Reason and Revelation

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 0 RELIGION
Zev Garber
{"title":"Reason and Revelation","authors":"Zev Garber","doi":"10.1353/ecu.2024.a922806","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\n<p> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> Reason and Revelation <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Zev Garber </li> </ul> <h2>I. Teaching Torah in the Academy</h2> <p><strong>S</strong>uccessful teaching, I believe, is a learning exchange. Learning involves not only the information given but also the recipient’s critical application of what that knowledge means to oneself as an individual and as a member of a community (faith-bound, or not). As a classroom teacher, my major concern is that I am less of a knowledge-dispenser and more of a knowledge-facilitator, who leads my students to make discoveries and articulate values and conclusions. From my teaching experience, I find that students learn better and appreciate more their understanding of the subject matter if they are actively involved in learning rather than being passively taught.</p> <p>Flexibility, innovation, implementation, enthusiasm, and relevancy are characteristic of a good teaching methodology. The college classroom should not serve as a podium for intellectual exhibitionism or be a forum for undisciplined free-for-all ranting. Some information and delight may result from such activities, but they are achieved at the expense of compromising student learning and scholarship. Instruction in the classroom ought to be student-oriented so that students are involved in comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation rather than becoming amen-sayers to authoritative professorial ranting.</p> <p>My pedagogic philosophy in teaching the Hebrew Bible is infused with a binary <em>midrashic</em> model: <em>midrash `atsmi</em> (self exegesis and eisegesis) and <em>midrash tsiburi</em> (explorations of others). In teaching the Hebrew Bible, for example, I encourage my students to engage the text as is (<em>peshat</em>), and, in return, the scripture begs <em>darshani</em> (<em>derash</em>, “expound me”); by sharing research and by learning from class discussion, seeds of <em>midrashic</em> activity are planted. Furthermore, the student gains self-respect from such an exposure, <strong>[End Page 121]</strong> his or her germane ideas are able to sprout, dialogistical learning commences, and a relaxed teacher-student symbiosis is created. Also, I grow in stature as an educator. By playing the role of a class catalyst, I have opportunities to present my own contribution and to refine it in light of class feedback to a greater degree than by a purely lecture method. My goal is to integrate teaching and learning, rooted in the way of Midrash, and the reward is in the participatory doing.</p> <p>I respect <em>torah mi-sinai.</em> The doctrine of the eternity of the Torah is implicit in verses that speak of individual teachings of Torah in phrases such as the following: “A perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your (lands of) dwellings” (Lev. 3:17), and “throughout the ages as a covenant for all time” (Ex. 3:16). Biblical (Proverbs, in which Torah equals wisdom), Apocryphal (the wisdom of Ben Sira), and Aggadic (Genesis Rabbah) traditions speak of the preexistence of Torah in Heaven. Though the Talmud acknowledges the pre-revelatory Heavenly Torah, which the Sages claimed was revealed to Moses at Sinai, it concentrates more on the Torah’s eternal humanistic values. Indeed, the rabbinic mind speaks of two strains: revelation (“everything which a scholar will ask in the future is already known to Moses at Sinai”; see BT Menach. 29b), and the power of intellectual reasoning, as suggested in BT Pes. 21b, Ketub. 22a, B.K. 46b, Chul. 114b, Nid. 25a, B.M. 59b, and so forth. By twinning the two dialectics, it appears, the Sages taught more Torah than was received at Sinai.</p> <p>So do I, with a twist. I combine modern biblical scholarship and classical Jewish learning to make sense of the <em>Tanakh</em> in the life of the people then and now. I conflate profane and sacred ways to return to Sinai and back, using source criticism to unravel complexities in transmission (composition, dating, events) and perplexities in thought (Israelite religion, biblical theology) but wholly concerned with faith questions—such as what does the wholistic Torah teach?</p> <p>In sum, my teaching <em>Tanakh</em> at a public community college, critically speaking, accepts the existential position that God’s teaching was shared at Sinai/Horeb, face <em>into</em> face (Dt. 5:4), with all of Israel, present and future. “Present” implies that God’s primary revelation occurred and that the Torah is the memory of this unique theophany; “future” hints that Israel’s dialogue with...</p> </p>","PeriodicalId":43047,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF ECUMENICAL STUDIES","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF ECUMENICAL STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ecu.2024.a922806","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • Reason and Revelation
  • Zev Garber

I. Teaching Torah in the Academy

Successful teaching, I believe, is a learning exchange. Learning involves not only the information given but also the recipient’s critical application of what that knowledge means to oneself as an individual and as a member of a community (faith-bound, or not). As a classroom teacher, my major concern is that I am less of a knowledge-dispenser and more of a knowledge-facilitator, who leads my students to make discoveries and articulate values and conclusions. From my teaching experience, I find that students learn better and appreciate more their understanding of the subject matter if they are actively involved in learning rather than being passively taught.

Flexibility, innovation, implementation, enthusiasm, and relevancy are characteristic of a good teaching methodology. The college classroom should not serve as a podium for intellectual exhibitionism or be a forum for undisciplined free-for-all ranting. Some information and delight may result from such activities, but they are achieved at the expense of compromising student learning and scholarship. Instruction in the classroom ought to be student-oriented so that students are involved in comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation rather than becoming amen-sayers to authoritative professorial ranting.

My pedagogic philosophy in teaching the Hebrew Bible is infused with a binary midrashic model: midrash `atsmi (self exegesis and eisegesis) and midrash tsiburi (explorations of others). In teaching the Hebrew Bible, for example, I encourage my students to engage the text as is (peshat), and, in return, the scripture begs darshani (derash, “expound me”); by sharing research and by learning from class discussion, seeds of midrashic activity are planted. Furthermore, the student gains self-respect from such an exposure, [End Page 121] his or her germane ideas are able to sprout, dialogistical learning commences, and a relaxed teacher-student symbiosis is created. Also, I grow in stature as an educator. By playing the role of a class catalyst, I have opportunities to present my own contribution and to refine it in light of class feedback to a greater degree than by a purely lecture method. My goal is to integrate teaching and learning, rooted in the way of Midrash, and the reward is in the participatory doing.

I respect torah mi-sinai. The doctrine of the eternity of the Torah is implicit in verses that speak of individual teachings of Torah in phrases such as the following: “A perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your (lands of) dwellings” (Lev. 3:17), and “throughout the ages as a covenant for all time” (Ex. 3:16). Biblical (Proverbs, in which Torah equals wisdom), Apocryphal (the wisdom of Ben Sira), and Aggadic (Genesis Rabbah) traditions speak of the preexistence of Torah in Heaven. Though the Talmud acknowledges the pre-revelatory Heavenly Torah, which the Sages claimed was revealed to Moses at Sinai, it concentrates more on the Torah’s eternal humanistic values. Indeed, the rabbinic mind speaks of two strains: revelation (“everything which a scholar will ask in the future is already known to Moses at Sinai”; see BT Menach. 29b), and the power of intellectual reasoning, as suggested in BT Pes. 21b, Ketub. 22a, B.K. 46b, Chul. 114b, Nid. 25a, B.M. 59b, and so forth. By twinning the two dialectics, it appears, the Sages taught more Torah than was received at Sinai.

So do I, with a twist. I combine modern biblical scholarship and classical Jewish learning to make sense of the Tanakh in the life of the people then and now. I conflate profane and sacred ways to return to Sinai and back, using source criticism to unravel complexities in transmission (composition, dating, events) and perplexities in thought (Israelite religion, biblical theology) but wholly concerned with faith questions—such as what does the wholistic Torah teach?

In sum, my teaching Tanakh at a public community college, critically speaking, accepts the existential position that God’s teaching was shared at Sinai/Horeb, face into face (Dt. 5:4), with all of Israel, present and future. “Present” implies that God’s primary revelation occurred and that the Torah is the memory of this unique theophany; “future” hints that Israel’s dialogue with...

