The obvious question is how can it be that we don't know who Iyov was and when he lived? Iyov is one of the 24 sefarim in Tanach and yet there is a well over 1000 year range as to when he lived. Achashveirosh was at the time of Purim which is the beginning of the Anshei Knesset Hagedola. How could they not have known that Iyov lived at their time?
The Ritva answers that the reason there are many views about the identity of Iyov is that the Book of Iyov was not well known to all of the people, but was hidden in the possession of individuals. In truth, this just raises more questions.
- When did the book of Iyov become well known to people?
- How did it become well known?
- Why did people accept it?
- Why was it hidden?
This kind of answer destroys the famous Kuzari proof of Judaism. We see clearly that there was no mass mesora on things like Sefer Iyov which is one of the 24 books of Tanach. If a group of individuals could introduce a new book into Tanach during the time of the second Beis Hamikdash then just about any change could be introduced into Judaism.
Kuzari defendants would respond that Iyov didn't involve everyone's ancestors. [Of course the kuzari argument fails for many other reasons].
ReplyDeleteThe Kuzari Proof, were it valid, would only prove that *something* happened at Har Sinia. It cannot prove that the Torah we have today is the same one given to Moshe.
ReplyDeleteThere are too many stories in Tanach and the gemara of parts of the Torah being "rediscovered" or somewhat arbitrary corrections being made for the claim of an unchanged Torah to be taken seriously.
What Iyov shows is that masses are willing to accept a book as part of Tanach based on the testimony of a group of individuals. The Kuzari proof states that individuals would never be believed on these kids of big things.
ReplyDeleteThe Kuzari Proof, or the kiruv version of it, anyway, is specifically about matan Torah and the claim that the whole nation witnessed Hashem give the Torah. The argument is that you could never get people to believe that their x-great-grandparents witnessed something if they didn't have a tradition about it, passed from generation to generation, and the fact that people did/do accept it is proof that there is such a tradition stretching back to matan torah, and that this tradition is proof that the event must have happened.
DeleteIt's not about large groups of people accepting a text as divine. It can't be, because the New Testament and the Koran would be obvious counters.
http://altercockerjewishatheist.blogspot.com/2013/07/kuzari-principle-or-argument-part-i.html Kuzari has several variants.
ReplyDelete