Q&A: A Question About Reward and Punishment
A Question About Reward and Punishment
Question
Hello Rabbi,
Personally, I do not believe in reward and punishment—not in this world either (because there is no evidence for it), and not in the world to come either (because that is speculation that seems far-fetched to me). It is important for me to know to what extent belief in this principle (in one of these two forms) is a foundation of the Jewish religion. Do the verses of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh)—which I admit cannot be denied—that speak about “a faithful God, with no injustice,” etc., leave room for maneuver and to argue that at least from the standpoint of Jewish belief, reward and punishment is a foundational principle? Basically, what is being asked of the religious person is to believe in this principle because God said so, and in order not to detract from the image of God, even though ontologically it is impossible to feel certainty about it (as opposed, for example, to the eternal existence of the soul). If that is indeed the case, there is a certain absurdity here: that a person is obligated to believe in a principle that does not accord with his experience, and therefore this is no longer belief but a kind of strange obligation imposed on him.
I hope this is phrased clearly.
Thank you,
Answer
Itamar, hello.
Your words contain an internal contradiction. You do not believe in X because it is speculative and does not arise from your experience. But at the same time you write that X does arise from the scriptures, and also that lack of belief in X detracts from the image of God, who is supposed to be perfect. Well then, those themselves are arguments that lead to belief in X. So what exactly is the dilemma?
You assume that beliefs must arise from your experience, and I do not really understand why you assume that. If there is some belief that is the result of logical reasoning, then in your view is it incorrect to believe it? What about the principle of causality? As Hume proved, it does not arise from our experience, yet it seems to me that we all believe in it.
You also assume that belief requires certainty, and that too is incorrect. As a human being, I cannot have certainty about anything (not even about that itself).
In my view there are no obligations to believe anything. Someone who does not believe will not start believing because there is an obligation. That is ridiculous. And someone who does believe does not need obligations. But if you are already talking about obligations to believe, then an obligation to believe something that arises from your experience is no less strange in my eyes. If it arises from experience, why do you need an obligation?