Halakhah su Levitico 19:18

Just as it is forbidden to shame one's friend in matters between man and his Maker, so is it forbidden to shame him in matters between man and his neighbor, even if what is said contains no admixture of falsehood. And I will not "conceal under my tongue" that there are in this [principle] many roots and branches, and that often this din changes [with the circumstances]. We shall speak about this at length, the L–rd willing, below in Principle X. But now we shall discuss one element that is forbidden beyond a doubt. That is, if one sees another asking his friend to lend him money (even though this [i.e., to lend] is a positive commandment of the Torah, viz. Shemoth 22:24: "When you lend money, etc.," as explained in the Book of the Mitzvoth of the Rambam, Positive Commandments 197), or [asking him] for some other favor, which he does not grant him; or [if he sees one transgressing] negative commandments between man and his neighbor, such as taking revenge and bearing a grudge, as is explained in Yoma (23a): "Which is revenge and which is bearing a grudge, etc.?" — since he [the object of the lashon hara] did not do him [the speaker] any evil (and there is also no benefit accruing to the affected party by his [the speaker's] recounting this to others), therefore, if he goes and recounts this to others, it is called "lashon hara" according to the din. And all this, even if it happened to [the speaker] himself, and it was also clear to him that he could have done him this favor, but refused to do so out of the perverseness of his nature. And there obtain here [also] all the elements of the issur which were explained in the preceding principle in section 3 concerning "between man and his Maker." And even if the withholding of the favor was to another, and the speaker's intent were only zeal for the truth (how much more so if the withholding of the favor were to the speaker himself!), it is certainly forbidden thereafter, to go and demean him for this. And one who transgresses this, aside from stumbling into the sin of lashon hara, also stumbles in this into the transgression of (Vayikra 19:18): "You shall not bear a grudge." And if he intends by what he says to take revenge of him for this, and to publicize the other's perverseness, he transgresses in addition (Ibid) "You shall not take revenge," aside from the issur of lashon hara.

We have already explained in the introduction of our composition, in the Commentary on the Mishnah, that most laws of the Torah have come out from the thirteen hermeneutic principles through which the Torah is expounded; and that there is sometimes a disagreement about a law that comes out through one of these principles; but that there are also, among them, laws the explanation of which was received from Moshe about which there is no disagreement. Nevertheless, they bring proofs about them from one of these thirteen principles. For it is the brilliance of Scripture that it is possible to find a hint or a verbal analogy in it, that indicates the received explanation - and we have already explained this topic there. And since the matter is such, behold: We can not say about every matter that the Sages brought out by a principle from the thirteen principles, that it was stated to Moshe at Sinai; and likewise can we not say about everything found in the Talmud in which they [only] supported it with one of the thirteen principles that it is rabbinic. For sometimes it will [nevertheless] be the received explanation from Moshe at Sinai. What is appropriate here regarding anything that is not found written in the Torah, but it is found that it is something they learned in the Talmud through one of the thirteen principles - if they themselves explain and say that it is a part of the Torah and that it is [a law] from the Torah, it is surely appropriate to count it. For those through which it is received said it is from the Torah. But if they did not explain this and did not say this, it is rabbinic - for there is no verse here indicating it. And this is also a principle that someone besides us has already been confused about; and therefore he counted fear of the sages as a positive commandment. And that which appears to have brought him to this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva (Pesachim 22b), "'You shall fear et the Lord, your God' (Deuteronomy 6:13) - to include Torah scholars." So he thought that anything that is arrived at through the thirteen principles is in the category [of the 613 commandments]. But if the matter was as he thought it, why did he not count honoring a mother's husband or a father's wife; and likewise not count honoring an older brother? For we learned that we are obligated to honor these individuals by inclusions. They said (Ketubot 103a), "'You shall honor et your father' - to include your older brother and your mother's husband; 'and et your mother' - to include your father's wife." That is just like they said, "'You shall fear et the Lord, your God' - to include Torah scholars." If so, why did they count these and not those? But they have come to even greater foolishness than that in this matter. And that is when they found a teaching about a verse, in which the teaching obligates an action or the distancing from something - but they are rabbinic without a doubt - they counted them among the commandments, even though the simple meaning of the verse does not indicate any of these things at all. This is in spite of the principle that [the Sages], peace be upon them, taught us about it - a verse may not be taken out of its simple meaning. So the Talmud asks everywhere where a verse is found from which we learn many things by way of explanation and proof, "What was the simple understanding of the verse written about?" But those who relied on this [mistaken] thinking counted visiting the sick, comforting the mourners and burying the dead in the category of the commandments, because of the teaching that is found about His, may He be blessed, saying, "and make known to them the way in which they are to go and the practices that they must do" (Exodus 18:20). And [the Sages] said about this (Bava Kamma 100a), "'The way' - that is acts of kindness. 'They are to go' - that is visiting the sick. 'In which' - that is burial of the dead. 'The practices' - that is the laws. 'That they must do' - that is [conducting oneself] beyond the letter of the law." And [the ones mistaken about what can be counted] thought that each and every one of these actions was a separate commandment. And they did not know that all of these actions - and those that are similar to them - fall under one commandment written in the Torah, when it is explained. And that is His, may He be blessed, saying, "and you shall love your neighbor like yourself" (Leviticus 19:18). And in this exact same way, they counted the calculation of the seasons as a commandment because of the teaching from, "it is your wisdom and your understanding" (Deuteronomy 4:6). And that is their saying (Shabbat 75a), "Which is the wisdom and understanding that is in the eyes of the nations? You shall say, it is the calculation of the seasons and the constellations." And [even] if one would [only] count what is clearer than this and what is more appropriate to count - that being, to count everything that we learn in the Torah from the thirteen hermeneutic principles through which the Torah is expounded - the count of commandments would add up to many thousands. And if you might think that I am running from counting them because they are not true; whether the law that comes out of it is true or not - that is not the reason. Rather the reason is that any extension that a person, and even if it was Moshe himself, draws out from the root principles that were told to Moshe at Sinai with their explanation - and these are the 613 commandments - is not appropriate to count. And the proof of this all is their saying in the Gemara, Temurah (Temurah 16a), "One thousand and seven hundred a fortiori inferences, verbal analogies, and precise inferences of the Scribes were forgotten during the days of mourning for Moshe. Even so, Otniel, son of Kenaz, restored them through his sharpness, as it is stated (Joshua 15:16-17), '"To he who smites Kiryat Sefer, and takes it, etc." And Otniel, son of Kenaz took it.'" And if this was what was forgotten, what was the total from which this amount was forgotten?! For it would certainly be false to say that everything that was known was forgotten. So, without a doubt, those laws that were drawn out by a fortiori inferences and the other principles were many thousands - and they were all known at the time of Moshe. And yet they are called precise inferences of the Scribes, because anything that they did not hear explained at Sinai is certainly from the words of the Scribes. Behold it has now been shown that that which was learned out through the thirteen principles even during Moshe's time, peace be upon him, is not to be counted among the 613 commandments that were stated to him at Sinai. Hence all the more so should that which was derived in later times not be counted among them. However it is nevertheless true that what was an explanation received from him is counted. And that is what the transmitters explain, and say that this thing is something forbidden to do and its prohibition is from the Torah; or they say that it is a part of the Torah. Behold that we count this, since it is known from tradition and not through a verbal analogy. Indeed, their [possible] mention of a verbal analogy and their bringing a proof for it from one of the thirteen principles [in such a case] is only to show the brilliance of Scripture, as we explained in the Commentary on the Mishnah.

2. It is a positive commandment to believe in God's oneness, believing with complete faith that He is One, without contemporary. As it is said (Deuteronomy 6:4): "Hear, O Israel: the Lord is our God - the Lord is one!" This is the fundament of the faith. After the initial knowledge that there is one God who exists, one needs to belief with complete faith that He is one - in simple and ultimate unity, that He has no body, that the concepts which apply to a physical body do not apply to Him, that things which happen to a body cannot happen to Him, that he has no second, and that there is no power beside Him. This belief is obligatory upon us in all times and all places, to males and females.