The Fundamental Structure and Systematic Theology of the Torah

[ewhandler]

Hello,

I've been browsing this thread for a few days and today I registered because I want you to consider incorporating new information into your scenario regarding the origin of the Pentateuch.

The Torah is a true Pentateuch. It consists of two parts: pastoral Genesis and national Israel (Exodus,Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy).

The paper: The Fundamental Structure and Systematic Theology of the Torah was published in 2012. It's posted on my page at academia.edu.

[snip]
It was upon finishing the essay on Genesis and then simply considering the analysis of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy, that the
Torah’s fundamental structure and systematic theology appeared to me. I had not yet connected all the puzzle pieces, but I now knew what the puzzle portrayed. I was able to recognize the fundamental structure of the Torah because I had seen it before in an abbreviated form in an earlier religious work, the Purusha Sukta (the Hymn of Man) an essential hymn of the Rig Veda.

Like Genesis, the Purusha Sukta is a creation account of primeval man. As I considered a closer reading of Moses’ establishment of a nation out of an undifferentiated population of former slaves, I recalled what Moses had accomplished and saw an analog for his accomplishments in the Vedic hymn. Here are the lines I recalled from the Purusha Sukta as I considered Moses appointing Aaron priest and Joshua warrior:

"When they dismembered Man, Into how many parts did they separate him?
What was his mouth, what his arms, What did they call his thighs and feet?
The Brahmin was his mouth; The Rajanya (Princes) became his arms."

The dismemberment of Man in the Vedic hymn describes the most basic functional classes into which nations are organized and the changes that occur as a community moves from a non-sedentary to a sedentary lifestyle. So does the Torah.

In Genesis, the patriarchs are non-sedentary shepherds who establish a diaspora in Egypt. Abraham is an armed shepherd who speaks directly to God. He tithes to Melchizedek, the pastoral archetype, whose name is warrior/priest, a man literally “re-membered.”

In Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy, Man is then dismembered as he is in the Vedic hymn. Moses appoints a priestly (Brahmin) class and a warrior (Rajanya) class before the conquest of Canaan begins and he offers his community a law written on stone tablets.

=============

The Torah rests on this Vedic template in which Judaism is structured as an ethnic caste, (a priestly nation).

Here are the lines preceding Man’s dismemberment in the Purusha Sukta:

"From that [Man’s original cosmic sacrifice] horses were given birth,
And cattle with two rows of teeth. Cows were born from that, And from that were born goats and sheep."

The book of Genesis is a narrative. The Purusha Sukta is a hymn. Its ideas are expressed in verse, its archaic language difficult for translators, but it is evident that all the animals named in these few lines preceding the description of Man’s dismemberment are domesticated animals “given birth” by
non-sedentary pastoralists, men “re-membered.”

If you "re-member" the dis-membered Purusha of the Hymn of Man, you're left with Melchi-Zedek, the pastoral archetype of Genesis and all the theology that implies. e.g. mastery of the oral tradition achieved by melding your warrior with your priest, which is a metaphor for "writing the Law on your heart" from the Bible.

Why does the Torah have a Vedic template?
Is the Torah loop actually the Persian land grant of - Nile to Euphrates - imperially confining the Israelite ethnic caste to Eber-Nari, the land beyond the river?

The Persians ((Vedic) Aryana) are an ethnic caste in diaspora coming from the East (northwestern India).
The Hymn of Man is a late interpolation in the Rig Veda appearing to record the Vedic Aryans settling down and adopting agriculture.
So does the Torah... Genesis (pastoral) into Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy (national).

Hopefully, you will be willing to consider these facts.

Thanking you in advance for any interest.

[Peter Kirby]

The paper: The Fundamental Structure and Systematic Theology of the Torah was published in 2012. It's posted on my page at academia.edu.

Thank you for sharing your paper.

[ewhandler]

Hi Peter,
Will the paper I shared be considered for discussion?

The prequel to The Fundamental Structure... is: The Book of Genesis from a Darwinian Perspective, also on my page.

[snip]
In Chapter 1 of The Origin of Species, titled “Variation under Domestication” under the heading “Principles of Selection Anciently Followed and Their Effects,” Darwin makes the following remark:“From passages in Genesis, it is clear that the colour of domestic animals was at that early period attended to.”
Darwin does not give chapter and verse for the passages in Genesis he mentions, but once the great naturalist and lapsed seminarian brought them to my attention, I had to find them. He had specifically written that the principles of selection were anciently followed in Genesis. I was amazed to find those principles applied throughout the story of Jacob and Esau, beginning in Genesis 25. The story of Jacob and Esau was the next knot in a strand of the Darwinian thread spun by Adam and Eve.
[end snip]

[Secret Alias]

An advertisement for the enlightening power of religion.

[Peter Kirby]

Hi Peter,
Will the paper I shared be considered for discussion?

Yes, of course, but if it isn't happening, you'll need to push to make it interesting to people to participate in such discussion.

First and foremost, you should be making your own thread!

And giving it an interesting title!

Then you need to give people something to respond to. A link isn't good as a "hook". People follow links when they're already invested in something. You need to lead with something that people can read on the forum post itself in a few minutes at most.

The posts that usually tend to get the most responses have this structure:

TITLE: CLAIM YOU MIGHT NOT AGREE WITH

POST: I CAN PROVE IT! HERE IS EVIDENCE 1, HERE IS EVIDENCE 2, HERE IS EVIDENCE 3, ETC. SURELY YOU ARE CONVINCED?

You don't need all these elements, but it's always a strong start. You can't just refer to your paper for the body of the post if you're trying to encourage discussion. You would want to pull out a few choice quotes from the paper that people can read and feel like they've gotten to understand your arguments.

Then they're primed and ready to say why they think your arguments are wrong and don't agree with their conclusion.

Or they agree with the conclusion and at that point may or may not post.

(Don't take me too literally above. There's all types of ways to participate on the forum. Just treat it a bit like a social media and if there's not the engagement you're looking for, try in a different way.)

[Peter Kirby]

Here's a new thread out of your existing post, but it wouldn't hurt for you to start over with a new thread and new first post.

Also, I did say that a link isn't everything, but also a link is something. Copy and paste the link here over just mentioning its existence.

I'm spread too thin to promise any response personally.