| נשלח ב-30/10/2005 06:55 |
 |
| |
חובת האדם בעולמו - גם אם לא מאמינים?
I have got an interesting question which I cannot, obviously, ask any of my rabbis. I would much appreciate if I can get a Torah'dig answer from one of the learned scholars here.
I have chronicled my struggles with belief in the almighty for about a year in a blog, which by now I have discontinued. The question I have pertains to the obligation one has on this world.
Suppose one does not believe in God, yet he still is wiling to act in accordance with the Torah, adhere to it's laws and follow it's rules. What is his status according to Jewish law? After all, it is impossible to require someone to believe, even if it is a commandment.
I understand that there are certain commandments which are certainly unattainable in such a case, such as Ahavas Hashem or fearing him.
Also, it would be interesting to know what are the requirements of someone who does not believe? Is the person to blame?
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-2/12/2005 16:21 |
|
| |
Hey Folks,
Here is a quotation which befits this cluster. It was mentioned in the hebrew Atzor by David the twelfth:
I am comfortable with religion as a source of spirituality and transcendence, tolerance and love, charity and good works. Who can object to [.. a] faith at least as long as that faith grounds moral positions one already accepts? I am uncomfortable, however, with religion when it makes claims about the natural world, let alone a world beyond nature.
http://hydepark.hevre.co.il/hydepark/topic.asp?topic_id=1520452&whichpage=2
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-7/11/2005 00:18 |
|
| |
Ani,
I guess that I didn't make myself clear. I got your point, it is not an ethical thing to do or not, but it ''jolts'' in to seeing what's right. It can only be said in the context that eating animals in general is not ethical. Do you suppose that this statement is true?
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-7/11/2005 00:04 |
|
| |
Dear Cosmo,
You write;
"So, what defines Torah from the other religions and philosophies? The only answer, to me, is: Gods will, and therefore we should ask ourselves what he meant. And subsequently whether your interpretation, regardless its depth and substance,
is genuine.
"
With all due respect I would disagree here. The difference may well be in the means, it may be that the ends are all about being and becoming more ethical. There can be many different roads leading to one goal. Is it really so that all religions are mainly about becoming more ethical? I'm not sure, I'm just saying that even if it is so then the difference is the means (obviously a religion that isn't mostly about ethics is a lesser choice in my book)
Now which religion has the best means to this coveted end? Dunno, and don't really care, for I don't have much of a choice (sure if I will see another religion being soo much better then I will start to care and see how and if I mabye can adopt that religion but at this point I haven't encountered a religion that will be able to benefit me [in my particular situation, i.e. taking for a given my social situation etc.])
The differnce is not because we are convinced that this and only this is God's word. It surely is likely that the writer(s) of the Torah were inspired people (by inspired I mean that they were so totally in the flow that they were able to live and see the facts without any bias, and we'd be amazingly surprised how not having stupid irrational blockages helps one in seeing the truth [no מסך המבדיל[(
But even if they were not so purified but they were simply smart people who found some good techniches for reaching the goal of living in total flow in harmony with Existence, Nirvana if you will, thats perfectly fine too.
We don't need to confirm if and what level of inspiration they were tallking.
 |
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-6/11/2005 23:38 |
|
| |
Hasid,
Yes, אותי עזבו...is mentioned there but it seems that they are intepreting it more in the vein of המאור שבה יחזרנו למוטב while I am more about keeping it that way, because in reality there is nothing more than being ethical as Hillel said, that being ehtical is the whole Torah.
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-6/11/2005 23:32 |
|
| |
Hasid dear,
I'm not sure what you mean about the 'aunt's milk ' point. I assume you agree that it's unethical to kill your neighbor so that you can have a good supper, killing an animal for your supper is also unethical.
Now remember, ehtics is all about living in harmony with the facts, in flow with Existence, the more blatant the contradiction the more unethical,. If I only 'know' that dealing drugs kills it's not as unethical as when I see first hand how it's killing people etc.
