home Cosmetics BBC Russian Service - Information services. Crime and Punishment

BBC Russian Service - Information services. Crime and Punishment

Is slavery a relic of the past or a current problem? December 2 is celebrated annually as the International Day for the Abolition of Slavery. On this day in 1949, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention for the Suppression of Trafficking in Persons and the Exploitation of Others. And yet slavery remains one of the global problems of our time.

Slaves also worked in the city's craft workshops. Usually here too they were entrusted with the hardest and dirtiest work. In pottery workshops they carried and kneaded clay, and free artisans did the modeling and painting of vessels. On the estates of slave owners, slaves crushed grapes and squeezed oil from olives. IN agriculture there were fewer slaves than in the crafts.

Athens and other Greek states had many domestic slaves. They were cooks, grooms, teachers. They clothed and fed slave owners and taught their children. A slave was not considered a human being. They gave him a nickname like an animal. The owner could always beat the slave for some guilt or simply out of whim, taking out his bad mood on him.

Cruel treatment and overwork pushed slaves to fight their masters. Sometimes, unable to bear the bondage, the slave tried to escape in fear of punishment. Slaves fled either alone or in groups of several dozen or even hundreds of people.

Whether or not a person is a slave is determined on the basis of three main criteria: 1. the person's activities are controlled through violence or the threat of violence; 2. a person is in this place and is engaged in this type of activity against his will and cannot change the situation according to at will; 3. for the work he receives insignificant payment or does not receive it at all.

Introduction

Slavery is historically a system of society where a person (slave) is the property of another person (master, slave owner, master). First, captives, criminals and debtors were taken as slaves, and later civilians who were forced to work for their master. Slavery in this form was widespread until the 19th century. During World War II, slave labor was widely used in Nazi Germany, but there was no official international concept slavery did not have. After the war, the United Nations defined a slave: any person who is not allowed to leave his job voluntarily. Slavery was condemned by the League of Nations treaty of 1926 and the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, as well as all other major documents relating to human rights. In Europe, for example, slavery is prohibited by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

For the past 5,000 years, slavery has existed almost everywhere. Among the most famous slave states are Ancient Greece and Rome; in Ancient China, the concept of xi, equivalent to slavery, has been known since the middle of the 2nd millennium BC. e. In more recent times, slavery existed in the United States and Brazil. Slavery in the Ancient East had many distinctive features.

1. The essence of slavery and the position of the slave

1.1. The emergence of slavery

To achieve production efficiency, division of labor is vital. When organizing such a division, hard (primarily physical) labor is the least attractive. At a certain stage in the development of society, prisoners of war, who had previously been killed, began to be deprived of their freedom and forced to do hard work for their master. People deprived of freedom and turned into the property of the master became slaves.

1.2. Slave position

According to Varro, a slave is only a “talking instrument”, animate property, beast of burden (in the language of Roman law - res, that is thing). Slaves are usually used as labor in agricultural and other production, as servants, or to satisfy other needs of the owner. The property character of a slave is, first of all, expressed in the fact that all products of slave labor become the property of the owner; on the other hand, the care of the food and other needs of the slaves lies with the owner. A slave does not have his own property; he can only dispose of what the master wishes to give him. A slave cannot enter into a legal marriage without the permission of the master; the duration of the marriage relationship - if it is permitted - depends on the arbitrariness of the slave owner, who also owns the slave's children. Like any component of property, a slave can become the subject of all kinds of trade transactions.

The living conditions of a slave are determined only by humanity or the benefit of the slave owner. The first was and remains rare; the second forces them to act differently depending on how difficult it is to get new slaves. The process of raising slaves from childhood is slow, expensive, requiring a fairly large contingent of slaves-“producers”, so even an absolutely inhumane slave owner is forced to provide slaves with a standard of living sufficient to maintain working capacity and general health; but in places where it is easy to obtain adult and healthy slaves, their lives are not valued and they are exhausted by work.

A slave is not a subject of law as an individual, as a person. Neither in relation to his master, nor in relation to third parties, a slave enjoys any legal protection as an independent person. The master can treat the slaves as he pleases. The killing of a slave by a master is the latter's legal right, but by someone else - it is considered an attack on the master's property, and not as a crime against the person. In many cases, the slave's owner is also liable for damage caused by the slave to the interests of third parties. Only in the later stages of the existence of slave society did slaves receive some rights, but very minor ones.

1.3. Sources of slaves

In the first stages of development, the only, and later a very significant source of slaves for all nations was war, accompanied by the capture of enemy soldiers and the kidnapping of people living on its territory. When the institution of slavery strengthened and became the basis of the economic system, others were added to this source, primarily

Natural increase in the slave population. In addition, laws appeared according to which a debtor who was unable to pay his debt became a slave of the creditor, some crimes were punishable by slavery, and finally, broad paternal power made it possible to sell his children and wife into slavery. One of the ways to turn into a slave in Rus' was the opportunity to sell oneself in the presence of witnesses. There was (and continues to exist) the practice of enslaving free people through direct, groundless coercion. Whatever the source of slavery, however, the basic idea that a slave is a captive has always and everywhere been preserved - and this view was reflected not only in the fate of individual slaves, but also in the entire history of the development of slavery.

2. The relationship between the position of slave, prisoner of war and prisoner

Sometimes in history slaves were prisoners who became them either as prisoners of war, or as debtors, or for crimes committed, or for other reasons.

According to some modern authors whom?, in some states a situation is deliberately created where the number of prisoners increases and these prisoners are used as cheap labor, that is, they actually find themselves in the position of slaves.

However, this analogy is incorrect, since there is a fundamental difference here: a prisoner or prisoner of war remains a member of society, a citizen, his freedom is only limited to one degree or another while serving his sentence, which, however, does not exclude the possibility of using his labor forcibly, in which , indeed, one can see a certain external similarities with slavery; a slave is an instrument of production, on a par with livestock and tools, and in principle does not have freedom as such and cannot have it by definition, as a thing, and his freedom is not limited for a time, but is completely and irrevocably destroyed even if at one time existed, and such a position was legitimized, enshrined in law or a custom replacing it.

That is, what a prisoner used in forced labor and a slave have in common is only forced labor, and their statuses should not be confused with forms of non-economic forced labor and forced labor at all with real slavery and slave ownership, which are characterized primarily not by the very use of forced labor of a slave (which, generally speaking, is not necessary), but precisely by his slave status, with all the ensuing consequences, mainly by the presence of his owner and his (owner ) the full right to dispose of a slave as property, a thing - both to force him to work and to use him for any other purposes.

Prisoners of war at all times were often forced to work without any trial, but by analogy with prisoners they also cannot be called slaves.

In recent history, the Geneva Convention has appeared, which, although not recognized by all states, still gives certain rights to prisoners of war. According to it, prisoners must be kept in conditions no worse than the military personnel of the side that captured them, and enjoy a number of rights: personal integrity, the right to medical care, to protect their rights and appeal against the actions of representatives of the side that captured them. The use of prisoners at work is limited by a number of conditions.

These norms, however, were very often violated in the past and are still being violated.

3. History of slavery

3.1. Primitive society

According to modern ideas, in the era of primitive society, slavery was at first completely absent, then it appeared, but did not have a mass character. The reason for this was the low level of organization of production, and initially - the production of food and items necessary for life, in which a person could not produce more than was necessary to maintain his life. In such conditions, turning anyone into slavery was pointless, since the slave did not bring any benefit to the owner. During this period, in fact, there were no slaves as such, but only prisoners taken in war. Since ancient times, a captive was considered the property of the one who captured him. This practice, which developed in primitive society, was the foundation for the emergence of slavery, since it consolidated the idea of the possibility of owning another person.

In intertribal wars, male prisoners, as a rule, were either not taken at all, or killed (in places where cannibalism was common, they were eaten), or accepted into the victorious tribe. Of course, there were exceptions when captured men were left alive and forced to work, or used as barter, but this was not the general practice. A few exceptions were male slaves, who were especially valuable because of some of their personal qualities, abilities, and skills. Among the masses, captured women were of greater interest, both for the birth of children and sexual exploitation, and for household work; Moreover, it was much easier to guarantee the subordination of women as physically weaker.

3.2. The Rise of Slavery

Slavery emerged and spread in societies that transitioned to agricultural production. On the one hand, this production, especially with primitive technology, requires very significant labor costs, on the other hand, a worker can produce significantly more than is necessary to maintain his life. The use of slave labor became economically justified and, naturally, became widespread. Then the slave system arose, which lasted for many centuries - at least from ancient times until the 18th century, and in some places longer.

In this system, slaves constituted a special class, from which the category of personal or household slaves was usually distinguished. Household slaves were always at home, while others worked outside of it: in the field, on construction, tending livestock, and so on. The position of house slaves was noticeably better: they were personally known to the master, lived a more or less common life with him, and to a certain extent were part of his family. The position of other slaves, personally little known to the master, was often almost no different from the position of domestic animals, and sometimes it was even worse. The need to keep large numbers of slaves in subjection led to the emergence of appropriate legal support for the right to own slaves. In addition to the fact that the owner himself usually had workers whose task was to supervise the slaves, the laws severely prosecuted slaves who tried to escape from the owner or rebel. To pacify such slaves, the most brutal measures were widely used. Despite this, escapes and slave uprisings were not uncommon.

As culture and education of society grew, another privileged class emerged among domestic slaves - slaves, whose value was determined by their knowledge and abilities in the sciences and arts. There were slave actors, slave teachers and educators, translators, and scribes. The level of education and abilities of such slaves often significantly exceeded the level of their owners, which, however, did not always make their life easier.

The position of slaves gradually, through a very long evolution, changed for the better. A reasonable view of their own economic benefit forced the masters to take a thrifty attitude towards slaves and mitigate their fate; this was also caused by security considerations, especially when slaves outnumbered the free classes of the population. The change in attitude towards slaves was first reflected in religious precepts and customs, and then in written laws (although it can be noted that the law first took domestic animals under protection, and only then slaves). Of course, there was no talk of any equalization of rights between slaves and free people: for the same offense, a slave was punished incomparably more severely than a free person; he could not complain to the court about the offender, could not own property, or marry; As before, the master could sell him, give him away, tyrannize him, etc. However, it was no longer possible to kill or mutilate a slave with impunity. Rules appeared regulating the emancipation of a slave, the position of a slave who became pregnant by her master, and the position of her child; in some cases, custom or law gave the slave the right to change his master. Nevertheless, the slave still remained a thing; the measures that were taken to protect the slave from the arbitrariness of the master were purely police in nature and stemmed from considerations that had nothing to do with the recognition of the slave’s personal rights.

Slavery in Media and Persia The right of the master over...

Slavery in India

Abstract >> History

Slavery in India Undoubtedly, among the Aryans, like everyone else...

Slavery in Ancient Rome

Abstract >> History

2. Transformation slavery in history Ancient Rome 2.1. "Patriarchal slavery" early republic... 3. "Flourishing" slavery Real "heyday" slavery occurred during the period... by serfs. The ultimate story slavery in antiquity ended with...

Commentary on the Torah

Book of Shemot

Weekly section of Mishpatim

Chapters 21:1-24:18

“And here are the laws...”

In Hebrew, laws are mishpatim.

Commentary on the Torah

Book of Shemot

Weekly section of Mishpatim

Chapters 21:1-24:18

“And here are the laws...”

In Hebrew, laws are mishpatim.

Rabbi Shimshon Refael Hirsch

Selected comments on the weekly parsha Mishpatim

The terms “slave” and “slaveholding” are associated among readers with plantations, the burning sun and beatings. Jewish slavery differs radically from this ugly picture.

Chapter 21

2.IF YOU BUY A JEWISH SLAVE. To the unprejudiced mind, nothing can prove so indisputably the authenticity of the Oral Law as these first two sections (vv. 2-6 and 7-11), with which the “legislation of Moshe” begins. This is the civil and criminal code of the nation; he puts forward the principles and provisions of law and humanity that regulate human relations within the state. As you might expect, the first paragraph deals with personal rights. But where does it start? From the laws that apply when a person sells another person or his own daughter into slavery! How unimaginably monstrous all this would be if this “document” turned out to be the only “book of the law” of the Jewish people; if only he and he alone were the main source of “Jewish social law”! These are, indeed, extraordinary situations, and it would be natural to expect that, before considering them, the Law would have turned to less strange cases, discussing them, explaining them, and laying down legal principles for their solution. And yet, it is with these phrases, which seem to cross out the concept of personal freedom, affirming the limitation of this most sacred human right, that the presentation of the Law begins!

However, all this will appear to us in a completely different light if we understand that this “book” is not the primary source of Jewish law, if we realize that such is the legal tradition that was preserved by the living word, and the “book” served only as an aid to memory and a source for resolving doubtful situations.

Consider that, as the text itself confirms, by the time Moses delivered this book to the people shortly before his death, the Law had already been known to the Jewish people and influencing Jewish life for over forty years.

These facts help us to understand why such exceptional legal cases are presented at the very beginning: this is done in order to urgently remind us of the ordinary principles of social justice.

We will then understand that the “book” does not register legal principles in general, but primarily individual, specific cases. And this is done in such an instructive manner that from the consideration of these cases we can easily extract the principles that were entrusted to the living soul of the people. In general, the language used in this “book” was so masterfully chosen that in many examples one unusual term, one modified construction, even the position of one word or a single letter can imply a whole chain of legal concepts. This book was not intended to be the primary source of the Fa. It was full of meaning for those who were already versed in the Fa to use it to preserve and renew what was stored in memory. She was supposed to be teaching aid for teachers of the Law, a reference book for confirming the Oral Law, so that an attentive student, having a written text in front of him, could easily restore in his mind the knowledge received orally.

The connection between the Written Teaching and the Oral Law is the same as between the notes taken during a scientific lecture and the lecture itself. Students studying the subject after the lecture only need short notes to recall the lecture at any time. They often find that all it takes is an underlined word, a question or exclamation mark, or even just a period. But for those who did not attend the lectures, these notes will be completely useless; trying to reconstruct the lecture on their basis, they will inevitably make mistakes. Words, signs, etc., which are extremely useful for the student listening to the lecture guiding stars to preserve the truths revealed by the lecturer seem completely meaningless to the careless student. The careless person who tries to use the same signs to create (as opposed to "recreate") for himself a lecture that he did not attend and could not understand will brand the most beautiful provisions of the Law as "groundless gymnastics of the mind and fruitless idle reflections."

