Am ha-Aretz / עם הארץ

Disproofs 15: Daniel's prayer [ Critique ]

From the Disproofs of the Oral Law series.

15. R. Yehudah HaLevi points out that Daniel [Dan. 6:11] risked his life to pray. However, nowhere in the written Torah do we see a commandment to pray [Kuzari, ibid.; Rashbash, ibid.]. While there is argument regarding the source of the obligation to pray [cf. Maimonides, Sefer Hamitzvot, positive commandment 5; Nahmanides, ad. loc.] and whether there is an obligation to risk martyrdom for prayer [cf. R. Nissim ben Reuven, Commentary to Rif, Shabbat 22b sv. Umakshu] , the question remains -- how did Daniel know whether or not to offer his life for this commandment? Without an oral law to explain the details of martyrdom, there is no way of determining when and where to become a martyr and when not to.

This proof makes sense in the Orthodox paradigm, in which every (religious) action must be the result of a commandment. The proof assumes that because Daniel did something, that thing was commanded. Yet it does not say anywhere that Daniel prayed or risked his life because these things are commanded. Student is right: in the Torah, there is no commandment to pray. Daniel "knew" to offer his life because people risk their lives for things they deem important.

1. In Daniel 6, King Darius was tricked into passing an unalterable law which made it illegal for Daniel to pray to God. After hearing about this law, Daniel continues to pray to God, as he has always done. Student claims that in doing do, Daniel was risking martyrdom. Yet, this is not established anywhere in the text. King Darius and Daniel were very close; Daniel might have believed that, if the push came to shove, Darius would not do anything to harm him. Or, Daniel might have known that, even if Darius did something, he would still survive by the grace of God. Remember that Daniel did receive visions from God. In fact, this is what happened: Daniel was put into a lions' den for a full night, yet "God sent His angel, who shut the mouths of the lions so that they did not injure [him]". Thus, in Daniel's mind, there might not have been any risk at all.

2. Even if Daniel, in his mind, did risk his life, it never says that he did so because he was following a commandment. Evidently, it was very important for Daniel to pray to God thrice daily. People do things that are very important to them, even if doing them puts their lives at risk. Just because Daniel prayed after the law was passed does not mean that he was following a commandment about martyrdom.

3. Even if we accept the premise that Daniel was following a commandment concerning martyrdom, his actions do not follow the Oral Law, as accepted by Orthodox Jews. According to Orthodox halakha, a person may break any commandment to save his life, except those that forbid idolatry, adultery, and murder. Further,

If the intention of the persecutor is not so much to benefit himself as to compel the Jew to transgress the laws of Judaism in public (explained to mean "in the presence of ten Israelites"), the Jew should rather submit to martyrdom than commit even the smallest transgression. In a time of general persecution of Jews one should prefer martyrdom when required to transgress a law even in private (Sanh. 74a, b; Maimonides, "Yad," Yesode ha-Torah, v. 1-3; Shulhan 'Aruk, Yoreh De'ah, 157, 1). (JE)

Yet, none of these conditions applied in the case of Daniel. Idolatry, adultery, and murder obviously do not apply. If we say that the "persecutor" were the satraps who conspired against Daniel and who tricked Darius, then they did this for personal gain, to prevent Daniel from gaining political power, as it says in Daniel 6:6. If we say that the "persecutor" was Darius himself, his intent in passing the law was not to compel Daniel to do anything: Darius was tricked into passing the law against Daniel, and after Darius realized this, he wanted to save Daniel. Finally, this was not a general persecution of Jews. Darius's law forbade anyone living in the empire to pray to any god. If this is defined as a "general persecution of Jews", then any law that conflicts with any Jewish religious law would be deemed as a general persecution, which it is not.

4. Does the Oral Law command us to risk martyrdom for prayer? Student says that it's not clear. How can it not be clear? If Daniel risked his life because he was supposedly following the Oral Law, then it follows that the Oral Law does require martyrdom in this case. Why then is it not clear?

5. Daniel prayed even after the law was passed because he wanted to pray. It does not say anywhere that he was following any law, either in regard to prayer, or in regard to risking his life. By the way, Daniel 6:11 says that he prayed while kneeling down. If he was following Oral Law, why don't the Orthodox Jews of today kneel down when they pray?

Posted by Ami at February 15, 2004 08:39 AM | TrackBack