EXOD338 While the Tanakh assumes that all nations are expected to follow a God-based universal standard of ethical behavior, Israel's uniqueness is based on its exclusive relationship with God, its status as a "kingdom of priests" [this verse]. Israel's mission is to be a "light to the nations" (Isa 49:6), and both Isaiah and Micah envision that other nations will view Zion as the source of divine instruction, which eventually will lead to universal peace (Isa 2:2-5, Mic 4:1-3; Zech 8:21-22, 14:9). (By Elaine Adler Goodfriend, “Ethical Theory and Practice in the Hebrew Bible)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD331 [Continued from [[EXOD872]] Exodus 23:9 oppress SACKS xxx]. This is what Judaism's dual covenant represents. On the one hand we are human, and we share a set of basic obligations to one another by virtue of that fact. We are all in the image and likeness of God. We are all bound by the basic rules of justice and fairness. Every life is sacred. Violence and murder are assaults against the human condition. This is what Abraham meant when he explained to Avimelekh, king of Gerar, why he said that Sarah was his sister, not his wife: "I said to myself, 'there is surely no fear of God in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife'" (Gen. 20:11). Fear of God-identified as Elokim rather than Hashem -- is assumed in Genesis to be a basic, shared set of principles as to what morality requires, even between strangers. On the other hand, the covenant of Sinai is not addressed to humanity as a whole. It is addressed specifically to the Israelites in their role as "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" [this verse]. This is more demanding than the Noah covenant, both because the Israelites are expected to be exemplars and role models of the holy life, and because there are strong ties of kinship between them. They share a past, a set of memories, and a fate. They are like an extended family. Much of the social legislation, for example in Leviticus 25, uses the language of kinship: "When your brother becomes poor ....." There have been ages in which the primary group has been the tribe. The result was war. There have also been attempts to abolish groups altogether in favor of the universal. The classic example was the European Enlightenment. However, group identity returned in the 19th-century, in the form of the nation-state and race. The result of European nation-states was two world wars. The worship of race brought about the Holocaust. We cannot escape identity, and hence the tension between inter-group and out-group. The only solution known to me that addresses this issue clearly and in a principled way is that of the Torah with its two covenants, one respecting our duties to humanity as a whole, the other our duties to our fellow members of the community of fate and faith. This unusual duality represents the two great features of the moral life: the universality of justice and the particularity of love. [On this, see Jonathan Sacks, Not in God's Name (New York: Schocken, 2015), and Avishai Margalit, The Ethics of Memory (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002)].

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD333 Kindness is the equivalent of care, which is the opposite of harm. Justice and righteousness are specific forms of fairness. In other words, the prophetic virtues are close to those that prevail today in the liberal democracies of the West. That is a measure of the impact of the Hebrew Bible on the West ... The point is that kindness and fairness are about relationships between individuals. Until Sinai, the Israelites were just individuals, albeit part of the same extended family that had undergone Exodus and exile together. After the Revelation at Mount Sinai the Israelites were a covenanted people. They had a sovereign: God. They had a written constitution: the Torah. They had agreed to become "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" [this verse]. Yet at the Golden Calf they showed that they had not yet understood what it is to be a nation. They were a mob. The Torah says, "Moses saw that the people were running wild and that Aaron had let them get out of control and so become a laughing stock to their enemies" (Exodus 32:25). That was the crisis to which the Sanctuary and the priesthood were the answer. They turned Jews into a nation.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD337 To be sure, in the Torah itself we see the Israelites as a recalcitrant, obstinate people complaining and rebelling against God. Yet the prophets in retrospect saw things differently. The wilderness was a kind of yihud, an alone-togetherness, in which the people and God bonded in love. Most instructive in this context is the work of anthropologist Arnold van Gennep, who focused attention on the importance of rItes of passage. [The Rites of Passage (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1960)]. Societies develop rituals to mark the transition from one state to the next-from childhood to adulthood, for example, or from being single to being married-and they involve three stages. The first is separation, a symbolic break with the past. The last is incorporation, re-entering society with a new identity. Between the two comes the crucial stage of transition when, having cast off one identity but not yet donned another, you are remade, reborn, refashioned. Van Gennep used the term liminal, from the Latin word for "threshold," to describe this transitional state when you are in a kind of no-mans-land between the old and the new. That is what the wilderness signifies for Israel: liminal space between slavery and freedom, past and future, exile and return, Egypt and the Promised Land. The desert was the space that made transition and transformation possible. There, in no-mans-land, the Israelites, alone with God and with one another, could cast off one identity and assume another. There they could be reborn, no longer slaves to Pharaoh, instead servants of God, summoned to become "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" [this verse].

