The Purpose of the Mitzvot part 4

The shock waves continued. In Ashkenazi Franco-Germany, there was a sound rejection of the "Guide". Their approach to Judaism was primarily based on the study of Bible and Talmud. Their halachah was based on the interpretations of great rabbis, as well as local traditions. Taking outside concepts (Greek philosophy) into Torah was unthinkable. Even in halachah, RAMBAM's formulation of the entire system ran contrary to the more eclectic views of Ashkenazi rabbis. In their view, if five rabbis expressed a view on a subject, we must either come up with a formula that encompasses as many of these views as possible, or else go by the majority. For RAMBAM, we take the view that is the most logical. He also was opposed to most post-Talmudic customs, whereas for the Ashkenazim, this was perhaps the most essential part of the system! Both his philosophical and legal works were burned in the cities of France and Germany. It would be another five hundred years before they took another look.

Most Sepharadic communities enthusiastically accepted RAMBAM's views in all areas. The undercurrent of Kabbalistic thought were strong. Some therefore kept themselves distant from RAMBAM's works, some attempted a fusion of the two. Their approach was to understand RAMBAM and Kabbalah as representing two different levels of understanding, both valid, even if seemingly contradictory. In the Iberian peninsula, three distinct approaches were evident. Nearly all accepted RAMBAM's halachic rulings. (This was often not the case in North Africa). But one faction followed RAMBAM's system exactly, often enlarging upon it. Since RAMBAM highly praised secular studies (he defined the concept of "Maaseh Breshit", the acts of creation, as the study of natural science), this segment of Iberian Jewry pursued the study of astronomy, chemistry, grammar; even poetry. We can now understand why many of the craters on the Moon are named for Spanish rabbis, who were also astronomers! Two separate approaches to Kabbalah arose(which were also central to the Jews of Southern France). One, which has all but disappeared today, was the "Prophetic Kabbalah". It was based on the idea that by meditating on the Names of G-d, or even the letters of the Hebrew alphabet, one can achieve the power of prophecy. These Kabbalists also accepted, to a large degree, the works of RAMBAM; especially because he apparently rejected the view of Talmudic rabbis that prophecy had ended with the destruction of the first Temple. (One twentieth century scholar actually wrote his doctoral thesis on the question if RAMBAM considered himself a prophet). The other approach (the one which eventually prevailed) was theosophic; trying to understand the meaning of the world and life through an understanding of G-d's attributes and His "inner life". (RAMBAM emphatically rejected any concept of Divine Attributes). For this group, as with later Kabbalists, the narratives in the Torah are "hints" at higher Truths, and the Mitzvot are part of two dramas, one involving the Universe, one involving our own inner life. (More on this in my next post). For them, RAMBAM's uncompromising view that we have no perception of G-d's intent, let alone His reality, seemed the exact opposite of what they were attempting to do.So, Spanish and Portuguese Jewry had different approaches to the mitzvot; are they symbols or tools? Are they reminders, or the controls governing all existence? Although some attempted a synthesis, most saw them as approaches which most be considered, but, ultimately, only one chosen as a guide to life.

The Purpose of the Mitzvot part 3

RAMBAM's "Guide for the Perplexed" sent shock waves through the Jewish world. The main reason that it does not do that very much today, is that the real issues that it deals with are now non-issues. Aristotelian concepts of the eternity of the Universe (as opposed to creation at a point in time), among others, and philosophical questions such as if G-d has attributes, does that contradict His unity, are not the big issues of our generation. In order to overcome such issues, RAMBAM posits a very distant, unknowable G-d. His foreknowledge makes prayer meaningless, except as an exercise in realizing our dependence on Him. He can only be perceived by philosophical inquiry. In fact, the Paradise envisioned by RAMBAM is the ultimate contemplation of Him. RAMBAM  is not a cold rationalist; he sees such contemplation, even in this life, as bringing one to a sense of ecstasy. In fact, Paradise only awaits those who have pursued such contemplation in this life. Philosophy, rather than Torah, is the ultimate goal. The mitzvot are seen as tangible reminders of G-d and His meaning. The mezzuzah on the door reminds us of His presence, as do the tefillin on our arm and head remind us of dedicating our hearts and minds to His reality. The Temple service was a concession rather than an ideal. Men were used to sacrificing. Rather than pagan rituals, including human sacrifice, we were given a toned-down sacrificial system that contains great lessons. Even the ketoret (incense)  of the Temple, which is seen in rabbinic literature as the most ethereal of the sacrifices, was seen by RAMBAM as merely having the function of removing the foul odors of the dead animals. Again, there were, and are, those who will interpret this mystically. Perhaps a "foul odor" means the forces of evil which must be banished. But RAMBAM would consider a belief in the "forces of evil" to be inconsistent with His unity and omnipresence. RAMBAM negates the existence of both angels and demons for this reason! Most controversial of all is his "Parable of the Island". He writes that there exists an island, on which is a palace, in which dwells a great king. People not living on the island, have no knowledge of any of this. Many live on the island who are unaware of the king. Some are aware, and circle the palace, but are unable to find the entrance. Only a few enter. RAMBAM explains: The people who know nothing of the island, the palace, or the king, are the pagans. Those living on the island, but are unaware of the palace, are the followers of other monotheistic religions. Those who circle the palace are the Torah scholars. Those who enter, are the philosophers. The Guide was hailed by many whose worldview was shaped by Aristotle. In Franco-Germany, the rabbis burned RAMBAM's books, all of them, in the public squares. Some defended his halachic works, while distancing themselves from the philosophical works, especially the Guide. Some refused to believe that the Guide was even written by RAMBAM. After all, if the Temple Service was merely a concession, why does it loom so large in the Torah (covering two-thirds of its commands). Moreover, RAMBAM's own halachic work, the Mishneh Torah, has a huge volume dedicated to the details of the Temple Service (like "how many priests carry the limbs of each sacrifice onto the altar?"). Indeed, if the purpose of the tefillin is to be a mere reminder, why does he go into such great detail in his halachic works about how they must be made, what the ink must be made of, how the parchment is to be processed? But, if they are mere reminders, do we really need to do these actions at all? Jewish humanism, as well as early Reform, used the idea of the commands being mere reminders, as a central feature in their ideology. indicating that the commands are really only suggestions, and that Judaism is primarily focused on ideas rather than actions. The shock-waves went out to the entire Jewish world. many theories came about, but they are still reverberating.