The Exgodolhador has a question.
[Which can be read here: http://extremegh.blogspot.com/2006/09/kuzari-proof-it-works.html]
In the posting linked above, the XGH brings up the Kuzari proof and the counter arguments.
The Kuzari proof is, according to Wikipedia:
"that a story such as that of the Sinai revelation must have originated with a real event or have been introduced at some later moment. In the latter case, the population will have been able to infer its falsehood merely from their lack of prior knowledge of the claim. Therefore, according to this logic, the story can only have been introduced at a time when the population knew it to be true from their own observation." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuzari]
XGH formulates it thusly:
"The story of Sinai is so huge - 600,000 males (approx 2.5 million people) all experiencing God’s revelation (in some fashion)- that it could not have been made up and then accepted by the public -- a further argument for this proof is that no other religion has such an origin story. All the other religions start with a revelation to a small group of people, or just one ‘prophet’. If a mass revelation story is easy to fabricate, then why didn’t every other religion start such a story? The fact that there are no parallels shows that such a story could not be ‘sold’ unless it was actually true."
It is evident from his subsequent text that XGH veers towards a rejection of the Kuzari proof as an argument for Torah mi Sinai.
To quote again: "On my previous blog I came to the conclusion that since there was no way to know any of this for sure, the only possible option is ‘shev ve’al taaseh’ (*). But this just leads to paralysis, and isn’t very practical when your kids are about to start 15+ years of Jewish education. So, we have to come up with something.
The question is, what?"
That's a good question.
In many ways it is the question that informs most of the J-blogs I read, and it partially explains both how I discovered the Judeo blogs and why I blog.
The answer I left in the comments on his posting is this:
"There is truth in Judaism. It is up to you to find it. It will take your entire life to do so. Start now. You may not succeed - there are no guarantees. You will be a better person for trying - which is probably the point of the tradition in the first place. You need not finish the task, neither may you abstain."
[I'll define Judaism in this context as Abrahamic monotheism, neither Gnostic nor Trinitarian, with as key documents Torah, Nach, Mishna, Gemara, and with shtarke denkers from Chazal through the Geonim, Rishonim, Acharonim, et al.]
Readers, I would like your thoughts.
Please discuss, debate, dispute, and above all comment - comment - comment.
Feel free to be mechazek my emunah (b'ezras Hashem if so), or not (equally b'ezras Hashem).
-----------------------------------
(*) Shev ve al taaseh = sitting and not doing; abstaining from a course of action.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A DUMPSTER FIRE OF TWITTERY
Often while at work I get to hear the sour old dingbats in the backroom spouting Republican drivel and venom. Which does not leave me positi...
5 comments:
I'll leave a little kvitl here...
I am not sure if you're asking about the Kuzari principle or your comment.
I don't see how the Kuzari holds up, but frankly, I don't understand even more how intelligent people can have the same debate over and over again without moving on. I am fascinated however by the real Kuzari, especially since as a kid I had to learn the classic Pushkin:
«Как ныне сбирается вещий Олег
Отмстить неразумным хазарам,
Их села и нивы за буйный набег
Обрек он мечам и пожарам...»
As far as your comment goes, although it sounds like the beginning of a good medieval quest, I don't really understand what you're saying... You're implying that the search for truth is so important that you should devote your entire life to seek it. However I am not sure what you mean by "truth". Truth as in historical? Truth as in testable? Truth as in understanding - then what is understanding? Scientific knowledge, self-awareness, understanding humanity?
And why is it so important to seek this?
My kvitl has gone unrekvitted :)
It's a tiefe shayle, and I intend to answer - truth in this context can not be defined dictionarily.
Unfortunately on Mondays I am more dead or demented than alive and awake (four hours sleep!), so rather than atlengthing (which I'll do tomorrow), let me instead do a quick and dirty.
I do not mean that one should devote one's life to the search for truth, but rather that the search for truth should be a constant theme in one's life.
Truth as used above meaning more an understanding of god, man, and existence. The first is unknowable, the second is without perspective, and the third is rather vague, and cannot really be understood.
We observe a dance of three 'variables', of which we ourselves are both a part and the biased and blinkered observer.
How they interact and relate to each other tells us as much as we'll ever know about all three - but full comprehension, full understanding, is always out of reach.
Even our own role is undefinable, but any hope of self-definition we can have depends on taking part in the investigation.
Cynically, glibly put: If Torah can be regarded as a lab-book recording the experiment, we perhaps are the caged monkey. We have access to the lab-book, but we are on the wrong side of the one-way glass.
Tayere e-Kvetcher,
Alas, I cannnot seem to come up with a better definition / description of truth in the context of the post than the one above. At least not one that does not sound impossibly pompous, or like boilerplate on a contract.
Perhaps it can best be circumscribed for each person by the process - the methodology of reading critically, comparing points and ideas, weighing texts and experience. One might not know at the end of that process what it is, or even why it might be important. But to not at least try seems not an option, cowardly even.
Your thoughts?
Yes, the written records of the Jewish Oral Law show an incredible record of mental acuity. Since Orthodox Jews believe that the halachot derived from this work are really messages from G-d, it makes sense for them to immerse themselves in it. But for everyone else, Jews that do not believe in Orthodox hashkafa and Gentiles, it seems like unless your goal is to either be a scholar of history or polemics, it would be more of a waste of your life than a path to truth, whatever that means. Getting to the point where you can really understand Gemara is non-trivial to say the least. Understanding the Rishonim/Acharonim is really non-trivial. And why stop with Judaism. There are many cultures and creeds that also produced impressive treatises on philosophy, theosophy, and .*sophy.
No disrespect is meant to anyone by this statement, just poking around to clarify this position to myself.
Post a Comment