alex94 wrote on 23 Jun 2025 21:37:
Because in a very real way, it failed him on a personal level, and that is not okay. (Maybe, over time, we can help him shift the blame from "the system" to the individual perpetrator, but that’s a delicate matter
Im confused by this. Why is it not okay that someone was failed? Who is expecting the world to be perfect? If the world isnt perfect, there are going to be a certain amount of people who get hurt in many ways. It hurts terribly, but I dont see how its wrong. Hashem doest expect of anyone to be perfect. He has angels for that. This world is the last place for anything to be perfect.
Furthermore, what use is there in blaming the individual perpetrator, presuming there really is someone to blame? Why is he more to blame than the system that enabled him? Why presume he acted with malice or that his actions were not a result of his own chinuch? Blaming is a natural response. However, staying with it and not moving on perpetuates the victim perspective and makes it harder for one to slowly integrate a Emuna perspective where one tries to understand and integrate the knowledge of and belief in the Divine providence orchestrating his personal mission that included him going through that pain, however it came about.
Important points--answering each paragraph separately, to the best of my ability:
1) 100%, there are going to be a certain amount of people who get hurt in many ways--
but that hurt shouldn't come as the result of the actions of another Yid. There are many causes of pain and hurt, but the actions of another Jew shouldn't be one of them. That's what makes it not OK. We're in גלות. Pain is everywhere. But it should never be the result of another Yid's actions. That's exactly the point--that
nobody expects the world to be perfect. Suffering is in so many places (לא עלינו), so the least we could do is try to make sure that
we aren't causing any of that suffering ourselves. Hashem doesn't expect anyone to be perfect, but He does expect us not to bring pain on others.
2) I understood Bright to be discussing circumstances/instances where the individual's actions were inexcusable and beyond the pale, to the point that whether his actions were the result of his own malice/cruelty or of his upbringing/Chinuch becomes irrelevant. (To clarify: This is akin to the infamous debate regarding terrorists raised by terrorists: are they evil in and of themselves? They've never had a chance to think differently, after all--from the second they were born, they were taught "Jews are the enemy, they're evil, kill as many as possible", and had a gun put in their hands at 3 years old so they could start "training". The answer: Yes, of course they're evil. You may be right that they never had a remote possibility of thinking differently. Who cares?!?! Whether it's their fault or not is an irrelevant philosophical discussion. A murderous terrorist is evil, regardless of whether it ever had a moment's exposure to thinking differently or not.)
להבדיל אלף אלפי הבדלים (obviously), there are circumstances where an individual inflicting pain on another is inexcusable, regardless of whether his actions were borne of his own malice or not. (Obviously, there are גדרים for this level, but I'd like to think most have the שכל to know them.) I understood Bright to be talking about such cases.
With that in mind, to address the last point: Yes, 100%--like you said, the לכתחילה response is to realize that everything that happens, even a cause of pain, is from Hashem, that nothing happens in this world that is not כרצונו. But I think we're talking "blame" in the figurative sense-that is, directing responsibility, not holding accountability for consequences. Every person has בחירה. The pain didn't have to come to that individual through them. A person is still
to blame (not the same thing as "blaming") for their actions. Of course the individual should internalize the point Alex spoke out--this pain was best for them, even if they don't understand how. כל מה דעביד רחמנא לטב עביד. That is the core of Emunah. But the person who inflicted the pain is still responsible for his actions, to the point that the system/מוסד/institution should ascertain that the person won't (or, depending on the instance at hand,
can't) repeat said actions.
