Jewish Concepts of Scripture A Comparative Introduction spITED BY Benjamin D. Sommer hi New York University PressContents Acknowledgments Introduction: Scriptures in Jewish Tradition, and Benjamin D. Sommer Concepts of Scripture in the Synagogue Service Ebi Stern Concepts of Scripture in Rabbinic Judaism: Oral Torah and Written Torah Steven D. Fraade ‘Concepts of Scripture in the Schools of Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Ishmael ‘Azan Yadin-lsrael Concepts of Scriptural Language in Midrash Benjamin D. Sommer Concepts of Scripture among the Jews of the Medieval Islamic World ‘Meira Pollack ‘Concepts of Scripture in the School of Rashi Robert A. Harris Concepts of Scripture in Maimonides James A. Diamond Concepts of Scripture in Nahmanides ‘Aaron W. Hughes ‘Concepts of Scripture in Jewish Mysticism ‘Moshe del ° | 64 = | 39 157‘ili Contents u Concepts of Scripture in Martin Buber and Franz Rosenzweig Jonathan Cohen ‘The Pentateuch as Scripture and the Challenge of Biblical Criticism: Responses among Modern Jewish Thinkers and Scholars Baruch |. Schwartz Concepts of Scripture in Yehezke] Kaufmann Job ¥. indo Concepts of Scripture in Moshe Greenberg ‘Mare Zvi Brttler Concepts of Scripture in Mordechai Breuer ‘Shalom Carmy Scripture and Modern Israeli Literature Yael S. Feldman Scripture and Israeli Secular Culture ‘Yair Zakovitch Glossary About the Contributors Index 379 317 32 335 Acknowledgments 1am grateful to Jennifer Hammer from New York University Press for sug- gesting that J edit this volume and for her patience. I worked on the vol tume during sabbaticals at the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and the Tikvah Center for Law and Jewish Civilization at New York University School of Law and also while serving as.a faculty member at Northwestern University and the Jewish Theologi- cal Seminary. All these places provide settings that nurture rigorous and engaged scholarship, and I am privileged to be associated with each of them. Funding for producing the indices and proofreading was provided by the Lucius N. Littauer Foundation. I am, always, very grateful to their support for research in Jewish Studies. My friend Richard Tupper gave me consistently excellent advice on matters of writing, conceptualization, and style. Andrew Katz did a fine job of editing the manuscript and preparing for publication. Leslie Rubin did a masterfl job preparing the index and aiding me with the proofs. It was a pleasure working with her. My family —Jennifer, Avraham Ayyal, Sarah Gileh, and Eliana Shlomit—create the perfect mix of respect and love, sometimes letting me sit in my office to study and work, and sometimes coming in and thus reminding me ifs time to play. aaran by 229 Ta, Benjamin D. Sommer syn 19 BY aw October 7, 2011 ‘Teaneck, NJChapter 8 Concepts of Scripture in Maimonides James A. Diamond ~ There is virtully no facet of present-day Judaism that does not bear the imprint of the formidable intellectual legacy of Moses ben Maimon (138— ), whether it be in Jewish law (alata), rabbinics, theology, philoso i ion. Even the mystical tradition’ (kabbala) in- ‘pture can be seen as a negative reaction to his overpowering rationalist approach. He was a first in many respects. No fun- lism to which Jews must subscribe existed prior to his introduction of thirteen articles of faith, what have since been generally assented to as the Jewish creed. He pioneered the first code of Jewish law (Mishneh Torah), organizing and systematizing what had previously been avast rabbinic morass that only the most skilled Talmudist could possibly navigate. After assimilating much of the philosophical/scientific tradition of his day, as transmitted through Islamic sources, he authored the single ‘most important and influential reconciliation between the Torah, Judaism's foundational document, and reasoned demonstrated truths with which it apparently conflicted. That treatise, titled the Guide of the Perplexed, con- tinues to vex, challenge, inspire, provoke, and stimulate any serious dis- cussion ot thought since, addressing apparent dichotomies between reli- gious texts, faith, and science. All of this he accomplished while leading his Jewish community in old Cairo and practicing mediciie, acquiting an outstanding reputation as a physician in no less than Saladin’s court. “The