tzedek tzedek tirdof
Aug. 24th, 2006 08:35 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cellioThis week's torah portion contains the directive "justice, justice you shall pursue". My rabbi had an interesting comment on this tonight, not about "tzedek, tzedek" but about "tirdof". Why does the torah say "pursue" instead of, say, "establish"? Isn't establishing justice a goal, moreso than just running after it?
He suggests that we are commanded to pursue justice precisely because we can never fully achieve it -- pursue, meaning never let up. There is always more to do. I see shades of eilu d'varim here -- these are the obligations without measure.
The rest of this entry is me talking, inspired by that.
If the commandment were to "establish" justice, we might delude ourselves into thinking we'd achieved the goal. Most of the western world has a pretty reasonable judicial system, at least in the abstract. But the abstract isn't good enough; there's a big gulf between, say, the idea of defendants having competent legal representation and all of them actually having it, or between fair rules of evidence and what actually happens. And it's not only about formal systems of justice; we must pursue justice on a personal level, in the ways we interact with other people and the world at large -- the kinds of "tzedek" that are fully ours to control.
"Establish" sounds like something that can be checked off -- yup, did that, on to the next commandment. "Pursue" does not have that connotation -- we can get closer, but we can't fully get there. Pursuit is an ongoing task.
"Pursuit" raises another issue in my mind, one that seems less positive: when we pursue something, don't we usually do it at the expense of something else? Pursuing an educational or career goal usually comes at the expense of time and comfort; pursuing a person comes at the expense of attention to other people. What does pursuing justice come at the expense of? If complacency, well and good -- but is that it?
He suggests that we are commanded to pursue justice precisely because we can never fully achieve it -- pursue, meaning never let up. There is always more to do. I see shades of eilu d'varim here -- these are the obligations without measure.
The rest of this entry is me talking, inspired by that.
If the commandment were to "establish" justice, we might delude ourselves into thinking we'd achieved the goal. Most of the western world has a pretty reasonable judicial system, at least in the abstract. But the abstract isn't good enough; there's a big gulf between, say, the idea of defendants having competent legal representation and all of them actually having it, or between fair rules of evidence and what actually happens. And it's not only about formal systems of justice; we must pursue justice on a personal level, in the ways we interact with other people and the world at large -- the kinds of "tzedek" that are fully ours to control.
"Establish" sounds like something that can be checked off -- yup, did that, on to the next commandment. "Pursue" does not have that connotation -- we can get closer, but we can't fully get there. Pursuit is an ongoing task.
"Pursuit" raises another issue in my mind, one that seems less positive: when we pursue something, don't we usually do it at the expense of something else? Pursuing an educational or career goal usually comes at the expense of time and comfort; pursuing a person comes at the expense of attention to other people. What does pursuing justice come at the expense of? If complacency, well and good -- but is that it?
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-25 01:52 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-25 01:56 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-25 01:59 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-25 02:14 am (UTC)I assume that whole volumes have been written on the differences between tzedek and din. I think, perhaps incorrectly, of tzedek as being what happens when din (strict judgement) and rachamim (mercy) combine. Tzedek is often translated "justice" (in this phrase, in particular), but isn't it closer to "righteousness"? A righteous judgement has to be true but tempered by mercy.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-25 02:11 am (UTC)One is that there is a mitzvah to proactively kill a rodef -- meaning one who is in the act of pursuing another with intent to murder -- even if the victim-to-be is a third party (so it's not strictly speaking self-defense). I've long felt that the use of the same shoresh in tzedek tzedek tirdof was to tell us that we should pursue justice with that same zeal of not just doing mitzvot to protect our own interets but to go out, find the injustice in the world even if it would pass us by and hurt another person, and take drastic measures if needed to prevent it.
My second thought on R-D-F is that I've always felt uncomfortable being labeled a "Ba'al Teshuvah" because that implies that I have some claim to have "mastered" the process of teshuvah. I call myself a "Rodef Teshuvah" along the same lines as your rabbi's interpretation that we pursue justice because it can never be fully achieved.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-25 02:53 am (UTC)I like that interpretation, and hadn't yet made the connection to killing a rodef. Thanks.
I call myself a "Rodef Teshuvah"
Ooh. That's much better than "ba'al teshuvah"! I'm not a big fan of "ba'al" anything; some uses incorrectly imply mastery (your example), and in other cases we use it to indicate agency alone. The "ba'al t'filah" isn't necessarily a master of prayer or even the best person in the room; he's just the guy who's leading today. Sometimes, I presume, they really do mean mastery (ba'al shem tov), but the word is used more broadly than it should be.
I'm not a BT or FFB; I'm a ger (another non-ideal term). I wonder if there's a "rodef [something]" that fits... not "teshuvah", because I wasn't obligated in the first place so there wasn't anything to "return" to. Eh, mostly I just don't worry about labels, but now I'm curious.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-25 12:46 pm (UTC)I think that's symptomatic of the "praise inflation" of our times. Why does every show get a standing ovation these days?
In my community some -- but not all -- do make a distinction between a shaliach tzibbur and a true ba'al tefillah (of which we are blessed with several), between a kor'ei and a ba'al k'riyah (again, we are fortunate to have several of those).
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-25 01:16 pm (UTC)And every child deserves an A. Yes, good point.
I actually haven't heard "ba'al {t'filah, k'riyah}" much in my community. Often people just use English, or we say "sh'liach tzibbur" or "leiner" (but usually not the latter). Often we don't use a noun -- David is leading services, Monica is reading torah, etc. I don't know to what extent this is expedience (assuming some people won't know the Hebrew terms) and to what extent it's philosophical (the objections we're talking about).
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-25 03:48 am (UTC)Pursuit of justice comes at the expense convenience, expeditiousness or perhaps even self-righteousness or vengeance. Those are easy the easy way out, and give us an emotional short-cut at the cost of a little bit of our soul. True Justice is difficult, and far more satisfying.
If following the Torah were easy, we wouldn't need it.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-25 01:39 pm (UTC)(I'm not even sure this is true in English for an ideal. Does my right to the pursuit of happiness come at the expense of life or liberty?)
I must also disagree with the posters who suggest that justice comes at the expense of mercy. As Ovadiah states, God intends us to "do justice" and "love mercy." The torah explicitly warns us, however, not to "pervert" justice by favoring the cause of the poor over that of the wealthy. I do not see these as antagonistic, but rather a command to keep them distinct. It is not appropriate to use justice as a vehicle for you to show mercy to another. If I sit in judgment between a rich man and a poor, I have an obligation to fulfill my task and render a just verdict under the law. Justice may require I decide a civil case for the wealthy employer over the poor employee. Mercy lies in my making a personal sacrifice to assist the poor rather than deciding it is better that the wealthy employer lose the judgment. (Note also that there is a difference between "mercy", which is not part of justice, and "equity," which is part of justice.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-25 01:49 pm (UTC)If we humans established justice, based on our own notion of justice, it would be an arbitrary thing, grounded in human falability and no better than any other human creation -- "vanity and striving after the wind" (Eccl.). But justice exists in the world because God -- himself both Just AND Mercifull -- created it. Therefore, like the other creations of God, it "endures forever" (Eccl.)
As such, we can not claim to "establish" justice. God has already done so. More, he has given the responsibility of fulfilling the imperfect vision of justice to all sons of Noah, as establishing of just courts is one of the seven mitzvot of Noah.
But to his Chosen People,God has given the Torah. We therefore have an obligation not merely to provide for the workings of justice, but to actively pursue it. Further, because God has given us a greater means to perceive His Will and Intent in this world by giving us the Torah, we may pursue justice based on Torah not merely human intuition. Hence "justice, justice" shall you pursue. Why the double use of "justice." For you must pursue two kinds of justice. The justice of an ordered society that God gave to all the sons of Noah, and the Justice of God's vision for our lives as embodied in the Torah.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-25 10:33 pm (UTC)A good idea. I'll see what I can find.
(I'm not even sure this is true in English for an ideal. Does my right to the pursuit of happiness come at the expense of life or liberty?)
No, that's not what I meant. I meant that you have a certain bucket of resources -- time, money, ability to concentrate, whatever -- with which you can pursue your bucket of goals -- sustenance, status, tikkun olam, etc. If you dedicate yourself to pursuing one of them, what are you then not doing because you've allocated those resources? Being able to pursue happiness doesn't cost you liberty, but depending on what makes you happy, actually pursuing happiness might.
We all have many obligations. As an extreme example that no credible torah scholar would ever actually condone: we could understand that we must pursue justice with all our hearts and all our being; does that mean we should beggar ourselves to do so, meaning the families we're obligated to support live in cardboard boxes and pray for good weather? No, of course not -- there is a limit, a balancing point. As soon as you grant that there is one, you have to figure out where it is. (This is no different from the many other obligations without measure, of course.)
But we can't use this as an excuse to do too little, either. No fair saying "I can't pursue justice fully so I won't at all". We have to do something, we'll never be able to do everything, and that's ok. My comment about "at what cost?" is about figuring out how much is the right amount, about where that balancing point is. Which in some sense is futile; we don't sit down with spreadsheets to figure out how to go through life. Mostly we wing it, but winging it can lead us to slack. I sure don't feel like I do enough to pursue justice.
I must also disagree with the posters who suggest that justice comes at the expense of mercy.
Right, we can't pervert justice in the name of mercy. We can, perhaps, decide that the merciful act means not being strict on justice (looking away from the "harmless" infraction), which is a separate (dangerous) issue. We certainly ask God to do this sometimes (and rather a lot in the coming weeks); if we were all judged fairly without mercy, things would be pretty grim. We ask God to use mercy to temper judgement; God is perfect and so can do that. We, however, aren't and can't.
Can you speak to the differences between "tzdek" and "din"?
As a final comment, I would suggest that the language of "pursue" rather than "establish" is also indicative of our idea of the source of justice.
I meant "establish" in the sense of "implement", not "invent out of whole cloth". I was thinking of the Noachide commandment, but didn't have text handy to check what verb is used there. I agree that we do not get to make up the rules.
uses of R-D-F
Date: 2006-08-27 02:46 am (UTC)Here are some torah hits on the root; I haven't yet chased down all the alternate forms (e.g. the passage under discussion here didn't come up):
Gen 44:4: ...Yosef said to his steward "up, follow after the men"...
Lev 26:17: ...and you shall flee when none pursues you.
Lev 26:36: ...and they shall fall when none pursues.
There are also several hits in Shoftim and Shmuel, and a few other scattered ones that I haven't yet investigated.