Home
In this issue
Nov. 20, 2009
Rabbi David Aaron: How to make every second of your life come first
Caroline B. Glick: Whither American Jewry
Nov. 19, 2009
Binyamin L. Jolkovsky: Please Listen to this Godcast (5 minutes)
Jonathan Tobin: ADL Crosses the Line with Report Bashing Obama Critics
Nov. 18, 2009
Rabbi Yonason Goldson: What Judaism has to say about the secret of the Mona Lisa's smile
JWisdom.com: The (Jewish) Dating Game with Rabbi Lawrence Hajioff (8 minutes)
Nov. 17, 2009
Steven Emerson: How Does the 4th Amendment Impact Terror Finance Investigations?
JWisdom.com: If Frank Sinatra married Edith Piaf with Rabbi Y.Y. Rubinstein (2 minutes) Life lessons from what would be regarded as the most inappropriate lyrics ever sung
Nov. 16, 2009
The Jewish Ethicist by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir : When borrowing is stealing
JWisdom.com: Deconstructing faith with Rabbi Warren Goldstein (9 minutes)
Nov. 13, 2009
JWisdom.com Sarah's subjective reality with Rabbi Sroy Levitansky ( 6 minutes)
Caroline B. Glick: Obama's failure, Netanyahu's opportunity
Nov. 12, 2009
The Kosher Gourmet By Marialisa Calta : A sweet sweet potato treat
JWisdom.com Does God get tired? with Rabbi Harvey Belovski ( 5 minutes)
Nov. 11, 2009
Rabbi Avi Shafran: Jews and money: When anti-Semitism isn't
JWisdom.com Marriages are not made in Heaven with Rabbi Lawrence Hajioff (VERY fast 15 minutes)
Nov. 10, 2009
Michael Doyle: Author of book exposing CAIR ordered to remove supporting documents from Web
JWisdom.com If the creation so loudly shouts the existence of the Creator, why aren't more people believers? with Rabbi Naftali Brawer (9 minutes)
Nov. 9, 2009
Mark Steyn: Shooter exposes hole in U.S. terror strategy
JWisdom.com It's never too late to have a happy childhood with Sarah Chana Radcliffe (5 minutes)
Nov. 6, 2009
Rabbi Berel Wein: Choosing to hear
JWisdom.com Zero to 1/60th: How to Empower An Hour with Gavriel Aryeh Sande (7 minutes)
Caroline B. Glick The mullahs' big week
Suzanne Fields A Fallen Wall for Fallen Man
Nov. 5, 2009
The Kosher Gourmet: Three scrumptious -- but simple -- butternut squash dishes
JWisdom.com Hidden Hints: Unlocking Faith & Prayer with Rabbi Jay Yaacov Schwartz (10 minutes)
Nov. 4, 2009
Tom Hamburger and Kim Geiger: Should prayers be covered?
JWisdom.com When God played peacemaker With Rabbi Sroy Levitansky (5 minutes)
Nov. 3, 2009
Martin Peretz: Beware, Barack. Beware, Rahm. Beware, Axelrod
JWisdom.com Are you are closet idolater? With Sara Yoheved Rigler (10 minutes)
Nov. 2, 2009
Paul Greenberg: The Holocaust is now on Facebook
JWisdom.com Abraham's Strange Change With Rabbi Yitzchok Fingerer (5 minutes)
Oct. 29, 2003
Mortimer B. Zuckerman: Graffiti On History's Walls (MUST-READ!)

Jewish World Review

What does ‘doing the right thing’ entail?

By Rabbi Abraham J. Twerski


Printer Friendly Version

Email this article


How to be good and do good


“Righteousness, righteousness shall you pursue.”

                        —   Deut. 16:20


http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | The great Chassidic master Rebbe Simchah Bunim of P'shis'che observes that the repetition of the word ''righteousness'' means that one should pursue righteousness with righteousness.


We may not use unjust methods even in the interest of a just cause.


The end does not justify the means In commerce, good and bad are determined by outcome. Profit is good, loss is bad. If someone undertakes a project in a helter-skelter manner and ends up with a windfall profit, he is a good businessman. If someone does a careful market analysis, uses every bit of caution in setting up his business and goes bankrupt, he is a bad businessman.


It is unfortunate that our preoccupation with commerce has resulted in our personal lives being influenced by commercial standards. We often evaluate ethical good and bad by results rather than by process.


Rabbi Chaim Shmulevitz, the late dean of the Mirrer Yeshiva of Jerusalem, cites the incident where Moses chastised the High Priest, Aaron, for burning a sacrificial offering against his instructions. Aaron argued that Moses may have erred in understanding the Divine commandment. Moses conceded that Aaron was right.


''You are right. G-d had indeed commanded as you said, but I had forgotten'' (Leviticus 10:20, Zevachim 101b).


Rabbi Shmulevitz points out that Moses was faced with a dilemma. Inasmuch as he was the sole conduit of G-d's word, to admit that he had forgotten something and erred would have placed the authenticity of the entire Torah (Bible) in jeopardy unto eternity. ''If Moses could err in this, where else might he have erred?'' It would perhaps be better if he said to Aaron, ''What I instructed you was right.'' Moses decided that he had only one responsibility: to tell the truth, whatever the consequences may be.


Preserving the authenticity of the Torah was G-d's problem, not his. His duty was to tell the truth.


There is an interesting question that arises from a unique halachah, Jewish law. The Talmud states that in a case of capital punishment, if all seventy-one judges of the Sanhedrin (Supreme Court) vote ''guilty,'' the case is dismissed. The rationale is that the cross-examination of the eyewitness was so meticulous that a minor discrepancy in the testimony was usually found, and this was enough to invalidate the testimony.


Therefore, if the testimony coincided so perfectly that there was not even the slightest difference between the two so that not even one of the seventy-one judges could vote ''not guilty,'' this was ample reason to believe that the witnesses had been carefully rehearsed and that the accusation and testimony was set-up.


The votes of the Sanhedrin were oral rather than by secret ballot. The question arises, suppose that seventy judges vote ''guilty,'' and the seventy-first judge happens to feel that the defendant was not guilty. If he casts a ''guilty'' vote, then the rule that a unanimous guilty verdict results in acquittal will apply, and his opinion that the defendant is not guilty will be implemented. However, if he votes ''not guilty,'' then there is no unanimous vote of ''guilty,'' and the verdict will be that of the majority: guilty. Should this last judge, therefore, vote ''guilty'' in order to achieve the acquittal that he believes to be just?


The Ohr HaChaim says that the last judge must vote his opinion of ''not guilty,'' even though that will result in the opposite of what he believes to be just. Why? Because a person is obligated to speak the truth as he sees it, rather than consider the result.


According to Torah ethics, the process must be righteous, because it is the process that lies in human hands. Results are up to G-d.

Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes inspiring articles. Sign up for our daily update. It's free. Just click here.

Rabbi Abraham J. Twerski, M.D. is a psychiatrist and ordained rabbi. He is the founder of the Gateway Rehabilitation Center in Pittsburgh, a leading center for addiction treatment. An Associate Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, he is a prolific author, with some 30 books to his credit, including, "Twerski on Chumash" (Bible), from which this was excerpted (Sales of this book help fund JWR). Comment by clicking here.

© 2004, Mesorah Publications, Ltd.