I just came across the following interesting article discussing the question: How can the Torah prohibit things that are natural?

http://www.askmoses.com/qa_detail.html?h=412&o=590

Interesting.

Actually, there was a letter in last week's Jewish Press that i was very tempted to respond to along the veins of what is "natural".

The letter discussed a woman's son's "same gender attraction" and saying "he was born that way", it was in his genetical makeup. The reply was that no one is "born that way", but simply gets off the derech.

The way I have learned it, it is a combination of both. Torah doesnt prohibit things that someone doesnt desire, otherwise there wouldnt be a NEED for the prohibition. Truth be told, there are those among us who are cholishing to try a piece of pork, but because HaShem forbade it- they will (boruch Hashem) never taste it.

Its not unnatural to have inclinations towards that which is forbidden, and after overcoming these, the love between man to Hashem is so much greater because man has managed to overcome his temptations.

So although there in truth may be people "born that way", or people who desire shrimp or pork, or whatever the case may be-
we still have our obligations and must fulfill them despite our inclinations.

quote:

Torah doesnt prohibit things that someone doesnt desire, otherwise there wouldnt be a NEED for the prohibition.

This concept may be visible in the following understanding of the two trees in Gan Eden prohibitted to Adam.

The one tree had its effect in the normal way that we eat fruit of trees - that is the one specifically prohibitted, which the Nachash tricked Chava into eating from.

The other tree had its effect by eating its bark, or perhaps even touching.

Cinnamon notwithstanding, since it is not in mankind's nature to want to eat the wood of a tree, it was not necessary to prohibit the eating of this tree.

This is another topic that seems deceptively simple but somehow keeps expanding the more one thinks about it.

But I have some ideas that come to my mind immediately. I'll put them down quickly before I feel so embarassed and full of self-doubt that I give up. No doubt I'll not be happy with the answers later, but I have to start somewhere. A wiser way for me to answer would be to study this topic for a year (or more, lol. At least a week), referring to the writings of our heritage. But, here I go.

Firstly, as Bracha said "What is natural?" And what is this special status being claimed for "natural", if one could work out what natural is anyway. Perhaps "natural" is as is found in nature, ie, existence, as opposed to six headed, green and scaly monsters with rose coloured, glittering teeth and one very long, purple toenail. But there are many things in nature, depending on the conditions that formed this result (including Hashem, right?). So you could say that everything that exists is natural. But are they really all ok? I think not. Who wants to act like a serial murderer; a seriously dysfunctional person; or a mentally ill person, for example?

But how do we decide what natural outcomes are ok? If it is left to each individual person to decide, the conclusions would be tied to the experiences and state of being of the person. What sort of credibility is that?:It is just opinion. No person can transcend the human condition, even if some people are wiser, more balanced, etc, than others. So whose opinion wins out. Does it come down to the survival of the fittest/: the person with the most power wins - the reddest in tooth and claw?

So how do we best decide what behaviour(including thoughts and feelings) are appropriate)? I think the way is to turn to what we can depend on to tell us the answers. In our case this is Torah. And it has often been said that there are so many personal returns from doing what we should; and benefits which impact further than we could ever imagine.

If one is not yet sure that Torah holds the answer, then it surely makes sense that one should, firstly, follow it out of trust because so many incredibly special people have done so before, and have even chosen to die rather than give up this guidance. And, secondly, one owes it to oneself to embark on a spiritual journey of discovery so one can learn that one can really trust Torah. This, of course, is easier said than done, but there are ways. The alternative is to trust in yourself (do you really think you are that crash hot?) or another person (but what security is there in idolatry?).

Rosemary, I am very glad that you did not hold yourself back from writing what you did- for it was a very worthy posting.

I agree with you- who knows what is "natural"?

Einstein said it well, "if a man spends an hour talking with a pretty girl- it seems like a minute. If a man sits on a hot stove for a minute- it seems like an hour!" The point being, that everything without Torah is relative.

I like to bring this example when I am in conversation with non-religious Jewish people I talk to:

Was Hitler (yimach shmo!) correct in murdering 6 million Jews?

The immediate answer is, "Of course not!"

But what does one base this answer upon? Where does one find that it wasnt correct?

When taking a person's vital signs, its very important to know what is called their "baseline"- you have to know what is accepted as normal for that one specific person- and then you draw conclusions as to whether they are in the normal range or not...

...Same too with societies. Each society has their baseline of what is accepted as normal. Some, like Sodom believed it was normal to kill people if they showed any sign of compassion for another. Some societies today torment animals for entertainment, and other societies devote their lives to saving the animals. The list goes on and on... Everything is relavent. Each of their baselines is different because of their backgrounds, environments etc.

Hitler (yimach shmo!) was raised in an environment of blatant Jew hatred- it was his baseline. How can a secular person possibly say he was wrong if they dont have a source to base it upon, but simply compare it to their own baseline?

The only emes is in Torah. Torah states explicity that murder is wrong, and thus, we dont murder. Of course there is such a thing as conscience and the guilt factor- but depending again on the baseline- people can become desensitized to all feelings, and thus we cannot rely upon human emotion as it ever changes.

A very worthy posting Rosemary, very worthy. Yasher koach.

The basic difference between humans and animals is the Will. Animals are governed by "nature" or "instinct". They don't need laws. Humans are governed by instinct too. However, the Will is the tool that allows humans to override instinct. If the Will overrides the instinct how shall the Will be governed? ...by laws and traditions. We have Torah specifically for the purpose of controlling the "natural" instinct because what's natural is not always holy.

Bracha, thanks very much for your reassurance and appreciation. I really stuck my neck out

I agree with what you said. Yes, indeed, we need Torah.

The Baal Shem Tov noted that all of creation was carried out by G-d himself, but , where the creation of man was concerned, the expression naaseh adam was used, let us make man. This means, says the Baal Shem Tov, that a combination of man and G-d together is needed to bring man to his potential.

A complementary take in this matter is provided by Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzato (Ramchal)argued that the human being is the only creature that is incomplete at creation. This born incomplete person must then work at his perfection

Which brings us back to on which basis we are to decide how to develop ourselves. This includes, as Moshe Yisraeli, pointed out using the will (which is a big matter in itself) to deal with (accept, deny, modify) impulses that arise, seemingly naturally, in us. The Talmud said "Had the Torah not been given, man would have brrn expected to learn proper behaviour from observation of nature. He would have learned respect for private property from ants, modesty from cats, and fidelity from pigeons' (Eruvin100b). Wow! That'd be a pretty big task. It seems that we'd be back to how to decide. Too bad if we learned something from the wrong animal. Good thing we have Torah.

quote:

Originally posted by Bracha:
Rosemary, I am very glad that you did not hold yourself back from writing what you did- for it was a very worthy posting.

I agree with you- who knows what is "natural"?

Einstein said it well, "if a man spends an hour talking with a pretty girl- it seems like a minute. If a man sits on a hot stove for a minute- it seems like an hour!" The point being, that everything without Torah is relative.

I like to bring this example when I am in conversation with non-religious Jewish people I talk to:

Was Hitler (yimach shmo!) correct in murdering 6 million Jews?

The immediate answer is, "Of course not!"

But what does one base this answer upon? Where does one find that it wasnt correct?

When taking a person's vital signs, its very important to know what is called their "baseline"- you have to know what is accepted as normal for that one specific person- and then you draw conclusions as to whether they are in the normal range or not...

...Same too with societies. Each society has their baseline of what is accepted as normal. Some, like Sodom believed it was normal to kill people if they showed any sign of compassion for another. Some societies today torment animals for entertainment, and other societies devote their lives to saving the animals. The list goes on and on... Everything is relavent. Each of their baselines is different because of their backgrounds, environments etc.

Hitler (yimach shmo!) was raised in an environment of blatant Jew hatred- it was his baseline. How can a secular person possibly say he was wrong if they dont have a source to base it upon, but simply compare it to their own baseline?

The only emes is in Torah. Torah states explicity that murder is wrong, and thus, we dont murder. Of course there is such a thing as conscience and the guilt factor- but depending again on the baseline- people can become desensitized to all feelings, and thus we cannot rely upon human emotion as it ever changes.

A very worthy posting Rosemary, very worthy. Yasher koach.

So many times the secular world confuses the idea of an abhorrent person's "consistent sin of choice" with what is "natural to them".

quote:

Originally posted by Yocheved Broscova-Guerra:
So many times the secular world confuses the idea of an abhorrent person's "consistent sin of choice" with what is "natural to them".

I don't think that the secular world is really confused. Even the Torah teaches us that sin is often natural with most people:

כי יצר לב האדם רע מנעוריו

"For the inclination of the heart of man is evil from his youth." (Breishis 8:21)

David

Ahh, but there is a difference between those who are evil and contemplate all day long what evil they can do, and those who would justify abhorrent acts as natural. It is hard for me to take the leap that an evil act requiring imagination, is the same as people not naturally choosing "good". I could be wrong.

What gets to me is when people call good evil and evil good.