Q&A: Jewish Law, Ethics, and Monetary Law
Jewish Law, Ethics, and Monetary Law
Question
Good evening!
1- On the one hand, you say that the Torah does not establish ethics, and that even in its ethical laws its aim is not ethics but religion. But on the other hand, you say that we are obligated to ethics and to monetary law that precedes the Torah, as Rabbi Shimon Shkop says. This is difficult for me, because the Rabbi himself said that even when the Torah speaks about ethics, its intention is religious. If so, how can we be obligated to rational laws when the Torah itself defined those very matters as religious commandments?
2- How can there be "if one did it, it is ineffective" even regarding legal effects in monetary law (such as a debt), if monetary law precedes the Torah?
Thank you very much!
Answer
1. I distinguished between Jewish law and ethics, not between Torah and ethics. God's will is expressed in both Jewish law and morality, and the two are independent. Besides, rational law and ethics are not the same thing.
2. I didn’t understand.
Discussion on Answer
1. You ignored the second half of my first answer. And beyond that, my whole answer there.
2. The Torah can uproot the law that preceded it, and it can also add another layer onto it without uprooting it. Certainly in monetary law, which is based on social-legal agreement, and there is no limitation on agreements made after the giving of the Torah. A law does not have to be ancient in order to be binding.
1- Rabbi Shimon Shkop links ethics with monetary law, in that he determines that the reason one is obligated in monetary law is itself the same reason that demands obligation to the Torah—namely, ethics!
2- The Talmud in Temurah discusses that an interest-bearing debt should not take effect, since it is forbidden and "if one did it, it is ineffective." My question is: how can a monetary law that precedes the prohibition be uprooted by the prohibition?