intellectual enterprise of reconciling reason and faith, or what has been referred to as Athens and who had his counterparts in was known by alternatively to the three traditions—Maimonides, Ram- bam, Musa ibn Maymun—attest also to the influence he had on all them, ventive re-reading124 JAMES A. DIAMOND, Hebrew Bible could never be read in the same way a lathe quest for human perfection which, for Whatever is attainable of the knowledge ofthe di hers poe ow] of the divine gain? erpretive ness tol truth fom ts mundane articaltion, ss Herta eoter Paradoxically, Scripture’s ing relate to human con Concepts of Scripture in Maimonides 125 ‘unified Being that is the Malmonidean God. That Maimonidean deity al- for no commonality whatsoever with existence as human beings ow and experience it. Therefore the Jew’s encounter with his or her sa- foundational text is fraught with an irresolvable tension between, on ‘one hand, discarding the text and extracting the philosophically pure jon masked by it and, on the other, preserving its original Sinaitic form ‘Medieval theologians and philosophers conducted their investigations and discourse in the shadow of a world largely constructed by a now out- Aristotelian science and ancient cosmology from beneath Scriptures an- thropomorphic surface, of what value is it to the contemporary reader of ns Maimonides took great pa swer continue to vex modern Jewish readers of the Bible. The fi hermeneutical inquiry into the precise nature of the biblical text peculiar language, and the second isthe existential quandary of how to re- ‘main loyal to both intellect and tradition without resorting to an either/or choice of renouncing one in favor of the other.° The hermeneutical agenda wading Scripture has withstood the mount- private addressee of the Guide, whose longing to find out ac- ceptable words (Eccles. 220, p. 4) drove their master.). locates God in two places at the same time, violating the spatial limitations of physical bodies, He ‘must be incorporeal. Then again, any analogy with the material world is ruled out, for you saw no figure (Deut. 4:15) at Sinai, as well asa subsea) Prophetic revelation links up with Sinaitic reportage to form a continuum reinforcing a philosophical bulwark of divine unity. The latter18 JAMES A, DIAMOND, ‘the lamb (Isa. 11:6]) must be read figuratively, will be vindicated, for *in the days of King ‘those metaphors [meshalim] and their allusion Knowledge of God, the noblest of intellectual pursuits, is intertwined wit ‘an appreciation for Scripture, which elevates Scripture along with its read and helps actualize the Messianic period. The nature of God and the nature’ of Messiah are inextricably bound in the process of correctly decipherin inguage. A properly conducted understanding of such language Promotes a philosophically coherent notion of both God and the Messiani age. Conversely, a crude literalist approach to biblical God-talk leads to a corrupt notion of the Supreme Being which ipso facto derails the arrival of the Messiah. Prophetic fantasies of the future must be read in the same ‘Maimonides’s program of al interpretation always looks back to ‘ward its pre-Sinaitic antecedents in the attempt to recapture them. In the 3 ‘Maimonidean perspective, human history from its inception did not evolve along a linear progression of knowledge and achievement but rather could be charted along a series of peaks and valleys determined by monotheisms fortunes. What began as a universal subscription to a pristine belief in and worship of one God deteriorated into a widespread idolatrous culture which virtually no trace ofthe authentic One remained in the mind of hu- ‘manity. Were it not for Abraham sui generis retrieval of a philosophically pure monotheism, the world would have been irrevocably doomed to theo logical and intellectual impoverishment. According to Maimonides, Abra hham discovered the existence and unity of God on his own, long before the revelation of Torah to Moses and Israel at Sinai and thus without benefit of Scripture."