16 Friday, April 18, 1986
THE DETROIT JEWISH NEWS
PURELY COMMENTARY
Passover's Glorious Lessons
Continued from Page 2
ditional Hammurabi regulations intro-
duce discussion which may be used by
debaters in support of either side of the
death penalty proposition. Dr. Sarna
thus introduced the debatable shbject:
One of the most misun-
derstood legal principles in the
Torah is the lex talionis, the law
of retaliation, commonly known
as "an eye for an eye." Few
other sanctions of the Bible
have suffered as much distor-
tion. The phrase "an eye for an
eye" at once evokes in the popu-
lar mind notions of primitive
vengeance. Worse, it is then ig-
norantly portrayed as epitomiz-
ing the dominant principle of
law in the Hebrew Bible, and
this misrepresentation is
exacerbated by projecting it
into the realm of theology, with
prejudicial effect.
It is taken for granted that
the substitution of monetary
compensation fdr physical in-
jury in place of retaliation in
kind constitutes a major ad-
vance away from barbarism
and toward humanization of the
judicial system. It may come as
a surprise to learn, therefore,
that the early law collections of
Mesopotamia already
prescribed pecuniary satisfac-
tion for bodily injury, and not
physical punishment ...
It was Hammurabi who first
introduced physical punishment
for physical injury. The texts
are clear enough: "If a seignior
has destroyed the eye of a
member of the aristocracy, they
shall destroy his eye. If he has
broken a(nother) seignior's
bone, they shall break his bone.
If a seignior has knocked out a
tooth of a seignior of his own
rank, they shall knock out his
tooth."
At first glance it would ap-
pear that Hammurabi's innova-
tion was retrogressive, a step
backward in the humanizing
process. However, it is now rec-
ognized that this judgment is
inaccurate and that in fact his
innovative measure actually
constituted in conception a sig-
nificant landmark not only in
the development of Mesopota-
mian law but also in legal his-
tory. This reevaluation results
from a revised understanding of
the role and function of com-
pensation and of physical retal-
iation, respectively, in different
societies. Anthropological
studies have shown that these
sociocultural phenomena can-
not be properly assessed with-
out reference to social, political,
and historical context. The find-
ing is that the direction of the
evolutionary process is not from
"an eye for an eye" to
pecuniary compensation, but
the opposite, strange as it may
seem.
In primitive and in less-
developed societies, an assault
by one individual upon the per-
son of another is a matter of
private wrong that is to be set-
tled between the parties in-
volved. While the natural in-
stinct of the victims and their
families might propel them in
the direction of violent retalia-
Dr. Nahum Sarna
tion or blood revenge as the
proper response, experience
teaches that such reaction in
kind begets further violence,
and that the private feud that is
aroused is destructive of the so-
cial fabric. Hence, there is a
coincidence of mutual and
wider community interests in
discouraging the cycle of ven-
geance and counter-vengeance.
Ruptured social relationships
are therefore repaired by the
preferred substitution of
pecuniary compensation for
physical punishment. The
amount is arranged by means of
negotiations between the
families of the assailant and the
victim.
With the development of
centralized political and judicial
authority, and increasingly with
the emergence and growth of
the city-state, the need to main-
tain social harmony becomes
ever more imperative. The state
gradually encroaches upon the
private domain, so that what
was hitherto a private matter
between the feuding parties
tends to become an issue of
public welfare. In the interest of
equity, the state now begins to
regulate the payment for var-
ious physical injuries. This is
the situation that prevails in the
above-cited Mesopotamian and
Hittite laws. However, there is a
built-in inequality in the system,
for it is easier for the rich than
for the poor to make pecuniary
resitution. Moreover, the operat-
ing legal concept is still that as-
sault is a private affair, to be
resolved between the parties,
though in accordance with the
guidelines set down by the
state.
