Musings on Maimonides: 27 July 2013
13 Principles of Faith
Every week we close Friday Erev Shabbos with the Short Amidah of 13 Principles of Faith. In English these are
1. I believe with perfect faith that G-d is the Creator and Ruler of
all things. He alone has made, does make, and will make all things.
2. I believe with perfect faith that G-d is One. There is no unity
that is in any way like His. He alone is our G-d He was, He is, and He will be.
3. I believe with perfect faith that G-d does not have a body.
physical concepts do not apply to Him. There is nothing whatsoever that resembles Him at
all.
4. I believe with perfect faith that G-d is first and last.
5. I believe with perfect faith that it is only proper to pray to
G-d. One may not pray to anyone or anything else.
6. I believe with perfect faith that all the words of the prophets
are true.
7. I believe with perfect faith that the prophecy of Moses is
absolutely true. He was the chief of all prophets, both before and after Him.
8. I believe with perfect faith that the entire Torah that we now
have is that which was given to Moses.
9. I believe with perfect faith that this Torah will not be changed,
and that there will never be another given by G-d.
10. I believe with perfect faith that G-d knows all of man's deeds
and thoughts. It is thus written (Psalm 33:15), "He has molded every heart together,
He understands what each one does."
11. I believe with perfect faith that G-d rewards those who keep His
commandments, and punishes those who transgress Him.
12. I believe with perfect faith in the coming of the Messiah. How
long it takes, I will await His coming every day.
13. I believe with perfect faith that the dead will be brought back
to life when G-d wills it to happen.
Having been accepted into Judaism in a Reform Shul (Synagogue) I have often wondered whether Reform Judaism accepts these principles, especially the ones concerning Torah, Messiah and resurrection. (Those in bold are the ones with which Reform Judaism has problems.) Some of these are covered at http://www.shamash.org/lists/scj-faq/HTML/faq/18-04-19.html and, while Rabbi Mecklenburger may or may not agree with the link, I do not agree. I tend to agree with RaMBaM and the 13 Principles as stated. Fortunately, Reform Judaism accepts me as I am and will not kick me out for my non-Reform thoughts.
Mainly, Reform and Conservative Judism has changed, or modified, some of the principles and Amidah to be "Politically Correct" and "get along" with the rest of the modern world. In particular, with the world stance on individual groups, wherein Judaism is a separated people, chosen by G-d to be a particular people, beloved of G-d above all others. If we maintain this stance, then we might be seen as "holier than thou" attitude. Well, so be it. After all, those are the words of HaShem, not mine.
The other problems are the world stance on adultery, sexuality and homosexuality. The world seems to accept adultery, pre-marital sex, abortion and homosexuality as part of today's culture whereas G-d has condemned them. If G-d has condemned them, then we should as well. True, we can not carry out his punishment but we should not have fellowship with those who practice those things.
There, it has now been said. Agree or disagree is not important. That is between you and HaShem, not you and me. But it should give you something to think about. Maimonides laid out these principles many years ago and we repeat them every Erev Shabbos and every Amidah Prayer. Maybe we should give more thought to the things that we say in prayer and think about them, especially if we are praying in Hebrew, a most holy language.
Shalom
Yaakov On
Saturday, July 27, 2013
Sunday, July 21, 2013
GOLF Still is a Four Letter Word
Greetings -
Watching the British Open right now - and my favorite golfer (after Jack) is Phil Mickelson. He has had a bad year until last week when he won the Scottish Open. Then this week he came from behind today and shot a 66, 5 under par, and, right now, leads by 3 and nobody can catch him. He will win the British Open for the first time. What a guy, what a family guy, what a great person. He has always put his family first, not second, to golf. Golf has always been a job (a great job) and a way to provide for his family.
I am sure that a lot of guys would swap places today with him but I am not so sure that they would swap places when he has had to go to bed at 7:00 in the evening or get up at 4:00 in the morning or when he had to drive five hours to get to the next tournament and then practice three hours before he could play that day. And his wife could not join him that week because he was just starting the tour and finances were short. Now, today, he has his own plane and he can get there and back to see his daughter graduate and then on to the next tournament and get four hours sleep before the first day of practice. But it has been a long journey and he has worked hard without sacrificing his family to get there. And he has been a perfect gentleman doing it.
Lee Westwood led going into today's round. He would have been the first Englishman in many a year to have won the British Open and, after Andy Murray (the first Scotsman EVER to win Wimbledon, BTW) won the British Tennis Open, it would have been nice for England if he had won, all of the USA is celebrating for Phil. If Zach Johnson had won, well, that would have been great for the USA as well but Zach had already won the Masters earlier this year so I was really pulling for Mick. Sorry Lee, but, after all, Mick is one of ours. Maybe next year.
So, congratulations Phil Mickelson for a job well done!
<updated Wednesday, 23 July 2013>
Just re-read USA Today from Monday, page 3C: "Victory thrilling, fulfilling" - "With skill and class, Mickelson wins one for the good guys" Christine Brennan wrote up an article on Phil that pointed that while other golfers (who are not named here but were named there) cursed openly when making bad shots, Phil not only maintained his cool but blamed only himself for poor shots. Even on the 16th par-3 when his shot hit the green and rolled back down and off the green several feet (about 15 or 20 feet to be exact) onto the fairway and he said, "Wow! That's as good as I got!" Meaning that he had hit everything that he had in the shot and it still did not go far enough. But he did not swear nor blame anyone else. And he still made par on the hole. And went on to make birdie on the 17th and again on the 18th. Then he tearfully fell into the arms of his wife and three children. Even his big old 6'6" caddie was crying. Shoot! Lots of folks were crying for joy with him. I know I was! Phil had won Number Five!! And I was there to see it.
Maybe I will be there next year for the U.S. Open when he wins Number Six and does the real "Number Six": The sixth golfer to win all four major golf events; the Masters, the U.S. Open, the British Open and the PGA. Only Jack Nicklaus, Tiger Woods, Gary Player, Gene Sarazen and Ben Hogan have done it so far. Right now only 19 players have EVER won five or more major championships so that in itself is pretty rare company. Tiger has 14 majors and ranks number two in the category. Jack has the all-time record at 18 but he has retired so that record is set in concrete and is not going anywhere. Only Tiger or Phil would have a chance at Jack's record and Phil is 43. But Tiger is getting on up in years as well - he is 37 now so he has to hurry if he is going to catch Jack. Jack won his 15th major at 38 so Tiger is right on track if he wins one this year or next.
Shalom,
Yaakov On
Watching the British Open right now - and my favorite golfer (after Jack) is Phil Mickelson. He has had a bad year until last week when he won the Scottish Open. Then this week he came from behind today and shot a 66, 5 under par, and, right now, leads by 3 and nobody can catch him. He will win the British Open for the first time. What a guy, what a family guy, what a great person. He has always put his family first, not second, to golf. Golf has always been a job (a great job) and a way to provide for his family.
I am sure that a lot of guys would swap places today with him but I am not so sure that they would swap places when he has had to go to bed at 7:00 in the evening or get up at 4:00 in the morning or when he had to drive five hours to get to the next tournament and then practice three hours before he could play that day. And his wife could not join him that week because he was just starting the tour and finances were short. Now, today, he has his own plane and he can get there and back to see his daughter graduate and then on to the next tournament and get four hours sleep before the first day of practice. But it has been a long journey and he has worked hard without sacrificing his family to get there. And he has been a perfect gentleman doing it.
Lee Westwood led going into today's round. He would have been the first Englishman in many a year to have won the British Open and, after Andy Murray (the first Scotsman EVER to win Wimbledon, BTW) won the British Tennis Open, it would have been nice for England if he had won, all of the USA is celebrating for Phil. If Zach Johnson had won, well, that would have been great for the USA as well but Zach had already won the Masters earlier this year so I was really pulling for Mick. Sorry Lee, but, after all, Mick is one of ours. Maybe next year.
So, congratulations Phil Mickelson for a job well done!
<updated Wednesday, 23 July 2013>
Just re-read USA Today from Monday, page 3C: "Victory thrilling, fulfilling" - "With skill and class, Mickelson wins one for the good guys" Christine Brennan wrote up an article on Phil that pointed that while other golfers (who are not named here but were named there) cursed openly when making bad shots, Phil not only maintained his cool but blamed only himself for poor shots. Even on the 16th par-3 when his shot hit the green and rolled back down and off the green several feet (about 15 or 20 feet to be exact) onto the fairway and he said, "Wow! That's as good as I got!" Meaning that he had hit everything that he had in the shot and it still did not go far enough. But he did not swear nor blame anyone else. And he still made par on the hole. And went on to make birdie on the 17th and again on the 18th. Then he tearfully fell into the arms of his wife and three children. Even his big old 6'6" caddie was crying. Shoot! Lots of folks were crying for joy with him. I know I was! Phil had won Number Five!! And I was there to see it.
Maybe I will be there next year for the U.S. Open when he wins Number Six and does the real "Number Six": The sixth golfer to win all four major golf events; the Masters, the U.S. Open, the British Open and the PGA. Only Jack Nicklaus, Tiger Woods, Gary Player, Gene Sarazen and Ben Hogan have done it so far. Right now only 19 players have EVER won five or more major championships so that in itself is pretty rare company. Tiger has 14 majors and ranks number two in the category. Jack has the all-time record at 18 but he has retired so that record is set in concrete and is not going anywhere. Only Tiger or Phil would have a chance at Jack's record and Phil is 43. But Tiger is getting on up in years as well - he is 37 now so he has to hurry if he is going to catch Jack. Jack won his 15th major at 38 so Tiger is right on track if he wins one this year or next.
Shalom,
Yaakov On
Saturday, July 20, 2013
Musings on Maimonides: 130720 - Chapter I - III of GftP
Musings on Maimonides - 20 July 2013
The Guide for the Perplexed - GftP
"Open ye the gates, that the righteous nation which keepth the truth may enter in." [Isiah 36:2] Such is the introduction to Part I of GftP.
[Chapter I] Gen 1:26 says, "Let Us make man in Our zelem" where zelem is translated as image. Men have for millennium translated zelem as meaning that G-d looked like a man and some even took that to mean that G-d had a corporeal body like man. They went so far at to say that G-d looked like man except that He excelled in greatness and splendor and that He was not flesh and blood and bone. WHAT, exactly, He was or is has not been said.
This chapter also explains that G-d is not corporeal at all by explaining the true meaning of zelem and demut. The ordinary shape and form of a thing can be toår (Gen 30:6, Sam 28:14, Judges 8:18). This term is not applicable to G-d. The term zelem, according to RaMBaM, however, does apply to G-D. Gen 1:27, "In the zelem of G-d He created him."
Demut comes from the term "he is like unto...". This denotes a general abstract term that means in agreement with something as regards an abstract relationship. For example, "I am like a pelican in the wilderness." (Ps 102;7) David does not mean that he has feathers, claws and a beak but rather that he is sad like a pelican that is lost without the rivers and lakes to the point of sadness.
[Chapter II] RaMBaM points out the Elohim (mighty ones, lords, angels, judges, rulers, etc.) is the plural form of Eloha. Elohim also is the singular form of G-d Almighty. This was properly pointed out by Onkelos the Proselyte where he explained that Gen 3:5 "And ye shall be like Elohim " is properly translated as "Ye shall be like princes " or "Ye shall be like kings " rather than "Ye shall be like G-d ". The rest of Chapter II deals with explaining that mankind should study and not just read the TaNaKh (the Bible) now and then. It is only by deep insight that we can understand the simple words that G-d has llaid out before us.
The words of emet and sheker, of true and false, of morally right and wrong, the tov and ra' - distinctions that are applied to all arguments. Also, RaMBaM covers the passage in Psalms 8:6, "Thou has made him (man) a little lower than the angels."
<-- Begin Commentary -->
Personally, because of the right of any Jew to interpret TaNaKh according to what he sees fit so long as it does not conflict with the TaNaKh itself, I have always seen this as passage as, "Thou has made him a little lower than God." where Elohim is interpreted as G-d. That would put mankind above the angles but lower than G-d. Now, back to Maimonides.
<-- End Commentary -->
After Adam transgressed in the Garden of Eden and he fully understood what he had lost he understood the passage, "ye shall be like elohim knowing good and evil " but not in the sense of discerning the true and false. It was then that the eyes of Adam and Eve were opened and they both knew that they were naked. After that, Adam had to sweat to make the Earth produce her fruit and bread and thorns and thistles grew where pleasant foods had grown before.
[Chapter III] This chapter deals with the Hebrew Homonym words words temunah and tabnit that many think are the same, but they are not. Tabnit is derived from banah, meaning "he built" and signifies to build or construct a thing. Compare this with the tabnit of the Tabernacle and the tabnit or pattern of its vessels (Ex 35:40). On the other hand, temunah is used in three different senses.
Shalom
Yaakov On
The Guide for the Perplexed - GftP
"Open ye the gates, that the righteous nation which keepth the truth may enter in." [Isiah 36:2] Such is the introduction to Part I of GftP.
[Chapter I] Gen 1:26 says, "Let Us make man in Our zelem" where zelem is translated as image. Men have for millennium translated zelem as meaning that G-d looked like a man and some even took that to mean that G-d had a corporeal body like man. They went so far at to say that G-d looked like man except that He excelled in greatness and splendor and that He was not flesh and blood and bone. WHAT, exactly, He was or is has not been said.
This chapter also explains that G-d is not corporeal at all by explaining the true meaning of zelem and demut. The ordinary shape and form of a thing can be toår (Gen 30:6, Sam 28:14, Judges 8:18). This term is not applicable to G-d. The term zelem, according to RaMBaM, however, does apply to G-D. Gen 1:27, "In the zelem of G-d He created him."
Demut comes from the term "he is like unto...". This denotes a general abstract term that means in agreement with something as regards an abstract relationship. For example, "I am like a pelican in the wilderness." (Ps 102;7) David does not mean that he has feathers, claws and a beak but rather that he is sad like a pelican that is lost without the rivers and lakes to the point of sadness.
[Chapter II] RaMBaM points out the Elohim (mighty ones, lords, angels, judges, rulers, etc.) is the plural form of Eloha. Elohim also is the singular form of G-d Almighty. This was properly pointed out by Onkelos the Proselyte where he explained that Gen 3:5 "And ye shall be like Elohim " is properly translated as "Ye shall be like princes " or "Ye shall be like kings " rather than "Ye shall be like G-d ". The rest of Chapter II deals with explaining that mankind should study and not just read the TaNaKh (the Bible) now and then. It is only by deep insight that we can understand the simple words that G-d has llaid out before us.
The words of emet and sheker, of true and false, of morally right and wrong, the tov and ra' - distinctions that are applied to all arguments. Also, RaMBaM covers the passage in Psalms 8:6, "Thou has made him (man) a little lower than the angels."
<-- Begin Commentary -->
Personally, because of the right of any Jew to interpret TaNaKh according to what he sees fit so long as it does not conflict with the TaNaKh itself, I have always seen this as passage as, "Thou has made him a little lower than God." where Elohim is interpreted as G-d. That would put mankind above the angles but lower than G-d. Now, back to Maimonides.
<-- End Commentary -->
After Adam transgressed in the Garden of Eden and he fully understood what he had lost he understood the passage, "ye shall be like elohim knowing good and evil " but not in the sense of discerning the true and false. It was then that the eyes of Adam and Eve were opened and they both knew that they were naked. After that, Adam had to sweat to make the Earth produce her fruit and bread and thorns and thistles grew where pleasant foods had grown before.
[Chapter III] This chapter deals with the Hebrew Homonym words words temunah and tabnit that many think are the same, but they are not. Tabnit is derived from banah, meaning "he built" and signifies to build or construct a thing. Compare this with the tabnit of the Tabernacle and the tabnit or pattern of its vessels (Ex 35:40). On the other hand, temunah is used in three different senses.
- the outlines of things are perceived by our bodily senses, their shape or form. "And ye make an image the form (temunat) of some likeness " (Dt 4:16)
- the forms of our imagination, or the impressions retained in our imagination when the objects no longer affect our senses. For example, "in thoughts from the visions of the night" in Job 4:13, which concludes "it remained but I could not recognize its sight, only an image (temunah) was before my eyes, "
- the true form of an object that is perceived only by the intellect. it is this term that is applied to G-d. The words "And the similitude of the HaShem shall he behold" (Num 12:8) means "he shall comprehend the true essence of HaShem."
Shalom
Yaakov On
Sunday, July 14, 2013
What's The Rush Already ??
Shalom:
I have been to a few Friday evening services where the Rabbi seemed to try and get through the passages extremely quickly, as though there were a fire behind the altar and he (or she, as the case may be) were trying to get through quickly and get the congregation out of the building before it spread any further. Another analogy? OK, she is going so fast it is as though she has a cake in the oven that is burning. Enough already! We get the point.
So! What's the rush? Last Erev Shabbos I was privileged to attend my very first Erev Shabbos in the home of one of the members' home. It was a pot-luck supper before services but, even then, the gentleman who led services (it was at his home) seemed in a hurry to get through. It seemed that everyone wanted to get home early that evening for something or the other.
Way back in my youth I remember that there was an old black Christian pastor who used to remark about the white Christian churches who started at 11:00 sharp and quit at 12:00 dull, "You know, those folks don't realize that sometimes the Holy Spirit don't get there until 2 or 3 O'clock in the afternoon." Maybe we could take a hint from that old gentleman. Reading in TaNaKh I remember that some of the celebrations of the High Holy Days went on at the Temple for days, some of the regular Shabbos services lasted from Friday evening until Saturday evening, not for an hour or so but for 24 hours straight. Those folks knew how to just praise G-d. To them, HaShem was not just a name in a book, a word that one said during a prayer. He was a living G-D, The Living G-D of Israel, a very personal G-d, a Personal G-d who cared about Israel, a G-d who cared about everyone in Israel and Judah, right down the the smallest baby. If only we could get back to that rapport with Him.
So, when we say our prayers to G-d, why not emphasize the words as though they came from the heart every time? When we say, "Magnified and Glorified", why not mean it? When we say, "Holy G-d", why not mean it and emphasize the "Holy" as though even the word itself was holy?
Just a thought...
Shalom.
Yaakov On
I have been to a few Friday evening services where the Rabbi seemed to try and get through the passages extremely quickly, as though there were a fire behind the altar and he (or she, as the case may be) were trying to get through quickly and get the congregation out of the building before it spread any further. Another analogy? OK, she is going so fast it is as though she has a cake in the oven that is burning. Enough already! We get the point.
So! What's the rush? Last Erev Shabbos I was privileged to attend my very first Erev Shabbos in the home of one of the members' home. It was a pot-luck supper before services but, even then, the gentleman who led services (it was at his home) seemed in a hurry to get through. It seemed that everyone wanted to get home early that evening for something or the other.
Way back in my youth I remember that there was an old black Christian pastor who used to remark about the white Christian churches who started at 11:00 sharp and quit at 12:00 dull, "You know, those folks don't realize that sometimes the Holy Spirit don't get there until 2 or 3 O'clock in the afternoon." Maybe we could take a hint from that old gentleman. Reading in TaNaKh I remember that some of the celebrations of the High Holy Days went on at the Temple for days, some of the regular Shabbos services lasted from Friday evening until Saturday evening, not for an hour or so but for 24 hours straight. Those folks knew how to just praise G-d. To them, HaShem was not just a name in a book, a word that one said during a prayer. He was a living G-D, The Living G-D of Israel, a very personal G-d, a Personal G-d who cared about Israel, a G-d who cared about everyone in Israel and Judah, right down the the smallest baby. If only we could get back to that rapport with Him.
So, when we say our prayers to G-d, why not emphasize the words as though they came from the heart every time? When we say, "Magnified and Glorified", why not mean it? When we say, "Holy G-d", why not mean it and emphasize the "Holy" as though even the word itself was holy?
Just a thought...
Shalom.
Yaakov On
Saturday, July 13, 2013
Musings on Maimonides: 130713 - Introduction to GftP
Shalom:
Musings on Maimonides
6 Av 5773 [13 July 2013]
Introduction to Guide for the Perplexed
During the introduction in Guide for the Perplexed RaMBaM (Maimonides) gets off into two subjects; prophecy and how to teach. RaMBaM feels, as did his mentors, that teachers should never give the truth of the scriptures to more than one person without cloaking it the obscurity of metaphors and allegories, much like the Christ taught the masses with examples (called parables in the New Testament) while he taught his disciples more directly. It comes from the adage, "The Ma'aseh Bereshith must not be expounded in the presence of two."
The other principle that he covers is also covered later in a chapters on prophesy. RaMBaM feels that prophesy is a gift from HaShem BUT that HaShem gives true prophesy only to those who have studied hard and long and have proven themselves worthy of the gift. RaMBaM says that prophesy comes in several forms, all of which may be akin to flashes of lightning that light up the darkness of our lives. That person is able to see through the veil of darkness for a moment much as person is able to see in a moonless night when lightning flashes across the plains of Jericho. But, to each prophet is given only what that person needs as a prophet. RaMBaM describes it as follows :
Now, you might ask, why would the sages not want to divluge the truths of scripture plainly and openly rather than cloaking them in riddles and allegories? Why did the Christ do this? Simple. Because we have been taught from the scripture to do this:
An example this is given: Solomon once said, "A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in vessels of silver." (Proverbs 25:11) The word maskiyoth, the Hebrew equivalent for "vessels," denotes "filigree network" , meaning things in which there are very small apertures, such as are frequently wrought by silversmiths. These are called in Hebrew maskiyyoth, or literally, "transpicuous", from the verb sakah, meaning "he saw", a root word which occurs also in the Targum of Onkelos, Genesis 36:8, because the eye penetrates through them. Thus Solomon might be interpreted to say, "Just as apples of gold in silver filigree with small apertures, so is a word fitly spoken." Not quite word-for-word from RaMBaM but close.
<Begin my personal commentary. Skip if you like.>
In the Targum and other writings you will note that scripture interpretation sometimes takes off into wild and unruly directions that often seem conflict with the original meanings. Personally, I hold that ANY interpretation given by anyone should NEVER conflict with the plain meaning that is given. When HaShem says, "Do NOT commit adultery." then no interpretation can ever be given that would permit adultery under any circumstances. Period. End of discussion. HaShem has said that neither you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your wife, nor your man servant, nor your female servant, nor any of your slaves, nor your ox, nor your ass, nor stranger within your gates shall do any work on the Shabbos. So, in my house, we do no work on the Shabbos. Nothing. We do not go to movies, we do not eat out at restaurants, we do not go to ball games, we buy nothing, we do no commercial business whatsoever. But, we might go to the rifle range since it is a club and is supported totally by dues of the members and there are no paid employees - none. We go to Shabbos services on Friday evening or Saturday morning or both. We enjoy meals together that are Kosher. We enjoy movies and snacks and the company of friends and family. My son might even go play music with his friends. But no work whatsoever. No studies for school, no studies for work, reading only of TaNaKh or reading books and/or magazines for pleasure. TV is permitted but usually we watch movies or TCM just to be on the "safe side" and not so that we are the cause of others having to work.
When HaShem says, "You shall not light a fire on Shabbos." that means that you shall not light a fire on the Shabbos. Period. End of discussion. Now, some have said that turning on a light switch causes a fire in light bulb. Others say that the bulb does not burn and is not consumed and is, therefore, not a fire. That is between them and HaShem. Personally, I hold to the second opinion that the bulb glows but is not consumed, that throwing the switch is not work, that since the bulb is "ignited" from another glowing source that the fire has not been "lighted" but ignited from anther source and therefore scripture has not been broken. However, there are times when I do not turn on lights because I feel that if I do that it might be breaking the commandments. Maybe... But if and when I do turn on the switch, I never feel guilty afterwards since I do not think that turning on the switch is a sin. Strange, huh? I have learned to live it.
All of the last two paragraphs to say this: RaMBaM had to rationalize in his day just as we have to rationalize in our day. The commandments of HaShem were give to LIVE BY and so we shall. We shall follow all of the ones that are humanly possible. Those which we cannot follow, such as stoning those who commit adultery or who use the name of HaShem in vain, we will leave for HaShem to punish. But we do not have to fellowship with those persons in the synagogue, our version of the Temple of HaShem today, until those person repent of their sins and return to the commandments of HaShem, blessed be His Name.
<And, so ends my personal commentary.>
Maimonides felt that there are seven causes of inconsistencies and contradictions that have to be met an any literary work. These are listed here:
Next week we shall begin with Part I and hopefully get through the first few chapters. I went over the page hits and, so far, nobody is looking so I do not have much to worry about on screaming comments. I seem to be writing for self-edification. But, that is good too. :-)
Shalom
Yaakov On
Musings on Maimonides
6 Av 5773 [13 July 2013]
Introduction to Guide for the Perplexed
During the introduction in Guide for the Perplexed RaMBaM (Maimonides) gets off into two subjects; prophecy and how to teach. RaMBaM feels, as did his mentors, that teachers should never give the truth of the scriptures to more than one person without cloaking it the obscurity of metaphors and allegories, much like the Christ taught the masses with examples (called parables in the New Testament) while he taught his disciples more directly. It comes from the adage, "The Ma'aseh Bereshith must not be expounded in the presence of two."
The other principle that he covers is also covered later in a chapters on prophesy. RaMBaM feels that prophesy is a gift from HaShem BUT that HaShem gives true prophesy only to those who have studied hard and long and have proven themselves worthy of the gift. RaMBaM says that prophesy comes in several forms, all of which may be akin to flashes of lightning that light up the darkness of our lives. That person is able to see through the veil of darkness for a moment much as person is able to see in a moonless night when lightning flashes across the plains of Jericho. But, to each prophet is given only what that person needs as a prophet. RaMBaM describes it as follows :
- A flash of lightning where a person gives a prophesy once and never gives another. (Num 11:25)
- Many flashes of lighting so that a long vision is seen or a few really long flashes separated by many years wherein the prophet is given many visions over the years. This is similar to the prophets of old, like Isiah or Jeremiah or Daniel.
- For some, such as Moshe, the lightening is continuous and night seems like day. Indeed, the skin of his face shone during the day. (Ex 34:29)
- For others it flickers as the light of a rotating sword in candle light. Just now and then as a candle in the wind.
Now, you might ask, why would the sages not want to divluge the truths of scripture plainly and openly rather than cloaking them in riddles and allegories? Why did the Christ do this? Simple. Because we have been taught from the scripture to do this:
- Hosea 12:10 - "I hae also spoken in similies by the Prophets."
- Ezekiel 17:2 - "Put forth a riddle and speak a parable."
- Ezekiel 21:5 - "Does He (meaning HaShem) not speak parables?"
- Proverbs 1:6 - "To understand a proverb and figurative speech, the words of the wise and their dark sayings..."
- Midrash, Shir ha-shirim Rabba; "To what were the words of the Law 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 roope with rope, and drew up and drank. so Solomon went from figure to figure, and from subject to subject, till he obtained the true sense of the Law."
An example this is given: Solomon once said, "A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in vessels of silver." (Proverbs 25:11) The word maskiyoth, the Hebrew equivalent for "vessels," denotes "filigree network" , meaning things in which there are very small apertures, such as are frequently wrought by silversmiths. These are called in Hebrew maskiyyoth, or literally, "transpicuous", from the verb sakah, meaning "he saw", a root word which occurs also in the Targum of Onkelos, Genesis 36:8, because the eye penetrates through them. Thus Solomon might be interpreted to say, "Just as apples of gold in silver filigree with small apertures, so is a word fitly spoken." Not quite word-for-word from RaMBaM but close.
<Begin my personal commentary. Skip if you like.>
In the Targum and other writings you will note that scripture interpretation sometimes takes off into wild and unruly directions that often seem conflict with the original meanings. Personally, I hold that ANY interpretation given by anyone should NEVER conflict with the plain meaning that is given. When HaShem says, "Do NOT commit adultery." then no interpretation can ever be given that would permit adultery under any circumstances. Period. End of discussion. HaShem has said that neither you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your wife, nor your man servant, nor your female servant, nor any of your slaves, nor your ox, nor your ass, nor stranger within your gates shall do any work on the Shabbos. So, in my house, we do no work on the Shabbos. Nothing. We do not go to movies, we do not eat out at restaurants, we do not go to ball games, we buy nothing, we do no commercial business whatsoever. But, we might go to the rifle range since it is a club and is supported totally by dues of the members and there are no paid employees - none. We go to Shabbos services on Friday evening or Saturday morning or both. We enjoy meals together that are Kosher. We enjoy movies and snacks and the company of friends and family. My son might even go play music with his friends. But no work whatsoever. No studies for school, no studies for work, reading only of TaNaKh or reading books and/or magazines for pleasure. TV is permitted but usually we watch movies or TCM just to be on the "safe side" and not so that we are the cause of others having to work.
When HaShem says, "You shall not light a fire on Shabbos." that means that you shall not light a fire on the Shabbos. Period. End of discussion. Now, some have said that turning on a light switch causes a fire in light bulb. Others say that the bulb does not burn and is not consumed and is, therefore, not a fire. That is between them and HaShem. Personally, I hold to the second opinion that the bulb glows but is not consumed, that throwing the switch is not work, that since the bulb is "ignited" from another glowing source that the fire has not been "lighted" but ignited from anther source and therefore scripture has not been broken. However, there are times when I do not turn on lights because I feel that if I do that it might be breaking the commandments. Maybe... But if and when I do turn on the switch, I never feel guilty afterwards since I do not think that turning on the switch is a sin. Strange, huh? I have learned to live it.
All of the last two paragraphs to say this: RaMBaM had to rationalize in his day just as we have to rationalize in our day. The commandments of HaShem were give to LIVE BY and so we shall. We shall follow all of the ones that are humanly possible. Those which we cannot follow, such as stoning those who commit adultery or who use the name of HaShem in vain, we will leave for HaShem to punish. But we do not have to fellowship with those persons in the synagogue, our version of the Temple of HaShem today, until those person repent of their sins and return to the commandments of HaShem, blessed be His Name.
<And, so ends my personal commentary.>
Maimonides felt that there are seven causes of inconsistencies and contradictions that have to be met an any literary work. These are listed here:
- The author collects opinions from various sources but does not give credit to those various sources nor mention the names of the other authors. Because of this, various conflicting opinions may be stated but the reader does not know which author said which.
- The author holds first one opinion and then another that conflicts with the first.
- Some passages should be taken literally and some figuratively but the author is never really clear which is which. This leads to seemingly conflicting statements that, while not meant that way, might seem that way to the normal reader.
- The premises are not fully stated in conflicting statements leading to apparent contradictions that are not really contradictions but only contradictions in appearance.
- The teacher assumes that the student understands a theorem or clause that is given in a class but does not fully explain that theorem or clause. If the teacher does not go back and explain then the student is left in a confused state of mind.
- The contradiction is not immediately evident but only becomes evident over time and with a series of premises and through later studies. The larger the number of premises the larger the probability that this will happen.
- The author, or teacher, has to introduce metaphysical problems that can be disclosed only partly at the time. Later these are discussed more fully and may seem, to the student or reader, contradictory but, in reality, are complementary. The author, or teacher, must endeavor, by concealing the fact as much as possible, to prevent the uneducated reader from perceiving the seeming contradiction.
Next week we shall begin with Part I and hopefully get through the first few chapters. I went over the page hits and, so far, nobody is looking so I do not have much to worry about on screaming comments. I seem to be writing for self-edification. But, that is good too. :-)
Shalom
Yaakov On
Saturday, July 6, 2013
Musings on Maimonides: 130607 - Analysis of Guide for the Perplexed
Musings on Maimonides, 6 July 2013
Analysis of the Guide for the Perplexed
This part of the blog deals with the introduction of "Guide to the Perplexed" - or GttP - as given by RaMBaM himself and as explained by the author. Part I of the book deals with the exposition of the esoteric ideas contained in the books of the Prophets, part II with a treatment of certain metaphysical problems and part III with an examination of the system and methods of Islam, or the Kalam, as he calls them. It has been said that RaMBaM was a zealous disciple of Aristotle which might explain many of his strange ideas with regard to trying to reconcile G-d with the universe. Aristotle proposed the theory of the eternity of the universe which is contrary to the teaching of the scriptures. The scriptures teach that only G-d is eternal and that He created the universe from nothing. This is the same trap of many modern-day so-called scholars who try to reconcile the scriptures with modern science theories and the Big Bang Theory. I have asked several of them what existed before the Big Bang and most answer that they either do not know or that the question is a nonsense question. So much for "modern science." Unfortunately you can believe one or the other but not both at the same time. Supposedly Maimonides does expose the fundamental weaknesses of the Kalam with regards to their theories of the universe. Please note that I do not capitalize Universe as Maimonides but use the more modern version of universe.
Maimonides goes to great lengths to show that G-d is not a corporeal being and that references to His hands, His ears and mouth etc do not refer to a corporeal being but to attributes so that we can understand him. He also deals with
Prior to the time of Maimonides Jewish writers had taken the position that the Torah (the first five books of the TaNaKh, the Bible) spoke in the language of man. Maimonides thought that all of TaNaKh was written for the more educated persons to explain to the less educated persons, or, in other words, a riddle that, on the surface, seemed simple but contained a much deeper explanation that could be understood only by those sufficiently trained over the years in the mysteries of the language and science. For now we will deal with GftP as RaMBaM dealt with them. Indeed, Maimonides pleads with the reader not to be hasty with criticism since he has carefully considered every sentence and every word before it was written down. Often he closes a thought with the admonition to consider carefully what has been said and go and think about it. Much like some of the passages of scripture end with the expression of "Selah." meaning, "Pause and meditate."
I shall, before each section of the GftP, attempt to give an overview before jumping into the deep end. I have found each section more exciting than the section before. However, before jumping into GftP I would like to discuss the Thirteen Principles as an overview. Most are pretty simple if you are Jewish, Christian or Muslim. If not, they might not appear so simple but I shall explain anyway.
So, for now, let us leave off with what I have done and next week I shall go on to the Thirteen Principles of Maimonides that we say every Friday evening as the Yigdal. Then on to a brief weekly discussion of "Guide for the Perplexed."
Shalom,
Yaakov On
Analysis of the Guide for the Perplexed
This part of the blog deals with the introduction of "Guide to the Perplexed" - or GttP - as given by RaMBaM himself and as explained by the author. Part I of the book deals with the exposition of the esoteric ideas contained in the books of the Prophets, part II with a treatment of certain metaphysical problems and part III with an examination of the system and methods of Islam, or the Kalam, as he calls them. It has been said that RaMBaM was a zealous disciple of Aristotle which might explain many of his strange ideas with regard to trying to reconcile G-d with the universe. Aristotle proposed the theory of the eternity of the universe which is contrary to the teaching of the scriptures. The scriptures teach that only G-d is eternal and that He created the universe from nothing. This is the same trap of many modern-day so-called scholars who try to reconcile the scriptures with modern science theories and the Big Bang Theory. I have asked several of them what existed before the Big Bang and most answer that they either do not know or that the question is a nonsense question. So much for "modern science." Unfortunately you can believe one or the other but not both at the same time. Supposedly Maimonides does expose the fundamental weaknesses of the Kalam with regards to their theories of the universe. Please note that I do not capitalize Universe as Maimonides but use the more modern version of universe.
Maimonides goes to great lengths to show that G-d is not a corporeal being and that references to His hands, His ears and mouth etc do not refer to a corporeal being but to attributes so that we can understand him. He also deals with
- The existence of Evil
- Omniscience and Providence of G-d
- Temptations
- Design in Nature, in the Law and in the Biblical Narratives
- True Worship of G-d
Prior to the time of Maimonides Jewish writers had taken the position that the Torah (the first five books of the TaNaKh, the Bible) spoke in the language of man. Maimonides thought that all of TaNaKh was written for the more educated persons to explain to the less educated persons, or, in other words, a riddle that, on the surface, seemed simple but contained a much deeper explanation that could be understood only by those sufficiently trained over the years in the mysteries of the language and science. For now we will deal with GftP as RaMBaM dealt with them. Indeed, Maimonides pleads with the reader not to be hasty with criticism since he has carefully considered every sentence and every word before it was written down. Often he closes a thought with the admonition to consider carefully what has been said and go and think about it. Much like some of the passages of scripture end with the expression of "Selah." meaning, "Pause and meditate."
I shall, before each section of the GftP, attempt to give an overview before jumping into the deep end. I have found each section more exciting than the section before. However, before jumping into GftP I would like to discuss the Thirteen Principles as an overview. Most are pretty simple if you are Jewish, Christian or Muslim. If not, they might not appear so simple but I shall explain anyway.
So, for now, let us leave off with what I have done and next week I shall go on to the Thirteen Principles of Maimonides that we say every Friday evening as the Yigdal. Then on to a brief weekly discussion of "Guide for the Perplexed."
Shalom,
Yaakov On
Musings on Maimonides: 130706, Intro
Musings on Maimonides, 7 July 2013, Introduction
This is, what I hope to be, the beginnings of a series of a group of writings, or musings, if you will, on one of the greatest writers in Jewish history, maybe of the world, Rabbi Mosheh Ben Maimon, , or RaMBaM for short, who is often called Moses Maimonides in English. He lived from Passover Eve (erev Passover) in 1135 until 12 December 1204. In Arabic he was known as Musa Ibn Ben Maimon. He was the most preeminent medieval Spanish Jewish philosopher, medical doctor, astronomer and scientist of his time. It has been said in Judaism that, "From Moses to Moses there has never been another like Moses." Meaning, of course, that only Maimonides was anything like the original Moses, the first prophet, law-giver and brother of Aaron the High Priest. Born in Corboda (present-day Spain) he rose to be head of the Jewish community in Egypt and his writings were met with acclaim as far off a Yemen and Israel. His fourteen-volumn Mishneh Torah is still the foundation of Jewish thought and became the cornerstone of the Talmud, considered the "Oral Torah" for most of Judaism. His Thirteen Principles of faith are the foundation of the Yigdal for final part of erev Shabbos services every Friday evening services in most Synagogues.
Most in Judaism already know all of that and the first paragraph was intended for everyone else. So what I have to say now is for everyone including my fellow Jews. :-) Too often we talk of Moshe without reading his works. His most famous work is "The Guide for the Perplexed", a work that can be found in paperback from almost any bookstore, even Amazon or B&N. The one that I have is the 2nd edition and was translated from the original Arabic text by Dr. M. Friedlander back in 1956 so it is not a very modern book at all - but quite good. The first edition was in three volumes and contained many more notes and Hebrew words and translations which would have been far more helpful. The second edition is more concise and maybe more readable to the casual reader.
The first book that I read from Maimonides was "Guide for the Perplexed" and it took quite a while to absorb everything. It is dedicated to one of his students, Joseph, the son of Jehudah Ibn Aknin, a diciple of Maimonides, and it is addressed to him as an example of this kind of student. It is "for him and for those like him." RaMBaM assumed that those who would read - and understand - his work would be those who had already studied sufficiently to comprehend scientific thought, mathematical concepts and philosophical treatises. He never considered that anyone else was worthy of reading his works. To say that Maimonides was conceited would be a bit of an understatement but, all things considered, he did not want the uneducated to read his works and comment on them. The book is divided into three parts: Part I has 76 short chapters, rarely exceeding a page or so in length, dealing mostly with word definitions and explanations but also dealing with divine names, terms, emotions, heaven and earth, and the the twelve propositions of the Kalam. Part II has 47 chapters dealing with the 26 propositions employed by the philosophers to prove the existence of G-d among other things and true prophesy. Part III has 49 chapters that deal with his introduction and apology for publishing, contrary to the teaching of the Mishnah, an interpretation of Ezekiel. Since that covers, by my count, 172 chapters - I will not take an entire post for each chapter but will try and deal with several chapters with each post or I might even skip a few chapters along the way - with an explanation, of course.
So! On to Introduction to MoM 101: A Guide for the Perplexed for the Curious...
Maimonides, the son of Maimon, started his first work at the age of 23 in Spain under the tyranny of King Ibn Tamurt who proclaimed that anyone who did not accept Islam, called Muslemim by the Jews of those days, would be put to death. The Jews did everything that they could to dissuade the King but to no avail. Some died, some converted for show, some fled. Pappa Maimon chose to flee with his family to Egypt where he settled to his son's future fame and fortune. King Ibn Tamurt died within a month after the proclamation but Pappa Maimon had already fled. Moses went on board his ship on on the 4th of Iyyar, 4925 (1165) and arrived in Acco on the 3rd of Sivan and was thus rescued from apostasy. On Tuesday, the 4th of Marheshvan, 4926, he left Acco and arrived at Yirushalayim (my transliterative) spelling of Jerusalem) shortly thereafter. On the 9th he visited the cave of Machpelah in Hebron. From those accounts we know that he and his family did not seek to protect their lives nor property by abandoning their their faith. His brother David carried on the trade in precious stones while Moses occupied himself with is studies in Medicine, philosophy, mathematics and worked in the community with the other Jews.
