6

The Bible’s Attitude to Private Property

An exchange with Pete Tobias who is the rabbi at the Liberal Synagogue at Elstree.

In his ‘Face to Faith’ article in the Guardian newspaper of Saturday 18th October Pete Tobias writes about a rabbinic saying which goes like this:

“There are four types of person: one who says ‘what is mine is mine and what is yours is yours’ - this is the average type. One who says ‘what is mine is yours and what is yours is mine’ - that is an ignoramus. One who says ‘what is mine is yours and what is yours is yours’ - this is a righteous person. One who says ‘what is yours is mine and what is mine is mine’ - that person is wicked.”

Though Pete Tobias claims he has never really understood this saying this doesn’t prevent him from using it to analyse our present precarious global financial situation. Here are his conclusions:

If we look towards one another in our communities, rather than relying on financiers and the market to shape and guide our lives, we can replace greed with mutual support, fear with trust, and the despair that seems to lie ahead with hope and confidence for a richer future.

I don’t in any way wish to dispute Pete’s findings. I only want to demonstrate how a god-of-the-marginals perspective clarifies this remarkable rabbinic saying, which Pete tells us he finds difficult to understand.

As I see it the saying as a whole is about what we refer to as ‘private property’. The first type who says ‘what is mine is mine and what is yours is yours’ simply establishes the obvious point that your average civilisation person believes in private property. The second type who says ‘what is mine is yours and what is yours is mine’ is described as being ‘an ignoramus’. He has to be seen therefore as a stupid person who denies the civilisation concept of private property. This saying presumably comes from pre-revolutionary times. The fact is, however, that with the advent of Marxism we now have to deal with serious civilisation people who seek to do away with the concept of private property by saying ‘from each according to his means and to each according to his needs’. However, we have to excuse the rabbis of ancient times for calling such people ignoramuses since we can’t expect them to deal with situations they had never come across. In any case it is not in this first contrast that the thrust of the saying as a whole is developed. For this we have to turn to the contrast between the third and fourth types. The distinction here is not between what from a civilisation point of view is sensible and stupid but rather between what from a biblical point of view is righteous and wicked. Even atheistic Guardian readers will have no problem in understanding the wickedness of the type who says ‘what is yours is mine and what is mine is mine’. It’s rather the righteous person who floors us – atheists and theists alike – when he says ‘what is mine is yours and what is yours is yours’. So how does a god-of-the-marginals perspective illuminate this perfectly wonderful and intensely biblical saying, which I have no doubt Jesus would have thoroughly appreciated. From a god-of-the-marginals perspective when you say ‘what is yours is yours’ you simply show that you take on board the general validity of the private property principle. However, in also saying ‘what is mine is yours’ you qualify this principle in showing you accept that those who are in danger of becoming marginalized have a legitimate call on you which you can never therefore rightly ignore. In short this truly extraordinary saying recognises the fact that the civilisation principle of private property can all too easily become the door by which marginalization enters the community and that as such it has to be kept firmly closed by each and every one of us.

Finally perhaps I should make it clear that when I say that Jesus would have approved of this saying I don’t want to be seen as claiming that the saying itself is Christian. I don’t care one jot for what is Christian or for what is Jewish for that matter. I care only about the Bible’s god-of-the-marginals tradition in which this saying must have a place of honour.

6

Previous - - Next