Printable PDF version available here.
Translation (Orot, 3:3): [1]
The center of life of the soul of Israel is in the source of holiness. Through truth and faith we were born and thereby we grow. We do not have disparate values; unity rests in us and the light of the One Lord lives within us. The laws, laws of the Living God’s Torah, distinguish us from every other nation. Holiness is at work on us internally, the great aspirations of our life are directed to it. There are inklings of holiness in every nation, but not all their life-values stem therefrom. This is not so in Israel. “In all of your ways know Him,” that small passage that encompasses the entire corpus of Torah, which is actualized by rare individuals, is actually the inheritance of all (Israel). Every life’s aspiration and life’s desire – acquisition, wealth, honor, dominion, expansion – in Israel flow from the source of holiness.
Therefore the laws are holy-of-holies in Israel… Moses our Teacher, of blessed memory, upon grasping the power of the law when it was first instituted in the nation, uplifted all the values of law until the end of generations, to the divine content to which the laws of Israel reach, and the search for God came together with Israelite jurisprudence. “When the people will come to me to seek God, when they will have a matter come to me, I shall judge between a man and his neighbor. And I shall make known the laws of God and His precepts.” [2] The God-quest of Law has remained an Israelite treasure, which is manifest in the divine character that encompasses eternity, and shines forth in the Land of Israel, [3] the land of His portion, the place of light of the holy treasure.
Christianity abandoned law, rooted herself in apparent mercy and love that undermines the world and destroys it. By emptying law of its divine content, it becomes seized by the grossest wickedness. The poison invades the private law of the individual and spreads through the souls of nations, becoming the foundation of national hatred and the depth of evil of bloodshed, without removing the yoke from man’s neck. The eyes of all must be lifted to the light of the world, the light of the Lord, which will be revealed through the Messiah of the God of Jacob. “And He shall judge earth righteously, nations justly.”[4]
Commentary
Many think that the main differences between Judaism and Christianity are theological. We believe in one God, they believe in a Trinity. We believe God is incorporeal, they believe He took human form. We maintain that the messianic redemption has yet to come, they believe it has already arrived. Rav Kook takes a very different approach. What distinguishes Judaism from Christianity is halacha, our focus on law. Every dimension of individual and communal life is guided, addressed and legislated by an intricate system of obligations and restrictions. We are so used to this that we tend to forget how unique it is. Consider the following incident recounted by Rabbi Chaim Saiman, a contemporary Orthodox rabbi, about a class he gave to a Christian audience:[5]
The topic of the lecture was how the rabbis read the Bible…. After a short discussion, I told the group that the Talmudic rabbis maintain that the first “commandment for generations” (applicable beyond Adam and Eve) was to “[b]e fruitful and multiply.” The group nodded in approval, and I sensed we were then on the same page. Next, I asked a simple, almost inevitable, question from a Talmudic perspective, but one deeply foreign to my audience.
Me: “How many?” Group: “How many what?” Me: “How many children?” Group: “What do you mean, how many children?” At this point I realized that we reached a bit of a brick wall, so I backed up. Me: “Do you believe the Bible is the word of God that expresses His Will?” Group: “Yes.” Me: “Do you believe you have to follow it?” Group: “Yes.” Me: “Well, then how do you know when you have done it? How do you know when you have been sufficiently fruitful?”
Again, blank stares from the audience. It was clear that the last question produced some discomfort. I proceeded to explain that when the rabbis read the Bible, they look to put it into practice, to operationalize it. Thus, most of their questions, and the rabbinic discourse as a whole, look to define the nature and scope of various provisions in the Bible and Talmud. And much like a good law professor, the rabbis dream up some rather bizarre hypotheticals to test the limits of each rule. When the rabbis read the verse “be fruitful and multiply,” they immediately attempt to define the properties and scope of this commandment, or mitzvah. [H]ow many children are required to fulfill the Biblical command[?]…. What if the children were capable of reproducing at birth, but sustained genital defects later in life? Must a couple have more children if the first set of children die? If the deceased children themselves had children, are the grandchildren counted in lieu of their parents?
Not surprisingly, at this point I was beginning to lose the group. I got the bug-eyed, “you’ve got to be kidding,” expression from nearly everyone…” I then paused, saying, “Let’s leave the rabbinic answers to these questions for now, but let me hear how in your tradition, you reason towards the answers. Surely you want to fulfill the word of God, so how do you know when you have done it?”
