Difference between revisions of "Shavuot Table Topics/0/en"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This topic has not yet undergone editorial review
m |
|||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li><multilink><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim2-33" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim2-33" data-aht="source">Moreh Nevukhim 2:33</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink>, in contrast, assumes that Hashem spoke directly only to Moshe. The people listened to their conversation, but only heard the Divine voice and could not decipher His words.  Rambam is likely motivated by his belief that indiscriminate prophecy is impossible.  Do you agree that prophecy is only possible with proper training and preparation, or can anyone reach prophetic levels if Hashem chooses to speak to them?  Support your position from elsewhere in Tanakh!</li> | <li><multilink><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim2-33" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim2-33" data-aht="source">Moreh Nevukhim 2:33</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink>, in contrast, assumes that Hashem spoke directly only to Moshe. The people listened to their conversation, but only heard the Divine voice and could not decipher His words.  Rambam is likely motivated by his belief that indiscriminate prophecy is impossible.  Do you agree that prophecy is only possible with proper training and preparation, or can anyone reach prophetic levels if Hashem chooses to speak to them?  Support your position from elsewhere in Tanakh!</li> | ||
| − | <li>According to those who maintain that revelation was a direct, face to face encounter, presumably one of the primary goals of the experience was to attain belief in Hashem. What, though, | + | <li>According to those who maintain that revelation was a direct, face to face encounter, presumably one of the primary goals of the experience was to attain belief in Hashem. What, though, was the purpose according to the position that  Moshe acted as an intermediary?  For elaboration, see <a href="The Decalogue: Direct From Hashem or Via Moshe" data-aht="page">The Decalogue: Direct From Hashem or Via Moshe?</a></li> |
</ul> | </ul> | ||
</category> | </category> | ||
<category>Were the Avot Jewish? | <category>Were the Avot Jewish? | ||
| − | <p>Shavuot celebrates the Children of Israel's receiving of the Torah, and in so doing becoming a religion in addition to a nation. Does this suggest that the Avot and Imahot, who lived centuries before Matan Torah, were not "Jewish"?  Did they keep the mitzvot? On one hand, many of the Torah's laws were designed for a nation and would be meaningless to the Patriarchs. On the other hand, it seems paradoxical to conceive of the founders of a religion not observing even its most basic commandments.</p> | + | <p>Shavuot celebrates the Children of Israel's receiving of the Torah, and in so doing, becoming a religion in addition to a nation. Does this suggest that the Avot and Imahot, who lived centuries before Matan Torah, were not "Jewish"?  Did they keep the mitzvot? On one hand, many of the Torah's laws were designed for a nation and would be meaningless to the Patriarchs. On the other hand, it seems paradoxical to conceive of the founders of a religion not observing even its most basic commandments.</p> |
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li>What other factors might lead one to suggest that the Avot did in fact observe at least some of the commandments?</li> | <li>What other factors might lead one to suggest that the Avot did in fact observe at least some of the commandments?</li> | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
</category> | </category> | ||
<category>Decalogue Differences | <category>Decalogue Differences | ||
| − | <p>It is well known that there are many differences between the wording of the Decalogue as found in Shemot and in Devarim.  How are the variations to be understood? Were they instituted by Hashem or by Moshe?  If the latter, what gave Moshe the authority to do so?  Do both versions | + | <p>It is well known that there are many differences between the wording of the Decalogue as found in Shemot and in Devarim.  How are the variations to be understood? Were they instituted by Hashem or by Moshe?  If the latter, what gave Moshe the authority to do so?  Do both versions of the Decalogue have equal status, or does one represent the ideal (and which)?  </p> |
<ul> | <ul> | ||
| − | <li>R. D"Z Hoffmann suggests that Moshe initiated the changes in the fortieth year and that they related to the nation's imminent arrival in the Land of Israel. In contrast, Malbim asserts that Hashem Himself made the changes in the aftermath of the Sin of the Golden Calf.  Due to sin, the people no longer merited a | + | <li>R. D"Z Hoffmann suggests that Moshe initiated the changes in the fortieth year and that they related to the nation's imminent arrival in the Land of Israel.  In contrast, Malbim asserts that Hashem Himself made the changes in the aftermath of the Sin of the Golden Calf.  Due to sin, the people no longer merited a miraculous existence, and the Decalogue was amended to fit a nation now governed by laws of nature.</li> |
| − | <li>How would each of the differences between the two versions | + | <li>How would each position explain all of the differences between the two versions?  Can all the variations be accounted for?  Which approach do you find more compelling?</li> |
| + | <li>In contrast to the above exegetes, Ibn Ezra maintains that the Decalogue in Devarim is simply Moshe's paraphrase of Hashem's words.  Though some words are different, there is no fundamental difference in meaning. He explains, "המלות הם כגופות, והטעמים כנשמות" and thus a change in wording is not significant.  Do you agree?  Is word choice meaningful?  How might Ibn Ezra account for the seemingly very different reason given for the commandment of Shabbat? </li> | ||
</ul> | </ul> | ||
</category> | </category> | ||
Version as of 06:11, 26 May 2017
Shavuot Table Topics
Revelation: A "Face to Face" Encounter?
Though many people assume that the entire nation heard all ten of the Aseret HaDibrot directly from Hashem, many commentators suggest that Moshe might have acted as an intermediary for at least part of, if not the entire, experience. What verses would support each position?
- Ibn Ezra and Rashbam maintain that the nation heard the entire Decalogue from Hashem, but then fear overcame them and they requested that Moshe step in. Had it not been for their fear, Hashem would have relayed the rest of Torah directly as well. How does this reading affect your perception of the uniqueness of the Aseret HaDibrot? Is it problematic to suggest that Hashem might have a change of plan?
- Rambam, in contrast, assumes that Hashem spoke directly only to Moshe. The people listened to their conversation, but only heard the Divine voice and could not decipher His words. Rambam is likely motivated by his belief that indiscriminate prophecy is impossible. Do you agree that prophecy is only possible with proper training and preparation, or can anyone reach prophetic levels if Hashem chooses to speak to them? Support your position from elsewhere in Tanakh!
- According to those who maintain that revelation was a direct, face to face encounter, presumably one of the primary goals of the experience was to attain belief in Hashem. What, though, was the purpose according to the position that Moshe acted as an intermediary? For elaboration, see The Decalogue: Direct From Hashem or Via Moshe?
Were the Avot Jewish?
Shavuot celebrates the Children of Israel's receiving of the Torah, and in so doing, becoming a religion in addition to a nation. Does this suggest that the Avot and Imahot, who lived centuries before Matan Torah, were not "Jewish"? Did they keep the mitzvot? On one hand, many of the Torah's laws were designed for a nation and would be meaningless to the Patriarchs. On the other hand, it seems paradoxical to conceive of the founders of a religion not observing even its most basic commandments.
- What other factors might lead one to suggest that the Avot did in fact observe at least some of the commandments?
- What evidence might you bring from Torah to support each position?
- With which side of the debate do you agree; why? See Avot and Mitzvot – Was Avraham the First Jew?
Decalogue Differences
It is well known that there are many differences between the wording of the Decalogue as found in Shemot and in Devarim. How are the variations to be understood? Were they instituted by Hashem or by Moshe? If the latter, what gave Moshe the authority to do so? Do both versions of the Decalogue have equal status, or does one represent the ideal (and which)?
- R. D"Z Hoffmann suggests that Moshe initiated the changes in the fortieth year and that they related to the nation's imminent arrival in the Land of Israel. In contrast, Malbim asserts that Hashem Himself made the changes in the aftermath of the Sin of the Golden Calf. Due to sin, the people no longer merited a miraculous existence, and the Decalogue was amended to fit a nation now governed by laws of nature.
- How would each position explain all of the differences between the two versions? Can all the variations be accounted for? Which approach do you find more compelling?
- In contrast to the above exegetes, Ibn Ezra maintains that the Decalogue in Devarim is simply Moshe's paraphrase of Hashem's words. Though some words are different, there is no fundamental difference in meaning. He explains, "המלות הם כגופות, והטעמים כנשמות" and thus a change in wording is not significant. Do you agree? Is word choice meaningful? How might Ibn Ezra account for the seemingly very different reason given for the commandment of Shabbat?
