Questions from a College Student

Some time ago, I received the following series of questions from a (non-Jewish) college student from a course she was taking. These were questions that she had to answer about several different religions, and she had been referred to me as a resource on Judaism. I have edited the questions slightly, to focus specifically on Judaism (as the original questions were written with reference to multiple religions).

---

How would Judaism react to the following issues:

• Animal testing 

Judaism recognizes a general prohibition against causing unnecessary suffering to animals. (This prohibition is derived from several Biblical sources, including Exodus 23:5.) Thus, for example, virtually all Jewish authorities prohibit hunting for sport. Even when the use of animals is permitted, which is the general rule for human benefit (e.g. food, clothing, labor), there is still an obligation  to refrain from causing excessive suffering. With regard to animal testing and experimentation, the general approach taken by most authorities is that, assuming steps are taken to avoid unnecessary suffering, animal testing and experimentation is permitted as long as it provides a real and non-trivial benefit to human beings. However, while simple in principle, practical application of this rule can be complex, and can only be determined on a case-by-case basis.

• Famine

(I’m not clear on what the “issue” of famine is in the first place. I am going to assume that the question is what the Jewish position is on helping people that are suffering from famine (although that would seem to be rather obvious).)

Judaism has always stressed charity as a moral obligation and providing aid to those who are suffering from starvation and famine is obviously an integral part of that obligation. In practical terms, when one personally encounters such suffering there is a clear obligation to provide aid to the best of one’s ability. There is also a broad moral obligation to make efforts to provide aid to suffering people wherever they may be, but what this means in practical terms must be dealt with on a case by case basis.

• Women’s reproductive rights

In general, the terminology of “rights”, rather than obligation, is foreign to traditional Jewish thought. Like every aspect of life, reproduction is encompassed by a number of laws and obligations in Judaism. There is a basic commandment to “be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28), which is understood to bear within it a prohibition against engaging in any kind of birth control (unless medically necessary). Abortion is forbidden as a crime akin to murder, and is only permitted when necessary to save the life of the mother. Again, outside of clear medical emergencies, the exact application of these rules can be complex and can only be determined on a case-by-case basis.

• Environmental concerns

There are many traditional Jewish teachings that indicate that, although God has given the earth to mankind to use for his benefit, we are expected to do so in a responsible manner. Wanton wastefulness is explicitly forbidden by Jewish law. (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hil. Melachim 6:8-10) There are also sources that indicate an obligation to maintain the public domain in an aesthetically pleasing manner, and to avoid damaging the environment in a way that harms other people.

• Homosexuality

Judaism absolutely prohibits engaging in any form of homosexual relations. Male homosexual relations is explicitly forbidden by the Torah (Leviticus 18:22, 20:13) as a crime bearing the death penalty. The prohibition against female homosexual relations is derived from Leviticus 18:3, and while completely  forbidden, is of a less severe nature. It should be noted that all of this refers only to actual relations. Sexual orientation per se is of no significance in Jewish law.

What does Judaism teach about what happens in death? Reincarnation and the soul?

Judaism absolutely recognizes the existence of the “soul”, which can be best understood as the non-physical locus of the human personality. One of the basic foundations of Judaism is the concept of reward and punishment, i.e. that God rewards us for our good deeds and punishes us for our (unrepented) bad deeds. Included in this principle is the concept that the primary domain of reward and punishment is the afterlife.

The concept of reincarnation does exist in Judaism, however the concept is markedly different from popular conceptions of the idea.

How does Judaism view God? Does an all-powerful God allow people to suffer?

Judaism defines God as the omnipotent and omniscient Source of Existence. All existence is dependent upon Him, but He is not dependent on anything. He is the only true Power in the universe, and nothing can happen against His will. This includes that which we perceive as evil.  As the prophet Isaiah said, “I am the LORD, and there is none else, beside Me there is no God... That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside Me; I am the LORD; and there is none else; I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I am the LORD, that doeth all these things.” (Isaiah 45:5-7)

How can a person reach salvation in Judaism?

The general theme of “Salvation” is a Christian concept that does not carry over well to Judaism. Of course, when we are threatened with destruction, either as individuals or as a group, we pray to God for salvation from destruction. Similarly, when we have sinned we are required to repent and pray to God to forgive us and save us from our iniquity. However, the general idea that a human being is, by nature, “unsaved” is foreign to Judaism.

What is the meaning or purpose of life in Judaism?

Judaism sees the purpose and goal of human life as striving to achieve an ever-growing connection with God. One achieves this connection through the fulfillment of God’s commandments, prayer, and the study of His Torah.

---

The Merit of Mordechai

In the opening verse of Shoshanas Yakov, we say, שושנת יעקב צהלה ושמחה בראותם יחד תכלת מרדכי – “The rose of Jacob (i.e. the Jewish people) was cheerful and happy when together they saw the techeiles (i.e.blue-dyed cloth) of Mordechai.” The language of the poem seems to indicate that there was some special significance to the techeiles worn by Mordechai, as if it was this, in particular, that brought joy to the Jewish people. Rabbi Shlomo Kluger (d.1869), in an essay for Parshas Zachor (ספר קהלת יעקב על המועדים, פרשת זכור, דרוש ג), raises this question, asking why the poem specifically mentions the techeiles of Mordechai.

To answer this question, R’ Shlomo Kluger begins by citing the Talmudic statement (Shabbos 55a), “תמה זכות אבות” – “the merit of the Patriarchs has ended.” (ועיין שם בתוס' ד"ה ושמואל אמר) The Jewish people were therefore afraid that, without zechus avos (the merit of the Patriarchs), they would be destroyed by Haman.

What is zechus avos? R’ Shlomo Kluger explains:

עיקר זכות האבות התחיל מאברהם, שכולם היו כופרים בו ית' והוא בשכלו חקר ודרש והבין שיש בורא כל העולמים, והכיר את בוראו, ומסר עצמו על כבוד שמו להיות נופל לכבשן האש, וממנו התחיל זכות האבות.

The primary merit of the Patriarchs began with Abraham, for [his contemporaries] were all deniers of His existence, but [Abraham] delved and sought with his intellect and came to understand that there is a Creator of the Universe. He willingly gave his life for the honor of God’s name when he was cast into the fiery furnace [and was miraculously saved]. It was from this that the merit of the Patriarchs began.

R’ Shlomo Kluger continues that when our relationship with God is based only on the tradition that we received from our ancestors, without coming to know God from our own understanding, then we are dependent entirely on zechus Avos. Just as we find, in Jewish law, that those idolaters who engage in idolatry simply on a cultural basis, following in the path of their ancestors (מנהג אבותיהם בידיהם), are not considered to be idolaters in the full sense, the same is true, in reverse, for the Jewish people. When we base our belief in God and our observance of His Torah on nothing but the fact that this is what we were taught by our ancestors, without any independent recognition and understanding of our own, then we do not truly have a fully developed relationship with God. In such a case we are dependent entirely on the merit of our ancestors, for it is only due to their efforts that we have any connection to God at all. This merit, as great as it is, is ultimately finite, and it is for this reason that the Jewish people were afraid.

However, R' Shlomo Kluger explains, a new zechus Avos for the Jewish people began to shine forth from Mordechai. For like Abraham, Mordechai had come to know God through his own understanding, fulfilling the injunction of King David to his son, Solomon, to "know the God of your father" (1 Chronicles 28:9) and not simply rely on your father's tradition.

The Talmud (Sotah 17a) tells us that the symbolic message of the string of techeiles on the tzitzis is that the color of the techeiles resembles the sea, the sea resembles the sky, and the sky resembles God's "Throne of Glory." R' Shlomo Kluger understands this to symbolically express the idea that we are supposed to study and contemplate the world and through this work our way up to an independent recognition of God.

By emphasizing the techeiles, the Shoshanas Yakov is telling us that the Jewish people recognized that Mordechai had this characteristic, and it is for this reason that they rejoiced for they understood that in this merit there would be a new zechus Avos for the Jewish people.

---

Mikeitz - The Error of Desperation

At the end of last week's parsha, after Joseph intepreted the dream of Pharaoh's wine steward and told him that he would be freed from prison, he asked the wine steward to intercede on his behalf with Pharaoh. Yet, upon being freed, the wine steward immediately forgot Joseph and did nothing for him.

Parshas Mikeitz begins exactly two years later, when Pharaoh is himself experiencing a dreams that no one is able to explain. Suddenly the wine bearer remembers Joseph, the man who had interpreted his own dreams while he had been in prison.

The Midrash Raba (פט:ג) states that there was a reason for this two year delay:

ע"י שאמר לשר המשקים זכרתני והזכרתני ניתוסף לו שתי שנים

Because he said to the wine steward “remember me… and mention me” two years were added [to his time in prison].”

The Midrash seems to indicate that by asking the steward for help, Joseph demonstrated insufficient bitachon – trust in God. This is extremely puzzling, as we know that it is permitted, even required, to make normal efforts to solve our problems. We are not supposed to simply sit back and wait for God to miraculously help us. So what was wrong with what Joseph did?

The Chazon Ish

The Chazon Ish, Rav Avraham Yeshaya Karelitz (d.1953), in his work אמונה ובטחון, explains that the true essence of bitachon is an absolute certainty that God is always in control of events. A person who genuinely believes this will therefore never give up hope or act out of desperation, because he knows that even if he is not able to do anything himself, God is still in control.

When a person who feels a sense of desperation, i.e. that he has a problem for which he can find no reasonable solution, he will often attempt to solve his problem through methods that are extremely unlikely to succeed. He will do strange and unusual things because he believes that he has run out of alternatives. However, a person with genuine bitachon will never do this, because he always has God to fall back on.

In other words, while we are required to take normal, rational steps to care for ourselves, and we are not permitted to simply rely on God to miraculously provide us with all our needs and solve all our problems, this does not mean that bitachon has no practical expression. Bitachon means that once one has exhausted all reasonable means to deal with a problem, then the problem is no longer your responsibility. A person with genuine bitachon never feels that he has to "do something", no matter how crazy, because "doing something is better than doing nothing." From a Torah perspective, if the "something" is nothing more than a shot-in-the-dark act of desperation, then doing nothing actually is better than doing "something", for doing "something" demonstrates that one doesn't really believe that God is in control.

Based on this concept, the Chazon Ish explains that the nature of Egyptian society was such that it was extremely unlikely that the wine steward - a high ranking nobleman - would repay Joseph - a foreign slave - by mentioning him to the king. Thus, when Joseph asked the steward to remember him and mention him to Pharaoh, he knew that this was really just a wild "shot-in-the-dark", and that it was extremely unlikely to succeed. Such an act of desperation expressed a lack of bitachon that was inappropriate for a person on Joseph’s high spiritual level.

---

The Thirteen Attributes of Mercy - The 13 Middos Shel Rachamim

One of the main features of the prayers of the High Holy Days is the recitation of the י"ג מדות של רחמים – the Thirteen Attributes of Mercy. These play a particularly prominent role in the daily Selichos recited at this time and in the Yom Kippur prayers. The Thirteen Attributes of Mercy were first revealed to Moses by God in the aftermath of the sin of the golden calf, when God forgave the Jewish people. (Exodus 34:6-7) The Talmud (Rosh Hashana 17b) tells us that God established a covenant that the Thirteen Attributes of Mercy never go unanswered and that God instructed Moses, “Whenever the Jewish people sin, let them perform this ‘order’ and their sins will be forgiven.”

There are, unsurprisingly, a vast number of commentaries on the exact meaning of these Thirteen Attributes and there is even some dispute about exactly how the words in these two verses should be divided into thirteen. For the ordinary person who wishes to recite the Thirteen Attributes with proper kavanah (intent), however, there is a need for a basic, straightforward, interpretation of the attributes that one can actually have in mind during prayer.

Moreover, as should be obvious, the Thirteen Attributes of Mercy are not a magical incantation of forgiveness. The Reishis Chochma (R’ Eliyahu di Vidas d.1592) writes (שער הענוה פרק א') that the Gaonim point out that the Talmud does not say that the Jewish people should “recite this order” for their sins to be forgiven, but that they should “perform this order.” This means that we must emulate these middos (attributes) in our own lives, and through this we will gain forgiveness. It is therefore important that when we recite these attributes, we have a clear idea of what they mean, not only as descriptions of God’s mercy, but also as practical guides for our own behavior.

The following is an highly condensed explanation of the Thirteen Attributes of Mercy that I compiled several years ago for my students (based on a wide variety of sources). After each attribute I am including, in parentheses, some additional commentary and notes on how we can apply this middah in practical terms. 

1. ה' – “Hashem” – God is merciful before we sin. (Even though He knows that we will sin, He is still merciful. So too, we should be kind and considerate to others, even if we don’t think they will appreciate it or reciprocate.)
   
   
2. ה' – “Hashem” – He is merciful after we sin when we repent. (If someone hurt us and sincerely wishes to make amends, we should forgive them wholeheartedly.)
   
   
3. א-ל – “God” – His power saves us from our sins after we repent. (If someone sincerely wishes to make amends for hurting us, then we should share the burden of reparation with them.)
   
   
4. רחום – “Merciful” – His mercy is active even before we repent. (If someone hurt us, we should not respond with anger and rejection, but with love and kindness, showing that way to forgiveness is still open.)
   
   
5. וחנון – “And Gracious” – He is kind to us even when we have not earned it.
   
   
6. ארך אפים – “Slow to Anger” – He waits patiently for us to repent. (Instead of punishing us immediately for our sins, as would be justified, God gives us time to repent on our own and avoid punishment. So too, if someone wrongs us, we should give the person time to make amends.)
   
   
7. ורב חסד – “And Abundant in Kindness” – He is biased to judge us favorably. (Whenever there is room for “doubt”, God’s kindness inclines Him to judge us favorably. Similarly, whenever there is room for doubt, we should judge others favorably.)
   
   
8. ואמת: – “And Truth” – He keeps His promises of good even if we are not deserving. (If we promised to do a good thing for another person, we should keep our word even if the person no longer deserves it.)
   
   
9. נצר חסד לאלפים – “He Keeps Kindness for Thousands [of generations]” – He rewards the righteous for two thousand generations. (If we owe a debt of gratitude to someone, we should continue to express that gratitude even to that person’s descendants.)
   
   
10. נשא עון – “He Lifts Up Sin” – When we repent, God “lifts up” our sins [of temptation]…
    
    
11. ופשע – “And Rebellion” – And our sins of rebellion…
    
    
12. וחטאה – “And Error” – And our unintentional sins, and transforms them into merits. (When a person sincerely wishes to make amends for hurting us, we should use this as an opportunity to develop an even closer friendship with the person.)
    
    
13. ונקה – “And He cleans” – Even when we need to be punished (i.e. cleansed) for our sins, He does so gradually, rather than overwhelmingly at once. (Even with repentance, the spiritual damage caused by the more severe sins may still require suffering to fully rectified. Even so, if the total punishment would be beyond our capacity to handle at once, then God spreads it out over time. So too, even in those cases where we must demand that someone make reparations for the harm that they have caused us, we should still be merciful and not demand that they do so in a way that is too difficult for them to handle.)

---

Ki Savo - The Tochacha and Serving God with Joy

The bulk of Parshas Ki Savo discusses the prophecy of reward and punishment for the Jewish people. The Torah tells us that if we listen to the voice of God and obey his commandments, then we will be greatly blessed. It is here that we find the famous verses (Deuteronomy 28:3,6):

ברוך אתה בעיר וברוך אתה בשדה:

ברוך אתה בבאך וברוך אתה בצאתך:

“Blessed shall you be in the city, blessed shall you be in the field.

Blessed shall you be in coming, blessed shall you be in going.”

The prediction of blessing for obedience to the commandments of God is followed by the Tochacha – the Admonition. In the Tochacha, the Torah describes, at length and in very harsh and frightening terms, the terrible punishments that await the Jewish people, as a people and as individuals, when they fail to obey the commandments of the Torah. The Tochacha speaks of warfare and slavery, disease and madness, famine and poverty, and every other form of human suffering. The concept of reward and punishment is made very graphically clear.

Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch writes (Deuteronomy 28:1) that the Tochacha is intended to stress the responsibility of every individual for the spiritual welfare of the nation. For when the nation suffers for its general failings, every individual – even the most righteous – suffers with it.

Although the subject matter of the Tochacha is very difficult for us, it also provides us with an essential key to understanding the events of Jewish history. The Jewish people have experienced great suffering over the millennia, despite consistently being morally superior to the surrounding peoples. This is the result of our special relationship with Hashem. Like any caring parent, God does not want His children to simply be superior to the surrounding environment, but that they should be truly good and righteous. Once we have absorbed the lessons of the Tochacha, the tragedies of Jewish history, while still tragic, are no longer mysteries.

When the Tochacha is read in the congregation on Shabbat, the custom is to read it in a low voice. Rav Avigdor Miller explained (The Path of Life p. 293) that this is to teach us an important lesson. Even when it is necessary to give strong rebuke to another, it should be done in as gentle a manner as is possible. “The most effective way of communicating and having people listen to you is to speak in a soft voice. ‘The gentle words of the wise are heard.’ (Ecclesiastes 9:17)”

In the midst of the Tochacha we find the statement that the Jewish people are being afflicted with these terrible punishments because they did not serve God with joy (Deuteronomy 28:47):

תחת אשר לא עבדת את ה' אלקיך בשמחה ובטוב לבב מרב כל:

“For you did not serve Hashem your God with joy and a good heart, when all was abundant.”

At first glance, the implication of this verse is that although the people were performing the mitzvos properly, their lack of joy in their service to God resulted in severe punishment. This is very surprising. While we can readily readily recognize the virtue of joy in the performance of the mitzvos, the lack of joy—by itself—would not seem to warrant such harsh punishment.

R' Matisyahu Salomon

Rav Mattisyahu Salomon, the mashgiach of the Lakewood yeshiva, explains (מתנת חיים-מועדים עמ' קל"ה) that this is not the intent of the Torah. Certainly, the grave punishments of the Tochacha are reserved only for the complete failure to perform the mitzvot entirely. The intent of the verse here is simply to explain how it is possible that the Jewish people could ever fall to such a low level of Torah observance. The Torah teaches us that this can only happen if, even when the Jewish people were observing the mitzvot, their observance was joyless. Only then could they come eventually to abandon the mitzvot entirely.

This teaches us a very important lesson. If one does not find joy in Torah and mitzvot, this is a clear indication that his Torah and mitzvot are flawed in some significant way. Perhaps he doesn’t properly appreciate the significance of mitzvot. Or perhaps he is performing the mitzvot incorrectly. A dry and mechanical observance of the mitzvot will quickly lose its appeal. We are required to find a way to serve God with joy.

Whenever we encounter an obligation that touches upon our inner feelings, people will often ask how can God command us to feel a certain way? We often hear people say, "I can't help how I feel!", as if our feelings are not subject to our control, and, in fact, there is a significant degree of truth to this. Exerting direct control over our feelings can be very difficult, and in many cases it is not possible, and attempting to do so can actually be harmful. But if this is true, then how can God demand from us that we control our emotions? For example, in our case, how can God require us to serve Him "with joy and a good heart"?

The answer is that while our emotions may seem to arise as if of their own accord from our experiences, how we perceive our experiences has a profound impact on our feelings and emotions. The exact same experience can inspire very different feelings, even in the same person, depending on how the person interprets or perceives the experience.

I remember once, as a child (I was probably about 9 years old), I was walking with some friends in our neighborhood and we encountered an older boy. He was probably only about 13 years old, but to us he seemed like a really big boy, almost an adult. He came over to us and starting asking us impolite questions, and making faces at us, and generally being rude. So we were rude back, and he started to run after us, and we ran away, and we called him names, etc. While this was going on we ran into an adult we knew, and we told him, "That boy is being mean to us!" He looked at the boy and, to our surprise, he became visibly upset, at us! He explained to us that this boy had not been making fun of us, he was mentally disabled and he was just being friendly. I still remember how this one piece of information hit me like a wave of ice water. Suddenly, in the place of my sense of justified anger, I felt guilt and shame. I looked at the boy, and now I could see it too, that he was just being nice and how confused and hurt he was by our behavior. Even today, more than thirty years later, I feel guilty when I think about this incident.

Ultimately, all of our emotions are rooted in how we perceive the world around us, and if our perception of the world is erroneous, then our feelings will reflect that error. It precisely in this manner that we are required to control our emotions, not by simply repressing our feelings, but by bringing our mental picture of the world into congruence with the ultimate truth revealed in the Torah.

In no area is this more important than with regard to happiness, and it is for this reason that failure to serve God with happiness is indicative of a much deeper spiritual problem. God has given us the great gifts of Torah and mitzvos, yet so often we act as if these are not gifts at all but burdens! This is rooted in a fundamentally distorted perception of our relationship with God that can be illustrated with the following analogy:

Imagine the owner of a small store, living in an urban neighborhood. Everyday he struggles to keep his business functioning, so that he can bring home enough money to pay the bills. Then one day, the door opens and in walks one of the local mobsters, followed by two huge thugs. "Nice store you have here, bud," he says with a grin, "wouldn't want to see anything happen to it." The two thugs chuckle, as a chill runs down the store-owner's back. "Tell you what," the mobster continues, "we have a service for guys like you. All you gotta do is pay a monthly fee, and we guarantee that nothing happens to your place of business. It's like insurance. You interested?" The storeowner knows exactly what is happening, and he realizes that he has no choice but to agree. "How much?" "A special deal for you, just $10 a month," the mobster replies, "that's practically for free!" And so, every month, the store-owner hands over his $10 dollars. And even though it's just $10, every time he pays that money he is filled with anger and resentment. But he has no choice; the mobster is stronger than him and if he doesn't do what the mobster says, then the mobster will destroy everything he has.

Now imagine, in a parallel universe, the same store-owner, and one day the door opens and in walks a fellow in a suit. "Hi," he says with a smile, "I don't know if you remember me, but I grew up in this neighborhood. You once helped me when I was a little kid and one of the bigger kids was bullying me. I have done very well for myself over the years, and I really want to show my gratitude to you, and to the community as a whole that got me off to such a great start. I think your store could do very well with a proper capital investment, so I would like to become a silent partner in your business." The surprised store owner asks, "How much money are you talking about?" and the fellow responds with a number well into the seven digits. "Don't worry," the fellow says, "your obligation to me will be minimal. I'm not really looking to make money off this, so all you have to do is send me a monthly payment of $10 a month." The fellow then writes out a check, hands it to the store-owner, and walks out the door. And so, every month, the store-owner pays his ten dollars to his benefactor, and the every time he wonders how such a minuscule payment can possibly be sufficient. Surely he ought to be doing more, but the "investor" won't hear of it.

There are two ways that we can view our obligation to obey God's commandment. I can look at all that I have: my life, my wife, my children, my home, my job, my cars, my bank accounts, my intelligence, my health, etc. and I can say, "These are mine! But God says that if I don't do what He says, He will destroy it all!" So I obey, because God is stronger than me, and I am afraid. Yet, every time I obey God's command,  I resent it.

Or I can recognize the truth, that everything that I have in life was given to me by God. I had no prior claim on anything before He gave it to me; I didn't even exist! God owed me nothing, yet He gave all of this to me, even though I had done absolutely nothing to earn it. And now God tells me that there are some things that He expects from me. There are a some rules and regulations that apply to all of these gifts that he has given me. When one looks at the world with this perspective, it is impossible not to see the mitzvos as the ultimate bargain. How can you not serve God with joy, when you realize that all God wants in exchange for all that He has given us is that we follow a few rules?

The sad reality is that it is all too easy to forget the true nature of the world, and to see God as if He is interfering in our lives. Much of the daily prayer service is intended precisely to help us keep the true perspective clear in our minds. As we see from the Tochacha, this task is of central importance. A Judaism without joy is a Judaism that is doomed to failure, if not in one generation, then the next.

Rav Moshe Feinstein would frequently say, "People destroyed their children by always repeating es iz shver tzu zien a Yid (it is hard to be a Jew). No – it is not hard to be a Jew. It is beautiful and joyous to be a Jew." (Reb Moshe p.73) If we truly appreciate the privilege of Torah and mitzvos, then we will always be filled with joy and happiness that we are Jews.

---

Pinchas - The Miracles of Daily Life

At the end of Parshas Pinchas, we read of the various communal offerings made in the Temple on the mo'adim - the special "appointed" times of the year. Conventionally, the term mo'adim includes all the various festivals of the Jewish year, thus the Torah goes on to list the communal offerings of the festivals of Passover, Shavuos, Rosh Hashana, Yom Kippur, Sukkos and Shemini Atzeres. However, the Torah's discussion of the special offerings of the  mo'adim seems to go far beyond the conventional understanding of the term, and includes not only the festivals but also Rosh Chodesh (the new month), the Sabbath, and even the daily tamid offering.

R' Samson Raphael Hirsch (Numbers 28:2 and in his commentary on the Siddur, p.23) notes that the inclusion of the daily tamid offering into the category of the mo'adim conveys "a Truth of no small importance". He writes (in his Siddur):

God appointed מועדים, special occasions that attest to His rule and summon His people to His presence, to commemorate annually His mighty acts in Egypt, at the Red Sea, on Mount Sinai and in the wilderness. These miracles actually involved suspension by God of the natural order which He Himself had instituted, and thus bear eloquent witness to His greatness. In the same manner, God also appointed the transitions of morning and evening, which occur daily with clock-like regularity, to be מועדים too. These daily, "ordinary" natural phenomena are also to serve as messengers testifying to God's power and summoning the people to worship Him, to demonstrate to us the hand of God as it can be seen even in the course of the world, and to call each of us to come before Him.

For the very steadiness, the regularity, of the phenomena of nature is a much clearer, more wonderful manifestation of Divine wisdom and omnipotence than the suspension of these natural laws when God's miracles were executed. In fact the purpose of these special acts of God which interrupted the regular order of nature was to point to Him as the Lawgiver of these natural laws, lest the thought of Him as Regulator, Master, and Lord of the world order be lost through the steady regularity of the natural phenomena.

In this passage, Rav Hirsch is articulating a very basic concept. Contrary to how we often think, the laws of nature are no less a product of God's will and power than even the most dramatic open miracles. In fact, fundamentally, the only distinction between the laws of nature and open miracles is that God apparently prefers the laws of nature to be the "normal" mode of operation for His universe. As Rav Hirsch points out, both here and elsewhere in his writings, the regularity and predictability of the natural laws can cause us to overlook or forget that they are not fundamentally any different from outright miracles. Indeed, the primary function of miracles is precisely to remind us that all of the natural world is subject to God's will, and that even the most ordinary of natural events is actually a miracle.

The principle being taught here by Rav Hirsch can be found in many earlier sources. In his commentary on Exodus 13:16, the Ramban (Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman, also known as Nachmanides, d.1270) develops this theme at some length, arguing that the function of miracles is to testify to the truth of the basic principles of belief, that God is all powerful and that He supervises and manages the events of this world. The Ramban summarizes this idea in a famous statement:

ומן הניסים הגדולים המפורסמים אדם מודה בנסים הנסתרים, שהם יסוד התורה כולה. שאין לאדם חלק בתורת משה רבינו עד שיאמין שכל דברינו ומקרינו כולם נסים, אין בהם טבע ומנהגו שך עולם, בין ברבים בין ביחיד.

From the great public miracles, man is led to acknowledge the hidden miracles, for they (i.e. the hidden miracles) are the foundation of the entire Torah. For a man can have no share in the Torah of Moses until he believes that everything that happens to us, whether as a community or as individuals, is entirely miraculous, and there is no element of "nature" or "the way of the world" in them.

Sometimes people, especially children, ask why God doesn't perform miracles for us nowadays. In fact, with the exception of the period immediately following the Exodus from Egypt, miracles have always been relatively rare events. Even in the days of the prophets, the ordinary Jew lived a life governed, on the surface at least, by natural laws. Why doesn't God perform miracles for on a regular basis? Wouldn't that make it easier for us to be better and more faithful Jews?

There are many answers to this question (not the least being that, as we see from the sins of the golden calf and the spies, the mere fact that one has witnessed open miracles does not ensure that one will avoid even obvious sins). This principle that we have just learned from Rav Hirsch and the Ramban gives us a deeper insight into why this is so. Ultimately, the will of God is not that we should recognize Him when He performs open miracles. God wants us to recognize His presence in every aspect of the natural world. In even the most ordinary and mundane elements of life, we should see the wisdom and kindness of the Creator.

Rav Avigdor Miller

One recent figure who truly embodied this idea was Rav Avigdor Miller ז"ל (d.2001). Rav Miller was famous for his ability to appreciate the wisdom and kindness of God in every aspect of life. I once heard Rav Simcha Bunim Cohen, a prominent Lakewood rabbi who is married to Rav Miller's granddaughter, speak of a minor incident he witnessed with Rav Miller that illustrated his unique ability in this area. Rabbi Cohen was accompanying Rav Miller on one of his regular walks in Rav Miller's Brooklyn neighborhood. As they were walking, Rav Miller noticed a peach pit lying on the sidewalk. Pausing in his walk, Rav Miller began to jump up and down on the peach pit. Somewhat bemused by Rav Miller's surprising behavior, Rabbi Cohen asked him what he was doing. Rav Miller pointed to the peach pit and asked him if it appeared damaged. Rabbi Cohen responded that it looked fine. Then Rav Miller pointed out that the peach pit is so hard that he had been unable to break it open even by jumping up and down on it, yet if it was placed in the ground and watered, after a while it would simply open up on its own and a delicate new plant would grow from it, eventually developing into a new peach tree. From this we see the wisdom and kindness of the Creator, Rav Miller continued, for he provided the seed with a strong protective shell, yet that hard shell will automatically open when it is time for the young tree to come out.

