12 Nov IS CAPITALISM KOSHER?
I. Self-Interest and
Capitalism
The theoretical basis
for the economic
system of Capitalism
is self-interest, another
term for greed. Those who devalue greed,
who view the accumulation of wealth as a
vice, necessarily see Capitalism as a system
based on sin. It may currently be the best
economic system but it is nevertheless a
method for succeeding by strengthening
one’s evil inclination. The question remains
whether greed is good according to Jewish
sources. This past September, I participated
in a rabbinic symposium on culture, religion
and the marketplace sponsored by the Tikvah
Foundation which got me thinking once
again whether Capitalism is based on a sinful
attitude.
Let us first note that the terms “self-interest”
or “greed” often have a negative connotation,
implying excessive desire for money.
However, that is not what I mean here. When
I use the words, I mean a desire that is not
necessarily excessive nor unduly selfish.
Most of us would consider it a natural desire.
If you have a choice between receiving
payment of $10 or $15 for the same task, a
person influenced by what I am calling greed
will choose the higher fee. What is the Jewish
attitude to the natural choice to accumulate
wealth?
Rabbi Aaron Levine, the late doyen of Jewish
business ethics, begins his classic work,
Economics and Jewish Law (NY, 1987), by
briefly addressing this question. He quotes a
midrash which says that the yetzer ha-ra, the
evil inclination, is “very good” (Gen. 1:31).
Without the evil inclination, no one would
buy a house, marry and have children, nor
engage in business (Bereishis Rabbah 9:7).
This shows a rabbinic understanding that the
desire for money is important for society.
Rabbi Levine writes that “since society’s
physical survival would be in question
without expression of the acquisitive motive,
man’s duty is not to suppress the evil impulse
entirely, but rather, to sublimate it into
acceptable channels” (Economics and Jewish
Law, p. 6). Here we will expand his study and
look at additional sources.
II. The Talmudic Sages
The Talmud certainly contains many
statements denouncing physical desires.
However, I am not certain that these can
be applied to greed. Money may facilitate
physical pleasures but its accumulation is not
in itself a physical delight. Nor is jealousy the
same as greed. The former means desiring
what someone else has; the latter means
desiring what one lacks. I cannot even think
of a term in Hebrew for greed. Neither
“ta’avah” nor “chemdah” seem to fit the bill.
A relevant Talmudic and Midrashic statement
amplifies the verse in Koheles (Eccl. 5:9):
“One who loves money will never be satisfied
with money.” The Midrash Koheles Rabbah
(1:13) states: “One who has one hundred [of
some currency] wants two hundred.” In other
words, greed is futile. It is an endless goal, a
path that just keeps on going.
Additionally, the Talmud (Sotah 48b)
denounces as lacking faith someone who has
bread in his basket — or money in his pocket
— and asks what he will eat tomorrow. Wealth
accumulation demonstrates a lack of trust in
God. This passage also denounces greed for
an indirect reason. Wealth accumulation for
its own sake, rather than out of concern for
the future, emerges unscathed.
This is further buttressed by the praise
given to the wealthy, not just due to
their charity but simply because of their
wealth. R. Yehudah Ha-Nassi is lauded as
exemplifying a combination of Torah and
wealth (Gittin 59a). The wealth of three
leaders of late-Second Temple Jerusalem
are colorfully described with no hint of
disapproval (Gittin 56a). In fact, the Talmud
(Ta’anis 9a) even offers tithing as a sure-fire
method of attaining riches and elsewhere
recommend best business practices that will
generate wealth (Chullin 105a).
On the other hand, the Talmud (Avos 4:1)
states that the truly rich person is one who
is happy with his lot. And elsewhere (Avos
2:7) it points out that with more wealth
come more worry. However, there are
multiple interpretive options for reconciling
this contradictory data with none emerging
as the clearly preferable understanding.
III. Medieval Scholars
Medieval philosophers and ethicists fall
into a spectrum regarding asceticism.
On one extreme, R. Avraham Ben Ha-
Rambam (Ha-Maspik Le-Ovdei Hashem,
Histapkus) adopts a radical asceticism. He
even includes withdrawal from money as
an appropriate behavior (p. 109 in Hebrew
only edition): “Contentment (histapkus) is
one of the best traits and it means being
happy with one’s portion of this-worldly
acquisitions and not being excited and anxious
to add to them. This testifies to a lack of desire
and minimal love for this-worldly pleasures,
which bring man to great sins and diminish
perfection.”
On the other side, R. Yehudah Ha-Levi
(Kuzari 2:50) allows for wealth accumulation
if it does not detract from one’s spiritual
pursuits (Korobkin translation): “Living in
deprivation [is not] an appropriate type of
service for one who is able to acquire luxury
without too much effort, and whose wisdom
and good deeds will not be compromised
by his wealth. And certainly if a person has
a family to support, and his desire to make a
living is therefore for the sake of Heaven, then
for him monetary pursuit is healthy.”
According to R. Avraham Ben Ha-Rambam,
if a transaction with one person can earn
you enough for your family’s needs but with
another it can earn you double, you should
opt for the smaller profit as a function of the
ethical value of contentment. According to
R. Yehudah Ha-Levi, you should opt for the
higher profit since you expend no additional
effort for it.
IV. Modern Thinkers
Asceticism reigned dominant among non-
Chasidic thinkers in the 18th and 19th
centuries, although some differed on this
point. Some advocated ascetic living and
others believed in embracing and sanctifying
physical pleasures. R. Dov Katz, in his Tenu’as
Ha-Mussar (vol. 3, ch. 15), describes how an
influential Mussar thinker changed the non-
Chasidic approach. R. Nosson Tzvi Finkel,
the Alter of Slobodka, a leading pedagogue
at the end of the 19th and beginning of the
20th centuries, believed that the changing
times required emphasizing the non-ascetic
approach to Judaism. His students became
deans of leading yeshivas and, between them
and the influence of Chasidism, not to mention
the allure of luxury in our wealthy society,
non-asceticism has dominated Orthodox
Judaism over the past century.
In summary, there are different approaches
to the accumulation of wealth in Judaism.
Everyone opposes excessive desire for
money, even when there is no intent to acquire
money sinfully. Some denounce all attempts
to acquire more than is necessary, while
some approve of the accumulation of wealth
if it does not detract from religious growth.
This last view is, I believe, the contemporary
mainstream approach.