#Believing is Knowing - Atom Believing is Knowing - RSS IFRAME: http://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID=21749731&blogName=Believing+is+Knowing&publishMode=PUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT&navbarType=BLUE&layoutType=LAYOUTS&searchRoot=http%3A%2F%2Fyediah.blogspot.com%2Fsearch&blogLocale=en_US&homepageUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fyediah.blogspot.com%2F Believing is Knowing Knowledge is the building block of Judaism. Love of God is contingent on what one knows about Him. ועל פי הדעה--על פי האהבה--אם מעט מעט, ואם הרבה הרבה I am planning to post from time to time some of the ideas that I develop as I read and think about issues that catch my attention. Usually they relate to Machshava or Halacha especially how they affect our daily life. I am looking forward to learn from all commenters. Friday, November 27, 2009 אָבַד חָסִיד מִן הָאָרֶץ, וְיָשָׁר בָּאָדָם אָיִן My Father in Law הרב החסיד יוסף שלום בן הרב שמחה יעקב הלוי מארקוויטש זכרונו לברכה was niftar yesterday, the 9th of Kislev. Posted by David Guttmann at 4:15 AM Links to this post Labels: Miscellaneous 8 comments Tuesday, November 17, 2009 Be Exceedingly, Exceedingly Humble - An Insight In The Torah's Understanding Of Human Nature. In a private communication with Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, we touched on Rambam in Hilchot De’ot that deals with Anavah, the virtue of humbleness or humility. I decided to interrupt the current discussion to address this, as it is very important and also is relevant to the subject that I am dealing with. Rambam in Hilchot De’ot 1:10-11 – ט כל אדם שדעותיו כולן דעות בינונייות ממוצעות, נקרא חכם; [ה] ומי שהוא מדקדק על עצמו ביותר ויתרחק מדעה בינונית מעט לצד זה או לצד זה, נקרא חסיד. י כיצד: מי שיתרחק מגובה הלב עד הקצה האחרון, ויהיה שפל רוח ביותר--נקרא חסיד; וזו היא מידת חסידות. ואם נתרחק עד האמצע בלבד, ויהיה עניו--נקרא חכם; וזו היא מידת חכמה. ועל דרך זו, שאר כל הדעות. Whoever observes in his disposition the mean is termed wise. Whoever is particularly scrupulous and deviates somewhat from the exact mean in disposition, in one direction or the other is called a Chassid. For example, if one avoids haughtiness to the utmost extent and is exceedingly humble, he is termed a Chassid, and this is the standard of Chassidus. If one only departs from haughtiness as far as the mean, and is humble, he is called wise, and this is the standard of wisdom. And so it is with all other dispositions. (Translation, courtesy of A Maimonides Reader by Isadore Twersky). Rambam explains that a Chassid is one who is working on himself to improve his Midot [disposition] while a Chacham is one who has perfected himself to the point that he can be exactly on the mean and needs no further improvement. The Chacham is therefore the paradigm of perfection. ומצווין אנו ללכת בדרכים אלו הבינוניים, והם הדרכים הטובים והישרים, שנאמר "והלכת, בדרכיו “We are commanded to follow these middle paths as they are good and correct [and also the paths of God] as it says “and you should walk in His paths”. As an example of a Chassid Rambam portrays someone who “is exceedingly humble” and a Chacham as “one who only departs from haughtiness as far as the mean, and is humble”. The clear implication is that humility is the preferred disposition and “exceedingly humble” is perfection in the making.However, in the second chapter of Hilchot De’ot Rambam presents a different picture. ויש דעות שאסור לו לאדם לנהוג בהן בבינונית, אלא יתרחק עד הקצה האחר--והוא גובה הלב, שאין הדרך הטובה שיהיה האדם עניו בלבד, אלא שיהיה שפל רוח, ותהיה רוחו נמוכה למאוד. ולפיכך נאמר במשה רבנו "עניו מאוד" (במדבר יב,ג), ולא נאמר עניו בלבד. ולפיכך ציוו חכמים, מאוד מאוד הוי שפל רוח. “There are some dispositions in regard to which it is forbidden merely to keep to the middle path. They must be shunned to the extreme. Such a disposition is pride. The right way in this regard is not merely to be meek, but to be humble-minded and lowly of the spirit to the utmost. And therefore, it is said of Moshe that he was “exceedingly humble”. Hence our sages exhorted us, “Be exceedingly, exceedingly lowly of spirit”.” (Translation as above) The contradiction is glaring and it is obvious that Rambam is not in the habit of contradicting himself. However, as usual, Rambam is very subtle and one has to read thoroughly all his discussions on a subject in its various contexts. In his introduction to Avot, the Eight Chapters, Rambam has a lengthy discussion about perfecting one’s disposition. In the fourth chapter, he discusses the idea of how to go about changing an inborn disposition. While he summarized in Hilchot De’ot, he expands this discussion in the Eight Chapters. In chapter 4 he describes the process of changing the natural disposition of individuals by moving away from the mean in the opposite direction of one’s natural disposition. For example, one whose natural disposition tends towards haughtiness should be scrupulous and be extremely humble for a while until he can slowly move back to the mean of humility. The same goes for all dispositions. At the end of a lengthy discussion, Rambam then makes a few revealing statements. וזאת התורה השלמה המשלמת אותנו, כמו שהעיד עליה יודעה: תורת ה' תמימה, משיבת נפש, עדות ה' נאמנה מחכימת פתי (תהלים י"ט, ח') לא ציוותה דבר מעין זה. ואין כונתה אלא שיהיה האדם טבעי, הולך בדרך האמצעי: יאכל מה שיש לו לאכול בשווי, וישתה מה שיש לו לשתות בשווי. ויישב המדינות ביושר ובאמונה. לא שישכון במערות ובהרים, ולא שילבש השער והצמר, ולא שיטריח גופו ויענה אותו. “And this perfect Torah whose mission is to perfect us as one who knew her [David] testified,” God’s Torah is whole, it soothes the soul, God’s testament is reliable, it enlightens a fool”, did not command any of this [self-flagellation]. Its mission is for a person to be natural and follow the mean path; eat and drink a balanced diet and inhabit lands with correctness and honesty. Not that he should in mountainous caves or wear hair shirts or punish his body.” In other words, the Torah’s goal is to develop people so that they become perfect and follow the middle path. That is however a utopian goal. The human condition will not allow such perfection. As the Torah deals with real human beings and is the tool that will bring people as close to perfection as possible, its laws are NOT the mean. They are always a little to one side or the other depending on the disposition. וזה, שהתורה לא אסרה מה שאסרה, ולא צוותה מה שצוותה, אלא מפני הסיבה הזאת. רצוני לומר: כדי שנתרחק מן הצד האחד יותר על דרך ההרגל. שכן איסור "המאכלות האסורים" כולם, ואיסור הביאות האסורות, והאזהרה מן הקדשה, וחיוב כתובה וקידושין, ועם כל זה לא תהיה מותרת תמיד, אלא תיאסר בעתות הנידה והלידה, ועם זה סייגו חכמינו למעט התשמיש, והזהירו מזה ביום, כמו שבארנו בסנהדרין - הנה לא צווה אלוהים אלא כדי שנתרחק מקצה "רוב התאווה" ריחוק רב, ונצא מעט מן המיצוע אל צד "העדר הרגשת ההנאה", עד שתתיישב בנפשותינו תכונת הזהירות “The law did not lay down its prohibitions or enjoin its commandments except for just this purpose, namely, that by its disciplinary effects we may persistently maintain the proper distance from either extreme. For the restriction regarding all the forbidden foods, the prohibitions of illicit intercourse, the forewarning against prostitution, the duty of performing the legal marriage rites – which nevertheless does not permit intercourse at all times, as, for instance, during the period of menstruation and after childbirth, besides its being otherwise restricted by our sages and entirely interdicted during the daytime, as we have explained in the tractate of Sanhedrin- all of these God commanded in order that we should keep entirely distant from the extreme of inordinate indulgence of the passions, and, even departing from the exact medium, should incline somewhat toward self-denial, so that there may be firmly rooted in our souls the disposition for moderation.” The Torah is not for the perfect utopian individual but rather for the human being who is working his way towards perfection. It is realistic about human frailties and allows for them setting the rules with that in mind. These rules are a little off the mean, tending a little to one or the other side depending on the type of disposition and the tendency of the majority of humanity towards that disposition. In the case of haughtiness, even a perfected person such as Moshe Rabbeinu cannot feel safe and must be exceedingly humble to counteract the human tendency to self-aggrandizement. A similar disposition is anger where too the human disposition tends towards it and that tendency has to be counterbalanced. Rambam in the first chapter of Hilchot De’ot describes the utopian perfected human being the Torah’s has as a goal to develop. In Chapter 2, he explains the method the Torah uses and points out that certain human traits can never be completely overcome. Haughtiness and anger are two such traits where even the most perfected person must be wary about recidivism. It is important to note that to Rambam, a person that follows the Torah and does the Mitzvot is embarked on the path to perfection; he is on the right track in his quest for the perfect disposition, a necessary and integral ingredient in the search for God and His ways. 　 Posted by David Guttmann at 5:43 PM Links to this post Labels: Ta'amei Hamitzvot, The Eight Chapters 18 comments Tuesday, November 10, 2009 Does a Non-philosophical Person Gain Rights to the World To Come (Olam Haba)? Ethics and Morality in Judaism (Part 4 in a series) Ethics and Morality are accepted norms in civilized societies. Much has been written about ethics all the way back to the Greek Philosophers and it is still a much-discussed topic in philosophy. For an excellent overview, see here . Rambam has what I believe to be a unique understanding of ethics from a Torah perspective. In MN 3:27, one of the introductory chapters to his discussion of Ta’amei Hamitzvot, he addresses what the goal of Mitzvot is. “The Law as a whole aims at two things: the welfare of the soul and the welfare of the body. As to the welfare of the soul, it consists in the multitude’s acquiring correct opinions corresponding to their respective capacity… As for the welfare of the body, it comes about by the improvement of their ways of living one with another. This is achieved through two things. One of them is their abolition of wronging each other. This is tantamount to every individual among the people not being permitted to act according to his will and up to the limit of his power, but being forced to do what is useful to the whole. The second thing consists in the acquisition by every human individual of moral qualities that are useful for life in society so that the affairs of the city may be ordered.” (MN3:27) Focusing first on the second aim, the welfare of the body, the description seems to be of a utilitarian system which promotes a healthy and well-ordered society. In this presentation, ethics and morality are seen as self-serving quid pro quo systems thus resulting in every member of that society living in peace with each other. In other words, ethics are ultimately self-serving. By being good to your neighbor, you can expect reciprocity. But Rambam does not stop there. The goal of an ordered society has a much loftier purpose than mere egotistical interest. It is to allow for the flourishing within it of perfect people, those who are concerned with the welfare of their soul. “His [man’s] ultimate perfection is to become rational in actu, I mean to have an intellect in-actu; this would consist in him knowing everything concerning all the beings that it is within the capacity of man to know in accordance with his ultimate perfection. It is clear that to this ultimate perfection, there do not belong either actions or moral qualities and that it consists only of opinions toward which speculation has led and that investigation has rendered compulsory. It is also clear that this noble and ultimate perfection can only be achieved after the first perfection [ethics] has been achieved. For a man cannot represent to himself an intelligible even when taught to understand and all the more cannot become aware of it of his own accord, if he is in pain or is very hungry or is thirsty or is hot or is very cold. But once the first perfection has been achieved it is possible to achieve the ultimate, which is indubitably nobler and is the only cause of permanent preservation [after death – Olam Haba – DG].” (MN3:27) Rambam’s ethics, though at first directed towards developing a well-ordered society, have as their ultimate goal to allow for the development of the perfect human being. That is a knowledgeable person who can focus on his own self-improvement, the acquisition of knowledge and thus get to know all creation and through it God. Once a person gets to know all he can about God and His ways, he understands and wants to emulate Him by partaking in His actions. “The object of the above passage is therefore to declare, that the perfection, in which man can truly glory, is attained by him when he has acquired--as far as this is possible for man--the knowledge of God, the knowledge of His Providence, and of the manner in which it influences His creatures in their production and continued existence. Having acquired the knowledge he will then be determined always to seek loving-kindness, judgment, and righteousness, and thus to imitate the ways of God. We have explained this many times in this treatise.” (MN 3:54) The ethics of the perfected man take on a completely new aspect. They no longer are self-serving, insuring a well-ordered society so that he can dedicate himself to contemplation, but rather understanding God’s ways, emulating Him and partaking in His work. Thus the same ethical act, the same Mitzvah, is performed in different contexts by different people, depending on their level of sophistication. We will return to this important point later in the discussion, but what is important now is to understand that Rambam’s ethics have an ultimate goal that goes beyond the egotistical. Giving alms to a pauper will have different meaning to different people. Some will do it because they see themselves in the same spot and want to be treated similarly hoping that others will emulate them should they be in need, while others do it because it makes them feel good to help another. Some feel guilty having so much while another lacks everything. Others do it because their religion promises good things in exchange. Rambam’s Jew does it because it is part of the process that is necessary to allow for the development of a person that knows God, who will then do the same act with the understanding and deep knowledge that giving this Tzedakah IS emulating Him. In Rambam’s Judaism, everything we do is with that goal in mind. “What I have here pointed out to you is the object of all our religious acts. For by [carrying out] all the details of the prescribed practices, and repeating them continually, some excellent men may attain human perfection. They will be filled with respect and reverence towards God and know who it is that is with them, and as a result act subsequently as they ought to. He [God] has explained that the end of the actions prescribed by the whole Law is to bring about the passion of which it is correct