A Birthday for the Trilogy (Column 261)
With God’s help
At the end of last week, my trilogy finally came off the press, and these days it is beginning to be sold. The trilogy is a summary of many years of thought, searching, and examination, conversations with countless questioners of many different kinds, who led me to go back and reexamine many foundational assumptions that had seemed obvious to me and on which I was raised. All this brought me to the conclusion that it is very important to reformulate a systematic, contemporary, coherent, and "lean" picture of Jewish faith from the ground up, and from that the trilogy emerged.
In recent days I have been making crazy trips all over the country, loading and transporting books from our flooded home to distribution points around Israel. I stole a few minutes from that race in order to place it in context. So I apologize for writing that I did not edit and into which I did not put enough thought. This column is, in a sense, my Song at the Sea, a kind of celebration in honor of the birth of the trilogy (or perhaps the birth of tragedy J). I would like to describe the journey here in general terms and say a bit about its meaning. I will describe it as a four-stage process.
Stage One: Background
The main motivation for this entire journey was the feeling of suffocation and stagnation expressed by many of the people with whom I spoke, a feeling that led quite a few of them to abandon their religious commitment altogether, even if not always their faith itself. Following these feelings, many calls have also arisen from within the religious camp for change, updating, adaptation, greater flexibility, and the like, from various directions. Many of them are presented superficially, and most point to the need but not to the path for doing so in a way that accords with our Jewish law and our tradition.
These feelings and questions touch on different areas. Some concern morality. Others wonder about the relevance of, or the logic behind, strange theological principles that are far from our common sense; biblical criticism, Torah and science, the obligation to follow the sages of earlier generations and the halakhic decisors of our own day (the authority of the generation’s leading sage), and much more. The rabbinic establishment usually stands helpless in the face of these questions, and no systematic work is being done to examine the foundational assumptions of our tradition, both in thought and in Jewish law, and perhaps even faith itself and religious commitment.
Usually these calls are labeled "reformist." Indeed, sometimes these are rash protests and appeals rooted in people’s difficulty and distress, and in a lack of commitment and willingness to bear hardship. But the difficulty a person feels vis-à-vis the system may also point to a problem within it. Beyond that, quite a few of the protesters are committed people who feel deep difficulty, and it troubles them precisely because they do not want to abandon the system and do want to identify with it (not every religious feminist is lax, even in cases where her claims are not justified).
It is very easy to dismiss these calls offhand as reformism and weakness, because sometimes that really is what they are. The establishment presents these voices as products of urges and weaknesses, lack of faith, or the confusion of young people captive to the spirit of the times. Such an approach is very convenient for us, because it of course also exempts us from the need to do some soul-searching ourselves. After all, clearly the problem lies only with the questioners and not with us (because our system is divine and perfect, as we recall). At best, people relate to the difficulties and try to "find solutions" to the problems, or "find answers" to the questions—that is, to present things in a more attractive and pleasant way. But this is still propaganda and excuses, not a willingness to examine the system and its assumptions. Very few thinkers and decisors are willing to take these difficulties seriously and not see them merely as the counsel of the evil inclination and weakness, and on that basis to undertake a genuine internal housecleaning.
The basic assumption, of course, is that our Torah is divine and therefore perfect. Who are we to touch it?! And why should a human being even entertain the need to touch it?! The accepted "answers" to these questions whitewash the difficulties, present them as the counsel of the evil inclination and as weakness, and at best offer unconvincing excuses (or say that this is a "Scriptural decree" that we cannot understand). Sometimes, at rabbis’ conferences, we are told that these questions are really answers. The questions arise only so people can permit themselves forbidden sexual relations. At best, they explain to us that what matters most is to embrace these people and give them the warmth and love they so lack in our cold and alienated age. But answers? Who ever even mentioned them.
For years now I have been fed up with these disparaging remarks, which, as I have written more than once, really stem from lack of confidence and lack of ability to provide genuine responses. The easiest thing is to say that everything comes from urges, and thus there is no need at all to address the questions themselves. All we need to do is give the wondering and confused youth warmth and love, and his questions will disappear on their own. The rabbis and educators cannot cope with the questions, and so they flee from them into condescending paternalism. This inability does not stem from the fact that these are stupid people. Not at all. It is one of the failures of the believing system itself. A faith that forbids us to examine it, that is unwilling to touch its foundational assumptions, cannot really cope with difficulties. If you are forbidden to acknowledge the existence of difficulties, you will never succeed in addressing them. Even if from time to time I hear questions and discussions behind closed doors, the fear of bringing them outside because of their harmful influence keeps them there. But hiding these discussions and difficulties is a problem no less grave, and its costs are far higher. But I have already dealt with all this in the past (see, for example, columns 36, 222, and others).
A few years ago I reached the conclusion that it was no longer possible simply to go on as before. The time had come to put things courageously on the table and open them to discussion. Our Torah, as it stands, is really not perfect. It is absolutely not the pinnacle of morality, and we can all relax: we too are not exactly shining examples in the universe. Quite a few of the foundational assumptions on which we were raised do not really hold water, and it is no wonder that they arouse difficulties and even cause people to leave.
It is important for me to clarify that my goal is not to prevent people from leaving, nor to help people in their distress. Nor do I want to make Torah relevant in the accepted sense (more pleasant and less threatening). I am not driven here by considerations of desecration or sanctification of God’s name. My goal is to clarify the truth. These difficulties, from my perspective, are an indication that something is rotten in the kingdom of Denmark. As a rule, I am not willing to write a single untrue word, even if it would save people from perdition. I oppose with all my might "holy lies" (see column 21) and the mixing of policy considerations with halakhic ones. Jewish law is not a spade to dig with, and I do not see it as an instrument for saving society or the state or anything else. For me, the distresses and difficulties I have described up to this point are only a trigger that motivates me to clarify our assumptions and offer a truer picture. In the final analysis, that and only that is my goal.
Therefore it does not trouble me in the slightest if someone thinks I am a heretic, or if in someone’s eyes my words are heresy (my assumption is that in the eyes of the Holy One, blessed be He, a heretic is only someone who is wrong). In general, labels are irrelevant to a substantive discussion. The only important question is whether what I am saying is correct or not. If I am right, then I would rather be a wise heretic/reformist than a foolish believer. And if I am not right, the way to show me that is to raise arguments on the substance of the matter that justify that claim, not to label me a reformist or an unbeliever.
Stage Two: The Website
At the beginning of the process I started floating trial balloons on this website, where I wrote some of my radical ideas and tested the reactions. Because of them I also earned the honorable title of heretic (see column 74), and that actually clarified for me that I was probably on the right path. I have already mentioned that over the years I have met countless questioners who did not receive satisfactory answers. Some of them are brave, honest, and very intelligent, and I was not at all impressed that they were motivated by urges and lusts. They described real difficulties and received no response to them. They clearly felt that the warmth and love offered to them were merely a substitute for the inability of educators and rabbis to cope with these difficulties. It became clear to me that precisely these radical ideas, and the willingness to put things on the table and discuss them—without fearing labels like heretic or reformist—constitute a fittingly forceful response to these difficulties. I did not solve all of them (although many of them I did), but at least I shared with people the insights I had accumulated and acknowledged that these are real difficulties.
