לשון הרע ולשון הטוב בשעת מלחמה

(י) כִּֽי־תֵצֵ֥א מַחֲנֶ֖ה עַל־אֹיְבֶ֑יךָ וְנִ֨שְׁמַרְתָּ֔ מִכֹּ֖ל דָּבָ֥ר רָֽע׃ (יא) כִּֽי־יִהְיֶ֤ה בְךָ֙ אִ֔ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֛ר לֹא־יִהְיֶ֥ה טָה֖וֹר מִקְּרֵה־לָ֑יְלָה וְיָצָא֙ אֶל־מִח֣וּץ לַֽמַּחֲנֶ֔ה לֹ֥א יָבֹ֖א אֶל־תּ֥וֹךְ הַֽמַּחֲנֶֽה׃ (יב) וְהָיָ֥ה לִפְנֽוֹת־עֶ֖רֶב יִרְחַ֣ץ בַּמָּ֑יִם וּכְבֹ֣א הַשֶּׁ֔מֶשׁ יָבֹ֖א אֶל־תּ֥וֹךְ הַֽמַּחֲנֶֽה׃ (יג) וְיָד֙ תִּהְיֶ֣ה לְךָ֔ מִח֖וּץ לַֽמַּחֲנֶ֑ה וְיָצָ֥אתָ שָּׁ֖מָּה חֽוּץ׃ (יד) וְיָתֵ֛ד תִּהְיֶ֥ה לְךָ֖ עַל־אֲזֵנֶ֑ךָ וְהָיָה֙ בְּשִׁבְתְּךָ֣ ח֔וּץ וְחָפַרְתָּ֣ה בָ֔הּ וְשַׁבְתָּ֖ וְכִסִּ֥יתָ אֶת־צֵאָתֶֽךָ׃ (טו) כִּי֩ יְהֹוָ֨ה אֱלֹהֶ֜יךָ מִתְהַלֵּ֣ךְ ׀ בְּקֶ֣רֶב מַחֲנֶ֗ךָ לְהַצִּֽילְךָ֙ וְלָתֵ֤ת אֹיְבֶ֙יךָ֙ לְפָנֶ֔יךָ וְהָיָ֥ה מַחֲנֶ֖יךָ קָד֑וֹשׁ וְלֹֽא־יִרְאֶ֤ה בְךָ֙ עֶרְוַ֣ת דָּבָ֔ר וְשָׁ֖ב מֵאַחֲרֶֽיךָ׃ {ס}

Deuteronomy 23:10-25

(10) When you [men] go out as a troop against your enemies, be on your guard against anything untoward. (11) If anyone among you has been rendered impure by a nocturnal emission, he must leave the camp, and he must not reenter the camp. (12) Toward evening he shall bathe in water, and at sundown he may reenter the camp. (13) Further, there shall be an area for you outside the camp, where you may relieve yourself. (14) With your gear you shall have a spike, and when you have squatted you shall dig a hole with it and cover up your excrement. (15) Since your God יהוה moves about in your camp to protect you and to deliver your enemies to you, let your camp be holy; let [God] not find anything unseemly among you and turn away from you. (16) You shall not turn over to the master a slave who seeks refuge with you from that master. (17) Such individuals shall live with you in any place they may choose among the settlements in your midst, wherever they please; you must not ill-treat them. (18) No Israelite woman shall be a prostitute,*prostitute Meaning of Heb. qedeshah uncertain. Perhaps a type of female functionary at a religious site. NJPS “sacred prostitute,” but the notion that ancient Near Eastern religions included prostitution as a religious act has since been discredited. nor shall any Israelite man be a prostitute.*prostitute Meaning of Heb. qadesh uncertain. Although it is simply the masculine counterpart of qedeshah (see previous note), it is mentioned as if it refers to a distinct category. (19) You shall not bring the fee of a whore or the pay of a dog*dog I.e., a male prostitute. into the house of your God יהוה in fulfillment of any vow, for both are abhorrent to your God יהוה. (20) You shall not deduct interest from loans to your fellow Israelites, whether in money or food or anything else that can be deducted as interest; (21) but you may deduct interest from loans to foreigners. Do not deduct interest from loans to your fellow Israelites, so that your God יהוה may bless you in all your undertakings in the land that you are about to enter and possess. (22) When you make a vow to your God יהוה, do not put off fulfilling it, for your God יהוה will require it of you, and you will have incurred guilt; (23) whereas you incur no guilt if you refrain from vowing. (24) You must fulfill what has crossed your lips and perform what you have voluntarily vowed to your God יהוה, having made the promise with your own mouth. (25) When you enter a fellow [Israelite]’s vineyard, you may eat as many grapes as you want, until you are full, but you must not put any in your vessel.