IF YOU BUY A JEWISH SLAVE. The Oral Law teaches us that the problem discussed here is the case described in Shemot 22:2, which tells us that a thief who did not have the means to compensate the loss of the one he robbed had to be sold in order to compensate the victim for what was lost. (“If he has nothing, he must be sold for his theft.”) Such a sale could only take place to compensate for the loss of the actual theft, and not to receive the double compensation stipulated in 22:3 as a punishment . In addition, this method of compensation is applicable only if the thief is a man and not a woman. The written text does not simply say “if he has nothing, then he must be sold,” but adds the qualification “for this theft of his,” [to show that the thief could only be sold to repay the property he stole]. And the fact that the text says not just “for theft,” but “for his theft,” indicates that women found guilty of theft do not fall under this article of the law. The situation in which someone voluntarily sells himself into slavery due to dire need is addressed in Vayikra 25:39ff (“If your brother becomes poor and sells himself to you”). For this reason we are only told here where we're talking about about theft: “If you buy a Jewish slave.” The law had already declared him a slave before you bought him; you can only buy him from the courtroom, But at the same time, as Mekhilta notes: he must remain in your eyes, a fellow citizen; The law calls him a slave only because it has no choice but to describe the man in those terms.

6....If we consider this law, which the Word of G-d places at the beginning of public legislation (in the previous verses), we will see that there is hardly any other law as suitable for enabling us to penetrate into the purpose of G-d institutions of social justice and show us how fundamentally Jewish law differs from all other legal systems. Here (in the case of the thief) we have one single example where the Divine Law, as a punishment (although we will see that this cannot actually be considered as a punishment), deprives a person of freedom. How is this punishment carried out? The law specifies that the offender must be placed in a family environment, just as today we can place a juvenile offender in a family environment. Note also the precautions enumerated by the Law, which are designed not to trample upon the self-respect of the offender, so that, notwithstanding the disgrace he has brought upon himself, he may feel treated as a brother and respected as a member. a family capable of earning and giving love! Notice how the Law ensures that he maintains contact with his own family and how he ensures that his family does not suffer as a result of his crime!

Although the Law deprives the criminal of his freedom, and therefore the opportunity to provide for his loved ones, it obliges those who benefit from the labor of the guilty person to take care of them during the entire period of his sentence.

The punishment of imprisonment, with all the despair and moral humiliation that accompanies it, with all the grief and sorrow that imprisonment brings to the wife and children of the criminal, is unknown to the Divine Law. Where Divine Law reigns, there are no prisons to punish criminals. Jewish law provides only for custody pending a court decision, and even this detention can only occur in accordance with a precisely established legal procedure. Such detention must be short-lived and circumstantial evidence is not a basis for it.

But even this single case, when the Law provides for imprisonment as a result of a crime, cannot be considered as “punishment”. Punishment cannot be the purpose of this Law because it sentences the thief to work for six years only to recover the actual value of the stolen goods, and not to collect a fine (double indemnity) as punishment for the crime. Hence, the loss of freedom is only a consequence of the criminal’s obligation before the Law to compensate for what was stolen. Compensation for damages should not become a punishment for the offender; This is just a way to eliminate the consequences of a crime. It lasts until the illegal or criminal damage caused to the victim’s property is restored. Even if the thief has not been convicted by a court, anyone who steals someone else's property automatically becomes obliged to pay for it on their own, through the application of their labor. Therefore, we only have one question left to answer: why does the court assess damages in terms of the criminal’s ability to work only in the case of unconditionally proven theft, but not in any other case when a person is obliged to pay compensation for the damage caused to him, but does not have the means to pay such compensation? This limitation seems to be determined by the consideration that theft is the most obvious manifestation of disrespect for the sanctity of personal property, especially if the owner believes that his property is safe, because he trustingly believes that all people respect the rights of others to property ... A person's awareness of his place in the world begins with the concept of the right to own property, and it is respect for the property of other people that makes a person truly human. Based on this, it is easy to understand why it is only in the case of theft that every aspect of the offender's personality is subject to an obligation to compensate.

However, a sentence involving forced labor is so closely connected with the criminal's obligation to pay reparations, and nothing more, and the Law is so far from making slavery a punishment, and has such respect for the sanctity of personal freedom, that the court can sell a thief only in in the event that the value of the stolen property is equal to or greater than the value of its functionality. For only in this case does the criminal automatically become obliged to pay for the consequences of his crime with every aspect of his personality. If his ability to work exceeds the value of the stolen goods, the court (may allow the use of his labor to compensate for the damage, but) does not have the right to sell it, because then the court would be guilty of encroaching on that part of the criminal’s personality that does not fall under such a sentence (Kidushin 18a). By the way, according to the Mekhilta, the victim of a robbery has the right to refuse compensation through the sale of the thief and be satisfied with the promise signed by the robber that he will compensate for the damage as soon as his financial situation improves.

7. ...Everything that we have learned from our national literature about the respect with which Judaism enjoins that women be treated, about the attitude of parents towards children, and about the considerations that should guide parents in choosing suitable spouses for their offspring - all this allows we can conclude without hesitation: if a Jew sells his young daughter as a servant, so that in the future she will become the wife of her master, then only the most bitter, terrible necessity could force him to do this. He had to sell his house and everything in the house, even his last shirt, before he was allowed to take such a step (Kiddushin 20a; Rambam, Laws on Slaves 4:2).

10. This is the only passage in which the Written Law discusses the duties of a husband towards his wife. To outline the “fundamental conjugal rights of the daughters of his people,” he chooses as an example a woman from the lowest rung of the social ladder, the daughter of a beggar who had already sold his last shirt and, in order to save himself and his child from starvation, sold her to become a servant. Then the girl, rejected by her master and probably abused, becomes the wife of the master's son. If this happens, the Law makes her equal to a woman who marries, being free and rich, and proclaims the greatest principle: the treatment of one should not differ one iota from the treatment of another!

11....Crime and poverty are two factors that in ordinary social life, as a rule, nullify respect for a person’s personal dignity. But the Law chose the criminal and the children of abject poverty and placed them at the very beginning of social legislation. In this way we learn how much the Law respects human dignity and how it strives to protect this right, even if the person is at the lowest level of society.

Verses 12-32 contain laws relating to personal rights: Art. 12-17 talk about crimes against human life and crimes equivalent to them. Verses 18-26 deal with crimes injurious to health. Verses 27-32 talk about injury and death caused by animals.

15. In order to indicate a fatal blow, after the participle “who struck” one should write “and he will die.” By itself, the participle “struck” does not indicate that the victim died as a result of the attack. Halakha teaches that even if the victim is killed, the offender can only be punished if his actions caused visible harm. (Hence, when this verse is taken in conjunction with v. 12, the law is as follows: He who strikes another so severely that the victim dies shall be subject to the death penalty. But he who strikes his own father or mother shall be subject to the death penalty, even if the (apparent) injury caused to the parent was not fatal in itself.

