[Avodah] Rav Elchanan Wasserman & Why People Sin

H Lampel via Avodah avodah at lists.aishdas.org
Tue Jun 2 14:39:33 PDT 2015



:
> From: Micha Berger via Avodah<avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
>
> [Rambam's statement (''And know that one of the strongest proofs for Creation ex nihilo, //for
> :: //one who ismodeh al ha-ememmes// ...
> :: is his confirming the fact that every one of all natural entities
> :: serves a specific purpose, with each one benefiting still another;
> :: and that this fact is a proof for the purposeful intent of an
> :: [I]ntender...'') is not an informal argument, akin to R' Aqiva's or REW's appeal
> to the obviousness of a design and thus Designer. Rather,] it is a recap of a formal proof The Rambam made in 2:19-20... 2:20 marks the end of an Argument from Design. As it opens: "According to Aristotle, none of the products
> of Nature are due to chance. His proof is this: That which is due to
> chance does not reappear constantly nor frequently, but all products of
> Nature reappear either constantly or at least frequently..."
>
> This is a formal argument, unlike R' Aqiva's or REW's own appeal
> to the obviousness of a design and thus Designer.
Philosophers may disagree with classifying the argument made in 2:20 
from ''frequency of appearance'' as ''an argument from design.'' But 
even if it is ''an'' argument from design, it's a different argument 
from the ''modeh al ha-emmess'' proof from the hierarchy of entities 
benefiting others. So the latter is not a recap of the former. And it 
does not necessarily follow that one who is modeh to the ''frequency'' 
argument considers the hierarchy argument ''one of the strongest.''


RZL, continued:
: He explicitly describes this/modeh al ha-emmess/  statement /as a
: tangential interruption/: After that statement, he says, "I will now
: return to the subject of this chapter, viz., the ultimate cause [i.e.
: the purpose behind the universe being as it is--ZL]."

: My point was that we nevertheless see that the Rambam recognizes that
: there is another approach to verifying truth, namely that which follows
: the non-formal mindset of those who are/modeh al ha-emmess/...

RMB: >Agreed it's tangential, which is why I doubt that if the Rambam did want
to say something that signficant, this would be its only mention.<

Again: Here, where the Rambam, for the first time, is about to bring up 
the hierarchy proof, he parenthetically mentions that it is intuitively 
understood by anyone unbiased. He does then go on to state the proof in 
a formal philosophic form. This is the most proper place to insert such 
a parenthetical remark parenthetically, and only once. It's not ''that 
significant'' for his purposes, because, as I had written, the entire 
purpose of the Moreh is to address people (including himself) concerned 
with hearing formal philosophic proofs and confronting the challenges 
that formal philosophic proofsbrought to the mesorah. Those interested 
in hearing an expanded version of the argument in informal form could 
find it in the Rambam's introduction to his his Mishnah commentary.

Zvi Lampel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150602/3a74572d/attachment-0008.html>


More information about the Avodah mailing list