← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Faust
Thread ID: 14117 | Posts: 4 | Started: 2004-06-10
2004-06-10 02:43 | User Profile
Is the Talmud Republican?
By Jay D. Homnick
The American Spectator
Published 6/9/2004 12:07:49 AM
I ponder often the mystery of the Talmud never being cited by political thinkers today. After all, the scholars who wrote it were political wizards in navigating the treacherous governmental byways of their own time. They not only lived in peace with the rulers of Iraq and Iran (still called Babylon and Persia 1,500 years ago), they were granted enormous leeway to lead the indigenous Jewish population, fielding their own governor and court system.
Most often I conclude that the authors of the Talmud signaled their own preference for the political sidelines when they wrote (Shabbat 11a): "If all the seas were ink, all reeds were pens, the skies were paper, and all humanity were scribes, they would not succeed in portraying the breadth of governance." The primary commentary adds: "It takes a deep heart to govern, because he must keep track of many states with different tax structures, and of many wars and legislative matters, all in one day." This paean to the profundity of the political class doubles as a sort of surrender by the academic class.
Still, there is much political wisdom to be mined in those tomes. The most basic example of this provides a sort of overview of the entire debate between the socialist and capitalist worldviews. It is presented (Brachot 3b) in the form of a dialogue which the Talmud projects backwards into history, positing a discussion between King David and his advisors.
It dramatizes the scenario by depicting King David as playing his harp and writing poetry one early morning. His advisors interrupt him for the daily briefing. Seeking to prod him into engaging in more creative trade practices with other countries, they begin by telling him the unemployment figures. His initial response is: "Let the rich feed the poor." In other words, levy a tax and use the money to pay unemployment benefits.
The advisors retort, "A lion is not satisfied with a handful, and a ditch cannot be refilled with its own earth." This is accepted by King David as the last word on the subject and he acquiesces to their trade policy initiatives.
The classical commentators (11th through 14th Century) concentrate on the second half of that phrase, taking it to mean that poverty can never be fully solved by redistribution of income. Somehow, digging a ditch does not yield sufficient earth to refill it to the top. Similarly, shifting a static pool of resources around will only lead to its progressive depletion, as the process of transfer takes a toll.
This slam against socialist governing seems explicit enough, but less clear is the opening line that "a lion is not satisfied with a handful." The commentators let that one slide without elucidation; possibly they assume it is making much the same point, that we cannot possibly give a person a welfare check that will support his gusty needs.
My own theory is that this refers not to the recipients of the public dole, but to the producers of the wealth. If we tax away their advantage in revenue, we have aborted the drive that engenders economic development. The lion, with motives more appetent than altruistic, will generate food for all the carnivores in his area. Thus, Bill Gates wanting a yacht is a boon to the entire society, catalyzing salaries for thousands, profits for millions and products for billions.
This insight is replicated in a legal decision of the Talmud (Bava Kama 85a). In cases of assault, the injurer must pay for medical care even if a free clinic is available. The victim may demand to see a paid doctor, because "a doctor who heals for nothing is worth nothing."
This legal principle, and the dramatization of King David's cabinet meeting, seem to place the Talmudic worldview squarely in the Republican camp. Indeed, by setting up the dialogue as interrupting David's poesy, and by presenting his first inclination as tax-and-spend, the authors acknowledge that the redistributionist impulse has a sort of dreamily poetic appeal. It is the hard-headed long-range vision that calls for freeing up ambitious achievers to expand the economy for all.
Little wonder, then, that Yeshiva students, almost to a man, were fervent devotees of Ronald Reagan and continue to be a solid Republican constituency.
Jay D. Homnick is a columnist at JewishWorldReview.com and author of several books in Hebrew on scripture and the Talmud.
url: [url]http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=6676[/url]
Here is the Freeper thread:
[QUOTE]Is the Talmud Republican? The American Spectator ^ | 6/9/04 | Jay D. Homnick
Posted on 06/09/2004 4:05:53 PM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
To: Alouette; SJackson; veronica; Slings and Arrows
Ping
2 posted on 06/09/2004 4:06:29 PM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle (I feel more and more like a revolted Charlton Heston, witnessing ape society for the very first time)
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Never looked at it like that before. But then again, the Talmud is the height of fairness and equity.
3 posted on 06/09/2004 4:08:48 PM PDT by Ciexyz ("FR, best viewed with a budgie on hand")
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Of course it is. God is a republican, everyone knows that. :-)
4 posted on 06/09/2004 4:09:26 PM PDT by ladyinred (RIP Governor/President Reagan, ride peacefully into that sunset.)
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Is there one Talmud? I have a copy of the Babylonian Talmud. Is that the same Talmud everybody has?
5 posted on 06/09/2004 4:10:58 PM PDT by RightWhale (Theorems link concepts; proofs establish links)
To: RightWhale There is also the "Jerusalem Talmud". The Babylonian is the more intensively studied. The contents of the two, though, are somewhat complementary.
Here's a Wikipedia Reference on the subject. I haven't read it, but find Wikipedia generally quick and useful. 6 posted on 06/09/2004 4:25:09 PM PDT by rightwingcrazy
To: 1bigdictator; 1st-P-In-The-Pod; 2sheep; 7.62 x 51mm; A Jovial Cad; a_witness; adam_az; af_vet_rr; .. FRmail me to be added or removed from this Judaic/pro-Israel ping list.
http://www.freerepublic.com/images/flags/israelC.gif
WARNING: This is a high volume ping list 7 posted on 06/09/2004 4:27:19 PM PDT by Alouette ("Your children like olive trees seated round your table." -- Psalm 128:3)
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
What about the idea of a proactive war. It seems to me that the idea of a milchemes mitzvah, which among other things, includes destroying your enemy before he destroys you. This is an idea both shared by the Talmud and classic conservativism as proper.
8 posted on 06/09/2004 6:14:15 PM PDT by daniel18 (not only domestic policy)
To: Ciexyz
[url]http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/talmud.htm[/url]
9 posted on 06/09/2004 6:22:52 PM PDT by good ol' W
To: good ol' W http://img22.photobucket.com/albums/v65/section9/FR%20Images/MotokoRifle.jpg Not only is Jesus Christ a Republican, but he's a member of the Broward County Republican Executive Committee. However, he's too busy welcoming the members of the Executive Committee into His Kingdom to take part in any political activities.
http://www.greenfieldvillage.com/images/Images%20Shuffleboard/shuffle31402.jpg
Ah, the Broward Republican Party. First in line in God's Waiting Room...
Be Seeing You,
Chris 10 posted on 06/09/2004 6:32:16 PM PDT by section9 (Major Motoko Kusanagi says, "Jesus is Coming. Everybody look busy.")
[url]http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1150754/posts[/url] [/QUOTE]
2004-06-12 23:24 | User Profile
No rants? I was thinking I would get lots of replies to this Neocon trash.
2004-06-12 23:41 | User Profile
Not surprising to see this sort of thing flying around, especially in FR-style circles.
What amuses me is how the FR posters grant automatic acceptance and legitimacy to the political implications they see in the Talmud. I wonder how a similar thread would run if it were titled, "Is the Edda Republican?"
2004-06-28 08:14 | User Profile
What about the idea of a proactive war. It seems to me that the idea of a milchemes mitzvah, which among other things, includes destroying your enemy before he destroys you. This is an idea both shared by the Talmud and classic conservativism as proper.
:blink:
