This is an in depth lecture with Rabbi Yossi Paltiel and Rabbi Manis Friedman on whether God needs our Mitsvot, is God Perfect, and How could he need us lowly humans. #God #education #Religion
And the Lord said unto me, A conspiracy is found among the men of Judah, and among the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Jeremiah 11:9 Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him. And he hath confirmed his words, which he spake against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil: for under the whole heaven hath not been done as hath been done upon Jerusalem. Daniel 9:11-12 Hear this word which I take up against you, a lamentation, O house of Israel. Amos 5:1 Because of the multitude of the whoredoms of the well-favored harlot, the mistress of witchcrafts, that selleth nations through her whoredoms, and families through her witchcrafts. Behold, I am against thee, saith the Lord of hosts: and I will discover thy skirts upon thy face, and I will show the nations thy nakedness, and the kingdoms thy shame. And I will cast abominable filth upon thee, and will set thee as a gazingstock. Nahum 3:4-6 Therefore thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I, even I, am against thee, and will execute judgments in the midst of thee in the sight of the nations. And I will do in thee that which I have not done, and whereunto I will not do any more the like, because of all thine abominations. Ezekiel 5:8 As it is written in the law of Moses, all this evil is come upon us: yet made we not our prayer before the Lord our God, that we might turn from our iniquities, and understand thy truth. Therefore hath the Lord watched upon the evil, and brought it upon us: for the Lord our God is righteous in all his works which he doeth: for we obeyed not his voice. Daniel 9:13-14 And Moses said unto Aaron, What did this people unto thee, that thou hast brought so great a sin upon them? Exodus 32:21 Yet many years didst thou forbear them, and testified against them by thy spirit in thy prophets: yet would they not give ear: therefore gavest thou them into the hand of the people of the lands. Nehemiah 9:30 For I know your manifold transgressions and your mighty sins: they afflict the just, they take a bribe, they turn aside the poor in the gate. Amos 5:12 Be ye not as your fathers, unto whom the former prophets have cried, saying, Thus saith the Lord of hosts; Turn ye now from your evil ways, and your evil doings: but they did not hear, nor hearken unto me, saith the Lord. Zechariah 1:4 For the punishment of the iniquity of the daughter of my people is greater than the punishment of the sin of Sodom, that was overthrown as in a moment, and no hands stayed her. Lamentations 4:6 Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the Lord, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward. Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. Isaiah 1:4-5 But truly I am full of power by the spirit of the Lord, and of judgment, and of might, to declare unto Jacob his transgression, and to Israel his sin. Hear this, I pray you, ye heads of the house of Jacob, and princes of the house of Israel, that abhor judgment, and pervert all equity. They build up Zion with blood, and Jerusalem with iniquity. Micah 3:8-10 And he said unto me, Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation that hath rebelled against me: they and their fathers have transgressed against me, unto this very day. For they are impudent children and stiffhearted. I do send thee unto them; and thou shat say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God. And they, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear, (for they are a rebellious house) yet shall know that there hath been a prophet among them. And thou, son of man, be not afraid of them, neither be afraid of their words, though briars and thorns be with thee, and thou dost dwell among scorpions: be not afraid of their words, not be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house. And thou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear: for they are most rebellious. Ezekiel 2:3-7 We have sinned, and committed iniquity, and have done wickedly, and have rebelled, even by departing from thy precepts and from thy judgments: Neither have we hearkened unto thy servants the prophets, which spake in thy name to our kings, our princes, and our fathers, and to all the people of the land. Daniel 9:5 Hear this word that the Lord has spoken against you, O children of Israel, against the whole family which I brought up from the land of Egypt, saying, You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities. Amos 3:1-2 O Israel, return unto the Lord thy God; for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity. Hosea 14:1 The Lord hath been sore displeased with your fathers. Zechariah 1:2 But thou hast utterly rejected us; thou art very wroth against us. Lamentations 5:22 Howbeit thou art just in all that is brought upon us; for thou hast done right, but we have done wickedly. Nehemiah 9:33
The Ramchal was very clearly a mekubal, and he is the mara d'shmaitsa of "Teva hatov l'heitiv". In Klach #30, the Ramchal explains that any of the "reasons" we give are only after the Ratzon of Hashem - which is why the gillui of Kesser is "Ayin", it's absolutely unfathomable to us. So all the reasons - "ein melech b'lo am"/"tevah hatov etc."/Gillui ha'achdus/dirah b'tachtonim etc. are all true . . . . . AFTER the ratzon of Hashem (hishtashelus) for this that all of these premises (king needing a nation/nature of good to do good/distinction between "upper" and "lower" realms etc.) should be true. As to the ultimate why - we simply cannot know. All of Kabbalah (as the seforim make repeatedly clear!) is only AFTER ratzon Hashem. And in this aspect, which is the only reality we know, all those reasons are very real. Beyond that, our categories fail. [And that's the bechinah of "kesser melucha" - the Malchus (humility) that is karuch with Kesser. That's the essence of yiddishkeit, the temimus and peshitus of not knowing. Ultimately, this is the ohr of Breslov, without getting into this whole thing now. What Chabad misunderstand as "Chagas" is actually "Kam" - Kesser-Malchus. It's a completely different paradigm. "Tachlis hayediyah asher lo neidah".] This is all "m'tzideinu"/"m'malei". From the standpoint of "m'tzido"/"'soveiv", it would appear that Rav Azriel of Gerona in Bi'ur Esser Sefiros addresses and resolves this using the doctrine of "koach hagevul b'bilti gevul". Well beyond the concept of "need" etc., this experience of a world limited by time/space/conceptuality etc. is all within the Ein Sof which is l'maalah min hamakom, bechinah of "ani Hashem lo shinisi", for the purpose of "completing" Hashem's shleimus. From this standpoint, there was no "need/desire/want" that "arose" and no "need/desire/want" that was then fulfilled. There just is Hashem's Infinite Perfection. And one of the facets of the Infinite Perfection is the capacity to manifest a realm of limit/imperfection. From the standpoint of Hashem, our entire metziyus always was, always is, and always will be - b'soch the Ein Sof: "Lo shinisi"/"Ein od milvado k'pshuto mamash". It's a feature of Hashem's Infinite Perfection. Ay, so there's no real point to anything? Ok, that's the old sugya of yediya and bechira with all of its discussion. The ultimate resolution to that stirah is the same (because b'shoresh it's the same connundrum) and it's resolved through tzimtzum, as Reb Nosson explains in Likutei Halachos. Hopefully this provides some more food for thought.
These Rabbis are very poor representitives of the baal hatanya. For a thorough experience in tachlis hayadiya shelo neyda you need the teachings of R. Aharon of strashelye the talmid muvhok of the baal hatanya. There you will see the chidush of the baal shem and the baal hatanya. It is something you will never be able to get from breslov which offers no chidushim in pinimyus hatorah at all or the Ramchal who didnt have the baal shem. In order to come to emunah pashuta you need the baal shem the maggid the baal hatanya and the strashele.
Proving who is right is יצר הרע because its causes hate and hate is the opposite of לאהבתך לרעך כמוך And hashem wants you to love him באמת because he gives every person free will so if you really want to לעבוד את השם באמת so do the מצוות because you really want to do it and not because it says to do it and the reason why its written in the torah to do מצוות because its the truth 😇
This is the most arrogant debate about God I have ever heard. God created everything the way he wanted it and they can’t understand nor can they accept it. If I were God I would be laughing at them.
God is pure omnipotent omniscient and omnipresent consciousness, God is our true Self, God is all pervading, Everything is God. God is fulfilled in Himself as noting is apart from him. whatever God wills happens, a need comes from a lack and God is never lacking, it is we who are lacking and we who are in need. So from the standpoint of ordinary consciousness of a devotee of the Lord man needs God, deeply so, and God hears mans plea and desire to cleave to him and through his merciful and gracious nature he responds to the pure of heart and our needs are fulfilled in him and him alone.
Sounds like a lot of defensiveness in this video. We cannot think of a logical answer to this question so it is apikorus. Baruch Spinoza had much better answers on this topic.
