GEN610 Many people show a greater disregard for the mitzvos that apply between a man and his fellow (bein adam la’chaveiro) than for those that are between man and God (bein adam la’Makom).  It appears that there are two reasons for this.  Firstly, they erroneously believe that one who violates the mitzvos between man and God is directly slighting the Creator’s honor, whereas one who violates the mitzvos between man and his fellow only damages the honor of man and his needs. The second rationale stems from the fact that no punishment is meted out by man [The power to mete out all physical punishments, including all forms of the death penalty, rested solely in the hands of the 71-members supreme court, the Sanhedrin.  Hence, these court-administered punishments essentially came to an end with the destruction of the Temple, and along with it, the rule of the Sanhedrin] for commandments transgressed between man and his fellow.  Even one who embarrasses another person in public—a sin so severe that he loses his share in the World to Come [As the Talmud points out in Bava Metzvia 59a, even one who omits adultery with a married woman – whose punishment is execution by strangulation – nonetheless retains his share in the World to Come] – is nonetheless free of any court-administered punishment.  Similarly, even one who commits robbery, one of the gravest transgressions  [This is implied by the Talmud’s statement Sanhedrin 108a that the fate of the Dor HaMabul (Generation of the Flood) was only sealed on account of their robbery], does not receive lashes [If one intentionally violated a biblical prohibition (laav) that is punishable by a Divine death (rather than a court-administered penalty), the Sanhedrin sentenced him to receive as many as 39 lashes.  It should be noted, however, that a number of extraordinarily difficult conditions had to be satisfied in order for this sentence to be carried out.  For example, two witnesses must testify that he committed the transgression within seconds of being warned by them not to do so.  The witnesses must also undergo extensive cross-examination separately, and their testimony is stricken if they contradict each other on even minor details].   However, both of these arguments are false. The first line of reasoning is forcefully refuted by the Ramban in Parshas Yisro Exodus 20:13, in his comments on the commandment “You shall not kill:” Behold, the Ten Commandments are divided [into two halves], so that five relate to the Creator’s honor, and five are for the man’s benefit … It appears that the tablets were written with the first five on one tablet – these are the commandments pertaining to God’s honor, as I mentioned.  The second set of commandments appeared on the second tablet, so that the two sets of five would be opposite each other. The Ramban elucidates this matter further in the continuation of his commentary, according to the allusions and secret mysteries of the Torah, in his usual, holy manner.  But we are not qualified to dabble in the Torah’s secrets.  The simple message that is revealed to us by the balanced layout of the Ten Commandments on the Luchos (Tablets) is the following.  Just as we may surely not believe that the two Luchos were unequal in holiness, or that the sanctity of all the Ten Commandments is not equal – so, too, are all of the Torah’s mitzvos equal in holiness, whether they are between man and God, or between man and his fellow.  For it is by the Word of God that we have been commanded to observe all of the Torah’s commandments.  The same Torah that commands, “You shall not eat from a carcass, or from a torn animal,” Leviticus 22:8 and “You shall not wears shatnes (mixed fibers), wool and linen together,” Deuteronomy 22:11, also decrees “You shall not be a gossip–monger,” Leviticus 19:16, “You shall not move your neighbor’s boundary,” Deuteronomy 19:14, and “You shall not steal.” Exodus 20:13.  In fact, violating one of the commandments between man and his fellow is even more serious than violating a commandant between man and God, since one who transgresses one of the former has not only sinned against God, as is the case for all of the Torah’s prohibitions, but also against his fellow man.  This is precisely what the Ramban alludes to in his commentary on Parshas Noach [this verse], regarding the statement by Rabbi Yochanan (Sanhedrin 108a) that the decrees of the Mabul (Great Flood) was ultimately sealed on account of their robbery, and not as a result of their adulterous behavior.  The reason, explains the Rambam [sic?], is that “robbery is evil committed against both God and human beings.” In other words, robbery is also a sin between man and God, since the Torah states “You shall not steal,” just as it commands, “You shall not commit adultery.” Exodus 20:13 But the former has an additional aspect of sin in that it causes harm to other people as well.  Similarly, the Rambam writes [Yad HaChazakah, “Laws of Charitable Gifts” 10:1], that we are obligated to pay more heed regarding the commandment of charity than with regard to any other positive commandment in the Torah.  Thus, although tzedakah is but a mitzvah between man and his fellow, we are obligated to be more stringent concerning its observance than for that f all the positive commandments between man and Gj-d.  We have also not seen it stated with regard to any commandment, that one who does not perform that mitzvah is not a descendant of our forefather Abraham, with the exception of one who does not have compassion for others, as cited in the Talmud (Beitza 32b).  The second line of reasoning used by those who show disregard for the mitzvos between a man and his fellow can also be rejected, based on the comments of Rabbeinu Yonah in Sha’arei Teshuva (3:24): … Our Sages of blessed memory taught (Chulin 141a): “One does not receive lashes for violating a laav (negative commandment) that is linked to a positive one.” For example, the prohibition Deuteronomy 22:6 “Do not take the mother-bird together with the young,” is linked to the positive commandment (that immediately follows it in the same verse), “You shall surely send away the mother-bird.” But even though the courts do not administer lashes for these transgressions, there are violations among them whose punishment reaches to high heaven in its severity, and whose judgment mounts on high.  For example, in the case of theft, it is written Leviticus 9:13, “You shall not rob,” and this is connected to the positive commandment Leviticus 5:23, “He shall return the robbed items that he has robbed.”  Yet our Sages have stated Sanhedrin 108a, “The fate of the generation of the flood was sealed only because of robbery, as it is stated [this verse]: ‘The end of all flesh as come before Me, for the earth is filled with robbery.’” And although the sin of illicit relations is more serious than that of robbery, the nature of the penalty for robbery is to draw nearer the day of destruction, and to hasten that which lies in store for one….  EYES 120-4