“Can you fulfill the mitzvah of repentance without repenting?” Strange though it may sound, this was the title of a booklet recently distributed in Bnei Brak shuls. The famous quip attributed to George Orwell immediately came to mind: “There are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them” (Orwell wrote a similar line in his 1945 Notes on Nationalism: “One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool”). Apparently, a not-dissimilar statement can apply to elements within the Yeshiva world.
Common to Yeshiva experience is the elitist attitude whereby “Torah sense is the opposite of common sense” – an English rendition of the well-known adage, “daas Torah hefech daas baalei batim.” Today, it seems the position has spread far beyond the boundaries of Yeshiva life and has become widespread even among many secular Jews. As I will explain below, common sense, it seems, is being devalued.
This does not bode well for the rehabilitation process that Israeli society needs. What we need is more common sense – on all sides of society
This does not bode well for the rehabilitation process that Israeli society needs. What we need is more common sense – on all sides of society.
Uncommon Sense: Yeshiva and Academia
During my time in Yeshiva, the sentence above articulated no slight disdain for baalei batim – those not privy to the depths of Torah knowledge, to taste its sweetness and study its intricate trails. “How does one know the correct answer to a Torah dilemma,” one friend quoted from the Rogotchover – “Just ask a baalbos, and the opposite answer is the correct one.”
On one level, a disdain for the common is natural for the elite institution that the Lithuanian Yeshiva institution (by contrast, for instance, with the Hungarian equivalent) was designed to be. In the case of academic knowledge, a range of authors, in particular continental thinkers (such as Emile Durkheim and many of his disciples), warn against the illusion of spontaneous understanding and the dangers of non-reflexive knowledge. Rather than intuition, truth can only be revealed by means of methodological, conceptual, and theoretical deconstructive techniques that deny the validity of prenotions concerning our mental grasp on reality.
Sometimes, the absence of common sense in academia can be jarring. One example among several that spring to mind is the thesis (written under the supervision of distinguished academics) that the absence of rape from the ranks of the IDF is due to Jewish racism and the wholesale dehumanization of Palestinian women.[1] Many more can be found in Helen Pluckrose’s and James Lindsay’s Cynical Theories, which focuses on what the authors dub “grievance studies.” However, the rejection of common sense is a feature of the academic system rather than a bug; academic freedom includes, almost by definition, freedom from common sense. Only thus can great innovations, scientific or philosophical, come to light.
The sense that arises from a Yeshiva education in the Brisk style is thus distinctively uncommon.
The same attitude can be applied in the Yeshiva space. An ordinary person equipped with common sense alone sees a gathered body of water as a simple pool. The Halachic Man, as Rav Soloveitchik explained, sees it as a mikveh, replete with a range of halachic categories and ramifications to which laymen are oblivious. The sense that arises from a Yeshiva education in the Brisk style is thus distinctively uncommon. Not unlike the academic parallel, it’s methodologies, semantic field, and appreciation of reality are different from those outside who are untrained in Yeshiva modes of thought.
However, there is something deeper at work.
Making Sense of Torah
Ultimately, Yeshiva, or Torah study on a broader level, is not academia. It cannot be an ivory tower, for it needs to reach practical conclusions that guide everyday lives. For this purpose, common sense is an essential tool.
Shut Radvaz, to cite one famous example, ruled that somebody who could save a life by sacrificing a limb – the case involved somebody who was threatened at sword-point to sacrifice a limb or else the assailant would kill somebody else – does not have to give up his limb. Among other arguments, his basic reasoning in the ruling is that “the Torah’s ways are pleasant” and that Torah law and practice “must comply with basic reason and logic” (Vol. 3, no. 627).
Indeed, the Pasuk in Tehillim states, “The precepts of Hashem are upright, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the Hashem is pure, enlightening the eyes.” The Torah is upright and enlightening when it makes sense; only thus can we be “a wise and understanding nation” in the eyes of the nations (Devarim 4:6).
Ultimately, Yeshiva, or Torah study on a broader level, is not academia. It cannot be an ivory tower, for it needs to reach practical conclusions that guide everyday lives. For this purpose, common sense is an essential tool.
The Gemara teaches that sevara, something known by means of simple logic or common sense, even receives the status of Torah law (see Bava Kama 46b; Sanhedrin 74a). Even the great Rosh Yeshiva and leader, Rav Elazar Menachem Shach zt”l, guided his disciples to know that “a well-reasoned opinion does not require additional proofs, while one that goes against common sense is wrong even when a thousand proofs support it” (cited in Hi Sichasi, p. 116). Common sense is thus a basic tool of Halachic deliberation and decision. Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt”l, would often note that a certain opinion is unacceptable because it “doesn’t make sense” (see, for instance, Shut Iggros Moshe, Vol. 5, no. 28).
Of course, a Yeshiva-Torah education goes far beyond common sense. When a Torah scholar analyzes, examines, compares, and contrasts the different Torah texts relating to a given matter, “common sense” is in the background rather than at the front of his labors. It is certainly not a sufficient condition for becoming a Talmid Chacham and rendering decisions, but it remains a necessary one.
Moreover, in the field of core values and ways of life that derive from them. A friend who wished to demonstrate how “Torah sense runs contrary to common sense” noted that most people think murder is a more heinous crime than violating Shabbos, while the Torah opinion is the opposite: the Torah punishment for desecrating Shabbos is stoning (the most severe Torah capital penalty) while murder is (only) punished by decapitation, a lighter penalty. The statement demonstrates the potential distortions that arise when we negate common sense, to the point of making light of one of the most severe of Torah offenses (among the three sins for which a person must give his life rather than transgress) and believing, literally, that a murderer is somehow better off than one who violates Shabbos.
Sefer Alfei Menashe (Chap. 35) notes that interpreting the Torah contrary to basic principles of common sense ridicules us and causes a chillul Hashem; the statement above is a good illustration.
Furthermore, the duty to follow common sense and intuition is prominent in cases such as the Generation of the Flood, among several others, in which groups and nations were punished for misdeeds despite there being no prior Divine instruction. How is that fair? How were they to know between right and wrong, good and evil? The simple answer, as mentioned by the Avnei Nezer (Choshen Mishpat, no. 35), is that we are charged with knowing right from wrong by means of common sense. Even after the Torah was given, providing us with instruction and guidance for every walk of life, we need to hold tight to the Divine gift of common sense. Denying it, as we know from experience, can have disastrous consequences.
Why, then, is it somehow opposed in the Charedi Yeshiva world? I wish to suggest that the discomfort with common sense relates to the defense of a way of life that is anything but common.
Defending the Uncommon
Rabbi Mordechai Neugroschel, a neighbor and colleague who is often called upon to represent Charedi society in front of secular audiences, told me that he once consulted with Rav Shach, zt”l, concerning how to present the Charedi draft issue. He knew it would come up (it always does) and didn’t know how best to address the deep non-Charedi grievance on the subject. Rav Shach, to his surprise, instructed him to refrain from entering into any discussion on the topic. Rather, he told him to state, “We do not serve in the IDF because this is what our rabbis have instructed us to do.” To his wonder, the response was received with applause (it’s hard to believe this could happen today).
The anecdote illustrates a basic property of common sense: its commonness. The arena of common sense is one of discussion and deliberation with others. Anybody can weigh in. And when you feel that something fundamental and fragile is being threatened, you generally don’t want to be in a place of discussion and conversation – not with others, and not even internally, with yourself. From this perspective, “We follow our rabbis” is a far better response than trying to explain away a thorny issue in commonsensical terms. The latter route is highly likely to backfire.
The arena of common sense is one of discussion and deliberation with others. Anybody can weigh in. And when you feel that something fundamental and fragile is being threatened, you generally don’t want to be in a place of discussion and conversation
As a means of coping with the grave challenges of modernity, Charedi society chose the route of isolationism – isolating from those elements of modern society, both cultural and value-based, that present a threat to a Torah way of life. Isolationism, almost by definition, implies a departure from the common, as clearly born out in the Charedi way of life, whether in dress codes, gender norms, workforce participation, language (certainly for the Yiddish-speaking parts of Charedi society), and much besides. The “common” in common sense threatens to undermine the strategy. Isolating from the common inevitably includes a measure of isolation even from common sense.
“Who is a Charedi Jew?” asked media personality R. Dov Povarsky. He proceeded to reply, “One who has taken it upon himself to heed to the voice of the rabbis […] even when the right seems to be left and vice versa.” The Charedi press often emphasizes that we must comply with Daas Torah even when it runs contrary to common sense. Moreover, Daas Torah comes in a variety of shapes and sizes, and it sometimes seems that the Charedi public (or, more precisely, parts thereof) actively searches for opinions that stray from the commonsense standard. The proliferation of segulos, mystical charms for procuring Divine assistance for every problem and ailment, is just one small manifestation of this trend.
A minority culture bent on survival through isolation is unlikely to take kindly to common sense arguments
The idea that “Torah sense is the opposite of common sense” is thus less descriptive of the Yeshiva study hall and more a feature of Charedi life in the social-political sense. A minority culture bent on survival through isolation is unlikely to take kindly to common sense arguments. The strategy, broadly writ and within reason, makes sense; faced with the spiritual dangers attendant to modernity, isolationism is an intuitive and commonsensical reaction. Among others, one of the prices you pay is a rejection, in some measure, of the “common” elements of common sense.
