Stealing Knowledge

Acharei Mot-Kedoshim

Lev. 16:1 -20:27

 

Précis: Acharei Mot begins with Adonai speaking to Moses after the death (acharei mot) of Aaron’s sons. It describes the rituals for Yom Kippur, including the prescribed sacrifices. There are specific details about the purification of the Sanctuary, vessels, and the priests. Following this description, rules for the slaughter of meat (including the prohibition against eating blood) are reiterated. The parasha concludes with a listing of prohibited marriages. 

            The opening words of Kedoshim are “You shall be holy” (kedoshim tihiyu), and it continues with various descriptions of how the People are to strive for holiness. Included are fundamental laws, such as fearing one’s parents and observing Shabbat. Consideration of the poor through the commandments to leave the corners of fields for gleaners is included, as are mandates which complement the ethical principles of the Ten Commandments (being honest, avoiding vengeance). Specific bans against magicians, soothsaying, witchcraft and defiling the dead follow, as are reminders to avoid human sacrifice. This parasha is often viewed as the very core of moral teaching for the Jewish People.

 

Lev. 19:11 “Do not steal, do not deny falsely, and do not lie to one another.”

        Erica Brown has written with great insight on this verse (Weekly Jewish Wisdom, 8/14/14), reviewing instances in which honored educators and medical professionals had been found to have lied extensively about their backgrounds and bona fides, and noting that learning that the public has been duped is painful. She adds that in our tradition, these professions are highly esteemed and both involve a high level of trust.

            When that trust is broken, it is a form of theft called “genevat da’at,” (translated literally as “stealing knowledge”) and is based on the prohibition found in the verse I cite this week. Sometimes it is subtle and falls beneath the radar. At other times, it is splashed across the front pages, as with the recent Fox News revelations of intentional deceit, exemplified by the thoughts and statements of the now-disgraced and departed Tucker Carlson. In our tradition, we denounce such deception, cheating, and creating false impressions.

            Sometimes the lies and deceit have minor consequences. At other times, those engaged in “genevat da’at” cause incredible harm to our society.

            Not long ago, we were shocked by the scam committed by George Santos, who entirely invented a CV upon which he was elected to the House of Representatives (and yet, he is now running for re-election!) One might argue that there is a huge difference between Santos' faking a transcript and  Carlson's knowingly and intentionally airing lies which eat at the roots of our civil society. However, in Jewish law, these are mere matters of degree. The willingness to misrepresent takes one to a place Brown calls “the land of deception, where integrity cannot live.” Whether it is Carlson or Santos, both damage what we hope America stands for. 

            As Brown humorously notes, you can adopt the view of George Burns: “Sincerity - if you can fake that, you've got it made.” Let's not allow false sincerity to become the standard by which we live. 

Undue reticence

 Tazria-Metzorah

Lev. 12:1-15:33

 

Précis: Tazria begins with laws concerning the need for ritual purification of women following the birth of children and the laws of what is usually referred to as “leprosy” of the skin and on garments (although this translation is most certainly erroneous; it appears to refer to an affliction which renders the person, garment, or home ritually impure).

Metzorah discusses laws for the purification of “lepers” with sacrifice and water. It also discusses growths on walls of a house which cause ritual impurity. The parasha concludes with a discussion of bodily secretions which are another source of ritual impurity.

 

Lev.14:34-35 “When you enter the land of Canaan which I gave you as a possession, and I inflict an eruptive plague upon a house in the land you possess, the owner of the house shall come out and tell the priest, saying ‘There is something like a plague which has appeared on my house.’”

As I have previously noted, the reticence of the priest to make the statement in this verse is strange for a Torah which has little difficulty in defining what is and is not appropriate.  “Something like a plague” is unusually tentative language! The Sages of the Mishnah, stated that “Even if he is a Torah scholar and knows for certainty that it is a plague-spot, he shall not declare outright, ‘It is a plague-spot,’ but rather ‘Something like a plague-spot.’”

The reticence can be understood on several levels. We do not want to “make a scene.” We do not want to impugn the integrity of another explicitly. We want to assume that every individual is good.

But this reticence also can stand in the way of criticism which is needed and merited. To remain silent or tentative in the face of a plague cannot be right, be it a plague of disease, of intolerance, of hate, of bigotry, or of totalitarianism.