Contemporary Conceptions

By: Jonathan Seidel

Jewish theology: experiential or hermeneutical   

Jewish theology has been going through a tough phase navigating theological speculation. Throughout Jewish literature, theology has been marginalised in a christian and islamic sense. There is no systematic structure until the medieval age. Yet the theological motif has persevered through the generations. Whether through a rational or mystical frame, talk about divinity has never ceased. 

Judaism’s theological outlook differs greatly form other religions. It does not discuss God himself. There is no mention of who he is, where he comes from and why he is doing it. The bible’s silence affirms its irrelevance. The bible teaches you what he wants. God wishes for his will to be facilitated. After the universal failure, he chose a family to ensure his will to be fulfilled. The rules and order that follows is linked to the theological affiliation. To be a committed Jew is to be halakhic. The biblical word coherently expressed for religious action not religious wonder. The law-centred religiosity compliments a methodical lifestyle bewildering the spiritual engulfment of other religions. 

The rabbinic model posed extensions to the text. Not only filling in the vague semiological scripture but also underpinning new values. Midrash aggadah signified a typified approach to religious religiosity. Whether for mass inspiration or education these sermonic narrations proved to be more than simply recorded stories. The stories were valuational in their literary complexity. Allegories posed a new avenue to religious expression. One could even say the sages were even more infatuated with the divine image presenting never-before-seen mythical creatures and stories of miraculous accomplishment. The sages at times seemed more God-intoxicated then Moses did. The law was the primary interest, yet they did not shy away from the depth of their mind blogging crusade.

Still, their textual sensitivity limited their scope of expression. They remained linked in a hermeneutical succession. Their allegories were sourced in traditional texts and followed reoccurring characters with meaningful observations. The medieval age moved beyond the religious bounds. The medieval arguments resided in religions questions not Jewish questions. Still it is overboard to mitigate and even belie Jewish argumentation. The syllogistic use by Maimonides, Gersonides and Hasdai to prove their points drifted to systematic alignment yet maintained a religious rigour. Maimonides Guide for instance quotes the biblical text numbers times. It is in fact a biblical commentary even if inversely constructed.

Modern existentialism fashioned a religious framework on a risk. There is no text or proof. It is the step into oblivion. Existentialism is the most interesting one because it does not require any feeling or intuition. It is a confidence to a beyond. Rosenzweig articulated a modern metaphysics, Buber a dialogical encounter, Soloveitchik a halakhic centrality and Fackenheim a holocaust influence. Each pressed his own version of a leap. Rosenzweig attempted to demonstrate’s the self’s metaphysical clarity, Buber the divine other, Soloveitchik the deepened loneliness and Fackenheim’s living with tragedy, Existentialism odes string the self but it does so in the private singular approach to the divine. It is the individual’s trek and his challenge. The individuals struggle and his hope for the infinite. 

In the postmodern age, we are presented with the mystical model. The mysticism has a supernal aura that is intrinsic to the community. It need not be professed in the public square. Kabbalah has its own form of hermeneutical formulation that demonstrates its deep links to ancient religious culture. For those searching, the mystical beyond the current frame gives more than the existential hope. The kabbalist provides a picture of the world. It is certain in its framework. The combination of mysticism with educating values has inspired many to feel close to the infinite. With so many looking for spirituality, an escape from this world, it is good to leave a visual bridge. This is not taking a step hoping not to fall to death but a seeing the bridge yet net necessary beyond the horizon. 

Clarity and evidence is requested from the public. The redirection of values to overcome the mass hysteria that would emerge from declining such an offer is a creative spin that does influence. Mysticism responds with a solution to the existentialist limit. We’ll tell you all about the godhead. You cannot see it but you can feel it and we’ll help you do that. Others decline to comment. Focus on law, not theology. The latter is dangerous. You can’t understand God, so stoping trying to comprehend him. Stick to things you can understand like halakha. Such primitive explanations miss the entire purpose of Jewish theology. What antiquity literature regards as theological prowess is rejected on christianised grounds. There are potential consequences to a corporeal God but if he has hands or smiles so be it. Though in theory limits him also embraces connectivity.

Berkovits and Soloveitchik both articulate theologies for halakhic expression. They understand the aggadah as a corollary to halakha. It only exists for law. Heschel greatly disagreed and demonstrated his divine pathos and experiential approach as models to reach a deeper level of conscious. Though Rosenzweig and Levinas are praised for their postmodern inspiration, Heschel is not far off and even if dejected, I will be honoured to restore his rightful place as a hero to the contemporary seeker. Heschel did not concern with mystical elements insofar as it led to ecstatic encounters. His experiential view based emotions of wonder, awe and sublime to the beyond. It is looking past the routine for spiritual amazement. His monumental focus on fulfilling man’s spiritual dream.   

   

The hermeneutical network is both textually posited by the postmodern thinkers and halakhic scholars. Both utilise the text as a gateway to religious theology. Even the ultra-orthodox look to the text as a starting point for religious philosophy. The normative textual theology follows a semantic perspective of religious expression. The text gives the answers. One understands the Lord from the text. The text is the affirmation of tradition. While this is the common denominator of these groups, it does not entail the sole method of theological association. Whether literal, allegorical, or reinterpreted texts, the text is beholden as the signifier. 

Medieval rationalism thought differently. It sought to provide a reality-based evidence for God. It was to transcend the text. Due to prophetic absence, intellectual syllogism were necessary to provide an empirical model. Though they did not deviate too much from the texts as their christian counterparts did. Still the intellectual hold prompted a new course of religious identification beyond textual rendition. The mystics constructed a supernal order that rested on more mythical notions  The mystics positioned a second layer of religious connection through spirituality. Divine ontology was a textual matter while spirituallity was an “empirical” one. 

I find Sacks’ solution as a possible identifier. Sacks found God in a different way. His use of textual events over textual language to speak about God provides an empirical model to speak about theology. Sacks’ opposition to the textual flavour was due to the lexicographical affiliation that followed. Sacks’ biblical theology does differ significantly from Wyschogrod, Medan and other theologians. The text highlights events and ideas while the postmodern age deconstructs the language itself. To the former, the ideas are secondary to the event. It it the events that inspire the ideas not vice versa.  

Sacks and Heschel both provide a deeper layer to the Biblical paradigm in their conceptual over ideological derivation. The events mark values not the textual gratification. The event marks the chapter God in history. There is a scent of interventionism but it is not explained nor approved, it merely argued based on historical survival and success. For Sacks, religion is meaning of reality. It provides the necessary tools to inspire the self. God is found in the leap of uncertainty. The history of his people coupled with the inspiration of their actions signifies the faithful lifestyle. For Heschel, man finds God in the most intimate of times. In the wonder of the world. God does not elude man, man misfires on God. God is teleological engine of livelihood. 

Yet while Heschel seeks the ineffable in the wonders of world, Sacks sees him in everyday life. Heschel’s emotional bliss need not be applied to the roaring creations of the world. Awe and splendour can be applied to the average person. His affirmation of a spiritualised induction personifies this transformation. Faith in God is the leap of action; to actively entrust faith to humanity and perpetuity. A self confidence and emboldened conviction. An existentialist leap and realistic expectations. 

The power of this faith strikes harder in the human heart in consequentialist motif. It is not waiting on God but acting in spite of it. The biblical lessons provide historical lessons to live and find God. It moves away from the medieval proofs but carries scant rationalisations for being faithful. It is a leap with a rationalised deduction. It is pragmatic  yet also so real. It is not some symbolic neurological association but a living spirit induced in the intellectual argumentation. The rhetorical strategy employed squares pragmatism with syllogistic consequentialism. Faith is worthwhile because of its influential history and the ramifications of its absence. 

The final pin is how to apply this beyond faith to the central tenants. There may not be a dogmatic Jewish theology but there are core tenants: creation, revelation and redemption. Questions about God’s corporeality, interventionism, and prophecy all are irrelevant to the contemporary Jew. Yet, I do think Heschel’s model does provide a humanity to the proper and his tough journey. The solutions are to use the event traditionally and pragmatically. A Jewish theology acknowledges the necessary factors of the cardinal trio but it does so less on historicity and more on value. These events are held in the highest esteem and it is their prevalence in religious life that manifests their glory.     

Contemporary communitarianism seeks to unite the Jewish people under one flag. That flag of tradition in whatever denominational, philosophical or theological lingo is the halakha. The halakha need not be the score of theology but it damn be the unifying theme. Belief cannot be demanded and thus cannot be centred as the uniform consultant. Law can be in its abiding citizenry. The search for the community is its tribal unity, not on abstractions but concrete action. Theology must first honour the legal unification and then ponder the religious valuational events. The law isn’t pragmatic its foundational. Jewish theology begins with a legal binding to the ancestral community and then spawns the supernal aspects that historically subsidise this claim and its generosity. The banner of constitutional law enables veering into valued components that only attempt to ground religion in its socio-mythos.