Q&A: Should a Book Be Disqualified Because of the Author’s Actions?
Should a Book Be Disqualified Because of the Author’s Actions?
Question
Hello Rabbi,
Is a person’s work (books, songs) to be disqualified in light of his immoral behavior? In particular:
- A person who wrote valuable / Torah-oriented books and sexually abused boys and girls and committed adultery with a married woman. What should the attitude be toward his work? And should children be allowed to read it?
- I’m now moving from the practical level to the case of Chaim Walder’s books. Should one distinguish between if his books are in the category of “sacred,” in which case we would say, “If the rabbi resembles an angel of God, then seek Torah from his mouth…,” or if they are in the category of “secular,” and just as it is not customary to inspect the private conduct of every author, we should ignore his bad deeds and allow ourselves and our children to read them? Also, perhaps one should distinguish (and play innocent?) and say that here there is only “suspicion” and not clear knowledge? Some have suggested putting a sticker over the author’s name.
In short, I’d be happy to hear the Rabbi’s view on this issue.
I’m asking the Rabbi specifically because I got the impression that the Rabbi opposes ad hominem arguments, and it seems to me that this issue is very close to that.
Thank you very much!
Answer
Indeed, I oppose ad hominem. There is no connection between the person and the books, neither in sacred matters nor in secular ones. One can learn from the person and from the books regardless of what we think about the person himself.
The requirement to inspect the private conduct of a teacher was said only where you are learning things from him orally and there is concern that the Torah he is transmitting to you is not correct. But where you are learning from him ways of thinking and other things that can be examined, there is no problem at all learning from anyone. “He ate the fruit and threw away the peel.”
Discussion on Answer
Thank you very much, a few clarifications:
1. I wasn’t able to understand what the difference is between learning from the rabbi orally or in writing.
2. Is there no educational value, at least for children, in not having a book by such a person on the children’s bookshelf (after all, the children know from the media what happened)? (As for criticism of the content, I understand that the Rabbi is assuming the parents have reviewed the content of the books, since children may find it harder to apply critical judgment here.)
3. Does it matter that in Walder’s case the matter may not be certain?
Thank you very much!
Shmuel,
Then read it privately. Beyond that, there is no concern at all that you are supporting his actions, because no sane person supports actions like these, including Walder himself. At most, some claim that he did not do it. And if someone understands from this that such actions are legitimate (because he is a blind admirer of yours) — then his opinion is nullified (or rather, his lack of judgment).
Anonymous,
1. It’s not a difference between writing and speech. When the Torah was transmitted orally, the information passed from rabbi to student and you had to rely on him not to distort it. You had no way of knowing the information without him. But today, after the Oral Torah was written down, there is no such dependence of a student on a rabbi. The information is accessible to everyone, and the methods of inference are open to logical criticism.
2. See my answer to Shmuel.
3. Walder is no longer alive. The question is what to do with the books. They can be used, and therefore it makes no difference whether this is doubtful or certain.
Rabbi, assuming he did this and denied it,
do you not think there is an educational problem in giving such books to children?
Not in the aspect of the content, and perhaps in another X years when everyone has already forgotten there will be no problem reading there…
but I mean in terms of legitimacy or in the educational aspect as a general instruction.
I already said clearly that I see no problem with this at all.
Although it is true that on the substantive level one should not disqualify a book because of its author, still, since on the public level this is interpreted as support for the accused, is there nevertheless no room to refrain from it?