Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
This verse is obviously one of the most central & important in the whole Torah. It has helped sustain us as a kind, harmonious, & loving nation for over 3,000 years & has helped introduce the Golden Rule to mankind.
Do the commentators explain if this command has any restrictions? I assume it doesn’t apply to those that are openly rebelling against HaShem or the Jewish Nation, but what about Bnei Noach?
The answer is in the passuk itself: “lirayacha” - your fellow, which always comes to include all Jews.
The Rambam makes this point explicitly in De’os 4:3:
מִצְוָה עַל כָּל אָדָם לֶאֱהֹב אֶת כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל כְּגוּפוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יט יח) "וְאָהַבְתָּ לְרֵעֲךָ כָּמוֹךָ".
It’s a commandment on every man to love everyone from Yisrael like himself, as it says, “And you should love your fellow like yourself.”
Note that the term “fellow” includes converts as well; in the words of the Rambam in the very next Halacha:
אַהֲבַת הַגֵּר שֶׁבָּא וְנִכְנָס תַּחַת כַּנְפֵי הַשְּׁכִינָה שְׁתֵּי מִצְוֹת עֲשֵׂה. אַחַת מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא בִּכְלַל רֵעִים וְאַחַת מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא גֵּר וְהַתּוֹרָה אָמְרָה (דברים י יט) "וַאֲהַבְתֶּם אֶת הַגֵּר".
Loving a convert who comes and enters under the wings of the Shechinah is two positive commandments: one because he is included under “fellows” and one because he is a convert, and the Torah says, “You should love the convert.”
However, non-Jews, even those who have accepted the seven Noahide laws, are not included in this commandment, as they are not considered your “fellows.”
Further, the Smag (Asei 9) adds, based on Pesachim 113, that even among Jews, one is not obligated to love his fellow if his fellow is a wicked person; to the contrary, it’s a mitzvah to hate him. (Do not try this at home without the proper guidance - everyone sins, not everyone is a wicked person. It’s beyond the scope of this article to discuss who is considered a wicked person that one should hate.)
By the way, this is the general usage of “your fellow” in the Torah - while anything in this post could be prohibited by other Biblical or Rabbinic laws, when the Torah says that you should not stand by idly on your “fellow’s” blood, it refers to a Jew specifically (Sefer HaChinuch 237); the prohibition against coveting your “fellow’s” property is limited to a Jew’s (Sefer HaChinuch 38).
It seems that the prototype for this usage is Shemos 2:13: “Why are you hitting your fellow?” While Rashi translates this in the context of the passuk (“a wicked person like you”), we see that “your fellow” indicates someone like you - in these cases, someone who is Jewish. I do not have a source for this final point, but in my humble opinion, this would seem to be the source for these rulings. (If I am correct, perhaps it can be argued that while a righteous Jew shouldn’t love a wicked Jew, a wicked Jew must love another wicked Jew.)
This is indeed how Sefer HaChinukh (mitsva 243) understands it
To love [with] love of the soul each one of Israel - meaning to say that we have compassion for an Israelite and for his money, [just] like a person has compassion for himself and for his [own] money; as it stated (Leviticus 19:18), "you shall love your neighbor as yourself."
and the Rambam (MT Hilchot Deot 6:3)
Each man is commanded to love each and every one of Israel as himself as [Leviticus 19:18] states: "Love your neighbor as yourself."
As R Yitzchak Ginsburgh writes
The Jew is commanded to respect all human beings. The Torah prohibits any negative behavior toward a non-Jew, so long as he is not an enemy. He is instructed, however, not to become too close a companion to him. Thus the above verse, veahavta l’reyacha kamocha, “You shall love your neighbor as your self”, does not imply a universal neighbor. To be honest with the text, the parenthetical “a fellow Jew” must appear.
This commandment applies even to a Jew having been condemned to death, the gemara in Baba Kama 51a writes
Rav Naḥman says that Rabba bar Avuh says that the verse states: “And you shall love your fellow as yourself” (Leviticus 19:18), teaching that even with regard to a condemned prisoner, select a good, i.e., a compassionate, death for him. Therefore, the structure used for stoning is constructed sufficiently high that he dies quickly, without any unnecessary suffering.
(see also similar passages in Ketubot 37b and Pesachim 75a)
Bnei Noach are all righteous non-Jews, by definition they do not belong to "your brother".
TL;DR the verse includes only Jews in good religious standing
This is an excellent question, but it should be clarified that is is also significantly limited: there are dozens of commandments and restrictions guiding interpersonal relationships and obligations that a Jew might have towards his fellow man, and all of these might have different definitions of who is included or not. Thus, for example, the prohibition of usury (lending money with interest) only prohibits Jews from lending to other Jews with interest, but deceiving someone is biblically prohibited for both Jews and non-Jews (according to most). Even in multiple cases where the Torah uses the same word, רעיך, there might be differences based on the context. For example, Rabbeinu Bachayei writes (to Ex. 20:13) that one is prohibited to bear false witness against a non-Jew, even though the Torah uses the term רעיך, your fellow.
The question here is: who is included in "fellow," or רעך in the Biblical command to "love your fellow", in Lev. 19:18?
Despite the teachings of the Christian gospel, rabbinic Judaism unanimously understands that רעך, or "your fellow" refers specifically to fellow members of the nation of Israel. The Sifra (primary halakhic midrash) comments on that verse that converts to Judaism are also included as learnt out from a later verse in the chapter (Lev 19:34), but the implication is clear that those who are not Jewish are excluded. Thus, Maimonides codifies the rule as follows (Hilkhot Deot Ch 6):
מִצְוָה עַל כָּל אָדָם לֶאֱהֹב אֶת כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל כְּגוּפוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יט יח) "וְאָהַבְתָּ לְרֵעֲךָ כָּמוֹךָ" It is incumbent upon every person to love each and every member of Israel as himself, as it says 'you shall love your fellow as yourself' (Lev. 19:18)
Commenting on the above-quoted statement of Maimonides, the author of Hagahot Maimoniot (here, bottom left column) writes
[the command to love someone] only applies to he who is "your fellow" in Torah and commandments; but [towards] a wicked person who does not accept rebuke it is a mitzvah to hate him
and to bolster this halakha the author quotes two verses and references a passage in Pesachim (113b), which may actually indicate that there is a talmudic dispute but the passage is not so clear. Either way, Hagahot Maimoniot's position is shared by Rashbam (to Lev 19:34), Semag (aseh no. 9), and R. Yitzhak Arama (Akeidas Yitzchak Lev no. 23).
However, not everyone agrees that sinners should be excluded from "your fellow" whom 'you must love as yourself.' In a fascinating comment, R. Meir Abulafiah explains that the Mishnah assumed that the command to "love your fellow" applies even for the wicked who are sentenced to death because
ויש לפרש ואהבת לרעך לשון רעים שבך one can interpret "love your fellow" [rei'ekha] as "the wicked among you" [ra'-im shebekha] (Ramah to Sanhedrin 52)
Some have also believed this to be the position of Maimonides, though it is hard to tell for certain. According to Maharam Shik (Taryag Mitzvot 244), the halakha is in accordance with the view that one's "fellow" in this context does include a sinner.
The entire discussion regarding Jewish sinners, however, refers specifically to those Jewish people who believe in God, are part of the Jewish community, but are known to engage in certain prohibited behaviors for whatever non-ideological reason. However, those who do not believe in the principles of faith are generally assumed to have lost their status as full-fledged members of the nation (in certain ways). Maimonides thus writes in his intro to the 10th Ch. of Mishnah Sanhedrin regarding believing the principles of Judaism:
וכאשר יהיו קיימים לאדם כל היסודות הללו ואמונתו בהם אמתית הרי הוא נכנס בכלל ישראל וחובה לאהבו ולחמול עליו וכל מה שצוה ה' אותנו זה על זה מן האהבה והאחוה ואפילו עשה מה שיכול להיות מן העבירות מחמת תאותו והתגברות יצרו הרע הרי הוא נענש לפי גודל מריו ויש לו חלק והוא מפושעי ישראל וכאשר יפקפק אדם ביסוד מאלו היסודות הרי זה יצא מן הכלל וכפר בעיקר ונקרא מין ואפיקורות וקוצץ בנטיעות וחובה לשנותו ועליו הוא אומר הלא משנאיך ה' אשנא וכו (Qafih translation)
And when a person upholds all these foundations, and his belief in them is true, he enters into the group of Israel and it is an obligation to love him, and to have compassion for him, and all that Hashem commanded us regarding love and brotherhood for each other. And even if he has done what can be of the sins due to his desires and the overpowerment of his evil inclination, he will be punished commensurate to the greatness of his rebellion but he still has a portion and he is of the sinners of Israel. But when a person doubts one of these foundations he has left the group, and denied God, and is called a sectarian and a heretic and a cutter of shoots, and it is an obligation to hate him, and of him it is said "do I not hate those who hate you, Hashem?" (taken from here; thanks Alex)
Someone who does not believe in Judaism, therefore, is not included in the Jews' obligation to love each other. This is also true of those who are 'secular' Jews, who do not follow the commandments out of ideological principle (see Shulhan Arukh, Y.D. 158:2 and Mishnah Berurah 55:46, among many instances) and perhaps even those who are simply completely indifferent to the Jewish religion (see Biur Halakha to 608:2, though this is less clear. The vast majority of rabbinic authorities do NOT propose implementing the harsh treatments against such people mentioned by Maimonides or the Shulhan Arukh (see here), but Maimonides' statements regarding loving and hating them still stands.
I basically agree with הנער הזה's answer. I wish to add two points:
1- The other answers quote various rishonim writing about loving all Jews, but they're really just working with a default. As he proves, this is only of Jews who believe and are observant, or at least aren't at fault for their lack of one or the other. Such as tinoqos shenishbu -- people raised with an attitude of disbelief for whom traditional Judaism was never in their comfort zone. They were prejudiced by upbringing, like the textbook "children taken captive" and raised by bandits.
But similarly, there is another exception that they thought was too rare to bother going off on the tangent -- geirei toshav (literally: "resident aliens"). Observant Noachides can be considered rei'akha, your peers.
The Rambam distinguishes between *chassidei umos ha'olam, "the pious from among the nations", and geirei toshav. Saying that the latter is more limited, requiring also that the non-Jew declare his fealty in a Jewish court, and accept Jewish sovereignty. It is not clear to me we actually rule that way. And even if we do, does the Rambam limit "rei'akha" only to geiri toshav or to all chassidei umos ha'olam?
It seems to me that the defining feature here is that we are including all who follow "Elokai Yisrael -- the G-d of Israel". Not the Jew, Yisrael, as an ethnic group. And therefore non-believing Jews are excluded, but non-Jews who are fellow travelers are included.
This is unlike mitzvos like usury, where the word used is "acemphasized texthikha -- your sibling". There the prohibition is specifically limited to Jews, and to all Jews. One cannot charge interest on a loan made out to a Jewish heretic. It's unbrotherly, no matter how bad the falling out. And a non-Jewish believer may be a rei'akh, our peer, but they aren't our brothers and sisters.
2- Here is a more full quote, with Ben Azzai's dissenting opinion.
From the "Jerusalem" Talmud, Nedarim 9:4, vilna edition 30b, as well its likely source, as the Sifra (ad loc):
(ויקרא יט) ואוְאָֽהַבְתָּ֥ לְרֵעֲךָ֖ כָּמ֑וֹךָ [אֲנִ֖י ה']. רבי עקיבה אומר זהו כלל גדול בתורה. בן עזאי אומר (בראשית ה) זֶ֣ה סֵ֔פֶר תּוֹלְדֹ֖ת אָדָ֑ם [בְּי֗וֹם בְּרֹ֤א אֱלֹהִים֙ אָדָ֔ם בִּדְמ֥וּת אֱלֹהִ֖ים עָשָׂ֥ה אֹתֽוֹ׃] זה כלל גדול מזה.
"Love your peer as yourself[, I am Hashem]" (Vayiqra 19:18) -- Rabbi Aqiva says, this is the Torah's great principle. Ben Azzai says, "These are the generations of man (or: of Adam); when G-d created man, in the likeness of G-d He made him.]" (Bereishis 5:1)
Ben Azzai leaves the discussion on a universalist note. All human beings are of one family, and we all carry the "'Image' of the Divine" in which Adam was created.
It is unclear to me what Ben Azzai is disagreeing about. It could be that Rabbi Aqiva's verse is indeed only about Jews, and that is why Ben Azzai disagrees by giving a source with a more universal message.
The problem is, then we would need to understand the two verses in light of each other. Are we to view all people as siblings, or only fellow followers of the G-d of Israel?
I would suggest that the verse, like all verses, is operating on multiple levels. And as a rule, Halakhah comes from derashah (hermeneutics), Mussar (ethics) come from peshat (simple meaning, including literal translation and idioms).
We may have derashah limiting the verse to fellow believers, but is that necessarily peshat? Perhaps the obligation to act lovingly is only to Jews, but the ideal of loving all is of all people -- even according to Rabbi Aqiva's verse?
The Qorban ha'Eidah (Rav David ben Naphtali Fraenkel of Berlin, 1704–1762) on this Yerushalmi undestands Ben Azzai as agreeing as to what the message of the main principle is, but objects to Rabbi Aqiva's framing it with a verse used for a more limited halakhah. Whereas his verse more clearly says that while all of humanity may not be brothers, we're all relations deserving of love.
But in any case, the Sifra and gemara do not actually conclude with "love your neighbor as yourself". The message of the whole discussion is certainly universal.
Does the verse to love your neighbor as yourself apply also to non-Jews or only to Jews?
Rabbi Akiva felt that the principle of the Torah is to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Leviticus 19, 18). Hillel said, “what is hateful unto you do not do unto others.” This means that what you hate to have done to you, do not do to others.[1]
The Leviticus 19:18 – “Love thy neighbor as yourself” is difficult to understand as it is impossible to command an emotion. Yet to Rabbi Akiva it is the basic principle of the Torah. And as one answer noted (above) it is even repeated in the New Testament, stressing its importance.
At least 36 times we read, “You must love the stranger,” meaning a non-Israelite, meaning non-Jews. In 19:34, referring to non-Israelites the Torah says, “Love him as yourself.” This is similar to the basic principle of Judaism which is “What is hateful to you do not do to your neighbor.”[2] But the mitzvah to love does not mean to command an emotion as it is impossible for one to love someone who they do not. Rather, it means to support them and treat them as we wish to be treated. thus, it seems that the two are related—namely, “What is hateful to you, do not do to others” (Hillel), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Rabbi Akiva). Both Talmudic concepts found in the Torah are regarded as "the Golden Rule to mankind."
Abraham showed loving-kindness to complete strangers. He did not walk to help them but ran and gave but time and money. Torah is not only about commandments but also narratives, whether true or not, that teach moral lessons. The patriarchs and matriarchs always helped people regardless of their background, sex, religion, or creed. We need to respect everyone. “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
In context the verse states: “You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against your countrymen. Love your fellow as yourself: I am the L-rd” (Lev. 19:18). The Torah groups "love," "vengeance" and, "grudges" together to make a point that love is to be performed by moral action, not only emotion.
Can the verse to love your neighbor as yourself apply also to non-Jews? I think so.
[1] See Babylonian Talmud Shabbat 31a
[2] Aaron pointed out to me in the comments that Hillel gave this quote while speaking with a Non-Jew who is about to convert, emphasizing the universality of this talmudic principle.
The contextual reading of the phrase makes it clear that at the very least it applies to Jews/Israelites:
יח לֹא-תִקֹּם וְלֹא-תִטֹּר אֶת-בְּנֵי עַמֶּךָ, וְאָהַבְתָּ לְרֵעֲךָ כָּמוֹךָ: אֲנִי, יְהוָה. 18
Thou shalt not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.
The subject of the pasuk is רֵעֲךָ, your neighbor, and it seems that your neighbor is a subgroup that comes from בְּנֵי עַמֶּךָ, "the children of your people." So at the very least, you are commanded to love a fellow Israelite as yourself since your neighbor definitely comes from the children of your people. However, there is no limit given in this pasuk on who you should consider as your neighbor.
Most Rabbinical writings legislate this love as applying to Israelites, and this makes sense even to a modern reader. We as modern people usually legislate laws starting from the bare minimum, and we prioritize certain laws for citizens vs non citizens. Therefore it's logical to have the Rabbis say that this commandment at the very least applies to only Israelites as the context implies.
However, some Rabbis go an extra step further and forbid expanding the concept of who your neighbor is to include non-Jews. It doesn't seem clear to me that the Torah ever forbids expanding the concept of who your neighbor is, and the Tanakh as a whole seems to only get more overtly inclusive toward non-Jews in the later books. Furthermore, I believe certain theological problems arise when you attempt limit the idea of your neighbor as only applying to your fellow Jew.
All of this boils down to how we define the word רֵעֲךָ. But for those who would say that the word רֵעֲךָ can only apply to Jews, and therefore you cannot expand this to include non Jews, then I would answer this argument has some terrible implications. This would mean that I am fully allowed to bear false witness against non Jews, covet their wives, and covet their homes and property.
The Ten Commandments from Devarim/Deuteronomy 5
.לֹא תִרְצָח, וְלֹא תִנְאָף; וְלֹא תִגְנֹב, וְלֹא-תַעֲנֶה בְרֵעֲךָ עֵד שָׁוְא וְלֹא תַחְמֹד, אֵשֶׁת רֵעֶךָ; וְלֹא תִתְאַוֶּה בֵּית רֵעֶךָ, שָׂדֵהוּ וְעַבְדּוֹ וַאֲמָתוֹ שׁוֹרוֹ וַחֲמֹרוֹ, וְכֹל, אֲשֶׁר לְרֵעֶךָ
16 Thou shalt not murder. Neither shalt thou commit adultery. Neither shalt thou steal. Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour. 17 Neither shalt thou covet thy neighbour's wife; neither shalt thou desire thy neighbour's house, his field, or his man-servant, or his maid-servant, his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy neighbour's.
Maybe there are those who would say that I could do all these terrible things to non Jews since they aren't "my neighbor." But I'm a person who cannot abide in believing in an unethical religion, therefore I cannot in good conscience say that I am completely allowed to bear false witness against and sleep with the wive's of non Jews while coveting all of their property because they aren't "my neighbor."
And I have my suspicions that those who would limit the concept of who your neighbor is only do so as a polemic against Jesus/Christianity who taught that your neighbor wasn't limited to fellow Jews. Jesus not only expanded who the concept of your neighbor is, but Christianity as a whole has continued to expand "your neighbor" to include everyone based on the following parable found in the Christian scriptures:
The Parable of the Good Samaritan from Luke 10
25 On one occasion an expert in the Torah stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
26 “What is written in the Torah?” he [Jesus] replied. “How do you read it?”
27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’ and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”
28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”
29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”
30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side [to avoid becoming ritually impure on account of the man who might die]. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side [for the same reason]. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii[e] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’
36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”
37 The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”
Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”
Clearly Jesus expanded this love to Samaritans (whom normative Jews classify as non Jews and potentially enemies) because of the Samaritan's love and mercy for the man in this story. The message being: your neighbor is anyone that has mercy on you. To me, this is a lesson I have seen reflected in my life, as some of the greatest mercy I have ever received has come from non Jews. Thus I feel compelled to say I find value in the teaching of Jesus, especially when compared to some of the more restrictive teachings about who your neighbor is or isn't. I would have loved it if I found as good a teaching from my tradition instead of having to quote Jesus, but I also believe that you should accept the truth regardless of the source.
So while I can't say that you are required to love non-Jews as you love yourself, I find it morally questionable to limit the idea of your neighbor to only being your fellow Jew.
