B’Har
Lev. 25:1 - 26:2
Précis: The parasha begins with a description of the Sabbatical Year and the Jubilee (Yovel) Year. In the 50th (Jubilee) Year, we are to “proclaim liberty throughout the land” and property is restored to its ancestral owners. The parasha continues with the prohibition against unlimited slavery, as well as the rules for the treatment of those who are slaves.
Leviticus, 25: 23-24 “Furthermore the land must not be sold beyond reclaim, for the land is mine, you are but resident aliens under my authority. Therefore, throughout the land you hold, you must provide redemption for the land.”
This verse is a reminder that wealth ultimately comes from God; at best we are temporary caretakers. This is part of the concept of the Sabbatical and Jubilee years which are contained in this parasha.
While our American tradition is that wealth is a sign of our individual achievement and hard work (“I made that!”), the Jewish concept stresses that we are God’s beneficiaries. The American ideal suggests that wealth is something we have earned, is ours, and we are entitled to use it as we see fit. The Jewish concept suggests that because we are not the true owners of our possessions (they are on loan from God), we are not free to use our wealth and possessions in any way we chose; our use is subject to moral and ethical demands, particularly to the less fortunate among us.
If you believe I am suggesting that there is a conflict between the American and Jewish concept of ownership and wealth, you are correct. Since we (at least most of us reading these words) are both American and Jewish, we are required to face this difference squarely and honestly. In the context of the current political discourse, when slogans and bumper stickers take the place of thoughtful debate, I ask whether it is possible to reconcile these two points of view. Name calling (Socialist! Fascist!) does not advance the discussion in which we, as thoughtful Jewish Americans, must engage.
If we really are trying to apply the Jewish tradition to our daily lives, and recommend these principles to others as a basis for creating a more just society, we first need to answer the question ourselves: what is the obligation of those with means to those in need? What policy ramifications does this suggest in terms of taxes and government expenditures?
I do not offer answers here, my friends. I’m just asking questions which I wish our current candidates would discuss with care and thoughtfulness.
No comments:
Post a Comment