Religious Reductionism
TALMUDIC AGGADA
By Rav Yitzchak Blau
Shiur #26:
Religious Reductionism
R. Simlai expounded: Six hundred and thirteen
commandments were communicated to Moshe.
.David came and reduced them to eleven
(principles), as it says: A Psalm
of David. Lord, who shall sojourn in Your tabernacle? Who shall dwell upon Your holy
mountain? He who walks upright, and
does righteousness, and speaks truth in his heart; who has no slander on his
tongue, nor does evil to his fellow, nor takes up a reproach against his
neighbor; in whose eyes a vile person is despised, but who honors them that fear
the Lord; he who swears to his own hurt, and changes not; he who does not lend
money with interest, nor take a bribe against the innocent. He who does these
things shall not falter. When R.
Gamliel arrived at this verse, he would cry.
He said: One who does all of the above shall not falter. If he does one of the above, he shall
falter?
He said to him: Even if he only does one of these things, he shall not
falter.
Yeshayahu came and reduced them to six (principles),
as it says: He who walks
righteously, and speaks uprightly; he who despises the gain of oppression, who
shakes his hands from holding bribes, who stops his ears from hearing blood, and
shuts his eyes from looking upon evil (Yeshayahu 33:15)
.
Mikha came and reduced them to three, as it says:
It has been told you, O man, what is good, and what the Lord requires of you:
only to act justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God (Mikha
6:8)
.
Yeshayahu returned and reduced them to two, as it
says: Thus says the Lord: Keep justice, and do righteousness (Yeshayahu
56:1).
Amos came and reduced them to one, as it says: For
thus says the Lord to the house of Israel: Seek Me, and live (Amos 5:4). R. Nachman bar Yitzchak questioned
this: Perhaps it means seek me via observance of the entire Torah? Rather, Chavakuk came and reduced
them to one as it says: And the righteous shall live by his faith (Chavakuk
2:4). (Makkot 23b-24a)
Rivan explains that the earlier generations,
who were more righteous than we are, were able to keep the entire Torah.
When later generations proved less
worthy, David and others provided a smaller list for them to focus on.
Many other commentaries reject this
approach. Did a king and prophets truly attempt to scale back the scope of
halakhic responsibility and tell their listeners to focus exclusively on a small
group of mitzvot? Furthermore, some of the acts listed are not
technically mitzvot. For
example, despising a vile person may not fulfill a commandment. One approach
explains that the lists enumerate broad categories that encompass or lead a
person to the totality of Torah. The lists do not exempt a Jew from other
commandments; they merely provide routes towards a more encompassing
fulfillment. Alternatively, the list simply expresses a minimum which qualifies
a person for the world to come, but does not exhaust the extent of religious
requirements.
Different interpretations of the three items
listed by Mikha present us with overarching categories. Mikha speaks of justice,
mercy and walking humbly. R. Yosef Albo explains that these categories
incorporate both commandments between man and God and between man and man. Mishpat
(justice) and chesed (loving kindness) belong to the latter category;
humility relates to understanding the awesome transcendence of the Almighty and
speaking appropriately about God (i. e. the doctrine of negative attributes). Thus, Mikha instructs his listeners
to begin with a twin focus on both interpersonal relationships and a proper
relationship with God (Sefer Ha-ikkarim 3:30).
R. Yaakov Ettlinger advances a similar
approach in his Arukh Laner. He also identifies mercy with the
interpersonal mitzvot and humility with a persons relationship with God.
However, he differs from R. Albo in suggesting that mishpat addresses
the category of mitzvot bein adam le-atzmo (between a person and
himself). According to R. Ettlinger, mishpat demands judging my own
actions carefully and testing their appropriateness. We should recognize the
importance of this third category of commandments, those relating to
responsibility to ones self. We can
better appreciate why some actions we strongly object to are wrong, such as
profanity, pornography, and drunkenness, by placing them in this third grouping. Those engaging in these patterns of
behavior fail to honor themselves more than they hurt others.
Maharal (Chiddushei Aggadot) locates a
different triumvirate in Mikhas prophetic call.
To understand his approach, note that the Gemara speaks of attending a
funeral in order to give honor to the deceased or bringing joy to a bride as
examples of walking humbly with God.
For Maharal, Mikha focuses on balancing strict law and justice with compassion
and mercy. Clearly, mishpat and chesed set up the two poles.
Maharal cleverly explains that caring for the deceased or for a bride straddles
the fence between the two categories.
Strict justice does not demand that I attend a funeral in the same way
that it requires me to pay my debts or to not damage your property. On the other hand, it is obviously
unjust for a deceased person to lie uncared for, in dishonor, or for a bride to
lack the means for her wedding.
Mikha taught us about law, mercy, and all that lies in between.
Perhaps we should think about this gemara
in the context of the need to avoid both an all or nothing approach and a
reductionist approach that limits Judaism to a single theme. On the one hand,
there is a danger in always demanding complete compliance. Individuals first
becoming observant often need a more gradual entry. Even those born into
committed families frequently struggle to meet the broad range of religious
demands. Rather than despair, they need to take pride in partial
accomplishments, while thinking about how to grow into greater devotion. To that
end, David, Yeshayahu, Mikha, and Amos emphasized short lists of obligations.
On the other hand, we cannot simply say that
all of Torah boils down to one principle. I am concerned when I see various
Orthodox groups for whom every dvar Torah (word of Torah) inevitably
comes back to the same mitzva. Some
Chabadniks focus every shiur (class) on the Messiah, some Religious Zionists
always come back to the land of Israel, some Breslavers make everything about
faith, while other groups appear exclusively obsessed with Torah study or acts
of chesed. In each of these cases, the groups incorrectly reduce the
multiple ideals of Torah to a single value.
An approach more authentic to Torah gives expression to the multiplicity
in the world of mitzvot.
I do not think that this gemara
justifies such single mindedness.
Most of the commentators make it clear that a more narrow focus was never meant
to supplant the many requirements of a Torah life. Rather, the shorter lists either
serve as some kind of bedieved (ex post facto) requirement or
they are intended as a starting point paving the way to a more robust and broad
observance.
In this context, it is worth noting Meiris
explanation of Chavakuks solitary theme. Though this prophet seemingly reduces
Judaism to the ideal of faith, Meiri interprets faith as wholehearted service of
God. Thus, the only way to reduce
Torah to one principle is to speak of a broad category, avodat Hashem
(service of God), constituting the goal of the entire system. Once we attempt to realize that
fundamental goal, we return to the world of multiple obligations and manifold
ideals.
Torah observance is not all or nothing, and we
value partial performance. At the
same time, we must constantly strive for more and not make a virtue out of
mediocrity. Furthermore, we should
appreciate the many values incorporated in our Torah and not fall into the trap
of religious reductionism.
This website is constantly being improved. We would appreciate hearing from you. Questions and comments on the classes are welcome, as is help in tagging, categorizing, and creating brief summaries of the classes. Thank you for being part of the Torat Har Etzion community!