What Is Jewish Philosophy?

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

What Is Jewish Philosophy? Josef Stern What is JewishPhilosophy? AView from the Middle Ages* KeynoteLectureatthe Grand Opening of the Maimonides Centre forAdvanced Studies on 29 October,2015 My late teacherProfessor Sidney Morgenbesser often taught his studentsthe ‘laws’ of JewishPhilosophyor, more specifically, of Jewishlogic,Jewishepistemology,Jewish metaphysics,and so on. Forexample, the laws of general logic are tautologies like ‘If p, then p’ or ‘If it is the casethat if p, then q, then not-q,then not-p.’ The first lawof Jewish Logic is: ‘If p, whynot q(spoken with aYiddish accent)?’¹ The question—What is Jewish Philosophy?—is typicallyanswered by describing Jewishphilosophies,i.e,the books, theories, and doctrines of canonicalJewishphi- losophers, such as,Saadiah Gaon, Moses ben Maimon (Maimonides), Judah Halevi, Levi ben Gershon(Gersonides). Indeed the distinguishedscholar of Jewishphiloso- phy, Julius Guttmann, entitled his classic history, Philosophies of Judaism.² But Jew- ish philosophyismore than asequence of doctrines or books. Like all philosophy, it is an activity,something one ‘does.’³ Forsome it is an intellectual exercise that solves theoretical puzzles. Forothers these exercises are practices that constituteawayof life, practices that give central place to the intellect and reasoning but aim at aprac- tical end, the achievement of happiness or aharmonious life in which one’sJudaism and intellect are in sync.⁴ In either case, philosophyisapursuit in which one engag- es, not onlyasubjectmatter or the results of the pursuit. Thenameofthe subject ‘Jewish Philosophy’ first emergedinGermany in thelate seventeenth centuryand earlyeighteenthcentury when we find the firsthistories of phi- losophy—andthe very idea that philosophyhas ahistory.The earliest histories areinthe doxographical tradition, portraying certain historical figuresasparadigms of what was then considered to be philosophical wisdom.Slightlylaterhistoriesweredevelopmental * Manythanks to Michael Fagenblat,Zev Harvey,and David Shatz for very helpful conversations and comments on earlier drafts of this paper. And of Jewish epistemology: ‘Your mother always knows best.’ And of Jewish metaphysics: ‘To be is to be in tzures (“pain, suffering”).’ And of Jewish aesthetics: ‘Beauty is for the goyim.’ But onlyinthe English translation which was not authorizedbyhim; the title of the German orig- inal uses the singular: Die Philosophie des Judentums. See Mark Steiner, “Rabbi Yisrael Salanter as aJewish Philosopher,” TheTorah u-Madda Journal 9 (2000): 42– 57. On philosophyasawayoflife, see PierreHadot, What is Ancient Philosophy? (Cambridge,Mass.: HarvardUniversity Press, 2002)and his collection of essays,idem, Philosophy as aWay of Life (Ox- ford: Blackwell, 1995). On Maimonides’ Guide of the Perplexed as aguide to away of life, see Josef Stern, TheMatter and Form of Maimonides’ Guide (Cambridge,Mass.: HarvardUniversity Press,2013). OpenAccess. ©2017 Josef Stern, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative CommonsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110527971-011 186 Josef Stern narrativesthat aimedtoshow that thepast is at most of historical interest andofnocon- temporaryphilosophical value. It is in these histories that the category of Hebraic, Mo- saic, scriptural,orprophetic andfinally ‘JüdischePhilosophie’ (first coined by Brucker in the 1740’s) was introduced, and ironicallyinsome of these books to specifically ex- clude theJewish tradition(as well as ‘barbarianphilosophy’)fromthe historyofphilos- ophythat tracesits originstoGreece. Later in thenineteenth century, historians and phi- lologists of Wissenschaft des Judentums appropriated the term ‘Jewish Philosophy’ in ordertoclaim afield of scholarship of their owninorder to legitimatetheir academic respectability.