Parashat Shoftim- Gratitude Versus Entitlement
Parashat Shoftim begins with a discussion of the nation’s judiciary, and in this context it reiterates the prohibition against taking bribes (16:19). The reason why a judge may not accept a bribe from a litigant is obvious. Judges must decide their cases with clear, strict objectivity. A judge who received a handsome sum of money from a litigant before the trial will obviously come into the courtroom with predisposed favoritism toward that litigant, and will be unable to try the case honestly and objectively.
The Talmud relates a number of stories that demonstrate how far the great Hachamim went to ensure a fair, balanced disposition in the courtroom. The Sage Shemuel was once crossing a narrow bridge, and a man extended his hand and helped the Rabbi make his way across. It turned out that this individual had come to ask Shemuel to settle a legal dispute. But Shemuel refused to try the case, as the man had done him a favor which might, ever so slightly, cloud his objectivity.
The Talmud also tells that a man once did Amemor the favor of brushing a feather off his clothing. Amemor refused to preside over a court case involving this individual – since he had done him this "service" of removing a feather! Similarly, Mar Ukba refused to hear a case because one of the litigants had covered some spittle in the street as Mar Ukba was walking so that the Rabbi would not step into it. Once again, the Rabbi feared that he would be unable to judge with strict objectivity because a litigant had done him a small favor. Finally, Rabbi Yishmael refused to try a case involving his sharecropper, who worked his fields and brought him a percentage of the produce. Even though the sharecropper earned his livelihood from Rabbi Yishmael and brought him his own fruits, Rabbi Yishmael still feared he might be predisposed in the sharecropper’s favor because of his service.
The obvious question arises, did the great Sages have such weak moral conviction that they would have been so easily led to subjectivity? Were they so easily flattered that they would show preference to somebody who had dusted a feather over their jacket?
The answer is that these Sages felt immensely grateful for even the smallest favors performed for them, and even for the service performed by their employees. We question their behavior in these incidents only because we do not sense the same level of appreciation and gratitude felt by these great Sadikim. We live in a society characterized by a sense of entitlement. People today always think they deserve more than they receive, that no matter what people do for them, they are actually entitled to even more. But the great Sages of Israel looked at things from the precisely opposite perspective. They genuinely appreciated even the small favors people did for them, and felt an enormous debt of gratitude for simple gestures like lending a hand at the bridge.
This is why the Rabbis refused to try cases involving individuals who had helped them, even by performing relatively small favors. They felt such a debt of gratitude for everything done for them, that they feared that this sense of indebtedness would cloud their objectivity. Their fear thus stemmed not from a lack of moral conviction, but rather from their overwhelming sense of gratitude.
The mindset of these Sages should serve as an example to all of us. We must not take for granted all that is done for us by our spouses, other family members, employees, employers, partners, associates and friends. Rather than feeling selfishly entitled to all that we receive, we should instead feel grateful and appreciative, and never assume that we deserve all that we have.
