Shabbat Afternoon Acharei Mot-Kedoshim 5785

who does not avenge himself and bear a grudge like a snake when insulted is not considered a Torah scholar at all, as it is important to uphold the honor of Torah and its students by reacting harshly to insults. The Gemara asks: But isn’t it written explicitly in the Torah: “You shall not take vengeance nor bear any grudge against the children of your people” (Leviticus 19:18)? The Gemara responds: That prohibition is written with regard to monetary matters and not personal insults, as it was taught in a baraita: What is revenge and what is bearing a grudge? Revenge is illustrated by the following example: One said to his fellow: Lend me your sickle, and he said: No. The next day he, the one who had refused to lend the sickle, said to the other person: Lend me your ax. If he said to him: I will not lend to you, just as you did not lend to me, that is revenge.

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).

BUT THOU SHALT LOVE THY NEIGHBOR. Many are of the opinion that the lamed of le-re’akha (thy neighbor) is superfluous. It is like the lamed of le-avner (Abner) (II Sam. 3:30). I believe that le-re’akha is to be taken literally. Its meaning is that one should love that which is good for one’s neighbor as he does for himself.

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. It is possible that since it does not say “and thou shalt love ‘eth rei’acha’ 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, 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, 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.Our Rabbis have already explained 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.” 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, 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, 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.

A person who takes revenge against a colleague transgresses a Torah prohibition, as [Leviticus 19:18] states: "Do not take revenge."Even though [revenge] is not punished by lashes, it is a very bad trait. Instead, a person should [train himself] to rise above his feelings about all worldly things, for men of understanding consider all these things as vanity and emptiness which are not worth seeking revenge for.What is meant by taking revenge? A person's colleague asks him, "Lend me your hatchet. He responds, "I refuse to lend it to you." On the following day, the person [who refused] needs to borrow a hatchet from his colleague. He asks him: "Lend me your hatchet." The latter responds, "Just as you did not lend it to me, I will not lend it to you." This is considered as taking revenge. Instead, when he comes to ask him for it, he should give it to him with a full heart, without repaying him for what he did.The same applies in other similar instances. Thus, King David proclaimed regarding his exemplary qualities [Psalms 7:5]: "Have I repaid those who have done evil to me? Behold, I have rescued those who hated me without cause."