DEUT1437 [This verse] forbids the muzzling of an ox while it is working in the field. Jewish law understands this prohibition as applying to any working animal, not just an ox (Maimonides, Book of the Commandments, negative commandment 219). It is cruel to muzzle an animal and thereby preclude it from eating of the food it is working with, seeing, smelling, and perhaps hungering for.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1438 While there is no explicit Torah law forbidding the causing of unnecessary pain to animals, the large variety of regulations ordaining the fair treatment of animals led the majority view in the Talmud to conclude that the prohibition of tza'ar be'alei chayyim (prevention of cruelty to animals) [The term literally means "the suffering of living creatures."] is a Torah prohibition (Bava Metzia 32b, and Shabbat 128b). [The Rabbis understood the law to help unload a burdened animal (Exodus 23:5) as mandating a general concern for the suffering of animals. Meiri, in his commentary on Bava Metzia 32b, argues that a general prohibition against causing unnecessary suffering to animals can be deduced from the previously cited law prohibiting the muzzling of an ox while it is working in the field (this verse; see paragraph 4). Maimonides and Judah the Chasid site yet another basis; see footnote on page 307.] Thus, even when situations arise that are not covered by specific biblical legislation, the operative assumption is that causing unnecessary suffering to animals is prohibited. The word "unnecessary" underscores that not all behavior that causes animals to suffer is forbidden. For example, the Bible permits the slaughtering of animals for human consumption, although Jewish law regulates the slaughter in an effort to try to minimize--though it is, of course, impossible to eliminate--the suffering. Similarly, animal suffering is permitted if there is substantial human benefit to be attained (for example, if insights gained through medical experimentation on animals can lead to a cure for disease; see pages 336 – 338).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1439 See [[DEUT1382]] Deuteronomy 24:15 poor SPERO 52-3

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1440 See [[LEV235]] Leviticus 18:16 nakedness AMEMEI 313

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1441 If a man dies without children, his brother performs yibum (marries the widow). A woman, when she marries, becomes like a limb of her husband. If he dies childless, her connection to his family does not dissolve. So that he gains a foothold in the physical world and will not be forgotten from it, his brother must marry her, and if a child is born to them it will be considered the offspring of the deceased, because the mother still is considered one of his limbs. The child will cause people to remember the deceased, who will have left someone behind him in this world to carry forth his name and serve Hashem. Another reason is that the man who died leaves nothing behind in this world except for his wife, who is like his own flesh. Therefore, Hashem desires that a child be born to him by means of a union between his widow and one of his brothers, for a brother, too, is like part of one's own flesh. The child of such parents is truly like a continuation of the deceased himself. The child will serve Hashem in this world as if the deceased is still here serving Him. Thereby, the man who died childless will, in fact, have offspring in this world. The mitzvos of “heir” and “replacement” shall bring him merit in the World to Come, for the good deeds of a son bring merit to his father.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1442 If a man dies without children and none of his brothers want to perform yibum, one of them must perform chalitzah. The widow was ready to become the wife of a brother of her deceased husband, as explained in [See Deuteronomy 25:5 yibum CHINUCH 380]. She was prepared to serve her new husband, just as she had served the deceased. If, however, none of the brothers wants to perform the mitzvah of yibum, the Torah commands that the widow come before a beis din and perform an act of servitude and subservience. Before the court, she removes the shoe of her husband's brother, as a sign to everyone that she had been obligated to serve this person as a servant serves his master, and that it would have been fitting that this man performed yibum and take her as his wife. Since no brother is willing to fulfill his responsibility to the deceased and assure that he, in effect, remains in this world through the existence of offspring that will carry forth his name, the widow must become free of this family. She no longer can be considered subservient to any of them, and as a sign of this fact, she spits on the ground in front of the family member who refused to perform the mitzvah of yibum. Her act demonstrates that she is completely free of him and has no duty to serve him or afford him honor in any way. Everyone sees that he is like a complete stranger to her, for she is even ready to spit on the ground in front of him. Having performed this act, she is permitted to become the wife of anyone she wants.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1443 If two men are fighting and the wife of one person attempts to protect her husband by killing her husband's adversary, the threatened man may "cut off her hand" [this verse]. The Chinuch (Sefer Hachinuch, Mitzvah #600) explains that if the threatened man is in mortal danger, he may indeed to kill her in self-defense. ... [This is an example of] the legitimacy of self-defense in Jewish thought and affirm[s] the general concept of "if someone comes to slay you, you should slay him first" (Sanhedrin 72a).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1444 The rabbis, taking their cue from the Torah, instructed that the essence of prayer, the Amidah, be a silent prayer, so that when people enumerated their personal sins, they could not be overheard (Sotah 32b). Jewish law is often more sophisticated and sensitive then courts of the twentieth century. One of the five categories of payment for damages was to be for embarrassment, based on [this] Torah verse. Even though this payment was subjective and according to strict rules of embarrassment (Maimonides, Hilchot Chovel Umazik 3:1 and 3:7), nevertheless, the Talmud (Bava Kamma 90b) states that the "lowest" poor person still was paid for embarrassment since he is a member of the Jewish people, giving him stature and dignity.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1445 If the only way to save someone's life is to kill his pursuer, we are obligated to do so. We are commanded to save someone who is being pursued even at the cost of the life of the pursuer. When it is possible to prevent the pursuer from murder by merely injuring him, it is obligatory to do so. However, if the only way to save the life of someone who is being attacked is by killing the pursuer, you are required to do so. (Chinuch 600).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1446 Rabbinic interpretation of another law in the Pentateuch yielded a special category of damages called boshet, "shame" or "indignity." Thus, we find the law [this and preceding verses]. Interpreting the "cutting off of the hand" as monetary payment, the rabbis concluded that the woman was to pay for the embarrassment and dignity which she caused. This was formulated in the Mishnah thus: "If a man wounds his fellow man he becomes thereby culpable on five accounts: for injury, for pain, for healing, for the loss of time, and for indignity inflicted.… How is one compensated for indignity inflicted? All according to the man who inflicts the indignity and the man who suffers the indignity" (Bava Kamma 8:1 and 8:6) The rabbis in the Talmud go on to demonstrate how the nature and extent of dignity/indignity is different for different people and depends upon any number of factors, including the social status, age, and sex of the individual involved, and the place, the time, and the public nature of the incident.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT