Q&A: The Uniqueness of Religious Commandments and Moral Value in Relation to Other Nations
The Uniqueness of Religious Commandments and Moral Value in Relation to Other Nations
Question
Hello Rabbi, I would be grateful if you could please help me.
The Rabbi noted in the fifth booklet several characteristics that make the Jewish people unique. One of them is the acceptance of many commandments that have no moral explanation, so it is not clear why they would accept them.
Are there no other nations that have a system of commandments of a purely religious nature? Let me explain:
If there are: did the Rabbi mean that when it comes to a group that takes all this upon itself, then it is unclear why? And what about claims about the revelation itself, such as the claim that maybe the Jewish people were somehow “drugged” during the Ten Commandments, and from that point on Moses was trusted to command them with further commandments lacking moral character—here, how is this different from a pagan religious leader who is authorized to command laws of this sort on the basis of existing faith? (Just as an example.)
If it is argued that what makes the Jewish people unique is that everyone accepted the commandments upon themselves (and therefore this too is hard to explain), then are there various answers that weaken that uniqueness?
Thank you very much.
Answer
I do not think there is another example of a system of commandments devoid of moral or ritual value. There are a few such things in Islam, but they continue the idea of Torah from Sinai and dilute and slightly renovate it. In Christianity, in my opinion, there are no such things at all (all the commands have either moral value or religious value—in the sense of a relationship with God, but not simply “decrees of Scripture”). Even pagans do things in order to achieve results (a rain dance to bring rain, sacrifices to appease the gods and calm their wrath, etc.). Even Buddhists, to the best of my knowledge, do things that are meant to bring a better life, tranquility, repair of the soul, and the like.
Discussion on Answer
1. I didn’t understand.
2. No. Why observe such strange and at the same time demanding commandments?
Because a nation that already believes in God and in His prophet-emissary (like many religions) would also do what the prophet commands them to do, even commandments like these (question 1), no? Or perhaps it would not accept the prophet’s command?
But this is not a prophet bringing things in God’s name; rather, it is a tradition about a revelation that took place before everyone.
How do we know that the event at Mount Sinai was not some impressive natural experience (even a drug) staged by the prophet, and that the people came to believe in the Creator because of that?
Or perhaps it was a narrative that spread, and in truth the faith was in the prophet?
How do you know that what you see is not a hallucination under the influence of drugs? How could the prophet have hypnotized masses like that? That you are willing to believe? So why not in God?
There is tradition and there is history, and that overall picture inspires trust in me. If it doesn’t in you—then it doesn’t.
Although, if I understood correctly, the Rabbi wrote elsewhere that it is not necessary that it involved masses, regarding narratives that spread. But even if there were no masses, it still isn’t possible…
There is no single decisive argument. Only the combination of all the considerations can decide the matter. A narrative that did not arise among the masses is a weaker argument. The larger the public, the less likely it is. Especially a public in real time (because after the narrative is accepted, it can spread among many people).
And despite that being a weak argument, it is still defined as unique—right?
I don’t understand these repeated questions. It seems to me that I explained everything (including in the parallel threads).
Hello Rabbi.
With regard to these commandments, can one say that there is a moral idea behind them? For example, with kashrut: by refraining from certain foods, a person learns to restrain his impulses and thereby rises morally?
It is true that taken together with the other claims, it is hard to understand why one would keep such rigid commandments—but when this phenomenon is in fact expected, through a narrative for example, then this phenomenon itself has to be unique in order to join the overall set of arguments, and that is why I am trying to clarify this.
You can say anything, but in my opinion it is not plausible. See column 15, where I explain that at the foundation of religious commandments there are religious values, not moral ones. True, there can be side benefits, such as control over impulses.
I couldn’t find column 15 in the posts…
???
https://mikyab.net/%D7%90%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%A1-%D7%91%D7%A9%D7%A2%D7%AA-%D7%94%D7%A7%D7%A8%D7%91-%D7%94%D7%9C%D7%9B%D7%94-%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%A8-%D7%98%D7%95%D7%A8-15/
I did not understand the Rabbi’s distinction between Jewish law and morality—
after all, the Rabbi gives moral explanations for commandments that are not moral, such as:
A captive gentile woman—the matter is not moral, but there is no halakhic prohibition—and there the Rabbi gave an explanation and wrote that in extreme cases this is permitted in order to tip the scales in our favor—and that is a moral explanation.
And also in the case of a priest’s wife who was raped—the Jewish law is not moral, and the Rabbi writes that the reason is to preserve the priesthood—and that is a logical and moral reason for the benefit of the Jewish people.
So I did not really understand the Rabbi’s general position.
Itai, preserving the holiness of the priesthood is not a moral reason. What connection is there between morality and having the priests set apart from everyone else?
For the benefit of the people, because that way the priesthood remains and there is Temple service that only they can perform.
I take it back—you are right.
Hello Rabbi.
1. Granted, it is not expected that a nation would take upon itself such a system of commandments, but as I asked: is it any more likely that a nation would be taken in by a prophet who would command them such commandments?
2. Such a system of commandments is unusual in the landscape of beliefs as a whole, but is it not something to be expected from an idea that continues and is more challenging than other beliefs? After all, the whole general idea is to please God.