A day after Stephen Paddock massacred 60 Americans in Las Vegas and shocked the world, it is perhaps permissible to turn the spotlight on two fascinating responses on a psychological-social level that emerged from the Israeli audience.
A. A desire to report that the shooter had indeed converted to Islam and was operating under the auspices of ISIS.
on. A sincere sense of relief when it became clear that there were no Jews among the dead.
To both of these reactions, it must be admitted, there is really no rational explanation.
What difference does it make if Stephen discovered the light in Muhammad's beard and felt that the death of dozens of innocent people would make the prophet happy, or if he simply had a few screws loose and felt happy at the sight of mutilated bodies?
What does it matter, in terms of the response, whether Jews took their lives or just 60 Gentiles who did no harm to anyone were turned into flesh and blood. Maybe the famous Jewish guarantee? It doesn't seem to matter, because if it existed, we would also care about the 150 Jews who die on average every day here in Israel, from diseases, accidents, suicides and terrorist attacks.
So why, after all, when we hear about a serious accident in the south in which three adults and two children lost their lives, is there a sigh of relief when it is reported that they were 'only' Bedouins? Why is it that when two Druze were slaughtered in a terrorist attack and one Jew was only moderately injured, is the incident perceived as 'minor' by us?
The answer I would like to offer lies in the psychosocial theory – 'the just world'.
People, the theory goes, shape their beliefs based on the assumption that the world operates in an orderly and understandable manner, a world in which there is justice and 'everyone gets what they deserve.' If someone gets cancer, there is a tendency to conclude that they probably smoked two packs a day, that someone's bankruptcy was caused by a corrupt and pretentious character, and that the accident was caused by reckless driving and the driver's incompetence.
This belief simply helps us live more calmly. It gives us a sense - an illusion - of control over our destinies. Because we don't smoke, we don't get corrupt, and we drive carefully.
If Stephen Paddock murdered people 'just like that', because he was 'screwed up,' our safe and just world is being undermined.
How does a person who was defined as 'normal' by his family members turn one bright morning into a monster who commits the greatest massacre in US history? What does this say about the 'safe' world we have created around us, perhaps even right next door to us, here in Modi'in Illit, where such a madman lives?
If Gentiles die, by the dozens, hundreds or thousands - that's completely normal. We Jews, probably the most observant among us, behave as we should, fulfill our duties and show fair and compassionate treatment to our fellow humans. We are not supposed to die 'just like that'. A plague or civil war in which millions of children are exterminated is simply perceived as belonging to another world. Less safe.
True, it is probably impossible to ignore the fact that people die by the hundreds every day in Israel as well, but mass death that is 'unnatural', sudden, and unjust is not perceived by us as right. As logical. As just. A sense of calm appears when we realize that there were no Jews in the disaster, that 'only' Arabs died in the accident, that 'only' Druze were murdered in the attack.
Our world remains just and safe, or at least under a false illusion of security.
What does he understand: She repented and, as a married woman, realized that her past was creating halakhic dilemmas. And now, the preacher whose class she attended showed her compassion, listened to her concerns, and several times granted her permission regarding the serious questions she raised.
And what is the legal attitude towards such a rabbi?
Here is Rabbi Yosef, to whom the woman came and told him what had happened, "Is this the halacha?"
""What does he understand about law? He is a preacher!" the rabbi replied, according to his student, the Rabbi Nakei, who added: "And our rabbi did not want, writes Rabbi Nakei, to answer her at all what to do.".
Rabbi, as a professional. Not as an amateur. Not as an 'expert in the field.' Do you have a serious question about halacha? Turn to the formal, professional authority, not to a rhetorician and sermon expert, even a respected one, who has not been authorized to do so.
And Rabbi Neki, who documented this incident [apparently in its relevant part], has already referred to the author of "Hilkut Yosef," the chief rabbi who ruled in the laws of Shabbat that whoever violates Shabbat according to a scholar who is not familiar with the teaching, his offense is considered intentional.
Join the Haredim 10 Facebook page >>
Join the X page of Haredim 10 >>
Want more news, videos and stories? Join the Haredim 10 WhatsApp channel >>
