Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: The Torah Wants Us to Uproot Even Thoughts of Stealing

What really was the final straw that led to the destruction of the entire world except for the righteous Noach and his family? Robbery. (Rashi to B'reishis 6:13, quoting from Sanhedrin 108a). I have a point I would like you to ponder. Given that it was the sin of גזל/robbery (not a sneak thief, but someone who steals with impunity) is what sealed the fate of the Generation of the Flood, wouldn't you think that a prohibition against גזל/robbery ought to make the Top Ten List, aka, עשרת הדברות?

But it is seemingly not there at all. Or is it? Before the big reveal, please note that לא תגנוב/Thou Shalt Not Steal (as they say in America) an exhortation that forbids kidnapping. (Fun fact: the victim does not need to be actually removed from their residence to be considered kidnapped. According to Cornell Law School (and we all know how much weight the opinion of ivy league schools carries nowadays):

Kidnapping is a crime at common law consisting of an unlawful restraint of a person's liberty by force or show of force.

Neither here nor there, but it came up this morning, so I am sharing.)

So on the left side of the tablets, where we have fundamental prohibitions that can destroy a normal human society, we have the prohibitions against false testimony, murder, adultery, kidnapping. Where is stealing? Where is the sin that sealed the deal for the generation of the flood?

It's right there at the end, you know -- the big finish: לא תחמוד/Thou shalt not covet. Interestingly, Google translates this as, "don't be greedy"; which is not entirely wrong. Rabeinu Bachaya explains that instead of simply prohibiting stealing, the Torah goes right to the source of the problem. Maybe because stealing is just so hard to stop, I don't know. In any case, the Torah is not satisfied with simply prohibiting the act itself -- as it does with murder, adultery, kidnapping, and bearing false witness -- but goes right to the root cause.

How do you do that? Essentially, you need to change your view of the world to look at anything that someone else has to be as irrelevant and uninteresting to you as the wings of a bird or a fairy princess. Not yours, not relevant to you, not interesting to you. See the Ibn Ezra for details.

Ok... that's the message I wanted to convey. From here on, you are welcome to read, but it's probably not as fun. This final "commandment" is also the only one that repeats itself: לא תחמוד appears twice in the verse. Same verse, but the phrase is repeated. Again, the Rabeinu Bachaya explains that there are times when חמדה for something -- someone, actually -- that is currently in someone else's home is appropriate. Namely, your fellow's daughter for your son or son for your daughter. To tell us this, the Torah uses the principle of כלל ופרט וכלל/a generalization (in this case, don't covet your anything in your fellow's household), a list of detailed items with share a common denominator, followed by a generalization (in this case: nothing that belongs do your fellow). The common denominator limits the generalization. In this case: things you can't take without his permission. That is the difficulty of this prohibition: desiring things that "aren't yours yet" is appropriate. Desiring things that "aren't your and can't be yours without the owner's permission, though, leads to stealing.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction. ...

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Sha...

Thought for the Day: Why Halacha Has "b'di'avad"

There was this Jew who knew every "b'di'avad" (aka, "Biddy Eved", the old spinster librarian) in the book.  When ever he was called on something, his reply was invariably, "biddy eved, it's fine".  When he finally left this world and was welcomed to Olam Haba, he was shown to a little, damp closet with a bare 40W bulb hanging from the ceiling.  He couldn't believe his eyes and said in astonishment, "This is Olam Haba!?!"  "Yes, Reb Biddy Eved,  for you this is Olam Haba." b'di'avad gets used like that; f you don't feel like doing something the best way, do it the next (or less) best way.  But Chazal tell us that "kol ha'omer HaShem vatran, m'vater al chayav" -- anyone who thinks HaShem gives partial credit is fooling himself to death (free translation.  Ok, really, really free translation; but its still true).  HaShem created us and this entire reality for one and only one purpose: for use...