16. As in the previous verse, where “partial murder”, i.e. Injuring one's father or mother is declared to amount to actual murder and is therefore classified as a criminal offense, so here the Law teaches us that personal liberty is property, the theft of which amounts to "social murder" and is therefore punishable by death. However, the child abductor is subject to the death penalty only if the victim is found in the abductor's possession and, as Devarim 24:7 adds, "he took advantage of his services and sold him"; in other words, if he treated him as a thing, an “object”...

17.The abduction of a child is the actual destruction of the personal dignity of the victim. But in relation to one’s own father or mother, even a curse, a purely verbal wish for their death, is a criminal offense punishable by death. This law does not lose force even if the parent thus cursed is no longer alive.

18. (quarrel, swearing) primarily means a verbal dispute, in contrast to that used in Art. 22 (if people fight...), which implies physical combat.

...Therefore, in this verse we are told (if people quarrel), and, for emphasis, the letter nun is added at the end of the word to emphasize that the quarrel was only verbal. The two parties did not intend to cause physical harm to each other; the blow could have been struck under the influence of strong emotions. But this in no way reduces the need for the criminal to pay compensation to the victim, because the purpose of compensation is not to punish the criminal, but to compensate, as far as possible, for the damage caused. And since monetary compensation is not a punishment for the wrong done, compensation for damages can never be complete in cases where the victim has suffered bodily injury; in particular, it cannot compensate for pain. Therefore, the criminal remains guilty in the eyes of G-d even after he has paid full monetary compensation, and only receiving forgiveness from the victim will atone for his guilt.

19. in this context probably cannot mean "staff" or "crutch". If the victim was previously able to move independently, but now has become limping as a result of the injury, then compensation for loss of time and medical expenses can in no way be considered adequate compensation for damages. And it cannot be interpreted as a “staff” or “crutch”, which is necessary for the injured person during his recovery, for while the effects of the injury remain, the Law cannot state that “he who struck him will be released.” means the support that the victim was accustomed to before the injury. Therefore, this presupposes his complete healing, i.e. achieving the ability to move in the same way as before the injury.

AND ENSURE HIS HEALING. The insistent statement, reinforced by the repetition of the verb form, refutes the misconception that going to the doctor demonstrates a lack of faith in G-d. Compare: “From this it follows that doctors have been given the sanction by G‑d to heal” (Bava Kama 85a). The law without reservation accepts the condition that the victim will receive medical assistance. Indeed, as noted by Tosafot (ibid.), the Law insists that the patient consult a doctor not only in case of bodily injury, but also in case of other illnesses.

23.YOU MUST GIVE YOUR LIFE FOR A LIFE. Only in the case of murder - in the sense that special person, who is the object of compensation, was killed - the sentence must be carried out on the physical person of the offender. But even in this case, as we have already noted, the expression "you must give" makes it clear that the punishment is in fact understood as a form of compensation for loss, but instead of the physical person of the victim who would have a primary right of action for this compensation, the claim is made by a " ideal person" of Law, justice and human dignity, whose demands must be satisfied...

24 and 25. (literally “an eye for an eye”, etc.). Treatise Bava Kama (83b) notes that from a moral point of view it is absurd to understand this law literally, i.e. “he who deprives another of an eye must himself be deprived of an eye, etc.” What if, for example, a one-eyed person deprives the eye of someone who had two healthy eyes, and as a result of the punishment he loses his only eye and then dies? In this case, his punishment would not have been fair, since he would have lost his life for a crime that resulted in his victim losing only one of the paired organs (while the other organs remained intact). Moreover, ... the provisions put forward in Art. 18 and 19 above, according to which victims of injuries requiring bed rest and medical attention should receive compensation for forced time off work and medical costs, exclude the interpretation (literal) “an eye for an eye”, etc., “a wound for wound”, etc. as ius talionis, since if the same injury were inflicted on the criminal, the latter would also require bed rest and medical attention. From these objective conclusions alone it should be clear that the halachic explanation of monetary compensation as the only means of compensation provided by the Law for such cases is the only possible explanation consistent with the spirit of Scripture. Moreover, a detailed study of the word (“for”, i.e. “instead”), on which this entire construction actually rests, will reveal that such an explanation is also the most faithful to the letter of the text.

In the vast majority of instances where the word appears in Scripture, it denotes compensation rather than punishment, so (lit. "an eye for an eye"), etc. simply means that the offender must "replace" the eye or any other organ that he has damaged, i.e. pay compensation to your victim. But depriving a criminal of an eye will in no way restore the eye he took from the victim. Because no person can literally restore someone else's eye, this law can only mean that the culprit must provide full monetary compensation for the lost eye.

Rav Lev Katzin

Why did you help this brute?

One day, when Rabbi Yisroel Salanter (1810-1883) was traveling on a train from Kaunas to Vilnius, a young man sat next to him. “Why did you open the window, I’m freezing from the cold!” - he suddenly shouted. “I did not open the window,” Rabbi Yisroel replied, but he got up and closed it anyway. The young man continued to be rude until the train stopped in Vilnius, where a crowd of Jews stood on the platform to greet the great Rabbi Yisroel Salanter.

The next morning, the young man found Rabbi Yisroel and asked for his forgiveness, explaining his behavior by saying that he was nervous on the way to Vilnius, where he hoped to take the exam to become a shochet (kosher meat cutter). Rabbi Yisroel forgave him and asked him to let him know how he would pass the exam. A few days later the young man returned and said that he had failed the exam and now did not know how to find a job and provide for his family. Then Rabbi Yisroel hired him a teacher who prepared him for the exam and then helped him find a job.

Why did you help this brute? - the students asked Rabbi Yisroel. “Isn’t it enough that you forgave him for his insults?”

I told him that I had forgiven him, but I still had an unpleasant feeling of resentment in my heart. Therefore, I took the advice of the Torah - to help someone towards whom you feel hostility, hatred or anger.

...The head of the Torah ve-Da'at yeshiva in Brooklyn, Rav Avraham Pam, told this story while explaining to his students the weekly chapter "Mishpatim", which is devoted to the laws governing relationships between people. The fact is that Rav Yisroel Salanter dedicated his life to spreading the ethical teaching of mussar, and it is symbolic that his yortzeit - day of remembrance - is celebrated at the same time...

Where does the Torah say to do something? good to man, towards whom we feel hostility?

In Parshat Mishpatim there are two commandments: one is to help load, and the second is to unload another person’s donkey. However, what should you do first if there are two donkeys in front of a person, and one needs to be loaded and the other unloaded? We must first unload the donkey so that the animal does not suffer under the load, say the sages of the Talmud.

But what if your friend's donkey is under a load and needs to be unloaded, and at the same time your enemy needs help loading his donkey? Which commandment should you fulfill first? We must first help our enemy! - states the Talmud (Baba Metzia, 32). Helping the enemy is more important than preventing the suffering of an animal, because it helps a person overcome the bad principle in himself - overcome hatred of another Jew.

“But if hatred is prohibited, then why does a person consider the owner of a donkey his enemy and hate him? - the sages ask (Psakhim, 113) and answer: “He has a good reason for hatred: he saw him commit some kind of crime.”

“But if this hatred of the sinner is allowed, then why should it be overcome?” - ask commentators of the Talmud (Tosafot, 12th century). “As in water face (is reflected) to face, so is the heart of man to man,” Tosafot quotes the words of the wise King Solomon (Proverbs 27:19). If a person hates a sinner, then the sinner will also hate this person, which will cause additional hatred in him, which is not allowed by the Torah and can be a catalyst for a chain reaction of increasing conflict. Therefore, the Torah instructs a person to do a good deed for his enemy and thus overcome feelings of hatred towards him.

Parents tend to love their children more than their parents' children. This is despite the fact that the children received care from their parents for many years. Moreover, the more effort parents invest in children (for example, in sick ones), the more more love they feel.

“If you are offended by your wife, you should not wait for her to apologize to you,” Rav Pam advised his students. “Do something good for her, buy her a gift, and it will help not only her, but also you, to overcome unpleasant feelings.”

Rav Zeev Meshkov

Slavery past and present

“If you buy a Jewish slave, let him serve for six years, and on the seventh year let him be set free without ransom...” (Shemot 21:1,2).

The Torah did not abolish slavery, but introduced laws that eliminated it de facto. She forbade the children of Israel from buying and selling their brothers. A Jew could fall into slavery only by a court decision and only for stealing, using stolen property and failing to return its value to the owner. A Jewish slave was forbidden to be beaten or insulted, his family was to be taken care of, and he was to be freed after six years, given a gift that would help him settle down in later life. A slave from another nation had to undergo circumcision, and he had the obligation not to violate the prohibitions of the Torah and to participate in the Passover meal. He could neither be killed nor maimed, and once released, he became a full member of society. Economically, slave labor under such laws became unprofitable. And in Israel, neither in the era of the conquest of the land, nor in the era of judges, nor in the era of kings, there was a slave system. All buildings, much more impressive than the pyramids, were created by free people. This happened both in the time of Shlomo and in the time of King Herod. The scale of this economic miracle can only be appreciated if we imagine a modern developed state that does without oil and petroleum products.

Phenomenon of the distant past

Slavery as a phenomenon is a thing of the past. The laws of countries have become more humane, and in schools children are taught respect for every person. And although society did not become ideal, it rose to a different level of development compared to the ancient world. And this happened thanks to the influence of the Torah, which changed the consciousness of the peoples (but not one of them has yet expressed gratitude to the Jewish people for the invaluable help provided to humanity in rising to a new stage of development).

Let’s imagine that the Western world would not adopt the values of the Torah, but would take the principles of Greek civilization as a basis. Aristotle called the slave an animate tool, and the tool an inanimate slave. And humanity is very lucky that his “Ethics” did not become a canon for the whole world, like his ideas about the universe, which captured the minds of people.

Behind the attitude towards a slave lies an even more serious problem: the attitude towards human life at all. We must not forget that not only in Sparta, but also in Athens, children were killed if they came to the conclusion that the child was not healthy enough to be useful to society. And if the sons of Israel had not stood up in the fight against Hellenism, defending the principles of the Torah at the cost of their lives, then there would not have been modern society, which declares equality, respect for people and the duty to take care of the preservation of every life.

Rest only in our dreams…

The struggle for enduring values is not over. It will continue until the world comes to its correction. In the meantime, it only seems that the principle “man is created in the Image and Likeness” does not raise any objections from anyone. And evidence of this is the popularity and strength that Islam has gained in the modern world.

Ramban also said that, unlike Christians, one should not engage in polemics with Muslims. He noted that Christians recognize the truth of the Torah, but Muslims do not. (This does not mean that Christians realized that everything good they had came directly from the Torah, fell in love with the Jews, and became our best friends.)

Islam claims that the Jews deliberately distorted the text of the Torah by making additions to it: they wrote that man was created in the Image and Likeness, while “All” has neither image nor likeness; added the commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself,” and also invented the concept of the sanctity of marriage and respect for women. Islam considers the true commandment of the Torah, written as it was given to Moses, to be “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” And the executioners mutilate people, since the judges did not take the trouble to figure out what we were talking about monetary compensation for the injury caused. Corporal punishment and public executions in public squares are an integral part of life in Muslim countries. And these laws are taught in schools as absolute truth, given from Heaven.

Not understanding that the Almighty, being present everywhere and controlling everything, nevertheless gives man freedom of choice, Islam proclaimed: “If G-d is everything, then man is nothing.” And this led them to the assertion that everything is predetermined, and therefore there is no point in protecting either your own life or someone else’s. Man, from the point of view of Islam, is an incorrigible evil. He can only do good by obeying a ruler who knows how to carry out G‑d's will. Such performances make it possible to recruit suicide bombers and send them into the crowd with explosives.

Carthage must be destroyed

Some European politicians began to realize that the struggle for the existence and well-being of Israel is the struggle for the existence of their countries. Israel is beginning to be seen as the forefront of the fight against the “children of the desert,” who destroy and turn into a desert everything that surrounds them, everything that they encounter in life.

This is not the first time in history that the responsibility of solving the world's problems has fallen on our shoulders. At one time, the sons of Israel were ordered to destroy the Canaanite tribes, which differed from the surrounding nations in that they sacrificed children. If their cities and temples had not been destroyed, the idea of sacrificing children would have spread throughout the world. Proof of this can be found in the fact that the remnants of the Knaanian tribes attempted to become an empire that determined the fate of the world. They settled on the coast and on the islands of the Mediterranean Sea and created one of the most powerful states Ancient world. And only in 146 BC. Rome defeated them. But before their capital Carthage was destroyed, its inhabitants sacrificed three hundred children, which horrified even the Romans. By His mercy, the Almighty destroyed the evildoers with the hands of the evildoers.

Sea sand

It is no coincidence that the Torah compares the sons of Israel to the sand of the sea. The Midrash states: “The Most High set boundaries for the sea, and no matter how much its waves try to overwhelm the shore, they run into the sand and roll back.” The waves are the destructive ideas of the peoples of the world, and the sand is us, called upon to prevent them from spreading.

We are not created to attack, but we cannot allow our defenses to be broken through. There's no one behind us. After all, even after the Almighty promised not to bring a flood into the world, the threat of the destruction of humanity did not disappear. There is no need to flood the land with water, no need to send fire from heaven: if the sons of Israel do not hold on to the Torah and defend its ideals, then people will destroy themselves.

Feeling right

In this struggle, the most important thing is not to lose confidence in your rightness. But, unfortunately, the Israelis, like ordinary people, and scientists and artists, as well as politicians, do not understand how important it is for all countries that we defend our ideals.

Nathan Alterman wrote about this:

And then Satan said:

“How can I defeat these people?

He has courage, ability, and skill;

He has weapons and masters the art of war.”

Satan said: “I cannot take away his strength,

I can't put a bridle on him,

I should not sow fear among him,

I can’t loosen his arms like before.

This is what I will do: I will cloud his mind,

And he will forget that the truth is on his side.”

