Getting Critical with Rabbi Sacks
By DANIEL SEPTIMUS
TO HEAL A FRACTURED WORLD
The Ethics of Responsibility
By Rabbi Jonathan Sacks
288 pages. Schocken. $25.
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks has been chief rabbi of Britain since
1991, and in that time he has published 15 books. This would be prolific for a
full-time writer, and it's almost supernatural for a scholar with such an
active public life. The books are impressive for another non-literary reason,
as well. They suggest that not only does Rabbi Sacks find time to write, he
finds time to read. Rabbi Sacks engages contemporary scholarship in a way that
is unfortunately unique in the Orthodox Jewish world today.
To be fair, Rabbi Sacks' books are somewhat repetitive. His frames of reference
change, but his arguments and ideas are packaged with a sense of déjà vu. Still,
the ideas he repeats are positive and productive. He espouses a theology that
is tolerant, intellectually engaged, and humanistic.
In his latest book, To Heal A Fractured
World, Rabbi Sacks continues his appeal for a thoughtful, morally inspired
Judaism. "Judaism contains mysteries, but its ultimate purpose is not
mysterious at all. It is to honor the image of God in other people and thus
turn the world into a home for the divine presence."
To Heal A Fractured World is, above
all, about responsibility, and from the outset Rabbi Sacks' Judaism is one in
which Jewish responsibility extends to all of humanity. Judaism is concerned
about the image of God "in other people" not just Jews. It wants
"the world," not just the Jewish community, to be filled with the
glory of God.
Rabbi Sacks' writing is visionary and utopian, and it might even be prophetic
if it didn't lack one fundamental aspect: critique.
Rabbi Sacks too often merges the prescriptive and the descriptive. His Judaism
is compassionate and meaningful, but it doesn't acknowledge that there are people
presenting other—less laudable—visions of his faith. He writes about what should be as if he were writing about what is. That there is work we need to
do and ideas we need to fight before we can describe Judaism in such gushing
terms is lost in the shuffle.
For example, early in To Heal a Fractured
World Rabbi Sacks writes that, "Jewish ethics is refreshingly
down-to-earth. If someone is in need, give. If someone is lonely, invite them
home. If someone you know has recently been bereaved, visit them and give them
comfort."
As a prescription for Jewish life, this is a praiseworthy goal. But it is
misleading as a description of Jewish ethics. Judaism is not nearly so
straightforward in its moral calculus. Rabbi Sacks might want Judaism to be
humanistic and universal but that doesn't mean it is: Traditional Judaism
certainly makes distinction between helping Jews and non-Jews.
This miscue is even more extreme because Rabbi Sacks introduces this part of
the book with a discussion about Maimonides, who in some circles is hailed as
the gentile-hater par excellence. One
Maimonidean source should suffice in highlighting the folly of Rabbi Sacks' reductionism.
In his legal work Maimonides writes: "As for Gentiles with whom we are not
at war… their death must not be caused, but it is forbidden to save them if
they are at the point of death; if, for example, one of them is seen falling
into the sea, he should not be rescued, for it is written: 'neither shalt thou
stand against the blood of thy fellow'—but [a Gentile] is not thy fellow"
(Mishneh Torah, Laws of Murder 4:11).
This is a far cry from Rabbi Sacks' "If someone is in need, give."
Additionally, I doubt we can achieve the ethical vision Rabbi Sacks dreams of
without honestly confronting the darker corners of Jewish tradition.
Rabbi Sacks isn't any more critical of his contemporaries. In discussing Jewish
morality, he duly notes the biblical laws that take care of the poor. Farmers
were required to leave the corners of their fields and their forgotten sheaves
for the less fortunate. In the sabbatical year, all debts were erased. "In
these ways and others," writes Rabbi Sacks, "the Torah established an
early form of welfare state."
One would hope this understanding of the laws would be unanimous, but it isn't.
In fact, a recent article in the Jewish journal, Azure, expressed a contrary position.
YosefYitzhakLifshitz's “Foundations of a Jewish
Economic Theory” (registration required) is an extreme
capitalist defense of property rights from a Jewish perspective. In a shorter
version of the article published in the New York Jewish Week, Lifshitz wrote: "Under no circumstances, then,
does Judaism absolve the poor of responsibility for themselves through the
redistribution of wealth. As opposed to classical Christianity, Judaism views
the property of the wealthy as entirely theirs and subject entirely to their
whims. Even in a society marked by vast differences in income, the poor have no
legal claim against the wealthy."
The idea seems absurd in light of the above-mentioned laws, but Judaism has
enough texts to create a theological narrative around most ideologies. Today,
as many Jews are more secure than ever in their financial situation, it makes
sense that an economically conservative theology of wealth might arise.
I certainly cannot fault Rabbi Sacks for failing to disagree with a specific
article, but I can—and do—fault him for continuously presenting his Judaism as the Judaism, thus not critiquing the Jewish
community where it falls short of his values.
It may be unfair to criticize an author for the book he or she did not write, but the same does not apply
to communal leaders. Leaders should be held accountable for their sins of
omission. Rabbi Sacks writes beautifully about responsibility. Given his
position and his knowledge it is his responsibility to be a prophet, not merely
a cheerleader.