Q&A: Orthodox and Conservative, and a Question About Reward and Punishment
Orthodox and Conservative, and a Question About Reward and Punishment
Question
Rabbi, good afternoon!
With your permission, three questions:
1. I’m trying to understand the dividing line between an Orthodox approach and a Conservative approach.
In one of the books, the third in the (fascinating!) trilogy, you drew a distinction between first-order decisors and second-order decisors.
This past Sabbath I was staying in Tel Aviv, and the prayer quorum where I prayed turned out to be one in which a woman read from the Torah and the Haftarah, and two other women were called up to recite the blessing.
I decided to take advantage of the opportunity and went to speak with the heads of the quorum after the prayer service. The impression I got was that they see themselves as an Orthodox quorum, and by their definition they rely on the Talmud as a source, and if they look for additional sources in the words of the medieval authorities and later authorities, that is done only as reinforcement, not as sources on which to base themselves. That of course immediately echoed your distinction for me.
If I try to summarize the conversation with them as an insight, then according to their approach the Orthodox are similar to the Conservatives, except that they reject their method because of policy considerations regarding what will better preserve a public committed to the commandments.
That is, in-depth Torah investigation will show that there is no essential difference, but reality proves that, as a matter of fact, members of the Conservative community generally will not ultimately see themselves as bound by Torah and commandments, whereas Orthodox ones will, and that is what affects the pace of introducing changes. Whether I’m close or completely mistaken, I’d be glad if you could help me sort this point out 🙂
2. A technical question—regarding the prayer itself on the Sabbath, is it relevant what kind of synagogue I prayed in? That is, if I prayed in a Conservative quorum—what halakhic questions arise for me?
3. Your distinction in the third book between absolute atheists and believers regarding whether their actions have religious value (commandment or transgression) or not is really interesting, and it makes me wonder about reward and punishment.
Do you believe there is reward and punishment? Heaven and hell? Resurrection of the dead and the World to Come?
Can one infer from your words that the deeds of an atheist Jew are not examined at all (commandments versus transgressions), and that his existence is limited only to this world, whereas for a believing person there are concepts like reward and punishment, resurrection of the dead, and the World to Come; he is judged before the Creator of the world, and all his actions are assessed in terms of their religious value?
Thank you and have a good week,
Matan
Answer
- I agree in principle, and I’ve written this more than once as well. There is no sharp line distinguishing Orthodox from Conservatives, and the right wing of the Conservatives has long since overlapped with the left wing of the Orthodox. Of course, there are many shades within each such group, so it’s hard to say this as a blanket statement about every quorum and every group. I think that in terms of the underlying conceptions this is roughly correct (perhaps the authority of the Talmud is a point of distinction. I’m not sure).
- I don’t think any do.
- I don’t know. I tend to think there is something that remains after death (because I am a dualist). As for the details, I have no idea, and I don’t think anyone does.
Discussion on Answer
I’m sure not. But I suggest asking them.
I don’t know how to explain to someone why it is worthwhile for him to do something. Calculations of worthwhileness are an individual matter. What I do know is how to try to explain what is right to do. And what is right has no connection whatsoever to reward and punishment. You also do a moral act because it is right, regardless of reward and punishment.
First of all, thank you very much for the answer!!!
With your permission, I’ll trouble you with one additional question in each of the sections—
1. Would more conservative rabbis also agree with the statement that there is no unequivocal distinction (even if they squirm uncomfortably), or would they reject this diagnosis altogether?
2. Reward and punishment—you are certainly right that we do not know for certain whether it exists and what the details are.
On the other hand, we are required to sacrifice (sometimes, quite a lot) in order to live a religious life, and here is my question:
What justifies living a life of commitment if there isn’t?
(Yes… I know that sounds self-interested and lowly…)
That is, the sacrifice is “worth it” when there is something for it, but if we won’t receive any recompense, and there is no difference between me and the ethical guy who became non-religious again (ethical on the social-moral level in the eyes of general society)—then what is the point?
Seemingly, we ought also to adopt the approach of “invent a religion for yourself”: embrace what seems to you right, moral, ethical, useful, and that’s it… Why toil over things that have only religious value? (As you suggested, in the distinction between universal morality and acts that have religious value, even if they are not moral.)
Thanks again!
Really appreciate it 🙂