Free Enough from Egypt? Free Enough to Serve God!
השתא הכא בשנה הבאה בארעא דישראל, השתא עבדי לשנה הבאה בני חורין
This year, we are here. Next year, in the Land of Israel!
This year, we are slaves. Next year, as free people?
Free...to serve God!
Freedom is awesome. But too much of it can be bad for your health. Just visit school cafeterias that banned soft drinks and fattening foods and the cities that banned trans-fats in restaurants. An undisciplined child, a society without rules, and roads without traffic lights or parking regulations would be fun for only a small period of time. It is said that some structure "keeps you out of trouble."
Do rules and structure always yield amazing results? As soon as the Jews are brought out of Egypt, they sojourn in a sweltering desert for forty years longer than necessary, enduring a near-death-by-chariot experience at the Sea of Reeds, lose their freedom to ignite fire on Saturdays, are forced to eat the Manna (or else!), and accepted the Torah on Mt. Sinai, forever! It makes sense why they would complain incessantly...and want to return to Egypt. And the Jews didn't consent to any of this in advance.
Yet, we know that life isn't so simple...it can't be a free-for-all. Whether you think that people are naturally evil-inclined, like Hobbes, or good-inclined, like Locke, everyone would agree that we need some government, either for keeping people from hurting each other (Hobbes), or for allocating property efficiently (Locke). Can you imagine LA traffic with no regulations?
Where do we draw the line?
Isaiah Berlin, in his "Two Concepts of Liberty" (1958), distinguishes between Negative Liberty and Positive Liberty. Negative liberty is the freedom that comes from fewer restrictions. It's like the freedom from Egypt - you don't have to worry about infanticide, building pyramids, or other inconveniences. Positive liberty is the freedom that comes from greater restrictions. It's the freedom that comes from parking regulations, and paying dues to society.
Each kind of freedom has obvious goods and controversies.
An example of how having strong Negative Liberty would be a great idea is for civil rights: Most people would agree that people should be free to voice their opinion, practice their faith, and own property. Controversially, though, would be the liberty to carry a weapon, burn an American flag, and obtain an abortion. Most would argue that Negative Liberty has gone too far when people cry "Fire!" in a movie theater or use their right to bear arms to limit someone else's right to own something.
Positive Liberty is no exception. Most people would agree that children would be freer if they were forced to go to school, not given alcohol, and forced to have painful vaccines. Courts rely on Positive Liberty to limit Negative Liberty to punish criminals and recover restitution. Controversially, though, is the mandate to buy health care, requirement to serve on a jury, and pay taxes. Most would argue that Positive Liberty has gone too far when totalitarian regimes use it as an excuse to oppress their subjects.
Jewish philosophy has instances of both concepts of liberty. On the side of Negative Liberty, it is stated that humans have free will, with a good and evil inclination. Slaves are protected from physical abuse, and land is protected. On the side of Positive Liberty, there are instances where a person's rights are restricted to allow the person to reach a higher ethical potential. These include God hardening Pharaoh's heart to reduce Pharaoh's free will and further the divine plan, courts forcing a recalcitrant spouse to submit or accept a writ of divorce, or land being liberated to the poor during the Sabbatical Year.
Thus, leaving Egypt to serve God in the desert would be a form of Positive Liberty.
Follow-Up Discussion:
1) Think of three kinds of Negative Liberty, e.g. rights, that would be considered universally acceptable. Now, think of three kinds of Positive Liberty, e.g. "entitlements" (in political parlance) that would be considered universally acceptable.
2) In the case of Negative Liberty, when does a right become so detrimental that it should be limited? In other words, when does Positive Liberty become preferable? Ideas for criteria: age, self-sustainability of a person, criminal history, harm to oneself, harm to others, culture, family, enforceability...
3) Do you feel that your ethical system offers you more Positive Liberty than the Negative Liberty that you surrender? How does the closeness you have with adherents, personal meaning, intellectual understanding, and other benefits compare with the burden of the rules that you adhere to?
References:
Berlin, Isaiah. Four Essays on Liberty. 1969.
Carter, Ian, "Positive and Negative Liberty", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/liberty-positive-negative/>.
Inspired to create
your own Haggadah?
Make your own Haggadah and share with other Seder lovers around the world
Have an idea
for a clip?
People like you bring their creativity to Haggadot.com when they share their ideas in a clip
Support Us
with your donation
Help us build moments of meaning and connection through
home-based Jewish rituals.
OUR TOP CONTRIBUTORS
Passover Guide
Hosting your first Passover Seder? Not sure what food to serve? Curious to
know more about the holiday? Explore our Passover 101 Guide for answers
to all of your questions.