Talmidav Shel Aharon
1-5768: Mitzvah 70
August 20, 2007

I am beginning now another year of my online study. What began as a lesson mailed to a few friends, is now a permanent blog with archives of all the previous lessons. I thank all of you who have taken the time to read and comment on my teachings for joining me in this study of Judaism and Jewish Law. May G-d bless our efforts in the New Year.

Mitzvah 70 – It is a positive commandment to unload fro the domestic animal of one’s fellow-human being that is lying under its burden.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “if you see the donkey of one that you hate lying under its burden …you shall surely help with him.” (Exodus. 23:5). – even if there was on it a larger load that was fit for it. It is one’s duty to unload it for nothing, without payment. However, an elder for whom it is beneath his dignity is free of the obligation. If one unloaded and reloaded [the animal] and it fell down again, he is duty-bound to unload and load it back on yet another time, and even a hundred times, as Scripture says, “you shall surely help with him”. And he as to walk with him as far as a parasang {to make sure all is now in order] unless the owner of the load says, “I do not need you.” It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.

There are two different reasons for this Mitzvah. The first is an issue of Tzar Baalai Hayyim, or Kindness to Animals. Since animals were the main beasts of burden, (esp. donkeys) it is possible to load them up with more stuff than they are able to carry. If the animal can’t carry the load, it will collapse under the weight or just refuse to carry it. At the beginning or end of the journey, there will be helpers to load and unload the animal, but on the road, only the owner of the load or the owner of the animal (it could be the same person) is present and reloading the animal requires more than two hands. It is in the animal interest to have the load redistributed so that it is easier to carry or that some of the load be transferred to a stronger animal. The animal can’t talk to us, so it is a matter of trial and error, but we need to keep up the process until the animal can carry the load placed on its back.
The other reason for the mitzvah has to do with caring about our fellow human beings. We can’t just ignore a person in need. Even if that person is an enemy or one that we hate, we must stop and lend a hand. Perhaps it will lead to reconciliation, but even if it does not, we still have the responsibility to help. It is certain that if we do not help but just walk on by, we will not be making any new friends, and our enemies will hate us even more. We are not to ask for any pay for helping a person in distress. There are some who say that this therefore would apply to seeing a person who has a broken down car by the side of the road. We cannot just drive by, but must help change the tire or do what we can to help the person get back on the road. We become the roadside assistant that the other person needs. There is a danger her. It is well known that there are some nefarious people who use a broken down car to lure unsuspecting drivers to stop and be robbed or worse. But in the middle of the day in the middle of the city, others may drive by but we should at least stop and offer to call for help, as long as we don’t endanger ourselves.
The Hafetz Hayyim also notes that an elderly person or someone infirm or unable to help, does not need to stop and help with a job that is clearly beyond his or her capacities. We should stop and do what we can, even if it means only getting someone else to come and help.
A Parasang is a “Persian Mile” it equals 8,000 cubits or about 2.4 miles or 3.84 km.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
35-5767: Mitzvah 69
August 20, 2007

Mitzvah 69 – It is a positive commandment to return something lost to a member of Jewry
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “you shall surely bring them back to your brother” (Deut. 22:1). If one turned a blind eye to it, he disobeyed a positive commandment and violated a negative one. If he took the lost object and did not return it, he also disobeyed this positive commandment and violated two prohibitions. It is a religious duty to return a lost object even to a wicked person. But if someone eats non-Kosher meat out of spite and defiance, or he violates the Sabbath openly, he is a heretic, and it is forbidden to return a lost object to him. If a person finds something with which it would be beneath his dignity to bother, and were it his own he would not trouble himself with it, he has no duty to bother with this. If, however, he wishes to act beyond the strict line or letter of the law, he may do so, and may blessing come upon him. Now, Rabbenu Yona wrote: If it is a religious duty to devote effort to rescue another person’s items of monetary value, how much more certainly must we expend effort to rescue him himself, to do something to save him in his time of distress. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.