The most obvious and telling response was the ensuing silence. The uneasy quiet indicated that the group had never thought to break down this question into the level of detail found in the Talmud. The command was not conceptualized as binding or operational in quite the direct way the rabbis assumed. While all agreed that the Biblical directives are binding, in the churchgoers’ minds the Biblical commandments took on a less concrete form. The assembled group did not interpret the verses as having the same degree of presentness and immediacy as assumed by the rabbis.
Many basic principles of our hashkafaare rooted in the centrality of law, a fact that is noted not only by Rav Kook, but other modern thinkers as well. The quotes below are from R. Eliezer Berkovits, who gives an extraordinary analysis of this point in God, Man and History:
- In giving law to man, God affirms his dignity. A concept of original sin is not just foreign to the Torah, but a contradiction to its very system. “[The law] is an expression of God’s continued concern with man. That God commands man is the proof that he considers man. The law represents the highest affirmation of man, as well as his crowning dignity. By giving man the law, his Maker declares: I do care how he lives and what he does with his life. Charging him with the law, God testifies, as it were, that man is man enough to live under. The law is the sign that God has a measure of confidence in man. The command of God implies the encouragement: I order you because I know you can do it.” (God, Man and History, pg. 89-90)
- Divine law is not impossibly harsh and unforgiving, as Jesus maintained. It alone guides man to ethical and loving conduct, while a religion of the spirit inevitably gives rise to unthinkable evil. “This, indeed, is the noble formula for the historic bankruptcy of all “natural,” as well as “spiritual,” religions. The invisible service of God is the prerogative. of invisible creatures. When man adopts such service for himself, he makes the dualism of his nature itself a religion. He will expect …[sentiment] and noble intentions of the soul, and will readily forgive the profanity of the body; he will have God “in his heart” and some devil directing his actions. He will serve God on the Sabbath and himself the rest of the week. He will worship like angelic being in the specified places of worship and follow his self—regarding impulses everywhere else.” (God, Man and History, pg. 125)
- A ‘spiritual’ religion is an irreconcilable contradiction to human nature. “The spirit itself is powerless; it may act only in union with the vital or “material” forces in the cosmos. No one has ever accomplished anything by merely contemplating an idea. All conscious action is the result of some form of cooperation between the mind and the body. Matter whatever its ultimate secret without the mind is inanity; mind without matter is, at best, noble impotence. Power by itself is purposeless; purpose on its own is powerless… What the idealism of numerous religions and philosophies overlooks is that man without a body is as little to be considered human as man without a soul… [M]an is a composite being, consisting of mind and matter, of soul and body. That God made him that way means that he has to make sense of his He in the form in which he was granted life. Any rejection of the body is a rejection of man himself of man as God created him for the tasks of this world. (God, Man and History, pg. 107, 120)
Questions for Reflection and Discussion
- Do you agree with Rav Kook and Rabbi Berkovits that the primary difference between Judaism and Christianity relates to law, as opposed to theology?
- Have you ever had an experience like Rabbi Chaim Saiman, where you had to explain the concept of a halacha to a non-Jewish friend of colleague?
- Rabbi Berkovits lists a number of hashkafic ramifications of the Torah’s focus on law. Can you think of any others?
About this Piece
Orot is a collection of essays, many analyzing Israel’s national rebirth. It was first published in Rav Kook’s lifetime, in 1920. It contains many provocative and complex insights. Rav Kook’s son referred to it as the “Holy of Holies” compared to Rav Kook’s other works. The Hebrew in Orotis extremely difficult, but an excellent English translation has been published by Bezalel Naor.
[1] Translated by Bezalel Naor, in Orot (Maggid, 2015).
[2] Shemot 18:15-16.
[3] Rav Kook is referring to the halacha that semikhah, which entitles one to serve in the Sanhedrin, can only be given in the Land of Israel. True semikhah involves an uninterrupted chain of transmission from Moshe, and has been defunct for many centuries. When we refer to contemporary rabbinic ordination as semikhah, we are using a borrowed term.
[4] Tehillim 9:9.
[5] Rabbi Chaim Saiman, Jesus’ Legal Theory, Journal of Law and Religion, Vol. 23, No. 1 (2007/2008), pg. 102-104. Rabbi Saiman has written an excellent book-length treatment of this subject.
