Do I need a rabbi to live righteously?

I hope he doesn’t mind me mentioning his name. Someone called Keith Chopping inspired this article, probably more than anyone else. At least he was an influence in its direction. I hope my naming him doesn’t put a black mark against his name for others.

So the question of the day is this:

“I’m not a Jew. I want to live a righteous life. I’ve heard of the seven laws and agree with them. But they’re talked about in Jewish tradition. So do I need a rabbi to live a righteous life? Do I need a rabbi, full stop?”

To clarify, “having a rabbi” or “needing a rabbi” doesn’t mean having access to Jewish books or books authored by rabbis. It means an ongoing personal relationship and regular contact with a rabbi in order to teach and guide you.

Now if you want to cut past all my verbal wranglings and argumentation, just go to the end of the article. I’ll leave a clear sign of where I share my own individual, Gentile, undisciplined, uneducated opinion, which, as you should know, you are free to ignore. [But if you don’t care about such a point of view, why did you even waste your own time reading this.] But if you want to at least get some understanding of my perspective, then, please, you’re welcome to proceed.

I watched a video some time ago by rabbi Chaim Richman called “What is a rabbi and why you need one.” It was shared by a group called Noahide World Centre. His humble answer to the question was yes, a “noahide needs a rabbi.” You can find that video on YouTube and see his message and pleasant manner.

What was his reasoning? Again, I believe I should understand the argument, the position, before I choose whether to embrace it or reject it.

So, his position is this. A rabbi is supposed to represent a chain of knowledge going back to Moshe giving the Torah, the Law, at Mt Sinai. Without the claim of omniscience, the rabbi should plug into that knowledge to rightly discern how a person can live right in God’s sight in this world. Rabbi Richman believes a rabbi should make life easier by assessing situations and giving advice that helps people, showing that he cares for the person he advises.

Then, to quote him,

“Now, does everyone need a rabbi? Do the non-Jews, who are seeking to know the ways of the Torah, and to attach themselves to the God of Israel, do they also need a rabbi? I would say yes.”

He refers to the complexities involved with applying the seven “noahide” laws as justification for his stance, as well as how other parts of the “Torah” apply to non-Jews. Although he acknowledges the plethora of opinions amongst rabbis which only appear to contradict one another in his eyes and the confusion this can cause, he falls back on two Jewish teachings: the first says to get a teacher; and the other says to live by the commandments which he interprets as meaning not to be confused, frustrated, or die by the commandments but rather to live happily by them. He says that by having one teacher who understands your situation in order to justly apply his expertise to it, then you can avoid the confusion and live a life acceptable to God by following his (the rabbi’s) authority expressing God’s will.

You can go watch the video to see if I fairly depicted his stance. Excuse me if I carry on.

Now, even I can admit that his words sound nice. Listening to the video, he has this calm yet interested voice of simple guidance. He’s not a bad man but someone who may well want the best for everyone seeking to live and do good.

Can you see where I’m heading? If you’ve had any experience of my articles, I think you may hazard a guess and it’ll be roughly correct.

Now, I don’t think his tone or his message warrants a response, no, a reaction like “what utter bullshit!” Because I don’t think it’s totally wrong.

Before I carry on, let me give my usual disclaimers. Look, for the most, I am a teacherless student. I’m a fighter with no master. I’m an undisciplined wretch. I read books on my own. I think about the subject and let it roll around my mind. Then, sometimes, I talk/type. I’m a no one talking to himself by means of WordPress. So if you haven’t already clicked off this article to something else, then you should know my words have none of the authority rabbi Richman imputes to rabbis in general. I’m just a voice in the internet hubbub, the din, that can be silenced or ignored.

You know, writing these articles, all sorts of obscure words just enter or leave my psyche which I don’t commonly use. Hubbub? Din? Damn, I sound like I have both words and sense. Well, at least I have words, right?

Anyway, what Keith shared with me (from another source) in a few sentences made more sense to me than the 10-minute talk from rabbi Richman: if a Gentile has to often consult a rabbi for guidance, then he may as well become a Jew.

Now, David, what sense is there in taking the words of that Gentile stranger rather than the teaching of a rabbi?

Before I answer that fully, let me just make an observation: that rabbi is a stranger to me as well. I don’t impute trust simply because of a title or consensus. I still have to balance what he says, just as I balanced the words of Keith (from another source).

But still, why does one idea sit better with me than the other? A number of factors actually.

One factor is that rabbis are akin to the Jewish judges that helped judge the affairs and disputes amongst the Jews or teachers in a Jewish community. Their primary role is to teach Jewish law and make legal decisions for Jews. Imagine a Gentile, someone outside the Jewish nation, in times past, repeatedly having to make journeys to the Jewish judge to get his life in order. Such a notion would seem, no, it would be unnatural. Those people who would frequent a religious teacher of the Jews would be either Jews or Gentiles who were residing in the Jewish nation with the intent of joining it to some extent. Hence, it makes natural sense that “if a Gentile needs to repeatedly get guidance from a teacher or judge of the Jewish community, then he may as well become a Jew.”

I know that some sects of Judaism have become a lot more “evangelistic” in their approach and that the role of rabbi is becoming less like the ancient judge of the Jews and more like a religious minister. Maybe that’s why Jews like Richman sees more of an international role for the rabbi where now everyone needs one instead a Jew focused on the Torah based cohesiveness of his own people … Hmmm … With the poor state or low percentage of Torah Judaism amongst Jews now, could it be partly because rabbis took their eyes of the ball? Started focusing too much on outsiders allowing the dilution and pollution of Torah info amongst their own people? I guess that’s just speculation, right?

Anyway, a Gentile needing regular attention from a judge of the Jews is just odd. I know it’s made to look natural now. I mean, so many “noahides” seek to join some teaching group headed by a Jew, a rabbi, right? Seems so right, right? Right?

Another factor is that rabbi Richman is a rabbi selling the international necessity of rabbis. Does anyone else except me see something … errr … suspect about that?

Anyway, another factor against this notion of the international necessity of rabbis is the international lack of rabbis throughout history. Right now, we live in a time of relative ease of communication. Multiculturalism means that some Gentiles may be more likely to see a Jew passing by or a rabbi on the telly. But when it comes to day-to-day life, rabbis can be more rare than gold or diamonds where some lands may be almost bereft of them. I know that in my life, rabbis are a regular no-show. They are virtually nowhere where I live. Not every Gentile in the UK lives near London. In fact, most do not.

I remember a number of times I did have a query about the seven laws or the wider morality for humans, having no rabbi near me I would email some rabbis for advice, and the response I received was silence. Of course, maybe they were busy. They should be busy, being so few in the world and having so many customers, Jew and Gentile, my communication may have got lost in the shuffle. But this again adds evidence to my point. I do not dislike rabbis, and I don’t dislike rabbis because they didn’t answer some of my questions. I did get answers sometimes, for which I’m grateful. Sometimes I contacted Gentile knowers of the seven laws and get no response. So this article isn’t based on some bitterness or hatred, just my personal observations and perceptions of how things are.

You see – maybe you’d agree – the idea of something being so needed yet not easily accessible seems … well, it just seems wrong. It’s like humans needing water, but the whole plane of human existence having only a few small pools where most of us can’t reach it. That makes no sense. In fact, that’s a death sentence for most humans.

Now, thank God, we’re all made in God’s image (well, supposedly anyway), and, since that refers to our rational and moral faculties, that means figuring out decency and some rationality is within the reach of any mature human throughout history. The same can’t be said for a rabbi or some Jewish judge.

As usual, I’ll hear the cries of some: “but if you don’t do good or avoid the wrong without the proper ‘theological framework,’ without faith in the God of Israel, then it means nothing.” But that sort of narrow thinking is what happens when a person gets so focused on the ideals that he forgets the benefits of the lower levels, the practicals. It’s the epitome of “too heavenly minded, no earthly good.”

A good friend of mine mentioned the importance of having a Torah approach to this issue. But what does the Torah, at least the written tradition, say about relations between Jews and the other nations once Israel received the pact with God which set them apart, made them them distinct, separating them from the nations? I read a portion about Jews leading more by example rather than evangelism (Deuteronomy 4). I don’t see anything about Jews sending Jewish judges out to the nations, or that the nations need Jewish teachers to do what is right. I don’t even read the part where the nations are commanded to obey Jewish judges/teachers, where God institutes the rulership of the rabbi. And in this absence, I am led to wonder about the “authoritative” guidance Richman said rabbis could give Gentiles. Maybe he just meant “expertise.” That’s all he could mean.

Anyway, let me get back on track.

So a Jewish teacher, this rabbi, is supposed to represent a chain of tradition back to Sinai. Yet he then mentions the plethora of opinions amongst rabbis that “appear to” conflict. In fact, they actually do conflict. There are a good amount I’m thinking of right now. His approach is to tell the outsider, “just pick a rabbi and do what he tells you.” But then the issue is no longer some representative of some tradition. It’s only picking sides whilst ignorant of the underlying factors that may well determine whether or not the rabbi you choose is actually teaching Sinai. It reminds me of politics. People who don’t understand the issues pick a tyrant to understand for them and make the decisions. They are not knowledgeable enough to understand the issue, yet they magically become knowledgeable to pick the right political candidate. And then the Gentile world turns to the mess it is. And with that in mind, sure, let the ignorant Gentile pick the right Jewish teacher/judge/rabbi!?! Right? There’s a reason for my being incredulous.

But the Jewish dictum, David? Make for yourself a teacher, right? Live by the commandments, right?

I guess so few Jews need teachers now that there is a surplus for Gentiles? “Judaism” is now rife amongst the Jews so now Gentiles can get themselves a what? A teacher? But wait! I know Gentiles can’t be rabbis but can’t a Gentile be a teacher? And if a Gentile can be a teacher, then is a rabbi so needed? Can’t he teach a Gentile sufficiently enough so that the Gentile can go and teach other Gentiles leaving the Jew free to help fix the problems with his own people? Or maybe it’s just too complex and complicated for us, the outsiders? Maybe it does make sense that the law for non-Jews cannot be applied by non-Jews? Maybe. And maybe that undermines the ancient teachings that we Gentiles should set up our courts, choosing our judges. Maybe that teaching should have been written as follows:

The law of courts and laws is that Gentiles should choose rabbis to make rulings and decisions according to the seven laws and warn the people about the laws. (Maimonides Missing Torah, Laws of non-Jewish things, chapter 9, law 14)

That would make more sense than what he actually wrote, right?

Just in case you don’t know, Maimonides actually wrote the following in Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings, chapter 9, law 14.

How must the gentiles fulfill the commandment to establish laws and courts? They are obligated to set up judges and magistrates in every major city to render judgement concerning these six mitzvot and to admonish the people regarding their observance.

And the Talmud states the following in tractate Sanhedrin, folio 56b.

The Baraitha informs us that they were commanded to set up law courts in every district and town. But were not the sons of Noah likewise commanded to do this? Surely it has been taught: Just as the Israelites were ordered to set up law courts in every district and town, so were the sons of Noah likewise enjoined to set up law courts in every district and town!

I’d laugh if someone believed that the law courts we were supposed to set up had to be headed up by a Jew or/and a rabbi. I’d love to know how Adam and Noah were commanded that!

When Nachmanides (otherwise known as “Ramban”) taught that not only are non-Jews supposed to set their own judges but that God commanded them about the details of theft, rape, wages, debtors, etc. comparable to the civil laws Israel was commanded (see his commentary on Genesis 34:13), the rabbi explaining this in footnote 45 of page 224-225 of “Ramban: The Torah: with Ramban’s commentary translated, annotated, and elucidated” said the following.

Minchas Chinuch (Mitzvah 51, 8) understands Ramban to mean that the Noahide courts are expected to judge in full compliance with the monetary laws of the Torah. It is also possible, however, that Ramban means only that the Noahide courts are expected to devise a legal system of monetary laws of their own , just as the Jewish people have such a system in the Torah – but not necessarily identical to that system. ([DD – he then refers to some inaccessible Jewish sources.]) (Emphasis mine)

So I guess it’s fairly clear that we Gentiles should be or become responsible for our own laws, to help and teach ourselves more often than needing Jews to, for all intents and purposes, rule us.

Oh, but, David, they are not ruling us, only teaching and guiding us.

When it is said by certain rabbis and their followers that rabbis have to make “rulings” for us Gentiles, a word that means authoritative (controlling) decisions, and that teach that, if a Gentile needs advice regarding the application of the seven laws that is deemed “difficult”, he must consult a learned Jew (see The Divine Code, Part 1, Chapter 5, topic 4, page 89-90 in printed editions). And I know that some may point me to its footnote as if that helps their case, but I’ve read it, and I see that grave doubts are placed on Gentile reasoning as the author deems it, similar to Richman above, that certain topics require such a breadth of “Torah” knowledge that it is doubtful that any Gentile can get the “exact” proper decision. And maybe he’s right. Maybe rabbis do such a poor job of teaching Gentiles called “noahides” as they have been doing for at least over a decade (the so-called noahide movement is supposed to have begun some time in the previous century, so I’m being kind to describe it as “over a decade”) that these noahides are still incapable of applying our own laws. And, once again, if they’re so bad at teaching Gentiles, what hope do the students of rabbis amongst their own people have? Or maybe, just maybe, it is as I’ve said in a previous article: although God placed the Jewish Torah close to them, according to Deuteronomy 30, he placed our seven laws inaccessibly far from us. Maybe, right?

Damn, I’m doing that incredulous sarcasm again, aren’t I?

Look, as you may see, I don’t agree with Richman’s opinion that everyone, including all Gentiles “seeking to know the ways of the Torah, and to attach themselves to the God of Israel,” needs a rabbi. If he only meant “those who want to attach themselves to Israel,” then I may agree, but I want to add that I notice something about his wording. To me, there’s something in his wording of this specific part that hints at a connection to Israel. It’s like he’s either talking about Gentiles wanting to get closer to Israel, or that the only way to learn about the seven laws is to join Israel in some fashion. Why do I say this? For two reasons. Firstly, he mentions “ways of the Torah.” He doesn’t say something specific to Gentiles like “the seven laws” or “human morality.” No, he refers to “the ways of Torah.” The term, Torah, normally refers to the 613 laws of the Jews, or the traditions held by them which is wider than the obligations for non-Jews. So this terminology at least hints at “Israel’s teachings.” Secondly, he says “the God of Israel,” to me, a specific term. He doesn’t say “the God of creation,” “the God of all mankind,” terms that would attach itself to everyone. No, he uses a term pointing to the specificity of Israel. That’s why I think he’s pointing to a joining with Israel, or at least hinting at it.

You know what? I’m good at over-thinking, focusing too much on wording. Maybe this is one occasion where I may be reading too deeply. Maybe. Or maybe he had different reasons for using this wording. Whatever. You can just overlook that focus on his wording.

Anyway …

Here is my own individual, Gentile, undisciplined, uneducated opinion, which, as you should know, you are free to ignore.

See, that should be a clear enough sign for those who skipped past my verbal wranglings.

So the question was this:

“I’m not a Jew. I want to live a righteous life. I’ve heard of the seven laws and agree with them. But they’re talked about in Jewish tradition. So do I need a rabbi to live a righteous life? Do I need a rabbi, full stop?”

Firstly, does a Gentile need a rabbi? No. A rabbi refers to a Jew, a Jew who is sufficiently learned in Jewish law to make legal decisions for his Jewish community. In times past, that would be a tangible national role for his people, like a Jewish judge or a Jewish teacher. Since what was a national covenant of Torah has been diluted into a religion called “Judaism,” the rabbi has become more like a religious minister. But at no point in the evolution (or devolution) of the role has the Jew gained any authority over a Gentile. A Gentile doesn’t need regular contact with a rabbi, doesn’t need to be under the wing of a rabbi, no, none of that.

Just to say, I am focusing on the word “need.” There is no need for a rabbi.

And to add, yes, the Torah does contain information for Gentiles, seven laws and moral expectations and information about God. But, as rabbis like Samson Raphael Hirsch taught, a Gentile can learn much of that without “Torah,” by which I’m referring to the traditions the Jews received. You don’t need regular contact with a Jew to figure out stealing is wrong. You don’t even need a rabbi to tell you idols are fake and worshipping them shouldn’t be done.

So do you need a rabbi, full stop? No. Hell no!

How about this? Does a Gentile need a rabbi to live a happy, good and moral life? Again, absolutely not! No! As I’ve said in previous articles, a Gentile can avoid the forbidden acts and be a decent perso …

BUT, DAVID, THEY NEED TO DO IT BECAUSE GOD COMMANDED IT TO MOSES AT SINAI!!!

LoL! I’m literally laughing. Why did you interrupt me, Devil’s Advocate David? You’re funny.

Although people claim that Maimonides said this, he didn’t. He said nothing about being moral and happy. He didn’t even say that if a person lives in accordance to the seven laws but doesn’t accept God and Sinai, they are therefore sinful and bad people. His issue was getting into the world to come, and I’m not even sure where he got this idea from.

But just to avoid a further argument, let me continue giving my uneducated opinion.

A Gentile can avoid the forbidden acts and be a decent person and be happy without a rabbi. I know some make it complex and complicated. I’d say that for a good amount of life, if not all of it, it’s not that hard. In fact, nowadays, with the proliferation of books py rabbis about the seven laws, it’s easier than before to learn about many of the details of the seven laws and morality without a rabbi. There may even be some friendly Gentile learners of the law to answer some questions. It does not have to be a rabbi or a Jew to teach you foundational or possibly intermediate levels of the seven laws or human morality.

Now, if a Gentile wants to possibly have more of a chance of becoming an expert at the details of the seven laws, knowing the finer intricacies, or you wanna find more Gentiles that know about the seven laws, or he want a Torah-learned Jewish advisor, then the Gentile may need a rabbi. That’s only nowadays.

If a miracle happens and Gentiles actually fully learn our laws and we actually apply them to national or community laws, thereby making it part of Gentile education, then the need for a rabbi becomes even less because we’d have our own experts, just as there are Gentile teachers in our Gentile schools. But that is just a dream about a future I may never see.

So, to the general question of whether a Gentile needs a rabbi, I’d say most likely no, and possibly much less than is advocated by most rabbis and “noahides.” Don’t get me wrong. It’s advantageous to be able to ask a rabbi questions if needs be. But “need?” Nah!

Should I now be prepared to duck?