Pursue Justice, Justly

Many of us are aware of the concept of the Seven Noahide Laws.  This concept says that there are Seven Essential Laws incumbent upon all of humanity.  Each and every member of the human race is liable for these Seven Laws.  Any person who lives by them, is considered righteous in God’s eyes.  If a person lives by these Seven Laws, no matter what religion he practices – or if he doesn’t practice any religion – he is considered okay.  The Seven Laws are what we would call, ethical principles.  They transcend religious doctrinal differences.

          These Seven Laws are not stated explicitly in the Written Torah.  At least, not all of them.  Largely, they’re a Rabbinic construct.  Now that might call into question whether they are truly the Will of God.  But on the other hand, if they are a Rabbinic innovation, they speak very highly about the Rabbis in particular, and Judaism in general.  Because after all, in our day and age many individuals believe quite charitably that Divine Favour is not limited to adherents of a particular religion.  But 2,000 years ago, this was far from a given.  And even today, Judaism is the only religious system in which one finds such a blanket justification of humanity.  One finds it in certain strains of other religions.  But nowhere else is such a doctrine present in all denominational strains of another religion, from the most traditional to the most contemporary.  In Judaism, it is.

          There is a grassroots movement in various parts of the world to embrace the Seven Laws and create, in effect, a new religious expression out of them.  This is often called, the ‘Noahide Movement.’  Many members of this ‘movement’ were once Christians.  Mostly, they encountered Judaism and heard of this teaching.  They didn’t feel compelled to embrace Judaism in its fullness.  Even so, the idea of the Seven Laws resonated with them.  But one does not have to create a religion based on the Seven Laws, to embrace them.  One doesn’t even have to know ot the rabbinic writing that specifies them.  Because many would consider the Seven Laws to be tantamount to Natural Law, something that represents the human will at its best.  Something that transcends religious teaching.

          I’m not planning to turn this drash into a lecture on the Seven Laws, but I do want to point out one of them.  It stands out from the other six for two reasons.  First of all, it is the only one which is a positive precept.  That is, a thou shalt as opposed to a thou shalt not.  Secondly, and this will become completely obvious in just a moment, it is the only one which a person cannot carry out as an individual.  Oh, an individual can contribute to the upholding of this principle.  But to actually put it into effect, requires a society’s cooperation.  And the precept is this:  you must establish and maintain a system of justice, with a structure of fair laws and the means of enforcing them.

           Now, you may be tempted to smack yourselves in the middle of the forehead and think, that’s it; we’re sunk!   But before you do, consider this.  The world has never known a perfectly conceived, or perfectly functioning, system of justice.  So maybe, just maybe, the onus isn’t to achieve it, but to uphold it as a principle – and to continually work towards it.

          Tomorrow’s Torah reading opens with the following dictum in Deuteronomy 16:18-20:  Appoint yourselves judges and magistrates for your tribes in all your settlements that the Lord is giving you, and make sure that they administer honest judgement for the people.  Do not bend justice, and do not give special consideration.  Do not take bribes, since bribery makes the wise blind and perverts the words of the righteous.  Justice, justice shall you pursue, that you may live and occupy the land that God is giving you.

Given the traditional notion that not one jot or tittle of the Torah is to be considered extraneous, how are we to understand the doubling of the word, ‘justice’?  Our Rabbis have suggested that it means we must pursue justice, justly.  That is, that we must not be pragmatic in our pursuit of justice.  We should never allow a miscarriage of pure justice in any given case, even when we believe that some greater good may be served by doing so.

What might be a good example of the latter?  If, for example, a guilty man were to be judged innocent – or the opposite – because of the belief that some societal benefit were to possibly come out of such a verdict.  IFF one is pursuing justice justly, then justice is justice and the first – and essential – element in justice is truth.

And what about the principle we refer to as ‘social justice’?  Many Jews would argue that we are liable to God for the way we order our society in order to bring about equality and to alleviate suffering.  This is what is often meant when we invoke the phrase, ‘social justice.’  Usually, when one uses the phrase it is not in the context of just laws and sanctions, but of some desired societal outcome.  Like redistribution of wealth.  Like providing extra opportunities for the poor, to advance out of poverty.  If that’s the sort of thing that ‘social justice’ means, it exists on an entirely different plane from justice, period.  The two are not necessarily in tension with one another.

But what if the two were in tension with one another?  That is to say, what if a certain action was thought to be expedient to the goals of ‘social justice’ yet would result in a miscarriage of justice, period?

I’m not going to mention any particular case right now, but if you follow the news and my speaking and writing then I’m sure you could think of an example of one from recent events.  But whatever example you might wish to use, I would say that justice, period trumps ‘social justice.’  And what would be the basis of my saying so?

In an earlier Torah reading, in the book of Leviticus 19:15, we read the following:  Do not pervert justice.  Do not give special consideration to the poor or show [extra] respect to the powerful.  Judge your people fairly.

In other words, the Torah seems to anticipate two oppositional tendencies.  One is to bend over backwards to give a break to the downtrodden.  The other is to do the same for the powerful.  But in reality, both tendencies are one and the same.  Both represent the attempt to use the system of just laws in the service of something else, even if it is a desirable end.  But the bottom line, Judge your people fairly, requires that justice is pure.  That justice is administered without any special considerations.  Except for the facts of the case, as best as can be ascertained through the apparatus of the law.

Let’s pursue social justice.  Let’s work in various ways to make our society a more fair one.  One in which we work to ameliorate disadvantages that stymie the success of certain people, through no fault of their own.  But let’s never consider making justice, period, a hostage to the quest for social justice.

In other words, truth is truth and truth is supreme.  It might seem to serve a greater good to adjudicate someone guilty despite there not being enough evidence to do so.  If so, no greater good can be served by perverting pure justice.  Guilt is guilt, and innocence is innocence.  Even when the truth does not serve some specific narrative of what is fair and what is not.  And the thrust of our Tradition, leaning on the reading of this verse in our weekly Torah reading, is trying to tell us this.  May we always pursue justice, justly.  Shabbat shalom.