Q&A: On History and Interpretations
On History and Interpretations
Question
I remember that in the second book you wrote about Yedaya HaPenini and Rashba, who disagreed with him. If I understood correctly, Yedaya HaPenini wanted to argue that the entire Torah is allegory and never literally happened at all.
What troubles me is that when I study the plain meaning of the Torah, together with the commentators and on top of that the midrashim, it comes out that I have no way of knowing what really happened. And more than that,
perhaps there is actually an advantage to this, because it creates a kind of "space" within reality that is unknown, and that very not-knowing allows for the multiplicity of midrashim and interpretations (even when they sometimes contradict one another). If it were known exactly what happened, all this spiritual richness would have been prevented. Do you agree with this claim?
Answer
The one who disagreed with Yedaya HaPenini was Rashba (not Maharsha). It is not really important what actually happened. The message is what matters. See my article on Myth and Historical Thinking. Rabbi Yitzchak Hutner wrote in a letter that there is a concealment of knowledge regarding historical facts in order to allow for a multiplicity of interpretations. See the introduction to the book Between the Years of One Generation and the Next.