The Law and The Prophet's I am who I am, I AM sent me I am the ONE who rescued you from the land of Egypt, the place of slavery You must put no other gods before ME You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image of anything in the heavens or on the earth beneath in the sea You must not bow down to them or worship them, for I AM jealous and WILL NOT tolerate your affection for any other gods. I lay the sins of the parent onto the children, The entire family is affected You must not misuse my name. I will not let those who misuse my name go unpunished: Thou shalt not kill OR rape Thou shalt not steal Thou shalt not covet for thy neighbor's house Thou shall not commit adultery Thou shalt not bear false witness/Not Lie on others Thou shalt honor thy mother and father Keep your day of rest holy Thou SHALT NOT KILL, written AGAIN! unless for food purposes, or last resort self-defense/survival purposes Thou shalt be kind and respect others Thou shalt NOT ENSLAVE Thou shalt protect the child Thou shalt not consort sneakily in the dark to constrict, ensnare, manipulate into corruption, or cause harm to others even for monetary gain Thou shalt help the elderly and weak and orphans or else... Thou shalt not litter The rich SHALL, in the future meaning FROM THIS POINT ON, realize money is just paper from trees and will begin using their imaginary dendritic monopoly currency to help the hopeless, homeless, starving poor, and begin fixing the infrastructure of THE HUMAN RACE and or all living beings. Thou shalt not exalt thy racial culture to be esteemed higher than any others because of your subjective stupidity Thou shalt not create torment or cruel punishments on behalf of your judicial, justice system, military, or imaginary religious beliefs
I wonder, what is gods motivation? It’s not to please humans, surely. To police and guide, what is the goal? A zoo keeper, a child with an ant farm? A relationship with a beloved pet? A perfect being that knows all would not need to pursue any of these and he certainly wouldn’t need to enlist the help of illiterate prophets and the like. Conclusion, it’s all bullshit, every last lie.
35:15. O ye men ! It is Ye that have need Of God : but God is The One Free of all wants, Worthy of all praise. 35:16. If He so pleased, He Could blot you out And bring in A New Creation : 39:7. If ye reject, Truly God hath no need Of you ; but He liketh not Ingratitude from His servants : If ye are grateful, He Is pleased with you. -(Quran) 33:1. And this is the blessing, wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death. 33:7. And this is the blessing of Judah: and he said, Hear, Lord, the voice of Judah, and bring him unto his people: let his hands be sufficient for him; -(Deuteronomy)
Because Hasheem needs today a Bridegroom, the Torah People, for the Bride the Mother Earth People like Hasheem needed a Bridegroom Moses for the Bride Zipporah. The Wedding of the 2 Hemispheres, the two Holocaust Peoples in the Womb of Hasheem. That is why Chabad came to America Turtle Island, March 19 1940 - to seek on the Donkey the Bride in the Garden. The marriage of T and O in: I have come TO My Garden
When God asks Moses to activate the plagues on Egypt he requires him to begin them by the utilisation of his staff. It seems to me that God required human involvement to assist him in this endeavour.
I SPEAK SALVATION DELIVERANCE HEALING RESTORATION TO FULLNESS OF LIFE THAT 613 BIBLE STATUTES IS YOUR ETERNAL LIFE EVERLASTING LIFE HAPPILY EVER AFTER LIFE BLESSINGS◇
If the holy spirit is love, mercy, peace& forgiveness then every teaching that I AM eternal punishment, hell, torment, wrath, and vengefulness defeat the purpose, blaspheming my very nature of kindness peace and patience. It turns my spirit into vengeance and is self-defeating. They're turning mercy into death and the grave... They murder for the law spiritually for gain and power & physically 🥺
Yossi,…Manis, I know you both. Manis , face to face. Yossi, only on what you post publicly. But in the end, the simple answer from the Alter Rebbe to you both is: אין קשה על התאוה . If either of you have a question about what that means, look to chapter one from volume one of בשעה שהקדימו from the Rebbe Rashab. If it’s not clear, תאוה is prior to the arousal of will, meaning רצון. Manis, you are using the English very loosely to describe תאוה as “want”. I respect you. Your English translation of קודש as transparency is very good. But your translation of תאוה as “wanting” is lacking and not in agreement with the vast majority of traditional Jewish teachings, including those of Chabad Chassidut. I can tell you that a young Jewish man, an intelligent and observant person, has tried to tell me in your name how HaKadosh, Baruch Hu needs us, meaning that G-d is lacking בחסרון! This thought is absolutely incorrect from a Torah perspective. That doesn’t mean the Torah (In Hebrew) is wrong. It means how you are translating it is inappropriate. To put it simply: I want you. Translation: אני רוצה אותך. This is the language of רצון. It is not the language of תאוה. Manis, my friend, you need to step back and reflect. If you can’t see and comprehend any distinction, then simply admit that you can’t put it into words. That’s better than teaching something false.
I like how you put that. The thing which bothered me is the way they described different levels of emes, which i understand, however, none of the levels contradict eachother, and as you pointed out if rotzon is and taavah are translated correctly then even the highest understanding of chassidus fits perfectly with kabbalah and ikkarim. It is a subtle point but makes so much difference. I have a different approach based on the ramchal which is the first 3 shiruim on my channel, but essentially all the schools of the arizal and kaballah work beautifully together, they are just looking at the same thing from a different angle.
@@adamherskine8594 It’s not my insight. I’m only quoting the exact published teaching from the 5th Lubavitcher Rebbe as cited. Like Ramchal states about his teachings generally, he comes to give the “nimshal” to the Ari z”ls “mushal” (the Analogy to the Allegory). Chronologically he came between the Ari z”l and the Ba”al Shem Tov. It is all one, consistent transmission and tradition. Only the nomenclature changes over time, in order to speak the language of each new generation. That’s why the Ma’amarim are published with their source citations. It is almost all mesorah, direct tradition from one generation to the next.
This isn't really any better, though... Sure, "desiring" is perhaps less of a contingency upon the thing being desired than "wanting", and wanting is less of a contingency than "needing", but ultimately, if Hashem "desires" the world, then, in being that world which He desires, He got something out of it that He wouldn't have had otherwise. That's still problematic and reflective of a lack in shleimus, which runs up against logic that - contrary to the assertion in this video, Kabbalah does not necessarily need to be seen as superseding. I think a better approach is to say that even this "taivah" of Hashem is still within the schema of hishtalshelus/ratzon, and isn't reflective of anything essential to Hashem Himself. (By the way, and this is a general point re the video, "nogei'ah b'Atzmus" doesn't need to mean "giving Hashem something on the level of Atzmus". It can also mean as I explained in my comment above in the tradition of Rav Azriel of Gerona.)
Manis has an entire lecture responding to this exact argument. I found it on his 11213 site, I believe it was titled "where some very knowledgeable people get confused" In regards to the translation, I'm wondering if it's not kvodo who should step back and reflect. It was Manis who was in charge of translating the Rebbe's farbrengens live several times a year... His translations, I know from experience of listening to him along with in depth knowledge of Chassidus, are very, very meduyak. And yes, he's familiar with the works of the Rebbe Rashab. Just like your view of him is one of being mistaken, might it be possible (just possible, I haven't had an in-depth discussion with you and so I cannot draw conclusions) that one can view your argumentd in the same way? As for the student understanding wrongfully that Hashem needs mitzad chisaron, I'd argue that it's not anywhere near as bad as perceiving Hashem as far removed. Better start off with a lower level relationship and build your way up, than to have a relationship that is not established any which way. Relationship counseling parallels this concept, as a mashal
@@jimdeane3667I have heard a lot of this way of thinking is based o a lot on the 5th rebbe Rashab of Chabad, and someone gave me the basic outline which sounds totally consistent with our mesorah, just it is going much deeper than even the arizal did, but still only speaking about the revealed aspect of Hashem which have permission to speak about, but he goes into very nuanced and abstract ideas of before the tzimtzum, which can only be spoken about extremely precisely and with nuance. My issue as you agree i assume is the way manis is saying it in a very simplified and crude way, which can be extremely misleading even for those knowledgable of kaballah and chassidus. I guess he would say it is worth it if he gets people interested in judaism, which i kind of see, although dont agree, as there are safer ways of doing it. Oh and btw, the ramchal was the same time as the baal shem tov, i think he was 5 years younger than him, but lived in different places in europe.
