So, there are thing we should be careful about learning, and things we should be careful about teaching. Basically, it's all the fun stuff: sex, death, creation, you know, the things people really want to know about.
What's interesting is that the Gemara doesn't seem to know why these things have been selected, and what to make of the specific numbers assigned to the prohibitions (3 for sexual violations, 2 for creation and 1 for that crazy chariot.) The rabbis try gamely to drash it out, but they don't really have a clue. The "proofs" such as they are, are forced.
It's an interesting issue though: are there things we should not teach? Things we should consider too hot to handle? Certainly, we are careful about what we teach in from the point of view of development (kids can learn this at this age and this at another) but there are few, if any, things about which we say: this can NEVER be studied, can NEVER be taught.
What would those things even be? Or are we passed believing that anything we learn could have such cosmic resonance such that we would say, with the Mishnah, "better that we never came into the world"?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
To me, it's all about context. I think the gemarra bears this out too in Rav Ashi's opinion not to discuss sex in a class of three, which the gemarra explains is because when there is one teacher and two students, the teacher and a student will discuss the issue while the other student will remain quiet. But if there are three students, then that quiet student can discuss the issue with the other student while the teacher is engaged with the first student and then go off the deep end. Parenthetically, this is an interesting window into how classes were run during this time. It seems that they really meant hevruta, and there was no such thing as a classroom discussion. Anyway, what the gemarra seems to be worried about here is supervision and context. It is possible that two students, discussing sex unsupervised, could be led astray. However, with the individual guidance of a teacher, it is more acceptable.
Sometimes I think that we are off with the context in which we flout our scholarship. This happens every year at 3080 with incoming freshman in List college - thus making them frum, atheists, or Conservative rabbis. It also can happen out in the field, both with teaching different age groups and the setting of the classroom. Though the value of academic freedom and open inquiry are essential in our society, it also takes the common sense to know when those discussions cause more harm then good.
Post a Comment