"The Torah, The Constitution, and the 4th of July
Rabbi Joshua Levine Grater
Spiritual leader, Pasadena Jewish Temple and Center
Huffington Post | July 2, 2011
(Michael Hoffman’s analysis follows this essay)
(Michael Hoffman’s analysis follows this essay)
There is a great deal of talk these days about the Constitution, about liberty and American values. In a cover story this week in Time, editor Richard Stengel asks if the Constitution still matters. Of course it does, but how we interpret it, how we try to understand what the framers meant, and how we apply it today is presenting us greater challenges than perhaps it did in the past.
Stengel writes, "As a counterpoint to the rise of constitutional originalists (those who believe the document should be interpreted only as the drafters understood it), liberal scholars analyze the text just as closely to find the elasticity they believe the framers intended.
Everywhere, there seems to be a debate about the scope and meaning and message of the Constitution. This is a healthy thing. Even the framers would agree on that." (ibid.)
On this July 4th weekend, as we celebrate our country and all of the amazing contributions it has added to the world, including the ideals and values of the Declaration and the Constitution, I wanted to share some thoughts about how this struggle to understand the meaning of an original document, formulated in a different time, in a different era, by very different people, is a very Jewish idea, one that we in fact gave to the world thousands of years before 1776.
We don't have a constitution, but we do have a Torah. And, like the debate we are having today in regard to understanding what the framers meant when they crafted the Constitution, Jews have been arguing about the original intent of the Torah pretty much since...well, since the Torah itself! There are laws, statutes and directives in the Torah that have been subject to debate, discussion and overruling, starting with the daughters of Tzelofchad, which we will read about in a few weeks, who question the Torah's earlier ruling about inheritance only being for sons, and Moses inquires of God and the rule gets altered.
There are verses in the Torah that were explained away by the rabbis of the Talmud as either not applying any longer, never applying or they get made so complex to enact that they eventually fall away.
What the Jewish tradition has that almost no other religious tradition shares, and which a great deal of modern jurisprudence is based on, is the Talmud and all the subsequent later codes, all of which work to explain the meaning of the original document, the Torah, and what it's framer (or framers depending on your view) meant. The Torah condones the death penalty while the Talmud pretty much outlaws it. The Torah tells us to take our malcontent children to the gates of the city and if they can't be reformed by the elders, to stone them to death. The Talmud tells us that never happened and never should happen. Sorry!
And, in the reverse, the Torah is pretty clear about what keeping kosher should look like, and it is pretty simple, while the rabbis of the Talmud and later codes expanded the laws and made them quite complex. We have a long history of interpreting our Torah, redefining its meaning, and using very advanced and creative hermeneutical tools to either alter, or in some cases, downright change, what the original meaning seems to have been. We have the principle of PARDES, which is a rabbinic literary invention, whereby each word of the Torah has four levels of interpretation: the literal meaning, peshat, a more subtle or hinting reading, remez, a creative commentary, drash, and a totally hidden or mysterious meaning, sod. Through this technique, and many others, commentators, most famously Rashi, 11th century in France, have sometimes completely changed the text from what it literally says. Our tradition is incredibly fluid and flexible and always has been.
Today, both in American life and in our Jewish life, we are facing challenges from those that want to read both of our foundational texts, the Constitution and the Torah, in a literalist manner. I will leave the legal aspects of the Constitution and how to understand it to the lawyers and experts, but from what I have read and studied, the framers seemed to want a document that would grow and develop in meaning based on the growth and innovation of the new country they were founding. As Stengel writes in his Time article, "There have been few conflicts in American history greater than the internal debates the framers had about the Constitution. For better or for worse -- and I would argue that it is for better -- the Constitution allows and even encourages deep arguments about the most basic democratic issues." The Torah, I would argue, has a similar make-up, namely that we have been arguing about, discussing, and interpreting the meaning of the text for thousands of years. And, we know that the times were different for the framers of the Constitution as they were for the authors of the Torah. Cultures were different, practices were different, perhaps we might even say that morals were different.
