Print
PDF FormatThe Israelite belief in man’s ability to choose good over evil assumes the existence of what Vico terms the “mental language common to all nations,” which enables every individual to exercise basic moral judgment. In Western thought, “natural law” or “natural morality” is based on this assumption.61 Judaism, too, believes in a natural morality, an intrinsic system of fundamental values which every individual can recognize because of his ability to discern good from evil. Again, however, because of man’s natural inclinations, it is not at all clear that he will actually choose good over evil. Man’s innate ability to make moral decisions—his natural morality—stands in opposition to his natural inclinations, the inevitable result being that human existence is filled with perpetual moral tension. As part of the natural world, man has unbidden inclinations, and desires, but unlike other animals, man also has knowledge of the world: That is, man has both consciousness and a conscience. While the rest of the world’s creatures follow the laws of nature and behave as they must, man has to choose between alternatives because of his ability to make moral distinctions and act according to his will.62 In the words of John Milton in Paradise Lost: “We live Law to our selves, our Reason is our Law.”63
This fundamental tension is the principal concern of the Bible. In its conservative spirit, the Bible addresses the general through the prism of the particular. Its concern is not so much the Israelite people and their Tora, in and of themselves, but their story as a lens to magnify and examine the human condition in general. The Bible speaks at length of virtuous characters whose behavior does not derive from the Tora, either because they lived before it was given (the Patriarchs) or because they were not Israelites (Jethro, and Ruth the Moabite). Frequently the focus is on the moral struggle of the individual in a corrupt society, in circumstances with virtually no bearing upon Israelite history or the Tora. The stories of Noah and the Flood, Lot and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and Jonah and the fate of Nineveh, for example, all underscore the importance Israelite tradition ascribes to a natural moral law, which every individual and society are subject to.
The book of Proverbs is one of the most comprehensive treatments in the Bible of the universal rules which ought to govern human society. The worldview of Proverbs is decidedly conservative, relating to basic moral values within a realistic—that is, skeptical—assessment of human nature.64 Proverbs 8, for example, presents this view at length, praising society’s achievements and stability. These are defined as “wisdom” (“For wisdom is better than rubies”) which is attained by adherence to morality (“Accept my moral message before silver, knowledge before choice gold”), experience and decency (“Through me kings reign and rulers decree just laws; through me princes rule, great men and all the righteous judges”). This same chapter scathingly criticizes any who would undermine society with unrestrained words and ideas—who would, in other words, present a revolutionary worldview (“I loathe the overturning mouth”).65 The conservative message is emphasized again and again: “My son, take heed and take in my words, and you will enjoy a long life. I teach you the way of wisdom; I guide you in straight paths. You will walk without breaking stride; when you run, you will not stumble. Hold fast to received discipline; do not let go, keep it—it is your life.”66 These and other verses make clear that Proverbs’ expressed values are the result of experience and wisdom handed down from parent to child—in other words, of common sense.
Little attention is devoted in this book to religious observance, at least in the narrow sense of precise fulfillment of ritual commandments. What treatment there is stresses, for the most part, the need to preserve the social order, to conduct oneself morally and to strengthen one’s inner integrity. Thus, Proverbs extols the importance of maintaining a proper legal system and condemning false testimony;67 respecting religion and its values;68 being attentive to the central role of the family, and faithful in marriage;69 preserving the sanctity of human life;70 exemplifying righteousness and fairness;71 and being compassionate and considerate towards others, while refraining from cruelty.72
This approach finds its fullest expression in the text describing the roots of evil in society, those things that are “abominations,” deserving of the strongest biblical condemnation:73 “Six things the Lord hates; seven are an abomination to him: A haughty bearing, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a mind that hatches evil plots, feet quick to run to evil, a false witness testifying lies, and one who incites brothers to quarrel.”74 All of these pertain to interpersonal relations and, as might be expected from a conservative text, they are presented not as abstract principles but within a practical and tangible context. Thus, the book of Proverbs offers an all-encompassing order of practical values, describing a worthy lifestyle of proper social conduct and moral acts—the biblical parallel to “civil society” in the Western conservative tradition.
The Israelite exploration of natural morality, however, is by no means limited to the Bible: It accompanies the Jewish people’s intellectual thought throughout history. This is the context for the extensive interest in rabbinic writings, for example, in the concept of human dignity (k’vod habriot). The importance of these laws is emphasized in numerous statements in the Talmud, such as the declaration that “human dignity is so important that it supersedes an express prohibition of the Tora.”75 The same tradition holds that those not learned in the Tora, or not even Jewish, may yet attain a high moral stature, to the extent that the scholarly and the righteous may learn from their example.76 The rabbis believed that in every age there are individuals who, lacking any contact with God or Tora, succeed in building a moral character and maintaining an ethical life. One finds this view expressed in a variety of contexts, from the descriptions of Jewish sages sitting and exchanging views with philosophers,77 to explicit maxims such as the statement by the talmudic sage R. Nahman about the non-Jewish wise men in the public square: “If not for the Tora, how many Nahman ben Abas would there be in the marketplace!”78 Perhaps the most explicit of all is the following midrashic passage:
It once happened that when R. Yanai was walking on the road he saw an extremely distinguished man, to whom he said: “Sir, I would be honored if you would partake of my hospitality.” The man replied, “Certainly.” He brought him to his house and gave him food and drink. He [R. Yanai] tested him in Scripture, and found him ignorant; in Mishna, and found him ignorant; in Agada, and found him ignorant; in Talmud, and found him ignorant. He said to him, “Take the cup and recite Grace after Meals.” He replied, “Let Yanai recite Grace, in his own house.”
He [R. Yanai] asked him, “Do you understand enough to be able to repeat what I say to you?” He answered, “Yes.” He said: “Say, ‘The dog ate of Yanai’s bread.’” The guest arose and grabbed him. He said to him, “You have my inheritance, and you are withholding it from me!” R. Yanai asked him, “And what is this inheritance of yours that I have?” He replied, “Once I passed by a school, and I heard the voice of the children reciting: ‘Moses charged us with the Tora, the inheritance of the congregation of Jacob’;79 it is not written, ‘the inheritance of the congregation of Yanai,’ but ‘the congregation of Jacob.’” R. Yanai said to him, “Why have you deserved to eat at my table?” The man answered, “Never in my life did I hear evil talk and repeat it to the person about whom it was said, nor have I ever seen two people quarreling without making peace between them.” R. Yanai said to him, “You possess so much of the way of the world, and I called you a dog!”80
The message is unequivocal: R. Yanai, recognizing the high moral stature of his guest who is unlettered in the Tora, repents having denigrated him, because even one who has not studied the Tora may observe the precepts of natural morality, the “way of the world”—and this is an honorable achievement in its own right.
Thus, Israelite thought draws a practical distinction between the Tora in its narrow sense (the body of laws given to Israel at Mount Sinai), and the moral principles inherent in the world from the time of Creation. Although clearly deriving from the same foundation as the Tora given to the Jewish people, these moral principles are also to be understood and applied by every person, in every age. For example, Judah Halevi states in The Kuzari that at least a partial understanding of the existence of God, and of basic moral principles, may be attained through philosophical inquiry alone, even absent knowledge of the Tora.81 This concept is expressed succinctly in the talmudic adage: “If someone tells you that there is wisdom among the Gentiles, believe it... that there is Tora among the Gentiles, do not believe it.”82
From the belief that all people are capable of understanding natural morality, it follows that its basic principles may be easily articulated, at least in broad terms. In the Israelite tradition, the conceptual framework for this is the seven “Noahide laws,” a set of fundamental moral principles binding upon all of humanity. “The rabbis taught, seven commandments were given to the Noahides: Establishing a judicial system, and prohibition of blasphemy, idolatry, forbidden sexual relations, bloodshed, theft, and eating the limb from a live animal.”83 In other words, all human beings are commanded to observe one active principle (the creation of a judicial system) and six prohibitions, three of them somewhat abstract in nature (blasphemy, idolatry and theft) and three quite tangible (forbidden sexual relations, bloodshed and the eating of a limb from a live animal). One who not only observes these rules but also acknowledges their divine source is regarded as a “righteous Gentile.” Although most of these principles may be observed by an individual, they are basically oriented to society—and only a society can observe all of the principles, especially the setting up of a judicial system. Indeed, according to Israelite tradition, these seven commandments are the minimal conditions for establishing a proper society. The consistent violation of these principles, on the other hand, makes for a society that is cruel, bestial and unworthy of existing—a society the Bible terms an “abomination.”
