Whenever something happens in the world, we wonder, “what does X have to say about this?” What is the Jewish perspective? What is the gay perspective? What is the ‘this group’s’ perspective? And of course, answers to such questions can’t help but be massive generalizations. In this moment, I am struck by the highly realistic joke: 2 Jews, 3 opinions. And what does it mean to turn to a tradition that is fundamentally democratic, disparate, and not dogmatic?
In the wake of the May 2, 2022 SCOTUS leak concerning Roe v. Wade, I felt an initial urge to study up on what Jewish wisdom or law has to say about abortion. I have studied this issue somewhat in the past and certainly have read many personal essays from my rabbi friends on the topic, so I kind of knew what I’d find. But then I stopped and considered, what the Jewish tradition has to say about abortion is what the Jewish tradition has to say about any topic, in some way. For the Jewish tradition is not just the final conclusion, but the process of democratic and intuitive decision making in and of itself.
Let us start with the Oven of Akhnai, a classic talmudic story about how Jewish law works in the world. When we don’t know what to do, do we wait for a voice from heaven to tell us, or do we figure it out, on the ground? The answer is the latter, but here is the story:
The Oven Of Akhnai (Bava Metzia 59b)
And this is known as the oven of akhnai. The Gemara asks: What is the relevance of akhnai, a snake, in this context? Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: It is characterized in that manner due to the fact that the Rabbis surrounded it with their statements like this snake, which often forms a coil when at rest, and deemed it impure. The Sages taught: On that day, when they discussed this matter, Rabbi Eliezer answered all possible answers in the world to support his opinion, but the Rabbis did not accept his explanations from him.
After failing to convince the Rabbis logically, Rabbi Eliezer said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, this carob tree will prove it. The carob tree was uprooted from its place one hundred cubits, and some say four hundred cubits. The Rabbis said to him: One does not cite halakhic proof from the carob tree. Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, the stream will prove it. The water in the stream turned backward and began flowing in the opposite direction. They said to him: One does not cite halakhic proof from a stream.
Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, the walls of the study hall will prove it. The walls of the study hall leaned inward and began to fall. Rabbi Yehoshua scolded the walls and said to them: If Torah scholars are contending with each other in matters of halakha, what is the nature of your involvement in this dispute? The Gemara relates: The walls did not fall because of the deference due Rabbi Yehoshua, but they did not straighten because of the deference due Rabbi Eliezer, and they still remain leaning.
Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, Heaven will prove it. A Divine Voice emerged from Heaven and said: Why are you differing with Rabbi Eliezer, as the halakha is in accordance with his opinion in every place that he expresses an opinion?
Rabbi Yehoshua stood on his feet and said: It is written: “It is not in heaven” (Deuteronomy 30:12). The Gemara asks: What is the relevance of the phrase “It is not in heaven” in this context? Rabbi Yirmeya says: Since the Torah was already given at Mount Sinai, we do not regard a Divine Voice, as You already wrote at Mount Sinai, in the Torah: “After a majority to incline” (Exodus 23:2). Since the majority of Rabbis disagreed with Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion, the halakha is not ruled in accordance with his opinion. The Gemara relates: Years after, Rabbi Natan encountered Elijah the prophet and said to him: What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, do at that time, when Rabbi Yehoshua issued his declaration? Elijah said to him: The Holy One, Blessed be He, smiled and said: My children have triumphed over Me; My children have triumphed over Me.
Fundamentally, what Torah has to say about anything, is in the hands of the people. Does that mean we get to rewrite the Torah? No. But it does mean it is read through our eyes and interpreted for our own lives. Torah is not dogmatic, but democratic.
But to go further, Torah was “revealed” to each member of the Israelite community. Try not to think of this too literally, but there is the idea that we were all “standing at sinai” when the Torah was given. It is not as if the ancient sages had more connection to the capital-T-Truth than we do. Sure, they may have been more learned (which is not to be glossed over and will be addressed soon), but in a way the text already and always has lived inside of us – how to live, how to stand in awe of this thing we call living.
Here is the text I am talking about:
We Were All Standing At Sinai (Shemot Rabbah 28)
Another explanation: "And God said all of these things, saying" - Rabbi Yitzchak said, What the prophets were to prophesy in the future in each generation, they received from Mount Sinai. As Moshe said to Israel (Deuteronomy 29:14), "But with those here with us standing today and with those not here with us today." It does not say [at the end of the verse], "with us standing today," but rather, "with us today"; these are the souls that will be created in the future, who do not have substance, about whom "standing" is not mentioned. For even though they did not exist at that time, each one received that which was his.
And then finally, our svara. I learned about svara from a yeshiva called, wait for it… SVARA. In their resources, they write the following:
Svara is a 2,000-year-old Jewish concept invented by the Rabbis of the Talmud, to refer to one’s moral intuition informed by Jewish learning. The Rabbis considered svara a legitimate—and sacred—means of figuring out how we should live our lives, in addition to the means they already had—the Torah. But they valued it as so reliable a source of truth that they considered any law that grew out of their svara to have the same status as that of a truth derived directly from Torah, d’oraita (“straight from the Torah”). In fact, according to Jewish law, svara can even supercede Torah when the two conflict. Svara has been central to the evolution of the Jewish tradition and underlies the radical nature of Jewish thinking itself, but has been, until now, something of a secret of talmudic scholars and rabbis. The crucial element in turning one’s moral intuition, insight and life experience into svara is learning. (svara.org)
I’ll repeat their last line for emphasis. The crucial element in turning one’s moral intuition, insight and life experience into svara is learning.
So what does Jewish tradition say about any topic under the sun? Something like this: start with your own deep learning – studying the laws and wisdom of generations past. Then, tap into your sacred moral intuition – what is your being, that was created divine, telling you. Finally, bring that to the community, and together, find the solution.
I fear we use Jewish tradition as proof text when we agree with it and ignore it when we don’t. Look no further than Jews who disagree on abortion. If you look carefully, I’m sure you can find texts that support and negate any topic or question you have – the prophets show us that even following the laws is eventually called into question as just empty religious theater (Amos 5:21-23, Isaiah 1:13-17).
I’d rather an ethic where Torah is not cherry-picked when convenient but understood as a process – a process of learning and deep contemplation and collaborative problem solving.
Let us release from our imaginations this mythic pillar we call “Judaism” and embrace a Jewish way of relating to our world. Instead of asking “what does ‘Judaism’ say about this?” try asking, “how can we take a Jewish approach to this question?”