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD339 Hillel said: Do not separate yourself from the community… Pirkei Avot, Perek II, mishnah 5. The community, the group living together holds a most important place in Judaism. To the group was given the Torah, and it is of the group, with its interrelations and collective activity, that the Almighty has willed to make "the kingdom of cohanim (priests) [this verse]. Indeed, the individual, in fulfilling his personal religious obligations, is often dependent on the community and its institutions. There is much in Torah that you cannot observe in isolation. For Hillel, the authentic, historic community in Jewry is even more. It is an implicit, immutable authority on normative Jewish law. Once a question arose: When the day before Passover occurred on the Sabbath, and people came to sacrifice the pascal lamb, were they allowed to carry their slaughtering knives to the Temple area? No one knew, and Hillel himself could not remember how his teachers had ruled. But he advised, "Let the people Israel (do as they are accustomed]. If they are not prophets, they are the children, the descendants of prophets." Once he saw what the people did, he remembered what he had been taught (T.B. Pesahim 66a). In an age when religious observance was a living force among the people, current practice, what people simply did or didn't do, could be relied on as a faithful, accurate reflection of the tradition.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD340 Priesthood of Israel's One God was thrown open to all that walk in His ways and who have made holiness their aim in life. This priesthood, attainable by all who so willed it, is to be illustrated and realized by Israel as "the Kingdom of priests and the holy nation" [this verse]. As "a holy nation", Israel's public and private life was one continuous consecration. Justice, truthfulness, solicitude for the weak, obedience and reverence for those in authority, regard for the rights of others, a forgiving and a candid spirit, aflame with love for men and consideration for beast, charity and humility--these are to be some of the characteristics flowering forth from the Jewish life dedicated to God.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD341 When it comes to Jewish thought, there is no one book that encompasses the correct Jewish view on any issue. Nor should there be. Unlike Jewish law, i.e., Jewish actions, when it was necessary to come to a consensus in order to form a generally unified Jewish practice, Jewish thought always permitted various viewpoints. This is even alluded to in the Torah itself. The Torah, on two separate occasions, tells us that when the Jewish people originally accepted the Torah and said, "We will do it." [This verse] This acceptance of practicing the Torah was said by the Jews in unison, as a total unified people. But a few verses later, when the acceptance by the Jewish people of the Torah practice and its ideas is recorded as, "We will do it and we will understand it," there the unity and the words "Yachdov"-"unified" and "Kol Echad"-"one voice," are conspicuously missing. From the very beginning, Jews understood that there could not be unanimity when it comes to Jewish thought. There is no one "right" idea or monolithic value concerning Jewish beliefs and outlook on life. Thus, referring to the joy gained from understanding of Jewish or Torah life, King Solomon wrote that the paths of Torah are pleasant, not the one singular path, but paths in plural, because there are many ways to understand the Torah in Judaism properly and legitimately. Maimonides makes the same point in his Mishna commentary (on Sanhedrin 10:3). He states that unlike Jewish law, which necessarily must come to one conclusion and follow one practice, when it comes to Jewish thought, one need not rule like any one of the various opinions. Judaism makes room for more than one attitude within the structure of traditional Judaism. Within the framework of Jewish tradition, there can be more than one proper path when it comes to philosophical ideas, ethics, and beliefs.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD342 Rules Regarding an Envoy. Rashi writes: "The Torah teaches us derech eretz--do not think that if the one who sent you knows of your deeds, you are no longer obligated to inform him [of the completion of your assignment]. This is the meaning of the verse, '… and Moshe relayed the people's word to Hashem" [this verse]. This obligation certainly applies if the person who sent the envoy does not know if the assignment was completed according to his instructions. Thus, in order to avoid causing undue worry to the person who appointed him, derech eretz would require the envoy to contact him.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD343 When someone sends us on a mission, we should report back afterward. Rashi cites the Mechilta: "Why was it necessary for Moshe to report back to God, the omniscient? Because the Torah comes to teach you derech eretz (proper behavior) from Moshe; Moshe did not say: 'Since He who sent me knows anyhow, I do not need to report.'" Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv cited this verse in a letter he wrote to someone who had neglected to respond to a letter that he had previously written him, and added: "We must learn derech eretz from Moshe and remember to report back to someone who sends us on an errand or mission." (Chochmah Umussar, vol. 1, p. 45).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD344 The Torah hereby teaches us derech eretz [proper deportment], that one should return an answer to his sender; for Moses said: Even though He knows, I shall return an answer (Mechilta).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT