Parashat Shoftim: Balancing moral decisions and personal interests

The more aware we are of the risk that our decisions are influenced by personal interests, the more likely we are to overcome this and make moral and correct decisions.

 An illustrative image depicting a question mark. (photo credit: Armend Nimani/AFP via Getty Images)
An illustrative image depicting a question mark.
(photo credit: Armend Nimani/AFP via Getty Images)

Parashat Shoftim addresses the organization of authorities in the Jewish state according to the biblical plan. There are four authorities in this state: judges, priests, a king, and prophets, each with a different role. The prophet conveys the moral voice of God; the king legislates and leads; the judges handle legal decisions; and the priests are responsible for worship and teaching.

The first authority that the people of Israel are commanded to establish is the judicial authority: “You shall appoint judges and officers in all your gates, which the Lord your God gives you, tribe by tribe; and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment” (Deut. 16:18).

Immediately following this command is a basic directive to the judge: “You shall not pervert justice; you shall not show partiality; and you shall not take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of the righteous” (ibid. 16:19).

Not every commandment in the Torah comes with such a clear explanation as does the prohibition against taking bribes. In fact, this explanation is intuitively understood by everyone, but it must be reiterated because it is relevant not only to judges but to everyone.

What does it mean that “a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise”?

Imagine a wise, learned person sitting as a judge. A case is brought before him – it could be someone who committed a criminal offense, a dispute between neighbors over property rights, a conflict between an employer and an employee, and so on. What is the judge’s role? To thoroughly study the case and rule according to the law. In some instances, the law requires interpretation because it does not explicitly address the specific case at hand, and the judge must derive a ruling based on existing law.

 Justice Elyakim Rubinstein (center) is flanked by judges Neal Hendel and Hanan Meltzer at the Supreme Court in Jerusalem in 2015. (credit: RONEN ZVULUN/REUTERS)
Justice Elyakim Rubinstein (center) is flanked by judges Neal Hendel and Hanan Meltzer at the Supreme Court in Jerusalem in 2015. (credit: RONEN ZVULUN/REUTERS)

The judge is supposed to be objective and neutral, which is why the prohibition against taking bribes is so important. When a person has a vested interest in a particular ruling, it can lead him down two illegitimate paths. The first is a conscious distortion of justice: the judge knows the law but rules – sometimes using convoluted and creative interpretations – contrary to what the law requires. This is a deliberate distortion of justice. However, the second path is more dangerous because it is unconscious: The judge understands the law differently because he wants to.

There is no doubt that this is one of the marvels of human cognition – the fact that a person’s understanding, which should be objective, can be influenced by his desires. We often see this when people argue over a certain position, where each side’s reasoned and well-founded stance aligns with his own interests. How does this happen?

The answer is that objective thinking without any personal interest is an illusion. The more an interest is involved, the more likely it is that our thinking will follow it and see things in a favorable light. “A bribe,” the Torah tells us, “blinds the eyes of the wise.” Straight thinking becomes distorted and aligned with the interest; objectivity turns into subjectivity.

However, it’s important to know that bribery is not just a monetary issue, and not only those who sit on the bench are at risk of “blindness” due to bribery. Each of us faces various decisions daily, whether personal or social-public issues, and we all have different interests. Are we capable of making decisions that are good for the public even if we personally suffer from them? Can we make personal decisions that are uncomfortable for us but align with our moral values?

These questions should guide us in our daily lives. We cannot escape our personal interests, nor can we avoid the responsibility to make decisions and choices. The only solution lies in awareness.


Stay updated with the latest news!

Subscribe to The Jerusalem Post Newsletter


The more aware we are of the risk that our decisions are influenced by personal interests, the more likely we are to overcome this and make moral and correct decisions. ■

The writer is rabbi of the Western Wall and holy sites.