Excerpt Browser

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

LEVITICUS — 19:11 falsely

LEV334 It is a negative commandment not to deny [falsely] anything of value [owed] for Scripture says, neither shall you deal falsely [this verse], and this is an admonition against the lying denial of anything of value worth from a p'rutah and up. It includes all kinds of denial in monetary matters, whether about something entrusted for safekeeping or a loan; whether one person robbed another or cheated him; or he found a lost object and did not return it. If the other sued him for it and he gave a false denial, he has violated this prohibition and becomes disqualified to be a witness and give testimony.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEVITICUS — 19:11 falsely

LEV336 The Torah clearly prohibits lying in several places: "You must not carry false rumors" (Exod 23:1); "Keep far from a false charge" (Exod 23:7); and "You shall not deal deceitfully or falsely with one another" [this verse]. While eschewing lies is necessary for the maintenance of trust among people, thus making human society possible, the Rabbis recognized that not every untruth is an evil to be avoided, not every truth necessary to reveal. According to a story on B. Sanhedrin 97a, Rava at first despaired of finding truth in the world. He then learned of another rabbi who never told lies and who had settled in a town called "Kushta" ("truth"). No one in Kushta ever told lies or died prematurely. The Kushtan rabbi married and had two sons. One day a neighbor called for his wife, who was washing her hair. The rabbi thought it inappropriate to mention that fact, and so (falsely) stated that his wife was not present. His two sons died, and when the townspeople investigated this unheard-of tragedy and learned how it had come about, they asked him to leave Kushta. The story's point is that absolute truth cannot abide an untruth told even for a virtuous purpose, and human life itself cannot be sustained within the realm of absolute truth. This latter rabbinic insight appears in a number of places in the Talmud and post-talmudic literature where the point is not necessarily that physical human life is endangered by absolute truth, but that absolute truth may endanger human relations, emotions, and psyches. For example, Genesis Rabbah 48:18 points out that while the matriarch Sarah had included her husband's advanced age along with her own as the reason she could not conceive (Gen 18:12), God reported her statement to Abraham as mentioning only her own age (Gen 18:13). The midrash points out that the Torah altered her statement in order to keep peace between them. B. Yevamot 65b also refers to Joseph's brothers' reference to the deceased father's non-existent request that Joseph forgive them (Gen 50:15-17), as well as to Samuel's misleading Saul as to the real purpose of his coming to see him (I Sam 16:2) -- which was to inform him of God's rejection. In the first and third of these biblical examples, it is God Himself Who utters or suggests the untruth. Referring to Genesis 50:15–17, Rabbi Il'a states that it is permitted to alter a statement for the sake of peace, but Rabbi Nathan relies on I Samuel 16:2 in asserting that it is a mitzvah to do so. The passage on B. Yevamot 65b closes with reference to God shading of the truth in Genesis 18:13, thus tipping the scale in Rabbi Nathan's favor. (By Alyssa M. Gray, "Jewish Ethics of Speech")

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEVITICUS — 19:11 lie

LEV337 It is a negative commandment not to swear falsely over the denial of a monetary matter as Scripture says, nor shall you lie one to another [this verse]. If someone sues his fellow-man for something of value (excluding land or deeds) worth from a p'rutah [the smallest coin] and up, where if the other admitted it he would be obligated to pay (excluding cases of fines) but he denied it and took an oath, or the claimant (plaintiff) pronounced an oath on him and he denied it [falsely]--the defendant is punishable, even if he did not answer amen. This is [known as] an oath over a pikadon (an object entrusted for safekeeping), and he is obligated to pay the principal [original amount] and a fifth. Whoever violates this prohibition violates also the injunction, And you shall not swear by My name falsely (Ya-yikra 19:12), which applies to an oath of expression. If a person denies his fellow-man's claim to landed property or deeds and he swears falsely, although he is free of pikadon, he is nevertheless liable on account of an oath of expression, since he swore to a lie.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEVITICUS — 19:11 steal

LEV344 Stealing is more than merely violating a Torah precept, although it is that as well [this verse]. It is also a statement of non-belief in God as an active force in the world. Although every sin shows a certain disbelief in God (since if we were conscious of a God who is watching and caring about us, how can we do anything wrong--see the chapter "Choices and Freedom"), stealing in particular denies an active God in the world. Belief in an active God implies that there is a certain reason that each person was granted the lot he has been given, even if we cannot understand why. Thus, God gave certain people a lot of talent, others great intelligence, and still others much wealth. By taking that wealth from one person and giving it to himself, a thief is saying, in essence, they he does not believe that there is a structure from God why people have what they do, and this thief will "redistribute the wealth" the way he sees fit and not the way God sees fit. Of course, most thieves do not actively think about this and most steal out of greed, not creed, but the effect is the same. Nevertheless, it was because people stole that the world was destroyed. Rashi, (commentary on Gen. 6:13), quoting the Talmud (Sanhedrin 108b), says that although there were many sins and crimes committed during that generation, the one sin that sealed the world's destruction was stealing. Because people demonstrated absolutely no belief in a higher being (and destroyed the fabric of society in the process), the world could not continue. That is why there is no difference in Judaism between a small theft or large theft, since in both, denial of God and His structure is implied.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

RSS
12345791011121314151617181920Last
Back To Top