Question

The Leibowitzian claim that Jewish law and morality are disconnected has no source whatsoever (I’d be happy to hear if you have one), and in my humble opinion it is nothing less than megalomania on his part to make such a claim against the entire Torah tradition of Israel, when not a single sage throughout the generations thought this way (at least no figure of accepted stature recognized by the whole Jewish people) — and then suddenly one person gets up and says it? Especially when the soul itself cries out against it, and against the mismatch between a person’s innate moral conscience and God’s Torah — as if God comes with unreasonable complaints against His creatures. I also didn’t understand the claim made by Rabbi Tzabar Eyal Karim when he gave a lesson about the beautiful captive woman. What didn’t he understand? Did he speak morally or not? Even according to your approach, he was speaking only in terms of Jewish law. And certainly, as the Hazon Ish writes regarding the Karaites, that today we do not kill them because it would lead to corruption and breach, unlike Maimonides’ words in his own time, when the reality was different and it was beneficial — so too Rabbi Tzabar answered. That also resolves the moral aspect: when the masses properly understand the laws of morality, then it applies, and when they do not, it does not; and this is given over to the sages to enact and decree, or the Holy One, blessed be He, arranges matters so that it cannot be enacted — just as stoning is not suitable today, and so the Holy One, blessed be He, arranged that there would be no Sanhedrin. And everything fits with morality without needing to speak about a disconnection. Also, human morality is limited in its perception, understanding, and consequences, and it is certainly possible that there is a higher, divine Torah morality that is not limited by any of these things. Therefore it can also happen that, at first glance before the explanations, it appears to contradict human morality, but after deep clarification it will not contradict it — and there are examples of this. I would be glad to hear your honor’s response to these points.