DOCSLIB.ORG

Downloaded From

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Downloaded From Yearbook of the Maimonides Centre for Advanced Studies 2019 Yearbook of the Maimonides Centre for Advanced Studies Chief Editor Giuseppe Veltri Yearbook of the Maimonides Centre for Advanced Studies 2019 Volume Editor Yoav Meyrav The Yearbook is published on behalf of the Maimonides Centre for Advanced Studies ISBN 978-3-11-060332-3 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-061883-9 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-060737-6 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 Licence. For details go to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. Library of Congress Control Number: XXX Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Cover image: Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg, Ms Cod. Levy 115, fol. 158r: Maimonides, More Nevukhim, Beginn von Teil III. Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck www.degruyter.com In Memoriam Roi Benbassat Contents Editorial IX Part I: Articles Aryeh Botwinick The Simultaneous GenesisofMonotheism andScepticism in the Jewish Religion 3 MichelaTorbidoni Socratic Impulse, Secular Tendency,and Jewish Emancipation:AComparison between Simone Luzzattoand Moses Mendelssohn 11 Behnam Zolghadr The TheoryofAḥwāland Argumentsagainst the Law of Non-Contradiction 31 Máté Veres The Causes of Epochē: ANoteonStromateis 8.22.1–4 53 Ze’ev Strauss Meister Eckhart Reading Ibn Gabirol’s Fons vitae 65 Giada Coppola ObadiahSforno and the Individual Human Soul 101 José María Sánchez de León Serrano Arnold Geulincx: Scepticism and Mental Holism 125 Avraham Rot Spinoza’sAffective Scepticism 145 Timothy Franz What wasMaimon After? His Metaphysical Foundations of NaturalSciencein 1790 173 Michah Gottlieb Does Judaism Have Dogma? Moses Mendelssohn and aPivotal Nineteenth- Century Debate 219 VIII Contents Anne Fiebig From Scepticism to Toleranceof“the Other”:The Example of Yeshayahu Leibowitz 243 GiuseppeVeltri Jesuit Strategic Scepticism toward Religious Self-Consciousness and Commonalities: Chinese Muslims, Jews, and Christians in the Eyes of Matteo Ricci(1552–1610) and His “Translator” NicolasTrigault (1557–1628) 265 Part II: Reports Activities and Events 281 compiled by Maria Wazinski SilkeSchaeper Report on the LibraryofJewish Scepticism 303 Editorial The Yearbook of the Maimonides Centre for Advanced Studies2019 is the fourth vol- ume of articles stemmingfrom research conducted by MCAS’sfellows and affiliates. It also includes asection with an overviewofthe activities and events conductedat the centre duringits fourth academic year and areport on its library. The twelve articles contained in the present volume exhibit the extent to which MCAS scholarship advances the understanding of Judaism and scepticism, both in- dividuallyand together,among different thinkers and within different areas of study. Whether ashortnote or afull-fledged analysis,each paper has something fresh to offer and something new to say, opening new directions of research and inviting the scholarlycommunity to jointhe discussion. Aryeh Botwinick’sopeningessayoutlinesanew and thought-provoking ap- proach to Western thought and religion’sperception of itself. Instead of anarrative of conflict,Botwinick’shistoriosophyraises the notion of God’sunknowability as the mediating thread thatrenders monotheism and scepticism fundamentallyinter- twined. Michela Torbidoni’sstudy adds an important chapter to the as-yetunderstudied history of the persona and function of Socrateswithin the Jewish tradition. Focusing on the cases of Moses Mendelssohn and Simone Luzzatto, who operated at different times and in different contexts, she tantalisingly argues that the figure of Socrates can be considered as avehicle for Jewishemancipation. The comparative discussion adds evidence to the thesis that modern Jewish Italian culturewas part of the intel- lectualbasis of the programme to reform the statusofEuropean Jews in the late eighteenthcentury. BehnamZolghadr tackles one of the cornerstonesofAristotelianlogic—namely, the principle of non-contradiction—by presentingcritiques of it as reported by the Muslim theologian Faḫral-Dīnal-Rāzī (d. 1210). Zolghadr argues thatthese critiques, which can be traced back to the Muʿtazilite mutakallimūn,function as part of its con- solidation of the theory of