Belief and Experience

Transcription

1 Mitzvat Asei 4: Fear of God By David Silverberg The fourth commandment is that He commanded us to believe the fear of Him, may He be exalted, and be fearful of Him, and not be like the heretics who conduct themselves according to their hearts' wishes and with [the attitude of] happenstance, but we rather sense the fear of His punishment at every moment. And this is what He said, "You shall fear the Lord your God" (Devarim 6:13, 10:20). Based on the verse "Et Hashem Elokekha tira" ("You shall fear the Lord your God"), Maimonides lists as the fourth of the Torah's affirmative commands the obligation of yir'at Hashem the fear of God. After citing this verse, he proceeds to draw proof to the inclusion of this mitzva among the 613 commandments from a passage in the Talmud (Masekhet Sanhedrin 56a). The Gemara searches for the Biblical source for the prohibition against blaspheming the divine Name. The punishment for this offense is explicitly stated in the Book of Vayikra (24:16), but there is no clear and straightforward reference to the prohibition itself. At one point in its discussion, the Gemara suggests that this offense is included under the admonition, "You shall fear the Lord your God," and this verse, then, would constitute the Biblical origin of this prohibition. The Gemara ultimately rejects this suggestion, because, among other reasons, this verse is stated in the affirmative form, as a mitzvat asei, rather than as a prohibition. Maimonides deduces from this exchange that the Gemara deemed it a mitzvat asei to fear God. Yir'at Hashem and the Doctrine of Reward and Punishment In our citation above from Sefer Ha-mitzvot, we followed the prevalent, Ibn Tibbon translation, whereby Maimonides describes this mitzva as requiring that we "believe the fear of Him." Rabbi Yosef Kapach, in his annotation to his edition of Sefer Ha-mitzvot, remarks, "I do not understand how one believes fear." Indeed, however one translates the Hebrew word yir'a fear, dread, intimidation, reverence or awe it clearly refers to an experience or emotion, rather than a doctrine that can be said to be "believed." Before we introduce and discuss Rabbi Kapach's translation and approach to the definition of this mitzva, we will first explore a possible explanation for the notion of "believing the fear of Him." A number of expressions used by Maimonides in this passage, when properly understood, may, indeed, suggest that he refers here to a philosophical doctrine, rather than an experience. First, he admonishes that we not act like "the heretics who conduct themselves according to their hearts' wishes" (Ibn Tibbon: "ka-koferim ha-holekhim bi-sherirut libam"). This phrase is most likely borrowed from a verse towards the end of the Book of Devarim (29:18), in the context of Moshe's warning to Benei Yisrael after presenting to them the tokhecha, the description of dreadful calamities that will befall them should they disobey God's law. Moshe suspects that there 1

