moral
Shalom Rabbi, in your article on morality and halacha you wrote – Thirdly, morality depends on the norms that develop in different times and places, and therefore the Torah does not want to set strict limits on it. There was once no moral problem with captive rape, but today there is one. The Torah does not set strict limits on morality, not only to make it easier, but also to make it stricter. In our time, when the matter is clearly perceived as a moral problem, there is no reason for the Torah to permit it. In other times, the situation is different. Therefore, the Torah is content with the general statement “And you shall do what is right and good,” which commands us to act morally, without specifying further what is right and good that is required of us. Every person and every society is required to understand this for themselves from their conscience and the values they were raised on.
And I ask – what do you mean by morality depending on evolving norms, and that there was once no moral problem with raping a captive, since morality is objective? Just like today, I assume, captives were once harmed by rape. Why then should morality change according to the norms of the time?
Morality is a function of circumstances, facts, and values. It is not like a world where the victor rapes captives as a symbol of his victory, as it is in our world. The meaning of rape also differs between worlds.
I didn't understand the answer, could you please elaborate more? For example, in a village in Brazil where it is customary to steal from elders, would stealing be considered moral?
I have already answered and given examples.
I did not write anywhere that morality is determined by what is accepted. So what is the difference between Brazil and my words here? What I said is that morality is affected by the changing reality. And this is mainly in the following: a. In different circumstances, the same moral principles are applied differently. b. The moral principles themselves are a function of cultural development. It is not possible to demand from warriors in the ancient world the norms that are required of warriors in our time. And not only because their moral level and the level of the world were different, but because there is also a meaning to reciprocity. To act according to higher moral norms in a world that does not act this way is sometimes nonsense. For example, according to the Meiri, the attitude towards Gentiles is affected by their spiritual level, and therefore the Sage and Biblical attitude towards them is irrelevant where Gentiles act as moral people.
Hello Rabbi. Here is a discussion with Ben Shapiro and an atheist about morality. I wanted to know if the Rabbi agrees with Ben's attitude towards slavery during the biblical period.
If you want to ask something, write it down here.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