to be brought about, as we have demonstrated in this chapter for the benefit of those who know the true realities. I refer to the fear of Him and the awe before his commands.” (MN 3:52) As this last quote indicates, all Mitzvot have the same objective. I have focused first on ethical Mitzvot because they are easier to contrast with general ethics but the same goal is for all Mitzvot. All have the ultimate objective to bring us to know God to the best of each one’s ability. I think that we can start getting a glimpse of why Mitzvot are Truth and doing them is doing Truth. I will however flesh these concepts out further in upcoming posts. I would like to end this post by pointing out that in the first quote from MN3:27, indeed in that whole chapter Rambam omits any mention of personal self-improvement other than in a societal context. Anyone who reads Rambam knows that one of the important traits needed for a correct understanding of God and His ways, is perfected Midot. Someone who is steeped in material needs and urges cannot acquire true knowledge according to Rambam. He makes that clear right in the second chapter of the Moreh. “You appear to have studied the matter superficially, and nevertheless you imagine that you can understand a book which has been the guide of past and present generations, when you for a moment withdraw from your lusts and appetites, and glance over its contents as if you were reading a historical work or some poetical composition.” (MN1:2) What happened to that whole segment of Mitzvot that deal with self-improvement to allow for apprehending correct notions? Posted by David Guttmann at 6:22 PM Links to this post Labels: Miscellaneous, Olam Haba, Ta'amei Hamitzvot 27 comments Sunday, November 08, 2009 Does a Non-philosophical Person Gain Rights to the World To Come (Olam Haba)? (Part 3 in a series) At the end of the first four chapters in Hilchot Yesodei Hatorah where Rambam give a concise summary of Physics and Metaphysics from a Jewish theological perspective, he legislates – ואני אומר שאין ראוי להיטייל בפרדס, אלא מי שנתמלא כרסו לחם ובשר; ולחם ובשר זה, הוא לידע ביאור האסור והמותר וכיוצא בהן משאר המצוות. ואף על פי שדברים אלו, דבר קטן קראו אותם חכמים, שהרי אמרו חכמים דבר גדול מעשה מרכבה, ודבר קטן הוויה דאביי ורבא; אף על פי כן, ראויין הן להקדימן: שהן מיישבין דעתו של אדם תחילה, ועוד שהן הטובה הגדולה שהשפיע הקדוש ברוך הוא ליישוב העולם הזה, כדי לנחול חיי העולם הבא. ואפשר שיידעם הכול--גדול וקטן, איש ואישה, בעל לב רחב ובעל לב קצר. And I say that one should not promenade in the Pardes only once one has filled his stomach with meat and bread. Meat and bread is a metaphor for knowing the clarification of what is forbidden and permissible and other such matters about the other [in addition to the five discussed here earlier] Mitzvot. Although the sages refer to these matters as a small thing, for the sages said “great matter is the workings of the chariot” and a small matter is the discussion of Abaye and Rava, they still should come first. They settle a persons mind and additionally they are the great good that HKBH bestowed to the inhabitants of this world, for them to inherit Olam Haba. All, adult and child, man and woman [note: woman too], a person with a broad mind or one with a limited one, can know it. I have discussed this Halacha in the context of the preceding ones here . In the context of the current discussion, I would like to focus in on Rambam’s ontological explanation of “what is forbidden and permissible and other such matters about the other Mitzvot”. From a human perspective, they are “meat and bread” but from an ontological one they are “the great good that HKBH bestowed to the inhabitants of this world, for them to inherit Olam Haba.” The placement of this Halacha is quite interesting too, at the end of the first chapters of MT that deal with Mitzvot that are intellectual rather than practical and presents as an introduction and transition to the practical Mitzvot that follow in the rest of MT. It says that knowing how to do the Mitzvot well [clarification of what is forbidden and permissible] (and I assume doing them), can be accomplished by all [adult and child, man and woman] thus, they all will inherit Olam Haba. Again, we see Rambam clearly telling us that Olam Haba is not dependent on intellectual apprehensions but rather a result of keeping the practical Mitzvot. There is however a caveat, not here but in Hilchot Teshuvah, where Rambam conditions proper actions on correct ideas. In Chapter 3 he discusses the process of divine judgment, Halachot that I find very difficult to understand though I hope to one day, and after a lengthy detailed exposition, he ends as follows: (Translation courtesy of Jonathan Baker. The translation is not ideal but will have to do for my purpose here). שכל ישראל יש להן חלק לעולם הבא, אף על פי שחטאו--שנאמר "ועמך כולם צדיקים, לעולם יירשו ארץ" (ישעיהו ס,כא); ארץ זו משל--כלומר ארץ החיים, והוא העולם הבא. וכן חסידי אומות העולם, יש להן חלק לעולם הבא. For every Jew has a share in the World to Come even if he sinned, for it is written, "Your people also shall be righteous; they shall inherit the land for ever". The word `land' here refers to the Land Of Life, namely the World to Come. Similarly, pious gentiles also have a share in the World to Come. Thus, even those that divine justice found guilty and therefore do not expect longevity in this physical world, do retain a part in Olam Haba as long as they are not one of those enumerated in the next Halacha. יד [ו] ואלו שאין להן חלק לעולם הבא, אלא נכרתין ואובדין, ונידונין על גודל רשעם וחטאתם, לעולם ולעולמי עולמים: המינים, והאפיקורוסים, והכופרים בתורה, והכופרים בתחיית המתים, והכופרים בביאת הגואל, והמשומדים, ומחטיאי הרבים, והפורשים מדרכי ציבור, והעושה עבירות ביד רמה בפרהסיה כיהויקים, והמוסרים, ומטילי אימה על הציבור שלא לשם שמיים, ושופכי דמים, ובעלי לשון הרע, והמושך עורלתו. The following types of people have no share in the World to Come, and are cut off, destroyed and excommunicated for ever on account of their very great sins and wickedness. An infidel; a heretic; one who denies the Torah; one who denies that there will be a Resurrection; one who denies that there will be a Redemption; one who converts from Judaism; one who causes a lot of people to sin; one who withdraws from communal ways; one who publicly sins in a defiant way like Yehoyakim did; an informer [against Jews]; one who instills fear in the congregation but not in the Name of God; a murderer; one who relates lashon Harah; and one who pulls back his foreskin [in order to cover his brit Mila]. It would be interesting to analyze in detail the commonality, if there is one, of those listed as forfeiting their Olam Haba. However looking at the list we get a clear sense that they relate to incorrect ideas about either God, society or the Jewish people. The striking thing however is the presentation. Rambam, basing himself mainly on the Mishna in Sanhedrin, does not say that one who believes in x, y and z will attain Olam Haba. The presentation takes a negative stance. One who has incorrect ideas whose actions under regular circumstances would be seen as righteous in the eyes of the divine judgment, is now found wanting. That again confirms that the Mitzvah act itself, as long is it is not based on an incorrect notion, is enough to warrant Olam Haba. To understand the relationship of doing a Mitzvah with Olam Haba, we must first discuss the different categories of Mitzvot and their goal, how and why ethical and moral Mitzvot are different from general ethics and morality and finally the relationship of Olam Haba and our own physical existence. As you can see, this subject is far from exhausted and I plan to develop these ideas. Posted by David Guttmann at 10:31 AM Links to this post Labels: Olam Haba 10 comments Sunday, November 01, 2009 Does a Non-philosophical Person Gain Rights to the World To Come (Olam Haba)? Obsessive Love (Part 2 in a series) I ended the previous and first post in this series asking what worshipping for the sake of love means. Rambam in Sefer Hamitzvot Asseh 3 lists a specific Mitzvah, a commandment, to love God. How can one be commanded to love? Love is a natural emotion? How can love be induced? המצווה השלישית היא הציווי שנצטווינו על אהבתו יתעלה שנתבונן ונסתכל במצוותיו ופעולתיו, כדי שנשיגהו ונתענג בהשגתו תכלית התענוג - וזוהי האהבה המצווה [עלינו]. The third Mitzvah is that we were commanded to love Him. [Meaning] that we should contemplate and look into His commandments and His actions so that we apprehend Him, thus experiencing [lit: enjoying] the ultimate enjoyment through that apprehension of him. That is the love that we were commanded. And to clarify, Rambam, after citing a series of verses, continues, 　 הנה ביארנו לך, שבהשתכלות תבוא לידי השגה, וימצא לך תענוג ותבוא האהבה בהכרח. We have thus clarified to you that apprehension comes through contemplation which in turn affords pleasure which brings about love inevitably. This Mitzvah requires a systematic process, starting with contemplating God’s commandments and his actions. The apprehension that results from that first step gives one so much pleasure that it inevitably triggers a feeling of love for the source of that pleasure. Once a person experiences the pleasure brought about by the quest for and apprehension of that knowledge, he wants to repeat the experience constantly and becomes obsessed with the quest. This addictive quality of a human being is thus used in a positive way. That resulting obsessive love is described at the end of Hilchot Teshuvah 10:3 ה [ג] וכיצד היא האהבה הראויה: הוא שיאהב את ה' אהבה גדולה יתרה רבה, עזה עד מאוד, עד שתהא נפשו קשורה באהבת ה', ונמצא שוגה בה תמיד--כאלו חולי האהבה, שאין דעתם פנויה מאהבת אותה אישה שהוא שוגה בה תמיד, בין בשוכבו בין בקומו, בין בשעה שהוא אוכל ושותה And what is the proper love? One should love God with such a very great and extremely intense love to the point that his mind [soul] is bound with the love of God becoming immersed in it at all times. It is like one of those who are lovesick, whose mind cannot free itself from the love of the woman he is immersed in at all times, while at rest and awake, while eating and drinking. The emotional feeling of love in this process is triggered by a rational experience. The experience of learning and apprehending a difficult and elusive matter produces such intense pleasure that the person wants to continuously experience it and therefore cannot stop thinking about God and the quest for Him. That knowledge however is elusive in our physical existence and becomes a constant quest. At its extreme level, the level of Moshe Rabbeinu, that obsessive quest reaches a point where the mind [soul] wants to free itself from its physical shackles. The Rabbis metaphorically describe this state as “death by kissing” based on Shir Hashirim 1:2, which [Shir Hashirim] is seen as a metaphor for this intense obsessive love of God. ב יִשָּׁקֵנִי מִנְּשִׁיקוֹת פִּיהוּ, כִּי-טוֹבִים דֹּדֶיךָ מִיָּיִן. 2 Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth--for thy love is better than wine. Rambam in MN 3:51 describes this experience by Moshe, Aharon and Miriam. “The more the forces of his body are weakened, and the fire of passion quenched, in the same measure does man's intellect increase in strength and light; his knowledge becomes purer, and he is happy with his knowledge. When this perfect man is stricken in age and is near death, his knowledge mightily increases, his joy in that knowledge grows greater, and his love for the object of his knowledge more intense, and it is in this great delight that the soul separates from the body…. The meaning of this saying is that these three died in the midst of the pleasure derived from the knowledge of God and their great love for Him. When our Sages figuratively call the knowledge of God united with intense love for Him a kiss, they follow the well-known poetical diction, "Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth" (Song 1:2). This kind of death, which in truth is deliverance from death, has been ascribed by our Sages to none but to Moses, Aaron, and Miriam. The other prophets and pious men are beneath that degree: but their knowledge of God is strengthened when death approaches.” The same pleasure that was so necessary while the person is in his physical state to trigger this obsessive love becomes eternal at death. Of course, we cannot fathom what that experience means, just as we cannot apprehend anything about God’s essence while in this physical existence. This pleasurable experience therefore has two components to it. While in physical existence, it is a necessary tool to help induce this intense and obsessive love of God and the quest for Him. As that experience of intense pleasure becomes eternal at death, it is now no longer a tool but an eternal reward. In a comment on the earlier post, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks questioned my understanding of what it means to perform a Mitzvah in a “proper and satisfactory” manner. Our goal in our physical existence is to apprehend to the best of our ability as much as we can in our quest for God and His ways. That can only be accomplished through the systematic approach described above which includes the pleasurable experience that comes with apprehension. Our addictive attachment to that pleasurable experience is a necessary step in developing the obsessive love for God and the quest for Him. That same pleasurable experience, once it becomes eternal, is no longer a tool but a resulting reward. Worship that has that eternal pleasurable experience as a goal is not “proper and satisfactory”. That I believe is how one must understand Rambam quoted earlier which is to me, the essence of Judaism. העובד מאהבה, עוסק בתורה ובמצוות והולך בנתיבות החכמה--לא מפני דבר בעולם, לא מפני יראת הרעה, ולא כדי לירש הטובה: אלא עושה האמת, מפני שהוא אמת; וסוף הטובה לבוא בכלל A person that worships [God] for the sake of love, is not involved in Torah and Mitzvot nor following the paths of wisdom, because of anything else in the world, not fear of bad things happening nor to gain good things. The only reason he does Truth is that it is Truth. The good things will generally come at the end. In upcoming posts, I would like to explore the meaning of Mitzvot as Truth. Posted by David Guttmann at 6:18 AM Links to this post Labels: Olam Haba 18 comments Sunday, October 25, 2009 Did Rambam's Attitude To Aggadah Evolve? - A review of Professor Loberbaum Article (Conclusion). Rambam in MN 1:70 discusses the word Rochev – to ride – when used by the prophets to describe God. He explains that just as a rider controls the beast he is riding upon, so too God is the Mover of the spheres. The idea is that all physical existence is subject to motion. In Aristotelian science, motion underlies all physical existence. In their view, the four basic elements mix in various combinations resulting in all the different components of the world below the sphere of the moon. That mixing is caused by motion which originates in the circular orbit of the outer sphere which in turn was first put into motion by the First Mover at the dawn of existence. As motion has to be induced, God, the First Mover, caused that original spherical motion. When we say that motion was caused by another body, we imagine one body impelling another, by transferring force from one to another. To dispel us from this imagery, the prophets saw God as the rider of the spheres. Just like a rider controls the animal without transferring anything physical, the animal moves of its own volition as ordered by the rider, so too God set the sphere in motion without transferring anything from Himself. Rambam shows how this concept is found in the prophetic writings and both in the Talmud and Midrashim. He shows how the Rabbis in their cryptic way were teaching these metaphysical truths in Breishit Rabah 68:10 (pages 777-778 in the Theodor-Albeck Edition), Pirkei D’Rabbi Eliezer 18 and the Gemara in Hagigah 12b. (I plan to write a separate post explaining this Rambam). In the middle of the chapter Rambam comments– “Consider how these excellent and true ideas, comprehended only by the greatest philosophers, are found scattered in the Midrashim. When a student who disavows truth reads them, he will at first sight, deride them as being contrary to the real state of things. The cause of this is because our Sages spoke of these subjects in metaphors: they are too difficult for the common understanding of the people, as has been noted by us several times.” (MN1:70) In the following chapter, MN 1:71 Rambam addresses why these deep truths are so rare in the Talmud and Midrashim. He explains that the political status of the Jewish people, the influence of foreign conquerors, eradicated all that knowledge which was orally transmitted. The little that remained was scattered in the Talmud and Midrashim in a very esoteric form. “This was the cause that necessitated the disappearance of these great roots of knowledge from the nation. For you will not find with regard to them anything except slight indications and pointers occurring in the Talmud and the Midrashim. These are as it were, a few grains belonging to the core which are overlaid by many layers of rind, so that people were occupied with these layers of rind and thought that beneath them there was no core whatsoever.” (MN 1:71) He then continues to explain that the few philosophical writings that we do find amongst the Geonim as well as the Karaites (!) were not based on tradition but rather developed by those people by adapting contemporary non-Jewish philosophy. Professor Loberbaum in his article reads this Rambam out of its context, focusing on the above quote and arguing that “a few grains belonging to the core which are overlaid by many layers of rind” clearly indicates that the Rabbinic Midrashim were not reliable because of “the disappearance of these great roots of knowledge from the nation.” He concludes that Rambam held that the Talmud and Midrashim were not philosophical/scientific texts and that most Rabbis were not philosophers. I really do not see that at all in reading the Rambam in context. All he is doing is explaining why these philosophical discussions are rare and why they are so well hidden behind metaphors and allegories. After all he just finished showing us in the preceding chapter how one should read a series of rabbinic Aggadot and Midrashim that complement prophetic writings and see in them deep metaphysical truths. This is clearly the case in view of the comment I quote earlier from MN 1:70, “Consider how these excellent and true ideas, comprehended only by the greatest philosophers, are found scattered in the Midrashim….” But now YL, in his concluding remarks, makes a faux pas that shocked me. Here is a translation of his words. “Rambam explained here- so too in chapter 59 – that what is found in the Talmud is at most a few philosophic/scientific statements, that are covered by “many rinds” namely a vast collection of Aggadot that have in them “rubbish and such perverse imaginings”. The rinds in the Talmud are so many that “people were occupied with these layers of rind and thought that beneath them there was no core whatsoever”. (Emphases in the original).” This statement is a perversion of everything we read so far in the above quotes of Rambam. “People were occupied with these layers of rind and thought that beneath them there was no core whatsoever”, because the ideas were well hidden and not because there are so many other statements in the Talmud that have only rinds, as implied by YL. But to make matters worse when we turn to chapter 59 from where “rubbish and such perverse imaginings” was lifted and transplanted here, we see that Rambam was talking about Piyuttim and not Aggadot and Midrashim of the Rabbis. In that chapter, Rambam tells us that it is not permissible to develop our own attributes for God especially when we pray. We must limit ourselves to what the Rabbis have taught us based on their readings of the prophetic writings. “We cannot approve of what those foolish persons do, that are extravagant in praise, fluent and prolix in the prayers they compose, and in the hymns they make in the desire to approach the Creator. They describe God in attributes which would be an offence if applied to a human being, for those persons have no knowledge of these great and important principles, which are not accessible to the ordinary intelligence of man. Treating the Creator as a familiar object, they describe Him and speak of Him in any expressions they think proper; they eloquently continue to praise Him in that manner, and believe that they can thereby influence Him and produce an effect on Him. If they find some phrase suited to their object in the words of the Prophets they are still more inclined to consider that they are free to make use of such texts--which should at least be explained--to employ them in their literal sense, to derive new expressions from them, to form from them numerous variations, and to found whole compositions on them. This license is frequently met with in the compositions of the singers, preachers, and others who imagine themselves to be able to compose a poem. Such authors write things which partly are real heresy, partly contain rubbish and such perverse imaginings, so that they naturally cause those who hear them to laugh, but also to feel grieved at the thought that such things can be uttered in reference to God.” (MN1:59) Need I say more? Since when are medieval Paytannim the authors of Midrashim and Aggadot? YL shows the weakness of his arguments when he has to resort to obvious distortions that can be verified by simply turning to the source, in order to prove his point. That being the case, why do I read articles by scholars? Why did I spend a series of posts disagreeing with Professor Loberbaum? The answer is simple. One learns from everybody even when someone is at best misguided, at worse dishonest in his or her reading of the great medieval thinkers. One is forced to go back to the source and reread it with the latest reading in mind. Inevitably, new insights are gleaned and a better understanding is reached. I also learn a lot from good scholarly work. Unfortunately, the pressure to publish and be innovative leads many to stray from the purported quest for the truth. But there are “a few grains belonging to the core” amongst “many layers of rind”, following YL’s way of reading. Posted by David Guttmann at 10:43 AM Links to this post Labels: Aggadah, Yair Loberbaum 0 comments Tuesday, October 20, 2009 Does a Non-philosophical Person Gain Rights to the World To Come (Olam Haba)? How? (Part 1 in a series) One of the difficulties people have is how to understand Olam Haba for the non-philosophical according to Rambam. Rambam describes Olam Haba in his Hilchot Teshuvah chapter 8 and in many other places as a result of the correct understanding of HKBH. He interprets all the seemingly physical rewards such as the Leviathan Feast, the crowns on the heads of the Tzadikkim etc… as metaphors for intellectual apprehension of the Deity (Hilchot Teshuvah chapter 8). That being the case how does a plain non-philosophical believer gain access to this unique and fabulous experience? In fact, some who study Rambam felt that although Rambam did not say so openly, Olam Haba was reserved for the elite philosopher only. The problem is that we have a Mishna at the beginning of the 10th Perek in Sanhedrin that says that ALL of Israel has a part in Olam Haba except for certain heretics who are precluded from it. Rambam subscribes to it and in fact uses that Mishna to launch a long dissertation on the 13 Ikkarim which include Olam Haba as dogmatic beliefs that one must have. In Hilchot Teshuvah chapter3:5 he legislates the Mishna as Halacha. It is inconceivable therefore, that he had an “esoteric” position on the matter. I would like to address this issue in a series of posts and hopefully it will also clarify Rambam’s Olam Haba which seems to be a little confusing to some, to say the least. (I have already touched on the issue of Olam Haba, to be found under the Olam Haba label on the sidebar, but have never devoted posts to a systematic study of the subject.) There is a famous Mishna in Massechet Makot at the end of the third Perek that is well known because it is repeated at the end of public Shiurim before the Kaddish Derabanan is recited. ג,יז [טז] רבי חנניה בן עקשיה אומר, רצה הקדוש ברוך הוא לזכות את ישראל; לפיכך הרבה להן תורה ומצוות, שנאמר "ה' חפץ, למען צדקו; יגדיל תורה, ויאדיר" (ישעיהו מב,כא). Rabbi Hananya ben Akashya says, as HKBH wanted to warrant merit to the Jewish people, He provided them with a plethora of Torah and Mitzvot as Yeshayahu says, “God wished, for his [servant’s] righteousness' sake, to make the teaching great and glorious.” (I translated the verse as understood by Targum Yehonatan and to agree with this drash. There are however other interpretations.) Rambam comments as follows: פירוש המשנה לרמב"ם מסכת מכות פרק ג יז] מיסודות האמונה בתורה שאם קיים האדם מצוה משלש עשרה ושש מאות מצות כראוי וכהוגן ולא שתף עמה מטרה ממטרות העולם הזה כלל, אלא עשאה לשמה מאהבה כמו שביארתי לך, הרי הוא זוכה בה לחיי העולם הבא, לכן אמר ר' חנניה כי מחמת רבוי המצות אי אפשר שלא יעשה האדם אחת בכל ימי חייו בשלימות ויזכה להשארות הנפש באותו המעשה. וממה שמורה על היסוד הזה שאלת ר' חנניה בן תרדיון מה אני לחיי העולם הבא, וענהו העונה כלום בא לידך מעשה, כלומר האם נזדמן לך עשיית מצוה ראוי, ענה לו שנזדמנה לו מצות צדקה בתכלית השלמות האפשרית, וזכה בה לחיי העולם הבא. ופירוש הפסוק ה' חפץ לצדק את ישראל למען כן יגדיל תורה ויאדיר. It is one of the Law’s fundaments of faith, that if an individual had executed [even] one of the 613 precepts of the Law, in a proper and satisfactory manner, without associating with it some mundane designs at all, but did it for its own sake, as [an act of] love … that person has gained the rights to the life in Olam Haba. Rabbi Hananya teaches that the great variety of precepts ensures that during the entire course of one’s life one would have had the opportunity to perfectly fulfill [at least] a single precept thereby gaining the right for the soul to remain. The question [and answer] of Rabbi Hananya ben Tradyon (TB Avodah Zara 18a) points to this fundament. He asked whether he has [rights] to the life in Olam Haba. The answerer [r. Yossi ben Kisma] said to him, “did you do any act?” Meaning, did you perform a Mitzvah satisfactorily?” He answered that he had the opportunity to perform the Mitzvah of Tzedakah in the most complete [perfect] way possible, and therefore gained the right to the life in Olam Haba. The meaning of the verse is; God wants to bring righteousness to the Israelites He therefore made the Law great and glorious. According to Rambam, the Mishna is teaching that the purpose of all the precepts is so that a person has the chance to fulfill at least one Mitzvah in his lifetime in a “proper and satisfactory” manner. He defines “proper and satisfactory” not as punctiliousness in its performance, but with the proper intent: “without associating with it some mundane designs at all, but did it for its own sake, as [an act of] love”. What exactly does that mean? As usual, the answer can be found elsewhere in Rambam’s works. “Associating with it some mundane design” is defined in Hilchot Teshuvah 10:1: אל יאמר אדם הריני עושה מצוות התורה ועוסק בחכמתה, כדי שאקבל הברכות הכתובות בתורה או כדי שאזכה לחיי העולם הבא; ואפרוש מן העבירות שהזהירה תורה מהן, כדי שאינצל מן הקללות הכתובות בתורה או כדי שלא איכרת מחיי העולם הבא. A person should not say that, “I do the Mitzvot of the Torah and learn its wisdom so that I will receive the blessings written in the Torah or so that I should gain the right to the life in Olam Haba. I will keep away from the transgressions the Torah warned against so that I am saved from the curses that are written in the Torah or so that I am not cut-off from Olam Haba”. Blessings and curses written in the Torah are matters that deal with our physical day-to-day existence such as health and wealth. We can easily accept that we are not supposed to do the Mitzvot for practical reasons. That we should not do them so that we become perfected and get Olam Haba is much more difficult to digest! After all Rambam just finished the whole chapter 8 describing Olam Haba as basking in the knowledge of God, the ultimate truth. ומה הוא זה שאמרו, ונהנין מזיו השכינה--שיודעין ומשיגין מאמיתת הקדוש ברוך הוא, מה שאינן יודעין והן בגוף האפל השפל What did the Rabbis mean when they said [describing the Tzadikkim in Olam Haba] “and they bask in the shine of the Shechinah”? It means that they know and apprehend [something] of the truth [essence] of HKBH, something that is impossible while they are in this dark and lowly [physical] body. The answer lies in the nuance. There is a difference between seeking the truth itself for its own sake and seeking the truth because one gets pleasure from knowing it. Olam Haba is the resulting pleasurable state that one is in once the truth is attained. To seek the truth for the sake of experiencing that state of pleasure must not be the goal of the perfect person. ב] העובד מאהבה, עוסק בתורה ובמצוות והולך בנתיבות החכמה--לא מפני דבר בעולם, לא מפני יראת הרעה, ולא כדי לירש הטובה: אלא עושה האמת, מפני שהוא אמת; וסוף הטובה לבוא בכלל. A person that worships [God] for the sake of love, is not involved in Torah and Mitzvot nor following the paths of wisdom, because of anything else in the world, not fear of bad things happening nor to gain good things. The only reason he does Truth is that it is Truth. The good things will generally come at the end. Note that three things, Torah, Mitzvot and paths of wisdom are all Truths. In this context, being involved in Torah and Mitzvot should be read in the popular sense, in that Torah is the ontological understanding as well as it contains the practical laws while Mitzvot means following them and acting according to these laws, the 613 Mitzvot. What exactly does Rambam mean when he says that Mitzvot ARE Truth? As I have discussed many times in past posts, Rambam seems to see the Mitzvot as utilitarian, a tool to help us reach our goal of knowing God, rather than Truth itself. Rambam already presented this idea in his introduction to Chelek, the 10th Perek of the tractate Sanhedrin. פירוש המשנה לרמב"ם מסכת סנהדרין פרק י שלא יעשה תכלית הלמוד לא שיכבדוהו בני אדם ולא רכישת ממון, ואל יעשה תורת ה' פרנסה, ואל יהא אצלו תכלית הלמוד אלא ידיעתו בלבד, וכן אין תכלית האמת אלא לדעת שהוא אמת, והמצות אמת ולכן תכליתם קיומם … one should