tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6141014.post3013904904644857736..comments2023-06-21T10:52:34.013-04:00Comments on Jeremy Rosen's Blog: Spinoza Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17043970242427877089noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6141014.post-32834147866297976422015-08-30T10:29:40.189-04:002015-08-30T10:29:40.189-04:00Now I get it. Yes I should apologize for the silly...Now I get it. Yes I should apologize for the silly comment about Reform. It didn't comer out the way I intended it. It should have come directly after the revelation bit.Rabbi Jeremy Rosenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12723608669485173271noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6141014.post-6485556222128421622015-08-29T21:05:16.556-04:002015-08-29T21:05:16.556-04:00And your point is? Not sure what you are driving a...And your point is? Not sure what you are driving at.Rabbi Jeremy Rosenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12723608669485173271noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6141014.post-43657354672562482342015-08-28T16:12:48.652-04:002015-08-28T16:12:48.652-04:00Reform Judaism is OK with the notion that the Mosa...Reform Judaism is OK with the notion that the Mosaic revelation might be fictitious or nonbinding, but is certainly not OK with considering "Jesus to be the summit of Divine relevation." Even Reform has its boundaries. Woodrowhttp://woodrowconservadox.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6141014.post-45054567791354506172015-08-26T10:48:50.483-04:002015-08-26T10:48:50.483-04:00I don't think I say anywhere that questioning ...I don't think I say anywhere that questioning or challenging traditional tenets of Judaism places you outside the community or beyond the pale. And I for one do not consider belief in God to be a sine qua non. Neither do I think that challenging the law in origin or development puts you out either. That is certainly not my position for if it were I would be a candidate for excommunication. Neither did I challenge Spinoza's intellectual or ethical standards.<br /><br />What I do say is that if claim that the Mosaic revelation ( and indeed the rabbinic tradition) is not binding and should be scrapped, if you consider Jesus to be the summit of Divine revelation then you are putting yourself beyond the Jewish religious pale ( and obviously I am not including Reform Judaism). Your parallel with Louis Jacobs is false because he was always committed to living a halachic life.<br /><br />If Torah is irrelevant to you, you may be a perfectly good human being, better than most religious ones, but you cannot claim to be part of a traditional Jewish community. Spinoza was asked by the Ma'amad to assert his commitment or to retract or to modify his views and he refused.<br /><br />I agree that current Orthodox communities are excessively conservative, narrow minded and read anything other than the party line as heresy. But Spinoza certainly did not even want to be part of that community, in that pre modern community there were no other options and therefore that community did not want him.Rabbi Jeremy Rosenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12723608669485173271noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6141014.post-90100130847173996572015-08-26T10:46:47.048-04:002015-08-26T10:46:47.048-04:00Yes I certainly believe in freedom of thought and ...Yes I certainly believe in freedom of thought and action but then you must accept that your choices may alienate you from some people and certain types of communities. I think Spinoza accepted this. You can't run with foxes and chase with the hounds.Rabbi Jeremy Rosenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12723608669485173271noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6141014.post-44571414633597472302015-08-26T10:45:48.488-04:002015-08-26T10:45:48.488-04:00Thank you.
You have understood me better than oth...Thank you. <br />You have understood me better than others. And your point about Uriel A Costa is well taken<br />Rabbi Jeremy Rosenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12723608669485173271noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6141014.post-80973514720570894332015-08-14T13:28:36.596-04:002015-08-14T13:28:36.596-04:00Neil, I agree with your post, but I'd add a co...Neil, I agree with your post, but I'd add a couple of points.<br /><br />Regarding 1: I may have misunderstood R. Rosen's point, but the way I interpreted it was that he was referring to expectations from the Jewish community in Amsterdam (and other areas). There's precedent among rishonim and earlier to not have to believe every word was transmitted to Moses from God, so one can be traditional, but perhaps not "Orthodox" (which didnt really exist in Spinoza's day anyway), to deny that tenet.<br /><br />Regarding 2: that is a more classical understanding of Judaism too. Or atvleast Rabbinic Judaism. The Talmud was always treated more as a legal work for the most part; at least among the Andalusian traditions and by rationalists.<br /><br />Regarding 3: There's also another problem with herem. When someone returns, the way they get treated is sometimes worse than if they had never sought to rejoin the community. Uriel de Costa is a perfect exampleMasrimaghrebihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18412983274143957898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6141014.post-24163790618894134472015-08-14T04:03:14.561-04:002015-08-14T04:03:14.561-04:00Surely one has to understand the response of the A...Surely one has to understand the response of the Amsterdam Jewish authorities in the context of the time. In some ways the Amsterdam community was similar to the baalei t'shuva movement today in that a large number of the community did not have the knowledge / learning that other communities had and therefore there was something of an inferiority complex e.g. the need to look to rabbis in Venice for respona - and as usual that led to the a desire to prove themselves by being "holier than thou" which in turn led to intolerance of different views.<br /><br />Spinoza was certainly a genius - even of his philosophical ideas have been superseded he was a very original thinker and asked questions others did not although he of course built on Descartes work.<br /><br />Three things in the article trouble me:<br /><br />1. The idea that one has to believe on original divine revelation either face to face or word byh word at Sinai in order to be accepted in the Jewish community. That is simply NOT an an original authentic idea. It dates from Rambam's huge error in setting out Articles of the Faith (in which one can argue he was aping Xtinaity and Islam). I maintain that no intelligent person who seriously thinks about it can hold that the entire Torah was given at Sinai word for word unless one is willing to delude oneself as to the evidence (and yes, I think lots of observant Jews are self-deluded in this respect) - to take one example: we are told that the form of the words is exactly the same in a Torah scroll as were given at Sinai (and even if some hold this only applies to the aseret dibra'ot the point still applies); and yet it is accepted that our current block script, k'sav ashri, is an Assyrian script adopted many hundreds of years after the exodus - reflecting its derivation from carving on clay tablets rather than writing ion parchment (Judea) or papyrus (Egypt), whereas the Israelites at the time of the exodus used k'sav Ivri. So how can the original Torah be written in a script that did not evolve for several hundred years (a Lubavitcher told me that Hashem foresaw the evolution of the later script - but if he needs to use some convoluted explanations, I suspect he could believe almost anything)?<br /> <br />2. The claim that 1. above is what distinguishes Judaism from other religions. That is not the principle distinction by any stretch. I would argue the main difference is that Judaism is a religion of deed not of faith. It is our deeds that are weighed in the balance, not our faith (cf. Xtianity). As R Wein quoting S R Hirsh ( I think) puts it, "The Talmud has almost nothing to say about theology or the nature of God. This is different from Xtian commentaries which are full of discussions as to God's nature. Arguably this reflect the fact that 'Xtianity is a religion created by Man to define God; whereas Judaism is a religion created by God to define Man.<br /><br />3. Jewish communal authorities never seem to learn. If they dislike heretical views so much then they should simply ignore them rather than take action such as Cherem. Such actions create publicity for the heretical views and thereby undermine the objective of the authorities. A good parallel can be made with the Louis Jacobs affair in the 1960s by which the United Synagogue effectively gave the Masorti movement the leg-up it needed to get going in the UK. While one might argue that the Amsterdam community was concerned with the view of the Dutch civil authorities who tasked the community with ensuring its members conformed to Jewish law, this need not have led to drumming Spinoza out of the community.NatanBerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15559894329427022650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6141014.post-57877648026496077812015-08-14T04:00:57.257-04:002015-08-14T04:00:57.257-04:00I read one book about Spinoza his philosophy and w...I read one book about Spinoza his philosophy and why they excluded him from the community and Jewish life. I also understand why he was put off. I could imagine him joining Masorti or the Reconstructionists in the USA if he were alive nowadays. I am glad we can have different opions nowadays and have free speech. Nobody has to believe anything nowadays. It is all about practice. Even then nobody is doing or able to do everything.<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07843583401382061475noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6141014.post-85372665788810363532015-08-13T18:43:17.659-04:002015-08-13T18:43:17.659-04:00Such an interesting post, Jeremy. We are lucky th...Such an interesting post, Jeremy. We are lucky that we live in different days and can (more or less) voice our opinions with impunity.Leilanoreply@blogger.com