God desires and God is perfect ... If God would not have desire.... God would be lacking the construct of "desire" However -- if we say that God desires -- God is lacking the absence of desire So... we could say that God is both desire and the absence of desire But a new question arises... God desired the world (us) is there an absence of the world? and a new answer is formed ... God is one! From nothing to something! This is perfection, No? To make a deeper point -- If God is perfect, God lacks imperfection -- and if God lacks, God is not God And so... we could say that God is perfect and imperfect. This is higher than perfection or imperfection. But why not go deeper -- and say -- that we cannot understand God -- And if we cannot understand God let us stand under God And one last question arises -- what dose God want from us? And many answers and many voices and many witnesses and many who know and many who do not And many who desire to know and many who do not And many who say they know and many who say they do not And God is one! And God is One! How do we know that God is one? When we speak of God we talk of Two (us and God) But if God is one -- and we are two Questions and answers are dual too But they go together -- and together is two What is One? Mind divides world as mirror reflects image Yet the mind is one appearing as two And the mirror is two (self and mirror) appearing as one
The most satisfactory answer I have heard (from a makubal in our generation in Yerushalayim) to this discussion is at the level of Zu"N (Kudsha Brichu U'Shechinatai) the word "need" is fitting. Above that, we can not speak of in any meaningful way. Meaning, that even at the lower, higher levels within hishtalshalus, to say He does need is as incorrect as saying He doesn't need. That sat very well with me.
True, but as the Rashash emphasizes, every level is considered to be Zu"N compared to what's above it. Yash'Sut is ZuN compared to Abba'vIma, Aba'vIma are ZuN compared to Arich, etc etc. Maybe this concept of Eirchin (relativity) is what Rav Friedman is talking about. Of course, of Atzmut HaShem, we can't say anything.
First master the fundamentals of Judaism, then understand Chassidus. Chassidus is not there to teach fundamentals, rather it assumes you already knows the fundamentals. Also, you must know what Chassidus is talking about. The fact that Manis is discussing "that Hashem has needs" already tells me that he is either not speaking about Atzmut, and he is misunderstood. Or he is intentionally misleading the masses. Perhaps he must clarify himself as not to be misunderstood and looks like he contradicts the great Posek (i.e. Rambam).
I think in the video he reveals why he did is speaking this way, it is for kiruv purposes, as nothing seems to work anymore without going to the ideas of chassidus, at least from his experience. My major issue is he seems to disregard the rambam, but imho there is no need for that and everything fits perfectly.
@@ysiegel You may be correct, but this 'debate' is more like an echo chamber. An actual debate usually has two opposing views. Both Rabbis, Manis Friedman & Yossi Paltiel are pretty much on the same page. An interesting and more informative/constructive debate would be with someone of an opposing view like Rabbi Yosef Mizrachi or the like. That would be more of an actual debate that, in my opinion, is lacking in general and specifically in this issue.
@@osherfeldman3048 point taken Chabas has a history of avoiding debate... The only exception is the first rebbe - the Alter Rebbe - publicly debating the opponents of Chassidus in order to clear up some points for all to hear, back when they had some legitimate worries that he wanted to clear up. But since then the official Chabad way has been to avoid dealing directly with opposers, opting to emphasize what we believe in and the positive, as opposed to responding to negatives I realize of course the argument to this, but when it comes to prominent figures within the movement, you'd be hard pressed to get them to act against this ages old accepted practice
@@ysiegel I question whether it is considered the 'accepted practice' to avoid debate. Without exerting effort, there is inherently no debate in any context or regarding any topic. It is not my role to tell them to invest that effort. However, as a viewer with a keen interest in this and other controversial topics (and I am certain I am not alone), I express that a real debate would be amazing, especially when other influential 'frum' rabbis like Mizrachi publicly oppose these views, it would be beneficial to organize a debate with divergent perspectives. Many individuals, even within the 'frum' community, are confused, and greater cohesion would be advantageous. A debate could facilitate this, particularly for those endeavoring to discern the facts to form their opinions, rather than experiencing conflicting statements from 'frum' rabbis. I believe it is crucial for them to engage in some form of debate. While this discussion is great, it lacks differing viewpoints, and suggesting it is not only a 'debate' but also 'heated' is inaccurate. If they are not inclined to have a genuine debate, that's their choice, but they should not present this as such. Also, an actual debate would undoubtedly get many, many more views. Just food for thought! Wish you the best!
So, do you need the mitzvah to make the body holy so Hashem can dwell amongst them? Hashem can dwell in the earth, but not amongst them without the holy sanctuary? Make for me a sanctuary so I may dwell amongst them.
Mitzvos are to purify us, and in fact they are a form of asking Hashem to reveal Himself and connect to us (eventhough we dont feel it yet). So every mitzvah literally makes us connected with Hashem, and Hashem is the source of purity. In fact the word mitzvah itself, is from the root tzavsah which means connection, as well as the other meaning of commandment, the common thread is that the connection is make by the commanded being willingly accepting the commander, and thus a connection is made. Tons to be said on this, and i touch on it in my first few shiurim here on utube.
So the lesson in part is What? #notchallenging When our words and actions align with his plan we grow as a people? The need of a Parent for his child to grow and see the fruit of his labor? Or is the question can he be God, and be needy?
Why would the King of the Universe need a chosen people, and name them as such, to do what he commands and fix a broken world, and not have any needs? That is creating a paradox.
So it seems like Chassidus is referring to the Presence of Hashem as it exists within the creation. While the rest referrs to the Atzmut (the essence of Hashem). So obviously Hashem (Atzmut) doesn't need us, while His created presence does need us, since it was created, and therefore limited, and therefore it can receive something from someone else
That is how everyone understands it no less the arizal himself. There are 2 so to speak dimensions of reality we have to take into account when speaking about Hashem, the higher one where nothing can be said and most importantly not even inferred using any human thought or reasoning, this is what most people refer to (for lack of a better term) atzmius, and then the 2nd dimension which is associated with revelation and our perception of reality, then you have Hashem's rotzon and "need" which is a created middah to give us opportunity to give to Hashem, but even that thing is really for our benefit, and it is in fact our connection with Hashem, which sounds a lot what the rabbis here are talking about. The issue is they seem to be saying this idea in atzmius and i feel they are not using the term atzmius as most people do, either that or they have got confused as the mishna in chagigah warns us to be careful of thinking about what is above lest you corrupt you mind (kvod konoh)
Abu Dhar (RZA) narrates the Prophet (SAW) as saying that Allâh the Glorious said: O' My slaves! "I have put ban against injustice on myself and constituted it unlawful to you, so do not commit oppression against each other. My slaves! All of you are misguided except whom I guide, so ask right guidance from me, I shall guide you. O' My salves! All of you are hungry (needy) except whom I feed, so ask me for food (sustenance) I shall provide you, O' My slaves! All of you are naked (need clothes) except one whom I clothe, so ask Me for the same I shall provide. ' My slaves! You are habituated (by nature) to commit sins night and day, whereas I ignore your sins, so ask Me for forgiveness. I shall forgive you, O My slaves! You can neither cause Me any harm nor you can approach Me to do good to Me. O' My slaves! Even if the first and the last of you, including the entire human race and that of Jinns too, become like most God-fearing one amongst you, nothing it would add to My Sovereignty. O' My slaves! Even if the first and last of you, including the whole human race, in addition to Jinns too in Union, become equal to the most wicked to a single person, it would cause no loss to My Sovereignty. O' My slaves! Even if the first and the last of you and the whole human race and that of Jinns too gather in one plain ground asking Me for their needs, and I confer upon every one what he asks for, it would cause no loss but such as needle causes loss to the sea when it is dipped therein. O' My slaves! It is, but your deeds (good or bad) what I have recorded for you (counted), the same will be refunded to you. So one who gets it fine he should be grateful to Allâh. And one who finds it other than that (fine) he should blame himself instead of others Muslim: 6572)
Why complicate the question - can G-d have a “need”? The simpler way to solve a question is always to go back to what the Torah says. It’s not good - for man to be alone (Adams “need” of Chava) - therefore He made a wife to Adam. A reflection of: … It was not good for G-d to be alone (HaShems “need” of Man) - therefore He made Man.
bs"d Want - definition of want by The Free Dictionary In British English, in conversation and in less formal writing, want has another meaning. If something wants doing, there is a need for it to be done.// At least, then, in the British lexicon, want & need? -- di zelbe zach. Other word-definition sites on on the search 'does 'want' mean 'need' ' showed the two words are similar, with need being more mandatory, like, required, as opposed to 'strongly desired'. In some usages, when a person is subject to 'want', it probably means impoverishment, meaning, neediness.