* After a lengthy process of vigorous internal ref tion from infancy to middle age, Abraham reasons his way toward those ‘truths that later become “explicitly” enshrined in the Bible. Jewish posterity is then left with a textual legacy of his findings the Jews enslaved in ancient Egypt generations ‘gan orbit, Scripture, for Maimonides, does not ‘address an urgent human predicament, a decline in the commitment to the theological and philosophical truths which Abraham reintroduced to hu- ‘manity but which his written oeuvre could not sustain. Discursive treatises Concepts of Seripture in Maimonides 129 are exchanged for a blend of laws and narratives better suited to preserve those principles which Abraham's literary strategy failed to do. ‘Maimonides describes the new measures God took, via Moses at the time of Fgyptian enslavement, to salvage Abrahams teachings. From these ‘ould not gain the timelessness Scripture did—“He crowned them th and showed them the way to worship Him and how to deal iman nature. The Guide apprises us of a fourth ingredient—the parable which externally might convey practical or political wisdom while inttr- nally signaling “beliefs concerned with the truth as itis" (GR. ‘The Torah, then, is neither the midrashic blueprint for the oughly human in its concerns and language. In that spirit, all its prohibi- tive and prescriptive regulations are drafted to promote “the welfare of the soul and the welfare of the body" the former entailing individual intellec- going moral and intellectual consistency would run contrary to human na- ture, and “God does not change at all the nature of human individuals by ture and humanity’s enduring process o «path of becoming rather than simply stagnant being. Scripture, in its entirety, is intended as a textual preservative for the “fundamental principle implanted by Abraham} of God’ existence, unity, creetion, governance, and exclusivity, whose existence precludes the possi- bility of any other God. Both in the Guide and the Mishneh Torah, the de- nial of idolatry is tantamount to the fulfillment “ofthe entire Torah, all the prophets and everything they were commanded from Adam to the end of30 JAMES A. DIAMOND time’ while the affirmation of idolatry is tantamount to the Torabi ation.”” This extends to those segments of the Torah intended to i ‘moral regimen in people and to construct a socially viable, politically sive community. Ethics and theology are inseparably ‘deal morality is one tha i a fanction of the. mimic God’ governance, or what is referre as such, human conduct must approximate thos ascribes to God wh i To q acteristics the To e same time being wary ofa true conceptic God that cannot sustain such characteristics in truth. All those acts mally describ th biblical terms as merciful, cious, which, are humanly motivated by emoti proceed fro: yy He be exalted, on acc to His essence” ( subject to the caveat that they do not signify erent qualities of but are rather attributes of action which are dispassionately distributed nature, Any other conception of the deity is idolatrous. Consequently, human conduct that aspires to imitaic that assimilate themselves to the extent of being considered godlike. The Torah, then, isa philosophical text in its totality. Correspondingly the Guide is an exegetical work dedicated exclusively to providing the for reading out of the Torah its philosophical subtext" At the same ti it mimics the Torah in its demand for reading keys that unlock the se- crets encrypted in its text. True to this vision of Torah, the Guides agenda is primarily “to explain the meanings of certain terms occurring in the books of prophecy” (GP, Intro, p. 5) and secondarily to offer “the ex: planation of very obscure parables occurring in the books of the prophets but not explicitly identified there as such’ (ibid, p. 6). The Guide advises its reader at the very outset that any cha t does not patently deal with biblical terms does so implicitly as ancillary to others which do, or by obliquely hinting to a term intentionally suppressed for the time being. Such chapters seemingly devoid of biblical reference might also “explain fone of the parables” or “hint at the fact that a certain story is a parable ibid, p. 10). The Guide could have just as appropriately been titled “How to Read the Bi Since the Mishneh Torah purports to deal exhaustively with halakhah, ‘what remains in Scripture to contend with is the physics and metaphysics covertly expressed therein. In the wake of this Maimonidean revolution, @ _ palace parable, it values © cesible and aimed at promoti Concepts of Scripture in Maimonides 131 ical concerns.” The