3 added links for 2 psukim quoted
source | link

Exodus 2:13Exodus 2:13 "He went out on the second day, and behold, two Hebrew men were quarreling, and he said to the wicked one (Hebrew: "rasha"), "Why are you going to strike your friend?"

Rashi commentsRashi comments:

Why are you going to strike: Although he had not struck him, he is called wicked for [merely] raising his hand [to strike him]. [From Talmud Sanhedrin 58b]

ALSO

Deut. 25:1Deut. 25:1 "If there is a quarrel between men, and they approach the tribunal, and they [the judges] judge them, and they acquit the innocent one and condemn the guilty one (Hebrew:"HaRasha")"

(My comment: Obviously the person being condemned in a random case as a "rasha" does not need to be completely evil. They simply are found to have been "condemned" regarding the narrow scope of the subject matter in their particular court case.)

  • Chabad.org translation.

We see from here that there is a concept to say that once a person initiates any action that is evil (such as attempting to hit someone) they are called wicked because of that. This is true even if they happen to be righteous regarding other things.

The Tanya gives other single examples of a "rasha" in chapter 1 (based on Talmudic passages) such as:

violating any Rabbinical prohibition (and it certainly goes without saying, a Biblical one), missing out on performing any positive commandment, being able to protest something wrong, but avoiding it, even neglecting enough Torah study.

However, the Tanya (ch 1 continued) also records the well known idea that when sizing up a person as a whole, if they have more good deeds than bad ones, they are considered righteous in judgment in general; but if they have a majority of sins they are considered wicked. (see Rambam Laws of Repentance 3:1 and Talmud Rosh HaShannah 16b with Rashi there.)

So there are two ways to view a person as righteous or wicked; and both are valid.

1) Focusing on the individual action at the moment.

2) Looking at their overall record in general.

But either way, there is possibly good and bad in everyone.

Oh and yes, bad middos (bad character traits) may also qualify to condemn a person. For instance, The Rambam says: "Anyone who gets angry is as if he worshipped idols" (see: Anger is a form of idolatry)

Also R' Yochanan says in the name of R' Shimon bar Yochai: "anyone who is arrogant is as if they have worshipped idols." - Talmud Sotah 4b

But, once a person repents, they are considered righteous. - see Talmud Kiddushin 49b.

Exodus 2:13 "He went out on the second day, and behold, two Hebrew men were quarreling, and he said to the wicked one (Hebrew: "rasha"), "Why are you going to strike your friend?"

Rashi comments:

Why are you going to strike: Although he had not struck him, he is called wicked for [merely] raising his hand [to strike him]. [From Talmud Sanhedrin 58b]

ALSO

Deut. 25:1 "If there is a quarrel between men, and they approach the tribunal, and they [the judges] judge them, and they acquit the innocent one and condemn the guilty one (Hebrew:"HaRasha")"

(My comment: Obviously the person being condemned in a random case as a "rasha" does not need to be completely evil. They simply are found to have been "condemned" regarding the narrow scope of the subject matter in their particular court case.)

  • Chabad.org translation.

We see from here that there is a concept to say that once a person initiates any action that is evil (such as attempting to hit someone) they are called wicked because of that. This is true even if they happen to be righteous regarding other things.

The Tanya gives other single examples of a "rasha" in chapter 1 (based on Talmudic passages) such as:

violating any Rabbinical prohibition (and it certainly goes without saying, a Biblical one), missing out on performing any positive commandment, being able to protest something wrong, but avoiding it, even neglecting enough Torah study.

However, the Tanya (ch 1 continued) also records the well known idea that when sizing up a person as a whole, if they have more good deeds than bad ones, they are considered righteous in judgment in general; but if they have a majority of sins they are considered wicked. (see Rambam Laws of Repentance 3:1 and Talmud Rosh HaShannah 16b with Rashi there.)

So there are two ways to view a person as righteous or wicked; and both are valid.

1) Focusing on the individual action at the moment.

2) Looking at their overall record in general.

But either way, there is possibly good and bad in everyone.

Oh and yes, bad middos (bad character traits) may also qualify to condemn a person. For instance, The Rambam says: "Anyone who gets angry is as if he worshipped idols" (see: Anger is a form of idolatry)

Also R' Yochanan says in the name of R' Shimon bar Yochai: "anyone who is arrogant is as if they have worshipped idols." - Talmud Sotah 4b

But, once a person repents, they are considered righteous. - see Talmud Kiddushin 49b.

Exodus 2:13 "He went out on the second day, and behold, two Hebrew men were quarreling, and he said to the wicked one (Hebrew: "rasha"), "Why are you going to strike your friend?"

Rashi comments:

Why are you going to strike: Although he had not struck him, he is called wicked for [merely] raising his hand [to strike him]. [From Talmud Sanhedrin 58b]

ALSO

Deut. 25:1 "If there is a quarrel between men, and they approach the tribunal, and they [the judges] judge them, and they acquit the innocent one and condemn the guilty one (Hebrew:"HaRasha")"

(My comment: Obviously the person being condemned in a random case as a "rasha" does not need to be completely evil. They simply are found to have been "condemned" regarding the narrow scope of the subject matter in their particular court case.)