Unfortunately, when reading Maimonides, I am reminded somewhat of the Sheldon character on the TV series, "Big Bang Theory." He is right 99% of the time but terribly conceited and unconscionably condescending to everyone else. For the purposes of these MoM blogs I shall NOT consider his scientific writings that are so terribly wrong and so terribly misguided. Neither shall I consider his writings on astronomy which, while possibly correct at the time, and I am not an authority but I do know that there are more than five or six planets to consider these days, even with the degrading of Pluto from a planet to something less. His views on Medicine are those of the 12th and 13th century so these also shall be dis regarded for this blog. However, his view on religion is far more attuned to being closer to the original Moses than anyone of today so I would like to follow those and comment on those. So, dear reader, please bear with me and we shall, in the following weeks and months, discover what RaMBaM has laid out for us in the following centuries. I think that we shall discover many wonderful things together.
Here are the questions that we shall attempt to answer as RaMBaM answered them:
Shalom,
Yaakov On
This is, what I hope to be, the beginnings of a series of a group of writings, or musings, if you will, on one of the greatest writers in Jewish history, maybe of the world, Rabbi Mosheh Ben Maimon, , or RaMBaM for short, who is often called Moses Maimonides in English. He lived from Passover Eve (erev Passover) in 1135 until 12 December 1204. In Arabic he was known as Musa Ibn Ben Maimon. He was the most preeminent medieval Spanish Jewish philosopher, medical doctor, astronomer and scientist of his time. It has been said in Judaism that, "From Moses to Moses there has never been another like Moses." Meaning, of course, that only Maimonides was anything like the original Moses, the first prophet, law-giver and brother of Aaron the High Priest. Born in Corboda (present-day Spain) he rose to be head of the Jewish community in Egypt and his writings were met with acclaim as far off a Yemen and Israel. His fourteen-volumn Mishneh Torah is still the foundation of Jewish thought and became the cornerstone of the Talmud, considered the "Oral Torah" for most of Judaism. His Thirteen Principles of faith are the foundation of the Yigdal for final part of erev Shabbos services every Friday evening services in most Synagogues.
Most in Judaism already know all of that and the first paragraph was intended for everyone else. So what I have to say now is for everyone including my fellow Jews. :-) Too often we talk of Moshe without reading his works. His most famous work is "The Guide for the Perplexed", a work that can be found in paperback from almost any bookstore, even Amazon or B&N. The one that I have is the 2nd edition and was translated from the original Arabic text by Dr. M. Friedlander back in 1956 so it is not a very modern book at all - but quite good. The first edition was in three volumes and contained many more notes and Hebrew words and translations which would have been far more helpful. The second edition is more concise and maybe more readable to the casual reader.
The first book that I read from Maimonides was "Guide for the Perplexed" and it took quite a while to absorb everything. It is dedicated to one of his students, Joseph, the son of Jehudah Ibn Aknin, a diciple of Maimonides, and it is addressed to him as an example of this kind of student. It is "for him and for those like him." RaMBaM assumed that those who would read - and understand - his work would be those who had already studied sufficiently to comprehend scientific thought, mathematical concepts and philosophical treatises. He never considered that anyone else was worthy of reading his works. To say that Maimonides was conceited would be a bit of an understatement but, all things considered, he did not want the uneducated to read his works and comment on them. The book is divided into three parts: Part I has 76 short chapters, rarely exceeding a page or so in length, dealing mostly with word definitions and explanations but also dealing with divine names, terms, emotions, heaven and earth, and the the twelve propositions of the Kalam. Part II has 47 chapters dealing with the 26 propositions employed by the philosophers to prove the existence of G-d among other things and true prophesy. Part III has 49 chapters that deal with his introduction and apology for publishing, contrary to the teaching of the Mishnah, an interpretation of Ezekiel. Since that covers, by my count, 172 chapters - I will not take an entire post for each chapter but will try and deal with several chapters with each post or I might even skip a few chapters along the way - with an explanation, of course.
So! On to Introduction to MoM 101: A Guide for the Perplexed for the Curious...
Maimonides, the son of Maimon, started his first work at the age of 23 in Spain under the tyranny of King Ibn Tamurt who proclaimed that anyone who did not accept Islam, called Muslemim by the Jews of those days, would be put to death. The Jews did everything that they could to dissuade the King but to no avail. Some died, some converted for show, some fled. Pappa Maimon chose to flee with his family to Egypt where he settled to his son's future fame and fortune. King Ibn Tamurt died within a month after the proclamation but Pappa Maimon had already fled. Moses went on board his ship on on the 4th of Iyyar, 4925 (1165) and arrived in Acco on the 3rd of Sivan and was thus rescued from apostasy. On Tuesday, the 4th of Marheshvan, 4926, he left Acco and arrived at Yirushalayim (my transliterative) spelling of Jerusalem) shortly thereafter. On the 9th he visited the cave of Machpelah in Hebron. From those accounts we know that he and his family did not seek to protect their lives nor property by abandoning their their faith. His brother David carried on the trade in precious stones while Moses occupied himself with is studies in Medicine, philosophy, mathematics and worked in the community with the other Jews.
Unfortunately, when reading Maimonides, I am reminded somewhat of the Sheldon character on the TV series, "Big Bang Theory." He is right 99% of the time but terribly conceited and unconscionably condescending to everyone else. For the purposes of these MoM blogs I shall NOT consider his scientific writings that are so terribly wrong and so terribly misguided. Neither shall I consider his writings on astronomy which, while possibly correct at the time, and I am not an authority but I do know that there are more than five or six planets to consider these days, even with the degrading of Pluto from a planet to something less. His views on Medicine are those of the 12th and 13th century so these also shall be dis regarded for this blog. However, his view on religion is far more attuned to being closer to the original Moses than anyone of today so I would like to follow those and comment on those. So, dear reader, please bear with me and we shall, in the following weeks and months, discover what RaMBaM has laid out for us in the following centuries. I think that we shall discover many wonderful things together.
Here are the questions that we shall attempt to answer as RaMBaM answered them:
- Who is G-d?
- Who are we with respect to G-d?
- What does G-d expect from us?
- What did G-d tell us to do?
Shalom,
Yaakov On
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)