But isn’t that ultimately just influences on individuals (being connected to a collective, and being part of a story)? Since many individuals were born into and got used to belonging to the same thing, they act that way instinctively, around shared matters…
Take away that same psychological influence from each and every individual—and nothing remains. There’s nothing beyond the psychological-individual…

And so it is stated explicitly in the Torah: “And you say in your heart: ‘My power and the might of my hand have gotten me this wealth’” 🙂

Regards, S.Z. Levinger

To S.Z.L. — look at the end of the verse (Berakhot 10a) —

17: “And you say in your heart: ‘My power and the might of my hand have gotten me this wealth.’” 18: “But you shall remember the Lord your God, for it is He who gives you the power to get wealth.”

That is exactly the point — God gave His people the Torah, which shaped its culture and gave it the ability to labor and reach where it has reached.

That is what the Rabbi wrote here in his answer.

And that is the meaning of the verse: “who gives you the power to get wealth.”

With God’s help, 19th of Cheshvan 5778

To Ch.Z.B. — greetings,

Isn’t the claim “my power and the might of my hand have gotten me this wealth” made by someone who violated the warning: “Take care lest you forget the Lord your God by failing to keep His commandments and His laws and His statutes… lest you eat and are satisfied and build good houses and dwell in them… and all that you have increases, and your heart grows haughty, and you forget the Lord your God…”

This person, who forgot his God and does not keep His commandments, laws, and statutes, and attributes his economic success to himself—“my power and the might of my hand have gotten me this wealth”—can we say to him that his success came from the Torah, which “shaped his culture,” a Torah he denies?

Onkelos’ explanation is more plausible: “for it is He who gives you power to get wealth” means “who gave you counsel to acquire possessions.” God helps him make correct decisions that lead him to “getting wealth,” to economic success, despite the fact that he abandoned God and His Torah.

The reason God helps him “acquire possessions” even though he forgot his God and His Torah is because of His covenant and oath to the fathers—“in order to establish His covenant that He swore to your fathers…” But God warns afterward that His help to those who forget Him and violate His will will not continue forever, and in the end “I testify against you this day that…” Therefore they are commanded to come to their senses and remember that God is the one who put into their hands the power and good counsel to succeed in their affairs, to recognize His goodness, and therefore to keep His commandments.

Regards, S.Z. Levinger.

S.Z.L., that is of course proof to the contrary. The verse says explicitly what I am saying, which somehow doesn’t stop anyone from quoting it confidently as though it says the opposite.
Indeed, the words of Ran in his homilies at the beginning of the tenth homily are old and worn out, but apparently it is still worthwhile to mention them:

This passage is attached and connected to the one above it, because at first he warned Israel about two things: one, that they should not attribute their success to their own power and the might of their hand; and second, that they should not attribute the conquest of the land to their own merit. For above this it says (Deuteronomy 8:12–18), lest you eat and be satisfied and build good houses and dwell in them, and your cattle and your flocks increase, etc., and you say in your heart, “My power and the might of my hand have gotten me this wealth,” and “you shall remember the Lord your God, for it is He who gives you the power to get wealth.” His intent was this: although it is true that individuals do possess special traits for certain things, just as some people are suited to acquire wisdom and others are inclined to devise plans in their minds to gather and accumulate, and therefore it is in some sense true that a rich man could say, “My power and the might of my hand have gotten me this wealth”; nevertheless, although that power is implanted in you, you must surely remember who gave you that power and from where it came. And that is what is meant by “you shall remember the Lord your God, for it is He who gives you the power to get wealth.” It does not say, “you shall remember that the Lord your God gives you wealth,” for if it said that, it would be denying that the power implanted in man is an intermediate cause in the accumulation of wealth—and that is not so. Therefore he said that although your power is what gets this wealth, remember the giver of that power, blessed be He.

With God’s help, 19th of Cheshvan 5778

Ran does indeed mention “that individuals possess special traits for certain things, just as some people are suited to acquire wisdom and others are inclined to devise plans in their minds to gather and accumulate, and therefore it is in some sense true that a rich man could say, ‘My power and the might of my hand have gotten me this wealth,’” and on this the Torah commands a person to remember that his Creator implanted these powers within him.

But later on (ed. L.A. Feldman, p. 162) Ran explains that there are situations in which it is clear that a person’s success went beyond his natural ability, as in the conquest of the land, when the Jewish people defeated nations greater and mightier than themselves. There there is no concern that a person will attribute the victory to his natural talents, “but there is concern that a person will attribute the divine help he merited to his righteousness and merit. For it is the nature of human pride and loftiness of heart, which distort his counsels, to attribute his successes to himself in one way or another. When they are matters dependent on acquisition and wisdom and good counsel, he thinks his wisdom stood by him; and when they are in a matter that he sees was beyond his power and counsel, he attributes them to his merit” (compare also “Version B,” p. 178).

The situation in our time, when the Jewish people survives and succeeds against enemies many times more numerous, flush with money and international support—is certainly beyond our natural ability, and is rather from God’s kindness, who arranges the causes to return children to their border.

Regards, S.Z. Levinger

Paragraph 2, line 2–3:
… when there is no concern that a person will attribute…

S.Z.L.,
when you bring the verse “my power and the might of my hand” as proof against me, that is proof to the contrary. Ran’s words explain the verse exactly as I do. The fact that he afterward adds another argument that analyzes events in the world and sees in them the hand of God—that I can disagree with, or say that this has changed in our time. I never committed myself to accepting all of Ran’s claims, or even all of his claims in that homily.
What I brought from him was his interpretation of the verse, especially its ending: “for it is He who gives you the power to get wealth.” It cannot be interpreted otherwise, and therefore to bring this verse against me is absurd.

To Rabbi M.A. — greetings,

What can one do? The Holy Scriptures and the Sages are full of statements that God watches over His world, and this is one of the foundations of Judaism. One can open a new religion that combines the view of Epicurus or Aristotle—that God does not watch over His creatures (Maimonides mentions them in Guide for the Perplexed, part 3, chapter 17, while unequivocally rejecting their views)—together with meticulous observance of commandments according to Talmudic Jewish law, but that is not Judaism. It is another religion! There is “Judaism”—there will also be “RMaism.”

Regards, S.Z. Levinger

I only recommend that you change one word in the Sabbath prayer: instead of “God, Master over all works,” sing “God, indifferent to all works” 🙂

S.Z.L., I don’t understand the “threat” to send those who hold the view that God no longer regularly intervenes in His world to open another religion.
If it’s true, then on the contrary, Judaism should be the first to adopt this approach, and if the sages of Israel throughout the generations got by…
Just as the theory of evolution is not supposed to trouble believers in the book of Genesis,
so too the cancellation of the doctrine of individual providence should not damage our faith, and we will find algorithmic or time-and-place-dependent solutions for all the verses and sayings that deal with it.
And if the view isn’t true, fine—continue the discussion and try to refute it logically. What does Judaism have to do with that?

Our master S.Z.L. —

This is a chewed-over argument recycling things already discussed in the question “On your conception of providence,” a few days ago.

A. I was glad to become acquainted with Ran’s words, who indeed emphasizes the end of the verse as I said.

B. When will you understand that there are people who don’t care what is “written”!

They are not impressed by the threat that their views constitute a “new religion”!

They are not impressed by labels and epithets like “heretic” and the like!

We want to decide, based on our understanding, whether there is providence and what its nature is. We’ll manage with the quotations (or not).

C. Regarding your quotation from Maimonides:

Rabbi Michi likes to say that there are students of the Chazon Ish who are his students because they imitate him, and there are those who are his students because they are as original and independent as he was.

The same applies to Maimonides. True, Maimonides rejected the words of Epicurus, as you pointed out, but Maimonides also represented the rationalist who was not afraid of what was written. It’s no trick to take from Maimonides only what is convenient.

His words in part 2, chapter 25 are well known: that if we had been convinced by proof of the eternity of the world, we would have concluded so, and we would have forced the verses.

So Maimonides is an example of thinking, examination, and inference—independent thinking. So don’t lean on him.

D. I return and ask you to finally answer whether in your view you see intervention toward the individual, in accordance with his deeds. Try to answer from examining reality, not from the book.

Regards

S.Z.L., sometimes I get the feeling that I am writing my words in vain. We’ve had this argument several times long ago, and I’ve already answered everything ad nauseam. Here I made only one remark about the interpretation of the verse you brought as evidence: “my power and the might of my hand.” About that I wrote that it is proof to the contrary. The rest of the claims you brought here are ancient and were answered long ago, as stated, so I’m not going to reopen the discussion.
And by the way, the fact that He is not involved does not mean that He is indifferent. It only means that He leaves it to us. Like parents with their children. In fact, on your view He seems indifferent, because all the evil in the world is His handiwork and He didn’t prevent it. But we’ve already dealt with that ad nauseam.

If what is written doesn’t interest you—then state “your truth” in your own name and don’t try to hang it on great trees, who quite clearly held the complete opposite. Why mislead people—and to your surprise there are such people—
for whom “what is written” does matter?

Maimonides and Ran lived in a period in which Aristotelian philosophy was the unchallenged peak of science, and in a period in which the Jewish people suffered and was humiliated in all the ruling kingdoms, and even so they clung to the faith of Judaism and did not surrender either to the “unchallengeable truths of science” or to the “test of historical success” of the rival religions.

Our situation today, both scientifically and historically, is immeasurably better. After thousands of years of belief in an “eternal world,” suddenly science too came to the conclusion that the world had a beginning. And in general they understand there that the scientific validity of every theory is limited, and new discoveries may always come and make the picture more complex.

Likewise the absolute deterministic conception that saw the laws of nature as absolute laws, leaving no room for intervention that is not an “open miracle.” Today, in many matters, science too does not define strict determinism, but rather a high probability that the result will be X and not Y. In such a situation, intervention can occur without contradicting the natural norm, and without requiring the Holy One, blessed be He, to change the order of creation.

All the more so since the historical and personal “test of success” is very favorable to Judaism. The ideological religions and empires that once ruled the roost—their glory has dimmed. Precisely Judaism, which only a few decades ago was considered a “dinosaur” on the verge of extinction, is growing stronger, returning to its strength materially and spiritually.

Regards, S.Z. Levinger

And to Ch.Z.B. — regarding your question about the success of the believer in the reality of this world. I already answered you there. Unlike Calvinism, which claims that the one favored by the Creator is the one with the fatter bank account, Judaism sees this world as a “vestibule” in which one acquires the truly important asset: a whole, balanced, corrected personality. The reward promised in this world is better conditions that make attaining perfection easier, and sometimes a person is punished for his few sins in this world in order to refine his soul. At any rate, the more a person refines his personality and deepens his faith, the more he throws off the burden of bitterness and frustration and attains a better “quality of life” even in our turbulent world.

With God’s help, 20th of Cheshvan 5778

To Rabbi M.A. — greetings, it seems to me that now I hear from you a new direction:

Not that belief in providence is contrary to reason and comparable to arguing for a “fairy with three wings”; and not that providence was meant for childish humanity and not for “humanity that has matured” (as it is today 🙂

What you are now claiming is that God has an educational consideration not to react immediately, but rather to wait patiently so that man and humanity may arrive at the truth by way of “trial and error,” and then they will accept the path of goodness and truth—not as an external dictate, but מתוך internal understanding and identification.

Or in other words: God is slow to anger in order to allow man to arrive at the good through personal choice.

That already sounds good. Go in this your strength!

Regards, S.Z. Levinger

With God’s help, 19th of Cheshvan 5778

To S.Z.L. — greetings,

No one hung anything on great trees, and no one misled anyone else.

Rabbi Michi keeps emphasizing that—in his estimation—there is no correlation between behavior and success or failure in this world. And I agree with him (he is my great tree).

The fact that Maimonides and Ran did or did not adopt Aristotelian theory is not connected to our topic. The fact is that Maimonides rejected whatever he thought was mistaken, following his understanding (which was no doubt influenced by his time), to the point that the Vilna Gaon, in the laws of divination and sorcery, wrote against him furiously that the accursed philosophy led him astray, etc. So just as Maimonides has the right to decide according to his understanding, so every person with knowledge and experience (“bar hakhi,” in the language of the local master) has such a right.

Regarding my question —

Again you didn’t answer, but never mind.

(The answer is supposed to be yes/no.)

Regards, Chaim Zelig Berger

(P.S. And regarding the “fake” response—I received compliments that the imitation surpasses the original…)

They tell of an impatient judge whose patience ran out and who said to the lawyer: “I permit you to ask the witness only questions that can be answered ‘yes’ or ‘no.’”

The lawyer said to the judge: allow me to ask Your Honor one pointed question, and I request a clear answer, ‘yes’ or ‘no.’

The judge agreed to one question, and then the lawyer asked him: Your Honor, have you stopped taking bribes? Answer me “yes” or “no”!…

What is the judge to do? If he answers “yes,” then he has admitted that in the past he did take bribes. And if he answers “no,” that means he continues to take bribes.

Conclusion: there are questions in life whose answer is a bit more complex than “yes” or “no.”

And regarding the boundary between “imitation” and forgery:

If I write in your style and sign with your nickname “Chaim Zelig Berger”—that is forgery.

But if I make clear in the signature that these are not really your words—then it can be an enjoyable and funny imitation.

Regards, Shimshaiim Tzveilig Levvinnberger

With God’s help, 19th of Cheshvan 5778

To S.Z.L. — greetings,

The answer you need to give (on your own view) is not too complicated to answer with yes or no.

If you like—I’ll help you formulate it:

Is there intervention in the individual’s success/failure? A. No.

And then you can immediately qualify it as you wish—but:
1. A person who keeps the commandments gains in other ways (that he merits good subjective feelings, as you brought in the past: “in the greatest gift in life, the gift of freedom, freedom from drives of jealousy, hatred, and competition, freedom from desires whose natural end is harm”—in your words).
2. The collective (the Jewish people) that keeps the commandments receives assistance from above (as per your view above).

