LEV459 If you observe someone who either says something or performs a particular deed, and his words or actions can be judged in either a negative or positive way -- if he is a God-fearing individual, you must judge him favorably, by way of the truth (I.e., even though the circumstantial evidence points toward guilt, since he is God-fearing, in truth he is probably innocent), even if the facts are closer and lean more toward his guilt. If he is within the norm, people who [on the whole] are careful not to sin, and yet sometimes falter, you must give him the benefit of the doubt and judge him favorably (Here Rabbeinu Yonah does not add, "by way of the truth."), as our Sages, z"l, said (Shabbos 127b), "Whoever judges his fellow man favorably, will [himself] be judged favorably by the Omnipresent." This is a positive commandment of the Torah, as the pasuk says [this verse], "You shall judge your fellowman justly." If the facts lean toward his guilt, you must treat it as you would any uncertainty – – do not tip the scales against him. But if the majority of his deeds are [geared] towards evil, or if you have checked that within his heart there is no fear of God, then [you must allow] his words and deeds [to] tip the scales against him, as the pasuk says (Mishlei 21;12), "A righteous person understands the house of the wicked; he construes the wicked towards evil." We have already explained this (Rabbeinu Yonah elaborates upon this verse in his commentaries to Mishlei (21:12) and Avos (1:6).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV461 It is a negative commandment not to have pity on a poor man in a court trial as Scripture says, neither show you favor a poor man in his cause (Sh'moth 23:3); and it says further, you shall not respect the person of the poor [this verse]. [This means] that the judge should not say, "He is an indigent man, and we have a duty to sustain him. I will declare him right in the court case, so that he will be sustained with ease."

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV460 Do not say: He is a poor man, and since I and the rich man are obliged to sustain him, I shall vindicate him in judgment so that he can support himself honorably. To this end it is written: "You shall not lift up the face of the poor" (Torath Cohanim)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV462 ... moral rules, unlike moral principles, require exceptions. John Stuart Mill stated it most concisely: “It is not the fault of any creed, but of the complicated nature of human affairs, that rules of conduct cannot be so framed as to require no exceptions, and that hardly any kind of action can safely be laid down as either always obligatory or always condemnable.” Smith and Sosa, Mill’s Utilitarianism, Wadsworth, 1969, p. 165. In his book, Generalization in Ethics, Marcus G. Singer clarifies the distinction between principles and rules. Rules, as we have seen, allow exceptions. They state what is usually right or wrong, but there are occasions when it is not only justified, but imperative to break a moral rule. In A.I. Meldon, ed., Essays in Moral Philosophy, University of Washington, 1958, p. 165. In some situations, a parent should steal milk for his starving child. Moral principles, on the other hand, allow no exceptions. They are also deeper than and the source of moral rules. Thus, we often speak of the principle underlying a certain rule which determines its scope and justifies exceptions to it. Ibid, 160. Moral principles are not only more fundamental than rules; they are also more general and comprehensive. It follows that principles are necessarily more abstract than rules. Ibid. 169. Given these conditions, it is clear that moral principles will not be nearly as numerous as moral rules. What are some moral principles? Kant's categorical imperative is such a principle: “Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” Kant, Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals, Bobbs-Merrill, 1959, p. 39. In other words, when faced with an ethical choice, we must ask the question, “What if everyone in a similar situation were to do that?” The categorical imperative, thus, warns the individual not to make an exception of himself and not to set himself above the moral law. There are exceptional situations, but no person is an exception. The Torah, the five books of Moses, speaks strongly on this point. None is above the law. Not the powerful and not the King. Leviticus 19:15, Deuteronomy 17:14-20. Even the poor, for whom the Torah has immense compassion, are not to be favored at the expense of justice. Exodus 23:3, Leviticus 19:15. This truth also implies that no principle, no nation, and no religion is above the moral law.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV463 It was due to the intolerance and disrespect of Talmud scholars for each other that the 24,000 students of Rabbi Akiva died, and the Jewish people today commemorate this great loss with a thirty-three day period of mourning between Passover and Shavout (Yevamot 62b). Judaism does not just believe in platitudes and declarations of its values. Rather, it puts these ideas of tolerance and respect for others into practice on an everyday level. This is the reason that it is forbidden to ignore the plight of a Jew in trouble or ignore even the lost object of someone else by passing by and not picking it up. The Jew is commanded to show respect and tolerance of others by helping and returning lost objects, no matter who are the owners [this verse, Deuteronomy 22:1-3].

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV464 … there is a general obligation upon every Jew to help anyone in trouble. Thus, one verse prohibits a Jew from standing by and doing nothing when someone's life is in danger, and another verse obligates a person to return any lost object that once belonged to someone. (In Judaism this is an obligation, not a mere good deed [this verse, Deuteronomy 22:2]). This obligation to help anyone in danger was codified into Jewish law, and it requires a Jew to help anyone in a life-threatening situation or even in ordinary trouble (Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 426:1).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV465 The ideal man, says the Psalmist (xv. 3. Called the "Gentleman's Psalm") is one who "hath no slander upon his tongue", lest he causeth thereby a shedding of blood." Nor is the actual doing or speaking of evil needed to constitute a wrong. Often a look or a smile is enough. A sudden silence is, at times, more eloquent than speech; as if one should say "I could a tale unfold, if I so wished". Such insinuation is called by the Rabbis "the fine dust of evil speaking" (abak leshon hara). God hates him who says one thing with his mouth, while he thinks another in his heart (Pes. 113b). The Talmud attaches much importance to honesty in all things, especially in commerce and industry. Jerusalem was destroyed when honest men ceased to be therein (Shabb. 119b).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV466 The holy Torah [] instructed: לֹא־תֵלֵ֤ךְ רָכִיל֙ בְּעַמֶּ֔יךָ, “Do not go as a talebearer among your nation.” (Leviticus 19:16). The Shelach explains that the pasuk uses the word “go” in order to teach us that the act of going [in order to speak negatively] is forbidden in its own right, aside from the actual prohibition of speaking rechilus.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV467 Gossip Mongering. "Do not go about as a gossip monger among your people" (this verse). "Such gossip mongering is the same as lashon hara" (Jerusalem Talmud, Peah 2:1).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV468 [This verse]. Our Sages, z"l, said (Ketubos 46a) that included in this injunction is not to besmirch the name of another Jew. The punishment from Heaven for this is extremely severe, as will be made clear when [we discuss] the level of death [administered by Heaven] (Paragraph 111. See also paragraphs 222-225).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT