Parashat Vayishlach (5760)

On the eve of the holy Sabbath, Parashat Vayishlach, 5760

Life and Values

In our portion, Jacob's preparation for his meeting with Esau and the four hundred warriors

who were with him is described. He adopted three different courses: gift-giving (presents, bribery), prayer (to God that He deliver him

from Esau), and war (a last resort: to fight). It is quite evident that Jacob thought it worthwhile to do everything

possible in order to prevent mortal danger or war. It may be that this is not true in every situation,

for we find in the Torah and in Jewish law legitimate reasons for going to war, for example the conquest of the Land

of Israel, and even reasons that seem at first glance lesser than this. The commentators have already noted that the

clear assumption is that there will be casualties in war, and nevertheless one must go out to it. From here it would seem at first glance

that the importance of values stands above the importance of life.

Admittedly, a value such as 'the Land of Israel' is a collective value, that is, the obligation is that the Land of Israel be

under Jewish control in general, and not necessarily under my own control in particular. Therefore one can still say that a person is

commanded to give up his life for the life of the entire community, and perhaps it should not be inferred from here that values (of

the individual) stand above life.

Later in the portion, when Jacob meets Esau, he calls him several times 'my lord,' and the Sages

tell us that he was punished severely for flattering a wicked man. Here too one might say that he acted this way in order

to prevent killing and danger, yet Jacob nevertheless receives the Sages' sharp criticism (more accurately: that of

God, according to the Sages' depiction) for his expressions. We see that there are things, even private ones, such as

flattery toward a wicked man, that do not yield to considerations of danger and the preservation of life.[1] Other well-known

examples are the three grave transgressions—idolatry, forbidden sexual relations, and murder—for which

one must give up one's life rather than transgress; and there are further examples as well.

At first glance, we arrive at the conclusion that in Jewish law there is a total outlook according to which values stand above

life. According to some authorities of Jewish law, the obligation to desecrate the Sabbath in order to save a life is derived

from the principle, 'Desecrate one Sabbath for him so that he may keep many Sabbaths,' that is, it is preferable to desecrate one Sabbath now because

by doing so one 'gains' the observance of many Sabbaths. This implies that the very preservation of life does not override

the Sabbath, and only this 'accounting' consideration is what leads to the permission to desecrate it. There seems to be here

a conception that life exists for the sake of the realization of values, and therefore if we are forced to forgo them there is

no point in life, and one must sometimes surrender it.

According to quite a few approaches within Jewish law, the permission to desecrate the Sabbath is not really a merely arithmetical consideration,

and human life possesses sanctity in and of itself.[2] In any event, it seems clear that life is not an

ultimate value, and there are situations in which a person is indeed commanded to give up his life for the realization of certain

values. It can be put this way: life is not only for the sake of values, but there are values

without whose fulfillment life itself is not life. In such situations one must give up one's life, for

life after capitulating with respect to forbidden sexual relations, murder, or idolatry is not truly called

'life.'

Life is a revelation of God in the world, and from this its value derives. When life is bound up

with injury to this revelation, the phenomenon of life becomes merely biological. That is not 'life' in the full

sense of the word, and therefore, in such situations, I am obligated to surrender it for the sake of God's revelation

in the world. The very existence of a collective (the Jewish people as a whole), and perhaps especially that, constitutes such a revelation, and therefore the individual

must, if required, give up his life for the sake of the existence of the entire collective.

Some maintain that if a person has no goal for which he is prepared to die, then neither does he have anything

for which to live. In light of what we have said above, one can formulate it somewhat differently: if a person has no goal for which

he is prepared to die, then it is not that he has nothing for which to live; rather, his life (biological) is not at all

'life' (a life of divine revelation).

In summary, when one speaks of concepts such as the sanctity of human life, it is clear according to all views that this is an incomparably important

value. On the other hand, some qualify this and argue that it is not the only value, and the proof is

that there are values for which we are prepared to give up our lives. In light of what we have said above, it seems

more correct to say that this is indeed the only value; however, the concept of 'life' is not a merely biological concept,

it is far more elevated than that. When biological life must be surrendered for the sake of life in its fuller form,

then, and only then, are we indeed commanded to surrender it.

'…I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live'

(Deuteronomy 30:19).

Have a peaceful Sabbath

This may be placed in the sacred-text repository of any religious academy or synagogue. Comments are welcome.

———————–

[1] The two values mentioned above, relinquishing the Land of Israel and flattery (=granting status) to wicked people

(terrorists), stand at the center of the public debate over the peace process. Formulating a position on this issue

depends, of course, on many additional questions as well. Here I wish only to note the relevance of

the abstract discussion here to a current issue. Human life does not always constitute the exclusive consideration when

one is discussing the relinquishing of foundational values such as these. We generally tend to deal only with

the political considerations, but everyone, regardless of his concrete position on the issue, ought not be insensitive

to its value-laden dimensions.

[2] There is a shocking dispute among legal authorities regarding a case in which non-Jews seize a certain man's daughter

in order to force her to apostatize: is he permitted to desecrate the Sabbath in order to save her, or does that permission

exist only for the sake of saving life? This reflects the above difficulty in an extreme way.

Biton13.doc