  • Chabad.org translation.

We see from here that there is a concept to say that once a person initiates any action that is evil (such as attempting to hit someone) they are called wicked because of that. This is true even if they happen to be righteous regarding other things.

The Tanya gives other single examples of a "rasha" in chapter 1 (based on Talmudic passages) such as:

violating any Rabbinical prohibition (and it certainly goes without saying, a Biblical one), missing out on performing any positive commandment, being able to protest something wrong, but avoiding it, even neglecting enough Torah study.

However, the Tanya (ch 1 continued) also records the well known idea that when sizing up a person as a whole, if they have more good deeds than bad ones, they are considered righteous in judgment in general; but if they have a majority of sins they are considered wicked. (see Rambam Laws of Repentance 3:1 and Talmud Rosh HaShannah 16b with Rashi there.)

So there are two ways to view a person as righteous or wicked; and both are valid.

1) Focusing on the individual action at the moment.

2) Looking at their overall record in general.

But either way, there is possibly good and bad in everyone.

Oh and yes, bad middos (bad character traits) may also qualify to condemn a person. For instance, The Rambam says: "Anyone who gets angry is as if he worshipped idols" (see: Anger is a form of idolatry)

Also R' Yochanan says in the name of R' Shimon bar Yochai: "anyone who is arrogant is as if they have worshipped idols." - Talmud Sotah 4b

But, once a person repents, they are considered righteous. - see Talmud Kiddushin 49b.

2 added 4 characters in body
source | link

Exodus 2:13 "He went out on the second day, and behold, two Hebrew men were quarreling, and he said to the wicked one (Hebrew: "rasha"), "Why are you going to strike your friend?"

Rashi comments:

Why are you going to strike: Although he had not struck him, he is called wicked for [merely] raising his hand [to strike him]. [From Talmud Sanhedrin 58b]

ALSO

Deut. 25:1 "If there is a quarrel between men, and they approach the tribunal, and they [the judges] judge them, and they acquit the innocent one and condemn the guilty one (Hebrew:"HaRasha")"

(My comment: Obviously the person being condemned in a random case as a "rasha" does not need to be completely evil. They simply are found to have been "condemned" regarding the narrow scope of the subject matter in their particular court case.)

  • Chabad.org translation.

We see from here that there is a concept to say that once a person initiates any action that is evil (such as attempting to hit someone) they are called wicked because of that. This is true even if they happen to be righteous regarding other things.

The Tanya gives other single examples of a "rasha" in chapter 1 (based on Talmudic passages) such as:

violating any Rabbinical prohibition (and it certainly goes without saying, a Biblical one), missing out on performing any positive commandment, being able to protest something wrong, but avoiding it, even neglecting enough Torah study.

However, the Tanya (ch 1 continued) also records the well known idea that when sizing up a person as a whole, if they have more good deeds than bad ones, they are considered righteous in judgment in general; but if they have a majority of sins they are considered wicked. (see Rambam Laws of Repentance 3:1 and Talmud Rosh HaShannah 16b andwith Rashi there.)

So there are two ways to view a person as righteous or wicked; and both are valid.

1) focusingFocusing on the individual action at the moment.

2) Looking at their overall record in general.

But either way, there is possibly good and bad in everyone.

Oh and yes, bad middos (bad character traits) may also qualify to condemn a person's actionsperson. For instance, The Rambam says: "Anyone who gets angry is as if he worshipped idols" (see: Anger is a form of idolatry)

Also R' Yochanan says in the name of R' Shimon bar Yochai: "anyone who is arrogant is as if they have worshipped idols." - Talmud Sotah 4b

But, once a person repents, they are considered righteous. - see Talmud Kiddushin 49b.

Exodus 2:13 "He went out on the second day, and behold, two Hebrew men were quarreling, and he said to the wicked one (Hebrew: "rasha"), "Why are you going to strike your friend?"

Rashi comments:

Why are you going to strike: Although he had not struck him, he is called wicked for [merely] raising his hand [to strike him]. [From Talmud Sanhedrin 58b]

ALSO

Deut. 25:1 "If there is a quarrel between men, and they approach the tribunal, and they [the judges] judge them, and they acquit the innocent one and condemn the guilty one (Hebrew:"HaRasha")"

(My comment: Obviously the person being condemned in a random case as a "rasha" does not need to be completely evil. They simply are found to have been "condemned" regarding the narrow scope of the subject matter in their particular case.)

  • Chabad.org translation.

We see from here that there is a concept to say that once a person initiates any action that is evil (such as attempting to hit someone) they are called wicked because of that. This is true even if they happen to be righteous regarding other things.

The Tanya gives other single examples of a "rasha" in chapter 1 (based on Talmudic passages) such as:

violating any Rabbinical prohibition (and it certainly goes without saying, a Biblical one), missing out on performing any positive commandment, being able to protest something wrong, but avoiding it, even neglecting enough Torah study.

However, the Tanya (ch 1 continued) also records the well known idea that when sizing up a person as a whole, if they have more good deeds than bad ones, they are considered righteous in judgment in general; but if they have a majority of sins they are considered wicked. (see Rambam Laws of Repentance 3:1 and Talmud Rosh HaShannah 16b and Rashi there.)

So there are two ways to view a person as righteous or wicked; and both are valid.

1) focusing on the individual action at the moment.

2) Looking at their overall record in general.

But either way, there is possibly good and bad in everyone.

Oh and yes, bad middos (bad character traits) may also qualify to condemn a person's actions. For instance, The Rambam says: "Anyone who gets angry is as if he worshipped idols" (see: Anger is a form of idolatry)

Also R' Yochanan says in the name of R' Shimon bar Yochai: "anyone who is arrogant is as if they have worshipped idols." - Talmud Sotah 4b

But, once a person repents, they are considered righteous. - see Talmud Kiddushin 49b.

Exodus 2:13 "He went out on the second day, and behold, two Hebrew men were quarreling, and he said to the wicked one (Hebrew: "rasha"), "Why are you going to strike your friend?"

Rashi comments:

Why are you going to strike: Although he had not struck him, he is called wicked for [merely] raising his hand [to strike him]. [From Talmud Sanhedrin 58b]

ALSO

Deut. 25:1 "If there is a quarrel between men, and they approach the tribunal, and they [the judges] judge them, and they acquit the innocent one and condemn the guilty one (Hebrew:"HaRasha")"

(My comment: Obviously the person being condemned in a random case as a "rasha" does not need to be completely evil. They simply are found to have been "condemned" regarding the narrow scope of the subject matter in their particular court case.)

  • Chabad.org translation.

We see from here that there is a concept to say that once a person initiates any action that is evil (such as attempting to hit someone) they are called wicked because of that. This is true even if they happen to be righteous regarding other things.

The Tanya gives other single examples of a "rasha" in chapter 1 (based on Talmudic passages) such as:

violating any Rabbinical prohibition (and it certainly goes without saying, a Biblical one), missing out on performing any positive commandment, being able to protest something wrong, but avoiding it, even neglecting enough Torah study.

However, the Tanya (ch 1 continued) also records the well known idea that when sizing up a person as a whole, if they have more good deeds than bad ones, they are considered righteous in judgment in general; but if they have a majority of sins they are considered wicked. (see Rambam Laws of Repentance 3:1 and Talmud Rosh HaShannah 16b with Rashi there.)

So there are two ways to view a person as righteous or wicked; and both are valid.

1) Focusing on the individual action at the moment.

2) Looking at their overall record in general.

But either way, there is possibly good and bad in everyone.

Oh and yes, bad middos (bad character traits) may also qualify to condemn a person. For instance, The Rambam says: "Anyone who gets angry is as if he worshipped idols" (see: Anger is a form of idolatry)

Also R' Yochanan says in the name of R' Shimon bar Yochai: "anyone who is arrogant is as if they have worshipped idols." - Talmud Sotah 4b

But, once a person repents, they are considered righteous. - see Talmud Kiddushin 49b.

1
source | link

Exodus 2:13 "He went out on the second day, and behold, two Hebrew men were quarreling, and he said to the wicked one (Hebrew: "rasha"), "Why are you going to strike your friend?"

Rashi comments:

Why are you going to strike: Although he had not struck him, he is called wicked for [merely] raising his hand [to strike him]. [From Talmud Sanhedrin 58b]

ALSO

Deut. 25:1 "If there is a quarrel between men, and they approach the tribunal, and they [the judges] judge them, and they acquit the innocent one and condemn the guilty one (Hebrew:"HaRasha")"

(My comment: Obviously the person being condemned in a random case as a "rasha" does not need to be completely evil. They simply are found to have been "condemned" regarding the narrow scope of the subject matter in their particular case.)

  • Chabad.org translation.

We see from here that there is a concept to say that once a person initiates any action that is evil (such as attempting to hit someone) they are called wicked because of that. This is true even if they happen to be righteous regarding other things.

The Tanya gives other single examples of a "rasha" in chapter 1 (based on Talmudic passages) such as:

violating any Rabbinical prohibition (and it certainly goes without saying, a Biblical one), missing out on performing any positive commandment, being able to protest something wrong, but avoiding it, even neglecting enough Torah study.

However, the Tanya (ch 1 continued) also records the well known idea that when sizing up a person as a whole, if they have more good deeds than bad ones, they are considered righteous in judgment in general; but if they have a majority of sins they are considered wicked. (see Rambam Laws of Repentance 3:1 and Talmud Rosh HaShannah 16b and Rashi there.)

So there are two ways to view a person as righteous or wicked; and both are valid.

1) focusing on the individual action at the moment.

2) Looking at their overall record in general.

But either way, there is possibly good and bad in everyone.

Oh and yes, bad middos (bad character traits) may also qualify to condemn a person's actions. For instance, The Rambam says: "Anyone who gets angry is as if he worshipped idols" (see: Anger is a form of idolatry)

Also R' Yochanan says in the name of R' Shimon bar Yochai: "anyone who is arrogant is as if they have worshipped idols." - Talmud Sotah 4b

But, once a person repents, they are considered righteous. - see Talmud Kiddushin 49b.