Universal Human Rights in Biblical and Classical Judaism? (1994)

50 SHOFAR Winter 1994 Vol. 12, No.2 UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS IN BIBLICAL AND ClASSICAL JUDAISM? by Richard A. Freund Professor of Religion, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Richard Freund is the author of Understanding Jewish Ethics, Volumes I and II (Mellen, 1990 and 1993, respectively ). I. Human Rights: Def"mitions and Issues Human rights, as rights possessed by all humans by virtue of being humans,' has become one accepted rubric in the post-World War II era for discussion of different issues, such as free will, natural rights, natural law, civil rights, etc. The rather vague designation of "human rights" in the definition cited above allows minimalist and maximaIist parameters. The post-World War II period has seen the maximaIist parameters extended in a number of ways. Certainly since the promulgation of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the late 1940s, "Human Rights" has been the preferred terminology for many different types of discussions of how to define an individual's position and standing in any given modern society. Since the 1950s, discussions of these "rights" usually relate to an unconditional series of specific rights shared by all peoples, in all societies (either in spite of their political situation or because of it) and generally focus upon the meaning of the word" human" (biological, social, legal, philosophical, religious meanings, etc.), which has been discussed 'Definitions of human rights are part of the problem. I have chosen this short definition: "Human rights are rights possessed by all humans by virtue of being humans." This, of course, is the most expansive/ma.."imalist and ambiguous definition possible and contains the pitfalls inherent with this type of definition. Other definitions and their problems are mentioned in A. Gewirth's Reason and Morality (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978). Universal Human Rights inJudaism? 51 in much literature.2 Although they are not exactly synonymous, human rights has become, in this new and expansive definition, the preferred terminology to refer to issues which had earlier (in the period from the Renaissance through the twentieth century) been a part of philosophical discussions related to natural rights and natural law. There is, however, some confusion which has developed among Jewish and non-Jewish writers in the post-World War II era about the nature of the vocabulary and conceptualizations of human rights in the ancient, medieval, and pre-modern periods. One finds two main groups among researchers on the topic of human rights. The two groups differ on the fundamental question of whether or not a vocabulary and conceptualization of human rights existed in biblical and classical]udaism. One group holds that there is textual evidence to support the idea of human rights in the pre-modern period, while the other group holds that there is no evidence to suggest such a concept. This article will investigate some of the claims of each group, the methods used by these researchers to support their claims, and some of the problematic parts of their arguments. II. Judaism and Human Rights: Some Opinions In his 1976 article entitled "Judaism and Human Rights," Louis Henkin asserted that "Judaism knows no rights but duties, and at bottom, all duties are to God."3 He went on to say: "Contemporary conceptions of human rights as political rights against government and human government was not central to original Judaism." He then cited as a basis for his view the example from I Samuel 8:6-7 which indeed frowns upon the people's request for a human king because of the possible abuse of power by the monarch. Henkin uses this negative, anti-monarchy I Samuel citation to prove that the Hebrew Bible does not recognize individual human rights because the King may and does abuse his subjects' rights, presumably with Divine support. In Milton R. Konvitz's 1972 collection, Judaism and Human Rights, a similar view is expressed in the introduc2For a summary of the major arguments and some of the literature see S. Hook. Philosophy and Public Policy (Carbondale: Southern Illinois Press, 1980), pp. 67-152. Judaism, Vol. 25, No.4 (Fall 1976), pp. 132ff; quote is from page 133. This was updated and appears in the Vatican...