The TALMUD’s Theological Language -Game A Philosophical Discourse Analysis Eugene B. Borowitz The Talmud’s Theological Language-Game SUNY series in Jewish Philosophy Kenneth Seeskin, editor The Talmud’s Theological Language-Game A Philosophical Discourse Analysis Eugene B. Borowitz ļ State University of New York Press Published by State University of New York Press, Albany © 2006 State University of New York All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission. No part of this book may be stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means including electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission in writing of the publisher. For information, address State University of New York Press, 194 Washington Avenue, Suite 305, Albany, NY 12210-2384 Production by Judith Block Marketing by Michael Campochiaro Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Borowitz, Eugene B. The Talmud’s theological language-game : a philosophical discourse analysis / Eugene B. Borowitz p. cm. — (SUNY series in Jewish philosophy) Includes bibiographical references and index. ISBN 0-7914-6701-5 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Aggada—Philosophy. 2. Aggada—History and criticism—Theory, etc. 3. Samuel ben Na±man, 3rd/4th cent.—Knowledge—Aggada. 4. Discourse analysis. I. Title. II. Series. BM516.5.B67 2006 296.1'27606—dc22 2005012109 ISBN-13: 978-0-7914-6701-5 (hardcover : alk. paper) 10987654321 The classic (1965) text updated: Ļ “To my beloved Estelle (1925–2004), who (for fifty-seven years) [has] taught me the meaning of existence in covenant.” ļ Ļ Contents ļ Preface ix Part One. Entering the Maze of Rabbinic Diction Introduction to a Religious Puzzle 1 1. What Is the Aggadah Problem? 7 Part Two. Scrutinizing Talmudic Aggadah at Three Levels 2. The Surface Characteristics 31 3. The Substantive Concerns 49 4. The “Logic” 67 5. Does Extending the Sample Alter the Findings? 83 Part Three. The Limits and Nature of Aggadah 6. Is Aggadic Discourse Self-Limiting? 115 7. Positively, What Is Aggadah? 145 8. Reconstruing the Aggadah Problem 179 Afterwords Can We Theologize as the Rabbis Did? 191 On Concluding 193 Ļ vii ļ viii ļ Contents Notes 195 Bibliography of Works Cited 281 COMPILED BY TINA WEISS Index of Text Citations 293 Index of Subjects and Proper Names 307 Ļ Preface ļ or a half century or more now, thinking about thinking— philosophy examining its own roots—has substantially con- centrated on how language shapes what we can and cannot meaningfully say. Ludwig Wittgenstein pioneered that linguistic F turn and gave it the lasting gift of his notion of a “language- game.” By devising an imagined set of conditions of what one may or may not do, one can create a small world of pleasure or frustration for all who are ready to abide by the rules of the game. Writ large, some- thing like that seems to be what makes it possible for people in many diverse areas of life to communicate with one another and to express a depth of meaning and command that often perplexes those who have no feel for the particular language-game involved. For well over three decades now it has seemed to me that we prod- ucts of Western culture and its academies will better understand the classic Jewish religious mind and its enduring manifestation, rabbinic literature, if we could appreciate the rabbinic language-game. Alas for the scholar with only one lifetime in which to work on such a grand scale. The rabbinic tradition itself knows that there are two major verbal universes intertwined in its linguistic universe: halakhah, its world of mandated action, and aggadah, all the rest of its concerns, most particu- larly for my theological concerns, the explicit statement of authorita- tive opinions (sic) on matters of Jewish religious belief. Against the odds—so it has seemed to me—I have long sought to understand the linguistic game rules of aggadic utterance. I am therefore especially grateful to the people and institutions whose help, personal and ma- terial, has enabled me to bring this task to this point of closure. Institutionally, this work could not have come into being without the perennial assistance of student-aid and research funds that the Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion made available for Ļ ix ļ x ļ The Talmud’s Theological Language-Game this project. A generation or more of students have spent their sum- mers—and, some, a few winters—searching libraries, finding and photocopying studies and texts of potential interest, writing up their reactions to these materials, and, more recently, utilizing the databases that have eased the task of retrieval. None of this would have been possible without the faith and personal support of old deans and dear friends, Paul M. Steinberg, of blessed memory, and Norman Cohen, and their recent successor, Aaron Panken. At a very early stage of this project, the then cultural arm of the Jewish Material Claims Confer- ence made a helpful grant that kept the work going forward. Dr. Philip Miller, director of the Klau Library at the New York School of the HUC-JIR, has been untiring in his efforts to provide me with the wide range of materials cited in this work and many others that did not merit inclusion. Through his knowledgeable and genial efforts, the exceptional holdings of our Cincinnati School Library have also smoothly come to me. Tina Weiss of the New York Library staff brought her fine skills to the arduous task of creating the bibliography. I learned very much and should probably have cited more of the insightful comments Rick Sarason of our Cincinnati School faculty made to the first version of this manuscript. An author is fortunate indeed to have so able and willing a colleague devote his time and learning to a friend’s work. Nan and Andrew Langowitz gave me considerable insight into how computer networks work, thus enabling me to de- velop my idea that the nonlinear structure of aggadic utterance might now best be understood in terms of the dynamics of network logic. And Andrew, with exemplary patience and knowledge, helped me resolve a host of computing problems. Ken Seeskin, eminent philoso- pher and mentsh, was kind enough to see the merits of this work and commend it to the SUNY Press. I am indebted to the staff of the SUNY Press for the high professionalism and personal courtesy with which, as the Hebrew idiom puts it, they “brought this book into the light.” My particular thanks go to Judith Block for the kind and imaginative efficiency she brought to this project, to Wyatt Benner for the strength of intellect and unflagging dedication he brought to the challenges of integrating the style of this work, to Elise Brauckmann whose graphic talent turned a book cover into an evocative commentary on my text, and to Nancy Zibman for the excellent indexes, which greatly add to the usefulness of the book. My thanks and gratitude to the Ultimate One who made possible this work and so much else are expressed in the final paragraphs of this volume. ACKNOWLEDGMENTSPreface Ļ xi Ļ Part One ļ Entering the Maze of Rabbinic Diction Ļ Introduction to a Religious Puzzle ļ any world religions know the distinction between scrip- ture—a centrally significant sacred text—and tradition, the less sacred accompaniment to scripture that has subsidiary authority in theory but, as the official M interpreter of scripture, practical preeminence. In Judaism’s case, scripture comes to be called the Written Torah (or the Written Law) and, with that development, it gained a companion rev- elation on Sinai called the Oral Torah (or Oral Law). But Judaism seems unique among religions in formally understanding Tradition, the Oral Torah, as bipartite. That is, it has two identifiable, closely related modes of discourse that differ in authority, areas of concern, and the “logics” by which they set forth their propositions and seek to have them accepted. The more authoritative, because normative, dic- tion is termed the halakhah, what came to be seen as the personal and communal duties of Jews to God under the Covenant, or simply, “the law.” The less authoritative part of God’s revelation of Oral Torah is the aggadah, or simply, all else in rabbinic literature. Explicit reflection on Jewish belief—the Jewish equivalent of “theology” in Christian- ity—takes place in the aggadah. This principle is so deeply embedded in rabbinic diction but so fully evidenced in rabbinic texts that it has the quasi-authoritative status of not requiring statement or demonstra- tion; it is taken for granted. This book arises from this Jewish under- standing that its classic statements concerning its beliefs are in the aggadah—but before saying more about this, let me briefly set these abstract statements about Judaism in historical perspective. Judaism’s foundation is God’s revelation as given in various forms in the Hebrew Bible, but the religious life that grew from it over the centuries was shaped not only by its explicit language but by the interpretation of its texts. By the time of the Roman domination of Ļ 1 ļ 2 ļ The Talmud’s Theological Language-Game the Land of Israel, as the Common Era was beginning, its ongoing way of life and thinking was more and more shaped by the dynamic read- ing and interpretation of the Bible (and the traditions associated with them) by “the Rabbis,” the sages mentioned in the Mishnah and the Talmud. The Mishnah, the increasingly authoritative, orderly study- book of halakhic dicta and its significant minority of aggadic state- ments, is the rabbis’ earliest documentary record, edited about 200 CE.