Reward and punishment TB Eruvin 22

One of the most difficult to answer theological questions is “why bad things happen to good people?” Even Moses asked God that question. (see Tb Berakhot 7a) Today’s daf TB Eruvin 22 presents a rabbinic answer to this question. “Rabbi Ḥaggai said, and some say it was Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed: The Lord, the Lord, merciful and gracious, long-suffering [erekh appayim], and abundant in love and truth” (Exodus 34:6)? Why does it say “erekh appayim,” using a plural form? It should have said erekh af, using the singular form. What this means is that God is long-suffering in two ways: He is long-suffering toward the righteous, i.e., He delays payment of their reward; and He is also long-suffering toward the wicked, i.e., He does not punish them immediately.” (Sefaria.org translation)

In other words the wicked receive the reward they deserve in this world while the righteous will receive their reward in the world to come. “What are we to make of the doctrine of reward and punishment? Any interpretation of the doctrine which things of God is vindictive, bent on enforcing His will in tyrannical fashion, presents an unworthy concept of Deity. The many rabbinic ideas on the subject are better understood as spontaneous prejudgment rather than systemic theological presentation… This is surely much more in the nature of a vivid piece of sermonizing rather than attempt to work out theological scheme.” (A Jewish Theology by Louis Jacobs, page 263)

Of course medieval rabbis like Rambam and Ramban answer this question differently. “There are three reasons why many moderns find the medieval formulations of the doctrine of reward and punishment unsatisfactory. These formulations are too neat, to cruel, and too vindictive for our tastes and because of this represent was for us as an inferior concept of Deity. There are surely gains in our greater reticence in these matters. We cannot presume to know how God works. The all too tidy schemes of medieval thinkers leave us unmoved… We are, moreover, more sensitive to cruelty. This might seem very strange assertion in the age of the concentration camp but it is true that far less cruelty is tolerated in civilized countries today than anywhere in the middle ages and, at least, we hesitate to adopt any theological scheme in which cruelty appears to be a scribe in some way to God. And modern emphasis on reforming the criminal rather than punishing him vindictively has made is very wary of any doctrine of retribution which seems to ignore reformation.” (ibid., page 267)

Modern theologians like Martin Buber, Abraham Joshua Heschel, Mordechai Kaplan, and Harold Kushner speak of God as intrinsically limited. God created the universe based upon what we call scientific laws, like the law of gravity. God cannot annul these laws. If an evil man shoots a righteous person the laws of physics control that bullet and not God. “Again, a limited God…does much for us; he has created a world where the good outweighs the evil. But he does not, he cannot, eliminate evil from the world.” (Sacred Fragments by Neil Gillman, page 200)

Each solution has its pluses and minuses. I recommend that you read books like A Jewish Theology and Sacred Fragments so that you can begin to create a theology that makes sense and is meaningful to you. 

I’ll just conclude with a quote from A Jewish Theology. “Evil is evil and is hateful in God’s eyes. Unless this is affirmed we reduce religion to a vague sentimental feeling for the divine. A God who tolerates a Hitler would not be deserving of our worship. The principle of reward and punishment means for us that ultimately it is better for us to lead a good life, to obey God’s will, and to reject an evil life, even though we must leave the details to God. When we pursue evil we are at variance with God’s purpose in this can never succeed in any ultimate sense. When we pursue the good we are doing God’s work and for all the suffering this may entail we find complete reassurance in the knowledge that there is no other purpose ultimately for man than to be on God’s ‘side’, as it were, in the struggle against evil.” (page 267)