Q&A: ‘The Power of the Agent in the Acted-Upon’ – ‘Fills All Worlds’ – ?
‘The Power of the Agent in the Acted-Upon’ – ‘Fills All Worlds’ – ?
Question
Hello Rabbi. In several books of research and thought I find the expression ‘the power of the agent in the acted-upon’ alongside the term ‘fills all worlds.’ Could the rabbi perhaps explain these ideas to me in simple language?
By means of what philosophical proof (ontological, physico-theological, cosmological, etc.) can one reach the conclusion of ‘fills all worlds’ and ‘the power of the agent in the acted-upon’? And what exactly does it mean?
Many thanks in advance.
Answer
These are expressions that seem to be taken from ancient philosophy, which I haven’t studied (they always seem to me to have a vague meaning and not say very much). But from a quick search it appears that this comes from Hasidic literature (mainly Chabad).
I assume the meaning of the expression is that the power of the agent is present in the thing acted upon (“one who blows, blows from within himself,” from the Zohar), and perhaps that the entire thing acted upon is the power of the agent. If so, then this conception is based on the infinity of the divine, such that it is impossible for something to exist and act outside of it. You can search online if you’re interested in more details.
Discussion on Answer
Ask whoever thinks that. I assume it comes from His infinity.
In my opinion, a two-bit thesis.
Thank you
By what philosophical or theological claim can one reach the conclusion that nothing exists outside of it?
I checked online a bit, and if I understood correctly, it is by virtue of the principle of causality. Since everything is supposed to have a cause, and since this is ‘something from nothing,’ therefore creation must require constant renewal. That is the meaning of the idea that the Creator gives life to His creation at every moment. Not that there is no creation, but that it needs continual renewal. “The word of God is present in creation and gives it life.”
Does that sound acceptable to you, or is that a two-bit thesis?