2 may be in his audience a person who, upon hearing these warnings, "will fancy himself secure, saying, 'All will be well with me when I follow the wishes of my heart' [ki bisherirut libi eilekh]'." The individual in question simply denies Moshe's prediction of calamity as God's response for disobedience; he allows himself the freedom of following his heart's wishes, to act as he pleases, because he does not believe in the harmful repercussions of sin. If we work on the logical assumption that Maimonides had this Scriptural context in mind when enlisting this term in Sefer Ha-mitzvot, it might emerge that this mitzva obligates us to accept the notion of divine retribution. Indeed, Rabbi Yitzchak Simcha Horowitz, who served as rabbi in Hartford, Connecticut and authored a scholarly work on Sefer Ha-mitzvot entitled Yad Ha-levi (published in Jerusalem, 1926), claimed that this mitzva is the source of the obligation to believe in the doctrine of reward and punishment, the eleventh of the "thirteen principles of faith" established by Maimonides in his Commentary to the Mishna. We are bidden not to accept the ideology of the agnostic whom Moshe foresees, who felt confident that no harm will befall him on account of his disobedience, and to rather accept the theological premise that God holds us accountable for our conduct and visits retribution upon those who betray Him. A second indication of this reading emerges from another term Maimonides enlists in this passage "u-ve-keri" "with happenstance." Maimonides presumably refers here to the numerous warnings towards the end of the Book of Vayikra (chapter 26) that Benei Yisrael will be punished for conducting themselves be-keri (see Vayikra 26:21,23,27). Maimonides explains this term very clearly in Mishneh Torah, in presenting the obligation to pray and fast during times of crisis (Hilkhot Ta'aniyot 1:3): But if people do not cry or sound the trumpets, and instead say, "This occurred to us as the natural way of the world, and this crisis surfaced by happenstance" this is an attitude of cruelty, and it causes them to become attached to their evil ways, and this crisis will bring upon further crises. This is what is said in the Torah, "And if you act towards Me be-keri; then I, too, will act towards you in the wrath of keri." Meaning, when I bring a crisis upon you so that you repent, if you say that it occurs by happenstance, then I will add the wrath of that happenstance. Several clauses in this passage require further elucidation, but clearly Maimonides here decries the attitude of keri, happenstance, whereby the connection between conduct and fate is denied, and people fail to acknowledge that troubles have befallen them on account of their misdeeds. He returns to this verse and this general theme in his Guide for the Perplexed (3:36): We are told to offer up prayers to God, in order to establish firmly the true principle that God takes notice of our ways, that He can make them successful if we worship Him, or disastrous if we disobey Him, that [success and failure] are not the result of chance or accident. In this sense we must understand the passage, "If you walk with me by chance," i.e., if I bring troubles upon you for punishment, and you consider them as mere accidents, I will again send you some of these accidents as you call them, but of a more serious and troublesome 2

3 character For the belief of the people that their troubles are mere accidents causes them to continue in their evil principles and their wrong actions, and prevents them from abandoning their evil ways. By making reference to this notion in his explication of the mitzva to "fear God," Maimonides may perhaps be indicating that this commandment is about accepting the doctrine of reward and punishment, rather than attributing all occurrences on earth to arbitrary circumstances. If so, then we may arrive at a compelling response to Rabbi Kapach's objection to Ibn Tibbon's rendition of Maimonides' definition of this mitzva, "to believe the fear of Him." This would mean, very simply, that "Et Hashem Elokekha Tira" requires the belief in sekhar va-onesh, accepting the doctrine of reward of punishment. Belief and Experience One might, however, argue for a different reading, in light of Maimonides' comment in this passage, where he demands that we "sense the fear of His punishment at every moment." This appears to describe not a belief, the acceptance of a theological tenet, but rather a constant awareness and feeling. This mitzva requires that a Jew live his life with a general awareness of divine justice and a sense of intimidation stemming from this awareness. Even a person who accepts theologically the notion of divine retribution does not necessarily live his life with this belief in mind, with an awareness of his accountability. Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakai famously blessed his students on his deathbed, "May it be His will that the fear of Heaven be upon you like the fear of human beings" (Berakhot 28b). His disciples wondered why he extended to them such a minimal wish that they should fear God only to the same extent to which they fear other humans. Rabban Yochanan explained that human nature is such that when one sins to God he pays no attention to the Almighty's omniscience and watchful eye, but is very concerned lest he be observed by other people. Even though one believes in divine retribution, he is not necessarily aware at all times of the consequences of his conduct. "Et Hashem Elokekha tira" therefore requires that beyond believing in the doctrine of reward and punishment, one retain a constant awareness of the prospect of retribution. The precise understanding of Maimonides' definition of this mitzva might hinge on the same linguistic question that we addressed in our discussions of the first two mitzvot, the "belief" in a Creator and the "belief" in God's unity. As in the presentation of those two mitzvot, Maimonides describes the obligation of "fear" with the Arabic word itakad, which Ibn Tibbon translated as "belief," whereas later scholars, including Rabbi Kapach, rendered as "knowledge." In our context, too, Rabbi Kapach advocates this translation of the term, and he thus renders the opening sentence of Maimonides' presentation of this mitzva as, "We are commanded to establish in our minds the fear of Him, may He be exalted." According to his understanding, Maimonides requires that the prospect of divine retribution be firmly implanted within one's mind, such that he experiences some degree of intimidation throughout his life. But the most compelling evidence to the fact that Maimonides' concept of yir'at Hashem involves the experience of fear, rather than the theological belief of divine retribution, stems from his discussion of this mitzva in Mishneh Torah. In the beginning 3

