Palacký University in Olomouc Faculty of Arts
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Palacký University in Olomouc Faculty of Arts Kurt and Ursula Schubert Centre of Jewish Studies Magdaléna JÁNOŠÍKOVÁ Eliezer Eilburg: Criticism of Miracles Diploma thesis Supervisor: Tamás Visi, MA, Ph.D. Olomouc 2012 I hereby declare that this thesis is my own work and effort. Wherever contributions of others are involved, every effort is made to indicate this clearly, with due reference to the literature, and acknowledgement of collaborative research and discussions. Prehlasujem, že som diplomovú prácu vypracovala samostatne a uviedla v nej predpísaným spôsobom všetky použité pramene a literatúru. V Olomouci dňa 20. augusta 2012. Magdaléna Jánošíková I would like to thank my supervisor, Tamás Visi, MA, Ph.D. for being endless source of wisdom, support and healthy constructive criticism that I appreciate the most. I also thank to Mag. Louise Hecht, Ph.D. and PhDr. Lenka Uličná for being wonderful teachers of Hebrew language in Palacký University in Olomouc. Last but not least, I would like to express gratitude to my family, and especially Miroslav, for all the love and patience they provided to me. Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................... 5 1 Miracles as an Issue of Philosophy ...................................................................... 10 1.1 Saadia Gaon .................................................................................................. 10 1.1.1 Saadia on Miracles ................................................................................ 16 1.2 Maimonides .................................................................................................. 18 1.2.1 Creationism and miracles: Guide of the Perplexed ............................... 20 1.2.2 Prophecy and miracles: Mishne Torah and Guide of the Perplexed ..... 21 1.2.3 Miracles: Treatise on Resurrection ....................................................... 25 1.2.4 Summary ............................................................................................... 27 1.3 Philosophical debate in transition: Ibn Sīna, Ibn Rushd and their Jewish followers .................................................................................................................. 29 1.4 Gersonides .................................................................................................... 32 1.4.1 Prophecy ................................................................................................ 33 1.4.2 Miracles ................................................................................................. 35 1.4.3 Summary ............................................................................................... 38 2 Criticism of philosophical approach .................................................................... 40 2.1 Don Isaac Abravanel .................................................................................... 42 2.2 Spinoza ......................................................................................................... 47 2.2.1 Prophecy and prophets .......................................................................... 49 2.2.2 Miracle .................................................................................................. 50 3 Eliezer Eilburg ..................................................................................................... 53 3.1 Biography ..................................................................................................... 53 3.2 Impact of Printing ......................................................................................... 55 3.2.1 Eilburg and Compilations of Manuscripts ............................................ 59 3.2.2 Dating of Eser She’elot ......................................................................... 61 3.2.3 Methodology ......................................................................................... 63 3.2.4 She’elah Rishonah: Criticism of Miracles ............................................ 65 3.2.5 Eilburg: Summarizing Medieval Approach .......................................... 66 4 Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 76 Resumé ........................................................................................................................ 80 Appendix A: Translation: the First Question by Eliezer Eilburg ................................ 90 Appendix B: Transcription: the First Question by Eliezer Eilburg .......................... 118 Introduction Biblical miracles are a topic discussed even in contemporary society. Through ritualization and commemoration some of them, such as the miracles connected to the narrative of the Exodus which are commemorated during the Seder meal on the feast of Passover, became educative tools teaching religious concept of Judaism. Miracles in the Bible could be understood as manifestation of God’s endless power that abrogates customary order. On the other hand, the sharp difference between miracles and customary regulations implicitly helps to constitute nature as having an order. The miracles we encounter in biblical accounts have specific providential and historical roles, which place the community of Jews in the centre of all events. Miracle is a unilateral type of communication of God with mankind. Despite the fact that miracles often receive a detailed treatment in biblical texts, there is no firmly established classification of supernatural events in the Bible. There are several words in Biblical Hebrew that denote miracles: gedolot (great deeds, magnificence of God), pele (wonders), nifla’ot (wondrous acts, miracles), ot (sign, signs of hidden or potentially happening in future), nes (sign of warning), and mofet (wonder, miracle).1 The plurality in terminology concerning unusual miraculous events supports the thesis that the Bible does not intent to work with any rigid theory of miracles. In the Talmud, Mishnah and midrashic literature we find diverse opinions concerning nature of miracles. Every commentator on miracles takes it for granted that they can happen. However, description of their nature differs to great extent. Some of the opinions became popular pre-texts for supporting a naturalistic interpretation of miracles in medieval Jewish thought. A passage in Tractate Avot, which is a later addition to the Mishna, says: “Ten things were created on the eve of the Shabbat at twilight, and these are they: the mouth of the earth [Nm 16:32], the mouth of the well [Nm 21:17], [3] the mouth of the donkey [Nm 22:28-30], the rainbow [Gn 9:13], the manna [16:4-21], the rod [Ex 4:2], the Shamir, the letters, 2 the writing, and the tablets.” The passage was repeatedly used by medieval Jewish 1 Cf. Brown, F., Driver, S. R., Briggs, Ch. A.: Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon. (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Pub, 1996), s.v. “gedolot”, “pele”, “niflaot”, “ot”, “nes”, “mofet.” 2 mAvot 5:6. 5 thinkers to support the argument that miracles are not done through direct volition of God. One of the most famous passages of the Talmud rejects the epistemological testimony of miracles. The halakhic discussion speaks about R. Joshua, who protests against R. Eliezer.3 The latter tries to support his opinion with the divine intervention into the normal course of things which are made on his behalf, and finally a heavenly voice declares that he is right, but at this moment R. Joshua cries out responding to the heavenly voice: “The Torah is not in heaven!4 […] We pay no attention to a divine voice because long ago at Mt. Sinai You wrote in Your Torah at Mt. Sinai, ‘After the majority must one incline.”5 This suggests that there was a tendency to limit miracles into the past history so that the rabbinic system of organization could thrive without being disturbed by older forms of religious behaviour. It also reveals that rabbis themselves were often understood as people that can bring out a miracle through various activities – predominately studying, making good deeds or praying. The account on Honi the Circle-Drawer is one of the brightest examples of this practice.6 Maimonides in the introduction of the Commentary on Mishnah speaks about the relation between prophets and rabbis. It is mitzvah to follow prophet’s demands, even if they collide with the Torah. There is an expectation concerning worshiping idols. According to Maimonides, contradictory nature of prophet’s actual demands does not break the Biblical laws, but it suspends them; therefore both, prophets and rabbis, may both enjoy their legitimate authority at the same time. The biblical and rabbinic text presented miracles as God’s action, although various intermediaries may appear in executing the divine will. Usually they are angels, prophets, and even sages. God is aware of every particular event and he has no problem to change the course of such events. God’s knowledge of particulars and implementation of His will was not seen as problematic. Under the influence the Arabic falsafa, philosophical branch influenced by Aristotelianism and Neoplatonism, questions concerning these issues were raised. 3 bBava Metzia 59b 4 Dt 30:12 5 Ex 23:2 6 mTa’anit 3:8 6 Shortly before his death, Judah Halevi (1075–1141) wrote his famous book Kuzari. This work was written in a form of a dialog between pagan king and followers of four systems of thought: a Christian, a Muslim, a Jew, and a philosopher. Judah Halevi as a proponent of the faith