There is a flaw in the logic
Old readers of my blog (I know that there are not so many of them) are privy to my ideological argument with Rav Shimon Schwab Ztz"l. I do return to that subject of Jewish History and the cover-up system that took its license from his opinion because I think this subject is one of the most important issues if we want to fight corruption in the Jewish people. I've just had a revelation that is so obvious and clear that I may only lough at myself for not seeing it before. Rav Schwab, in his article "Jewish History" (mitteilungen, Dec. Mar 1984-1985) that could be found also on the internet (http://www.tzemachdovid.org/gedolim/essays/ravschwab.htm) says: "Suppose one of us today would want to write a history of Orthodox Jewish life in pre-holocaust Germany. There is much to report but not everything is complimentary. Not all of the important people were flawless as one would like to believe and not all the mores and lifestyles of this bygone generation were beyond criticism." Now, wait a minute, Rav Scwab admits, nah, he states as a matter of known and undisputable truth. that not everything WITHIN the Orthodoxy was fine and holy. He testifies that there was a lot to be desired. Ohmigosh, do you understand that?! This is not a statement from some Epikoires who could not and should be trusted. This is a statement from one of Gedoilei Yisroel. a man that the truth is his guiding light
Now, when we read the actual inspirational stories that he proscribed in this article and then we read this article itself, we KNOW that what is written in those stories is not the truth, because Rav Schwab told us that it is not! And here is the issue. In order to justify something that is untrue one must admit, at least to himself that it is untrue. But once you've admited it, nothing would make it true, not in your eyes and not in the eyes of your oponents
Now, when we read the actual inspirational stories that he proscribed in this article and then we read this article itself, we KNOW that what is written in those stories is not the truth, because Rav Schwab told us that it is not! And here is the issue. In order to justify something that is untrue one must admit, at least to himself that it is untrue. But once you've admited it, nothing would make it true, not in your eyes and not in the eyes of your oponents
תוויות: Jewish History, Rav Shimon Schwab
posted by ZA at 12:19 לפנה״צ
2 Comments:
I believe that Gedolim have always believed that there are two approaches. One reflects the doubts and thought processes that most thinking people of exceptional ability go through. It is fraught with risks and perils and always presents the possibility of leaving an important question of faith open to doubt. He would then share his doubts with his flock and hope that they find their way with his help. There is another way of the gadol in how he may present answers to the masses. We believe we are capable of handling doubts and unanswerable questions. The rav doesn't want to take on this responsibility in this derech and believes we are better off either avoiding the uncomfortable realities or getting simplistic answers to our questions. If you were a gadol which derech would you choose? Rav Schwab chose derech number 2 and we don't like it but derech number one is also problematic.
That's correct, there are two ways and I am well aware about it. The problem is reality, if you do not tell the truth (i.e. if you do not choose the first way,) somebody else would tell that truth and potentially from an unfavorable angel. And because that somebody will tell the truth while you don't, his version would be much more credible. The net result of that situation is that the people you tried so hardly to protect would be viewed as evil or stupid or both while you forwent the oportunity to tell their true story of greatness mixed with humanity
There is a book from Proffesor David Assaf of Tel-Aviv University about some historic Schandas in the Hasidic world. Those are presented in what seems to be scientifically objective way. They are based on documents and seem to be a fair representaion of historic truths. The Hasidic version is presented and is even given some credibility, just to be dismissed as a cover-up scheme. Not only do we learn that one of the Alter Rebbe's sons converted to Christianity for example, a fact that seems to be hush-hushed, and not only we really could not refute that fact, but the main holder of the uncredible Hasidic version, himself an important Admor, is presented as a simple lier. Had the Hasidim be more truthful, the argument of the second Admor that his brother was suffering from mental illness would be credible and the later Admor honor would not be questioned
הוסף רשומת תגובה
<< Home