Halakhah sobre II Samuel 8:16

Judaism fails to recognize a dichotomy between criminal law and jurisprudence. All private wrongs are viewed as trespasses against God. Conversion of funds or property belonging to another to one's own use or failure to deliver monies due another person, constitutes not only a wrong against a fellow man but a transgression against God as well. In adjudicating a claim between litigants, the Bet Din acts not simply to determine rightful ownership but to assure fulfillment of a religious obligation. The Gemara, Sanhedrin 6b, citing the verse "And David performed justice and charity unto all his people" (II Samuel 8:16), points out that justice and charity are disparate concepts. King David in his capacity as chief magistrate was certainly expected to dispense justice. But a just decree awarding a plaintiff that which is lawfully his is hardly an act of charity. By the same token, an act of charity is categorized as such precisely because it is not the product of a legal obligation. The Gemara proceeds to explain that a just verdict requiring payment or restitution does simultaneously represent justice for the plaintiff and charity vis-à-vis the defendant: "Justice to the one for having returned his money, and charity to the other for delivering the theft out of his hand." The Bet Din provides a service not only to the litigant who prevails but also performs an act of compassion on behalf of the loser in preserving him from transgression. In the same vein, the Gemara, Sanhedrin 7a, remarks, "Let him whose cloak the Bet Din has taken away sing a song and go on his way."