Q. At the beginning of the book The Kuzari, after the Philosopher lays out his concepts, the King of Kuzar rejects it with two claims:
1. “Your words appear quite logical as such, but they do not provide a reply to my question, because I know of myself that my soul is pure and my actions are just and conform to the will of the Creator, but in spite of this, I was told that my actions are not desirable, although the intention is. This means that there definitely exists a certain action that the Creator desires not as a means of purification of the heart, but as an end in itself.”
The King of Kuzar is certain that there is a desirable act, that is – there is truth in the world because he was told so in his dream: “Your intention is desirable to the Creator, but your deeds are not desirable” therefore there exists a desirable deed. He is an honest and good man, just as the Philosopher claims he should be, but he is still told in a dream that his deeds are not desirable, and the King of Kuzar is certain of the truth of his dream.
But this is a conclusion that stems from the “plot” of the story, not from life itself. Perhaps the King of Kuzar can be sure that there is a truth in the world because that is what was told to him in a dream, and therefore he personally can reject the words of the Philosopher, who claims there is no correct act, and that the main thing is to transcend [in the mind], but what do we answer the Philosopher? Certainly we would not rely on the dream of the King of Kuzar when it comes to the Jewish worldview. So from where do we prove that there is a specific truth, and through that, that the words of the Philosopher are incorrect?
2. “If this were not so, then why does Christianity wage war on Islam, and they divide the world between them? Although each of them purifies his soul and wishes [communion with] G-d, practices continence, fasts and prays, etc…”
The Kuzari’s answer to the Philosopher is that there are religions [that call for moral action, not just moral intent] that have a huge impact on the world, and people cling to them with all their might as if it’s a matter of life and death. Therefore, according to him, truth is found in any religion, as opposed to the Philosopher, who says there is no particular truth. But does the fact that people behave in a certain way prove that it is truth? Certainly not, even if many people act that way. Certainly popular things should be taken seriously, but it does not prove that they are the truth.
So what is the Jewish response to the Philosopher?
I would like answers that are not based on Jewish sources, but rather on life itself, since I am coming to examine and build emuna from the ground up, from scratch. (Basing it on sources that require already having emuna is beyond the level where I am currently holding.)
No comments:
Post a Comment