43
ImagInIng the JewIsh Future
A second way is to invite our “thinned-
up” Jews – which is all of us, I think,
at one time or another – to think
deeply about the term and concept
of
mitzvah
.
Mitzvah
,
of course,
means commandment. Colloquially,
it’s undergone a very interesting
transformation of its own. It has been
and is used to mean “good deed” or
whatever seems like a nice, Jewish
thing to do.
It may also interest you to know that
in the third to fifth centuries in the
land of Israel, the rabbis of the land
of Israel used the word
mitzvah
as a
synonym for charity. It meant charity.
And it wasn’t only the rabbis, by the
way. Their contemporaneous Christian
neighbors also used a Semitic cognate
word for
mitzvah
that meant charity.
We see this usage in the rabbinic
literature of the land of Israel. The
poor are portrayed as saying, “Give
me a
mitzvah
,”
meaning “give me
charity.” People are described as
marei
mitzvata
,
the masters of the
mitzvah
,
meaning “masters” of charity. It’s
almost as if the rabbis that used this
term wanted to say that charity was
the mitzvah
,
the quintessential
mitzvah
.
But what’s interesting and important
to note is that, ultimately, the word
tzedakah
predominates as the term for
charity in classical rabbinic literature.
The rabbis were well aware that the
term
mitzvah
covers a full range of
Jewish rituals: Shabbat, holidays,
kashrut
–
the entire range of Jewish
practices. By elevating the term
tzedakah
over
mitzvah
as their primary
word for charity, the rabbis, as it were,
put charity in its place. It is indeed a
major
mitzvah
,
a significant
mitzvah
.
There are hundreds and hundreds
of rabbinic traditions that extol the
religious merit of
tzedakah
.
But at the
end of the day, it is one
mitzvah
among
the many
mitzvot
.
The notion then, that charity for the
poor is called “
mitzvah
”
and is
the
quintessential
mitzvah
does not survive
the passage of time. In fact, the later
Babylonian Talmud, a product of the
seventh century, doesn’t know at all
of
mitzvah
as a word that can mean
charity.
Tzedakah
is
the
term for
charity in the Babylonian Talmud.
The rabbis signal this tendency to
view charity as one
mitzvah
among the
mitzvot
in yet another way. As a rule,
one is not permitted to discuss business
on Shabbat. There is an exception,
however, when it comes to charity.
On Shabbat, we are permitted to
discuss how much charity we will
give
after
Shabbat. That’s as far as the
exception goes. We’re not allowed to
touch money on Shabbat, and charity
is no exception. We’re not allowed
to put our hand in our pocket on
Shabbat to pull out the money to give
as charity. Again, charity is significant,
it’s holy, it’s a divine imperative, and
it earns an exemption from the “no
talking business on Shabbat” law. But
rabbinic law does not allow the giving
of charity to trump the observance of
Shabbat, which ranks extremely high
in Jewish tradition.
So, thus far, we have these two
ways through which we can thicken
ourselves up, thicken up this “thinned-
up” Judaism: study, and reflecting on
mitzvah
.
The bottom line is that social
responsibility is a thread, a scarlet
thread, a very important thread, but
it’s
one
thread in the larger tapestry
which is Judaism.
Then there’s a second type of Jew,
which is me and, I suspect, some of
you. This is the Jew who says, “I have
a good, strong moral compass.” And
these Jews may well be right, by the
way. This Jew says: “I have a good
moral compass, I’m an ethical person,
I have excellent principles. What I
believe just
has to be
what Judaism
teaches.” This is the Jew that I call the
“
projection Jew:” the Jew who projects
her own very strong, moral, and ethical
compass onto Judaism.
At an extreme you can get a situation
where a Jew may say, “I’m a Democrat.
I’m a Republican. I’m a socialist.
I’m a libertarian. I’m a liberal. I’m
a conservative.” These philosophies
or perspectives all have points to
commend them. We all want to do the
right thing by society, and by the most
vulnerable among us. We all have the
right intentions, and try to come up
with the best ideas. This Jew may go
on to say: “I’m surrounded by good
people. My ideology – Democrat,
Republican, etc. –
must
therefore be
what Judaism teaches. We’re good
people trying to do good!” And, in
fact, Jews
are
Democrats, Republicans,
socialists, Libertarians, liberals, and
conservatives – but Judaism is not.
Judaism was historically not apolitical,
but it is not completely consonant with
any of our current political perspectives
and ideologies. Judaism should not be
politicized. Judaism does not teach us
to vote for this or that candidate, or to
support this or that piece of legislation.
This does not mean that the use of
Jewish texts and traditions has no place
in these conversations. But when we
think back to what we said about
study a few moments ago, we must
remember that the use of Jewish texts
and traditions has to take in the full
range of what Jewish tradition has to
say about an issue – whether I find its
perspectives congenial or not.
Study
,
yes;
prooftexting
positions I already
hold, no.