The framers of the Constitution, while giving us freedom of religion and speech, also thought blacks were 3/5's of a human and slavery was okay. The Torah also thinks that slavery is okay, even as it seeks to give rights to slaves that never existed. And, in interpreting text for today, we are called upon to use our own minds, hearts and experiences to understand and apply meaning.
Just as the Constitution didn't know from healthcare, military drones, the internet or globalized commerce, and so lawyers and judges must figure out how to legislate on these matters based on what they think the intent of the framers was, along with later precedent and case law, so too the Torah didn't know from many of the cultural and religious issues facing us today in modern American life: from end of life decisions that involve modern medicine to using technology to bring Shabbat services to homebound seniors. And, because it is so timely with New York's landmark marriage equality law passed just last week, I believe that the Torah verse from Leviticus that has been used for generations to deny gays and lesbians their equal rights in our tradition, must be finally read away with the same Talmudic logic and thinking that was used to read away killing our wayward children. We have changed, evolved, moved as a society and culture, even if some don't agree.
Remember, plenty of people thought slavery was still okay, and the Civil War didn't finish the job when it comes to racial discrimination. As Judge Hand told us, we must sometimes trust our hearts and not our texts.
However, another timely issue that fascinates me, and directly relates to this discussion is that of circumcision. While this merits an entire sermon, I want to end with this thought: Why is it that this ritual, which appears in Genesis, is really, for the most part, one of the only so-called "primitive" rituals from the time of the Bible that we still follow and practice without any real challenge or dispute. Sure there are fringe groups of Jews that have always been against brit milah, but 99% of Jews, religious and secular, follow this ancient ritual without question. Sure, many moms have trepidation, but they still do it. We have never stopped doing it and today, in the face of ridiculous legal challenges, which have thankfully been abandoned in Santa Monica but continue in San Francisco, Jews of all stripes, along with Muslims and religious freedom advocates, are fighting for our right to continue this ancient practice, even as we don't do most of the ancient Biblical practices any longer. Why is that? Fascinating question.
And so, as we celebrate this 4th of July, let us be grateful that we live in one of the freest countries ever to exist, yet we are not perfect. The Constitution must never be allowed to become an idol, just as the Torah must never be allowed to become an idol.
One midrash teaches that Moses shattered the first tablets as a reminder of that notion. We must always do battle between fear and liberty, between power and freedom. That is the great gift, and great challenge, of being human. Thomas Jefferson said it best, when he wrote, "All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate which would be oppression." That is our great challenge, as Americans and as Jews. May we ponder deeply on this, our nation's birthday. Shabbat shalom and God bless America.
(End quote from Rabbi Grater; emphasis supplied).
Michael Hoffman’s analysis of Rabbi Grater’s Essay
First let’s look at how Rabbi Grater employs his terms: "There are verses in the Torah that were explained away by the rabbis of the Talmud as either not applying any longer, never applying or they get made so complex to enact that they eventually fall away.”
In Orthodox Judaism the Talmud and the Torah (first five books of the Old Testament = Pentateuch) are conflated. Both are referred to as Torah. Rabbi Grater ignores the conflation, perhaps not wanting to reveal that the Talmud is held in at least equal esteem (actually in greater esteem) than the Old Testament. Next we should realize that Grater’s writing represents the Revelation of the Method. He openly admits that the Talmud tampers with the Word of God as found in the Bible.
The rabbi further states: "The Torah condones the death penalty while the Talmud pretty much outlaws it. The Torah tells us to take our malcontent children to the gates of the city and if they can't be reformed by the elders, to stone them to death. The Talmud tells us that never happened and never should happen.”
This appears like a liberal’s dream. All the “bad parts” of the Bible have been reformed by the Talmudic rabbis. First let’s dispense with a lie: the Talmud does not forbid the death penalty for a malefactor classified as a rodef (pursuer) or a moser (informant). Are these rare categories which are seldom invoked and sparsely populated? Not really. The entire population of Palestine is viewed as rodef, all subject to the death penalty when “Israel” goes to war as it did in Gaza 2008-2009. They can and are killed in times when “Israel’ is not at war, as well.
The Old Testament was in some respects a harsh law code. Who was it that actually reformed it? Jesus Christ.
