Document Sample
philosophers Powered By Docstoc
					               The Philosophers
• 1-640 C.E.
• Need to harmonize Torah with known Science and
• Can God change his mind with the Aristotelian principle
  that change indicates imperfection?
• Can one believe in miracles that interrupt the course of
  nature and believe in philosophical principle that the laws
  of nature are immutable?
• If Jews were Chosen by God why are they homeless?
 Moses Maimonides 1141-1205
• Produced a commentary on the Mishnah
• Guide to the Perplexed published in 1190
Maimonides and the Existence of
• Negative theology
• “one cannot actually say what God is… and then
  list attributes. Those who believe that God is One
  and that he has many attributes declare the unity
  with their lips and assume the plurality in their
  thoughts. One cannot discuss God in positive
  attributes but one can describe what God is not.
  God is not corporeal, does not occupy space, does
  not experience regeneration nor corruption.”
• God is simply God, as the highest cause of being.
    Anthropomorphic Imagery
• The anthropomorphic imagery are all all
  allegorical passages designed to ease the
  transition of the Jewish people from idolatry
  to monotheism.
• “created in the image of God” Created our
  of free will and we are granted the ability to
  reason and a free will of our own but there
  is not family resemblance
      Sayings of Maimonides
• It is improper to consider personal danger
  when the public welfare is at stake
• If you build a synagogue, let it be more
  beautiful than your house. When you feed
  the hungry, clothe the naked, or devote
  anything to a holy purpose, it must be from
  your best.
          Thirteen Articles of Faith
•         1 Belief in the existence of the Creator, be He Blessed, who is
    perfect in every manner of existence and is the Primary Cause of all
    that exists.
•         2 The belief in G-d's absolute and unparalleled unity.
•         3 The belief in G-d's noncorporeality, nor that He will be affected
    by any physical occurrences, such as movement, or rest, or dwelling.
•         4 The belief in G-d's eternity.
•         5 The imperative to worship Him exclusively and no foreign
    false gods.
•         6 The belief that G-d communicates with man through prophecy.
•         7 The belief that the prophecy of Moses our teacher has priority.
•     8 The belief in the divine origin of the Torah.
•     9 The belief in the immutability of the Torah.
•     10 The belief in divine omniscience and
•     11 The belief in divine reward and retribution.
•     12 The belief in the arrival of the Messiah and
  the messianic era.
•     13 The belief in the resurrection of the dead.
      Resurrection of the Dead
• "There is neither Jewish faith nor any
  attachment to the Jewish faith, for an
  individual who does not believe in this"
• To reject this belief is to give up ones share
  in Olam Haba - the Hereafter (Mishneh
  Torah Hilkhot Teshuvah 3:6).
          Biblical justification
• "Thus, he says, `And many of them that sleep in
  the dust of the earth shall awake. ...' And the
  Angel said to Daniel, `But you, go to the end of all
  flesh and rest; and stand in your lot at the end of
  the days.' [Daniel 12:2-13]
• "And I will state that the resurrection of the dead -
  …refers to the return of the soul to the body after
  it had departed.
• What, then, is so incredibly important about the
  belief in the resurrection of the dead that ALL of
  Judaism rests upon it?
• Second, the very concept of the resurrection of the
  dead seems odd. Why is it necessary for a soul
  that has frolicked in the Garden of Eden for
  thousands of years to suddenly be torn from that
  wonderful abode and re-enter a physical body and
  repeat living on earth.
• The Talmud (Berakhot 64a) finds a scriptural
  proof for this concept: "The righteous have no
  peace, not in this world and not in the world to
  come, as it is written, 'They ascend from strength
  to strength' (Psalm 84)."
• An ascendance of much higher magnitude is
  enjoyed on each anniversary of the day of the
  passing of the soul, known as Yahrzeit. The
  following year the soul rises even higher.
• Why, then, is it necessary for these souls to
  suddenly leave this exceptional abode and return
  to this world in a physical body?
• the resurrection of the dead is part of the reward
  promised by G-d for the observance of the Torah
  and its commandments.
• One in the Garden of Eden, when the souls are
  separated from their bodies, and the other on earth,
  when the soul is once again enclothed in the body.
• We must conclude that the latter reward, in the
  form of the resurrection of the dead, is far greater
  than that of the Garden of Eden.
• If this were not the case, then the resurrection of
  the dead would be more like a punishment rather
  than a reward. But what kind of a reward is this?
• What could a soul possible enjoy more on earth,
  trapped in a physical shell, more than the G-
  dliness in the Garden of Eden.
• There are those who explain that the purpose of the
  resurrection of the dead is to provide reward, not for the
  soul, but for the body.
• Just as the soul has its own special place where it is
  rewarded in the Garden of Eden in its natural environment
  and habitat from which it was originally extracted, so too
  the body must return to its domain, where it too can be
  rewarded with the pleasures in which it delights.
• And being that a reward must always be qualitatively
  similar to its cause, the body must be returned together
  with the soul to the place where it earned the reward in the
  first place.
• "A king chose two guardians to protect his garden. One was blind and
  the other a midget. What did they do? The blind man put the midget
  on his shoulders and through this they were able to eat all the fruits of
  the garden.
• "The king returned, furious, and questioned them as to what had
  happened to his fruit.
• "Each one explained to the king how he could not have eaten the fruits
  on his own due to his own deficiency.
• "What did the king then do?
• "He put the stout man on top of the blind man and judged them as one"
  (Sanhedrin 91 a,b).
• So, too, says the Talmud, "G-d The resurrection of the dead is
  necessary to reward the body.
  Martin Buber (1878 C.E. -1965 C.E.)

• Martin Buber was
  born in Vienna in
• Buber was a utopian
• Best Known for his his
  book I and Thou
               I-I Relationships
• the other is not
  recognized as an
  object any more than
  as a subject. The other
  is accepted, if at all, as
  one to be spoken at
  and spoken of; but
  when the other is
  spoken of, the lord of
  every story is I.
               I-It Relationships
• According to Buber, frequently we view both objects and
  people by their functions. Doing this is sometimes good:
  when doctors examine us for specific maladies, it's best if
  they view us as organisms, not as individuals. Scientists
  can learn a great deal about our world by observing,
  measuring, and examining. For Buber, all such processes
  are I-It relationships.
• We do so either to protect our vulnerabilities or to get them
  to respond in some preconceived way, to get something
  from them
              It-It Relationships
• the objects of their interests dominates their lives
• they study without any thought of use
• they are devoted to their subject but it does not
  speak to them
         We - We Relationships
• no individuality has emerged
• life is lived through others
         Us-Them Relationships
• world is divided between the children of light and
  the children of darkness
• righteousness, intelligence and integrity are the
  prerogatives of Us, while wickedness, stupidity,
  hypocrisy belong to them
     I-You-Thou Relationships
• Occurs when we place ourselves completely
  into a relationship, to truly understand and
  "be there" with another person, without
  masks, pretenses, even without words. Then
  each person comes to such a relationship
  without preconditions. The bond thus
  created enlarges each person, and each
  person responds by trying to enhance the
  other person.
         Transitory movements
• I-Thou relationships are not constant or static.
  People move in and out of I-It moments to I-Thou
• Attempts to achieve an I-Thou moment will fail
  because the process of trying to create an I-Thou
  relationship objectifies it and makes it I-It. Even
  describing the moment objectifies it and makes it
  an I-It.
• When you have it, you know it.
              God and I-Thou
• God is the Eternal Thou. By trying to prove God's
  existence or define God, the rationalist
  philosophers automatically established an I-It
• Like a person we love, we can't define God; we
  can't set up preconditions for the relationship. We
  simply have to be available, open to the
  relationship with the Eternal Thou. .
• The Thou encounters me by grace - it cannot be found by seeking. But
  that I speak the basic word to it is a deed of my whole being, is my
  essential deed. The Thou encounters me. I enter into a direct
  relationship to it. Thus the relationship is election and electing, passive
  and active at once: An action of the whole being must approach
  passivity, for it does away with all partial actions and thus with any
  sense of action, which always depends on limited exertions. The basic
  word I-Thou can be spoken only with one’s whole being. The
  concentration and fusion into a whole being can never be
  accomplished by me, can never be accomplished without me. I require
  a Thou to become; becoming I, I say Thou.
                   Jews and I-Thou
• After our redemption from Egypt, we as a people encountered God.
  We were available and open, and the Sinai moment was an I-Thou
  relationship for an entire people and for each individual. The Torah,
  the prophets, and our rabbinic texts were all written by humans
  expressing the I-Thou relationship with the Eternal Thou. By reading
  those texts and being available to the relationship inherent in them, it is
  also possible for us to make ourselves available for the I-Thou
  experience with the Eternal Thou. We must come without
  precondition, without expectation because that would already attempt
  to limit our relationship partner, God, and thus create an I-It moment.
  If we try to analyze the text, we again create an I-It relationship
  because analysis places ourselves outside of the dialogue, as an
  observer and not a total participant.
• For Buber, to do an action because it has
  been previously legislated is meaningless.
  Only our response at the moment of I-Thou
  can have meaning

Shared By: