Free will

RE’EH - Deuteronomy XI, 26 - XVI, 17

Re’eh, “look,” says the Torah, I place in front of you Brachah uKelalah, “a blessing and a curse.” In this way, we are made to know that the option is ours, that the result of our actions can be anticipated, and that the consequences for them are not arbitrary. If we fulfill the Mitzvot, we obtain Brachah, a blessing, and if not, we suffer Kelalah a curse. In future chapters, this warning will be repeated, and we will read in the text, “… I gave you to choose between life and death, between blessing and curse, uvacharta bachayim, and I exhorted you to choose life …”.

On a visit to the United States, the late Israeli President Zalman Shazar appeared before a meeting of the New York Board of Rabbis, where he cited the text in question. Shazar questioned the fact that the Torah contradicts the hypothesis of behira chofshit, which is free will, by instructing uvacharta bachayim. The possibility of choice would have been better applied if our text limited itself to pointing out the anticipated consequences of our behavior and allowing everyone to choose their own path.

Shazar continued with an analysis of the great moral evils that afflict our society and concluded by pointing out that disinterest and apathy cause dehumanization, stifling any possibility of advancement and progress. Insensitivity to the suffering of others is morally indefensible and apathy is more pernicious to society sometimes than a lack of concern for the pain of others. Misunderstanding and indifference produce greater anguish than the cruel attitude of not offering a helping hand or concrete help.

The Torah is sensitive to this human failure and the cited text orders reflection on the Brachah and the Kelalah. We must meditate on what the results are when living according to Mitsvot as opposed to behavior that does not take them into account. The Torah commands us to meditate on our responsibilities and consequently we cannot assume a kind of behavior that is characterized by inertia and lack of action. The conclusion of any reflection, according to Shazar, must necessarily lead to uvacharta bachayim. Because we all want a harmonious and conflict-free society, which is impossible to achieve in an environment where theft reigns. Because we all support, in principle, the unity and firmness of the family nucleus and we know of the tragedy that irresponsible parenthood brings. Because we all feel that work is necessary, but, at the same time, we know that the spirit, the soul also requires attention. Our essential weakness is that we do not pay enough attention in analyzing our daily behavior. The desirable and advisable result of any reflection would be an orderly life, under a regime of human law and order, which should invariably lead us to uvacharta bachayim.

The Bechirah chofshit, free will, however, is fundamental to our tradition, because otherwise we could not contemplate the total structure of Sechar veonesh, the reward for good deeds, and the punishment for crimes which is part of our religious orientation. The possibility of free choice is an essential requirement to later request and demand that responsibility be assumed for the consequences of the actions.

Harav Yosef Dov Halevi Soloveitchik, a teacher of teachers, questions the response of our ancestors when they were offered the Torah, which is the Law. According to the biblical text, the response at the foot of Mount Sinai was naaseh venishma, which our tradition interprets as a manifestation of the willingness of our ancestors to obey and fulfill the precepts, even before they knew the details and content of these instructions. Indeed, the generation of that time did not exercise their Bechirah chofshit, since they did not previously make an evaluation and a weighted judgment in relation to the commitment they were making.

Soloveitchik proposes the existence of two types of will. He calls the first one Ratson Elyon, which means superior will. This expression of our will is not based on an intellectual process and does not resort to reasoning. The Ratson Elyon, responds to certain impulses of our spirituality and reveals the authentic identity of the human being. The internal debate that consists of logical evaluation of the different possibilities belongs to the world of the Ratson Tachton, which is the lower will. This is the will that we use in performing tasks and in the usual reasoning process.

It is of interest to note that the great resolutions of life are not the result of intellectual activity that meticulously examines the assets and debts, the pros and cons that our actions imply. The most consequential decisions, such as marriage and career, are generally not preceded by a careful examination of options. Faith, for example, is rather the result of an existential leap and the consequence of a strong irresistible feeling and does not signal the culmination of a process of reasoning. Our father Avraham did not arrive at his conception of the Godhead because he examined the orbit of the planets with a fine telescope or proceeded to count the stars in the sky. Contemplating the vastness of the cosmos, Avraham feels, deep within his being, the Divine presence. It is an emotional conviction and a spiritual truth that the patriarch recognizes at that time. The moment of discovery or scientific discovery occurs, on numerous occasions, as a kind of internal light that for no apparent reason reaches the intellect, explaining the phenomenon that was previously not intelligible. (There are also those who rightly point out that only researchers and those who work hard for a long time in solving certain problems are those who, suddenly, receive that spontaneous illumination).

The hypothesis that we indicate implies certain risks or dangers since it affirms that intuitions and feelings are those that govern the most complex processes of our lives. The probability of pressing a key on a computer that can unleash a world atomic conflagration, according to our considerations, perhaps depends on this Ratson Elyon, a will that is beyond the control of our intellect. The exercise of the Ratson Elyon comes to be the result of involuntary sensations and uncontrollable impulses, apparently, not verifiable.

The Ratson Tachton probably also serves as some kind of control over the Ratson Elyon. Discovery and invention are the results of that indefinable internal light that is the Ratson Elyon. But then the Ratson Tachton comes into play to verify and confirm the theories and suggested conclusions.

The rapid acceptance of the Torah represented by the Naaseh that our ancestors expressed was followed by the Nishma which demands study and research of the consequences of the leap of faith that they initially gave. Perhaps it can be deduced from our reflection that the Naaseh, by itself is insufficient and can lead to superstition, unless it is followed by the Nishma, pondering and reflection about the received laws.

The texts of the Kabbalah suggest that only in God are the Ratson Elyon and the Ratson Tachton united in total harmony. While in man, in many opportunities, these two wills are in conflict. It depends, perhaps, on our goals in life. The Ratson Tachton is pragmatic, satisfied with mediocre achievement, and seeks immediate utility. It is limited to the visual and current perception of things. But the glory belongs to the Ratson Elyon, that responds to a vision, to causes that have noble purposes and represent eternal values.