Q&A: Defining God as “Whatever He Commands Must Be Done”
Defining God as "Whatever He Commands Must Be Done"
Question
I heard the Rabbi say several times that we are obligated to observe the commandments because that is what God said.
And whoever asks, “Why are we obligated to do what God commands?” has not understood what God is.
Well, then—I have not understood what God is.
That is: I do not understand why I am obligated to obey Him.
I would appreciate it if the Rabbi would explain the point that someone who asks why one must obey God has failed to understand.
In addition, who defines God that way?
Perhaps you could also clarify what is meant by “obligated”: is that something that exists on the other side, or also as a trait within me? And if it is also within me—I would appreciate further elaboration.
Answer
God is the One who created the world and us, and also commanded us various things. One must obey His commands by virtue of who He is. I have no explanation beyond that. You can read my article on philosophical gratitude; there is a bit more detail there.
Discussion on Answer
I have no way to explain it. It is like a person who understands moral values but does not understand that they obligate him to do something. But clearly it does not depend on your deciding. Every person is obligated to obey. If you do not understand that, then at most you are under compulsion. Like someone who does not see some fact—it does not change the fact.
Jumping into the discussion—
If we must obey by virtue of His being God, and not because we committed ourselves to it,
then what is the meaning of the oath to uphold the Torah that we swore at Sinai, to the point that if someone swears to nullify a commandment it does not take effect, because that is an oath upon an oath, since he is already sworn and standing from Mount Sinai?
After all, he is obligated by virtue of the command itself even without an oath.
Before you ask why we had to swear, ask whether we actually swore. There is not the slightest hint anywhere that there was an oath there. The Talmudic statement about being already sworn and standing is apparently a halakhic fiction.
In any case, the Holy One, blessed be He, could have commanded us without expecting consent, but He decided that He wants only a people that agrees. That is His right.
The question is whether every norm ultimately has to be grounded in ontology. Attaching an article I saw on the “Knowing Faith” website: https://www.knowingfaith.co.il/%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%A8/%D7%90%D7%A0%D7%99-%D7%90%D7%AA%D7%94-%D7%95%D7%90%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%A7%D7%99%D7%9D
I will ask the same about morality:
Who said that the laws of morality are binding?
In what sense is that a fact?
Morality is of course an important thing that it is very worthwhile to act in accordance with, but it is not obligatory.
What is “obligation” at all?
Is claiming “I have nothing to explain” not exactly the despair of reason that the Rabbi so strongly objects to?
No. Despair of reason is failing to use it where it is possible to use it. There are always basic concepts and basic assumptions, and regarding those there is no possibility of discussion.
I know and agree with the definition of God as the Rabbi described it.
What is still not clear to me is why I am obligated to obey.
That is, if not understanding a certain thing means I have not understood what God is—even though I understood and agreed with everything else except that—then maybe one can simply say that this is the thing that is unclear to me.
What is the basis for this obligation?
Is the obligation one of gratitude?
Is it possible for a person to say to himself, “I am not obligated,” and in fact not be obligated?
That is, he may be punished and so on.
But this obligation—is it something a person decides whether to commit himself to?