English Summary
and English Digests of the Chapters

THE    PERCEPTION    OF    SUFFERING
AND    SOLIDARITY    WITH    THE    SUFFERERS
in the Thought of the Ancient Sages of Israel
till the end of the Talmudic Era

By   R a c h e l    R o s e n z w e i g
Supervisors: Prof. David Flusser and Prof. Shmuel Safrai.
Subject: History of Jewish Thought.

S U M M A R Y

The wise is conscious of his suffering and tries to find a way to cope with it.
But is he conscious of his fellow's suffering as well,
and capable of identifying with the sufferer?

Israel's sages' mosts immediate concern was for the suffering of their community.
From its very beginnings, the characteristic strength of Israel's philosophy
was rooted in its frank and courageous confrontation with the nation's fate.
It is not by stories about heroes or by dreams of victory
that Israel's literature is defined,
but by reproofs and consolations.

Those who reprove are not hostile observers from the outside,
like some Christians, who developed an ideology of anti-solidarity
directed against suffering Israel,
thus negating the mission of their master to his people.
Neither are they those members of the Dead Sea Sect,
who "segregated from the men of evil".
In each generation, Israel's "reprovers" (Ez. 3,26)
identified with the suffering and practiced solidarity with their community.
Their reproofs as well as their consolations are consequences of their solidarity.

Solidarity is not to be understood as an ethical requirement or as a divine duty,
but as a matter of self-interest, a fundament of life.
Solidarity is the necessary consequence of the "Law of Mutual Guarantorship".

This natural law states,
that man's fate is not only determined by his own actions,
but also by those of his forefathers,
by those of his fellows
and by the actions of his community [and especially their rulers].
Also, the suffering of a community might be the consequence
of its being guarantors for the misdemeanours of an individual.
Whoever recognizes this law,
which binds a man to his fellow and to his community,
must identify with his fellow
and practice solidarity with his community.
On the other hand:
unless identification with the sufferers
is translated into individual responsible action,
directed at the prevention of suffering
or at its relief,
identification is entirely without value.

For this reason,
the strong identification of the sages of Israel with their community
did not provoke them into any kind of "collectivism",
but, to the contrary,
educated them towards individuality [uniqueness] and responsibility.
The individuality [uniqueness] of man is, therefore,
a direct consequence of the Law of Mutual Guarantorship.
Just as the individual [yakhid] is capable of damaging his group,
he is also able to rescue it.
Everybody must see himself as a potential Abraham.

However, only outstanding individuals [yekhide-segulah]
have ever and fully realized this aim.

The perception of the nation's suffering
did not leave much scope for that of generally human or of individual suffering.

Suffering common to all human beings failed to bring about international solidarity.

The individual's suffering occasioned judgment, not identification.

True: in practice,
assistance to the suffering, especially for the poor, was well organized,
but in general the approach to the suffering fellow
was not prompted by the idea
that "he is like I am, his soul is like mine".

They who demonstrated solidarity with the suffering individual,
like Jesus of Nazareth and Rabbi Joshua ben Levy,
lit a beacon in the night.

This is a strange fact,
since the sages themselves showed a thorough understanding
of the biblical principle of identification, and taught it as well.

Identification is not a "commandment",
and be it the most important one,
but it is denoted as "an important principle of the Torah" -
meaning it is the very base for all morals.
"don't oppress the stranger,
for you know the stranger's soul,
for strangers you have been", [Ex 23,9]

Solidarity also links the community and the individual,
for the community depends upon the individual.
In biblical society,
the sinner was "uprooted" from his nation,
in order not to make his community a guarantor for his sins.
Experience showed,
that escape from this guarantorship
is not achieved by getting rid of the sinner,
but by "reproving" him,
as an expression of solidarity.
In this respect,
the sages went very far indeed.
They prohibited the extradition of an individual to foreigners,
even if he was a proven criminal,
for
"it is better that all should perish,
but there will be no extradition of a single soul from Israel."

Efrat, my daughter-in-love, was responsible
for the production of the Festival of Sculpting during the Feast of Succot
at Ma'alot-Tarshiha