רש"י על דברים כ״ג:י׳

(א) כי תצא וגו' … ונשמרת. שֶׁהַשָּׂטָן מְקַטְרֵג בִּשְׁעַת הַסַּכָּנָה (תלמוד ירושלמי שבת ב'):

Rashi on Deuteronomy 23:10

(1) כי תצא וגו׳ ונשמרת WHEN [THE HOST] GOETH FORTH [AGAINST THINE ENEMIES], THEN KEEP THEE [FROM EVERY EVIL THING] — because Satan accuses men in time of danger (Jerusalem Talmud Shabbat 2:6; Midrash Tanchuma, Vayigash 1 on Genesis 42:4; cf. Rashi on that verse and our Note thereon).

רש"י על דברים כ״ג:י׳

(א) כי תצא וגו' … ונשמרת. שֶׁהַשָּׂטָן מְקַטְרֵג בִּשְׁעַת הַסַּכָּנָה (תלמוד ירושלמי שבת ב'):

Rashi on Deuteronomy 23:10

רמב"ן על דברים כ״ג:י׳

(א) ונשמרת מכל דבר רע שהשטן מקטרג בשעת הסכנה לשון רש"י (רש"י על דברים כ״ג:י׳) והנכון בעיני בענין המצוה הזאת כי הכתוב יזהיר בעת אשר החטא מצוי בו והידוע במנהגי המחנות היוצאות למלחמה כי יאכלו כל תועבה יגזלו ויחמסו ולא יתבוששו אפילו בניאוף וכל נבלה הישר בבני אדם בטבעו יתלבש אכזריות וחמה כצאת מחנה על אויב ועל כן הזהיר בו הכתוב ונשמרת מכל דבר רע ועל דרך הפשט היא אזהרה מכל הנאסר ובספרי (תצא קיט) ונשמרת מכל דבר רע שומע אני בטומאות ובטהרות ובמעשרות הכתוב מדבר ת"ל ערוה אין לי אלא ערוה מנין לרבות עבודת גלולים וגלוי עריות ושפיכות דמים וקללת השם ת"ל ונשמרת מכל דבר רע או יכול בטומאות ובטהרות ובמעשרות הכתוב מדבר ת"ל ערוה מה ערוה מיוחדת מעשה שגלו עליו כנענים ומסלק את השכינה אף כל מעשה שגלו עליו כנענים ומסלק את השכינה כשהוא אומר דבר אף על לשון הרע וגם זה מן הטעם שפירשנו כי מלבד האזהרות שבאו באלה העבירות החמורות יוסיף לאו במחנה שנשמר בו מכל אלו העבירות שלא תסתלק השכינה מישראל אשר שם כאשר אמר כי ה' אלהיך מתהלך בקרב מחנך והנה העושה העבירות הגדולות במחנה כאותם שכתוב בהם (ירמיהו ז ל) שמו שקוציהם בבית אשר נקרא שמי עליו לטמאו ועוד שלא יגברו עלינו האויבים אם נעשה כמעשים הגורמים להם שיגלו מפנינו וזהו ולתת אויביך לפניך (שם) והוסיפו בו לשון הרע כדי שלא ירבו ביניהם מחלוקת ויכו ביניהם מכה רבה מאד יותר מן האויבים:

Ramban on Deuteronomy 23:10

(1) WHEN THOU GOEST FORTH IN CAMP AGAINST THINE ENEMIES, THEN THOU SHALT KEEP THEE FROM EVERY EVIL — “because Satan indicts [people] in the hour of danger.” This is Rashi’s language.
The correct interpretation regarding this commandment appears to me that Scripture is warning of a time when sin is rampant. The well-known custom of forces going to war is that they eat all abominable things, rob and plunder, and are not ashamed even of lewdness and all vileness. The fairest of man by nature comes to be possessed of cruelty and fury when the army advances against the enemy. Therefore, Scripture warned, then thou shalt keep thee from every evil. And by way of the simple meaning of Scripture this is an admonition against doing anything forbidden. And in the Sifre it is stated:271Sifre, Ki Theitzei 254. “I might think that Scripture is speaking of the laws of defilements and purities and tithes. It therefore says ‘ervah’ [an unseemly thing, which refers to unchastity].272Further, Verse 15: and that He see no ‘unseemly thing’ in thee. Whence do I know to include idolatry, lewdness,273“Lewdness.” In our Sifre this term is not mentioned here, and rightly so, since it has already been expressly forbidden, as explained above. bloodshed, and blasphemy? Scripture therefore says, then thou shalt keep thee from every evil. Or perhaps the verse is speaking of defilements and purities, and tithes? It says ervah (an unseemly thing):272Further, Verse 15: and that He see no ‘unseemly thing’ in thee. just as ervah uniquely represents a deed for which the Canaanites were driven from the Land274Leviticus 18:24. and which removes the Divine Presence [from Israel], so all deeds for which the Canaanites were driven from the Land and which remove the Divine Presence [from Israel] are included in the admonition of this verse. When Scripture states davar [thing, but literally ‘word’ — then thou shalt keep thee from every evil ‘davar’] it includes also ‘evil talk.’” This also is included in the purport of the verse we have explained, that besides the [specific] admonitions which are stated concerning these stringent sins, he added yet a [special] prohibition to an army that we guard against any of these sins so that the Divine Presence withdraw not from the Israelites who are there, just as he said, For the Eternal thy G-d walketh in the midst of thy camp275Further, Verse 15. Thus he who commits any of the great sins while in the army, those about which it is written, they have set their detestable things in the house whereon My Name is called to defile it,276Jeremiah 7:30. [he causes the Divine Presence to withdraw from Israel]. Moreover, [we are to avoid these sins] in order that the enemy should not overpower us because of our committing the very deeds that cause them to be driven from before us, this being the sense of the expression, and to give up thine enemies before thee.275Further, Verse 15. The Sages [in the Sifre] added evil talk [as derived from this admonition] in order that contention should not increase among them and smite them with a very great plague, [even] more than the enemy [will inflict upon them].

משנה אבות ב׳:ח׳

(ח) רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי קִבֵּל מֵהִלֵּל וּמִשַּׁמָּאי. הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, אִם לָמַדְתָּ תוֹרָה הַרְבֵּה, אַל תַּחֲזִיק טוֹבָה לְעַצְמְךָ, כִּי לְכָךְ נוֹצָרְתָּ. חֲמִשָּׁה תַלְמִידִים הָיוּ לוֹ לְרַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, וְאֵלּוּ הֵן, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן הוֹרְקְנוֹס, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן חֲנַנְיָה, וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַכֹּהֵן, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן נְתַנְאֵל, וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲרָךְ. הוּא הָיָה מוֹנֶה שִׁבְחָן. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן הוֹרְקְנוֹס, בּוֹר סוּד שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְאַבֵּד טִפָּה. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן חֲנַנְיָה, אַשְׁרֵי יוֹלַדְתּוֹ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַכֹּהֵן, חָסִיד. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן נְתַנְאֵל, יְרֵא חֵטְא. וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲרָךְ, מַעְיָן הַמִּתְגַּבֵּר. הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, אִם יִהְיוּ כָל חַכְמֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּכַף מֹאזְנַיִם, וֶאֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן הוֹרְקְנוֹס בְּכַף שְׁנִיָּה, מַכְרִיעַ אֶת כֻּלָּם. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר מִשְּׁמוֹ, אִם יִהְיוּ כָל חַכְמֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּכַף מֹאזְנַיִם וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן הוֹרְקְנוֹס אַף עִמָּהֶם, וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲרָךְ בְּכַף שְׁנִיָּה, מַכְרִיעַ אֶת כֻּלָּם:

Pirkei Avot 2:8

(8) Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai received [the oral tradition] from Hillel and Shammai. He used to say: if you have learned much Torah, do not claim credit for yourself, because for such a purpose were you created. Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai had five disciples and they were these: Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, Rabbi Joshua ben Hananiah, Rabbi Yose, the priest, Rabbi Shimon ben Nethaneel and Rabbi Eleazar ben Arach. He [Rabbi Johanan] used to list their outstanding virtues: Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus is a plastered cistern which loses not a drop; Rabbi Joshua ben Hananiah happy is the woman that gave birth to him; Rabbi Yose, the priest, is a pious man; Rabbi Simeon ben Nethaneel is one that fears sin, And Rabbi Eleazar ben Arach is like a spring that [ever] gathers force. He [Rabbi Yohanan] used to say: if all the sages of Israel were on one scale of the balance and Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus on the other scale, he would outweigh them all. Abba Shaul said in his name: if all the sages of Israel were on one scale of the balance, and Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus also with them, and Rabbi Eleazar ben Arach on the other scale, he would outweigh them all.

