tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post752324742721244456..comments2023-10-12T10:09:54.121-04:00Comments on Believing is Knowing: Miracles: In the eyes of the beholder.David Guttmannhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07668302013143561290noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-76809724134545941182006-11-19T05:50:00.000-05:002006-11-19T05:50:00.000-05:00It seems to me that we are just arguing on semanti...It seems to me that we are just arguing on semantics. Daily occurrences are not miracles but natural events that result from a system of cause and effect. I do not see God's hand directly in every event but rather see Him as the original Cause because He set the rules in motion. He does not get involved in the day to day minutae, though He "knows" them. It is our responsibility to predict the occurrences and take advantage of them. That is my understanding of schar mitzva, mitzvah. OTH Ramban selieves that there really is no rule of nature. Nature is an illusion and theoretically unpredictable. God just hides His presence by making sure things are repetitive but at any moment something can happen that is unpredicted at God's will. Nature is a ness nistar and miracle is ness galuy. It takes independence away from man and in a way reduces responsibility. Tefilah now can cahngew things immediately. If I eat bad food and get sick and pray properly and do teshuvah, God will heal me. Ramban's tshuvah is a panacea. Rambam on the other hand believes you cannot change the past you can only see to it taht it does not repeat. Teshuvah is geared to the future. See hilchot Ta'anit wher he explains why you must do teshuvah otherwise one is an achzar as he will repeat his bad deeds.<br /><br />I accept the Rambam's approach and have great difficulties with Ramban's.Ramban's however is the accepted theology nowadays and I believe is the cause of the many problems in the community. Rav Soloveitchik tried to address that and explain Ramban's approach so the responsibility comes back to the individual. The Yeshiva (chareidi) unfortunately does not want that. Chaval.David Guttmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07668302013143561290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-55788313558347866382006-11-19T02:41:00.000-05:002006-11-19T02:41:00.000-05:00Well, I am in favor of taking responsibility and b...Well, I am in favor of taking responsibility and being independent, but I do not understand where you see man's responsibility in the context of miracles?<br />Actually, I can also relate to Rambam's point of view (the way you described it). In our everyday life miracles are there as a part of God's original plan'. We do have responsibility to utilize the occurances and acknowledge them if we wish to live in harmony with the ways of God. Is it the nature of responsibility you are reffering to? Or did I get you wrong?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-53025719602704310282006-11-18T19:10:00.000-05:002006-11-18T19:10:00.000-05:00Avshalom, Your point of view is Ramban all over hi...Avshalom, Your point of view is Ramban all over his perush on Chumash.At length in Shemos 13:17 but many other places agian and again. It is a very valid and acceptable shita. I do not subscribe to it because it takes away responsibility from man and i believe a human being has much more independence and freedom. But I can acceopt others. Rav Soloveitchik in the beginning of his Kol Dodi Dofek has an interesting take on this. He repeats itI think in one of his other papers with a twist.(I think Adam one and Adam two)David Guttmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07668302013143561290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-73466124942265743472006-11-18T14:48:00.000-05:002006-11-18T14:48:00.000-05:00I read through the debate and it reminded me of a ...I read through the debate and it reminded me of a group meeting I attended that discussed the nature of miracles. The Bible tells that God performs miracles. And for some reason I raised the question about what is the part of human beings in the act of performing miracles. I remember an orthodox lady in our group said that we just have to pray for miracles to happen, but later she seemed to have reservations. It takes me to your focus on the relationship between the miraculous event and man. I believe that miracles happen all the time on every scale. Ofcourse the Bible tells us of the big ones. But miracles happen on a daily basis, it only takes paying attention and acknowledgment. It seems to me like the debate on this issue reflects two point of views, or as spiritual jargon says two levels of consciousness. Besides why are we compelled to understand miracle stories in the bible in a certain way. I believe miracles are living demonstrations of God for whevever is paying attention. It takes intuition to recognize miracles and see the divinity in our world. <br />So maybe when we find ourselves in times of trouble and pray for a miracle, we are actually in search of an event that we can say this is divinity in action, "צמאה נפשי לאל חי". Your comment on the Ness of the sea split in Egypt is in my eyes a very interesting point of view. I only wish in our days and especially in the holy land we had leaders as great as Moshe with prophetic insight and wisdom to acknowledge God's miracles. <br /><br />Shavua TovAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-35126766721430913642006-11-17T04:24:00.000-05:002006-11-17T04:24:00.000-05:00Just want to add to the above,that you can ascribe...Just want to add to the above,that you can ascribe such free will to a falling stone.<br />Using the same semantics one can say that the stone does have free will & can choose not to fall to the ground but ALWAYS chooses to do so.<br />What's the difference between God & the stone?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-29036357537564534022006-11-17T03:57:00.000-05:002006-11-17T03:57:00.000-05:00> IOW it is the outstanding example of God having ...> IOW it is the outstanding example of God having the ability to change nature at will. What is fascinating is that he is implying that the example choisen by the Rabbis is something no one ever experienced! He can but will not! <br /><br /><br />Well,David,this is semantics,just playing with words.<br />What's difference between saying "He can but will not " & saing "He can not"<br />What did you gain by it,except that it sounds better..<br /> He can BUT NEVER DOES is the same as saying HE CAN'T.<br />The same goes for "free will".<br />It's pointless to say that HE HAS FREE WILL & at the same time say that He ALWAYS chooses to do good.<br />If He can not but choose to do good,He doesn't have free will.<br />The same as said goes for miracles.<br /><br />Shabbat Shalom.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-80843169569444667812006-11-16T14:00:00.000-05:002006-11-16T14:00:00.000-05:00JS this morning when I was writing this post it oc...JS this morning when I was writing this post it occurred to me that in his iggeret Techyat Hametim, where Rambam is a little coy about what excatly he believes on that issue, he explains TH as part of the belief in miracles. IOW it is the outstanding example of God having the ability to change nature at will. What is fascinating is that he is implying that the example choisen by the Rabbis is something no one ever experienced! He can but will not!David Guttmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07668302013143561290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-45924414876159652082006-11-16T12:38:00.000-05:002006-11-16T12:38:00.000-05:00Just a quibble - Nach is not divine. Torah is.
Th...Just a quibble - Nach is not divine. Torah is.<br /><br />The story is told as it was seen by at least some of the observers. I did not have the time to research the shemen story but I vaguely remember addressing it in the past. i will look into it.<br /><br />In general though I don't know what is the problem. Until the 18 century or so people thought that comets were miraculous. read the Seder Hadorot and you will see how every few years it mentions a comet followed by a calamity. This is already intelligent bpeople how much more the masses. <br /><br />Of course the story is meant for everybody. Whoever feels comfortable with the story as is let him. I believe that one is expected to transcend that stage, try to figure out why this particular story was recorded and the meaning behiind that. I believe that it will be a much more productive endeavor than closing off critical thinking. <br /><br />What do you think made Hezekiah ubeit dino decide which story to record and which to discard in Melachim and shmuel? ezra in Divrei hayamim? Shmuel in his book and Shofetim? And then what made the cannonizers in Alyat Chezekiah ben Gurion decide what to include and what to edit? that to me is a worthwhile analysis.David Guttmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07668302013143561290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-65118779397583500112006-11-16T11:51:00.000-05:002006-11-16T11:51:00.000-05:00>Of course that in itself is natural as it is man'...>Of course that in itself is natural as it is man's natural ability that allows him to predict - but that is as far as miracles go.<br /><br />David,the Rambam is very selective in his natural explaination of miracles.That's not a fair method.<br />He chooses a few which he is able to explain,sometimes in a farfetched way.(as does Ralbag).<br />He uses the same method to explain anthropomophisms in Tanach.<br /><br />When one reads Tanach one can not but read that the miracles were FOR REAL & not for the EYES OF THE BEHOLDER! <br />Of course by using all kinds of *dreyerei*,some of it ingenious,one can explain anything one wants.<br />But the bible was not meant to be read that way,not did the people read it that way.<br /><br />Just one example of many,what I wrote in my earlier comment,about the miracle of cruse(asuch shemen)of oil performed by Elisha,How would you explain it ?!<br />How would Rambam?<br />Was Elisha some sort of trickster,magician,a Uri Geller,?<br />Did he hypnotize her in order for her to be deceived?<br />Is that what Tanach wants to tell us?<br />Or perhaps we should read it as it's meant to be read,that Elisha performed a real miracle.<br />I understand the dilemma you are facing.<br />You want to maintain the divinity of the Tanach & at the same time you can't believe in real miracles(not just in the eyes of the beholder).<br />IMO,if one is honest with himself,he can't have it both ways.<br /><br />p.s. thanks,I still have that article from chakirah you sent me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-61145125360086547362006-11-16T08:19:00.000-05:002006-11-16T08:19:00.000-05:00JS, you are missing one point - the interaction wi...JS, you are missing one point - the interaction with man. The fact the prophet predicts the event and even more, takes advantage of it, is the miracle. Of course that in itself is natural as it is man's natural ability that allows him to predict - but that is as far as miracles go. See Ramban on Breishit 46:16(? long rambna on Sheloshim veshalosh). ( parshat Vayigash) where he of course diasgrees with Rambam in general and describes his understanding of everything being a ness all the time, but he does agree that the Torah only tells us stories of nissim when there is human interaction and prediction. He interprets it differently but it is an observation that is valid for this position too.<br /><br />Rambam addresses Elisha's miracle with the boy, Yehoshua with the sun, and explains them naturistically. Re pach shemen see Aruch hashulchan at the beginning of hilchot hanukkah.IMO the ness was the victory. Because of the problems with the later hasmonaim the Rabbis emphasized this rather then the real ness.<br /><br />For a thorough treatment see my last article in Hakirah. I think I sent it to you. If not let me know and I will send again.David Guttmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07668302013143561290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-61532681048539036802006-11-16T06:22:00.000-05:002006-11-16T06:22:00.000-05:00>So what is a miracle? If we look at miracles it i...>So what is a miracle? If we look at miracles it is always the interaction between man and the event. It is when man is saved because the event occurred at a fortuitous moment for him.<br /><br /><br />This is not how miracles are perceived in the Tanach or Chazal.<br />A miracle is by definition something that happens SUPERNATURALLY.If it can be explained by physical laws,NO MATTER HOW RARE,it's not a miracle!<br />If someone wins the lottery-1 of 14,ooo,ooo,he thinks it's a miracle for him,but was it? Someone had to win.<br />You are saying something similar to what the Ralbag is explaining the miracle Of Elisha & the axe that fell into the water (ii Kings 6:6).But not everything that Ralbag says is Torah miSinai.<br />See Malbim ad loc.what he says about his explanation:<br />והרלב"ג חפש בזה תחבולות טבעיים כדרכו,ודבריו הבל <br /><br />How will you explain Elisha's miracle with the cruse of oil(ii Kings 4)? <br />How do you explain all the miracles by Eliyahu,& Elishah & all the other miracles in the Tanach?!<br /><br />How do you explain THE NESS OF CHANUKAH (I mean the oil,not the victory)?<br /><br />A traditional believing Jew will say that God can change nature if He so desires.But you (& Ralbag)don't accept that,Ralbag's explanation of Elishas miracle is so farfetched,that I prefer the traditional understanding.<br />As I wrote in a previous comment,one's difficulties doesnt give him the right to do with a text whatever he wishes.<br /><br />You are saying exactly what David Hume,in his book on miracles, is saying.That there never was even one miracle which can't be explained by the laws of nature.<br />BUT HE WAS AN ATHEIST!<br />(Of course,when I use the word miracle I don't mean it in the sense that is used in everyday conversation as a manner of speech.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com