Difference between revisions of "Shavuot Table Topics/0/en"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m |
m |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
<category>Revelation: A "Face to Face" Encounter? | <category>Revelation: A "Face to Face" Encounter? | ||
| − | <p>Though many people assume that the entire nation heard all ten of the Aseret HaDibberot directly from Hashem, many commentators suggest that Moshe might have acted as an intermediary for at least part of, if not the entire, experience.  Which verses might provide support for each position?</p> | + | <p>Though many people assume that the entire nation heard all ten of the Aseret HaDibberot directly from Hashem, many commentators suggest that Moshe might have acted as an intermediary for at least part of, if not the entire, experience.  Which verses might provide support for each position?</p><ul> |
| − | <ul> | ||
<li><multilink><a href="IbnEzraDevarim5-5" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraDevarim5-5" data-aht="source">Devarim 5:5</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary20-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 20:1</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RashbamShemot20-15" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamShemot20-15" data-aht="source">Shemot 20:15</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> 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 our perception of the uniqueness of the Aseret HaDibberot?  Is it problematic to suggest that Hashem might have a change of plan?</li> | <li><multilink><a href="IbnEzraDevarim5-5" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraDevarim5-5" data-aht="source">Devarim 5:5</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary20-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 20:1</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RashbamShemot20-15" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamShemot20-15" data-aht="source">Shemot 20:15</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> 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 our perception of the uniqueness of the Aseret HaDibberot?  Is it problematic to suggest that Hashem might have a change of plan?</li> | ||
| − | </ul> | + | </ul><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 in on their conversation, but heard merely a Divine voice without being able to 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?  Attempt to bolster your position from other cases 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 in on their conversation, but heard merely a Divine voice without being able to 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?  Attempt to bolster your position from other cases in Tanakh.</li> | ||
<li>What ramifications does this dispute have for understanding the main purpose of the Sinaitic revelation?  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> | <li>What ramifications does this dispute have for understanding the main purpose of the Sinaitic revelation?  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> | ||
| Line 23: | Line 21: | ||
</category> | </category> | ||
<category>Decalogue Differences | <category>Decalogue Differences | ||
| − | <p>There are many differences, both larger and smaller, between the formulations of the Decalogue found in Shemot and in Devarim.  How should these variations be understood?  Were they engendered by Hashem, Moshe, or both?  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)?  See <a href="Decalogue Differences Between Shemot and Devarim" data-aht="page">Decalogue Differences</a> for elaboration.</p> | + | <p>There are many differences, both larger and smaller, between the formulations of the Decalogue found in Shemot and in Devarim.  How should these variations be understood?  Were they engendered by Hashem, Moshe, or both?  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)?  See <a href="Decalogue Differences Between Shemot and Devarim" data-aht="page">Decalogue Differences</a> for elaboration.</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, <multilink><a href="MalbimShemot20-7-10" data-aht="source">Malbim</a><a href="MalbimShemot20-7-10" data-aht="source">Shemot 20:7-10</a><a href="R. Meir Leibush Weiser (Malbim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Meir Leibush Weiser</a></multilink> 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 each account for all of the variations?  Which approach do you find more compelling?</li> | <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, <multilink><a href="MalbimShemot20-7-10" data-aht="source">Malbim</a><a href="MalbimShemot20-7-10" data-aht="source">Shemot 20:7-10</a><a href="R. Meir Leibush Weiser (Malbim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Meir Leibush Weiser</a></multilink> 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 each account for all of the variations?  Which approach do you find more compelling?</li> | ||
<li>In contrast to the above exegetes, <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary20-1_2" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary20-1_2" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 20:1</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> 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 insignificant.  Do you agree?  Is word choice meaningful?  How might Ibn Ezra account for the seemingly very different reasons given for the commandment of Shabbat?</li> | <li>In contrast to the above exegetes, <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary20-1_2" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary20-1_2" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 20:1</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> 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 insignificant.  Do you agree?  Is word choice meaningful?  How might Ibn Ezra account for the seemingly very different reasons given for the commandment of Shabbat?</li> | ||
Version as of 10:17, 29 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 HaDibberot directly from Hashem, many commentators suggest that Moshe might have acted as an intermediary for at least part of, if not the entire, experience. Which verses might provide support for 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 our perception of the uniqueness of the Aseret HaDibberot? 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 in on their conversation, but heard merely a Divine voice without being able to 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? Attempt to bolster your position from other cases in Tanakh.
- What ramifications does this dispute have for understanding the main purpose of the Sinaitic revelation? For elaboration, see The Decalogue: Direct From Hashem or Via Moshe?
Were the Avot "Jewish"?
Shavuot celebrates the Children of Israel's receipt of the Torah, and thus becoming a religion in addition to a nation. What does this imply about the status of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs who lived centuries before Sinai? Did they keep the mitzvot? On the 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 can be brought from the Torah to support each position?
- With which side of the debate do you agree and why? See Avot and Mitzvot – Was Avraham the First Jew?
Decalogue Differences
There are many differences, both larger and smaller, between the formulations of the Decalogue found in Shemot and in Devarim. How should these variations be understood? Were they engendered by Hashem, Moshe, or both? 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)? See Decalogue Differences for elaboration.
- 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 each account for all of the variations? 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 insignificant. Do you agree? Is word choice meaningful? How might Ibn Ezra account for the seemingly very different reasons given for the commandment of Shabbat?