כתובות י״ז

כַּלָּה כְּמוֹת שֶׁהִיא. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: ״כַּלָּה נָאָה וַחֲסוּדָה״. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית שַׁמַּאי לְבֵית הִלֵּל: הֲרֵי שֶׁהָיְתָה חִיגֶּרֶת אוֹ סוֹמָא, אוֹמְרִים לָהּ: ״כַּלָּה נָאָה וַחֲסוּדָה״? וְהַתּוֹרָה אָמְרָה: ״מִדְּבַר שֶׁקֶר תִּרְחָק״! אָמְרוּ לָהֶם בֵּית הִלֵּל לְבֵית שַׁמַּאי: לְדִבְרֵיכֶם, מִי שֶׁלָּקַח מִקָּח רַע מִן הַשּׁוּק, יְשַׁבְּחֶנּוּ בְּעֵינָיו, אוֹ יְגַנֶּנּוּ בְּעֵינָיו? הֱוֵי אוֹמֵר: יְשַׁבְּחֶנּוּ בְּעֵינָיו. מִכָּאן אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים: לְעוֹלָם תְּהֵא דַּעְתּוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם מְעוֹרֶבֶת עִם הַבְּרִיּוֹת

Ketubot 17

One recites praise of the bride as she is, emphasizing her good qualities. And Beit Hillel say: One recites: A fair and attractive bride. Beit Shammai said to Beit Hillel: In a case where the bride was lame or blind, does one say with regard to her: A fair and attractive bride? But the Torah states: “Keep you from a false matter” (Exodus 23:7). Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: According to your statement, with regard to one who acquired an inferior acquisition from the market, should another praise it and enhance its value in his eyes or condemn it and diminish its value in his eyes? You must say that he should praise it and enhance its value in his eyes and refrain from causing him anguish. From here the Sages said: A person’s disposition should always be empathetic with mankind, and treat everyone courteously. In this case too, once the groom has married his bride, one praises her as being fair and attractive. When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: This is what they sing before brides in the West, in Eretz Yisrael: No eye shadow, and no rouge, and no braiding of the hair, and yet she is comparable to a graceful ibex. The Gemara relates: When the Sages ordained Rabbi Zeira, this is what they metaphorically sang with regard to him in his praise: No eye shadow, and no rouge, and no braiding of the hair, and yet she is comparable to a graceful ibex. On a related note, the Gemara relates: When the Sages ordained Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi, this is what they sang to them: Anyone from people of this kind and anyone from people of that kind, ordain them for us. Do not ordain for us others, neither from those who corrupt [sarmisin] halakhot, nor from those who are worthless [sarmitin]. And some say: Not from those who provide only one-fifth [ḥamisin] of the reason for a halakha, and not from those whose knowledge is incomplete [turmisin]. The Gemara relates another instance of singing the praise of the Sages: When Rabbi Abbahu would come from the academy to the house of the emperor, the maidservants of the emperor’s house would go out to greet him, and this is what they sang to him: Master of his people and leader of his nation, candle of illumination, blessed is your arrival in peace. With regard to the mitzva of bringing joy to the bride and groom, the Gemara relates: The Sages said about Rabbi Yehuda bar Elai that he would take a myrtle branch and dance before the bride, and say: A fair and attractive bride. Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak would base his dance on three myrtle branches that he would juggle. Rabbi Zeira said: The old man is humiliating us, as through his conduct he is demeaning the Torah and the Torah scholars. It is further related: When Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak died, a pillar of fire demarcated between him and everyone else, and we learn through tradition that a pillar of fire demarcates only for either one person in a generation or for two people in a generation. Rabbi Zeira said: His branch [shotitei] was effective for the old man, as it is due to this mitzva that he fulfilled so enthusiastically that he was privileged to receive this great reward. And some say that Rabbi Zeira said: His nonsense [shetutei] was effective for the old man. And some say that he said: His method [shittatei] was effective for the old man. Rav Aḥa would place the bride on his shoulders and dance. The Sages said to him: What is the ruling? Is it permitted for us to do so as well? He said to them: If brides are comparable for you to a beam, fine, but if not, no, you may not. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: It is permitted to look at the face of a bride throughout all seven days of the wedding celebration, in order to endear her to her husband, whose appreciation of her beauty will be thereby enhanced. The Gemara notes: And the halakha is not in accordance with his opinion, as it is prohibited to look at any married woman, even a bride. § The Sages taught: One reroutes the funeral procession for burial of a corpse to yield before the wedding procession of a bride. And both this, the funeral procession, and that, the wedding procession, yield before a king of Israel. They said about King Agrippa [Agrippas] that although he was not required to do so, he rerouted his entourage before the wedding procession of a bride, and the Sages praised him for doing so. The Gemara asks: The Sages praised him; is that to say by inference that he did well in yielding? But didn’t Rav Ashi say: Even according to the one who said with regard to a Nasi who relinquishes the honor due him that his honor is relinquished, i.e., he may do so, with regard to a king who relinquishes the honor due him, his honor is not relinquished. As the Master