Timeless Torah

Jerusalem: Chanukah, 2006 - In a first in Israel, seven rabbis who view Judaism as a culture will be ordained. These ‘rabbis’ who studied at the International Institute for Secular Humanistic Judaism do not pray to G-d, but believe in man’s humanity. The group believes in G-d “as a literary character,” and will conduct bar/bat mitzvah and marriage ceremonies that will exclude G-d.

Did you hear about the ‘frog’ test? Scientists shouted, “Jump!” at hundreds of frogs. Every frog jumped. They then cut off one leg, and again screamed, “Jump.” It jumped, although not as far. They cut off a second leg and then a third, each time observing that the frog responded, but jumped smaller distances. When they cut off the fourth leg and shouted the result was always the same: the frog did not move. Their conclusion: frogs go deaf when you cut off all their legs.

Sadly enough, we all come to the conclusions we want to believe. Literary experts compare the Bible to other works of that time-frame and deduce that its style doesn’t fit in. Their conclusion: Torah was written at a later date.

But Torah, written by G-d, is for all times and all places. Every story, every verse, is relevant and speaks directly to all of us, here and now. Yet, any attempt to prove the Torah’s divinity will be unsuccessful. G-d wants our relationship with Him to be freely chosen, not coerced. If this is true in regards to Torah, it is even more valid in connection to our Divine soul.

At this point, let us ‘jump’ from the lab to the village of Chelm famous for its simpletons. There the resident ‘philosopher’ informs his fellow citizens that since he can’t perceive his own face directly he must not have one. In addition, he explains, as anyone can plainly see, what seems to be his face clearly resides in the mirror.

This Chelm tale is not limited to those who are uneducated. Celebrated Yale psychology professor Paul Bloom laments human beings’ stubborn commitment to the notion that people possess a spiritual component. He pities those who, like his six-year-old son, insist on pretending that there is an “I” somehow separate from the physical cells of one’s body and brain.

Joining the call to enlighten the backward masses is Harvard professor Steven Pinker, who mocks those who think of the brain as “a pocket PC for the soul, managing information at the behest of a ghostly user.” The professor advises us to set aside such, “childlike intuitions and traditional dogmas.” Or, as they might say at the University of Chelm, since the soul seems perceptible only through the brain, the brain must be the soul.

Scientific interpretations of evidence (or the lack of evidence) can also be wrong. After all, scientists can be just as pig-headed as anybody else. Moreover, they are prone to the folly of confidence - despite the humbling history of science littered with discarded ‘proofs’.

Were this debate merely academic, we might choose to ignore it. Unfortunately, the denial of a holy spark that requires man to act in a holy way has deep repercussions influencing society’s attitudes. Unfortunately, in the absence of a soul, there is simply no reason to consider humans more worthy than animals, to prevent us from casually terminating a yet-unborn life, or to regard any lifestyle as unkosher. And if humans are not qualitatively different then no person has any reason to aspire to anything beyond the gratification or instincts we share with the animals. A world in denial of the soul might craft a utilitarian social contract. But right and wrong would not be real. Put succinctly, without a soul society is soulless, and it shows.

This notion is hardly novel. Humanity has already encountered those bent on de-spiritualizing humanity; the high priests of philosophy and Communism. The very first ‘materialists’ however were the ancient Greeks, whose focus on the superiority of the ‘human animal’ over other species produced an unprecedented celebration of the physical. Accordingly, much of Hellenist thought revolved around the belief that the enjoyment of life was the most worthwhile goal of man. No wonder, the words epicurean and hedonist stem from Greek culture.

And so it followed almost logically that Greece would see the Jewish focus on the divine as an affront. Shabbat denied the unstopping nature of the physical world; circumcision implied that the body is imperfect; the Jewish calendar imparted holiness where previously there was only mundane orbits; and modesty or any sort of limits on indulgence in physical pleasure were simply unnatural. True, the Greeks had their ‘gods’, but they were diametric to holiness, modeled entirely on the worst examples of human beings, evidencing the basest of inclinations. And when Hellenist philosophers spoke of a ‘soul,’ they employed the word to what we would call the personality or intellect. The idea of a being, “In the image of G-d,” that makes choices and merits eternal existence, was as indigestible to the Greek, as it is indispensable to the Jew.

With the passage of centuries and the example of those who lived the Jewish faith, humanity became heir to the idea that it is in fact unique within creation. This is especially crucial on Chanukah when we focus on the difference between the ideals of Judaism and Hellenism. So let us open ourselves to the light of the Chanukah candles. Its moral cannot be proven, so the choice has to come from within: be as unresponsive as a legless frog, or take a leap in response to our higher calling.