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 — 1:26 image

GEN52 At its core, the soul you are is already holy and pure.  How could it be otherwise, since we are told in no uncertain terms in the Torah that we are made “in the image” and “likeness” of God? Yet in the reality of our lives, that radiant inner being is often hidden. The holy light of the neshama would shine constantly in our lives and through us into the world, were it not for the fact that the condition of certain inner qualities, which are framed for us as our soul-traits at the level of nefesh-soul, obstruct the radiance.  MORINIS 19-20

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 1:26 image

GEN53 [The Tanakh’s] first statements about humankind confer upon them great dignity and worth, as humans are “created in God’s image” [this verse] formed by God’s hands, and animated by His breath (Genesis 2:7). Thus humans have a correspondence to God that other creatures lack. (By Elaine Adler Goodfriend, “Ethical Theory and Practice in the Hebrew Bible) OXFORD 44

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 1:26 image

GEN54 I want to suggest that, for Jewish ethicists, the sacredness of human life translates into several distinct but related sets of principles that, in turn, are exemplified in a variety of specific rules.  While the following analysis is sketchy, it should suffice to demonstrate some of the way in which a Jewish theology of creation shapes biomedical ethics. [This verse]. In the Genesis account only human beings are singled out as reflections of God’s own image. Human life is holy because it shares something of the essence of divinity. That human life is sacred means, in the first place, that it possesses intrinsic and infinite value.  Its value is absolute, not susceptible to quantification and not relative to the value of anything extrinsic to it.  Thus, Jewish scholars traditionally have rejected any argument evaluating human life in terms of its “quality,” for this implies that its value is relative to some other good, such as health or happiness or consciousness.  Accordingly, rabbinic authorities have not sanctioned measures that shorten one’s life simply because ordinary physical or mental capacities have been compromised.  Similarly, they have not supported the abortion of fetuses with known or suspected abnormalities, since low quality of life in no way diminishes its sacredness. The sanctity of life generates a second major principle of Jewish ethics, that the preservation of life is the highest moral imperative.  The rabbis were especially sensitive to those situations in which obedience to the law conflicted with the preservation of life.  Since the law, like life itself, comes from God a moral conflict between them is especially profound.  But the tradition resolves all such conflicts in favor of the preservation of life.  Thus, to treat a critically ill person one can violate the laws of the Sabbath, prepare non-Kosher food, and so on.  [B. Shabbat 16:17; principle of pikuah nefesh]  Moreover, if there is any doubt whatsoever as to the condition of the patient, we err on the side of preserving life.  By the same token, Jewish law proscribes individuals from engaging in life-threatening activities, unless of course they do so in the interest of saving another life.  Thus, experimental procedures with significant (or unknown) risks are never mandatory and often not recommended, except in cases where performing the procedure is necessary for saving a life.  The view that human life is sacred implies a third central principle, that all lives are equal.  Because Jewish tradition offers no criteria for valuing one life more highly than another, issues of triage are especially problematic.  As one handbook of Jewish medical ethics puts it, “This is the foundation for the practice of triage, and is fundamentally incompatible with Jewish values and Jewish law. Since, in Judaism, all human life is equally sacred including each moment of an individual’s life…no selection is justifiable among those with the need for, and the possibility, however slim, of cure.  [Citing Feldman and Rosner, Compendium on Medical Ethics, 105]. It seems that only a random or arbitrary system of allocating scarce medical resources (among patients who need the resource equally) is compatible with the sanctity of life, as Jewish scholars have understood it.  The sanctity of human life gives rise to a fourth important tenet of Jewish medical ethics, that our lives are not really our own.  Human life is not even a gift so much as a loan, which we possess conditionally and ultimately must return to its source.  Thus, Jewish ethics allows little room for notions of personal autonomy that figure so prominently in Kantian ethics.  The implications of this perspective are especially evident in discussions of abortion.  Rabbinic authorities over the centuries have tended to permit abortion in cases where the mother’s life or health (including possibly her psychological health) is endangered.  In this sense, and only in this sense, the tradition does recognize the distinctions between lives – the actual life of the mother clearly takes precedence over the potential life of the fetus.  But the notion that a mother could terminate a pregnancy for any reason on the grounds that she has a right to control what happens to her own body is entirely foreign to Jewish tradition.  The fetus, though not regarded as fully a “person,” is still alive, and insofar as all human life is sacred, it can be terminated only for the most compelling reason, in order to preserve other lives.  This same principle emerges in Jewish discussions of suicide.  One does not have a right to take one’s own life, even under the most debilitating circumstances.  Similarly, we do not control the timing or the circumstances of our death.  This undergirds the leniency among many traditional authorities with respect to treatment of the dying.  When a person is in a moribund state, we are not required to prolong the moment of death.  The principle of “sit and do nothing” is consistent with the view that God controls the ultimate disposition of our lives.  When death is imminent, it is a sign of humble resignation before God’s will to refrain from action.  PASTIMP 108-10

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 1:26 image

GEN55 [Article analyzing employee rights in a situation of dismissal.]  We have now examined our guiding principles: the unconditioned value of human beings; and its derivative principle, respect for contract. We have also noted manifestations of these principles in both halakhic and general ethical sources, and we have made two policy proposals which emerge from the guiding principles. Still, an essential question remains: what undergirds the guiding principles themselves in addition to various historical and sociological factors which influence our choices, what convictions constitute the meta-ethical assumptions and foundations of our thought? For us, those meta-ethical stances are fundamentally Jewish, and thereby meta-halakhic as well. The cornerstone of all our thinking is the Jewish conviction that human beings are created b’tzelem elohim, “in the image of God.” This core conviction, derived from [this and following verses], raise Kant’s claims of human value to a transcendent level. While Kant asserted the unconditional value of human beings, Judaism roots that absolute value in God, the absolute source of all value: human beings possess implicit and unconditional worth because they are created in the image of God. Judaism insists upon the recognition of the transcendent dignity of every human being, no matter what the market conditions, no matter what the effect of profit or productivity.  In fact, b’tzelem elohim, seems to be a guiding assumption of Jewish law itself, the meta-halakhic principle responsible for Jewish law’s protecting the worker’s status in the various circumstances reported above.  One might still argue, however, from the classical capitalist perspective, that the free market system provides for the utmost dignity of its participants by providing all with the utmost freedom.  Another meta-halakhic principle, however, refutes this classical claim. Unlike classical free-market capitalism, Judaism does not enshrine freedom as an absolute value.  The Jewish ethical tradition certainly relies significantly on the experience of and redemption from slavery: “You shall not oppress a stranger, for you know the feelings of the stranger, having yourself been strangers in the land of Egypt” Exodus 23:9. Nonetheless, yetziat mitzrayim, the exodus from Egypt, is the necessary means to an end: matan torah, the revelation of the Torah at Mt. Sinai. The Israelites were redeemed from slavery not to wander in the desert and make their own rules, but in order to accept the divine obligations presented to them at Sinai. This dual notion that freedom entails responsibility, and that responsibility requires freedom is central to Jewish self-understanding (and corresponds to the more contemporary concept of moral agency); indeed, the acceptance of mitzvot, of deontological obligations, is the necessary basis for the halakhic system itself. The existence of the Halakhah is evidence that Judaism, while valuing liberty, considers human freedom neither sufficient expression nor sufficient guarantee of human dignity. Mitzvot constitute an explicit, rigorous, and visible hand of guidance towards individual and collective well-being. Finally, just as God and divinely-inspired obligation are the source and protection of the human being’s unconditional value in Judaism, they also underlie the value of contract. In this case, brit emerges as a compelling concept. If brit is the Jewish people’s (and the Jewish individual’s) covenant with God, and human beings are created b’tzelem elohim, then the core concept of brit might also suggest the sanctity of commitments between human beings … from a Jewish perspective the divine element in human beings imposes upon human agreements some of the sacred responsibility of brit.  REFJEW 297-8

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 1:26 image

GEN56 [One of] the features of the ethic of Torah that make it transformative and uniquely sustainable over time … was the unprecedented dignity of the individual, signaled in the statement of the Torah’s first chapter: [This verse] … The idea that a human being could be in the image of God was not new to the ancient Near East. That is what Mesopotamian Kings, Assyrian emperors, and Egyptian pharaohs were believed to be: the children of the gods, or the chief intermediaries with the gods. What was revolutionary to the Bible was the proposition that this applies equally to all of us. The concept of human rights was not born until the 17th century, yet it is fair to say that its possibility was created in those words. The rabbis spelled out some of the implications. A Mishna in Sanhedrin (4:5) states that humans were created singly (the Torah speaks of the creation of the first man and woman) to teach that a single life is like the universe. When a person destroys a life, it is as if he destroyed the universe. When a person saves a life, it is as if he saved the universe. They were also created singly for the sake of peace so that no one could say to others, “My ancestor was greater than yours.” Lastly, the Mishnah concludes, it was to show the greatness of the Holy One, Blessed Be He, for when humans make many coins from one mold, they all emerge alike, but God makes each person in the same image, His image, and they are all different. Therefore we are each obligated to say, “For my sake the world was created.” There is an important point worth noting here. Monotheism is not just a set of beliefs about God. It has deep implications for our understanding of humanity as well. Discovering God, singular and alone, humans discovered the significance of the individual, singular and alone. Hence remarks like that of Moses, “Shall one man sin and will You be angry with the whole congregation?” Numbers 16:22.  Hence also the appearance for the first time in literature of sharply individuated characters like Moses, David, Elijah, and Jeremiah alongside women like Deborah, Ruth, Naomi, and Hannah. These are not the two-dimensional representational figures but rather, complex individuals who think and act as individuals.  SACKS xx-xxi

