A concise question about the Rabbi’s approach to suffering
Peace and blessings, Your Honor.
Following our conversation a few days ago about the suffering in the world, I wanted to exhaust your approach on the matter.
Your argument is that there must be some kind of deficiency, a flaw in the perfection of God, for which He created the world and within it us who have the power to choose. The Rabbi explained this in that phone call, based on Rabbi Kook’s words that the only deficiency of a perfect being is that he cannot be perfected any more. Therefore, He created a world in which we can be perfected.
This is a wonderful excuse for our very creation, but it still does not explain the problem of evil in the world. And to claim that it is impossible to create a better world within the framework of the current laws of physics is, in my opinion, puzzling.
A- Because history shows ups and downs that also occur within the framework of those rigid laws, and what would prevent an omnipotent and absolutely good Creator from placing the world on a good footing for the world?
B – If I understood correctly, the Rabbi’s explanation was that erasing only suffering from the world in its current form is like creating a round triangle, since the rigid laws of nature also dictate suffering. My question is, why can’t the element of suffering alone be isolated from the entirety of the laws (at least wherever it is unjust, such as harming babies and innocent people). The only answer is that God specifically wanted this system of laws, which would also dictate suffering (as a goal, or as collateral damage), and the question is why He specifically wanted this system of laws, which on its face appears to be unjust and capricious, at least in the eyes of His creatures.
And again, congratulations on your wonderful site.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well, the question was also linked there, (under the tag - predatory animals) and my main question is why it is impossible to put the world in a better place under the current leadership. (We have seen better times throughout history, with much less suffering for humanity).
Well, are you continuing here? Where is the original discussion? Give the link there. There's no point in opening a new thread that continues a previous discussion.
Haim, don't you see that the unconnected discussion is causing the rabbi suffering?! You are like chaining him with iron chains and not linking him to the original discussion about suffering and making life easier for the rabbi, Haim.
You assume that because this system of laws *seems* unjust and capricious to you, it *actually* turns out to be unjust and capricious. But the transition from the beginning to the end will be logically valid only if you make another assumption, that we have no reason to think it is true, and that there are actually good reasons to think it is false. The required assumption:
If humans are incapable of thinking of good reasons that justify God's permission for evil to exist, it is likely that there are no such reasons.
This is a false assumption. If God exists, then as high as heaven is above earth, his thoughts are so high that it is not at all surprising that he would have reasons that we are incapable of even thinking of.
Take, for example, a baby girl whose father takes her to receive painful treatment. Suppose she cannot know the reasons for her father allowing others to cause her suffering, but if she concludes that “therefore, it is unlikely that there are good reasons that justify it” that would be a bad inference.
Indeed, that is what I assume. If a child who did nothing suffers, it is injustice. The examples you gave are not of the type of matter. The doctor and the father cannot save the child without causing him suffering, but God Almighty can do everything.
The answer was simply that your assumption was wrong, and it explained why it was wrong. If you want to refute it, you should explain why you think it should be surprising or improbable that God is aware of reasons that we are not capable of thinking about in principle.
God cannot do things that are against His nature. For example, to order the murder of innocent people for pleasure and to offer sacrifices to Molech, to cause there to be less than infinite prime numbers, or to create free-willed humans who are incapable of choosing evil.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