not make the goal of learning so that people will respect him nor should he do so to gain wealth, one should not make a living from the Torah of HKBH. The goal of learning should be only to know it [the subject]. So too, the goal of Truth is to know that it is Truth and as the Mitzvot are Truth, therefore their goal is to perform them… This is a partial quote in a lengthy exposition on the subject, which I plan to work on separately in future posts. For our purpose here, we find Rambam repeating this idea that Mitzvot are Truth and he adds one more concept; “therefore, their goal is to perform them”. In other words by keeping Mitzvot one acts the Truth. What exactly does this mean? There is one more term that Rambam uses in the Halacha from Hilchot Teshuvah quoted above - העובד מאהבה – A person that worships [God] for the sake of love. How are we to understand this love? What does it mean? I plan to deal with all these questions and others that will crop up as we follow this line of thought, in upcoming posts. Posted by David Guttmann at 4:16 AM Links to this post Labels: Olam Haba 3 comments Col. Kemp, An Impartial Observer VS a Traitor of Our Own, Goldstone YS. Of course this was kept secret while Goldstone got all the publicity. Hat tip to Rabbi Arie Folger. Posted by David Guttmann at 3:15 AM Links to this post Labels: Miscellaneous 5 comments Monday, October 12, 2009 Did Rambam's Attitude To Aggadah Evolve? - A review of Professor Loberbaum Article (Part 5). Professor Loberbaum proceeds to try to prove his thesis that Rambam lost respect for Aggadot, as he grew older. Rambam in his introduction to the Moreh describes the metaphors and allegories found in the prophetic texts. He first quotes a Midrash from Shir Hashirim Rabah where the Rabbis describe the processes Shlomo Hamelech used in his metaphors. “Again, Solomon begins his book of Proverbs with the words, "To understand a proverb and figurative speech, the words of the wise and their dark sayings" (Prov. 1:6); and we read in Midrash, Shir Hashirim Raba, 1:1); "To what were the words of the Torah to be compared before the time of Solomon? To a well, the waters of which are at a great depth, and though cool and fresh, yet no man could drink of them. A clever man joined cord with cord, and rope with rope, and drew up and drank. So too Solomon went from figure to figure, and from subject to subject, till he obtained the true sense of the Torah." So far go the words of our Sages. I do not believe that any intelligent man thinks that "the words of the Torah" mentioned here as requiring the application of figures in order to be understood, can refer to the rules for building Sukkot, for preparing the Lulav, or for the law of the four trustees.” The Midrash presents Shir Hashirim as a prophetic parable. It is teaching us how to read the parable. It offers different metaphors which suggest that we need to be careful how we read these parables and how we decipher them. The metaphor in this segment of the Midrash describes how at times a systematic approach is required, where every component, the ropes and the cords are attached and by slowly following the clues in proper order, we can grasp the intended goal – the difficult and hidden idea. Rambam quotes another metaphor the rabbis use to describe how one reads a prophetic parable. “What is really meant is the apprehension of profound and difficult subjects, concerning which our Sages said, "If a man loses in his house a sela, or a pearl, he can find it by lighting a taper worth only one issar. Thus the parables in themselves are of no great value, but through them the words of the holy Law are rendered intelligible." These likewise are the words of our Sages; consider well their statement that the internal meaning of the words of the Torah is a pearl whereas the external meaning of all parables is of no value in itself. They compare the hidden meaning included in the literal sense of the simile to a pearl lost in a dark room, which is full of furniture. It is certain that the pearl is in the room, but the man can neither see it nor know where it lies. It is just as if the pearl were no longer in his possession, for, as has been stated, it affords him no benefits whatsoever until he kindles a light. The same is the case with the comprehension of that which the simile represents.” Some prophetic parables contain filler which are unimportant and one should not try to explain every detail of it. The metaphor describes the relative value of the light and the pearl where one is a tool to find the other, the important item. Rambam adds a little to the Midrash by introducing the furniture that fills the room that is a co-conspirator with the darkness in hiding the valuable pearl. In other words although the candle lights up the room, one still has to clean away the valueless furniture before finding the pearl. Rambam then describes a type of metaphor also found in the prophetic writings where there are dual meanings where both are important, though one may be of greater importance than the other may. In other words, once the reader has grasped what the parable is trying to teach, he may encounter a double meaning where the external teaches important matters but is only like silver in comparison to the gold found in the deeper meaning. “The wise king said, "A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in vessels of silver" (Prov. 25:11). Hear the explanation of what he said: The word maskiyoth, the Hebrew equivalent for "vessels," denotes "filigree network"--i.e., things in which there are very small apertures, such as are frequently wrought by silversmiths. They are called in Hebrew maskiyyoth (literally "transpicuous," from the verb sakah, "he saw," a root which occurs also in the Targum of Onkelos, Gen. 26:8), because the eye penetrates through them. Thus, Solomon meant to say, "Just as apples of gold in silver filigree with small apertures, so is a word fitly spoken." See how beautifully the conditions of a good simile are described in this figure! It shows that in every word which has a double sense, a literal one and a figurative one, the plain meaning must be as valuable as silver, and the hidden meaning still more precious: so that the figurative meaning bears the same relation to the literal one as gold to silver. It is further necessary that the plain sense of the phrase shall give to those who consider it some notion of that which the figure represents. Just as a golden apple overlaid with a network of silver, when seen at a distance, or looked at superficially, is mistaken for a silver apple, but when a keen-sighted person looks at the object well, he will find what is within, and see that the apple is gold. The same is the case with the figures employed by prophets. Taken literally, such expressions contain wisdom useful for many purposes, among others, for the amelioration of the condition of society; e.g., the Proverbs (of Solomon), and similar sayings in their literal sense. Their hidden meaning, however, is profound wisdom, conducive to the recognition of real truth.” Clearly, Rambam is not talking here about the parable itself but about what was deciphered by either the reader or the prophet in describing his vision. He tells us that one must not stop at the first teaching one grasps because many times there are dual meanings, where a deeper ontological or metaphysical idea is also present. For some reason YL sees these descriptions of prophetic writings as a criticism of how the Aggadot are different. He contrasts the “good simile” in the last example with the ones before where there is some fluff in the parable. He is confusing the description of a parable with a description of the result one gets once the parable is deciphered. Furthermore, YL somehow reads this whole discussion to refer to Aggadot, though a careful read of the quotations above clearly show they are ALL describing PROPHETIC parables. Rambam is at first quoting Midrashic metaphors that describe the prophetic parables and then quotes Shlomo Hamelech who describes the results of the deciphered parables as having more than one meaning – silver and gold. I reread the section several times and for the life of me cannot see what YL sees there. I leave it to the reader to decide. z2There is one more purported “proof” that I will discuss before summarizing and opining. 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 Posted by David Guttmann at 6:02 AM Links to this post Labels: Aggadah, Yair Loberbaum 0 comments Thursday, October 01, 2009 Did Rambam's Attitude To Aggadah Evolve? - A review of Professor Loberbaum Article (Part 4). In apparent digression, Rambam in MN 3:43, in the midst of discussing reasons for the different festivals and specifically the reason for taking the Lulav and Etrog on Sukkot, discusses a certain type of Midrashic exegesis. Professor Loberbaum uses it to further develop his theory about Rambam’s supposed change of opinion regarding Rabbinical Aggadot. 　 “As regards the four species [the branches of the palm tree, the citron, the myrtle, and the willows of the brook] our Sages gave a reason for their use by way of Aggadic interpretation, the method of which is well known to those who are acquainted with the style of our Sages. They use the text of the Bible only as a kind of poetical language [for their own ideas], and do not intend thereby to give an interpretation of the text. As to the value of these Midrashic interpretations, we meet with two different opinions. For some think that, the Midrash contains the real explanation of the text, whilst others, finding that it cannot be reconciled with the words quoted, reject and ridicule it. The former, struggle and fight to prove and to confirm such interpretations according to their opinion, and to keep them as the real meaning of the text; they consider them in the same light as traditional laws. Neither of the two classes understood it, that our Sages employ biblical texts merely as poetical expressions, the meaning of which is clear to every reasonable reader. This style was general in ancient days; all adopted it in the same way as poets [adopt a certain style]. Our Sages say, in reference to the words, "and a paddle (yated) you shall have upon your weapon" [azeneka, Deut. xxiii. 14]: Do not read azeneka, "thy weapon," but ozneka, "thy ear." You are thus told, that if you hear a person uttering something disgraceful, put your fingers into your ears. Now, I wonder whether those ignorant persons [who take the Midrashic interpretations literally] believe that the author of this saying gave it as the true interpretation of the text quoted, and as the meaning of this precept: that in truth yated, "the paddle," is used for "the finger, "and azeneka denotes "thy ear." I cannot think that any person whose intellect is sound can admit this. The author employed the text as a beautiful poetical phrase, in teaching an excellent moral lesson, namely this: It is as bad to listen to bad language, as it is to use it. This lesson is poetically connected with the above text. In the same sense you must understand the phrase, "Do not read so, but so," wherever it occurs in the Midrash.” Rambam is referring to a series of Derashot recorded in Vaykra Rabah 30:8-16 about the reason for taking the four kinds – Arbe’a Minim. The first derasha explains how Etrog is connected with the words used to describe it in the Torah, Pri Etz Hadar, and the same for the remaining three. Thereafter, the Midrash discusses possible symbolism in the Mitzvot, such that the four Minim represent different aspects of God, the three patriarchs and Yosef, the four matriarchs and so on. All the Midrashim use the verse as an exegetical device for their ideas. All these references are far from Peshuto Shel Mikrah, the plain meaning of the text. Rambam explains that these types of Midrashic texts are recordings of sermons or sermon types of Aggadot that use a poetic type of presentation. The Rabbis wanted to teach how one should look at Mitzvot and use them for connecting with the transcendental, get in touch with Judaism’s basic tenets and in general teach Hashkafic and ethical concepts, using the text as a tool to impress or as a mnemonic device. The rabbis are not explaining the text but use it as a tool to make their point, which may have nothing to do with the text. As an extreme example, much more distanced from the text than the ones in Vaykra Rabah, Rambam quotes the one about stuffing your fingers in your ears when confronted with prohibited talk. Clearly, the verse is not talking about it and the Rabbis just used it as a device to make a totally unrelated point. Rambam uses this opportunity to describe and explain a certain common type of Midrashic text amongst many other types of such texts. YL however wants to take this a step further. In the Pirush Hamishna in the introduction to Chelek Rambam also presented three opinions about Derashot: Those who insist on literalness, those who denigrate and the third group, the correct ones, those who see in them great depth and philosophical teachings. If we set them parallel with the three groups Rambam enumerates here, the third correct one is parallel to the ones who understand the exegetical method of teaching unrelated issues using the verse. YL contrasts Rambam’s description of the correct approach in Chelek as philosophical and of great depth while here he describes it as poetical and not the real meaning of the text. In other words in Chelek the Rabbis teach a deep and true concept as opposed to here, where they distort the true meaning of the text. Furthermore, Rambam describes them as “derashot”, public sermons, that are directed to the masses and not of great depth. He therefore claims that again we see a change of heart about Aggadah that is consistent with the supposed change in the introduction to MN we discussed in the previous post. YL does note that the presentation here is milder than the one in the introduction. There, according to YL’s understanding, Rambam was quasi insulting to the Rabbis while here he seems to praise their “poetical talent”. He therefore discovers a “Halachik” impact in these Derashot, which are the reason Rambam is more careful. He does not want to weaken our regard to Halacha! He is also trying to protect Halachik exegesis which when one would insist that it is the meaning of the text, would lose its legitimacy. If I am correct, and I am convinced I am, that YL misread Rambam in the introduction to MN, as I have shown in the preceding post, this whole argument has no leg to stand on. In addition, my read of the Rambam above is unquestionably correct. Rambam, typical and true to form, sees the complexity of the Derashot. Aggadah is a term that covers many different non-Halachik writings of the rabbis. Some have deep philosophic import and teach very complex issues from observations about our universe and environment to the ontological and metaphysical. They however also contain many ethical and moral teachings; these probably make up the great majority of the Aggadic texts. Some of these were indeed public sermons and used different types of devices to impress upon the listeners. To impress and make sure the teaching is absorbed and remembered they used the text in a non-literal way. To insist that Rambam is monochromatic and his comments are generalized to all Aggadot is disingenuous. I believe that Professor Loberbaum’s reading of this Rambam is faulty and does not prove his point. However, YL has still more proofs and I want to address them. At the end of this series, I plan a post to explain why I decided to address this article and a general comment on the importance of academic work on Rambam. Posted by David Guttmann at 5:00 AM Links to this post Labels: Aggadah, Yair Loberbaum 2 comments Friday, September 25, 2009 Did Rambam's Attitude To Aggadah Evolve? - A review of Professor Loberbaum Article (Part 3). Professor Yair Loberbaum in his article turns to the Moreh in his attempt to show that Rambam’s attitude towards Aggadah changed drastically in his later years (Rambam wrote it in his fifties). In his introduction, Rambam enumerates seven possible reasons why we sometime find contradictions in things we read and then proceeds to bring examples that fit each of these categories. The contradictions we find in Mishna and Braitot usually belong to the first category where two opinions are brought down without clarifying that they belong to two different people. The contradictions in Talmud fall either under the same category or under the second one where an author changes his mind and both opinions are recorded. The contradictions in the writings of the prophets fall under either the third where there is a mixture of metaphor and plain talk or under the fourth where certain conditions are omitted. If one does not discover the omission, one gets the impression that there is a contradiction when there really is not. (I plan to discuss this last issue at length on another occasion so forgive my skimming it superficially here (as per the fifth reason)). “As for the divergences occurring in the books of the philosophers, or rather those who know the truth, they are due to the fifth cause.” The fifth cause for contradictions is pedagogical. Sometimes an easier subject has to be taught before the more difficult one, but cannot be comprehended without having a superficial understanding of the more difficult subject. The difficult subject is presented in a way that can be understood by the unsophisticated even if it is not exactly accurate. As the student progresses he will return and acquire a deeper and more accurate understanding of the matter. “On the other hand, the contradictions occurring in most of the books of authors and commentators other than those we have mentioned are due to the sixth cause. Likewise, in the Midrashim and the Haggadah there is to be found great contradictions due to this cause. That is why the sages have said: No questions should be asked about difficulties in the Haggadah. There are also to be found therein contradictions due to the seventh cause.” Professor Loberbaum reads the sixth cause as negative. It describes authors that write about deep matters and err because they have not figured out all the ramifications that result from their position thus taking a contradictory stand on a related matter. While philosopher’s contradictions are pedagogical, Aggadah is contradictory because it is wrong. Therefore, they should be disregarded – “No questions should be asked about difficulties in the Haggadah”. Contrast this with Rambam’s position in Pirush Hamishna that Aggadot are deep metaphors, clearly there is a change of heart from the young to the old Rambam. As the discussion here focuses on the sixth cause, I quote it in full. “The Sixth cause: The contradiction is not apparent, and only becomes evident through a series of premises. The larger the number of premises necessary to prove the contradiction between the two conclusions, the greater is the chance that it will escape detection, and that the author will not perceive his own inconsistency. Only when from each conclusion, by means of suitable premises, an inference is made, and from the enunciation thus inferred, by means of proper arguments, other conclusions are formed, and after that process has been repeated many times, then it becomes clear that the original conclusions are contradictories or contraries. Even able writers are liable to overlook such inconsistencies. If, however, the contradiction between the original statements can at once be discovered, and the author, while writing the second, does not think of the first, he evinces a greater deficiency, and his words deserve no notice whatever.” Rambam explains that even amongst the greatest thinkers there is the possibility of not taking an idea to its ultimate conclusion. When that occurs, a contradiction may exist between two statements where one only becomes aware of it when that ultimate conclusion is reached. When the ultimate conclusion is easy to arrive at and obvious, the contradiction can only be because the writer has missed it through negligence or forgotten his earlier position. Such authors are not considered in this analysis. However, when the conclusion is not apparent and needs much thought and processing, such errors may occur amongst the best. It is however noteworthy that Rambam does not assume such a possibility in Halachik matters in Mishna and Talmud nor in the books of the prophets. He does however do so with “commentators”, which apparently include those who comment on Halachik subjects. Revelation cannot be suspected of not thinking through to the end, nor can a work composed by the many such as Mishna and Talmud be suspected of doing so. In metaphysics on the other hand, which is the subject of Aggadah, even the greatest may fall prey to such an error. Therefore, when we encounter such a contradiction we have to accept that is due to a contradiction that was not apparent to the author and questions stop there, thus “No questions should be asked about difficulties in the Haggadah”. There is no indication that they should be disregarded as YL reads it. If we read it this way, it would agree with Rambam’s earlier position that there is great depth in Aggadah and should be taken very seriously. I did not see Rambam claim that there are no errors and the Rabbis were always right. In fact, Rambam many times questions the correctness of Tannaim and Amoraim when it comes to metaphysical and philosophical issues. Even the great Rabbi Eliezer ben Hurkanos, Rabbi Eliezer Hagadol, does not escape his critique. My reading finds support if the version Rav Kafieh mentions in note 28 is correct. “Divergences that are to be found in this treatise are due to the fifth, (sixth – according to the R. Kafieh versions) and the seventh.” I do not think Rambam would assign the sixth cause to himself if it had a negative connotation. YL dwells on Rambam statement, “Likewise, in the Midrashim and the Haggadah there is to be found great contradictions due to this cause”. He tries to argue that “great contradictions” fall under the category of, “If, however, the contradiction between the original statements can at once be discovered, and the author, while writing the second, does not think of the first, he evinces a greater deficiency, and his words deserve no notice whatever”. He equates “Great contradictions” with “the contradiction between the original statements can at once be discovered”. I believe he is stretching here to make a point. “Great” in this context is more a matter of the subject, where a contradiction in an important matter is seen as great, not because it is obvious. I do not think this proof is very convincing. However, there is more to come and I will look at those proofs too. I also plan to tackle these contradictions in a series of posts, the different way of reading prophetic writings and Midrash and Aggadah. As we all know, when one learns Rambam one has to be very careful with the words he uses, context, tone and the order in which things are presented. Shabbat Shalom. Posted by David Guttmann at 5:40 AM Links to this post Labels: Aggadah, Yair Loberbaum 3 comments Monday, September 21, 2009 Did Rambam's Attitude To Aggadah Evolve? - A review of Professor Loberbaum Article (Part 2). Professor Yair Loberbaum (YL) proceeds to make his case for his thesis on Rambam’s sharp change in attitude towards Aggadah in his later years. He quotes two responsa written is his later years that seem to suggest that Rambam felt Aggadah was not to be relied upon as opposed to his earlier statement in Pirush Hamishna that it contained great depth. The first is amongst answers to several questions posed to him by the Dayan Rav Pinchas of Alexandria (Blau edition #458 (i) ). The second is a well-known Teshuvah to R. Sa’adyah ben Pinchas, a disciple, regarding the Sefer Shiur Komah about which he clearly changed his mind drastically as he grew older (I quoted and discussed this issue here ). YL contrasts these two divergent positions, with the opinion of the Geonim who dismiss Aggadah as unreliable. He tries to show that in his youth, Rambam disagreed with the Geonim and as he aged, he eventually accepted their take going even further then them as seen from his vehement rejection of Shiur Komah. I will not bother repeating the whole presentation. I did not find it very convincing. Shiur Komah is an esoteric work and though traditionally it is attributed to Rabbi Ishmael, the great Tanah, Rambam believes it to be misattributed and was composed by Greek preachers (ii) . That is far from proving that he felt that one could ignore genuine Tannaitic works. The other responsa, which I quote verbatim in footnote 1 above, is ambiguous and does not necessarily disagree with the possibility of Aggadah containing deep truths. However, as the Aggadot need deciphering, each thinker has a tendency to come to his own interpretations. How then can one ask from them or use them as proofs for a specific position? An alternate interpretation will yield a different understanding. It is in fact consistent with how Ma’aseh Merkavah is supposed to be taught, Mosserim lo Rashei Perakim and the excelling student comes to his own conclusions (iii) . YL also brings additional support from a comment in Iggeret Techyat Hametim. That is even less convincing than the first two. I am not sure why he resorted to these three “proofs” as they do little to help his thesis. In the next post, I will discuss the proofs YL brings from the Moreh itself. Some are quite convincing, at least at first blush. We will see if they stand up to scrutiny. Gmar Chatima Tova to all my friends and readers. Footnotes. (i) שו"ת הרמב"ם סימן תנח ולעניין יוצא תיבה +הכוונה אולי למאמרו של ר' יוחנן בסנהדרין ק"ח ב' למשפחותיהם יצאו מן התבה אמר ר' יוחנן למשפחותם ולא הם, ועי' הספרות שהביא לוצקי שם /התקופה ל - ל"א/ עמ' תש"ב+ כל אותן הדברים דברי הגדה +על יחסו של רבינו לאגדה עי' לוצקי שם /התקופה ל - ל"א/ עמ' תרצ"ט ואילך+ ואין מקשין בהגדה +עי' על מאמר זה לוצקי שם /התקופה ל - ל"א/ הע' קכ"ד+ וכי דברי קבלה הן או מילי דסברא אלא כל אחד ואחד מעיין [בפירושן] כפי מה שיראה לו בו +השווה דברי רה"ג באוצר הגאונים חגיגה עמ' נ"ט+ ואין בזה לא דברי קבלה ולא אסור ולא מותר ולא דין מן הדינין ולפיכך אין מקשין [בהן] ושמא תאמר לי כמו שיאמרו רבים וכי דברים שבתלמוד אתה קורא הגדה כן כל אלו הדברים וכיוצא בהן הגדה הן בעניינם בין שהיו כתובין בתלמוד +השווה אוצר הגאונים שם /חגיגה/ עמ' ס', והשווה גם לוצקי שם /התקופה ל - ל"א/ סוף הע' קכ"ז+ בין שהיו כתובין בספרי דרשות +הם כנראה המדרשים המיוסדים על פסוקי המקרא ומסודרים לפי סדר התנ"ך+ בין שהיו כתובין בספרי הגדה +הם כנראה הקובצים הכוללים אגדות בלי סדר מיוחד.+ (Blau’s footnotes are inserted between two addition signs in the text above). (ii) I am not sure who these Darshanim were, possibly composers of Midrashic texts who attributed to great people their own ideas. A similar claim was levied against the Zohar centuries later. (iii) ולא במרכבה ביחיד, אלא אם כן היה חכם ומבין מדעתו and תני רבי חייא אבל מוסרין לו ראשי פרקים Hagigah 13a. Posted by David Guttmann at 9:03 PM Links to this post Labels: Aggadah, Yair Loberbaum 6 comments Sunday, September 13, 2009 Did Rambam's Attitude To Aggadah Evolve? - A review of Professor Loberbaum Article (Part 1). I just finished reading a very intriguing article by Professor Yair Loberbaum (YL) in Tarbiz volume 78 #1 October-December 2008. It deals with Rambam’s attitude towards Aggadah and tries to show how his thinking evolved over time. I will try to highlight in upcoming posts YL proofs and see if they stand up to scrutiny. In the introduction to the Moreh, Rambam writes, “In our commentary on the Mishna we stated our intention to explain difficult problems in the Book on Prophecy and in the Book of Harmony (Commentary according to Pines). In the latter we intended to examine all the passages in the Midrash which, if taken literally, appear to be inconsistent with truth and common sense, and must therefore be taken figuratively.” Rambam was planning two separate treatises, one dealing with the books of the Prophets and a separate one dealing with the rabbinical exegesis. In fact, in his introduction to Perek Chelek as part of his discussion of the seventh Ikar, he writes: פירוש המשנה לרמב"ם מסכת סנהדרין פרק י ולכן אניחנו למקומו או בספר ביאורי הדרשות שהבטחתי בו, או בספר הנבואה שהתחלתי לחברו, או בספר שאחבר בפירוש אלו היסודות After telling us that it would take a lot to explain prophecy and how Moshe’s prophecy differs, Rambam writes, “And I will leave it to write about it in its proper place, either in the treatise on the derashot (exegesis) which I promised, or the book on the prophets which I have already begun to write, or in a treatise that I will compose about these fundaments (dogma).” So, in his youth (he was in his twenties when he wrote the Pirush Hamishna), Rambam had plans to write three books; one on Aggadah, one on the books of the prophets and one on the fundamental issues of Judaism. What happened to those plans? Continuing the introduction to MN Rambam explains that as he started the project of explaining the Midrashim he faced a dilemma. He could not fully explain the real meaning of those Midrashim because that would thwart the original intent of keeping them secret. As further consideration he writes, “We have further noticed that when an ignoramus among the multitude of Rabbanites reads these Midrashim, he will find no difficulty; inasmuch a rash fool, possessing no knowledge of the properties of things, will not reject statements which involve impossibilities. When, however, a person who is both religious and well educated reads them, he cannot escape the following dilemma: he takes them literally and thereby questions the abilities of the author and the soundness of his mind. He is doing thereby nothing which is opposed to the principles of our faith. Or he will acquiesce in assuming that the passages in question have some secret meaning, and he will continue to hold the author in high estimation whether he understood the allegory or not.” YL points out Rambam’s surprising statement that by questioning the abilities of the author and the soundness of his mind, the religiously intelligent “is doing thereby nothing which is opposed to the principles of our faith”. He further contrasts it to Rambam’s statement on the same issue in his introduction to Chelek, twenty-five years earlier about these same people. , והם כת ארורה שהתפרצו כלפי אנשים רמי המעלה שכבר נודעה חכמתם אצל החכמים. "And they are an accursed group that has weighed in against people of high caliber whose wisdom is well known to the scholars." (For the whole quote in Hebrew, see the footnote). An accursed group is quite different from “it not being opposed to the principles of our faith”. Comparing Rambam’s attitude towards the other two groups, the one that accepts the Midrashim as is, even when they violate logic and those who are advanced and understand them as allegories YL demonstrates a subtle change too. In the Pirush Hamishna the first group, those who insist and accept the Midrashim as literal are seen as insulting rather than respecting the rabbis by making them look foolish. He is quite vociferous saying that this group (which was quite widespread in his time and so it is the common Yeshivish stand nowadays) “destroys the beauty of the religion and darkens its splendor”. In MN however his tone is much milder; “inasmuch a rash fool, possessing no knowledge of the properties of things, will not reject statements which involve impossibilities”. It is a personal deficiency rather than an insult to the Rabbis. As to the third group, those who realize that the Midrashim are allegories for deep matters, in his Pirush Hamishna he offers them help while in MN he is satisfied with them knowing that there is an interpretation that might elude them. Professor Loberbaum uses this analysis as the opening statement for his argument that Rambam’s opinion about Midrashim and Aggadah evolved. This in itself is not proof positive yet. First, we have to take into account the intended audience of the two works of Rambam. Pirush Hamishna was intended for the general public and MN to the sophisticated reader. YL dismisses this possibility though I do not find his argument conclusive. Second, Rambam tended to be much more polemical in his youth. However if it were for this alone, YL’s argument would not be very convincing. In upcoming posts, I will review some of his other proofs, some quite insightful and surprising. Footnote: פירוש המשנה לרמב"ם מסכת סנהדרין פרק י והכת השניה גם הם רבים והם אותם שראו דברי חכמים או שמעוהו והבינוהו כפשטו, וחשבו שאין כונת חכמים בכך אלא משמעות פשטי הדברים, ולכן זלזלו בו וגנוהו וחשבו למוזר מה שאינו מוזר, וילעיגו על דברי חכמים לעתים קרובות, וחושבים שהם יותר נבונים מהם ויותר זכי רעיון, ושהם עליהם השלום פתיים חסרי דעת סכלים בכל המציאות, ואינם משיגים שום דבר כלל, ורוב מי שנפל במחשבה זו אותם הטוענים שהם רופאים, וההוזים במשפטי המזלות, לפי שהם לפי דמיונם פקחים חכמים פילוסופים וכמה רחוקים הם מן האנושות אצל הפילוסופים האמתיים. והם יותר סכלים מן הכת הראשונה ויותר פתים, והם כת ארורה שהתפרצו כלפי אנשים רמי המעלה שכבר נודעה חכמתם אצל החכמים. ואלו הכשירו את עצמם במדעים עד שידעו איך כותבים את הדברים בענינים האלהיים וכיוצא בהם מן המדעים להמון ולחכמים, ויסגלו לעצמם את החלק המעשי של הפילוסופיא, כי אז היו מבינים אם החכמים חכמים או לאו, והיו מובנים להם עניני דבריהם. Posted by David Guttmann at 6:57 AM Links to this post Labels: Aggadah, Yair Loberbaum 10 comments Friday, September 04, 2009 Fear Of Thinking Is Not Fear of Heaven - It Is Ignorance. החסרון היותר גדול שיש בתכונתה של יראת שמים שאינה מחוברת יפה באורה של תורה הוא מה שבמקום יראת חטא היא מתחלפת על יראת המחשבה וכיון שהאדם מתחיל להיות מתירא לחשוב הרי הוא הולך וטובע בבוץ הבערות הנוטלת את אור נשמתו מכשלת את כוחו ומעיבה את רוחו (Free Translation) (Shemona Kevatzim – 267 – page 86) The greatest downside of Yra’at Shamayim (Fear of Heaven) which is not properly rooted in the light of torah, is that fear of sin is replaced with intellectual fear. Once a person becomes afraid to think, he slowly becomes mired in ignorance that takes away the light of his soul, weakens him and thickens his spirit. לעולם אין רשות להתיבה האמורה או הנכתבת להיות סותמת בפני השכל הישר וזה כלל גדול בתורה בין בדיעות היותר נשגבות בין בפרטים היותר קלים (Idem 278 – page 88) One may never let the oral or written word override straight logic. This is a great Torah rule, whether on the weightiest theological issues or in the lighter details. The popular understanding of Yra’at Shamayim is meticulousness with the performance of rituals, especially ritualistic Mitzvot. It is at the root of the Chumra phenomenon we observe nowadays. It extends into the areas of thought. One may not think for himself, must accept on belief all that he was told is supposedly “Mesora” without questioning its veracity even when it goes against logic. The “consensus” of the opinion of, according to some “Klal Ysroel” and others “Gedolei Hatorah”, whatever the definition of these terms may be, is binding. This closed-mindedness is a false fear that is not rooted in Torah. It throws the person back into the dark ages. Torah on the other hand teaches us to seek out the truth and not to shy away from it. The “light” of Torah illuminates our minds, admonishes us to always think, observe things with open eyes and an open mind. Fear of sin is not the same as intellectual fear. Suppressing thought takes away from a person that which makes him human: his soul, creativity and spirit. Reliance on one’s logic, the ability to think freely, applies in all matters even when confronted with oral or written words, no matter who the author is. This does not mean that an authoritative text that one does not understand should be dismissed. It means that if it is authentic and authoritative and does not make sense, it must have been misunderstood and needs further investigation. The Torah is truth and is not afraid of it. When honestly and thoroughly investigated, it stands up to all scrutiny. Such fear of thinking is an insult to Torah as if it has to hide from truth and has to be accepted on faith. Shabbat Shalom. Posted by David Guttmann at 4:24 PM Links to this post Labels: Rav Kook 7 comments Friday, August 28, 2009 Kefirah is Good For Jews. כשחושבים על דעת אלוהים בלא השכלה ובלא תורה מתהוה ברעיון ציור אפל מלא תוהו ובוהו ואחר כך כשבאים להשתעבד לעבודת אלוהים על פי המושג הריקן הקדום האדם הולך ומאבד את זוהר עולמו על ידי מה שהוא מקשר את עצמו לדברי תוהו ובוהו נידף וכשהדבר הזה נמשך משך של איזה דורות מוכרחת הכפירה לצאת בצורה תרבותית לעקור את זכר אלוהים ואת כל המוסדים של עבודת אלוהים אבל מה היא עוקרת רק הבלים ודברי נואש שהם רק חוצצים בין האדם ובין אור אלהי אמת ועל משואות החורבות שהכפירה מחרבת בונה דעת אלהים הנשגבה את היכלה (Free translation) When one speculates about God without [secular] knowledge and without Torah, one develops in one’s mind a dark image, full of emptiness and confusion. When that person now turns to divine worship based on this previous empty concept, man slowly loses the splendor of his existence, because he becomes attached to empty and confused ideas. When this goes on for several generations, it is inevitable for Kefirah to show itself culturally[1] with the goal of eradicating the memory of God and all the trappings of God worship. But ultimately, what is it eradicating? It is eradicating nonsensical and hopeless ideas that truly interfere between man and the light of the true God. It is upon these destroyed ruins trampled by Kefirah, that God’s supreme wisdom builds its temple! (Shemona Kevatzim volume 1, page 31). Rav Kook again amazes. Without the combination of the two, Torah and a good understanding of the environment, a person develops a distorted picture of God and in turn, a false concept of divine worship. One has to have a good understanding of reality and combining that knowledge with a correct understanding of the ontological teachings of Torah, one may develop a correct notion of God and His worship. Without that, religion descends into the dark ages losing its spark. Human thought cannot be suppressed. With time, people rebel against mind-numbing and irrational thought and rituals. They blame religion and the worship that it entails for this obscurantism. The reaction of the establishment is to ostracize and evict these miscreants. But what are these revolutionaries battling? They are not attacking truth, but nonsense and misunderstandings of the Divine. By cleansing society from this misdirection, a new sublime and true religion, based on Truth and a proper notion of the divine resurges. Rav Kook is describing the sociological process and internal upheavals of how true religion develops. He has an unbounded and optimistic view of human nature. What others see as a negative he has a broader and longer view and sees as constructive. As I said in an earlier post, these are personal notes that Rav Kook used to jot down when ideas came to his mind. Reading this we can appreciate how he could love every Jew and accept all without exception. He was friendly and close with intellectuals and scholars of many different stripes and ideals, religious and non-religious even anti-religious. Just look at his correspondence. Shabbat Shalom. [1] I suspect he is referring to the Haskallah Movement. Posted by David Guttmann at 5:28 AM Links to this post Labels: Belief., evolution of thought, Rav Kook 4 comments Sunday, August 23, 2009 Is Cognitive Dissonance a Religious Requirement? Among my readings is Shemona Kevatzim, a collection of personal notes that Rav Kook Z”L used to jot down. Many of these show the thinking process of a great man, thinker and Tzaddik. Here is one that made an impression. Rambam was happy when Hashgacha (providence) took on a rational form in his mind. This happiness is well deserved. For as long as this belief, that is fundamental to [human] life on earth, does not have a rational form, it cannot partake in the living flow of the intelligent soul, the one that has an innate need to understand. However once it has taken on a rational form, it becomes deeply rooted in all the compartments and depth of the soul, the person now finds himself satisfied, as his spiritual inner life is now whole. Here is the original Hebrew as my translation skills leave much to be desired. שמח היה הרמב"ם כשצורת ההשגחה קבלה אצלו צביון של הדרגה שכלית וראוי הדבר לשמח על זה מפני שכל זמן שהאמונה הזאת שהיא מבססת את חיי העולם היא מונחת בלא תואר שכלי איננה מתערבת עם כל גלי החיים של הנפש החכמה השואפת להשכיל אבל אחר שקבלה לתוכה צורתה השכלית הרי היא משתרשת במעמקי הנשמה בכל חדריה ומעמקיה והאדם מוצא את עצמו מאושר כשצורתו הרוחנית מתאחדת לחטייבה אחת This comment spoke very strongly to me. We are taught certain beliefs from childhood on, we develop a way of thinking that directs our actions based on these teachings but as we mature, questions about these beliefs start taking shape. There are two approaches. One sublimates the question and promotes blind faith. That is a very destructive attack on the innate human need to understand. It creates internal conflict, anger and frustration. It is at the root of the aggressiveness we experience today in our society where people condemn any thinking that is different from their own. It stifles and brings about cognitive dissonance and paranoia. The other approach is to understand that a belief has to be consistent with reality. If one accepts that the Torah is divine, it cannot contradict reality. One has to be confident that thorough investigation and proper insight into the belief dictated by this divine religion will be consistent with reality. All one has to do is work hard and honestly at understanding both, because religion dictates how to react to reality not what it is. It is only then that the cognitive dissonance so prevalent in our community, the split personality supposedly required of the intelligent believer, will be healed and banished. Here is how Rambam poses the same problem in his introduction to the Moreh Hanevuchim. “The object of this treatise is to enlighten a religious man who has been trained to believe in the truth of our holy Law, who conscientiously fulfils his moral and religious duties, and at the same time has been successful in his philosophical studies. Human reason has attracted him to abide within its sphere; and he finds it difficult to accept as correct the teaching based on the literal interpretation of the Law, and especially that which he himself or others derived from those homonymous, metaphorical, or hybrid expressions. Hence, he is lost in perplexity and anxiety. If he be guided solely by reason, and renounce his previous views which are based on those expressions, he would consider that he had rejected the fundamental principles of the Law. Even if he retains the opinions which were derived from those expressions, and if, instead of following his reason, he abandon its guidance altogether, it would still appear that his religious convictions had suffered loss and injury, for he would then be left with those errors which give rise to fear and anxiety, constant grief and great perplexity.” Posted by David Guttmann at 11:55 AM Links to this post Labels: Belief., Rav Kook 0 comments Tuesday, August 18, 2009 An Important Issue - Health Care Reform - Obama's Deception. I very rarely comment about politics or public policy. Though I am inundated with news all day, being on the Internet constantly at work and at home, I form a general opinion by assimilating information without paying attention to the details. In other words it is not a scientific but rather an intuitive process. The current health care debate in congress and the approach of both sides to pinpoint where the problem is and how to solve it has been very disappointing. I expect politicians in congress to be cynical. I see congress as a necessary evil and I have very little respect for our senators and congressmen. The president on the other hand is another story. With few exceptions (Jimmy Carter for one), I believe they are patriotic leaders who try to do their best for the country as a whole. I may not agree with their policies but I do not see them as cynical self serving politicians. When President Obama came into office, I had a lot of foreboding because of his stance towards Israel and Iran. Though I did not vote for him because of that, I thought he probably would be good for the country. He looks intelligent, is eloquent and has the capability to be a good leader. His Op-Ed article this Sunday in the NY Times however dispelled all illusions and his dishonesty or worse for a leader, creating a straw man and blaming the innocent, comes through loud and clear. Here is the article. The President has cynically set up the insurance companies as the scapegoat for all that is wrong with the current system. He pays lip service to the problem of rising health care costs and proposes to legislate some form of cost control. As we know all these approaches will not work. Every time the government tries to outsmart and set limits to the free market, it falls flat on its face. Legislators don't have a chance against businessmen who will eventually find a loophole to circumvent whatever restriction is imposed. After all they are there to make money. To control the insurance companies he proposes government competition. Good luck! When was the last time a government entity managed itself well enough to be a long term competition to private enterprise? Look at the post office! The problem with the President is that for some reason, which I suspect is not innocent, he ignores one of the major contributors to the elevated cost of health care in our country and that is malpractice insurance. See here for an overview. The cost of malpractice is very insidious. Think about the doctors, the hospitals, the drug companies and every other entity that supplies or has anything to do with the health care industry. Think about the direct cost such as insurance and the indirect cost such as unnecessary procedures just to insure that the provider is not sued. Addressing that issue by changing the law and disallowing any punitive payments, limiting compensation for error to what is necessary for the recovery of the injured patient, would drastically reduce that cost. It would bring down doctors and hospital bills dramatically and thus insurance costs. The free market will make sure that all these costs will find a rational level. When we compare the cost of health care in the USA to that in other countries, our higher cost, I am convinced is directly attributable to our malpractice law. Approaching the problem from that point of view would not interfere with the free market and the open system we are used to. It would affect the judicial system, which is where the government should be active. Free market and a fair justice system foster great economies. Leave the markets to its participants and afford them an attractive playing field by putting in place fair laws. Some will argue that reducing the threat of malpractice would foster negligence and carelessness by health care providers. That to me is nonsense. A free market will take care of it if the information channels are open. The government could play a role in monitoring and publicizing outcomes at each provider. A provider will not afford too many mistakes. He would have no patients very fast. Once cost have been brought down and insurance rates are now affordable, a much larger portion of the population will be able to afford purchasing insurance. The government then can step in by providing a safety net for the few who could not for whatever legitimate reason, afford it. Medicare and Medicaid costs would rapidly decline and maybe some of the savings could go towards closing the social security gap. There is another issue that makes health care costs stay high and that is corruption. Hospitals in general are not the most efficient organizations and corruption is more common there then in other private businesses. I suspect that it has to do with the way hospitals are reimbursed which feeds into this practice. I will hopefully address it in a separate post. The fact that Obama and both his supporters and opponents in congress have not brought this out, makes one wonder how much the interest of the US population, their constituents who they are supposed to represent , is the underlying reason of this debate. I cannot but feel that they are all cynical politicians who hopefully will be voted out of office at next election together with the disappointing President Obama. Posted by David Guttmann at 5:07 AM Links to this post Labels: Politics and Policy 5 comments Sunday, August 16, 2009 Accept the Truth From All Sources - Rabbi Yaakov Anatoly and Michael Scot - Naples circa 1230. Several years ago I was introduced to Rabbi Yaakov Anatoly (1194 – 1256) and his sefer Malmad Hatalmidim while reading Professors Aviezer Ravitzky and Moshe Halbertal. RYA was a son in law and possibly also a brother in law of R. Shmuel Ibn Tibon, the great translator of Rambam’s Moreh Hanevuchim. He was born in Provence and eventually became a member of the court of Frederick II, in Naples. To put him in perspective he was born when Rambam was in his late fifties, about 10 years before his death. Provence during his time was the center of the Maimonidean movement but was also buffeted by the first Anti-Maimonidean controversy. For a short summary of the great man’s life and works go to here Once I was made aware of RYA I started noticing many references to him in Meiri’s Chibur Hateshuvah and in other works of the era. A fast search on the Bar Ilan Responsa site yielded references to the Ba’al Hamalmad in Abudraham, Orchot Chaim, Kol Bo, Magen Avot, Ibn Shuib and some later authors. He was one of the early interpreters and teachers of Rambam’s thought and had a great influence on subsequent Maimonidean thinking. He was also a friend of Michael Scot (1175 – 1232) here a Christian mathematician and scholar at the court of Frederick II and he quotes him extensively in his sefer praising his interpretation of the subject at hand. The Sefer Malmad Hatalmidim (which translates as “the goad of the students”) is a record of speeches he made every Shabbat to the congregation. Besides dealing with theological issues along the Rambam Derech, he also interprets large sections of Mishlei, explains allegorically many stories in Chumash and Tanach and in general as a very provoking Sefer Mussar. Here is how he introduces us to Michael Scot – ספר מלמד התלמידים הקדמה ומעט אשר שמעתי מפי החכם הגדול מיכאל שמו הוא אשר התחברתי עמו ימים וכל הימים ההם כשנזדמן לנו פסוק מן הפסוקים שהיה אומר בו דבר חכמה הייתי מקבלו וכותב אותו בשמו לפי שאין כונתי להתפאר בכלים שאולים כדי להחזיק אותי בחכם ואין ראוי לחכם לתפוש אותי בזה ולא לבזות הדבר הכתוב בשמו לפי שאינו מבני עמנו כי אין לבחון הדבר רק מצד עצמו לא מצד אומרו הלא תראה שמשה רבינו ע"ה הקדים פרשת יתרו למתן תורה לחבוב דעתו ואני גם כן הלכתי בדרך התורה להזכיר דבר בשם אמרו And the little I learned from the great scholar Michael by name, with whom I had contact for a time. During that time, whenever a verse presented itself to us and he made a smart interpretation, I accepted it and wrote it down in his name, for it is not my intention to be admired for borrowed items so that I should be considered a scholar. It is also improper for a scholar to censure me for this and to disdain things written in his name because he is not a member of our nation, for a matter should judged on its own merit, not on who is its author. See how Moshe Rabbeinu had the story of Yissro precede Matan Torah, because he so strongly appreciated his input. I too went in the way of the Torah, repeating things in the name of its author. I plan to slowly work my way through the sefer and as I come across matters that catch my attention, I will post them under a new label – R. Yaakov Anatoly. You can find a complete copy of the Sefer here. Posted by David Guttmann at 2:44 PM Links to this post Labels: R. Yaakov Anatoly 1 comments Friday, August 07, 2009 A Personal Reflection On Why I Am A Jew. I have been learning Rambam’s thought for many years now. I find his approach to Judaism extremely attractive and it has enhanced my innerand daily life tremendously. It is not Rambam’s supposed extreme rationalism as I am not a cold rationalist devoid of emotions and neither is Rambam. On the contrary, one has only to read the last chapters in Moreh Hanevuchim, the periodic emotional outbursts in Hilchot Yesodei Hatorah and even more in Hilchot Teshuvah to appreciate the great internal fire that was burning inside the great man and Tzaddik. David Blumenthal even claims that Rambam had a mystical bend to him. I believe he misinterprets Rambam in some of the proofs he uses to make his point but there certainly is some truth to it. So why do I pick Rambam’s approach over others, say Ramban and his predecessor the Kuzari, Rabbeinu Sa’adyah, R. Chasdai Crescas and others? It has to do with how Rambam understands the relationship of man to God. One of the great problems the traditional or to be more accurate, popular approach to religion has, is that it is seen as fantasy that makes people feel good rather than being the truth. When I am told that I have to believe in God, that He controls everything, directs everything that happens, that by doing Mitzvot I induce Him to make good things happen to me and to others and if they do not happen it is because I did not do the Mitzvah well enough, I get an urge to become an atheist. I see it as an escape for the helplessness we feel in our attempt to control our lives, as the opiate needed to calm our insecurities. I see prayer for the sick, Tehilim, Mi Sheberach et al, the way it is popularly understood, in the same vein. It is this distorted thinking, distorted in my view though it may work for others, that leads to the obnoxious and ridiculous explanation of the holocaust as punishment for lack of religiosity between the wars. It is this type of thinking that leads to the rejection of the State of Israel and all the nonsense we observe in our community including the latest Chilulei Hashem that keep on surfacing endlessly and that are so painful and difficult to observe. Unfortunately, these events are not surprising. The popular understanding of religion, unfortunately encouraged by our leaders, is responsible for the big discrepancy between the religious and ethical life of so many of our coreligionists. After all if I am zealous enough by observing every Chumra, I daven thrice daily, say a long Shemona Esreh and yell out Amen Yehei Shmei Raba with full force etc…, God must look at me with favor and no bad can befall me even if I steal, rob etc… especially from a goy! Isn’t there a mitzvah of Lo Techanem in their case? This thinking is not exclusive to Judaism; it is the norm in all religions. The Richard Dawkins of this world have therefore a very good argument in their rejection of religion, seeing it as anti-science and a pure fantasy developed by fertile imaginations. According to my understanding of Rambam, he probably would agree (I am saying this tongue in cheek – it would be a travesty to place him in the same camp as Dawkins). Rambam’s understanding of Judaism is that it came into existence to reject and counter this kind of religion. Idolatry saw the gods as entities that when treated right would serve humankind. Give them the proper bribe and in return, your crops will flourish, sicknesses will be healed and all good things would happen. Judaism teaches that God is not in man’s service. Man is obligated to serve God. (See the second Parsha of Shema). Religion is the search for an answer to the ultimate existential questions, why are we here? Is there a meaning to our existence? Does humankind have a role to play in the whole of existence? If yes, what is it? What is good and bad? What is right and wrong? How do I, an individual, do what is right? What is our obligation to ourselves, to our surroundings, to the whole of existence and ultimately to God? In short, what is the ultimate Truth? These questions can only be answered if we understand our environment and our part in it, how we came into existence, whether our existence is just there or was brought into being, if the latter, what entity was responsible for that and if yes, try to conceptualize that entity in the only way possible namely what He is not. The problem is that after answering the questions about our environment by learning the empirical sciences that describe how things work, the questions we confront do not have easy answers. There are no hard facts that can demonstrate what existed the split second before the Big Bang, the currently accepted theory of how things came into being, how the event was triggered, why at that moment or who was responsible for it. These questions are beyond physics and science. They belong to the realm of metaphysics which some will refer to as pseudo science. Notwithstanding these difficulties, how we answer these questions is very important because they will have a major influence on how we lead our life and our whole raison d’etre. How does one approach this without going off into a world of fantasy? The central Mitzvah in Judaism is Talmud Torah, the learning of Torah. Torah in Rambam’s thought is not limited to religious texts and halachot but it includes all sciences and knowledge about our existence. Note the emphasis on the word Talmud – “learning”. There is a lifelong obligation of constantly “learning”, in other words, searching. The Rav Z”L has a beautiful shiur on tape in Yiddish where he defines Avraham Avinu as the ultimate searcher. He was searching for HKBH, for Truth, and found it by recognizing God, the definition of Truth. The Torah is full of admonitions to search. We just heard one of those admonitions in last week’s Parsha – כט וּבִקַּשְׁתֶּם מִשָּׁם אֶת-יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ, וּמָצָאתָ: כִּי תִדְרְשֶׁנּוּ, בְּכָל-לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל-נַפְשֶׁךָ. 29 But from there you will seek the LORD your God; and you will find Him, if you search after Him with all your heart and with all your soul. (Devarim 4:29) This is not only an individual’s lifelong search but multi-generational throughout human history. That is why the concept of Yemot Hamashiach is so important in Judaism and is one of its dogmas. It is a paradigm for this continuous search and what it hopes to accomplish. Unlike other Rishonim who accepted Kabbalah, Rambam sets strict limits to the human ability to acquire knowledge. We can only know the physical world we live in and we can extrapolate back to a time after things came into existence. Before then and how the physical relates to the transcendental, the whole construct of the Mekubalim of Atzilut, Bria’ah and Yetzira, the process of emanation and all the rest of these theories are foreign to Rambam thought. He believes that humans do not have the ability to know these things and trying to do so is futile. By trying to understand our physical world, we have enough information that allows us to find the traces of God and get an understanding of how He wants us to act in His world. That is the Truth that we are seeking and that the Torah and Mitzvot are there to help us get in a proper, correct and true perspective. ב] העובד מאהבה, עוסק בתורה ובמצוות והולך בנתיבות החכמה--לא מפני דבר בעולם, לא מפני יראת הרעה, ולא כדי לירש הטובה: אלא עושה האמת, מפני שהוא אמת; וסוף הטובה לבוא בכלל One who worships for the sake of love, is involved with Torah and Mitzvot and walks in the paths of wisdom, not because he fears the bad or so that he can enjoy the good or for any other reason in the world. He acts the Truth because it is true, and the good will generally come eventually. (Hilchot Teshuvah 10:2) We expect nothing. All we want to do is to “act the Truth” because it is Truth. Note how it is not “find” or “contemplate” or “connect” but “act” the Truth – Osseh Ha’emet. In other words, finding the Truth is not an intellectual exercise but a necessary exercise to know how to act responsibly emulating God’s ways, the understanding we acquire in this continuous search. In this worldview, the Mitzvot that are regulated by Halacha, are only one part of the whole Torah. They are the tool, the exclusive and obligatory tool a Jew has, to insure that he really searches for Truth. It prompts him to do so and then teaches him how to act, keeps him focused on the goal, disciplines and perfects him so that he remains objective and leads him on the path to Truth. Judaism is thus divided into two parts, the practical and the theological, where the first is the tool necessary to acquire the second, which in turn allows man to emulate his Creator by acting responsibly towards the whole of Creation including humanity. It is this understanding of our religion that speaks to me. I see it as a guide and a teaching, as the word Torah implies, challenging us to express our full potential by living a life of responsibility. It is not an opiate but a