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 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.