A Birthday for the Trilogy (Column 261)

With God’s help

At the end of last week, my trilogy finally came off the press, and these days it is beginning to be sold. The trilogy is a summary of many years of thought, searching, and examination, conversations with countless questioners of many different kinds, who led me to go back and reexamine many foundational assumptions that had seemed obvious to me and on which I was raised. All this brought me to the conclusion that it is very important to reformulate a systematic, contemporary, coherent, and "lean" picture of Jewish faith from the ground up, and from that the trilogy emerged.

In recent days I have been making crazy trips all over the country, loading and transporting books from our flooded home to distribution points around Israel. I stole a few minutes from that race in order to place it in context. So I apologize for writing that I did not edit and into which I did not put enough thought. This column is, in a sense, my Song at the Sea, a kind of celebration in honor of the birth of the trilogy (or perhaps the birth of tragedy J). I would like to describe the journey here in general terms and say a bit about its meaning. I will describe it as a four-stage process.

Stage One: Background

The main motivation for this entire journey was the feeling of suffocation and stagnation expressed by many of the people with whom I spoke, a feeling that led quite a few of them to abandon their religious commitment altogether, even if not always their faith itself. Following these feelings, many calls have also arisen from within the religious camp for change, updating, adaptation, greater flexibility, and the like, from various directions. Many of them are presented superficially, and most point to the need but not to the path for doing so in a way that accords with our Jewish law and our tradition.

These feelings and questions touch on different areas. Some concern morality. Others wonder about the relevance of, or the logic behind, strange theological principles that are far from our common sense; biblical criticism, Torah and science, the obligation to follow the sages of earlier generations and the halakhic decisors of our own day (the authority of the generation’s leading sage), and much more. The rabbinic establishment usually stands helpless in the face of these questions, and no systematic work is being done to examine the foundational assumptions of our tradition, both in thought and in Jewish law, and perhaps even faith itself and religious commitment.

Usually these calls are labeled "reformist." Indeed, sometimes these are rash protests and appeals rooted in people’s difficulty and distress, and in a lack of commitment and willingness to bear hardship. But the difficulty a person feels vis-à-vis the system may also point to a problem within it. Beyond that, quite a few of the protesters are committed people who feel deep difficulty, and it troubles them precisely because they do not want to abandon the system and do want to identify with it (not every religious feminist is lax, even in cases where her claims are not justified).

It is very easy to dismiss these calls offhand as reformism and weakness, because sometimes that really is what they are. The establishment presents these voices as products of urges and weaknesses, lack of faith, or the confusion of young people captive to the spirit of the times. Such an approach is very convenient for us, because it of course also exempts us from the need to do some soul-searching ourselves. After all, clearly the problem lies only with the questioners and not with us (because our system is divine and perfect, as we recall). At best, people relate to the difficulties and try to "find solutions" to the problems, or "find answers" to the questions—that is, to present things in a more attractive and pleasant way. But this is still propaganda and excuses, not a willingness to examine the system and its assumptions. Very few thinkers and decisors are willing to take these difficulties seriously and not see them merely as the counsel of the evil inclination and weakness, and on that basis to undertake a genuine internal housecleaning.

The basic assumption, of course, is that our Torah is divine and therefore perfect. Who are we to touch it?! And why should a human being even entertain the need to touch it?! The accepted "answers" to these questions whitewash the difficulties, present them as the counsel of the evil inclination and as weakness, and at best offer unconvincing excuses (or say that this is a "Scriptural decree" that we cannot understand). Sometimes, at rabbis’ conferences, we are told that these questions are really answers. The questions arise only so people can permit themselves forbidden sexual relations. At best, they explain to us that what matters most is to embrace these people and give them the warmth and love they so lack in our cold and alienated age. But answers? Who ever even mentioned them.

For years now I have been fed up with these disparaging remarks, which, as I have written more than once, really stem from lack of confidence and lack of ability to provide genuine responses. The easiest thing is to say that everything comes from urges, and thus there is no need at all to address the questions themselves. All we need to do is give the wondering and confused youth warmth and love, and his questions will disappear on their own. The rabbis and educators cannot cope with the questions, and so they flee from them into condescending paternalism. This inability does not stem from the fact that these are stupid people. Not at all. It is one of the failures of the believing system itself. A faith that forbids us to examine it, that is unwilling to touch its foundational assumptions, cannot really cope with difficulties. If you are forbidden to acknowledge the existence of difficulties, you will never succeed in addressing them. Even if from time to time I hear questions and discussions behind closed doors, the fear of bringing them outside because of their harmful influence keeps them there. But hiding these discussions and difficulties is a problem no less grave, and its costs are far higher. But I have already dealt with all this in the past (see, for example, columns 36, 222, and others).

A few years ago I reached the conclusion that it was no longer possible simply to go on as before. The time had come to put things courageously on the table and open them to discussion. Our Torah, as it stands, is really not perfect. It is absolutely not the pinnacle of morality, and we can all relax: we too are not exactly shining examples in the universe. Quite a few of the foundational assumptions on which we were raised do not really hold water, and it is no wonder that they arouse difficulties and even cause people to leave.

It is important for me to clarify that my goal is not to prevent people from leaving, nor to help people in their distress. Nor do I want to make Torah relevant in the accepted sense (more pleasant and less threatening). I am not driven here by considerations of desecration or sanctification of God’s name. My goal is to clarify the truth. These difficulties, from my perspective, are an indication that something is rotten in the kingdom of Denmark. As a rule, I am not willing to write a single untrue word, even if it would save people from perdition. I oppose with all my might "holy lies" (see column 21) and the mixing of policy considerations with halakhic ones. Jewish law is not a spade to dig with, and I do not see it as an instrument for saving society or the state or anything else. For me, the distresses and difficulties I have described up to this point are only a trigger that motivates me to clarify our assumptions and offer a truer picture. In the final analysis, that and only that is my goal.

Therefore it does not trouble me in the slightest if someone thinks I am a heretic, or if in someone’s eyes my words are heresy (my assumption is that in the eyes of the Holy One, blessed be He, a heretic is only someone who is wrong). In general, labels are irrelevant to a substantive discussion. The only important question is whether what I am saying is correct or not. If I am right, then I would rather be a wise heretic/reformist than a foolish believer. And if I am not right, the way to show me that is to raise arguments on the substance of the matter that justify that claim, not to label me a reformist or an unbeliever.

Stage Two: The Website

At the beginning of the process I started floating trial balloons on this website, where I wrote some of my radical ideas and tested the reactions. Because of them I also earned the honorable title of heretic (see column 74), and that actually clarified for me that I was probably on the right path. I have already mentioned that over the years I have met countless questioners who did not receive satisfactory answers. Some of them are brave, honest, and very intelligent, and I was not at all impressed that they were motivated by urges and lusts. They described real difficulties and received no response to them. They clearly felt that the warmth and love offered to them were merely a substitute for the inability of educators and rabbis to cope with these difficulties. It became clear to me that precisely these radical ideas, and the willingness to put things on the table and discuss them—without fearing labels like heretic or reformist—constitute a fittingly forceful response to these difficulties. I did not solve all of them (although many of them I did), but at least I shared with people the insights I had accumulated and acknowledged that these are real difficulties.

Over the years it became clear to me that although there are indeed some people who were influenced by my words and abandoned their religious commitment, at the same time there are quite a few people for whom these ideas are actually very helpful, and perhaps even save their religious commitment. Therefore, despite serious hesitations, and although many of my friends—whose judgment I value greatly—disagreed with me (both about the content itself and about the decision to put it openly on the table), I decided that the time had come to continue this important discussion in public, without condescending esoteric considerations (that take pity on the less sophisticated, lest they make bad decisions because of it), in the words of Justice Brandeis, because sunlight is the best disinfectant for every ill.

Stage Three: The Trilogy

Shortly after I began my work on the website, I also began writing the trilogy, whose purpose is to offer as complete a picture as possible of our faith and tradition, in a way that rids it of the excess baggage it has accumulated, distills the binding foundational principles, and clarifies the methodology for conducting the discussion in Jewish law and thought. The first book speaks about belief in God and religious commitment, and its direction is actually the conventional one: to show that faith accords with rational thought (in fact, not only accords with it, but is derived from it). That is relatively easy for the ordinary believer to read. The second book deals with Jewish thought, a field about which I long ago reached the conclusion that it is fictional. There is no such thing. There are correct thoughts and incorrect ones; the correct ones are binding on all human beings (Jew or Gentile), and they may also come from any human beings (Jew or Gentile), while those that are incorrect are not binding even if they came from Moses our Teacher himself. There I explain that the assumption that there is authority in matters of thought is conceptually and logically absurd, and I very much doubt how many theological principles are rooted in tradition from Sinai rather than in the thought of one person or another (my claim is that in Jewish law this is different, but this is not the place). The third book deals with Jewish law. That was my original goal, since I feel that Jewish law is the focus of Judaism (indeed, it is Judaism itself), and for precisely that reason it is so important to separate wheat from chaff and examine the foundational assumptions that have piled up without control in this area as well.

A significant part of my conclusions is based on conceptual analysis without sources. But conceptual analysis is very powerful reasoning, and our sages already taught us that when there is reasoning there is no need for sources: Why do I need a verse? It is simply logical! (why do I need a verse? It is logical!). Thus, for example, I reached the clear conclusion that there is no possibility at all of speaking about authority in factual matters and in matters of thought. This is not a question of sources at all, but of analyzing the concept of authority. It is a necessary logical conclusion, and therefore no source can contradict it, in the spirit of By God, even if Joshua son of Nun had said it, I would not have obeyed him. (By God, even if Joshua son of Nun had said it, I would not obey him). I think that here my scientific and philosophical background found expression, as did the upheavals I underwent on the personal plane as well (between different social groups and worldviews), and I am very glad that these tools too are in my toolbox.

The Work Process

Work on the trilogy lasted about four years. Enormous labor was invested in it. The writing was the easy part. The last year and a half, during which I kept being asked when it was finally coming out, were devoted to intensive editing under the direction of Dr. Hayuta Deutsch, a writer whose work I love. Hayuta’s contribution to the trilogy cannot be overstated, and this is the place to thank her for her stubbornness and strong-mindedness. She did not let me off the hook and forced me to reexamine the issues and formulate them again (and sometimes also to soften formulations a bit). The dialogical structure of the first two books was her idea. In the past few months the books went through proofreading and indexing. At every such stage we had to go over the books again and again, until we reached a product that satisfied us.

This was a very large project, undertaken without a well-known publishing house, for various reasons (some feared the "reformist" stigma). When you read the books, you will of course find mistakes; we are all human. But this is an unavoidable result of working on such a complex, multi-stage project of thought and writing, in which at every stage additional errors can creep in (as we discovered again and again).

The Support and Identification

This process would never have gotten off the ground or advanced without the enlistment of three of my friends on behalf of the cause. Israel Yagel, Avi (Alan) Itzkovitz, and Oren Margalit pushed me to launch this project, accompanied it with advice and action, and above all funded it in full. And do not take this lightly. We are talking about nearly a quarter of a million shekels (I am sharing this only so that you understand what is involved), which they probably will not get back (my writing and work, of course, were done free of charge. I will not see a penny from this, and of course I have no problem with that. That is not my goal here).

The editor’s mobilization as well, far beyond her professional role, stemmed from identification with the goal (even if not with all the contents of the books) and an understanding of its necessity. Beyond that, when we issued a call for volunteers to operate distribution stations, we received a surprisingly strong and impressive response. That response, together with various reactions I receive from readers and interlocutors who tell me that my words have proved very helpful to them and that they did not receive a satisfactory response in the conventional answers, greatly strengthened my sense of the project’s necessity and importance.

I am very grateful to everyone for this. Had I not been convinced of the necessity of this project, and had I not seen it as a pressing need to which we all ought to contribute, I would not have allowed myself to use people voluntarily and without compensation for my personal needs. I think we all share the feeling that the situation is not simple, and that the need for a systematic and deep examination of our tradition is very great, yet almost nothing is being done. That is probably why people stepped forward, and continue to step forward, for this effort.

Stage Four: The Road Ahead

The next stage of the journey is distributing the books. I am convinced that it is very important that they reach as wide an audience as possible and arouse discussion. The price of the books was set so that they would be within everyone’s reach (the three aforementioned friends were willing to subsidize the price for that purpose and not recover their investment). I call on anyone who identifies with these ideas and can contribute to the dissemination of the books to try to interest as many people as possible in buying/reading them. A link to purchase the books is located on the upper left side of the page.

I should say that I think these books will also be very useful to rabbis and accomplished Torah scholars. It is not information they lack, but rather a mode of analysis and perspective to which perhaps not everyone is accustomed (and probably not everyone will accept it). It also opens a discussion of foundational assumptions that accompany them and that they themselves may not always have reflected on. This is very important for the discussion that will develop around the books and these subjects, and I hope that perhaps in this way we will emerge from the narrow straits of labels and factional camps into the open space of substantive and open discussion, in the true spirit of Torah.

Ultimately, my goal is not to sell books but to stimulate a broad and open discussion about the foundational assumptions of our tradition. I do not want to "find answers" for questioners, but to take the questions as a lever for examining and changing ourselves. The phenomena of people leaving and the feelings of suffocation may perhaps also be resolved as a matter of course (but, as stated, that is not my goal). I assume I am not right about everything, but if there is no open discussion we will not be able to clarify these issues and we will remain stuck. The more people who address these matters and discuss them, the clearer the matter will become, and Through me and through you, the Most High will be glorified. (through me and through you the Most High will be praised).

The Fifth Stage

The fifth stage is what will happen as a result of all this. I am not presumptuous enough to predict it. I hope that at least a discussion will arise. Its conclusions cannot be determined in advance; they are the result of the views of all the participants in the discussion and of the developments that will follow it. Here I only wanted to contribute my part. My feeling is that we are all part of a process that began with Abraham our Patriarch and continues to this day, and we too must contribute our share to it. For all the critical edge in my words, they are written out of deep identification. I feel an intimate closeness to all the great Jewish sages of every generation, and even when I scold them, and shout at them or laugh at them, I do so as a family member. As far as I am concerned, we are all sitting around the same table, and family members should not be ashamed to speak and disagree. We are all in our home, and we are all responsible for its functioning and its soundness (see the museum example in the concluding chapter of the trilogy).

In the final analysis, I want to thank everyone who took part in the work. Some were mentioned above, and there are many others as well (especially all my interlocutors over the years, most of whom I do not know and with most of whom I have had no contact beyond the meetings and conversations we had). Of course, heartfelt thanks to my wife Dafna, my faithful partner in life, and in this project in particular. She runs it with a firm hand, and without her none of this would have happened.

I hope and believe that the appropriate blessing here is who is good and does good and not who has kept us alive:[1]

Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, who is good and does good.

[1] The theological difficulties that this blessing raises for you, and rightly so, I leave to you as a homework exercise (hint: see here).