I wrote the local orthodox rabbi an e-mail:
Rabbi -----------,
I am curious about the nature of Jewish revelation. I talked to a friend of mine who now lives out of town, but he had attended your synagogue some years ago and he recommended that I consult you. He and I would also be interested in any book we could read in English which summarizes the Jewish approaches to revelation, and whether there is and, if not, why there has not been a definitive answer to the question of why there has not been something like a wholly authoritative ecumenical council for the Jews since the Talmud. As much as we could, hypothetically, consult the Talmud ourselves, that is a task for a lifetime and he the medical student and myself the legal student would not do study of the Talmud justice. This request is the first of two questions. The second comes later.
I am a Catholic, and I am secure in my faith; I also agree with John Paul the Great who recognized that the Jewish people are our elder brothers in that same faith. In this spirit, I wondered what the Jewish answer could be to the atheist question: “Why doesn’t G-d just write a message on the moon to prove He does, really, exist?” Atheists themselves, I understand, cannot be persuaded by men to believe in G-d as we do, but their question lingers like the barbs of a thistle.
The Christian answer — the earliest answer I’ve read is by C.S. Lewis — consists of, to paraphrase, “You really don’t want G-d to come again, for when he does it will be total and final and you cannot only then change your allegiance.” Public revelation is closed, and definitively, with the accounts in Apocalypse and Jesus’ prophecies and resurrection in the Gospels. I also answer with the caveat of an active prayer life and other ever-continuing private revelation, but these answers are always dismissed as placebo effects by atheists.
Is there an analogue to the Christian closing of revelation in Judaism? From what I can tell, the Tanakh has the Torah where G-d is very really seen, prophecy where he is said to be seen again someday and further writings after that which do not seem to have the direct character of G-d nearly as present as He was with Moses. The Talmud seems to be commentary, and subsequent writings are often characterized to me as commentaries on that commentary. While I trust that some are very rightly held in very high esteem, I cannot shake this impression: That Jews are left listening for G-d, who speaks ever quieter through the centuries and is so quiet now that He can hardly be said to be speaking at all. Ever-quieter whispers from G-d have the effect on the untrained ear, I think, as if G-d ended in the middle of a sentence — or a question — without resolution. Christians, on the other hand, believe we have heard the final question and, while they wait for the answer, live with reasonable satisfaction that the answer has been hinted at. The only cause for anxiety is a matter of when it will strike — and we must live our lives as if it always strikes.
In writing the above, a strange thought occurred to me: Is the training of the ear to listen ever closer to G-d the point? Does G-d speak ever quieter to the Jewish people so they learn, always better, to listen? Are the commentaries not, as I assumed, going out further and further out into speculation, as if towards the end of a limb, but rather to dig deeper and deeper into the Torah, as towards the lode of a mine?
I think I have removed the thistle. I ask you, Rabbi, my second question: How else is it removed?
Thank you for your thoughtful reply,
— N.