In Judaism, one is not allowed to say, “I don’t want to get involved.” We have duties to G-d and we have duties to ourselves and we also have duties to our society. This is one of them. A lost object may be of little interest to me, but I can not just ignore it and walk on by. I have an obligation by this commandment to protect that which was lost and make a proper attempt to locate the owner. If the object is properly labeled with the name of the owner, I have to search out and find the owner and return his object in as good a condition as I found it. I can not allow it to become any more damaged than it already may be and, if I keep the object for any real length of time, and I am fixing my own similar objects, I should fix the lost property as well.
If the object found has no name on it, but it does have marks by which it can be identified, than we must publicize the finding of the object and ask those who would claim it as their own, to describe the identifying marks. For example, if jewelry were found, all that needs to be done is to announce that “a bracelet” was found and those who come to claim it can describe it in order to identify it.
If the object has no name on it or marks that could identify it, than I do not have the obligation to seek the owner. It is assumed that the owner has written it off as lost, and therefore it should be considered ownerless and the finder can keep it. For example, cash that is lost but not in a wallet or identifiable purse, that has no unusual marks on the bill, could not be returned because all money looks alike and there is no way to identify the true owner.
If the object is not worth saving, that is, it is so inconsequential that there is just no point in returning it, than we do not need to return it. If you find an old pair of beach shoes in the sand, and they could be identified but clearly the person who left them would not come back to find them, they could simply buy themselves a new pair, then we have no obligation for returning the object at all. If the owner did come and ask about it, it would probably be more charitable to buy him or her a new pair of shoes.
If I find an object that should be returned, and I don’t try to find the owner, I am in violation of this law and the law that insists that we don’t ignore the property of our neighbor. If I take the object and don’t seek the owner, I violate those laws and the law of robbery as well. I have kept something that does not belong to me.
The owner of the object does not matter. If we know who it belongs to, we have to return it, even if that person is our enemy, or if that person is wicked. As for the heretic, since he as separated himself from the community, he does not get the benefits of being a part of the community. The issue of eating treif meat or violating Shabbat should not be taken literally since these are very subjective Mitzvot. You may not keep my level of Kashrut or do what I do on Shabbat but that does not make one a heretic. If one denies G-d, than such a person is outside the community. As a Conservative Jew, I am not so sure that I would be so quick to brand someone a heretic or not to return an object that was once owned by a non-Jew. In all cases, retuning lost property is a great Mitzvah and even if we don’t have the obligation to return it, if we do so, we are praised for going above the letter of the law. At the end, we are reminded that if it is so important that we return lost property to a person, how much more important it must be if we save a person from distress, danger and trouble. We just cannot sit by and let someone else save the person. The only restriction on this is if saving someone else would endanger out lives. We are not obligated to save anyone or anything if, by saving him, her or it, we would be endangering our lives.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
34-5767: Mitzvah 68
August 14, 2007

Mitzvah 68 – It is a positive commandment to return whatever one has taken in robbery.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “he shall restore what he took by robbery” (Lev.5:23). If a person seized by robbery something worth a perutah or more, he is to return it to the robbed person. If the robbed man has died, he is to return the seized object to the heirs. If the seized object is lost, he is to give its value in money. Included in this commandment there is also the duty of returning anything gained by theft or swindle. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.

First of all, the definition of perutah is the smallest coin in the world of the ancient rabbis. Not only was it the smallest denomination of coin, but, as usual for the ancient world, it was also physically a small coin. The value of a coin was determined by the amount of the metal from which it was made. So larger coins were worth more than smaller ones.

Robbery is a crime. It is mentioned in the Bible and the penalty is, in some cases a fine of double the value of the stolen object if it is a moveable object. If it is cattle, the fine could increase to four or five times the value of the animal. No matter what the fine, the object that was stolen has to be returned to its owner. So, to be clear, robbery is not a mitzvah, but returning the seized object is. If the object is lost, than the value of the object is returned. And if the owner has died, it is to be returned to his heirs.

Finally, this law applies to all goods obtained illegally. If the object is not taken in an armed robbery but shoplifted, swiped, or gained by sleight of hand or by confusing the owner, than it still must be returned.

The point of all this is to insure that the person who stole the object could not benefit from his robbery. For example, if someone was the owner of a precious object and another offered him a fair price to buy it, but the owner declares that it is not for sale at any price since it has sentimental value. The buyer cannot steal it from the owner, and then pay the fine and keep the object. The object must also be returned. There is no difference if the object is valuable or not, one must return stolen goods.

