Aggadot and Midrashim - Words of great wisdom - the underpinnings of Judaism.

Some detractors who claimed that he did not believe in the Resurrection of the Dead, Techyat Hametim (TH), attacked Rambam in his later years.
To defend himself he penned the Iggeret Techyat Hametim a remarkable work in its own right. I am not about to discuss the whole issue on this post. I just want to focus in on a segment in the letter where he describes his attitude to Aggadah and to people who quote sources without critical analysis.

Rabbi Shmuel ben Eli was Rosh Yeshiva in Baghdad at the time and he composed a book to attack Rambam on the issue and defend the popular understanding of what TH means. To prove his point R. Shmuel collected a host of quotes from Gemarot and Midrashim. Rambam in his letter comments: (paraphrased translation from the Sheilat version page 351 with my comments in parentheses)

“We received and read the booklet written by the Gaon in its original language. We noted all the Derashot and Haggadot he collected therein. People know that Scholars are not expected to repeat all these exegesis and fantastic stories verbatim, just like women repeat them to each other at the house of mourners (what in our times is known as Tze’enah Ure’enah – Tzena Rena in Yiddish). What one expects of scholars is to explain them so that they are as close as possible to rational thought. (Rambam is aware that many Haggadot are difficult to understand unless one is well versed in philosophic discourse and abstract thinking – not a universal trait).”

This comment dovetails with Rambam’s lengthy discussion of Haggadot in the introduction to his Pirush Hamishna and also in his introduction to the Moreh. The reason I referred to the letter is that here the Aggadah is directly related to what has ultimately Halachik implications – the possibility of a person who does not believe in it being considered a heretic. Still Rambam will not take those Haggadot at face value and expects us to interpret them rationally. Every time I read this I am struck how Rambam writes with much pathos when he describes the problem faced by the intelligent religious person when he faces these seemingly fantastic stories. In this segment he refers to the metaphors in Tanach:

“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; and 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.”

He then elaborates further on the dilemma facing those who confront the Haggadot:

“We have further noticed that when an ill-informed Theologian reads these Midrashim, he will find no difficulty; for possessing no knowledge of the properties of things, he 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: either he takes them literally, and questions the abilities of the author and the soundness of his mind-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.”

Some commenters have been vehement and felt that I have no respect for Haggadot. On the contrary I believe they are even more important in a sense than Halacha. They teach us the purpose of the Halachik enterprise. As they deal with deep subjects that not everyone has the capacity to understand, they use metaphors and allegories and what at first blush seems like myths and fables.

I believe that anyone who insists on reading them literally is Mevazeh Chazal by inferring that they were stupid and ignorant. The Torah teaches us how to develop our rational faculty and Sechel which is what makes us human. It does not ask us to sublimate it and act like ignoramuses.