The Project pt 6: The Divine Code, Fundamentals of the Faith, cont’d

Now I come to Chapter Six of Part 1, Fundamentals of the Faith, and this chapter is called “Serving God; Prayer and Grace After Meals.” Again, it goes against the flow to say what I’m about to, but do I care? Of course not. This chapter has nothing to do with the Seven Commandments. Serving God is not one of the Seven Commandments. It’s not part of the Seven Commandments. Since Weiner devotes the first section of his code to religion, the “Faith,” it’s not surprising that it’s here. Unfortunately, its proximity to the actual seven commandments gives it an air of authority it does not deserve.

Now, that is not to say it teaches bad things. A lot of what it says is informative to the community and households. But in a book devoted to what God commanded Gentiles, it should either be in the back or in a separate edition called “Divine Service: Torah Guidance for Gentiles.” In fact, I would excise the section from a book about the seven commandments and offer it to households and community educators and leaders. Because it’s not useless or bad, just ill-placed.

I question some of the wording.

By arousing his will to focus his mind and heart, to direct his thoughts and opinions so that his actions will be in accordance with the will of his Creator. This will bring pleasure and satisfaction to God. (the end of topic 1, chapter 6, part 1, The Divine Code, by rabbi Moshe Weiner, emphasis mine)

Compare such language with this.

Since it has been clarified that He does not have a body or corporeal form, it is also clear that none of the functions of the body are appropriate to Him: neither connection nor separation, neither place nor measure, neither ascent nor descent, neither right nor left, neither front nor back, neither standing nor sitting. He is not found within time, so that He would possess a beginning, an end, or age. He does not change, for there is nothing that can cause Him to change. [The concept of] death is not applicable to Him, nor is [that of] life within the context of physical life. [The concept of] foolishness is not applicable to Him, nor is [that of] wisdom in terms of human wisdom. Neither sleep nor waking, neither anger nor laughter, neither joy nor sadness, neither silence nor speech in the human understanding of speech [are appropriate terms with which to describe Him]. Our Sages declared: “Above, there is no sitting or standing, separation or connection.” (law 11, chapter 1, Foundations of the Torah, Mishneh Torah, Maimonides, emphasis mine)

You see the difficulty? A book based mostly on Maimonides, mirroring the beginning of Mishneh Torah, speaks of God having pleasure and satisfaction?

Now I know, I know. It will be said, in defense of this book, that Weiner is simply speaking in human terms for God. The Jewish Bible speaks about God in similar terms. I just don’t see it as consistent for Weiner.

Maybe that is a small qualm.

“Qualm.” Damn, when am I gonna use that word again? Ever?

Topic 6 says that a praying Gentile should “direct his mind and speech to say verses from the Hebrew Bible.” Why? Instead of saying “a Gentile can say Bible verses when he prays for reason x,” it’s just something that should be done. It’s claimed that by doing this “God’s name is glorified.” That’s not a reason. It’s a claimed ano unseen effect of doing the act. So if I don’t use a scripture, is God’s name not glorified?

Also, in the same topic, he says that a person should not mention God while distracted because that degrades God’s honour.

…

This?

…

In a book about the seven laws?

No, not the seven laws. The Weiner Code.

I was informed that rabbi Weiner did not write all of this book himself, that that he had the assistance of several rabbis of whom he doesn’t share the names. In a video, he states this to show that he wasn’t just making things up, that he wasn’t just making his own construction. Me calling his work “the Weiner Code” may seem like me spitting on his sincerity, contradicting his efforts to just communicate God’s law for Gentiles.

I am sure that his efforts came from a good and sincere heart. But since when did sincerity of the heart mean that the deeds and works of a person is beyond scrutiny? Calling his work “the Weiner Code” is a valid acknowledgement of the author of the work and the importance of testing his words to see if they are relevant, adequate and consistent with other statements of tradition and with itself, with the commandments of God.

Anyway, carrying on.

And then there are clothing prescriptions for prayer.

*Sigh*

And then it goes into all the Jewish blessings Gentiles can do. I wouldn’t even give this to community leaders or households. No. This would not find its place in the court. The vast majority of this section would simply be binned. If people want to pray like Jews, they can research or talk to the Jews. Each people group has its own ways, characteristics, verbal manners. As long as it is respectful and not idolatrous, let it find its own voice to talk to God.

The next section is “Sacrificial Offerings.” Again, something permissible but not commanded. It’s a small section. If we’re living in a time where communities accepted the seven laws, I think the whole world would be at a better moral level, definitely Godward. I agree that such teaching about a proper burnt sacrifice would reside with the Jews. Once we Gentiles learn it for ourselves, it’s just up to the individual and his community.

My question is this: should the court step in if there starts to be a pattern of blemished sacrifices? I guess that is for the community to decide.

Anyway, carrying on.

The next section to do with “Obligatory Moral Conduct” seems to be more for personal conduct. As per usual, I have to choose what to do about claims of things outside the seven actual commandments being forbidden. Ignore it? Reinterpret it as just “it is wrong to” or “a person should not?” For example,

It is forbidden for a person to tell lies, or act in a smooth-tongued and luring manner in order to deceive or persuade. (topic 4 of “Obligatory Moral Conduct” in Part 1 of The Divine Code)

It’s not forbidden. Yes, it’s wrong, but not by means of commandment. The fact is that if I take the book as written, then, of course it’s wrong to say God commanded something he didn’t, and there’s no other authoritative source for morals for Gentiles. So … I guess I can’t take it as written and I’ll just take that sort of information as just general guidance.

This whole section about moral behaviour could easily be given to the community and to households. Not really for a court. The same can be said for the final chapter of this part, called “Repentance”. Really nice teaching. Nothing to contradict. Just teaching for individuals.

Ok. That’s the end of “Fundamentals of the Faith.” Enjoyed going through that. It gave me a chance to consider the words of Weiner and learn a good amount too. But next I actually start getting into the actual seven laws! Can’t wait!