This applies only to things that are moveable property. Real Estate that is stolen is a different category and the penalties are much higher since stealing property requires more effort. One must either move a boundary stone or pay witnesses to create a false bill of sale. Either way, it is a crime, in the bible against both human beings and G-d and a different set of laws applies.
This is a law designed to insure that “Crime does not pay”

Talmidav Shel Aharon
33-5767: Mitzvah 67
July 30, 2007

Mitzvah 67 – It is a positive commandment to render judgement on matters of buying and selling.
Hafetz Hayim: By the rule that the Torah ordained about it. This is to say that there are situations where a transaction between seller and buyer remains valid, and situations where it has no validity; and an obligation lies upon us to judge between them according to the instruction of the Torah. A specific commandment is given about this in a specific portion [of Scripture]: “and if you sell something to your fellow or buy from your fellow’s hand, etc. (Lev. 25:14) – because it [trade] is a constant thing among human beings, without which it is impossible for people to live even one day. Land can be acquired as one’s possession through money, a document, or demonstration of ownership; and moveable goods or a domestic animal by drawing {it to oneself] and all the more certainly by lifting it, and so forth. It applies everywhere and in every time.

This one surprised me for a couple of reasons. It is the first we have encountered that does not have a “proof text” from the Bible and the text that it does quote only makes the point of this Mitzvah more confused. Is this a Mitzvah only for judges, or for appraisers or does it apply to everyone, (note the conclusion does not include people).
Let me start with the quote from Leviticus 25:14. I need to give you the rest of the quote because, for some reason, the Hafetz Hayim does not quote the entire verse let alone the section in which it sits. Let me quote the section:
“When you sell property to your neighbor, or buy any from your neighbor, you shall not wrong one another. In buying from your neighbor, you shall deduct only for the number of years since the jubilee; and in selling to you, he shall charge you only for the remaining crop years; the more years, the higher the price; for what he is selling you is a number of harvests. Do no wrong one another, but fear your G-d; for I am the Lord your G-d.”
This is from Parshat Behar and speaks of the Jubilee year when land returned to its original owner. In a technical sense, the land was never sold, but leased for the number of years until it had to be returned. We see, in this case, there has to be a determination as to how many years are left until the land must be returned. Since we are talking about crop years, with the assumption that farming is the purpose of buying (leasing) the land, the number of years will depend on which crop is being planted and what time of year the sale takes place. This would mean that the Hafetz Hayim would be referring to land and the jubilee year only, and clearly he is not.
Perhaps since he is talking about buying and selling, he expands the mitzvah to include moveable property as well as cattle. The laws concerning buying and selling are very long and complicated and I have only a modest understanding of them. Part of the reason for this is because, under Jewish Law, when there is a conflict between Jewish law and civil law, in the case of monetary laws, we follow the law of the land and not Jewish law.
It seems more likely that the Hafetz Hayim is referring to all the laws of transactions here. The mitzvah is to make sure that all transactions are performed properly. In the case of land, to have a valid transaction you have to hand money for the land over to the seller in front of two or more witnesses, or you can draw up a contract, and by taking possession of the contract in front of witnesses, or a demonstration of ownership, that means putting up a fence, hoeing, locking the premises or putting down a mattress to sleep or any other act that would show that this person is the owner. (I note here that since a Ketubah, a marriage contract, transfers ownership of part of the grooms land to the wife in the event that he should predecease her, that the rules of transaction by contract, that is the need for witnesses and the placing of the Ketubah in her hands, is necessary and therefore a part of the wedding ceremony)
In the case of moveable property or animals, the actual object has to moved into the domain of the buyer. It can be carried there, or, in the case of animals, “pulled” there. If it is not practical to move the object, the buyer, lifting it from its place, can acquire it. There are other technical ways to acquire objects, such as using a handkerchief, or in some cases, the transfer of money. What I think the Mitzvah here is to be one of the witnesses to the transaction and therefore enable business to go on as usual. Without witnesses, business would grind to a halt and everyone would suffer.
This could explain why the Mitzvah is so unusual. While we are “commanded” to do this, it could involve a great deal of inconvenience. Rabbis would want to insure that commerce goes on but the requirement part of this seems to be very tenuous.
I invite any of my readers who have a deeper understanding of the laws of acquisition in Judaism to attach their comments if it would help clarify this Mitzvah.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
32-5767: Mitzvah 66
July 16, 2007

Mitzvah 66 – It is a positive commandment to give the wages of a hired hand on the same day.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “On his day you shall give him his hire” (Deut. 24:15) To a “resident stranger” ( who has committed himself to observe the seven commandments of Noah) this law also applies, that “on his day you shall give him his hire.” It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.

I believe that this law is the source of the maxim: An honest days pay for an honest days work. That is the fundamental ethic behind this Mitzvah. If someone does work for you, they are entitled to be paid. The Mitzvah also insists that the payment should be given on the same day the work is done.
The importance of this law seems obvious. A day laborer depends on his pay to support himself and his family. To withhold that pay, or to make him or her wait to be paid, would cause needless suffering. It would also leave the laborer with little recourse to get his money later. Such day laborers do not have the resources to sue the employer for their wages. By the time the matter gets to court, the entire family could be starving. These workers are some of the most vulnerable in society. They are at the bottom of the labor hierarchy; The Sages passed many laws to protect them. One was last weeks Mitzvah, that they be given opportunities to snack on the job. This one adds the protection that they will be paid promptly.
I apply this mitzvah to all small business owners who go out and try to offer a service to the community. The gardeners, the pool technicians, the handyman and the roof repairman are all basically in business for themselves and depend on being paid promptly. If they accept a credit card, the bill is paid on the spot. If they are used to sending a monthly bill, I direct the bill pay at my bank to pay them as soon as the bill arrives and not wait 30 days to send payment. Large corporations, the power company, the mortgage company, the city water bureau, and the credit card companies I pay just prior to the due date, but not the “little guys.” The Torah teaches us that they deserve a break and should be paid, if possible, the same day. The Talmud records a dispute between such laborers and a wealthy landowner. He withheld payment and seized the workers garments because they were moving barrels of wine and broke one, causing him a loss. The workers took the man to court and the court insisted that their garments be returned, since they did not intend to break the barrel, it was just an accident and they could not be held liable for accidental damages. The court also demanded that they be paid for the day. The landowner was incensed that they had caused him damage and now he hand to pay them too! Still the court insisted that they had done their best that day and deserved to be paid.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
31-5767: Mitzvah 65
July 9, 2007

Mitzvah 65 – It is a positive commandment that an owner should allow the laborer to eat of what he is working at, when it is something that grows from the ground.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “When you come into your fellow’s vineyard, then you may eat etc.” (Deut. 23:25) and it says, “When you come into your fellow’s standing grain, you may pluck the ears etc.” (Deut. 23:26) and by the Oral Tradition it was learned that Scripture speaks here of a laborer.
He may eat produce that either was plucked or is attached, whose work has not been completed yet, and by this act [of his labor] the work is completed. This means then, not before the completion of the work nor after the completion of the work, but only during the completion of the work. And for the purpose of returning a lost working time, to the owner, the Sages taught “that the workers should eat while walking from one furrow to another, and while returning from the winepress [even though they are not actually working then] so that they should not stop their work and sit down to eat, walking, and thus not be idle from their work.
If someone is guarding produce attached to the soil, he is not to eat of it at all since a watchman is not like one doing actual labor. If a person is guarding reaped produce he may eat of it not by the laws of the Torah, but by the norms of the land. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.

We sometimes get so used to the Sages talking about moral laws and often neglect laws like these, which are basic labor laws. These laws are designed to help understand the relationship between labor and management. While we can also understand them as moral laws, they are really part of a genre of laws that relate to proper business practices.
What we have here is a basic law of management/labor where it spells out one of the rights that the laborers have when working in the field. Jewish law forbids a man to muzzle his ox when threshing grain to prevent the animal from eating the grain on the threshing floor. This was seen as preventing animal cruelty. If we feel that way about animals, how much more should we allow the laborer to eat of the produce he or she is harvesting!
The parameters of the law are identified here. If the reaping has not begun and the laborers are just repairing fences, then they cannot touch the grain or fruit. If the harvest is over and the grain or fruit is waiting to be tithed or other taxes need to be paid, the laborer cannot touch it. If the laborer is hired to be a watchman for produce still in the field, he is not allowed to eat from it since he is supposed to be guarding it. Normally this would apply to produce already reaped, but local custom says he is entitled to snack on what he is guarding.
Workers in the field, however, who are in the process of reaping the produce can eat from what they are harvesting. The only issue is if they spend all their time eating and not enough time actually working! The law states that when they move from field to field, or from one row to another, or when they are dropping off the grain or grapes at the barn or the winepress, they can eat while they are walking. This is not in lieu of a lunch break, for laborers were required to bring their own lunch and could sit for a while and eat it. This is just a snack during the day and they are supposed to keep working while they are “snacking”. To do otherwise would be stealing time from the owner of the field. I suspect that this walking rule also prevented the workers from eating too much of the produce they were harvesting.
Thus both the landowner and the laborer understood their responsibilities during the harvest and the work got done, and the laborer was treated with respect. It is not too bad a system. We will see more about worker rights in our next lesson.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
30-5767: Mitzvah 64
July 2, 2007

Mitzvah 64 – It is a positive commandment to release (cancel) a loan in the year of Shmitta (release).

Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “every creditor shall release what he has lent his fellow.” (Deut. 15:2) If a borrower repays a creditor a loan over which the seventh year (shemitta) has passed, he is not to take it from him but is rather to tell him, “I release it”: for Scripture says, “And this is the manner (lit. the spoken word) of the release” (ibid). If the borrower says, “Nevertheless, take it.” He may accept it from him.
By the law of the Torah, the release of money obligations is in effect only at the time that the law of the jubilee year is in effect. But it is a decree of the Sages that the release of money obligations should be in force also in the present time, so that the law of release should not be forgotten by Jewry. However, a prosbul (the declaration in court after a loan is given that the shmitta year is not to cancel it) is effective against the law of released money obligations at the present time, that this loan should not be cancelled. It applies to both men and women.

The Torah is specific that a debt should be cancelled in the seventh year, the shmitta year. There is no basis in the Torah for getting around this release. That is why if the borrower comes to the lender and offers to repay it after the shmitta has begun, the lender must declare out loud, that he has released the borrower from his obligations for the loan. Only if the borrower insists on repayment, can the lender accept it.
The reason for this law reflects the reality of an agricultural economy. Farmers need cash to raise crops. They can borrow against the profit they will receive from their crops in the spring and repay it after the harvest is sold. That should leave the farmer with enough to feed his family and to be able to plant again in the spring. Any farmer knows, however, that the situation is far more precarious that that. Sometimes the produce prices are depressed after the harvest and they do not get enough money to repay the loan. Sometimes there are natural or man-made disasters that destroy the crops and leave the farmer with no way to repay the loan. A couple of bad growing seasons and the burden of debt can be so crushing that the farm will have to be sold or the farmer will have to sell himself into indentured servitude to repay what he owes. This release from debt every seven years allows the farmer to have a new start and to still keep his farm and his freedom.
The problem arouse when the Israelites began to develop a business class. In the cities, the release of debts was a serious impediment for developing capital for new ventures. As the seventh year approached, loans became impossible to get or with impossible terms. For this reason, the sages developed a law called “prosbul” where the debt was handed over to the court who did not have to release debts in the seventh year and could still claim payment when other debts had to be cancelled. While later Rabbis tried to fit this into the structure of Jewish Law, it was really a new idea that arose not from the law, but from the needs of the people. In much the same way that Conservative Judaism acts on behalf of the needs of the people today.
The reality of Judaism is that we no longer really follow the seven year cycle when we do not live in the land of Israel and we are far from the commitment to the calendar that our ancestors used to have. The whole process of releasing debts should have only applied to those who live in our holy land. The Sages tell us, however, that no matter where we live, we have an obligation for Jewish Law that insists that we continue to keep this basic Torah law in spite of it being almost impossible to enforce. Still, because of our love of G-d and our love of Torah, many pious Jews still include with all loans of substance, clauses that protect the lenders from losing their capital. Other Jews follow a different custom that teaches, that in monetary matters, “Dina d’malchuta dina” which means that the law of the land is the law. We follow the secular rules of lending money unless we are in the land of Israel where these laws are still very much a part of the legal landscape.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
29-5767: Mitzvah 63
June 25, 2007

Mitzvah 63 – It is a positive commandment to give a pawned object back to its owner at the time that he needs it.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “you shall surely restore to him the pledge.” (Deut. 24:13) It is all one whether a person takes an object I pledge from another person through the court or he takes it with his own hand (directly), by force or with the borrower’s consent – he has this duty, and is to return him a pillow at night; and tools with which he does his work, or clothes that he wears in the daytime, he is to return him by day for the entire day. Whoever transgresses and does not return a pledged object at its proper time disobeys this positive commandment and violates one prohibition.

This rather simple Mitzvah cuts to the core of what it means to be live by Jewish Law. A person would only pawn something in order to raise some cash in an emergency. Most of the time such a person would pawn something of value that was not needed everyday. But sometimes, the need is such that something crucial to the family would have to be pawned. He might pawn his pillow upon which he needs to sleep. The tools by which he earns a living, clothing he needs to wear each day. Judaism insists that if we take that object as the collateral on the loan, we still maintain our ownership of it, but we can not prevent the borrower from using it when he needs it. We must return his pillow at night and he must return it to the lender in the morning. If we take his tools, we must return it before the borrower goes to work and he must return it to the lender when the days work is done. How could such a person ever hope to redeem the pledge and pay off the loan if he can not work, go out in the world or get a good night’s sleep.
The objects listed by the Hafetz Hayim are only examples. Anything that a person might need, cooking pots, uniforms, etc, all must be returned if it will prevent the borrower from being able to feed his family or earn the money to pay back the loan. The lender retains the “ownership” of the item, even if the borrower is using it, and it must be returned when the borrower no longer needs it. It does not matter if the collateral was seized by the lender or given to him by a court to pay off the loan. We cannot expect a person to pay back what is owed if we seize the very items that will make this possible.
Judaism demands justice even when we do business. Judaism does not say, “business is business” and turn its back on those in need. Capitalism demands that people pay back the loans they contract. But Judaism insists that a pledged item might still be needed and must therefore be returned to give a person a chance to get their life back in order. It is a beautiful part of our business law.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
28-5767: Mitzvah 62
June 18, 2007

Mitzvah 62 – It is a positive commandment to lend money to poor Jews.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “If you lend money to any of my people, to the poor with you.” (Ex. 22:24) and this is a duty. This mitzvah is greater than charity, and more obligatory. The Torah disapproves severely of anyone who refuses to lend to a poor person, since it says, “and your eye may be evil against your needy brother … and it will be a sin for you.” (Deut. 15:9) It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.

According to Maimonides, the greatest form of charity is giving a loan to someone in need to help them get back on their feet. It is a form of giving that is respectful of the person who is in need and allows him or her to retain their dignity. The force of this Mitzvah, however goes even beyond this ruling.
Charity, as defined by the Hafetz Hayim, and by virtually all other sages, is not the same as what we call charity today. When we use the English word, “charity” we are usually referring to the giving of money out of the goodness of our heart to a worthy cause. In Hebrew, the word we use for charity has a very different meaning. “Tzedakah” is from the root meaning, “justice”. Social justice demands that we take account of the poor and hungry and we must help them in their time of need. It is not something left to the “goodness of our heart” but it is a requirement of all Jews to help those who are in need. It is simple justice that those who have enough should support those who do not.
This Mitzvah, takes Tzedaka to the next step. If we are able, we should move not just to help someone with their daily needs, but should feel obligated to help them out of the cycle of poverty as well. We all know that in a capitalistic society, one must have money before one can make money. This is the kind of capital investment that yields great rewards. Not in money returned for the investment, but in lives saved from poverty. It is giving another person a second chance in life. We are helping that person to start over trying to become a fully productive member of the community. It is important that we realize that if we feel that such a loan will indeed make a difference in that person’s life, we have an obligation to make the loan. That is the nature of this commandment.
Once again, because of the way the Biblical passage is written, there seems to be a bias to supporting Jews who are poor and not other non-Jews in the community. It is my feeling that we do have a requirement to support Jews first. That is, if we have limited resources, that we should make the effort to help our own poor before we help the other poor in the community. I hold this because it is similar to helping one’s own family before one helps the poor of other families.
However, this does not mean that we have no obligations to the other poor in our community. If we have the means to help lift others out of the cycle of poverty through loans of support, than we should be equally obligated to such loans. Clearly we can not personally end all poverty that we see around us, but if we feel that such a loan can have a lasting effect on a person and his/her family, we should not hesitate to make such a loan. The reason this applies is a principle in Jewish Law called “Mipnay Darkei Shalom” we do some things “for the sake of peace”. It is not just that people may feel angry that our money only goes to Jews, it is the greater reason that through such loans, those who are lifted from poverty will praise their benefactor, praise their faith and praise their G-d. It is a matter of Kiddush HaShem, the primary obligation to bring honor to the name of G-d.
It does no good to have charitable funds just sitting in the bank and not working to help ease the plight of poor families of any faith. We need to exercise our obligation to help others, all others, to get back on their feet.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
27-5767: Mitzvah 60 and 61
June 11, 2007

Mitzvah 60 – It is a positive commandment to bear affection for everyone in Jewry as for oneself.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “and you shall love your fellow as yourself ” (Lev 19:18) It is therefore necessary to have as much protective concern for another person’s physical self, his items of monetary value and his esteem, as for one’s own. If someone derives honor from another’s disgrace, he as no share in the world to come. And included in this positive commandment is the religious duty of making peace between a man and his friend. It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.

