Background: Shaul and Yonatan are killed in battle. David is sad about this.

Articulates this sadness and demands to know how it could be that such great men fell in battle. Thus, were going to be using this as a springboard to discuss theodicy (the question of why bad things happen to good people.) Objective: 1. To discuss the question of theodicy and hopefully not ruin anyones lives while doing so. 2. To discuss the numerous solutions given to the problem, and the problems that exist with each approach. 3. The piece by Rav Soloveitchik. The question of theodicy cannot be solved by philosophizing. Evil exists, suffering exists and they cannot be made to disappear because you thought of a theological justification. Rather, suffering must be used as a motivation to overcome sin and evil. 1) Shmuel Bet 1:19-23

() : ) () : () : : () :
Israel, your beauty was ruined on your hills! Oh, how those heroes fell! 20 Dont tell the news in Gath! Dont announce it in the streets of Ashkelon. Those Philistine cities would be happy! Those foreigners would be glad. 21 May no rain or dew fall on you, mountains of Gilboa. May there be no offerings coming from your fields. The shields of the heroes rusted there . Sauls shield was not rubbed with oil. 22 Jonathans bow killed its share of enemies, and Sauls sword killed its share! They have spilled the blood of men now dead. They cut into the fat of strong men. 23 Saul and Jonathanhow dear they were to us! In life they loved being together, and even death did not separate them! They were faster than eagles and stronger than lions. Because of Sin? 2) Talmud Bavli Masechet Shabbat 55a

. :
Rav Ami said: There is no death without sin, and no suffering without sin. 3) Iyov, 11:5-6 (Iyovs friend trying to explain why Iyovs life has been so terrible recently)

() :() :
I wish God would answer you and tell you that you are wrong. 6 He could tell you the secret of wisdom. He would tell you that every story has two sides. You can be sure of this: God is not punishing you as much as he should. How do these sources understand human suffering? What is its cause? 4) Iyov 13:23-24

() :() :
How many sins have I committed? What wrongs have I done? Show me where I went wrong or how I sinned. 24 God, why do you avoid me and treat me like your enemy? What is Iyovs response to his friend? 5) Shabbat 55b

 - , , :
And thus we conclude, there is death without sin, there is suffering without sin, and Rav Ami has been refuted. What does the gemara conclude about Rav Amis statement? What problems does this raise? The World to Come? 7) Kiddushin 39b

, : , ; : , : ; , , - , ? ? , , . ! ' . -
There is no reward for mitzvot in this world, as it is taught, R. Yaakov said: There is no mitzvah written in the torah whose reward is stated next to it which does not depend on the resurrection of the dead. By honoring ones father and mother it states, so that your days will be prolonged, and by sending away the mother bird it says, so that it will be good for you and prolong your days. Now, if ones father tells him to go up to the nest and take some baby birds, and he sends away the mother bird and takes the baby birds, and on his return, he falls and dies, where is the goodness of his days? Where is the prolonging of his days? Rather, so that it will be good for you- in the world that is fully good, and that it will prolong your days- in the world that is completely prolonged. But maybe this didnt happen? R. Yaakov saw it happen. 1. What does it mean that there is no reward for mitzvot in this world? What does this mean about the question of righteous people suffering? 2. What is R. Yaakovs solution? What forced him to arrive to this solution? How does this solve the problem? 8) Horayot 10b

( : , )? , : ? : . , .
Rav Nachman bar Rav Chisda expounded, What does it mean when it is written, there is a futility that is done on the earth (that the righteous who receive according to the actions of the wicked, and there are wicked who receive according to the actions of the righteous, this too is futility)? Fortunate are the righteous who receive according to the actions of the wicked in the next world in this world, and woe to the wicked who receive according to the actions of the righteous in the next world in this world. Rava said, would it be so terrible if the righteous enjoyed both worlds? Rather, Rava said, fortunate are the righteous who receive according to the actions of the wicked in this world in this world, and woe to the wicked who receive according to the actions of the righteous in this world in this world. 1. What solution does Rav Nachman bar Chisda propose? 2. What problem does Rava raise? 9) Mishna Avot 4:15


Rabbi Yannai said, it is not in our ability to understand the tranquility of the wicked or even the suffering of the righteous. What might the advantages of this approach be? Why might this approach be disadvantageous? 10) Rav Soloveitchik, Kol Dodi Dofek Judaism, with its realistic approach to man and his place in the world, understood that evil cannot be blurred or camouflaged and that any attempt to downplay the extent of the contradiction and fragmentation to be found in reality will neither endow man with tranquility nor enable him to grasp the essential mystery...We do not inquire about the hidden ways of the Almighty but, rather, about the path wherein man shall walk when suffering strikes. We ask neither about the cause of evil nor about its purpose but rather about how it might be mended and elevated. How shall a person act in a time of trouble? What ought a man to do so that he not perish in his afflictions? The Halakhic answer to this question is very simple. Afflictions come to elevate a person, to purify and sanctify his spirit, to cleanse and purge it of the dross of superficiality and vulgarity, to refine his soul and to broaden his horizons. In a word, the function of suffering is to mend that which is flawed in an individuals personality. The Halakha teaches us that the sufferer commits a grave sin if he allows his troubles to go to waste and remain without meaning or purpose. 1. What problems does Rav Soloveitchik solve? 2. Which of the above approaches does Rav Soloveitchik most resemble?