A number of aggadic passages depict Alexander the Great's moral encounters with the kingdoms he conquered. One aggada (Vayikra Rabba 27:1) touches on an issue that spiritually-involved people often become preoccupied with - religious competition. The setting is the Kingdom Beyond the Mountains, and Alexander has just met its king. [Comments are in parenthesis.]

"I want to see your judicial system," asks Alexander. As they (Alexander and the king) are speaking two men enter before the king for judgment.

One litigant says, "My master the king, I bought a broken down property from this man, dug in it and found a treasure. I told him to take back the treasure. I only bought a piece of property, not a treasure."

The other litigant said, "Just as he is afraid of the punishment for theft, so am I. When I sold him that property I included everything within it in the sale."

The king called over one of them and asked, "Do you have a son?" He answered, "Yes." He called the other and asked, "Do you have a daughter?" He answered, "Yes." Said the king, "Have the two marry and you will together benefit from the treasure."

Alexander looked at this scene with amazement. The king asked him, "What are you so amazed at? Did I not judge well?" Alexander replied, "Yes, you did." "And if the same case came before a court in your land what would you have done?" asked the king. Alexander replied, "We would have beheaded both of them and the treasure would have fallen to the royal treasury."

"Does the sun shine in your land?" asked the king. "Yes," answered Alexander. "Does rain fall in your land?" "Yes." "Perhaps there are small animals in your kingdom?" "Yes." ". . . It is only in the merit of the small animals that the sun shines and the rain falls in your land. You are left unpunished in the merit of the small animals, as it is written, `Man and animal You save, O G-d.' You save man in the merit of the animals.

Three positions are presented in the story - Alexander and his kingdom, the king/judge, and the two litigants. Alexander's and his kingdom's moral stance is clear; they are takers; murder justifies the accumulation of wealth. They are ready to kill the two pious litigants as long as they get the treasure at the end. The king and the litigants both seem to represent goodness in this midrash. However, there is a significant difference between the king's approach and that of his two litigants.

The litigants, despite their piety, did not solve their problem out of court. They argue about who will get stuck with the treasure -- and be considered a thief. The second litigant verbalizes this, "Just as he is afraid of the punishment for theft so am I." They are not takers, but they are not givers either. Each wants to make sure he is a Non-Taker, and they compete about which of them will give in.

The king teaches his subjects two lessons. First, he tells them, "Let us work out a way that both of you can be givers." He built on the concern both had about others' property and took it a step further. Do not stop at being non-takers, he said, but go on to be mutual givers. Furthermore, he teaches, do not get caught up in pious competition. Instead, he encourages them to look for a solution that protects both of them -- not only their property but also their moral status. This midrash communicates to us, get beyond religious competition and moral one-upmanship. Our piety should not only involve protecting ourselves from sin, but concern for others' religious lives.

This mutual concern is tied up with arevut, the mutual responsibility all Jews must have for each other's shmirat mitzvot, moral and spiritual lives. Religious competition does not get past a very individualistic, particularistic perspective. The competitors are caught up in the achievements of their own religious lives, so others' successes somehow seem threatening, perhaps arousing feelings of insecurity. The foundation of arevut is that all the individuals of G-d's nation are interconnected, as one large organism serving Him together. When we live with the perspective behind arevut, we are naturally joyous about the spiritual accomplishments of others. Like the king in the aggada teaches, we should not only protect our own moral standing, but look out for others' moral lives as well.

[One source that seems to encourage competition between Torah scholars is diffused by the Maharsha. The halakha restricts certain kinds of business competition, opening a competing business in close proximity to an existing one in certain limited cases. One exception permits opening a new school for teaching young children how to read the Torah even when an existing one is already open (Bava Batra 10). This is based on the principle, "Kinat sofrim tarbeh chokhma" (Jealousy among reading teachers increases wisdom). Ostensibly, this source encourages competition in the realm of Torah in order to ensure better results. However, the Maharsha points out the gemara's careful choice of words - referring to "sofrim," reading teachers, rather than "chakhamim," scholars. Lesser level scholars can avail themselves of artificial motivation of competition, but Talmidei chakhamim should be free of any jealousy.]

prepared by R. Eliezer Kwass