LEV480 In survey after survey, individuals are asked if he or she is "a good person," and more than ninety-five percent of the respondents respond that they think of themselves as basically good. Even though they may regularly lie and not help others in need, they still believe they are good. How is that possible? This phenomenon occurs because most people tend to believe that as long as they do not do anything truly evil and do not commit a major crime, they are good. Does that concur with the Jewish definition of goodness? King David outlines the formula for Jewish goodness, saying that it is a two-step process. First a person has to reject and desist for doing all evil actions, but that is not enough. After rejecting evil, the person must actively do moral acts and help others. Only then is that individual considered to be a good person (Psalms 34:13,15). This is also reflected in the Mishna, which says that if the person does nothing to help or hurt others ("What is mine is mine, what is yours is yours"), at most he is considered a mediocre person, but certainly not a good person (Mishna Avot 5:10). Another opinion equates this person with the evil values of Sodom. Thus, doing no evil is certainly not enough to be considered good in Judaism. In actuality, doing nothing is more than just being "neutral" in Jewish thought. In the twentieth century, Edmund Burke stated that, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that a few good men do nothing." But long before Burke, the Torah and Jewish law considered it a sin to do nothing when anyone in need can be helped (this verse; Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 426:1). In fact, Judaism is the only legal system in the world in which a person can be punished and it is considered a crime if he or she does nothing when in a situation to stop evil actions. Thus, from the Jewish perspective, not being a bad person does not render an individual a good human being.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV481 In the United States, there are laws directing a person's reaction to the sexual abuse of a child. Every state has a law mandating "professionals"--including doctors, nurses, therapists, welfare personnel, and teachers--to report such abuse, but only in three states is failure to report considered a felony. In thirty-nine states, not reporting the sexual abuse of children is only a misdemeanor. Eighteen states have a law requiring non-professionals to report such an act, with no specification for those failing to report. In contradistinction, the attitude and ruling about this crime in Judaism is very definitive. Not acting and/or not reporting is a clear sin, and reporting the molestation of a child fulfills one of the 613 Commandments in the Torah, as Judaism forbids any person, not only professionals, from standing by and doing nothing [this verse]. Maimonides records this law with specific examples, including any sexual acts against a person's will (Maimonides, Hilchot Rotze'ach 1:15). In addition to reporting, a Jew's first obligation is to prevent an imminent act from occurring, or stopping an act that he or she witnesses. The Code of Jewish Law goes one step further and even requires a Jew to hire others to stop the act if the witness cannot do it by himself (Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 426:1). This applies to any situation in which one person is harming another person, but certainly when the victim is a defenseless child.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV569 There are many sources pointing out the strong antagonism of Judaism to the emotion of hatred. These sources flow from the Torah, the Tanach, the Talmud, and Midrash. The Torah specifically states [this verse] that one may not hate a brother (fellow Jew) in one's heart. The verse in Obadiah (1:12) another verse Proverbs 24:17–18) also says that you may not be joyous when your enemy is defeated, lest God get angry. This concept, of not being happy when an enemy falls, is codified in the Mishnah by Shmuel Hakatan (Avot 4:19). The idea of hatred was so distasteful to the Jew that the Talmud records that the Second Temple was destroyed because of unfounded hatred among Jews even though they performed mitzvot and were kind (Yoma 9b). Furthermore, it says in that passage that since we know that the first Temple was destroyed because Jews committed the three cardinal sins of Judaism--adultery, murder, and idolatry (the only three of the 613 for which one must choose death rather than perform them at gunpoint).... [t]his teaches us that for him who hates needlessly it is as if he has committed all three cardinal sins combined! The essence of Judaism itself involves the avoidance of hatred. When Hillel was asked by the non-Jew to tell him the entire Torah while standing on one foot (Shabbat 30a), Hillel replied that you should not do unto others what is hateful to you.... Thus, the essence of Judaism, according to Hillel, is to not act in a hateful manner.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV555 It is a negative commandment not to hate in one's heart any decent person in Jewry as Scripture says, You shall not hate your brother in your heart [this verse]. And should one man sin against another, he should not bear hatred for him in his heart and keep silent. Instead, it is a religious duty for him to inform the other person and tell him, "Why did you do thus–and–so to me?" And he should erase the hatred from his heart. If, however, he saw the other person committing a sin, whereupon he warned him, but the other did not turn back, it is then a religious duty for him to hate the other one (since he does not conduct himself as "your brother").

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV560 See [[EXOD807]] Exodus 23:5 enemy SINAI2 23

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV561 See [[GEN1450]] Genesis 37:4 speak AMJV 129

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV585 Honoring While Giving Rebuke. The verse says, "Surely rebuke your fellow man and do not bear sin because of him" [this verse]. Sifra states: "Even if one gives rebuke four and five times to no avail, he is obligated to continue to rebuke the sinner. Should he give rebuke even if this will cause embarrassment to the sinner? The verse says, 'Do not bear sin because of him.'" This teaches that it is prohibited to rebuke the transgressor in public if this will cause embarrassment; however, one is obligated to continue giving rebuke in private (this law is discussed in detail in Sefer HaChinuch, mitzvah 500). Sefer Orach Meisharim (ch. 31) writes that the person giving rebuke should not speak harshly; instead, he should assure the sinner that it is in his own best interest to accept the rebuke. He should speak gently and argue in a logical and sincere manner, thus sparing the sinner embarrassment. Furthermore, the purpose of giving rebuke is that the sinner change his ways. Concerning this, the Sages say, "The words of a wise man are heard in gentleness" (Koheles 19:17)--over-aggressiveness on the part of the person giving rebuke will have the effect of further entrenching the sinner in his ways. (Continued at [[NUM251]] Numbers 20:10 rebels WAGS 75-6).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV639 It is a negative commandment to harbor no hatred in our heart toward our fellow-man as Scripture says, nor shall you bear any grudge [this verse]. Bearing a grudge means that one harbors hate in his heart: for instance, if he tells him, "Here I am lending it to you; I am not paying you back as you acted toward me, refusing to lend me something." This is bearing a grudge, where he nurses hate in his heart. Instead, he has to lend it to him wholeheartedly; there should be no ill will whatever in his heart, but he should rather erase the matter from his heart, and not retain it or remember it at all. These two qualities are extremely bad. For all the matters and concerns of this world are vapid nonsense and triviality, and it is not worth taking revenge or bearing a grudge about them.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV657 Finally, the key to the reason that the urge for revenge and the urge to retain a grudge should be overcome and forgotten comes from the verse itself that prohibits this sin. It is not an accident that the commandment to love one's neighbor as oneself is placed at the end of the verse prohibiting revenge [this verse]. Since no one would want anyone else to commit revenge against him or her for something he or she did, so too, no one should not (sic) take revenge against any individual who feels wronged and who feels as though he or she deserves the right to take that revenge. Because this is so difficult to do, it is the ultimate test of the verse to love one's neighbor as oneself. Any Jew who can bury this urge and not commit revenge can be said to truly love someone else as much as he loves himself.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV717 But why is it that in regard to all other traits and actions, Jews should imitate the behavior of God, and only in the case of revenge does God operate alone, not wanting His actions to be emulated? Perhaps it is precisely because revenge is such an intense and volatile feeling that God forbade it completely from the realm of man's actions. Human beings would not know how to use this feeling properly and repay a wrong in the proper proportion. Just as Cain murdered Abel as revenge for a sacrifice favored by God, which was certainly an "overreaction," perhaps no person can properly control rage and feeling the need for revenge, and therefore cannot administer it properly against another human being who is deserving of punishment. That is why it is left only to God to take revenge and avenge a sin properly, in a way that is exact compensation for a wrong committed. Chizkuni implies as much when he says that only God can assuage the feeling of revenge within man. [Chizkuni commentary on this verse].

SHOW FULL EXCERPT