“… You shall love your friend like yourself…” (Leviticus 19:18)
One of the great tragedies of our times is the terrible conflict that exists between different streams of Jews. Three times last year, a Reform synagogue in Ra'anana was vandalized by overly-zealous adolescents overtaken by an evil excess of religious fervor. A letter condemning the attack signed by virtually all of the Orthodox rabbis in Ra'anana – including Chief Rabbi of the city, Rabbi Peretz – was read out at that Reform synagogue, so that it would be clear to all that at least the Orthodox establishment decried the crime.
The manner in which halakhically observant Jews relate to other streams of Judaism will depend upon the interpretation of a well-known verse in this week’s Biblical reading, “You shall love your friend like yourself.”
Yes, Rabbi Akiva referred to this commandment as “the great rule of the Torah” (Torat Kohanim 19,45 ad loc). Yes, when a would-be convert came to Hillel with the request to be converted to Judaism on the condition that he be taught the entire Torah while standing on one foot, the sage responded, merely restating the words of our commandment: “What is hateful to you, do not do to your friend. That is the entire Torah; the rest is commentary. Go and study” (B.T. Shabbat 31a). And yes, no observant Jew would want to enter his synagogue only to find that it had been vandalized.
But an observant Jew’s attitude towards this crime will ultimately depend upon our interpretation of a single word in the text of the commandment: “friend,” or re’a (Hebrew).
The narrowest interpretation of the word would insist that the verse refers only to "your friend vis a vis the commandments," which means an individual who is as ritually observant as you are. If it is someone who would be considered ritually lax in his observance, you may even hate him (see additions to Rashi and Rashbam ad loc).
Maimonides would seem to limit the Biblical commandment to another Israelite (Laws of Proper Opinions 6:3), although he would most probably extend the practice of human sensitivity to every individual who keeps the universal moral laws of Noah (see his last ruling in his Laws of Slaves).
It is the Ibn Ezra who interprets the text in accordance with every word in the verse and understands that it refers to every human being created by God “in His image." This is why this verse dealing with inter-personal laws concludes, “I am the Lord,” in order to explain that God created all of us “as one.” All of us were created in His image, all share a portion of God within ourselves, and hence we are all siblings. (Ibn Ezra, ad loc).
It is from this perspective that Rabbi Akiva taught, “Beloved is the human being, who is created in the Divine Image” (Mishnah Avot 3,18),. This is what makes this commandment “the great rule of the Torah,” the rule which is inclusive of all of humanity. And it would most certainly include our Reform siblings and co-religionists.
I would like to go one step further. I am a very proud Orthodox Jew, teacher and rabbi, who believes that our Torah is the word of God. I believe that it is the halakha – our fealty to the Jewish legal system which has its roots in Sinai and which developed through the generations as recorded in the Talmud, the Codes and the Responsa – which has guided our continued and creative existence into this period of “the beginning of the sprouting of our redemption.”
Hence, I cannot pray a statutory prayer service conducted in a non-Orthodox synagogue, since it would not conform to the rules of congregational prayer which I hold to be sacrosanct.
However, the other movements are not my enemies; from a certain perspective, they are my partners. In many instances, they have reached Jews whom neither I nor my Orthodox co-religionists were successful in reaching and have brought them closer to Jewish traditions. There are even a significant number of students who have come to our Rabbinical School on a religious journey which began in a Reform congregation or camp setting. Yes, we do not agree, yet, are there not many instances wherein partners generally disagree?
Moreover, we can even learn from heterodox groups. There were many aspects of synagogue life, especially in the diaspora, where we learned from non-Orthodox movements such as having more decorous services, including a sermon in the vernacular, and explaining our prayers to the uninitiated. Indeed, the challenge of the non-Orthodox movements made Orthodoxy more receptive and more open to human sensitivities. In a situation of “competition,” every “establishment” must try a little harder!
And, even in a more extreme situation, did not Rabbi Meir continue to learn from Elisha ben Abuyah, even after he turned away from traditional Torah and became a heretic? And this was justified by the other Sages (B.T. Hagigah 15b)! The bottom line: our Torah teaches that we must love others like we love ourselves even if – perhaps especially if – the other is different from ourselves. We must always be mindful of the fact that our common “image of God” makes that which unites us as siblings more significant than anything which divides us.
Jewish tradition encourages everyone – from childhood on – to study our legal texts, because such studies create a socially unacceptable climate for legal infraction. A dangerous culture of male, "macho" chauvinism and corruption seep into the highest echelons of our political and military elite; when such an evil spirit of acceptance of sexual harassment rears its ugly head, it is crucially important that our press step in and express public revulsion.
Obviously, they must do so responsibly – and hopefully the laws of libel protect the innocent from unfair attacks by the media.
It must be remembered, however, that fame and public office engenders added responsibility – not added privilege! One dare not turn on the public in whose adulation one basked the moment it displays its disappointment and disgust. Our society owes a vote of thanks to public media, one of whose tasks must be the safeguarding of morality in the most sacrosanct corridors of power and influence.
Tazria-Metzora
We have been suffering these past years from the unedifying sight of politicians and civil servants exposed for serious crimes including corruption, breach of trust, sexual harassment and obstruction of justice. In Israel, these crimes have recently extended to the prime minister's bureau, a mere 13 months after our country's president was sentenced to seven years in prison for rape and other offenses. Many of the scandals have been exposed by the newspapers, leading to public debates about the role of the media: do they interfere too much in our society, or are they a healthy watchdog? What is the Torah's view?
Metzorah is usually identified as a plague of leprosy; however, many if not most biblical commentaries reject this identification. First of all, a physical illness must be attended to by a medical doctor, rather than a religious Kohen-Priest. Secondly, the walls of a house cannot be affected by a physiological disease. And thirdly, a physical plague spreads most rapidly in a crowded situation; however, no "lepers" were to be quarantined – even temporarily – in Jerusalem during the Pilgrim Festivals, precisely a time when streets overflowing with visitors would enable a physical plague to spread with wild abundance.
Hence, our Sages (most notably Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch) maintain that tzaraat was a spiritual malady, brought about by speaking or listening to slander. Rav Yisrael Salanter would often explain that the Biblical portion of Metzorah follows the biblical portion of Shmini – which concludes with the forbidden animals, birds and fish – in order to teach us that what comes out of our mouths results in far greater damage than what we put into our mouths!
Maimonides lists three forms of forbidden talk: Firstly, a rohel, someone who conveys words about someone else, going from one to another saying, 'so have I heard about so and so.' Even if the words are true and even if they are not negative, the talebearer is still considered as one who destroys the world. There is a much greater transgression than this, which is called evil speech (lashon hara); this occurs when one speaks in a derogatory fashion about someone else, even if what one says is true. And thirdly, one who spreads evil falsehoods about someone else is a motzi shem ra.
Maimonides adds that, "Such evil speech will result in the death of three individuals: the one who says it, the one who listens to it, and the one whom about whom it is spoken. And the one who listens to it is worse than the one who propagates it" (Laws of Proper Ideas 7, 1-3).
From this perspective, how can we justify the publicity of the Fourth Estate, which so often judges events without even being certain of the facts? Perhaps such slanderous reporting ought to be prohibited!
I would maintain that a free press remains one of the glories of Israeli society and dare not be tampered with. Even Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan (known as the Hafetz Hayim), who wrote an important work on the evils of slander, maintains that for the common good –for example, when one is asked about the suitability of a person for a marriage (a shidduch) – one must tell the entire truth, even if the report is a negative one.