On morality and law
Hello Rabbi,
In the third book of the trilogy, the rabbi claims that morality and halacha are two separate things and if I have a conflict between them, then I have the option to choose morality or halacha.
Although, I didn’t understand how one could even talk about morality. It seems to me that the definition of this concept is so vague that only in the best case can one say that it is a social convention. And this certainly does not obligate all of humanity.
What is the rabbi’s definition of the concept of “morality”?
I explained it there, and also in the third part of the fourth conversation in the first book (the fourth notebook here on the site).
It’s not a vague concept at all. There are arguments on the margins, but the majority is agreed upon and completely clear. One might think that in halacha or law there are no arguments. Usually there is more than in morality. This is about what constitutes a moral act. But your question concerns the validity of morality, not its applicability. To that I say that if this is just a social convention for you – then you simply do not recognize the validity of morality, and it is doubtful to what extent there is an obligation to uphold it.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
