"It is forbidden to judge anyone ever, unless they are causing actual harm"
This is a pretty terrible rule. The whole point of judging is to prevent those who can cause harm to harm us. If you don't allow judging never, we will be innocent naive sheeples.
How are you interpreting the word "judging"? To be clear, I mean calling them a bad person or the like, not making a private assessment of a person being dangerous or situation being sketchy.
Do you have a specific example of a case where someone isn't causing harm and we should judge them anyway?
Works out pretty well with Hillel's "That which is hateful to you do not do to another; that is the entire Torah, and the rest is its interpretation. Go study."
That's an astute observation. Perhaps it too, namely, not treating people according to how they subjectively prefer is also included in what is hateful to you, as you too would like your personal preferences and idiosyncrasies factored in by others.
That could be! There is a problem with my proposal, though. It depends on an accurate representation of another person's mind. So maybe it should be amended as follows.
IF you can do the legwork of getting to know someone and knowing from them what they like and dislike, then unto others do not do things that they would not like done to them.
BUT IF you either can't or haven't learned what someone likes or dislikes, then best to rely on don't do to others what you would not like done to yourself.
2) People are people, not animals. (Boys are boys and girls are girls)
3) All people should be respected, because they are people. Respect means different things to different people. Belittling is not okay. Pity the belittlers and remain intellectually curious
4) Keep building, and growing. Expanding, deepening and broadening. (but without letting go of what we’ve already achieved) Build homes, families, cities and farms
5) Don’t do to others what you would not want done to yourself
6) Israel and the temple mount is the homeland of the Jews.
7) The Israeli leadership (and residence) should work to make the place more friendly to religious Jews
8) Sometimes, you can just be. Think and reflect on yourself and the world. Learn to think past your own biases, ask for peer review and elder review, visit other places or learn about other cultures and ideas.
9) Recognize that the world also contains energy forces, spiritual concepts and vibes. Learn to see the cycles and patterns in the world around us and in history, this will give you a much deeper human experience
10) It’s ok to have been wrong, we are evolving and growing. Don’t get stubbornly stuck on where you are
Hanging on my wall is a wooden sign with part of VaYikra 19:14 written on it.
I think that Lifnei Iver, if we interpret it broadly as a commandment never to take advantage of the different ways in which all of us are deaf and blind, is a great ethical grounding.
Commandments #1 and #4 contradict #5 Why is Israel the homeland of the Jewish people if the Torah isn't divine?
We were kicked out of there 2,000 years ago and other people moved in. By your 21st century moral standards, Jews had no right to muscle in and take it over by force.
Imagine if someone came to your house claiming his ancestors lived on your land 2,000 years ago and therefore he has a right to kick you out?
The only thing that justifies choosing Israel instead of anywhere else in the world is the Divine promise of Israel as the land of the Jewish people given to them by G-d.
Without the Torah's Divine origin, there is no way to morally justify displacing hundreds of thousands to achieve and maintain a Jewish majority in Israel.
A religious argument for Israel is always going to be a lot weaker than a secular argument. One can easily reject the claim of "my God gave it to me" just as one can reject any claim made purely by a supposed divine will. A claim presented without evidence can be rejected without evidence. However, a secular argument for Zionism will be a lot stronger as it doesn't rely on a personal divine being's supposed will.
Can you think of a secular argument for Zionism? If not, I'd suggest reading some Zionist writers and thinkers as they were almost all secular.
It sounds like your justification for a Jewish state is solely religious and you can't even imagine a secular argument. I'd suggest you ask Gemini or chatgpt for a good secular argument as many have been made by 21st century Jews and Israelis and thats probably the best way to access it and interrogate it. I'm not going to reinvent the wheel here for you, nor do I have an interest in arguing about this
I certainly can imagine a secular argument (right to self-determination, safety and security, etc.) but you are consistently missing my point becuase this entails doing a lot of harm to a lot of people along the way.
Your very first commandment which supersedes all others is "Be Kind". You forgot about that one? That is a distinctly 21st century morality which the original secular Zionists would have rolled on the floor laughing at with tremendous scorn.