What is so complicated about that?

Regards, Chaim Zelig Berger

On the matter of imitation/forgery: the issue came up in connection with the suggestion that you open a blog, a suggestion you refused. An attempt was made—a pilot—to examine the possibility of setting up a blog and writing there in your name, thereby sparing you the burden involved.

To Ch.Z.B. — greetings,

The answer to the question whether there is divine intervention in the individual’s life is not “no,” but rather: there is recompense for every act of a person. Sometimes it is immediate in this world, and sometimes it is not immediate, for various reasons, such as the Holy One, blessed be He, being slow to anger, merit of the fathers, merit of “good offshoots” that will emerge, refinement or atonement for sins, and so on. And as explained, the main recompense is spiritual: the soul’s attaining perfection, a process that begins in this world and reaches its peak in the world to come, where a person is freed from the troubles and temptations of this world.

Regards, S.Z. Levinger

Regarding a fake blog in my name, perhaps I’ll respond there under the nickname “Shimshai Zelig Levinberger” 🙂

S.Z.L., there isn’t even a new vessel here. It’s an old vessel full of old stuff. What I wrote here is exactly what I already wrote dozens of times in the past, and we argued about it with not a shred of change. But I’m exhausted.

The original question was different (and admittedly in the last response I didn’t formulate it correctly):

Not whether there is intervention, but whether there is an indication of intervention. That is, can you discern such intervention (toward the individual).

And the answer is—no.

Right?

Regarding what happens to me, I can speculate that some event was a divine response to some act, in order to engage in soul-searching. Regarding what happens to others: I am not allowed to do soul-searching for them, unless I am a prophet 🙂

Regards, S.Z. Levinger

I’m asking you whether, from observing your surroundings, you discern a correlation,

and you answer me that you are prevented from analyzing the results of the observation, since there is an “prohibition” on such analysis for someone who is not a prophet.

Did I understand correctly?

With God’s help, 20th of Cheshvan 5778

To S.Z.L. — greetings,

Well, you still haven’t answered me.

If you meant that seriously, I suggest you open a new question here in the system, and ask our great master Rabbi M.A. whether there is a prohibition for someone who is not a prophet to analyze such observations.

After he permits you, we can add signatures from great Torah sages in order to reach a permit from a hundred rabbis. We’ll do annulment of vows for you, and everything will be permitted to you.

When you use the permit and check the observation, and see that it is impossible to detect in our world any correlation whatsoever (at least in the individual’s life) between his deeds and his success/lack of success, then we can continue our discussion from that point onward.

Agreed???

Regards,

Chaim Zelig Berger

Ch.Z.B., brilliant.
I don’t understand why the Master of the Universe needs to watch over human beings when they do it very well themselves.

With God’s help, 20th of Cheshvan 5778

To Ch.Z.B. — greetings,

Regarding the correlation between faith and commitment to the Torah’s values and commandments and success in life, I have already written to you several times that my intuition tells me that someone who has faith and a stable moral compass frees himself of much bitterness and frustration, and that has a positive effect on health and quality of life.

In order to test this and confirm the intuitive insight on the basis of practical data, I would need to enter into the depths of other people’s souls in order to examine their level of faith and their religious and moral commitment, and then examine in parallel their quality of life.

I could do such an examination if I were a prophet, or alternatively if I were a researcher in psychology or the social sciences who has (perhaps 🙂 tools for assessing the personalities and happiness of the people being studied. Since I am neither a prophet nor a psychologist and the like—I cannot say anything beyond an intuition, which is not admissible evidence in a scientific discussion.

I am left only with going to my professional field, information retrieval. Regarding prophets, you can find an interesting comparative discussion in Isaiah chapter 57. Regarding research literature—see the material cited in Wikipedia, under the entry “Religion and happiness.” Perhaps there you will find satisfaction for your curiosity on the question of the correlation between faith and religiosity and success in life.

Good luck with the inquiry, S.Z. Levinger

Again and again you run off toward the subjective gain that a person gets from believing and keeping commandments. And I already agreed (just for the sake of discussion) that there is such a gain.

And I asked you many times about external, objective gain. Is it possible to discern a correlation between religiosity and the degree of success or lack of success—externally?

Can one discern a difference in the level of vulnerability to earthquakes/epidemics/wars/car accidents/diseases between righteous people and wicked people?

S.Z.L.!

Are you pretending not to understand the question, or do you really not understand?

Just say you don’t want to answer, and that’s it. Why dodge and wriggle???