4 of the second chapter of Hilkhot Yesodei Ha-Torah (halakhot 1-2), Maimonides speaks of fear of God together with the obligation to love God, and he requires that one study and probe the natural world to arrive at the experience of love and fear: It is a commandment to love and fear the honorable and venerable God, as it says, "You shall love the Lord your God," and it says, "You shall fear the Lord your God." What is the means of loving and fearing Him? When a person contemplates His great, wondrous actions and creatures and sees within them His inestimable and boundless wisdom, he immediately loves and gives praise and exalts, and experiences great desire to know the great Name And when he contemplates these very matters, he immediately recoils, is frightened, and knows that he is a small, lowly, insignificant creature standing with minimal, inferior knowledge before He who is of perfect knowledge. Here Maimonides establishes that one reaches the experience of fear of God through contemplation of the natural world. Clearly, scientific research is hardly relevant to the doctrine of reward and punishment. Necessarily, then, Maimonides speaks here not of theology, but of a mindset and experience which one engenders by studying the natural world and gaining firsthand knowledge of the Almighty's boundless wisdom and power. Yir'at Ha-onesh and Yir'at Ha-romemut Much of the rabbinic literature surrounding Maimonides' definition of this mitzva involves what is commonly perceived as a contradiction between the description he offers in Sefer Ha-mitzvot, and his comments in Mishneh Torah. According to many writers, Maimonides speaks in these two contexts of two very different kinds of experiences. In Sefer Ha-mitzvot, Maimonides explicitly describes fear of punishment, often referred to in Hebrew as yir'at ha-onesh. By contrast, in the passage cited above from Mishneh Torah, he appears to refer to what is often termed, yir'at ha-romemut, or "fear of [His] greatness." This "fear" is not the fear of calamity, the concern one has that God might visit harm upon him. Rather, it is the intimidation a person instinctively feels upon encountering a being infinitely greater than him. A feeble man will often feel intimidated in the presence of a large, able-bodied, accomplished athlete; an ordinary citizen will generally experience a kind of "fear" when he speaks with a world-renowned leader. In both these instances, the person feels intimidated even though the one causing him this unease poses no practical threat to his well-being. The individual feels intimidated because he comes face-to-face with his own lowliness and limitations; the encounter with greatness reminds him of his relative unimportance, and hence causes him discomfort and intimidation. Yir'at ha-romemut is precisely this type of experience, only infinitely magnified. When a person considers God's unlimited power and greatness, he is reminded of just how feeble and unaccomplished he is. Seemingly, this is precisely the experience Maimonides describes in Hilkhot Yesodei Ha-Torah: "And when he contemplates these very matters, he immediately recoils, is frightened, and knows that he is a small, lowly, dark creature standing with minimal, inferior knowledge before He who is of perfect knowledge." As opposed to Sefer Ha-mitzvot, where he speaks of practical fear, the fear 4

