Timeless Torah

In past generations many of the miracles associated with the Messianic redemption were undoubtedly viewed as implausible myths. But now modern science has turned legend into reality. Even the Biblical prophecy of the Resurrection of the Dead, once considered the ultimate ‘fairy-tale’ is now seriously discussed in respected medical journals True, today’s technology doesn’t yet allow for the type of breakthroughs where dinosaurs are brought back to life as dramatized in movies like Jurassic Park. However, similar medical miracles (remember Dolly the sheep), utilizing the process of cloning, are on the horizon. Thus when the Sages spoke of the miniscule luz spinal-bone being the source to rebuild all Jews who once lived, they were simply intimating how G-d might employ the DNA within one microscopic bone to bring a person back to life. In truth, the general concept of cloning predates the Talmud of two thousand years ago. Indeed, the very first Jew already understood its implications and lent his voice to a discussion that currently worries many ethicists. So let’s travel back in time and do exactly what the Bible does, reintroduce ourselves to Abraham and his family. That’s right! After reading all about Abraham and his adventures, including the birth, binding, and marriage of his son Isaac, the Torah suddenly waxes nostalgic and reiterates: “These are the generations of Isaac, son of Abraham, Abraham begat Isaac.” Beside the obvious question (why repeat that which is already known), the verse, even on its own, seems strange. If the first half of the sentence reports that Isaac was Abraham’s son, what new information is to be gleaned from the phrase, “Abraham begat Isaac”? Rashi, quoting the Midrash, explains: Back then the cynics were saying, “When Sarah was abducted and brought into the palace, she became pregnant through King Avimelech, and not Abraham, with whom she had lived many years without being able to have a child.” What did G-d do? He made Isaac’s facial features exactly resemble Abraham’s, so that everyone had to admit that Abraham had indeed fathered (‘begat’) Isaac. (Don’t go away, there is more.) The Torah also relates that, “Abraham was old, well advanced in years.” Once again there is a problem of redundancy. If Abraham was old, why add that he was well advanced in years? The Rabbis noticed something else: Abraham and Sarah are the first people in the Torah described as being old, despite the fact that many previously mentioned biblical characters lived to a much greater age. What this means, we are told, is that until the era of Abraham, people did not age as we know it. Imagine no wrinkles, white hair, and sagging muscles. However, because Abraham and Isaac looked exactly alike, people who saw Abraham said, “That’s Isaac,” and people who saw Isaac said, “That’s Abraham.” This created unexpected difficulties. So Abraham prayed that he grow old-looking, and this is the meaning of the phrase, “And Abraham was old.” (Sanhedrin 103b) At first, Isaac looked like a clone of his father as derived from the words, “Abraham begat Isaac.” Ultimately Abraham requested the deed to be undone, inferred from the phrase, “Abraham was old.” The moral: we each have the right to be ourselves. Still, the facts are that cloning takes place everyday in nature, where plants (for example) reproduce themselves asexually. In addition, there are indeed some powerful emotional arguments for human cloning, such as helping infertile couples have children, or perhaps to replace a deceased child. So what’s so terrible? Is a case of mistaken identity, indeed so grievous? Nonetheless, as foreseen by Abraham, this would ultimately prove disastrous for humans. Parents are not their children and children are not replicas of their parents. We are each unique. That is why Abraham prayed to G-d that there be some clear and recognizable difference between father and son. To be sure, genetically identical persons do exist, as in the case of identical twins. It is one thing though for this to happen accidentally, quite another to deliberately bring it about. Twins do not come into being so that one may serve as a substitute or replacement for the other. Conversely, if we cloned humans, which means if we treated individuals as a means rather than as an end, then human life would be nothing more than a commodity that could be manufactured, sold, and bartered. What would then become of love and the unique bond between two friends, if we could always create a replica? Would we treasure what we have? Even more tragic than losing our friends, would we lose our sense of self if we discovered that we were made to order? Judaism, starting with Abraham prayed that humanity not be thus reduced. Instead, our Sages argued the exact opposite: that each individual is non-substitutable and irreplaceable. As one Mishnah succinctly put it, “When a human being makes many coins in a single mint, they all come out the same. G-d makes every human being in the same image, His image, yet they all emerge different.” Hence, every child born of the genetic mix between two parents is by definition and by necessity, unpredictable. To quote one philosopher: “Every child has the right to be a complete surprise to its parents.” Therefore, all offspring are somewhat similar, while at the same time dissimilar to those who brought them into the world. That mix of kinship and difference is essential to productive human relationships, for it is specifically our diversity that fuels ideas, healthy competition, and progress. If there is a mystery at the heart of the human condition it is otherness: the otherness of man and woman, parent and child, teacher and student, friend and neighbor. It is the space we make for others and their individual qualities that makes love something other than narcissism, and parenthood something greater than self-replication. It is this that gives every person the right to be themselves, to know they are not reproductions of someone else, constructed according to a pre-planned genetic template. Sure, a world populated by clones would be more efficient, but it would not be human. And that was not His plan. In the end, G-d did not wish for a society of robots, even if they be breathing and alive. Why? Because we were never created in another man’s image, we were fashioned in His.