By Michael Derfler
According to transgender activists, people may choose to identify with a gender that does not match their biology. This idea has practical consequences like which locker-room a person should use and who can compete in women’s athletic events and beauty pageants. Some would go so far as to create laws to compel others to use “transgender pronouns.” This issue is consistently in the headlines. Why is it important?
The Talmud (Shabbat 67b) mentions a practice in which a man would call his wife by his name and she would call him by her name. In a sense they exchanged genders. The Talmud includes this practice in the “ways of the Amorite,” which are forbidden. What is the underlying philosophy, or worldview that this practice expresses and does it fit a worldview that is popular today?
The basic understanding of the “ways of the Amorite” is that they involved some sort of sorcery, witchcraft, or related practices. Maimonides connects these practices with idolatry.[1] He further writes that the central goal of the Torah is to abolish idolatry.[2]If so, it cannot be that idolatry is just a crude act of worshipping an idol. Idolatry must contain fundamental and conceptual ideas about life and the world.
Rav Kook understood idolatry to be a foundation of evil.[3] Understanding that the forbidden practices of the Amorite were connected with idolatry, Rav Kook explained that “the ways of the Amorite” express different aspects of the idolatrous worldview. Obviously, this worldview is diametrically opposed to the Jewish worldview.
What aspect of the idolatrous worldview does exchanging gender identities express? Here is an excerpt from what Rav Kook wrote (Eyn Ayah Shabbat B 6:100; translated in Understanding Evil: Selections from Rav Kook’s Eyn Ayah) on the above-mentioned passage of the Talmud:
The foundation of the paved way of God in Israel is the fulfillment of obligation. The divine purpose surrounds man. To fill its characteristic the human being was formed according to his fate to be a man or a woman, that is, to fulfill a specific role in existence….
The ways of the Amorite were founded on the materialistic premise that life is about the fulfillment of desire, not the fulfillment of obligation. It is possible to exchange desires based on the allure of a more exciting desire.
Family life, imprinted according to the fulfillment of obligation, directs one’s role on all sides such that even with all the influences that one person receives from another, the foundation of existence and the character of life are not exchanged. This is the foundation of the (concept of a) name.
This is not so in the ways of the Amorite, which strive only toward fulfillment of desire. And with the delightfulness of desire and the uplifting of its value, they have no dealing with obligation. They teach even exchanging the essential nature of their lives when the spirit so inclines. And all the most perverse paths can spread, by discarding restraint from life, without life having purpose or obligation except for desire and the fulfillment of the heart’s whims.
Jewish society is built on responsibility, not pleasure. Responsibility unites us. Pleasure does not unite us; it divides us.
Like other issues, the issue of transgenderism challenges the guiding principle of society. Should we be guided by the pursuit of our desires or by the fulfillment of responsibility? If pleasure is our guiding principle, then if I want to be a woman, even though I am biologically a man, my desire should be respected and accepted. If responsibility is our guiding principle, then I am obligated to accept the reality imposed on me by nature.
It seems that media emphasis on this issue is part of an agenda to promote ideas and priorities that undermine – perhaps “transform” is a more appropriate word – society. This issue perfectly fits the goal of moving society leftward. Since leftists think people are on average morally incompetent (See https://www.dennispragerismistaken.com/), it is logical that the leftist media would encourage society to value pleasure over responsibility. In this case, it is not just the pleasure of identifying with one’s gender preference, but that people should have the pleasure of seeing themselves as compassionate in their sympathizing with transgender individuals.
It is possible that transgender activists are unaware that their position undermines the role of responsibility in society. It may be they are full of compassion, which is certainly an important value. And certainly, we have a responsibility to be compassionate.
However, one of the challenges of life is to prioritize values and responsibilities. Another challenge is to apply values appropriately. It seems to me that the transgender agenda is a failure on both counts. Compassion must not be used to undermine the importance of responsibility. Further, such compassion is ultimately cruelty because without responsibility, people are reduced to the status of intelligent animals.
The underlying drive of transgenderism is to value pleasure over responsibility. Even if there is something positive about the movement, nonetheless, it strives (let’s assume unconsciously) to damage society. Therefore it should be opposed, of course with compassion.
Michael Derfler’s books are available here: https://www.amazon.com/Michael-Derfler/e/B07JHTTDC9/ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_1?qid=1545243076&sr=1-1
[1] Guide for the Perplexed 3:37
[2] ibid
[3] “The foundation of evil, which is subdivided into idolatry and heresy, comes to secure a place for the scum of life, for reality’s excesses that are in existence and humanity, in morality and desire, in enterprise and behavior, to give them greatness and rule within the good and the holy – not to purify the holy, but to defile and pollute it.” – Orot: Yisrael u’Tehiyato 15.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.