Over the years it became clear to me that although there are indeed some people who were influenced by my words and abandoned their religious commitment, at the same time there are quite a few people for whom these ideas are actually very helpful, and perhaps even save their religious commitment. Therefore, despite serious hesitations, and although many of my friends—whose judgment I value greatly—disagreed with me (both about the content itself and about the decision to put it openly on the table), I decided that the time had come to continue this important discussion in public, without condescending esoteric considerations (that take pity on the less sophisticated, lest they make bad decisions because of it), in the words of Justice Brandeis, because sunlight is the best disinfectant for every ill.
Stage Three: The Trilogy
Shortly after I began my work on the website, I also began writing the trilogy, whose purpose is to offer as complete a picture as possible of our faith and tradition, in a way that rids it of the excess baggage it has accumulated, distills the binding foundational principles, and clarifies the methodology for conducting the discussion in Jewish law and thought. The first book speaks about belief in God and religious commitment, and its direction is actually the conventional one: to show that faith accords with rational thought (in fact, not only accords with it, but is derived from it). That is relatively easy for the ordinary believer to read. The second book deals with Jewish thought, a field about which I long ago reached the conclusion that it is fictional. There is no such thing. There are correct thoughts and incorrect ones; the correct ones are binding on all human beings (Jew or Gentile), and they may also come from any human beings (Jew or Gentile), while those that are incorrect are not binding even if they came from Moses our Teacher himself. There I explain that the assumption that there is authority in matters of thought is conceptually and logically absurd, and I very much doubt how many theological principles are rooted in tradition from Sinai rather than in the thought of one person or another (my claim is that in Jewish law this is different, but this is not the place). The third book deals with Jewish law. That was my original goal, since I feel that Jewish law is the focus of Judaism (indeed, it is Judaism itself), and for precisely that reason it is so important to separate wheat from chaff and examine the foundational assumptions that have piled up without control in this area as well.
A significant part of my conclusions is based on conceptual analysis without sources. But conceptual analysis is very powerful reasoning, and our sages already taught us that when there is reasoning there is no need for sources: Why do I need a verse? It is simply logical! (why do I need a verse? It is logical!). Thus, for example, I reached the clear conclusion that there is no possibility at all of speaking about authority in factual matters and in matters of thought. This is not a question of sources at all, but of analyzing the concept of authority. It is a necessary logical conclusion, and therefore no source can contradict it, in the spirit of By God, even if Joshua son of Nun had said it, I would not have obeyed him. (By God, even if Joshua son of Nun had said it, I would not obey him). I think that here my scientific and philosophical background found expression, as did the upheavals I underwent on the personal plane as well (between different social groups and worldviews), and I am very glad that these tools too are in my toolbox.
The Work Process
Work on the trilogy lasted about four years. Enormous labor was invested in it. The writing was the easy part. The last year and a half, during which I kept being asked when it was finally coming out, were devoted to intensive editing under the direction of Dr. Hayuta Deutsch, a writer whose work I love. Hayuta’s contribution to the trilogy cannot be overstated, and this is the place to thank her for her stubbornness and strong-mindedness. She did not let me off the hook and forced me to reexamine the issues and formulate them again (and sometimes also to soften formulations a bit). The dialogical structure of the first two books was her idea. In the past few months the books went through proofreading and indexing. At every such stage we had to go over the books again and again, until we reached a product that satisfied us.
This was a very large project, undertaken without a well-known publishing house, for various reasons (some feared the "reformist" stigma). When you read the books, you will of course find mistakes; we are all human. But this is an unavoidable result of working on such a complex, multi-stage project of thought and writing, in which at every stage additional errors can creep in (as we discovered again and again).
The Support and Identification
This process would never have gotten off the ground or advanced without the enlistment of three of my friends on behalf of the cause. Israel Yagel, Avi (Alan) Itzkovitz, and Oren Margalit pushed me to launch this project, accompanied it with advice and action, and above all funded it in full. And do not take this lightly. We are talking about nearly a quarter of a million shekels (I am sharing this only so that you understand what is involved), which they probably will not get back (my writing and work, of course, were done free of charge. I will not see a penny from this, and of course I have no problem with that. That is not my goal here).
The editor’s mobilization as well, far beyond her professional role, stemmed from identification with the goal (even if not with all the contents of the books) and an understanding of its necessity. Beyond that, when we issued a call for volunteers to operate distribution stations, we received a surprisingly strong and impressive response. That response, together with various reactions I receive from readers and interlocutors who tell me that my words have proved very helpful to them and that they did not receive a satisfactory response in the conventional answers, greatly strengthened my sense of the project’s necessity and importance.
I am very grateful to everyone for this. Had I not been convinced of the necessity of this project, and had I not seen it as a pressing need to which we all ought to contribute, I would not have allowed myself to use people voluntarily and without compensation for my personal needs. I think we all share the feeling that the situation is not simple, and that the need for a systematic and deep examination of our tradition is very great, yet almost nothing is being done. That is probably why people stepped forward, and continue to step forward, for this effort.
Stage Four: The Road Ahead
The next stage of the journey is distributing the books. I am convinced that it is very important that they reach as wide an audience as possible and arouse discussion. The price of the books was set so that they would be within everyone’s reach (the three aforementioned friends were willing to subsidize the price for that purpose and not recover their investment). I call on anyone who identifies with these ideas and can contribute to the dissemination of the books to try to interest as many people as possible in buying/reading them. A link to purchase the books is located on the upper left side of the page.
I should say that I think these books will also be very useful to rabbis and accomplished Torah scholars. It is not information they lack, but rather a mode of analysis and perspective to which perhaps not everyone is accustomed (and probably not everyone will accept it). It also opens a discussion of foundational assumptions that accompany them and that they themselves may not always have reflected on. This is very important for the discussion that will develop around the books and these subjects, and I hope that perhaps in this way we will emerge from the narrow straits of labels and factional camps into the open space of substantive and open discussion, in the true spirit of Torah.
Ultimately, my goal is not to sell books but to stimulate a broad and open discussion about the foundational assumptions of our tradition. I do not want to "find answers" for questioners, but to take the questions as a lever for examining and changing ourselves. The phenomena of people leaving and the feelings of suffocation may perhaps also be resolved as a matter of course (but, as stated, that is not my goal). I assume I am not right about everything, but if there is no open discussion we will not be able to clarify these issues and we will remain stuck. The more people who address these matters and discuss them, the clearer the matter will become, and Through me and through you, the Most High will be glorified. (through me and through you the Most High will be praised).
The Fifth Stage
The fifth stage is what will happen as a result of all this. I am not presumptuous enough to predict it. I hope that at least a discussion will arise. Its conclusions cannot be determined in advance; they are the result of the views of all the participants in the discussion and of the developments that will follow it. Here I only wanted to contribute my part. My feeling is that we are all part of a process that began with Abraham our Patriarch and continues to this day, and we too must contribute our share to it. For all the critical edge in my words, they are written out of deep identification. I feel an intimate closeness to all the great Jewish sages of every generation, and even when I scold them, and shout at them or laugh at them, I do so as a family member. As far as I am concerned, we are all sitting around the same table, and family members should not be ashamed to speak and disagree. We are all in our home, and we are all responsible for its functioning and its soundness (see the museum example in the concluding chapter of the trilogy).
In the final analysis, I want to thank everyone who took part in the work. Some were mentioned above, and there are many others as well (especially all my interlocutors over the years, most of whom I do not know and with most of whom I have had no contact beyond the meetings and conversations we had). Of course, heartfelt thanks to my wife Dafna, my faithful partner in life, and in this project in particular. She runs it with a firm hand, and without her none of this would have happened.
