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

LEV359 As for one who refuses to pay (he has the means but is powerful enough to resist), he transgresses the explicit injunction of the Torah [this verse]: "You shall not oppress your neighbor." As is laid down in the Choshen Mishpat (Chap. 359, Par. 8): "What constitutes oppression? – – A person gains possession of his neighbor's money with the owner's consent. When payment is demanded, he retains his neighbor's money by force and refuses to return it. For instance, someone was owed a debt or his wages. He demands the money, but is unable to exact payment because the defendant retains the money by force." Chazal have also designated four types of persons as wicked, and one is the borrower who does not repay, as it is said (Psalm 37:21): "The wicked borrows, and does not repay." How ashamed should a person feel when he knows he can repay, but does not, and thereby attaches the name of rasha' [i.e., "wicked" -- AJL] to himself. Now if his neighbor were to call him rasha', even in private when he would suffer no embarrassment, he would nevertheless greatly resent the insult. How much shame will he eventually suffer in the future, when his notoriety will be exposed in the presence of myriads upon myriads of holy beings. So the holy books have stated, that all man's affairs are disclosed and made public in everyone's presence in Heaven. He may be able to assume an impressive appearance towards his contemporaries, acting as if he were innocent, but to God the greatness of his crime is revealed. This is what Chazal meant by saying (Avoth 2:13): "And do not be wicked in your own esteem." (Especially if one is a Talmid Chacham is his sin exceedingly grave, for he desecrates the Divine Name. Beside his other wrongs, he transgresses the prohibition (Leviticus 22:32): "And do not profane My holy Name." Chazal have given the matter even greater emphasis (Yoma 87): "How is His name desecrated?--If one buys and does not pay at once." How much more guilty is the one who does not pay at all.) Choshen Mishpat (Chap. 97, Par. 4) rules it forbidden for a borrower to take a loan and squander it on needless things, to the extent that the lender will no longer find anything left from which to exact payment. One acting in this manner is called a rasha'. This is surely so where he has the means but refuses to pay the debt. How great is his iniquity!

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV361 You shall not hold back what belongs to your neighbor. Our Torah, the only complete and perfect system of law, distances us from the cruel practice of retaining possession of what belongs to another or is rightfully due him. When someone comes to collect from us what is his, we are not allowed to hold back payment, and neither are we allowed to keep him in suspense as to when his demand will be met. One is forbidden to push him off, saying, “Come back tomorrow,” every time he comes for what rightfully is his. The Torah forbids any sort of deceptive tactic whose aim is to withhold a rightful claim. Included is the case of an employer who owes his worker wages (although here, by unlawfully withholding the wage, he is not holding back anything that belonged to the claimant previously). There are three ways to unlawfully withhold something that is rightfully the claimant’s: holding it back (עשק), stealing it (גנבה) or robbing it (גזלה). The Torah writes separate prohibitions for each of the three transgressions, for the following reasons: 1) Hashem wants only our good. So that we stay far clear of unlawful possession of what is not ours, He repeatedly warns us about taking or keeping what belongs to others. 2) Hashem wants to bestow merit upon us. To this end, He gives us, His chosen nation, a number of mitzvos, each one presenting us with another opportunity to earn reward. Reward also accrues to us when we abstain from violating prohibitions. Accordingly, although we could have been given one general commandment, such as, “Do not unjustly keep or take what belongs to another,” we were given three separate prohibitions, to increase our reward for refraining from these transgressions.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV360 We are forbidden to withhold money that we owe. The prohibition against retaining money refers to someone who accepts money from another person and refuses to return it upon demand. This would include someone who borrows money and does not repay the loan, or an employer who refuses to give an employee his salary. Withholding part of a loan or wages is also included in this prohibition. (Rambam, Hilchos Gzaila v'avaida 1:4). In order not to be guilty of withholding someone's wages, you should always reach an agreement with a worker about his wages before he begins the job. Failure to decide on a price in advance usually leads to arguments later on, with the result of both sides feel cheated. If the employer fails to pay the employee the amount that is customary to pay in his area, the employer is guilty of withholding wages. When a price is decided upon in advance, the employee will usually agree to a lower price than he would afterward, so that besides the spiritual benefits, the employer will also gain financially. If the employer is a Torah scholar, failure to set a price in advance could also lead to a chilul Hashem. The worker might say that Torah scholars are dishonest. (Chofetz Chayim in Sfas Tomim, ch. 5).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV362 Now the verse we have quoted previously admonishes even in the case where the employer gives the worker his due hire, but merely defers payment and does not remit on time. How much greater is the warning where the employer withholds the hire altogether, and does not pay at all--or else, deducts even a single cent from the amount agreed-upon in the first place. The employer here is guilty of actual robbery. He transgresses the prohibition [this verse]. So the Gemara explains (Bava Metzia 61a/b; 111a).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT