Immanence

I perceive God as a being, a figure, a persona, who created the world at some point and somehow, and revealed himself to the people of Israel, according to my understanding, in sight and sound. In an ‘external’ revelation to human consciousness.
They tried to explain to me that God is not a persona, he is not a figure, and he is not some ‘boss’ of the world, but he is the soul of the world, the essence of the world, the wisdom of the world, it is difficult for me to say exactly because I have difficulty fully understanding the claims. I assume that the rabbi is familiar with the article "Torment from Soups" which is the basis for those claims.
I myself do not understand how such a God, who in my understanding is a rather abstract idea (even for God) comes to a state where he tells humans what he wants.
Following the heretical article in question that came out in Otniel sometime in early spring, one of the members wrote the following text under the name of Rabbi Giora Nadler (unknown): ‘Moses our Lord grasped reality and understood being, and this is what he wrote. We call this composition Torah, that is, the Book of Commandments, which are the laws of being. The questioner will ask - if so, did God not speak to Moses, but did Moses alone understand the Torah. This is a physical question, since this is the meaning of the concept of the word of God. Moses understood the Torah - the laws of being - in prophecy’.
In my understanding, this does indeed purify the deity from pagan physical concepts, but it also sterilizes the concept of God and religion.
If I am not good at explaining the opposing position to me, it is mainly because I do not understand it, and I am mainly trying to mediate it to the Rabbi who may understand some of the words or relate them to a similar position that he does understand.
If I also don't explain the childish-naive (according to my friends) view that I present in an understandable way, then I'm probably really less smart than I think.

I know these statements but don't really understand them. I tend to reassure myself that the people who say them probably don't understand them either. As far as I'm concerned, these are all just empty words, meaningless wordplay.
As far as I understand it, there are only two possibilities: 1. A personal God (i.e. some entity) or a pantheistic God (he is the universe itself). “The soul of the universe” These are empty words. Because I'll ask again: is this soul some entity or is it the natural whole itself?
The first possibility is what is usually called belief in God (theism), and the second is atheism in disguise (very thin). If the whole of nature is God, then there is no God. We just call the whole of nature by its name and that's all. There is no one to worship and no one to obey. In short, a complete waste.

Elad Elad Elad

When you said:
“I myself don't understand how such a God, who in my opinion is a rather abstract idea (even for God) gets to the point where he tells humans what he wants.”
—>I answer: That's philosophy, brother. Before you get involved in this, you need to be strong and have faith in the power of G-d.
G-d tells humans what He wants from them because He created them to be good to them. In two words: All the graces He does to us, He wants us to also “sacrifice” of ourselves so that He can influence us more. That not everything be by grace but by merit.

And when you said:
“Following the heretical article in question that came out in Otniel sometime in early spring, one of the members wrote the following text under the name of Rabbi Giora Nadler (I don't know): 'Moses our Rabbi grasped reality and understood being, and this is what he wrote. We call this composition Torah, that is, the Book of Commandments, which are the laws of being. The questioner will ask - if so, did God not speak to Moses, but did Moses alone understand the Torah. This is a physical question, since this is the meaning of the concept of the word of God. Moses understood the Torah - the laws of being - in prophecy.'
In my understanding, this does indeed purify the deity from pagan physical concepts, but it also sterilizes the concept of God and religion.
If I am not good at explaining the opposing position to me, it is mainly because I do not understand it, and I am mainly trying to mediate it to the Rabbi, who may understand from the words or connect them to a similar position that he does understand.”
——————>———–>—–>There are several contradictions and fallacies in the words here, and in my opinion if you were to analyze everything you said and compare it with what is written in the Torah, you would find them on your own. For example:
How could Moses understand on his own what was created every day in the world?
How could Moses assure the Israelites that they would leave Egypt?
How could Moses assure them that they would have manna and water and meat..and a pillar of cloud and a pillar of fire?
How could Moses assure that they would receive the Promised Land?
If Moses understood the Torah on his own, wouldn't he need prophecy? But not only did he need prophecy, but so did the 70 elders.

And your worst fallacy is that you say that the ’ Moses was given the Torah, but Moses R. understood the Torah through prophecy. And what is prophecy? Prophecy is speech and the transmission of information..

And again, how on the one hand do you say that the G-d is spiritual and on the other hand do you deny this by saying that Moses understood the Torah alone and this is the word of the G-d while you say that this is a physical question …
The Rabbi said in a few abbreviated words and he was precise “harta barta”.

In conclusion, the G-d is spiritual and created the world and us in order to benefit us by merit and not just by grace. And He told us His will in the Torah so that we would know what to do without harming ourselves.

Two of my friends, whom I asked to explain their teachings here to make it easier for us to understand, answered me privately, both of them gave the same answer, that there is a third possibility, that God contains the world.
I think this is equivalent to saying that God reduced Himself and created the world, but now it is possible to understand to speak of the world as one part of God and the ‘rest of God’ as a part that is apparently external to the world.

This is a continuation of that meaningless swan, what the Danan sect calls panentheism (as opposed to pantheism).
In short, I would love to hear what the meaning of the claim that we are part of it is: do we have the ability to make independent decisions? Or are we a member of the divine organism and only it makes decisions? If the second option is correct, we have returned to pantheistic idealism (the perception that the world does not exist), and then it is not clear who is even asking the question here. Let him decide for himself whether he exists and decide what to do in the world. What does this have to do with us? And if we make decisions and act independently, then what is the meaning of the claim that we are part of it? If my hand can make independent decisions, then it is not my organ in any relevant sense, but rather an independent one. These are just plain nonsense.

“Do we have the ability to make independent decisions?”

Yes.
We have a layer of independence, which the deeper we go into it, the more we discover that we are all one – God.
Reality is one, there is no separation. We just need to, with the help of free choice, reveal this.
It is possible that beyond this there is also an “external God”, but that is not relevant right now. The main thing is the interior – the revelation of God within us (by the way, this is also a verse in the Torah that ’ instills God in us).

I recommend trying to open your mind a little and give this method a chance.
You can read it here
https://haravkuk.com/%d7%9e%d7%94%d7%99-%d7%a9%d7%99%d7%98%d7%aa-%d7%93%d7%a2%d7%aa-%d7%90%d7%9c%d7%95%d7%94%d7%99%d7%9d/