Q&A: And Do Not Stray
And Do Not Stray
Question
Hello Rabbi.
As you say, the prohibition of “do not stray” applies to a person without philosophical skill and/or one whose urges are pushing him to transgress, and therefore he reads heretical writings in order to escape.
Suppose there is a person who wants to study philosophy, thought, and religion in order to ground his life and be more thoughtful, grounded, wise, and not act merely out of inertia in life. He believes in the Torah, but deep down he has a small desire (“temptation”?) that Judaism not be true, because then he would be “exempt” from the burden of the commandments. Of course, if he reaches the conclusion that Judaism is true, then Judaism is true; and of course it could be that in the course of his inquiry he will discover that Judaism is sublime and that the very best and most fitting thing is to be a servant of God with all 248 limbs, and he might even be upset if he loses his faith in it. Is he permitted to embark on an inquiry (a very comprehensive one) that includes heretical writings (arguments against religion and the like)?
Answer
As far as I remember, I never wrote anywhere about a person’s skill. It is not relevant to the discussion.
A person who wants to clarify can clarify. As for having urges—we all have them.
Discussion on Answer
As far as I remember, I did not write such a thing.
https://mikyab.net/%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%AA/%D7%90%D7%99%D7%A1%D7%95%D7%A8-%D7%94%D7%97%D7%A7%D7%99%D7%A8%D7%94-%D7%9C%D7%92%D7%91%D7%99-%D7%A2%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%A8%D7%99-%D7%94%D7%90%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%94/
Rabbi, what in your opinion counts as an urge toward heresy/apostasy such that it would be appropriate to forbid such a person to investigate?
Does confronting Judaism with difficulties because you want to check whether there is a more attractive alternative for your life count, in your opinion, as an evil urge toward heresy?
It does not say here that if there is an urge, it is forbidden to investigate. It says that perhaps(!), if your doubts are not genuine but merely urge-driven—meaning that your goal is not clarification but finding a ladder for your urges—then there may be room to forbid investigation. That is a completely different claim.
And your question is just trolling. Checking for a more attractive alternative is not an urge. It is a motivation for examination.
I will not answer this kind of trolling any further.
Rabbi, I sent the link to show that you wrote about philosophical skill.
And I did not write in order to troll; I am genuinely struggling with this issue, and I respect you and the site and your work very much (very much).
I apologize.
I understand, but as I noted, that is not what is written there. It has nothing to do either with philosophical skill or with urges. I wrote there that the prohibition as such is not accepted by me at all. And if it can be understood at all, then only perhaps as a prohibition on a person who does not want to investigate and examine at all, but rather believes completely, and wants to use those books and arguments in order to follow his urges and sin. Meaning, he is not really examining and reaching conclusions, but using it as excuses. Anyone who wants to examine—regardless of whether he does or does not have urges, and regardless of whether he does or does not have skill—there is not, and cannot be, any prohibition in that. Therefore there is no point in asking me what exactly is included in the category of urge and what is not. And checking alternatives is certainly not included in urge. That is precisely the motivation for which one goes to examine, and rightly so.
Thank you. As far as I remember, I saw that you wrote that if a certain person lacks philosophical skill, then the prohibition may apply to him because it is a recipe for getting into trouble, so I added that here.