|
|
עמוד:IX
those are the words of the living God" ) BT Eruvin 13 b ( : both of these contradictory positions are valid and true , and no final and absolute decision can be rendered in favor of one or the other . The disagreement will persist and any decisions will apply only to particular cases , as a function of the circumstances . Some are one-time rulings , while others remain in force for generations . This is the art of halakhic ruling as practiced by the rabbis , who have at their disposal a set of substantive and procedural tools for determining the practical Halakhah in cases of disagreement , doubt , and conflict . A typical example of this is the tension between humanity and nationalism , which can be found in philosophy , Halakhah , and even the liturgy . For example , Jewish prayers and blessings are full of references to the unique status of the Jewish people– “ Who selected us from among all the nations” ) the blessing on the Torah (–alongside abundant hopes and prayers for all humankind—“ when all humanity will call on Your name” ) from the daily prayer Aleinu ( . The dialectic of values is manifested in specific halakhic issues : it is forbidden to steal from non-Jews , but one need not return lost property to them–although in certain circumstances the injunction to restore lost property to non-Jews is given greater weight than the command to restore such property to a Jew . Distinctions are drawn between “ repulsive idolaters ” and “ nations who live according to ethical laws . ” The nature of the relationship between Jews and these types of people fluctuates in response to historical and cultural circumstances . The dialectic approach does not support the idea that humanistic values are meta-halakhic principles that influence halakhic decision-making , as is sometimes stated in works on the philosophy of Halakhah . In my view , universal humanistic values are part and parcel of
|
|