Thus spoke Satan,

And the heavens trembled with horror,

when they saw him get up,

to bring your evil plan to life

Rav Shlomo Zelig Avrasin

Once again about slavery

Last week's Torah portion told us about the Sinai Revelation, during which the People of Israel received the Ten Sayings inscribed on two stone tablets, five on each. The impression of the Revelation was so strong that the Israelis no longer wanted to expose themselves to the risk of direct communication with G‑d, and asked Moshe Rabbeinu to become their representative before G‑d and receive on their behalf all the commandments that the Creator wished to establish for them. Our weekly chapter opens with a series of chapters that list the very commandments that were given to our people immediately after the Sinai Revelation.

The first topic that the Torah touches on immediately after the Ten Sayings is the topic of slavery, and this is no coincidence - the Almighty puts the relationship between people in society at the forefront, and only then the relationship between the individual and G-d. This is what the Mishnah says about this in the treatise “Yoma”: “Yom Kippurim (Judgment Day) atones only for sins committed by a person in relation to the Almighty, and does not atone for sins committed in relation to one’s neighbor until the sinner receives forgiveness from the person he offended." The Midrash says that the decisive factor that brought into effect the judgment of the destruction of the generation of the Flood was robbery, not idolatry. Another example: during the era of the First Temple, when the Northern Kingdom (Israel) and the Southern Kingdom (Judah) existed on the territory of Israel, there was a period when King Ahab ruled the Northern Kingdom. He was married to the Sidonian princess Izebel, who brought the cult of Baal, alien to the people, to Israel, and the king himself helped her in planting this pagan belief. Despite this, the Almighty sent Ahab military victories, because he cared about his people and was a good ruler in matters that did not concern religion. However, when Ahab appropriated Naboth’s vineyard, which he had been licking for a long time (and for this, his wife falsely accused Naboth of a crime that he did not commit, and Naboth was executed, and the property went to the royal treasury), the Most High turned away from him, and conveyed through the prophet Eliyahu that Ahab would soon die, and his blood would be shed in the vineyard that previously belonged to Naboth.

So, what does the Torah say about slavery, which was then a social norm? “AND HERE ARE THE LAWS THAT YOU SHALL EXPLAIN TO THEM: IF YOU BUY A JEWISH SLAVE, HE WILL SERVE SIX YEARS, AND ON THE SEVENTH YEARS HE WILL BE RELEASED WITHOUT RANSOM” (Shemot 21:1). That is, the concept of eternal slavery does not exist between fellow tribesmen! At that time, this was a very innovative and progressive approach. In what cases did a person fall into slavery? Jewish law provides for two possibilities for this - either a person who stole property from a neighbor and could not pay the victim due compensation, was sold by the rabbinical court, or by a person who found himself in serious financial situation, could sell himself. But in any case, such slavery cannot last more than six years. And even during this time, the owner is obliged to take care of his slave no worse than himself. For example, he cannot entrust him with shameful work, or work that is backbreaking, but he is obliged to feed him as himself.

It further says: “IF HE CAME ALONE, HE WILL COME OUT ALONE, AND IF HE HAD A WIFE, THE WIFE WILL COME OUT WITH HIM.” Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki) asks the question: “Suppose a man somehow fell into slavery, but how did his wife get there, what follows from the words of the Torah that she also goes free?” The answer is simple - during the entire period of slavery, the owner is obliged to feed not only his slave, but also his family! Therefore, our Sages of blessed memory said: “If a person bought himself a slave, it’s the same as buying himself an owner!”

The Torah continues: “IF HIS MASTER GIVES HIM A WIFE, AND SHE BEARS HIM SONS OR DAUGHTERS, THE WIFE AND HER CHILDREN WILL REMAIN WITH THE MASTER, AND THE SLAVE WILL GO OUT ALONE. AND IF THE SLAVE DECLARE: I LOVE MY LORD, AND MY WIFE, AND MY CHILDREN, NOT WHEN I COME FREE, LET THE LORD BRING HIM TO THE JUDGES, AND LET HIM TAKE HIM TO THE DOOR OR TO THE POST, AND THE LORD WILL PURCH HIS EAR WITH AN AWELL, AND HE SHALL REMAIN TO SERVE HIM FOREVER.” At least two questions arise here: firstly, what does the ear have to do with it? And secondly - what does the door or jamb have to do with it? The Midrash answers these questions this way: The same ear that heard on Mount Sinai the words “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery,” must be pierced, for man, despite this , that now he serves the Almighty, he again fell into slavery, this time voluntarily! But the slave’s time belongs to the owner, and this means that the person will not be able to devote it sufficiently to fulfill the commandments. And the door and doorposts were just witnesses to the fact that G-d led our people out of Egyptian slavery, because... this was preceded by the commandment to stain them with the blood of the Passover lamb, and now they are called upon to testify that this man voluntarily renounces his freedom.

Let's try to figure out why slavery is so attractive? The answer is quite trivial - a slave is free from any liability, including criminal liability (at least according to Greek slave laws). Remember the legend of Aesop? All his life he dreamed of becoming free, and when he finally received his freedom from the owner, the owner’s wife, wanting Aesop to stay in her house, placed a cup stolen from a pagan temple on him, and she herself denounced him. A free man was subject to death for such theft - he was thrown into the sea from a high cliff, while the slave was simply returned to the owner, who paid a fine to the temple. Aesop should have admitted that he was a slave and he would have lived, but he chose to die as a free man. But Aesop was a sage, strong in spirit, and people who were weak or weak-willed, afraid of responsibility, found protection from slavery in slavery. outside world. And one more thing - the food of a slave does not depend on the results of his labor. Whether he works or not, the owner is obliged to feed him. Many were impressed by this, as it relieved them of worry about the future. That is why the Almighty gave the Jews in the desert manna, which could not be accumulated for future use - so that they would “squeeze out a slave” and learn to rely only on the Almighty, and the distance at which the mana became available to them changed depending on their spirituality states, i.e. was due to their internal work. Therefore, a person who voluntarily remains in slavery turns out to be unworthy of the high title of “servant of the Most High,” since he is unable or unwilling to take responsibility for his actions and for his own future. But even this “shelter for the poor in spirit” is not evening - in Hebrew the word “forever” also has the meaning “for the period until the next anniversary year,” i.e. until the fiftieth year comes, which is called “Yovel” (hence the word “anniversary” in Russian). In this year, according to the law of the Torah, all slaves, including voluntary ones, with a pierced ear, became free, and all fields and lands were returned to their original owners - the so-called “social reset” was carried out, and yesterday’s slave became not just a free person, but addition to the owner of the land, and had a chance to start all over again.

People born in the USSR had a particularly close acquaintance with slavery, but their spiritual feat is even greater when they begin to behave like free people, which often requires daily application of strength. As a recipe for the rudiments of slave psychology, I can offer the statement of our Sages - “Only those who devote themselves (or part of their time - author’s note) to the study of the Torah are truly free.”

Moshe Abelets

Translation by Anna Fine

Laws of Jewish life

In the weekly section “Itro” G-d gave the Torah to the children of Israel. This weekly section talks about how Moshe received an impressive list of laws of Jewish life. For example, laws regarding the treatment of slaves, laws for the return of lost property, laws for resolving conflicts between people.

Compared to the sublime Sinai Revelation, all these laws seem completely earthly. During the Sinai Revelation, the sons of Israel felt the presence of the Most High. Extraordinary things happened, miracles, revelations. The children of Israel felt themselves to be “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” It was to be expected that they would now receive more detailed instructions on how to sanctify their existence, how to serve G-d, how to build a kingdom of priests in the Holy Land.

Instead, the Almighty hands them long list instructions regarding simple everyday matters and concerns. There is nothing “Divine” about these instructions. Most likely, there are similar laws in other societies and other peoples.

However, the Torah insists that the union of G‑d and Israel be secured through earthly, everyday affairs. Holiness is not achieved by seclusion in the house of study, not by long prayer, or even by scrupulous observance of ritual. On the contrary, it can only be achieved through full inclusion in the life of society, in relations between people. And relationships between people are impossible without conflicts. The Torah requires a fair resolution of disputes, no matter what level of society the participants stand on.

It is no coincidence that the list of laws begins with those that apply to slaves. The Jews had just been freed "from the house of slavery." They understand well how difficult the lot of a slave is. People who are at the bottom rung of society should be treated fairly. They deserve to have their dignity and honor protected.

Also, people involved in litigation deserve to be treated fairly by a fair judge. Both animals and those who are hated need protection, not to mention widows, orphans and strangers.

We can only be fair by participating in the affairs of society. This is the only way we can achieve holiness. Only in this way will we learn to treat our neighbor the way he himself would like to be treated. And this is the real fulfillment of the Sinai covenant.

Moshe Abelets

Let us note that each of these cases has its own characteristics: In one case, the mother and offspring are killed on the same day; in another, the offspring are killed in front of the mother; finally, in the third, mother's milk, a symbol of fertility, is used to prepare food from the offspring.

However, there are also general points here. Firstly, in all these laws we are talking about actions that are permitted, in principle: you can slaughter a calf, kill a bird (not on the same day), boil milk or kids. However, all three laws emphasize the same idea: killing a cow and a calf on the same day, taking eggs and killing a bird on the same day, breeding a kid in its mother's milk - all this is an act of cruelty to animals. Therefore, by prohibiting mixing meat and milk, Judaism teaches us to show compassion not only for people, but also for animals.

Now let's try to understand why the Torah, meaning all animals and any milk, chose goats as an example. We will find the answer to this question in the Book of Proverbs: “And goat’s milk is sufficient for food for you, for food for your household, and for food for your maidservants” (Mishlei 27:27).

That is, in biblical times people drank mostly goat's milk, not cow's milk. Accordingly, the Torah uses an example that was as clear as possible for the people of that time. However, the sages explain that this prohibition applies to any milk and any meat.

Rabbi Nachum Purer

Immediately after the Ten Commandments, Jews receive from Mount Sinai a set of laws governing human behavior in society. The 53 commandments in this section cover the following topics: the duties of a husband to his wife; punishments for those who insulted their parents or raised a hand against them; respect for Jewish judges and leaders of the nation; monetary liability for damage to someone else’s property (taking into account the “source” of damage: a person, his animate or inanimate property, a pit, fire, etc.); compensation and fine for theft; liability of the “guard” for property not returned to the owner; the right to self-defense during robbery; prohibitions - on the seduction of an unmarried woman, witchcraft, bestiality and making sacrifices to idols. The Torah requires treating proselytes, widows and orphans well, and avoiding lies; prohibits giving money in interest to fellow tribesmen; limits the lender's rights to confiscate the collateral; commands not to delay temple sacrifices and to sanctify even such everyday actions as eating; teaches the correct conduct of court cases; formulates the commandments to observe the Sabbath and the Sabbath year; commands three times a year - on Pesach, Shavuot and Sukkot - to make a pilgrimage to the Temple; communicates the main principle of kashrut: do not mix meat and dairy products. G-d promises to bring the Jews to the Land of Israel, to help them in its conquest and expulsion of the local pagans, and guarantees success and victory, subject to compliance with His laws. Moshe writes the Book of the Covenant, seals the agreement with G-d with a sacrifice, and reads this Book to the Jews. The people promise to “do and hear everything that G‑d has said.” Moshe leaves to receive the Torah on Mount Sinai, where he will stay for 40 days.

With or without witnesses

“When you lend money to my people, the needy who are with you...” (22:24).

In the tractate “Bava Metzia” of the Babylonian Talmud, three people are named whose complaints G-d ignores. One of them is the one who lent money to another Jew without witnesses. Witnesses must be present when the loan is transferred. Otherwise, an unscrupulous recipient may claim that he did not take any money when the lender demands to repay the debt.

Another thing is “tzedakah”, alms, or more precisely, monetary assistance that does not require repayment. It must be given to the needy, if possible, secretly, so that no one sees or knows. As it is said in “Mishlei” (Proverbs of King Shlomo): “A gift given in secret quenches wrath...” (21:14).

The above verse makes a clear reference to this distinction between a loan and a gift of money. “When you lend money to My people...” - the loan must be issued “in public,” in the presence of other people. But when you give money to the “poor” for free, let this act be “with you” - done in private, and no one else should be a witness to it.

Commandment for altruists

“If you see your enemy’s donkey lying under his burden, will you leave him without help? Help without fail: together with the owner” (23:5).

Donkeys used to carry bags of sand and stones for construction purposes. The importance of this commandment increases, said Chafetz Chaim, the spiritual leader of European Jewry at the beginning of the last century, if the bags contain bread for the starving residents of a city robbed by bandits. It is even more important to help the owner (even if he is your enemy) if his donkey carries medicine to the hospital or oxygen cylinders for the seriously ill.

Let us go up one more step, continued Chafetz Chaim. Let us assume that it is not a pack animal, but a person, who bends under the heavy load of medicines: helping a person, and especially a Jew, is immeasurably more important than helping an animal. It is impossible to overestimate the significance of this double mitzvah - to relieve the Jewish porter from the torment and to alleviate the suffering of the sick, for whom every minute of delay can turn into a tragedy.

What if before us is not an ordinary Jew, languishing under the weight of a material burden, but a “rosh yeshiva,” the head of the yeshiva, bearing the burden of the Torah on his shoulders, providing for the needs of not only his students, but the entire Jewish people? After all, without the Torah we are all like dead people. The book “Devarim” directly says: “For this is your life and your longevity.” When a wise rabbi gives his all to his yeshiva and supports young people who study Torah day and night, can other Jews stand aside?

Contrary to popular belief, Israeli yeshivas receive only a minority of their funds from the state treasury. In many of them, plaques with the names of private donors, religious and secular, are prominently displayed. They all carry an invaluable cargo - along with its “owner”.

When Shabbat becomes Saturday

“Six days do your work, and on the seventh day remain at rest; Let your ox and your donkey rest, and let the son of your handmaid and the stranger rest” (23:12).

Among the laws of Shabbat observance, perhaps the most often violated is the provision of “amira le-akum,” which stipulates the conditions when and how one can tell or hint to a non-Jew to do some action that is prohibited to a Jew on Shabbat.

There are many restrictions in this position, the main purpose of which is to preserve the sublime atmosphere of the seventh day. After all, it is so easy to hire a non-Jew to continue everyday activities on Shabbat - let him work for you, and you yourself rest - you do not violate any laws of the Torah. As a result, the holy Sabbath turns into a weekday Saturday.

Let's take this example. Many people believe that if a circuit breaker trips and the lights go out in the middle of an evening meal, a non-Jew can be asked to turn the electricity back on. Wrong. Except in special cases, a Jew may not directly benefit from “melacha” (forbidden work) performed by a non-Jew on Shabbat.

Many people scrutinize the kosher stamp on food packaging before putting it into their mouths, but they won’t hesitate to ask a foreign nanny caring for an elderly neighbor to stop by for a moment on Shabbat and flip the switch.

Yes, such a prohibition exists, and neglecting it can lead to serious consequences, and not only in the world to come...

About two hundred years ago, a large fire broke out in the Prussian town of Märkisch-Friedland, destroying most of the Jewish quarter. Many houses had to be rebuilt. The city's chief rabbi, Rabbi Akiva Iger, urged Jews in need of new housing to include a special clause in their contracts with construction contractors prohibiting work on Shabbat and Jewish holidays.

The entire community supported this appeal with the exception of its chairman. He was a very rich man, and he passionately wanted to restore his burnt mansion as quickly as possible. Therefore, he ordered non-Jewish workers to work without respite, including the Sabbath and holidays.

No protests from the community members or Rabbi Iger himself had any effect on him. Construction went on continuously. Rabbi Iger was incredibly saddened by such a demonstrative violation of Halacha. He once said that a house built with such flagrant violations would not last long.

Needless to say, the community chairman's mansion was completed much earlier than other houses under construction. It was not just a house, but a real palace, a source of pride for its owner.

However, very soon an emergency occurred: one of the mansion’s ceilings collapsed, almost crushing its inhabitants. An examination revealed that this beam was made of rotten wood. Then it turned out that almost the entire wooden frame of the building was affected by rotting. We had to demolish this beautiful palace and start construction anew.

Building inspectors then checked all the other houses that had been built, but not a single rotting beam or support was found in any of them. Engineers spent a long time and unsuccessfully racking their brains over the question of why, of all the houses built in the same period and from materials from the same warehouse, only one turned out to be hopelessly defective.

But the Jews of Märkish-Friedland knew the answer to this riddle well.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

No more and no less

“The rich man must give no more and the poor no less than half a shekel as an offering to G‑d for the redemption of your souls” (Shemot 30:15).

The sages say that all our delusions, mistakes and sins come down to three vices: envy, lust and pride.

On the coming Shabbat, synagogues will read the “Shekalim” section, the first of four special passages that are included in Saturday morning prayer in preparation for two spring holidays - Purim and Passover. These passages set us up for the spiritual cleansing that must take place in the heart of every Jew if he wants to qualify for the right to “come out of Egypt.” In order to deserve the title of “Am Kadosh,” a holy people close to G-d, we must get rid, first of all, of envy, sexual immorality and arrogance.

The Shekalim section contains a formula for neutralizing envy. It was envy that prompted the sons of Yaakov to sell their young brother Yosef into slavery for twenty pieces of silver. Fixing this grave sin The tradition of allocating half a shekel for the needs of the Temple service helps.

The procedure for the half-shekel collection established by the Torah differs from other donations to the Temple in that all people give the same amount: “The rich no more and the poor no less.” This clearly demonstrates the universal equality of Jews before G‑d, and equality, as we know, is the best cure for envy.

Rav Menachem Michael Giti

At the time of adding

Versions of past lives in the second matrix

For the second matrix, we have a huge number of versions of how a person’s past life could unfold, but here again its current manifestations are important. As we have already noted, the details of a person’s behavior indicate to us the habits that he brought with him to the reality of the present from the distant past. The past is forever imprinted in the depths of our Life Matrices until we work through each one separately and move to the next level of our development. In the context of our thoughts, this means that another matrix, the next in the hierarchy, will begin to dominate our manifestations.

There are only four matrices, and each has its own special energy. The energies of the matrices replace each other in our living space. And our life is filled with the energy of one matrix or another. This fullness depends on what matrix dominates at the present moment in time, and on the situation in which we find ourselves. For example, if our main matrix is Matrix of Bliss and Peace, and the situation assumes the presence of energy Matrices of Patience and Accumulation, then we need to turn to our second matrix for its energy.

This means that we will have to move the predominance of energy in the situation to the next level - the level of the second matrix. For a complete and conscious life we must be able to interact with the energies of all matrices.

Changing the Matrices of Life with each other is a natural process in the development of our lives.

The first matrix is replaced by the second, the second by the third and the third by the fourth.

The peculiarity of this cycle is that after the fourth matrix we need to return to the first. Only there can we fully rest from our labors. Unless we stuck in the first matrix, our life did not turn into continuous rest. Then we don’t accumulate experience, we don’t waste energy, and we don’t have access to the euphoria of victory. This means that we have nothing to rest from.

The sequence of transition from matrix to matrix is determined by the Laws of the Universe. And we are unable to change this vector, given by an unknown Force. But our knowledge helps us follow the laws, and we go through life, reaching ever new heights of success. Unless we are stuck in any of the matrices and have stopped resolving pressing issues.

But let’s continue further about the options for past incarnations in the second matrix. One of the unpleasant versions offers us a past in slavery. That is, from a past life a person could have acquired the habit of groveling, servility, unquestioning obedience and blindly following instructions. But slavery can be different, because you can spend your whole life believing that this is exactly how you should live, only this is correct, and nothing else. But it happens that a person does not even look for a way out of a difficult situation, but simply endures. And in this case, he is simply a slave to his own beliefs, which limit his choices and deprive him of the ability to think freely.

However, we should not forget that the second matrix can be very good and people can be very rich without striving for the pinnacle of success, for victories and titles. Their nature contains some kind of thoroughness and thrift, and they imperceptibly and gradually become prosperous. And this is also reflected in their thinking and behavior. And the point here is not that their parents could instill in them their habits.

I met people who became rich, whose ancestors lived in the village for generations, sometimes from hand to mouth, illiterate and pious. And their offspring achieved impressive success by moving to the city and organizing their own business. Although they could not receive anything along the genetic line, they were controlled by some hidden forces that can only be discerned by external manifestations. And often these manifestations indicate with great accuracy the connection between current successes and the experience of past incarnations.

This text is an introductory fragment. From the book Experience of Past Lives. How to find out about own mistakes and fix them by Lynn Denise

Past Life Guides Sometimes spirit guides can be those who were present in your past life. They could be your teachers, giving you guidance, or someone you loved dearly. Such mentors often appear in the form you are familiar with,

From book Real people, real past lives by David Wells

Chapter 15. Past Life Astrology Each of us has personal reasons for incarnating again, but what are they? Earlier I noted that astrology can give you the opportunity to learn more about them. Essentially, your entire natal chart can be interpreted as

From the book Shaman, Sage, Healer author Villoldo Alberto

CRYSTALLIZED ENERGIES FROM PAST LIVES While working with healers, I learned that the cause of solidified energies in the human body can be past lives. These energies remain near a person for so long that they are absorbed into the tissues of the body. When extracting such

by Angelite

Signs of elaboration of matrices and versions of past lives First, study the table. It presents signs of elaboration and lack of elaboration of matrices. Try to apply these concepts to yourself, which one is more consistent with your daily manifestations. This