40/664
December 2009/Kislev 5770
A JOURNAL OF JEWISH RESPONSIBILITY
Law of the Land
Shira Nadich Levin
The Law of the Land
Isthe Law ...........1
Michael J. Broyde
National and
International Law,
and Jewish Law. . . . . . . 2
Diana Villa
The Agunah Problem
and Israel’s Law of
the Land. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Shmarya Rosenberg
After Madoff: An Rx for
Communal Health . . . . . 5
David Zwiebel
Understanding
Malfeasance. . . . . . . . . . 6
Benjamin Gluck
Case Study: Form
Over Substance. . . . . . . . 7
Discussion Guide . . . . . . 7
Matthias B. Lehmann
“Memories” of 1492 . . . . 9
Aryeh Cohen
An Intimation of
Hanukkah in S. Y. Agnon’s
T’mol Shilshom . . . . . . . 10
Arnold Band
On Reading a Complex
Jewish Text. . . . . . . . . . 11
Michal Govrin
Agnon’s Ironic
Spinning Top. . . . . . . . . 11
Margo Howard
Ambition and the
Iceberg. . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Daniel Alter
Kashrut Is a Law: It’s Not
About Ethics. . . . . . . . . 16
What is it that the rabbinic dictum “The law of the land is the law” has meant and continues to mean for those who feel bound by Jewish law? To what extent does it resonate, and how are we to understand its impact — or, for that matter, its lack of
impact — in the wake of a series of highly public, searingly disturbing fiscal and ethical
scandals linked intimately to Orthodox sectors of Jewish life? This Sh’ma issue includes an
array of voices — experts in civil and religious law, community leaders, and others — that will
help the wider community understand the complexities of this intersection of secular and
religious law, and how this nexus sheds light on the chilling events of the past year.
We also feature a couple of literary reflections on an intriguing text about Hanukkah
written by the enigmatic Nobel Prize winner S.Y. Agnon. The pieces, as Aryeh Cohen explains,
explore the “tensions between the new secular Zionist understanding and embrace of
Hanukkah as a nationalist symbol of freedom from tyranny and the traditional understanding
of Hanukkah as celebrating a miraculous religious event.” And, finally, Margo Howard,
daughter of “Ann Landers,” writes our fourth installment in a year-long series of contemporary
reflections on the midrash of Avraham smashing the idols in his father’s store. —SB
The Law of the Land Is the Law
SHIRA NADICH LEVIN
TO SUBSCRIBE:
CA LL (877) 568-SHMA
ONLINE www.shma.com
EMAIL shma@cambeywest.com
As a New York city real estate attorney for whom Judaism and Jewish law have personal and profound significance, I
regard the principle of dina de-malkhuta dina
(the law of the kingdom is the law) with fascination. It is a principle that addresses the question of how Jews living outside of the state of
Israel should behave when facing the law of the
land in which they live. Under this principle,
the law of the state,
despite its secular nature, is binding upon
Jews under Jewish
law, subject to certain
limitations. Its origin is viewed generally as
biblical and was postulated by Rabbi Samuel,
a Babylonian amora and scholar who lived in
the third century CE. Rabbi Hershel Schachter,
in his article “Dina de-Malkhuta Dina: Secular
Law As a Religious Obligation, in Halacha and
Contemporary Society” explained that “in certain areas and under certain, specific circumstances, the halakhah requires that we be governed by the dictates of the sovereign state in
which we live rather than by the teachings of
the Torah alone.”
The practical import of this principle is evident, as it provides a means of self-preserva-
tion, a tool with which the Jewish community
can exist in a non-Jewish state. However, the
concept has limitations under Jewish law, stemming both from the view of halakhic authorities
that Jewish law is superior and the differentiation made between the two substantive areas to
which halakhah applies, issura (observances
relating to religious and ritual observances) and
mammona (observances relating to financial,
The principle of dina de-malkhuta dina could not be subverted to insulate those who commit acts of wrongdoing,
whether under the standards of civil or Jewish law.
civil matters). It is clear that no secular law
compelling Jews to violate the Sabbath or the
laws of kashrut, as obvious examples, would be
tolerated. The principle of dina de-malkhuta
dina and the state’s authority over its Jewish citizens applies only in civil matters.
With these limitations, the ease with which
this principle is to be followed seems self-evident. In fact, where is the conflict? There are
certain areas that fall into both categories, such
as matters related to divorce. In that case, one
set of laws does not overrule the other and, for
most rabbinic authorities, both would apply.
Most rabbis will not officiate at a marriage of a
