tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post3431120965194171040..comments2024-03-29T12:21:24.976+03:00Comments on Daas Torah - Issues of Jewish Identity: Rabbinic Authority - Descriptive vs rational justificationDaas Torahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07252904288544083215noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-42806803160242392592009-03-20T06:45:00.000+02:002009-03-20T06:45:00.000+02:00"Why don't we try another dichotomy. If you think ..."Why don't we try another dichotomy. If you think his belief that studying of science leads to a greater appreciation of G-d is applicable to all times and all places - than you would conclude that he made a major mistake. On the other hand if you view that he only wrote that for his generation then you would assume that he would have abandoned it in our age when we see being a scientist does not produce a better understanding of G-d than studying Torah."<BR/><BR/>I do not think that the Rambam would abandon his view. True, he would be shocked by Chilonim studying Science and not finding G-d. But his directives were for Torah Jews. I submit he would be appalled by the intellectual corruption in today's Yeshiva world, in no small part caused by the ignorance of Science, davka after it gave birth to insights into Creation that are without precedent.madaralhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12464817724312275528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-32110123738191327202009-03-19T23:44:00.000+02:002009-03-19T23:44:00.000+02:00HAL said... It all boils down to whether you th...HAL said...<BR/><BR/> It all boils down to whether you think Rambam was a Tzadik or a Heretic.<BR/><BR/> If you think he was a Tzadik, then you must accept his view that the more we learn of nature and science, the more we appreciative of Hashem we become.<BR/><BR/> If you think he was a Heretic, then of course anything you learn of the natural world that might ask uncomfortable questions of Rabbeim is out of bounds.<BR/><BR/> ===============<BR/>Why don't we try another dichotomy. If you think his belief that studying of science leads to a greater appreciation of G-d is applicable to all times and all places - than you would conclude that he made a major mistake. On the other hand if you view that he only wrote that for his generation then you would assume that he would have abandoned it in our age when we see being a scientist does not produce a better understanding of G-d than studying Torah.Daas Torahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07252904288544083215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-58096307666049346812009-03-19T23:25:00.000+02:002009-03-19T23:25:00.000+02:00It all boils down to whether you think Rambam was ...It all boils down to whether you think Rambam was a Tzadik or a Heretic. <BR/><BR/>If you think he was a Tzadik, then you must accept his view that the more we learn of nature and science, the more we appreciative of Hashem we become.<BR/><BR/>If you think he was a Heretic, then of course anything you learn of the natural world that might ask uncomfortable questions of Rabbeim is out of bounds.<BR/><BR/>The Torah are the words of Hashem. I think it can withstand the questions of science and curious minds.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-56741801959492319242009-03-19T20:13:00.000+02:002009-03-19T20:13:00.000+02:00More specific quote on the problem with how "...More specific quote on the problem with how "the typical academic" views Jewish History:<BR/><BR/>http://64.112.226.77/one/ajs/ajs08/index.php?click_key=1&cmd=Multi+Search+Search+Load+Session&session_id=61452&PHPSESSID=66b91f28314f3c5337d6880fdb1bedd7<BR/><BR/>Abstract:<BR/><BR/> Post-modernism, broadly understood, raises a host of challenging questions for the study of Jewish history, culture, and society. Among them are questions linked to the frequently invoked conceptual polarity “essentialism versus constructivism.” Until recently, the conventional assumption was that Judaism was a religious civilization whose central core was more or less fixed and whose borders were well-defined and easily recognizable, whatever the time, whatever the place. <B>Post-modern scholarship, on the other hand, which posits that meaning is contingent, unstable, and always in flux, disputes this.</B> As Moshe Rosman writes in his recent book How Jewish Is Jewish History?, “If the word ‘Jewish,’ signifies no essential features continuous over time and place, if it can be – or if it has been – constructed in an infinite number of ways, if it is always and everywhere contingent, then, as a practical matter, how do we go about defining the subject which we seek to research and write about?” This session will explore how these issues impinge on contemporary scholarship about the Jewish past and present. The participants will also comment on why these issues have come to the fore with particular force at this time and how they might be linked to social, cultural, and religious tensions outside the walls of the academy.<BR/><BR/>[As if tension does not exist within the walls of the academy and all the academics are magically immune to any bias.]Freelance Kiruv Maniac (Mr. Hyde)https://www.blogger.com/profile/10298176204317506218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-83488455812859490942009-03-19T20:00:00.000+02:002009-03-19T20:00:00.000+02:00I also think that there is enough material in Chaz...I also think that there is enough material in Chazal for anyone with an open and courageous mind to completely be absorbed into their world-view. The distance of centuries can be overcome with sufficient effort.<BR/>Jews are not limited by any "Wittgensteinian paradigm" where only those who share a common temporal culture can communicate accurately to one another.<BR/><BR/>Hashem has guaranteed that Torah Learning is capable of transcending the natural cultural barriers of different times and different places for all Jews to speak a common Torah language.<BR/><BR/>I imagine this was the subject of these sessions at the last (40th) AJS conference:<BR/>http://www.ajsnet.org/2008prog/program.pdf <BR/><BR/>Session 7, Monday, December 22, 2008 11:15 AM – 1:00 PM<BR/>7.1JUDAISM OR JUDAISMS? THE POST-MODERN CHALLENGE<BR/>Sponsored by the American Academy for Jewish Research<BR/>Chair: Todd M. Endelman (University of Michigan)<BR/><BR/>Is Jewish History Really Jewish? Th e Boundaries of Minority History<BR/>David J. Biale (University of California, Davis)<BR/><BR/>Texts as Cultural Anchors: Talmud, Piyyut, Hekhalot<BR/>Ephraim Kanarfogel (Yeshiva University)Freelance Kiruv Maniac (Mr. Hyde)https://www.blogger.com/profile/10298176204317506218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-48897901974962062082009-03-19T04:28:00.000+02:002009-03-19T04:28:00.000+02:00Refael: Professor Berger claims that all factions ...Refael: Professor Berger claims that all factions of Judaism use the liberal understanding of law.<BR/><BR/>I think P. Berger missed the point.<BR/><BR/>The issue regarding Rabbinic Authority is related to Torah authority. Those that view Torah as a guiding light that teaches as how to think, feel, assess priorites and every minute action is governed by the Torah will naturally look to Torah experts to provide the Torah view on the aforementioned subjects. <BR/><BR/>Conversely, those that view Torah as a general code of regulations + some moral lessons, IOW, they think the Torah, chalilah is limited, will riddicule Rabbinic Authority on matters outside halachah.Rocco Lamponehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18347650969032558548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-74619874821923321472009-03-19T03:12:00.000+02:002009-03-19T03:12:00.000+02:00I would say that the charedi model follows a legal...I would say that the charedi model follows a legalistic definition of truth.madaralhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12464817724312275528noreply@blogger.com