LEV471 … even the historical context of traditional Jewish law did not raise the question of special privacy requirements for professionals, in our day we may apply its concern for the general welfare to protect professional – client confidentiality. So, for example, if a lawyer knows that a client has a criminal record of fraud, (this verse, "Do not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor") would seem to require the lawyer to warn any of the client's potential business partners of the extra risks involved in doing business with him or her. Because society needs legal services, though, and because people will seek the aid of an attorney only if they can be assured of confidentiality, we may interpret Jewish law as permitting – – or even insisting--that the lawyer keep quiet about the client's past. That clearly impinges on the potential partners' welfare, for they may be taking on a larger level of risk than they realize or want to; but the need of the community for legal help and for confidentiality in attaining that help may outweigh the partners' individual or collective well-being. In interpreting Jewish law in this way, I am narrowing the domain of (this verse) to exclude professionals who are keeping confidences made known to them in their professional roles. (Cohen (1984), 224-227, takes this position and I agree with it). On the other hand, if there is no practical need to reveal negative facts about a person, disclosing them is itself a sin. (Continued at [[NUM168]] Numbers 15:32 man DORFFLOV 65).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV477 Defamatory speech is an important thing to avoid as much as possible, but there are some very clear exceptions to the prohibition. One exception occurs when failure to defame the person will result in harm to someone else. If someone routinely defrauds customers, for example, you are duty-bound to warn potential victims and to inform the authorities, however negative your report may be. In fact, as a general rule, when failure to disclose a financial or physical abuse to the proper authorities will result in continued illegal activities, the victim and anyone who notices the wrongdoing are obliged to report such activities. Even though that will inevitably defame the abuser, such action is not only permissible but mandatory when it is done in an effort to prevent harm to oneself or someone else.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV476 Because of the enormous value placed on human life, we are expected to spare virtually no effort to save human life, even for a short time. And conversely, the deliberate taking of a human life is considered one of the most grievous sins a person can commit. Not only is the active taking of human life a terrible crime, but the Jewish tradition also considers an abtension from saving a life as a serious offense. In contrast to the Western notion of individualism under which a person is not obligated to come to another's aid, the Torah specifically admonishes us: "Do not stand idly by your fellow's blood." [this verse]. Allowing someone to die while taking a laissez-faire attitude is not acceptable either for a physician or for a layman. Thus there is a virtual unanimity that active euthanasia, even for a suffering human being who is imploring the physician to take action to terminate the suffering, is simply not acceptable. Shortening a patient's life by deliberate injection or other similar means remains murder even if life is shortened by just a few moments, and even if the intention is compassionate. No less forbidden is suicide or assisted suicide. One has no more right to take one's own life than to take another's life. It has even been suggested that suicide is, in a way, worse than murder. A murderer has an opportunity for repentance after the dead, and indeed death itself is regarded as a mechanism of forgiveness. But the person who commits suicide forfeits the possibility of repentance, for the very act of death, which might redound to a person's credit, is in this case itself the result of a venal sin.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV487 When we see that someone's life is in danger, we are forbidden to stand idly by if we are able to save him (Chinuch 237). We are obligated to trouble ourselves with a lost ox or sheep; all them more so, we must aid their owners (Shaarey Tshuvah 3:71). Below are the basic laws of this commandment: 1) If you see that someone's life is endangered (for example, if you see someone drowning or being attacked by robbers), you are obligated to save him. If you are unable to rescue him yourself, you must hire someone to save him (for example, call the police). Failure to save someone is a violation of a Torah prohibition. (Choshen Mishpot 426:1). 