<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"><html><head><title>[Aspaqlaria]
Mysticism and Rationalism</title><link rel="stylesheet"
href="http://www.aishdas.org/asp/wp-content/themes/my_hueman/style.css"
type="text/css" media="screen" /><meta http-equiv="Content-Type"
content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body>Aspaqlaria has posted a new
item, '<a href="http://www.aishdas.org/asp/mysticism-rationalism">Mysticism
and Rationalism</a>'<br>
<br>
<font size=+1><br>
<div class="pf-content">
<p>A lot has been said on-line about Mystical (e.g. Qabbalah) and Rationalist
(e.g. the Rambam) approaches to Judaism.</p>
<p>In this post, I aspire to propose clear definitions of these terms. Because
much of the existing discussion suffers from a lack of precision to the point
of inconsistency. For example, the Rambam was a Rationalist by the standards
of his day. But after the invention of science, scientific method, and
checking things empirically, would we today use the term
“Rationalist” for someone who followed untested worldviews that
stood unquestioned for 1,500 years, the way the Rambam did Artistotle’s
Natural Philosophy?</p>
<p>So what do we mean by “Rationalism” that is seems to fitting
for the Rambam but not for a <em>Mequbal </em>who spent his life trying to
ascend to higher worlds and experience the Divine?</p>
<p>My proposal:</p>
<p>I think that rather than talk about Rationalism vs Mysticism in terms of
what one believes is true or how one reaches one’s conclusions, I think
the only way the terms can be used with clear definitions is in attitude and
inspiration.</p>
<p>A rationalist is inspired by the design he can see in how the world works.
He therefore looks for the explainable, and will favor parsimonious
explanations that don’t require too many assumptions beyond what accords
with common experience.</p>
<p>The mystic is inspired by how much beyond his ken everything is, the
emotional experience of getting glimpses beyond his reach. He will therefore
look for explanations that cover more ground than the rationalist will, that
require a far greater body of received knowledge. (“Received
[knowledge]” being the literal translation of the word
“<em>qabbalah</em>“.) And that emphasize the emotion-experiential
relationship with the Divine rather than a comprehensible path to one.</p>
<p>This also explains why, even though it’s not inherent to Mystical
philosophy, people who pursue Mystical paths in <em>hashkafah</em> are also
more likely to believe the maximalist version of <em>midrashim</em>, those
that make the most miraculous claims. The Rambam sides with
Shemu’el’s version of the messianic vision in which nothing
changes but “subjugation to [foreign] kingdoms”. The Ramban or a
Chassid is more likely to speak of how shuls and <em>batei medrash</em> flew
to Israel. Did the Red Sea “just” split, or did it split into 13
channels with food and even delicacies if you just reached into the walls? And
so on. The miraculous satisfies the Mystic’s desire for a world beyond
comprehension, but it strains the Rationalist’s need for a G-d Whose
Brilliance overawes us.</p>
<p>And while Qabbalah normally is more appealing to someone of Mystical
inclinations, that isn’t always to. Rav Aryeh Kaplan taught on very
rationalist terms, and his books were popular because of how much his work
made hard things logical from first principle. And then we have schools of
thought like the Maharal’s, which tend to go mystical, but don’t
draw from the Zohar or the Ari za”l, the sources we tend to associate
with Qabbalah.</p>
<p>And so, I think that there has been too much confusion about what Mysticism
and Rationalism are, primarily because we’re looking in the wrong venue.
They aren’t defined by sets of beliefs, or by different kind of ways to
reach one’s beliefs. It starts earlier — with what kinds of
beliefs one finds inspiring. That division will create tendencies in various
issues, but only that — tendencies. If you try defining these terms by
those issues, you end up trying to work with inconsistent data.</p>
</div><br>
</font><br>
<br>
You may view the latest post at<br>
<a
href="http://www.aishdas.org/asp/mysticism-rationalism">http://www.aishdas.org/asp/mysticism-rationalism</a><br>
<br>
You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are
posted.<br>
Best regards,<br>
micha<br>
micha@aishdas.org</body></html>