A thought on Passover from Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, excerpts below:
The advent of Passover and Easter… beckons a deeper discussion about one of the principle differences between Judaism and Christianity… it is the difference between a values system based on struggle and a values system based on perfection.
The reason there are no perfect people in the Torah is that we don't believe in perfect people…Do you know what the perfect person lacks that the imperfect person has? An imperfect person fights to do what is right. He struggles with his conscience. When you fight for something, you demonstrate its worth.
Personally, I have no patience for perfect people. I find them boring, predictable, and judgmental. It is human beings whose goodness is real, yet purchased amid Herculean effort and struggle, whom I find so endlessly fascinating.
People used to think Martin Luther King Jr. was a saint… But then we discovered that in fact he was deeply human and did things that betrayed big character flaws. Suddenly... his true greatness was thereby manifest: He was flawed and frail and still he accomplished so much. You mean he was scared in front of those attack dogs and Bull Connor? He had to struggle to do those things? My G-d, that truly is a great man. To me, that is so much more inspiring. King wrestled with his conscience. Now he speaks to me, because I'm just like him. He was not an angel, not a saint, just a person who struggled to live righteously and courageously.
The truth is that perfection fosters dependency. It is an engine that actually retards human progress, because it continually tosses humans back on a sense of their own inadequacy. Rather than lift them up, it keeps them down.
Those for whom life has been so sweet and smooth, those who refuse to struggle, will never know the true taste of courage. They will never develop the ability to overcome obstacles to do what is right. They will never firmly establish that their convictions are not just feelings. Struggle is where the infinite value of goodness is established.
Monday, March 29, 2010
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Voltaire
I’m a rationalist, not necessarily by choice but by nature. As a result I often find myself attracted to other rationalist writers. Recently I started reading bits and pieces of Voltaire. Voltaire was one of the great thinkers of the Enlightenment. One of the pitfalls that rationalists tend to fall into especially when they get older is they get bitter and cynical. I hope to avoid this trap by always being cognizant of that and by always pushing myself to keep learning and growing. I’d like to think that with this attitude I can avoid some (being a rationalist I acknowledge that I won’t be able to avoid them all) of the downsides associated with growing older. However I do hope that in my effort to stay upbeat I don’t find myself growing out of touch with reality like some of those that I know and admire. With that said, here are a few wonderful quotes:
All sects are different, because they come from men; morality is everywhere the same, because it comes from God.
Judge a man by his questions rather than by his answers.
Every man is guilty of all the good he didn’t do.
All sects are different, because they come from men; morality is everywhere the same, because it comes from God.
Judge a man by his questions rather than by his answers.
Every man is guilty of all the good he didn’t do.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Silence
"The silence of God about the evils of the world, or our inability to hear his voice, is an inscrutable mystery. But the silence of man is a different matter. It confronts us, it challenges us, and it does not escape judgment."- Riccardo di Segni, Chief Rabbi of Rome
Thursday, March 18, 2010
The fake crisis / What Obama is trying to do
Interesting article by David Rothkopf in Foreign Policy, a few selected quotes:
This is one of those diplomatic flareups that may trigger fire drills in the governments and polemic fireworks from pundits but which, upon analysis, is really much less than meets the eye. It's actually a fake crisis.
Obama, with few foreign-policy accomplishments to point to thus far in his young presidency, needs the peace process at least as much if not more than Netanyahu does. Time and leverage are, for the near term at least, on Netanyahu's side ... Further, the United States can't really turn its back on Israel and embrace the Palestinian side any more closely than it has because there is really no there there.
The U.S. argument that the Israelis need to be seen to be more quietly cooperative with U.S. efforts or Obama won't be able to effectively stop the Iranian nuclear weapons program is undercut by the fact that the United States won't, in the end, actually stop the Iranian nuclear program. We just don't have the domestic will or the international support to do so...When the Iranians do ultimately go nuclear, the United States will want and need a strong relationship with Israel more not less.
"Tough on your friends, weak with your enemies" is neither a common trait among great leaders nor is it a particularly good campaign bumper sticker.
And more from Jeffery Goldberg at the Atlantic:
I think it's fair to say that Obama is not trying to destroy America's relations with Israel; he's trying to organize Tzipi Livni's campaign for prime minister, or at least for her inclusion in a broad-based centrist government.
The goal is force a rupture in the governing coalition that will make it necessary for Netanyahu to take into his government Livni's centrist Kadima Party (he has already tried to do this, but too much on his terms) and form a broad, 68-seat majority in Knesset that does not have to rely on gangsters, messianists and medievalists for votes.
