Monday, June 27, 2016

Questions, not Excuses


This is the opening to the first chapter in my book. Comments/corrections/suggestions are welcome.
===


                Moshe sat in the waiting room, a little nervous, a little hopeful. In many ways, he was a typical yeshiva bochur. He had spent a couple of years leaning full-time after high school and was now learning part of the day and in college in the evenings. He dressed the same as the other bochrim in his yeshiva, listened to the same frum music that they did, went to the same events, and kept all of the mitzvos. Yet, in one important way, Moshe was different.
                His fellow students had no problems with their emunah, but Moshe was plagued by questions. He wanted to know the reasons for mitzvos. To understand how many things accepted by the community, like segulos, worked. To square strange statements about the world in tanach and the gemara with how he knew the world to work. As a teenager, the principal of his high school had called Moshe into his office one day and told him that, while Yiddishkeit allowed one to ask questions, even encouraged it, he should stop asking his questions in class. These questions didn't occur to the other bochurim, and why should their emunah chas v'sholom be weakened by Moishe's questions?
                Moshe was a good kid, and he did as the principal asked, but the questions didn't go away. If anything, the more he learned about the world, the stronger they became. Moshe sought out and read kiruv books that promised to answer questions of emunah and prove the Yiddishkeit was correct. They were disappointing. Every now and then Moshe would come across something that seemed convincing, that seemed like it could be the idea on which he could rebuild his faith. Within a week or two, as he thought about the exciting new concept, he would sadly realize it was full of holes. It relied on logical errors, or didn't match up with real-world experiences, or contradicted other things Moshe had learned in yeshiva.
                Moishe's interest in his religion blossomed into an interest in the history of Judaism, in comparative religion, in philosophy and mythology and biblical scholarship. The more he read, the less tenable yiddishkeit seemed, until one day Moshe realized that he couldn't avoid the obvious conclusion. Judaism wasn't true, and there probably wasn't a God. The realization upset him, and he felt a deep sense of loss, but there it was. Still, he thought to himself, maybe this is all just the yetzer hara, trying to convince me not to keep the mitzvos. He continued to keep the mitvos as meticulously as he always had.
                 A year went by. Keeping the mitzvos while not believing in Judaism in order to make sure it wasn't the yetzer hara planting thoughts in his head was starting to feel faintly ridiculous. It would soon be time for Moshe to start dating, but how could he in good conscience go out with Bais Yaakov girls when he didn't believe? In a last-ditch effort to regain his emunah, he had a friend put him in touch with a kiruv worker. The rabbi came highly recommended, and Moshe met with him a few times to discuss his issues with Yidishkeit. The rabbi was friendly and seemed genuinely concerned about Moishe, but like the kiruv books, his answers were disappointing. A week ago the rabbi had called Moshe with exciting news. He had gotten Moshe an appointment with a big rav, a real talmid chocham who would be able to answer Moishe's questions, help him see that Torah and Yiddishkeit were the emes and regain his emunah.
                At last Moshe was ushered into the rav's presence. The rav asked Moshe why he had come, and Moshe explained that he had questions of emunah that bothered him, and gave a few examples. The rav listened, then gave Moshe a bracha that his emunah shelaima should return.
                "I was hoping that you could answer some of my questions." Moshe said.
                The rav quoted the Brisker Rav and said "I answer questions not excuses." He explained, "You have decided to be porek ol, since you did not control your yetzer haras, and you found an excuse that you had 'questions', and I don't answer excuses!"
                The rav gave Moshe another beracha that he would merit teshuva shelema, and Moshe was ushered back to the waiting room.