2) There is an opinion (Yerushalmi cited by Bais Yosef, Choshen Mishpot 426:2) that one must be prepared to risk a possible threat to one's life in order to save someone whose life is definitely in danger. The rescuer takes only a doubtful risk while the other person faces a certain danger and saving one soul is equivalent to save an entire world. But the Shulchan Aruch, Rambam, Tur, RIF, and ROSH do not cite this opinion as law (SMA, Choshen Mishpat 426:1). The Chofetz Chayim writes that a person is not obligated to jeopardize his own life to save someone else. But he must weigh the matter carefully before he decides that his own life will be jeopardized by his action (Mishnah Brurah 329:19). The Aruch Hashulchan (Orach Chayim 329) adds that in such matters everything is dependent upon the particular circumstances. 3) If you overhear someone's plans to harm another person, you are obligated to inform the intended victim. When you are able to convince the schemer not to perpetrate the crime, you are obligated to do so. (Choshen Mishpot 426:1). 4) A doctor who fails to try to heal someone or is lax in his efforts violates this prohibition. (Eved Hamelech, Vayikra, p. 92b). 5) If you are able to admonish someone and fail to do so, you violate this prohibition. We are obligated to save someone's body; all the more so are we obligated to save his soul. (Minchas Chinuch 239:4). 6) If you unnecessarily told Reuven that Shimon spoke against him or wronged him, and Reuven grew angry to the extent that Shimon's life is in danger, you have an even greater obligation than usual to remove the danger. If you are unable to do so yourself, you must ask others to help you. (Shmiras Haloshon vol. 2, ch. 17). 7) It is advisable for every city to have volunteers who are prepared to rescue others from distress. (Shaarey Tshuvah 3:71). 8) If you hear that someone is planning to do something that might endanger his life, you are obligated to try to dissuade him from carrying out the act. (Pele Yoatz, section Yoatz).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV475 [This verse]. Duties toward our fellow men are described in Leviticus 19:11-16. According to Hertz (The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, London, Soncino Press, 2nd edit. 1962, pp. 499-501), these precepts restate the fundamental rules of life in human society that are contained in the second tablet of the Decalogue. These moral principles were expanded by the Sages and apply to every phase of civil and criminal law.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV483 See [[EXOD229]] Exodus 15:26 diseases ROSNER 20-1

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV489 Many ethical principles found in biblical and talmudic texts should apply in all sorts of modern context, including dating. Whether you view the text as Divine or divinely inspired, or just want to be more considerate of others, imagining everyone as having been created b’tzelem Elohim-- in the image of God, and therefore possessing a bit of the divine that renders us all equally worthy--can inspire greater respect toward the people with whom we share the planet. This equality keeps us grounded to our common bond as humans, even as it reminds us to behave in a more divine way. The people in our case may not lack a commitment to commitment, but they may be lacking the commitment to conversation. While rocking a perfectly good boat is an understandable fear, if the person you are looking at is a potential partner for life, working out how to have a discussion about something difficult is a vital skill. Are you allowed to go see your ex who is going through a bad time and keep that from your partner? Does it hurt him or her more to know about it, or to not know about it? Is phone sex or cybersex cheating? Does it matter if you know who you are having sexual relations with or if it's all anonymous? If civilizations form around a shared set of values and behavioral expectations, how do you identify the ethical geography of your relationship? How can you expect to know the answers to any of these questions unless they are specifically discussed? At bare minimum, the Torah seems to tell us, there is the injunction not to stand idly by the blood of your neighbor (Leviticus 19:16). While this can certainly be read as a commandment against endangering your partner, a figurative reading also provides some contemporary resonance. According to texts, blood doesn't just mean literal blood spilling forth from a wounded body, but also the blood that rushes to our faces when we become embarrassed. The word adom, meaning “red” in Hebrew, contains the word dam, which means “blood.” When we are literally or emotionally wounded, we redden. Hence our lesson is to not be the inflictors of wounds that cause such reddening, either through literal or emotional methods. People who have not defined the borders of their relationships should not be surprised when their significant others end up defining them differently. They may unintentionally end up wounding each other. Hillel told us to do under others as you would have them doing to you (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 31a). Would you like to be treated the way you are treating others when it comes to dating and relationships? If your answer is no, a self-assessment may be in order. Then there is the much loved phrase, “kol yisrael arevim zeh lazeh,” or “all the people of Israel are responsible for each other” (Babylonian Talmud, Shavuot 39a). This kind of nationalistic appeal takes humanity from the general to the particular, in case that kind of appeal strikes a greater residence with the modern Jewish dater. “You shall not … place a stumbling block before the blind,” the Torah tells us (Leviticus 19:14). There is always a temptation to be literal with biblical text, but taking a more figurative approach also indicts those who deceive others: convince your fellow that things are other than they seem to be and you have caused both their blindness and their fall. A policy of honest communication between partners about the nature and depth of their relationship keeps the playing field level. Both partners go from blind to sighted, and no unfortunate unforeseen obstacles lie in their paths. I have always believed that sexual ethics should be the same for all human beings, whether they are involved in casual sex, a friends with benefits situation, or committed partnerships of any sort with anyone of any gender, and that for all of these groups, communication about the nature of the relationship should take place in advance of sexual union. But anecdotally, evidence seems to point to the fact that people feel awkward talking about their relationships, especially in a moment when passions are running high and logical honesty is... not so much. Most people agree that it's not the act of consummation that creates a committed relationship. If there has been no conversation to define a dyad, it cannot be considered exclusive. (By Esther D. Kustanowitz)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV490 “Do not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor” (Leviticus 19:16). “Our Rabbis taught: how do we know that one who sees that someone [literally, “his friend,” haveiro] is drowning in the river or that a wild animal is dragging him or that highway robbers are attacking him is obliged to save him? Because the Torah says, “Do not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor.”—But is it derived from that verse? Is it not rather derived from “And you shall restore him to himself” Deuteronomy 22:2)?--From that verse I might think that it is only a personal obligation, but that he is not bound to take the trouble of hiring men [if he himself cannot save the victim]; therefore, the verse [Leviticus 19:16] teaches that he must [also spend his money to hire others, if necessary].-- Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 73a. Furthermore, the duty to strive to heal takes precedence over all but three of the other commandments: “With regard to all transgressions in the Torah except for idolatry, sexual licentiousness, and murder, if enemies say to a person, “Transgress and then you will not be killed,” the person must transgress and not be killed. What is the reason? “And you shall live by them [My commandments]” (Leviticus 18:16) [implies] that he should not die by them [Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 74a).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV492 See [[EXOD572]] Exodus 21:19 heal DORFFWITO 150-2

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV491 Hashem loves His nation, the Jewish people, and wants the best for them, so much so that He refers to them as His “children,” “portion,” and “inheritance,” as well as by many other affectionate titles that indicate the extent of His love for them, as the pasuk says: אָהַ֤בְתִּי אֶתְכֶם֙ אָמַ֣ר יְהוָ֔ה, "I love you, said Hashem"... (Malachi 1:2). Because of this great love, He distanced the Jewish people from all bad practices, and especially from lashon hara and rechilus, which cause people to argue and quarrel. At times, lashon hara and rechilus can even lead to bloodshed, as the Rambam writes in Hilchos Dei’os (7:1): “Even though this prohibition does not incur lashes, it is a grave sin, and causes the murder of many Jews. Therefore, the prohibition of lashon hara is juxtaposed with: לֹ֥א תַעֲמֹ֖ד עַל־דַּ֣ם רֵעֶ֑ךָ, “Do not stand by idly while your friend's blood is spilled" (Vayikra 19:16). Go and learn from what happened with Doeg the Adomi”—whose rechilus caused the massacre of Nov, the city of kohanim. [1 Samuel 21-22--AJL]. These deplorable practices [of lashon hara and rechilus] have caused many other terrible calamities. As we know, the sin of the Serpent was primarily one of lashon hara, for the Serpent spoke lashon hara about Hashem by telling Chavah that “Hashem ate from this tree and then created the world.” He used this claim to seduce Chavah, as Chazal say (Shabbos 146a), “The Serpent came unto Chavah and contaminated her.” We see, then, that his lashon hara led to immorality. The Serpent's actions also brought death into the world; we see, then, that his lashon hara led to bloodshed. In addition, the Serpent’s lashon hara caused Adam Harishon and Chavah to violate the will of Hashem. Consequently, one who speaks lashon hara is adopting the trait of the Serpent, which destroys the world. (Continued at [[GEN1437]] Genesis 37:2 reports SEFER 30-1).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT