Jewish Philosophy - an Obligation? Geoffrey Boycott wouldn't answer a question like that... Also mentions that crowd-pleasing term: Modern Orthodox.

Bob Dylan’s career has gone through many different stages but a significant development worthy of comment took place in the late '90s after a creative lull which had lasted around a decade. His songs became darker and more world-weary, showing the reflections of a man who felt that new insights had arrived with age. One of the lines which sums up a certain maturity of mind goes like this: "The world is old, the world is grey, lessons of life can't be learned in a day." Sounds sort of depressing, admittedly, but it makes a good point. They can’t.

So when I was thinking about my last post and how it seems to invite an answer or counter-response to the issue of philosophy and Judaism it struck me that I don’t really want to go about my posts by raising every possible theme/problem/issue and give answers in a blog. It seemed sort of trivial. I would rather raise issues and maybe suggest a few approaches that I have explored whilst leaving it fairly open ended. So what I have decided to do instead is to approach it indirectly through the writings of R. Sa'adia. 

Geoffrey Boycott, referring to the title, was an English opening Batsman who saw defence as the best form of attack and would rather spend hours defending rather than carelessly trying to score runs. He would certainly understand that big issues can’t be dealt with by playing the big strokes too soon (Feel free to ignore the cricket references, they are more for peace of mind than anything else).

   

One of the most striking elements of Sa’adia’s work is his elevation of knowledge-acquisition to the status of a religious act. He describes four branches of understanding and knowledge – the universal ones of inference, intellect and observation and the additional Jewish element of Divine revelation. Quoting Mishlei, he writes that the pursuit of knowledge and truth is an essential component of the religious experience: "For my mouth shall utter truth, and wickedness is an abomination to my lips. All the words of my mouth are in righteousness."

 Man is endowed with intellectual faculties and he must recognise these as a gift from God. The fruits of his wisdom and speculation further God-awareness in the world. The novelty of this understanding is the fact that it asserts that there exists a rational process, independent of tradition or revelation which can be used to gain knowledge about God, the world and morality. 

In his introduction to Emunot ve Deot, Sa’adia writes that the reason he felt the need to embark upon his project was that “I saw in our time many of the faithful possess mistaken convictions, whilst many of the deniers boast of their corruption and act haughtily”.

Certainly, Sa’adia acted partly out of a defensive need to bolster the hearts and minds of the community who he saw to be struggling with the perceived onslaught of philosophy. The cultural events known as Majalis, where groups would convene to discuss philosophy, adopted a relativistic and sceptical attitude towards religious truth. The largely Islamic group known as the Kalam actively pursued a reconciliation between religion and reason. In his own words, the confusion faced by his fellow Jews caused Sa'adia's heart to grieve for mankind.

 But in addition to this he saw the rational pursuit of wisdom as being essential to the human experience. The need to work things out and grapple with issues, he argues, is a fundamental one. Doubt, he explains, comes about “Since all human arts consist of stages, the mind is meant to work at things”. Unlike God, who is perfect, man’s being part of nature requires him to go through a process in achieving understanding, which requires time and patience.

Many of the perceived conflicts that exist within the Jewish world, it can be argued, are simply the result of intimidating categorisation. The word “rationalism” is associated with a dour, cold and anti-religious intellect. The word “philosophy” carries with it connotations of heresy and danger. Yet placed within another context, the power of the mind is an essential tool for discovering the wisdom of God, both within the realms of the natural world and within the words of the Torah itself. It is this that made its mark on me when I started reading Sa’adia’s works. Instead of portraying the world of philosophy as a dangerous enemy, it transformed it into a powerful tool to strengthen religious faith itself.

 Certainly, he recognised the conflicts which could also take place, but by embracing the struggle itself as a glorious part of the religious journey, he left a legacy which helped fortify the minds of young and old for generations to come. Incidentally, this is reflected in the fact that one of his projects was a translation of the Torah into Arabic – the spoken language, which could be understood by all.

Categorisation in general always carries a heavy stigma attached, particularly when it comes to world-views in the religious world. To be "Modern-Orthodox" is to some ears an admission of religious laxity, to others a particular fondness for Netanya beach, to very few the desire to incorporate all elements of the world experience into service of God. Similarly, to be "Grey" or (this is a new one to me) "Machmir modern-Orthodox" implies a sort of progression from the aforementioned position without quite going the whole way to the promised land. To be "Chareidi" is to some to be helplessly and irredeemably narrow minded and to others a ticket to that promised land. To refuse to categorise, however, is to concede to belonging to that privileged category of "the confused" and so on and so forth - Fun times!