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 1:26 image

GEN57 Scripture describes the human being as created in the image of God [this verse], but also as “dust” (see, e.g. Genesis 3:9, Genesis 18:27; Job 42:6; Psalms 103:14).  One the one hand, “each person is obliged to say: The world was created for my sake” Sanhedrin 37a, and, on the other hand, “if a person becomes too proud, he should be reminded that the gnats preceded him in the order of creation” Sanhedrin 38a.  The human being is God’s partner in the work of creation Shabbat 10a, as well as a creature derived from a fetid drop of semen who ends up in a place of worms and maggots. Pirkei Avot 3:1. Human beings share qualities both with the angels and animals. Haggai 16a; Genesis Rabbah 8:11, 14:3.  The Jewish view of human nature hovers between such sets of polar opposites: dust and divinity, animal and angel, creature and creator. SHER20C 151

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 1:26 image

GEN58 The Talmudic rabbis taught that God not only reveals the Torah, but that God also observes the commandments: “A human king issues a decree. The king may then choose to obey it; or the king may choose to have only others obey it.  Not so the Holy One. When God issues a decree, God is the first to obey it. As it is stated, ‘And they shall observe my observances… I am the Lord’ Leviticus 22:9. I [God] am the first to obey the commandments of the Torah” Palestinian Talmud, Yebamot, chap 4. Sec 12. Yet, when creating human beings, God did not obey the commandments of the Torah.  Though Scripture forbids making an image of God, when God created human being, God made an image of God.  Of all of God’s creatures, only the human creature is described by Scripture as having been created “in the image and likeness of God” [this verse; see also Genesis 5:1, 9:6]  As Rabbi Joshua ben Levi said, “A procession of angels pass before a human being wherever he or she goes, proclaiming – Make way for the image of God” Deuteronomy Rabbah, chap 4, sec 4; see also Midrash Tehillim, chap 17, sec. 8, 66a.  Rabbi Akiva taught that not only have human beings been created in the divine image but that divine grace allows them to become aware of it: “Beloved are human beings for they were created in the [divine] image. Even more beloved are they, because they can be aware of having been created in the [divine] image. As it is written, ‘For in the image of God, God made human beings’ Genesis 9:6Palestinian Talmud, chap 3, sec 14.  Jewish ethics focuses upon how human beings can live out their lives in the awareness of their having been created in the image and likeness of God. SHER20C 1

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 1:26 image

GEN59 Throughout classical Jewish literature, there is a variety of interpretations of the term “image of God” that employs ontological analogies. For example, Maimonides considers God to be an essentially intellectual being.  For him, the attribute that human beings share with God is the intellect, the rational faculty.  As Maimonides states in the opening chapter of his philosophical magnum opus, The Guide of the Perplexed, (bk. 1, chap 2), “It is on account of this intellectual apprehension that is said of man, ‘In the image of God, God created human beings'” [this verse]. Maimonides’ interpretation became commonplace in subsequent Jewish philosophical literature. [See, e.g., Altmann 1968, 254] For Maimonides, ethical behavior requires the employment of the intellect.  A function of the intellect is making distinction, and ethical behavior presumes the ability to make distinctions between truth and falsehood, good and bad actions. (bk 1. Chap 2, 24-25).  SHER20C 3

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 1:26 image

GEN60 [He is called …] one who loves the Omnipresent God, one who loves mankind.  Pirkei Avot VI:1  This is the ultimate reward that the Torah student seeks, and achieves: that from him too should emanate some of the Divine aura which is the Almighty’s presence.  So does he love mankind and receive its love in return; for his very being, his life and ways reveal the nature and immanence of the Heavenly Father.  He is a living channel for the sh’chinah, indeed beloved by all, as R. Isaac of Toledo comments, “because everyone learns from him every good thing, and no harm comes to anyone from him.”  For the very Torah he studies will teach him to “love our neighbor as yourself,” since all humans are created “in the image of God.” [this verse]. Since his study is lish’mah, for its own sake, he has no reason to hoard or withhold his knowledge; seeing others going blindly astray, he will gladly share his knowledge with them out of love, if they will listen.  SINAI3 269

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GENESIS — 1:26 image

GEN61 [A] framing Jewish attitude [that shapes economic life] is that human beings are created b’tzelem Elohim, in the image of God [this verse]. Martin Buber suggests that we encounter other individuals as created b’zelem Elohim, that we establish “I-Thou” relationships with them.  In doing so, we see beyond the extraneous and utilitarian aspects of the other person and connect deeply. By contrast, when we engage others for what we can get from them, they become objects in our eyes. This defines an I-It relationship. Buber asserts that most people cannot constantly sustain I-Thou attention. We move between I-Thou moments and I-It ways in which we engage the world. Jewish wisdom encourages us to stretch beyond the illusion of separation between self and others, and to safeguard the dignity and well-being of each person even when we are not able to sustain deep attention to their fundamental essence. The infinite worth of human beings means that they should not be reduced to being means to an end, like rowers in a slave galley. Each of us reflects the divine presence in the world so we must see each person we encounter – bus driver or salesperson, student or teacher, executive or janitor – as a person worthy of our recognition, attention, caring and commitment. This should shape every one of our encounters with others, as it should shape the rules and procedures that we use in our economic lives.  Identifying tzelem Elohim as the core Jewish value that it is may seem radical and utopian. However, it gives direction and depth to our efforts in many domains—spiritual as well as political and economic. TEUTSCHEO 9

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

RSS
12346891011121314151617181920Last
Back To Top