There is no way to achieve self-determination and safety and security IN THE LAND OF ISRAEL while "doing no harm". You can do it somewhere else where no one is living, and that is how secular zionism would be expressed in the 21st century moral culture.
That's a pretty radical claim you are making. You are essentially saying that the far leftists and islamists who say Israel has no right to exist are more logical given that they don't subscribe to orthodox Judaism. Do you really think so?
(I know I didn't make an argument for zionism/the right to Jewish sovereignty in historical israel, but I seriously find it hard to believe that you swallowed that woke pill which doesn't recognize the right of Israel to exist, leaving the religious element aside.)
I’m not him but I’ll answer your question with a question: What is your argument for Israel’s right to exist that doesn’t contradict “don’t harm anyone”?
I think there is an implicit assumption on the pro-Israel side (and this is pervasive in most hasbara) that the Palestinians entirely deserve what's coming to them, because "they chose war". This is usually combined with geopolitical and historical arguments that the Jews deserved the land of Israel in the first place, and the Arabs ought not have been so opposed to them, and therefore only they are to blame for the tens of thousands of dead Palestinian children and Israel can wash their hands of them- don't you dare use the word "genocide", you anti-semite. And this is an argument that most of us Jews are sympathetic to, and might be entirely correct on some level. But it's very different than what the typical 21st century humanist means when he says "Just be kind, don't harm anyone".
It’s almost as if the secualr pro Israel position has substituted ה אלוקי ישראל for אלה אלוקיך ישראל (in this case it’s the ideal of self derermination)! For without this, there is no justification for the humanist’s Zionism. Unless, of course, all of these people are willing to be stuck in their cognitive dissonance.
Exactly. I'm not the one who said zionism can be adapted to 21st century morality. Benyomin Zev made that claim, and he didn't realize at the time he wrote them that it simply doesn't work. Now he is being lazy and telling me to look up google to make his arguments becuase heknows he is incapable of making one himself.
I don't have to show my cards here, because I didn't put zionism in my ten commandments!
Arguing with frum people in the comments is the most tiring part of this blog and I just don't want to do it. If you're interested in me clarifying my position, I'm happy to but I think you're just trying to shlug me up and I'm not really interested in engaging. Others have made secular arguments for zionism and I don't need to reinvent the wheel.
One could possibly argue, a la chareidi ideologue who needs an excuse to suckle off of sweet Zionist moolah (though for opposite reasons), that since Israel already exists in the 21st century, we should exploit its existence as the national homeland, even if the original pretext for conquering and occupying the land was bigoted chauvinistic nonsense. To quote a Talmudic principle (even though the author of the above Ten Commandments doesn’t believe in its authority): מאי דהוה הוה.
If you hadn't noticed, the suffering of the hundreds of thousands of Arabs who were displaced is ongoing. You can't claim מאי דהוה הוה when there is still massive death and displacement happening in Gaza literally as we speak.
The only just solution according to Binyomin's 21st Century morality is to grant all Palestinian refugees the right of return and equal citizenship in Israel. And if he does that, bye-bye Jewish homeland.
He has no way to morally square this circle between his 4th and 5th commandments.
I think 4-10 are kind of contentious, honestly. And not really appropriate for the 21st century. You seem stuck in 700 BC Canaanite tribal thinking, while AI is taking over the world and SpaceX will put people on Mars any day.
2. This one is an actual commandment, so I won’t complaint, even though I think it’s a very extreme request, and seeing as it directly contradicts the natural tendencies of human nature, one could say it is in conflict with the third commandment.
3. This one is less a commandment and more a wish washy suggestion. You should probably use more assertive language if you are to deem these commandments; if a rule has, built into it, a sense of ambivalence regarding belief in a fairly important concept, it needs some fixing. Also, couldn’t you have used more precise wording? Saying that humans exist isn’t exactly the best pretext for requiring their needs to supersede “G-d’s needs”…
4. I don’t see how saying the Torah was written by G-d leads people to harm others in his name, nor do I see why, in the context of these commandments, that’s an especially bad thing. Granted, I understand that in your experience, many have judged you (or worse) in the name of G-d, but if his existence isn’t a given, and in fact belief in him is a personal choice, why would it be so bad to heap blame on Him? The alternative is people harming other people in the name of the hypothetical human authors of the Torah, and I don’t see how that’s better. In fact, it sort of contradicts #3’s sentiment of humans being more important than G-d. Never-mind, of course, the shaky foundations of documentary hypothesis to begin with: that’s for another day.
5. If Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people, shouldn’t they have more rights and privileges than non-Jews in the land? Otherwise, what makes the country “Jewish”? If it’s about population ratios, the land (including יו״ש) contains about 51% Arabs and 49% Jews (by your definition of Jew), so that won’t exactly cut it. Why shouldn’t Judaism be all about golus nationalism, taking after the wonderful success that was the bund…
In all seriousness though, I find it hard to reconcile the inherently chauvinistic concept of a nationstate with the universal democracy you suggest for Israel. If you could explain to me how those two fit in together, I would greatly appreciate it.
6. This isn’t a commandment in any way shape or form; this is a matter opinion with not much historical evidence strongly in favor of a specific view.
7. This is yet another wishy washy suggestion. Also, how does one determine if the spouse has become Jewish, and how does one raise their kids Jewish? Let’s say keeping shabbos and all other rituals makes me unhappy because I’m an ADHD zoomer, and therefore #10 absolves me of the obligation to keep shabbos. In this case, how will I be able to raise my kids Jewish? Should I perhaps send them to a Jewish school? No, surely not. Those generally feed the children with the archaic, close minded views of the Rabbinites/Orthodox, who believe in Divine Revelation and maximalist adherence to the Torah.
As an aside, what would an authentic (non Rabbinite) Jewish school look like in this hypothetical Judaism?
8. Three strikes; how come it’s all unassertive suggestions?
Also, why should I learn to read or speak Hebrew if I live in the diaspora (yishuv haaretz makes me uncomfortable so I’m absolved of that mitzvah)? There are not many israeli nationals here, and fewer who are unilingual. I don’t have to Daven or learn Torah, and even if I wanted to I could just use a Birnbaum or an Artscroll and only look at the pages on the left, and there would be no repercussions because mitzvah observance is anyway personal and optional.
9. If I don’t believe in G-d, and if I am mechuyav to believe in a manmade Torah, why should I “embrace” (how much longer will you use unassertive language for a ‘commandment’?!) Jewish religious practices, and how is this command any different than #10? Also, you can’t command people to do something if they want to. That type of language removes any and all authority of said command, making the whole code a mere shadow of a laughingstock. You can do better than this!
10. Final nail in the coffin; yet another unassertive, subjective “commandment”, which is more of a feel-good suggestion than anything. What is the point in commemorating Shabbos and Yom Tov if the Torah is manmade, and their practice was anyway deceptively imposed by (possibly malicious) priests in the times of Josiah and Ezra, so lost in their quest to legitimize their own indolence at various intervals of the week and year that they superimposed their rest days onto a fictional Moses’ tongue? If shabbos commemorates a faulty creation account and/or an exodus שלא היה ולא נברא, why keep it at all? Likewise for the regalim. For yamim noraim, the case is weaker, for why should I commemorate a day whose stated purpose is to commemorate a fictional binding of a fictional Isaac, and why should I beg a possibly non-existent god who surely doesn’t care about our prayers for mercy and forgiveness? What am I even asking forgiveness for?
Furthermore, why should this be a separate command from #9, which already permits abstinence from practice of rituals if the practitioner so chooses?
Seemingly, these are ten core principles, rather than hard commandments.
I hope my criticisms are reasonable. I would love a response, but, a la #9, your level of acquiescence to my request for a response is entirely up to your determination.
Thanks for taking the time to give it a full Orthodox critique. A few points in response:
1. These aren't Halachas which should be logically analyzed like a Gemara. They're values that guide my own Judaism.
2. They are written for those of us who feel alienated by conventional dogma but still wish to live meaningfully and Jewishly. That’s why the tone is sometimes assertive, sometimes permissive. That’s intentional. Unlike dogmatic orthodoxy, you can take it or leave it without being called a koifer. They're just, like, my opinions man.
3. I really don't see why I need to give specific examples of people doing shitty things in the name of religion and God that they wouldn't do otherwise but just in case you can check out any Muslim country or spend time at your local yeshiva.
4. Israel is and should remain both Jewish and democratic, and I don't see your issue with that. The “Jewishness” of the state should be expressed through culture, language, and national identity, not through second-class citizenship for non-Jews.
5. As for Shabbat, or Jewish traditions: these are tools for meaning and connection. If they don’t serve that function, they’re optional. If they do, they’re precious. Religion, or God or Halacha, doesn't have to play a role here.
You're right that these aren't commandments in the traditional sense. That's the whole point. They're not meant to be just another religion, specifically because I'm not a fan of religion. However, it sounds like you're very comfortable in your Orthodox world so I hope you enjoy that.
3. I sort of see, but I don’t see how that’s worse than blaming men
4. Again, if the non Jews become the majority, what happens to the Jewishness?
5. What exactly are we connecting to if God and religion don’t play a role? בטל טעמא בטלת תקנה.
I know you’re not a fan of religion. I was originally making a sort of tasteless comment to correct your semantically incorrect terminology, but then it became that long winded critique.
Regarding 3 - All morality should be able to be investigated and interrogated. If something causes overall harm then it should be classified as bad. Believing a book is written by God prevents us from the capability to improve it to minimize harm.
Regarding 4 - I don't think that's going to happen anytime soon as most Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza have no interest in becoming citizens of Israel. Regardless, that question is outside the scope of this piece.
Regarding 5 - we are connecting to our tradition and heritage. Community and connecting to our Jewish identity is a lot stronger to me than a (likely) imaginary being that commanded us to do things.
5. What’s so Jewish about it though? Is collective ignorance for thousands of years something to be proud of and celebrate? Methinks that’s an embarrassing part of our collective history which we should wish to de-emphasize.
Also, you didn’t really respond to my main objection on your 2nd commandment, that being that it contradicts 3 by denying yourself the human need to judge people when they feel judgy.
My main point in the third commandment/value is that when there's a conflict of human needs and supposed divine obligations then human needs come first. The third doesn't contradict this as I don't think being judge is a human "need", just as the urge to be unkind isn't a "need."
I don't really get your point about 5. I'm very proud to be Jewish and happy to partake in Jewish practices. The fact that God worship played a part in the development of these practices doesn't take away its meaning. God worship played a part in the development of most practices and traditions in the West. That doesn't mean it must be discarded just because the God doesn't exist
Did you actually spend that much time meditating these 10 commandments?
regarding commandment #2, I think we cannot judge other people in the sense that we can't know what motivates them or what their fears are. But we can still insist on civil order and punish if necessary, only contempt is not allowed.
Do you think there would be any differences if you spent more time thinking about it? Or if you didn't limit yourself to the 10 commandment frame work?
"It is forbidden to judge anyone ever, unless they are causing actual harm"
This is a pretty terrible rule. The whole point of judging is to prevent those who can cause harm to harm us. If you don't allow judging never, we will be innocent naive sheeples.
How are you interpreting the word "judging"? To be clear, I mean calling them a bad person or the like, not making a private assessment of a person being dangerous or situation being sketchy.
Do you have a specific example of a case where someone isn't causing harm and we should judge them anyway?
Umm yeah. Anyone who has the potential to do harm.
Do you think people cannot be bad people? I judge antivaxxers for example, even though they are very nice.
Anti vaxxers are causing actual harm to themselves and their children. Can you give me an example of someone not causing harm?
Works out pretty well with Hillel's "That which is hateful to you do not do to another; that is the entire Torah, and the rest is its interpretation. Go study."
I struggle with that one, because surely what matters more than what you hate is what the target of your behavior hates.
That's an astute observation. Perhaps it too, namely, not treating people according to how they subjectively prefer is also included in what is hateful to you, as you too would like your personal preferences and idiosyncrasies factored in by others.
That could be! There is a problem with my proposal, though. It depends on an accurate representation of another person's mind. So maybe it should be amended as follows.
IF you can do the legwork of getting to know someone and knowing from them what they like and dislike, then unto others do not do things that they would not like done to them.
BUT IF you either can't or haven't learned what someone likes or dislikes, then best to rely on don't do to others what you would not like done to yourself.
1) There is a Creator and a Master of the world
2) People are people, not animals. (Boys are boys and girls are girls)
3) All people should be respected, because they are people. Respect means different things to different people. Belittling is not okay. Pity the belittlers and remain intellectually curious
4) Keep building, and growing. Expanding, deepening and broadening. (but without letting go of what we’ve already achieved) Build homes, families, cities and farms
5) Don’t do to others what you would not want done to yourself
6) Israel and the temple mount is the homeland of the Jews.
7) The Israeli leadership (and residence) should work to make the place more friendly to religious Jews
8) Sometimes, you can just be. Think and reflect on yourself and the world. Learn to think past your own biases, ask for peer review and elder review, visit other places or learn about other cultures and ideas.
9) Recognize that the world also contains energy forces, spiritual concepts and vibes. Learn to see the cycles and patterns in the world around us and in history, this will give you a much deeper human experience
10) It’s ok to have been wrong, we are evolving and growing. Don’t get stubbornly stuck on where you are
Hanging on my wall is a wooden sign with part of VaYikra 19:14 written on it.
I think that Lifnei Iver, if we interpret it broadly as a commandment never to take advantage of the different ways in which all of us are deaf and blind, is a great ethical grounding.
Love that!
I can sum up the commandments in one:
There is no such thing as a commandment, only a suggestion.
Commandments #1 and #4 contradict #5 Why is Israel the homeland of the Jewish people if the Torah isn't divine?
We were kicked out of there 2,000 years ago and other people moved in. By your 21st century moral standards, Jews had no right to muscle in and take it over by force.
Imagine if someone came to your house claiming his ancestors lived on your land 2,000 years ago and therefore he has a right to kick you out?
The only thing that justifies choosing Israel instead of anywhere else in the world is the Divine promise of Israel as the land of the Jewish people given to them by G-d.
Without the Torah's Divine origin, there is no way to morally justify displacing hundreds of thousands to achieve and maintain a Jewish majority in Israel.
A religious argument for Israel is always going to be a lot weaker than a secular argument. One can easily reject the claim of "my God gave it to me" just as one can reject any claim made purely by a supposed divine will. A claim presented without evidence can be rejected without evidence. However, a secular argument for Zionism will be a lot stronger as it doesn't rely on a personal divine being's supposed will.
Can you think of a secular argument for Zionism? If not, I'd suggest reading some Zionist writers and thinkers as they were almost all secular.
Don't hide behind late 19th and early 20th century zionists for a secular justification for Zionism.
You have the burden of making a case for displacing hundreds of thousands of arabs in the 21st century moral climate.
You can't. You lose the argument.
It sounds like your justification for a Jewish state is solely religious and you can't even imagine a secular argument. I'd suggest you ask Gemini or chatgpt for a good secular argument as many have been made by 21st century Jews and Israelis and thats probably the best way to access it and interrogate it. I'm not going to reinvent the wheel here for you, nor do I have an interest in arguing about this
I certainly can imagine a secular argument (right to self-determination, safety and security, etc.) but you are consistently missing my point becuase this entails doing a lot of harm to a lot of people along the way.
Your very first commandment which supersedes all others is "Be Kind". You forgot about that one? That is a distinctly 21st century morality which the original secular Zionists would have rolled on the floor laughing at with tremendous scorn.
There is no way to achieve self-determination and safety and security IN THE LAND OF ISRAEL while "doing no harm". You can do it somewhere else where no one is living, and that is how secular zionism would be expressed in the 21st century moral culture.
If you can't imagine kindness as a guiding principle, even when dealing with real complicated politics like Zionism then you are truly lost.
Kindness is a terrible principle especially when others aren't being kind. It's a horrific idea to be kind to someone who is not.
That's a non-answer if I ever heard one. Good day.
That's a pretty radical claim you are making. You are essentially saying that the far leftists and islamists who say Israel has no right to exist are more logical given that they don't subscribe to orthodox Judaism. Do you really think so?
(I know I didn't make an argument for zionism/the right to Jewish sovereignty in historical israel, but I seriously find it hard to believe that you swallowed that woke pill which doesn't recognize the right of Israel to exist, leaving the religious element aside.)
I’m not him but I’ll answer your question with a question: What is your argument for Israel’s right to exist that doesn’t contradict “don’t harm anyone”?
I think there is an implicit assumption on the pro-Israel side (and this is pervasive in most hasbara) that the Palestinians entirely deserve what's coming to them, because "they chose war". This is usually combined with geopolitical and historical arguments that the Jews deserved the land of Israel in the first place, and the Arabs ought not have been so opposed to them, and therefore only they are to blame for the tens of thousands of dead Palestinian children and Israel can wash their hands of them- don't you dare use the word "genocide", you anti-semite. And this is an argument that most of us Jews are sympathetic to, and might be entirely correct on some level. But it's very different than what the typical 21st century humanist means when he says "Just be kind, don't harm anyone".
It’s almost as if the secualr pro Israel position has substituted ה אלוקי ישראל for אלה אלוקיך ישראל (in this case it’s the ideal of self derermination)! For without this, there is no justification for the humanist’s Zionism. Unless, of course, all of these people are willing to be stuck in their cognitive dissonance.
Exactly. I'm not the one who said zionism can be adapted to 21st century morality. Benyomin Zev made that claim, and he didn't realize at the time he wrote them that it simply doesn't work. Now he is being lazy and telling me to look up google to make his arguments becuase heknows he is incapable of making one himself.
I don't have to show my cards here, because I didn't put zionism in my ten commandments!
Arguing with frum people in the comments is the most tiring part of this blog and I just don't want to do it. If you're interested in me clarifying my position, I'm happy to but I think you're just trying to shlug me up and I'm not really interested in engaging. Others have made secular arguments for zionism and I don't need to reinvent the wheel.
One could possibly argue, a la chareidi ideologue who needs an excuse to suckle off of sweet Zionist moolah (though for opposite reasons), that since Israel already exists in the 21st century, we should exploit its existence as the national homeland, even if the original pretext for conquering and occupying the land was bigoted chauvinistic nonsense. To quote a Talmudic principle (even though the author of the above Ten Commandments doesn’t believe in its authority): מאי דהוה הוה.
If you hadn't noticed, the suffering of the hundreds of thousands of Arabs who were displaced is ongoing. You can't claim מאי דהוה הוה when there is still massive death and displacement happening in Gaza literally as we speak.
The only just solution according to Binyomin's 21st Century morality is to grant all Palestinian refugees the right of return and equal citizenship in Israel. And if he does that, bye-bye Jewish homeland.
He has no way to morally square this circle between his 4th and 5th commandments.
I want Binyomin to make his own defense. It won't help to attack the messenger for the contradiction he fell into.
Somewhere in the talmud is the 11th commandment "Thou shalt not meddle with the other 10!"
I think 4-10 are kind of contentious, honestly. And not really appropriate for the 21st century. You seem stuck in 700 BC Canaanite tribal thinking, while AI is taking over the world and SpaceX will put people on Mars any day.
There are a couple issues with this listing…
1. This one actually isn’t so bad.
2. This one is an actual commandment, so I won’t complaint, even though I think it’s a very extreme request, and seeing as it directly contradicts the natural tendencies of human nature, one could say it is in conflict with the third commandment.