Regards, Chaim Zelig Berger

With God’s help, 21st of Cheshvan 5778

To Chaim Zelig [“happy” in Ashkenazi pronunciation] — greetings,

For me, the measure of objective success is health, and first and foremost mental health, which by its nature also brings about stronger physical health. When a person is full of faith and love, content with his lot and emotionally balanced—that radiates onto his physical health.

Likewise the values of kindness and community, and honoring parents and elders, increase the physical, emotional, and even economic support for the elderly, the disabled, the sick, and the needy, and help them cope more successfully with problems and difficulties. And all this even before we mention the factor of divine help to those who love Him and keep His commandments and call to Him sincerely.

And these things are reflected in statistical data. See for example the article “In which locality do people live the longest?” (on the Israel Hayom website, 23.11.2013), which says that Bnei Brak and Beit Shemesh are among the leading cities in life expectancy, even though economically they are among the poorer cities.

Likewise, among the lowest mortality rates are religious localities such as Modiin Illit, Shoham, and Givat Shmuel, no less than Ra’anana, Gedera, and Ramat HaSharon, which have a high standard of living.

Which is to say: at Mount Sinai we merited to become people of “B.R.G.”—an acronym for bashful, compassionate, and doers of kindness—and thereby Chaim Zeligs, happy and long-lived.

Regards, S.Z. Levinger

S.Z.L., I’m following only superficially, and I have to join the wonderment of the happy Zelig: are you pretending not to understand in order to dodge an answer, or do you really not understand?

One who is full of faith and lives a moral life merits a healthier and better life in this world, and therefore in poor Bnei Brak and Beit Shemesh life expectancy is among the highest in the country. The Torah gives length of days, literally!

You’re not willing to hear verses, but here I’ve brought statistics—the Central Bureau of Statistics itself!

Regards, S.Z. Levinger

After all, you believe in Torah from Heaven, so why is the faithful testimony of the Holy Scriptures not sufficient?

Regards, the aforementioned S.Z.L.

I am repeating my question one last time (God willing), because I too have had enough.

I did not ask about life expectancy (that is a clear result of a preferable subjective state, such as satisfaction and meaning in life).

I asked about coping with objective disasters.

Pay attention (!!!) to what I emphasized in my previous question:

Is there a change in being harmed by: earthquakes/epidemics/wars/car accidents/diseases. That is what I wrote.

If you don’t answer the question, I’m out.

Regards, Chaim Zelig Berger

Your behavior is very disrespectful. You insist on “not understanding the question.” I’m sick of it.

To happy Chaim, man of the mountain, may your peace increase like a river!

I understand your question, but my ability to answer is limited to material backed by studies. You can declare categorically, with no evidence at all, that there is no difference. I look for research material, and it is not clear that anyone has studied these things.

Regarding epidemics, as far as I know in the “Black Death” in Europe in 1348, mortality among Jews was far lower than among Christians. Historians claim that this stemmed from greater attention to hygiene due to care with handwashing and cleanliness in prayer and eating and the like.

Regarding wars, the situation seems the opposite, since because of our uniqueness as Jews, more wars are fought against us. Let us hope that our enemies too will understand that our stubbornness cannot be broken! It is the secret of our survival!

Go up and succeed in your respectful and respectful way 🙂

Regards, S.Z. Levinger

I will further note that when one tries to make a forced interpretation of the principle of providence explained in the Holy Scriptures and restrict it only to the collective and not the individual, or to say that it expired in a certain period—the burden of proof rests on the one making the forced interpretation.

After all, the Holy One, blessed be He’s, ability to govern His world even above nature follows from His being the Creator of nature, and was plainly revealed in the open miracles of the Exodus from Egypt and in the wondrous survival of the Jewish people throughout history. On what basis should we come and limit His governance only to the collective or only to a certain period?

Regards, S.Z. Levinger

S.Z.L., if you enjoy repeating your arguments again and again without reading and without relating to what people write to you, then good for you. I just have to say that I enjoy it less (in fact I’m completely exhausted), and I get the impression there are other readers like that as well.
Everything you are bringing up here has already been discussed to exhaustion several times, and it is not at all the topic of discussion in this thread. People keep explaining that to you again and again, but you just keep going. For some reason you choose to ignore what people are saying to you, so how exactly do you expect a constructive conversation to take place?! Too bad.

To Rabbi Michi,
I disagree. In fact, S.Z.L.’s statistical method is really interesting. After all, you don’t expect, as Ch.Z.B. suggests, that we can conduct an observation on a single person. What would determine for us that he really deserves exceptional divine providence? And if he is wicked, Asaph the psalmist already asked in Psalms why the way of the wicked prospers. The only way to proceed along this path, as S.Z.L. argues, goes through prophecy, which you reject.
The alternative S.Z.L. finds lies in statistics. The fact that we constantly prefer materialist explanations does not rule out additional explanations and therefore does not refute providence. The statistics merely raise questions that need to be answered.