Now comes an important admission: “...the Torah is pretty clear about what keeping kosher should look like, and it is pretty simple, while the rabbis of the Talmud and later codes expanded the laws and made them quite complex. We have a long history of interpreting our Torah, redefining its meaning, and using very advanced and creative hermeneutical tools to either alter, or in some cases, downright change, what the original meaning seems to have been. We have the principle of PARDES, which is a rabbinic literary invention, whereby each word of the Torah has four levels of interpretation: the literal meaning, peshat, a more subtle or hinting reading, remez, a creative commentary, drash, and a totally hidden or mysterious meaning, sod. Through this technique, and many others, commentators, most famously Rashi, 11th century in France, have sometimes completely changed the text from what it literally says.”
Rabbi Grater is admitting they make this stuff up, which results in a fantasy religion that pretends to be predicated on Biblical law and is in practice founded on man-made fiat. He reveals that the rabbis “completely change the text” of the Bible. How true! As Christ said, they nullify the Word of God. They change the original meaning, and this methodology has a parallel with those who get “creative” with the U.S. Constitution. Often times these U.S. Constitution nullifiers are inspired by Talmudic Judaism's Bible nullifiers and trained at law seminars conducted by rabbis.
Rabbi Grater writes, “...the Torah didn't know from many of the cultural and religious issues facing us today in modern American life: from end of life decisions that involve modern medicine to using technology to bring Shabbat services to homebound seniors.”
Here we see the inherently anti-Biblical orientation of Judaism. I have documented numerous cases wherein the rabbis despise and attack the Bible. They believe they are superior to God and must correct His “mistakes" by the intervention of their elevated brain power and great “wisdom.”
Hence, God, as reflected in His Word (“the Torah”) didn’t foresee the issues that would face us in the modern world and the Bible does not have answers to those questions. Man must supply them. How? Through nullification:
"And, because it is so timely with New York's landmark marriage equality law passed just last week, I believe that the Torah verse from Leviticus that has been used for generations to deny gays and lesbians their equal rights in our tradition, must be finally read away with the same Talmudic logic and thinking that was used to read away killing our wayward children.”
Orthodox Judaism “kills” its wayward children spiritually, by laying burdens on them impossible to bear— burdens which steal their humanity through the imposition of religious fanatical, anti-life strictures and regulations. Rabbi Grater pretends that Judaism frees people; actually Orthodox Judaism enslaves them. It regulates human life down to how you should tie your shoes and what side of the bed you should sleep on.
We don’t need the Talmud to stop the stoning of children. Jesus Christ declared that the Kingdom of God is like the little child.
Notice the rabbi’s twisted Talmudic logic, so unlike that of Jesus: we must permit homosexual marriage because we have banned the killing of children. How many children will be killed spiritually by being legally adopted and raised by a homosexual couple?
Rabbi Grater: "The Constitution must never be allowed to become an idol, just as the Torah must never be allowed to become an idol.”
The rabbi is making an apples and oranges comparison: the Constitution and the Torah. The Constitution was made by man. Though we respect it, we must not make such a human document into a divine liturgy. On the other hand, God wrote the Torah. It is His Word. An idol is a false god. Is the Bible a false god? Is God’s Word false? In many cases the Talmud and the rabbis answer in the affirmative. God’s Word says Noah was righteous. The Talmud and the Midrash say he was a drunk who was sodomized on board Noah’s Ark. There are hundreds of other examples of Bible-denying in Judaism. They worship themselves and their own words. God and His Word “should not become an idol”!
Rabbi Grater: "Thomas Jefferson said it best, when he wrote, 'All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate which would be oppression.”
Grater forgot to mention that Thomas Jefferson also said, "Ethics were so little understood among the Jews, that in their whole compilation called the Talmud, there is only one treatise on moral subjects. Their books of morals chiefly consisted in a minute enumeration of duties...What a wretched depravity of sentiment and manners must have prevailed, before such corrupt maxims could have obtained credit...It was the reformation of this ‘wretched depravity’ of morals which Jesus undertook.”
[Michael Hoffman is at work on a revised, updated paperback edition of his book, “Judaism Discovered.” Donations toward its publication are gratefully accepted]
***
0 comments:
Post a Comment