Obama knows that this sort of stable, centrist coalition is the key to success.
This is one of those diplomatic flareups that may trigger fire drills in the governments and polemic fireworks from pundits but which, upon analysis, is really much less than meets the eye. It's actually a fake crisis.
Obama, with few foreign-policy accomplishments to point to thus far in his young presidency, needs the peace process at least as much if not more than Netanyahu does. Time and leverage are, for the near term at least, on Netanyahu's side ... Further, the United States can't really turn its back on Israel and embrace the Palestinian side any more closely than it has because there is really no there there.
The U.S. argument that the Israelis need to be seen to be more quietly cooperative with U.S. efforts or Obama won't be able to effectively stop the Iranian nuclear weapons program is undercut by the fact that the United States won't, in the end, actually stop the Iranian nuclear program. We just don't have the domestic will or the international support to do so...When the Iranians do ultimately go nuclear, the United States will want and need a strong relationship with Israel more not less.
"Tough on your friends, weak with your enemies" is neither a common trait among great leaders nor is it a particularly good campaign bumper sticker.
And more from Jeffery Goldberg at the Atlantic:
I think it's fair to say that Obama is not trying to destroy America's relations with Israel; he's trying to organize Tzipi Livni's campaign for prime minister, or at least for her inclusion in a broad-based centrist government.
The goal is force a rupture in the governing coalition that will make it necessary for Netanyahu to take into his government Livni's centrist Kadima Party (he has already tried to do this, but too much on his terms) and form a broad, 68-seat majority in Knesset that does not have to rely on gangsters, messianists and medievalists for votes.
Obama knows that this sort of stable, centrist coalition is the key to success.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Asking Hashem
From a wise friend:
Prayer is not about asking Hashem for what we need or want cause He already knows and like a loving father would give it to us anyway if we needed it...so why what the point of asking? Its to change ourselves to the point where that thing we are asking for becomes good for us. The analogy is as follows...a father gets a gift for his son, but holds off on giving him the gift until the child acknowledges the father as the giver which is what the father was waiting for...the recognition from the child maybe all the father is waiting for.
Prayer is not about asking Hashem for what we need or want cause He already knows and like a loving father would give it to us anyway if we needed it...so why what the point of asking? Its to change ourselves to the point where that thing we are asking for becomes good for us. The analogy is as follows...a father gets a gift for his son, but holds off on giving him the gift until the child acknowledges the father as the giver which is what the father was waiting for...the recognition from the child maybe all the father is waiting for.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Lonely Atheists
I've been thinking about the review of Christopher Hitchen's all day, a few years ago when I was first starting along my road to increased observance, I came across this brilliant article by Michael Novak, that reviews the works of Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett and Richard Dawkins and it has always stuck with me. I feel that similarly to the other three authors Hitchen's misses the fundamental point about religion and other peoples relationship to it. I hope and pray that this will help clarify what I wrote earlier this morning.
The whole inner world of aware and self-questioning religious persons seems to be territory unexplored by our authors. All around them are millions who spend many moments each day (and hours each week) in communion with God. Yet of the silent and inward parts of these lives - and why these inner silences ring to those who share them so true, and seem more grounded in reality than anything else in life - our writers seem unaware. Surely, if our atheist friends were to reconsider their methods, and deepen their understanding of such terms as 'experience' and 'the empirical,' they might come closer to walking for a tentative while in the moccasins of so many of their more religious companions in life, who find theism more intellectually satisfying - less self-contradictory, less alienating from their own nature - than atheism.
New Commandments
Recently a friend sent me this article written by Christopher Hitchens, and asked me what I thought, so lets get going...
In his opening he states with all due humility that the Ten Commandments are due for a rewrite. Before I go any further lets restate them now they are: No other God, Do not worship false images, Do not use my Name in vain, Keep the Sabbath holy, Honor thy father and mother, Do not murder, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness and Do not covet.
To start, I’ll say this taking advise from Christopher Hitchens on theology is a little like listening to your local holy man about particle physics, he might be a smart guy but ultimately he’s spent most of his life learning about an unrelated subject. Also I must say I find his style contemptible, he is snotty and dismissive of anything he does not understand. He has no problem lambasting the words of people that he makes no attempt to understand, he takes the Ten Commandments as an end point rather than a beginning point, which is precisely what they are in the Torah. Does he ever for a moment in this article stop and ask himself; is there something I could be missing? No, not for one second, and I find his conviction in knowing absolutely and without question the answers, admirable if not misguided. Unfortunately its people like Hitchen’s, people who are so convinced that they and only they know what this world is really about who are the most dangerous. In my travels in my explorations I have only become convinced of one thing that certainly is for the simple minded. For the rest of us the truth lies somewhere in the gray areas.
I’ll spare you the details of the article and instead jump to his conclusion which he starts with this line: “I am trying my best not to view things through a smug later prism. Only the Almighty can scan matters sub specie aeternitatis: from the viewpoint of eternity.” Then he offers his own set of commandments: Do not condemn people on the basis of their ethnicity or color. Do not ever use people as private property. Despise those who use violence or the threat of it in sexual relations. Hide your face and weep if you dare to harm a child. Do not condemn people for their inborn nature. Be aware that you too are an animal and dependent on the web of nature, and think and act accordingly. Do not imagine that you can escape judgment if you rob people with a false prospectus rather than with a knife. Denounce all jihadists and crusaders for what they are: psychopathic criminals with ugly delusions. Be willing to renounce any god or any religion if any holy commandments should contradict any of the above.
Not bad but to me it looks a little like the seven Noachide laws (the laws g-d gave to Noah and his sons after the great flood) which are: no idolatry, no murder, don’t steal, don’t be sexually perverse, do not use g-ds name in vain, don’t eat the flesh of an animal taken while it was still alive (a remarkably relevant law, given the nature of most slaughterhouses in this age) and set up a just governing body. He ends with this statement: Do not swallow your moral code in tablet form.
That’s a great ending line and I agree it should be followed. Do not be so arrogant to believe that any one system can give you all the answers, expect life to be messy, and expect to constantly be confronted with situations that test your own moral compass. Above all else think for yourself, allow yourself to be guided by those who care about you, not some journalist writing an article directed at people who already agree with him. Be an individual and love all people even those who make no attempt to try to understand you.
L'shalom
In his opening he states with all due humility that the Ten Commandments are due for a rewrite. Before I go any further lets restate them now they are: No other God, Do not worship false images, Do not use my Name in vain, Keep the Sabbath holy, Honor thy father and mother, Do not murder, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness and Do not covet.
To start, I’ll say this taking advise from Christopher Hitchens on theology is a little like listening to your local holy man about particle physics, he might be a smart guy but ultimately he’s spent most of his life learning about an unrelated subject. Also I must say I find his style contemptible, he is snotty and dismissive of anything he does not understand. He has no problem lambasting the words of people that he makes no attempt to understand, he takes the Ten Commandments as an end point rather than a beginning point, which is precisely what they are in the Torah. Does he ever for a moment in this article stop and ask himself; is there something I could be missing? No, not for one second, and I find his conviction in knowing absolutely and without question the answers, admirable if not misguided. Unfortunately its people like Hitchen’s, people who are so convinced that they and only they know what this world is really about who are the most dangerous. In my travels in my explorations I have only become convinced of one thing that certainly is for the simple minded. For the rest of us the truth lies somewhere in the gray areas.
I’ll spare you the details of the article and instead jump to his conclusion which he starts with this line: “I am trying my best not to view things through a smug later prism. Only the Almighty can scan matters sub specie aeternitatis: from the viewpoint of eternity.” Then he offers his own set of commandments: Do not condemn people on the basis of their ethnicity or color. Do not ever use people as private property. Despise those who use violence or the threat of it in sexual relations. Hide your face and weep if you dare to harm a child. Do not condemn people for their inborn nature. Be aware that you too are an animal and dependent on the web of nature, and think and act accordingly. Do not imagine that you can escape judgment if you rob people with a false prospectus rather than with a knife. Denounce all jihadists and crusaders for what they are: psychopathic criminals with ugly delusions. Be willing to renounce any god or any religion if any holy commandments should contradict any of the above.
Not bad but to me it looks a little like the seven Noachide laws (the laws g-d gave to Noah and his sons after the great flood) which are: no idolatry, no murder, don’t steal, don’t be sexually perverse, do not use g-ds name in vain, don’t eat the flesh of an animal taken while it was still alive (a remarkably relevant law, given the nature of most slaughterhouses in this age) and set up a just governing body. He ends with this statement: Do not swallow your moral code in tablet form.
That’s a great ending line and I agree it should be followed. Do not be so arrogant to believe that any one system can give you all the answers, expect life to be messy, and expect to constantly be confronted with situations that test your own moral compass. Above all else think for yourself, allow yourself to be guided by those who care about you, not some journalist writing an article directed at people who already agree with him. Be an individual and love all people even those who make no attempt to try to understand you.
L'shalom
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
