By Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel
CHULA VISTA, California –Brad Pitt’s latest horror film, World War Z, started making me think of more practical questions regarding the existence of zombies. With the ongoing saga of election fraud, and in light of the Supreme Court ruling regarding election manipulations, I thought I would share some tongue-in-cheek and sardonic reflections about the issues that really matter in life, or in this case–death: Can a zombie be counted as part of a minyan?
Fact can often be stranger than fiction. Whenever elections take place, it seems as though that in most places in our country—and even in foreign countries—the dead are periodically listed to have “voted.”
One case that comes to mind dates back to February of 1964. Bobby Rowan, who was a member of the Georgia Senate, who proposed that the following amendment be incorporated into the Georgia election code:
- No person may vote either in the Democratic primary or in the general election in the State of Georgia who has been deceased more than three years.
Anyone with an ounce of Talmudic reasoning or common sense would have to ask several questions: If we can agree in principle that the dead can vote, why should we limit their privilege to just three years? Of course, there is a more obvious question: Why should we allow the dead to vote at all?
The closest parallel I found in the Talmud that parallels this issue comes from one of the first century’s most illustrious rabbis. R. Yochanan expounded the verse, “Among the dead I am free (Ps. 88:6). Once a man is dead, he is free from religious obligations,” e.g., observing kashrut (which would explain why zombies prefer human flesh to animal) or putting on phylacteries. [1]
Rabbi’s Yochanan’s opinion would strongly suggest that a zombie is exempt from participating in a minyan (Jewish prayer service). However, speaking from experience, as a rabbi, I think there may have been many occasions where we did count a zombie as part of our minyan.
Congregants—gotta’ love them.
Would Rabbi Yochanan’s statement apply to the responsibility to voting as well? The common sense is obvious. If a person is free from the obligation to perform religious duties (mitzvoth), then one is certainly free from the civic duty to vote!
However, from a halachic (Jewish Law) perspective, what would the law be if the person stipulated before he died, that someone act in his stead to vote Democratic in all future elections? Would such a stipulation be considered legally binding? Put in different terms, can a man designate another as a proxy to perform a good deed in his absence? Talmudic texts all admit that shilach shel adam comoto, “the messenger of a person is like the person himself” (BT Kiddushin 43a) In one Talmudic discussion, there is a debate whether a person can acquire something that has not yet come into existence. The philosophical and theological implication suggests that existence is a sin qua for acquiring anything. Conscious awareness is an essential ingredient to being fully human. This common sense attitude certainly ought to apply to dead voters.
On second thought, there is always the matter of the levirate marriage. According to biblical law, the Torah obliges a brother to marry the widow of his deceased brother, so that the child will be considered as the son of the deceased brother (Deut. 25:6-7; cf. Gen. 38:8).
Might such an idea be suggested for dead voters as well? The Georgia Senate might have had one intriguing rabbinical discussion had they thought of inviting some rabbinical scholars and theologians to their deliberations.
As I mentioned in the beginning of this article, the dead continue to participate in elections—even as late as the 2012 Presidential election. It may seem stranger than fiction, but Eric Holder and his Justice Department did their best to prevent the State of Florida from purging its records of dead people. I suspect they will be voting once again in the 2016 Presidential election.
Yet, the dead are not only voting at elections, many are also receiving welfare benefits as well! Arguably, one could say that if death prevents a person from being able to earn a living, why can’t it entitle them to receive government assistance?
Massachusetts recently conducted an audit, which revealed that the state had doled out some $18 million dollars in what they defined as “questionable public assistance benefits” over recent years. Approximately 1,200 dead people were receiving some form of welfare.
The bottom line is simple: Despite our advances in technology, human nature and artifice will always find a way to get around the rules.
And now you know the rest of the story . . .
*
Rabbi Samuel is spiritual leader of Temple Beth Shalom in Chula Vista. He may be contacted via michael.samuel@sdjewishworld.com