⁵ In short,itisonlyrelativelyrecent that engagement with ancient,medi- eval, andearlymodern philosophers became ahistorical discipline, creatingthe history of philosophy. Jewish philosophy is aspecialcase or byproduct of this phenomenon.Un- likethe physical worldthat existsindependentlyofand prior to thescientific discipline ‘Physics,’ the domain ‘Jewish Philosophy’ wasthe creation of the academic discipline, the ‘HistoryofJewishPhilosophy,’ an artifact made by an academic discipline as muchasthe discipline studies it. What was it,then, that those thinkers and authors were doing—and Iwill con- centrate now on the medieval casesince thatiswhat Iknow best—that we scholars nowadays refer to as ‘Medieval JewishPhilosophy’?Well, the simple answer is: Phi- losophy! However,stating what philosophyis, say, in adefinition, or through neces- sary and sufficient conditions,isnoeasier than spellingout what Jewish philosophy is. Instead Iwill sketch two examples of different conceptions of philosophyinwhich two seminal medieval Jewishphilosophers wereengaged, Saadiah Gaon and Maimo- nides. But,first,you might reasonablyask: ‘If it was simplyphilosophythey were doing,why label it Jewish philosophy?’ What JewishPhilosophy is Not Letmefirst tell youwhat Jewish philosophy is not. It is not philosophycomposed or studied in aJewish language, say, Hebrew.⁶ We do speakofmedieval Arabic philosophy and medieval Latin philosophy, meaningmedieval philosophywritten in Arabic or in Latin, but we cannotdescribethe full gamutofmedieval Jewish philosophy as medieval Iamindebted to Dirk Westerkamp’srich and insightful “The Philonic Distinction: Germanic En- lightenment HistoriographyofJewish Thought,” Historyand Theory 47 (2008): 533–559, for the his- tory of the origins of the term ‘Jewish philosophy’ and of the fields of Jewish philosophyand the his- tory of Jewish philosophy. See also Daniel Frank, “What is Jewish philosophy?,” in HistoryofJewish Philosophy,eds. Daniel H. Frank and OliverLeaman (London: Routledge,2004): 1–8. On the emer- genceofthe academic studyofthe historyofphilosophyingeneral, and on varieties of ways of doing the history of philosophy, see Michael Frede, “The History of PhilosophyasaDiscipline,” Jour- nal of Philosophy 85 (1988): 666–672. JacobKlatzkin, the author of the famed Oṣar ha-Munaḥim ha-Filosofiyyim (Thesaurus Philosophicus Linguae Hebraicae)(reprintedNew York: Feldheim, 1968), makes aclaim to this effect. What is Jewish Philosophy? AViewfromthe Middle Ages 187 Hebrew philosophy.⁷ Leavingaside Philo of Alexandrainthe first century whowrote in Greek,works written in theIslamic empire(e.g.,bySaadiah,Maimonides,Judah Halevi, andmanyothers)wereall composed in Arabic or Judeo-Arabic(Arabic in Hebrew char- acters).Onlyafter 1148 domedieval Jewish philosophers in Christian Europe compose andread works in Hebrew.And, of course, for modern Jewish philosophyafter the En- lightenment,the relevant languagesinclude German, French, andEnglish. Moreover,itisnot self-evident thateverything philosophical written or read in Hebrew should necessarilycount as Jewish philosophy. ManyAristotelian and Arabic philosophical texts weretranslated into Hebrew,and some onlysurvive in their me- dieval Hebrew translations. Is this sufficientfor them to count as Jewish philosophy? To complicatematters,manymedieval Jewishthinkers composed supercommenta- ries in Hebrew on commentaries originallywritten in Arabic but then translated into Hebrew (say, Gersonides’ supercommentaries on Averroes’ Arabic commenta- ries) on Greek classics by Aristotle. If these supercommentariesare part of medieval Jewishphilosophy—and whyshouldn’tthey be?—should the Hebrew-translatedAra- bic commentaries on which they are super-commentaries,orthe original Greek texts translated into Hebrew,alsocross the boundary?Maybe it would more accurate to saythat thereisnoboundary.Inany case, languagealone cannot settle the question. Second, youdon’thavetobeJewishtodoJewish philosophyand, by the same token, not just anykind of philosophycomposed by aJew,i.e., someone of Jewish descent or confession, need be Jewish philosophy.⁸ Some medieval Jewish philo- sophical texts werecomposed after theirauthor’sconversion to Islam (e.g., Abu’l- Notethat some Islamic (Arabic?) philosophy, such as Avicenna’s Danishnamah-yi ‘Ala’,was com- posed in Persian. See, however,Raphael Jospe, What is JewishPhilosophy? (Ramat Aviv:Open University,1988): 28–29: ‘Aphilosopher’sJewish identity is anecessary condition, but not asufficient condition, for determiningwhetherhis philosophyis, indeed, aJewish philosophy[…]. Jewish philosophycannot be developed by anon-Jew. Anon-Jewcannot writeJewish philosophy.” See also p. 6whereJospe claims that Aristotle and Al-Farabi, for all their influence on Jewish philosophy, ‘have no sharein [it] for the simple reason that they werenot Jews.’ No argument is given, but even if one agrees that aJewish philosopher (meaningsomeone whoisboth aJew and aphilosopher)must be Jewish, it does not follow that Jewish philosophy must be written by aJew.That would be no different than requiringthat feminist philosophybewritten onlybywomen. Notwithstanding the counterexamplesI mention in the text, of course, the fact—contingent fact of course—is that (almostall?) Jewish philos- ophyhas been written by Jews.But this fact,atleast in the past,can be easilyexplained by historical, sociological reasons(access to languages, training,ethnic divisions). The same was true for at least a thousand years about rabbinics—and for the simple reason that non-Jews (apart from Jewish converts to Christianity) did not have the education or trainingtodoserious rabbinics.Today, however,with the proliferation of academic Jewish studies,wenow
Recommended publications
  • 1 Jews, Gentiles, and the Modern Egalitarian Ethos
    Jews, Gentiles, and the Modern Egalitarian Ethos: Some Tentative Thoughts David Berger The deep and systemic tension between contemporary egalitarianism and many authoritative Jewish texts about gentiles takes varying forms. Most Orthodox Jews remain untroubled by some aspects of this tension, understanding that Judaism’s affirmation of chosenness and hierarchy can inspire and ennoble without denigrating others. In other instances, affirmations of metaphysical differences between Jews and gentiles can take a form that makes many of us uncomfortable, but we have the legitimate option of regarding them as non-authoritative. Finally and most disturbing, there are positions affirmed by standard halakhic sources from the Talmud to the Shulhan Arukh that apparently stand in stark contrast to values taken for granted in the modern West and taught in other sections of the Torah itself. Let me begin with a few brief observations about the first two categories and proceed to somewhat more extended ruminations about the third. Critics ranging from medieval Christians to Mordecai Kaplan have directed withering fire at the doctrine of the chosenness of Israel. Nonetheless, if we examine an overarching pattern in the earliest chapters of the Torah, we discover, I believe, that this choice emerges in a universalist context. The famous statement in the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 4:5) that Adam was created singly so that no one would be able to say, “My father is greater than yours” underscores the universality of the original divine intent. While we can never know the purpose of creation, one plausible objective in light of the narrative in Genesis is the opportunity to actualize the values of justice and lovingkindness through the behavior of creatures who subordinate themselves to the will 1 of God.
    [Show full text]
  • Competing Tropes of Eleventh-Century Andalusi Jewish Culture*
    Competing Tropes of Eleventh-Century Andalusi Jewish Culture* Ross Brann Judaism and the Jews, whose very names are determined by ties of memory to a particular place (Judea), embraced the concept of diaspora out of political, religious, and historical necessity. Following the exile of Judean elites to Babylonia in 587 BCE, the idea of diaspora became enmeshed in a complex bundle of remembered and imagined experiences such as destruction and dispossession along with decidedly ahistorical aspirations such as redemption and return.1 Diaspora thus became a critical feature of the dialectic of Jewish history in that it described the current state of the Jews' dispersion and sense of rupture with a past "pristine age" yet reinforced their expectation and hope that it was destined to come to an end with the "ingathering of the exiles." Jews of very different literary, intellectual, and spiritual orientations treated Exile/Diaspora as the central trope of Jewish experience. How was this trope handled in Andalusi-Jewish culture?2 Here, I am concerned * This essay is a revised version of a talk presented at the University of California (Berkeley), the University of Washington (Seattle), King's College (London), Yale University, and Cornell University. 1 "Scattering," "dispersal" [Ezekiel 36:19: "I scattered them among the nations, and they were dispersed through the countries"], and recuperation [Ezekiel 36:24: "I will take you from among the nations and gather you from all the countries, and I will bring you back to your own land"] are already inscribed as tropes in the biblical literature of the first exile after 587 BCE.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction 
    © Copyright, Princeton University Press. No part of this book may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher. INTRODUCTION It belongs to the cherished traditions of Western civilization that Judaism “invented” monotheism. In the eyes of most Jews and Christians, as well as numerous scholars of religion, the “monotheistic revolution” of the Hebrew Bible represents a radi- cal break with the backward and underdeveloped abominations of the polytheistic cultures that surrounded—and continuously threatened—ancient Israel. As such, Jewish monotheism is con- sidered to be a decisive step in the development of humanity to- wards ever higher forms of religion. According to the triumphal- istic Christian view of history and its progress-oriented academic counterparts, this “evolution” reached its climax in Christianity (more precisely, in nineteenth-century Protestantism). Just as poly- theism inevitably lead to monotheism, so the remote and stern God of Judaism had to be replaced by the loving God of Chris- tianity. When Christianity adopted Jewish monotheism, it simul- taneously softened it by including the idea of God’s Trinity and his son’s incarnation on earth. Only through this “extension” of strict monotheism, it is argued, could Christianity liberate true faith from Jewish ossification and guarantee its survival and perfection. The notion of the necessary evolution of monotheism out of polytheism is as stereotyped as the conceit of its successful fulfill- ment in Christianity. Regarding the latter, the Christian doctrine of the Trinity can hardly claim, despite the efforts of the church fathers, to manifest the apex of monotheism.
    [Show full text]
  • John Dewey's Legacy for the 21 Century
    John Dewey's Legacy for the 21st Century Larry A. Hickman Center for Dewey Studies Southern Illinois University Carbondale Why would anyone today think that John Dewey's ideas are still relevant to the problems of the second decade of the 21st century? For one thing, the six decades since his death in 1952 have seen enormous technical, demographic, climatic, economic, and cultural changes, to name just a few. For another, at the time of death his ideas had already been out of fashion for more than a decade. Nor would they get much in the way of respect during the remainder of the 20th century. Nostalgia aside, do we have any good reasons for continuing to read Dewey with an eye to our current situation? Tracing Lines of Intellectual Influence. Historians of philosophy and intellectual historians might answer this question by reminding us that there is still much that we do not understand about Dewey's role in the history of philosophy, and more specifically about his contributions to the development of American pragmatism and the philosophy of education. Examination of the ways his ideas relate to those of Peirce, James, Mead, Addams, and others, and especially to the many female teachers and school principals who were his collaborators and, as he said, his inspiration as well – all of this holds the promise of expanding our understanding not only of the past, but of our present and future as well. Lines of influence between Dewey and William James, for example are at this point far from clear. Since Dewey was not particularly keen on preserving his correspondence, the entire known extant James/Dewey correspondence comprises only 26 letters.
    [Show full text]
  • The Theology of Nahmanides Systematically Presented
    The Theology of Nahmanides Systematically Presented DAVID NOVAK THE THEOLOGY OF NAHMANIDES SYSTEMATICALLY PRESENTED Program in Judaic Studies Brown University BROWN JUDAIC STUDIES Edited by Shaye J. D. Cohen, Ernest S. Frerichs, Calvin Groldscheider Editorial Board Vicki Caron, Lynn Davidman, Wendell S. Dietrich, David Hirsch, David Jacobson, Saul M. Olyan, Alan Zuckerman Number 271 THE THEOLOGY OF NAHMANIDES SYSTEMATICALLY PRESENTED by David Novak THE THEOLOGY OF NAHMANIDES SYSTEMATICALLY PRESENTED by DAVID NOVAK University of Virginia Scholars Press Atlanta, Georgia THE THEOLOGY OF NAHMANIDES SYSTEMATICALLY PRESENTED By David Novak Copyright © 2020 by Brown University Library of Congress Control Number: 2019953676 Open access edition funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities/Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Humanities Open Book Program. The text of this book is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDeriva- tives 4.0 International License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. To use this book, or parts of this book, in any way not covered by the license, please contact Brown Judaic Studies, Brown University, Box 1826, Providence, RI 02912. STUDIES IN MEDIEVAL JUDAISM Edited by Lenn E. Goodman To the Memory of Harry H. Ruskin (1905-1989) The righteous man lives in his faith. - Habakkuk 2:4 other works by David Novak Law and Theology in Judaism (2 volumes) Suicide and Morality The Image of the Non-Jew in Judaism Halakhah in a Theological Dimension Jewish Christian Dialogue Contents Editor's Foreword ix Preface xi Introduction 1 Notes 17 Chapter 1 The Human Soul 25 Chapter 2 Faith 31 Chapter 3 Tradition 51 Chapter 4 Miracles 61 Chapter 5 Natural and Supernatural 77 Chapter 6 The Land of Israel 89 Chapter 7 The Commandments 99 Chapter 8 Eschatology 125 Bibliography 135 List of Abbreviations 136 Index of Names and Subjects 137 Index of Passages 141 Publishers’ Preface Brown Judaic Studies has been publishing scholarly books in all areas of Ju- daic studies for forty years.
    [Show full text]
  • Reevaluating the Interaction Between Ancient Israel and Greece Mike Tolliver University of Missouri-St
    University of Missouri, St. Louis IRL @ UMSL Theses Graduate Works 3-7-2014 The aS ges and Philosophers: Reevaluating the Interaction Between Ancient Israel and Greece Mike Tolliver University of Missouri-St. Louis, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://irl.umsl.edu/thesis Recommended Citation Tolliver, Mike, "The aS ges and Philosophers: Reevaluating the Interaction Between Ancient Israel and Greece" (2014). Theses. 257. http://irl.umsl.edu/thesis/257 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Works at IRL @ UMSL. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of IRL @ UMSL. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Sages and Philosophers: Reevaluating the Interaction Between Ancient Israel and Greece Michael M. Tolliver Th.M., Covenant Theological Seminary, 2013 M.Div., Covenant Theological Seminary, 2010 B.S., Business Administration, Truman State University, 2005 A Thesis Submitted to The Graduate School at the University of Missouri – St. Louis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters in Philosophy August 2014 Advisory Committee Jon D. McGinnis, Ph.D. Chairperson David Griesedieck, Ph.D. C. John Collins, Ph.D. Copyright, Michael M. Tolliver, 2014 Abstract: The previously assumed late development of the Jewish sacred writings led many to conclude that the Hellenistic world greatly influenced both the content and worldview of the Hebrew authors. Though the evidence for the historical reconstruction that required the Jewish texts to develop late has been called into question, scholars have yet to reconsider the implications this has for the antiquity of the ideas contained within the Jewish writings and their influence on surrounding cultures.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Models of Jewish Philosophy Submitted for the Degree of Phd in Philosophy at the London School
    Justifying One’s Practices: Two Models of Jewish Philosophy Submitted for the degree of PhD in Philosophy At the London School of Economics and Political Science Daniel Rynhold 2000 1 UMI Number: U120701 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U120701 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 773 ) Thesis Abstract Judaism is a religion that emphasises the importance of a set of practical commandments and in the history of Jewish philosophy various attempts have been made to rationalise or justify these commandments. In this thesis I try to establish a general model for the justification of practices through a critical examination of two such attempted rationalisations. However, the study is framed within the more general question of whether or not there can be such a thing as Jewish Philosophy as a genuinely substantive discipline. Thus, I take the particular topic of rationalising the commandments as a ‘case study’ in order to see whether we can do substantive Jewish philosophy at least in the practical sphere. In the main body of the thesis I look at the methods of rationalisation of Moses Maimonides and Joseph Soloveitchik and argue that despite being based on very different scientific models they share a central methodological presumption that I term the Priority of Theory (PoT).
    [Show full text]
  • The Philosophy of Don Hasdai Crescas
    Hl~ ILLINOI S UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN PRODUCTION NOTE University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library Brittle Books Project, 2009. 296 W56p Ri _ _ r THE PHILOSOPHY OF DON HASDAJ CRESCAS COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS SALES AGENTS NEW YORK: LEMCKE & BUECHNER 30-32 EAST 20TH STREET LONDON : HUMPHREY MILFORD AMEN CORNER, E.C. SHANGHAI : EDWARD EVANS & SONS, LTD. 30 NORTH SZECHUEN ROAD COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL STUDIES VOL. XVII THE PHILOSOPHY OF DON HASDAI CRESCAS BY MEYER WAXMAN SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY, IN THE FACULTY OF PHILOSOPHY, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY Qltu Pork COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS 1920 All rights reserved PRINTED IN ENGLAND AT THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS NOTE A PECULIAR interest attaches to Hasdai Crescas. He swam against the current of the philosophical exposition of his day. He was bold enough to oppose the speculative reasoning of Aristotle, the man who held nearly all the philosophers in his grip during so many centuries; and, above all, he dared to criticize the introduction of Aristotelian views into the religious philosophy of his own people, even though these views were dressed in Jewish garb by the master hand of Maimonides. The current passed him by; it could not overwhelm him. In the following pages Dr. Meyer Waxman has given us a detailed and a very interesting exposition of Crescas's philosophic system; and he has added to this a comparison of Crescas's views, not only with those of Maimonides, but also with those of Spinoza. We have thus lined up for us the three greatest minds that speculative Jewish theology produced during the Middle Ages; and the means are afforded us to estimate the value of their dip into the Unknown.
    [Show full text]
  • Pansacramentalism, Interreligious Theology, and Lived Religion
    religions Article Pansacramentalism, Interreligious Theology, and Lived Religion Hans Gustafson College of Arts and Sciences, University of St. Thomas, 2115 Summit Avenue, Mail 57P, St. Paul, MN 55105, USA; [email protected] Received: 21 May 2019; Accepted: 26 June 2019; Published: 28 June 2019 Abstract: Opening with a philosophical definition of sacrament(ality) as a mediator (mediation) of the sacred in the concrete world, this article offers pansacramentalism as a promising worldview—especially for those rooted in or emerging from the Christian traditions (since, for them, the language of sacramentality may have a stronger resonance)—for bringing together interreligious theology and data mined by Lived Religion approaches to the study of religion. After articulating the concept of pansacramentalism and emphasizing interreligious theology as an emerging model for doing theology, growing trends and changing sensibilities among young people’s religious and spiritual lives (e.g., the “Nones”) is considered insofar as such trends remain relevant for making contemporary theology accessible to the next generation. The article then considers the intersection of pansacramentalism and interreligious theology, especially the issue of determining sacramental authenticity. To explain how this challenge might be met, Abraham Heschel’s theology of theomorphism is offered as but one example as a nuanced means for determining sacramental authenticity of the sacred in the world. Turning to “Lived Religion” approaches, rationale is offered for why pansacramentalism and interreligious theology ought to be taken seriously in the contemporary world, especially considering recent data about the nature of contemporary religious identities among young people living in the West. Keywords: pansacramentalism; sacramentality; interreligious; lived religion; interreligious studies 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Death and Its Beyond in Early Judaism and Medieval Jewish Philosophy
    University of Denver Digital Commons @ DU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 3-1-2011 Death and Its Beyond in Early Judaism and Medieval Jewish Philosophy Adem Irmak University of Denver Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd Part of the Jewish Studies Commons, and the Religion Commons Recommended Citation Irmak, Adem, "Death and Its Beyond in Early Judaism and Medieval Jewish Philosophy" (2011). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 306. https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd/306 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. DEATH AND ITS BEYOND IN EARLY JUDAISM AND MEDIEVAL JEWISH PHILOSOPHY __________ A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of Arts and Humanities University of Denver __________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts __________ by Adem Irmak March 2011 Advisor: Dr. Alison Schofield ©Copyright by Adem Irmak 2011 All Rights Reserved Author: Adem Irmak Title: DEATH AND ITS BEYOND IN EARLY JUDAISM AND MEDIEVAL JEWISH PHILOSOPHY Advisor: Dr. Alison Schofield Degree Date: March 2011 Abstract Afterlife and the concept of soul in Judaism is one of the main subjects that are discussed in the academia. There are some misassumptions related to hereafter and the fate of the soul after departing the body in Judaism. Since the Hebrew Bible does not talk about the death and afterlife clearly, some average people and some scholars claim that there is nothing relevant to the hereafter.
