Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Standards of Proof/Learning from the G'onim

There are two things people say that I find particularly annoying: "I always wanted to ..." and "I'll never forget ..."  Really?  Since your first breath in this world you had that desire?  Really?  You know the future and what other events might occur that will crowd this one out?

That being said; I've always wanted to learn האמונות והדעות/Beliefs and Opinions by R' Saadia Gaon.  It is one of (if not the) earliest treatise on the rational basis for our (that is, Orthodox Jewish) beliefs and "vortlach" from it are widely quoted.  (For example: that there is not eating nor drinking in the world to come; that world is an entirely spiritual experience.)  I am very glad that my Hebrew has finally gotten good enough and my understanding mature enough to work through this beautiful sefer.
The main difficulty is not the language.  Baruch HaShem, my modern Hebrew skills are pretty poor, but the language of our sages in all generations has a consistent vocabulary and style.  The only real difficulty with the language is that R' Saadia writes in a particularly elegant style and precise vocabulary.  The biggest hurdle for me is some unfamiliar words; not much different the difficulty one faces when reading a text book (on any subject) vs a magazine article on the same topic.

A much bigger hurdle is accounting to the different mind set of a writer from over a thousand years ago.  האמונות והדעות was completed circa 933 -- long before Newton and Copernicus.  Even so, R' Saadia addresses the question of multiple worlds and other heavens; very mature ideas, indeed.  His proofs, based as they are on the Aristotelian world view, do not "sing" to us today.  None the less, the way he addresses the issues allows one to clearly separate the problem/issue from its proof; allowing one to contemplate the same issues now with our different world view.

R' Saadia begins, after a long introduction on the nature of proof in general, with a warning.  One who is embarking on this investigation, he notes, is delving into matters that are not discernible by our physical senses.  These are entirely intellectual delving into the deepest and most fundamental principles of our existence.  That being the case, he gives three criteria for success:
  1. It must be logical and internally self-consistent.
  2. One must have answers for the questions brought by other philosophies/investigations the demonstrate the superiority of our conclusions.
  3. It must be supported by the signs and wonders wrought by our prophets.
Here's my perspective on his criteria.  If you don't have (1), you have nothing at all anyway.  Without (2), you have no reason to choose your perspective over another.  Without (3), you are not taking into account whatever little concrete data we do have.  I found it particularly fascinating that R' Saadia is only interested in signs and wonders after he has a world view that is logically consistent and demonstrably better than any other world view.  On the one hand, signs and wonders are impressive, but without context they don't prove anything.  On the other hand, you can't just ignore signs and wonders because they don't fit into your world view.  Note that with every new competing philosophy and idea, one must check if (2) still applies, modify (1) accordingly, and do a reality check with (3).

R' Saadia is therefore saying that Orthodox Judaism demands extreme intellectual honesty, a constant awareness and understanding of current issues, and a lifetime of refining one's outlook.  In the end, then, authentic, Torah/Orthodox Judaism is refreshingly modern in its approach and demands; always has been, always will be.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction. ...

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Sha...

Thought for the Day: אוושא מילתא Debases Yours Shabbos

My granddaughter came home with a list the girls and phone numbers in her first grade class.  It was cute because they had made it an arts and crafts project by pasting the list to piece of construction paper cut out to look like an old desk phone and a receiver attached by a pipe cleaner.  I realized, though, that the cuteness was entirely lost on her.  She, of course, has never seen a desk phone with a receiver.  When they pretend to talk on the phone, it is on any relatively flat, rectangular object they find.  (In fact, her 18 month old brother turns every  relatively flat, rectangular object into a phone and walks around babbling into it.  Not much different than the rest of us, except his train of thought is not interrupted by someone else babbling into his ear.) I was reminded of that when my chavrusa (who has children my grandchildrens age) and I were learning about אוושא מילתא.  It came up because of a quote from the Shulchan Aru...