I was taking a taxi the other day – as we began riving the driver asked me if I said tefilas haderech. I thought that was a bit strange as the driver was obviously not religious. I explained to him that for this short trip (and we were not leaving the city) it wasn’t required. His response was “How can any intelligent person today believe in all this junk….”
Now his original question made sense to me – he was making fun.
My quandary was how to respond – if at all. Given his attitude I felt that there was little I could say in a 5-minute taxi ride that would make an impression. I thought maybe he was trying to draw me into a fight so he can tell his buddies later what jerks religious people are. My decision was not to directly address his question, or argue at all. I just wanted to leave the impression that religious people are nice & respectful etc. I thought that would be more beneficial in the long run.

My question – is what would you have done in that situation? Try to make a short cogent argument that Judaism is not “a big bluff” - as he called it (note: he wasn’t just someone who was never introduced to Torah – he grew up frum, went to yeshiva, put on tefillin, etc . And what would you have said?
Be polite (as I was). Or argue with him even if it won’t help.

B"H

Gilad,

Once, it is written: ענֵה כסיל כאולתו. At another place, it is written: אל תַּעֲנֵה כסיל כאולתו

The Talmud rectifies the apparent discrepancy. Where you are expected to answer the foolish man (כסיל) is when he says what he says in order to incite and to be disrespectful, to cast an affront against the observant, or to belittle G-d's laws. Here, you have every right to answer him in the same tone and manner that he answered you.

David

It is not a matter of "right to" as much as what will accomplish the most. i.e., when the taxi driver thinks about this encounter at some point, what will make him more likely to reevaluate his hashkafa?

B"H

Gilad,

The advise given by those scholars who left us our Talmud is, without question, the right and proper conduct to take in such cases.

David

David,
I am not questioning the veracity of Chazal’s teachings. At any rate the גמרא in שבת ל makes a different distinction then the one you mentioned above. The גמרא quotes the 2 פסוקים and says that one refers to worldly things and (not to respond) and the other refers to Torah (which you should respond to). The גמרא then tells us a story about רבן גמליאל who strongly questioned what he was teaching.But, he responded to the questioner in a polite way.

There is a תוספות in פסחים נ that makes a similar point that you made above. In reference to learning Torah שלא לשמה the ר"י points out that learning in order to belittle and make fun of others by your learning is never OK …

Anyway, I am not sure if that גמרא is relavent in this particular case. Perhaps he was engaging me in conversation (in his own cynical way) because he wasn’t happy with his new “free” life – but wasn’t ready to get back into being religious yet. If that was the case (obviously this is all conjecture) a cynical response would have turned him off for a long, long time.

Let me just tell a short (true) story. My wife’s grandfather worked for the UN and was once sent to Israel for a conference (in the 1950’s). He was assigned an escort to help him get around. The escort turned out to be anti-religious. The day before Yom Kippur the escort (knowing that my wife’s grandfather was religious) complained that all the restaurants were closed the next day & ranted about religious coercion. It was clear that he was trying to draw him into a fight. Her grandfather opted to not say anything at all. After Yom Kippur he asked his escort if he had located a place to eat. The escort responded by saying that he was so impressed that he didn’t argue and fight with him that he decided to fast and go to shul instead. Clearly in this story the silent approach was the proper path…

There is a book that has been written in order to deal with just such people who have gone "Off the Derech." It is called (surprise, surprise) "Off the Derech". Further details can be seen here: Off the Derech Web Site

That looks very interesting - thanks for the link.

I think it's obvious that the guy feels guilty of his status and is only saying that because he's trying to give himself some reensurance that he's the one with the intellegent choice.

Think about it. If you see a punk in the street with a pink Mohawk do you feel compelled that you need to go over to him to scream at him that he's wrong. You just probably pass him saying that he's some Meshigana. It doesn't bother you that he's that way because his values are not a threat to your status. you couldn't care less what certain Meshiganas think of you because they can't think less of you than you of them.

So what compelled thid taxi driver to say anything? I mean, you try to be polite to the customer as much as possible. But obviously it bothers Him. A lot. That compells to ahve to blurt out that he's the intelligent one. "I'M TELLING YOU I'M THE INTELLIGENT ONE" He would say grabbing on to your lapel.

i think the best way is bringing it up why does it bother you the way I'm religous. If you really think we're all nuts, wouldn't you just shake your head and go on with life. what is really bothering you? I'm convinced that the whole reason you feel compelled to say this is because you could understand how intelligent people believe in this, especially you know that inteligent people do believ in this. (After all inteligent people spend the day studying and are not usually known as the taxi drivers of society )

quote:

i think the best way is bringing it up why does it bother you the way I'm religous.

I think that is a great point.

quote:

(After all inteligent people spend the day studying and are not usually known as the taxi drivers of society )

to be fair, most taxi drivers are honest people trying to make a living. And, I have had some of my most memorable mussar shmuzen from simple sephardic taxi drivers. they specialize in telling it as it is - no spin. sometimes I think about their simple (but profound) ideas for days after!

quote:

to be fair, most taxi drivers are honest people trying to make a living.

That's true. but they're still not rocket scientests . It's still a "blue coller" job. If he would be part of the intelligentia, he would be some professor someplace or doctor etc.

quote:

And, I have had some of my most memorable mussar shmuzen from simple sephardic taxi drivers. they specialize in telling it as it is - no spin. sometimes I think about their simple (but profound) ideas

True, but they're coming from different backgrounds. In S'fardi society a job is to make a living. By the secular, it's a career. it defines the person.

quote:

Originally posted by Gilad:
David,
I am not questioning the veracity of Chazal’s teachings. At any rate the גמרא in שבת ל makes a different distinction than the one you mentioned above. The גמרא quotes the 2 פסוקים and says that one refers to worldly things and (not to respond) and the other refers to Torah (which you should respond to).

Gilad,

I would have to agree with you that, sometimes, a soft response does more good for the person than a forceful response.

As for the Talmud (Shabbos 30), in my humble opinion, protesting an answer like “How can any intelligent person today believe in all this junk…,” is defending the Torah against a "kesil's" remarks. When a "foolish man" says what he says in order to incite and to be disrespectful to a Talmid Chacham, to cast an affront against the observant, or to belittle G-d's laws, etc., this would, by definition, be considered an affront against the Torah, for which we are obligated to speak out. Your tone of voice used, however, would perhaps depend on the person being reprimanded.

David