Monetary Laws and Stealing

 

The Torah encompasses not only religious laws but also a vast number of civil laws, including detailed regulation of commerce and of the judicial system.

 

Torah law is very vigilant of its jurisdiction over these seemingly mundane matters.  One reason for this is the desire to rule according to the statutes of Divine law.  As legal scholars readily acknowledge, any system of "impartial" laws necessarily embodies a certain system of values.  Only if we base our judgment on the laws of the Torah can we be certain that the laws we apply are founded on the eternal principles of fairness and morality which God demands of us.

 

However, this consideration is but one aspect.  The halakha explicitly forbids bringing a civil case between Jews to a non-Jewish court even if the secular law in their particular dispute is the same as the Jewish law (SA CM 26.)  Conversely, it is a mitzva to bring a suit to the Jewish Beit Din even though they generally judge according to the prevalent commercial custom and according to customary secular laws regulating commerce (SA CM 74:7.)

 

The basic idea behind these laws is that judgment is ultimately a Divine prerogative.  Human beings can administer utilitarian regulations, but human judges can administer true justice only as "deputies" of the Divine Judge Himself.  "Don't show favoritism in judgment, hear the small as the great, and fear no man; for judgment belongs to God" (Devarim 1:17.)

 

Indeed, the Hebrew word "Elohim" is not only one of the appellations of God but also a word designating human judges.  And the verse in the Ten Commandments which warns us against making "gods of silver and gods of gold" (Shemot 20:7) is also interpreted to mean that we shouldn't appoint judges who receive their position because of their wealth or influence (Sanhedrin 7b.)

 

THE IMPORTANCE OF COMPROMISE

 

Therefore bringing cases before a Jewish court is important because of the specific rules of Jewish law which guarantee fairness as well as due to the statement it makes that we acknowledge God and the Torah as the source of all legal authority.

 

This might lead us to believe that Jewish law would be wary of arbitration or mediation, where an impartial third party that may not necessarily be learned in Jewish law decides between the two sides.  This is indeed one opinion in the Talmud:

 

"Rebbe Eliezer the son of Rebbe Yosi HaGlili says, it is forbidden to compromise.  Rather, let the law cut the mountain, as it is said, Judgment belongs to God; and Moshe also used to say, Let the law cut through the mountain" (Sanhedrin 6b.)

 

However, the Talmud continues in a different vein: "But Aharon loved peace and pursued peace, and established peace between a man and his fellow, as it is said (Malachi 2:6):

 

"The Torah of truth was in his mouth, and no injustice was found in his lips; he walked with Me in peace and straightness, and he turned many away from wrongdoing." 

 

The Talmud concludes: "Rebbe Yehoshua ben Korcha says, it is a mitzva to compromise, as it is said (Zecharia 8:16), "Truth and judgment, judge peace in your gates."  How can this be – where there is judgment there is no peace, and where there is peace there is no judgment!  Rather, judgment that causes peace as well - this is compromise.  And so verse testifies regarding King David (Shmuel II 8:15) "And David did justice and righteousness for all his nation."

 

Rebbe Yehoshua ben Korcha agrees that where there is judgment, it must "cut the mountain": where there is judgment, there is no peace – the judge is forbidden to take into account the consequences of his ruling and must apply the strict letter of the law.  Yet the best solution is not to resolve the conflict in the fairest legal manner but rather to forestall the conflict altogether.  This is then judgment that has peace and righteousness together with it.

 

So it is true that all conflicts must be resolved in strict accordance with Divine will, but the wise judge will find a way to avoid a conflict altogether, and to bring the sides together to find an agreed-upon solution through arbitration or mediation.  As a result, it is considered a mitzva for the judge to encourage the sides to reach a compromise and not resolve their dispute through a suit (SA CM 12:2.)

 

 

CHAPTER 182 - STEALING

 

The prohibition of stealing is generally considered self-evident, and is one of the seven commandments incumbent on all of mankind.  Even so, there is an inner, spiritual dimension to this commandment that is worthy of elaboration.  Each of the basic characteristics of ownership, the right of enjoyment and responsibility over one's possessions, has a spiritual counterpart.

 

It is a fundamental belief of Judaism that a person's possessions are granted him by Divine providence.  Any number of sayings of our Sages support this: "All of a person's expenditures are determined between Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippurim - except for spending on Shabbat and Yom Tov, and children's Torah education" (Beitza 16a).  "No man touches what is set aside for his fellow...even to a hair's breadth"  (Yoma 38b.)  It seems that it is very important to God what possessions are assigned to whom!

 

One reason for this is the right of enjoyment.  As we learned in the laws of blessings (chapter 50), our earthly enjoyments have a very holy source - so much so that our Sages say that anyone who enjoys them without a blessing is guilty of "me'ila," benefit from sanctified property (Berakhot 35a.) And this enjoyment is something essential for our souls: in the "borei nefashot" blessing we thank God for creating souls and their needs, "in order to enliven the souls of all life!"

 

So one reason that God grants property to one particular person is because the special enjoyment of that property is just what his or her soul requires.  Someone who steals that property is not only depriving the rightful owner's soul of this special spiritual enjoyment, but he himself can not benefit from it.  This enjoyment was designated for someone else, so anyone who benefits without permission is simply incapable of absorbing this particular enjoyment. 

 

Chassidut describes this as "gold that is turned to dust," and we all know the experience of having all the fun taken out of an experience because the human context was not what it was supposed to be.  This also explains why a person who acquires his wealth dishonestly has an insatiable desire for more possessions, since he never really enjoys what he has.  In their fateful meeting, the rapacious Esav says that he has "much," but the scrupulous Yaakov replies that he has "all"  (Bereishit 33:9,11.)

 

Another reason relates to the owner's responsibility.  Just as each of us is responsible for the material care of our possessions, so are we responsible for its spiritual care.  Everything existing in the material world which is not forbidden to enjoy has a potential to be used in God's service; God grants it as property to that person who is best able to realize this potential.  This can be directly, for example by enjoying the object or by using it for a mitzva, or alternatively by selling it to someone else who can actualize the object's potential.  Perhaps the greatest realization of property's potential for holiness is to give it away as charity.

 

Again, anyone who acquires something dishonestly is incapable of affecting this repair.  He is depriving not only the owner, but also the stolen object itself, which now finds its potential for holiness temporarily stymied.  We know that in Judaism, a frustrated potential for holiness is one of the most abhorrent states there is.  It is a profound explanation for the state of tum'a as well as the special state of improperly offered sacrifices known as pigul.

 

This explains a seemingly cryptic statement of our Sages.  While we might think it would be a very coarse and materialistic person who would value his possessions even more than his own self, our Sages tell us that it is precisely the righteous who have this trait! "'And Yaakov remained by himself' (Bereishit 32:25) - Rebbe Elazar said, he remained behind for some small jugs.  From this we learn that righteous saints delight in their possessions more than their own selves.  And why is this? Because they don't set their hands on anything stolen" (Chullin 91a.)

 

In light of our explanation, we can well understand Yaakov's behavior.  As one at a very high level of Divine care (hashgacha), he was aware that he was very much in need of these jugs in order to obtain some benefit from them which would bring him closer to spiritual perfection.  He also realized that the jugs were very much in need of him, to fulfill their own potential for God's service. 

 

(Based on Likutei Halakhot of Breslav, laws of geneiva and gezeila.)