Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 6

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Moses Mendelssohn
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
My general objective in this paper is to provide (1) the outlines of the reception of Baruch Spinoza and Moses Mendelssohn in the Russian Enlightenment of the late 18th century as well as (2) in the Russian-Jewish Haskalah. In part (1) of the paper I consider Gavrila (Gavriil) Derzhavin’s mention of Mendelssohn in his “Opinion,” the translation of Mendelssohn’s Phaedon in Nikolay Novikov’s Masonic-inspired journal Utrennyi Svet, and the readings of Spinoza’s view on God and then-shared interpretation of his views as an “atheism” in Feofan Propovich, Vasily Trediakovskiy, and Alexander Sumarokov. In the part on the late Russian-Jewish Haskalah of 1860s I examine two intellectual biographies appeared in the period—Saveliy (Saul) Kovner on Spinoza and Yakov Gurliand on Mendelssohn, which aim to interpret positions of Spinoza and Mendelssohn as exemplary strategies of the Jewish emancipation within the framework of claims and prospects of the modern European culture. I also rediscover and reinterpret Spinoza’s approach to religion as the late Russian Haskalah’s authors strongly object to label Spinoza’s philosophy of religion as “atheistic” and consider it as close to the “pure, or true Judaism.”
EN
Among the many criticisms advanced against the enlightenment is that its emphasis on rational reflection and commitment to universal moral truths serve as solvents of tradition and community. Here, I wish to show how the German Jewish enlightenment figure, Moses Mendelssohn in his classic work, Jerusalem succeeded in bringing together universal rational religious reflection and Halakhah, Jewish ceremonial law. Essentially, the ceremonial law for Mendelssohn, forms a traditional mimetic society, whose members absorb the Halakhah naturally and intuitively both from the community at large and from its teachers through a process of total immersion. If we see religious practice as a language, then members of this halakhic mimetic community, for whom the Halakhah is a first language practiced fluently and intuitively, are able to use this language to intelligently discuss the great truths of religion. In this way, tradition and community and rational reflection turn out to be mutually supportive.
EN
The paper discusses Moses Mendelssohn’s work Phaedo and its Polish translation which was published in 1829 by Jakub Tugendhold. Although this book did not exert impact on Polish philosophy, Tugendhold, the translator, aimed to use Mendelssohn’s biography and his Phaedo as an instructive example for those representatives of Jewish community who wanted to free themselves from isolation and undergo social and economic, though not religious, assimilation into their Polish and Christian surrounding. Moreover, the author briefly compares Plato’s and Mendelssohn’s Phaedos.
EN
Jewish versions of the Bible frequently feature extensive commentaries in addition to translated text. In many instances these commentaries elicit as much attention as the translation itself-if not more. Typically combining grammatical and exegetical remarks, these commentaries accompany both freer and more literal renderings and may contain non-Jewish and non-traditional commentators along with substantial offerings from mainstream Jewish exegetes. The erudition displayed by these Jewish translators is extensive, often aimed at a more learned audience than the translated text itself. Overall, such Jewish versions may be seen as efforts to open up for non-Hebrew readers the intentionally ambiguous language of the original, where lexical and grammatical multivalence are characteristic features-features that are frequently lost when rendering words and expressions from one language to another.
Diametros
|
2020
|
vol. 17
|
issue 65
12-31
EN
This article examines Paul Guyer’s claim that we should attempt to ground the principle of religious freedom on the basis of Kant’s arguments for religious liberty. I problematise Guyer’s suggestion by investigating a hypothetical ‘dogmatic conflict’ between a scientifically and a religiously grounded belief. I further suggest that considering Christian Wolff’s philosophy might provide us with an approach which shares the benefits that Guyer identifies in Kant, while at the same time avoiding the issues Kant might run into that result from the occurrence of the dogmatic conflict. I start by providing a background to Wolff’s philosophy and explaining the notion of the dogmatic conflict. Then I present a potential contemporary case of the dogmatic conflict and try to see how it would be dealt with based on Guyer’s proposal. Finally, I consider what a Wolffian solution would look like, arguing that Guyer’s project might benefit from considering Wolff.
PL
Druga połowa XVIII wieku przyniosła istotną zmianę w dziejach Żydów i ich religii – judaizmu. Nowe elity żydowskie, pod wpływem europejskich prądów oświeceniowych, zaczęły kwestionować paradygmaty żydowskiego życia religijnego i społecznego, eksponując takie wartości jak: tolerancja, równouprawnienie i wolność religijna. Dążono do obywatelskiego zrównania praw Żydów oraz odrzucenia tradycji ukształtowanej przez judaizm rabiniczny. Do głosu doszły także nurty racjonalistyczne. Tendencje te dały początek nowej kulturze żydowskiej zwanej haskalą, która w początkowej fazie znalazła swe centrum w Berlinie, a za jej prekursora i lidera uznano Mosesa Mendelssohna, wybitnego ilozofa żydowskiego doby oświecenia okresu „pre-Kantowskiego”, zwanego „żydowskim Sokratesem”. Na jego stosunek do judaizmu i kultury żydowskiej miała wpływ (1) zdobyta w młodości formacja religijna i intelektualna, (2) presja otoczenia domagającego się zmiany modelu kształcenia językowego Żydów i wewnętrzna tego potrzeba, (3) chęć dążenia do zachowania żydowskiej tożsamości religijnej przez reinterpretację tradycji za pomocą narzędzi ilozoii oświeceniowej. Autorzy artykułu opisują te trzy czynniki, charakteryzując w ten sposób początkową fazę haskali żydowskiej.
EN
The second half of the eighteenth century brought a significant change in the history of the Jews and their religion – Judaism. The new Jewish elite, influenced by European currents of the Enlightenment, began to question the paradigms of Jewish religious and social life, exposing values such as tolerance, equality and religious freedom. They sought to equate civil rights of Jews and rejection of tradition shaped by rabbinic Judaism. They came to the fore as the rationalist currents. These trends have given rise to a new culture called the Jewish Haskalah, which in the initial phase found its center in Berlin, and for its forerunner and leader was Moses Mendelssohn, the famous Jewish philosopher of the Enlightenment period “pre-Kantian” called “Jewish Socrates.” On his relationship to Judaism and Jewish culture have an impact: (1) acquired in his youth, religious formation and intellectual, (2) peer pressure, demanding a paradigm shift in education language of the Jews and the inner of this need, (3) the desire to strive to maintain a Jewish religious identity through reinterpretation tradition of using tools Enlightenment philosophy. The authors of article describe these three factors, characterizing thus the initial phase of the Jewish Haskalah.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.