Q&A: Hard Questions
Hard Questions
Question
Hello Rabbi, and happy new year,
A. I had thought that I wanted to learn and teach Talmud in depth, but lately I’ve been rethinking it. There are many things in the world whose value is clearer and more tangible to us: saving lives (medicine, the security system), mathematical or scientific contributions that translate into knowledge about the world and technological developments, improving people’s mental state and preventing suffering, and so on. What logic is there in preferring vague goals, where it’s hard to understand exactly to whom and in what way they contribute—like the commandments, and especially Torah study for its own sake—over those goals whose importance feels much more tangible to me and in which I’m much more convinced? In other words, even if I keep Jewish law and so on, what logic is there in choosing a life of Torah study over those other goals?
B. In in-depth Talmud study, people spend a lot of time trying to reconcile various different laws within one commandment with one another, and to create a complete and coherent picture of that commandment, when sometimes it simply feels like there really is no such coherent picture, and the Sages just were not that consistent and orderly, and derived different interpretations from the verses that, if you follow them far enough, do not fit with one another. Isn’t trying to force all these things together simply self-deception?
C. Following from B: do you really believe in the divine origin of the hermeneutical principles? I read your explanations in the trilogy and so on, but sometimes I feel that I’m just trying to convince myself of this, and that there really is no chance that the Holy One, blessed be He, revealed to the Sages any initial core of the hermeneutical principles; rather, they simply started them on their own, and in fact this method just leads them to laws that are sometimes arbitrary and sometimes contradictory, etc., and when we study Talmud we’re just taking it upon ourselves to fix the complications they created with this method. Do you really believe that the hermeneutical principles (or some initial version of them) were given at Sinai?
D. When I heard the shofar on Rosh Hashanah, I realized that I’d heard so many little homiletic interpretations about what I’m supposed to think during the shofar that in the end I didn’t think about anything. Even if we strip away all the nonsense, there are at least two main meanings that seemingly contradict one another: A. the shofar as coronating God; B. the shofar as crying out / weeping / prayer. How can it be that with a commandment so central to the holiday, it’s not at all clear to us what it’s about? How can one fulfill commandments this way? What goal is achieved by performing commandments like this without fulfilling the purpose of the commandment, which is not clearly known to us?
Answer
A. You assume that worthy goals are only things that help people and the world. But that is a mistake. I’ll illustrate this with my favorite story about the poor Chinese man. He received two pennies and bought a slice of bread and a flower with them. They asked him why he hadn’t bought two slices of bread, and he explained: I bought the bread so I could live, and the flower so that there would be something to live for.
It is very strange to regard helping people as the goal of life and the goal of creation. After you help them, they’ll live well and society will function properly. But why should they live well, and why should society function properly? What are people and society themselves there for?
B. The question is too general. So I can only respond in general terms. If you think the Sages were just playing around, then indeed there is no value or meaning to the whole game. You’ve lost trust in the system. But that is really not plausible. Why invest so much energy in games like that? What would be their purpose? So it is more reasonable that they were indeed trying to reach the truth as best they could. They were human beings, and of course they could make mistakes. We can try to organize their statements in the best way possible, and hope that this is indeed the intent. If you have an alternative that seems more credible to you, then maybe you really should follow it. I don’t see such an alternative. True, there is no need to overdo the coercion for the sake of coherence. When there is a contradiction and there is no good resolution, you should decide which of the two sides of the contradiction you accept. Unreliable pilpul is not the truth, and it is not right to get drawn into it. Just bear in mind that sometimes analysis of positions and claims leads to a coherent picture that the speaker himself was not aware of, and it is still a correct interpretation. You can search here for the dispute between the Seridei Esh and Rabbi Yehoshua Hutner regarding Rabbi Chaim and Maimonides, and my discussions around it.
C. Same as above. It is highly implausible otherwise. It is much more reasonable—and also fits the facts better—that the principles were given at Sinai in a raw, embryonic form, and were conceptualized and elaborated over the generations.
D. Don’t think about anything, and ignore the little homiletic interpretations. Those are good for Sheva Berakhot and for kiddush in synagogue on the Sabbath with herring. You just need to intend to fulfill your obligation. That’s all.
Discussion on Answer
I don’t see any connection between the question of understanding and the question of importance. If you believe in the Torah and in its importance, then you must observe it regardless of understanding. And if you do not believe, then what is this whole discussion about?! Suppose you have some medical knowledge and you understand how a certain medicine works. Would that be a reason to take it instead of another medicine that the doctor recommends?
Thank you for the answers.
As for A, I think I wasn’t understood correctly. There are goals that make more sense to me, regardless of helping. The beauty of art or music, or discovering the truth about the world through science, and likewise goals of producing pleasure or preventing suffering—these are goals whose importance is very intuitively clear to me (to my mind), much more than the goals of the commandments, and certainly more than the goal of Torah study. Wouldn’t it make more sense, then, to engage in those and give less weight to the commandments and Torah study as a central occupation?
As for D, what logic is there in the commandment of shofar if we understand nothing about it beyond the action itself? Do you really think the purpose of the shofar is “to effect spiritual repairs,” and that it has no connection at all to something we are supposed to understand?