Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Is Free Will Entangled?

Catchy title, no? If you were a physicist, you'd be deeply amused by my wittiness. If you are not, you can at least be amused at how witty I think I am being.

Here is the core issue: We humans are the unique beings in Creation who have unencumbered free will. That is, in fact, what the Torah means when it says that man was created in the image of his Creator. (I am oversimplifying a bit; but really just a bit.) The question is whether we can each make our own decisions independently, or do they need to mesh together?
I should note at this point that free will is not anarchy; if I decide to jump up, I am going to follow a relatively ballistic trajectory until I land. I can't decide at the apex of my trajectory to change directions or just hover; my trajectory is a consequence of -- and therefore an integral part of -- my initial decision.
The most dramatic way to phrase this question is: If Bob murders George, has Bob's free will choice of murder just interfered with George's free choice (in this case, by preventing George from making any more choices at all), or was George already destined to die in just that way at just that moment? It is crucial to note at this point, that Bob is just as much a murderer in either case. George's destiny is not a factor in Bob's guilt or innocence. This question is, therefore, almost entirely philosophical and it is very difficult indeed to cook up a case where it would make a practical or empirical difference.

Be that as it may, we should be able to see what how are Sages viewed this question by looking at different events in the Torah and see how they explain them. Since we are being dramatic, lets look at the first murder in the history of Creation: Kayin murdering his brother Hevel. The Torah records that HaShem admonished Kayin (B'reishis 4:1) and tells him, "the bloods of your brother (דְּמֵ֣י אָחִ֔יךָ) cry out to Me". Why the "bloods" in plural? Rashi, in his first explanation says it means the blood of Hevel and all his future descendants. Aha! If there are potential descendants to cry out, then his death was preordained for this moment! (I heard that דיוק just this last Shabbos from R' Doniel Lehrfeld, Rosh Yeshivah Beis Yisrael. Very, very g'shmack!) So we have clear evidence of entanglement.

I spoke to the rosh yeshiva the next day and noted that Rashi gives a second explanation. Namely, that Kayin didn't know which blow would be the fatal one (being the first murderer, after all), so he stabbed Kayin several times to ensure that at least one blow would be the fatal one. Why does Rashi need a second explanation? Exactly our machlokes: according to those who hold there is no entanglement, there were never going to be future generations. The rosh yeshiva was not displeased with my הערה.

In any case (and this was actually the main point that R' Lehrfeld wanted to make): We must take very seriously that our actions -- both positive and negative -- can and do have a profound effect on others,. We will certainly have to stand to answer the accusations created by our own actions.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Love in the Time of Corona Virus/Anxiously Awaiting the Mashiach

Two scenarios: Scenario I: A young boy awakened in the middle of the night, placed in the back of vehicle, told not to make any noise, and the vehicle speeds off down the highway. Scenario II: Young boy playing in park goes to see firetruck, turns around to see scary man in angry pursuit, poised to attack. I experienced and lived through both of those scenarios. Terrifying, no? Actually, no; and my picture was never on a milk carton. Here's the context: Scenario I: We addressed both set of our grandparents as "grandma" and "grandpa". How did we distinguish? One set lived less than a half hour's drive; those were there "close grandma and grandpa". The other set lived five hour drive away; they were the "way far away grandma and grandpa". To make the trip the most pleasant for all of us, Dad would wake up my brother and I at 4:00AM, we'd groggily -- but with excitement! -- wander out and down to the garage where we'd crawl
Post a Comment
Read more

Thought for the Day: אוושא מילתא Debases Yours Shabbos

My granddaughter came home with a list the girls and phone numbers in her first grade class.  It was cute because they had made it an arts and crafts project by pasting the list to piece of construction paper cut out to look like an old desk phone and a receiver attached by a pipe cleaner.  I realized, though, that the cuteness was entirely lost on her.  She, of course, has never seen a desk phone with a receiver.  When they pretend to talk on the phone, it is on any relatively flat, rectangular object they find.  (In fact, her 18 month old brother turns every  relatively flat, rectangular object into a phone and walks around babbling into it.  Not much different than the rest of us, except his train of thought is not interrupted by someone else babbling into his ear.) I was reminded of that when my chavrusa (who has children my grandchildrens age) and I were learning about אוושא מילתא.  It came up because of a quote from the Shulchan Aruch HaRav that referred to the noise of תקתוק
Post a Comment
Read more

Thought for the Day: David HaMelech's Five Stages of Finding HaShem In the World

Many of us "sing" (once you have heard what I call carrying a tune, you'll question how I can, in good conscience, use that verb, even with the quotation marks) Eishes Chayil before the Friday night Shabbos meal.  We feel like we are singing the praises of our wives.  In fact, I have also been to chasunas where the chasson proudly (sometimes even tearfully) sings Eishes Chayil to his new eishes chayil.  Beautiful.  Also wrong.  (The sentiments, of course, are not wrong; just a misunderstanding of the intent of the author of these exalted words.) Chazal (TB Brachos, 10a) tell us that when Sholmo HaMelech wrote the words "She opens her mouth Mwith wisdom; the torah of kindness is on her tongue", that he was referring to his father, Dovid HaMelech, who (I am continuing to quote Chazal here) lived in five worlds and sang a song of praise [to each].  It seems to me that "world" here means a perception of reality.  Four times Dovid had to readjust his perc
Post a Comment
Read more