Excerpt Browser

This page displays the full text of excerpts.  When viewing a single excerpt, its “Share,” “Switch Article,” and “Comment” functions are accessible.

GENESIS — 4:8 killed

GEN493 Why sacrifices? To be sure, they have not been part of the life of Judaism since the destruction of the Second Temple, almost two thousand years ago. But why, if they are a means to an end, did God choose this end? This is, of course, one of the deepest questions in Judaism, and there are many answers. Here I want to explore just one, first given by the early-15th-century Jewish thinker, Rabbi Joseph Albo, in his Sefer Haikkarim. Albo’s theory took as its starting point not sacrifices but two other questions. The first: why after the Flood did God permit human beings to eat meat? Genesis 9:3-5. Initially, neither human beings nor animals had been meat eaters Genesis 1:29–30. What caused God, as it were, to change His mind? The second: What was wrong the first act of sacrifice, Cain’s offering of “some of the fruits of the soil” Genesis 4:3-5? God’s rejection of that offering led directly to the first murder, when Cain killed Abel. What was at stake in the difference between the offerings Cain and Abel brought to God? Albo’s theory is that killing animals for food is inherently wrong. It involves taking the life of a sentient being to satisfy our needs. Cain knew this. He believed there was a strong kinship between man and the animals. That is why he offered not an animal sacrifice, but a vegetable one (his error, according to Albo, is that he should have brought fruit, not vegetables -- the highest, not the lowest, of non-meat produce). Abel, by contrast, believed that there was a qualitative difference between man and the animals. Had God not told the first humans: “rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves in the ground”? That is why he brought an animal sacrifice. Once Cain saw that Abel’s sacrifice had been accepted while his own was not, he reasoned thus: if God, who forbids us to kill animals for food, permits and even favors killing an animal as a sacrifice, and if, as Cain believed, there is no ultimate difference between human beings and animals, then I shall offer the highest living being as a sacrifice to God, namely my brother Abel. Cain killed Abel as a human sacrifice. That is why God permitted meat-eating after the Flood. Before the Flood, the world had been “filled with violence.” Perhaps violence is an inherent part of human nature. If humanity were to be allowed to exist at all, God would have to lower his demands. Let humans kill animals, He said, rather than kill human beings-the one form of life that is not only God’s creation but also God’s image. SACKS 159-60

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 4:8 said

GEN495 The classic example … of those rare and powerful instances in which the Torah deliberately uses fractured syntax to indicate a fractured relationship … is [this] untranslatable verse in which Cain kills Abel.  The breakdown of words expresses the breakdown of relationship which leads to the breakdown of morality and the first murder. SACKS 43

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 4:9 keeper

GEN499 The Jewish tradition cannot accurately be used to support any particular ideological stance—conservative, moderate, liberal, or anything else—in responding to the problem of poverty. Nevertheless, some guidelines clearly emerge from Jewish concepts and law. In light of God’s image embedded in each of us, we must determine the recipients of aid, the donors, the methods of collection and distribution, the programs of prevention, and all other related factors in this area by asking: What is the most practical and efficient way of caring for the poor while preserving the dignity and economic viability of all concerned? God responds to Cain’s question, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” with the resounding “What have you done? Hark, your brother’s blood cries out to Me from the ground!” [this verse].  In responding to what is often life-threatening poverty, we must fulfill our God-given responsibility for each other by effectively and honorably providing for the immediate needs of the poor while simultaneously helping them support themselves—all in a context of respect and dignity. Because the best type of aid by far is prevention of poverty in the first place, the clear mandate of the Jewish tradition is to support governmental and private programs of education in general and job training in particular. These programs pay multiple dividends, keeping whole groups of the population from a life of unemployment, degradation, and often crime and enabling them to become productive and dignified members of society. This priority begins first with the biblical responsibility of Jewish parents and, by extension, the community to teach children a form of gainful employment, and puts into practice the top rung of Maimonides’ hierarchy of charity. If assistance is necessary, for both practical and moral reasons it is better to proffer employment, a loan, or investment capital to poor people than to give money as a dole. A loan or investment has the potential for making the poor person self-supporting, thus eliminating the drain on the community’s resources. It also preserves the dignity of the poor person now and, if the venture succeeds, for the long-term. Even so, a poor person seeking aid from an individual cannot be denied enough for immediate sustenance. However we may react to being confronted by street figures, Jewish law requires that we give something to those who ask, or if we cannot, that we at least treat them kindly.  B. Bava Batra 9b and M.T. Laws of Gifts to the Poor 10:5. Jewish law intends, though, that we provide food, clothing, and shelter for the hungry; we need not give beggars money when we have good evidence that it will not be used for that purpose. Most commonly, this occurs when the people asking are clearly inebriated or under the influence of drugs and when the money would in all likelihood be used to feed their habit. Indeed, to give them money under those circumstances would be “placing a stumbling block before the blind,” a violation of Leviticus 19:14 as the Rabbis interpreted it.  To avoid this problem, some people keep on their person a ready supply of food coupons redeemable at restaurants or supermarkets so that they can be sure that their contribution to a beggar will indeed be used for legitimate purpose. Others maintain that giving people even such a specified voucher encourages them to continue on the dole and that the morally responsible thing to do is to direct them (or help them get to) a communally run program that will provide for their basic needs while simultaneously taking steps to help them become self-supporting. In the end, confronting beggars is emotionally very difficult, no matter what you do. Even if you think that you should not give them anything for one or another of the reasons mentioned in this chapter, you clearly may not just pass by but must rather notice these people in recognition of their basic humanity. If you have neither the time nor the information to help beggars reach a responsible agency, it is probably best to give them something. Even though such people may be deceiving you and even though you may even be contributing to a bad habit of panhandling, it is better to take those risks then to pass by someone who is truly in need. On the other hand, nobody is obliged by Jewish law to supply people who asked for help with large sums of money; a small donation is all that is called for. Anything more than that undermines our concern to dissuade people from begging on the streets; we want them instead to get help from the public and private agencies created to supply assistance with continuity and with the professional expertise to assess and respond to people’s actual needs. Similarly, on a communal level, immediate sustenance should be available for a truly destitute with few, if any, questions asked ...  DORFFDRAG 155-7

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 4:9 keeper

GEN496 Cain’s words have come to symbolize people’s willingness to accept responsibility for the welfare of the other.  The Alter of Kelm identifies this tendency in all of us and urges us to recognize that, yes, we are our brother’s keepers, and not just for our brothers’ sake.  … bearing the burden of the other is action that cultivates the soul of the doer.  The ego wants everything for me, cares only for me, and it is by learning and struggling to bear the burden of the other than one is enabled to overcome the insistent voice of the ego as the guiding source in life.  MORINIS 204-5

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 4:9 keeper

GEN501 We live in an age when mussar, ethical teaching, is considered outmoded; chastisement and constructive moral criticism are considered in bad taste; to insist on religious self-examination and improvement, is regarded as offensive.  We have accepted the cardinal, primary Anglo-Saxon rule of life: “Mind your own business.” Therefore, if you see someone commit a wrong, do not interfere; it is no concern of yours.  Nothing could be more contrary to the Jewish view. “All Jews are responsible for one another”: this is our cardinal, primary rule, enunciated and echoed in the Talmud and Midrash. [Talmud Shebuoth 39a and other citations] In the infinite, timeless vision of Torah, the Jewish people are one organic unity: all parts, sections, members are responsible for one another. What affects one, affects all. We reject the heartless, murderous cynicism of a Cain who asks, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” [this verse]. [With Cain’s preceding words, this could also be rendered, “I did not know that I am my brother’s keeper.” Judaism rejects this too: ignorance is no excuse]. SINAI1 xxi (Continued at [[EXOD793]] Exodus 23:4 back SINAI1 xxi-xxii and then at [[DEUT1082]] Deuteronomy 22:1 bring SINAI1 xxii).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 4:9 keeper

GEN497 Do not separate yourself from the community.  Pirkei Avot II:5  For long periods of his life the human being is quite helpless, unable to survive alone. In infancy, in sickness, in old age, man is dependent on others and on the community. Moreover, culture and civilization as we know it would be impossible if we lived as hermits, in total isolation and total self-reliance. Through the organization of society, specialization and division of labor, each of us can enjoy the fruits of the cooperative work of myriads of his fellows. If for a brief episode during his prime, a man has illusions of self-sufficiency, he would do well to remember that in the very near future he will need the community, the organization, the synagogue that perhaps he now ignores.  And always, whether he knows it or not, he benefits indispensably from the activities and contributions of countless others.  Furthermore, the large communities of mankind build and maintain an invaluable reservoir, a repository of knowledge, wisdom and spiritual values only because society preserves and transmits the precious traditions of past generations.  This is especially true of historic Jewry with its age-old Oral Torah.  One of mankind’s enormous early sins is expressed in Cain’s terse question, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” [this verse] With hostility and suspicion the human being would reject the common brotherhood of man, or at least question it with asperity.  Hillel’s answer is a gentle affirmation: “Do not separate yourself from the community.” Share your life with your fellow humans.  SINAI1 146-7

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 4:9 keeper

GEN500 Uncontrolled anger is, along with hatred, the most destructive of emotions.  The Torah cites several instances of the horrors that ensue when people do not control their rage.  For example: When God rejects Cain’s offering while accepting that of his brother Abel, Cain murders Abel, and then shows no remorse. [this verse] He taunts God.  TELVOL1 248

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

RSS
First394041424344454647485052535455565758
Back To Top