The Importance of a Just Society
And it was on the following day and Moshe sat to judge the nation. And the nation stood by Moshe from the morning until the evening. (Shemot 18:13)
Moshe
was the leader of Bnai Yisrael. He
cared for the people’s material and spiritual well-being. Among his various tasks, he served as
judge. Each day, he devoted time to
resolving the various disputes that inevitably arose among individuals. The pasuk
indicates that, at least on occasion, this required the entire day. Rashi comments, that according to the Talmud
in Tractate Megilah, the pasuk alludes
to an important lesson. The Talmud
interprets the pasuk
homiletically. Moshe did not actually
devote the entire day to judging the people. The intent of the pasuk
is to communicate the importance of this function. One who judges justly – even for an hour – is equated to a
scholar absorbed the entire day in the study of Torah. Furthermore, the righteous judge is
considered a partner with Hashem in the creation of the universe.[1] One can easily appreciate that a judge plays
an essential role in sustaining a just society. However, describing a judge as Hashem’s partner in creation seems
exaggerated.
The
meaning of this lesson can be understood through an insightful comment of
Rabbaynu Yonah. Rabbaynu Yonah begins
by noting an apparent contradiction in Pirke Avot. Shimon HaTzadik teaches that the world is supported upon three
pillars. These are Torah study, service
to Hashem and acts of kindness.[2] Raban Shimon ben Gamliel asserts that the
world exists by virtue of justice, truth, and peace.[3] It seems that these two scholars are
involved in a dispute regarding which practices and behaviors are most
important. Rabbaynu Yonah explains that,
in reality, these scholars are not contradicting one another and do not
disagree. They are addressing two
different issues. Humanity was created
with a purpose and mission. What is
this mission? This is the issue that
Shimon HaTzadik is addressing. He
explains that we are charged with the responsibility to seek the truth, serve
the Creator, and act with kindness towards His other creations. However, in order for humanity to achieve
its goals, a social infrastructure is essential. The advancement of humanity requires a coordinated effort; our
goals are unattainable unless we can work together. If this social infrastructure does not exist and humanity cannot
pursue its mission, then the creation of humanity loses its meaning. Raban Shimon ben Gamliel is identifying
those elements that are essential to creating this social infrastructure. A cohesive, functioning society requires
must uphold justice; its members must act truthfully towards each other and goodwill
must exist among its members. A society
lacking any one of these elements is doomed.
In
short, these two Sages do not argue.
Shimon HaTzadik is defining the purpose of humanity and its
mission. The achievement of this
purpose requires a functioning society.
Raban Shimon ben Gamliel is outlining the fundamental elements of a
healthy society.[4]
Rabbaynu
Yonah’s insight explains the teaching of our Sages quoted by Rashi. An equitable judge establishes justice
within society. He helps create the
society necessary for humanity to pursue its mission. The judge works towards assuring that creation has meaning and
purpose. In this sense, the judge is a
partner in creation.
And Moshe went forth from the nation to greet the L-rd from the encampment. And they stood at the foot of the mountain. (Shemot 19:17)
The pasuk describes Bnai Yisrael as standing
at the foot of Sinai. However, the
Talmud comments that the nation stood under the mountain. Hashem uprooted Sinai
and held it above Bnai Yisrael. He told
the people that if they would not accept the Torah, they would be buried under
the mountain.[5] If the comments of the Sages are intended to
be understood literally, then it is strange that the Torah only makes reference
to such a wonder through an allusion.
Had this event actually occurred, the revelation at Sinai was very
different from the description provided by the explicit meaning of the
passages.
It
seems that the Talmud is communicating to us two ideas. First, the development
and existence of Bnai Yisrael is not a chance historical event. Bnai Yisrael was created and fashioned by
Hashem. The nation was carefully
nurtured in order to prepare it for revelation at Sinai and its acceptance of
the Torah. This was Bnai Yisrael’s destiny and its mission. Second, the exodus from Egypt and the
awesome events of Sinai were essential elements of this process of
preparation. These wonders were
designed to provide overpowering evidence of the omnipotence of Hashem and
revelation. They were designed to assure
that Bnai Yisrael accept its mission.
In short, Bnai Yisrael was created and formed for the moment of
revelation; acceptance of the Torah was virtually predetermined or compelled. It was as if the mountain was raised over
the heads of the people.
I am, Hashem, your Lord that brought you out from the land of Egypt, the house of bondage. (Shemot 20:2)
This is
the first statement of the Aseret
HaDibrot – the Decalogue. It
presents the most fundamental premise of the Torah. There is a G-d.
Maimonides understands this statement to be a commandment; we are
commanded to accept the existence of a G-d who is the source of all reality.[6]
The
Halachot Gedolot differs with Maimonides.
The author maintains that although acceptance of G-d’s existence is
fundamental to Judaism, it is not appropriate to classify this conviction as a
commandment. Nachmanides explains the
reasoning of the Halachot Gedolot. The
six hundred thirteen commandments – the Taryag
Mitzvot – can be compared to the
decrees of a king. These decrees
presuppose the acceptance of the king as sovereign. The act of acceptance is clearly not one of the decrees, but
instead must precede them. Based on
this reasoning, acceptance of the existence of Hashem logically precedes the mitzvot and cannot properly be viewed as one of these commandments.[7]
Rabbaynu
Chasdia Kreskas also differs with Maimonides.
He presents a very powerful argument against defining acceptance of
Hashem’s existence as a mitzvah. He argues that every mitzvah, by definition, must engender some obligation or
result. A command to accept G-d’s
existence could not meet this criterion.
Why? To whom is the command
directed? If it is directed to a person
who is already convinced, then the command engenders no new outcome. This person is already convinced! The alternative is even more absurd. This would require that the command be
directed to the non-believer. But the
non-believer could not take such a command seriously! Through this argument, Rabbaynu Chasdai is illustrating the
impossibility of legislating belief in G-d.
Based on this argument, Rabbaynu Chasdia sides with the Halachot
Gedolot. He concludes that conviction
in the existence of Hashem precedes mitzvot
and cannot be counted among Taryag.[8]
Another
criticism of Maimonides’ position questions the logic of a commandment that
legislates any belief. A person can be
commanded or compelled to act or behave in a specific manner. However, a person cannot be commanded to
adopt a belief. I person either accepts
or rejects a specific. Acceptance of a
belief is not accomplished through an act of will.
How can
Maimonides’ position be explained? This
issue provides a fundamental insight into Maimonides’ understanding of Taryag Mitzvot. Apparently,
Maimonides disagrees with a basic premise of the Halachot Gedolot. This premise is that the mitzvot can be equated to decrees. Maimonides seems to maintain that Taryag must be defined in a more inclusive
manner. He includes among the mitzvot, commandments that legislate actions and behaviors and others
that describe beliefs. Obviously, this
second group of commandments cannot be regarded as legislative for the reason
explained above. However, they are
included because combined with the other commandments they describe a model or
a representation of human excellence.
Not all aspects of this model can be emulated through sheer willpower
and determination. Convictions cannot
be attained through an act of will.
Nonetheless, these fundamental convictions are essential components to
the Torah’s model of human excellence.
Without adoption to these beliefs, excellence has not been
achieved.
In other words, according to Maimonides, Taryag can best be described as the basic blueprint for excellence in a person and nation. This blueprint includes the guide to achieving this excellence as well as the basic description of the behaviors and convictions of the individual who embodies this excellence. Based on this definition of Taryag, Maimonides’ position can be appreciated. The most basic ingredient to human perfection is acceptance of Hashem who is the source of all other reality. No description of the shalem – the perfected individual – can be construed which does not include this fundamental conviction.
[1] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer Shemot 18:13.
[2] Mesechet Avot 1:2.
[3] Mesechet Avot 1:18.
[4] Rabbaynu Yona ben Avraham of Gerona, Commentary on Mesechet Avot 1:2.
[5] Mesechet Shabbat 88a.
[6] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam/Maimonides) Sefer HaMitzvot, Mitzvat Aseh 1
[7] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Nachman (Ramban/Nachmanides), Critique on Maimonides’ Sefer HaMitzvot, Mitzvat Aseh 1.
[8] Rabbaynu Chasdai Kreskas, Ohr Hashem, Introduction (HaTza’ah).