理性与启示
以下是内容的简要摘录,以代替摘要: 我认为,成功的教学是一种学习交流。学习不仅包括所提供的信息,还包括接受者批判性地应用这些知识,以了解这些知识对作为个人和社区成员(无论是否有信仰)的自己意味着什么。作为一名任课教师,我最关心的问题是,我是不是一个知识传播者,而更像是一个知识促进者,引导我的学生去发现、阐述价值观和结论。根据我的教学经验,我发现如果学生能主动参与学习,而不是被动地接受教育,他们会学得更好,也更能体会到他们对学科知识的理解。灵活、创新、实施、热情和相关性是好的教学方法的特点。大学课堂不应成为知识炫耀的讲台,也不应成为无纪律的自由咆哮的论坛。这些活动可能会带来一些信息和愉悦,但却是以损害学生的学习和学术为代价的。课堂教学应该以学生为本,让学生参与理解、应用、分析、综合和评价,而不是成为权威教授侃侃而谈的阿谀奉承者。我在教授希伯来圣经时采用了二元米德拉士模式:midrash `atsmi(自我训诂和注释)和midrash tsiburi(探索他人)。例如,在教授《希伯来圣经》时,我鼓励学生原原本本地阅读经文(peshat),反过来,经文也会恳求darshani(derash,"阐释我");通过分享研究成果和从课堂讨论中学习,米德拉士活动的种子就种下了。此外,学生从这种接触中获得了自尊,[第 121 页完] 他或她的新思想得以萌芽,对话式学习开始了,轻松的师生共生关系产生了。同时,作为一名教育工作者,我的地位也在不断提高。通过扮演课堂催化剂的角色,我有机会展示自己的贡献,并根据课堂反馈对其进行完善,这比纯粹的讲授法效果更好。我的目标是根植于米德拉士方式,将教与学融为一体,而收获则在于参与式的实践。我尊重 Torah mi-sinai。关于《圣经》永恒性的学说隐含在以下关于《圣经》个别教义的经文中:"在你们世世代代居住的所有(土地)上都是永恒的律例"(利 3:17),以及 "历世历代都是永恒的盟约"(出 3:16)。圣经》(《箴言》,其中《托拉》等同于智慧)、伪经(《本-西拉智慧书》)和阿加迪(《创世纪》拉巴)传统都提到《托拉》存在于天堂之前。尽管《塔木德经》承认先于启示的天堂《托拉》,圣贤们声称《托拉》是在西奈启示给摩西的,但《塔木德经》更注重《托拉》永恒的人文价值。事实上,拉比的思想有两个方面:启示("学者将来要问的一切问题,摩西在西奈已经知道了";见 BT Menach.29b),以及智力推理的力量,如 BT Pes.21b, Ketub. 22a, B.K. 46b, Chul.114b, Nid.25a, B.M. 59b, 等等。看来,通过将两种辩证法结合起来,先贤们传授的《托拉》比在西奈半岛接受的《托拉》更多。我也是这样做的,但有一个转折。我将现代圣经学术与古典犹太学相结合,在当时和现在的人们的生活中理解《塔纳赫》。我把亵渎和神圣的方式混为一谈,回到西奈,再回到亵渎和神圣的方式,利用源头批判来解开传承中的复杂问题(组成、年代、事件)和思想中的困惑(以色列宗教、圣经神学),但完全关注信仰问题--比如整体的《圣经》教导了什么?总之,我在一所公立社区学院讲授《塔纳可》,从批判的角度看,接受了上帝的教导是在西奈/何烈面对面(《申命记》5:4)与所有以色列人(现在和未来)分享的这一存在立场。"现在 "意味着上帝的主要启示已经发生,《圣经》是对这一独特神迹的记忆;"未来 "则暗示以色列人与上帝的对话。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信