LEV1031 (Continued from [[EXOD710]] Exodus 22:24 lend BLOCH 51). Charitableness is motivated by compassion (Baba Batra 10) and a sense of responsibility for the welfare of one's fellowman [this verse]. The significance of charity as a religious rite conducive to salvation and divine forgiveness is another important factor (Rosh Hashanah 16b). The underlying rationale, which denies the individual the choice of whether to give or withhold charity, is the premise that all wealth belongs to God (Haggai 2:8) and that the possessor of property is merely a custodian who is permitted to manage it for the benefit of all. Hence, the rabbis said, he who gives no charity will in the end come to lose his property and have to depend on charity for his subsistence (Bamidbar Rabbah 18). On the other hand, if one is a generous contributor to charity, and as a result runs out of funds, the Almighty will provide him with additional money so that he may continue his philanthropy (Baba Batra 9b). The rationale of charity, based on God's ownership of our wealth, is implicit in the phraseology of several biblical injunctions. Thus the command to help the needy "within any of the gates in the land, which the Lord thy God gives you" (Deuteronomy 15:7) stresses the point that it was God who gave the land and who lays down the rules for its disposition.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV1137 "But he, being full of compassion, forgives iniquity and destroys not." -- Psalms 78:38. … Moses was the first biblical figure to assert the crucial importance of forgiveness in God's relationship with man. The worshipers of the golden calf were initially condemned by God to death. Moses was distressed by God's decree, which did not leave the door open to forgiveness. Addressing the people, he said "You have sinned a great sin, and now I will go up unto the Lord; perhaps I shall obtain forgiveness for your sin" Exodus 32:30). Moses' forceful argument in his plea to God formulated the theological doctrine of forgiveness as a permanent factor of divine judgment. The doctrine which emerged out of the dialogue between God and Moses established the principle that forgiveness is a conditional privilege which only those who are worthy of divine compassion may expect. This principle was clearly spelled out in a divine proclamation [Exodus 34:6-7]. Forgiveness, according to this proclamation, is rooted in divine compassion, which is consistent with truth. In other words, forgiveness is not an emotional reaction but a rational judgment based on truth and justice. What must an offender do to deserve divine compassion and forgiveness? The basic condition is an admission of wrongdoing and an expression of penitence. This is the import of the biblical passage in Leviticus: "And they shall confess their inequity… in the treachery which they committed against me… if then perchance their uncircumcised heart shall be humbled… then I will remember my covenant with Jacob" (to protect his offspring; Leviticus 26:40-42).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM26 See [[EXOD295]] Exodus 18:20 way BLOCH 114-5

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM219 A feeling of guilt for having failed to develop one's potential is a common source of discontent. Those who blame others for their own shortcomings are indeed doomed to a lifetime of discontent. Those who blame themselves may find ultimate contentment after a reassessment of their potential. An individual whose career falls short of his original expectation need not reproach himself if the disappointment is not due to his own neglect. All that we may expect of any individual is that he do his best, no more and no less. Discord, domestic or otherwise, is an irritant as grievous as pain. Fortunately one can do much to remove this cause of discontent. If his manner and character are at fault, he must make amends and change. If another party is at fault and his remonstrances are not heeded, he can physically remove himself from the source of discord. The Bible describes in great detail the discord sowed by Korah due to his jealousy of Moses. When all attempts at reconciliation failed, an order was issued to the people: "Depart from the tents of these wicked man" [this verse]. A physical departure may restore contentment.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM392 We may now proceed to examine the areas in which a biblically prescribed harsh treatment appears to be contrary to established principles of compassion. A survey reveals two distinct concerns of early Judaism. One was the survival of monotheism in an ocean of paganism. The other was the eradication of bloodshed in a primitive society where feuds were normally resolved by murder. In both of these areas the Bible demands strict justice untempered by mercy. The promise of the Land of Canaan to the Children of Israel was contingent upon their acceptance of monotheism. Moses warned that the Canaanites must be expelled and their idols destroyed [this verse]. Coexistence with the Canaanites, a morally corrupt people, would have aborted the growth of monotheism at its very inception. The harsh decree of expulsion was an emergency measure which did not establish an ethical norm. It was never applied to the pagans of other countries, for their practices posed no danger to the viability of monotheism in Palestine. Thus when the prophet Jonah rued God's willingness to forgive the Ninevites (4:2), God retorted: "Shall I not have compassion for Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons?" (4:11). In every situation where idolatry threatened to weaken the will of the people to uphold monotheism, the Bible warns against permitting compassion to undermine the determination to uproot idolatry. This admonition was couched in the oft-repeated classical phrase: "Thine eyes shall not pity them" (Deuteronomy 7:16). It applied equally to pagans and to backsliding Jews guilty of inciting the people to revert to idolatry (Deuteronomy 13:9). Continued at [[DEUT934]] Deuteronomy 19:13 pity BLOCH 64).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM401 See [[NUM408]] Numbers 35:19 death BLOCH 65-6

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM404 See [[NUM408]] Numbers 35:19 death BLOCH 65-6

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM408 (Continued from [[EXOD720]] Exodus 17:14 Amalek BLOCH 65). The desire to eradicate bloodshed was paradoxically responsible for the biblical tolerance of the institution of the blood-avenger. A blood-avenger was an heir of a victim of murder who considered it his duty to avenge the death of his kin by killing the murderer [this verse]. This practice most likely originated in the distant past prior to the establishment of competent criminal courts. Avenging a kin's death was a debt of honor. There were also some who believed that the victim's soul would find no rest until the killer was destroyed. Moved by such emotional considerations, a blood-avenger would neither understand nor comply with any law which attempted to suppress his right to avenge his kin's death. The Bible intimates that God took into consideration the "heat of anger" of an avenger (Deuteronomy 19:6). The practice was therefor left undisturbed by the Pentateuch, in the words of Maimonides, "in its great zeal to eradicate bloodshed" (Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Rotzeach 1:4). However, the Bible imposed limitations on the avenger's right to take the law into his own hands. Thus, while tolerating the practice, it practically illuminated it. The avenger was permitted to catch the killer, but he could not execute him until such time as the suspect was convicted by a court (Numbers 35:12). In the event that the homicide was unintentional, the killer was granted sanctuary in cities of refuge (Numbers 35:11). In time, the law of the avenger became obsolete. (Continued at [[EXOD592]] Exodus 21:24 eye BLOCH 66-7).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM409 See [[EXOD591]] Exodus 21:24 eye BLOCH 61-2 and Numbers 35:19 death BLOCH 65-6

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM421 See [[EXOD592]] Exodus 21:24 eye BLOCH 66-7

SHOW FULL EXCERPT