I hope and believe that the appropriate blessing here is who is good and does good and not who has kept us alive:[1]
Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, who is good and does good.
[1] The theological difficulties that this blessing raises for you, and rightly so, I leave to you as a homework exercise (hint: see here).
Discussion
For flesh and blood, or for those who fear Him? 🙂
Mazal tov
Is there a proof for the Oral Torah in the trilogy?
I happily bought the trilogy. More power to you in Torah.
Many thanks
Best of luck!! Of course, Arama is also ready to help with sales in whatever way possible
You mean the oral explanations that accompanied the written trilogy?
Thanks
No. I mean whether your trilogy provides a foundation for the Oral Torah.
The question is what you mean by “a foundation.” If you mean that all of it was given at Sinai, then certainly not. If you mean that it is binding, I do address that. My claim is that authenticity is not a condition for obligation (you don’t have to assume that the Oral Torah was given at Sinai in order to be bound by it).
As someone who has been following you for many years, your projects are definitely inspiring in terms of their scale and their systematic character, and of course the content itself.
Thank you very much
Is this the post closest to poetry and religious feeling of all the posts so far…?
To fulfill what was said: “The work of My hands is drowning in the sea, and you are singing?!”
I bought it — and am eagerly waiting to read it
Gentlemen, esteemed readers of the site, pay attention to the pictures on the books’ covers. Three pictures connected to one another, and given by one shepherd. A nice story lies behind them, and they were not chosen by chance.
And to you, Rabbi Michi, many thanks for the enterprise and for the compliment. Here’s to the books still on the way.
Yessssssss
Much success
I’m betting that the 18th of Kislev, 5780, will be engraved throughout the Jewish world as “Liberation Day” 2020
Well then, maybe explain what you mean? I didn’t grasp the depth of it
I’d be glad to know whether the books present new ideas that don’t appear here on the site, or whether this is more or less a well-organized summary of what already appears here anyway.
Thank you very, very, very much, and also many thanks to Dafna. I spoke with her on the phone, and if I may say so, I’m crazy about her
I still haven’t read the books,
but a priori I think that although you recited “Who is good and does good,”
we (the readers) should recite two blessings: 1. True Judge. 2. Who is good and does good.
I thought to say that:
– Regarding "No Man Has Power Over the Wind," the cover symbolizes the “breaking” of the consensuses in Jewish thought.
The shards are what Rabbi Michael broke in his book, and the tablets at the summit symbolize the “thin” theology.
– Regarding "Walking Among the Standing Ones," the cover symbolizes the layers that were added to halakhah over the course of history.
The tablets hidden in back symbolize the Torah as it was given to Moses, and the objects before them are the additions of the Sages (the derashot, halakhic rulings, enactments, etc.).
As for "The First Existent," I couldn’t find a satisfying explanation. Maybe the connection is to the end of the book about religious commitment.
Then the tablets symbolize the religious command that a philosophical God commanded us.
I’d be happy to hear whether I was close 🙂
And of course to hear an explanation about the first volume.
In any case, the paintings are really impressive and beautiful in my eyes, and they fit the spirit of the books.
Will there be distribution points in yeshivot?
First of all, congratulations on this enormous project in scope and on bringing it to fruition!
As for the content, the purchase site didn’t mention the number of pages in each volume, and from past experience I fear that you did not adopt Maimonides’ method whereby what can be written in one chapter is not written in two, so I’m waiting for someone to pick up the gauntlet and summarize it for the benefit of the masses out in the fields.
P.S.
I join the commenter JK above that one should also recite “Blessed is the True Judge” over the concept called “Judaism,” which in the book presumably becomes something no Jew ever knew it was…
If someone wants to preserve his anonymity, can he write the check with initials?
With blessings, So-and-so, Anonymous Yeshiva, Holy Community of Holiness
Thank you very much, Rabbi Michi! May many thinkers and rabbis follow your example, and thus knowledge will increase in the land. The next stage: we want the opening of a research kollel for high-level Torah thought, from which publications, journals, books, and classes will emerge. If you open such a kollel, or perhaps a coillege or academ-iah, we will all be delighted! And we’re already waiting for the quadrilogy! More power to you, and may the Lord bless you in all the work of your hands that you do.
You wrote in the past that when the trilogy was published you would hold a launch event for all the site’s readers.
When will that happen?
Tomorrow (19 Kislev) at Binyanei HaUma. From 18:00-20:00 Rabbi Yehoshua Shapira and Rabbi Jacobson will speak. And from 20:15, Naor Carmi, Hanan Ben Ari, and Aharon Razel will delight us with their voices. Come with joy!
L’chaim, Jews, l’chaim! Drink two logs!
With blessings, the awakeners
Though it should be noted that in R. M. A.’s view there will be only “Torah study in the person” and not “in the object,” as explained in the trilogy, here and there 🙂
Is it possible to see the table of contents of the books? Especially the second one in the trilogy?
And can the second book also be read without an introduction from the first?
Since I was late with this comment, very few crowns remain with which people have not already adorned you. I won’t be clever or try to add more.
I can only hope that all the contentious Torah scholars who serve in holiness and shepherd the community will look to you and do likewise. May it be His will that they not sweep their hesitations, their doubts, and their questions under the rug. And when they have in hand and in heart a reasoning or solution that, in their humble opinion, resolves the doubt, may they have no fear of flesh and blood, and may they say their piece with courage and an upright back. May it be His will that we not be able to ask: “How many Michis are there in the marketplace?” Their splendor will not be diminished in the least if they wrestle publicly. On the contrary.
Even though I have not yet read even a single page, and although in all likelihood I will not see eye to eye with you on every matter and issue, like those who preceded me, I too think the publication of the books is a most important event.
I join the request of one of my predecessors to publish the list of chapters in each book (if the titles indicate the content of the chapters).
Thank you for having granted us this privilege.
Thanks
🙂
Without a doubt. The planes to my grave are already warming up their engines…
It’s hard for me to answer. There are clearly new ideas there, but I don’t know how much and to what extent. The full picture is described there.
Me too
If anything, then “two blessings” (not “two” in the masculine).
When and where will it be possible to order shipping to the U.S.?
There are some in several yeshivot. If you want to open one in your yeshiva and there is purchasing potential there, please contact us by email or phone. See the trilogy store website (top left here on the page).
Maybe no one knew it was such, but it was always such.
Thank you, also for the help regarding biblical criticism.
When someone picks up the gauntlet and organizes it.
I wrote that each of them can be read separately, but the full picture emerges from all three together.
We’re trying to add the tables of contents to the store site. We’ll see.
Many thanks. As stated, we are now trying to upload the tables of contents to the store site.
We are trying to open a channel on Amazon. We’ll publish it if and when it happens. Amazon prints abroad on demand.
Mazal tov.. A courageous deed, more power to you
Thanks
🙂 And by the way, a nice Jew named M(a)ndi Bronfman uploaded a picture of the three volumes on his desk under the caption “The house was filled with light”! And from the picture one can estimate their average weight (which of course depends on the density of the letters per sq. cm., etc.):
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10157729631602305
More power to the rabbi for the books
It looks like an impressive enterprise
With the help of Ger Lover the volumes are expected to reach as far as Mexico
I’ll wait patiently for them to arrive
Same here, and waiting eagerly! (And for the rabbi’s other books too.)
The day we hoped for.
More power to you!
Thank you for the blog and for the books
I bought them
It דווקא seems to me that the problem is specifically faith in the Creator of the world and not any other problem; all the problems you mentioned are connected to faith. The issue is that most people do not think this is a problem of faith, since they do not understand what faith is.
If people understood the meaning of faith in depth, they would have no questions about anything.
Apparently today there is no proper education toward faith in any sector, and therefore the matter of faith is not understood by most people. People assume that “to believe” means to say “I believe there is a Creator of the world,” but they do not understand that one must also believe that there is a Creator of the world from the heart.
Of course this is not the place to elaborate on what faith is.
Regarding the comment: “Tomorrow! (to Chaim),” line two:
…will delight us with their voices: Naor Carmi, Avraham Fried, Hanan Ben-Ari, and Yonatan Razel…
Mazal tov on the birth of the triplets. Even though the rabbi knows that I disagree with him on many things connected to Jewish thought, and even believe that it is not right to slim down the Torah but rather to solve the problems in a genuine way (in many cases saying that something was not given at Sinai is also not a solution, or in my opinion too easy a solution), the rabbi’s enterprise does advance the discovery of truth (and I am even sure that it is of great value in itself even if it contains mistakes. In the vast majority of cases, the rabbi’s mistakes are good mistakes), and I am glad that this day has come
By the way, if help is needed with sales in the Holon area, I’d be happy to help
With God’s help, 19 Kislev 5780
To Ailon – greetings,
That’s how it is when triplets are born. They’re usually underweight. They put them in an incubator until they put on some flesh 🙂
With blessings, Shatz
(: 🙂
Michi, congratulations!!!
As you know, I think you do not always interpret your (synthetic) view correctly, correct though it is in itself.
Even so, your philosophical enterprise is inspiring, and most importantly: it advances rational thought in our world.
If there is a heaven for those who contribute to general culture—your chances of joining it are excellent.
Fortunate are you
?
Thank you
With God’s help, Tuesday after Parashat Vayishlach 5780
It seems that the “thin” approach, which attributes success to the person himself—“I have much” *), and the “fat” approach, which attributes success to God, who intervenes and helps one who acts—“the children with whom God has graciously favored [your servant]” “for God has favored me, and because I have everything”—are twins, as old as the existence of the people of Israel, and “there is nothing new under the sun”…
With blessings, Shatz
*) And now he has a rabbi too 🙂
It is doubtful whether the trilogy will lead anyone to finding the truth. (Although in my process it did indeed help):
Since most people are not capable of, or do not want to, deal with unpleasant or complex things, and usually slide either into apologetics or into verbal laundering (where the purpose of verbal laundering is often to stand behind a certain position that sounds, plainly, stupid, but to grant it a supposedly deeper meaning—only that in many cases it isn’t clear whether the spin is aimed at the questioning public or at the respondent himself)
So for example on the issue of the relation between Israel and the nations, when a certain student asks why it seems that the Torah discriminates against gentiles, they’ll give him a few answers:
That there is no discrimination here but different roles; the people of Israel are the elite commando unit and the gentiles are the kitchen platoon; that in Hasidism and Kabbalah it is explained that every creature has its role; and so on and so forth; think of yourself as a company commander leading a battalion; or that these things apply only to the wicked and not to the “righteous among the nations” (a very theoretical term, since halakhically we are dealing only with some theoretical gentile who believes in the Torah of Israel—how many of those are there already?). They won’t tell the perplexed questioner the simple truth: that the overwhelming majority of Jewish sages since the acceptance of the Zohar saw the gentile as an inferior creature worth as much as a cat, and even less than that (according to the Ari, who is considered more or less the greatest of the kabbalists, the gentile is less than an animal, and in fact apparently in an ideal reality has no right to exist, and this is the root of the preservation of all the above halakhot). Because then what? The respondent will find himself embarrassed (since it is doubtful whether he himself believes this, and since he himself finds it hard to accept it, he will wrap it in the verbal laundry of an elite commando unit).
If the youth asks about divine providence nowadays, reward and punishment, and so on, they’ll tell him that things that seem unclear in faith are matters beyond reason and understanding, and that this is the test of a Jew in this world, etc. (and again, it is doubtful whether there exists a person who will answer the questioner that this is the faith and this is how it is accepted, but it’s not as though every current Jewish belief is taken directly from the Pentateuch or from the Gemara, because what educator wants to be associated with labels of heretic?) So too regarding the blessing “who has not made me a woman” (instead of admitting that perhaps the Sages indeed saw woman as inferior and that this is how the halakhah was preserved); reservations regarding the metaphysical sanctity of the state (Yoel Elhanan Mahari’s nonsense in Azamrekha BeLe’umim does a great service in disproving the claim that the Kookist conception is something that came down from Mount Sinai); it is precisely in the realm of scientific mistakes that today most admit the simple fact that Hazal were not scientists.
Most people will not want to deal with the observance of 613 commandments when there is no ideology of elite commando unit, tikkun olam, sanctity of the nation, or “Jew, son of a king, God loves you” (delete as appropriate). Most people will not want to keep 613 commandments when there is no promise of heaven, and what even more people will not want to do is confront the doubt whether each of the current principles of faith of Orthodox Judaism (the sanctity of the transmitters of tradition, Israel’s chosenness, the thirteen principles, and so on) is true. Most people love sharp, direct answers and a Torah that gives them the feeling that they discovered the world.
The goal of your trilogy is of course not to please people but to say precisely these things… but it seems to me that most people are not honest enough to admit it (what balebos from the Religious Zionist or Haredi public has the courage to admit that the great kabbalists denied the right of existence of other nations? that Hazal saw woman as an inferior creature? that the thirteen principles did not come down from Sinai?). There are fundamentalists who have no problem with this very conception; others, like the apologetics that Sh. Tz. Levinger tends to publish here every time one of these points is shown to him, simply love living in denial.
To sum up: I agree in principle with your views, but unfortunately it doesn’t seem to me that these things will really be opened up and put on the table.
At most they’ll give old-new answers
To clarify, I have no problem whatsoever with pure fundamentalists
(those who say: this is our view, plain and simple)
but when people do in fact adhere to a certain principle (and launder it in words, as in the example of the elite commando unit or “a woman is the queen of the home”), then in my opinion there is dishonesty here, deception, and even more than that, treating the entire general public as retarded children to whom you can hand out candies and sweets so they’ll be satisfied)
With God’s help, 20 Kislev 5780
To Rational(ly speaking) (still only relatively) – greetings,
The comparison of the people of Israel to an “elite commando unit” is indeed apt: the pioneering force that goes before humanity in order to draw it toward faith in the Torah and its values. The people of Israel are called by God “My firstborn son,” and the destiny of a firstborn son is to be responsible for his younger brothers. Likewise, the destiny of the people of Israel is to be “a kingdom of priests” in relation to the other nations, and after all the role of the priest is to teach the rest of the people the way of God.
The people of Israel call upon all the nations to observe the seven Noahide commandments, and thereby to be among the “righteous of the nations.” But more than that, every individual from the nations of the world can also enter the “elite commando unit” by accepting the 613 commandments—and who is greater than King David, who came from Tamar the Canaanite and Ruth the Moabite, and from whom the Messiah King will emerge, who will add to his pedigree also Naamah the Ammonite (the wife of King Solomon). It is no accident that in the prayer “the righteous and the pious” are mentioned together with “righteous converts” as part of the spiritual leadership of the people of Israel. Perhaps it is precisely because of the foreign element in the Messiah’s ancestry that he is able to influence all humanity,
Rabbi Yehuda Halevi too, who based the principle of Israel’s special quality, defines the people of Israel in relation to the nations of the world as “the heart among the limbs,” and after all the role of the heart is to channel life-force to the other limbs. And indeed, over the thousands of years of its existence, the people of Israel have succeeded in instilling many of the Torah’s values into humanity as a whole: the belief in divine unity, the Sabbath as a day of rest and spiritual elevation, and the pursuit of peace and kindness. The value of education for all was instituted among the people of Israel some 1,800 years before humanity as a whole began to think about it.
