EXOD706 If someone needs money, but would be ashamed to receive charity, then find a way to coax her into taking the money as a gift or, if that would also embarrass her, as a loan Ketubot 67b. [While today we think of charity primarily in terms of donations, the Bible--perhaps because it was written at a time when few people had large amounts of money that could be given away--primarily associates charity with interest-free loans. See for example, this verse.] The psychological advantage of a loan-- particularly to someone who used to have money--is obvious: "a dole demeans by the very fact that the recipient is on a level subordinate to that of the donor but, in the case of the loan, both parties are deemed equal" (Byron Sherwin, Jewish Ethics for the Twenty-First Century, 146). Such a loan should, of course, be interest-free.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD740 Concern with the feeling [text says "feeding" - AJL] of animals is present in another Torah law. If one animal is attached by another and killed, its flesh is forbidden for human consumption (since the animal has not been slaughtered in the ritually prescribed manner). Rather, the Israelites are instructed to give the dead animal's meat to dogs.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD742 See [[EXOD325]] Exodus 19:6 holy OXFORD 39-40

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD821 People are entitled to receive help from others only if they do what they can to help themselves first.… the obvious implication of the words "with him" [in this verse] is that the animal's owner must work with the passerby to help raise the animal. But, notes Rabbi Avrohom Feurer, "If the owner… refuses to do so because he expects the passerby to do it himself because it is a mitzvah, the passerby is excused…"(see Mishnah Bava Mezia 2:10). Basing himself on this Torah verse, Rabbi Ephraim of Luntshits (1550-1619), known as the Kli Yakar, the name of his Torah commentary, teaches that "we may derive an application of this idea to the poor among our people who impose themselves on the community by refusing to work though they are able. They cry that we do not supply them with their needs, but they are wrong. God did not command us to help them in those situations where they can help themselves." In short, poor people should not refuse gainful employment they are capable of performing. Only if someone makes efforts to support himself and fails is the community and its members obligated to support him.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD888 See [[EXOD397]] Exodus 20:10 cattle TELVOL2 302

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD893 On three occasions, the Bible forbids the cooking of an animal in its mother's milk (this verse, Exodus 34:26, and Deuteronomy 14:21). Jewish law derives from this repetition additional prohibitions, the most well-known of which is a ban on eating milk and meat foods together. But the verse's most fundamental prohibition is its literal one, forbidding behavior that is heartless. Obviously, the mother animal will not be aware that her child is being cooked in the milk she produced, but such behavior results in a person taking perverse pleasure in the suffering of other creatures. [Nachmanides understands this prohibition as rooted in the Torah's desire to keep Jews from becoming a "cruel nation"(Commentary on Deuteronomy 14:21). The same rationale applies to the previously cited regulation: "The essence of the prohibition is not in killing the animal and its offspring [on one day]… but rather… the most important issue is so that we not become cruel" (Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:6).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD1048 See [EXOD893]] Exodus 23:19 boil TELVOL2 303

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV193 Biblical and talmudic laws prohibit eating any animal not killed instantly and with a single stroke, in effect making hunting forbidden to Jews as a method of acquiring food. At most, biblical law does permit an Israelite to capture an animal [this verse] and then slaughter it. But to chase after an animal, often accompanied by pursuing dogs, is proscribed (Avodah Zarah 18b; see Rashi's commentary). In the words of Maimonides, "We should not kill animals… for the purpose of sport (The Guide for the Perplexed 3:17). Also, we should remember that animals are often wounded but not killed by the hunter, and die a prolonged and agonizing death.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV217 Jewish tradition understands the verse," You shall keep My laws and My rules, and you shall live by them…"(This verse; emphasis added) as meaning that Torah laws are binding only if observing them will not lead to our death (Yoma 85; [three exceptions: Murder, (Sanhedrin 74a, Pesachim 25b, Yoma 82b); Idol Worship (Sanhedrin 74a); and certain types of illicit sexual behavior, such as engaging in incest (Yoma 82)]. For example, observing the Sabbath, one of the Ten Commandments, is a cornerstone of biblical law. Nevertheless, when the situation arises in which adhering to Shabbat laws put someone's life at risk--for example, if a person has a life-threatening ailment and needs to be driven to the hospital (normally, Jewish while prohibits driving on the Sabbath)--these laws are suspended so that a sick person's needs can be met. As the Talmud rules: "The saving of life supersedes the Sabbath" (Shabbat 132a).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV259 … the Torah expresses great antagonism toward the Canaanite nations, including a call to destroy their idolatrous temples, and either eject them from the land of Israel [The Bible clearly wanted to preserve the highest standard of monotheistic religion in Israel in the same way that Muslims expect Islam to be observed more strictly in the holy city of Mecca, and Catholics expect Catholicism to be practiced more purely in the Vatican. In addition, the Bible warned that if the Canaanites remained in the land they would influence many Israelites to practice idolatry. They did indeed remain in the land and influenced the ancient Hebrews to follow them (See, for example, Judges 2:11–13; II Kings 21:6 records that King Manesseh, deeply influenced by local idolatry, even sacrificed one of his sons) or destroy them. People commonly assume that the Bible's position on idolatry is solely due to its theological error in positing many gods instead of one. But a close reading of the text shows this to be false; the Bible's opposition was primarily directed against the immorality sanctioned by Canaanite idolatry. One looks in vain for passages in the Torah mocking the multiplicity of gods worshiped by the ancient Canaanites. What one finds instead is abhorrence at Canaanite practices such as child sacrifice (Deuteronomy 12:31) and bestiality [this and previous verses], along with the fear that, if the Canaanites remain in the land, "they [will] lead you into doing all the abhorrent things that they have done for their gods… (Deuteronomy 20:18). When committed by non-Israelites, the theological error of idolatry, as opposed to its moral misbehavior, was not particularly troublesome to the Torah. Thus, Moses, in his farewell address, warns the Israelites against being lured into worshiping the sun, moon, or the stars, but then says: "These the Lord your God allotted to other peoples everywhere under the heaven" (Deuteronomy 4:19) (The prophet Micah comments in a similarly nonjudgmental fashion: "Though all peoples walk each in the name of its gods, we will walk in the name of the Lord our God forever and ever" (4:5). The clear implication is that while Israel must worship God alone, the Lord was not troubled--at that point in time--by other nations worshiping His creations, such as the sun [the word for "sun" in Hebrew, shemesh, is related to the word shamash (to serve) implying that the sun, which others worship as a god, is simply a servant of God.) What God does not condone for Israelites and non-Israelites alike is immorality and cruelty. The prophets reinforced the Torah's view of idolatry. While they, like the Torah, do not generally criticize the non-Israelite nations for worshiping other gods, they condemn them for acts of cruelty. Thus, the citizens of Edom might have been idolaters, but what really incensed the prophet Amos is that they pursued their adversaries with the sword "And repressed all pity" (Amos 1:11). Similarly the nearby state of Ammon is announced for ripping "open the pregnant women of Gilead, in order to enlarge their own territory" (1:13). The same is true of Amos's critique of the ancient kingdoms of Damascus, Gaza, Tyre, and Moab (Chapters one and two).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT