You probably won’t find references to stem-cell research, weapons of mass destruction or pop culture in traditional Jewish texts.
But those old teachings nonetheless convey plenty of wisdom and guidance on the thorniest of contemporary matters, says Rabbi Elliot Dorff, a professor of philosophy at the University of Judaism in Los Angeles.
First, Dorff says, those seeking higher guidance must develop skills for applying that tradition to “issues our ancestors could never have even thought of.”
“If you’re looking for Jewish guidance on any kind of moral questions, you can’t just simply look at the text or tradition and apply it in a very direct matter, almost cookbook-like,” says Dorff. Traditions first must be understood in their historic context, the specific values must then be culled out and applied to modern issues.
Dorff, a frequent consultant on ethical topics who served on former First Lady Hillary Clinton’s health care task force, will offer a Jewish perspective on modern dilemmas when he speaks at San Francisco’s Congregation Sherith Israel during a visiting scholar weekend Oct. 11 to 13. His appearance kicks off a lecture series by local rabbis and scholars, which covers Jewish perspectives on such topics as corporate scandals, war with Iraq and sexual ethics.
When planning the events last year, “we were a bit prescient because the Catholic scandals hadn’t happened yet, Sept. 11 hadn’t happened,” says David Perlstein, chairman of the Reform synagogue’s adult education committee. “It was before Enron.”
Dorff will give three talks during his visit, on deriving moral guidance from Jewish tradition, bioethical issues and the challenge of raising Jewish children in a non-Jewish world.
In some matters, such as stem-cell research, Jewish tradition is unequivocal, says the 59-year-old Dorff, a Conservative rabbi and the author of eight books.
“We do not see a fertilized egg cell in a petri dish as a human being,” he says. “Stem-cell research holds out so much promise” for curing cancer, Parkinson’s disease and other catastrophic illnesses. “We really have a divine mandate to get as involved in that as possible.
“If you take a Jewish lens to look at the issue, you get a very different result than if you use a Catholic lens, a Southern Baptist lens or a Bush administration lens.”
Likewise, the Jewish perspective can be applied to help a woman with a family history of breast cancer decide whether to be tested for the genes that are linked to developing the disease.
Tradition says that “if there is something you can do to avoid the cancer to save your life, then we ought to do something,” Dorff says.
“If not, then there’s no good reason” to undertake a test with results that could prove traumatic and unalterable, he adds. “It’s not science for science’s sake.”
In other applications, Jewish thought may be less clear-cut. Dorff cites the example of a baby born prematurely, who can be saved with modern medical intervention but faces a likelihood of having severe disabilities.
“Do you do a full-court press” to save the baby or “treat the child palliatively?” asks Dorff. “Those are not easy questions. In many cases it depends on how the couple would react to having a child with such deficits.”
On the potential clash between Jewish and American cultures that affect so many families, Dorff says it’s important to sort out the similarities and differences between those two traditions.
American tradition views the individual as someone with rights, while “at Sinai, we didn’t get any rights. We got obligations, we got commandments.”
Some Jews respond to that contrast by ghettoizing themselves in separate communities, Dorff says, while others respond with complete assimilation.
The intermediate response is to “see Jewish law as being binding on us, but not forcing us to live in the ghetto,” says Dorff. “Integrating the Jewish and American tradition is a constant challenge, but I think it is one that is our privilege, really. In most places, Jews did not have this ability to act as full-fledged citizens.”