Adam Berman served as the Rabbinic Intern in Yeshiva University’s Center for the Jewish Future, where he developed an innovative Jewish learning curriculum for the university’s service-learning programs. He is currently studying medicine.
Shuki Taylor is the director of Jewish Service Learning and Experiential Education Programs at Yeshiva University, where he founded a number of innovative programs.
Berman and Taylor examine the religious underpinnings and challenges of Jewish global social action.
Introduction
There are numerous texts within the Biblical and rabbinic tradition charging the Jewish people to ensure the welfare of humanity at large. However, this message is tempered or even challenged by a variety of other – equally valid – statements in the Jewish tradition. These teachings, either those that present a particularistic imperative or those that discriminate between the Jew and the non-Jew, cause the serious Jewish thinker to pause and reflect on his or her role in contributing to those outside of the Jewish community.
When attempting to implement a coherent system of social engagement guided by Jewish values, one is confronted with a barrage of conflicting priorities and needs. Yeshiva University sits at the apex of this conflict: it strives to engage with and contribute to the world outside the confines of the bet midrash while simultaneously recognizing the needs – be they educational, spiritual, or financial – of the global Jewish community. As members of the Department of Service Learning and Experiential Jewish Education in Yeshiva University’s Center for the Jewish Future, we are involved in the design and execution of numerous service programs for our student body. Over the course of every year, our programs send hundreds of students across the globe to do meaningful service work for both the Jewish and non-Jewish community. From providing medicine and clothing for elderly Jews in the Ukraine to building an education center for a rural community in Nicaragua, our students have a unique opportunity to interact with other cultures through service during some of their most formative years.
As a department focused on bringing Jewish values to life through service, we are constantly challenged to find a balance between the various streams of Jewish thought that relate to our service work. There are numerous practical and philosophic questions that we engage internally and with our students through our Jewish learning sessions on our programs. For instance: Why should we be performing service for the global Jewish community when there are still many within our local communities who are in significant need of assistance? Additionally, why should we be involved in humanitarian work in developing countries when our Jewish brethren – both in Israel and the Diaspora – are in need? While we plan to address these issues in this paper, we would like to argue that it is precisely because we engage these and other questions with our students that our service work is able to have such a profound impact on the Jewish identities of all who are involved.
Background
Before any discussion as to the exact nature of a Jewish system of social engagement, we must first establish that we even have a right to tamper with God’s creation. Being that God created the world and maintains an active role in it, one could argue that if apparent injustice or poverty exists, it must be the will of God and we, as petty humans, have no right to intervene. Such an argument, however, is antithetical to Judaism. Throughout the book of Genesis and as evidenced by the specific commandment of “fill the land and conquer it” (Genesis 1:28), God charges humanity to assume an active role in the world (see Soloveitchik (1983) pp. 100-101 for a further exposition on this subject). Time and again, the Bible stresses the importance of supporting those in need through a variety of personal obligations and social institutions (e.g., tzedakah – Leviticus 25:35 and Deuteronomy 15:7-8; shemitah – Exodus 23:10-11; pe’ah – Leviticus 23:22). Professor Isadore Twersky, in his article entitled “Some Aspects of the Jewish Attitude toward the Welfare State” (1963),eloquently describes the relationship between humanity and God as a unique partnership in pursuing a more perfect world. His source text is BT Bava Batra 10a which features a discussion between Rabbi Akiba and the Roman general Turnus Rufus:
Turnus Rufus asked Rabbi Akiba, “If your God loves the poor, why does He not sustain them?” He responded, “In order that, through our giving them charity, we may be saved from the judgment of Gehinnom.” He [Turnus Rufus] responded, “On the contrary! This [the giving of charity] is what actually condemns you to be punished in Gehinnom!”