Also, say, using Red Cross trucks to kill (or to deliver Cyclone B) jolts one to ones core, it highlights the contrast between the ought and the is, this action is much more contradicting, for contradiction is all about one awareness not coniciding with another awareness, so if these two contradicting awareness' are in the forefront of my mind, if I'm being very aware of both then the contradiction is stronger.
Milk tells me about nourishment and life support of this kid goat, it's mothers milk tells me much more about how it's meant solely for this particular goat, it contradicts more.
Hence the use of "mothers milk" when getting the point across about it being wrong to cook a kid in milk, it gives us the stark picture of it's contradiction to how things belong.
|
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-6/11/2005 22:13 |
|
| |
Ok, I think that I'm getting it.
Prayer is just a humbling way to make you more ethical. It is not an act of being ethical at its own.
Still, why is not cooking a goat in its mother's milk more unethical then cooking it in his aunt's milk? I can you see you being grossed out by it, but call it unmoral, Why? On the other hand, is it also a way of getting you to stop eating animals altogether which will be the ultimate ''ethical'' thing to do in a few generations down? Just like veto mentioned as to why the Torah forbade certain animals. (Thinking ''morally'' though, perhaps the animals forbidden by the torah where at the brink of extinction and only the domesticated animals, which were bound to be slaughtered in check, was allowed.)
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-6/11/2005 22:04 |
|
| |
Ani dear, thanks. Isn't thinking what we aspire to?
It is here that I get confused. What does prayer have in common with ETHICS? Why is cooking a goat in its own mother's milk considered unethical? I guess the question is what is ETHICS?
I agree that we should be ethical but what does it mean? Perhaps we should open a new eshkol discussing this.
Veto and Ani,
I wish to make myself clear here, I unfortunately know zero about philosophy. I tried understanding Ayn Rand's toireh, Nietzsche's concepts and Spinoza's writings but the books I chose to take out from the library bored me to hell. I'm a big Am ha'arets in these things. Perhaps it is for the better, for I can rely on my own thoughts rather than conforming to Spinoza, just because he is, well, Spinoza. But I thank you all for your patience and eloquent writing. Soon I'll be quoting those guys like a rogil ve'boki.
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-6/11/2005 20:17 |
|
| |
This was written before seeing OOni's response.
Hasid,
religion, comes packaged in many things that are meaningless if not outright unethical.
1. A "package deal" always means that you take the bad part for the sake of the good part which is worth it.
2. From what I have learned from our Toire I truly believe that it may very well always have been ethical relatively to the prevailing mentality until the evolution of Toire shebaalpe has stopped. Now you will of course ask "hayitoochen?" Slavery, mass killing etc...
So let me please elaborate one point which is crucial to our discussion. Ayn Rand in Atlas Shrugged describes her hero John Galt as Hoodom hashoolem or "man as he ought to be versus man as he is". She succeeded quite well [besides some Nitzchean haughtiness towards people less gifted but more virtuous]. Had she written a Toire, she would just say "be a tzadik goomir". Such a Toire would be worthless as an educational tool. Had you told the Americans a few centuries ago to abolish slavery, they would kill you [which they did]. Tell the most righteous people today to stop caging animals or killing them for your stomach's sake, they'll laugh at you.
In order to educate, you go down to the one you wish to educate "lefi darkoi". You don't tell him abolish slavery, but at least treat your slave as a human and if he is your brother even better. That is acceptable. You don't tell him don't kill animals for eating, but you tell him to limit the animals to the finer ones, not to take them directly form life to food, not to make it into food with what was meant to keep it alive [boosor bechooov]. You don't tell him don't make war but be a pacifist and make love, you tell him make war but but view friend and enemy according to a higher criteria than your immediate whims and so forth.
The point is that the Torah walks man as he is from where he is to where he ought to be and chazal knew that so they shtipped arayn pshat in whatever they found man to be ready for it, like ayin tachas ayin means geb gelt etc...
Can you not be ethical without belonging to a group? Can one not be moral without proclaiming allegiance to religion?
One of my friends who used to write in the hebrew Atzor said that he was tired of davening like a machine, so after shmoinessre he had his own personal nissach that he added. But when the telephone rang in middle of his nissach he ran to it unlike in the conventional one. For self education like for self therapy or dieting group and religion are necessary for the best results.
What exactly is moral? Who decided what is considered moral or ethical. Agree with me too that the definition constantly changes.
You decide and the definition changes only so long as you didn't find the exact words, but the gut feeling intuition remains the same. In the hebrew Atzor I also have putten it into a definition which does not seem to change, which is "to comply with reality" ["Hatamah" belaaz]. Rav S.R. Hirsh already says it that man should comply out of choice like the rest of creatures do automatically.
ethics sometimes conflicts with the Torah. In this case why stick with it?
1. Package deal as above in the beginning of this notice.
2. As I said above in the prior notice, in principle when extreme cases arise [like letting a goy die on shabbes], you do the ethical and usually you can find a pilpul lehatir sheretz bekifnin.
תוקן על ידי - ווטו1 - 06/11/2005 20:18:13
|
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-6/11/2005 19:52 |
|
| |
Hasid,
There's a lot of thingking to be done in order to respond to all your points, counterpoints...
For now let me make some quick comments;
You claim that the Torah as of today has little relevance in making a person more ethical. I somehow find that most of the Mitzvoth that we keep today are directly related to ehtics.
What are the basic Mitzvoth that we are surounded every day? Tefila, With some ritualistic garments to put one in the right frame of mind, also to do it along with other people doing the same, again it makes for strong effect.
Yeah, go ahead, run out in middle of your busy afternoon and "grab a mincha", reiterate to yourself that Hoshienu Venvoshia, if Existence will give me then I have, if not not. It's not ME that makes ANYTHING happen, (there really is no ME) .
While your are humbling yourself or while you are just confirming the facts as they are (humbling is not about "being a good boy (scout), not about satisfying the feeling of "i want to be ethical". it's just about not lying to myself, accepting the facts without twisting them.
The FACTS should be my God , whatever Is Is, (similiar to Eheyh asher Eheyhe)
While I'm conceding to the Facts I should also concede to the fact that other people/entities are just as important and valuable as myself. Again it's not about "being good, holy, ehtical" it's about seeing the facts as they are. The fact is that objectively i'm not one iota more important than the next person, unfortunatly I can't change that, just as I can't change the fact that 2 + 2 = 4.
don't ask me "why do i care about the objective facts, maybe i should just disregard them? For it's the same liking asking me to disregard the fact that 2+2=4.
So during Tefilla it would make sense to also give some tzedakah so as to acquiese to the fact of others being just as important as me, so that there I lessen a bit this "me first" stupidity.
By davening in plurals I try to convey to myself this message too.
Truth is that I went off in a tangent here, it's much more complicated than what I'll be able to throw in here as an aside, so let me get back to my "quick point"
Teffila is great for ethical growth. Berachot is awsome, a 15 second reminder that Existence is everything. There isn't much else that we do on a daily basis, or am I missing something? oy vey.
I constantly see from your responses that our point of contention is really about the importance of ethics, we should maybe discuss it more in depth in the cluster of Why be ethical>
|
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-6/11/2005 18:59 |
|
| |
Veto, thanks for you candid answers.
I hope you don't mind if I pick your brain furthermore.
If the religion to you is only about morals, why do you need religion in the first place? Agree with me that religion, any religion, comes packaged in many things that are meaningless if not outright unethical. Can you not be ethical without belonging to a group? Can one not be moral without proclaiming allegiance to religion?
What exactly is moral? Who decided what is considered moral or ethical. Agree with me too that the definition constantly changes.
You might answer the first question with the next, and that is the need for religion. But even according to you ethics sometimes conflicts with the Torah. In this case why stick with it?
|
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-6/11/2005 18:42 |
|
| |
Cosmo,
1) What will you do when you come up against a contradiction between Torah and morality?
Of course morality, but practically, I have learned how to be mepalpel and show that this is what the Torah meant and I truly believe that this is what the Torah is all about, because if not it stops being Torat Hove yisboorach.
2) If the reason you'll recommend one to continue live in a Frum community despite his will, for the sake of improve himself, or preventing him from deteriorate, why do you add to it the impression that it has a Jewish value?
As I just said it cannot be that Being's Torah contradicts Being and this is the Jewish value.
hasid,
1) Do you think that there are other religions or sub-religions that are more ethical than Judaism?
There could very well be* and for some people I am sure that for them another religion would be better [in other words, their shoiresh neshoome is there  ].
2) Say that the answer is yes; would you care if your son adopts this religion? Might you even encourage him?
Sure I will, but I will tell him that he shouldn't tell you that I told him so and also I will tell him to be first sure that he is capable to weigh all the pros and cons. Once he is there and my parents are in oilom hooemes, I may join him as I already have mishpooche in that religion.
*****
* although yoogati veloi mootzoossi, see Bob above and see also,
http://hydepark.hevre.co.il/hydepark/topic.asp?topic_id=856357
what Bugi wrote in my name.
תוקן על ידי - ווטו1 - 06/11/2005 18:50:21
|
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-6/11/2005 04:28 |
|
| |
Linkzetzer,
Thank you! it seems that the learned there agreed with Ani's quote ''halevei oisi ozvi ve'es torosi shomoori''
Ani,
It is still up to me to decide if I want o be part of this better world called ''ethical'' or not. As a sociopath who cares little about others perhaps you shouldn't have enlightened me that there are no real consequences, if one is careful enough. Seriously, you cannot impose ethics on me if it is not something that we both TOGETHER agree is ethical.
Your observations on how moral the Torah was compared to the common practice in those days is impressive but it does not change the fact that most of the Torah is still either outright immoral or has little value in today's society.
In light of this, the Torah has to be updated every now and then. Maybe the Reconstructionist movement is the right one. And also, only if one chooses to join!
I will add a few more questions to Veto, if you don't mind Cosmo.
1) Do you think that there are other religions or sub-religions that are more ethical than Judaism?
2) Say that the answer is yes; would you care if your son adopts this religion? Might you even encourage him?
|
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-6/11/2005 01:50 |
|
| |
Dear Veto, first let me thank you for your open (personally.) and enlightening post.
But still, and I will disregard the sociological aspect for a moment, hope to discus it later,
There are two questions:
1) What will you do when you come up against a contradiction between Torah and morality?
2) If the reason you'll recommend one to continue live in a Frum community despite his will, for the sake of improve himself, or preventing him from deteriorate, why do you add to it the impression that it has a Jewish value?
תוקן על ידי - cosmo_jew - 06/11/2005 1:50:04
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-6/11/2005 01:11 |
|
| |
My post was written before I saw your post, Veto. I'll read and try (if I'll have what) to respond to it.
Dear Any ;
The impotence is, in my eyes, very simple:
Had you or Veto never said that you are trying to give a true interpretation to the Torah, I wouldn't say a word. But the truth is that you insist, zealously, on that you represent the genuine Judaism. That what I'm trying to discuss with you.
That is why it is so relevant to Hassids question:
Keeping Mitzvoth without western modern morality is- actually- just the opposite of improving humanity and ethical behaviour. And observing Torah selectively raises the question; what's the point?
Why, instead of avoiding cutting tissue on Shabbat,
Not going out to the forests and enjoy the beauty of nature and ovoid tearing off a rare flower?
In my eyes it can bring, the same- probably even a greater- result as avoiding picking a bone from a fish.
|
|
|
|
| נשלח ב-5/11/2005 19:28 |
|
| |
Agite Woch
Dear Cosmo,
I didn't miss the point. I am basically trying to get across the same message as Ooni. I guess that the misunderstanding is due to my lack of clarity, therefore I will try to make myself better understood [at least intellectually if not emotionally].
1. Let me make it clear that I am not trying to justify ideologically the way I chose. I have sufficient sociological reasons for remaining in the tchoolent. This means that even if I had come to the conclusion that I do not need Judaism for my betterment anymore [or in your words; that God does not ask me to be Jewish anymore], I would still stay [almost] the same as I am now. [The rewards I could have from prikas ol of the whole package, do not justify its price, neither of becoming a social outcast nor the pain that I will inflict to my parents, my in-laws and maybe even my Rebbi and others.] What I first said above was that this cluster seemed in its style, to be more one where two sides justify the ways they chose than one of cold intellectual debate. Therefore I tried to say that the issue was not personal and that it may very well be that for some of us here it wouldn't harm our moral betterment to do what I described and as I guessed, Ooni agrees. [I just forgot to add "shechal beshabbes koidesh". With "berootzoin kol hatzdoodim" I meant to include the husband of the mother and the audience, but not the bacon since the pigs wish the whole world would keep the Torah. There was a caricature about it somewhere in Atzor.]
2. Now getting back to the discussion; Let me make this clear for the umpteenth time, "God's will" does not exist in my lexicon in the sense of some divine imposing personality having made noises in order to scare and threaten me to keep shabbes. Whatever is right is "God's will", whether it was written from nowhere [meieilav], through Moishe, or lehavdil through Joshke Pondrik or Charlie Chaplin. Therefore I pointed out that for some who have nothing to loose [morally since it is berootzoin kol hatzdoodim], it may be right to do what I illustrated at neile [Ooni: about an hour after the minche reading]. I have a friend [let's call him Bob] who learned by my Rebbi in "Aish" and upon his recommendation went back to the states where he stopped keeping the mitsves strictly. He keeps his talles itfillin on his upper shelve to use them whenever he feels he needs it. I mentioned in R' Gedalie's cluster that my Rebbi felt guilty about it and asked RG if he should do anything about it. RG said that it is ok; in other words that it is right for Bob. [During RG's shiva my Rebbi finally met him again and they spent the shabbes at Ipche's house.] Just like it is ok for Bob, it may be so for many others especially if they have been already imbued previously with the true yiras shoomayim as Sachliel said here, that they carry the yoke of doing what's right 24/7. So maybe on the personal level you don't need it [like the Maskil who said I have no issirim].
3. The discussion is also not about the philosophically beautiful ideas that one can derive from the Torah. For that, one does not necessarily have to be frum and being frum might not always help. The idea of "Being" [Hoive] has been beautifully described by Art Green although he is not frum. [After trying for one year, he decided that he didn't need it.] Even if we appreciate the poetically emotional way the Torah talks [like "lo tevashel gdi…"] to be superior to other Toires so that we see "shoomayim batoire", we can still claim like Bugi does, that "ok we got the message, let's go further ahead".
4. The discussion here is about the necessity to maintain a social/educational system [or misgeret as Ooni wrote] that creates the "true yiras shoomayim" mentioned above. [Cosmo, please don't confuse yira for pachad, as I clarified already in Atzor we are talking about awareness of right and wrong not fear of punishment.] The above mentioned Bob who is a Dr. in eastern philosophies and knows directly their society as he has spent a lot of time with them, said that although their leaders [Rebbes] are not less moral than our Rabbeim [I mean the better ones not the crooks], the general population is not imbued with the teachings and carefulness like the simple frum baaleboos, whose life is centered around Talmud Toire veshmirooso.
This is the point: Not throwing away this educational system.
[Furthermore, even if you, Cosmo, would find a system that educates to 24/7 true yiras shoomayim in a better way, I doubt that you would be able to become part of it after belonging so strongly to the Jewish one.
5. Once we agree on that, we should discuss what should and could be done to improve this system so that it be totally compatible with "God's will" [of my interpretation]. Some [like Bugi] will say [and as R' Getzel quoted somewhere] that the goal is to have a thousand shtreimlach driving on shabbes or in other words to have shabbes become like a very frum chol hamoed and some [like myself] would say chas veshoolom etc… Here we are going back to the details of the Atzor discussions.
OOny 
תוקן על ידי - ווטו1 - 05/11/2005 19:43:49
|
|
|
|
|
|
