Q&A: The Context of Discovery and the Context of Justification
The Context of Discovery and the Context of Justification
Question
I am currently managing some discussion in a WhatsApp group. They are dealing there with submitting assignments to supervisors who do not observe Torah and commandments. The question came up whether this involves causing a secular person to stumble. I brought the Rabbi’s responsum on the topic, that perhaps one can say there is no possibility of causing a secular person to stumble into a transgression.
One participant in the discussion focused on the Rabbi’s introduction about rationalizing intuition through halakhic means, and claims that the Rabbi’s motivation disqualifies the discussion from the outset.
It occurred to me to ask whether the distinction between the context of discovery and the context of justification is relevant in Jewish law as well, or whether there are hidden layers in halakhic ruling that are harmed by the force of a “Reform” or non-Orthodox motivation.
Answer
The difference between me and others is that I put it on the table. This happens not infrequently with others too.
Beyond that, the distinction between the contexts is very much on target in this context as well. The question is whether my words and reasons hold water, not what my motivation is. Why is the motivation relevant? But truth comes from whoever says it.
That disputant apparently relates to rabbis’ words as a source of authority, and therefore disqualifies them on the basis of mistaken assumptions and motivations (in his view). But in my opinion, things should be examined on their own merits, and motivations are really not relevant at all. So it is in Torah, and so too in every other field.
Discussion on Answer
Not that I know how or who decides when the motivations are non-kosher.
But for the sake of the discussion.
What does that have to do with the context of discovery? You mean that he is looking for reasons in order to reach the goal of declaring the creeping thing kosher? But that is done with genuine reasons, as the Maharal explained. So why does it matter that he finds them in order to purify the creeping thing?
Unfortunately I’m not familiar with the Maharal on this topic, and I’d be happy to look into it more deeply. Can the Rabbi point me to a source?
See for example here: http://beinenu.com/sites/default/files/alonim/50_26_74.pdf
Thank you very much
Thank you to the Rabbi for the answer.
One more question, on the same matter: what is the meaning of the phrase “to declare the creeping thing kosher with 150 reasons”? Isn’t this a situation in which the context of discovery is non-kosher?
Or is that unrelated?