states(aḥwāl), which can consequentlyberegarded as a dialetheic theory.Assuch, Zolghadr devises the first steps in modelling it logically using tools of paraconsistent logic developed in the late twentieth century,more than athousand years after the theory’sinception. Máté Veres enrichesthe understanding of ancientscepticism by exploring Clem- ent of Alexandria’sdiscussion of epochē (suspension of judgment) in his Stromateis. He examines and refines arguments thatsupport the claim thatClement is present- ing avariety of scepticism thatpredates the well-known version expounded by Sex- tus Empiricusand considers different explanations as to whyaChristian theologian of Clement’sstandingwould express interestinsceptical arguments, let alone recog- nise theirpotential legitimacy. OpenAccess. ©2020, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the CreativeCommons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110618839-001 X Editorial Ze’ev Strauss offers the first comprehensive scholarlywork in English on Meister Eckhart’semployment of IbnGabirol’s Fons vitae. He shows the vast extent to which Eckhart drawsonthis work, explicitlyand also implicitly,inorder to account for his own Christian philosophy, primarilygravitating towards IbnGabirol’smetaphysics of the One. Strauss shows that manyofthe provocative and unusual elements of Eck- hart’sChristian thoughtcorrespond to Eckhart’sfavourable view of Fons vitae. Giada Coppola elucidates Obadiah Sforno’s(?1475–1550) philosophicalinterpre- tation of the individual human soul in his Lightofthe Nations,with emphasis on his defence of its immortality.Coppola shows how exegetical interpretation and the text’sphilosophical background are intrinsically connected, identifies Sforno’ssour- ces common to the Hebrew and Latin traditions, and displays the interesting dynam- ics between Sforno’sphilosophical composition and his biblical commentaries. José MaríaSánchez de León Serrano offers anew reading of the Flemish thinker Arnold Geulincx (1624–69)based on an audacious interpretation of his epistemolog- ical views. By tracing the central tenetsofGeulincx’sthought back to his method of self-inspection, SánchezdeLeónSerrano illuminatesthe unity and systematic char- acter of this multifaceted philosopher—who at first glanceseems to offer an incoher- ent blend of scepticism and metaphysics—and opens up new vistas in the studyof this stillwidelyoverlooked thinker. Avraham Rot’spaper offers an original and challenging interpretation of Spi- noza’sphilosophical project,arguing that if one shifts the focus of analysis from his theory of knowledge to his theory of affects, Spinoza emergesasaphilosopher whose scepticism is significantlymoreradical than its Cartesian counterpart.Rot claims that for Spinoza, the doubt that matters is not doubt as amethodological de- vice employed to attain certainty,but rather the doubt that human beingsconstantly experience insofarasthey are finite, embodied, and uncertain of their future. TimothyFranz offers ahighlydetailed, in-depth analysis of Solomon Maimon’s seldom-studied Weltseele (1790), which he describes as aproto-dialectical metaphy- sics of the absolute. Beyond exploring the Weltseele on its own terms, Franz identi- fies it as akey stageinMaimon’sphilosophical development and argues that it func- tions as an attempt to overcome the self-conceivedfailure of Maimon’swell-known Essay on Transcendental Philosophy. In turn, the ideas in the Weltseele wereaban- doned,although not before they exposed the need to construct alogic of the abso- lute, which was ultimatelyexpressed in Maimon’s Logik (1794). Michah Gottlieb’scontribution does much to clarify the debate surroundingJu- daism and dogma as reflected in German-speaking Jewishauthors in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, showing thatitisnot merelyatheoretical question, but also has much to do with concrete considerations concerning Jewish society.Hebe- gins with athorough analysis of Moses Mendelssohn’sview of Judaism, explaining in what sense it should be understood as anti-dogmatic and also how it reflects Men- delssohn’saspiration for aself-conception of Judaism thatisdistinct from Christian- ity.Gottlieb then turns to discuss leading nineteenth-century German-speakingJew- ish thinkers and shows how they transform the problem from an intrareligious one to Postscript XI an interreligious one. Each response is informed by aconcept of Judaism that is in- timatelyconnected to the problem of Jewishcommunal unity. Anne Fiebig’sarticle is the first to offer asystematic account of the concept of tolerance in the thought of Yeshayahu Leibowitz (1903–94), one of the most impor- tant—and certainlymost controversial—Israeli philosophers, as it emergesfrom his religious scepticism. AnalysingLeibowitz’sepistemology,Fiebigpresents Leibowitz as amodel against religious dogmatism, which Leibowitz regardsascorruptive to agenuinelyfaithful position. Finally, through an analysis of an earlyseventeenth-century Jesuit report about religious minorities in China,Giuseppe
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 Unit 1 Metaphysical Method of Aristotle and Aquinas
    UNIT 1 METAPHYSICAL METHOD OF ARISTOTLE AND AQUINAS Contents 1.0 Objectives 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Aristotelian Method of Metaphysics 1.3 Metaphysical Method of St Thomas Aquinas 1.4 Metaphysics and Epistemology 1.5 Let us Sum up 1.6 Key Words 1.7 Further Readings and References 1.8 Answers to Check Your Progress 1.0 OBJECTIVES Aristotle’s thirst for knowledge pushes him beyond the phenomenal world. He does not just contemplate on them but arrives at them through causes. At the beginning of metaphysics which he called ‘first philosophy’ Aristotle had raised the problem of knowledge and wisdom. Aquinas devoted much of his thought to the question ‘what does it mean to be’? Many Thomists think that his greatest philosophical ability was shown in the area of metaphysics. In this Unit you are expected to understand: • The metaphysical method of Aristotle • The metaphysical method of Aquinas • The inseparable relation between metaphysics and epistemology 1.1 INTRODUCTION 1 The term metaphysics is not of Aristotle, it was of his disciple Andronicus of Rhodes (40 BC) who edited his works. The texts on ‘first philosophy’ were grouped after those of physics and were called meta ta physika. Aristotle defines metaphysics or first philosophy as “a science which investigates being as being”. It is the science that studies being as being. Other sciences touch only a portion of the things. They touch on a particular sphere of being and analyse the attributes of being in that particular sphere. Metaphysics, on the contrary, considers being as such, entity as such in the universal manner and in its highest and most general determinations, thus seeking the ultimate causes.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy of Science and Philosophy of Chemistry
    Philosophy of Science and Philosophy of Chemistry Jaap van Brakel Abstract: In this paper I assess the relation between philosophy of chemistry and (general) philosophy of science, focusing on those themes in the philoso- phy of chemistry that may bring about major revisions or extensions of cur- rent philosophy of science. Three themes can claim to make a unique contri- bution to philosophy of science: first, the variety of materials in the (natural and artificial) world; second, extending the world by making new stuff; and, third, specific features of the relations between chemistry and physics. Keywords : philosophy of science, philosophy of chemistry, interdiscourse relations, making stuff, variety of substances . 1. Introduction Chemistry is unique and distinguishes itself from all other sciences, with respect to three broad issues: • A (variety of) stuff perspective, requiring conceptual analysis of the notion of stuff or material (Sections 4 and 5). • A making stuff perspective: the transformation of stuff by chemical reaction or phase transition (Section 6). • The pivotal role of the relations between chemistry and physics in connection with the question how everything fits together (Section 7). All themes in the philosophy of chemistry can be classified in one of these three clusters or make contributions to general philosophy of science that, as yet , are not particularly different from similar contributions from other sci- ences (Section 3). I do not exclude the possibility of there being more than three clusters of philosophical issues unique to philosophy of chemistry, but I am not aware of any as yet. Moreover, highlighting the issues discussed in Sections 5-7 does not mean that issues reviewed in Section 3 are less im- portant in revising the philosophy of science.
    [Show full text]
  • HERMANN COHEN and LEO STRAUSS Leora Batnitzky
    JJTP_addnl_186-213 4/26/06 4:00 PM Page 187 HERMANN COHEN AND LEO STRAUSS Leora Batnitzky Princeton University Introduction Leo Strauss concluded both his first and last major works with ref- erence to Hermann Cohen.1 The arguments of Strauss’s first pub- lished book—Spinoza’s Critique of Religion—are rooted in Strauss’s initial work on Cohen’s interpretation of Spinoza. Strauss’s second book— Philosophy and Law—begins and ends by declaring that Cohen is right that the philosophy of Maimonides represents “true rationalism” and more particularly that Maimonides is better understood as a Platonist than as an Aristotelian. Strauss’s last published work, Studies in Platonic Political Philosophy, published posthumously, ends with an essay on Cohen, which was also the introduction to the English translation of Religion of Reason out of the Sources of Judaism. Interestingly, though this essay on Cohen is the final essay in Studies in Platonic Political Philosophy, it doesn’t have much to say about Plato. Although Strauss claims in this essay not have read Religion of Reason for forty years, those familiar with Strauss’s project will recognize that it is from an engagement with Cohen that Strauss forms his basic reading of Maimonides and then Plato. These readings changed in emphasis throughout Strauss’s career but they nevertheless remained funda- mental to his philosophical program. In this essay, I explore Strauss’s philosophical relation to Cohen. It is not an overstatement to suggest that Cohen is responsible for Leo Strauss’s turn to medieval Jewish philosophy. The focus of this essay, however, is not primarily on the details of Cohen and Strauss’s Presented at “Hermann Cohen’s Ethics,” the University of Toronto, August 2001.
    [Show full text]
  • Averroes's Dialectic of Enlightenment
    59 AVERROES'S DIALECTIC OF ENLIGHTENMENT. SOME DIFFICULTIES IN THE CONCEPT OF REASON Hubert Dethier A. The Unity ofthe Intellect This theory of Averroes is to be combated during the Middle ages as one of the greatest heresies (cft. Thomas's De unitate intellectus contra Averroystas); it was active with the revolutionary Baptists and Thomas M"Unzer (as Pinkstergeest "hoch liber alIen Zerstreuungen der Geschlechter und des Glaubens" 64), but also in the "AufkHinmg". It remains unclear on quite a few points 65. As far as the different phases of the epistemological process is concerned, Averroes reputes Avicenna's innovation: the vis estimativa, as being unaristotelian, and returns to the traditional three levels: senses, imagination and cognition. As far as the actual abstraction process is concerned, one can distinguish the following elements with Avicenna. 1. The intelligible fonns (intentiones in the Latin translation) are present in aptitude and in imaginative capacity, that is, in the sensory images which are present there; 2. The fonns are actualised by the working of the Active Intellect (the lowest celestial sphere), that works in analogy to light ; 3. The intelligible fonns-in-act are "received" by the "possible" or the "material intellecf', which thereby changes into intellect-in-act, also called: habitual or acquired intellect: the. perfect form ofwhich - when all scientific knowledge that can be acquired, has been acquired -is called speculative intellect. 4. According to the Aristotelian principle that the epistemological process and knowing itselfcoincide, the state ofintellect-in-act implies - certainly as speculative intellect - the conjunction with the Active Intellect. 64 Cited by Ernst Bloch, Avicenna und die Aristotelische Linke, (1953), in Suhrkamp, Gesamtausgabe, 7, p.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Thomas Meyer Leo Strauss's Religious Rhetoric
    Thomas Meyer Leo Strauss’s Religious Rhetoric (1924-1938) Although he had been regarded as shy and restrained since his period of study in Marburg, Strauss was a master of religious rhetoric in his letters and [published] texts. This rhetoric was, for him, neither a [form of] compensation [for insufficient argument], nor a superficial adornment. On the contrary, he deployed religious rhetoric in same way that he analysed [its function] in Plato and Aristotle, through Maimonides and Abravanel, into Spinoza and Hobbes, and up to Hermann Cohen and Julius Guttmann: as an expression of the complex contest between philosophy and religion. After his engagement with Hermann Cohen’s critique of Spinoza in 1924, religious rhetoric was, for Strauss, no longer a feature of Zionist debates alone. Instead, it was a constitutive element of a problematic that Strauss strikingly and provocatively dubbed the “querelle des anciens et des modernes.” In order to understand this change in the function of religious rhetoric [in Strauss’ work], I shall consider three stations of Strauss’ intellectual development. First of all, I shall present several articles that I found in the “Jewish Weekly for Cassel, Hessen, and Waldeck”, which have remained unknown to scholarship until now. Strauss published these articles between February 1925 and January 1928. If we connect these texts with Strauss’s conclusions regarding Spinoza, we can develop a stable account of his religious rhetoric up to about 1934. But [Strauss’s use of religious rhetoric in these texts] can be understood only if we consider it in light of Strauss’ translation of a different religious rhetoric [into the terms of his own thought]: namely, the way Strauss enriched his religious rhetoric through an understanding of, and in dialogue with, the most radical position in Protestant [thought]—that of the dialectical theologian Friedrich Gogarten.
    [Show full text]
  • Pomponazzi on Identity and Individuation Han Thomas Adriaenssen Abstract. Aristotle Defines Growing As a Process in Which An
    Final version forthcoming in Journal of the History of Philosophy Pomponazzi on Identity and Individuation Han Thomas Adriaenssen Abstract. Aristotle defines growing as a process in which an individual living being persists as it accumulates new matter. This definition raises the question of what enables an individual to persist as its material composition continuously changes over time. This paper provides a systematic account of Pietro Pomponazzi’s answer to this question. In his De nutritione et augmentatione, Pomponazzi argues that individuals persist in virtue of their forms. Forms are individuated in part by their material, causal, and temporal origins, which commits Pomponazzi to the view that individuals necessarily have the material, causal, and temporal origins they do. I provide an account of why Pomponazzi was willing to this view. While his opponents remain unnamed, I argue that his arguments for this view are best read as addressing, among others, Paul of Venice and Gregory of Rimini. In On Generation and Corruption, Aristotle describes growing as a process in which “any and every part of the growing magnitude is made bigger . by the accession of something, and thirdly in such a way that the growing thing is preserved and persists” (321a18–22).1 For instance, when an animal grows as the result of the intake of food, all of its limbs grow larger as the result of the intake of new matter, in such a way that the same individual animal persists throughout the process. 1 All Aristotle translations are taken from the Jonathan Barnes edition of the Complete Works. 1 Final version forthcoming in Journal of the History of Philosophy Simple though it may perhaps appear, this definition confronted Aristotle’s later followers and commentators with a problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Kant's Critique of Judgment and the Scientific Investigation of Matter
    Kant’s Critique of Judgment and the Scientific Investigation of Matter Daniel Rothbart, Irmgard Scherer Abstract: Kant’s theory of judgment establishes the conceptual framework for understanding the subtle relationships between the experimental scientist, the modern instrument, and nature’s atomic particles. The principle of purposive- ness which governs judgment has also a role in implicitly guiding modern experimental science. In Part 1 we explore Kant’s philosophy of science as he shows how knowledge of material nature and unobservable entities is possible. In Part 2 we examine the way in which Kant’s treatment of judgment, with its operating principle of purposiveness, enters into his critical project and under- lies the possibility of rational science. In Part 3 we show that the centrality given to judgment in Kant’s conception of science provides philosophical in- sight into the investigation of atomic substances in modern chemistry. Keywords : Kant , judgment , purposiveness , experimentation , investigation of matter . Introduction Kant’s philosophy of science centers on the problem of how it is possible to acquire genuine knowledge of unobservable entities, such as atoms and molecules. “What and how much can the understanding and reason know apart from all experience?” ( CPuR , Axvii). This raises the question of the role of experiments in the knowability ( Erkennbarkeit ) and the experientiality (Erfahrbarkeit ) of nature. Kant’s insights into the character of scientific experimentation are not given the hearing they deserve. We argue that Kant’s theory of judgment establishes the conceptual framework for understanding the subtle inter- actions between the experimental chemist, the modern chemical instrument, and molecular substance.
    [Show full text]
  • Against the Heteronomy of Halakhah: Hermann Cohen's Implicit Rejection of Kant's Critique of Judaism
    Against the Heteronomy of Halakhah: Hermann Cohen’s Implicit Rejection of Kant’s Critique of Judaism George Y. Kohler* “Moses did not make religion a part of virtue, but he saw and ordained the virtues to be part of religion…” Josephus, Against Apion 2.17 Hermann Cohen (1842–1918) was arguably the only Jewish philosopher of modernity whose standing within the general philosophical developments of the West equals his enormous impact on Jewish thought. Cohen founded the influential Marburg school of Neo-Kantianism, the leading trend in German Kathederphilosophie in the second half of the nineteenth and the first decade of the twentieth century. Marburg Neo-Kantianism cultivated an overtly ethical, that is, anti-Marxist, and anti-materialist socialism that for Cohen increasingly concurred with his philosophical reading of messianic Judaism. Cohen’s Jewish philosophical theology, elaborated during the last decades of his life, culminated in his famous Religion of Reason out of the Sources of Judaism, published posthumously in 1919.1 Here, Cohen translated his neo-Kantian philosophical position back into classical Jewish terms that he had extracted from Judaism with the help of the progressive line of thought running from * Bar-Ilan University, Department of Jewish Thought. 1 Hermann Cohen, Religion der Vernunft aus den Quellen des Judentums, first edition, Leipzig: Fock, 1919. I refer to the second edition, Frankfurt: Kaufmann, 1929. English translation by Simon Kaplan, Religion of Reason out of the Sources of Judaism (New York: Ungar, 1972). Henceforth this book will be referred to as RR, with reference to the English translation by Kaplan given after the German in square brackets.
    [Show full text]
  • The Aeolipile As Experimental Model in Early Modern Natural Philosophy
    7KH$HROLSLOHDV([SHULPHQWDO0RGHOLQ(DUO\0RGHUQ1DWXUDO3KLORVRSK\ &UDLJ0DUWLQ 3HUVSHFWLYHVRQ6FLHQFH9ROXPH1XPEHU0D\-XQHSS $UWLFOH 3XEOLVKHGE\7KH0,73UHVV )RUDGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQDERXWWKLVDUWLFOH KWWSVPXVHMKXHGXDUWLFOH Access provided by Oakland University (22 Aug 2016 16:29 GMT) The Aeolipile as Experimental Model in Early Modern Natural Philosophy Craig Martin Oakland University What causes winds was regarded as one of the most difficult questions of early modern natural philosophy. Vitruvius, the ancient Roman architectural au- thor, put forth an alternative to Aristotle’s theory by likening the generation of wind to the actions of the aeolipile, which he believed made artificial winds. As Vitruvius’s work proliferated during the sixteenth and seventeenth centu- ries, numerous natural philosophers, including Descartes, used the aeolipile as a model for nature. Yet, interpretations of Vitruvius’s text and of the relation of the aeolipile to natural winds varied according to definitions and concep- tions of air, wind, rarefaction, condensation, and vapor. 1. Introduction Numerous early modern natural philosophers, Aristotelians as well as their detractors, invoked the workings of the aeolipile to explain the origin and matter of winds. An aeolipile, in its simplest form, is a hollow metal ball or vessel that has one or two small openings. An external fire, or other source of heat, warms water placed within the ball until jets of steam and air shoot forth from the aperture or apertures. From antiquity to the seventeenth century, natural philosophers referred to this artificial device as evidence for specific theories of the wind. These writings typically cited Vitruvius, the ancient Roman author of De architectura, who gave the earliest Prelimary versions of the paper were presented at seminars sponsored by the Department of History and Science and Technology at Johns Hopkins University and by the Graduate School Field Committee in Medieval and Early Modern Studies at the University of Maryland, College Park.
