Wow. That’s really revolutionary (though kind of inevitable). Whole sections of the Talmud that I sat and learned in yeshiva are not a commandment. The criticism, though, is very strange.

Criticism?

*Logical.

This riddle-like writing is beyond me.

It was just a comment that although what you say is logical, it’s very novel compared to what I’m used to. It’s hard for me that whole sections of traditional yeshiva learning (not Jewish thought) are actually not “Torah.” But apparently you’re right.

Is the discussion of what counts as “moral” according to Rabbi Michael Abraham’s definitions considered “Torah”?

With the blessing of Torah, M. Kashan

Seemingly, to be on the safe side one could say the verses “May the Lord bless you” and the baraita “These are the things whose fruits a person enjoys in this world…” — but according to the view that God has stopped intervening, perhaps these are not considered “Torah” either? 🙂

And a few more questions:

A. If someone has not properly examined the possibilities of heresy, when it has already been explained in several places on this very site that he is not really a believer, since all his faith is in the category of “a child captured among the gentiles” — is he permitted to recite the blessings over Torah? After all, it has been explained that if someone does not believe, his commandments have no value. If so, how can someone who has not properly examined the possibility of heresy say, “Who sanctified us with His commandments,” when his commandments have no value?

B. After all, many of the authors of Torah literature — Tannaim and Amoraim, medieval authorities and later authorities — accepted belief innocently, following tradition, and did not properly examine the possibilities of heresy. Once we have learned that one who did not examine the possibility of heresy is not considered a “believer,” is the Torah of such a “non-believer” considered “Torah,” and is there not a concern here of “learning from one who does not believe”?

C. Can one ask, “Please make the words of Your Torah sweet in our mouths,” since for two reasons this is an improper request: 1. After all, the Holy One, blessed be He, does not intervene? 2. After all, performing commandments should be done without ulterior motives or biases, so how can we ask God to trip us up in learning with ulterior motives, which remove all the religious and moral value of the commandment to study Torah?

And regarding all this, may the teacher of righteousness instruct us, and so too may the Master say!

With blessings, Immanuel Jeremiah Kantinger

I didn’t write that someone who hasn’t examined things is not a believer. What I wrote is that if someone is afraid to examine things out of concern that he might become a heretic, that concern has no basis — because if he becomes a heretic, it will turn out retroactively that he had always been one, so what is gained by avoiding the examination?! But if a person believes innocently, he is a full believer and everything is fine. And these things are written explicitly in several places in my writings (including the trilogy)..

If someone is negatively influenced by arguments for heresy, does it “turn out retroactively” that he was never a believer? Why in the world? A person may fall into the net of heretical arguments because he lacks the knowledge and methodological tools to deal with those arguments.

The preventive “remedy” is in-depth study of faith from the books of the sages of Israel. In most cases the questions have already been raised, discussed, and answered. Even if these seem to be new arguments, someone who is steeped in the study of Jewish thought from its sources is aware of the depth and complexity of these matters. And just as one who studies Talmud knows that “no one dies from a difficulty,” and that after toil the answer comes, so too anyone who studies faith analytically will not be alarmed by every “difficulty,” but will labor to understand the depth of the matters, and “if you have labored and found, believe.”

Best regards, Sh"tz