Wozner and Abiri on the Tree of Knowledge and the Birth of Normativity @TAU_LAW

Shai Wozner, Tel Aviv University, and Gilad Abiri, Yale University Law School, have published The Tree of Knowledge and the Birth of Normativity at 27 Jewish Law Association Studies 239 (2017). Here is the abstract.

The constitutive myth of the Garden of Eden and the Tree of Knowledge is central to the biblical law. It deals with fundamental normative and legal issues – commandment, prohibition, sin and punishment – combines the main aspects of nomos and narrative, and represents an organizing story upon which the thick normativity of biblical precepts and prohibitions is based. In the paper, we would like to suggest a new interpretation of the myth, according to which the tree of knowledge was an ordinary tree and its fruits were normal fruits. Its uniqueness was constituted only by Divine commandment and prohibition, which were put in place in order to enable Adam and Eve to break the law. Infringing the law and eating from the forbidden fruit was the means by which God taught Adam and Eve the notions of good and evil. In order to fully grasp normativity, it was necessary for Adam and Eve to violate the Divine command at least on one occasion. In this reading, God is not a stringent law-maker, but rather a teacher teaching mankind an important lesson. When commanding Adam and Eve to refrain from partaking of the fruit, his actual goal was not to hinder them from eating but to afford them an opportunity to break the law and to learn the notion of good and evil. It was an exercise in educational manipulation, foreseeing their failure and sin. The sin of eating from the tree of knowledge was not a derailment of the Divine program, but rather its performance.

The full text is not available from SSRN.

Jackson on Law and Narrative in the Book of Ruth

Bernard Jackson, University of Manchester, has published Law and Narrative in the Book of Ruth: A Syntagmatic Reading. Here is the abstract.

It is important to follow the plot line of the Book of Ruth, paying attention to who knows what when — both the characters in the story and its (ancient and modern) audiences. This is the syntagmatic dimension of the text, which should be viewed independently of its possible interpretation in terms of its possible intertextual references (which may not have been available to its ancient audiences). The article focuses on the developing issue of the fate of Elimelekh's original land, and its relationship to the marital history of his surviving family, and concludes with a new analysis of the legal dénouement in ch.4, which at last reveals what had happened to Elimelekh's land. The ultimate resolution does not accord with Pentateuchal legal norms, but also suggests that the pragmatics of the text (the author's purpose) may have been related to landholding disputes between "returnees" from the Babylonian exile, and "remainees" in ("exilic") Judah.

Download the article from SSRN at the link.

Theory of Sovereignty In the Hebrew Bible

Geoffrey P. Miller, New York University School of Law, has published Sovereignty and Conquest in the Hebrew Bible, as NYU School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 10-61. Here is the abstract.

This article examines the Hebrew Bible’s theory of sovereignty with special reference to the book of Joshua. The author conceives of sovereignty as the exclusive and absolute control over territory. The sovereign is “all Israel” – the biblical analogue to “we the people.” The territory is the land promised to the Patriarchs and partially conquered by Joshua in the war of conquest. Israel’s title to this territory is established vis-à-vis foreign nations by boundary agreement (Aram), partition (Ammon and Moab), abandonment (Edom), and renunciation (Egypt); its right to dispossess the prior inhabitants is based on theories of conquest, capacity, appropriation, grant, promise, purchase and contract. Israel’s control over territory is explored in narratives describing the allocation of the Promised Land. The author’s approach is pragmatic rather than programmatic, stressing the value of fair procedures and recognizing arguments for distributive justice based on merit, equality, productivity, expectations and need. The author argues that a property distribution, even if fair ex ante, must also be accepted as reasonable ex post.

Download the full text from SSRN at the link.

The Eden Narratives and Law

Geoffrey P. Miller, New York University School of Law, has published The Dark Age: How the Biblical Narratives Demonstrate the Necessity for Law and Government as NYU School of Law Public Law Research Paper No. 10-18. Here is the abstract.

In earlier work I argue that the Garden of Eden story in the book of Genesis explores a basic question for political theory: why people have an obligation to obey the law. The narratives that follow describe a “Dark Age” in world history characterized by accelerating violence and ending in a catastrophic flood. These texts expand the analysis of the Eden narratives by asking whether human beings can achieve a good life in the absence of government and law. The narratives describe an experiment in which people interact strategically with one another in an environment where cooperation can generate a surplus but defection from cooperative arrangements is always possible. The message of the Dark Age texts is that, at least under the specified conditions of scarcity, self-interest, and character types, people will not achieve a good life in the absence of government and law.

Download the paper from SSRN at the link.