The innovation of Ham-
murabi in his "eye for an eye"
legislation can now be seen in
its proper perspective. This re-
markable king succeeded, by
conquest and by diplomacy, in
unifying Mesopotamia. A
A Din Torah With God
Continued from Page 2
While leading the congrega-
tion in prayer one Rosh
Hashanah, the Rabbi of Ber-
ditchev, grieving over. Israel who,
despite its sufferings, persisted in
sanctifying God's Name, broke
from the fixed words of the He-
brew liturgy to cry out in the folk
tongue that not only the people,
but the Lord as well, understood.
The text of that Kaddish, the Yid-
dish content, the English translation by
Rabbi Dresner, serve continually to in-
spire an appreciation by the Jewish
communities where it is frequently
heard at public assemblies. That Kad-
dish is perhaps the most appealing in
Jewish folklore and inspired realism.
Therefore the reproduction of .both is
most valuable for all time. The texts,
taken from Rabbi Dresner's Levi Yitzhak
follows:
THE KADDISH OF
RABBI LEVI YITZHAK
Good morning to You, Lord; Master
of the Universe.
I, Levi Yitzhak, son of Sarah of
Berditchev,
I come to You with a Din Torah
from Your people Israel.
What do You want of Your people
Israel?
What have You demanded of Your
people Israel?
For everywhere I look it says, "Say
to the Children of Israel,"
And every other verse says, "Speak
to the Children of Israel,"
And over and over, "Command the
Children of Israel."
Father, sweet Father in Heaven,
How many nations are there in the
world? Persians, Babylonians,
Edomites.
The Russians, what do they say?
That their Czar is the only ruler.
The Prussians, what do they say?
That their Kaiser is supreme.
And the English, what do they say?
That George the Third is the sov-
ereign.
And.!, Levi Yitzhak, son of Sarah of
Berditchev, say,
"Yisgadal v'yiskadash shmei raboh
Magnified and sanctified is Thy
Name."
And I, Levi Yitzhak, son of Sarah of
Berditchev, say,
"From my stand I will not waver,
And from my place I shall not move
.
Until there be an end to all this.
Yisgadal v'yiskadash shmei raboh —
Magnified and sanctified is only Thy
Name."
Gut morg'n Dir, Ribbono steel olom!
Ich, Levi Yitzhok ben Soroh mi-
Berditchev,
Bin Tzu Dir gekoomen mit a Din
Torah
Far Dein folk Yisroel.
Un vos host Tu tzu Dein folk Yis-
roel?
Un vos host Tu Zich ongezetzt
Oif Dein folk Yisroel?
Az vos nor a zach iz, "Tzav es bnei
Yisroel,"
Un vos nor a zach iz, "Emor livnei
Yisroel!"
Un vos nor a zach iz, "Dabeir livnei
Yisroel!"
Tatengu! Kamo umos ba'olom?
Bavloyim, Parsoyim, Edomin!
Die Deitschlender vos zogn zei?
"Unzer Koenig iz a Koenig!"
Die Englender vos zogn zei?
"Unzer Malchus iz a Malchus!"
Un ich, Levi Yitzhok ben Soroh
mi-Berditchev, zog:
"Yisgadal v'yiskadash shmei
raboh!"
Un ich, Levi Yitzhok ben Soroh mi-
berditchev, zog:
"Lo ozuz mimkomee; ich vel zich
fun ort nit riren!
Un a sof zol dos zein, un an ek zol
dos nemen!
Yisgadal v'yiskadash shmei raboh!"
Folklore is replete with the Levi
Yitzhak songs and sOnets, appeals to the
Almighty, the linking of God with man,
the outcry for justice.
One of the most famous of the Levi
Yitzhak songs is Dudele. It had received
acclaim through the decades since it was
chanted by the famous Chassid and has
since remained unchanged and revered
for perhaps a century and a half.
Rabbi Dresner wrote an interesting
introduction to the Dudele as well, stat-
ing in his book:
Among the most beloved folk
songs of East European Jewry
are those attributed to the Rabbi
of Berditchev. These songs are in.
fact prayers that he wrote and
sang (for it is the custom of the
people Israel to sing their
prayers) in moments when his
soul overflowed the bounds of
the written text.