Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: The Difficulty of Conversations with Adherents to Derivative of Torah Judaism

The word "apikorus", it is claimed, is from the Greek "Epicurean".  The word "Epicurean", in turn, means one who is an adherent to the world view originally promulgated by the Greek philosopher Epicurus.  According Wikipedia, his world view can be summarized as follows:
For Epicurus, the purpose of philosophy was to attain the happy, tranquil life, characterized by ataraxia—peace and freedom from fear—and aponia—the absence of pain—and by living a self-sufficient life surrounded by friends. He taught that pleasure and pain are measures of what is good and evil; death is the end of both body and soul and therefore should not be feared; the gods neither reward nor punish humans; the universe is infinite and eternal; and events in the world are ultimately based on the motions and interactions of atoms moving in empty space.
I like that summary.  It is a simple statement of the facts without passing judgement.  While many might shy away from being labeled as an epicurean, I don't think they would argue too strongly on this statement.  There are, of course, adherents of the derivative religions from Torah Judaism, though, who would not want to deny a life after death.  However, even they would most likely ascribe to a reformed view that says that death ends our physical state, but the soul lives on forever.  That one change will make a difference in particular decisions, but it doesn't change the essence of the philosophy.

That is, both the orthodox and reform epicurean would agree that short term pain -- exercise, refraining from smoking, chemotherapy, and whatnot -- is a worthwhile trade off for longer term ataraxia and aponia.  They would also agree that there is no sense at all to pursuing  goal that brings no benefit.  They would argue on things that don't bring a benefit in this world, though they might have very similar practices.  They might both help in a soup kitchen, for example.  Why?  The orthodox epicurean gets a good feeling -- a pleasure he enjoys; whereas the reform epicurean feels it is good for his soul.  They might both go to a symphony.  Why?  The orthodox epicurean is experiencing the peace and absence of pain that he always seeks.  The reform epicurean, though, may feel that by relaxing and "recharging his spiritual batteries" he will better perform whatever service he needs to perform in service of getting a beautiful life after death.

They understand each other and they understand their differences.  Both believe they are correct and the other is being naive, but it is an understandable naiveté.

It has taken me years to realize that such discussions between us Orthodox/Torah Jews and the adherents of derivative faiths is just not like that at all.  I have often felt frustration, in fact, with not being able to have conversations as above with those adherents.  I finally realized the source of the frustration and the near impossibility of bridging the gap.  The problem is twofold.  First, our motivations are not quantitatively different, the are qualitatively different.  The Torah Jew is not motivated by ataraxia and aponia; not in any way shape or form.  While we may hope for something like that, may even strive for that in this world (within the bounds of permitted behaviour, of course).  But ultimately our motivation is to do what HaShem wants as He has revealed to us in His Torah and transmitted to us by our sages.  Really; that's it.  That's one problem.

The other problem is that we use the same words for completely different concepts.  Take the word "angel".  We know them to be spiritual/transcendental forces that carry out HaShem's Will something akin to the way a printer carries out your will when you want a document printed.  To at least one major derivative religion (class of religions, actually), angels are some sort of super being who sometimes even rebel against their creator.  To them angels are not much different than the gods of Greek and Roman mythology. (In fact, I would argue they are, in fact, just an adaptation of that mythology to terms more palatable to the reader of the "Old Testament" [sic].)  Imagine talking to someone about chemistry when he suddenly says, "Oh?  In your belief system protons and neutrons don't have free will?  How strange!  I mean, then how to you explain radioactivity?!"  Once you see that he refers to "your belief system" and "neutrons having free will"... he is just not seeing the world as you do; he is not asking how you explain radioactivity, but explaining to you how your "belief system" is obviously and patently wrong.

You would think this epiphany would stop me from trying to have those conversation.  Sigh... I am still working on myself.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Battling the Evil Inclination on all Fronts

Yom Kippur.  When I was growing up, there were three annual events that marked the Jewish calendar: eating matzos on Passover, lighting candles on Chanuka, and  fasting on Yom Kippur.  Major news organizations around the world report on the "surreal" and "eerie" quiet of the streets in even the most secular neighborhoods of Israel.  Yom Kippur.

As you know, I am observant of Jewish law.  Some have even called me "ultra orthodox" (not in a kind way).  Given that, I have a question.  How likely do you think that I would be tempted to eat on Yom Kippur, that most holy day of the year?  Let's make the scale zero to ten, where zero is "as likely as driving through McDonald's on Shabbos and ordering a Big Mac with extra cheese." and ten is "as likely as breathing regularly".  Take your time.  If you answered "zero"; thank you, but -- sadly and penitently -- no.  The answer is more like nine; I'd like to say lower, but i…

Thought for the Day: Sometimes a Food Loses Its Identity When It Loses Its Bracha; Sometimes It Doesn't

Let's start with a question: Why are We Allowed to Drink Coffee and Whiskey Made by Non-Jews?  Before you ask,"Why would I think that I shouldn't be able to drink whiskey and coffee made by non-Jews?", I'll tell you. Simple, we all know that Chazal made a decree -- known as בישול עכו''ם/bishul akim -- that particular foods cooked by non-Jews are forbidden.  There are basically two criteria that determines if a dish falls into this category:
Is not consumed raw.Fit for a royal banquet. Cooked carrots, therefore, are not a problem since they can be eaten raw (I actually prefer them that way).  Baked beans are find because the are not prestigious enough.  (For great synopsis of the laws, see the article on the Star-K site, FOOD FIT FOR A KING, by Rabbi Moshe Heinemann, shlita.)  There are lots of cool questions and details (baked potatoes are prestigious, does that make even potato chips and issue?) which are for another time.  Clearly, though, both coffee an…

Thought for the Day: Coming Into This World for Torah, Avodah, and Acts of Loving Kindness

This TftD is so self-serving that I should be embarrassed.  But I am not... talking about grandchildren is always off budget.  I have, bli ayin hara, a beautiful new grandson; born at 6:11 PM CDT last Friday night.  The secular (aka -- by me, anyway -- slave) date is October 20, 2017 CE.  The Hebrew (aka Real) date is certainly Rosh Chodesh חשון/Cheshvan and certainly in the year 5778 since Creation.  The date, you ask... good question!

Sundown on Friday night was 6:01 PM CDT, which means he was born either at the end of the last day of תשרי or the beginning of the first day of Cheshvan; a period know as בין השמשות/twilight.  What's the big deal, you ask... I am so glad you asked.  We all deal quite handily with בין השמשות every week and every holiday; we're just stringent.  We start Shabbos and the first day of Yom Tov before בין השמשות; that is, before sundown.  Likewise, we end Shabbos and the first day of Yom Tov after בין השמשות; some 42, 50, 60, or 72 minutes after sundo…