Israel and Humanity - The commandment against theft
VIII.
The commandment against theft.
§ 1.
It is curious to see the originally assigned by the rabbis to the prohibition against theft Noachide. She goes after them to paradise. They discover in effect in the authorization given to Adam to eat from any tree in the garden, except that the knowledge of good and evil. [1]. Everything contained in Eden was not then owned by the first man, since he had the Divine permission to be available legitimately.
The flight itself is not the only form of ownership that is guilty defended Noachide. It goes without saying that any robbery or armed robbery is an aggravation of the same crime, but the abduction of a woman prisoner is too. Similarly, the teacher who refuses to pay the salary of the servant's work, the worker who, during the hours of rest in the vineyard, eat grapes from the owner, is guilty of theft. To constitute a theft from an Israelite, it is necessary that the value of the thing taken at least a small change [2] copper peruta for the law Noachide there is no such exception. But what is very characteristic that agree in this with the Hebrew tradition which, to his eternal credit, has also endorsed the provision, she understood the slave trade in the defense to steal [3]. It is superfluous to point out everything that formal condemnation of slavery has such a wonderful time and in such an environment.
The penalty that attaches by Noachism Judaism theft in all its forms can not be more rigorous: it goes so far as capital punishment. In our opinion, this is a most that the company has to defend itself in cases where it deems necessary, but there should not see the punishment applicable alike in all circumstances. This rule is perfectly justified and understood it enough to convince them to invoke the testimony of history. We see people whose lives were such that the greatest severity against the theft appeared to be a necessity. "When you violate the security interest in property, says Montesquieu, there may be reasons that capital punishment is [4] ". It has rightly observed that the accidental crime is ten times more worthy of indulgence that professional crime and that, on balance, the latter causing the most damage to society.
§ 2.
This is not out of our subject to recall here the idea that Judaism is the property. For the tradition as the Bible, there is a correlation between the notion of acquiring and starting work, it is through work that happens to property and the transformation of an object is the title of ownership. This system is no stranger to the economic philosophy of our times and an original thinker has drawn the consequences, distinguishing between land and the productions of human labor. "The principles outlined by John Stuart Mill, he said, the absolute right of ownership can not apply to what is not work product, the raw material of the earth. No man has made the earth, it is the heritage of all primitive mankind [5] "[6] The right of land ownership therefore can not be absolute for the individual as is the creation of his own work on grounds of utility alone can justify exclusive individual possession of land. When private ownership of land is not useful, it is unfair. In light of these fundamentals, we understand the profound difference that Jewish law has drawn between the movable and immovable property belonging to one without returning to the individual, others returning after a certain period with the community. It is unnecessary to add that this distinction with the inalienability of the land is not an isolated event in history. Some old laws prohibiting the sale of the land. The system of collective ownership of land by the tribe, as found today in some countries is, according to scientists, a stage of civilization in which all peoples have passed.
