why observe Jewish law?
Nov. 19th, 2005 11:27 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cellioA friend asked (in a locked post, so I won't link) why I follow Jewish law. What do I get out of it? I want to record my answer here.
I follow the law because it improves my relationship with God and because it elevates mundane tasks.
Consider eating. Animals eat. Humans need to eat, but we have minds and souls and we don't have to be like animals. The simple act of saying a blessing before ("getting permission") and giving thanks afterwards ("grace") elevates the otherwise-coarse act of eating to a holier status. Now consider actually choosing to restrict what I eat (and how I eat it) because I understand that this is what God asks of us. It's such a simple thing to skip the shellfish and, in return, God might reach out a little to me just as I reach out to God. That's a win!
When I was in the process of becoming more religious (that is, moving from being an apatheist to actually paying attention to God), I found that if I sincerely tried, even with baby steps, I saw positive results. Psychologists might well say that that's because I caused those changes through a more positive outlook; if so, so what? Does that matter if God -- or my God-concept -- was the underlying force? We're supposed to take an active role; if by praying to God I get no direct effect from God, but the act itself causes me to improve my own behavior, isn't that still a win? Well, it's not just prayer that can produce that effect. Keeping Shabbat, eating properly, striving to repair the world, studying torah... it's all bundled up in there.
I follow the law because it improves my relationship with God and because it elevates mundane tasks.
Consider eating. Animals eat. Humans need to eat, but we have minds and souls and we don't have to be like animals. The simple act of saying a blessing before ("getting permission") and giving thanks afterwards ("grace") elevates the otherwise-coarse act of eating to a holier status. Now consider actually choosing to restrict what I eat (and how I eat it) because I understand that this is what God asks of us. It's such a simple thing to skip the shellfish and, in return, God might reach out a little to me just as I reach out to God. That's a win!
When I was in the process of becoming more religious (that is, moving from being an apatheist to actually paying attention to God), I found that if I sincerely tried, even with baby steps, I saw positive results. Psychologists might well say that that's because I caused those changes through a more positive outlook; if so, so what? Does that matter if God -- or my God-concept -- was the underlying force? We're supposed to take an active role; if by praying to God I get no direct effect from God, but the act itself causes me to improve my own behavior, isn't that still a win? Well, it's not just prayer that can produce that effect. Keeping Shabbat, eating properly, striving to repair the world, studying torah... it's all bundled up in there.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-11-20 01:53 pm (UTC)The difficulty is that one accepts religious authority as a standard for one's life, nothing guarantees that the demands of the authority will be only "simple things." The act of accepting someone's authority that God wants certain things is itself not a simple thing; it means that the judgment of another stands above your own judgment of what is right.
For instance, as you put it, the act of saying a blessing before eating implies that one must have permission from authority even to eat. This permission may have conditions on it. The conditions may be actions which you would otherwise know were wrong. The choice is then to defy the authority or to close off your mind.
In the Book of Joshua, God allegedly told the Israelites to massacre the entire population of Jericho, right down to the babies and the livestock. They committed mass murder it simply because that was what God asked of them, and because they expected that God would do something for them in return.
Israel has advanced beyond that barbaric standard, but the Book of Joshua hasn't been expunged from the list of holy books, even though it glorifies genocide. And there are other people (mostly Muslims of a certain flavor) who still commit mass murder because they believe it is what God asks of them and because God will reach out to them in return.
If "God wants it" is a sufficient justification for action, we haven't risen above the level of savagery.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-11-20 05:02 pm (UTC)If I thought "God said so" was sufficient argument for any action, I'd be in a very different place theologically. I believe that God asks us to do certain things and it is up to us to respond. (I left "just do it" behind in my childhood religious experiences.) Part of being in covenant is that both parties have input. I can choose to ignore God's commands, and I believe the result of that would be a distancing of myself from God -- not a lightning bolt from on high. (I can disobey; God can withdraw.) If I honestly thought that God had commanded me to do something I find reprehensible, like killing someone (or a bunch of someones) outside of any legitimate judicial process, I would disobey. Joshua records the destruction of Jericho, but the torah itself rebukes Shimon and Levi for slaughtering the men of Shechem. We are told to blot out Amalek, but we are also given rules for war and, particularly, for noncombattants. It's not a single, universal picture.
Maybe this will sound fluffy to some of my traditional friends, but I believe I have a relationship with God that requires dialogue, give-and-take, and free will. If I believe that following a commandment will strengthen my relationship with God -- which includes factoring in ethics as I understand them, because service through unethical behavior weakens the relationship -- then I'll probably do it. If not, not. I try to at least consider it, but sometimes the answer is going to be "no", or "not yet".
(no subject)
Date: 2005-11-21 02:36 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-11-22 12:29 am (UTC)The rabbis were disputing whether an oven constructed a certain way could be kosher. The majority said no, and one rabbi (R. Eliezer) said yes. Eliezer said (several times) "if I am right let such-and-such prove it", and each time an unnatural event occurred. (There's an aside where R. Joshua rebukes the walls that are in the process of falling, saying "what right do you have to interfere?") In the end, even a voice from heaven says he's right. And the rabbis respond: the torah is not in heaven; it has been given to men to interpret. The halacha follows the rabbis, not Eliezer.
Does Eliezer know better than God? No, of course not -- but part of God's covenant with the people involved God giving up some authority. So I think it's ok to argue with God, to interpret, and to hesitate. If God really wanted it otherwise he could have wired us differently, but so long as he gave us free will and reason we have the right and responsibility to apply them to our relationship with him. A person who does something reprehensible because he thinks God said so is bringing scorn on not only himself but God.
I certainly do not claim to know as much as, or more than, God does about the world at large. But I know a fair bit about me (as does God), and I have to factor that knowledge, along with my understanding of what God wants, into my decisions.