You, no doubt, know the Talmudical saying, which includes in itself all
the various kinds of interpretation connected with our subject. It runs
thus: “The Torah speaks according to the language of man,” that is to
say, expressions, which can easily be comprehended and understood by
all, are applied to the Creator. Hence the description of God by
attributes implying corporeality, in order to express His existence;
because the multitude of people do not easily conceive existence unless
in connection with a body, and that which is not a body nor connected
with a body has for them no existence. Whatever we regard as a state of
perfection, is likewise attributed to God, as expressing that He is
perfect in every respect, and that no imperfection or deficiency
whatever is found in Him. But there is not attributed to God anything
which the multitude consider a defect or want; thus He is never
represented as eating, drinking, sleeping, being ill, using violence,
and the like. Whatever, on the other hand, is commonly regarded as a
state of perfection is attributed to Him, although it is only a state
of perfection in relation to ourselves; for in relation to God, what we
consider to be a state of perfection, is in truth the highest degree of
imperfection. If, however, men were to think that those human
perfections were absent in God, they would consider Him as imperfect.
You are aware that locomotion is one of the distinguishing
characteristics of living beings, and is indispensable for them in
their progress towards perfection. As they require food and drink to
supply animal waste, so they require locomotion, in order to approach
that which is good for them and in harmony with their nature, and to
escape from what is injurious and contrary to their nature. It makes,
in fact, no difference whether we ascribe to God eating and drinking or
locomotion; but according to human modes of expression, that is to say,
according to common notions, eating and drinking would be an
imperfection in God, while motion would not, in spite of the fact that
the necessity of locomotion is the result of some want. Furthermore, it
has been clearly proved, that everything which moves is corporeal and
divisible; it will be shown below that God is incorporeal and that He
can have no locomotion; nor can rest be ascribed to Him; for rest can
only be applied to that which also moves. All expressions, however,
which imply the various modes of movement in living beings, are
employed with regard to God in the manner we have described and in the
same way as life is ascribed to Him; although motion is an accident
pertaining to living beings, and there is no doubt that, without
corporeality, expressions like the following could not be imagined: “to
descend, to ascend, to walk, to place, to stand, to surround, to sit,
to dwell, to depart, to enter, to pass, etc.”
It would have been superfluous thus to dilate on this subject, were it
not for the mass of the people, who are accustomed to such ideas. It
has been necessary to expatiate on the subject, as we have attempted,
for the benefit of those who are anxious to acquire perfection, to
remove from them such notions as have grown up with them from the days
of youth.