3. This one is less a commandment and more a wish washy suggestion. You should probably use more assertive language if you are to deem these commandments; if a rule has, built into it, a sense of ambivalence regarding belief in a fairly important concept, it needs some fixing. Also, couldn’t you have used more precise wording? Saying that humans exist isn’t exactly the best pretext for requiring their needs to supersede “G-d’s needs”…
4. I don’t see how saying the Torah was written by G-d leads people to harm others in his name, nor do I see why, in the context of these commandments, that’s an especially bad thing. Granted, I understand that in your experience, many have judged you (or worse) in the name of G-d, but if his existence isn’t a given, and in fact belief in him is a personal choice, why would it be so bad to heap blame on Him? The alternative is people harming other people in the name of the hypothetical human authors of the Torah, and I don’t see how that’s better. In fact, it sort of contradicts #3’s sentiment of humans being more important than G-d. Never-mind, of course, the shaky foundations of documentary hypothesis to begin with: that’s for another day.
5. If Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people, shouldn’t they have more rights and privileges than non-Jews in the land? Otherwise, what makes the country “Jewish”? If it’s about population ratios, the land (including יו״ש) contains about 51% Arabs and 49% Jews (by your definition of Jew), so that won’t exactly cut it. Why shouldn’t Judaism be all about golus nationalism, taking after the wonderful success that was the bund…
In all seriousness though, I find it hard to reconcile the inherently chauvinistic concept of a nationstate with the universal democracy you suggest for Israel. If you could explain to me how those two fit in together, I would greatly appreciate it.
6. This isn’t a commandment in any way shape or form; this is a matter opinion with not much historical evidence strongly in favor of a specific view.
7. This is yet another wishy washy suggestion. Also, how does one determine if the spouse has become Jewish, and how does one raise their kids Jewish? Let’s say keeping shabbos and all other rituals makes me unhappy because I’m an ADHD zoomer, and therefore #10 absolves me of the obligation to keep shabbos. In this case, how will I be able to raise my kids Jewish? Should I perhaps send them to a Jewish school? No, surely not. Those generally feed the children with the archaic, close minded views of the Rabbinites/Orthodox, who believe in Divine Revelation and maximalist adherence to the Torah.
As an aside, what would an authentic (non Rabbinite) Jewish school look like in this hypothetical Judaism?
8. Three strikes; how come it’s all unassertive suggestions?
Also, why should I learn to read or speak Hebrew if I live in the diaspora (yishuv haaretz makes me uncomfortable so I’m absolved of that mitzvah)? There are not many israeli nationals here, and fewer who are unilingual. I don’t have to Daven or learn Torah, and even if I wanted to I could just use a Birnbaum or an Artscroll and only look at the pages on the left, and there would be no repercussions because mitzvah observance is anyway personal and optional.
9. If I don’t believe in G-d, and if I am mechuyav to believe in a manmade Torah, why should I “embrace” (how much longer will you use unassertive language for a ‘commandment’?!) Jewish religious practices, and how is this command any different than #10? Also, you can’t command people to do something if they want to. That type of language removes any and all authority of said command, making the whole code a mere shadow of a laughingstock. You can do better than this!
10. Final nail in the coffin; yet another unassertive, subjective “commandment”, which is more of a feel-good suggestion than anything. What is the point in commemorating Shabbos and Yom Tov if the Torah is manmade, and their practice was anyway deceptively imposed by (possibly malicious) priests in the times of Josiah and Ezra, so lost in their quest to legitimize their own indolence at various intervals of the week and year that they superimposed their rest days onto a fictional Moses’ tongue? If shabbos commemorates a faulty creation account and/or an exodus שלא היה ולא נברא, why keep it at all? Likewise for the regalim. For yamim noraim, the case is weaker, for why should I commemorate a day whose stated purpose is to commemorate a fictional binding of a fictional Isaac, and why should I beg a possibly non-existent god who surely doesn’t care about our prayers for mercy and forgiveness? What am I even asking forgiveness for?
Furthermore, why should this be a separate command from #9, which already permits abstinence from practice of rituals if the practitioner so chooses?
Seemingly, these are ten core principles, rather than hard commandments.
I hope my criticisms are reasonable. I would love a response, but, a la #9, your level of acquiescence to my request for a response is entirely up to your determination.
Thanks for taking the time to give it a full Orthodox critique. A few points in response:
1. These aren't Halachas which should be logically analyzed like a Gemara. They're values that guide my own Judaism.
2. They are written for those of us who feel alienated by conventional dogma but still wish to live meaningfully and Jewishly. That’s why the tone is sometimes assertive, sometimes permissive. That’s intentional. Unlike dogmatic orthodoxy, you can take it or leave it without being called a koifer. They're just, like, my opinions man.
3. I really don't see why I need to give specific examples of people doing shitty things in the name of religion and God that they wouldn't do otherwise but just in case you can check out any Muslim country or spend time at your local yeshiva.
4. Israel is and should remain both Jewish and democratic, and I don't see your issue with that. The “Jewishness” of the state should be expressed through culture, language, and national identity, not through second-class citizenship for non-Jews.
5. As for Shabbat, or Jewish traditions: these are tools for meaning and connection. If they don’t serve that function, they’re optional. If they do, they’re precious. Religion, or God or Halacha, doesn't have to play a role here.
You're right that these aren't commandments in the traditional sense. That's the whole point. They're not meant to be just another religion, specifically because I'm not a fan of religion. However, it sounds like you're very comfortable in your Orthodox world so I hope you enjoy that.
1. I know
2. Fair
3. I sort of see, but I don’t see how that’s worse than blaming men
4. Again, if the non Jews become the majority, what happens to the Jewishness?
5. What exactly are we connecting to if God and religion don’t play a role? בטל טעמא בטלת תקנה.
I know you’re not a fan of religion. I was originally making a sort of tasteless comment to correct your semantically incorrect terminology, but then it became that long winded critique.
Anyway, thanks for responding
Regarding 3 - All morality should be able to be investigated and interrogated. If something causes overall harm then it should be classified as bad. Believing a book is written by God prevents us from the capability to improve it to minimize harm.
Regarding 4 - I don't think that's going to happen anytime soon as most Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza have no interest in becoming citizens of Israel. Regardless, that question is outside the scope of this piece.
Regarding 5 - we are connecting to our tradition and heritage. Community and connecting to our Jewish identity is a lot stronger to me than a (likely) imaginary being that commanded us to do things.
3. Sure, I guess.
4. Fair
5. What’s so Jewish about it though? Is collective ignorance for thousands of years something to be proud of and celebrate? Methinks that’s an embarrassing part of our collective history which we should wish to de-emphasize.
Also, you didn’t really respond to my main objection on your 2nd commandment, that being that it contradicts 3 by denying yourself the human need to judge people when they feel judgy.
My main point in the third commandment/value is that when there's a conflict of human needs and supposed divine obligations then human needs come first. The third doesn't contradict this as I don't think being judge is a human "need", just as the urge to be unkind isn't a "need."
I don't really get your point about 5. I'm very proud to be Jewish and happy to partake in Jewish practices. The fact that God worship played a part in the development of these practices doesn't take away its meaning. God worship played a part in the development of most practices and traditions in the West. That doesn't mean it must be discarded just because the God doesn't exist
If it weren’t for Coca Cola and PR, Christmas would’ve died a long time ago.
Easter sort of has the same story, but it has more of a real religious significance than Christmas.
So why should we waste our time with fake practices? Why shouldn’t we all just be humanists with no separate identity from everyone else?
Did you actually spend that much time meditating these 10 commandments?
regarding commandment #2, I think we cannot judge other people in the sense that we can't know what motivates them or what their fears are. But we can still insist on civil order and punish if necessary, only contempt is not allowed.
No I thought of it on the train to work
Do you think there would be any differences if you spent more time thinking about it? Or if you didn't limit yourself to the 10 commandment frame work?
Do you believe the Torah is Divine?
No, I do not
Good luck! Maybe post it on the internet and you can gain many followers (though it's likely that even your own family laughs at you).
Nice piece