The problem was that the gentile disciples of the people of Israel refused to recognize it as the source of their faith and values and persecuted us. The wondrous revival of the people of Israel after all the suffering and disasters has begun to bring some of the nations to a different outlook. If in the past the Church claimed that the people of Israel were destined for eternal suffering because they did not recognize “their messiah,” then in our generations other voices are beginning to be heard as well. Beginning with King George V and Balfour, who said they were proud of their ability to repay the Jewish people, who bestowed upon humanity its faith and values. Continuing with the current Pope, who dared to declare that the people of Israel are “our elder brother,”
Today a worldwide movement has arisen in which many people are attaching themselves to Judaism as Noahides. For now it is still only a “slow drip,” but the people of Israel are accustomed to long-term historical processes. And with God’s help, may we merit that you too will become rational in the full sense of the word, and not only “relatively rational” 🙂
With blessings, Shatz
Our call to the world toward faith in the Torah and its values does not begin with an outward address. Its foundation is the personal example we are supposed to give in lives of values filled with holiness.
And the beginning is in the home. When a man and a woman understand that the yod in him and the heh in her together create the name of God; when each sees the virtue of the other spouse, he “honors her more than himself” and she treats him as “king and minister,” and both are focused on shared values, on building a home of Torah and kindness, a home in which both parents invest in educating the children to Torah and good character—then the Divine Presence dwells between them, and their home becomes a lighthouse radiating light to its near and far surroundings.
It is no accident that we celebrate the great national festivals not with noisy victory parades *). The Exodus from Egypt is celebrated with a “family sacrifice” in which the parents are focused on telling the story of the miracle to their children. Likewise, the victory over the Greeks is celebrated with “a lamp for a man and his household,” to teach us that the cultural victory over the mighty empire begins in the home. For it was one family, a father and his five sons, who ignited the spark that “burned up the flax” of the Greek empire.
To establish a Jewish home, both partners are needed: the father who “teaches his son Torah” and the mother who “coaxes him with words” and instills in her children love of Torah and good character. And for that reason Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi says (in the Mekhilta on the verse “Honor your father and your mother”) that the honor and awe due father and mother were equated.
With blessings, Shatz
*) In contrast to the joyful Greek parades, “afikoman” in the foreign tongue, in which the merry celebrants go from house to house—on Passover “one does not conclude with afikoman,” but rather remains until the end within the group, where the joy reaches its climax: “an olive’s bulk of the Passover offering and the Hallel—and the roof bursts.”
Same here?
I hope you’ll find somewhere to elaborate on all this, because on the face of it all this seems to me like empty slogans.
Many thanks
To you too 🙂
It is not upon you to finish the work, but neither are you free to desist from it. We do what we can, and I hope that little by little progress will be achieved.
To Rational,
I completely agree. That is one of the reasons for writing the trilogy (to avoid those hollow slogans). Except that I have a problem with pure fundamentalism. Not a problem of honesty in discourse, but of its correctness.
Hello Rabbi Abraham.
First of all, congratulations on the publication of your book; may it be God’s will that you see fruit from your labor!
The battle for truth is important, but there is another battle no less important, and that is the emotional world.
And in the language of our Sages: “Rabbi Yitzḥak said: A man’s evil inclination overpowers him every day, as it is said: ‘Only evil all the day.’
Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: A man’s evil inclination overpowers him every day and seeks to kill him, as it is said: ‘The wicked watches the righteous and seeks to put him to death.’ And were it not for the Holy One, blessed be He, helping him, he could not prevail against it, as it is said: ‘The Lord will not leave him in his hand.’” (Sukkah 52a-b)
What drives a person—the heart or emotion?
I am sure that even very rational people (however much so) are also driven by emotional motives.
Intellect (that is, truth) is important, but it is not the only thing that is important.
Sometimes the emotional motive bends common sense (“a spirit of folly entered him,” in the language of our Sages).
What does truth contribute to a person if he does nothing with it?
And perhaps this is the author’s intention when he says, “The phenomena of leaving and feelings of suffocation too may perhaps be solved as a matter of course (but, as stated, that is not my purpose).” By the way, that is the key sentence for me in the article.
With blessings.
I didn’t understand the comment. I will only say that truth is not supposed to contribute anything whatsoever to anyone. Its value lies in the fact that it is true.
To Sh. Tz. Levinger
Rabbi Yehuda Halevi was not a kabbalist.
His approach toward gentiles is indeed moderate and even positive; contrary to what is usually thought, he was not the one who started the whole business of the Jewish soul and the kelipot and so on.
The Noahide movement belongs to Rabbi Cherki of Machon Meir, who is a student of Merkaz HaRav, and among Rabbi Kook’s students there are indeed some who adhere to the “elite commando unit” approach.
But what can be done—factually, since the acceptance of the Zohar, this is simply not the prevalent approach (see, for example, the end of the book Chesed LeAvraham by one of the greatest kabbalists of the later generations, where it is made clear according to his method that apparently the vast majority of the gentiles are in the category of kelipot whose existence will gradually be nullified in the future, and this is “repairing the world”):
“There is no need at all for the idolatrous nations, and therefore the nation of Esau, which is wholly evil, will be utterly abolished, as it says, ‘there shall not remain any of the house…’; and likewise all evil among the nations will be abolished, and only the good parts will remain among them, which is the influence of the kelipah from its first three [sefirot], from which come the pious of the nations who have a share in the world to come. Of these it is said, ‘For then I will turn to the peoples a pure language’; and when the other evil kelipot are abolished, the nations will be abolished with them. However, the kelipot that are a shell protecting the fruit will remain, so that benefit and not harm may come from them. And behold now there are two aspects to the kelipot: the first, the aspect of kelipot that is not evil but good, from which comes the shell protecting the fruit—and this is the secret of the evil inclination that improves itself and enters inwardly, and therefore it will not be abolished. And the second, the evil kelipah, which is filthy, causing the righteous to stumble, rebuking and prosecuting. And since the king’s son has no need of rebuke, what need is there for the whip. This is the meaning.”
And that is exactly my problem with people like you, Sh. Tz.: you quote sources selectively that suit your opinion and act as though other sources never existed. One can argue that this is perhaps a minority opinion; one can argue that perhaps this is not the accepted view (although that is not true, and since the appearance of the Zohar this has indeed been the accepted view among those versed in the literature of esoterica, which, like it or not, is Orthodox Jewish canon just like the rest of the books). Now you can argue that you do not accept this approach, that there are other opinions, and so on—but don’t open for me a dance of quotations whose purpose is to prove as if this approach does not exist… (or to give this approach a sugary interpretation and wrench things from their plain meaning, like starting to say that kelipah and impurity are concepts beyond our understanding, and that what this terminology really means is an ice-cream cone).
There are approaches in Judaism that claim women are inferior to men, period; there are approaches that claim that created existence itself is entirely evil and that every idea or event in the world is directed by “impure” and supernal forces of some heavenly prince; and there are approaches claiming that the gentiles, including the “righteous among the nations,” are a historical accident. You may accept or reject their truth, but do not deny that they exist, because that does not contribute to the discourse (sugary approaches like yours ultimately earn contempt in public discourse, both on the right and on the left—and rightly so).
Michi—I read your introduction to Emet VeLo Yatziv. The issue is that one simply can’t really speak to fundamentalists in that language for a simple reason: they hold that “the great ones of Israel” possess divine inspiration, and to argue over the factual truth of their writings is like a Catholic trying to argue with a student of Joseph Smith over the truth of his prophecy (as I said in another context, about many kabbalists it was claimed that they were reincarnations of all sorts of biblical figures from the past, and the moment someone like that pulls such a card out of his sleeve, you have no means left to enter into a logical discussion with him).
I’m more optimistic than you. In my view, it is possible to argue and even to succeed. Beyond that, there is a broad public with an unformed position that is open to hearing. It’s a process that doesn’t end in a day or in a year, but each person contributes his small step.
“I will only say that truth is not supposed to contribute anything whatsoever to anyone”—it seems to me that I did not understand your meaning.
Is there a difference between the truth of the claim that “Moses is true and his Torah is true” and, for example, that a tree is a plant?
To me it is clear that there is. The first claim obligates, whereas the second does not.
With God’s help, 20 Kislev 5780
To the relatively rational one – greetings,
There cannot be a dispute between the Zohar and what is explicit in the words of the prophets—that in the future the world will be repaired, all the nations will stream to the mountain of the Lord so that the Messiah King may teach them the ways of the Lord and make peace among all the nations, etc. And these are precisely the words of the author of Chesed LeAvraham that you cited: that the evil kelipah that incites and causes the righteous to stumble will disappear, while the good kelipah, which is in the category of “a shell protecting the fruit,” will continue to exist even in the messianic age, and its rectification will come, as explained in the words of the prophets, through the guidance of the Messiah King.
The bringing near of Noahides was also engaged in by Rabbi Eliyahu Benamozegh, Rabbi A. I. Kook, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Yehuda Ashkenazi, and Rabbi Yoel Schwartz, of blessed memory, whose approaches are founded both on the revealed literature and the esoteric literature. The esoteric is not another Torah that contradicts the revealed, but rather a dimension of depth. And there is no point in dealing with esoteric sources before we have exhausted what is said in the revealed literature: Scripture, the words of Hazal, and the books of thought by the Rishonim and Acharonim. These are what I try to present according to the knowledge I possess. What I do not know—I do not discuss.
With blessings, Shatz
How does truth win when we live in a world of falsehood? I don’t know, but in the end truth wins!!!!!!!!
Paragraph 1, line 2
…and all the nations will stream…
Paragraph 2, line 1
…the Lubavitcher Rebbe…
Sh. Tz. Levinger, hello—I just now saw your message above.
“There cannot be a contradiction”—indeed, but as you know far better than I, many commentators on Scripture turn to many different modes and interpretations according to how they understand the Torah; or to put it in your style: each one gives an interpretation that “reveals new facets.”
According to some of them (and I correct myself and say some, because in Kabbalah too, like in every other stream of Judaism, there are differing opinions), indeed many gentiles will stream and serve shoulder to shoulder and so on, only they interpret this differently. (And apropos the Lubavitcher Rebbe whom you mentioned—he was indeed pleasant to people and loved every creature, but in his talks about the future to come for the nations of the world he makes clear that heaven forbid the intention is that the nations should merit knowledge of the Holy One, blessed be He; rather, they are to be servants to the Jews. He even brings in Likkutei Sichot the opinion of one of the Hasidic rebbes that a stage will come in which the gentiles will begin to walk on all fours like beasts, because this is part of their rectification—to return to their true nature—and in the end they will die. I did not take this quotation from a heresy website, since such sites are not precise, but from forums and articles by Chabad Hasidim themselves.) As for Eliyahu Benamozegh, he had a different approach, far from being mainstream in Kabbalah and in Orthodoxy in general, regarding the nations and the religions of the world (he argued that Christianity and Islam too have a divine aspect, and that Judaism is in fact universal and should connect all cultures—and it is no accident that almost no one has heard of him).
You are trying to do here a slippery trick that perhaps helps you make peace with yourself—that if there are such statements, then they do not mean what they plainly say, and that it cannot be that those great men meant that, because it contradicts the words of their predecessors. The simple truth is that it is very possible that such views can exist even among innocent, God-fearing Jews who love the Holy One, blessed be He. The statements of those kabbalists who deny the image of God and free choice to the gentile, and his ability to reach holiness and redemption, do indeed contradict the plain sense of Hazal and Scripture—and yet they do not see this as a contradiction but as the revelation of new facets.
Sh. Tz., I do not like apologetics. When the Lubavitcher Rebbe writes explicitly that the rectification of the gentiles is to walk on all fours; when the author of Chesed LeAvraham states explicitly that the rectification of the nations is to be nullified (well, maybe except for a few isolated gentile kelipot); or when Rabbi Tzadok HaKohen writes explicitly that a gentile has no free choice and is in the category of a wicked person and will not change his deeds (and again, is destined to be erased from the world)—there is no reason to interpret their words otherwise simply because they are unpleasant to the ear, especially since for some reason their straightforward and faithful disciples do not see any need to interpret this otherwise. “The jealousy of scribes increases wisdom” (I am also pretty sure that all those Torah scholars and God-fearing men, if they had wanted to convey some different message and not their words in their plain sense, would have written that).
In every discussion about any sacred book and approach in Judaism (or about any thinker in the world), one must not engage in sweet and pleasant apologetics—because such things contribute nothing to the discourse at all and do not hold water. If one follows the justified approach that if certain things run counter to common sense (and also to the sense of justice in this case), then they are probably not correct even if the one who wrote them is the greatest righteous man in the world and we do not reach his ankles—it is better to say that. And if you adhere to an approach that things that completely contradict common sense are true (determinism that goes hand in hand with denying the existence of other peoples, seeing the whole world as composed of a struggle among heavenly princes, reincarnations of biblical figures inside righteous men in our day)—then say that too! I have no problem with such an approach (I scorn it and reject it, and of course also think it is bizarre, full of superstitions, and even things bordering on idolatry, and at times—as in the case of the attitude toward gentiles—also wicked and foolish), but I will respect you as a worthy opponent because you are not hiding behind masks but stating your plain opinion—and thus helping me and the public to form a position.
In an interview between Yaron Yadan and Mr. Yehuda Meshi-Zahav (if I am not mistaken, a journalist for the Edah HaChareidis by profession?), Yaron Yadan (who became secular but remained Haredi in his soul, just in the opposite direction) attacked Meshi-Zahav over the fact that in Haredi education they say that “the whole world was created to serve the Jew.” Meshi-Zahav did not resort to the apologetics of an elite commando unit and the like, but said that this is indeed the accepted Haredi approach and everyone can shout until tomorrow (perhaps his words too are deep and secret and meaningful? and perhaps the words of the holy divine rebbe, expert in hidden wisdom, may not be interpreted literally either?
)—I appreciated him for the courage to say such things in the media without any fear. (And again, not because I think every opinion is legitimate, but because by laundering words we will never be able really to examine the opponent’s opinion and the public will never be able to form a stance.) It was also once brought on Tomer Persico’s blog (a scholar of religions) regarding Gemara study for women—that Rabbi David Stav rejected, rightly, the bizarre claim that women were originally forbidden to study Gemara because they have a “higher soul,” and also his article “This Is Sinai!” (which explains more or less the Lithuanian approach to halakhah)—I enjoyed reading it.