This story represents an ideal that we all need to work towards. We need to be aware of God's presence, of His wisdom and kindness, in every moment of our lives. We should see him in the food we eat, in the functioning of our bodies, and in every aspect, both human and natural, of the world around us. Rav Miller himself wrote a great deal about this idea, much of which is based upon the classic mussar work, Chovos HaLevavos. In particular, the second section of the Chovos HaLevavos, called the Shaar HaBechina (The Gate of Examination), focuses on this essential concept.

---

Balak - The School of Abraham and the School of Balaam

In Parshas Balak we encounter the enigmatic case of the wicked prophet Balaam. The very idea of a wicked prophet raises obvious questions. Perhaps the most basic question is how can a person who speaks to God choose to act wickedly?

The key to this puzzle is found in the mishna in Pirkei Avos (5:19 or nearby) in which the Sages teach us:

כל מי שיש בידו שלשה דברים הללו מתלמידיו של אברהם אבינו, ושלשה דברים אחרים מתלמידיו של בלעם הרשע.

עין טובה ורוח נמוכה ונפש שפלה - מתלמידיו של אברהם אבינו. 

עין רעה ורוח גבוה ונפש רחבה - מתלמידיו של בלעם הרשע.

Whoever has these three things is from the disciples of our father Abraham, and whoever has three other things is from the disciples of the wicked Balaam.

A good eye, a subdued spirit, and a modest personality - [such a person is] from the disciples of our father, Abraham.

A wicked eye, an uplifted spirit, and a greedy personality - [such a person is] from the disciples of the wicked Balaam.

The commentaries discuss the exact nature of each of these traits (and bring Scriptural examples of each in connection to Abraham and Balaam). The basic explanation of these three traits (and its opposite extreme) is as follows:

• עין טובה - A Good Eye: This refers to the trait of הסתפקות - being satisfied with what one has. The opposite is the "wicked eye", which is a jealousy of others and a desire to possess that which belongs to them. The full extent of the "good eye" - as defined by Rabbeinu Yonah - is generosity, i.e. the ability to give to others.
• רוח נמוכה - A Subdued Spirit: This refers to humility. The opposite is the "uplifted spirit", i.e. arrogance and pride.
• נפש שפלה - A Modest Personality: This refers to the trait of self-control with regard to physical desires. The opposite is the "greedy personality" that constantly seeks to satisfy every desire.

The mishna continues:

מה בין תלמידיו של אברהם אבינו לתלמידיו של בלעם הרשע? תלמידיו של אברהם אבינו אוכלין בעולם הזה ונוחלין בעולם הבא, שנאמר, "להנחיל אוהבי יש ואוצרותיהם אמלא." אבל תלמידיו של בלעם הרשע יורשין גיהנם ויורדין לבאר שחת, שנאמר, "ואתה אלהים תורידם לבאר שחת אנשי דמים ומרמה לא יחצו ימיהם ואני אבטח בך."

What is the [ultimate] difference between the disciples of our father Abraham and the disciples of the wicked Balaam? The disciples of our father Abraham eat in this world and inherit the world to come, as it says (Proverbs 8:21), "To cause those that love Me to inherit substance [in the world to come], and I shall fill their storehouses [in this world]." But the disciples of the wicked Balaam inherit Gehinom and descend into the pit of destruction, as it says (Psalms 55:24), "But you, God, shall bring them down into the pit of destruction, men of blood and deceit shall not live out half their days, and I shall trust in You."

There is a great deal to discuss in this mishna, but we will focus on a very basic issue. Although the mishna is contrasting two groups of "disciples", the disciples of Abraham and the disciples of Balaam, it is not speaking of literal students of these men. Rather, a disciple is one who follows in the path of another. Thus, Abraham and Balaam represent two opposing schools of thought, each of which has followers.

Now, whenever we speak of opposing schools of thought, we are always speaking of two different approaches to the same subject matter. (Thus, we never speak of a debate between a school of thought in art and a school of thought in chemistry.) If there is a conflict between the school of Abraham and the school of Balaam, then both schools must be dealing with the same basic issues.

The Tiferes Yisrael (commentary on the Mishna by R' Yisroel Lipschutz, d.1860) explains the nature of the two schools of thought:

[מתלמידיו של אברהם אבינו] אפילו הוא עכו"ם, עכ"פ הוא מתלמידי אאע"ה שלימד לכל בני עולם דעת אלהים ומדות ישרות. ומה"ט לא נקט תנא תלמידי משרע"ה, דתלמידי משרע"ה צריכים לקיים כל התורה.

[One who possesses these three traits,] even if he is a gentile, is still from the disciples of our father, Abraham, for he taught all mankind the knowledge of God and upright character. It is for this reason that the mishna did not say, "the disciples of Moses, our teacher", for the disciples of Moses must uphold the entire Torah.

Thus, the school of Abraham is one that is far broader than the conventional limits of "Judaism," and applies to all mankind. It is the school that follows the basic teachings of Abraham, i.e. the knowledge of God (דעת אלהים) and upright character (מדות ישרות).

As is clear from Scripture, Balaam also fully recognized God as the Creator and All-Powerful Lord of the universe. Balaam also had דעת אלהים - the knowledge of God. However, while Balaam's intellectual recognition of God was of an extraordinarily high level, he did not recognize the importance of מדות ישרות - upright character. To Balaam, and those who follow in his path, the knowledge of God is all that matters. Yet, not only is this insufficient, but, as the mishna states, the knowledge of God without upright character is literally the path to damnation.

R' Samson Raphael Hirsch

This idea is expressed by R' Samson Raphael Hirsch in his commentary on the Torah in this parsha (Numbers 22:8) (emphasis added):

We saw in Abraham's time that, in the midst of a polytheistic world, there was still a Malchi Zedek, the priest of the highest god, who was the One and only God of the Abrahamites, how Job and his friends appeared as pure honourers of this One, so we see Balaam also considering himself and calling himself solely in service of this One.

Altogether, the monotheistic truth as opposed to the polytheistic error is not the special, and certainly not the whole, characteristic of Judaism. That is rather the monotheistic truth with the full realization of what it entails for human living, the identifying One God with one mode of life, by His revealed Law.

But Balaam's monotheistic spiritual height appears morally muddled, far off from even that of Malchi Zedek, far from a Job and his friends. His high spiritual gifts bringing him near to God were subordinated to his egoism and placed themselves at the service of earthly potentates and mighty ones and their lowest desires.

This is a profoundly important lesson. A Jew can only function as a Jew, a disciple of Moses, if he is already functioning on the more basic level of a proper human being, a disciple of Abraham. While a proper human being must have knowledge of God, that is only the beginning. To be a true disciple of Abraham one must also have מדות ישרות - proper character traits. Otherwise, regardless of one's apparent spiritual achievements, one is actually on the path to the pit of destruction.

---

The Fundamental Beliefs of Judaism - The Thirteen Foundations of Maimonides

About 800 years ago, Rabbi Moses Maimonides saw the need for a formal compilation of the most fundamental Jewish beliefs. The beliefs enumerated by Maimonides were certainly not new to Judaism; on the contrary, they were all broadly accepted concepts in Judaism.

In his compilation, which he wrote as part of his commentary on the Talmud, Maimonides succeeded in creating a summary of Jewish religious doctrine that has been accepted by Jews all over the world. Brief versions of these thirteen foundations are printed in most Jewish prayer books and many Jews recite them on a daily basis. The following is a basic summation of the thirteen foundations:

1. The First Foundation is to believe in the existence of God. God is defined as the Creator of all that exists. He is entirely independent of all that exists, but all that exists is dependent on His constant maintenance and control.
2. The Second Foundation is that God is one. God is absolutely simple; He has no parts or divisions, and there is nothing that can be compared to Him.
3. The Third Foundation is that God is not physical and physical concepts cannot be applied to Him.
4. The Fourth Foundation is that God existed prior to everything else.
5. The Fifth Foundation is that it is proper to serve God and it is improper to serve any other being, no matter its stature, even as an intermediary to God.
6. The Sixth Foundation is that there have been—and will be—people who have received communications from God. These people are called prophets.
7. The Seventh Foundation is that the prophecy of Moses, as embodied in the Torah—the first five books of the Bible—has absolute authority over all other prophecy. Moses achieved a higher level of prophecy than will ever be achieved by any other human being.
8. The Eighth Foundation is that the Torah is from God. We believe that the Torah that was conveyed to us by Moses is entirely the word of God. Even Moses himself did not add anything on his own.  This is also true for the traditional explanation of the Torah, which was also received directly from God. This traditional explanation is called the Oral Torah.
9. The Ninth Foundation is that the Torah is permanent. We may not add anything to or remove anything from the Torah. This is true for both the Written and Oral Torah.
10. The Tenth Foundation is that God knows the deeds and thoughts of man and never turns His eyes from us.
11. The Eleventh Foundation is that God rewards those who obey the commandments of the Torah and punishes those who violate its prohibitions. The primary domain of reward and punishment is in the afterlife.
12. The Twelfth Foundation is that God will eventually send the Messiah. The Messiah will be a descendant of King David. He will return the Jewish people to the land of Israel and rebuild the Holy Temple in Jerusalem. At this time the world will enter into a time of complete peace and security and all mankind will know God and serve Him wholeheartedly.
13. The Thirteenth Foundation is that at some time in the future all the righteous people from all time will be resurrected.

These are the thirteen fundamental beliefs of Judaism. Maimonides’ use of the word “foundations” is very specific. Just as in erecting a building, the foundation is only the beginning; similarly, these foundations are only a starting point.

There is a wide spread notion, found in many popular books on Judaism, that Judaism makes no creedal demands upon its adherents, but demands only righteous action. This myth originated in the 18th century, and there is no support for it anywhere in traditional Jewish literature, whether in Scripture, the Talmudic and Kabbalistic literature, the writings of the medieval Jewish philosophers, or later.

Adherents to this misconception often point to the controversy surrounding Maimonides’ Foundations as evidence for their case. They assume that the critics of Maimonides were upset that he had created a list of required beliefs, when, they believe, Judaism doesn’t have any required beliefs. This is not what the controversy was about. On the contrary, the main criticism of the principles was the implication that these thirteen principles had a status above and beyond the rest of the Torah. As the critics put it, one is obligated to believe in every word of the Torah! What justification does Maimonides have in giving priority to these thirteen?

Other criticisms were based - explicitly or implicitly - on the answers given to the above challenge. Whatever the function of these thirteen principles, critics would argue that the list could be modified to better serve that function.

For further study on this topic, see the excellent book, With Perfect Faith
, by J. David Bleich.

---

Behaaloscha - Humility and Torah

At the end of Parshas Behaaloscha (Numbers 12) we read of the incident where Miriam and Aaron, the elder siblings of Moses, speak critically of Moses. As prophets themselves, they believed that they understood the demands that Moses' position placed upon him, and they believed that this did not justify his actions. (The exact nature of their criticism of Moses is left extremely vague in the text, and is discussed in the commentaries.) God Himself intervenes, and speaks to Miriam and Aaron (12:6-8):

And He said: "Hear now My words: when one of you is a prophet, I Hashem, I make Myself known to him in a vision, I speak with him in a dream. This is not so with My servant Moses; he is trusted in all My house. I speak to him mouth to mouth, in a vision without riddles; and he sees the image of Hashem. Why then are you not afraid to speak against My servant Moses?"

These verses teach us one of the most basic and central principles of Judaism, the supremacy of the prophecy of Moses. Maimonides included this principle as the seventh of his thirteen foundations of Judaism. Maimonides opens his discussion of this principle with this basic summary:

The Seventh Foundation is the prophecy of Moses our Teacher. This means to believe that he is the father of all the prophets, both those that preceded him and those who arose after him; all of them were below his level. He was chosen from all of Mankind, he attained a greater knowledge of God than any other man ever attained or ever will attain, and he rose from the level of man until he attained the level of the angels and, being on the level of an angel, there remained no screen that he did not penetrate and nothing physical hindered him. He was devoid of any flaw, big or small. His powers of imagination,  and the sensual perceptions were nullified by his understanding and the power of his desires was silenced, leaving him with pure intellect.

Maimonides goes on to detail how the prophecy of Moses differed in several basic ways from that of all other prophets.Much of his discussion is based upon the verses that we just quoted above.

But how did Moses achieve this exalted level? What was it about Moses that set him apart, not only from the rest of his generation, but from all mankind for all time? How was he alone able to reach such a great height of understanding and knowledge of God? 

The answer to this question can be found just a few verses earlier (12:3):

And the man Moses was very humble, more than any human on the face of the earth.

While Moses had many virtuous traits, his central virtue was humility. It was this that set him apart from all others, and it was this virtue that enabled him to become the greatest prophet of all time, and the one who would receive the Torah from God.

In the first mishna of Pirkei Avos, the mishna opens by saying:

משה קבל תורה מסיני

Moses received the Torah from Sinai.

Now, of course, Moses did not receive the Torah from Sinai. Moses received to Torah from God. Sinai was simply the location where this happened. Why then does it say that he received the Torah from Sinai? This question is addressed by a number of commentaries on Pirkei Avos, including the Tiferes Yisrael (R' Yisrael Lifshitz d.1860), who writes:

ר"ל משה שהיה עניו מאד, עי"ז קבל התורה שנמשלה למים שמניחין מקום גבוה ומתאספים בנמוך (כתענית ד"ז א'). ולכן קבל התורה מסיני הנמוך בהרים (כמגילה כ"ט א'). להורות דרק ע"י ענוה מקור לכל המדות ישרות יזכה אדם לתורה

The mishna wishes to tell us that it was because of Moses' great humility that he received the Torah, for the Torah is compared to water that flows away from the high spots and gathers in low areas (as it says it the Talmud, Taanis 7a). This is why Moses received the Torah at Sinai, the lowest of the mountains (as it says in the Talmud, Megilla 29a). This is to teach us that it is only through humility, which is the source of all upright character traits, that a person can merit to Torah.

We see that this idea is not only relevant to the initial reception of the Torah by Moses at Mt. Sinai, but is relevant for all of us. Proper Torah study is a reenactment of the giving of the Torah at Mt. Sinai, and no success in Torah study is possible without humility. This principle is a basic theme in Jewish thought, found repeated in innumerable ways in innumerable sources. Torah can only come through humility.

Why is humility so important for Torah study? There are many layers to the answer to this question. 