For Rabbi Akiba, humankind and God are linked in an intimate partnership, one that both grants and charges humanity to pursue justice and alleviate suffering. In contrast, Turnus Rufus sees man as solely a servant of God, a relationship which views man’s intervention in worldly affairs as a rebellion against His wishes and deserving of Gehinnom. On Judaism’s unique view of man’s role in the world, Twersky (1963) writes:
The first premise to emerge from this dialogue [in BT Bava Batra 10a] is that chesed [sic] is that distinctive function which legitimatizes our worldly existence and adds a new dimension of purposiveness to life. It constitutes a special challenge and unique prerogative for man by establishing him as a very powerful agent and delicate instrument in the conduct of human affairs. God has abdicated part of a function of His in order to enable man to continue and extend creation. It is our practice of kindness which enables us to continue of God’s creative plan, elevates our life from brutishness to sensitivity, and extricates us from chaotic, vacuous biological existence. (p. 140)
It is with this background that emerges from both the Bible and the rabbinic tradition that empowers humanity as a whole and the Jewish people in particular to pursue the realization of a better world.
Sources
After having established the license Judaism grants humanity to actively engage in pursuing a more perfect existence, we can now focus on Judaism’s specific social obligations as they relate to both the Jew and the non-Jew. From the Tanakh itself, strong universalistic messages emerge that direct the Jew to be involved in securing the welfare of humanity at large. In Genesis 18:19, we learn that God chose Abraham “because he instructs his children and his posterity to keep the way of the Lord by doing what is right and just.” In the following two verses, God informs Abraham of his plan to destroy Sodom (Genesis 18:20-21). Upon hearing this, Abraham proceeds to argue with God to save the city on account of the righteous members contained within. The juxtaposition between Abraham’s pursuit of “what is right and just” with his bargaining with God over the injustice of the impending destruction of Sodom reveals Judaism’s eternal focus on the pursuit of justice for all of humanity (see also Lichtenstein, 2010, pp. 12-14 for a further discussion as to the universal nature of hesed and the importance of the Bible’s ethical teachings both pre- and post-Sinai). Additionally, in the book of Jonah, God commands Jonah to forewarn the inhabitants of Nineveh of their impending destruction and His desire for them to return from their ways of wickedness (Jonah 3:4). On Jonah’s special significance during the Yom Kippur service, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik (1989) explains:
It is […] characteristic of the universal embrace of our faith that as the shadows of dusk descend on Yom Kippur day, after almost twenty-four hours of prayer for Israel, the Jew is alerted through the Book of Jonah, prior to the closing of “the heavenly gates” (ne-ilah), that all humanity are God’s children. We need to restate the universal dimension of our faith, especially when we are sorely persecuted and are apt to regard the world in purely confrontational terms. (p. 143)
We view these strong theological messages of social responsibility and universal engagement that emerge from the Tanakh as charging the Jewish people to actively engage in the welfare of humanity as a whole.
A similar focus on Judaism’s universal call-to-action emerges resolutely from the Talmud in numerous places. In BT Sotah 14a, the Talmud elucidates the commandment of following in the ways of God – as commanded in Leviticus 19:2, Deuteronomy 10:12, 13:5, 28:9 – as the requirement to emulate God’s ethical attributes. The Talmud proceeds to exemplify these different traits using verses in the Humash as proof texts. Three of the four verses – those referring to clothing the naked (Genesis 3:21), visiting the sick (Genesis 18:1), and comforting mourners (Genesis 25:11) – all refer to acts God performed before solidifying the covenantal relationship with the Jewish people at Mount Sinai. The Talmud’s choice of these verses in expounding the commandment to emulate God’s ways indicates a pointedly universal stance – one reminiscent of that taken by the Psalmist when he stated, “God is good to all and His mercies extend over all His works” (Psalms 145:9). Additionally, the Talmud concretizes that the commandment to perform charitable acts applies to non-Jews as well. In BT Gittin 61a, the Talmud records:
The rabbis taught: we provide financial support to the gentile poor along with the Jewish poor; we visit the gentile sick along with the Jewish sick; we bury the gentile dead along with the Jewish dead because [these are some] of the ways that foster peace and harmony [darkhei shalom].
