If I may, I'd like to rephrase a bit of what you wrote and see whether or not we are saying the same thing.
I think in general, when posed with an interesting and/or difficult question we seek immediate resolution. We do not like (as you noted) the discomfort of the contradiction or the unsettled or unanswered question. And we seek to solve that discomfort by finding an answer that is "good enough" or sounds plausible.
In this case, it is not truth or insight that we are after, but rather a resolution of our internal feelings of unease or discomfort.
Now, what form that takes may differ from person to person. In the case of a (seeming) contradiction, one may settle on some sort of "compromise" (as you put it), but I imagine that there are other ways that people take to resolve such "conflicts".
The key point is not the particular type of quasi-resolution that one takes, but rather the method one uses or does not use to address the problem.
The first step is to simply appreciate the question, issue or contradiction. To fully comprehend it and relate to it as it is. And to not be bothered by whether or not one is able to answer the question or resolve the contradiction.
The question and/or contradiction are beautiful in and of themselves. Let's appreciate them before we attempt to address them.
Then, once we have fully appreciated their beauty, we can then develop the art and science of how to approach and deal with these questions and contradictions. How one does that may very well depend on the subject or issue. Sometimes the answer may be grammatical, other-times philosophical or halachic. It may involve introspection and/or self-awareness.
There is, in my mind, no one-size fits all method - but rather a spectrum of methods and means that one develops the more one learns and thinks about Torah.
In terms of the particular contradiction that you mentioned, I would offer the following as a means of addressing them.
1) Look at the context in which the Prophets spoke as opposed to the nature of the Torah. That is to say, the Torah is the world of the ideal, the fundamental Divine principles and directives that G-d gave us. The Prophets, on the other hand, are living in a particular time and place and are dealing with particular people and issues. They are living in a world of implementation. They are helping people figure out how to implement those principles based on who those particular people are and what they are doing.
2) Clearly define what it means to "know" G-d. I assume that the word used in all of the quotes in your previous article is the Hebrew word Daas (דעת). This word has a long and rich history in the Torah -- starting with (but certainly not ending with) the Tree of Daas of G-d and Evil. A richer, deeper understanding of what it means to know G-d, that is to have daas of G-d MAY help resolve or better understand the conflict.
3) Knowing G-d sounds like an end. Sacrifices sound like a means. It could be that the issue that the Prophets are addressing is one of confusing means for ends.
And I am sure there are other approaches. The key here is to work on developing a set of approaches to these types of questions and then dedicating oneself to using them to gain deeper and broader insights into the Torah.
With that said, I look forward to seeing how you resolve the issue in your next post.
I like how you put it - are we looking for true insight or are we looking to alleviate the discomfort of a question?
The ideas you expressed in points #1 and #3 will indeed figure in my forthcoming treatment, but we will find that the matter is a lot deeper and richer.
If I may, I'd like to rephrase a bit of what you wrote and see whether or not we are saying the same thing.
I think in general, when posed with an interesting and/or difficult question we seek immediate resolution. We do not like (as you noted) the discomfort of the contradiction or the unsettled or unanswered question. And we seek to solve that discomfort by finding an answer that is "good enough" or sounds plausible.
In this case, it is not truth or insight that we are after, but rather a resolution of our internal feelings of unease or discomfort.
Now, what form that takes may differ from person to person. In the case of a (seeming) contradiction, one may settle on some sort of "compromise" (as you put it), but I imagine that there are other ways that people take to resolve such "conflicts".
The key point is not the particular type of quasi-resolution that one takes, but rather the method one uses or does not use to address the problem.
The first step is to simply appreciate the question, issue or contradiction. To fully comprehend it and relate to it as it is. And to not be bothered by whether or not one is able to answer the question or resolve the contradiction.
The question and/or contradiction are beautiful in and of themselves. Let's appreciate them before we attempt to address them.
Then, once we have fully appreciated their beauty, we can then develop the art and science of how to approach and deal with these questions and contradictions. How one does that may very well depend on the subject or issue. Sometimes the answer may be grammatical, other-times philosophical or halachic. It may involve introspection and/or self-awareness.
There is, in my mind, no one-size fits all method - but rather a spectrum of methods and means that one develops the more one learns and thinks about Torah.
In terms of the particular contradiction that you mentioned, I would offer the following as a means of addressing them.
1) Look at the context in which the Prophets spoke as opposed to the nature of the Torah. That is to say, the Torah is the world of the ideal, the fundamental Divine principles and directives that G-d gave us. The Prophets, on the other hand, are living in a particular time and place and are dealing with particular people and issues. They are living in a world of implementation. They are helping people figure out how to implement those principles based on who those particular people are and what they are doing.
2) Clearly define what it means to "know" G-d. I assume that the word used in all of the quotes in your previous article is the Hebrew word Daas (דעת). This word has a long and rich history in the Torah -- starting with (but certainly not ending with) the Tree of Daas of G-d and Evil. A richer, deeper understanding of what it means to know G-d, that is to have daas of G-d MAY help resolve or better understand the conflict.
3) Knowing G-d sounds like an end. Sacrifices sound like a means. It could be that the issue that the Prophets are addressing is one of confusing means for ends.
And I am sure there are other approaches. The key here is to work on developing a set of approaches to these types of questions and then dedicating oneself to using them to gain deeper and broader insights into the Torah.
With that said, I look forward to seeing how you resolve the issue in your next post.
I like how you put it - are we looking for true insight or are we looking to alleviate the discomfort of a question?
The ideas you expressed in points #1 and #3 will indeed figure in my forthcoming treatment, but we will find that the matter is a lot deeper and richer.
Re #2, the previous section of this work is entitled "Knowing Hashem" and addresses what that means at length. Here's a good place to start: https://shnayor.substack.com/p/exodus-exile-and-redemption-section-05f.