On one level, of course, we know that excessive pride and arrogance can be barriers to understanding in secular studies as well as Torah. A degree of humility is necessary for success in all forms of scholarship and this is also true for Torah. R' Eliyahu HaKohen of Smyrna (d.1729) addresses this aspect in his classic mussar work, Sheivet Mussar (ch. 52):

Know and perceive how the Torah remains with one who is lowly (מי שדעתו שפלה עליו), and not by one who is prideful. One who is lowly will not be ashamed to say, "I do not understand," and his teacher will then review with him until he understands it. Also, if he sees that someone who is his social inferior knows more than him, then he will go to learn from him. Similarly, because his humility enables him to recognize his own ignorance, he continually reviews his studies, and this causes his Torah to stay with him.

The opposite is true of the prideful person. His pride causes him to hide his own ignorance, and all the more so does it prevent himself from going to study by someone who is his social inferior, even if he recognizes that the other person has the wisdom of Solomon! Similarly, the prideful person is not motivated to study, because his pride makes him incapable of recognizing his ignorance.

This brings us to a somewhat deeper understanding of the connection between humility and Torah. For not only does pride prevent one from properly studying the Torah on a practical level, it also can cause one to come to false conclusions in his studies. We all recognize the role that our personal biases can play in our understanding and interpretation of what we see and know, in all aspects of life. Pride is the ultimate bias, and Torah knowledge is particularly susceptible to being corrupted in this way. The study of Torah must be done in a state of kabbala - literally, reception - in which the student opens his mind to receive the Torah without imposing his own ideas upon it. The goal of Torah study is only to truly understand what God is teaching us. To study for the sake of true understanding is, as R' Chaim Volozhiner (d.1821) explains (Ruach Chaim 6:1), the essence of studying Torah lishma - "for its own sake." The prideful person, however, will inevitably impose his own thoughts upon the Torah, consciously or unconsciously, thereby creating a corrupted version of the Torah. 

The Talmud (Taanis 7a) states, "One who studies Torah for its own sake, his Torah becomes an elixir of life for him... and one who studies the Torah not for its own sake, it becomes for him an elixir of death." One who studies the Torah for its own sake, allowing the Torah to impose its form upon his mind, experiences the true Torah, which is an elixir of life. The one, however, who studies the Torah without truly striving to understand, creates something else, which is not truly Torah at all, and which is therefore an elixir of death.

This brings us to the deepest, and most basic, level of understanding the necessity of humility for Torah. For ultimately, the Torah is not of this world. The Torah is gift, it is given to us by God, not just once at Mt. Sinai, but continually, every time we study it. To truly succeed in Torah, each of us must emulate Moses himself, in his most basic character trait, humility. For God gives His gift of Torah only to those who truly open themselves to Him, who have eliminated all the various internal barriers of the ego that separate us from Him. (See Ruach Chaim 1:1.) This is what Maimonides is saying in the passage we quoted earlier, that Moses had reached a level in which "there remained no screen that he did not penetrate and nothing physical hindered him."

---

Emuna Peshuta - The Misuse of "Faith"

I frequently encounter people who claim that their basis for belief in God is "faith" or, if they are religious Jews, "emuna peshuta" - "simple faith". You're most likely to hear this when a religious person is confronted with a challenge to his belief in God by modern atheists, who claim that modern science and philosophy have eliminated any basis for belief in God. (This is not true, but that is a topic for another time.) To this, the response of many religious people is that they believe out of simple "faith"

I recently received an example of this kind of reasoning in an e-mail, which presents a fictional dialogue between an atheist professor and his religious Christian student:

Professor : You are a Christian, aren’t you, son ?

Student : Yes, sir.

Professor: So, you believe in GOD ?

Student : Absolutely, sir.

Professor : Is GOD good ?

Student : Sure.

Professor: Is GOD all powerful ?

Student : Yes.

Professor: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to GOD to heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But GOD didn’t. How is this GOD good then? Hmm?

(Student was silent.)

Professor: You can’t answer, can you ? Let’s start again, young fella. Is GOD good?

Student : Yes.

Professor: Is satan good ?

Student : No.

Professor: Where does satan come from ?

Student : From … GOD …

Professor: That’s right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?

Student : Yes.

Professor: Evil is everywhere, isn’t it ? And GOD did make everything. Correct?

Student : Yes.

Professor: So who created evil ?

(Student did not answer.)

Professor: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don’t they?

Student : Yes, sir.

Professor: So, who created them ?

(Student had no answer.)

Professor: Science says you have 5 Senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Tell me, son, have you ever seen GOD?

Student : No, sir.

Professor: Tell us if you have ever heard GOD?

Student : No , sir.

Professor: Have you ever felt GOD, tasted GOD, smelled GOD? Have you ever had any sensory perception of GOD for that matter?

Student : No, sir. I’m afraid I haven’t.

Professor: Yet, you still believe in Him?

Student : Yes.

Professor : According to Empirical, Testable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says your GOD doesn’t exist. What do you say to that, son?

Student : Nothing. I only have my faith.

Professor: Yes, faith. And that is the problem Science has.

Student : Professor, is there such a thing as heat?

Professor: Yes.

Student : And is there such a thing as cold?

Professor: Yes.

Student : No, sir. There isn’t.

(The lecture theater became very quiet with this turn of events.)

Student : Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don’t have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.

(There was pin-drop silence in the lecture theater.)

Student : What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?

Professor: Yes. What is night if there isn’t darkness?

Student : You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light. But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and its called darkness, isn’t it? In reality, darkness isn’t. If it is, well you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?

Professor: So what is the point you are making, young man ?

Student : Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.

Professor: Flawed ? Can you explain how?

Student : Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good GOD and a bad GOD. You are viewing the concept of GOD as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, Science can’t even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing.

Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor, do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?

Professor: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.

Student : Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?

(The Professor shook his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument was going.)

Student : Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor. Are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher?

(The class was in uproar.)

Student : Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor’s brain?

(The class broke out into laughter. )

Student : Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor’s brain, felt it, touched or smelled it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established Rules of Empirical, Stable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says that you have no brain, sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?

(The room was silent. The Professor stared at the student, his face unfathomable.)

Professor: I guess you’ll have to take them on faith, son.

Student : That is it sir … Exactly ! The link between man & GOD is FAITH. That is all that keeps things alive and moving.

This little "dialogue" is a good example of what is, in my opinion, a fundamentally erroneous approach to religious belief. While the "student" makes a one or two minor points that are valid (or at least defensible), his core argument is simply absurd.

The essential problem here is that the word "faith" is used to mean different things, and the essay improperly lumps them together. The primary definition of "faith" is trust, in that we take something "on faith" from a person or authority that we trust. (This is the definition of faith being used by the professor, towards the end of the dialogue, when he says that we should accept what he teaches in his lectures on faith, even if we have not (yet) confirmed them with our own senses.) Of course, such faith has to be earned, in that there must be a reason why we trust a given authority figure sufficiently to take his statements on faith. Assuming that we have good reason for trusting the authority, then such faith is perfectly rational.

However, there is another, deeply problematic, understanding of faith, which is to believe something without any rational basis. This is the definition being used by the student, when, in response to his professor's challenge that there is no rational basis for belief in God responds that he has no answer, "...I only have my faith." Fundamentally, what this means is that the "student" acknowledges that the argument against his belief in God is valid, yet he believes in God anyways, simply because he wants to (which actually means that he doesn't really believe in God at all, since, in principle, he acknowledges that he could just as easily choose not to believe in God). This kind of faith has become increasingly popular amongst religious people in the modern world, who see it as the only answer they can give to the arguments made against religion by atheist "professors", but the answer is self-defeating because it is essentially a concession to the intellectual superiority of atheism. By claiming that their belief in God is based on nothing but "faith", they have openly surrendered the intellectual battlefield to the atheists.

If you only believe in God because of
your "faith", then your God is nothing
more than a figment of your imagination.

