Faith is the implicit and absolute belief in the truth of the
communication made to us and in the trustworthiness of him who makes it
to us. The child has faith in its parents that their wishes or commands
are for its good; the pupil in his teachers that they impart correct
knowledge; we have faith in our friends that they have no intention to
deceive us; in the men of science and learning that the results of
their researches may be accepted as well established. In all these
cases the faith is but imperfect and of a relative and temporary
character. Time, investigation, and extended observation and knowledge
may either confirm the contents of our faith or may convince us that we
have been in error. This is not the case with religious faith. It keeps
within the boundaries of its own domain and does not encroach on that
of the senses and of reason. Whatever can be known by means of
scientific research and thorough investigation we need not accept on
faith. Religion—I have, of course, our own religion, the Jewish, in
mind—does not only not forbid such examination, but even encourages it.
Thus we read in the Book of Proverbs, “A fool believeth every word, but
the prudent man looketh well to his going” (xiv. 15). For this purpose
God has given us intellectual faculties that we should employ them in
our search for truth. At the same time, however, He has set limits to
our faculties, and there are things which are beyond these limits,
being nistaroth, “things hidden” from our senses, whose existence has
been made known to us through the grace of God, by such means as His
infinite wisdom determined. We search and investigate, examine and
demonstrate, within the sphere of our senses; but all that is beyond
their reach belongs to the nistaroth, the knowledge of which can only
be imparted to us directly by the Almighty, or indirectly by those to
whom they have been communicated by Him. Our belief with regard to
these nistaroth may be supported or strengthened by philosophical or
dialectical arguments, but can never be proved by mathematical or
logical demonstration.
The sources from which we derive our knowledge of these nistaroth are
Revelation and Tradition. God reveals things otherwise unknown to man
to such persons or to such a generation as His wisdom chooses, and from
those thus privileged the knowledge spreads to the rest of mankind by
means of Tradition. In addition to these two sources there is a third
one in ourselves: God implanted in our souls certain ideas common to
all of us as essential elements of our inner life, and these ideas form
to some extent the basis of our faith. Such is, e.g., the idea of an
all-powerful Being, God, who is the source and origin of everything in
existence.
There is no real conflict between faith and reason. It may sometimes
seem as if there were such a conflict, and we then naturally begin to
doubt. In such cases the truth of our faith may be doubted, but the
correctness of our reasoning is no less subject to doubt. We may have
erroneously included in our faith beliefs which do not belong to it,
and on becoming aware that they are contrary to reason, we cast them
aside without the least injury to our faith. On the other hand, our
reason is not perfect; we frequently discover mistakes in our arguments
and conclusions, and reject opinions which we hitherto have considered
as firmly established.
Through patient and thorough investigation of our doubts, without
over-estimation of our reasoning faculties, we shall be able to settle
the seeming conflict between reason and faith in a satisfactory manner.
The examination of our doubts will prove that none of the truths which
the Almighty revealed to mankind are contrary to reason.
In this way we are enabled to separate from our faith all elements that
in reality are foreign to it; we shall be able to distinguish between
faith and superstition. The latter consists of erroneous notions and
beliefs which can be tested and subjected to the ordinary means of
inquiry. Superstition is not tolerated by true religion; strict
adherence to the teachings of our holy religion is the best check to
superstitious beliefs.
The importance which the Bible attaches to implicit faith in God and
His word may be gathered from the following passages:—
“And he (Abraham) believed in the Lord, and He reckoned it to him as
righteousness” (Gen. xv. 6). The Hebrew for “righteousness” is in the
original צדקה which is used in the Bible as the sum-total of
everything good and noble in man’s life.
When the Israelites had crossed the Red Sea, it is said of them: “And
Israel saw the great work which the Lord did upon the Egyptians, and
the people feared the Lord: and they believed in the Lord, and in Moses
His servant” (Exod. xiv. 31).
Again, when Moses and Aaron had sinned at the waters of Meribah by
striking the rock instead of speaking to it, they were rebuked for want
of אמונה “faith,” in the following words: “Because ye believed not in
me (לא האמנתם בי) to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of
Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this assembly into the land which
I have given them” (Numb. xx. 12).
When Moses in his song האזינו blamed the Israelites for their evil
doings, he called them “children in whom there is no faith” אמון
(Deut. xxxii. 20).
King Jehoshaphat, addressing the army before the battle, says: “Have
faith in the Lord and you will be safe; have confidence in His prophets
and you will succeed” (2 Chron. xx. 20).
In the same sense Isaiah says to King Ahaz: “If you have no faith,
surely you will not be safe” (Isa. vii. 9).
Also Jeremiah, speaking of Israel’s disobedience to the word of God,
exclaims: “The faith, האמונה is perished, and it is cut off from
their mouth” (Jer. vii. 28).
The prophet Habakkuk, praying to God for an explanation why evil-doers
succeed and prosper, receives the divine answer: “The righteous shall
live by his faith” וצדיק באמונתו יחיה (Hab. ii. 4); and when Hosea
predicts the future redemption of Israel, he tells them in the name of
God, “And I will betroth thee unto me by faith” וארשתיך לי באמונה
(Hos. ii. 22).
Our teachers, the sages and rabbis, who succeeded the prophets, have
been equally emphatic in commending religious faith. The following are
a few of their sayings concerning faith:—
“Great is the merit of faith. Through their faith in the Creator of the
universe the Israelites were inspired by the holy spirit, and were
enabled to sing praises to the Lord.” “Faith in the Lord was the source
of all the temporal and eternal blessings which were bestowed upon
Abraham; it gave him the enjoyment of this world and the world to
come.” “When the Psalmist says: ‘This gate leads to the Lord; righteous
people (צדיקים) shall come in through it,’ he denoted by the term
‘righteous’ those who possess faith in God” (Yalkut on Ex. xiv. 31).
In spite of the fact that the Torah and the prophets most emphatically
declare faith אמונה to be a very essential element in Judaism, it
does not seem to have the same importance in the writings of Jewish
theologians and philosophers, some of whom have endeavoured to
substitute reasoning and logical arguments for simple faith, and to
rebuild upon scientific research the religious edifice erected on the
foundation of faith. The following are the utterances of the principal
Jewish theologians since the close of the Talmud on the relation
between faith and reason:—
The Gaon Saadiah of Fayyum wrote a book on creeds and religious beliefs
(אמאנאת ואעתקאד־אמונות ודעות). In the Introduction to this work the
philosopher describes the causes of human error and doubt, and assumes
four classes of believers. There are, first, those who recognise the
truth found by them, cling to it, and are happy in it. There are,
secondly, those who have the true principle before them, but do not
recognise it, doubt its correctness, and abandon it again. The third
class includes those who adopt an opinion without having recognised it
as true; they mistake falsehood for truth. The last division consists
of those who form no definite opinion, but remain continually in an
unsettled state of mind. Saadiah is anxious to see at least his
co-religionists in the first class, and his work was intended to help
them towards this end.
According to Saadiah, belief or faith must be an integral part of our
soul; the various truths which form the faith are stored up in the soul
as in a repository, completely ready for use whenever required. It is,
however, possible that we store up opinions as true which are false.
Tests must be applied to each opinion in order to ascertain its right
character. Three of the tests are of a general nature, but the fourth
has its force only for us, the believers in the truth of the Holy
Writings. The first three tests will show us whether a certain opinion
is confirmed or contradicted by our senses, by our innate ideas, or by
our logical reasoning. In addition to these we possess a fourth test in
the trustworthy communication (הגדה הנאמנת), i.e., the contents of
Holy Writ and Tradition. Holy Writ recognises the necessity of the
three general tests, and frequently exhorts us to apply them. On the
other hand, Saadiah is convinced that the contents of Holy Writ and
Tradition are never contradicted, but in many cases are confirmed by
these tests. Such confirmation is in reality superfluous; but the human
mind feels more at ease when it finds that the teaching of Holy Writ is
supported by other proofs. Besides, attacks on the Bible come
frequently from these tests, and it is therefore useful to learn how to
refute them. According to Saadiah, the truth taught in the Bible can
never be contradicted by the results of scientific or philosophical
research.
Thus to Saadiah philosophy and science are mere luxuries, and cannot be
considered as handmaids to the Torah. They are not studied on account
of their intrinsic value or as helps for the understanding of Holy
Writ, but merely for the purpose of procuring proper weapons for
theological warfare, or of superadding the conviction that what is
known to us from the most trustworthy source is confirmed from other
less reliable sources.
The poet and philosopher Solomon ibn Gabirol, who is lost in enthusiasm
in contemplating the powers of the human soul, humbly acknowledges that
it was his faith that saved him from fall and ruin. Referring to man’s
faculty of acquiring knowledge, he says in his “Royal Crown” כתר
מלכות: “Who can comprehend Thy wisdom in giving to the soul the
faculty of acquiring knowledge, on which her existence depends,
knowledge being her foundation? She is permanent and immortal in the
same measure as her foundation is well established.” But, reflecting on
human weakness, he expresses his feeling of gratitude to the Creator
for His guidance in the following words: “Thou hast done yet more for
me. Thou hast implanted in my heart a perfect faith, so that I believe
in Thee as the true God, and in Thy prophets as true prophets; Thou
hast not cast my lot among those that rebel against Thee, or among
those who provoke Thy name, despise Thy Law, attack Thy servants, and
disbelieve Thy prophets.” Knowledge—philosophy and science—is the very
essence, the immortal element of the soul, and yet without the Word of
God man would go astray and be lost.
The boundaries between faith and reason are more distinctly set forth
in the Commentary on Sefer Yetsirah by Dunash ben Tamim (ed. L. Dukes
in Shire Shelomoh, i. p. vi. seq.): “All these beings above and below
have been created by God, and it is within the province of man to
explore and to examine all of them; but he must not pass beyond these
boundaries to investigate into the essence of God; ‘for in the city of
his refuge shall he dwell,’ and ‘if he goeth out of his place, and the
avenger of blood smite him, he hath no remedy.’ Besides, wisdom and
science acknowledge that man is unable to comprehend by his own
intellect anything that exists outside the sphere of created beings.”
R. Bachya, son of Joseph hassephardi, who lived in the eleventh
century, treats, in the Introduction to his “Duties of the Heart,” of
the three sources of human knowledge—Holy Writ, Tradition, and Reason.
Bachya is fully convinced that the knowledge derived from the first two
sources is complete and correct. “If you are a man endowed with
knowledge and reason, and are able to demonstrate the principles of
your belief and your religious practice, which you have been taught by
the Sages in the name of the prophets, it is your duty to do so, and to
let reason confirm what Tradition teaches. If you abstain from
attempting this investigation, you neglect your duty towards your
Creator.”
Still more emphatic is Shem-tob ibn Palqera in demanding the right of
free inquiry into everything taught by Revelation and Tradition. In a
dialogue between the believer and the inquirer (Hammebhakkesh) the
former is represented as ignorant of everything our mind desires to
know; whilst the wise man, who combines belief and confidence in
Tradition with the right use of his reason, knows how to satisfy the
inquirer, and lays down the rule, “Let the study of the Torah be the
foundation, and the study of other things secondary; believe nothing
that is not proved by reason or by God” (i.e., by the word of
Revelation).
R. Abraham ben David, in Emunah ramah: “Because three out of four
scholars (R. Akiba, Ben-azai, Ben-zoma, and Elisha) were unsuccessful
in their philosophical researches, therefore many turn their backs upon
science, and in consequence of this neglect they remain ignorant of the
chief principles of our religion.” The object of his book is to
reconcile religion and science.
R. Judah hallevi, in his “Kuzari,” endeavours to convince the Kuzarite
king of the truth of the Jewish religion by philosophical arguments,
but gives unhesitatingly the preference and the higher authority to
Divine revelation. He is convinced that reason or philosophical
argument could never refute any principle taught in the Law. He says:
“Prophecy is certainly stronger than logical inference.”
R. Abraham ibn Ezra believes that man’s intellectual faculties are
insufficient to solve all transcendental problems; thus, e.g., the
nature of the spirit of man is unknown to most, and is only
comprehended by him “whose thoughts are weighed in the balance of
reason, and are established on the four elements of wisdom, viz., the
three R’s: reading, writing, and reckoning; (in Hebrew, the three ס:
סְפָר סֵפֶר סִפּוּר) and the Divine Law.” Ibn Ezra recommends the study of
science, united with the belief in Divine revelation. “The Torah,” Ibn
Ezra remarks in his Commentary on Ps. xix. 8, “is perfect in itself; it
requires no evidence from without for the truths which it teaches.”
Maimonides’ “Guide to the Perplexed” is entirely devoted to the problem
how to reconcile Scripture and reason. Scripture cannot contain
anything contrary to reason; nor can the result of scientific research
and philosophical speculation be conceived as contrary to reason, which
is their very basis. But where any such contradiction is perceived, we
are at fault either in our reasoning or in our interpretation of the
Divine Writings. The Incorporeality and Unity of God are doctrines that
have been fully proved, and Scripture cannot teach anything that is
contrary to them. Where we believe them to be contradicted in the Holy
Writings the contradiction is only apparent, and by assuming an
allegorical use of words and phrases the seeming contradiction is
removed.
R. Joseph Albo prefaces his book on the principles of Judaism as
follows: “As the human understanding is incapable of finding out what
is true and what is good, there must be a higher Being that assists us
in determining what is good and in comprehending what is true. It is
therefore necessary, above all, to study and to know the divine Law
that guides man in these problems.”
R. Eliah del Medigo, in his Bechinath haddath (Examination of Religion)
says as follows:—
“Let us first see whether or not the study of philosophy is permitted
to the followers of our religion; and, if it be permitted, whether the
study is to be considered a duty and a laudable act. The right-minded
Jew does not doubt that the Law aims at leading us to humane conduct,
good deeds, and true knowledge, the common people according to their
capacity, and the more gifted according to their abilities. Certain
fundamental truths are therefore set forth in the Law and the Prophets
in an authoritative, poetical, or dialectical style; but the higher
order of intellects are encouraged to search for proper proofs. Thus
the whole nation is addressed by Isaiah: ‘Lift up your eyes on high and
see who hath created these,’ and the like. Also the chief of the
Prophets tells the Israelites: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord is our God;
the Lord is One.’ Those who are more highly endowed than their
fellow-men are exhorted, either directly or indirectly, to follow the
course which is suitable to them. The direct exhortation to
philosophical research is contained in the words: ‘Know then this day,
and take it to thy heart, that the Lord He is God,’ &c.; and indirectly
it is contained in the commandment to love and to fear God, as has been
explained by R. Moses Maimonides.—The study of science will certainly
be of use to the scholar; it leads to a knowledge of the created
things, and through these to a knowledge of the Creator. Such study may
even be considered as necessary to the Jewish scholar, though not to
the ordinary Jew. The scholar must, however, not entirely rely on his
research, but on that which is taught in the Law. In this the scholar
and the ordinary man are equal, that both accept the teaching of the
Torah as infallible; only with this difference, that the scholar can in
addition satisfy his thirst for knowledge and confirm by scientific
proof what he has already accepted as true on the authority of the
Bible.”
Of modern scholars I only quote Moses Mendelssohn’s theory. He accepts
unconditionally the teaching of the Bible; all its truths are absolute
and perfect; no reasoning whatever can refute them; but difficulties
may sometimes present themselves to us in reconciling the teaching of
the Bible with that of our reason. What have we then to do? The
philosopher declares: “If I were to find my reason in contradiction to
the Word of God, I could command reason to be silent; but the
arguments, so long as they have not been refuted, will nevertheless
assert themselves in the innermost recesses of my heart; the arguments
will assume the form of disquieting doubts, which will resolve
themselves into childlike prayers, earnest supplication for
enlightenment. I should utter the words of the Psalmist: ‘Lord, send me
Thy light, Thy truth, that they may guide me, and bring me to Thy holy
mount, to Thy dwelling-place!’”
The conception which Moses Mendelssohn had of Jewish belief and its
relation to reason we learn from the following passage:—“I recognise no
other eternal truths than those which are not only comprehensible to
the human mind, but also demonstrable by human powers. This principle
by no means brings me into conflict with my own religion; on the
contrary, I consider it an essential element in Judaism, and the
characteristic difference between Judaism and Christianity. Judaism has
no revealed religion in the sense in which Christianity has. The Jews
have a revealed legislation which instructs them in the divinely
ordained means by which they may attain the eternal bliss. Laws and
rules for conduct in life were revealed to Moses in a supernatural way,
but no doctrines, no saving truth, and no general laws of logic. The
latter the Eternal reveals to us, as to all men, through nature and
through the things themselves; never through words and letters. The
divine book revealed to Moses, though a book of laws, includes an
inexhaustible treasure of truths and doctrines.... The more we study it
the more we wonder at the depth of the knowledge contained in it. But
these truths are taught, and not forced upon us as dogmas. Belief does
not allow itself to be commanded; it is based upon conviction. In the
Hebrew language, the very word which is generally translated ‘faith,’
viz., אמונה denotes originally confidence, trust that the promise
made will also be fulfilled, and not what we understand by ‘religious
faith.’”
These words of Mendelssohn show how greatly those err who quote his
opinions in support of the dictum that Judaism recognises no dogmas.
According to Mendelssohn, Judaism does not consist entirely of laws; it
teaches also certain truths. We have certain dogmas without which the
laws can have no meaning, yet there is no precept, “Thou shalt
believe.” Nowhere in our Law, whether written or oral, is a solemn
declaration of our creed demanded. In so far Mendelssohn’s view is
correct; but when he believes that all the truths we are taught in
Scripture can be made evident by logical demonstration he is mistaken.
As to the meaning of אמונה comp. supra, p. 4.