View Single Post
  #2  
Unread 06-05-2017, 06:46 AM
Roger Slater Roger Slater is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 16,475
Default

Actually, Gorky did not remember the words correctly. Hillel's famous maxim was in the first person, "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? But if I am only for myself, who am I? If not now, when?" Ethics of the Fathers, 1:14

The middle part, notably, doesn't ask "why am I?" but "who am I?" -- that is, it suggests the idea of being for others is part of being for oneself. Being for oneself and being for others are not in opposition but are two sides of the same coin.

I'm pretty sure that any kid who has ever gone to even the most basic Hebrew school is familiar with these words, which are practically as famous as the Golden Rule (and very much related in terms of emphasizing one's own personal worth while acknowledging the equal worth of others).

I don't think it has a lot to do with "protecting" the individual or the community, but to me it has more to do with how a person ought to live and think about his own life. Even in the first part, Hillel isn't saying that his self should be "protected" for its own sake. The purpose of being "for" one's self is to allow others to know the real you and be "for" you. And by the same token, you are called upon to perform that same role on behalf of others not as an act of sacrifice but as part of the process of being for yourself.

There's been a lot written on these words. Here's something I stumbled on just now that is interesting.
Reply With Quote