This statement is recorded as law by Maimonides (Mattenot Aniyyim 1:9, 7:7; Melakhim 10:12) and brings non-Jews within the rubric of hilkhot tzedakah. (For a further discussion of Maimonides’ application of the principle of darkhei shalom to charitable deeds for non-Jews, see Greenberg (1995) pp. 385-388 and Schacter (2009) pp. 192-197).
This universal focus, however, meets resistance when viewed in full-view of Jewish law and practice. For instance, there are a variety of laws that work to limit the interaction between the Jew and the non-Jew in the social sphere (see, for instance, BT Avodah Zarah 35b-36b which forbids bishul akum [foods cooked by an idolater], pat akum [bread baked by an idolater], and stam yeinam [wine produced by non-Jews];Maimonides Ma-akhalot Asurot 17:9). Additionally, there are other laws that, in theory, discriminate between the Jew and the non-Jew in the economic arena (see, for instance, BT Bava Kama 113b, Shulhan Arukh Yoreh Deah 151). While such laws and practices run counter to the Western zeitgeist, they nevertheless communicate authentic – albeit challenging – protocols in maintaining a cohesive and vibrant Jewish community.
Additionally, Jewish law dictates a relatively rigid framework of priorities when engaging in charitable endeavors. In relation to Jewish charity obligations, Maimonides codifies a hierarchy based on familial and physical proximity: one’s family and relatives take first priority, next come the people of one’s city, and lastly the needy of other locals (Mattenot Aniyyim 7:13 and 10:16; see also Shulhan Arukh Yoreh Deah 251:3). Regarding our obligation to support those outside the Jewish community, the Talmud in BT Bava Metsia 71a makes it clear that Jewish individuals and the broader Jewish community have priority over non-Jews when distributing aid. The Talmud states:
Rav Yosef taught: “When you lend money to My people, to the poor person [who is] with you” (Exodus 22:24), [this teaches that between] a Jew and a non-Jew, the Jew has priority; the poor and the rich, the poor have priority; your poor [relatives] and the poor of your town, your poor have priority; the poor of your city and the poor of another town, the poor of your town have priority.
While this Talmudic statement relates to lending money, its overall prioritization of economic support to Jews over non-Jews would also apply to general charitable practices. Even nowadays, when most Western governments ensure the basic needs of their constituents through a variety of social safety-nets, it makes practical sense that our philanthropic and charitable priorities continue to remain focused on Jewish communal and spiritual needs such as those that relate to education and communal services (see Broyde (2010) for a detailed discussion as to Jewish charity in an era of government funded social services. See also Lichtenstein (2010) pp. 22-28).
Our Work
Taken together, we view the conflict that arises between universalistic and particularistic Jewish sources as providing the crucial vantage point from which to design and implement Jewish programs for social progress. While we must maintain priorities that focus on building a vibrant and healthy Jewish community – both in the Diaspora and in Israel – we cannot forget that we, as the Jewish people, have been charged to ensure the welfare of humanity at large. How that works out precisely in terms of dollars and cents is less clear-cut. Nevertheless, we must not become philanthropically paralyzed by supporting just one rung on the charitable ladder of priorities. As the great scholar, Rabbi Yechiel Michel Epstein (1829-1908), writes regarding priorities in charitable giving:
There is a fundamental issue with the hierarchy of tzedakah that troubles me. If we explain the texts according to their simple meaning – that certain groups have priority over others – they imply that one does not need to give anything to those who fall into a secondary category of priority. It is well known that every rich person has many poor relatives […], and if the above implication is the case, poor people without rich relatives will die of starvation. How can this be so! Therefore, in my humble opinion, the explanation of [tzedakah priorities] is as follows: certainly every person, whether of limited or significant means, is obligated to give a portion of his tzedakah to needy people who are not relatives. To his poor relatives, however, he should give a greater amount than he gives to those who are not his relatives. And this apportioning applies along the entire ladder of priorities. (Arukh HaShulhan, Yoreh Deah 251:4)
The majority of our programs provide impactful service to Jewish communities throughout North America, Israel, Europe, and South America. While there is certainly no lacking of service opportunities for the Jewish community, we feel strongly – based on the halakhic and philosophic discussions above – that we must actively contribute to the welfare of peoples outside the Jewish community. With that in mind, we send students every year on humanitarian programs throughout the globe to help improve the welfare of non-Jewish communities that lack access to safe drinking water, secure food sources, and/ or basic education.
Our students return from our service programs as changed individuals fostering deeper connections to their Jewish identities and feeling empowered to build a better future. Additionally, they emerge with a more nuanced understanding of global issues, the pursuit of social justice, and their mission as members of the Jewish people. We would like to argue that it is not the physical service itself that enables our programs to impact our participants in such meaningful ways. Instead, these outcomes result precisely because we address the conflicts that emerge from priorities in tzedakah and our relationship with those outside of our community. For instance, learning about the halakhic importance of prioritizing Jewish need over general aid to non-Jews when confronted by abject poverty in the developing world evokes feelings of conflict. Additionally, internalizing bishul akum, a decree meant to separate the Jew and the non-Jew, in a manner whereby it can be imparted sensitively to the non-Jewish individuals who prepare our meals in the field while also trying to recognize that all members of humanity are partners in God’s creation certainly causes internal tension. Confronting these conflicts – even if they are uncomfortable – while immersed in service has the potential to heighten our awareness of what it means to be Jewish and how that should affect our lives. Our programs help our students witness the grandeur of God’s creation and recognize that we – as the Jewish people – are part of a great matrix, far larger than our rural or metropolitan Jewish communities. By removing ourselves from our normal lives in order to experience issues affecting millions of people created in God’s image, we have the opportunity to experience the “other” through their perspective and internalize our role in God’s eternal plan. Embracing these conflicts fills us with a sense of purpose and fortifies our relationship with both the Jewish community and with humanity at large. Furthermore, by exposing our students to poverty outside of their communities, they become sensitized to and involved in issues back home which they may never have previously noticed. The universalistic Jewish values, when implemented effectively in conjunction with in-depth Jewish learning, strengthen the particularistic experience, empowering our students to become active members in their Jewish communities. Oftentimes, our programs serve as a wake-up call, providing the boost needed to jolt our students from feelings of apathy to those of empowerment. These service opportunities – infused with serious Jewish learning – provide the catalyst to enable our students to recognize that they, too, have the power to be true agents of change, both for the Jewish people and for all of God’s creations.
References
Blidstein, G. J. (1998). Tikkun olam. In D. Shatz, C. I. Waxman, & N. J. Diament(Eds.), Tikkun olam; social responsibility in Jewish thought and law (Orthodox Forum Series). Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.
Broyde, M. J. (2010). The giving of charity in Jewish law: For what purpose and toward what goal? In Y. Prager (Ed.) Toward a renewed ethic of Jewish philanthropy (Orthodox Forum Series). New York, NY: Yeshiva University Press.
Greenberg, M. (1995). Studies in the bible and Jewish thought. Philadelphia/ Jerusalem: The Jewish Publication Society.
Lichtenstein, A. (2010). Jewish philanthropy, wither? Tradition, 42(4), 7-32.
Schacter, J. J. (2009). Tikkun olam: Defining the Jewish obligation. In R. Medoff (Ed.), Rav chesed; essays in honor of Rabbi Dr. Haskel Lookstein. Vol. II. Jersey City, NJ: Ktav.
Soloveitchik, J. B. (1983). Halakhic man. New York: The Jewish Publication Society.
Soloveitchik, J. B. & Besdin, A. R. (1989). Man of faith in the modern world: Reflections of the Rav 2. Hoboken, NJ: Ktav
Twersky, I. (1963). Some aspects of the Jewish attitude toward the welfare state. Tradition, 5, 137-158.