Q&A: Do Not Place a Stumbling Block Before the Blind
Do Not Place a Stumbling Block Before the Blind
Question
Hello Rabbi, what is the definition of “do not place a stumbling block before the blind”? If I merely enable someone to commit a transgression (for example, I rent him a store that I know he will open on the Sabbath), is that considered part of the prohibition?
Answer
Let me begin by saying that in my opinion this is no different from renting an apartment to someone who desecrates the Sabbath, and I have not found anyone who is careful about this. Although perhaps there is a difference in terms of public violation, but this is not the place to go into it.
Principally, the Torah prohibition applies only in a case of “two sides of the river,” meaning that without you the transgression could not be committed. Therefore, if he could have rented another store, then there is no Torah-level prohibition of “do not place a stumbling block before the blind” here, though there may perhaps be the issue of assisting a transgression, which is a rabbinic prohibition.
On the other hand, it is not clear that you are required to incur a loss in order to look after him. If you cannot rent it to someone who observes the Sabbath, or perhaps you would not earn the same amount, it is not certain that you are obligated to worry about him more than he himself does. Especially if he is like a “captured infant,” in which case there is no prohibition in what he does.
However, such a rental does involve the issue of Sabbath wages, and for that one must make sure in the contract that there is no such component. In my opinion, a reasonable global payment solves the problem.
See a summary here: https://tvunah.org/%D7%94%D7%A9%D7%9B%D7%A8%D7%AA-%D7%93%D7%99%D7%A8%D7%94-%D7%9C%D7%92%D7%95%D7%99/
Discussion on Answer
The Torah is dealing with physical tripping, so it speaks about a blind person. The Sages expanded this to giving unfair advice and causing someone to sin. In that sense, a “blind” person is someone who does not understand the matter.
What would you expect it to say positively: that one should save him from being tripped up? That is included in “do not stand idly by your neighbor's blood.” Or that one should cause him to perform commandments? Maybe that is included in “you shall surely rebuke.”
In any case, the commandment is a prohibition against causing someone to stumble. That cannot be formulated positively. Sometimes there is also a positive side, and the Torah chooses the negative form because the positive one is not included in the Jewish law requirement (it is too high a bar).
On the difference between a prohibition and a positive commandment, see my article on the sixth root here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwJAdMjYRm7IeFFraktmeVNrNFE/view
Why is the phrase “and before the blind you shall not place a stumbling block” placed next to “and you shall fear your God; I am the Lord” and next to “you shall not curse the deaf”?
Simply put, it is because the blind person and the deaf person cannot know who harmed or cursed them, and therefore refraining from harming them is enforced by the Holy One, blessed be He, Himself. One must fear Him, even if one does not fear them.
Why does the Torah specifically give the example of a blind person, and not of someone who does not understand the matter / someone who could easily be tripped up?
Why does the Torah phrase it in the negative way (a prohibition) and not in the positive way (a positive commandment)?