First, note that the Torah has been given to the Jewish people, not to other peoples, and binds us Jews as our covenant with God. So the question has to be narrowed down to “what is the ultimate purpose for Jews of observing the Torah?”

Second, one must distinguish between the end result and any “ultimate purpose” that one might wish observing the Torah to achieve. Maimonides pointed out in his introduction to his Commentary on the Mishnah on “Perek Chelek” (in Tractate Sanhedrin) that a person of sufficient intellectual, (spiritual, ethical, and emotional) maturity will not seek to achieve any purpose in studying Torah and observing God’s commandments other than to know what is true and to do what is good. Thus he negates observing the Torah for any other purpose, including living a good life, having a successful social existence, meriting “the Garden of Eden”, “the days of the Messiah”, etc. Nevertheless, he points out that the ultimate natural consequence of observing the Torah - a consequence that one should not be aiming for consciously while observing the Torah - is achieving eternal life of the spirit / the soul in some kind of “nearness to God” which is beyond our human ability to imagine.

Third, other formulations have been given to “the ultimate purpose” of Jews observing the Torah. One is written in Exodus chapter 19, where God tells Moses to introduce the giving of the Torah with the following exhortation: “And you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” Thus the ultimate purpose of observing the Torah is to achieve holiness - personal and national. Indeed, our sages instruct us to precede the performance of many commandments with a blessing to God, about Whom we say, “Who has sanctified us with His commandments”.

Shalom David,

Thank you for sharing your thinking.
I think that we are in agreement.
As you know, the purpose of the Torah is human-oriented, not G-d-oriented since God is all-powerful and does not need to see people doing mitzvot, as if G-d needs people to observe the commands for some undisclosed reason.

In his Commentary on the Mishnah, Introduction to Perek Chelek Maimonides writes that people only achieve immortality when they develop their minds, not based on the care that they take in observing Torah commands. Thus, Maimonides stated that the purpose of the Torah is three-fold: to teach true ideas and helps improve individuals and society. People fulfill the Bible’s mandate, he stressed, when and only when they study and understand about science and the laws of nature and use their knowledge of the world to improve themselves and society. Thus, Maimonides considered it a mitzvah to study science.

Hi David,
The Torah was given to the Jewish people by whom? Can’t be God as it is not a revelation.

"Revelation is a communication of something, which the person to whom the thing is revealed did not know before. For if I have done a thing, or seen it done, it needs no revelation to tell me, I have done or seen it done nor enable me to tell it or write it. Revelation, therefore, cannot be applied to anything done upon earth, of which man is himself actor or witness and consequently all the historical part of the bible which is almost the whole of it, is not within the meaning and compass of the word revelation and therefore is not the word of god." Thomas Paine

Jonathan: Thank you for sharing your thinking.
I think that we are in agreement.
Vj ~ If either of you could really think, you guys would be atheists.
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

Thus, Maimonides considered it a mitzvah to study science.
Vj ~ And what did MaiMonides says about the origin of science?

"We owe a lot to Indians, who taught us how to count, without which no worthwhile scientific discovery could have been made." Albert Einstein

Thank you Vijai for your concern about me. After much contemplation, I have embraced rational religion over mysticism. I think it upsets you that there is truth in other religions. Maimonides was correct when he said the truth is the truth no matter what its source. Thus, he had no quarrels accepting the philosophy of the Greek pagan Aristotle, one of the most influential thinkers in the history of Western thought.

Thus, Maimonides considered it a mitzvah to study science.
Vj ~ And what did MaiMonides says about the origin of science?

"We owe a lot to Indians, who taught us how to count, without which no worthwhile scientific discovery could have been made." Albert Einstein
Vj ~ You're claiming to embrace rational religion and yet ignored this.

Maimonides was correct when he said the truth is the truth no matter what its source.
Vj ~ The truth is only the truth when it meets a single definition universal in nature.
Do you want to know of such a definition?

he had no quarrels accepting the philosophy of the Greek pagan Aristotle,
Vj ~ Most of all Greek philosophers beginning Plato, Aristotle, etc. studied in India's Nalanda University.

Thanks again, Vijai. Again I apologize, I just don’t have the free time to sort out the correct and the incorrect ideas in what you wrote. Please keep studying. Perhaps you will enjoy https://noahideworldcenter.org/w... There is a lot there that you may learn. Moreover, perhaps you may enjoy one of my essays, http://www.mesorahmatrix.com/ess... or The Natural Limits of Freedom: On the Tight Structure and Comprehensive Contents of Birkat Kohanim .

I engaged in comparative studies of religion long ago. Judaism is the only “true religion” - although I have pointed out elsewhere that Judaism is not really “a religion”. but rather much much more. Its theology is extremely different from that of anything else, so I am afraid that the suggestion that its root is in India is a mistake. Indeed, one important point is that while we human beings can learn a lot about God both by using logic and by studying the universe and the laws that God instituted in the universe, nevertheless we will never know all there is to know about God if all we do is use our own logic and experience. To know more, and to experience God’s presence in the universe and our relationship with God, we must also have an experience that we cannot possibly have just by ourselves - we must also experience God “reaching across the infinite gap that separates us from God”, so that we can feel God’s presence, appreciate it, have an authentic relationship to it, etc (again, please pardon my brevity)

Again, you may quote Paine as much as you like, but that doesn’t make what he said true, and it is not true just because Paine said it. The same goes for Einstein. A more careful discussion of the points they addressed calls for more time than I have now. Let me just point out that such questions as “what was God doing before creation” are meaningless, since we know now that “before creation of the universe” there was no such thing as time, hence “before” is just not a relevant concept. Furthermore, God’s “revelation” of His self (if you continue to insist on using that term, which has only limited meaning in this context) was necessary to produce a relationship, as I wrote above, which is something that no human being can discover only through his other experiences. Moreover, it is not ultimately relevant only to a given time, place, and people, for the whole point is that we human beings - both as individuals, and as peoples, and as all of humanity - have been going through a long process that has been bringing spiritual growth to us. It begins in one time and place and with one people, but it grows way beyond that in the course of time. Just think of the vast rejection of most Greek/Roman/pagan idolatrous beliefs that was achieved by Christianity (which still has a way to grow), and the vast rejection of idolatry by Arabs and others as a result of Islam, and the more recent vast rejection of idolatry by a billion Chinese who have been taught to prefer atheism to idolatry. These are all steps of progress, and every step has been a consequence of the mission of the Jewish people. More will come in the future, God willing.

You quote Albert Einstein frequently yet fail to cite a source. Needless to say, Socrates taught Plato, Plato taught the Greek philosopher Aristotle, Aristotle taught Alexander the Great, who conquered India. There were no Greeks in India previous to Alexander's conquest. You invented that out of thin air. You're inventing history. Nevertheless, what's your definition?

Needless to say, Socrates taught Plato, Plato taught the Greek philosopher Aristotle, Aristotle
Vj ~ And who taught Plato?

Nevertheless, what's your definition?
Vj ~ Actually you don't have the brains for it, but maybe you can prove me wrong.
It's all here

Thank you for your reply David! A brief look of what I present isn’t what I expected of a man who claims to know “how to think and to think critically”. If you can, then you must know comparative studies of all religion is necessary to ascertain truth.

Hinduism, which is also a false dogma, is the oldest (5000 yrs) religion in the world which means the concept of God or religion has its root in India and nowhere else on this planet.

Paine is right about revelation which cannot contain historical references, for it it does, then it is only good for one people, one region and one creation, which begs the questions, who created God and what was He doing before this creation?

Albert Einstein described belief in God as "childish superstition" and said Jews were not the chosen people. - News - India - Science

Again, there are no sources that indicate that Greeks were in India prior to Alexander's conquest. You are inventing a narrative without any historical basis. Same with your definition. A lack of evidence does not substitute evidence. Or to put it differently, extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence.

Again, there are no sources that indicate that Greeks were in India
Vj ~ When the source fails you apply reasoning! I've never been to India either.

So you're admitting there are no sources? Second, there is no historical document that indicates that the Greeks were in India prior to Alexander's conquest. What do you want me to do? Take it on faith?

You're no better than the Mormons who say Jesus appeared in America without offering a shred of evidence. You're a joke. Have a good day.

Thanks for your comment, Vijai. I looked briefly at the link you sent, and it has some things with which I can agree, and others which I see differently. I regret that I do not have sufficient free time available to discuss it with you. I do hope you will do what you wrote there, about keeping an open mind and being ready to learn new and different insights and understandings about ourselves, about God, and about the universe.

One thing I can say is that quoting the statements of Jefferson, of Thomas Paine, of Einstein, and others, has only limited value to me, for I also know how to think and to think critically, and I also have some insights that we human beings have gained since the time each of those lived. Thus I do not accept any of their statements merely because they are supposed to be some kind of “authority” whose statements I am obliged to accept.

First about your question, “who gave the Torah to the Jewish people?” The answer is, indeed, God.

The objection you present is based on: 1 - the application of the English word “revelation” to God’s giving of the Torah - which is not a word I suggested on this topic, and 2 - Paine’s argument that “revelation” must refer to something about which one knows nothing.

How simple-minded and shallow can one’s thinking be? We human beings don’t live an all-or-nothing life. We learn and get to know some things in various ways through a range of experiences. Indeed, authentic communication requires the two communicating parties to share some types of understanding before the communication takes place, and to gain more understandings as a result of the communication. So when God gave the Torah, for example, human beings had to have some knowledge about being human and about how human beings live, and the communication was to add dimensions that we did not yet know about. Knowing about human history, for example, doesn’t mean that we can understand what it is all about without the benefit of communications from God.

All of this has to do with two very different aspects of what we know about God. One is that there is nothing in the universe which is God, since God is transcendental and totally, absolutely, an “other”. On the other hand, God’s presence is immanent and palpable within our universe, and within our selves, in a variety of ways. God, in giving the Torah to the Children of israel, gave us a great wealth of understandings, and challenges, that we have been going through for several thousand years.

You're a joke.
Vj ~ No Jonathan, you and David are jokes! You say the Torah is human-oriented and David is saying it's God-oriented.

Set your house right before trying to fix others. Good day!

Hi David,
This is what would seriously bother a critically thinking man!
"If there is a God who has created heaven and earth, it will be unjust on His part if He deprived millions of souls born before Moses, of His divine knowledge." Prof. MaxMuller.

Perhaps you have done some comparative study of religions, but it is very dishonest to claim yours to be one true religion before making the necessary effort to study the Vedic religion which is now before you.

Again, it is relevant to know what God was doing before this creation, if not it would mean your God isn’t Omniscient, knower of all three periods of time, past, present and the future.

There is creation and thus there is time and since God always exist, why couldn’t time and creation always periodically exist as it is now?