New Defenders of the Faith
As many Tzarich Iyun articles discuss, Charedi society is far from static. As the walls of isolationism become increasingly more porous, the repudiation of common sense becomes less accentuated. Different groups within Charedi society are forming a new equilibrium, which, in turn, influences the way in which the leadership deals with challenges and social issues. It seems, however, that an opposite trend in secular Israeli society is mirroring this direction of Charedi society.
I was inspired to think about the issue of common sense after witnessing the horrific – it is difficult to employ a gentler term – sights of this year’s Yom Kippur, on which participants at some fifteen prayer services across several cities in Israel were verbally and physically attacked, some on the grounds that prayers were held under gender-segregation, and some just because.
Some were attacked at Dizengoff Center, a prayer service whose mechitza (partition between men and women) was subject to a recent decision of Israel’s Supreme Court, and others at a range of venues, some of which had held annual services for many years. The attacks left thousands shocked, stunned, and wondering if they can still go out to dance on the streets on Simchas Torah, as the traditional custom for many. Indeed, the Tel Aviv municipality initially outlawed traditional Simchas Torah celebrations (hakafos sheniyos, to be precise), but later, at the request of the Supreme Court, rescinded its decision.
Merav Michaeli, leader of Israel’s Labor Party, told the rioters that they stand “at the spearhead of the struggle of the liberal public in the State of Israel.”
And I say: Where is the common sense? Where was it in the court decision to ban a show intended for the Charedi public at a municipal stadium because of gender separation for the audience? Where was it when Hebrew University decided to disallow religious girls from dancing behind a partition at the end-of-the-year ball? Where was it when a Charedi cadet program for civil servants was canceled on the grounds that it was gender separate? And where on earth is it when Jewish rioters attack worshippers on the holiest day of the Jewish calendar, and mainstream Israeli institutions – the media, academia, and politicians – condone them?
The answer is that it is absent. Gone. It is absent from these decisions and situations, and it is likewise absent from a variety of other decisions in matters related to the defense of liberal Israel. It is absent from the hugely irresponsible (if not entirely credible) statements of reserve duty officers to the effect of not taking up arms on behalf of the current government. It is absent from New York demonstrations against Prime Minister Netanyahu by flag-waving Israelis under the pretext that Israel has de-facto transitioned into a dictatorship. And it is absent from attempts to outlaw altruistic kidney donations earmarked for Jewish recipients.
It is absent because when we enter a mental position of defensiveness – when we feel that our core values are threatened – we tend to abandon the common sense that invites discussion and dialogue and operate in ways that defy basic logic
It is absent because when we enter a mental position of defensiveness – when we feel that our core values are threatened – we tend to abandon the common sense that invites discussion and dialogue and operate in ways that defy basic logic. The trouble is that when we abandon basic logic, things only get worse.
In the past, Charedim were the main occupants of the “defenders of the faith” position that grants a broad exemption from employment of common sense. Today, as Charedi society grows in numbers and confidence, their monopoly on the space is being challenged by defenders of the liberal faith, who employ familiar alarmist arguments (predominantly various versions of the slippery slope argument) to justify nonsensical actions and decisions out of fear. Sometimes, it seems that the Charedim of yesterday are slowly becoming the Zionists of the future while the secular Zionism of the past is adopting Charedi strategies to confront its anxieties over Israel’s status as a liberal democracy.
Olam hafuch ra’iti. The world has gone topsy-turvy.
***
The last sentence may be true in a wider sense than that under discussion: indeed, significant swathes of our world seem to be abandoning common sense for radically defensive positions that leave no room for discussion, deliberation, and compromise. But for the purposes of this article, I wish to remain firmly on Israeli soil. We are all brothers. We can do better.
The Divine Image in which humanity was created includes two basic expressions. One is our free will and rational faculty of thought. The other is our ability to engage in the profound relationships unique to humanity. Both of them require common sense – the sense that we all share. As we end the Chagim period and begin the new year, strengthening it on all sides of the political and religious spectrum would be a wonderful resolution.
[1] http://zeevgalili.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/military-rape2.pdf.
Picture: Mark Leiman, לע”מ.
If “common sense” is a legal term in Jewish law, may “unreasonableness” be a legal term in Israeli secular law? Are they the same? Are they different?
This trenchant and bracing article reminds that we all have to realize the problem as a famous American cartoonist noted is in our mirrors
There is a more important point about the Rav ztl’s statement about viewing a pool of water as a mikve. In the Halakhic Mind, the Rav makes abundantly clear that there are different, independent, sometimes contradictory, but legitimate ways to view the same thing. Two branches of science can productively maintain contradictory views. This notion, broader in certain respects than ei’lu ve’ei’lu, is important to be recognized and respected.