<HTML>A number of comments from widely different viewpoints have been offered
on the issue of ethics and the avot. I will attempt to clarify the
issues involved by changing the wording and perspective of the basic
questions that have been raised. I think that many of the readers will
agree with this. I hope it will help the readers reach some conclusions
about their own beliefs, however different from my own beliefs.
1) First, I don't think there is anyone who can answer the question in a
clear and satisfying manner. I would guess that this is one of those
essential questions that never has a final answer.
Most people who sit down to learn come to the table with preconceived
ideas or assumptions about the avot. The person might believe that we
are not even allowed to discuss the avot in human terms. At the other
extreme, a person might believe that we should not assume that the avot
were anything special. There are an unlimited number of levels in
between. What's important is that the ideas and beliefs and assumptions
are there before the person studies a specific event.
While learning, the person then tries to fit the event into his/her
preconceived ideas. For example, one who believes that the avot were
totally upright will try to explain the event in a way that the avot did
no wrong. One who believes that they are open to small criticisms will
allow for that in explaining the story. Usually, studying a specific
event does not alter one's preconceived beliefs about the avot. Rather,
the event is understood in a way that conforms to a prior assumption.
I think that we need to think about where our preconceived beliefs come
from. It is true that most of us are not exactly sure about our beliefs,
and we continually modify and clarify our beliefs as we continue to study
and grow wiser. So how do you as an individual form your beliefs? Do
you base your assumptions and belief about the avot on traditional
sources only? Modern psychology? Recent archeological finds? Whatever
it is that helps you define your assumptions about the avot, you modify
your assumptions as you discover more information, and you view each
event about the avot from that perspective, so that you adapt the story
to fit your ideas. (This does not necessarily mean that you change the
facts of the story.)
2) When forming our beliefs, we need to be careful of misinformation,
underinformation, and different cultures. Misinformation may come from
biblical cartoons and movies. Underinformation means not having all of
the facts before coming to a conclusion. For those who rely primarily on
traditional sources, this means being aware of midrashim and meforshim,
and comparing to phrases elsewhere in the Torah. For brevity's sake I do
not want to give examples, but they are numerous.
I feel it is also wrong to judge the avot by the '90's standards. At a
recent women's meeting in our town, they were discussing if Rivkah had a
happy marriage, based on the age difference between her and Yitzchak. We
have to allow for a difference in cultures when discussing the avot.
3) The same issue that is being discussed about the avot can probably be
asked of Hashem. In our society, we have many attitudes about things
like Korbanot, Sotah, the punishment for Avoda Zara, and so on. I am not
asking you to explain any of these. Rather, many of the Digest's readers
jump to Hashem's defense on these types of issues. The same way that you
set a line beyond which you will not pass when it comes to Hashem, most
of us set a line for questioning or judging the avot. While that line is
not the same for Hashem, where do you set the line for avot?
This is becoming far too lengthy, yet I have much to say to support my
own beliefs that are based on Chassidic teachings. I will hold on to
that for another time, and I look forward to hearing more from honored
Digest contributors.
Rabbi Chaim Kosofsky
Lubavitcher Yeshiva Academy
Longmeadow, MA</HTML>
