Proper motive, cleaving to God and Galatians 5:2-4

/0 Comments/in /by

Mainline Judaism never advocated Torah observance in order to earn salvation.

Simeon the Righteous was the last of the “Great Assembly”  and assumed the position of High Priest after Ezra. The successor of Simeon was Antigones of Soko. The Mishnah indicates that Antigones taught that the Torah should be obeyed without an agenda to earn a reward or wage, but simply for the sake of the fear of God:

“Antigones of Soko received [Torah] from Simeon the Righteous. He used to say, ‘Be not like servants who serve their master for the sake of wages, but be like servants who serve their master with no thought of a wage – and let the fear of Heaven be upon you.’ ” – Mishnah, Avot 1:3

The Rabbi Ben Azai (Mishnaic Sage) states that the reward for obeying a commandment is the commandment itself as well as the conditioned habit of obedience. If one is in the practice of obeying the Torah, this will lead the individual away from sin.

“Ben Azai says: Run to do an easy commandment as to a difficult one, and flee from sin; since a commandment leads to another commandment, and a sin leads to another sin; since the reward for a commandment is another commandment, and the reward for a sin is another sin.” – Mishnah, Avot 4:2

We see that even during the time of the writing of the Talmud (500 AD) Rabbinic Judaism still taught against Torah keeping for motives other than the love of God and the desire to obey him:

“‘Happy is the one…That delighteth greatly in His commandments’, was explained by R. Eleazar thus: ‘it is a desire for the commandments, BUT NOT IN THE REWARD FOR KEEPING HIS COMMANDMENTS. This is just what we have learnt. ‘He used to say, Be not like servants who serve the master on the condition of receiving a reward; but be like servants who serve the master without the condition of receiving a reward.’ “But whose desire is in the law of the Lord. – Talmud, Abodah Zarah 19A

Religious motive became such an issue, that the term “Lishmah” developed, translated as: “for its purpose,”  implying that one should not complicate the matter by assigning any other motive. A cautionary tale was developed as a frightful warning against delving into the sacred Torah with impure Lishmah. A great sage named Doeg haEdomi fell into apostasy:

“He was the head of the Sanhedrin in the generation of Shaul and Shmuel, yet he is counted among those who have no share in the world to come. Why did the Torah that he studied not protect him? Because he studied “sheloh lishmah” – with improper motivation!” – Chesbon HaNefesh, page 13, Forward.

Compare this with Paul’s dire warning to the Galatians:

“Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all…You who are trying to be justified by the law have been severed from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.” – Galatians 5:2,4

A superficial reading of this scripture would seem to suggest that the terrible error that the Galatians were committing was the supposed sin of seeking circumcision. Surely this could not be the case since Paul circumcised Timothy in Acts 16.  Something more complicated was clearly at work, unless we are to concede that Paul deliberately  compromised Timothy’s salvation In Acts 16.

The Jewish concept of lishmah immediately reconciles the apparent contradiction. Timothy was circumcised in order to avoid offending the Jews they were preparing to witness to. Timothy had a Jewish mother, and according to Jewish law this made him Jewish by birth. Paul knew that the Jewish community would never invite instruction from an uncircumcised Jew. In an effort to remove the possible offense, Timothy was circumcised. Therefore the “lishmah” behind the circumcision was pure and conducted in order to advance the gospel. However, the book of Galatians mounts a condemning case against the congregation in Galatia. The Galatians not only had the wrong lishmah, they were shamelessly promoting conversion and Torah observance for the absolute worst lishmah possible: in order to earn salvation. The Galatians were falling for the same error as the great Doeg, and in grave danger of suffering the same fate if they continued. Paul writes: “Christ will be of no value to you at all” – meaning they would lose their salvation. To put it in Jewish terms, they were going to “lose their place in the world to come.”

Given the severity of the wrong lishmah, much discussion has been made exploring the nature of lishmah, the rationale behind it and how to cultivate it properly.

Rabbi Chafetz Chayim writes:

“Now it is written in scripture, ‘Happy is the man who fears Hashem, who delights greatly in his commandments (psalms 112:1)…We find that the sages made a precise inference from the term ‘in his commandments’ (Talmud Bavli, Avodah Zarah 19a) explaining that it implies ‘but not for the reward for his commandments.’ Now at first sight this seems puzzling. Surely we know that the reward for keeping the commandments is to enjoy the radiance of the shechinah in Paradise.” – The Concise Book of Mitzvoth, The chafeetz Chayim, forward.

Rabbi Chafetz Chayem addresses the possible confusion that can result when inquiring as to why we should pay no regard for the reward of the commandments, especially since our reward is entrance into “paradise” meaning the Messianic age, and the ultimate joy of residing within the radiance of “Shekinah”, God’s presence. This is no doubt wonderful, and so how can we refrain from rejoicing? How can we ignore the natural inclination to obey God to receive such prospective rewards?

Rabbi Chafetz gives the following proposal:

“Well, I thought to explain that it is a known matter that wherever the Torah says “me’od” (“Very much” or “greatly”), it means to convey “without end or limit” – something that will never terminate. This is the meaning of the words, “who delights greatly in his commandments, but not in the reward for his commandments.” Although we have explained the great value of the reward for the mitzvoth, that it is on a most high and exalted level, and the immense longing of a person to attain this exquisite pleasure – nevertheless, “who delights greatly in his commandments” – here lies one’s infinite, boundless longing and yearning, after he ponders and considers the greatness of a mitzvah itself, how far-reaching its effect is. Then even its reward is to be reckoned as nought and nothing compared with the great value of doing the mitzvah itself. So there is no end or limit to a person’s longing to fulfill a mitzvah.” – The Concise Book of Mitzvoth, The chafeetz Chayim, forward.

After fully recognizing the value inherent within the commandments, all other motivations should fade away, they are “reckoned as nought and nothing” compared to the glory and privilege of the commandments themselves. However, this does not fully explain why we are to view mitzvot this way. Rabbi Chayim makes the assumption that the reader should already know. What is so great about the mitzvot; what is the value behind it all? According to scripture, the ultimate purpose behind proper lishmah is to “cleave” to God:

…you shall diligently keep all of these commandments which I command you, to do them, to love the Lord your God, to walk in all his ways, and to cleave unto him. – Deuteronomy 11:22

You shall walk after Lord your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and you shall serve him, and cleave unto him. – Deuteronomy 13:5

“…that you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast [cleave] to him.” – Deut 30:20

“But be very careful to keep the commandment and the law that Moses the servant of the Lord gave you: to love the Lord your God, to walk in obedience to him, to keep his commands, to hold fast [cleave] to him and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul.” – Joshua 22:5

The Hebrew verb behind the English translation “cleave” or “hold fast” is pronounced “Dabaq” and is used to imply the general concept of two or more joining as one, such as: sticking, joining, cleaving, attracting, etc. The word is first used in Genesis regarding the imperative of Adam to “cleave” to Eve as his wife. The mitzvot is therefore provided as the medium, the spiritual technology through which God’s proverbial wife (Israel) is able to cleave to God, to experience joining/connecting with God in an intimate way. The abstract noun based on “Dabaq” was invented: “Devekut” referring to the experiential oneness with God resulting from the practice of obedience, intense study and focus on God.The act of cleaving results in a deep “knowing” between the two subjects. While “understanding” connotes an intellectual grasp of something, “knowledge” is quite different. Knowledge implies understanding specifically joined with experience, and it is by the deepest experience of Eve through cleaving, that Adam came to “know” his wife: “and Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived” (Genesis 4:1). By cleaving to God through the mitzvot/commandments, we come to know God. This is what the Apostle John was intimating with this statement in his first epistle:

“By this we can be sure that we have come to know him: if we keep his commandments.” – 1 John 2:3

God, through the prophet Jeremiah poses the following question to the king of Judah reigning at the time:

“‘Did not your father have food and drink? He did what was right and just, so all went well with him. He defended the cause of the poor and needy and so all went well. Is that not what it means to know me?’ declares the Lord.” – Jeremiah 22:15.

According to King Solomon, biblically regarded as the wisest man who ever lived, the highest purpose for man is to obey the commandments:

“Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the duty of all mankind.” – Ecclesiastes 12:13

If the commandments were provided as a spiritual technology to precipitate “Devekut” – experiential unity with God, and if the highest goal for man is to obey the commandments, then by inference, we can understand why the sages believed that the deeper insight behind Ecclesiastes 12:13 is that the highest goal for man is devekut:

“Our sages of blessed memory have instructed us that man was created for [the sole purpose of] reveling in the eternal and delighting in the splendor of the divine presence, this being the ultimate joy and the greatest of all pleasures in existence.” – The path of the Just, Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto,  Chapter 1, page 8.

It seems that in an effort to avoid false doctrine, and to heed the warnings of Paul against “The works of the law” protestant Christians appear to have an estranged relationship with works. If the stakes involved are so high, even to the point of possibly jeopardizing one’s salvation, it’s understandable why Christians would have such a suspicious disposition against wanting to “do” for God. It’s even more sensible why Christians would have such an aversion to the Torah. However, in the light of Jewish wisdom and the devices invented over millennia to best handle these matters, such as “lishmah” and “devekut” we are given the context to fully understand it all, and in the manner the way the Apostles did. As discussed, it’s imperative that any religious act or “work” such as the commandments, should not be performed with the wrong lishmah. The proper lishmah for obedience  is to do so  in love or gratitude for God, and for the sake of cleaving to him. Through a lifetime pursuit of cleaving to God through obedience, we can all hope to achieve Devekut. Devekut, or experiential unity with God is the highest purpose of man.

Faith and the “Works of the law”

/0 Comments/in /by

In Galatians 2:16, Paul drives a theological wedge between faith and what he calls “the works of the law”. Emphasis was placed on this demarcation, in order to consolidate his position on a matter of great significance: how are we made justified? Paul fervently argued that we are justified through faith and not by the “the works of the law”. Given the apparent severity of relying on “the works of the law,” it would be imperative to know what exactly Paul was opposing. Is the contention against any kind of good deed or “work”, or is the phrase referring to something more nuanced?

The “Works of the Law” is an Essene doctrine

The Hebrew word for a religious act of devotion is “Avodah” meaning “labor” or “service”. In most cases, Avodah is linked to Temple ritual and sacrifice. However, occasionally scripture applies a more general use of the term:

“And now, Israel, what does the Lord your God require of you, but to fear the Lord your God, to walk in all his ways, to love him, to serve [Avodah] the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul [Nefesh].” – Deuteronomy 10:12

The Hebrew word for “soul” is “Nefesh”. Although “soul” in English carries metaphysical connotations, the Hebrew word “Nefesh” is simply a reference to the life of the body. Therefore, to serve God with all our Nefesh is to leverage the use of our bodies to perform good works. The Hebrew word for “works” or “deeds” is “Ma’aseh”. The fact that the Greek Septuagint translates both words with the same Greek word “ergon” indicates that over time, “service” and “works” became closely linked to the concept of a fervent zeal to obey the ceremonial law in service and worship to God.

There is a Dead Sea Scroll titled: 4QMMT. The “4Q” indicates that it came from the 4th cave of Qumran. The “MMT” is an acronym for the title of the scroll: “Misqat Ma’ase ha-Torah” which translates into English as: “On the works of the law”. The type of “works” mentioned in the scroll is exclusively on matters of ceremonial purity. The letter constitutes an attempt by the Essenes to convince the Pharisee’s of their error in certain interpretations. The end of the letter utilizes the phrase “works of the law”:

“Now, we have written to you some of the works of the Law, those which we determined would be beneficial for you and your people…”

For the sake of civility, the Essenes offer the following sentiment:

“…because we have seen that you possess insight and knowledge of the law”

According to the Essenes, If the Pharisee’s would come to their senses and see things the Essene way, they would recognize that their grievous errors are only leading them down the path to the devil (Belial):

“Understand all these things and beseech him to set your counsel straight and so keep you away from evil thoughts and the counsel of Belial.”

The Essenes finish with:

“Then you will rejoice at the end time when you find the essence of our words to be true. And it will be reckoned to you as righteousness…”

Evidently, the Essenes believed that it was only through the proper obedience of the ceremonial laws that one could be made righteous. A review of the list of concerns discussed in the scroll yields one important conclusion: in Essene language, “works” only includes matters of purity and ceremonial law. The scroll does not even once, mention “works” the way that most protestant Christians understand it, such as charity, caring for the widow and orphan, helping your neighbor, etc. No, the use of the phrase as applied and used during this time was very specific. We must take this into account when wanting to arrive at an answer regarding what “works of the law” Paul is addressing when he is making a contrast between these works and faith.

It’s no coincidence that Paul uses this term in his epistles, when this is also presented in the Essene scrolls as an important doctrine in the Essene community. Paul was opposing a doctrine that no doubt would have stirred intense contention among the Christian Jews who were a mix of all manner of allegiances. The Book of Acts indicates that many priests and Pharisee’s became converts to Christianity. However, it would have been likely that a good number of Essenes became Christian as well. In fact, Christian Essenes would later coalesce into the first heretical Christian movement after the destruction of the second Temple. The Catholic church fathers called them “Ebionites” – they were vegetarians and fierce opponents of Paul. After joining the Essene belief of the “Works of the Law” with faith in Jesus, they would have been a party to the many Jews who were pressuring the gentiles to obey the ceremonial aspects of the Torah to earn salvation. It makes total sense then, why Paul would want to separate “faith” from “works” or the “works of the law”- the message was: salvation is through faith alone, and not through the “works” of the ceremonial law. And further, if the observance of the ceremonial law is not required for salvation, then the gentile should not be forced to convert to becoming a Jew for salvation.

This view is not new, but was held by several Catholic Church fathers before Martin Luthor led Protestant Christianity down an entirely different road. According to St. Thomas of Aquinas, the “Works of the Law” only referred to the ceremonial aspects of the law and not the moral law:

“It should be known, therefore, that some works of the Law were moral and some ceremonial. The moral, although they were contained in the Law, could not, strictly speaking, be called the ‘works of the Law,’ for man is induced to them by natural instinct and by the natural law. But the ceremonial works are properly called the ‘works of the Law.’” – Commentary on saint Paul’s epistle to the Galatians, St. Thomas Aquinas, translated by F.R. Larcher, O.P.

According to Church Father Jerome:

“he here [Paul] calls the ceremonial works, works of the law; which works, after the death of Christ, were dead.”

We uphold the Law

Paul’s contention was not with the law itself, but with the incorrect handling of the law:

“We know that the law is good if one uses it properly.” – 1 Timothy 1:8

This was addressed to Paul’s disciple and traveling companion who underwent the procedure of circumcision performed at the behest of Paul himself. How can we reconcile this, when Paul wrote to the Galatians that circumcision would jeopardize their salvation? In Timothy’s case, the Torah was handled correctly. Timothy was circumcised for the purpose of removing possible contentions that the Jews in the area would have had if Timothy wished to preach to them. The motive was therefore pure, and done to advance the gospel. This is in stark contrast to Galatians, who were receiving circumcision out of the worst motive possible: to earn their salvation.

During the 1st Century, the issue of motive regarding Torah observance became such a heated topic that the term “Lishmah” was developed, translated as: “for its purpose” – asserting that one should not complicate the matter through assigning impure motives. Rather, they believed, the Torah should only be pursued out of a sense of duty with “no thought of a wage.”

In Romans 3, Paul offers the following inquiry: if we are not saved through the works of the law, do we abandon the practice, consider it abrogated, made obsolete by faith? The answer is surprising. Paul responds: “Not at all! Rather we uphold the law” (Romans 3:31). The observance of the Torah itself was not the damnable practice that Paul was condemning. Instead, Paul was opposing pursuing Torah with improper Lishmah! This was the error behind the “Works of the Law” that Paul was desperately trying to communicate.

For a more in depth look into the concept of Lishmah: Proper motive, cleaving to God and Galatians 5:2-4

Paul writes that Israel failed to achieve the righteousness they were seeking because they misunderstood the purpose of the law. They pursued it as if it were a platform for accruing works when they could have pursued it “by faith”:

“…but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal [of righteousness]. Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works.” – Romans 9:20-32

Here we arrive at the real point of contention with the “works of the Law.” The “works of the Lorah” ultimately represent works done with improper Lishmah, that is, works done for the “sake of wages” and with motive to earn. Anything done by faith, in contrast, is performed with no thought of a wage – we do them because we wish to be faithful to God, and what he requires.

This means that the “works of the Law” are not limited to the Ceremonial laws. Paul appropriated the term because it represented an Essene doctrine of works-based righteousness. The danger is therefore in accidentally turning anything, even charity, into the “works of the Law.” As Paul makes clear in the passages quoted, there is nothing wrong with the Ceremonial works of the Torah, if done “by faith.” Therefore the term, as applied by Paul should be understood in this way:

  • “Works of the Torah” = Ceremonial law, or any other religious ‘work’ done with the improper motive to earn
  •  “By Faith” = Ceremonial law, or any other religious ‘work’ done with proper motive

Saint Thomas of Aquinas identified a problem in assuming the error of the “works of the Law” was simply obedience to the Torah. He details the dilemma like this: if the consequence of the works of the law is compromised salvation, it follows that the Patriarchs and all the Jews leading up to the death and resurrection of Christ who were faithful to the imperative to obey the Torah, are all consequently damned and without a place in the resurrection. This of course is nonsense. He reconciles the problem, by assigning a distinction in obeying the Torah and placing one’s “hope” in the Torah:

“But against this it can be said that the ancient fathers were of the works of the Law. Therefore, they are under a curse and, consequently damned – which is a Manichean error. Hence it is necessary to understand this correctly. And it should be noted that the Apostle does not say, “As many as observe the works of the Law are under a curse,” because this is false when applied to the time of the law. He says rather: As many are of the works of the Law, i.e, whoever trust in the works of the Law and believe that they are made just by them are under a curse. For it is one thing to be of the works of the Law and another to observe the Law. The latter consists in fulfilling the Law, so that one who fulfils it is not under a curse. But to be of the works of the Law is to trust in them and place one’s hope in them.” – Commentary on Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians, St. Thomas Aquinas, F.r. Larcher, O.P.

He then mentions the conditions of the early Jewish church, that many were Torah observant, but since they did not place their “hope” in the Law, they were not condemned:

“Now in the early Church there were some just men who observed the Law without being under the Law, inasmuch as they observed the works of the Law; but they were not under the Law in the sense of putting their hope in them.”

This concept of the proper use of one’s “hope” is equivalent to the Jewish concept of “Lishmah” or “motive”:

  • Improper Lishmah = obeying to earn a reward
  • Placing “one’s hope” in the Torah = obeying the Torah to earn Salvation