    [Show full text]
  • Opening the Torah to Women: the Transformation of Tradition
    Opening the Torah to Women: The Transformation of Tradition Women are a people by themselves -Talmud: Shabbat 62a Traditional Judaism believes that both men and women have differentiated and distinct roles delegated through the Torah. A man’s role is focused on positive time-bound mitzvot (commandments), which include but are not limited to, daily praying, wrapping tefillin and putting on a tallit; whereas a women’s role and mitzvot are not time bound and include lighting Shabbat candles, separating a piece of challah for G-d on Shabbat, and the laws of Niddah (menstruation purity). 1 Orthodox Judaism views the separate roles of men and women as a valued and crucial aspect of Jewish life and law, whereas Jewish feminism and more reform branches of Judaism believe these distinctions between men and women are representative of sexual discrimination and unequal opportunity in Judaism. The creation of the Reform and Conservative movement in the late 1800s paved the way for the rise of the Jewish feminist movement in the 1970s, which re-evaluated the classical Jewish texts and halakha (Jewish law) in relation to the role of women in Judaism. Due to Judaism’s ability to evolve and change throughout time, women associated with different Jewish denominations have been able to create their own place within Judaism while also maintaining the traditional aspects of Judaism in order to find a place which connects them most to their religiosity and femininity as modern Jewish women. In Kabbalah (Jewish mysticism), there is a teaching that states that when each soul is created it contains both a female and male soul.
    [Show full text]
  • Prof. David Johnson Prof. Meir Soloveichik Syllabus: PHI 4931H Seminar: Metaphysics of Judaism Spring 2021
    1 Prof. David Johnson Prof. Meir Soloveichik Syllabus: PHI 4931H Seminar: Metaphysics of Judaism Spring 2021 Goals of Seminar: Using medieval and modern philosophical sources, we will rigorously and extensively examine traditional Judaism’s philosophical and theological views on the nature and attributes of God. For centuries, Jewish philosophers, theologians and mystics have pondered biblical passages that speak of complex subjects such as: God’s love for Abraham and his children Israel; God dwelling within the tabernacle, and the Temple in Jerusalem; God’s foreknowledge of all human events, but also His anger at Israel’s sin, His regret following sin and His forgiveness following this anger. Maimonides, famously, read these verses through the lens of his own philosophical approach, seeking as much as possible to reduce any true analogy between God’s attributes (such as knowledge and love) and similarly named attributes of human beings. Describing biblical language about God as referring to either “negative attributes” or “attributes of action,” he insisted that any other approach would embody an assault on the doctrines of God’s perfection and noncorporeality. Maimonides’s philosophy does not embody the totality of Jewish thought. From Judah Halevi before Maimonides, to Nahmanides after, this approach was criticized as irreconcilable with biblical language and with Talmudic theology. Meanwhile, in the Christian world, Thomas Aquinas seriously engaged Maimonides’s writings and responded to them in a way that can be deeply instructive to Jewish students of philosophy. Centuries later, Michael Wyschogrod, influenced by the writings of Protestant theologian Karl Barth, offered his own critique of Maimonides.
    [Show full text]