5 of the repercussions of one's actions, in Mishneh Torah Maimonides describes the sense of lowliness that one must feel by contemplating God's handiwork. We find three general attitudes among later scholars towards this discrepancy. Most writers, including the Kin'at Sofrim commentary to Sefer Ha-mitzvot and the Minchat Chinukh (mitzva 432), make no attempt to reconcile the two passages, and simply are not bothered by Maimonides' differing formulations. The Kin'at Sofrim finds no need to reconcile the conflicting descriptions because, he claims, Maimonides was not very precise in his description of the mitzvot in Sefer Ha-mitzvot. He refers here to a responsum written by Maimonides (#89), cited in the Kin'at Sofrim's introduction to his commentary, where Maimonides writes about Sefer Ha-mitzvot, " for the intent of that work is not for knowing the [detailed] study of the mitzvot, but rather to know their concepts." Meaning, Sefer Ha-mitzvot was not intended as a detailed exposition of all the laws concerning each individual mitzva, but rather as a general survey and concise listing of the Biblical commands. Of course, Maimonides' description of the purpose of Sefer Ha-mitzvot in no way absolves us of the need to reconcile seeming discrepancies between his comments in that work and in Mishneh Torah. In this responsum he merely excused himself for the lack of detail and comprehensiveness in Sefer Ha-mitzvot; this does not allow for outright contradictions in defining the obligations involved in the various mitzvot. Indeed, other writers have attempted to find some resolution for this discrepancy. The work Nimukei Maharai (cited in the Likutim section of the Frankel edition of Mishneh Torah) advances an approach that corresponds to a theory we mentioned in our previous shiur, regarding the obligation to love God. As we saw, some writers were of the view that the mitzva to love God manifests itself differently with regard to different people. For the less educated masses, "love of God" requires an emotional experience that can be attained through the study of Torah; the intellectual elite, however, are called upon to also explore the natural world to reach a more profound understanding of God and sense of love and affection towards Him. Correspondingly, the Nimukei Maharai suggests that yir'at Hashem at its lowest standard means the fear of retribution. The highest level of performance, however, requires a more profound kind of "fear," one which results not from the individual's concern for his own well-being, but rather from his keen understanding of, and firsthand encounter with, the greatness and power of the Almighty. In Sefer Ha-mitzvot, this theory claims, Maimonides presents the elementary standard of this obligation, whereas in Mishneh Torah he describes the obligation in terms of its ultimate demand, to achieve yir'at ha-romemut, rather than merely yir'at haonesh. This approach works off the assumption that these two kinds of "fear" yir'at haonesh and yir'at ha-romemut operate as two levels of the same experience. The Nimukei Maharai casts yir'at ha-onesh as an inferior level of fear, and yir'at ha-romemut as a higher and more advanced experience of fear. One might argue, however, that these are two entirely unrelated experiences, and do not represent two levels on the same scale. Yir'at ha-onesh means the fear of divine retribution, while yir'at ha-romemut denotes the realization of one's frailty and limited capabilities. Seemingly, these two experiences are inherently unrelated and qualitatively different from one another, rather than signifying different degrees of the same emotion. 5

6 Therefore, one might prefer Rabbi Kapach's surprisingly simple yet innovative approach to reconciling Maimonides' comments in Sefer Ha-mitzvot with his discussion in Mishneh Torah. According to Rabbi Kapach, even in Mishneh Torah Maimonides describes yir'at ha-onesh, and not yir'at ha-romemut. When he speaks of the feeling of lowliness brought upon by encountering God's greatness as manifest in the wonders of nature, Maimonides refers to the same experience of fear that he mentioned in Sefer Hamitzvot. When one realizes God's unlimited power over all creatures on earth, he is immediately gripped with fear and dread. Hence, there is no contradiction between Maimonides' descriptions in Sefer Ha-mitzvot and in Mishneh Torah. In Sefer Hamitzvot, he defines the mitzva as fear of divine retribution, and in Mishneh Torah he informs us practically how one acquires this fear: by contemplating the natural world, the clearest manifestation of God's unlimited capabilities. We might thus formulate the relationship between the descriptions in Sefer Hamitzvot and in Mishneh Torah as follows. Maimonides defines the mitzva in Sefer Hamitzvot as demanding that a Jew live his life with a certain degree of fear, an awareness of the potentially grave consequences of disobedience of God's laws. As Maimonides was well aware, however, this awareness is hardly instinctive. Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakai, as mentioned earlier, noted the irony that people are naturally more fearful of other human beings than of God. Human nature is such that we do not naturally experience the fear of God, despite our knowledge of His omniscience and our acceptance of the doctrine of reward and punishment. Therefore, in Mishneh Torah, Maimonides instructs the reader how to engender this sense of fear: by contemplating God's handiwork, which reminds a person of his lowliness and helplessness in relation to the Almighty. 6