User loginSupport JRF
Navigation |
To Believe in Sinai is Unethical
The problem of Judaism would not be so acute if the traditional doctrine of revelation were merely obsolete. The trouble is that to cherish that doctrine is as unethical as being guilty of bigamy. To believe that we are in possession of the authentically revealed will of God is incompatible with religious tolerance to say nothing of religious equality. [Kaplan biographer Mel Scult writes: Kaplan was truly a revolutionary and I would like to maintain that we have not yet begun to understand the radical nature of his theological commitments. The central event of Sinai which we celebrate on Shavuot is not reinterpreted here or put into language that is more acceptable to us. It is rather dismissed as unethical because it assumes the existence of some eternal truth, a doctrine that Kaplan dismisses. Many moderns are in the same situation but they refuse to face it squarely and to see our situation for what it is. Kaplan challenges us to face the fact that we cannot grasp the eternal and that whatever the basic truths are they are changeable and not the special property of any group. It is not easy to accept such ideas and make them part of a religious commitment but if we are followers of Kaplan that is what we must do. It is also clear that pluralism and tolerance for the beliefs of others is more important to Kaplan than any supposed revelation. . —Mel Scult]
|
 
 Darfur Syndicate |
Revelation and Sinai-- Universalism and Particularisms
There are three famous midrashim about Sinai MMK is pointing out that the first two of these are anathema to reconstructioists and Dan Cederbaum is pointing to the third which is essential.
Midrash I: God offered the torah to all other peoples and each of them were prepared to accept part but not all until He (sic) came to B'nai Israel who said we will hear and we will do.
Midrash II: God took the whole mountain and turned it upside down over B'nai Israel and said if you don't accept the Torah I will drop this mountain on your head.(i.e. the Holocaust and the exile are the mountain dropped on our heads)
Midrash III: We were all together at Sinai and not only do I remember being there but I also remember who stood next to me. In other words local units make up the peoplehood of Israel and unite us in our peoplehood.
Unfortunatley the "zot hatorah" in the traditional liturgy mythologises the first two and ignores the third. That is why choosing the second phrase (etz khaim he) rather than the first phrase of the longer paragraph from the pre Birnbaum orthodox prayer books is a better choice, which traditional (this tradition dates from the the period 1880-1940) prayerbooks have chosen.
I believe there was no doctrinal decision in the traditional editing of the paragraph down to one phrase --it simply was the first line. We can choose and have chosen the second line without offending tradition.
Revelation and Sinai--Universalism and Particularisms
Very well put, Eric. And thanks for pointing out that "our version" of "zot hatorah" is grounded firmly in traditional liturgy (from this part of the service, that is), which I had not realized.
Revelation and Sinai
Thanks, Rabbi Kaplan. But I think that you should complain to your editor about the heading on your post --believing in "the traditional doctrine of revelation" is not necessarily the same as believing in "Sinai," which many of us do in the same way we "believe" in the Exodus.
Shabbat shalom. -- Dan