3

We are commanded in Vayikra (19:18) "You shall neither take revenge nor bear a grudge against the members of your people".

Some people say, “I don’t hold grudges. I just hold memories that keep me better prepared for our next encounter.”

Is holding bad memories (against Jews of course) permitted according to the Halachah, for example, le’Toeles, in order to protect me from further hurt?

IsraelReader
  • 4,988
  • 1
  • 12
  • 28
  • I edited your post based on your comments to Al’s answer. In the future, please make sure to add all relevant information to your question. – DonielF Jan 22 '19 at 17:12
  • Thank you. The reason I didn't write it originally, was because the additional questions merely became salient to me in reaction to Al's answer. – IsraelReader Jan 22 '19 at 17:19

1 Answers1

2

Rambam rules (Deos 7, 8) pretty clear:

"אֶלָּא יִמְחֶה הַדָּבָר מִלִּבּוֹ וְלֹא יִטְּרֶנּוּ.
שֶׁכָּל זְמַן שֶׁהוּא נוֹטֵר אֶת הַדָּבָר וְזוֹכְרוֹ שֶׁמָּא יָבוֹא לִנְקֹם."

"Forsooth, as long as he bears the matter and remembers it, he might be tempted to take vengeance. It is on account of this that the Torah is particular concerning the bearing of a grudge to blot such sin out of his heart and not remember it at all."

Edit: The further details on the Mitzvah of נטירה are very scarce, but it appears that Rambam hints that the prohibition of נקימה is the reason for נטירה. In other words, it would be forbidden to hold memories IF one intends to use them one day to act in vengeance. But if one holds the memories to protect himself from further damage it would be allowed.

Al Berko
  • 25,936
  • 2
  • 22
  • 57
  • 1
    If I know someone to be a "jerk", and have great difficulty every time time I interact with him, must I pretend that he's a saint, and get burnt all over again? Or may I remember this fact, le'toeles, in order to protect myself from further hurt? – IsraelReader Jan 22 '19 at 17:05
  • @al berko I wonder if the rambam’s choice of the word נוטר is significant. It means to guard. Why not use the word זוכר? I think he’s saying that as long as you are guarding it and remember what happened you may come to revenge. As opposed to just remembering what happened and taking appropriate precautions. – mroll Jan 22 '19 at 17:10
  • @mroll He’s just using the wording of the passuk. Still an intriguing inference, though - that just pushes the question back. – DonielF Jan 22 '19 at 17:10
  • See Yoma 23a, which seems to indicate that bearing a grudge only relates to taking revenge over monetary matters ההוא בממון הוא דכתיב. – IsraelReader Jan 22 '19 at 17:15
  • @IsraelReader See my edit. – Al Berko Jan 22 '19 at 17:16
  • Hey Al, what do you think of the passuk using the term את בני עמך in the context of this mitzvah? What are your thoughts on applying עושה מעשה עמך here? – DonielF Jan 22 '19 at 17:17
  • @DonielF This is a pretty standard phrasing for all Mitzvos of Midos that pertain to the fellow Jews only. like עמיתך, חברך, אחיך etc. Like ואהבת לרעך כמוך (in hte same possuk). – Al Berko Jan 22 '19 at 17:20
  • What I mean to say is, the Gemara does apply עושה מעשה עמך in many of these cases (ex. ריבית). Since the term is used here, do you think the derashah should apply, and perhaps the entire question is moot, as if the person is repeatedly “burning” the victim, he’s in violation of שארית ישראל לא יעשו עולה ולא ידברו כזב and the obligation not to bear a grudge wouldn’t apply. – DonielF Jan 22 '19 at 17:22
  • @DonielF It's a huge Machlokes and I'm not going to start it. I do agree that for every approach the Drasha should apply consistently to all topics. 2. My personal approach is that it is a גברא Mitzvah so one should check oneself for bad thoughts, grudges etc in order to serve Hashem in Simhat and Tuv Levav. I wonder it is a separate Mitzvah and not a part of ואהבת. – Al Berko Jan 22 '19 at 17:30
  • @AlBerko (I got mixed up - I forgot it said אחיך by ריבית, not עמך. Sorry!) You’ve intrigued me here - I’ve gone ahead and asked the question separately. You seem to know something about the discussion that I don’t, and I’d love to hear it. – DonielF Jan 22 '19 at 17:56
  • I upvoted as you provided a source answering the question. However, it is not obviously inferable that keeping the memory for protection purposes is allowable. I agree that it is wise to do so, but the quote above doesn't make it clear that you can infer this. – DanF Jan 22 '19 at 21:38