[Avodah] AN INSTANCE OF THE 7th KIND OF CONTRADICTION IN THE MOREH NEVUCHIM

[Micha Berger]

On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 11:17:42PM -0400, H Lampel wrote:
: The Rambam built he case that accepting Aristotle's version of an
: eternal universe would topple the message of the Torah, repeatedly
: describing Creation ex nihilo a y'sod of the Torah, denial of which
: he declared heretical. So maybe what you mean to say is that Strauss
: preached that although the Rambam considered himself a heretic, he
: thought there's nothing wrong with being a heretic, because heresy
: was the truth....

I understood Strauss to be saying -- to the extent I understood him at
all -- that the Rambam didn't really believe it was heresy. Rather, this
was the real Judaism that the intelligensia always knew. Remember that
whenever the Rambam deals with a maamar chazal that doesn't work with
his Aristitilian Neo-Platonism is that it's a daas yachid. That the
main stream of Chazal really agree with his worldview.

Those claims of heresy were just there to scare the amei haaretz into
looking into ideas they'll misunderstand in heretical ways.

Now, what Strauss would do with Hilkhos Teshuvah and its definiition
of heresy is beyond me. And frankly, I don't care enough about his
opinion enough to bother figuring it out. Da mah lehashiv only justifies
so much...

: But regardless, it's not consistent with the facts or reason. The
: Rambam constantly depicted the masses as the ones who accepted
: Aristotle's eternity, and did not have the sophistication to see
: doing so contradicted their following the Torah....

He did? I thought that was the Perplexed intelligensia, the true
target audience of his book.

: As far as the Midrashim are concerned, it's the other way around.
: The Rambam points out that on their face they often /are/ heretical
: (as are many pesukim depicting Hashem as a physical entity) or
: otherwise unacceptable, and the masses accepted those literal
: meanings. The Rambam struggled to convince his audience that they
: required interpretation to remove the heresy and unacceptable
: literal meanings.

And, based on what I said above, Strauss would say that the Rambam
would say those hidden meanings include things like eternity of
the universe.

: >But my problem stands. Bil'am saw a real event, and therefore he saw his
: >donkey having a real exchange with an angel. No problems with Bil'am's
: >witnessing the exchange, but I don't understand how the Rambam explains
: >that exchange itself.
: >
: >However, the Rambam believes that nevu'ah comes from knowledge, and the
: >consequent connection to haSeikhel haPo'al / the Active Intellect. How
: >could the donkey have that exchange?

: Bilaam was not seeing an earthly donkey. He was seeing a seichel
: nivdal kind of donkey, which I would think is at home with other
: such entities and with whom it is able to communicate...

He saw his own donkey, though. It might have been the metaphisucal entity
(seikhel) behind his donkey, but the donkey refers to their longstanding
relationship.

Or to put it another way... The Lot the mal'akhim sawed was the real
Lot, not a seikhel nivdal kind of Lot.



On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 10:47:41AM -0400, H Lampel wrote:
:> No, the Rambam said pretty much the opposite, that the theory of
:> an eternal world could fit into yahadus al pi sevara, but as we
:> have the Torah attesting to creation ex nihilo, then that is what
:> happened and that is what we believe.

: You're thinking of what he said about Plato's version of an eternal
: universe, wherein Hashem was always eternally generating the
: material from which He finally formed the universe.

Which fits "yeish mei'ayin" -- yeish only exists because Hashem Wills
it out of the ayin. However, Hashem always existed, and doesn't change
His Mind, to He must always have been willing that yeish mei'ayin.

So G-d creates the world from nothingness, but in a way that causes
the whole chain of causality -- not in the manner of the first link in
that cian.

It has its logic. Or would, if "always" when we spoke of HQBH would mean
"across all of time" rather than "lemaalah min hazman". IOW, the timeline
too, in its full length is Willed into existence. Whatever that length
may be.

: As far as Aristotle's version, that Hashem was always necessarily
: eternally generating the fully formed universe, based on His
: inability to change His Mind, which obviates the possibilities of
: miracles and reward and punishment...

Actually, Plato has something similar, but only about hyle (chomer),
not the final tzuros.

The Rambam's attack on Aristo had more to do with A relying on
what we today would call the Law of Conversation of Matter[-Energy
lefi Einstein]. Or as Aristo put it, change is only in forms, not
substance. Denying yeish mei'ayin because he assume nature always holds,
even during Creation.

And that's why the theory implies a lack of miracles and sekhar va'onesh,
because it is based on believing nature always holds, and the Will of
G-d /is/ nature.

It is also addressed in the Rambam's statement about how no one can study
a living person and guess how it would live during gestation as a mashal
for trying to apply the way the world runs now to maaseh bereishis. But
that only addresses creation, not hashgachah.


:> If, on the other hand, Aristotle had a proof for his theory, the
:> whole teaching of Scripture would be rejected, and we should be
:> forced to other opinions.

To highlight something RZL and I agreed on in all previous iterations...
Note that the Rambam does not assume we would reinterpret Scripture
in contradiction to mesorah. Even though he just said he could fit the
words to the notion of eternity, even Arito's. The Rambam actually had
two criteria for accepting a rationalist explanation: that the
philosophy be sound, on a solid proof; and that the TSBP is consistent
with it. (Not necessarily supporting; just not definitivaly contradicting.)

Here is saying that if his grandmother had wheels, she'd be a trolly; and
if Aristo had proved something that contradicted TSBP, we'd have to dump
Yahadus. Such a scenrio would disprove Judaism [the whole teaching of
Scripture], and thus was can take it for granted would be impossible.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             None of us will leave this place alive.
micha at aishdas.org        All that is left to us is
http://www.aishdas.org   to be as human as possible while we are here.
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner