Responsibility 101
Rabbi Arnold Jacob Wolf, "Unfinished Rabbi" (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1998), p. 60
Original
Jews are commanded to open their homes to visitors, particularly the poor and the learned. Jews are not to convert their homes into fortresses protecting the nuclear family from invasion, but to sensitize their children to other people by inviting visitors regularly into their homes. The house is not to be a refuge but a bridge – if the analogy can be imagined, a kind of spiritually self-aware hotel.
Suggested Discussion Questions

1. Who are the players in this text – seen and unseen?
2. What power dynamics are at play?
3. What social justice themes emerge from this text?

Emanuel Levinas, "The Temptation of Temptation," Nine Talmudic Readings, trans. Annette Aronowicz (Indianapolis: Indiana Univ Press, 1994), pp. 48-49
Translation Original
The direct relation with the true, excluding the prior examination of its terms, its idea — that is, the reception of Revelation — can only be the relation with a person, with another. The Torah is given in the Light of a face. The epiphany of the other person is ipso facto my responsibility toward him: Seeing the other is already an obligation toward him. A direct optics, without the mediation of any idea — can only be accomplished as ethics…To hear a voice speaking to you is ipso facto to accept obligation toward the one speaking...Consciousness is the urgency of a destination leading to the other person and not an eternal return to self. But the “we will do” does not exclude the “we will hear.” [Annette Aronowicz translation]
Suggested Discussion Questions

1. What is Levinas putting forth about human interaction?
2. What is our responsibility toward others?
3. What social justice themes emerge from this text?

David Hartman, A Living Covenant (New York: Free Press, 1985)
Original
Torah, therefore, should not be understood as a complete, finished system. Belief in the giving of the Torah at Sinai does not necessarily imply that the full truth has already been given and that our task is only to unfold what was already present in the fullness of the founding moment of revelation. Sinai gave the community a direction, an arrow pointing toward a future filled with many surprises. Halakhah, which literally means “walking,” is like a road that has not been fully paved and completed. The Sinai moment of revelation, as mediated by the ongoing discussion in the tradition, invites one and all to acquire the competence to explore the terrain and extend the road. It does not require passive obedience and submission to the wisdom of the past.
Suggested Discussion Questions

1. What is Hartman's criticism here?
2. What role does social justice have in the continuing path forward?
3. What are come contemporary justice issues that did not exist 100 years ago? How are we meant to navigate our way to dealing with them while still being in line with Torah and mitzvot?

Abe Rosenthal, Thirty-Eight Witnesses: The Kitty Genovese Case (California, Univ of California Press 1964), pp. xxvii-xxix
Original
In the middle of a cold night, thirty-eight people refused the risk of being stabbed or getting involved by answering a cry for help of a person they could not see. Is that a greater mystery, a greater offense, than that by light of day thousands on a single street withhold help to suffering people, when it would cost them virtually nothing and put them in no peril, even though they see their faces and sores? Are the people who turned away that one night in Queens, each in a separate decision, any more immoral or indecent or cowardly because there happened to be thirty-eight, than if there were just one of them? Does God judge by the individual or by head count? And what if we hear the scream but cannot see the screamer? Of all questions about silent witnesses, to me this is the most important. Suppose the screamer is not downstairs but around the corner. Surely somebody else is closer, so we don't have to run out, do we? What is the accepted distance for hearing but not moving—two flights down, five, one block, two blocks, three? Suppose you know people are screaming under persecution—not discrimination but persecution, as in imprisonment, torture, genocide, forced starvation—for their race or their religion. You have seen the pictures of African children with their bellies distended: our own government, even this government, defines this as a genocide. You know they scream, but they are not within sight and you cannot reach out and touch them, nor are you allowed to visit them. But the screams are piercing. How far away do you have to be to forgive yourself for not doing whatever is in your power to do: stop doing business with the torturer, or just speak up for them, write a letter, join a human rights group, go to shul and pray for the rescue of the persecuted and the damnation of the persecutors, give money, do something. Three stories up, a thousand miles, ten thousand miles, from here to Queens, or from here to Sudan and Chad for victims of genocide anywhere? How far is silence from a place of safety acceptable without detesting yourself as we detest the thirty-eight? Tell me, is there any question more important than this?
Suggested Discussion Questions

1. What is the phenomenon that the author of this text is criticizing?
2. What is he asking of us? Does it seem reasonable to you?
3. What social justice themes emerge from this text?