Firm and clear positions, stated without apology, even if they shock me for a moment, help me form a position; vague talk does not. (And many times I have wondered whether perhaps the Haredi-fundamentalist position, which sees all Jewish writings as divine inspiration and prophecy, is actually the correct one, and perhaps I am the bizarre one because I find it hard to throw away reason.)
In short, Sh. Tz., I truly do not understand what is so difficult about admitting that the writings of Hasidism, Kabbalah, the Rishonim and Acharonim, and so on are not a single block that can be harmonized and said to be all aiming at the same thing, but that there are disagreements. I understand even less why, even if you admire a certain great figure and in your opinion he is wrong about something, it is so hard for you to say that too, and instead you must resort to bizarre interpretations. (By the way, not only faithful Jews like you on the right do this, but also liberals from the Orthodox left and secular academic scholars do it when they try, for example, to explain to us that Maimonides really upheld the principles of Thomas Jefferson’s Enlightenment.) Both this and that do not hold water.
By the way, why do I write “idolatry”? Not because one should really claim that any thought I dislike borders on idolatry, but because for some reason, when a certain contemporary Jewish thinker claims that it is doubtful that all thirteen principles came down from Sinai, he gets tagged as “a heretic who has no share in the world to come,” on the grounds that Maimonides’ principles of faith may not be disputed.
Whereas thinkers who are in all our bookshelves and who often espouse determinism (Tzidkat HaTzaddik), books explaining that the purpose of Torah and commandments is war against demons and heavenly creatures and princes, and other libraries that sometimes go so far as to claim that in the Land of Israel the God of Israel rules, while in other lands different princes and gods rule and there is a perpetual war between them—views which according to the thirteen principles and the medieval sages would have been perceived as heresy and as associationism in worship (certainly according to the thirteen principles)—are considered legitimate.
Not that they are really idolatry, since none of these approaches proposed worshiping another god; but on the other hand they are much closer to heresy in the mystical sense than the claim that perhaps there is no providence nowadays.
With God’s help, 21 Kislev 5780
To the relatively rational one – greetings,
In order to address a statement by one of the great ones of Israel and understand it correctly and precisely, one must attend carefully to its wording and understand its context—both the specific context in the place where the words were said, and the broader context of the speaker’s overall philosophical method. All the more so when dealing with a text that belongs to the world of the esoteric, which is full of statements by way of parable and riddle. As Maimonides explained in his introduction to the chapter Helek regarding baffling aggadot, they are to be understood allegorically.
The only text you have so far cited and brought in its wording is the statement of the author of Chesed LeAlafim, and there the distinction is clear. There is an evil kelipah that pursues, incites, and harasses the righteous—and it is destined to be abolished; and there is a kelipah that is “a shell protecting the fruit,” capable of clarification, and it will continue to exist in the future as well. This is very much the message that also emerges from the revealed literature and from common sense: the persecutors who pursue and incite will come to their punishment, while ordinary people who were misled and drawn after the wicked will come to their rectification by accepting the Noahide commandments under the guidance of the people of Israel.
As I mentioned, engaging in bringing Noahides close to observing their commandments is not only the domain of Rabbi Eliyahu Benamozegh. Rabbi Yoel Schwartz from the Lithuanian camp engaged in it, Rabbi Yehuda Ashkenazi (and may his student Rabbi Uri Sherki live and be well) from the school of Rabbi A. I. Kook, and the Lubavitcher Rebbe from the Hasidic circles, who worked greatly to spread awareness of observing the Noahide commandments, to the point that the U.S. established his birthday as “Education Day.” It does not seem to me that he was running an “all-fours walking campaign” for them 🙂
Rectification by becoming an animal is mentioned in the Bible in connection with Nebuchadnezzar, who was punished this way for his arrogance. Perhaps the rebbe quoted in Likkutei Sichot thought that the counterparts of Nebuchadnezzar in our generation, such as Tsar Nicholas, Stalin, and Hitler and the like, would also merit that sort of honor. I would appreciate it if you would indicate the source of these words so that they can be understood.
Likewise, what you brought in the name of Rabbi Tzadok—that a gentile has no free choice and is compelled to do evil—requires explanation, for if so then apparently all the nations would be exempt from all responsibility and punishment for the evil deeds they committed. Perhaps he meant the ordinary gentile who is merely dragged after leaders who incited him, in the category of “a gentile taken captive,” and here too only an exact source and quotation can make possible a proper understanding of the words.
In short: the picture has meanwhile not changed from what emerges from the words of the author of Chesed LeAvraham, namely, that there is a distinction between the wicked persecutors and inciters and the ordinary gentile.
With blessings, Shatz
Regarding the illumination to the nations in the future, the author of the Tanya writes (Likkutei Amarim, end of chapter 36):
‘…Only afterward sin caused them and the world to become coarse until the time of the end of the right hand, when the physicality of the body and the world will be refined, and they will be able to receive the revelation of the light of the Lord that will shine to Israel through the Torah, which is called strength.
And from the superiority of the illumination to Israel, the darkness of the nations too will be lit up, as it is written, “And nations shall walk by your light,” etc.; and it is written, “House of Jacob, come, let us walk in the light of the Lord”; and it is written, “And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see together,” etc.; and it is written, “To enter into the clefts of the rocks and into the crevices of the crags, from before the fear of the Lord and the splendor of His majesty,” etc.; and as we say: “Appear in the majesty of Your proud strength over all the inhabitants of Your world…”
Eitan, what I wrote is that the value of truth lies in its being true, not in its contributing something. “Moses is true and his Torah is true” is a normative truth, not a factual one in the physical sense. And still, it is true not because it contributes something to us, but because that is the truth. That is how one ought to act.
Sh. Tz., I’m already tired of pilpul upon pilpul over every letter and every word.
The author of Chesed LeAvraham did not write that only the harmful and inciting ones will be punished, but that the end of the redemptive process is the nullification of all nations and kelipot. Apparently the intention is that some part, or a few isolated gentiles, will continue to exist, and even that only in a lower capacity. (Which yields that the relation to the concrete gentile is like to tefillin or a mezuzah at best, meant to serve the Jew, and that he has no independent existence or value. And again, I have no problem with someone making this claim—like Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, whose traits, Torah knowledge, and merits are certainly greater than mine. I am not saying such people should be silenced, nor am I in favor of a communist dictatorship of thought; but it is better that whoever thinks this should say so openly and not hide behind parables of elite commando units.)
