Q&A: The Ramchal’s “Conjured Pen,” and More About Evil in the World
The Ramchal’s “Conjured Pen,” and More About Evil in the World
Question
Hello Rabbi,
A.
In my humble opinion, a rational person would not believe, without good evidence, a claim that someone has spiritual powers—like a heavenly mentor, or a conjured pen, or divine inspiration, etc.
I assume that neither the Amoraim nor the medieval authorities (Rishonim) had more spiritual powers than we do; it’s just that to accept extraordinary claims, I require extraordinary evidence.
But yesterday a friend asked me a good question:
He asked: if in your opinion they didn’t have such powers, how do you explain the fact that serious and respected people claimed about themselves that they received things from Heaven—like the Ramchal, the Ari of blessed memory, the Amoraim, the Beit Yosef, and many others?
Were they lying? Imagining things?
What do you think explains statements by great figures about powers they had?
B.
Regarding evil:
According to the logical position that God mostly does not intervene,
and that He handed the world over to the human species and gave it freedom along with responsibility,
you have written more than once that the painful question of why God does not intervene and save humanity from evil and suffering is less difficult, since in order to sustain free choice there also has to be suffering and evil, and apparently it is not possible to play with the dosage.
A thought occurred to me, and I’d be glad to hear your opinion: does a person who brings a child into the world, and thinks that this is the right thing to do, thereby reveal a hidden belief of the following kind:
That he believes that although this world is dangerous and involves a major possibility and risk of suffering, he still assumes that the decision to bring a person here is a good one, even though he will not be able to help that child through large parts of his life, and the child will certainly experience suffering, and perhaps even a great deal of suffering.
And if so, then a person who has a child is exactly like God: both bring people into a world that has the potential for suffering and for good. And they justify bringing them here on the grounds that overall they hope things will be okay, and that the child will choose and experience good.
Without answering the question of why God does not intervene, a person who has a child is in effect claiming that despite all the suffering, it still makes sense to bring a child into our world with good intentions.
If so, such a person can wonder why God does not intervene, but he cannot doubt whether God’s motives are good.
What do you think?
Answer
A. Some of these claims are metaphorical. For example, Rabbi Margaliot writes in the introduction to his edition of Responsa from Heaven that when the Raavad says, “Divine inspiration appeared in our study hall,” his intention is that the matter was absolutely clear there to everyone. This is not a mystical claim, just a manner of expression.
There are also intelligent people who have delusions. There is no contradiction between those two things. And there are those who want to magnify the impression so that people will accept what they say.
And finally, it is also possible that there are such statements that are in fact true. That really is how it was.
B. I didn’t understand the explanation. That person cannot intervene, but God can.
Discussion on Answer
With God’s help, 4 Tammuz 5784
Elchanan—hello,
The analogy you gave is excellent. A parent wants his child to choose the path of good (as he understands it), but for that choice to come out of the child’s own desire and personal decision.
Therefore educators have to maneuver between guidance and reward that direct the student toward the path recommended by his educators, and giving the student room to cope on his own and find his way, sometimes by a process of “trial and error,” after which the student’s decision to choose the good will be internal and firm.
Proper and successful education is a constant balancing act between partial intervention that gives the student a “sense of direction,” and granting the student freedom of choice to arrive at the good through his own personal choice.
Total intervention gives the student a feeling of suffocation; complete elimination of parental intervention gives the student a feeling of losing his way, which harms his self-confidence. Good education follows the “golden mean.”
It seems to me that the Holy One, blessed be He, also runs His world this way: “touching and not touching.” He directs, guides, and follows everything that is done, but decides, out of educational judgment, when intervention is needed and when freedom of action and room for choice are needed.
Best regards,
Fish"l
A. I didn’t understand. People who came from Heaven? A text of people that came from Heaven? So is it by people or from Heaven? You should get clear on what you mean before asking.
B. Does that need proof? If there are good reasons that justify the suffering, then it is justified, and if not, then not.
A.
I’m perfectly clear.
I mean a text that came from a human being but through some spiritual force, like the Ramchal’s conjured pen or the Vilna Gaon’s lot.
In short: is there any case where you think it is reasonable to think there was a specific spiritual influence involved in producing the text?
B.
Never mind, it’s probably more of a psychological insight than a philosophical one: when a person has a child, he assumes that despite the uncertainty and insecurity, he has trust that it is the right thing.
A. What is the meaning of “influence”? Even in our intuition there are “mystical” influences. Spiritual intuitions all the more so (like a find that comes to a person when his mind is elsewhere). Even in the Raavad I mentioned, one can view the metaphor as a true expression of some kind of influence. So the question is not well defined. In the writings of the Ari, in my opinion, there are spiritual intuitions. Is that an influence? I don’t know.
If you mean something external that dictates the words of the text to a person and merely uses him as a conduit or a typewriter, then probably not.
Thank you very much, you helped me a lot.
Thank you very much.
A.
Do you think there are any people, or any text by people, for which it is reasonable to say that it came from Heaven? Of course other than the Torah and the Prophets.
B.
Right, it still isn’t clear why God does not intervene, but here a person proves that if God has some reason that prevents Him from intervening, then it is still good and right to allow such a world. After all, he is now acting exactly like God.