said that the meaning of the verse “You shall place a king over you” (Deuteronomy 17:15) is that his awe shall be upon you. The Torah established that the subjects’ awe is an essential component of kingship and it is not the prerogative of the king to waive it. The Gemara answers: It was at a crossroads that he encountered the wedding procession, and the fact that he yielded to the bride was not obvious to onlookers. Therefore, the honor due the king was not compromised. The Sages taught: One suspends the study of Torah to attend the removal of a corpse for burial and to attend the entry of a bride into the wedding canopy. The Sages said about Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Elai, that he would suspend the study of Torah to attend the removal of a corpse for burial and to attend the entry of a bride into the wedding canopy. In what case is this statement said? In a case where there are not enough people with him, i.e., accompanying the corpse, to satisfy all his needs, i.e., to appropriately honor him. However, if there are enough people with him to satisfy all his needs, one does not suspend Torah study. The Gemara asks: And how many people constitute all his needs? Rav Shmuel bar Eini said in the name of Rav: Twelve thousand men and six thousand additional men each sounding a shofar to herald the approaching funeral procession. And some say: Thirteen thousand men and, among them, six thousand men sounding a shofar. Ulla said: All his needs means a crowd large enough so that the men in the funeral possession form a partition stretching from the gate of the city [abbula] until the cemetery. Rav Sheshet, and some say Rabbi Yoḥanan, said: The number of people required for taking of the Torah from the Jewish people with the death of a Torah scholar is equivalent to the number present at its giving to the Jewish people. Just as its giving took place with six hundred thousand men present at Sinai, so too, the taking of the Torah at the funeral of a Torah scholar is with six hundred thousand men. The Gemara notes: This applies only to one who read the Bible and studied mishna, i.e., one who is a student of Torah, and consequently worthy of that honor. However, for one who taught others, there is no measure for the number of people attending the funeral. The mishna continues: And if there are witnesses that she went out of her father’s house to her wedding with a hinnuma her marriage contract is two hundred dinars. The Gemara asks: What is a hinnuma? Surḥav bar Pappa said in the name of Ze’eiri: It is a canopy of myrtle over the bride’s head. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is a veil [kerita] covering the bride’s face under which the bride dozes [menamna]. The mishna continues: Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka says: Even testimony that there was distribution of roasted grain constitutes proof that she is a virgin. It was taught with regard to the mishna: In Judea, that is proof; however, what are the customs at the weddings of virgins in Babylonia? Rav said: Smearing fragrant oil on the heads of the Sages was customary. Rav Pappa, who was unfamiliar with that practice, said to Abaye: Is the Master saying oil for shampooing the hair? Calling him an orphan because he was ignorant of the custom, he said to him: Orphan, didn’t your mother perform for you smearing of oil on the heads of the Sages at the time of the performance of your wedding ceremony? As this was the case when one of the Sages who arranged for his son to marry into the family of Rabba bar Ulla attended the wedding, and some say that it was Rabba bar Ulla who arranged for his son to marry into the family of one of the Sages; and he smeared oil on the heads of the Sages at the time of the performance of the wedding ceremony. The Gemara asks: What is the custom at the wedding of a widow? Rav Yosef taught: A widow does not have roasted grain [kisanei] distributed at her wedding. The mishna continues: And Rabbi Yehoshua concedes in a case where one says to another: This field belonged to your father, and I purchased it from him, that he is deemed credible. The Gemara asks: And let the mishna teach: Rabbi Yehoshua concedes in a case where one says to another: This field belonged to you, and I purchased it from you. The Gemara answers: Although Rabbi Yehoshua concedes that his claim is accepted even in that latter case, he addressed the case where the field originally belonged to the father due to the fact that the tanna wanted to teach in the latter clause that if there are witnesses that it was the father’s field, and he says: I purchased it from him, he is not deemed credible. That is the halakha only with regard to a field that belonged to the father, and not to the claimant himself. Were it referring to a field that he purchased from the claimant, what are the circumstances? If it is a case where the one in possession of the field consumed its produce for the three years necessary to establish presumptive ownership, why is his claim that he purchased the field not deemed credible? After three years of unchallenged possession, the purchaser’s claim is sufficient to establish ownership without documentation. And if he did not consume its produce for the three years necessary to establish presumptive ownership, it is obvious that his claim is not deemed credible. Since the distinction between a case where witnesses are present and a case where there are no witnesses present does not apply when the field in question was the property