Relationship with others, part 3

Relationship With Others, Part 3
Introduction - We’ve been on a journey for the past few weeks. We’ve been
considering God’s expectations of us in our relationships with others. We
began with the core principle of loving our neighbor as our self. We worked
through what that means with those closest to us - our families, those in our
community, our real neighbors. We then extended our concernto those in
our midst who are weaker, who are in need.Today we go further out still -
to the stranger, to the servant and slave, to the enemy, and even to
animals. Let’s see how we’re to understand and live true to the arc of
expectations our God has established all across this spectrum of living
creatures that have been placed by God with us in our world.
XXXV.Read Deuteronomy10:19.

A. Let’s start with this question: who do we take these strangers to be?
There’s been a lot of discussionover the centuries about this matter, but
let’s begin with your views.
(One rather traditional view is that the ger is a convert to our religion from
another. While this is a narrower view, it takes us to certain places that are
important. We should not take a lesserview of such a person, nor treat
him/her in any lesserway than one who has beenamong us forever when
both profess and live in the Way of God.There’s certainly an inclination to
preferone with whom we’ve beenlong familiar and have long walked the
path together. Further, there might be a temptation to doubt whether the
newcomeris sincere and has truly becomecommitted. We learned what it
is like to be treated in subservient ways when we were in Egypt. We
shouldn’t treat one who has come to us from elsewhere in a subservient
way.
But this reading seems too limited. Even Chinuch goes further to discuss
the applicability of this mitzvah to anyone who finds himself in foreign
settings. From the wording of the mitzvah itself,why do we want to go
beyond the traditional view?
(We didn’t convert, at least in any fundamental way, when we were in
Egypt, yet the mitzvah is asking us to apply what we learned from our
experience there to others who are with us now as we were there. This
suggests that these duties, logically, extend beyond those who convert. It
must involve at least some reasonable degree of showing mercy, bringing

comfort,and avoiding mistreatment to those in our midst who are as we
were in the midstof Egypt.
In that spirit, a post-Talmudic midrash teaches: “I call Heaven and earth to
witness, the Divine Spirit rests upon every man, whether he be Jew or
gentile, if his life be worthy.” Tana debe Eliyahu, IX.)
B. But does this mitzvah drive us to love all “strangers” in our midstin the
same manner and to the same degree. It would naturally be easier with
“our own.” It would next be somewhat easier with a convert. But is the
same love expected of us for all other foreigners in our midst?
(I don’t think the mitzvah demands equivalency. We wouldn’t have
expected the Egyptians to treat us as Egyptians, would we? We might not
have beenfull citizens, expecting equality. But we would have expected
fairness, respect, dignity, compassion, mercy, a lawful treatment, etc. In
return, we certainly carried the duty to live in a “worthy” manner. So,
perhaps this is something close to the standard we should expect of
ourselves and the strangers in our midst, that is, true foreigners who live
with us.
My mind is drawn to those we studied last year who lived on the outskirts of
the camp. They were weak, out of place, vulnerable, and likely oppressed.

We have a duty of right treatment to them, and we bear the consequences,
if we don’t live out that duty.)
XXXVI-XXXVII.Read Exodus 22:20 (or 22:21).Here are two more mitzvot
regarding treatment of the stranger: we’re to wrong them neither in
business (the generally accepted meaning of “not to oppress”)nor in
speech. Why are these additional provisions valuable or even necessary,
given the broader directionwe’ve just discussed, to love the stranger?
(These may actually be designed to get us to love by getting us to control
the evil inclination, the temptation to act on our bias and feelings in such a
way that causes distress to the stranger. We feel uncomfortable with the
other; we see him/her as less than ourselves. The first step in the slippery
slope that leads to ill will or worse is to cause distress and then oppress.
Could these have beenthe first steps the Egyptians took against us when
they began “to know not Joseph?”
Further, the stranger is particularly vulnerable and susceptible to
harassment, and has fewerresources and support. These mitzvot cause us
to be specificallysensitive to that weakness as we work to come to love.

We must act in good ways that God expects and invoke God’s kindness, in
order that others, here the strangers, can feel and come into the circle God
intends for all. This is clearly in tune with the prophetic vision of all coming
to the mountain.)
XXXVII-XL.Read Exodus 21:2: Leviticus 25:39,42, 43, 53; and
Deuteronomy24:17,18.
In our exploration of God’s expectations of us with respect to our duties to
others, we now move even further away from family, friends, neighbors,
and others whom we more naturally believe to be “co-equals.” Here we will
considerthe very difficult subject of servants and slaves.
In our day, we, of course, have abolished slavery. And I believe the very
mitzvot we’ll look at planted the seeds of slavery’s destruction in a time in
the world in which slavery was commonand quite accepted. We’llhave a
robust discussionof slavery in a bit.

But let’s first deal with a person who is not actually a slave, but rather an
indentured servant, who is generally paying off debts through service to
another. Even here, our customs are different than those of the ancients:
we don’t have bondmen exactly as they did. While we don’t generally make
people literally work for us directly until a debt is paid off,we do indirectly
do things of the sort. We oftenwill hold a personaccountable for working
and paying until a debtis paid off entirely.
Let’s look back at ancient customs and pay attention to how God’s word
drove people to make those customs more humane and ultimately to revise
and change them. Ethical advance oftencomes in small but hugely
important ways. This study allows us to see that up close!
A. Looking at the Exodus passage, and again putting aside your own 21st
century bias against a practice we no longer deploy, what is your first
impressionof this language?
(The impulse is toward the freedom of the servant. There is an outer limit
on the time of service. As we learned last year, if during the six years, the
Jubilee occurs, he’s freed. He can always pay the remaining part of the
debt and be instantly freed. And, generally, he’s freed if the personto
whom he is indebted dies.)

B. 1. Now let’s look at the three mitzvot in Leviticus. What’s their effect?
(One can’t treat such a personlike a slave, that is, in a degrading manner.
And one can’t impose harsh or unnecessary work on the person.)
2. What does this mean?
(Certain behaviors were not allowed, such as: inordinate subordination;
putting on or taking off shoes; washing feet;dressing and undressing; all
such activity that is incompatible with being a hired laborer; work that is not
really needed; and work that is unduly harsh and dispiriting. (In pondering
what the mitzvah means, we should think of the work to which we were
subjected in Egypt.) We must recall the wisdom that even this sort of
worker is more a brother than a slave to the master.)

C. What are the bases for these mitzvot?
(As we just discussed, we were bondmenin Egypt, and, in the tradition of
“love of neighbor,” we must not treat those who work for us in the way we
were treated. God shows us care and compassionand kindness; so should
we act toward others. There should never be that large a gap between
God’s people as to permit one to submit another to degrading work or
status. Paying off debt in such a way could happen to us or one in our
family, and we would not want to be treated in a degrading way.
In the long vision, we will all walk to the mountain together. We must live
today as if the other will be walking next to us on the path on that day. We
are all servants of God alone.)
D. What’s the ultimate end of the trajectory of the ethical arc here?

(It seems to move toward the idea, according to Chinuch, that we are to
provide for the servant on a par with how we would provide for our own. We
should provide amenities to the other as if the relationship were closerto I-
Thou, than I-it. While, for some,this may not entail “every delicacy” and
comfort,it does at least mean amenities of a standard sort, not inconsistent
with others in the house and clearly not inferior and no less than that of a
regular paid worker.
Some sages insist it does go to equality. “One who acquires a Hebrew
servant has effectivelyacquired a master for himself.” Tosafos.
In either case,we get so close to brotherhood, we either come to the end of
the practice of having servants or it’s a sort of work governed by “love of
neighbor” principles.)
XLI-XLII.Read Leviticus 25:42 and Exodus 21:8.

We won’t dwell on these two mitzvot, either generally or specifically with
respect to the complicated and somewhat confusing language of the
second one. I did want you to read them and ponderthem briefly, though.
In simple terms, they carry forward the ideas we just discussed. Essentially,
should there be a further need for the servant to work off the debt through a
transfer, say, to another master, there can in no way be any treatment of
him/her by anyone or in any processof transfer that is tantamount to the
treatment given a slave.
XLIII-XLIV.Read Deuteronomy 23:16-17 (This may be 15-16 in other
Bibles.)
A. Know that the traditional reading of these verses is that the bondman at
issue is one who has escapedfrom abroad and come into the Land.
Whether you choose to read it that narrowly or more broadly, what do you
make of these mitzvot, especiallythe first?
(They make a huge additional dent in the institution of servitude. In the
Hammurabi Code,which was advanced at the time, it was a capital crime
to abet the elopement of a bondman. The Mosaic code commands to the
contrary (though the bondman was deemedto owe the master whatever
was left of the indebtedness). Nothing approaches this in any other ancient
code.Though we take today’s abolition of slavery for granted, we should
have special regard for these first Divinely blessedstirrings of concernfor
the well-being and freedomof the bondman.)

B. Why do we have the second mitzvah?
(The second mitzvah goes the next step to guide the way we treat the
fugitive. We must not wrong him, or oppress him,or mistreat him. This is
seen principally as not wronging by speech. The basis of this prohibition is
similar to that involving the stranger. This personis weak and vulnerable.
We’re to curb any negative instinct we have toward such a personand
rather show mercy and kindness to one who is freebornand has sought our
help.)
XLV-XLVI.Read Exodus 21:8.
We won’t spend much time here. Obviously it is strange to us to read of
ancient customs regarding a father who was so destitute that he would
choose to “pay off” his debtthrough offering up the service of a minor child

to the debtholder. The sages held this practice in disparagement, though it
was fairly commonin the ancient world. The further point I would make is
that, once again, the mitzvot serves to limit the power of the debt holder
and to make him take responsibilityfor the well-being of the young woman.
Marrying her would serve to create security for her, as would seeing to her
protectionand redemption. God does not show a blind eye to her condition,
nor can the powerful male debt holder treat her as if He doesn’tsee.
XLVII-XLVIII.Read Deuteronomy15:13,14.
What do you make of these mitzvot? What meaning do they carry,
especiallyin light of all the mitzvot we’ve studied relating to bondmen?
(These complete a picture of God’s intention that this institution, to the
extent it survives, be limited and constrained and made humane. The
laborer has served dutifully for an extended period of time. Now he is about
to go out, typically without resources and on his own. These requirements
cause the master to show gratitude, care for the laborer’s welfare, and
provide a transition and bridge - a running start - to his new life. We’re all
dependent on God and God’s blessings; so should we bless,and in like
manner, those who have beendependent on us. These mitzvot call upon
the parties to bring about an end to the relationship in peace.

Further, they create a more equal plane of being for two people the ancient
world (and ours?) tend to want to place at opposite poles.They press the
powerful to be less the master and the weaker less the servant. They press
the master to put himself in the positionof the servant and act toward him
as he would want to be treated. All of this has the effectof extending the
principles of “love of neighbor” ever-outward.)
XLIX.Read Leviticus 25:44-46.
Let me set the stage for our discussionhere.
Slavery has beenpracticed throughout history. Even to the extent it’s been
reduced in our own time, aren’t there vestiges of it when we buy things
made of foreignlabor, indeed children’s labor, where workers are paid
pennies a day? Yet, it’s hard for us to read and make sense of these words
in our Bible, as perhaps sanctioned by God. Some who see these words on
the surface as unacceptable to our enlightened sentiment run away, saying
this is just one more example of harshness, injustice being touted or
justified, hypocritically, in a Book that’s supposed to be about love.

So, as people of faith, as loyal readers of, and believers in, the Bible, aware
of what we’ve studied togetherand what you’ve studied separately in the
past, how would you respond to such naysayers?
(A. Slavery was commonplacethroughout the ancient world among all
peoples. It would be totally unlikely for the people to whom God’s word was
revealed to be alone and exemptfrom such universal practice.
B. The constraints on the practice of slavery beginstraightaway in the
Torah, and the limits only grow over time in the prophetic and later sacred
writings, as well as in the commentaries. These include a variety of
requirements of acts of mercy and justice, including: feeding the slave first,
giving heed to the slave, and never striking, speaking violent words or
being arrogant to the slave. Slaves were to be treated with kindness and
compassionand would be freed if mistreated. (See Maimonides’ discussion
of these mitzvot in the Mishneh Torah.)
C. Even in the words we read, slavery is not assumed or required.
D. The rules for bondmen, recognizing that we were once slaves in Egypt,
have at their heart the power that will over time make all slavery untenable
to God and for us. The “love of neighbor” principles seem inexorably to be
moving to the goal of “equal in God’s eyes” for all God’s children. They
have beenspun out, are already at work in these ancient mitzvot, and are
so much a part of the Bible’s logic that they will one day make slavery
impermissible.

