GEN1002 [The Rashba [Shlomo ben Aderet (1235–1310)] attributes the Jewish people’s great love of truth to several reasons, including the inheritance of Torah, a Torah of truth, and the fact that they are descendants of Yaakov, whose defining characteristic was truth.   The Rashba also alludes more subtly to a third reason – that they are “entirely an offspring of truth.”   That is, our entire nation descends from the patriarch Avraham, who could not be persuaded to worship idols by his father and his entire generation, all of whom were heathens.   Rather, he investigated the matter on his own, until he arrived at the truth and his soul became attached to the true God.   Thus, the very founding of our nation came about as a result of Avraham’s tireless search for the true path, and it thus became the defining characteristic of our nation.   This explains the Rashba’s later statement about “a powerful testament to how much the nation of the God of Avraham loves the path of truth.”   Thus, he mentions only the God of Avraham, and not the God of Yitzchak and Yaakov, because Avraham was the first to bequeath to his children and household the true path, as it is written [this verse]: “because he commands his children and his household after him that they keep the way of HaShem, doing charity and justice.”   EYES 437-8

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1003 Throughout the Book of Deuteronomy, Israel is called upon “to walk in all His ways.” Deuteronomy 28:9, 11:22   But this expression was already used in Genesis, before the Sinaitic revelation, in reference to Abraham [this verse]. This would indicate that these values are not merely the ways which God has commanded man to walk in but that they are actually God’s ways – i.e., the ways in which God Himself walks. These “ways” are later revealed to Moses, when he asks to be shown God’s ”glory,” as middot, attributes of moral qualities: “merciful, gracious, long-suffering, abundant in loving–kindness.” SPERO 86

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1004 [In respect to Sodom it is written: “The outcry of Sodom and Gemorrah, because it is great,” and in respect to the generation of the flood it is written Genesis 6:5: “And God saw that the evil of man is great.]” This teaches us that their actions were similar. Yerushalmi, Baba Metzia 1:21.  TEMIMAH-GEN 86

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1005 Failure to aid the poor is a most serious crime.   Rabainu Yonah noted: “We find concerning the sin of Sodom, that although they sinned with many perverse acts such as robbery, violence, miscarriage of justice and illicit relations, Scripture attributes their annihilation to their failure to practice charity, as it is stated, ‘Behold, this was the transgression of your sister Sodom: pride …neither did she uphold the poor and the needy’ Ezekiel 16:49.”  Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv explained why this is so. We are obligated to emulate the ways of God. We must bestow kindness upon others, just as He bestows kindness upon the entire world. If someone lacks the desire to emulate God, it shows a lack of appreciation of God’s divine providence. For if a person is sincerely aware of God’s goodness to him, he too will bestow kindness upon others.   Therefore, the failure to perform acts of chesed is not merely one specific fault; it implies a denial of God. Chochma Umussar, vol. 1, p. 32).  PLYN 75

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1006 The same Jewish law which protects the rights of the individual to his own property in turn limits those rights and grants others, the community and other individuals, moral claims to that property.   The rabbis of the Talmud, reflecting an interpretation that was already hundreds of years old, claimed that the sin of Sodom was its inability to share its wealth with strangers, with the weak, and with the poor—and its insistence on the absolute right of each individual to his own property.   The Mishnah defined one who said, “What’s mine is yours and what’s yours is mine” as a simple man.   He who says, “What’s your is mine and what’s mine is mine” is an evil man.  He who says, “What’s yours is yours and what’s mine is yours” is a righteous person.   But “What’s yours is yours and what’s mine is mine – some say this is the mark of Sodom.”   Ethics of the Fathers 5:10.   [In his Bible commentary], the Malbim, a 19th-century rabbinical scholar in central Europe, commented on [this verse] as follows: It must be remembered that the Bible stresses that Sodom was fertile and rich “as the garden of Egypt” before its destruction. The citizens of Sodom were worried that the desert dwellers or the poor from the surrounding areas would come to their cities in search of a livelihood and wealth.   It was in order to prevent others from sharing in the wealth that legislation against strangers –unless they were rich, like Lot – was passed and enforced in Sodom.  This jealous protection of their wealth later led to the corrupt laws and practices which characterized Sodom and precipitated its destruction.”   There is a story about the Gaon of Vilna – the preeminent Talmudic scholar of 18th-century Lithuania – underscoring this idea.   In the middle of the 18th century there were renewed persecutions of Jews in Germany and Poland, which led to refugees flooding Vilna; the Jewish Council of Lithuania debated new legislation to prevent their entry.  Obviously what bothered them was the economic burden of providing food and shelter for the refugees, as well as the economic threat posed by their competition.   When the Gaon arrived and was told of the pending legislation he immediately left, saying, “This is considered new legislation? These are the laws enacted already in Sodom.”   Charity is not simply an act of kindness but rather the fulfillment of a legal obligation.  The “haves” in Judaism have an obligation to share their [property with the “have nots,” since it was given to them by God partly for that purpose.   TAMARI 51-2  

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1007 See [[GEN598]] Genesis 6:11 violence BLOCH 135-6

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1008 See [[GEN757]] Genesis 11:5 came EYES 207-8

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1009 The repentant has been exhorted to examine his ways, and [to know] the number of sins and transgressions he has [committed]. (See the First Gate, paragraph 36 (the eleventh principle of repentance)). Upon completion of his examination, he has [further] been exorted to investigate the severity of every single sin, as the pasuk [this verse] says Eichah 3:40, “Let us examine our ways and analyze [them].”   He must become aware of the seriousness of the offense for each sin, since the severity of some offences reaches the very heavens [E.g., this verse and Yonah 1:2 (Sha'arei Teshuvah Hameforash), and one evil may equal many grave sins (e.g. the sin of lashon hara) [evil speech] see paragraph 201.   The quality of one's repentance is commensurate with the scale of his self-analysis, for in accordance with his awareness of the magnitude and severity of the sin, he will be distressed. "Perhaps, then, their uncircumcised heart (See the Second Gate, note 8) will be humbled, and they will gain appeasement for their transgression [this verse]. GATES 159

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1010 We should not condemn others based on hearsay. In the Bible, God sets and example of how to avoid condemning others without first checking the facts.   Since God is all-knowing, the words “I will go down to see” are obviously an anthropomorphism. We must try to make sure that we know the whole story before we assume the worst about another, and certainly before we attack him.  TELVOL 1:76

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1011 [T]he Rabbis see motives as the characteristic determinant of virtue. Interestingly enough, Maimonides singles out as examples David and Elijah, who displayed harshness and anger, albeit in righteous causes, to show how lack of love results in loss of virtue even though in practice the exigencies of justice leave no room for choice. [Maimonides, Shemonah Perakim, chap. 7].   It is not surprising therefore that the Halakha itself recognizes the suspension of the usual halakhic criteria in those instances where conflict on the motivational level is acute.   The archetype is our father Abraham.   So boundless is his love for man that he rebels against accepting the divine decree against the wicked cities of Sodom and its allies.  Scripture says, “Abraham approached” [this verse], and Midrash comments: “R. Elazar explained thus, ‘For war-I come; for conciliation-I come; for prayer-I come.’” Bereshit Rabbah 49. Abraham does not shrink from war, as it were, against the Almighty, and driven by love he hurls an accusation against “the Judge of all the earth.” The question reappears in various guises.   In order to save lives, is every action justified? Based on Talmudic remarks about Esther and Yael, Sanhedrin 74b, Rabbi Joseph Colon saw it as permissible for a woman to surrender to or even arouse the adulterous lust of bandits in order to save the lives of their captives. Responsa Maharik, 137. More recently Rabbi Ezekiel Landau demurred. Noda Be-Yehuda, Tinyana, 161.  The same question is discussed in our own time by Rabbi Yehiel Weinberg. Seridei Esh, v.3, sec. 109.  All the authorities agree that in extreme cases, there is no prescribed course of action, and the woman’s own conscience must be her guide, for only she can determine what her true motives are.  Not only an overwhelming challenge of love can suspend the usual norms.   The same applies to the stern demands of justice.   … Lest one allow oneself too much freedom in taking liberties with established judicial procedure [Maimonides] concludes, “It is the glory of the Torah only to act in accordance with its statutes and ordinances.”  It is only in cases of overriding urgency that the individual is given the liberty to probe his own motives and act as he sees fit regardless of the usual rules.   FOXMJE 93-4

SHOW FULL EXCERPT