A rabbi in the Babylonian Talmud Shabbat 88a praises the Israelites who said at Mount Sinai naʿaseh ve-nishma, “let us do and let us hear” in Exodus 24:7. He claims that the Israelites showed a “leap of faith.” They accepted God’s commands even before they heard what God was demanding.
The Talmud states. “Rabbi Elazar said: When the Israelites gave precedence to ‘let us do’ before ‘let us hear,’ a Divine Voice spoke to them: “Who revealed to My children this secret that the ministering angels use? As it is written: Bless the Lord, His angels, you mighty in strength, who do His word and listens to them”’ (Psalm 103:20).
This is an example of Midrash. It is a lesson Rabbi Elazar wanted to teach, but it is not what the Torah says. Verse 7 clearly states that Moses first revealed God’s commands, and only after hearing them did the Israelites accept them. The verse is, “Then he took the book of the covenant and read it in the hearing of the people. And they said, ‘All that God has spoken, let us do and let us hear!’”
Not all Talmudic views are rational. This one exemplifies a talmudic rabbi accepting a Christian concept of “Leap of Faith.” “Leap of Faith” means that if someone in authority, such as clergy, tells you something that makes no sense to you, don’t question the authority, accept it, and do what you are told to do and believe what he says you should believe. If a rabbi tells you that God is made up of ten parts that became apart but is still one, and this makes no sense to you, accept it anyway.
This concept is alien to Judaism, which stresses that people should use their intelligence. Intelligence is the “Image of God” mentioned in Genesis 1:27, which Maimonides said God placed in humans. In his Guide for the Perplexed 3:17 and 18, he stressed that the Divine Providence that helps humans when aid is needed is not the intervention of God into human affairs but the people’s use of their intelligence that helps them, and the more intelligent a person is, the better help the person receives.
Furthermore, the talmudic rabbi in Shabbat 88a misses what Targum Onkelos teaches. The Aramaic translation of the Torah, Targum Onkelos, renders the Hebrew word shema, which many, as this rabbi, translates as “hear,” as “accept.” It is like a mother telling her child, “Hear what I am saying.” She does not mean “listen.” She means “accept and do what I am telling you to do.”
This is also the meaning of the widely known command, Shema Yisrael, “Hear Israel, God is One and is One.” The command is “Accept Israel, for God is the only deity and is unique.”
So, the Israelites were saying in Exodus 24:7, “We will do and {thereby} accept” what God commands.
Dear Israel,
Leaf of faith is a jewish concept.
Believe in Steve and he will grant u 3 wishes 🙂
You are correct, it is not Jewish.
Questioning and searching for the truth is a jewish tradition
Yes, I see Judaism searching for the truth, not beliefs. Behavior, not just thinking. Improvement,not just love.
Do we need trust or faith to believe in a God?
I think we should not waste time trying to believe in God. Instead we should try to know as much about God as we can. We do so by seeing what God created. It is like never knowing who created a certan unusually beautiful watch, but the watch itsef tells us somethings about the watch maker.
I agree with Rabbi Drazin. I think that God is the watchmaker, he makes the watch and then watches.
I also agree that we should not have “faith” but learn about God from what has been created. We should put our trust and confidence in God, but also do what we can to improve ourselves and society.
I also think that we do not need to believe in God because we can know that God exists. When we see a watch, we have evidence of the existence of a watchmaker; and in like manner the creation is evidence of the existence of a Creator.
We agree.
Why is leap of faith a concept that exist?
Why did people believe in this concept?
IS it because it gives people hope?
I think Soren Kirkegard develped the idea because many Christian concepts do not make sense to some people such as God being three different entities but still one. He said accept it without thinkinking.
I think Soren Kirkegard was mistaken when he said that we must make a leap of faith to accept irrational ideas. However, I agree with his views on prayer.
“The function of prayer is not to influence God, but especially to change the nature of the one who prays.” Soren Kirkegaard
I think even if it did that God had a body in the past, it means the intellect today.
We agree.
“Intelligence is the “Image of God” mentioned in Genesis 1:27, which Maimonides said God placed in humans.”
In the opening Biblical account of creation when it is written that the human being is created in the image of God, the image of God does not refer to human intellect as Maimonides interprets and distorts to fit his Aristotelian conceptions. The term image in Biblical Hebrew has the meaning of a physical idol and, the original meaning of the verse is in all likelihood that the human being created in the image of God is referring to the physical form of the human being implying that God has physical form. This is the plain meaning of scripture and what scripture is intending to teach. However, I like Maimondes’ interpretation and I accept it even though it is contrary to scripture because it is a rational interpretation.
You may be right, but I do not think so. But even if I am wrong, we agree that Maimonides’ interpretation is excellent.
In Mysteries of Judaism 4, you wrote, “Genesis 1:27 states that God created humans in the “image of God,” but does not explain what this means. Maimonides states in his Guide of the Perplexed 1:1 that it means that
God gave humans intelligence. There is not even a hint of Maimonides’s explanation in chapter 1. Should we accept it?”
I think we should accept it because it is a rational interpretation but I agree with what you wrote eailer that Maimonides’ idea that the “image” refers to intellect is not even hinted in scripture. In addition, a later verse says in clear Hebrew – “And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden”. As a voice or sound cannot walk, God walks in the garden of Eden because one cannot walk without legs. God speaks throughout the Bible and one cannot speak without a mouth, tongue and vocal chords. In the plain meaning of Scripture God is depicted in crass, anthropomorphistic (human) terms.
While I accept his rational interpretation, I do not think that Maimonides is correct when he explains that the “image of God” that God is intelligence? The Torah does not state so explicitly that God gave humans intelligence and the verse is in all likelihood is referring to the physical form, implying that God has physical form.
Hi Rabbi Drazin,
Do you want to reply to the comment (above) where I mention Mysteries of Judaism 4?
Since a rational understanding reveals that Image of God cannot mean God has a human body, it must mean something else, and this something else is the intellect.
I enjoyed this short essay about “faith” and Judaism. When you wrote that the notion of a “leap of faith” is not Jewish, it is Christian, are you suggesting that Rabbi Elazar was influenced by Christians? In addition, if the early Christians were Jews who thought Jesus was the Messiah, isn’t the concept of faith Jewish? Paul stressed that we need to have faith. Paul was Jewish. Does this make the concept of “faith” Jewish? A Jewish idea that Judaism should reject?
I understand the matter differently. Paul was interested in converting non-Jews to what he considered Judaism which was Judaism with the idea that Jesus was some kind of wise man. He soon saw that non-Jews did not want to become Jewish because of such things as circumcision and the need to eat only kosher food. So he develped the non-Jewish idea that if you have faith it is enough even though you are not circumcised or eat kosher.
This word faith has been so terribly abused by “revealed” religions that it has come to mean the suspension of our God-given reason in order to accept an unreasonable claim made by a “revealed” religion. I prefer to use the word “trust” instead of faith due to the twisted meaning the word “faith” has acquired after centuries of abuse.
I don’t think faith is required to accept the existence of a God. This quote from the Deist Voltaire sums it up, “What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason.”
I don’t understand how this idea is non-Jewish if it is sourced from Paul. Can we call any idea we don’t like non-Jewish? It seems to me that if Paul invented the idea of faith then it is a Jewish idea even if it was tailored for non-Jews and even if non-Jews accepted it.
Hi Rabbi, what do you think of my comment? Can we call Paul’s idea Jewish even if it was tailored for non-Jews and even if non-Jews accepted it? Paul was Jewish. Does that make his idea Jewish? Or, is it non-Jewish even though the person who invented faith was Jewish since it was given to non-Jews and they accepted it?
I have to thank you ! A sheynem dank, Rabbi Israel Drazin; best: stephen
Trust in God, often against seemingly insurmountable odds, is a recurring theme in the Jewish scriptures. However, Jewish thought emphasizes the importance of action and responsibility, rather than relying solely on blind faith. Therefore, while the specific term “leap of faith” is not a traditional Jewish concept, the idea of having faith in God’s providence and acting intelligently is significant in Jewish practice and theology. Am in full agreement with your text analysis, dear Rabbi Israel Drazin ! It is always a pleasure and honor for me to participate in your intelligent discourses, which demonstrate deep human experience and highly developed cognition of important topics and subjects for our learning and life. Best and thank you: stephen
It is a huge compliment when one recieves a compliment from a scholar like you.