Q&A: Kindness Beyond the Letter of the Law
Kindness Beyond the Letter of the Law
Question
With God's help,
Hello Rabbi, not long ago I read in one of the commentators an explanation that the reason we go beyond the letter of the law is so that the Holy One, blessed be He, will give us a good reward in the World to Come. And there is also the idea that He will deal with us beyond the letter of the law.
I wanted to ask whether the Rabbi has written anywhere what his view on this really is. From a pragmatist explanation, it indeed seems that one should arrive at a more pleasant society, or else reward and punishment from above. But is that the only dimension of the story?
Why, really, shouldn't the good also be the right, full stop? Just strict law without mercy.
Answer
I don't agree with the thesis you presented. The reason to act beyond the letter of the law is that this is proper behavior. Just as commandments are observed because that is what is proper, and not for the sake of reward.
Why are some obligations defined as beyond the letter of the law? Because this is not an absolute, non-negotiable demand, but rather a virtue such that one can still be considered a reasonable person even without it. Exactly as the law does not contain all moral demands.
Discussion on Answer
You're mixing questions. My claim was that going beyond the letter of the law is a virtue. That does not necessarily mean that I myself would see it as a virtue. The Torah / the Sages see it that way. I also would not have come up with the commandments on my own.
The claim that it is proper to act beyond the letter of the law reflects a view that this is indeed proper. For example, returning a lost object after the owner has despaired is a proper thing to do, even though it is not an obligation under the strict law. Not because society cannot survive on the letter of the law alone. On the contrary, it can survive that way—that is why this is only beyond the letter of the law—but it is still proper to behave this way.
I'm not sure that in every case where one acts according to the letter of the law you would consider him reasonable—for example, indirect causation. And conversely, not every case of going beyond the letter of the law is merely a "virtue"; it can seem like even more than that.
In any case, the question is: what is the source for behaving this way, in your opinion? Or in other words, why is this proper behavior?
Is the reason for this something irreducible on the value plane? Or is there in fact an idea that contains it—for example, that a properly ordered society cannot endure over time on the basis of the trait of Sodom alone.