Re'eh: the vision of society
The fifth book of the bible. Devarim, is Moshe's speech to the Israelites as the are about to enter the Promised Land. The nation is about transition into a settled life. Gd's promise is about to be fulfilled. Moshe's mission will end. The nation is entering a land that Moshe will only see from a distance.
As the book continues, the descriptions and instructions become more concrete. The people are instructed in what may be done and what should not be done. In this week's parsha many of the instructions involve building and maintaining a unified people.
I grew up balancing my Jewishness with being American. In the 1970's, until the ascendancy of America First in 2016, American values were close to universal values. The US stood for liberty for all; it was the country that did not tolerate oppression; it offered refuge to the desperate; it fought against hunger and disease everywhere. The US was the capital of divine justice through kindness. The institution that acted on these values, the American government , had rescued my parents from the holocaust, allowed them to rise from penniless poverty to middle class home-ownership and retirement in Florida. These were values I could not reject. Then came America first.
America was spending more on European military defense and the benefits were vague. Why did the burdens of world hunger and disease fall (disproportionately) on Americans? Cheaper (exploited) foreign labor was filling jobs that people (legitimately) born in this country could (theoretically) fill. All true. I question the need to look at it that way. But the questioning opened my eyes to some of the propaganda that substituted for truth in the descriptions of wars against communism in Asia and Latin America. I also saw the "rescue" of my parents in a new light: they were the fortunate exceptions.
Jet travel and the internet created markets with billions of consumers and allowed the emergence of monopolies that could supply the whole world. The (inevitable) Markov process that concentrates all wealth into one entity began. It is a process that is aided by nationalism of the rich and fought with the nationalism of the poor.
And it all begins with our parsha.
The parsha includes a dream of a centralized society, built around a capital city
The parsha imagines a society that merits the blessing of Gd. It cares for those who are excluded from economic opportunity because of circumstances (the widow, the orphan) or privilege ( the Levite). There is a great , centralized capital
Much of the parsha is deals with poverty. At one point we are presented with a contradiction:
אֶ֕פֶס כִּ֛י לֹ֥א יִֽהְיֶה־בְּךָ֖ אֶבְי֑וֹן There shall be no needy among you in 15;4 and
כִּ֛י לֹא־יֶחְדַּ֥ל אֶבְי֖וֹן מִקֶּ֣רֶב הָאָ֑רֶץ For there will never cease to be needy ones in your land, in 15;11
I do not want to resolve the contradiction by emphasizing the "among you," (Ibn Ezra's solution) On can live in a neighborhood where the poor are banned, hence not visible (re'eh). This solution is an efes, a zero.
The subsequent verses state that the absence of the poor is predicated on adhering to the commandments. The commandments demand helping with the poor with loans, fair employment and support. Fulfillment of these statutes would minimize the number of poor people.
I think that he word evyon is related to the word for stone, even. (Hebrew has strong letters that are full consonants and weaker letters, like yad and vav that are really vowels and thus, subject to omission. Omitting these letters from Evyon yields even - stone) There is an aspect of poverty that is stone-like: A degradation of worth, not meriting consideration, a fungible existence. These are the people stepped over (or stepped on).
Contrast this with another word for the poor: ani. This is a word that conveys the idea of begging. A merchant is sometimes called a canaani , perhaps because he entreats the purchaser. There are circumstances when people beg although they are not degraded; and there are certainly people in great need who do not beg. Both should be in our field of vision.
The word dal (which appears as part of the word yechdal in the second sentence) also means poor. Its fundamental meaning is lacking. It is the objective aspect of poverty.
In many parts of the world, starvation is limited to behaviors that seem volitional (although they are usually driven by psychiatric disease). In my rich, American, world anyone who is starving and asks (begs) for food will be fed. In this sense, perhaps, there are no needy. The Utopian statement: there shall be no needy among you is fulfilled. But that does not seem sufficient. There is still lack (dal) and disrespect for the less fortunate and, perhaps worst of all, a failure to see the needs of the needy.
I enjoy the wealth of America. It allows me to feel generous. I have enough that I can comfortably give. Perhaps this is not a sustainable situation, and fewer people will have "enough." There are also major problems with philanthropy: the voluntary (and arbitrary) distribution of (excess) wealth. The donor decides on the recipient(s). Some of the richest people in the world support exploration of Mars and beyond for eventual human settlement. Maybe I cannot see far enough. Maybe they are too rich to see the needs of ordinary contemporary earthlings.
In all this, where does that Capital for the Jewish people sit. I have been to the new Jerusalem. Those visits make me wonder what the prayer for "rebuilding Jerusalem" means. I am not sure, but I still say it and I am glad.
