Q&A: Studying the Thought of Yeshayahu Leibowitz
Studying the Thought of Yeshayahu Leibowitz
Question
Hello Rabbi,
Why is Yeshayahu Leibowitz’s doctrine not given legitimacy in the religious ציבור?
I hear what he says, and his words make sense.
Why is he defined as a heretic?
Answer
Ask them. As is well known, there are those who define me too as a heretic. It is true that his views are unusual, and some of them do not fit accepted conceptions (including some of the principles, such as the coming of the Messiah). But as I explained in the post about my heresy, there is no point in dealing with the question of whether something is heresy. It should be examined on its own merits. See there.
Discussion on Answer
I don’t know. It seems to me that in the accepted definition, a heretic is someone who thinks differently from me and I have no answer to his arguments. So I use labels instead of addressing him substantively.
I’m glad to hear Rabbi Aviner’s remarks, and I have to say that more than once I’ve enjoyed what he says because it isn’t predictable in advance. He addresses things substantively and not from the gut. Even though there are quite a few disagreements between us, I very much appreciate people who address arguments and arguers on their merits.
(While we’re at it, I’ll mention that from Rabbi Aviner I heard praise about you—that you are an outstanding Torah scholar, etc.)
Roni Miron, in the article “Phenomenology of a Believing Person” in the collection “On Faith,” points to a certain problematic aspect in Leibowitz’s demands. On the one hand, Leibowitz demands a separation between God’s transcendence and the immanent world; on the other hand, performing commandments for their own sake connects the human being with God. As a result, the two demands cancel one another out in a way that prevents them from existing together, and therefore turns Leibowitz’s method into something impossible (I suggest looking at the article, because the presentation here is superficial and not exhaustive).
I remember that I had this understanding vaguely already at an early stage, in a way that caused me to distance myself from Leibowitz’s position.
By the way, the Rabbi explicitly does not hold Leibowitz’s position, since he maintains that the commandments are a divine need, contrary to Leibowitz’s first demand.
Leibowitz himself pointed to contradictions in his doctrine, and said that he was not bothered by it — “the universe is full of contradictions.”
That’s nonsense. If he has a doctrine full of contradictions, then any conclusion can be derived from it. In other words: it says nothing at all. And no, the universe is not full of contradictions.
Well, the truth is that I was warned by people in our circle to stay away from you and to ask that an “apikoros, a traitor to Israel” like you be kept away from Bar-Ilan University. I nervously called Rabbi Shlomo Aviner (why he is more qualified than you is a good question…) and he told me that they crown you a heretic because you don’t belong to any sector and “he really loves precision”…
So the religious coward in me (that is, the hidden heretic within me) calmed down. What can you do—there are religious people who are afraid to deal with the foundational questions of religion… Maybe it would be worth going to psychotherapy to deal with that…?
By the way, is this issue dealt with in the Rabbi’s theology book?
I never understood what a “heretic” is. After all, even Maimonides was considered a heretic in his day, because he did not believe that God has a body… and nowadays he is one of the greatest believers. So who is it that crowns the heretics, and on what basis?