Pearson Edexcel Level 3 Advanced GCE in Religious Studies – Anthology
240Extract 1: M K ellner ‘Jewish Ethics’
Taken from: A Companion to Ethic s; edited by Peter Singer (Blackwell, 2001),
Chapt er 7, pp. 82-90
The very concept ‘Jewish ethics’ raises a number of problems, some of them
inherent in the notion of any paroc hial ethic (be it Christian ethic s, Navajo ethic s,
Marxist ethic s, or whatever) and some of them unique to Jewish ethic s. But, these
problems aside, t here exist s a subst ant ial body of literature whic h by c ommon
consensus is called ‘Jewish ethics’. A separate essay in this volume is devoted to an
analysis of the relation between religion and ethics; the general problems raised,
therefore, by the notion of Jewish ethic s as an example of a religious et hic will not
be addressed here. There remain, however, a number of problems unique to Jewish
et hic s. T his essay, t hen, will be divided int o t wo part s. In t he first I will desc ribe
some of the problems raised by the notion of Jewish ethics while in t he sec ond I will
describe that body of literature ordinarily denoted by the term.
What is Jewish ethic s? Answering this question presupposes being able to
answer the antec edent question, ‘What is Judaism?’ This is not so simple a task. As
the old saw has it, ‘Two Jews, three views’. The well-known propensity of Jews to
disagree on mat t ers t heologic al while not definit ively exc luding eac h ot her from t he
faith or from the c ommunity may reflec t the typic al Jewish c onc entration on
matters concrete and prac tic al. This c onc entration elevates matters of behaviour
(inc luding most emphat ic ally et hic al issues) t o a c ent ralit y of import anc e whic h may
be unique among Western monotheistic faiths. Thus, for example, we find the
Talmud quoting God as saying, ‘Would that they [the Jewish people) had
abandoned Me but kept my Torah!’ (T.J. Hagigah, 1.7). This emphasis on how to
behave as opposed to what to believe makes it difficult to define ‘Judaism’ as a
syst em of beliefs in a simple fashion.
In the c ontemporary world, for example, Judaism can be defined in both
sec ular and religious t erms. T he sec ular definit ion c an it self be eit her nat ionalist or
c ult ural. T he sec ular nat ionalist definit ion c an eit her be Zionist (c alling for t he
resettlement of the Jews in their anc ient homeland) or non-Zionist. T he Zionist
definit ion of Judaism is it self defined in a plet hora of ways. Defining Judaism in
religious terms is no simpler today. Four different major movements (Orthodoxy,
Conservatism, Rec onstruc tionism and Reform) eac h c laim t o be t he normat ive
interpretation of Judaism. Many of the approac hes mentioned here c an also be
c ombined (as, for example, in forms of religious Zionism).
It is immediat ely evident , t hen, t hat no one definit ion of Jewish et hic s is
possible, since there are so many varieties of Judaism. Since, however, we cannot
possibly hope t o set t le t his issue here we will simply ignore it henc efort h. But , even
assuming that we know what the term ‘Jewish’ means in the expression ‘Jewish
ethics’, there are still fundament al problems whic h need c larific at ion.
Judaism is very muc h a religion orient ed t owards prac t ic al perfec t ion in t his
world (a ‘religion of pots and pans’ in the words of its nineteenth-century Protestant
derogat ors). T his prac t ic al orient at ion finds its concrete expression in the codified
norms of Torah-based behaviour called Halakhah or Jewish law. While muc h of
Halakhah is given over t o what we would t oday c all religious or rit ual law, it