The Purpose of the Mitzvot part 2

In the Talmud, we have widely differing views on the purpose and meaning of the Mitzvot.  Some of the rabbis saw them as the "pipeline" for Divine blessing.  Some rejected any earthly meaning or benefit, and saw them as preparing our places in Paradise. Some saw them as reminders of G-d's presence. Others saw them as forces beyond anything which we can fathom, with meanings well beyond our meager perceptions. All, however, shied away from interpreting the meanings of specific mitzvot. After all, only three mitzvot list reasons in the Torah itself, all relating to the King (not to have too many wives, not too much wealth, not too much horse trading). Solomon, the wisest of men, fell through in these, as he thought that he could get away with violating the law, without violating the reasons. He was mistaken. The human capacity for rationalization is remarkably vast. What the rabbis of the Talmud were primarily concerned with was determining what the laws are, and the best way to fulfill them. Already in the early Talmudic period, a Hellenized Jew, Philo of Alexandria (25 BCE-50 CE) attempted to find philosophical reasons for the Mitzvot, as well as the narrative parts of the Torah. So, for example, Adam and Eve became an allegory for the relationship between form and substance. The mitzvot are also analyzed as allegories, not really intended to be observed. Philo was virtually ignored in Jewish, non-Hellenized circles, but had a major impact on several early Christian thinkers. Many historians believe that he had a great influence on Paul. In post-Talmudic times, an entire genre developed of "Taamei HaMitzvot" (the reasons for the mitzvot). But many opposed this literature, as it would be the height of hubris to pretend to know the thoughts of G-d. This literature sometimes takes the form of philosophy, similar to Philo, but emphasizing  the need to actually fulfill the laws. Some took the approach of mysticism. Some took an approach of ethics. RAMBAM's "Guide for the Perplexed" is the most famous of these works. Let me just say that although I am well aware that some people believe that RAMBAM didn't really believe what he was writing, and merely was trying to win back those Jews who had given up Moses in favor of Aristotle, or, alternatively, his writings are in a sort of code, that concealed great Kabbalistic secrets, I totally reject these views based on RAMBAM's own extensive writings. Some people have a need to show that all rabbis are, and always were, on "the same page". To me, it is one of the best features of Judaism; there are different approaches and understanding, all fully within the Tradition. Our minds are not in chains, bound to one understanding. Yes, I am aware of books published several centuries later that said that he studied Kabbalah in his later life, but wasn't able to retract his words, which he now greatly regretted. There is, however, no hint of this in his own later writings, or those of his son or his disciples. RAMBAM lived in a time and place where Aristotle was seen as the repository of all Truth. Torah had to be put in harmony with Aristotle (as some modern rabbis go to great lengths to reconcile Torah with modern science), or, if irreconcilable, philosophical "proofs" must be used to show Aristotle wrong, based upon Aristotelian logic itself. I will go into some depth on Maimonides  Guide, both in terms of its triumphs and failures. For the sake of transparency,  I must note that I am a follower of Rabbi Nachman of Breslov. He considered RAMBAM's Guide one of the worst things ever written, and should not be looked at at all. Most Breslovers will not even say the name of the book. I will attempt, to the best of my ability, to give a fair analysis, and discuss both sides of this issue. It cannot be denied that this work had a huge impact, still felt in many circles.

The Purpose of the Mitzvot part 1

A person approaching Torah for the first time will be struck by the almost total lack of doctrine or theology. The central feature of Scripture is the Laws of G-d (mitzvot). Narrative sections almost always lead up to how we received these laws, or how we were rewarded for their fulfillment, or punished for their neglect. Although there is a sub-theme of inheriting, losing, and regaining the Land of Israel, even this is put in terms of observing G-d's laws. This is true to such an extent that the very word "Torah", which means "Teaching", is (mis)translated in non-Jewish sources as "the Law". In the Oral Torah, there is likewise a concentration on the laws and their details. There are some theological passages, but almost nothing that is undisputed. Medieval scholars worked long and hard in trying to derive theological doctrines from the Bible and Talmud. Few conclusions are established as "bedrock". But what do the laws mean? Are they requirements of G-d, or merely suggestions for our physical and spiritual well being? Does G-d CARE about what we do? A recent television series, featuring an atheist physician, had him saying: "If there IS a Creator of all, do you think he cares what you throw into your alimentary canal?" Is G-d somehow affected by our actions? Do our actions promise wealth and happiness? Do they have to do with our afterlife? (an idea never mentioned in Scripture, and rejected by heretical groups such as the Sadducees). Do our actions affect the world, or even beyond? These questions presented themselves, albeit without a clear answer, in both Scripture and Talmud. In Scripture, Job is a righteous man, whose life falls apart for apparently no reason. His "friends" rebuke and chastise him for only appearing righteous, while being a secret sinner. Why else would G-d make him suffer? By the end of the book, G-d informs both Job and his friends that Man doesn't have a clue. The apparent answer is that there is no answer, at least not one that Man can be privy to. In the Talmud, we have the tragic figure of Elisha Ben Avuyah. Elisha had been one of the greatest rabbis, a colleague of Rabbi Akiva. At some point, he abandoned G-d and Torah. Why? Several answers are given. One was the fascinating story of something that he had witnessed. He saw a father order his son to climb a tree which held a bird's nest. The father told his son to free the mother, and bring him the eggs. Elisha looked on with admiration. This young man, with one action, was fulfilling two mitzvot; honoring his father, and "shiluach haken" (freeing the mother bird when taking the chicks or eggs). Not only that, but these are two mitzvot for which the Torah promises "long life upon the land". As he watched, the young man fell and died. Elisha was dumbstruck. Where was this young man's promised long life? He concluded "there is neither Judgment nor Judge", and devoted the rest of his life to Greek culture and philosophy. He was henceforth referred to in the Talmud as "acher" (someone else), saying "this isn't Elisha, it must be someone else". The rabbis entered into a discussion of what happened. They re-interpreted "long life" to mean a rich spiritual life in Paradise.  They even concluded that "there is no reward for a mitzvah in this world"; an idea that apparently contradicts many Scriptural passages. So, how are we to interpret the mitzvot, and their place in our lives? I shall write the different approaches which we find in our sacred literature. It will be each person's task to take what makes sense to them, and find the meaning and majesty in G-d's commandments.