God, Torah, Israel: Traditionalism Without Fundamentalism (review)

Volume 10, No.1 Fall1991 153 monides (and other medieval philosophers). When discussing morality and law, Leaman argues that Maimonides' analysis "is entirely in line with the traditional way of dealing with this topic in Islamic philosophy" (p. 146), and attempts to reconcile the tensions inherent in the text between religious /moral and intellectual perfections. In what is perhaps the most interesting chapter (chapter 10), Leaman analyzes Maimonides' paradigm of intellectual perfection and suggests that Maimonides' conception of contemplation as the ideal of human perfection is "a rather bloodless conception" (p. 175). And yet, as readers of Maimonides' letters can attest, Maimonides was anything but bloodless! In short, Leaman's stated intent to present the philosophical heart of Maimonides' work unimpeded by technical scholarly jargon is surely laudable . His project raises anew the question of how The Guide ought to be read. " Unfortunately, in striving to counteract the "scholarly industry" which has developed in recent years, Leaman's portrayal of Maimonides emerges as regrettably narrow. Without any access to Jewish historical and theological forces affecting Maimonides' thought, readers may leave this book even more perplexed than before. T. M. Rudavsky Department of Philosophy The Ohio State University God, Torah, Israel: Traditionalism Without Fundamentalism, by Louis Jacobs . Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1990. 92 pp. $18.00. This slim volume incorporates the text of three lectures dealing with each of the three cornerstones of classical Jewish theology. Jacobs' more /' particular concerns are reflected in the full titles of the lectures: "Belief in a Personal God: The Position of Liberal Supernaturalism," "Torah as Divine Revelation: Is the Doctrine Still Acceptable to Moderns?", and "The Concept of Israel as Chosen: The Struggle Between Particularism and Universalism ; Related Eschatological Questions." On God, Jacobs rejects agnosticism, uncritical atheism, religious naturalism , and fundamentalist supernaturalism in favor ofwhat he calls "liberal" supernaturalism where God is acknowledge to be "personal" (as opposed to a process), but where God's personhood is understood to be a metaphorical, not a literal claim. On Revelation, Jacobs insists that the full impact of the modern critical spirit forces us to abandon any simplistic claim that the Torah represents God's explicit, verbal revelation to Israel. In its place, he propounds the view 154 SHOFAR that Torah was revealed not only "to" Israel, but also "through" Israel, and that it hence must be viewed as including not only a divine, but also a substantive human component. This position, Jacobs argues, is yet fully consistent with continued devotion to the HaLakha and the mitzvot. Finally, in the third lecture, Jacobs defends the doctrine of the chosen people as an "associative" rather than a "qualitative" claim, as a statement that Jews have viewed themselves as singled out only to fulfill the commandments . He explores the tension in classical Jewish thought between particularism and universalism, and he concludes with a stance of "reverential agnosticism " toward Jewish eschatological speculation. In short, Jacobs' position-familiar to students of his previous writings -is a learned, graceful, but no less passionate defense of liberal Jewish theology. In this age of increasing polarization between uncritical fundamentalism on one side and secularism on the other, there is no questioning the need for a voice of this kind. Of the three lectures, the second, on revelation, is by far the most richly textured. Jacobs begins with a sympathetic outline of the traditionalist position , deals at length with the decisive impact on that position of higher biblical criticism, and briefly considers more humanistic and naturalist positions. The chapter catches fire, however, with Jacobs' own version of the so-called "Jacobs Affair" launched when the Chief Rabbi, Israel Brodie, vetoed Jacobs ' appointment to become principal of Jews' College, precisely because of the liberal position which Jacobs had espoused on this issue in his published writings. The last third of the chapter is devoted to a fantasy debate between proponents of the three positions-he dubs them "halakhic fundamentalism," "nonhalakhic nonfundamentalism," and "halakhic nonfundamentalism "-on the way each understands the mitzvah of wearing tefiLLin, the dietary laws, liturgical changes, and the study of Torah. He concludes with the claim that it is the Jewish people who are "... the ultimate sanction for what does and does not...