question

asked 7 years ago

on. the.

Shalom Rabbi Michi

I have recently been faced with a decision that may have a very strong impact on my future. I thought I would ask you for help and present a question that might help clarify some aspects of the decision problem I face.

Well:
To what extent did the academic path you took enrich your personality and to what extent did it contribute to the Torah-based parts of you? To what extent would you have been Michael Avraham if it had not been for that path?

When I say academic track, I mean your physics studies, from undergraduate to postdoc. I emphasize this because I am not interested in the potential contribution of studies in the faculties of humanities and social sciences (I assume that in your opinion is minimal or negative), but rather in the faculties of natural sciences and exact sciences, especially physics and mathematics.

Another emphasis on the question: I do not want to dwell on the general question of how much contact with knowledge outside the Beit Midrash might prove to be enriching and contributing (I believe it is very likely), or how much even huddling in the tent of Yafet contributes to huddling in the tent of Shem. Let’s assume that you were reading the same philosophy books and other books, meeting with the same bodies of knowledge, except for the knowledge you acquired in your academic studies, how close your personality would have been to what it is now and how developed your Torah parts would have been compared to their current state (you can also tell me that they would have been more developed because there is a price for going to school).

Another emphasis: I’m not talking about circumstantial influence, such as, your studies brought you together with inspiring people, with books you wouldn’t have encountered in the Beit Midrash, and other indirect influences. I mean the influences of bodies of knowledge, of the conceptual world, and of methodologies. To what extent did they contribute to your personality and your Torah study?

I would be very happy to receive your answer. As I wrote in my opening, it may be of great help to me and show me several aspects of the dilemma I face.

Thank you very much.

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

0 Answers

0 Vote Up Vote Down

מיכי Staff answered 7 years ago

Hello. Some introductions: First, it is difficult to clearly distinguish between the influence of the place and chance encounters and the influence of the material being studied itself. Secondly, it is difficult for me to assess what would have happened to me without my studies, like the question of what Maimonides would have said about a certain issue if he were alive today. If he were alive today, he would not be Maimonides. Although your question about this is different, because the question is well defined (although it is probably impossible to answer): What would have become of me without my studies. But there is still a similarity, because I have seen what would have happened if I had been influenced by what I am today (certainly the judgment, but probably also the facts). Third, I do not accept concerns (if there are any) about the impact of the material being studied. This can only be beneficial. Let’s say that because of these encounters you believe less in God or in the giving of the Torah, I still think it is right to study it, because this is the truth (for you), that you do believe less. If you hide the material from yourself, you will not be you, but you will live in the illusion that you believe even though you do not. This is in contrast to indirect effects, not of the material and ways of thinking themselves. Fourth, there is certainly value in studies that are not natural sciences and mathematics. However, it should be noted that they are not science in the conventional sense, and it is important to approach them very critically (more so than in relation to natural sciences. Mathematics is completely neutral). As for your question, I really don’t know. It depends on what I would do instead. Are you asking what would have happened if I had been a kollel berecht? But that wasn’t really an option for me. I tend to think that in almost every situation there wouldn’t have been a significant difference, except that I had fewer tools. Sorry for the laconic answer after all the introductions, but this is the correct answer in my opinion, and I also think it may still be a useful answer.

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.