Editing Apophatic theology (section)

==Judaism==<!-- This section is linked from [[Monism]] -->
{{See also|Tzimtzum#Inherent paradox|Divine simplicity#Jewish thought|Free will in theology#The paradox of free will}}
[[File:Maimonides-2.jpg|thumb|right|[[Maimonides]], 1138–1204 AD]]

[[Maimonides]] (1135/1138–1204) was "the most influential medieval Jewish exponent of the {{lang|la|via negativa}}."{{sfn|Fagenblat|2017|p=4}} Maimonides – along with [[Samuel ibn Tibbon]] – draws on [[Bahya ibn Paquda]],{{citation needed|date=April 2017}} who shows that our inability to describe God is related to the fact of his [[Jewish principles of faith#God is One|absolute unity]]. God, as the entity which is "truly One" ({{lang|he|האחד האמת}}), must be free of properties and is thus unlike anything else and [[Divine simplicity|indescribable]].{{citation needed|date=April 2017}} In ''[[The Guide for the Perplexed]]'', Maimonides states:

{{blockquote|God's existence is absolute and it includes no composition and we comprehend only the fact that He exists, not His essence. Consequently it is a false assumption to hold that He has any positive [[Abstraction|attribute]]{{nbsp}}[...] still less has He [[accident (philosopy)|accidents]] ({{lang|he|מקרה}}), which could be described by an attribute. Hence it is clear that He has no positive attribute however, the negative attributes are necessary to direct the mind to the truths which we must believe{{nbsp}}[...] When we say of this being, that it exists, we mean that its non-existence is impossible; it is living &mdash; it is not dead;{{nbsp}}[...] it is the first &mdash; its existence is not due to any cause; it has power, wisdom, and will &mdash; it is not feeble or ignorant; [[Jewish principles of faith#God is One|He is One]] &mdash; there are not more Gods than one{{nbsp}}[...] Every attribute predicated of God denotes either the quality of an action, or, when the attribute is intended to convey some idea of the Divine Being itself &mdash; and not of His actions &mdash; the [[negation]] of the opposite.<ref>''[[The Guide for the Perplexed]]'', [http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/gfp/gfp.htm 1:58].</ref>}}

According to Rabbi Yosef Wineberg, Maimonides stated that "[God] is knowledge," and saw his essence, being, and knowledge as completely one, "a perfect unity and not a composite at all."<ref name="Wineberg"/> Wineberg quotes Maimonides as stating:

{{blockquote|This [form of unity] wherein G‑d's knowledge and so on is one with G‑d Himself is beyond the capacity of the mouth to express, beyond the capacity of the ear to hear, and beyond the capacity of the heart of man to apprehend clearly.<ref name="Wineberg">[http://www.chabad.org/library/article.asp?AID=7994 ''Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah Ch. 8'']</ref>}}

According to Fagenblat, it is only in the modern period that negative theology really gains importance in Jewish thought.{{sfn|Fagenblat|2017|p=4}} [[Yeshayahu Leibowitz]] (1903–1994) was a prominent modern exponent of Jewish negative theology.{{sfn|Fagenblat|2017|p=2}} According to Leibowitz, a person's faith is their commitment to obey God, meaning God's commandments, and this has nothing to do with a person's image of God. This must be so because Leibowitz thought that God cannot be described, that God's understanding is not man's understanding, and thus all the questions asked of God are out of place.<ref>Zev Golan, "God, Man and Nietzsche: A Startling Dialogue between Judaism and Modern Philosophers" (New York: iUniverse, 2008), p. 43.</ref>

=== Jacques Derrida ===

The work of Jewish philosopher [[Jacques Derrida]], and in particular his critical method called [[deconstruction]], has frequently been compared to negative theology, and led to renewed interest in apophaticism in the late 20th century, even among continental philosophers and literary scholars who may not have otherwise have been particularly invested in theological issues.<ref>{{cite book|author1=Jacques Derrida|editor1-last=Coward|editor1-first=Harold|title=Derrida and Negative Theology|date=1992|publisher=State University of New York Press|location=Albany, N.Y.|page=128}}</ref> Conversely, the perception that deconstruction resembled or essentially was a form of secular negative theology also – according to Derrida himself – took the form of an accusation from his critics, implicitly positing both negative theology and deconstruction as being elaborate ways of saying nothing of any substance or importance. However, Derrida strongly repudiated this comparison for much of his career, arguing that any resemblance between his thought and apophaticism is purely superficial. Derrida argued that the aims of negative theology – to demonstrate the ultimate, incomprehensible, transcendent reality of God – are a form of [[ontotheology]] which runs fundamentally counter to deconstruction's aim of purging Western thought of its pervasive [[metaphysics of presence]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Shakespeare |first1=Stephen |title=Derrida and Theology |date=2009 |publisher=T&T Clark |location=London |isbn=9780567032409 |pages=100–111}}</ref>

Later in his career, such in as his essay {{lang|fr|"Sauf le nom"}}, Derrida comes to see apophatic theology as potentially but not necessarily a means through which the intractable inadequacies of language and the ontological difficulties which proceed from them can brought to our attention and explored:<ref>{{cite book |last1=Shakespeare |first1=Stephen |title=Derrida and Theology |date=2009 |publisher=T&T Clark |location=London |isbn=9780567032409 |pages=111–123}}</ref>

{{Blockquote|text=There is one apophasis that can in effect respond to, correspond to, correspond with the most insatiable desire of God, according to the history and the event of its manifestation or the secret of its non-manifestation.

The other apophasis, the other voice, can remain readily foreign to all desire, in any case to every anthropotheomorphic form of desire.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Derrida |first1=Jacques |title=On the Name |date=1995 |publisher=Stanford UP |location=Stanford |isbn=0804725551 |page=36}}</ref>}}

Scholars such as Stephen Shakespeare have noted that – despite Derrida's pervasive concern with many aspects of Jewish theology and identity – his writing on negative theology draws almost exclusively on Christian writing and couches the topic in the language of Christianity generally. Derrida's thought in general, but in particular his later writing on negative theology, was highly influential in the development of the Weak Theology movement, and of [[postmodern theology]] as a whole.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Caputo |first1=John D. |title=The Weakness of God |date=2006 |publisher=Indiana UP |location=Bloomington |isbn=0-253-34704-1}}</ref>

David Wood and Robert Bernasconi have highlighted how Derrida [[Deconstruction#Derrida's "negative" descriptions|explains what deconstruction is in an overwhelmingly negative, "apophatic" fashion]].<ref>Wood, David, and Bernasconi, Robert (1988): ''Derrida and Différance'', Evanston: Northwestern University Press.</ref>