Excerpt Browser

This page displays the full text of excerpts.  When viewing a single excerpt, its “Share,” “Switch Article,” and “Comment” functions are accessible.

EXODUS — 23:6 quarrel

EXOD826 "in his quarrel" [i.e., in judgment] you do not incline, but you do incline [in favor of a poor man] in respect to leket, shikchah, and peah [i.e., If in doubt whether something in the province of these mitzvoth [i.e., gleanings and corners of the field, forgotten produce -- AJL] belongs to you or to him, decide in his favor] (Yerushalmi Peah 4:5).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXODUS — 23:6 rights

EXOD827 As indicated in chapter one, a majority of contemporary Jews responding to polls assert that in their view social justice is the core commitment of the Jewish tradition. Such responses were not, as noted there, far off the mark. The demand for justice is indeed a persistent part of Jewish sources from the Bible to our own day, and it is a significant element in Jewish visions for the future. This includes both procedural justice and substantive justice. Procedural justice demands that people be treated fairly in court and in society generally, with distinctions drawn among persons only for reasons having to do with their own actions or skills. So for example, a just society is one in which people are not judged guilty or innocent, or fit for a job, according to the color of their skin or how much money they currently have. … [Exodus 23:6-8; see also Deuteronomy 16:18-20, Leviticus 19:15-16; see also Deuteronomy 1:16-17; Deuteronomy 24:16]. Maimonides makes some of the Torah’s procedural concerns more specific: 1. It is a positive commandment for the judge to judge fairly, as Scripture says, “Judge your neighbor fairly” (Leviticus 19:15). What is fair judgment? It is equalizing the two litigants in every respect. One should not let one litigant speak as long as he wants and tell the other to be brief; and one should not be friendly to one litigant, speaking to him softly, while frowning upon the other and speaking to him harshly. 2. If one of the litigants is richly dressed and the other poorly dressed, the judge must say to the former, “Either dress him like yourself before you come to trial against him, or dress like him such that you are equal; then the two of you may stand in judgment.” 3. One litigant should not sit and the other stand, but rather both should stand. If the court wanted to permit both to be seated, it may do so. However, one must not sit on a seat higher than the other; they must be seated side-by-side. ... Although some of this may seem obvious to us now, note that much of it took quite a long time to become adopted in Anglo-American law. The guarantee that parents and children not be held liable for each other's offenses, although articulated in Deuteronomy 24:16, which scholars date to the end of the seventh century B. C. E., was not part of British law until about 1830; until then, descendants would suffer for their ancestors’ treason, a process known as “attaint.” The Founding Fathers of the United States therefore had to ban that explicitly in Article 3, Section 3 of the United States Constitution in 1789. More pervasively, the kind of fairness envisioned in the Torah and by Maimonides was not common practice in the United States until very recently, for poor people and blacks were commonly treated unfairly just because they were poor or black. It is still the case in the United states, in fact, that blacks are much more likely to be executed for killing whites than whites are for killing blacks. Furthermore, American law does not insist on the formal requirements that Maimonides articulates to make both litigants look alike in social status. Thus, the Jewish vision of an ideal world should prompt us to work toward refining the American sense of procedural justice. If that is true for the United States, which in our day has a relatively refined sense of procedural justice in comparison to its own past and to so many other nations of the past and present, the Jewish vision of procedural justice in the ideal society is even farther from reality in most other countries in the world--in Asia, Africa, South America, and Arab lands. Thus biblical and rabbinic standards of procedural justice still have a lot to teach contemporary humanity. Substantive, in contrast to procedural, justice demands that society be structured so that people have basic food, clothing, and shelter--and, in our own day, health care and access to transportation. Western concepts of substantive justice are rooted in the Torah. Contrary to Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Persian, Greek, Roman, and most other cultures of the ancient world, the Torah demands that such basic care be supplied not only for citizens but also for strangers.... (Exodus 22:20-26; Deuteronomy 24:17-18). The biblical prophets are perhaps best known for their scathing criticism of people--Jews as well as other nations--who fail to care for the downtrodden and destitute.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXODUS — 23:7 distance

EXOD828 There are [those who are not] entrenched in lying but who are also not concerned about keeping their distance from it. If the opportunity arises, they will lie, though often they will lie in a joking manner or the like without any ill intent. Nonetheless, the wisest [of all men] has instructed us that all of this is contrary to the will of the Creator, blessed be He, and to the virtue [found among] his pious. This is what is written (Mishlei 13:5): "The righteous hate false words." It is in reference to this that the following prohibition was issued [this verse]: "You shall distance yourself from a falsehood." And note that does not say "safeguard yourself from falsehood" but rather "distance yourself from falsehood" – – to make us aware how much we need to distance ourselves and flee to escape this. And it has already been stated (Tzefanyah 3:13): "The remnant of Israel should do no iniquity, nor speak falsely, nor should there be found in their mouths a deceiving tongue."

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXODUS — 23:7 false

EXOD829 “Keep far from a false charge...” (Exodus 23:7). This is understood to be a broad and very stringent prohibition against lying. However, there are a number of specific instances in which the Torah commands lying, including cases in which peace can be preserved or embarrassment can be prevented, (Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot 65b; Bava Metzi’a 23b; Berakhot 27b). .... There are quite simply, no hard and fast rules. The need to lie, or the demand to tell the truth, is contextual. I believe that the same thing is true for dating: there’s no formula for knowing what is right and what is wrong. This by no means indicates that there isn't such a thing as right or wrong, but that the definitions of fidelity and betrayal, obligation and permission depend on the specific relationship. Here's why: whether people perceive the boundaries of their relationship as being preserved or broken depends on what they think the boundaries of the given relationship are. That thinking comes from a whole bevy of sources: individual psyches, cultural assumptions, family patterns, past experiences, etc. Most people aren't explicitly aware that what they think are assumptions. They are more likely to understand their requirements as just the way relationships are. When you multiply those assumptions by two people, a lot of misunderstanding can result. The same is true for successful marriages, to some degree. However marriage is, in this case, distinguished from dating because, Jewishly speaking, marriage has fixed rules: for example, don't cheat on your spouse. But in dating, partners first need to agree upon or assume exclusivity before infidelity can exist. First dates don't constitute contracts. Moreover, we should know who we are in relationships, to the best of our ability. This isn't the same thing as knowing where we're going, an expectation that can kill a connection before it has come to fruition. Rather, we have to find out what our expectations are of each other, and revisit them quite often as those expectations grow and develop. We have to talk about what we need. Patience and honesty aren't quick remedies to what ails relationships, but they have the advantage of being true and heartfelt virtues. We should have patience for our partners. We should be as honest with them as we're able to be without hurting them. I have faith that where we can accomplish these virtues, and when the connection is ready, love will grow. I adjure you, O maidens of Jerusalem, By gazelles or by hinds of the field: Do not wake or rouse Love until it please! (Songs 3:5) (by Scott Perlow)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXODUS — 23:7 false

EXOD831 There is no quality greater than speaking the truth, to wit (Tehillim 119:160): "The crown of Your word is truth." And we have exhorted [this verse]: "Keep yourself far from a false word." Even one's insinuations should be truthful, for the reward for truth is very great. One should, therefore, accustom himself to walk in truth, and he should study Torah to know the truth in order to be able to perform the mitzvos truthfully, according to the Halachah. One should always acknowledge the truth, and he should even study matters of Aggadah which do not involve the fulfillment of mitzvos, so that the heart will believe a truthful thing. One should not be ashamed to accept the truth from anyone. Even if one is the smallest of the small and completely spurned, still accept the truth from him, for a precious pearl, even the hands of the small and despised, is still a precious pearl.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXODUS — 23:7 falsehood

EXOD835 Beit Shamai asks Beit Hillel: how can you lie and say the bride is beautiful if she is lame, for example? Isn't it a violation of the Torah commandment to keep far away from a lie? Beit Hillel answers with an analogy about goods purchased in the marketplace. If a man spends a lot of time and a lot of money selecting an item and then asks you what you think of the item, what will you answer? Beit Shamai said that they would say it was beautiful, implying that they gave this answer so as not to insult the person and because to him the item is indeed special. Beit Hillel said the same thing is true with any bride. To the groom, she must be beautiful, even if lame. From this discussion, we can deduce that Beit Shamai measured beauty in objective terms, and if the bride is not objectively beautiful, it would be a lie to say that she is. Beit Hillel, on the other hand, believes that beauty is indeed subjective, "in the eyes of the holder," and thus to every groom she is indeed beautiful. Saying that she is beautiful is not a lie. Shulchan Aruch Even Ha'ezer 65:1 codifies according to Beit Hillel, implying that beauty in Judaism is indeed a subjective quality.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

RSS
First235236237238239240241242243245247248249250251252253254Last
Back To Top