Q&A: Precisely "Love your neighbor as yourself"
Precisely "Love your neighbor as yourself"
Question
Hi Rabbi, I wrote this in a group and I want to know what you think… a hard question:
Is loving another person more than yourself, or giving to another more than to yourself, a problem of "adding to the commandment" because of "love your neighbor as yourself," since it doesn't say more than yourself? And maybe loving another more than myself actually has an aspect of nullifying the commandment, since it's no longer "as yourself." A question… maybe one has to strengthen self-love and from that rise to love of the other, and then it would be in a way that's permitted?
Is self-nullification before another, in a way that one loves the other more, actually a matter of the evil inclination?
Is that turning the other into a supreme value?
And maybe that's why it says, "Love your neighbor as yourself; I am the Lord"—to emphasize that one shouldn't go too far and turn the other into idolatry? After all, Jewish law recognizes that if two people are walking in the desert without water, he must prefer saving himself first and not give the other his water.
Answer
"Adding to the commandment" applies where the Torah set a fixed measure. But if you interpret the Torah as setting only a minimum threshold, then there is no issue of adding to the commandment. Giving more than a fifth to charity is not adding to the commandment. Studying Torah more than reciting the Shema morning and evening is not adding to the commandment. So now the question is whether the Torah says to love as much as myself, or to love at least as much as myself. Simply speaking, the latter is correct.
According to your approach, "love your neighbor as yourself" comes to teach that it is forbidden to love more than yourself? That is completely implausible. Clearly it comes to be stringent, not lenient. It is a positive commandment (to love), not a prohibition (not to love too much).
This of course connects to the dispute between Ben Petora and Rabbi Akiva (regarding two people who were walking in the desert—I see you mentioned it), but in my opinion there is no connection. There the discussion is about the importance of life and the obligation to protect it. Beyond that, even according to Ben Petora, not everyone agrees that this is an obligation to drink yourself. Some explained that it is your right, but not an obligation (you are allowed to share).
Thank youuu