EXOD784 "You shall not follow a multitude to do evil." If you join a group to speak or hear loshon hora, you violate this prohibition (See Shaarey T'shuvah 3:50).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD786 See [[LEV462]] Leviticus 19:15 rich HIRSH 34-5 ft. 7

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD785 However, a real understanding of the relationship between Halakhah and morality must begin with an awareness of what must be seen as a basic conflict between their fundamental principles. The Halakhah in its aspect of law and in regulating regulations between man and man is based upon the concept of justice and equality. It therefore stresses the notion of "What is mine is mine, and what is thine is thine." In its social aspects, it emphasizes negative rules or prohibitions because it assumes that individuals come endowed with life and possessions and rights. It therefore strives to prevent the proper order of society from being disturbed and the rights of individuals from being violated (This is perhaps why the moral rules in the Decalogue are primarily negative). The point of conflict with the broader concept of morality can be understood in the disparity between "Thou shalt not favor a poor man in judgment" and "Make right the poor and the indigent" [this verse, Psalms 62, Chullin 134]. In considering a judgment between two individuals, the Halakhah requires that we ignore the fact that one is poor and the other rich and make every effort to decide the case with objectivity and in accordance with the general rules governing possessions or damages or rights or responsibilities. But what of our obligation to help the needy, to have compassion up on the poor, and to unselfishly give of ourselves and our fortunes in our love for others? The answer is that you may indeed voluntarily relinquish what is your own. In judgment, however, the judge may not be charitable with the money of others. The case must be decided on its merits (Ketubbot 84). The basic disparity between din (morality and its aspect of judgment) and morality as benevolence is reflected in an important Mishnah: "There are four attitudes among men: he who says, 'mine is mine and thine is thine,' is a median [middle-of-the-road] attitude, but others say it is the attitude of Sodom. He who says, 'mine is thine and thine is thine' is a Hasid…" (Avot 5:13).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD787 Do not favor the poor in matters of justice. Do not show favoritism to the weak or impoverished who stand before you in litigation. Rather, follow only the dictates of strait justice. In matters of justice one cannot show favoritism.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD790 The prophetic pleas for justice, integrity, mercy and benevolence were embodied into the legal codes of the Torah. Here they were translated into concrete laws to govern the affairs of men. Animated by faith, the law was so formulated as to serve the ends of morality and was to be so administered as to have justice done to all. To ensure the rights of poor and rich, of home-born and strangers alike represents the duty of the judges, rulers and Kings. God Himself is the guarantor of justice. "Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; you shall hear the small and the great alike; you shall not be afraid of the face of any man; for the judgment is God's" [Deut. 1:17]. Most striking are these laws in the Code of the Covenant: [this and previous verses] Geiger calls attention to the uniqueness of the last law. The rich man must receive no advantage because he is rich, nor should the poor man have preferential treatment because he is poor. "Sympathy and pity are emotions that have their proper place in use, but even those noble feelings must be silent before justice." [Judaism and Its History, p. 37] The full significance of this law is brought out by its sequel: "Thou shalt not wrest the judgment of the poor in his cause" (verse six). It is more important that he get justice than that he be favored. Inequity in any form is iniquity. The Code of Holiness state similarly: "Thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor favor the person of the mighty; but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbor" (Lev. 19:15).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD788 R. Shimon b. Lakish said: (Psalms 82:3): "Grace the afflicted and the poor" -- What is the intent of "Grace"? If in a judgment, is it not written: "And a poor man do not favor in his quarrel"? The intent must be, then: "Be gracious with what is yours [in case of doubt as to whether it is yours or theirs] and give it to them (Chullin 134a).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD789 See [[DEUT628]] Deuteronomy 13:9 pity TZADIK 143-5

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD792 We shall note briefly [a] non-biblical passage [] to which the Rabbis on occasion refer in order to validate their legal rulings. The verse "That Thou mayest walk in the way of good men, and keep the paths of the righteous" (Proverbs 2:20) was obviously not intended to service as a legal maximum. Yet Rav based a decision upon it. The Talmud relates (Bava Metzia 83a) that wine caskets belonging to Rabbah Bar Bar Hana were broken while being handled by porters. The text is not clear whether it was in any way due to their negligence, but Rashi thus interprets it. Whereupon Rabbah took possession of their clothing. They complained to Rav and he ordered Rabbah to return it to them. Whereupon he said, "Is this the law?" And Rav answered, "Indeed it is, for does it not say, 'Walk in the ways of good men'?" Rabbah Bar Bar Hana thereupon returned the clothing. The porters then asked for pay, saying, "we have worked all day. We are hungry and have nothing." Rav ordered that they be paid. Again Rabbah Bar Bar Hana asked, "Is this the law?" And again Rav answered, "Indeed it is, for does it not say 'And keep the ways of the righteous'?" [Rashi interprets it to mean "act lifnim mishurat hadin," go beyond the requirements of the law.] Now by all definitions of law and legal procedure, what Rav did was illegal. If there ever was a clear-cut case of "uprooting" a law of the Bible this was it, for the Bible specifically states, "Neither shalt thou favor a poor man in his cause" [this verse]. Rav does not defend his action by appealing to any legal dictum, such as hefker bet din hefker [court authority to expropriate property - AJL]. Instead he quotes an ethical maxim from Proverbs and insists that he is following the law. And his action remains unchallenged in the Talmud.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD791 See [[EXOD673]] Exodus 22:21 widow SPERO 126

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD794 We are obligated to return lost objects to their owner. Rabbi Naftoli Tzvi Yehuda Berlin points out in his commentary that the Torah stresses the obligation to return a lost object to your enemy. By enemy the Torah means someone who usually insults you. You might think that you should keep a distance from this enemy and not come into contact with him by returning his belongings. The Torah therefore emphasizes that even in the case of an enemy, you must return what is rightfully his. Furthermore, because of the merit of this mitzvah, he might not insult you in the future. Even if he does insult you, however, you should display restraint. (Haamek Dovor, on this verse). The laws pertaining to lost articles are complex and a halachic authority should be consulted whenever any questions arise. [The author lists and explains 23 basic laws of this commandment].

SHOW FULL EXCERPT