(18) You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against members of your people.
Love your neighbour as yourself: I am the Eternal.
Thy Neighbor’s Cat by Chuck Klosterman
The New York Times, Aug. 9, 2013
One of my neighbors complained to my co-op board’s management firm, claiming I allow my cat to exercise unsupervised in the hallway — a blatant lie. Without hearing my side, the board declared that no cats could be in the hallway, supervised or not. Is it ethical for me to never again speak to the person who lied about my cat? W. S., NEW YORK
First of all, I love the concept of a cat “exercising unsupervised,” even if it never actually happened. Second, I don’t see the ethical conflict in your quandary. A normal person talks to his neighbors (particularly if a neighbor initiates the conversation), but it’s not a moral obligation unless the neighbor is in some kind of immediate danger. If your despised neighbor stops you in the hallway and desperately says, “I need your help,” you can’t walk away on account of your cat’s unjust persecution. But most of the time, day-to-day conversations aren’t that intense; most of the time, you can freeze out whomever you like, for whatever reason you see fit. Friendliness is a virtue, but not a moral requirement. This behavior, however, will have its own set of discomfiting consequences. “I don’t know about that guy in 6-C,” your neighbors may gossip as you wordlessly skulk about the building. “He seems like an oversensitive recluse. Also, I heard that his cat has really gained weight.”
The full range of the Tanakh’s rea, “neighbor,” is remarkably wide, like the English “fellow.” It can designate any human being (Gen 11.3) or denote a person with whom one has an intimate relationship such as a friend (e.g., Ex 33.11; 1 Chr 27.33) or a lover (e.g., Hos 3.1; Song 5.16). Often rea refers to a person encountered in everyday life: Proverbs 3.29 explains that “your rea” is someone who “lives trustingly beside you”; in Jeremiah 9.1–5 the prophet berates his people for the widespread deception among neighbors. In Deuteronomy 19.14 and 27.17 rea refers to a landowner with whom one shares a boundary.
It is therefore not surprising that the term “neighbor” figures prominently in the legal literature of the Tanakh, for neighbors rely on laws to regulate their relationships. In the context of biblical law the term refers to a person with whom one has a legal relationship (e.g., Ex 22.25; Deut 4.42). Here it is perhaps analogous to “citizen” or “compatriot.” This is the case for Leviticus 19.18.
- Michael Fagenblat, "The Concept of Neighbor in Jewish and Christian Ethics," in The Jewish Annotated New Testament, ed. Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler
If we have difficulty understanding how to love God because we don’t know God well enough, we could have just the opposite problem loving God’s creatures—because we know them all too well...
Many of us find this hard because all people are flawed, all have a yetzer ha’ra, all do things we don’t like. Yet we are taught in the Torah to “Love your neighbor as yourself,” and about this verse Rabbi Akiva says, “This is a great principle of the Torah.” It may not come easily to love humanity, and that is exactly what makes it such a great and effective spiritual practice for cultivating the loving heart we seek.
- Alan Morinis, With Heart in Mind
ואהבת לרעך כמוך, if he is truly your colleague, friend; however, if he is wicked you need not love him, as even God hates him...
And according to your reasoning, let us make the structure a minimal ten handbreadths. Why? ...the reason is in accordance with the opinion of Rav Naḥman, as Rav Naḥman says that Rabba bar Avuh says that the verse states: “And you shall love your fellow as yourself” (Leviticus 19:18), teaching that even with regard to a condemned prisoner, select a good, i.e., a compassionate, death for him. Therefore, the structure used for stoning is constructed sufficiently high that he dies quickly, without any unnecessary suffering.
מִצְוָה עַל כָּל אָדָם לֶאֱהֹב אֶת כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל כְּגוּפוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יט יח) "וְאָהַבְתָּ לְרֵעֲךָ כָּמוֹךָ". לְפִיכָךְ צָרִיךְ לְסַפֵּר בְּשִׁבְחוֹ וְלָחוּס עַל מָמוֹנוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר הוּא חָס עַל מָמוֹן עַצְמוֹ וְרוֹצֶה בִּכְבוֹד עַצְמוֹ.
Each person is commanded to love each and every one of Israel as themselves as Leviticus 19:18 states: "Love your neighbor as yourself."
Therefore, one should speak the praises of [others] and show concern for their money just as one is concerned with one's own money and seeks one's own honor.
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. What then is the meaning of “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...
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.
וטעם ואהבת לרעך כמוך הפלגה כי לא יקבל לב האדם שיאהוב את חבירו כאהבתו את נפשו ועוד שכבר בא רבי עקיבא ולמד חייך קודמין לחיי חבירך (ב"מ סב) אלא מצות התורה שיאהב חבירו בכל ענין כאשר יאהב את נפשו בכל הטוב ויתכן בעבור שלא אמר "ואהבת את רעך כמוך" והשוה אותם במלת "לרעך" וכן ואהבת לו כמוך (ויקרא י״ט:ל״ד) דגר שיהיה פירושו להשוות אהבת שניהם בדעתו כי פעמים שיאהב אדם את רעהו בדברים ידועים להטיבו בעושר ולא בחכמה וכיוצא בזה ואם יהיה אוהבו בכל יחפוץ שיזכה רעהו האהוב לו בעושר ובנכסים וכבוד ובדעת ובחכמה ולא שישוה אליו אבל יהיה חפץ בלבו לעולם שיהיה הוא יותר ממנו בכל טובה ויצוה הכתוב שלא תהיה פחיתות הקנאה הזאת בלבו אבל יאהב ברבות הטובה לחבירו כאשר אדם עושה לנפשו ולא יתן שיעורין באהבה ועל כן אמר ביהונתן (שמואל א כ יז) כי אהבת נפשו אהבו בעבור שהסיר מדת הקנאה מלבו ואמר (שם כג יז) ואתה תמלוך על ישראל וגו'
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, “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...
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, because Jonathan had removed [altogether] the attribute of jealousy from his heart, and he said [to David], and thou shalt be king over Israel, etc.
Among the many answers given to the question, the following one asks us to continue reading until the less familiar end of the verse, “love your neighbor as yourself, I am the Lord.” When you understand that you were both created by God who gave you both a soul, then you will love your neighbor because you are both part of humanity, and the bonds of solidarity and commitment connect you.
- Sivan Rahav-Meir, #Parasha
With your crooked heart.
- W.H. Auden, "As I Walked Out One Evening"
By Amy Bloom, Jack Shafer and Kenji Yoshino
The New York Times, Feb. 18, 2015
A couple downstairs has started letting their baby cry it out. Having no kids myself, I don’t know if this is a valid parenting strategy. What I do know is that it kept me up for an hour at 2 a.m. last night and has woken me up several times this week. Is it within my rights to talk to them about it? J.B., BROOKLYN
Jack Shafer: …If they’ve already had a discussion, I would say advance that discussion. If they haven’t, I would approach them very gingerly, perhaps bring a gift for the baby, knock on the door and say, “Oh, I hear your baby has had trouble sleeping, and I thought that this little cuddly might help.”
People are suckers when you give their babies a present.
Kenji Yoshino: …That said, it may be that these neighbors who are Ferberizing their baby don’t know you are bothered. So Jack’s approach would be a beautiful way to open up the conversation that puts them on notice if there is some kind of help that they can engage in, like moving the crib to a different room or something that you can work out together. There might be a very easy, happy solution here.
Shafer: I don’t want to be tagged as a softy on this one. If the gift and the direct approach don’t work, call the landlord and complain. You have a right to tell your neighbors that they have an ethical responsibility to you as a neighbor to control the noise, whether it’s a baby or a rock band playing in their apartment at 2 a.m. I would escalate, but I would escalate slowly.
Bloom: The option of escalation is always there. I also suggest that since the letter writer describes the couple as being downstairs, it’s hard to imagine that the person upstairs has never made a lot of noise that has bothered the people downstairs. This is the way in which the ethical responsibility goes both ways.
But I don’t think you can go wrong going downstairs with a little gift and saying, “Congratulations on the new baby, and I wonder if there’s any way that we could make this better?” Certainly it seems possible to me that the solution is to move the crib and get a pair of earplugs.
If that doesn’t work, if you’re in for a stretch of colic, you have to decide what kind of neighbor you want to be. I’m not sure the landlord can make people move because they have a colicky baby, so I’m not sure where that’s going to get you in the end — except, of course, making your downstairs neighbors feel very distressed and probably very quick to pick up the phone when you are thumping around in your Cuban-heeled boots.
Yoshino: In some ways what we’re all saying is that you could either make friends for life if you approach it in a way that you and Jack have articulated, or it could go really, really badly if you frame it as a noise disturbance like playing your stereo too loudly and you must stop.
Shafer: We agree: Speak softly and carry a stuffed animal.