Our Gemara on Amud Aleph uses a play on words from a verse (Numbers 21:30) to describe the fate of the sinner who denies that God will hold him accountable:
ונשים עד־נפח אשר עד־מידבא
We have wrought desolation at Nophah, which is by Medva
The name of this place, Medva, also is a pun indicating that God will eventually bring justice and “do as He pleases.” (“Ad De-Baiy”, in Aramaic means “what he wants” which is phonetically similar to Medva.)
The phrase is ambiguous. Who is the “He”, and what does “He” want? The simple reading is that He is God, and “what He wants” means to say as follows: Though God may take His time to mete out justice in this world for His reasons, in the World to Come, God will not hold back and give each sinner as he deserves (see Rashbam, ibid.) However, Rashash (ibid) suggests a different idea. He says the “he” is the sinner. The meaning is then that God allows the sinner to do as he wishes in this world, due to the principle that “God leads along the path that the person wishes to follow” (Makkos 10b). This is an extraordinary principle of our theology. God values human free will so greatly that He does not interfere and may facilitate the wishes and behaviors that the person desires, even if not correct.
There is an amazing example of this from Gemara and Tosafos Yevamos (62a) discussion of Moshe’s rationale for accepting celibacy upon himself.
Celibacy is not typically considered pious or proper in Jewish practice. But Moshe reasoned, “If the Jews had to separate from sexuality in order to experience revelation at Mount Sinai, kal v’chomer I myself must constantly refrain from sexuality, since God appears to me at any time.”
The Gemara reports that God agreed with Moshe’s reasoning, as later on, after the Torah was given, God states, “The Jews shall return to their tents, but you, stay with me.” As if to say, the rest of the nation can return to their tents (wives and families), but you, Moshe, have a special role.
Tosafos here asks and answers a question, which leads to a remarkable philosophical conclusion about how God relates to human free will. Tosafos wonders why Aharon and Miriam were challenging Moshe’s decision to be celibate. It is one thing to doubt the logic of his kal v’chomer. However, if God Himself endorsed the decision, how can they complain and disagree? Tosafos answers: Aharon and Miriam were claiming, based on the teaching in Makkos (10a), “In the way that a person wants to go, so too from heaven he will be led.” However, Aharon and Miriam did not take into account the additional principle of, “When one desires to be pure, God does more than lead but even assists”, and thus Moshe was indeed justified because his intentions were pure. (This last part is based on the commentary of Chokhmas Shelomo, Op. Cit.)
To elaborate on Tosafos’ answer, Aharon and Miriam might have argued, “True you reasoned a good kal v’chomer, and as we know, the Torah is not in Heaven (Bava Metzi’a 59b), so once you decided what you wanted to do, God “agreed”. That just makes it right enough. But still, our argument is stronger and you should not have ruled that you are allowed to be celibate. Then, God would have agreed to that too!”
This is an astounding and remarkable theological statement. As a loving and respectful parent, God is so supportive of human self-determination, that there is room for Him to sometimes endorse human assessments and free-will, even if it is not the most correct manner. True, in this instance Aharon and Miriam underestimated Moshe in several ways and so they were wrong, but theologically speaking, the principle that allowed them to think that they could be right, even though God endorsed Moshe’s reasoning, would still seem to be valid.
Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation 
Do you like what you see? Please subscribe and also forward any articles you enjoy to your friends, (enemies too, why not?)