of the claimant, the tanna cited a case where the field belonged to the father. The Gemara asks: If so, the same difficulty may be raised with regard to a field belonging to the claimant’s father as well: If the one in possession of the field consumed its produce for the three years necessary to establish presumptive ownership, why is his claim that he purchased the field not deemed credible? And if he did not consume its produce for the three years necessary to establish presumptive ownership, it is obvious that his claim is not deemed credible. The latter clause is no more applicable to the father’s field than it is to the claimant’s field. Why did the tanna prefer to cite a case where the field belonged to the claimant’s father? The Gemara answers: Granted, with regard to the case where the field belonged to his father, a circumstance can be found where there is uncertainty with regard to the presumptive ownership of the field, where the one in possession of the field consumed its produce for two of the three years necessary to establish presumptive ownership during the lifetime of the father and one year during the lifetime of the son after the death of his father. And this is in accordance with the opinion of Rav Huna, as Rav Huna said: One cannot establish presumptive ownership of the property of a minor, even after he reached majority. This is because the minor is unaware of the property owned by his father; the fact that he did not challenge the claim of the one in possession of the field proves nothing. Therefore, only two of the three years necessary to establish presumptive ownership have passed. The Gemara asks: And since the mishna can be explained only in the case delineated by Rav Huna, did Rav Huna come to teach us a mishna? There is no need for an amora to teach matters that appear in a mishna, as the content of mishnayot is known by all. The Gemara answers: If you wish, say that Rav Huna is stating the inference from the mishna, as the circumstances are not written explicitly in the mishna. And if you wish, say instead that he is teaching us that even if during the year after the father died his son was no longer a minor, one may not establish presumptive ownership of the property of a minor, even after he reached majority. From the mishna, one could learn only a case where during the third year the son was still a minor. The Gemara asks: And let the tanna teach the halakha in a case where the one in possession of the field says that he purchased the field from the claimant himself. And let him establish the mishna in a case where the one in possession of the field consumed its produce in the presence of the claimant, who was the original owner of the field, for two of the three years necessary to establish presumptive ownership, and consumed its produce not in his presence for one year. And that scenario is in a case where the claimant fled and therefore, the fact that he did not challenge the claim of the one in possession of the field proves nothing. The Gemara asks: That scenario is referring to one who fled due to what reason? If it is that he fled due to the fact that his life was in jeopardy, it is obvious that the one claiming presumptive ownership is not deemed credible, since the owner of the field is unable to protest, as he fears for his life. And if he fled due to money that he owes, and that is why he does not return to protest the possessor’s occupation of the field, he ought to protest from afar, as we maintain that a protest lodged not in the presence of the one using the field is a legitimate protest. He could have lodged in a court in his place of exile his protest against the illegal occupation of his field. This is as we learned in a mishna (Bava Batra 38a): There are three independent lands in Eretz Yisrael with regard to establishing presumptive ownership: Judea, Transjordan, and the Galilee. If the original owner of the field was in Judea and another occupied his field in the Galilee, or if he was in the Galilee and another occupied his field in Judea, that does not establish presumptive ownership, until the one occupying the field will be with the original owner in the same country. And we discussed that mishna: What does this tanna hold? If he holds that a protest lodged not in the presence of the one using the field is a legitimate protest, then even in the case where one is in Judea and one is in the Galilee the protest should also be legitimate. And if he holds that a protest lodged not in the presence of the one using the field is not a legitimate protest, then even in the case where one is in Judea and the other one is in Judea as well, the protest should also not be legitimate. Rabbi Abba bar Memel said: Actually the tanna holds that a protest lodged not in the presence of the one using the field is a legitimate protest, and the Sages taught this mishna with regard to a crisis period, when travel is perilous and information cannot be transmitted from Judea to the Galilee. Therefore, although no protest was received from the original owner, the occupier does not establish presumptive ownership of the field, because the lack of protest can be attributed to the perilous situation. The Gemara asked: And if it is due only to the exigent circumstances that the protest is ineffective, what is different about Judea and the Galilee that the tanna cited specifically these two lands? Ostensibly, even within one of the three lands, if travel and communications are restricted, the same halakha would apply.

משנה תורה, הלכות דעות ו׳:ג׳

(ג) 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. וְהַמִּתְכַּבֵּד בִּקְלוֹן חֲבֵרוֹ אֵין לוֹ חֵלֶק לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא:

Mishneh Torah, Human Dispositions 6:3

(3) Each man is commanded to love each and every one of Israel as himself1In his commentary on the Torah, the Ramban questions how one can possibly have the same degree of love for another person as one has for himself. However, since all Jews share the same Godly essence, when one relates to that essence, there is really no difference between loving another person and oneself (Tanya, ibid.). as [Leviticus 19:18] states: "Love your neighbor as yourself."
Therefore,2The question often raised in connection with this mitzvah is: How can one command feeling? Therefore, certain commentaries have stated that the mitzvah merely requires us to perform deeds which would normally be motivated by feelings of love. However, in Sefer HaMitzvot (Shoresh 9), the Rambam specifically states that this mitzvah involves our emotions. Therefore, it must be interpreted to mean that we are commanded to bring ourselves to a state of mind that will inspire feelings of love.
Though the mitzvah involves our feelings, it also requires a specific course of behavior as the Rambam continues:
Therefore, - i.e., the following are the applications of this mitzvah in the ethical realm. However, since "'Love your neighbor as yourself' is a great general principle in the Torah" (Sifra, Leviticus 19:18), there are also applications of this principle in many other spheres.
Thus, Hilchot Eivel 14:1 states:
It is a positive mitzvah ordained by the Rabbis to visit the sick, comfort mourners, participate in a funeral or a wedding, accompany guests, arrange for all the needs of burial..., and to bring joy to a bride and a groom and assist them with all their needs.These are deeds of kindness performed with one's person for which there is no measure.Although these are Rabbinic commands, they are included in [the commandment, "Love your neighbor as yourself," [which implies that] all the things that you would like others to do for you, you should do for your brother in Torah and mitzvot.
The Rambam also mentions this commandment in connection with choosing a bride (Hilchot Ishut 3:19), ransoming captives (Hilchot Matnot Ani'im 8:10), and even determining the proper manner of execution (Hilchot Sanhedrin 15:1). one should speak the praises of [others] and show concern for their money just as he is concerned with his own money3Avot 2:15 states: "Your friend's money should be as dear to your as your own." and seeks his own honor.4This corresponds to speaking praise of others. See Avot 2:13: "Your friend's dignity should be as dear to you as your own."
Whoever gains honor through the degradation of a colleague5i.e., builds his reputation by emphasizing a colleague's faults does not have a share in the world to come.6See Hilchot Teshuvah 3:14.

משנה אבות א׳:א׳

(א) משֶׁה קִבֵּל תּוֹרָה מִסִּינַי, וּמְסָרָהּ לִיהוֹשֻׁעַ, וִיהוֹשֻׁעַ לִזְקֵנִים, וּזְקֵנִים לִנְבִיאִים, וּנְבִיאִים מְסָרוּהָ לְאַנְשֵׁי כְנֶסֶת הַגְּדוֹלָה. הֵם אָמְרוּ שְׁלשָׁה דְבָרִים, הֱווּ מְתוּנִים בַּדִּין, וְהַעֲמִידוּ תַלְמִידִים הַרְבֵּה, וַעֲשׂוּ סְיָג לַתּוֹרָה:

Pirkei Avot 1:1

(1) Moses received the Torah at Sinai and transmitted it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets to the Men of the Great Assembly. They said three things: Be patient in [the administration of] justice, raise many disciples and make a fence round the Torah.