To S.Z.L.
A snarky remark: someone who doesn’t work has a lot of free time to engage in acts of kindness. It’s a snarky remark because the fact that someone works doesn’t necessarily mean that if he didn’t work he would engage in acts of kindness. So it is to the credit of the Haredim that they engage in acts of kindness, and to their discredit that they do not work.

Y.D., that’s not the argument here. Here a discussion arose with S.Z.L. about the verse “my power and the might of my hand.”
The question you raise goes to the substance of the matter. Since you raised it, I’ll address it briefly:

A. On the methodological level:
1. In my view the burden of proof is on the one who claims there is involvement, not on the one who claims there isn’t, and to the best of my judgment there is no such proof.
2. The proof that needs to be brought is not from the verses but from reality. I belong to the school of Ran (“one must not deny what is perceptible”) and not that of Tosafot (who prove that there are many stars from a verse in the Torah).

B. On the substantive level:
1. The findings he brings can be explained in both ways (involvement of the Holy One, blessed be He, and mental health that stems from faith, whether true or not).
2. S.Z.L. himself does this, and at the same time proves from it the involvement of the Holy One, blessed be He (that is already a real logical folly).
3. Beyond that, if indeed Jews react differently, then we are back to the Chatam Sofer’s claim that one should not learn medicine from gentiles or use a gentile doctor. Likewise, one should not use findings from medical studies, for spiritual state and prayer always change and influence things (and no one, including all the greatest God-fearing people, for some reason bothers to neutralize that). Not to mention the ridiculous excuses of “duty of effort” that explain why we all nevertheless take medicines and go to doctors.
4. In general, if one wants to examine the meaning of these findings more systematically (which of the two explanations above is correct), one needs to do several experiments with comparisons between control groups and samples: people with Jewish faith and other faiths, those who pray and those who don’t, righteous people and those who aren’t, and also compare with people who use similar secular techniques. As far as I know this has not been done, and therefore the conclusions are up in the air.

In conclusion, I’ll just note that I too do not deny that there may be sporadic involvement of the Holy One, blessed be He, in the world. My claim is that there is no indication of anything regular, and certainly not that everything in the world is the handiwork of the Holy One, blessed be He (except in the sense of Ran’s homilies and the verse “He is the one who gives you power to get wealth.” But as stated, that is not the discussion with S.Z.L.).

With God’s help, eve of the holy Sabbath, Chayei Sarah, 5778

To Rabbi M.A. — greetings,

The topic of discussion here is the question of divine intervention in the world, a topic that has not ceased to occupy the world of believers from the days of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) until today, and the discussion has two sides…

When Mr. Berger demanded that I bring him an “indication” of intervention in each and every detail, I explained to him in several ways that one cannot bring proof or explanation for each and every detail. We do not know all of a person’s deeds, we do not know the value of every deed, and we do not know when the Holy One, blessed be He, reacts immediately and when He is slow to anger.

We have no full proof and explanation for each and every detail, but we do have a clear indication—from our knowledge of the immense wisdom of the Creator, and from seeing the wonder of the Jewish people’s survival, holding out for thousands of years against nations greater and stronger than it.

From what we see and understand, we can safely infer that even what our understanding is too weak to grasp, at least at this stage, is due to “the shortcoming of the perceiver and the depth of the object perceived.” It is not simple to understand the depth of divine wisdom. Presumably we will not reach a full understanding of it, but we are not exempt from trying to understand more and more!

With Sabbath greetings, S.Z. Levinger

A peaceful Sabbath to you too.

I’ve finished the discussion with S.Z.L., and all that remains is for me to join our master’s Sabbath greetings.

To complete the picture regarding the (bizarre) outlook of believers nowadays, I quote from comments on the Haredi (infantile) site JDN.

There is a video there of a real incident that happened at a wedding, when one of the participants choked on a piece of steak. Luckily for him (or by individual providence), a Hatzalah man was sitting nearby, performed the Heimlich maneuver on him, and saved his life.
The organization published the video (I assume with the victim’s consent) in order to raise awareness of the importance of learning life-saving knowledge (and for public relations).

Here are the comments (I corrected typos):
It’s hard to say this, but someone who studies Torah should not learn this (that is, it’s better not to learn first aid — Ch.Z.B.), because from Heaven such cases will not be arranged for him, and if he learns—they will be arranged. So I heard from Rabbi Ben Zion (Abba Shaul — Ch.Z.B.) and Rabbi Shach.

Another comment:
Let us not forget, simply, that if that devoted first responder had not been there, by whose hand the drummer was saved, then the drummer would not have choked in the first place, because his time to die had not yet come..
Because on Rosh Hashanah it is written, and on Yom Kippur it is sealed..
Of course this does not detract in the slightest from the enormous merits of the life-saver. Ever.
If so, why did Heaven arrange things so that he would almost choke and in the end be saved?
We do not know Heaven’s calculations. But in this way the survivor feels his miracle and gives thanks, merit comes to the rescuer, and others are strengthened. (This comment too implies, as above, that there is no point in learning first aid — Ch.Z.B.)

Another comment:
I already took first responder training twice, and I still don’t know how to do it, even though I got a 95.
So all that remains is jjjjjust to pray, may God guard us!

In their view, the fate of the choking man was determined in advance, and the obligation to learn first aid they are forced to reconcile in convoluted ways.

These comments show that the surfers cannot digest the simple understanding that learning first aid saves lives, and cannot synchronize that with the teachings of faith they received in educational institutions.

The comments themselves don’t bother me all that much. Every place has its idiots. What bothers me is that there are no sane comments alongside them, arguing and rejecting this crooked view.

It should be noted that this is a major Haredi news site for a large public, mainly Hasidic, and the various filters give it a monopoly by blocking other news sites such as Kikar HaShabbat and B’Hadrei Haredim.
Attached is the link: http://www.jdn.co.il/news/israel/905583

With God’s help, Saturday night, Chayei Sarah, 5778

To Y.D. — greetings,

What you suggested—that Haredim engage more in kindness because they “don’t work”—is incorrect. Kindness has characterized the Jewish people from the days of the Patriarchs until our own day. Abraham, who called in the name of God, was the greatest practitioner of kindness; Moses, giver of the Torah, began his path by saving a Jew from his attacker, continued by rescuing the daughters of Jethro, and led his people with a Torah of kindness.

The secular jurist Prof. Daniel Friedman already pointed out the Torah’s uniqueness in relation to all the law codes of the ancient Near East: the Torah is the only one that commands helping the other and sees it as an absolute obligation. Help for another is not called “compassion” or “charity” but “tzedakah,” doing justice. And even in the laws established by the sages, charity is among the things for which the individual can be compelled.

Throughout history there was no community in Israel that did not have groups involved in charity and acts of kindness with body and money, and to this very day there is no Religious Zionist or Haredi synagogue, Ashkenazi or Sephardi, that does not have a charity committee and free-loan fund trying to help every needy person to the best of their ability. Even in the organizations of kindness and medical assistance operating nationwide, many of those involved are Jews who keep Torah and commandments.

In the field of first aid alone (which our friend Mr. Berger mentioned), there are at least three organizations in the Haredi sector—ZAKA, Hatzalah, and United Hatzalah—while Religious Zionists volunteer en masse in Magen David Adom (regarding whose volunteering rabbis had reservations and concerns about spending long hours with young women on the treatment team, and for that reason the Haredi organizations were established.

A tradition of thousands of years of kindness among the Jewish people leaves its mark even on Jews who have distanced themselves from Torah and commandment observance, who nevertheless excel—as those whose ancestors stood at Mount Sinai—in the basic traits of “bashful, compassionate, and doers of kindness.”

A believing person who believes that God watches over him and helps him at every step—naturally sees himself as obligated to walk in the ways of his Creator and fulfill: “Just as He is merciful and gracious, so too you be merciful and gracious; just as He bestows kindness, so too you bestow kindness.”

With blessings for a good week, S.Z. Levinger

Torah scholars have less time for acts of kindness. No yeshiva head or kollel head will allow his students to engage in acts of kindness during the yeshiva or kollel schedule. Outside the kollel, each one has waiting for him a large family that needs help in raising and educating them. If amid his diligence in Torah and his help at home, an avrekh manages to “scratch out” free time also for acts of kindness—he is worthy of appreciation.

To conclude the discussion, I turn again to Rabbi S.Z.L.:

I apologize if in the heat of the debate I was hurtful. At times, in the heat of debate, I express myself offensively, or in a foolish mood I pull some prank.

I continue to stand by the recommendation that you open a blog of your own. I explain again, with all due respect, that the format of writing comments requires conversation, give-and-take, dialogue in the foreign tongue.
When a person writes monologues and does not relate to the responses he receives, he is going beyond the framework. The appropriate place for writing monologues is a private blog. There one can write without limitation, and the public will vote with its feet (or with its fingers—to be more precise).
Writing monologues outside a private blog is not “fair,” in my opinion. There is even an element of exploitation in it.

In my opinion, and it seems to me also in Rabbi Michi’s opinion, what you conducted here (and in other places) was not a dialogue but a monologue.

In any case, again, sorry and forgive me, and have a good week.

To Ch.Z.B. — greetings,

First of all, I am glad that a week after you announced that you were exhausted, you began the new week with renewed strength, “double wisdom,” and from here a conclusive proof for the paytan’s words: “and the Sabbath restores the soul.” (“Yom Shabbat Kodesh Hu,” by Rabbi Yehonatan)

As to the substance of your remark, I already answered that a discussion has two sides. If so-and-so and so-and-so claim that the Holy One, blessed be He, does not intervene in His world—then obviously, in order for there to be a discussion here, the other side also has to be heard. Otherwise this is a choir, not a discussion!

With blessings for a good week, S.Z. Levinger

Have a good week

In general, personal efficiency suggestions you can send to my private email: shimloewinger@gmail.com

Regards, S.Z.L.

To my teacher and rabbi Michi, greetings,
I have no dispute regarding “my power and the might of my hand” in Ran’s approach. Perhaps S.Z.L. does, but I do not. But even if I believe in man and his power, one can still say, as S.Z.L. argues, that there is an added blessing stemming from individual providence.

The proposal you make to conduct a controlled experiment is problematic for reasons S.Z.L. already mentioned. We do not know the opinion of the Master of the Universe about each of the particulars, and in addition we cannot fathom His mind; the story of Joseph’s sale proves it (there are four different interpretations there—the brothers, Joseph, Jacob, and the Master of the Universe).

In light of this, S.Z.L. proposes what economists describe as a natural experiment. He proposes the test groups as the Jewish people versus the nations of the world. He proposes conducting the test on statistical anomalies over time that will reduce additional variables. He noted several anomalies and more can be added (after the dash a scientific explanation is suggested, and in parentheses a providential explanation):
The survival of the Jewish people — (fear of the Divine Presence upon the gentiles)
The economic success of the Jewish people — literacy (the Netziv: blessing)
The low number of victims from the Black Death — hygiene, though it is worth noting that the city of Prague was also hardly affected.
The percentage of Jews winning Nobel Prizes — genetic change among Ashkenazim.
The return to Zion and ingathering of exiles — nationalism and antisemitism (“and the Lord your God will restore your captivity”)
The revival of the Hebrew language —
The Holocaust — antisemitism (“You alone have I known from among all the nations”)
Longevity in Haredi cities — acts of kindness (acts of kindness)
The explanations do not always conflict, and some of them really dovetail. In any case, according to S.Z.L.’s approach, the scientific explanations do not refute the explanatory power of providence, and therefore on his view this is evidence for the existence of providence that is no worse than any other evidence.

To Ch.Z.B.
The above too is signed.

All this is clear, and to that I answered that it could be a result of the character and culture of the Jewish people (or of believers in general) and does not prove involvement of the Holy One, blessed be He. Therefore these “experiments” prove nothing. I also proposed experiments that would improve the situation, even if they would not constitute a clear decision.

With God’s help, 23rd of Cheshvan 5778

To Y.D. — greetings,

Ran says that there are things a person can achieve by virtue of the disposition God implanted in him, but there are things in which a person succeeds beyond his powers, and here it is clear that only divine help enabled him to succeed.

Divine help is not an alternative to human action and effort. In the same example Ran brings, the conquest of the land, the children of Israel fought in natural ways, set ambushes, and used tactics, just as God instructs Joshua in the conquest of Ai.

Man acts diligently and wisely to the best of his ability, and God completes and “closes the corners” in what lies beyond human control.

Regards, S.Z. Levinger

Regarding providence in Maimonides’ thought,
see the comments “Free choice necessitates providence (Guide, 3:17),” “Among the ways of providence” (column 39, 7 Kislev 5777); “From the words of Rabbi Abraham ben Maimonides on the trait of trust” (ibid., 16 Kislev 5777),

Additional sources in Maimonides’ words —
in the comments from 20–22 Sivan 5777, in column 36. And in the comment “And on the issue of providence in Maimonides’ thought (to Gil,” in the discussion on “A response to your conception of providence.” (12 Cheshvan 5778)

Regarding providence through nature —
in column 59, in the comments from 14–16 Tevet 5777

Regards, S.Z. Levinger.

*ben Maimonides
**conception of providence

In the last line:
in column 44, in the comments…

With God’s help, 2 Elul 5782

To Chaim Zelig Berger — greetings,

I do not know whether you are related, but perhaps you will find interest in the fascinating story of the struggle of the late Yitzhak Zelig Berger (from the village of Bushtina) with the terrors of the Holocaust, as told by his son Shlomo in his testimony “A long and almost ungraspable path of hardships, suffering, and courage,” on the “The Multi-Generational Connection” website.

Regards, Menashe Barkai Buch-Treger