To talk about ethics is no easy task. In
contemporary liberal democracies we are witnessing a
severe tendency towards dismissing ethics and morality
in favor of legal maneuvers. Contrariwise, referring
to the ethical judgment as a vigilant act,
attributable to the transcendental subject rather than
to the empirical individual, hints at the uncanniness
of human existence.
In compliance with this position I contend that
viewing justice in legalist terms signifies the
Westerners’ betrayal of its 'polis' heritage,
where the political is bound to ethics. In Sophocles’
Antigone Heidegger presents us with a human
swirl, as a reflection upon arguing rightly and
thinking humanely[i]. In violating the overpowering
limiting power of ‘Being’ poetically, creative
thinkers have created ‘the place’ in the
polis, where the rhetorician, politician,
philosopher, or legislator aspired to convince the
public about the 'truth value' of innovative bits of
knowledge in order to be won. Physics which epitomizes
the fluidity of concepts that once had been defined,
their content being constantly altered, reminds us of
the ‘empty space’ in the centre of the
polis. In Judaism, where ‘truth’ is divine, this
‘empty space’ does not exist! Thus, it is
deprived of the ethical whirling experience. The
question is: How is it possible for the ethical
episode to happen, if science and art are prohibited,
and justice is replaced by obedience? Jewish law
tolerates neither empty spaces to be filled up by
rhetoric, nor disparity to be acted out by the means
of theatre or epics.
But, the ‘empty space’ is the core of
hermeneutics, as the art of inspiring new chains for
understanding a text creatively. The Judaic approach
to the playfulness of language is more elusive than it
seems. The Jew who oscillates between immutable
textual knowledge and the “turn it and turn it,
for everything is in it”, without plumping for
either, is jammed into false hermeneutics. Hence
Judaism which conceives the human being as
subordinated to the Text, the claim of bringing
hermeneutics to its prime fails.
In his article ‘The Law Wishes to have a Formal
Existence’ Stanley Fish speaks ironically about the
threat of hermeneutics, as the exposure of a text to
too many uncontrolled interpretations. The two threats
to ‘The Law’ are morality, to which the law pretends
to be related, and interpretation. If justice could be
inferred directly by a chain of moral obligations
there would be no need for a legal system. The fear of
the ‘deleterious’ influence of morality
maintains the formal existence of the law. Oddly
enough, formal legalism coincides with Judaic conceit
of elevating hermeneutics to its peak and at the same
time preserves zealously the formal status of The Law.
Thus, for the purpose of distancing the observant
subject from imaginative reading leading to unruly
moral thinking, an esoteric hermeneutics followed by
rhetorical spins was elaborated. In devising
self-executing formalities Jewish hermeneutics
ascertains the meaning as possessed by the last word.
Lyotard asks: if deconstruction is about something
badly constructed, how can deconstruction deconstruct
a text which cannot be amended? The problem with the
Jews is that instead of being the ‘Guardians of
Being’, they turned into the guardians of
‘not-forgetting-the-forgotten’, distorting justice in
the name of ‘The Law’[ii]. Hence in fact the ‘people
of the book’ are the ‘people of the one and the
same book’, they are literate but not knowledgeable.
Conceiving themselves as the ‘light of the nations’,
they fail to show any eagerness to be enlightened.
Judaic zeal for abstract signification, the refusal to
supply presentation for the unpresentable interferes
with a capacity to speculate with ideas.
This irreconcilable gap between Hellenism and
Judaism can be exposed in the Decalogue where sin is
not defined in ethical or moral terms, and ethical
wrangling is replaced by dutiful obedience. For more
than 2500 years the world was suffused with the myth
of justice and social welfare which the Ten
Commandments bestowed upon it. From a cautious reading
of the Ten Commandments, an all-embracing intention to
disconnect human beings from their natural instincts,
impulses and natural drives can be revealed.
Start with the commandment that tells us to respect
and love our parents. We love our parents
instinctively, but rebel against their authority
through many life episodes. This ethical intricate
burden that was relentlessly reconsidered by Greek
mythology and tragedy, is delivered as an imperative,
which excludes any ethical battling with the ‘given’.
To be commanded to respect our parents in exchange for
being rewarded with long life in the Promised Land
does not sound like a revelation of truth and justice.
Likewise with the ‘Sabbath’: in the ancient world the
tillers of the soil had to plough, sow and reap. Once
the tears and toils of farming and growing were ended
by joy, they celebrated with feasts of wine and
dancing. The harmony of man and nature was signified
by the rhythm of nature’s passing seasons, hoping for
balance in a soft way. After sweating in the fields,
people took a rest to rejoice. To punctuate peoples’
lives by six days of ‘labour’ and ‘rest’ on the
seventh is not such a great socially beneficial
legislation. Notably on the Sabbath Jews are not
allowed to ignite fire or to move from one place to
another; in Judaism things cannot be left alone for a
moment. Actually, with pagans as ordinary human beings
the values of decency, civility, respect for parents
and the elderly, obedience to magistrates, and
submission to laws are venerated in most ancient pagan
texts.
Jewish monotheism is distinct not only from the
Pagan world but also from Christianity. As a tribal
cult, regarding themselves as chosen, Jews
differentiated themselves from the gentiles whom they
held in contempt. Christianity as a universal religion
enables ethical contemplation without the interference
of supremacist postures. Judaic Law is thus an
impoverished system of justice. Even the six tomes of
the Talmud as a collection of behavioral guidance are
scarcely engaged in moral intuitions. Here are some
disturbing questions to raise: If Jewish scholarship,
should as declared by Jews be accredited as a
universal wisdom embracing ethics and morality, why is
it that the more the Jews are engrossed in this
learning, the more segregated they turn out to be? How
can ethical thinking mesh with learning that results
in segregation? Is it the Judaic suppression of 'the
image' and the submission to the Word, which is
recognized as the reign of intellectuality over
sensuality that distances its bearers from being in
tune with earth and heaven?
Despite Jewish attempts to persuade us to extract
wisdom from the Talmud, it never evolved into an
essential part of western intellectual thought. Its
polemical image disguises a tradition of chewing
ready-made disputes, in which the views and opinions
of previous scholars are faithfully preserved verbatim
citing the rabbi who first uttered them. Hence, whilst
grieving the forgotten wisdom of the Talmud, Jewish
scholars disguise its formal judicial nature. Jewish
Law is not founded in a moral or an ethical conception
of man; but rather as a set of regulations which grew
out of social conditions and cultic motives obsolete
and no longer understood.
The Jews, who praise themselves for rescuing the
oriental world from the cruelties of paganism,
actually impersonated their own mental picture of an
invisible God as a simulacrum of an oriental pitiless
tyrant who grounds His power in the Mosaic Law. In
fact, this conception of God is the most ingenious
device ever invented for cementing a tribal group. It
is a mastermind’s indestructible strategy, that in
combining repression with gratitude, it authorizes a
perfect scheme for self-preservation.
Mosaic monotheism always aimed at achieving a
complete grip on Jewish daily life. In the shma
Israel prayer, Israel is told ‘…You must
love your God with all your heart and soul and
strength, when you lie down and when you rise’.
This double-bind imperative: loving God
coupled with dread, imposes indebtedness for being
bestowed with stolen treasures ”Your God
will bring you into the land which he swore to your
forefathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob that he would
give you a land of great and fine cities which you did
not build, houses full of good things which you did
not provide, cisterns which you did not hew, and
vineyards and olive-groves which you did not plant.
When you eat your fill there, be careful not to forget
the Lord who brought you out of Egypt.
The spirit of the Jewish religion was not inspired by
ideas, but rather by a covenantal pact of conditional
activities which took over all aspects of the peoples’
life. Yet, many non-observant Jews follow the Jewish
rites, and maintain the same vague admiration for
Judaic wisdom. This brainwashing regarding the
intellectual intensity of the Talmudic debate is
sustained by a predetermined common ignorance. While
Orthodox Jews reject external knowledge, most secular
Jews are unfamiliar with the Talmudic text.
Since Rabbinic tradition does not supply an
intelligible moral meaning for the Law,
decision-making is authorized by tribal needs or
personal greed, whilst moral issues are approached in
terms of profit/loss calculations. Relations with God
are conceived in contractual terms: good deeds are
measured against bad, as in a business balance sheet.
Bultmann points to the disturbing nature of blind
obedient ethics where the realization of the ideal man
is replaced by the glorification of God. Differing
from Greek thought, Jewish morality is perceived in
terms of action and not as one of the virtues of the
‘ideal man’[iii]. The people who are inspired by the
god within differ from those who are led by the
pillars of ‘cloud and fire’. Devotion based on fear,
leaves the trembling Jew to propitiate ‘God authority’
by ostentatious obedience. But then, what is moral
satisfaction when based on dread rather than love?
What does God’s ‘Love’ means, if it is associated with
intimidation and fright? Thus, whilst Hellenism
inspired Western thought throughout 25 centuries, the
Old Testament’s contribution can be entirely
dismissed. Yet, any attempt to highlight this gulf
between Athens and Jerusalem, is immediately denounced
as anti-Semitism.
The Law flourishes on the ruins of ethics.
Heidegger opined that the more people are immersed in
legalism, the more they quit the embrace of ‘Being’.
While legalism is anchored within rules, justice is
the object of an idea. While an ethical judgment is a
game without rules, the Law is a linguistic
‘fashioning’, elevated to a supreme sacred stage of
secular fundamentalism. If ethics manifests itself in
the inexpressible twilight zone where universalism
surrenders particularism, how can Judaism which
resists 'pluralism’ make an ethical act happen? Is it
the subservient choice which prevents theological
reflection.
In the book of Job which is the only
biblical-theological text on God’s justice, we learn
how Job’s children are killed, servants slaughtered,
Job himself is brought to the brink of death, his wife
and his friends deny him any support and
understanding. Tragically, from the depths of his
misery, Job meets with a stone wall, to discover that
his complaints cannot obtain a hearing from the judge
who is so much praised for his justice. The denial of
fair trial is the worst of all. If this is a lesson
God teaches us about fairness; why are people in court
asked to swear upon a book which presents us with such
heartless injustice? Jung justly asserts that God is
far more preoccupied with a manifestation of His might
than sustaining His right.
The view regarding human beings as endowed with the
ability to make rational judgments divides mainstream
Enlightenment approaches from Judaism and Islam in an
insuperable clash. Conceiving the human subject as
spoken rather than self-defining individuals, rejects
the notion of democracy. Yet, whilst Jews are bestowed
with a special status in the eyes of God, Islam is not
a tribalistic religion. Judaic righteousness is
motivated not by love but by the fear of a jealous
power. The bible commands: In the cities of these
nations whose land the Lord is giving you as
patrimony, you shall not leave any creature alive. You
shall annihilate them all. Among the incompatible
groups who resist western thought, Judaism is the most
uncompromising. A quest to decipher the triumph of
Jewish monotheism over western civilization is yet to
come.
In this paper I focused on Judaism, as dichotomous
from Hellenism and from the other two monotheist
religions. Judaism celebrates the primacy of the ear
over visual representation. But despising the
vividness of the referent leaves the Jewish subject
sealed in a segregated bubble, impelled into an
incurable detachment. The Jews are homeless; but
frightened by uncanniness. Although regarding
themselves as ‘citizens of the world’, they feel most
secure within the walls of their mental ghetto. In the
no man's land, between Law and Ethics, Is it not too
dangerous for people who lack the care for Being, to
manifest themselves as a political-national entity?
[i] Heidegger, M. (2000), Introduction to
Metaphysics, trans. Gregory fried and Richard Polt,
New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 159-176
[ii] Lyotard, J. F. (1988 a), Heidegger and “the
Jews”, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press
[iii] Bultmann, R. (1958), Jesus and the Word,
Fontana Books, pp. 57-8
[iv] Bultmann, R. (1960) , Primitive Christianity,
The Fontana Library
*Ariella Atzmon. Israeli born. Senior lecturer
in the School of Education and the School of Law at
the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. (retired in 2002).
Author of "Multiple Amnesia: a poststructuralist
gaze".
Save
Add Comments To This Story