Mitzvah 61 – It is a positive commandment to bear affection for a ger (stranger, convert)
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture states, “you shall therefore love the ger” (Deut. 10:19) This is a religious duty in addition to the precept, “You shall love your fellow as yourself” (Lev. 19:18) [since plainly a ger is included in general Jewry] The Holy One loves the ger since it is written, “He loves the stranger giving him food and clothing” (Deut. 10:18) and it says, “you know the heart of the stranger” (Ex. 23:9) The meaning of ger here is one who has come from another land or another city to live with us and all the more certainly someone who has converted to Judaism. It is in force everywhere and always, for both men and women.

The plain meaning of this mitzvah is that we should love everyone as we would love ourselves. Or as the Sage Hillel put it so succinctly, “Do no do to others what you would not want them to do to you.” Rabbi Akiva in the Talmud notes that this is the most important Mitzvah in the entire Torah. It seems so simple but the implications are so great. If we understand that we are commanded, obligated and required to treat all people with the same respect that we feel we deserve we will find ourselves treating others with respect and acting humbly at all times. We are not better than other people, we are no worse, we are all the same, needing the same support, the same love and the same concern that all other human beings require. If we provide that for others, they will, return that favor in our time of need. It cannot be stressed enough. Give others the love and respect that we think we deserve and the world will be a far more peaceful and loving place.
So why is this so hard to do? Why is this commandment that is so important so universally ignored or challenged. I think of the joke where one man says to another, “the guy who said we should love our neighbor never had MY neighbors!” You see a hint of this even in the Hafetz Hayim’s statements. I am not sure why he needed to make this two separate mitzvot. The commandment is clear, “Love your fellow as yourself.” It does not say, as the Hafetz Hayim says, “to love your fellow Israelite as yourself.” But in many circles, some that are populated by very pious people, feel that it only applies to Jews. Implying that one is not required to treat non-Jews in this manner. While there are many important Sages in ancient and modern times who may hold this position, I , and many other Rabbis as well feel that this is a completely wrong interpretation. I will say it clearly and completely, Leviticus requires that we treat all people, Jews, non-Jews, converts, pagans, obnoxious people, people who are dumber than us, people who disagree with us, people who look different, people of a different gender, people who talk different, our enemies, the enemies of our friends, people who think they are better than us, people who are more popular than us, people who we feel are keeping us from our full potential, all of these must be treated at all times with respect just as we would want to be treated. In short, read this Mitzvah literally, “Love your fellow as yourself”.
A good friend of mine, Rabbi Irwin Kula of CLAL, teaches that if you can’t love your fellow as yourself, than don’t look at the other person to see why you can’t love him, rather look inside yourself. This does not mean you have to like everyone you meet, only that they deserve your respect at all times. No matter how you may feel about another person you should be able to sit at the same table, engage in civil discussion, not speak nasty words behind his or her back and not engage in gossip about anyone. If you disagree you are allowed to express your opinion, and you must listen to their opinion. You are to act with respect and civility at all times.
The reality is that if you keep just this one Mitzvah, it will bring in its wake almost all the other mitzvot as well. Just loving our neighbor as yourself, you will be on your way to observing all the mitzvot “bain Adam L’chavero” “between one human being and another.” We can say even further that if we treat all human beings with kindness and love, we are also in fulfillment of most of the other commandments which are “bain Adam L’Makom” “between a human being and G-d”. It is for this reason that the modern Siddur used by the Conservative movement includes, near the beginning of the morning service, a prayer offered by the “Ari” in the 17th century. “Behold I am about the fulfill the Mitzvah of my Creator to Love my fellow human being as myself”. If we can say this prayer first thing every morning, and let is guide us all day, it will be much harder to go astray from the path G-d desires. One last point, note the punishment for one who derives a living from embarrassing or deriving personal honor from disgracing someone else. Such a person loses his or her share in the world to come. Trafficking in gossip, trading in slander and promoting yourself by denigrating someone else, is a high crime indeed. Speak only of your own good points and never put anyone else down so you can look better. The Hafetz Hayim reminds us that there are special punishments in hell for those who would make a living doing this. This is why we all need to be so careful and “Love our neighbor as yourself.”