INSIGHT 5779 - #21: MY TRUTH

For Parshat Zachor
 
Not yet available on the Nishma website


1) There is, perhaps, an interesting application of this idea in regard to the Purim story. T.B. Megilla 12b informs us that the people were hesitant in responding to the edict to attack the Jews because they were concerned about the potential for Achashveirosh to change his mind and punish them for following his first intentions after he changed his mind. His edicts were simply not well thought out as evidenced by his edict that the husband should objectively be the head of the household notwithstanding the actual reality of the subjective nature of the individual husband-wife relationship. (See, further, Rashi.) This is the way of the evil person -- to state a truth regardless of its basis in reality -- and this was Achashveirosh. (Perhaps, also, connecting to the classic question of whether he was just a fool or more evil than Haman). In this case, imposing his 'My Truth' actually worked for the benefit of the Jewish People.

2) It was intention that I chose the title 'My Truth", obviously referring to the modern use of this term. This is not to say that the use of this term always reflects evil -- it clearly does not and there are times, in fact, when we should use this term to reflect the proper application of our subjective evaluation of the facts within the parameters of honest objectivity. My use of this term, though, does still indicate that people must be careful not to follow Amalek's lead to define one's behaviour notwithstanding what is absolutely known to be the objective reality.

Insight 5777-24: WHAT, REALLY, ARE WE SUPPOSED TO REMEMBER?

For Parshat Zachor, Ki Teistzei and Beshalach
Not yet available on the Nishma website

Insight 5774-25: The Absence of Doubt

For Zachor
Not yet available on the Nishma website.


People may wonder: does this argument not also imply that we should have doubt in God? Are we not obligated to be certain in our conviction to Him and His Torah? 

Doubt is really a human condition and has nothing to do with the reality of God. One who doubts God really doubts oneself, one's ability to recognize the Divine. This is, however, in fact the human condition: we are all limited as human beings in knowing God. Surety is thus not a statement about God but, rather, a statement about self. One who is sure about what he believes about God or about what God says is really declaring a surety in his/her ability to comprehend God. Are we commanded to be as sure as we can possibly be in our relationship with the Divine? Absolutely. Are we, though, to think we are clearly 100% correct? There is the problem. As Rav Moshe says in his Hakdama to Iggrot Moshe, what is demanded of us is to do the best humanly possible for us. Could I still be wrong, though? The answer is yes. It is such a person who is then open to correction and education. Is it not surprising that Rav Moshe calls upon people to analyze his answers and tell him if there is a problem. This did not take away the needed adamancy he had in his psak for that is necessary of one called upon to render decisions. He also, though, recognized his inherent limitations. 

Belief in God cannot be belief in one's perception of God. Such a belief is actually the belief of the religious dogmatist who is not really interested in the true nature of God which fosters questioning but the certainty of his/her dogmatism. Our belief must be a belief in the true nature of God. This demands that one have some doubt in one's perception and is open to being taught about this True Nature which may demand a shift in one's perception.


Study Question

1)