                The above is a composite story, combining my experiences and those I have read or been told by others who have had the misfortune to be frum and skeptical. Elements of it would be recognized by anyone who has been in yeshiva and questioned ikkarei emunah. I thought about religion while none of my fellow students did, I was told by my high school principal to stop asking questions, I wanted to understand how Judaism works and how religious ideas square with the world I experience, and I found that the more I learned about the world, about history, theology, philosophy, and science, the less tenable Yiddishkeit seemed. I have read accounts by people who continued to keep the mitzvos for years after losing their faith because they were worried that their questions might be the yetzer hara trying to fool them into giving up the mitzvos.[1] Many people have related the sadness and sense of loss they felt when they realized that Judaism wasn't true and there probably wasn't a God. And many people have talked about how maddening it was after years of searching for answers to have their sincere questions dismissed as excuses to be porek ol. The conversation between Moshe and the rav is lifted nearly verbatim from an account an encounter between three questioning bochurim and Rav Chaim Kanievsky.[2]
                Many frum people believe that Judaism is obviously correct. After all, at the midrash[3] tells us that Avraham Avinu figured out that Hashem was the master of the Universe when he was only three years old! It's obvious even to a child that Hashem runs the world. Yet if it's so obvious, how could anyone go off the derech? How could anyone disbelieve when the truth is staring him in the face? Chazal answer,[4] "lo uvdo avodas kochavim ela l'hatir lahem arayos," "[people] don't worship idols except to permit to themselves sexual licentiousness." The person wants to do aveiros, but he can't because he knows Hashem will punish him. So he comes up with "questions" that allow him to convince himself that Hashem won't punish him after all, and he can do whatever he wants.
                The thesis of this book is that those who reject the tenets of Orthodox Judaism are not hedonistic cretins looking for excuses to throw off the ol hatorah and wallow in their taivos. That it is not obvious that God exists and that Judaism is true. That there are serious questions that undermine Orthodoxy, Judaism, and belief in God. That it is reasonable to doubt Judaism's tenets and act on those doubts. That doing so is more reasonable than clinging to the belief that the tenets of Orthodox Judaism are obviously true.



[1] See http://baalhabos.blogspot.com/2006/08/orthoprax-at-home.html for one example
[2] Bruer, P. (10/21/2010). Al teirutzim ani lo onah teshuvos. HaShavua Retrieved from: http://shiltonhasechel.blogspot.com/2010/11/excuses-not-questions.html 6/5/16
[3] Sepher Ha-Yashar 9:13-19 This is a polemic against idolatry rather than an argument for God's existence or the truth of Judaism.
[4] Sanhedrin 63b

25 comments:

  1. Some minor typos:
    - "learning full time" not "leaning" (first paragraph)
    - sometimes you spell it "Moshe" and others "Moishe"
    - "from an account OF an encounter" (right before the [2] hyperlink)
    - "after all, the midrash" - take out "at" (right before [3])

    Also, all of the hyperlinks seem to be to a document on your C: drive instead of to the bottom of the blog post.

    The thing about Judaism being obvious and people therefore only leaving belief due to ta'avos is from R' Elchonon Wasserman in Kovetz Ma'amarim, although I'd have to do some digging to find exactly where.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the corrections.

      I've read the quote from R' Wasserman in translation, but if you could find the quote and source, that would be great!

      Incidentally, that somone like R' Wasserman, a respected RY and talmid chocham, could write something like that with apparently no awareness of the Hume or other objections to the cosmological argument undermines those who say that they believe because of all the great rabbonim who beleived despite all of the issues.

      Delete
    2. A quick hebrew Google search turned up this: http://olamot.net/sites/default/files/pdf/56.pdf (pages labeled 8 and 9)

      Delete
    3. One of the comments on the newest Cross Currents article (http://www.cross-currents.com/archives/2016/06/29/random-thoughts-on-another-flawed-survey-of-orthodox-jews/) points to an article by R' Dessler in Strive for Truth labelled "There never was a true apikores". Another commenter points to a Bais Halevi in Bereishis to the same effect.

      Delete
  2. I have a moral hesitation about your book project (which I think is very interesting, by the way, and for myself I'm looking forward to it with interest). I would imagine that at least part of the purpose of writing this book is to lay out all the arguments in an organized, clear manner. If done properly it would probably be pretty persuasive.

    The problem is that for many people discovering that their religion is false can create a huge amount of long-standing emotional distress, wreck entire marriages and families, and even lead to suicide.

    I was once talking with a group of philosophy friends in college. Almost all of us had grown up religious (in several different religions) but had eventually lost our faith. Someone posed the question, "if you could turn back the clock and make it that you never ended up questioning your faith, would you do it?" Several people said "no way, I'd rather know the truth even if it caused me pain and suffering". But several others (including me) said that the pain and suffering weren't worth it. I think we were split about 50-50 on the question. Keep in mind that this was a group of philosophy majors, who presumably value the truth very highly. I strongly suspect that less intellectually-oriented people would go more heavily towards the "ignorance is bliss" option.

    So my issue is this: There's a good chance that by writing this book you will make at least a few people lose their faith where they otherwise would not have. There's also a good chance that some or all of those people will suffer greatly from the revelations in your book. Are you willing to take responsibility for causing their suffering?

    I'm not arguing that there's no good in writing your book - far from it. I'm not even arguing that all things considered you shouldn't write it. I'm just throwing out something that bothers me. In fact, these considerations are what has stopped me several times from doing the same thing you're doing now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, for the sincerely frum, a book like this can create real problems, And I find that I am deeply uncomfortable trying to convince frum people that Judaism is wrong. But the typical frum person is not the book's intended audience. The main audience is those who have questions but believe that there must be something wrong with them. In reality, the main audience, as much as there is an audience, will probably be people who have already left and are looking for something to tell them what they already know.

      Also, as much as the concerns you raise are real concerns, keeping knowledge from people out of some sense that I know what's better for them is, to me, unbearably paternalistic. My life would be simpler if I didn't know what I know about Judaism, but I wouldn't give it up.

      Delete
    2. I don't think it matters who the intended audience is so much as who the actual audience will turn out to be. Fact of the matter is that if you have a well-written, well-argued book laying out all the evidence, it'll get linked to and read by people outside of your intended audience. And some of those people will likely be burned badly by it.

      Re paternalism, I think there's a difference between not withholding information and actively disseminating it. It's one thing to try to prevent people from finding something out (which is pretty impossible in today's world anyway). It's another thing entirely to actively publish a book that could hurt a lot of people.

      Again, I'm not paskening that these downsides necessarily outweigh the benefits. As you said, there are people who are suffering now who's pain can probably be lessened by this book. It's a question of writing in order to help some people vs. not writing out of a concern for unintended but serious side effects. Personally I think I'd opt not to write it, but I'll respect your decision if you decide to proceed. I just feel morally obligated to voice my concerns before you begin.

      Delete
    3. @Anonymous - you disregard the dangers of fundamentalism. And much of the required info and philosophical repudiation is not easily available or available anyplace. My blog has repudiates Kirv arguments for reasons that I do not think are found any place else. Using your logic would mean Spinoza should not have published, Darwin should not have published etc:

      Delete
    4. A@Anonymous almost forgot - I have been told by many people they wish they had seen my blog years ago. Now they are married with kids and stuck in Orthodox Jewish community etc: If only they knew then what they now know. Blogs such as mine, second son, Kefirah of the week, stop kiruv now, Jewishatheist-tumbler etc: are a great resource both for potential BTs, teens and young adults searching for alternative views. Even for older people.