This mentality may be understandable with Christians (such as the author of the dialogue printed above) because many core elements of Christianity are, in any case, fundamentally irrational. However, this is not an acceptable approach within Judaism. Our belief in God is not based upon an irrational "faith"; rather it is based upon the objective historical experiences of the Jewish people. When the Jewish people stood at Mt. Sinai, they didn't believe in God just because they had "faith", their belief was based upon direct, objective knowledge. While we, today, no longer have that degree of direct knowledge, we do have the historical tradition of that experience, which (among other things) provides a rational basis for our belief in God and the Divine origin of the Torah. With that basis, we can then have faith, of the rational kind, that even when we do not understand why God does something, there must be a good reason for it.

It is only in this context that the concept of emuna peshuta - simple faith - comes into play. We trust God because we have simple faith in Him. But before we can trust him, we must first know that He exists. That initial knowledge cannot be based upon "simple faith."

This distinction is not always made clear in many seforim (classical Torah works) when they discuss emuna (belief), and in some cases, as when one comes across sources that are critical of philosophy (of which there are many), one might come away with the impression that the author is arguing in favor of an irrational faith. However (while there may be some exceptions), in almost all cases, these sources are only talking about using philosophy as a means to reinforce one's belief, and are not addressing the core basis for belief in God (a distinction which I discussed in the previous post). To my knowledge, almost all of these sources would acknowledge that, when it comes to one's basic belief in  the existence of God, this must be based upon an actual rational conviction that God exists, and not simply on an irrational "faith."

---

Mitzva #1 – Belief in God

Maimonides and most other authorities consider the obligation to believe in God to be one of the six hundred and thirteen mitzvos, and understand this to be the obligation expressed in the opening sentence of the Aseres HaDibros – Ten “Commandments” – (Exodus 20:2), “I am Hashem, your God, Who took you out of the land of Egypt, from the house of slavery.” There are, however, some authorities, such as the Halachos Gedolos (circa the 8th century), who do not include this obligation in their catalog of the 613 commandments.

It should be clear at the the outset that all opinions, whether or not they include it in their formal catalog of the mitzvos, consider belief in God to be absolutely obligatory and foundational to Judaism. Belief in God is axiomatic to Judaism and failure to believe in God puts one completely outside the bounds of Judaism. 

Nevertheless, despite its importance, there is good reason to omit the obligation to believe in God from a formal catalog of the mitzvos. The entire concept of a commandment presupposes the existence of an authority that issues commands. A commandment to believe in the existence of the authority that issued the commandment is logically impossible. So how, then, can a person be commanded to believe in God? Either he already believes, in which case the commandment is unnecessary, or he doesn't believe, in which case the commandment can have no meaningful authority or content.

It follows that the basic obligation to believe in God must exist independently of, and logically prior to, the mitzvos. This "meta-obligation", if you will, is one that is morally inherent in one's existence as a human being who is capable of recognizing the existence of His Creator and Benefactor. Being that God has created us and is the sole source of everything that we value in existence, to deny His reality is inherently immoral and no command is necessary. Being that God does exist, failure to believe in Him can mean only that one is in error, and to the degree that one is capable of correcting that error, he is morally obligated to do so. (This concept of a moral obligation existing independently of a Divine command also touches upon other important issues, such as the very nature of morality itself, but that is a topic for another time.)

This point is so basic that it raises the question of how to understand the position of those, like Maimonides, who do include the obligation to believe in God in their catalog of the commandments.

There are several answers to this question, all of which basically distinguish between the basic recognition of God's existence, which, in fact, cannot be commanded, and the mitzvah of emunah (belief) or yedias Hashem (knowing God), which can begin only after that first basic recognition has been achieved.

Essentially, the mitzvah of emunah requires us to internalize our basic recognition of God's existence into our personality. There is a great distance between intellectually recognizing a truth and making that truth an integral part of how you think and feel. The “meta-obligation” of belief in God is satisfied once we come to the intellectual recognition that God exists. This recognition must have a rational basis (not so-called “faith”, for reasons we will discuss in the next post). For the Jewish people at Sinai the knowledge of God was the result of direct experience. For us today, who have not directly experienced such an open revelation, our recognition of God must be rooted primarily in the historical traditions and experiences of the Jewish people and in our recognition of God’s hand in history and in nature. (See also my previous post, "Jewish Arguments for the Existence of God".)

It is only after we have achieved this basic recognition that the actual mitzvah of emunah comes into play. This mitzvah obligates us to take steps to reinforce and internalize our recognition of God, so that it becomes a basic part of our personality. Many sources see this as the intent of the famous verse in Deuteronomy (4:39), "And you shall know today, and take it to your heart, that Hashem is God in heaven above and upon the earth beneath; there is none else." There are two stages, first you must "know" that Hashem is God, and then you must "take it to your heart."

There are a wide range of methods that can be used for this purpose. In fact, the bulk of Jewish practice is intended to help us work towards this goal. Thus, the observance of the Sabbath is intended to reinforce our belief in Creation, the various holidays reinforce our belief in God's supervision over the events of the world, prayer reinforces our belief in God's supervision over every aspect of our lives, and so on through almost everything we do as Jews. Moreover, the very act of living a life in obedience to God's will helps us internalize our belief in Him. When we refrain from a forbidden act, whether it be eating a forbidden food or speaking lashon hara, we reinforce in our minds the reality of God's existence.

However, there are also a number of methods that are uniquely suited towards reinforcing our belief in God. Many sources emphasize the importance of deeply studying the various philosophical proofs for God's existence. Others, however, see the engagement in philosophical study as potentially doing more harm than good (for reasons that go beyond the scope of this essay), and instead emphasize other techniques, such as studying the wisdom and kindness evident in the natural world, and the miraculous survival of the Jewish people through thousands of years of exile and upheaval. (Also see my previous posts, "The Role of Philosophy in Judaism" and "Why Study Jewish History? Part 3 - Strengthening Our Emunah".)

R' Elchonon Wasserman

A somewhat different, more mussar oriented, approach is given in a famous essay by Rabbi Elchonon Wasserman (d.1941) printed in Kovetz Maamarim. R' Wasserman writes that, in truth, God's existence is so self-evident that it should be clear to any rational person. Why then do so many intelligent people fail to recognize this truth? R' Wasserman answers that human beings have an extraordinary talent for self-deception, i.e. intelligence does not necessarily equate to rationality, and when we don't want to accept a truth, we are very capable of fooling ourselves into denying even the most self-evident of truths and of using our intelligence to provide apparently rational arguments for our self-serving desires.

Based on this, Rav Wasserman argues that the commandment to believe is actually a commandment to work on ourselves to subdue and rectify those natural inclinations and character flaws that cause us to deny that which should be obvious. Once we do so, belief in God's existence will come naturally as a self-evident truth.

While, to my knowledge, R' Wasserman is the first to clearly formulate this approach, it is firmly based upon earlier sources. The idea that the denial of God's existence is actually rooted in deeper character flaws is found, either explicitly or implicitly, in many earlier sources. For example, Maimonides, in his Guide for the Perplexed (3:51) writes:

...all those that have no religion, neither one based on speculation nor one received by tradition.... I consider these as irrational beings, and not as human beings; they are below mankind, but above monkeys, since they have the form and shape of man, and a mental faculty above that of the monkey.

Maimonides believed that only a fundamentally irrational person could deny this most basic of self-evident truths - the existence of God. The reason why so many of us struggle with belief in God is because, as in many other areas of life, what we are really struggling with is our natural inclination towards self-serving irrational behavior.

---