Komentarz do Kapłańska 19:18

לא תקם THOU SHALT NOT AVENGE — If one says to another “Lend me your sickle", and he replies, “No!", and the next day he (the latter) says to him (the former), “Lend me your hatchet”, and he retorts, “I am not going to lend it to you, just as you refused to lend me your sickle״ — this is avenging. And what is “bearing a grudge”? If one says to another, “Lend me your hatchet”, and he replies “No!” and on the next day he says to him “Lend me your sickle”, and he replies: “Here it is; I am not like you, because you would not lend me” — this is called “bearing a grudge (נטירה)” because he retains (נוטר) enmity in his heart although he does not actually avenge himself (Sifra, Kedoshim, Chapter 4 10-11; Yoma 23a).

There follows a general, all inclusive rule to be observed in relations towards one’s fellow, phrased as ואהבת לרעך כמוך, telling us to apply the same yardstick to our concern for our fellow that we would want applied to ourselves if we were in his shoes in similar situations.

לא תקום ולא תטור, "Do not take vengeance and do not bear a grudge." Yuma 23 defines vengeance as someone responding in kind to a hateful act by his neighbour he has experienced, whereas the "grudge" is defined as repaying a hateful act with a kind act pointing out, however, that one is morally superior to the person who committed the hateful act. The proof for this is the verse following that one should "love your neighbour as yourself." The reason the Torah has to say this is to indicate that it is G'd's wish that we relate to our fellow Jews with the same love we have for ourselves. If the person described as bearing a grudge told his neighbour that despite the fact that the latter refused to lend him his spade, he in turn was willing to lend him his own spade, he indicated that he had harboured resentment against his neighbour first. G'd tells us that the reason we must not bear a grudge is because the Lord is our G'd. This means that by means of individual Israelites experiencing a unification of their hearts, G'd's Unity itself is enhanced. This is all based on the kabbalistic concept that all Jewish souls are branches of the Holy name of G'd (י־ה־ו־ה) based on Deut. 32,9 "for His people are part of Him" (compare Zohar volume 3 page 16).

לא תקם , repaying evil with evil.

"Do not bear a grudge ("titur")..." According to the simplest understanding, the grudge is [a form of] revenge after a period of time, similar to [Nahum 1:2] "and he bears a grudge for his enemies." (R. Naftali Hirz Wessely)

לא תקום, “Do not take revenge.” An example of revenge meant here is that if your neighbour refused to lend you any of his tools, and he turns to you some day asking you to lend him yours, you are not to justify your refusal to lend him your tools by saying that seeing he did not lend you his tools when you needed them, you now do not lend him yours either. Some people ask why the Torah criticizes the second party for his refusal to lend, without saying a word about the behaviour of the first party who had started the chain reaction by refusing to lend his tools in the first place? The answer given is that the first party, who obviously is a miser, while not acting as a good neighbour, had not violated a law as it says nowhere that one must lend one’s tools, however, he who basically is willing to lend his tools to neighbours, refuses to this neighbour only as an act of revenge. This is not tolerated. It is a negative virtue. His refusal stems from feelings of hatred. Some people answer the above question by saying that it is clear that the first one will be punished more harshly so that there is no need to spell this out, seeing he had started the chain of reciprocal unfriendliness. We have a tradition that the plague of tzoraat occurs, among other reasons, as retaliation for miserly conduct, withholding help from one’s neighbour being one such example.

Sifrei Agaddah and Musar have long been perplexed as to how a Talmid Chacham can be associated with as ugly a characteristic as this... It seems to me that this characteristic is rightly described as being that of a snake, whose poison is weakened by its strike. That is also the intended message in our context. Even though it is appropriate for a Talmid Chacham to begrudge and take vengeance on those who molest him, for the sake of the honor and standing of the Torah, such acts need to be in the style of the snake, whose effect weakens over time.

Lend me your scythe. You might ask, why is a scythe used first in the example of revenge, and an axe is used first in the example of bearing a grudge? The answer is that regarding revenge he mentions a scythe first in order to add that even if he only refused to lend you a scythe which is worth one zuz, and then he asked you for an axe which is worth five zuz, even so, do not take revenge and lend it. Regarding bearing a grudge he mentions an axe first so that one should take note [of the difference between these two utensils] and explain the added point discussed above.

AND THOU SHALT LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF. This is an expression by way of overstatement, for a human heart is not able to accept a command to love one’s neighbor as oneself. Moreover, Rabbi Akiba has already come and taught,⁸⁶Baba Metzia 62 a. This teaching applies to a case where “two people are together on a journey and one has a pitcher of water; if they both drink from it they will die, because there is not enough for both, but if only one will drink he will survive. Ben Petura taught that it is better that both should drink and die, rather than that one should see the death of the other. [This was held to be the law] until Rabbi Akiba came and taught: that thy brother may live with thee (further, 25:36), thy life takes precedence over the life of thy brother.” “Your life takes precedence over the life of your fellow-being.” Rather, the commandment of the Torah means that one is to love one’s fellow-being in all matters, as one loves all good for oneself.⁸⁷Thus: “he is to speak in praise of his neighbor, and be as careful of his neighbor’s property as he is careful of his own property, and be as solicitous of his neighbor’s honor as he is of his own” (Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchoth Mada, 6:3). It is possible that since it does not say “and thou shalt love ‘eth rei’acha’⁸⁸In that case the command would have been to love the person of one’s neighbor as much as one loves one’s own self. But instead the verse says l’rei’acha, which means “to [or ‘for’] your neighbor,” thus teaching that that which is good “for” your neighbor you should love as if it were good for youself. as thyself,” but instead it likened them in the word ‘l’rei’acha’ [which literally means “to” thy neighbor], and similarly it states with reference to a proselyte, and thou shalt love ‘lo’ (him) [but literally: “to” him] as thyself,⁸⁹Further, Verse 34. Here too the thought conveyed is: “that which is good for the proselyte you should love, as if it were good for your own self.” that the meaning thereof is to equate the love of both [himself and his neighbor, or himself and the proselyte] in his mind. For sometimes a person will love his neighbor in certain matters, such as doing good to him in material wealth but not with wisdom and similar matters. But if he loves him completely, he will want his beloved friend to gain riches, properties, honor, knowledge and wisdom. However [because of human nature] he will still not want him to be his equal, for there will always be a desire in his heart that he should have more of these good things than his neighbor. Therefore Scripture commanded that this degrading jealousy should not exist in his heart, but instead a person should love to do abundance of good for his fellow-being as he does for himself, and he should place no limitations upon his love for him. It is for this reason that it is said of Jonathan’s [love for David], for he loved him as he loved his own soul,⁹⁰I Samuel 20:17. because Jonathan had removed [altogether] the attribute of jealousy from his heart, and he said [to David], and thou shalt be king over Israel,⁹¹Ibid., 23:17. etc.
Our Rabbis have already explained⁹²Sifra, Kedoshim 4:10-11. the matters of taking vengeance and guarding a grudge [which are here forbidden], that they apply to cases where there is no monetary obligation, such as, “Lend me your sickle, lend me your hatchet.”⁹³If he answers, “I will not lend it to you, just as you refused to lend it to me,” that is vengeance. But if he answers, “yHere it is; I am not like you, who would not lend it to me,” that is bearing a grudge. For in a case where his friend owes him money, such as because of damage that he caused him or for similar reasons, one is not obliged to let his friend go free. On the contrary, he should sue him before the court and receive payment from him, on the basis of the verse which states, as he hath done, so shall it be done to him,⁹⁴Further, 24:19. and he [who caused the damage] is himself obliged to pay just as he must pay back that which he borrowed or robbed; and how much more so in matters of life, [the next of kin] should take vengeance and guard the grudge against the murderer, until the blood of his brother be redeemed by a court that will render judgment according to the laws of the Torah.

לא תקום, “do not take revenge;” your inability to conquer your anger would reflect poorly on your personality. G-d is able to suppress His desire to take vengeance, as we know from: נוקם ה' ובעל חימה, “The Lord passionate and able to take revenge but He controls His anger.”

ואהבת לרעך כמוך THOU SHALT LOVE THY FELLOW MAN AS THYSELF —Rabbi Akiba said: “This is a fundamental principle of the Torah” (Sifra, Kedoshim, Chapter 4 12; Talmud Yerushalmi Nedarim 9:3).

ולא תטר; not even in your heart, but train yourself to resist your natural impulse to get even.

All other transgressions against one's fellow man are objectively immoral, except for revenge, which seems like justice. Therefore, 'love your fellow as yourself.' Just like you don't want others to take revenge on you, so you should not take revenge on your fellow, even though you are in the right to take revenge. And so too in all other ways you should love your fellow as you love yourself. And Moses Mendelssohn interpreted it as "You shall love your fellow in all the ways of love that you love yourself," equal in quality of love and not in its quantity, whenever there is no conflict between two beloved things. However, that's similar to the trait of a Sodomite (what's mine is mine and what's yours is yours [Pirkei Avot 5:10]), for how can I benefit my fellow without causing myself loss or effort, light or heavy? For there will always be a conflict between my benefit and other people's benefit, and there is no way to give a perutah to my friend without losing a perutah from my pocket.

This is a great principle. I.e., this mitzvah includes the whole Torah as Hillel the Elder said, “What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow,” and Rashi explains, “’Your friend and the friend of your father do not leave’ (Mishlei 27), this is the Holy One. ’Do not leave,’ [i.e.,] do not transgress His words, because it is hateful to you when your friend transgresses your words.” It seems to me that according to this, “You shall love your friend as yourself” means as follows. What friend is spoken of? You shall love, “I, Hashem,” Who is called a friend. You shall love Me like [you love] yourself, as is said of you, “[What is hateful to you], do not do [to your fellow].”

The Torah was very shrewd in giving these directives to the Israelite in a staggered form. 1) First of all, one is not to hate a fellow Jew; 2) next, one is not take revenge for something a fellow Jew has done to him; 3) one is not even to bear a grudge; 4) one is to love one's fellow Jew. The Torah uses 2 different descriptions for a fellow Jew, a) "your brother;" b) "your colleague" or "member of your people." This tells us that the legislation applies only to Jews who basically are Torah-observant but with whom you have a disagreement of a personal nature. If your hatred for them is due to such a Jew displaying his disdain for the Jewish religion one must not only not love them but hate them as we have been told by David in Psalms 139,21 "You know I hate those who hate You, etc."

ולא תטור, “and do not nurse a grudge.” The Torah speaks of matters involving money. When it comes to physical harm experienced by the victim, he does not need to become conciliatory until the offending party has made the first move in that direction. Alternate interpretation:

ואהבת לרעך כמוך, if he is truly your colleague, friend; however, if he is wicked you need not love him, as even G’d hates him as we know from Proverbs 8,13 יראת ה' שנאת רע, “to fear the Lord is to hate evil.” (compare Pessachim 113)

לא תקום, “do not act vengefullv: ולא תטור, and do not hold a grudge: i.e. in your mind.

You shall love your fellow. Our Sages said that this is a great general principle in the Torah. Shabbos (31a) relates that there was once a proselyte who asked Hillel to convert him on condition that he would teach him the entire Torah while he stood on one foot. Hillel taught him the verse, “You shall love your fellow as yourself” … It seems that this proselyte was a righteous convert and he was not mocking in jest to propose that Hillel teach him the entire Torah while he literally stood on one foot. Rather, he was requesting Hillel to show him one foundation for all the Torah’s commandments, upon which all the Torah’s commandments stand, so that he will not come to forgetfulness, which is common for a convert who did not learn anything about the Torah’s commandments from his youth …

לא תקום, Rashi explains this by providing us with a parable: if someone had asked a neighbour to lend him his scythe, and had been refused, and on the day after that refusenik asked him to lend him his spade to dig with, the second person not only refusing but adding as a reason that he was refused the loan of the first person’s scythe, this is an example of revenge, i.e. לא תקום. What then is the meaning of לא תטור, “do not bear a grudge?” Answer: if the second person does lend his spade to the one who had refused him his scythe, but he added when giving him his spade: “I am not like you who refused me his scythe just yesterday.” The second person still feels vengeful even though he did not act vengefully. If you were to ask why it is that the Torah did not specifically forbid the first person to refuse to lend the second person his scythe, but referred with obvious displeasure to the second person who did lend his tool as having committed a violation of a commandment? Surely the Torah should have criticized the first person for being so miserly as not to lend his tool to his neighbour?We must give the first person the benefit of the doubt for refusing to lend his tool because he may have been afraid that his neighbour would treat his scythe, which he treasured greatly, carelessly, and that would explain his refusal. The Torah does not command us to lend our tools against our better judgment as to whom we entrust it. On the other hand, the second person made it clear that he bore the first person ill will for his refusal and he wanted to impress him as being a better person than his neighbour. Therefore the Torah commanded us to allow our goodwill towards our neighbor to outweigh our disappointment over his having refused us without giving an adequate explanation which would have been acceptable and which would have avoided any ill feeling between these two people. By practicing this kind of goodwill we would have contributed to making this a more peaceful world.

He taught him the verse, “You shall love your fellow as yourself” because the Sages said (Makos 24a): “Chabakuk came and stood them all upon one: ‘A righteous man will live in his faith.’” This does not contradict Hillel’s words, for all the Torah’s commandments are one of two types: One is the commandments between man and Hashem, and the foundation of them all is faith in Hashem. The second is the commandments between man and his fellow man, and the foundation of them all is, “You shall love your fellow as yourself” … On this foundation he stood up for him the commandments between man and his fellow man. Additionally, he taught him the end of the verse as well, “I am Adonoy,” which is the foundation upon which Chabakuk stood all the Torah’s commandments, that is, faith in Hashem.

.ואהבת לרעך כמוך, “if you (and everyone else) will practice this virtue you will contribute to peaceful relations between man and his fellow.” The prefix letter ל before the word רעך, “your fellowman,” is superfluous. Other examples of the Torah using such a letter ל as an unnecessary prefix can be found in Exodus 14,28: לכל חיל פרעה, “of the whole army of Pharaoh;” compare also Exodus 27,3: לכל כליו תעשה נחושת,” “all of its appurtenances you shall construct out of copper. An alternate interpretation: the Torah was careful not to write ואהבת רעך כמוך “love your fellowman as you love yourself,” as this is something impossible for human beings to do. It is however, possible to love things that belong to your fellow human being as much as you love the things that are your own. You are to put yourself mentally into the position of your fellow human being, and therefore not to do anything to him that you would not have others do to you. By the same token you should love as much to do favours for him as you would have others do favours for you. The same interpretation also applies to verse 34 in our chapter where we are asked to love the convert to Judaism כמוך, “just like yourself.”

And you shall love your neighbor as yourself:... And the philosophers have already explained that the primary axiom which is the root of moral philosophy is that one should will that everything that he does be a universal axiom (chok kollel). This means that that if he should want that evil occur to his fellow so that he will benefit, he must evaluate it to see if he would want it to be a universal axiom, such that this axiom would be that everyone may cause damage to their fellows when it brings benefit to themselves. And this will certainly not be acceptable to him, that damage should be caused to him in order that benefit come to his fellows. And through this, he too will desist from doing it to his fellow. And likewise if he is able to benefit his fellow and he desists from it, he must evaluate it to see if he would want this to be a universal axiom, such that all people would desist from benefitting him. And this is [the meaning of] that which Rabbi Akiva said, that it is the great principle (klal gadol) of the Torah. However the critical philosophers questioned this maxim, since this axiom is still not universal. For according to this, everyone would act on the basis of the benefit to themselves, whereas it is fitting that all of their actions be on account of axioms of sublime universal reason without any admixture of personal benefit. And for this reason, Ben Azzai elevated the axiom to a more sublime matter when he based [it] on "This is the book of the generations of man." For all men are bound together like one body. All of them were created in the image of God to complete the highest image and form which contains the souls of all mankind. All of them are like one single person, and like one body which is composed of different members... According to this theory, the words of Rabbi Akiva follow his own understanding (leshitato), since he expounds (Sifra Behar 5:43, Bava Metzia 62a), "Your life comes before that of your fellow."