When Socrates met Yaakov in Yerushalayim

Mea Shearim hosts an exclusive Platonic dialogue on truth, the philosophy of proper names and the existence of Moses

[Image: The Hebrew Yaakov (L) and the Greek Socrates (C) discussing proper names on streets of Jerusalem. Brit John Stuart Mill (R) taking notes. They all decided to wear tzitzit as a mark of respect for the locals.]

You are about to read a newly-produced Platonic dialogue on the topic of the existence of Moses and the philosophy of proper names. In the Chanukah spirit, the Hebrew outfoxes the Greek. Enjoy.

---

The community was fed up. This impertinent Greek tourist had been going around the neighborhood taking intrusive photos and challenging the locals. Week in, week out, he was there in Me’a Shea’rim, up to his normal mischief in search of the truth. His name: Socrates. His goal: To challenge the foundations of the Torah.

Yaakov had seen enough. He approached Socrates precipitously with the energy of a man possessed.  Socrates, deep in conversation with yet another unwilling participant, was taken aback by the payot-adorned new arrival. Normally it was he who disturbed the peace. So upon seeing a native taking the initiative, he couldn’t but admire his chutzpah. 

The dialogue to come changed the life of Socrates for it was then he glimpsed his own humility, realising that the Greeks had been hogging the truth limelight for way too long.

Socrates: I’m sorry. Sorry! I’ll put the camera away.
Yaakov: Keep it out.
S: Excuse me?
Y: And turn on “record”.
S: Because?
Y: Because old Plato was very selective in his reports. You’ve always been presented in the best of lights.
S. Well perhaps that’s because…
Y: You’re brilliant! Amazing! The founder of Western civilization!
S: Well if you say so.
Y: I don’t.
S I beg your pardon?
Y: Look, let’s stop bickering and get to business. Challenge me. What “nonsense” do I believe that I need disabusing of?
S: Well I’m not sure. Are you really ready for this encounter ? What have you read? What books do you have access to? What knowledge do you have?
Y: Very touching. Very naive. So it’s true: You really believe that the Haredim don’t access the internet!
S: But it says…?
Y: Where? In Hamodia? You probably believe that we sit around in Yeshiva all day. Hah! Never believe the press, especially our press. And Hus v’shalom you listen to our “representatives” in the Knesset! We’re pretty smart, you know.

S: Ok. Challenge accepted. Prove to me that Moses exists.
Y: Easy!
S: Easy?
Y: That’s right. Easy. Why’re you doubting the obvious?
S: Um…biblical criticism for a start.
Y: OK, for the sake of argument, let’s entertain the possibility of a fictional Sinai.
S: And that Tanach was written in Babylon?
Y: Sure. 
S: And that the Bible wasn’t really written by God, but by man?
Y: We’ll get to that later. Let’s just take your premise that the Hebrew Bible is the work of a man or group of men in Babylon. Let’s assume the fictionality of the Exodus. It doesn’t matter. Moses still exists. And without a doubt.
S: Sorry, excuse my ignorance but…
Y: Don’t worry; you're Greek! 
(pause)
Only kidding. Come on, be fair. Let me ask the questions today.
S: Sure. It’s a difficult habit to break.

Y: Understood, but let’s begin. Do you accept the existence of the Torah?
S: Meaning?
Y: The five books of Moses. Can it not be found in all good bookshops? About this big?
S: Of course.
Y: Is it composed of words?
S: Yes.
Y: Is it written either on parchment or in a book?
S: Naturally.
Y: So we agree. The Torah was written?
S. Uh, huh.
Y: Written down by a person or people?
S: Yes of course.
Y: Right…
S: …but not by Moses! 

Y: What do you mean by Moses?
S: The adopted son who grew up in Pharaoh's palace. The Prince who fled to Midian. The humble man who received the Ten Commandments.
Y: So you mean the historical figure?
S: Yes. You can’t prove he existed can you?
Y: Did Socrates exist? 
S: Very good…. Yes of course we know. It’s in the books of Plato and Plato was Socrates’ student.
Y: Indeed we know a Socrates existed, but I’m talking about the Socrates in Plato’s dialogues? You really think Socrates said all those things?
S: Well not exactly…
Y: “Socrates” was a puppet in the mouth of Plato. He said whatever Plato fancied to make a point. Is that not so?
S: You’re right. But there was a historical Socrates. Why do you deny this?
Y: I don’t. But the historical Socrates wasn’t Socrates. He wasn’t the man in those scrolls. 
S: So who was he then?
Y: He was an Ancient Athenian that shared some of the characteristics of Plato’s character.
S: I’m lost.

Y: Look. Think about Jonah.
S: Big whale Jonah?
Y: That’s the one. Did he exist? Historically speaking I mean.
S: Bible scholars appear to believe so.
Y: But do those scholars believe that he called for repentance in Nineveh?
S: No.
Y: Do they believe that he was swallowed by a big fish?
S: No.
Y: Do they even believe that his name was Jonah?
S: No.
Y: So in what way did Jonah exist?
S: There was a man who was the inspiration for the Biblical book. A real person who the book was based upon.
Y: That’s right. So you’re saying that Jonah “existed” even though he wasn’t called Jonah and didn’t do the exact same things as the man in the book named after him.
S: Yes
Y: Just like Socrates then?
S: I see where you’re going here…..

Y: So if we were to find out that there was a man called Moses - or even a man with a different name, but a man who inspired the Torah character - who did many of the things that Moses did, would that man be Moses?
S: No.
Y: Come now Socrates. If your namesake existed and Jonah existed, then Moses….
S: …would exist if someone had some evidence of such a man.
Y: But how much evidence? And what would that evidence tell us anyway ? How would it help?
S: You’ve lost me again.
Y: Look, if a “Moses” existed …
I should say here that his birth name wasn’t Moses. According to the text that was the name given by the daughter of Pharoah to describe how she drew him from the water. We still don’t know the name given by his birth mother.
But anyway, if a “Moses” existed - the inspiration for the Biblical character - and he did some of the things in the text, would that be Moses?
S: Well if Socrates is Socrates and Jonah is Jonah then…
Y: But is the better definition of Moses the guy who may have done some of the things that the Biblical Moses did or the man or men who wrote the Torah? 
S: (Giggles synically) God I suppose?
Y: Not God. We’ll get back to the “God wrote the Torah” idea later. Now answer the question. Is the definition of Moses the guy who may have done some of the things that the Biblical Moses did or the man or men who wrote the Torah? 
S: The historical Moses.
Y: Come now. You don’t really believe that?! Or else I may have to talk again about the historical Socrates. So please answer. Which is the better Moses descriptor? A possible historical Hebrew who grew up as an Egyptian prince and may have led a revolution and freed the slaves from Egypt or the “greatest prophet that arose in Israel” who wrote down the law? Which descriptor matters to us today?
S: Uh…both.
Y: You asked for it! Which Socrates matters: the historical Socrates whose day to day life we know nothing of or the cartoonishly perfect Socrates as described by Plato who fought for the truth and questioned the unquestionable?
S: The latter.
Y: So Moses?
S: You got me. It’s the lawgiver. It’s the author of the text that matters.
Y: Thank-you. Have we not now confirmed that whatever historical evidence we found of Moses it would tell us less about Moses than the identity of the author of the text that we both accept exists?

S: OK, but just a minute. We both accept that the text exists, but not that it was by the hand of Moses.
Y: Thank-you for getting back to the original discussion which you diverted me from with your talk of “historical Moses”. Do you remember what we were saying earlier? Let me refresh your memory. So we agree that the Torah was written?
S. Yes.
Y: Written down by a person or people?
S: Yes.
Y: And do we now agree that Moses is the descriptor of he who wrote down the Torah?
S: I suppose so…
Y: So Moses existed!
S: But what if a man called Yitzhak wrote it in Babylon?
Y: Then he is Moses.
S: Or if Yitzhak and 10 of his friends wrote it?
Y: Then they combined are Moses.
S: But they are not. They are Yitzhak and…
Y: Come now. We’ve already agreed that the “real, historical Jonah” was not called Jonah and didn’t do much of what he meant to have done.
S: Fine, but…..
Y: Yet he is Jonah because he matches a certain collection of descriptors.
S: Yes so…
Y: So whoever wrote the Torah is Moses because they fit the descriptor?
S: I see what you mean.
(pause)
   But they didn’t have any of the experiences of Moses. They didn’t live in a palace. They didn’t free the slaves?

Y: Do you not accept that most stories and even non-fiction are inspired by personal events? That they are auto-biographies in disguise?
S: Yes.
Y: And that without lived experience, narrative writing can lack all credibility, albeit that it’s disguised by changed names and locations?
S: Umm…
S: So the writers of the Torah - the historical Moses, Yitzhak or whoever - must have had the same inspirations as “the real Moses” or they couldn’t have written it?
S: Yes.
Y: And the same divine inspiration, universe connection or whatever you want to call it?
S: Yes.
Y: So if “the greatest prophet that arose in Israel” wrote the Torah, then its writer - Moses - was the greatest prophet….. notwithstanding that his day to day name may have been Yitzchak.
S: Got it. And as you said, the “real Moses” wasn’t even called Moses by his birth mother.
Y: Right. You’re beginning to understand. And what’s more, no-one, but no-one - except some Hollywood directors in films we “never” watch - thinks that God physically wrote the Torah; that God took out his physical hand and,,,
S: That would be heresy right?
Y: Right. It was written by the hand of Moses to whom God “spoke”. Spoke not with a mouth; God hasn’t got a mouth; but through intimate spiritual connection.
S: Essentially in his head. Moses was a vessel for God.
Y: Right.
S: He was “profoundly divinely inspired”, you could say?
Y: Right. So whoever wrote the Torah was divinely inspired like Moses, whether it was in Babylon or upon Sinai?
S. Correct.
Y: So if Moses is the descriptor of the person/people who wrote the Torah with the experiences and the divine inspiration to do so and the Torah text does in fact exist then…
S: Moses existed!

Y: We got there. Hebrews 1, Greeks 0. Happy Chanukah!
Er…no offence. 
S: None taken. It was the Syrians you defeated anyway. But one thing. Why do you place truth in words written and stories told over historical lives lived?
Y: Because we believe in narrative. We believe that the  historical Moses was real, but that’s faith not archaeology. And who knows to what extent that Moses day-to-day corresponded to the man in the text? But, whether historical or merely descriptively true as a matter of “connotation”, Moses began our story. The grandest of grand narratives. From slavery to freedom to eventual peace all through the medium of prophecy, listening to the still, small voice….and surviving hatred. Unlike you Greeks, we don’t see truth as ruins and ancient stones, but as stories lived. Moses continues to live in our hearts, regardless of the “evidence”, because we continue to live his story. We honour him by fighting to write the next chapter. And the truth of the Torah is only determined by our ability to continue following in its narrative footsteps.
S: Look I better go.
Y: No not at all, come to our house for a meal. Only there will you see the legacy of Moses, not in words but in deeds. 
S: Are you sure?
Y: Yes. That’s the truth.