What is Traditional Theodicy?
What is Traditional Theodicy?
Is it explaining October 7th as a sign from God about "secular" Israel?
In the previous post, I critiqued Rav Aharon Feldman’s explanation of October 7th, which is now available in English translation:
Several people protested that my critique was contrary to Torah. After all, isn’t it foundational to Judaism that bad things happen for a reason? And that such reasons relate to our sins? And so wasn’t Rav Feldman’s approach perfectly in line with Jewish tradition?
This sort of thing always comes up. After every great disaster, there have always been rabbis who pinned it on specific things. And the problem is always the same.
Yes, Judaism teaches that things happen for a reason, and that there is divine providence. However, Judaism also teaches that you need a prophet to know exactly what the specific reasons are, and that such people no longer exist.
Rav Feldman himself acknowledges this. But he immediately proceeds to claim that based on his understanding of both Torah and current events, it is “clear” what the specific reason is. But his idea of what is “clear” is not at all clear to everyone else. If anything, it’s the opposite which is “clear.” Even when you have a prophet who gives a sign, the sign has to make sense. If when Eliyahu was on Mount Carmel, the fire had come down from Heaven and consumed the offering of the prophets of Baal, it wouldn’t have helped Eliyahu’s case.
When we talk about things happening as a punishment for sins, the crucial question is: which sins? For some reason, many people assume that disasters only happen as a punishment for sins bein adam leMakom, between man and God. But maybe it’s for interpersonal sins? And maybe it’s not vague and individual sins like lashon hara, but institutional and/or societal wrongdoing? After all, when discussing the Destruction of the Temple, the prophets talked about about the corruption of religious figures and the oppression of the weak and the meaninglessness of religious ritual in the face of such things, not chillul Shabbos, bittul Torah, or lashon hara.
Rav Feldman claims that the sins which caused October 7th are clearly the secular nature of Israel in general, and specifically with regard to certain events of last year. But his arguments not only lack evidence - the evidence would point to the exact opposite conclusion.
The fact that the majority of fatalities on October were of secular Jews is meaningless, since secular Jews happened to be the majority of people living next to Gaza. When terrorists are geographically closer to charedi Jews - whether in Har Nof or Neve Yaakov - it’s charedi Jews who are killed. And when there are large numbers of religious Jews in combat, it’s correspondingly large numbers of religious Jews who are killed. And when it’s charedim who are in Meron and have set up a totally unsafe mass event, it’s charedim who are killed.
Rav Feldman claims that the “extreme” event of the months preceding the war were the judicial reform protests, and hence they must have been the spiritual trigger. But you could just as plausibly argue that it was the judicial reform itself that was the extreme event and was thus the trigger!
Rav Feldman also claims that the most disturbing thing, the final straw, was the failure of Jews to sufficiently protest the desecration of the Yom Kippur services in Dizengoff. Again, how does he know? Maybe it was the failure of Jews to sufficiently protest the respect shown by great rabbis and important charedi figures to Chaim Walder?
Even more concretely, there was one hugely significant and undeniable consequence of October 7th. Before that happened, the charedim had unprecedented political strength, and they had a very specific idea of how to use it. The government was about to permanently enshrine into law that charedim would forever be exempt from the IDF, and would even be financially supported by the state for this. The charedi way of life was about to become set in stone.
But as a consequence of October 7th and the resulting war, that is completely off the table. Moreover, it has been replaced by an unprecedented push, even and especially from religious Jews, to draft charedim, and certainly to reduce the financial support of yeshivos.
As a result of October 7th, the non-charedi way of life - supporting the state economically and militarily - has become ever more important. And it’s the charedi way of life which was stopped from being strengthened, and which is instead under severe threat. So if you’re going to claim that Judaism requires us to see October 7th as a message from God, wasn’t the clearest message that He is against the charedi approach?
Any explanation of a calamity that points fingers at others and doesn't place any responsibility on the head of the explainer is meaningless
I started writing about blaming a "them", but as I did so R Chaim Lando's comment appeared beneath this edit window. Barukh shekivanti.
You write "The fact that the majority of fatalities on October were of secular Jews is meaningless, since secular Jews happened to be the majority of people living next to Gaza." Not really. After all, HQBH chose this catastrophe rather than something else. So, while I think that we cannot meaningfully play the game R Feldman is suggesting, I do not think this particular argument against it is valid.
Rather, the whole thing is meaningless because if Hashem is punishing a sin, or pushing us to do better even if not a sin (a likely definition of "yissurim shel Ahavah -- tribulations of [Divine] 'Love'"), it has to be a message that could be read by and acted on by those who are at fault. So, even a "this happened to them but we could learn from it to ..." is a valid message. Like the Chafeitz Chaim's response to an earthquake in Japan.
As it is, the analysis as described here is a call not to act. Nothing for us, it's "their" problem.
And a second difference between what Chazal did and the way these modern statements are presented (and I am hoping it's in the presentation, and not the original statement): While we may never know THE Divine 'Reason' for anything with any reliability -- and likely cannot understand one anyway, any lesson the person could take would be of value. We are obligated to use these opportunities as motivations to improve. The Rambam says to ignore them would be akhzaryius -- cruelty. But that doesn't mean the motivation is the Divine "Reason" for the event. To think we can understand such things, with mere human-sized minds, is incredible hubris.