Q&A: The Author of the Akedah
The Author of the Akedah
Question
Hi, I wanted to ask what you think about the claims of the author of the Akedah regarding the creation of the world.
If you know them, he argues that multiplicity, wisdom, and purpose confirm that the world was indeed created anew, and he brings proof from the psalm “Bless the Lord, O my soul” in Psalms.
What do you think?
Does this fit with scientific knowledge?
And it reminded me of one of your arguments, about Leibniz’s law, the principle of sufficient reason.
“And when the act is in this manner, I mean from the perspective of purpose, it too proceeds by way of will. All the questions that were asked — why was this this way and not otherwise — are nullified. For the correct answer to all of them is: because it was His will.”
That is, if one looks at the purpose for which He created and formed the world, it is possible to understand why the laws are such and not different.
I’d be happy if you’d correct me if I got something wrong somewhere.
Answer
I’m not familiar with it. Your wording reminds me of the physico-theological argument, which I discussed at length.
Discussion on Answer
The physico-theological argument is ancient, and he certainly didn’t invent it. It already appears in the midrash about Abraham our forefather, who asked who turns the sphere. And also among Christian thinkers. There’s nothing new in it. There are refinements that have come up in recent generations that improve the argument and deal with various objections to it (like evolution). The history of ideas is a very tricky field. You can always find some supposedly new idea in earlier sources.
By the way, regarding a multiplicity of things, that seems to me to lack any real meaning in the context of the proof. Coordination is something else.
Indeed, and that’s why I’m asking this.
I’ll quote him:
“This itself is the first argument, taken from the fact that chance occurrences are only rarely renewed, together with the point that multiplicity predicated equally requires absolute will, and not, Heaven forbid, the existence there of two principles.
Second to this is: ‘You made them all with wisdom.’ And this itself is the second argument. For the correctness of their functioning, the arrangement of their structure, and the fitting harmony of all the parts of their operations, clearly indicate the immense wisdom of the One who made them with great intentionality. And by saying ‘You made,’ it indicates complete will, as the sage al-Ghazali explained in the third and fourth questions: one who does not act by will is called neither a maker nor an agent.”
That is, if I understood correctly, he argues that spontaneous creation or spontaneous formation (accidental and not willed) would not produce a multiplicity of things — in this case, the universe, where everything works out properly and everything has a role.
This very much resembles the physico-theological argument.
By the way, he brings the argument from Maimonides and Aristotle.