      Delete
  3. @G3 Write your book. Fundamentalism (includes Orthodox Judaism) causes plenty of harm. My blog was intended to refute Orthodox Judaism and I think provides some unique insights. Orthodox Jews are so cock sure their religion is true thus people who go OTD or are not Orthodox are because 1) They are ignorant 2) They have mental issues 3) Yetzar Harah 4) They were molested. Why is it OK for religions (including OJ) to missionize while anti-missionizing should be held in check. We are obligated to speak the truth and halt the spread of superstitions which includes Orthodox Judaism. Even some caged animals may not want to leave the cage when the door is opened. Nevertheless, open the door for them.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Almost forgot - I have been told by many people they wish they had seen my blog years ago. Now they are married with kids and stuck in Orthodox Jewish community etc: If only they knew then what they now know. Blogs such as mine, second son, Kefirah of the week, stop kiruv now etc: are a great resource both for potential BTs, teens and young adults searching for alternative views.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Many people have related the sadness and sense of loss they felt when they realized that Judaism wasn't true and there probably wasn't a God." I became skeptical of Judaism and Hashem only after many several years of exposure to science, Bible Crit, Ancient Near East Studies and Philosophy. It was heart wrenching and earth shattering. Then I became dismayed that an elaborate hoax was being perpetuated by the Rabbis and Orthodox Jewish community. That I was a victim of this hoax. That the hoax is being foisted on all my relatives, extended family etc:

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that "hoax" is the wrong word to use here. A hoax involves deliberate deception, like Barnum's mermaid or the balloon boy. Frum people, though they may be mistaken, sincerely believe in what they are teaching.

      Delete
    2. @G# I cant help but think many of the Rabbis and OJ leaders know they are delivering a false message, so I think the word hoax is appropriate, at least in some circumstances. But it is also possible many Rabbis and OJ leaders are ignorant or just believe in the fairy tales and so they would not be committing a hoax.

      Delete
    3. @G3 - If the Rabbis and OJ leaders did due diligence they would find OJ is almost certainly false. But for the most part they would rather stick their head in the sand or make up apologetic excuses. IMHO, they have the obligation to be intellectually honest and if they are not they can be accused of perpetuating a hoax.

      Delete
  6. "He wanted to know the reasons for mitzvos" Yes this was very important for me. Rambam wrote extensively on this topic and sometimes he is on target, but sometimes not. I wrote several blog posts specifically regarding Rambam. But in a way many of my posts directly address this issue. What are the origins of Torah rituals, festivals etc:

    ReplyDelete
  7. Something else bothered me about the Torah and Orthodoxy - it's unequal and unfair treatment of women. It's wasteful blood sacrifices and I did not find Rambam apologetics on sacrifice truthful.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I just read your post. I agree as to your questions but began to find answers reading the works of Rav Louis Jacobs zt'l,and Rav Dovid Weiss Halivni Selita. There is nothing that disproves our core beliefs in God and a Torah min haShamayim it is fundamentalism that has lost its creditability

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Nothing that disproves" isn't good enough. There's nothing that disproves the existence of fairies who will reward me for dancing on my lawn in the moonlight, but I won't be dancing tonight.

      Delete
    2. "There is nothing that disproves our core beliefs in God and a Torah min haShamayim" There is to. Start here http://altercockerjewishatheist.blogspot.com/2014/04/some-reasons-to-reject-orthodox-judaism.html

      Delete
    3. And like Spinoza demonstrates - it is as clear as sunshine at noon the Torah can not be from the Mosaic period.

      Delete
  9. Whether a person is frum or gone otd, whether a person believes or not, one center must be Orthodoxy. It can be Orthodoxy and philosophy, or physics/math or literature and history, whatever the content of the ellipse, one foci is the torah library. Orthodoxy is never a circle self contained and removed from the world. A Jewish life should be a dialogue between our tradition and the secular world of knowledge and sensibility.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm trying to understand your comment because I respect your opinion, but I'm having some trouble. If a person doesn't believe, why "must" a center be Orthodoxy and the Torah library? I can understand an argument that the tradition has value, and I would agree with that, but that value cannot obligate anything. There are lots of valuable bodies of knowledge/practice/tradition, but I don't think that you would make the same argument for any of them.

      Delete
  10. More please.

    Ps, nice blog (linked here from rationalist judaism) and I like the book idea.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @G3 check out this new blog http://ajewwithquestions.blogspot.com/ maybe add to your roll. Thanks

    ReplyDelete