Private Orthoprax - Continued.
Orthopraxy continued from here .
I carried on day to day without any change, like a robot.
I didn't fully trust my thought processes. Adherence to Halacha was a form of Pascal's Wager. I like to call it Pascal's insurance. The odds of a modern day building burning is slim, but you get insurance, just in case. OJ was a lie, but just in case, why rock the boat.
You would have thought that I would have spent lots of energy on trying to prove/disprove Judaism. I didn't do that. I was certain that would lead me off the derech. I had no desire to be any more convinced than I already was.
I just bided my time and waited to see how things turn out.
I threw myself into career, simchas, family, tsures, etc and was content to put up with the inconvenience of OJ practice. Which is really another reason I stayed OP. I did not find most of it terribly burdensome. A lifelong set of practices and habits remained doable.
I even started learning again, it is a social and intellectual activity that's cool with me.
But as I mentioned, my wife is unaware of my true opinion of OJ.
So no matter what, how much of a Sheigets can I be in my own home? I need to go to shul or else family and friends would notice. Treife food? Certainly not at home. So I stayed completely Orthoprax. I even poured the hot water before the coffee on Shabbos.
Now, heres the kicker. Eventually, after many years, my mistrust of my judgment wore off. Just the fact that I was able to stay completely frum for 6 years while not even believing it, refuted the Chazal's adage of Lo Uvdo Avoda Zara.
Ironically, that realization set me free.
Some things did fall away, like hot water first on shabbos. But nothing that would be considered a real no-no.
To be honest, there was one extenuating halachic event that is beyond the scope of this blog. It was not done for my own sake, you could say L'tsorech Tsibbur. (Maybe one day I'll get into it if I'm in a good mood.)
Then I knew I was truly free. Free to practice or not. And I do practice, without many mis-givings about it. I have a good life so why not.
Will I always stay this way? Who knows. If I learned one thing is that we don't know what tomorrow brings.
(I hate Shabbos shul though, I can't take the hours.)
I have no compelling need to practice. On the other hand, I have no compelling need to violate Halacha just to prove a point.
Am I still stuck in a Pascal's Wager mode? Possibly. I don't think so, but sometimes we deceive ourselves.
So I'm free; thats wonderful, right? Well not exactly, because I traded freedom for a new set of burdens.
PS. I re-read this post several times and I'm just not 100% happy with it. I think it might come across as if I'm trying to beg the believers for permission to doubt and deny. Well I'm not. By definition a believer cannot grant me that.
So what do I want? I want the skeptics approval for why I do not violate Halacha and I want other frum skeptics out there to know "you are not alone". BHB
16 Comments:
Meaning what? That he left?
Moshe Kappoya.
> You are correct, no one can make you believe, it has to come from within yourself.
Correct, you either believe or not. You either believe the world is round or not. Tsk, Tsk but that goes against Chazal. Chazal say people CHOOSE not to believe. I had similiar discussions with Lakewood Yid.
> You're too smart to follow blindly
It has very little to do with IQ.
> but you're too comfortable to act on your beliefs.
Very true.
> And yes, your kefira is your believe.
Huh?
> Your believe in your own superiority. You know better, you understand more, you're more "open minded" then your father, grandfathers, and the thousands of simple jews who live their lives according to the traditions they received.
There is an element of truth to that. I am different than prior generations. But it's not superiority on my part, it's just that our parents and grandparents were never exposed to the truth with such glaring clarity. And the argument you're making just distracts from the real issue, being the accuracy of the transmission of our beliefs. Simple people have simpler beliefs Emuna Peshuta. Nice for them. We are more sophisticated. And our Dogma can't hold it's own when analyzed.
> I feel for you
thank you.
> because one day you will not be satisfied with the status-quo
Very true, I'm like that already.
> and you will feel driven to act one way or another.
One day at a time.
> I say this with great empathay, because dear baal habos, I've been there. I've been to the edge and stared into the abyss, and it is only through Hashem's kindness that I did not fall in.
I'm glad you're ok.
It's not a matter of falling in. I admit that I do have emotional issues as a direct result of my beliefs; and I will discuss this at length. Emotional Issues in my life are extremely rare, so please don't turn this around and state that my emotional state brings on my beliefs. It's the reverse.
But my (and your) emtional issues don't mean that TMS is true.
> I hope and pray that Hashem helps you see the truth.
Your prayers have been answered.
I do see the truth. And it aint pretty according to our upbringing. So, I have to adjust. It's not easy and it takes work, of which I don't have time right now.
MK, I appreciate your input.
> Incidently, Aristotle said the same thing.
He was right too.
> Ok firstly, the earth being round or not is NOT an issue of belief.
Not any more. Before Magellan(?) proved it it probably was amatter of belief. (Steven Hawkings said greeks knew it from the curvature of the Earth because ships dis-appeared over the horizon and also because of the shape of the moon as it appeared in shadows during an eclipse)
> But Emunah, and Yirat Shemaim, is 100% choice. I know this for myself because I have wavered back and forth on that choice before and seen the difference it makes.
For you. because you wavered on the line, you had to choose, so you choose Emuna.
But if you don't believe, just like you don't believe in Christianity, then you don't believe.
IC,
> Would my life be any different if I threw away my orthodox beliefs and became reform. So I played thought experiments and did a myriad of other things, and at certain points I could see "my life changing" I could actively choose to do this, or do that.
Whoa! Please re-read that.
You seem to be acknowledging that you slected a life style on the basis of of it how it affected you, not on the basis of the historicity of OJ. Yes, I agree YOU chose to choose. I also am "choosing" to live OJ, but not because I believe it. I don't and I'm not sure now that you even believe in OJ in the historic sense.
> I believe in OJ in the historic sense only because I choose to have Yirat Shamaiam in general.
Irviner, good for you. But that's the cart before the horse. A Mormon with the same yiras shomaim ends up a christian.
> lets look at political affiliation. When I read the Republican "who we are" list and compare it to the Democrat "who we are list", I can then decide which party I want to go with. And to me, thats the only thing that really matters. No amount of "Scandal" will sway me on that issue. Because in my mind, its almost irrelevant to what I think the "real issues" are.
But the real events that my religion claims occurred are of utmost importance to me.
I should keep Shabbos because I "believe" God split the sea as a miracle and I "believe" God created the world in six days and rested on the seventh. Not because my Rabbi keeps shabbos.
IC, the question is simply whether you believe miracles (natural or otherwise) took place during Yetsias Mitrayim. You do. I don't. I wish I'd be in your shoes. Life was much more fulfilling then.
IC, Other people say it so more more elegantly, so I'll look it up and post it here. But briefly, it gets to a point where the whole JO system is problemamtic. Sure theres a Doichek answer for everything, but the sum of all the questions is greater than each individual difficulty. Like a Rubic's cube, where you're constantly juggling answers but can never get the whole solution at the same time. And suddenly you bump into a model where everything just fits much better. And it just suddenly clicked. This is without reading any skeptical material, blogs or anything. Just the 5 books of Ball from my prior post. (there my have been a few more that I did not mention, like dead sea scrolls, etc) anyhow, others state it much better. I'll find them for you sometime tomorrow.
IC, check this out, it's much better stated than what I said.
http://daasdiybur.blogspot.com/2006/01/pegs.html
> I am curious why on that issue you don't (believe).
Once you start to doubt, the question becomes not why don't you believe in miracles but rather why *do* you believe in miracles.
IC, It looks like XGH just addressed some of that new post on Dov Bear. Your questions are good ones, and I'll try to formulate my own answers sometime tonight.
IC,
> Why the lie about the origins of the book? (No other religion lies about its origins)
This is a mis-characterization. It's not a lie, Now it is explainable by DH, Ezra, Joshia.
But what you're really asking is the same thing as the Kuzari. If it's not true, how did it start.
There are ready refutations to the Kuzari, one of which really makes a lot of sense. It is in a link on TFSG and I'd rather not post it. It basically shows that there are several examples of peoples that do not know their own origins and have attributed it public miracles (not in the religious sense, but a whole people originating from the ground, I think it was old Ireland or something like that).
But there's no religious bent to it.
2. Why the acceptance of the system? The system as written, does not give authority to one group of people over another.
Sure it does according to DH. It establishes the soveriegnty of Judeah over Israel. Read Finkelstein. Even without that, the Kohanim (Tsedukim?) are favored.
>There is no concept of a person superceding the rules. (such as a pope)
Not relevant, read Finkelstein. Also there is the king who is somewhat priveliged?
3. Why is it so poorly written? No other religious book is so dry and uninspiring, not even from similar time periods.
I can't speak to this, I'm not familiar with other books. I find it quite inspiring and poetic, especially Breishis, Shmos and Devarim.
>Infact, most of the apocrypha is more exicting than whats actually in Tanach.
So what?
> As for the reason why I beleive in miracles... Its because I see them almost every day, in my life.
You call it miracles. It's not a Nes. Nes in Hebrew means "sign" or "flag" as to indicate something unusual happened here. Clearly the Bible, when using miracles, does not mean the kind we ALL see in everyday life, such as a tree growing, sunset, etc.
> As those more athiestic scientists like to say, "we have the most amazing power to see patterns in statstical noise"... To them, this is evidence of our ability to see things which arn't real. To me, its just further evidence of our connection to the ultimate singularity.
That's nice and poetic but what does that mean. I don't deny God as a singularity, but what does that have to do with OJ.
To recap, I agree, there are some questions as to the origin of the Bible if it's not divine. But there are many many more questions and absurdities if you insist it's the word of God (especially as LY sees it). The best explanation is the rational and scientific. Is the Bible true? In my opinion highly unlikely, almost impossible and if it is, then maybe Jesus is the saviour or the Koran ?
Is Science and DH true? More likely than the Bible.
Does Occams razor apply here? I don't know. OR is much more complex than it sounds.
So, I admit, the Bible might be true, But no way is that what I "believe" to be true.
Once again, I say I'm not very good at debating and I can't always express myself well, but that's the gist of it.
Shabbat Shalom
> Like I am good at debating???
If you'd leave out the Kabbala, you;d be much better. (IMHO)
>
So if you are going off of DH, then you have just exchanged one non-falisfiable idea for another.
True.
> Can you give me the links to the "kuzari" argument.
Whats your Email I don't want to post it. I'll send it after shabbos or sunday.
> I have heard lots of "what if" stories, and everyone I have heard is flawed in quite a few ways to the story of Judaism.
sure, it looks flawed, because people give new interpretations and apologetics for the Bible.
>
> In fact there is a 2700 year old "priestly blessing" amulet that was found.
So what does that prove? That Yivorecha is old? So what it gets incorporated into the Bible when it's redacted.
IC,
> Thats not appologetics.
They were appologettics 2000 years ago. Aish Hatora is new appol. Those were new back then.
>So what does that prove? That Yivorecha is old? So what it gets incorporated into the Bible when it's redacted.
>Apparently you don't know much about amulets.
Probably right.
> You don't create an "magical amulet" and then place it into a holy book.
why not? Especially if it's a blessing. There must ne hundreds of K'mayos written new not from other seforim.
I'll tryu to do some reasearch.
> But anyway, why should I leave out the Kabbalah?
You can keep it for yourself. But that certainly wont win points with rational seeking skeptics.
> Honestly, I don't know how someone can understand Judaism without understanding Kabbalah. What do you daven of on Shabbat?
What did Chazal daven on Shabbos?
> What are the zemirot you sing at your shabbos table?
I sing all the usual (I love Zemiros) . What did Chazal sing on Shabbos table?
> I was suggest that I use a different word than Kabbalah. But I don't know a good word to use. Should I use the term Sod? Perhaps Pardes?
You don't need to drop Kaballah from your thoughts, just your arguments. Just my 2 cents. NOt that debating helps much anyway. do you think one person ever changed his mind because of a debate?
> I have changed my mind because of a debate. It wasn't untill many months and sometimes years after I had, or heard the debate, but the debate has changed my mind before.
I find that I'm more influenced by reading. And then debating with myself.
> Also realize, to say that I can have the kabbalah in my heart, but not use it as an argument, means that I will end up just not giving anyone the answer to the question they desire regarding the origins of things.
> Because the only place that Judaism deals with origins, is in works that involve Kabbalah.
B'reshis bara Elohim (Genesis).
Basarah Mamoros nivra Holam.
Shlosha Devarim you're not allowed to ask, etc,
IC, you mentioned in another comment that you were engaged. Mazel Tov! When's the wedding?
dear Baal Habos,
i have just discovered your blog and some other bloggers who are in the same boat. i too am a heretic who lives as a frum woman, and whose family and husband do not suspect my divergance. i wonder if there is an email address i can send you a message to and ask you some questions that you might be able and willing to address.
Certainly. BAALHABOS@GMAIL.COM
Post a Comment
<< Home