Again, to say that Chabad’s statements are directed only at uniquely wicked individuals is a distortion and tendentious interpretation of their words. (It is about as ridiculous as claiming that whenever the Hasidim speak of love of Israel they mean only select individuals like Maimonides and Yosef Karo, as opposed to the ordinary ignoramus or the wicked secular Jew; or making a liberal interpretation that whenever the severity of sexual prohibitions is discussed, the meaning is only mass orgies as opposed to a simple one-night stand by an innocent balebos, which contains no evil, only a desire to enjoy a bit. With pleasant and comfortable readings of every text we will not get far, as Professor Nadav Shnerb already remarked to you many years ago in the polemic about Hasidic thought.) In Hasidism it is indeed made clear more than once that the souls of the nations are all impure, wicked, driven by the evil inclination, and that there is nothing good in them. In Hasidism too there exists the notion of select individuals who are “righteous among the nations” (and again we should note the simple fact that apart from Naaman and a few historical/talmudic figures and a tiny movement in the United States, there are none), who receive some sort of legitimacy. (And even then, the attitude of Hasidic writings toward them is by no means positive; at most this is an attitude akin to that given to a particularly advanced ape or to a black slave with very high intellectual capacities, not to an equal creature or one with an independent destiny.) It is indeed true that the Lubavitcher Rebbe managed to hold both a mystical view according to which most of humanity is somewhere between the level of “slave” or “instrument,” like tefillin, and the level of human—and at the same time to express warmth and friendliness to everyone. Rabbi Chaim Vital too wrote a rather chilling kabbalistic teaching about punishment in which he wonders why the prohibition “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed” applies to gentiles, since they are not in the category of man at all (this from a student of the Ari, whose views toward gentiles are known). There he answers that one who kills a gentile is punished because potentially a righteous convert could have emerged from him, and really without that, monetary payment for the murdered person would have sufficed. And on the other hand, one should love all creatures, including gentiles. Psychology is not my concern here; apparently those people did not see any psychological dissonance in holding both these positions. (And yes, Rabbi Tzadok HaKohen also wrote that it is fitting to have compassion on gentiles and to feel pain at their suffering.) We can direct those psychological questions to them at the resurrection or in the world to come.
And yes, your difficulty still stands: Rabbi Tzadok HaKohen’s deterministic doctrine is indeed logically difficult, and yet that does not mean it is not his doctrine. (He does make a distinction between those pious gentiles who will merit to receive some of the commandments in the messianic age—there will be their peak and their only moment in time before they perish—and the wicked who will not merit even that and perhaps will also receive the sufferings of Gehenna. And if we are engaging in psychological humor, then perhaps according to his doctrine it would be preferable to be a wicked gentile and at least merit some eternal belonging.)
For some reason, Sh. Tz., lots of students of Chabad and Kabbalah quote and understand these things literally. I wonder whether, after I show you an article by a Torah scholar claiming that this is indeed what the texts say, you will be able to admit that this approach exists (and not offer some sophisticated interpretation of an article written by a living person).
In your opinion, is there any significance to the fact that there is not a single Torah figure who agrees with your views?
For example, you claim there is no authority to command belief or factual claims. Throughout the generations, all the great thinkers of every kind thought there was such authority (unless you know otherwise), whether with regard to principles of faith or other matters. So everyone was wrong and only you are right?
After all, you don’t claim they were idiots, so according to your view they all fell into such a simple error?
In addition, do you really have the slightest thought that an ordinary person who sees before him all the great figures of the Jewish people throughout history—including Tannaim, Amoraim, Rishonim and Acharonim, thinkers, judges, and decisors, etc.—who hold, for example, that there is an obligation to believe in the resurrection of the dead (as brought in chapter Helek in Sanhedrin), and then a person, however wise or brilliant he may be, comes and claims against all of them that they have no authority to command me to believe in the resurrection of the dead (while they certainly hold there is such authority)—
do you really think that that person will adopt your opinion rather than theirs?
It has significance, but not too much. Of course, if many disagree with me, that makes me think again about my positions. But after I have thought and reached my conclusions—those are my conclusions.
I don’t think anyone on earth ever thought there is authority on factual matters, since that is not conceptually defined. It is more likely that they thought those facts are true and therefore bind everyone. But even if everyone thought otherwise—that is my clear conclusion. Already in the Gemara we find: “By God, if Joshua son of Nun had said it, I would not obey him.”
The last question interests me about as much as the peel of a garlic. Everyone makes his own soul-searching and forms his own positions. That is a factual question, and I assume there will be those who do and those who don’t. They are not supposed to accept things from me because I said them, but to weigh the arguments.
Who knows better than you that even in the historical canonization project of the sacred books, “the question was whether you are a heretic, not whether you are right.”
Well then, rest assured that there too, the criteria for acceptance that Hazal set at the entrance to the Jewish bookshelf were not “what is correct,” but “what corresponds to our outlook.” Support for the platform was the admission ticket, whether for leniency or stringency. And when the censors (“those who wanted to hide away”) came to a book that it was really a shame to give up—the solution was apologetics.
“Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: However, may that man be remembered for good, and Hananiah ben Hezekiah was his name; for were it not for him, the Book of Ezekiel would have been hidden away, because its words contradicted the words of the Torah. What did he do? They brought up to him three hundred jugs of oil, and he sat in the upper chamber and expounded it.” (Shabbat 13b)
“Rav Yehuda son of Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat said in the name of Rav: The Sages sought to hide away the Book of Ecclesiastes because its words contradict one another. And why did they not hide it away? Because its beginning is words of Torah and its end is words of Torah… They also sought to hide away the Book of Proverbs, because its words contradict one another. And why did they not hide it away? They said: For Ecclesiastes—did we not examine it and find a reason? Here too, let us examine it.” (Shabbat 30b)
And the trilogy? Imagine if you had to choose whether to be interpreted and emasculated in seventy ways and by thirty-two hermeneutical rules, or to remain outside the canon of sacred books but at least be studied according to its plain meaning.
In line 3
…since the very dawn of the existence of the people of Israel. …
Indeed, unfortunately there was such an aspect to the discussions, but I think your description is exaggerated. Even regarding the Book of Ezekiel, it contradicted the words of the Torah—that is, it was incorrect. Beyond that, this is only the initial assumption (to hide it away). In the end they did not hide it away. And the expositions they made for it can be interpreted in various ways. One of them is that they explained why it was correct and did not contradict the principles of faith. That is interpretation, and it is legitimate.
But you are absolutely right that a discussion of this kind is not foreign to our tradition. Still, I do not accept it.
With God’s help, 3 Tevet 5780
And in Ezekiel’s prophecy there is a confrontation with the conceptions that had become widespread among the people—that the exile and destruction show that “the Lord has forsaken the land” (8:11), and that the people of Israel are now in the category of “a slave whose master sold him,” whose servitude is annulled. Ezekiel makes clear that the exile and destruction came because of the sins of the people, but the Lord does not abandon His people and will redeem them for the sake of His name, lest it be profaned among the nations when they say: “These are the people of the Lord, and they have gone out of His land” (36:20).
And with God’s help, just as we have merited to see the beginning of the fulfillment of Ezekiel’s prophecy: “But you, mountains of Israel, you shall shoot forth your branches and yield your fruit to My people Israel, for they are soon to come” (36:8), and the beginning of the fulfillment of the promise: “And I will take you from among the nations, and gather you out of all the countries, and bring you into your own land” (36:24)—so too may we soon merit the fulfillment of the continuation: “Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you… and I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you… and I will cause you to walk in My statutes and keep My ordinances and do them…”
With blessings, Shatz
Thank you very much, Rabbi Michael. Thank God that we have finally merited to have a brave person who is honest with himself, who will weigh all our basic assumptions regarding Judaism in a logical way, and who is also brave enough to publish these books. Without you, Judaism would have remained in the eyes of many (myself among them) an irrational philosophy based on blind and ridiculous faith that cannot be proven. Fortunate are you!
Many thanks
Does it seem to you that the trilogy did the work you expected it to do or not?
That can be examined only after a longer period. This is theoretical work. It has certainly influenced and helped individuals, and its public impact will be measured many years from now. I hope to pave a way for when circumstances make these changes necessary and people look for halakhic mechanisms. See the column that will be coming up soon on the distress of feminist women.
And after reading the books I bless: "Blessed is He who has shared of His wisdom!"