Parshah Rabbit Hole - Behar

You shall not cheat one another, and you shall fear your God for I am Hashem, your God.

To not mistreat any Israelite with words: To not mistreat any Israelite with words, meaning to say that one not say to an Israelite words that hurt him or cause him pain and he doesn’t have the strength to be helped by them. And in explanation, they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bava Metzia 58b), “How is it? If he was a penitent, he should not say to him, ‘Remember your previous deeds.’ If ailments are coming upon him, he should not say to him in the way that Job’s friends spoke (Job 4:6), ‘Is not your reverence, your confidence, etc.’ If one saw donkey drivers seeking [feed], he should not say, ‘Go to x,’ when he knows that he does not have any. And do not say to a trader, ‘How much is this item?,’ when he does not wish to buy it.” And about this it is stated (Leviticus 25:17), “A man should not mistreat his countryman.”

He went up from there to Bethel, and as he was going up on the way, little boys came out from the city and taunted him and said to him, “Go away, baldy! Go away, baldy!”

He turned around and saw them. He cursed them in the name of Hashem. Two bears came out of the woods and tore apart forty-two of the boys.

Rav and Shmuel had a dispute with regard to this episode. One says there was a miracle, and one says there was a miracle within a miracle. The Gemara explains: The one who says there was a miracle claims that there was already a forest in that place but there were no bears, and the miracle was the appearance of bears. The one who says it was a miracle within a miracle claims that neither was there a forest nor were there bears in that area. The Gemara asks with regard to the second opinion: Why was a double miracle required? And let there be bears and no forest; The Gemara explains: The forest was necessary, because of fear.

"Because of the fear" - of the bears to attack them without a place nearby for them to escape to and hide. But if they were close to a forest then they would go out confidently.

If there were no forest and the bears were to come, the little boys would be terrified when they saw the bears from afar and would run away to save themselves. Rashi interprets "fear" as referring to the bears, which is far-fetched, since they were brought through a miracle they would certainly not be afraid to attack little boys.

...Anyone who descends to Gehenna ultimately ascends, except for three who descend and do not ascend, and these are they: an adulterer, as this transgression is a serious offense against both God and a person; and one who humiliates another in public; and one who calls another a derogatory name. The Gemara asks with regard to one who calls another a derogatory name: That is identical to one who shames him; why are they listed separately? The Gemara answers: Although the victim grew accustomed to being called that name in place of his name, and he is no longer humiliated by being called that name, since the intent was to insult him, the perpetrator’s punishment is severe.

"accustomed to it" - he is already used to people calling him this, therefore he does not get embarrassed. Nevertheless, it is meant to humiliate him.

There are other sins which are less severe than those mentioned. Nevertheless, our Sages said that a person who frequently commits them will not receive a portion in the world to come and [counseled] that these [sins] be avoided and care be taken in regard to them. They are:
one who invents a [disparaging] nickname for a colleague; one who calls a colleague by a [disparaging] nickname; one who embarrasses a colleague in public...

Rambam writes "one who assigns a nickname" and not "assigns a mean nickname". It seems to me that he wrote it this way to include [a case in which the victim is] accustomed to this name and nobody perceives it as a mean name anymore, and nevertheless, it is forbidden...

...And it is possible that 'calls by name' implies the first one who calls them this. And because the Gemara says "even though he is accustomed to it," Rambam infers the inclusion of those who continue to call by this name, but this requires further investigation.

Rabbi Zakkai was once asked by his disciples: In the merit of which virtue were you blessed with longevity? He said to them: In all my days, I never urinated within four cubits of a place that had been used for prayer. Nor did I ever call my fellow by a nickname. And I never neglected the mitzva of sanctifying the day of Shabbat over wine.

the students of Rav Adda bar Ahava asked him: To what do you attribute your longevity? He said to them: In all my days I did not become angry with my household, and I never walked before someone greater than myself; rather, I always gave him the honor of walking before me. And I did not think about matters of Torah in filthy alleyways; and I did not walk four cubits without engaging in Torah and without donning phylacteries; and I would not fall asleep in the study hall, neither a deep sleep nor a brief nap; and I would not rejoice in the mishap of my colleague; and I would not call my colleague by his nickname. And some say that he said: I would not call my colleague by his derogatory family name.

"By his nickname." This means a nickname that a person is called in a derogatory way. "By his family name" - this means a name that is assigned to a family... For example, Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra, whose entire family was called that. But this is specifically when it is used derogatorily. But if it is for praise then it is permitted.

..and he was careful say a person's actual name, and would not alter their name, which is common for people to do, and he would also not refer to a person by their family name alone.

And there is a reason why he lived to be very old, because it is known that the life of a person is dependent on the letters of their name... and if one refers to someone by the letters of their actual name, this reinforces their life-force, which is dependent on the letters of their name, and therefore he was granted long life because of this.