LEV349 See [[LEV243]] Leviticus 18:21 profane LOC 20-21

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV352 See [[LEV37]] Leviticus 5:1 guilt CHINUCH 86-8

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV351 Lashes are administered for some of the prohibitions relating to speech, for this is what our Sages, z"l, said (Makos 16a): "Pertaining to all the prohibitions of the Torah, lashes are not administered for [the violation of] an injunction lacking a physical action, with the exception of one who swears (i.e., falsely or in vain) or curses another in Hashem's Name." Although an oath taken in vain does not involve capital punishment administered by beis din, nonetheless, its punishment through Heaven is much more severe than that of the many transgressions that do have such capital punishment -- for one who swears falsely desecrates Hashem's Name, as [this verse] says. ..., and the punishment for the desecration of God's name supersedes that of all other sins. This is not stated (i.e., that a prohibition involves desecration of Hashem's Name), [in the Torah] in respect to any transgression other than that of a false oath and idolatry, as the pasuk says [concerning idolatry] (Vayikra 20:3), "For he gave of his offspring to Molech, so as to defile that which is sanctified to Me and to desecrate My holy Name."

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV353 Witnesses in court testify under oath and in God's name ("so help me God"), or affirm, with the understanding that they are doing so in God's Name, that they are telling the truth (Obviously, atheists do not swear or affirm in God's Name, but they are a very small percentage of the population.) Therefore, lies told in court constitute a Chillul Hashem ("profanation of God's Name), since they associate God with a lie: "And don't take an oath, then lie in My Name and profane the Name of your Lord" (this verse; the prohibition against bearing false testimony is also one of the Ten Commandments; Exodus 20:13). [(Because of the profanation of God's Name, the Bible regards perjury as among the worst of crimes and, in writing of the punishment inflicted on perjurers, appends, "And you shall wipe out the evil from your midst" (Deuteronomy 19:19)]. Furthermore, since justice is so important a commandment (the Torah ordains, "Justice, Justice you shall pursue"; Deuteronomy 16:20), thwarting justice undermines a society. It is bad enough that a society contains criminals and corrupt individuals. If, however, the justice system itself is corrupt, then there is no hope for the society to improve itself. Therefore, lying under oath undermines a society's hope of being, or becoming, just.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV350 It was taught: R. Yishmael says: "And do not swear in My name falsely" -- But you may swear to [rescue yourselves from] murderers, and pillagers, and tax-gougers (Yerushalmi Nedarim 3:4)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV355 Abduction is stealing a human being. Because the Torah elsewhere prohibits stealing goods [this verse] the Rabbis, who assume that there is nothing superfluous in God's teachings in the Torah, interpreted the prohibition against stealing in the Ten Commandments [Exodus 20:13, Deuteronomy 5:17] as a ban against kidnapping. [Mekhilta. Mishpatim, 5.] Couched between the two commandments against murder and adultery, both capital offenses, kidnapping too was held to be a capital offense. [Exodus 21:16] (By Laurie L. Levenson, "Judaism and CriminalJustice"

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV354 (Continued from [[LEV112]] Leviticus 11:40 carcass SACTAB 69-71). We learn in the third chapter of Leviticus about the zevach sh’lamim, the “whole offering, which, Baruch Levine notes in The JPS Torah Commentary, is described in 1 Samuel 9 as a meal shared by priests and laypeople. This is the origin of the idea that every meal is like a sacrifice to God, a korban, a word stemming from the Hebrew kareiv, that which brings us near to God. With the Temple destroyed, our table has become the altar, and the food we consume on it should assist our march to holiness. What we would not offer on the Temple altar, the Torah tells us, we should not offer on our dining room table. Confronting the mitzvot of eating, Reform Jews cannot be content to look only at the mitzvot considered part of dietary practice in the past. We need to look at all the things that Torah says about eating. Reform Judaism has long held that new times reveal new aspects of God's will--the Pittsburgh Principles defined Torah as “God's ongoing revelation to our people and the record of our people's ongoing relationship with God.” If tzaar baalei chayim--compassion toward animals, is a value--is indeed, one of the seven mitzvot commanded to all human beings (See B’reishit Rabbah 16:6)--we need to investigate the methods by which animals are slaughtered and be assured that our meat comes from the most humane possible practices of slaughter. When we know that some animals are fed and penned in destructive ways, like geese for pate de foie gras and calves for veal, we should deal with them the same way that Torah deals with pork and shellfish. When the Torah prohibits us from participating in oshek, the oppression of laborers (Leviticus 19:13), I believe it means we need to refrain from eating the foods produced by oppressive labor--like fruits or vegetables sold under labels of growers who refuse to offer their workers minimum wage and decent conditions in the fields and factories, and who insist upon spraying their products with pesticides that harm workers and consumers. The value of bal tashchit, the avoidance of practices destructive of nature (based on Deuteronomy 20:19-20), should lead us to build aspects of conservation into our observance as well. (By Richard N. Levy, “KASHRUT: A New Freedom for Reform Jews”)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV356 The study of oshek gives the contemporary Reform Jew a way of looking at the nexus of ritual practice and social justice in sanctification of our daily meals. Oshek, the oppressor of a laborer, is forbidden by the Torah (Leviticus 19:13-14). It is a transgression against God as well as against the exploited worker (Leviticus 19:11-13). Oshek is first prohibited in the “Holiness Code” in Leviticus 19:13: Lo taashok et rei-acha, “Do not oppress your neighbor. Do not withhold that which is due your neighbor and do not rob him. The wages earned by a day laborer shall not remain overnight with you until the morning.” It occurs again in Deuteronomy 24:14-15: [these verses]. Writing in eleventh-century France, Rashi interpreted this text prohibiting oshek to apply particularly to a farm worker. V’eilav hu noseh et nafsho, “It is the farm worker who risks his nefesh, his life, climbing up a ladder or hanging from a tree to do his work.” (Pentateuch with Rashi Commentary, 119). The classic sacred sources of Judaism call on us to actively oppose the oppression or exploitation of the farm worker who frequently toils under dangerous conditions. (Ibid.) What then is the relationship between Jewish dietary ritual and the prohibition of oshek? The prophet Isaiah preached that exploitation of the laborer actually nullifies the value of a dietary ritual observance (Isaiah 57:14-58:14). In these passages, Isaiah proclaimed that God is unresponsive to the ritual piety of fasting while the laborer is oppressed. Instead, God desires a fast comprised of breaking every yoke, sharing one’s bread with the hungry, housing the homeless, and clothing the naked. This view became so essential to Judaism that Isaiah’s words became the haftorah portion for the Day of Atonement. it provides the linkage every Yom Kippur between filling the dietary ritual of fasting and the ethical responsibilities of social justice. Isaiah’s ancient words describe the social justice goals we help fulfill when we become part of the contemporary farm workers’ movement. (National Farm Workers Ministry website: www.nfwm.org). (By Richard Litvak, “OSHEK: The Meeting Point of Ritual Piety and Human Moral Purity in a Contemporary Reform Kashrut”)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV357 It is a negative commandment not to wrongfully retain anything belonging to one fellow man for Scripture says, You shall not wrongfully deprive your fellow [this verse]. This means that a person is not to withhold an item of monetary value of his fellow-man that came into his hand by the other's wish, and [now] he retains it and does not return it to the other: for example, if he has in his possession a loan [that the other lent him] or wages [that the other has earned] and the other cannot extract it from him because he is powerful, he thus violates this prohibition.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV358 Torah study influences its students to become more empathetic. For example, if we study the laws regarding employers and employees, we learn the Torah mandates paying a worker as soon as his job is complete (Deuteronomy 24:15; see also this verse); as the text puts it: "For he is needy and urgently depends on it." In a different context, the Tanchuma (in its commentary on Exodus 22:25-26) notes: "It is like the case of a man who had bought a sheath of corn which he placed upon his shoulder, and then walked in front of a donkey who was longing to eat it. But what did the owner do? When he reached home, he tied the sheaf high above the donkey so that the animal could not reach it. People said to him, 'You cruel man; the animal has been running the whole day for the sake of the sheaf, and now you refuse to give it to him.' So it is with the hired worker; the whole day has been toiling and sweating, hoping for his wages and you sent him away empty-handed" (Mishpatim number 10). Throughout history, and in many societies, wealthy people not only underpaid laborers, but often paid them late; they knew that even if their employees complained, the law was unlikely to protect them. But how could anyone study these two texts and not feel concern for the needs of his or her workers? At the very least, these texts teach us that not treating our employees fairly and compassionately is an offense against humanity and God.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT