[Avodah] RYBS TEEM Musings

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer ygbechhofer at gmail.com
Sat Jan 13 20:58:44 PST 2007


> *The Emergence of Ethical Man.(Book review).* Daniel Rynhold. 
>         */Religious Studies/* 42.3 (Sept 2006): p364(5). 
> <http://find.galegroup.com/itx/publicationSearch.do?queryType=PH&inPS=true&type=getIssues&prodId=EAIM&currentPosition=0&userGroupName=newb77636&searchTerm=Religious+Studies&index=JX&tabID=T002&contentSet=IAC-Documents>
>
> *Full Text :*COPYRIGHT 2006 Cambridge University Press
>
> Joseph B. Soloveitchik The Emergence of Ethical Man, Michael Berger 
> (ed.). (Jersey City NJ: Ktav Publishing House, 2005). Pp. xxii + 214. 
> [pounds sterling]20.00 (Hbk). ISBN 088125 873 3.
>
> Feted as the figurehead of the form of Judaism that became known as 
> modern orthodoxy, Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik (1903-1993) gained a 
> reputation as one of the foremost Jewish thinkers of the twentieth 
> century. This status, which transcended denominational and religious 
> divides, was based on a relatively small number of philosophical and 
> theological essays. Since his death, however, a number of 
> Soloveitchik's unpublished manuscripts have entered the public domain 
> through the MeOtzar HoRav series, under the expert stewardship of 
> David Shatz and Joel Wolowelsky. The Emergence of Ethical Man (EEM), 
> edited by Michael Berger from ten handwritten notebooks, is the fifth 
> and possibly most significant volume of the series so far.
>
> EEM focuses on Soloveitchik's abiding interest in elucidating 
> 'religious anthropology ... within the philosophical perspective of 
> Judaism' (xii), as he himself describes it in a letter excerpted in a 
> helpful editor's introduction. Part 1 utilizes the opening chapters of 
> Genesis, a text Soloveitchik returned to many times, to put forward an 
> account of man that emphasizes his continuity with the natural world. 
> Part 2 begins with the central question of how man emerges as a unique 
> ethical being out of these entirely naturalistic origins and continues 
> with an account of the corruption of the ethical personality through 
> sin. Finally, Part 3 deals with the rehabilitation of man through a 
> description of the various manifestations of what Soloveitchik terms 
> the 'charismatic personality' as embodied in Abraham and Moses.
>
> While naturalistic elements have always been present in Soloveitchik's 
> work, they appear far more marked in EEM, and he is keen throughout 
> Part 1 to distance himself not only from Greek and Christian views, 
> but also from the widely held Jewish view that insists on a 
> qualitative metaphysical distinction between man and nature. As Berger 
> notes in his introduction, the work is 'revolutionary in that it 
> breaks with traditional metaphysical categories that are the warp and 
> woof of medieval Jewish commentary and philosophy, and instead bases 
> its analysis purely on the categories of the natural and social 
> sciences' (xxi), an observation that is entirely borne out by what 
> follows.
>
> The basic point in Part 1 is that' man may be the most developed form 
> of life on the continuum of plant-animal-man, but the ontic essence 
> remains identical' (47). Indeed, in his account of the famous biblical 
> idea that man is made in the image of God (tzelem elohim) he 
> explicitly rejects what he takes to be the metaphysical and 
> transcendental Christian reading of the term tzelem. Instead, in a 
> description that surpasses even the strongly scientific elucidation of 
> the term in 1965's The Lonely Man of Faith, Soloveitchik insists that 
> tzelem 'signifies man's awareness of himself as a biological being and 
> the state of being informed of his natural drives' (75-76).
>

Fascinating take on "Tzelem Elokim." One wonders what the zayde (in this 
case, R' Chaim *Volozhiner* would have had to say about this. Is there 
any precedent in earlier Jewish sources for this definition?

> The impression one gains that Soloveitchik's naturalism is more 
> pronounced here than in his published writings on Genesis is probably 
> in part down to the anthropological perspective from which he is 
> writing. Thus, in his 1964 essay Confrontation where Soloveitchik 
> takes his favoured typological approach, 'natural man' is derided as a 
> hedonically minded pleasure seeker. The contrasting anthropological 
> perspective of EEM means that 'natural man' is used as a descriptive 
> anthropological category and thus there is no call for any such 
> evaluative judgement. In EEM it is, for Soloveitchik, simply a true 
> description of the nature of man.
>
> With the naturalistic context in place, Part 2 turns to the emergence 
> of ethical man. Firstly, in order to experience the ethical norm, 
> external divine intervention is necessary. Only through the divine 
> command can man transcend his natural biological self and experience 
> the ethical. This is because the ethical imperative has to be 
> 'experienced as both a must and as something that may be resisted or 
> ignored' (81), and this normative pull cannot derive from nature 
> since, as Soloveitchik notes, 'biological motivation is neutral as far 
> as ethical standards are concerned' (87). So, on the one hand 
> Soloveitchik retains a fact/value distinction such that an 'ought' can 
> never arise from an 'is'. He can only conceive of value emerging from 
> a realm beyond the natural and given the religious framework of his 
> thinking, God is naturally the source of value. Yet Soloveitchik 
> insists on retaining his naturalism at the human level, concluding 
> Part 2 by saying that 'the ethical personality is not transcendent. It 
> only reconsiders its own status in a normative light, conceiving the 
> natural law as identical with the moral law' (144). So man remains a 
> biological rather than metaphysical being, but man's unique ethical 
> perspective emerges through his encounter with the divine imperative.
>
"Natural law" sounds to me like Rousseau. Is RYBS suggesting that  human 
beings are "naturally" ethical? It seems that he is saying more than 
that: That to be ethical is also not connected to being transcendent - 
viz., a person who attempts to transcend this world is a priori 
"unethical." Is this Ba'al Mussar's (!!!) deriding Chassidim/Mekubalim?

> What is most important about this divine imperative is its role as a 
> condition of the freedom necessary for the emergence of the ethical 
> personality. The divine imperative does not play a Euthyphro-like role 
> of defining the good. Instead, we find in more Kantian fashion talk of 
> the divine imperative as a necessary condition of freewill and the 
> normative 'must'. Indeed, the echoes of Kant are unmistakable in much 
> of what he has to say about 'universal natural morality' (154), 
> whether when referring to the charismatic man who 'refuses to obey an 
> external authority ... [but] discovers the ethos himself' (153), or 
> when writing that 'the postulate of freedom is necessary ... for the 
> legitimation of the very essence of the ethical experience' (77, 
> emphasis added).
>
> The further stages of the emergence of the ethical similarly revolve 
> around the 'postulate of freedom'. Thus, Soloveitchik's second stage 
> requires that man conceive of himself as separate from nature, and 
> through this consciousness of otherness, as a subject standing against 
> an object, he understands that he is a free being (78). And in an 
> interesting parallel with much contemporary Jewish thought from Buber 
> through to Levinas, the full emergence of the free ethical personality 
> requires the third stage of confronting the 'thou' through the 
> creation of the other. Interestingly for Soloveitchik scholars, though 
> Buberian elements have long been detected in Soloveitchik's writings, 
> EEM is the first work to explicitly reference his works, albeit not in 
> relation to this particular issue.
>
> Soloveitchik goes on in Part 2 to give an account of 'the Fall' and 
> consistent with the naturalism of Part I, 'Man's sin consisted in 
> betraying nature.... Naturalness is moral, unnaturalness is sin' 
> (141). A close reading of the Genesis text yields for Soloveitchik the 
> idea that sin arose as a result of the seduction of humanity by 
> pleasure, causing a split in a once harmonious personality. In what is 
> more than a nod to Kierkegaard, Soloveitchik describes how pursuing an 
> unbridled hedonism that respects no boundaries causes man's ethical 
> self to split from his esthetic self. This schism in man's personality 
> means that repentance is achieved through the ' rebirth of a 
> harmonious personality by returning to God and eo ipso to one's own 
> selfhood' (136-7). EEM's detailed working out of his view of sin 
> supplies us with a natural corollary for the similarly naturalistic 
> view of repentance familiar from Soloveitchik's other works.
>
Olam hafuch ra'isi. Shouldn't that be: "Morality is natural, sin is 
unnatural?" What is the different connotation of RYBS's formulation?

> It is in Part 3 of the book, probably its most original section for 
> those familiar with Soloveitchik's writings, that we find him return 
> to a more typological approach in his account of the rehabilitation of 
> the ethical personality through 'charismatic man'. The 'charismatic 
> personality' achieves the restoration of the human personality to its 
> original unity through realizing the covenant with God in history. 
> Soloveitchik traces his development through an analysis of the 
> biblical personalities of Abraham, and in particular Moses, who moves 
> through a number of stages of development. At this point, though no 
> less rich and suggestive, the thread of the argument becomes more 
> difficult to follow and it seems less completely developed to this 
> reviewer. Though this can only be pure speculation, given that we are 
> reading a work that Soloveitchik never published, one wonders whether 
> this section of the text had been less worked through.
>
Charisma: *cha·ris·ma*   (k?-ri(z'm?) n.   /pl./ *cha·ris·ma·ta* (-m?-t?)

   1.
         1. A rare personal quality attributed to leaders who arouse
            fervent popular devotion and enthusiasm.
         2. Personal magnetism or charm: /a television news program
            famed for the charisma of its anchors./
   2. /Christianity/ An extraordinary power, such as the ability to
      perform miracles, granted by the Holy Spirit.

/The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth 
Edition/. Retrieved January 13, 2007, from Dictionary.com website.

How does this definition fit with RYBS's usage? Surely he means 
something else by "charisma." But what?

> What is abundantly clear, though, is the characteristically 
> Soloveitchikian conflict that we find in the attempt to realize the 
> covenant, which is thwarted by a natural reality that does not simply 
> yield to a covenantal teleology. In parallel to the redemption of the 
> individual, therefore, the realization of the covenant requires that 
> two orders, this time the natural human and the charismatic 
> historical, are brought into harmony. And it fell to Moses, in his 
> guise as the apostolic personality, to begin the process of redeeming 
> the tension between the two. And again in characteristic style, we 
> find man in this world at the centre of this covenantal history. Thus, 
> 'God worked through Moses in order to introduce man into the sphere of 
> historical creativeness. Let man himself attempt to realize the 
> covenant' (184).
>
> As a number of writers have noted, this 'this-worldly' emphasis in 
> Soloveitchik's work meant that he did not pay much attention to 
> eschatological questions. It is particularly striking therefore that 
> ultimately, with its talk of covenantal realization, Part 3 is all 
> about a lengthy historical process of messianic redemption. 
> Nonetheless, the 'this-worldly' approach retains its hold throughout, 
> most notably in what is his lengthiest reflection on immortality. 
> Thus, we are told that 'Abraham did not conquer death in the 
> metaphysical transcendent sense. His immortality is through and 
> through historical' (169). And again 'the first concept of immortality 
> as coined by Judaism is the continuation of a historical existence 
> throughout the ages.... The deceased person does not lead an isolated, 
> separate existence in a transcendental world. The identity persists on 
> a level of concrete reality disguised as a people' (176). While he is 
> careful to note that this is only the 'first' concept of immortality, 
> it is the only one that he discusses. Moreover, this is all given a 
> messianic aspect when combined with the view that 'the realization of 
> the moral goal is not to be found within the bounds of an individual 
> life span. The individual may contribute a great deal to the 
> fulfilment of the ethical ideal, yet he can never attain it. A moral 
> telos is gradually realized in a historical process' (168). In a 
> naturalized eschatology that owes much to one of Soloveitchik's most 
> significant philosophical influences, Hermann Cohen, what begins as a 
> view of immortality as continued historical existence culminates in 
> the covenantal realization of a messianic moral vision.
>
Is man's drive to immortality then primarily the drive to enter history? 
This might actually link up RYBS with Dr. Isaac Breuer - no coincedence, 
considering the common influences on their thought.

> Of all the volumes to have seen the light of day so far in this 
> series, this one is probably the greatest treasure trove for 
> Soloveitchik scholars. It genuinely advances and refines themes 
> familiar from his published works, and throws up all sorts of further 
> questions for research, particularly regarding his intellectual 
> influences. Though we are not informed of the dating of these 
> manuscripts, much of the material in EEM obviously parallels that 
> contained in the more 'existentialist' works of the 1960s. Yet we also 
> see a continuation of his earlier fascination with Kant and Hermann 
> Cohen, all of which should be of particular interest for Soloveitchik 
> scholars. But in addressing general questions regarding the place of 
> the ethical in the religious sphere and as an example of how a 
> contemporary thinker committed to an orthodox religious tradition can 
> attempt to make philosophical sense of it in a non-apologetic manner, 
> it is also entirely accessible to the non-Jewish reader and would act 
> as an excellent introduction to Soloveitchik's oeuvre.
>
> DANIEL RYNHOLD
>
> King's College London
>
>
>
> *Named Works:* The Emergence of Ethical Man (Book) Book reviews
>
> *Source Citation:* Rynhold, Daniel. "The Emergence of Ethical 
> Man.(Book review)." /Religious Studies/ 42.3 (Sept 
> 2006): 364(5). /Expanded Academic ASAP/. Thomson Gale. Ramapo Catskill 
> Library System. 13 Jan. 2007 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070113/b62b13db/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: dot.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 49 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070113/b62b13db/attachment-0001.gif>


More information about the Avodah mailing list