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.
Friday, August 28, 2009
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.”
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.”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)