|
April 29, 2011 04:30:59
Posted By The Stash
|
|
This fascinating parasha is filled with verses that form the foundation of Jewish daily life. They constantly insist that the commandments should be followed because they will make people more “Godlike”—what the Catholic philosophers called “imitatio Dei”. But that explanation appears insufficient to explain the famous verse: “A person should fear their mother and father, and keep My Sabbaths, I am the Lord.” This is a verse which will reward our close analysis. To begin, this verse—as our Sages observed—is a parallel of “Honor your father and your mother”. Read in tandem it is clear that the Torah doesn’t discriminate between parents by gender. Both mother and father are partners in the raising and nurturing of a child. But this verse has an even broader scope than this apparently cursory parallel to the Ten Commandments. Recall if you will that tradition divides these commandments in two: the first five are between God and humans (bein adam l’makom) and the next five are interpersonal (bein adam l’chavero). This verse links the two, somehow equating the observance of “my Sabbaths” (shabtotai) with “fear for parents”. But what does the verse seek to teach through this connection? Rashi cites the Talmud in Baba Metzia to argue that even if a parent orders you to violate the Sabbath, you may not listen—and this is not a contradiction of “honoring parents”—because the verse says “I am the Lord YOUR (in the plural) God.” Thus, both parents and children are equally duty bound to serve God; parents cannot tell their children that the “divinely mandated” commandment of honoring parents allows the commission of acts that dishonor the name of God in the world. This idea has modern applications. One of the most striking occurred immediately after the Second World War when the Allied powers drafted principles of international law at the Nuremberg Tribunal. Article IV states: “the fact that a person acted pursuant to an order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him of responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible for him.” (my emphasis) What exactly is “moral choice”? Some of its underpinnings are in the Talmudic interpretation of our verse: if a person claims their parent ordered them to break the Sabbath, they are told that a Greater Power exists to repudiate their reliance on parental authority. While keeping the Sabbath is not a universal moral imperative, certainly the Noahide commands to desist from murder, rape, robbery, and adultery are. And this is the essence of “holiness” which is the subject of our parasha. For Jews, a great deal of holiness is found in the particularism of mitzva observance. But many of the mitzvoth allude to a broader scope and perspective. There is a higher law that prohibits humans from hiding behind legal fictions to commit acts of genocide, terrorize their people, and intimidate them through all manner of brazen acts. Whether that legal fiction bears the name of a dictator or a god is totally irrelevant—so long as a moral alternative was in fact possible—these acts are illegal. Certainly we can legitimately argue over what constitutes the possibilities of moral choice. Certainly not every perpetrator is equally guilty. Indeed, holding an entire nation culpable en masse for genocidal acts has proven to be wrongheaded zealotry. But, we must not allow these reasonable issues to cloud over the one key issue: there is an absolute morality in this world, and violaters of the core Noahide principles must be consequenced by all civilized nations. Using sacredness to sanction genocide removes the holiness from our world and makes the wait for the Messiah even longer. |