challenge. Shabbat Shalom. Posted by David Guttmann at 5:07 AM Links to this post Labels: Rambam's significance, Ta'amei Hamitzvot, Truth 18 comments Sunday, July 26, 2009 Truth at The Risk of Atheism in Levinas Thought and Understanding of Judaism. I am reading Difficult Freedom – Essays on Judaism - by Emmanuel Levinas and came across a very illuminating and interesting idea. “For Judaism, the goal of education consists in instituting a link between man and the Saintliness of God and in maintaining man in this relationship. … Judaism has decharmed the world, contesting the notion that religions apparently evolved out of enthusiasm and the sacred. Judaism remains foreign to any offensive return of these forms of human elevation. It denounces them as the essence of idolatry. The numinous (supernatural – DG) or the Sacred envelops and transports man beyond his powers and wishes, but a true liberty takes offence at this uncontrollable surplus. The numinous annuls the links between persons by making beings participate, albeit ecstatically, in a drama not brought about willingly by them, an order in which they founder. This somehow sacramental power of the Divine seems to Judaism to offend human freedom and to be contrary to the education of man, which remains action on a free being. Not that liberty is an end in itself, but it does remain the condition for any value man may attain. The Sacred that envelops and transports me is a form of violence” (Emphasis in the original). Believing in the supernatural and what Levinas terms the Sacred and making it part of life denies human freedom of will, denying the concept of actions and consequence, being that the interference of a supernatural power plays a greater decisive role in the outcome of any action. This understanding of the supernatural is experienced through the ecstatic, where the intellect relinquishes control. Violence denotes submission to the control of another by giving up voluntarily or involuntarily control of self. Levinas then uses this idea to explain Echad, the uniqueness of God. “Jewish monotheism does not exalt a sacred power, a numen triumphing over other numinous powers but still participating in their clandestine and mysterious life. The God of the Jews is not the survivor of mythical gods. … Monotheism marks a break with a certain conception of the Sacred. It neither unifies nor hierarchizes the numerous and numinous gods; instead it denies them. As regards the Divine which they incarnate, it is merely atheism.” In other words, by denying the concept of the divine of the religious forerunners of Judaism, it is seen as atheism. It reminds me of the reaction I get when I deny that there is a supernatural – “are you a believer, a Maamin?” I may be an atheist in the questioner’s eyes but he unfortunately is misled clinging to idolatrous notions. “ … And one frequently encounters curious Talmudic texts which try to present the nature of Israel’s spirituality as something which lies in its intellectual excellence. They do this not through any Luciferian pride of reason, but because intellectual excellence is internal and the “miracles” it makes possible do not at all wound, like thaumaturgy [the working of miracles or magic feats – Wikipedia dictionary], the dignity of the responsible being; and above all because these “miracles” do not ruin the conditions for action and effort.” The “miracles” in Judaism are connected to the prophet, a person of intellectual excellence. They are therefore the result of action and effort. The “supernatural” in Judaism does not take away human control but is the result of human effort, an understanding of his environment and taking advantage of it. A little further on Levinas confronts the risks that this thinking entails. “The rigorous affirmation of human independence, of its intelligent presence to an intelligible reality, the destruction of the numinous concept of the Sacred, entails the risk of atheism. That risk must be run. Only through it can man be raised to the spiritual notion of the Transcendent. It is a great glory for the Creator to have set up a being who affirms Him after having contested and denied Him in the glamorous areas of myth and enthusiasm. It is a great glory for God to have created a being capable of seeking Him or hearing Him from afar, having experienced separation and atheism.” One has to deal with reality using one’s intellect in the search for Truth. There are no shortcuts and it is not simplistic “faith” nor the ecstatic experience brought about by the imagination that will allow a man to attain Truth. It is the painstaking search, even at risk of atheism that will eventually allow for a true understanding of God’s transcendence. This is my first encounter with Levinas and is at a very early stage. So far I liked what I read. Posted by David Guttmann at 12:10 PM Links to this post Labels: Levinas, Spirituality and Mysticism, Superstition, Transcendence, Truth 2 comments Older Posts Subscribe to: Posts (Atom) Disclaimer Explanations of Rambam are my understanding of him and do not necessarily reflect his true position nor always agree with many of his classical or modern commentators. About Me David Guttmann I am a businessman living in Brooklyn. I spent time at Slabodka in Bnei Brak and Beth Medrosh Elyon in Monsey during the Sixties. Altough I have to thank the Yeshivos for giving me the basic tools to learn and think, I have found that they have not prepared me to be a thoughtful and practicing Jew once I was confronted with reality. Most of my real learning and personal growth was attained on my own while being active in the real world. View my complete profile My Published Articles * And Behold Miriam was Leprous,as White as Snow * Avodah Zarah as Falsehood—Denial of Reality and Rejection of Science * Divine Providence - Goals, Hopes and Fears כי כל דרכיו משפט * Miracles in Rambam's Thought - A Function of Prophecy * Negative Attributes and Direct Prophecy Share it Search This Blog Loading... Recent Comments Subscribe To [arrow_dropdown.gif] Posts [subscribe-google.png] [subscribe-bloglines.png] [subscribe-netvibes.png] [subscribe-newsgator.png] [subscribe-yahoo.png] [icon_feed12.png] Atom [arrow_dropdown.gif] Posts [arrow_dropdown.gif] All Comments [subscribe-google.png] [subscribe-bloglines.png] [subscribe-netvibes.png] [subscribe-newsgator.png] [subscribe-yahoo.png] [icon_feed12.png] Atom [arrow_dropdown.gif] All Comments Subscribe To [arrow_dropdown.gif] Posts [subscribe-google.png] [subscribe-bloglines.png] [subscribe-netvibes.png] [subscribe-newsgator.png] [subscribe-yahoo.png] [icon_feed12.png] Atom [arrow_dropdown.gif] Posts [arrow_dropdown.gif] All Comments [subscribe-google.png] [subscribe-bloglines.png] [subscribe-netvibes.png] [subscribe-newsgator.png] [subscribe-yahoo.png] [icon_feed12.png] Atom [arrow_dropdown.gif] All Comments Recommended Reading * Betorato Shel Rav Gedalia * Encountering the Creator by Rabbi Benzion Buchman * Homo Mysticus by Rabbi Dr. Jose Faur * Judaism, Human Values and the Jewish State by Prof. Yeshayahu Leibowitz * Livyat Chen by Rav Levi ben Avraham edited by Prof Haim Kreissel * Ma'asseh Nissim by Rabbi Nissim of Marseilles edited by Prof Haim Kreissel * Maimonides: Confrontation with Mysticism by Prof. Menachem Kellner * Minofet Tzuf on Moreh Hanevuchim by Rabbi Jonathan Blass * Moreh Hanevuchim translated by Prof, Michael Schwartz * Moreh Hanevuchim translated by Rav Kafih * People of The Book by Prof Moshe Halbertal * Philosophic Mysticism by Professor David Blumenthal * Pirush Harambam lesippur Briat Haolam by Prof Sarah Klein - Braslavy * Rambam and Redemption by Rabbi Benzion Buchman * Searching for a Distant God by Prof. Kenneth Seeskin Lijit Search Lijit Search Followers Google Book Search Google Book Search _______________ Search Labels * Actions (7) * Aggadah (25) * Alex (1) * Angels (7) * Antisemitism (4) * Belief. (36) * Bibliography (1) * Blumenthal (6) * censorship (1) * Comments on Society (4) * Cosmogony (13) * Drazin (4) * evolution of thought (30) * Existence of God (48) * Halacha (52) * hashkafah (37) * History (19) * ID Intelligent Design (5) * idolatry (23) * ikkarim (14) * Kabbalah (19) * Knowledge (21) * Levinas (1) * literalness (7) * Livyat Chen (2) * Magic (10) * Mesora (9) * Minhag (8) * Miracles (20) * Miscellaneous (84) * MN1:1 (2) * MN3:43 (25) * Morality and ethics (17) * mourning (1) * Olam Haba (8) * Orot Hakodesh (2) * Politics and Policy (1) * Prayer (24) * Prophecy (79) * Providence (55) * Purpose and Goals (33) * R. Yaakov Anatoly (3) * Ralbag (2) * Rambam letters (16) * Rambam versus Ramban (28) * Rambam's significance (17) * Rav Gedalia Nadel (3) * Rav Kook (11) * Remah and Rambam (2) * Resurrection (7) * Reward and Punishment (30) * Science (25) * Sinai (33) * Spirituality and Mysticism (24) * Superstition (17) * Ta'amei Hamitzvot (50) * Technician (1) * Teshuvah (4) * The Eight Chapters (4) * Theodicy (21) * TMS Divinity of Torah (34) * Transcendence (40) * Treatise on Resurrection (7) * Truth (13) * Will (19) * Yair Loberbaum (6) Enter your Email ______________________________ Subscribe me! Powered by FeedBlitz Subscribe with Bloglines Blogroll Me! Blog Archive * ▼ 2009 (65) + ▼ November (5) o אָבַד חָסִיד מִן הָאָרֶץ, וְיָשָׁר בָּאָדָם אָיִן o Be Exceedingly, Exceedingly Humble - An Insight In... o Does a Non-philosophical Person Gain Rights to the... o Does a Non-philosophical Person Gain Rights to the... o Does a Non-philosophical Person Gain Rights to the... + ► October (5) o Did Rambam's Attitude To Aggadah Evolve? - A revie... o Does a Non-philosophical Person Gain Rights to the... o Col. Kemp, An Impartial Observer VS a Traitor of O... o Did Rambam's Attitude To Aggadah Evolve? - A revie... o Did Rambam's Attitude To Aggadah Evolve? - A revie... + ► September (4) o Did Rambam's Attitude To Aggadah Evolve? - A revie... o Did Rambam's Attitude To Aggadah Evolve? - A revie... o Did Rambam's Attitude To Aggadah Evolve? - A revie... o Fear Of Thinking Is Not Fear of Heaven - It Is Ign... + ► August (5) o Kefirah is Good For Jews. o Is Cognitive Dissonance a Religious Requirement? o An Important Issue - Health Care Reform - Obama's ... o Accept the Truth From All Sources - Rabbi Yaakov A... o A Personal Reflection On Why I Am A Jew. + ► July (5) o Truth at The Risk of Atheism in Levinas Thought an... o Hakirah Volume 8 Has Arrived o The World To Come In This World - Does One Experie... o For the Rational Faculty is God’s Glory” – כי השכל... o Rational Faculty and Metaphysics. + ► June (8) o וְזוכֵר חַסְדֵי אָבות - He Remembers The Merit of ... o Science and Metaphysics Are TORAH. o A Response To Another Self-Hating Jew. o מְהָרְסַיִךְ וּמַחֲרִיבַיִךְ, מִמֵּךְ יֵצֵאוּ. - t... o The Goal of the Torah and The Mitzvot. o Torah and its Mitzvot and the Role of Humanity in ... o For Israel is not widowed, nor Judah, of his God, ... o Man Emulating God- Righteousness and Loving-Kindne... + ► May (5) o And Jacob set up a pillar upon her grave - וַיַּצּ... o Action Oriented Knowledge o The Importance Of Humankind And Its Role In Creati... o Harambam - A Collection Of Essays Edited By Profes... o What Is The Purpose of Existence? + ► April (6) o Justice and Altruism - Tzeddek and Tzedakah o Natural Morality o Human Aspirations - Metaphysical Speculations Lead... o Happy Liberation Week o Esther the Starbucks Queen o Standing In Front Of God. + ► March (9) o The Idea Behind The Majority Rule - Rove. o The Dangers Of Undisciplined Speculation - Avodah ... o Achdut - The Unity Of The Jewish People Is Its Str... o God and Materia Prima - Cause and Effect. o This Is Really Scary - o Uninterrupted Speculation And Prayer. o Moshe Not Losing Sight Of God's Back - + ► February (6) + ► January (7) * ► 2008 (114) + ► December (10) + ► November (9) + ► October (5) + ► September (9) + ► August (6) + ► July (9) + ► June (10) + ► May (11) + ► April (9) + ► March (13) + ► February (10) + ► January (13) * ► 2007 (176) + ► December (13) + ► November (14) + ► October (13) + ► September (11) + ► August (9) + ► July (20) + ► June (14) + ► May (15) + ► April (9) + ► March (18) + ► February (17) + ► January (23) * ► 2006 (188) + ► December (12) + ► November (16) + ► October (14) + ► September (15) + ► August (15) + ► July (18) + ► June (17) + ► May (21) + ► April (20) + ► March (22) + ► February (17) + ► January (1) Links * A Curious Jew(ess) * A Thoughtful Jew * Ancient Hebrew Poetry * Avakesh * Balashon * Divrei Chaim * Emes Ve-Emunah * Hirhurim * Ishim Veshitos - * Krum as a Bagel * Machon Moshe - Rav Kafah's Followers * Matt's Musings * Menachem Mendel * On The Main Line * Parshanut - Rashbam this year * Rabbi Fohrman's Shiurim * Rabbi Joshua Maroof * Rambam, Maharal et al. * Rav Brovender * Seforim * The Law Blog - Bein Din Ledin - * Yehudah's Ideas * Yemmenite Rambamists My Blog List * On the Main Line Yarmulke - From an 1846 Polish-German-French dictionary: From an 1851 Polish-English dictionary: 17 hours ago * parshablog Angels or messengers? - *Summary*: There is a famous Rashi which starts of Vayishlach that the * malachim* Yaakov sent were *malachim mamash*, actual angels. This likely relates to... 18 hours ago * Ancient Hebrew Poetry On Friends, Proverbs, and a Dinner at SBL-New Orleans - It was a pleasure to share an evening of fine food and conversation with blogging friends and others at the Deutsches Haus on the last day of SBL-New Orlea... 19 hours ago * Emes Ve-Emunah Sex Abuse - Looking under the Rug - The boy was raped before he could take his weekly mikvah. Pinned from behind in the bathhouse where Orthodox Jews purify themselves with rain water, the 7-... 22 hours ago * avakesh Temple will be rebuilt when the Hurva is competed - If the Vilna Gaon was right, the 3rd Temple is on its way . From Haaretz: If the 18th-century rabbinic authority the Vilna Gaon was right, on March 16, 2010,... 1 day ago * Havolim Vayishlach, Breishis 33:9. What Yitzchak, Yishmael, and Eisav Have in Common: בְּאֵר לַחַי רֹאִי - I diligently avoid Toras haNistar, and I recommend the same to all my fellow Torah dilettantes. I find that some of what I understand is descriptive rather... 1 day ago * למה לי קרא סברא הוא השקה של "אלוהים, אדם והיסטוריה " - הודעה שקיבלתי ממרכז שלם: *הוצאת שלם שמחה לארח * *אירוע השקה לרגל הוצאתו לאור של הספר * *אלוהים, אדם והיסטוריה * *מאת אליעזר ברקוביץ * *בהשתתפות: * *פרופ׳ מנ... 1 day ago * אישים ושיטות On Chasam Sofer's Derekh HaLimud - From Gittin 11a: You can see from here the way the Chasam Sofer would actively look for Halachic implications even during his theoretical learnining. In ... 1 day ago * Rambam System Tefilla as Gedankenexperiment - * * *5. *Now no tree of the field was yet on the earth, neither did any herb of the field yet grow, because the Lord God had not brought rain upon the ea... 3 days ago * בין דין לדין Bayesian Inference - UPDATE: I have corrected an inaccuracy in my probabilistic analysis of the Gemara, and I have added to it an example using concrete numbers. The Mishnah st... 1 week ago * HebrewBooks.org Official Blog New Video Tutorials - We are happy to announce the addition of several new video tutorials for our site. A full list of tutorials is available here. The following videos are ava... 3 weeks ago counter customizable free hit