is infinite. The Torah tells us that there's free will.

37:40 It's beyond human comprehension to be able to understand how those two things are true, because when all I know of knowledge is foreknowledge, knowledge of what Moshe is going to do. And God's knowledge, I have no idea how it operates. So I know God has something called knowledge. I can't speak about it. I don't have any language skills to develop it, and yet at the same time, somehow with God's knowledge, there's a capacity to be free will, because I don't have a kasha. Because God's knowledge is not interrupting in any way His free will. My knowledge would interrupt free will. God's knowledge would never interrupt free will. It has no shaychus to free will. How would your knowledge interrupt? Because if I know in point A what Moshe is going to do in point B, and I absolutely know that, then there's no question that Moshe has to do that thing in point B. But God's, but I can't now take that statement and apply it to God because then I'm taking a human experience of knowledge and saying God's knowledge is the same. I never developed those language skills. Kushner, last question. Would God's knowledge be encompassing of your knowledge, which means it includes foreknowledge?

38:36 Again, I don't know. I have no idea. You're taking a position on God's knowledge and what God's knowledge would look like, and maybe it's a legitimate position, but I don't have the language to articulate how that could possibly be. I couldn't speak about God's knowledge anything more than to say that God's knowledge is one. I can't speak about it. You can also have that the knowledge which is. But it's not just also the nature of God's knowledge. What's I guess the nature of God's knowledge is that it's beyond human language. I can't comprehend God's knowledge any more than I can comprehend God Himself, because I can't comprehend God Himself. I can't comprehend God's knowledge. We'll stop here for today.