On the Blindness of Justice and Morality

Parshat Shoftim

by Rabbi Avi Billet

On July 25, Brett Stevens (not to be confused with Bret Stephens) wrote on amerika.org that the Israel-Hamas conflict shows the true nature of liberalism. 

 Some of his points suggested that liberalism focuses on appearance and nothing more, arguing for the moral high ground. However, he contends, that supporting the weaker party in a struggle does not automatically translate to being in that moral high ground. Supporting a militarily weaker group whose ideology is irrational, destructive, and murder-focused does not bode well for those who claim morals drive them.

 In Stevens’ view, “Conservatism thinks about results, so it picks the action which will bring best results. Liberals think about appearances, and so choose whatever option makes them look good, and then ignore the consequences [until after] disaster unfolds.”

 His conclusion: “[W]e have people out of their heads on the drug of artificially boosted self-esteem that liberalism provides, cheering for the genocide of the group that the last world war was fought in part to protect.”

 Political ideologies aside, in light of the opening of our parsha, Mr. Stevens couldn’t be more correct. The Torah tells us, “Do not bend justice and do not give special consideration [to anyone]. Do not take bribes, since bribery makes the wise blind and perverts the words of the righteous.” (16:19) With reference to inter-human dealings, the Torah, from which only truth emerges, couldn’t come up with a truer insight into human nature.

 It’s not that the liberal media (i.e. The New York Times) takes bribes. Nor is it the case that all of the protestors in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Boston, and all over Europe are taking bribes.

 But they have been made blind because, as Dennis Prager has put it, were the two sides of the conflict described as neutral parties – group A and group B – every sensible person in the world would side with the group that describes Israel’s perspective. However, since one of these groups is called “Israel,” a word which triggers the most irrational form of judgment, it is automatically painted as the guilty party by bigots and anti-Semites who refuse to acknowledge their bigotry and anti-Semitic natures. We have all seen videos of protests, with horrific small-scale or larger-scale violence, profanity, despicable name-calling (“Nazis,” “baby killers”) aimed at those who present Israel’s rights to live peacefully, and to defend itself when attacked by rockets and terrorists (excuse me, “freedom fighters.”)

 Before he was President, John Adams defended the British soldiers who had fired on civilians at the so-called “Boston Massacre.” Adams won the case. Did it matter that the soldiers were trained fighters, better armed, and in a place where some (ignorants) might have called them “occupiers?” No! Because justice is supposed to be blind. And the judges who judge cannot be blinded by greed. The soldiers in that case had been provoked and were fearful for their lives. They fired in self-defense. And just because someone dies in a shooting does not mean the dead was the innocent party.

Even President Obama, whose support for Israel is suspect, declared years ago that "If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I'm going to do everything in my power to stop that. And I would expect Israelis to do the same thing." I think he has less of a problem with Israeli shooting down missiles (which is why he supports Iron Dome), and much more of a problem with Israel actually attacking the source of the missiles. Stop the rockets once they’re mid-air, yes. But don't allow them to be shot from the ground, because if you attack the rocket-launcher, people will die. Sigh.

 Targum Yonatan explains what bribes do to judges: “It causes utter stupidity to happen upon them.” It doesn’t matter if the person is judging correctly in the case, or judging incorrectly. The judge who takes a bribe becomes blind to realities and justifies things that are unjustifiable.

 And so it is with those who judge with pre-conceived notions. Those who believe that Jews whose “genocide the last world war was fought to prevent” (as Stevens put it - though that was really an outcome and not purpose for fighting - FDR was no tzaddik -) are the bad guys are buying into the oldest bribe in the world, the worst stereotype to plague the history of humanity, that the evils of the world are the fault of the Jews.

 The Ro”sh on this verse puts it rather succinctly: “Bribery (however defined) causes the judge to become evil,” for not seeing the case for the sides it truly presents. When it comes to defense and preservation of self, John Adams got it right. If the soldiers who were threatened and who caused the deaths of “civilians” in self-defense could be acquitted, a Jewish State which defends itself (while suffering deaths of civilians, including children) and causes the unfortunate death of civilians in the process is completely in the right.

 Those who see it otherwise, don’t understand what Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple, had to say in his recent visit to Israel. “Had a good time visiting Jerusalem and Gaza Strip today. If Israel did not react, the rockets would continue anyway. If Hamas halted rockets, Israel would not attack them. Peace.”

 When the world ceases to be morally blind (instead of taking the liberal “moral highground), and will judge a case based on merits without pre-conceived notions, maybe there will be Peace indeed.

Too Strict About Shabbos?

Ki Seesaw

by Rabbi Avi Billet

The Jewish movements that changed the face of Jewry in the 19th and 20th centuries raised serious concerns about the nature of the Torah and how it stands the test of time. Many of the mitzvot of the Torah, for example, are not applicable in our day and age – highlighted by the lack of a Temple in Jerusalem.

Some mitzvot are simply not observed – the mitzvah of the eved ivri (Jewish indentured servant), amah ivriya (Jewess maidservant), yibum (levirate marriage), for example – because our society has evolved in such a way that these are quite strange.

We also have a difficult time swallowing the nature of the mitzvah to wipe out Amalek. While there are enemies of the Jewish people who exhibit Amalek-like qualities, this does not make them Amalekites. As such, I, for one, am glad that we cannot identify true Amalekites and are not subject to the mitzvah of destroying them.

There is a passage in Ki Tisa which is difficult to explain to the modern Jew, and to a world that shies away from the notion that we have the right to administer a capital punishment. To be sure, the Torah makes capital punishment very difficult to administer. The Torah also did not create a prison system. Punishment was carried out immediately, to serve as a deterrent, and was practiced at minimum expense, quickly, with no attention paid to a concern of "causing undue pain and suffering." It was done as humanely as possible – very forward thinking for its time

While capital punishment is much easier to understand when someone has committed murder, how do we understand it in the context of – "Six days you shall work, the seventh day is the Sabbath – it is holy to God. Whoever does 'melakha' on this day will be put to death" (Shmot 31:15)?

The Torah even describes a case when an individual who gathered wood on the Sabbath was put to death. (Bamidbar 15:32-36)

Of course, this is not something we pay any attention to now – in the sense that we would never ever put someone who does "melakha" on the Sabbath to death. We might, however, explain – as we do for all laws in the Torah that carry a death punishment in their depiction (i.e. hitting or cursing one's parents (see Shmot 21:15,17)), that these are very serious offenses, not to be taken lightly.

Beyond that, however, I think it is important to understand two points: where the Torah is coming from in advancing this rule, and why it is not our place to judge the Torah.

I would suggest that the Sabbath, being one of the "Ten Commandments" and being the model of God's rest from the work of Creation, is our best example of how we can imitate our Father in Heaven. He created for six days, and rested on the seventh. In this sense, neglecting the Sabbath serves as a denial of His role in creating the universe. A Jewish person who snubs God's existence in this way is like a person who smugly rebels against a king in his own court, at the king's celebration of his kingdom. [I understand people do not feel this way – but this is a very simple argument of where the Torah may be coming from.]

I don't feel we can judge the Torah as being immoral for suggesting a capital punishment for this offense, because morality is defined differently in every generation. This point was articulated brilliantly by Rabbi Norman Lamm in a sermon he delivered on March 21, 1970, entitled "In Defense of Samuel."

Addressing Shmuel the Prophet's right to kill Agag, king of Amalek in Samuel I 15:33, Rabbi Lamm suggested there are absolute moral principles, but there are also "moral insights that develop slowly in the history of the human family as a result of various individual insights, until by consensus…they are recognized as binding moral judgments."

In his homiletical elaboration, he raises historical developments of the practices of polygamy and slavery of old, as well as the draft board (this was during the Vietnam War) and the penal system of our society today, the former two having been defined in more modern times as being morally reprehensible, and the latter two are subject to scrutiny in our evolving society. Are we to therefore judge great otherwise moral people of ages past for having practiced these activities in a time and place when our contemporary moral sensitivity did not yet exist, and when the common consensus was that these activities were moral?

"Quite possibly, flogging a man once and for all and letting him free thereafter is more humane than taking 15 of the best years of his life and throwing him into jail with other criminals, there only to compound his injury by making it permanent."

I do a lot of work, and participate in many education opportunities that cater to non-observant Jews. Many people simply do not have the education, the ability, the know-how, or the wherewithal to change old habits, or to commit to the Sabbath the way many of us are committed.

This does not take away from their commitment to being Jewish, or their desire to represent the Jewish people and to take the proverbial bullet for our People.

I hope that all Jews can engage themselves in a step by step process – even if it is a many-years-long process – to reconnect with the Sabbath. Start with Friday night, turn off the phone and computer, light the candles, enjoy a meal and relax. You may extend your "vacation" into Saturday over time, and I am sure your life will be enriched from it.

Enjoy the Sabbath. Enjoy a taste of the World to Come.