E. This becomesespeciallyso as the mission of being a holy nation
expands to bringing all the peoples togetherto the mountain, to God. At the
revelation, it may not have seemed possible that many Canaanites would in
time worship the One God.In that world, the logic of slavery may have
continued to seem possible.
Yet, even the most ancient commentators started at once in interpreting the
text toward a more eternal purpose. Though we won’t get into all the ways
they did so in our discussionhere, we know, as our faith matured and the
missionexpanded, the idea of enslaving people we hoped to bring together
one day in faith to God was no longer compatible with the dream.
Relationship with God is available to all who choose the path, which forever
changes our relationship with them, including those who have not yet made
the choice but whom we hope will.
F. There have been narrower readings of the following verses, but the
dream of them is clearly broad:
“I make this covenant, with its sanctions, not with you alone, but both with
those who are standing here with us this day before the Lord our God and
with those who are not with us here this day.” Deuteronomy29:13-14.
“But in the end of days it shall come to pass,
That the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established at the top of the
mountains,
And it shall be exalted above the hills;
And peoples shall flow unto it.
And many nations shall go and say:
‘Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord,

And He will teach us of His ways,
And we will walk in His paths.” Micah 4:1-2))
L. Read Deuteronomy20:19
A. There is so much here in this mitzvah it is hard to classifyit. It is surely
about doing harm to a tree, vegetation created by God to provide us
comfort and food.It is also obviously about avoiding offenseto God. But I
am choosing it to begin a discussionof the duties we bear our enemy.
Why?
(While we might, and indeed sometimes, must wage war, we still have
duties to, and are limited in how we treat, combatants and others on the
enemy side. We do not have the same feelings toward them that we do
those about whom we’ve spokenso far in this lesson, but the arc of God’s
interest in how we live with others extends even here.
Defeating the enemy is one thing. But depriving them of a prime source of
food and sustenance into the future is another. This causes pain above and
beyond what is absolutely required, and it does so into the future, beyond
the time of war.

Ramban sees this prohibited behavior as likely emanating from an attitude
that is so insanely destructive that it seems to say there is no tomorrow.
This mad impulse must be curbed.
Others take from this that we also must not burn clothes, break vessels,
harm women of child bearing age, or block the flow of streams and rivers.
Why do they make those extensions?
(The core meaning of the mitzvah is to limit the damage we do to an enemy
to winning the war. We are to avoid denying, and rather are required to
preserve,the essentials of life for the citizens who live in a city we are
besieging. If our civilians were in the same position as theirs, we would
want no less.God demands no less for all of us.))
B. Pull away from the surface of actual physical war and battle. What does
this teach us about people we find to be more common“enemies”in
everyday life?
(Perhaps we fight when we must, but desist from destroying what gives the
other life, from attacking without mercy or concernabout consequence,
from undue damage that prevents the other from returning to life after the
“battle.”)

LI.-LII. Read Deuteronomy21:10-14.There is a debate among the
commentators about what this mitzvah requires. Some believe it’s
unnatural to try to abate the passions of the soldier in war when he
immediately encounters a beautiful woman in the heat of action. While he
may exercise that passionon first encounter, they say, he is strictly bound
to limits thereafter, limits that allow her to grieve, make decisions about her
faith and future, and even leave without burden. Others argue he is
constrained by these strong limits from the outset. Our sentiments most
certainly side with the latter view. But, how would you justify either, and
how does each inform us?
(The importance of both is that they limit the powerful party in powerful
ways. Not only do we have here a case of a stronger man with a weaker
woman - typically; we have one of “us” on the one hand and a
representative of the defeated enemy on the other. God says we must
respect and honor the enemy as the enemy should honor and respect us. If
we were the captive woman or her father, husband, brother, or son, we
would deeplyhope for and pray for such mercy, compassion, and care for
her.
Also, the delay of passion forces the soldierto see the woman not as an
object of physical gratification, specificallyone to be used in the raw
emotion of a war and conquest setting. Rather, with the imposed delay, he