conventional rabbi whom hs parable involves himself solely with halakhah while accept- “fundamental principles of religion” “on the basis of traditional author- rather than independent speculation. Such a conventional rabk irting around the palace while never 619). Those who perceive Toral ‘minutiae of divine worship dim or the subject matter of the Code first four chapters.” b refatory cher are interspersed with biblical verses and strategies for reading Scripture philosophically, Maimonides’ prioritized understand- " is I will elucidate some- Mishnah Commentary, “My method consistently is 1 willeluc thing anyplace where there is an alasion to mates of ath, for its more mye of wht eel form would ‘of not having to cater to human exigencies, Due to the faites of Hamman natre the Torah, in its present form, blends “pri- rary intentions” with “secondary” where the former are aimed zt "the ap- prehension of Him, may he be exalted, and the rejection of idolatry” (GE, Iga, 57) while the later couch the former in norms that are ntho- pologically palatable, Prominent iustrtive of those necessary yet inher- ently distractive and misleading measures is the sacrificial cult which oc- ‘cupies a substantial portion of the text, 2 pagan form of worship co-opted by the Torah to subvert idolatry from within. However, there was134 TAMES A. DIAMOND ‘This notion qualifies his prot ie Rock [zur], His work foses's pacan to God as the Rock, or “the principle and efficient cause of all things other than = himself” (GP, 136, p. 42), j ly authentic Jewish interpretive stan is Scripture. When Moses is on the precipice of the very acme knowledge, God instructs him to stand erect upon the rock (Exo whose meaning, filtered through the Maimonidean lexicon, sh from locus of place to locus of thought: “Rely upon and be firm in con: sidering God, may He be exalted, as the first principle” (GP, 116, p. “The opening narrative of the Torah must be read as a philosophically ri ‘orous presentation of God as a “frst principle’ while its finale demands ‘entryway through which you shall come to signed both the spiritual quest and its dest is a contemplative one, whose primary activity is es a text. The ultimate aim of that exeg buried deep beneath all the text’ literary genres, be they poet narrative prose, or even legislation. In a verse from Psalms, The nearness. is not only “nearness” that demands a philosophically nuanced treatment, but so does the value judgment of good. The “cognitive apprehension’ sig- nified by nearness consists in assimilating the co cts the meaning we have seen assign before Moses. That Mosaic assimilation of the good of all ultimate goal of cognizing to which all mast aspire. The tions for a Malmonidean con Concepts of Scripture in Maimonides 135 thought, ive vortex Doth reader and text emerge in the exe ellect, or that ‘which God and humanity share in common (GP, 13, p. 21) During Maimonides’ discussion of the meaning of shah) in the Guide, he cites a rabbinic rubric exempting discussions of To- ic prescriptions of purity that allows them to /—“The words of the Torah are not 5) 2° This rabbinic reference ichow ontologically unique that cognitive effort determines oné’ distance the mystical tradition. The Torah is important for ts contents. Since ab- achings have no ontic reality outside the mind, they cannot con- purities, This rabbinic rubric is also crucial because it reflects many ture is available for reading, deciphering, and understanding, not cantations orto provide some kind of refuge in what might be perceived 4s its magical apotropaic aura simply by chanting it?” For Maimonides, “uncleanness” can have three senses: disobedience of commandments in contracted through, ‘thought or action; dirt; ritual contact with dead bodies (GI rity and dirt must be ruled out wi! ‘The remaining sense of uncleanness that can be us. tonym (holiness) for Scripture is “disobedience and trans mandments concerning action or ” (ibid). When Maimonidess disciples perceive their Scripture ‘own compliant response wit but are a function of human apprehension and discussion of Him s0 Scripture’ holiness resides in the human action and Finally, we return to the maxim with which our discussion began—the Torah speaks in the language of human bei lore its ramifica- ‘Great is the power of the prophets for reator”* What this conveys is both the audac- ity and confidence of the prophets when articulating their visions of God296 TAMES A. DIAMOND in popular images. The rabbinic phrase great is the power always expresses “their appreciation of the greatness of something said or done, but whose appearance is shocking” (GP. I-46, p. 103). What I take this to imply is that to do justice to the biblical prophets’ creative prose and poetry, Scripture ders rather than the comfort we so often bel Scripture is intended to provide. Reader response must correspond to. thorial license, and if Scripture placates rather than disturbs, then been mistead. The great power the Rabbis ascribed to themselve captures what Maimonides envisions the ‘which required its execution in the presence of more than one person. image, in its literary structure, encapsulates the loneliness and iconodl destined to imbue any Jewish relationship to Scripture that matures in boldness which measures up invested by its authors in drafting its enigmatic and parabolic compo: Maimonides, taking his cue from the Psalter’s admonishment, Silence is praise to thee (Ps. 65:2) (GB, 159, p. 139), maintains that the ideal me- the nonverbal and ‘one must adopt a restrained approach to the text and guard one- raven into the beauty of its prose and poetry and landing ‘Moses's humility, awe, and self-restraint. It also provides the paradigm for the method and goal of reading Scripture: “When doing this, he should to him and should not from the outset strain and impel his thoughts ward apprehension of the deity {here read “text” in place of “deity” rather should feel awe and refrain and hold back until he gradually el himself” (GP, Es, p.29). Concepts of Scripture in Maimonides 337 11 Fora recent study of subsequent prominent Jewish philosophers, one in the seventeenth century and one in the twentieth, who seriously engaged the Bible in imonides’s interpretive legacy, see my "Maimonides, Spinoza, and Bu- Keys of Divine Fire’ and ‘Spiit” leago: University of Chicago Press, chapter. ee the eighth and ninth principles in his Commentary to the Mishnah See also Mishnel Torah (MT), Laws teuch survives Dei in Maimonides Guide of the Perplexed” AJS Review 19, no. 2 (3994): 169~ esp. 203-5. '8, See CM, introduction to the tenth chapter of m. Sanhedrin. the Basic Principles of the Torah, x8.138 JAMES 4. DIAMOND ss: Forth nbn wus ate tere Sprain ts Abas Geen Magicn “petites Tl dag ce Sle Age sc enon Scan fr To ko a (New Yorechcken Boston eh nn Mt “Sanson eh To Mi Ls of try. sehr Skt agg BT Hr 1 Sete ry “Sever of epee ion Ge epee oh Hr ota ogo seas ryan a 3g that the Torah existed before God. Concepts of Scripture in Nahmanides Aaron W. Hughes Ilk29, p. six based on Sifre Devarins 54, Introduction: Cultural and Intellectual Background . Moses ben Nahman (1194-1270), customarily referred to as Nehman- ides or the Ramban, is one of the towering figures of premodern Judai Scholat, commentator, halakhist, communal leader, and spokesperson, his ‘career represents the creative intersection of the three primary trends of ‘medieval Judaism: rationelism, traditionalism, and mysticism. Like the ‘great Maimonides, with whom he fs frequently compared and often too neatly juxtaposed, he was a product of the rich Iberian-Jewish intellectual tradition.’ However, whereas Maimonides is often regarded as the last ter, } Paterson Smyth, Edgar Goodspeed, James Fischer, Richard Holloway Steven 4 MeKenai, jack Rang), Maimonides, by sejecting thistle constertely spared os 4 a further perplexity of imply cee K : 95. 23. BT Shabbat 8b, 24. MI, Bthical Traits, 25. MI, Torah Study, a1~12. Many of the manuscripts substisule gemara fo ‘ald 26. Also cited in MT, Lans of Reciting Shema, 8:4. One can recite the words of the Torah afer having experienced a seminal emission, which would normally In order to put Nabmani necessary to situate him larger intellectual and social backdrop that characterized the diversity of Jewish communities in the thirteenth century. This was a time of exchange and interchange between numerous Jewish cultures in northern Spain and France. Exhibiting different intellec- tual customs and local knowledges, these cultures were neither necessarily ith one another. The rationalism associated of Provence, and the Tosafist tradition of "understandings of Judaism and jewish texts.