Re:
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/the-lighthouse/.premium-1.579393Here are some excerpts from your article in quotations and my replies below. The main point is that the Author didn’t make the implications you say. There are many other logical conclusions and it opens a much larger hashkafic discussion. I do not know everyone’s hashkafa and I hope you realize neither do you. If you want to assume the author meant something why not ask him, could it be there is another explanation? (Dan’s update tried to explain that other view) Maybe the day of investigative journalism has died and we are left with what will get the most likes or shares on Facebook. Regardless here are some thoughts.
“*pointing to this miracle as some sort of support for Jewish religious beliefs*”
Where in the article do you see that? Who is trying to prove anything about Jewish beliefs from this article?
“*There is nothing unique about a story of someone who did not travel on the Sabbath and was spared from a disaster.*”
Near death experiences may be common place with 7,000,000,000+ people in the world, but when we lose touch and say nothing is significant I think it shows on a lack of meaning in life. No one said you have to be moved by a man’s life being saved based on a decision he made. But to put down all near death experiences and saying they have no meaning seems a bit crass and cynical to me. One man was moved by what happened to him, if sharing his stories helps move other people into seeing the temporal nature of this world, that is a problem?
“*It is a common and fallacious claim to say that not being present or being spared from any particular harm is the hand of God saving the saved for religious reasons.*”
It is equally fallacious to accuse the author the article of having made such conclusions. Did he posit that in print? If so where? Yes the story fit nicely with the line that Shabbos keeps the Jews, but that is a saying that fit well, it was not stated that that is the reason G-d saved the traveler. This is a story that was shared not a proof brought in a religious debate.
You seem to want to be in debate and therefore made conclusions of the story and author therefore being able to lay out your theologies and ideas to the public. This helped you receive much attention and media fame in your first publishing for Haaretz. That is great for your career. But to say with conviction that you feel the article clearly implied what you say it did is simply erroneous.
If you would have said what can and can’t be learned from the article I would understand you are nervous some people may draw false conclusions. But how you present it that this is what the articles intentions were is again erroneous.
“*If, as believers in Judaism, we reject the claims that Jesus or Allah spared their followers how do we blindly accept that our God saves adherents to Judaism?*”
Do you not on any level in your belief in G-d follow him blindly? This is a basic concept in Judaism that its adherents have followed for thousands of years. The same way you believe your version of the Bible is correct this story believes that our G-d is the guiding hand. Why can’t our G-d save a Christian or a Muslim devotee? As you point out we cannot understand why G-d does what he does, so why would you bring this as proof it’s not G-d?
What are we to say about Sabbath observant people who die in plane crashes?
Because nowhere in the article is G-ds rationalization for saving this man presented, why would you assume a reason for others dying be presented?
“*Or non-observant people who survive because they missed their flight?*”
Again who is rationalizing G-d’s actions?
“*The application of miraculous salvations to one person of one religion out of millions of counter examples is disingenuous and incredibly arrogant.*”
Nowhere was this applied, and of course I will counter the accusation of such an application is disingenuous and arrogant of you. Showing you have a party line to sell and found a scapegoat that kinda sorta fit the demographic you want to target so you went with it.
What happened to the days of journalism when people investigated and searched for the truth of what the original author meant, instead of seeing something to give you a free ride in the social media world and selling in this case Dan down the river.
“*Even worse is the implication of such a claim.*”
Exactly an implication this article is based on and doesn’t exist. If you want to prevent others from concluding something from a story that than say don’t conclude XYZ, but don’t say the story itself is evil.
“*If God saved one person from the plane for observing the Sabbath, we are also saying that God caused the other people on the plane to suffer whatever harm has befallen them.*”
If that helps you gain attention you can conclude that. But know it’s not true.
“*In our zeal to proclaim that our beliefs save lives, we are in effect condemning others to death for their religious beliefs.*”
No one is Rationalizing why G-d did what he did besides your assumption of false implications.
“*it is extremely unlikely that he actually kept the Sabbath according to Jewish law.*”
Wow, now you assume others are sinners, your cynical view of the world is shining bright and clear again. Are you implying that sinners deserve to die? I’m really not sure what you gained by mentioning this besides trying to get into the rationalization that you made up in the first place. Now you take that rationalization and say that because flying is derabanan and he PROBABLY did worse aveiros on Shabbos in Beijing, then he would deserve to die. What?! You detest all rationalization and now you get into even according to that rationalization he should have died in Beijing. Really?
Why did you bring this point up? Was it to mention more controversial views and gain more traction for your article?
“*stories like this give people the impression we should keep the Sabbath so that we are saved from incidents like Flight 370.*”
And you don’t like people keeping Shabbos more? You care so much for their reasoning you throw out the result. I’m not saying it is right or wrong and if you want them to keep Shabbos more for the right reasons explain what they are, but to say that stories like this lead to greater observance is bad, I think lo lishma ba lishma argument may be applied here.
People will take what they want from stories. Being more observant is hardly a terrible outcome. I went to a school for many years and detested the Friday musar schmooze where I was told I’m going to Hell for enjoying Baseball too much during recess, but I didn’t let that bother me. I knew why I was religious and if those scare tactics worked for others than good for them.
Same as this story, neither I nor Dan concluded that you should observe Sabbath inorder to be saved from death, but if others do conclude that and observe the Sabbath more, is it so bad?
“*None of our sources teach that the Sabbath is to be observed so that God will save you.*”
And did the article say there was a source for that? Although I like to think that people who do the right thing, live good happy lives, in just knowing that they are living a meaningful life.
“*Sabbath observance is not a charm or talisman.*”
That is correct. Random? Unless you are saying what some MIGHT conclude not what the story was written for.
“*It is downright offensive.*”
Of course I must interject your assumptions are offensive as well, having not done any research into the author’s beliefs or views. The saying about what happens when you assume applies well here.
“*It’s akin to saying the Mona Lisa is beautiful because it wards off the evil eye or that Niagara Falls is awe-inspiring because its waters can heal the sick.*”
You are comparing Shabbos to the Mona Lisa? If that’s the conclusion you saw so be it. I don’t think that crossed the authors mind.
“*What are we to make of this story? Nothing really. Things happen. It was noble of the travel agent to suggest keeping the Sabbath in a pleasant way and it was nice that the traveler valued the Sabbath enough not to travel. The traveler should feel grateful that his choice to connect with his Jewish roots might have spared his life.*”
Oh the cynicism. You feel we should learn nothing really from the story. I try to find inspiration where I can in this generally tough world we live in. I will quote Jewish Comedian Mendy Pellin who I feel brought out the story very well. (I also like how he chose to write about the positive of the article as oppose to the negative)
“Many people are talking about this story. Amazed by this miracle of a man NOT going on the vanished plane because the travel agent didn't want to book another Jew on a Shabbos flight.
My amazement is not at the divine providence (Gd does miracles every day, it's just hard for us to connect the dots.) My amazement is at the man who wouldn't book a flight for another Jew on Shabbos.
We've all seen the stereotype of the Jew trying to suck out money from whomever and whenever possible. We've all seen the stereotype of Jews picking and choosing what laws they will be strict with to accommodate what benefits them best. This story knocks both those stereotypes down. This travel agent is the real deal. He didn't impose his beliefs on others. He just kept true to himself. And by being true to himself, it rubbed off on his client (who could have booked his own flight).
The B&H guys have always inspired me. I'm sure they could have found 1000 loopholes to keep their website open on Shabbos and fill the millions of dollars worth of orders after shabbos. But they stay true to their beliefs. That's probably why they are so successful. They are the real deal.
The best way to inspire others is to just be a better Jew to yourself. Imposing your beliefs won't inspire. Living your beliefs. Now, I'm inspired.”
Those are some great points I think we can all benefit from.
“*Most importantly, the Sabbath its own eternal meaning. Let’s explore the rich tradition of the Sabbath and soar to the heights of one of the great spiritual gifts of Judaism, the Sabbath.*”
Amen!
p.s. I apologize for the brevity and any grammatical errors, if I have more time I will work on a fuller reply, as of now I just wanted to jot down some thoughts.
Topic Wiki