    [Show full text]
  • CCAR Journal the Reform Jewish Quarterly
    CCAR Journal The Reform Jewish Quarterly Halachah and Reform Judaism Contents FROM THE EDITOR At the Gates — ohrgJc: The Redemption of Halachah . 1 A. Brian Stoller, Guest Editor ARTICLES HALACHIC THEORY What Do We Mean When We Say, “We Are Not Halachic”? . 9 Leon A. Morris Halachah in Reform Theology from Leo Baeck to Eugene B . Borowitz: Authority, Autonomy, and Covenantal Commandments . 17 Rachel Sabath Beit-Halachmi The CCAR Responsa Committee: A History . 40 Joan S. Friedman Reform Halachah and the Claim of Authority: From Theory to Practice and Back Again . 54 Mark Washofsky Is a Reform Shulchan Aruch Possible? . 74 Alona Lisitsa An Evolving Israeli Reform Judaism: The Roles of Halachah and Civil Religion as Seen in the Writings of the Israel Movement for Progressive Judaism . 92 David Ellenson and Michael Rosen Aggadic Judaism . 113 Edwin Goldberg Spring 2020 i CONTENTS Talmudic Aggadah: Illustrations, Warnings, and Counterarguments to Halachah . 120 Amy Scheinerman Halachah for Hedgehogs: Legal Interpretivism and Reform Philosophy of Halachah . 140 Benjamin C. M. Gurin The Halachic Canon as Literature: Reading for Jewish Ideas and Values . 155 Alyssa M. Gray APPLIED HALACHAH Communal Halachic Decision-Making . 174 Erica Asch Growing More Than Vegetables: A Case Study in the Use of CCAR Responsa in Planting the Tri-Faith Community Garden . 186 Deana Sussman Berezin Yoga as a Jewish Worship Practice: Chukat Hagoyim or Spiritual Innovation? . 200 Liz P. G. Hirsch and Yael Rapport Nursing in Shul: A Halachically Informed Perspective . 208 Michal Loving Can We Say Mourner’s Kaddish in Cases of Miscarriage, Stillbirth, and Nefel? . 215 Jeremy R.
    [Show full text]
  • Bernard Revel Graduate School of Jewish Studies
    Bernard Revel Graduate School of Jewish Studies Table of Contents Ancient Jewish History .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Medieval Jewish History ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Modern Jewish History ......................................................................................................................................... 8 Bible .................................................................................................................................................................... 17 Jewish Philosophy ............................................................................................................................................... 23 Talmud ................................................................................................................................................................ 29 Course Catalog | Bernard Revel Graduate School of Jewish Studies 1 Ancient Jewish History JHI 5213 Second Temple Jewish Literature Dr. Joseph Angel Critical issues in the study of Second Temple literature, including biblical interpretations and commentaries, laws and rules of conduct, historiography, prayers, and apocalyptic visions. JHI 6233 Dead Sea Scrolls Dr. Lawrence Schiffman Reading of selected Hebrew and Aramaic texts from the Qumran library. The course will provide students with a deep
    [Show full text]
  • Marketing Fragment 6 X 10.T65
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-78218-0 - The Cambridge History of the Book in Britain, Volume II 1100-1400 Edited by Nigel Morgan and Rodney M. Thomson Index More information General index A Description of England 371 A¨eliz de Cund´e 372 A talking of the love of God 365 Aelred of Rievaulx xviii, 6, 206, 322n17, 341, Abbey of the Holy Ghost 365 403n32 Abbo of Saint-Germain 199 Agnes (wife of Reginald, illuminator of Abel, parchmenter 184 Oxford) 178 Aberconwy (Wales) 393 Agnes La Luminore 178 Aberdeen 256 agrimensores 378, 448 University 42 Alan (stationer of Oxford) 177 Abingdon (Berks.), Benedictine abbey 111, Alan de Chirden 180–1 143, 200, 377, 427 Alan of Lille, Anticlaudianus 236 abbot of, see Faricius Proverbs 235 Chronicle 181, 414 Alan Strayler (illuminator) 166, 410 and n65 Accedence 33–4 Albion 403 Accursius 260 Albucasis 449 Achard of St Victor 205 Alcabitius 449 Adalbert Ranconis 229 ‘Alchandreus’, works on astronomy 47 Adam Bradfot 176 alchemy 86–8, 472 Adam de Brus 440 Alcuin 198, 206 Adam of Buckfield 62, 224, 453–4 Aldhelm 205 Adam Easton, Cardinal 208, 329 Aldreda of Acle 189 Adam Fraunceys (mayor of London) 437 Alexander, Romance of 380 Adam Marsh OFM 225 Alexander III, Pope 255, 372 Adam of Orleton (bishop of Hereford) 387 Alexander Barclay, Ship of Fools 19 Adam de Ros, Visio S. Pauli 128n104, 370 Alexander Nequam (abbot of Cirencester) 6, Adam Scot 180 34–5, 128n106, 220, 234, 238, 246, Adam of Usk 408 451–2 Adelard of Bath 163, 164n137, 447–8, De naturis rerum 246 450–2 De nominibus utensilium 33, 78–9 Naturales
    [Show full text]