The limits and sources of authority

שו”ת › Category: faith › The limits and sources of authority

asked 3 years ago

I have a hard time with your teaching. I read the book No Man Has Control over the Spirit and I asked her what exactly motivates you to observe the laws like any religious person, if you have great doubts about significant things like private supervision, and you said that you do not focus on yourself in prayer.
I understood from your words that only something that can be proven by reason or that there is a clear tradition that it was actually said at Sinai, you said that this is one of the tenets of Maimonides’ faith, is binding on you.
I asked a really simple question, what exactly is required if there is no private connection between me and God? This authority that you are talking about? The consent of Israel? If so, then even private supervision is agreed upon. What do you think is a clear tradition from my perspective, even though it is not written in the Torah?
I’m asking a lot of questions here, but I’m bothered by a very simple thing: what exactly can convince me to observe the laws over time and even pass them on to the next generation, in the way you suggest?
I’m a 19-year-old guy, I left yeshiva because I got tired of the beliefs I encountered. I don’t really believe right now but I’m really scared, not of me and I’m wrong like me. These doubts will bother me for the rest of my life. Your trilogy really helps me think logically, but what bothers me is less your words and more what I see in your actual way of life, that you observe the laws even though you don’t believe or aren’t sure about the private providence.
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 3 years ago

You assume that observing the Halacha is intended to receive favor from God, who is involved in the world. I disagree with you on this. The obligation to observe the mitzvot is because God created us and the world and there is an obligation to obey Him (this is the meaning of the concept of ‘God’). Beyond that, if He commanded, then it is probably beneficial in some way, that is, it improves reality. Even if I don’t understand how and where. Therefore, there is no need to assume divine involvement to explain commitment to the mitzvot. Regarding private supervision, this is a claim of fact (a claim about reality). Authority and public acceptance can be about norms, that is, laws. There you can be told you must do X or not do Y because the public has accepted it. But in claims of fact, authority and public acceptance have no meaning. If I think it is not true, that is, that in my opinion there is no private supervision, then what do I care that the public has decided that there is? Then he is wrong.

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

ע"מ replied 3 years ago

Why does the concept of God mean an obligation of obedience?

מיכי Staff replied 3 years ago

There are two ways to approach such a question: 1. Explanation: He created us and the world, and therefore we must obey Him. See my article on gratitude. 2. The very definition of the concept of God is like this. There is no point in asking why, because that is the definition. Anyone who does not perceive God in this way simply perceives something else, not God. It is like not asking why the wall in front of me is white. It is white because it is white. That is what it is. We simply see it. Even with regard to God, those who perceive Him understand that there is an obligation to obey Him. This goes hand in hand with our very perception of Him.
You will see that in most cases the argument with secularists is about the question of whether He exists and whether He commanded (was there a Mount Sinai ceremony). But it is rare to argue that even if He exists and commanded, it is not binding. People understand that God is someone whose commands are binding.
The same is true of morality. The fact that murder is evil immediately means that it is also forbidden. The existence of the norm entails commitment to it. This is part of its definition.