Just finished Tractate Chullin! It's my 14th complete tractate! Now onto the post...
One reason I love Judaism is that it is mainly a religion of deed. That's why I was surprised today when I came across a teaching that one can be punished for his thoughts - if that thought was about idol worship.
The teaching come in the context of an incident where a child sends away a mother bird before fetching eggs for his father. Based on the Torah, one is promised a long life if he does either of two commandments (sending away a mother bird before taking their young and honoring one's parents). However, on his way down the child falls to his death, and the text must struggle with the question of theodicy: how can such a bad thing happen to such a meritorious boy?
In debating what went wrong the Talmud suggests that he was punished for his sinful thoughts. However that is quickly dismissed because "The holy one does not consider a sinful thought to be in the realm of deeds." Therefore the child would not be punished on account of this.
However, the text continues, if he was thinking about idol worship that warrants punishment. So what's different about idol worship?
The Meiri has an interesting answer: Idol worship at it's core is a belief in one's heart.
When I pray to God I do a lot. I read words. I bow. I stand. However, my real prayer comes from my intention. That's different than say eating pork because I can think about the other white meat till the cows come home but until I eat it I haven't done anything wrong. Thinking about Baal or any other gods, is in a way akin to actually worshipping them.
So what does this text teach us? There is something special about prayer that nothing else has and it's the fact that we can do it even while others are watching. Prayer is inner and personal. Prayer is sui generis which makes it all the more powerful.
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Marc, I always enjoy reading and learning from your commentaries here. Coming up with a positive conclusion about the power or import of prayer from this horrible story, as you did, is certainly an impressive act of philosophy and imagination.
ReplyDeleteI think you've gone too far, though. Don't you think there comes a time when one needs to say, as a modern Jew, that the core idea in this teaching, that a little child could deserve to die because he might have had a "bad" thought, is utterly unacceptable and completely immoral by our standards? I don't think we can or should excuse it by explaining its context, any more than we'd accept excuses for any other execrable ideology or belief. Its context and its time may help to explain its origin, but not to justify it. The idea is simply abhorrent and unacceptable. There's always a risk of getting so caught up in legalistic explanations and justifications that we lose sight of core values, and from my point of view, that's the result here.
I also think it goes too far to equate thinking about something forbidden with doing something forbidden, even in a religious or spiritual context. We'd have no literature of interest, for example, without that sort of "transgression." And policing our thoughts really is anathema to our contemporary civic or civil values, even though it is common to many religious traditions, and doesn't fall in nearly as extreme a category as trying to blame a child's death on his impure thoughts.
Don't worry Joe. I find the text just as problematic. We can talk more about it in person. I was trying to understand WHY the rabbis would say what they do, not to defend their choice.
ReplyDelete