is to see her, make decisions about her, and act based on who she really is
- needs, views, and all such unique and personal features.
Note the continuing theme here - one that we saw in the case of the slave -
of an inherent hope that the other, without being forced,will choose to
follow the path of God. This not only informs our treatment of the other, but
it also reflects on why we must show care and compassion. We all are
potentially followers of the same God. Thus, even to the enemy, we must
act in a manner pleasing to God and have and show kindness to them.)
LIII-LV.The exploration in Torah of our duties to others extends all the way
out to animals. Before we study any of the relevant mitzvot, let me ask you:
why?
(Animals are God’s creatures, too, so we must care about and for them.
Animals have feelings, which should give rise to our compassion. Finally,
we show our true values in how we approach and deal with all living
beings, including human beings, by how we treat and act toward animals.)
Read Leviticus 22:28;Deuteronomy22:6,7.What do these mitzvot teach
us?

(The Torah accepts that we are by nature prone to wanting to, and perhaps
needing to, be meat eaters. But it appears in many place to expectus to
show a sensitivity to the feelings of animals and to reduce the pain our
needs might cause them. Just as God shows us mercy, we should show
mercy to God’s creatures. Living true to these mitzvot causes us to limit our
urges, be respectful of God’s creatures, be mindful of animals’ feelings, and
show a regard for family (that of the animals and, by extension, ours and
others.
Note the way the last two mitzvot work. We release the mother, probably
the most desirable source of food in the nest, in orderto prevent pain for
her. The young are less desirable, thus perhaps leading us to leave the
nest undisturbed altogether. Further, if we feel this sort of compassionand
show this kind of mercy to animals, doesn’tthat conditionus to treat fellow
human beings in such circumstances with greater mercy as well?)
LVI-LVII.Read Deuteronomy12:21 and Leviticus 17:13.
The first mitzvah has been understood in a far broader way than it appears
on the surface because of meaning accorded to the words in God’s
command. It is read to impose requirements on the killing of animals for
food,requirements that are designed to cause the animal the least pain
possible. Knowing that, explain the purpose of these mitzvot.

(They acknowledge that human beings can and will eat animals for food,
but they require that compassionbe shown the animals and that the killing
be done humanely. They probably go further to show a preferenceforthe
vegetarian path in that they and the kosher rules that we will discuss in a
future sessioncreate obstacles to the killing of animals and the eating of
meat. As with the hunter approaching the bird nest, faced with all the
limiting rules and required respect, we will either show great care in the
eating of meat or forbear altogether.
Note in the second mitzvah the regard one must pay to the blood of the
killed animal. It’s as if it must be buried as a body would be.)
LVIII.Read Deuteronomy25:4.
What does this teach us?

(It continues to teach of the merit of showing compassionto animals, as we
should to each other. Here the animal is actually helping us increase our
productionand is hungry. When we see that and act with kindness and
respect forits work, position, and contribution, we exhibit a virtue that ought
to characterize our approach to all in such circumstances.)
LIX.Read Exodus 23:5.
We saw and discussedthe mitzvot regarding a person who is trapped with
a burden and his/her animal. Now we come to the requirement specifically
and separately to help the trapped animal, perhaps that is alone or perhaps
that is the animal of someone we don’t like. What’s added here?
(The compassionand assistance that are due the animal are irrespective of
the owner or the problems of the owner, though helping the animal may
indeed help the owner. And that help to the owner is due irrespective of our
feelings for that person. It is important to note that the sages make clear
that helping another human being comes before helping an animal.)

Conclusion. This is a wonderful place to close out our discussionof this
segment relating to relationship with others. For all living creatures - from
ourselves to those closest to us, from citizens of our community to
strangers in our midst, from us to the servant and slave or even the enemy,
and from human being to animal - God expects a duty of us to show mercy
and compassion. While the arc of love of neighbor may not fully cover all
such relationships, its principles are to be extended as broadly as possible
and are intended to guide us in the way we live with all of God’s creatures,
the living beings with whom we share this earth.

Relationship with others, part 3

More Related Content

Viewers also liked (17)

Similar to Relationship with others, part 3 (20)

More from Sandy Kress (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Relationship with others, part 3