Looked at this way, blood may be seen as representing one’s intrinsic value. Thus, human life being sacred, God calls out to Cain, after Cain kills his brother Abel: “[W]hat have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood [lit. d’mei, bloods] cries out to me from the ground!” (Genesis 4:10).
The blood of a sacrificial animal is so important, the Torah designates it – when animal sacrifice is operative – for the altar as a fundamental part of providing atonement.
But the word damim is more inclusive: it also refers to the intrinsic worth of an item; thus its common use to designate money. This being the case, the commandment referred to above would also apply to one who sees his neighbor’s property in jeopardy.
Indeed, in Sefer ha’Mitzvos ha’Katzar (The Concise Book of Commandments), the Chofetz Chaim explicitly notes in Negative Commandment 82: “Included in [not standing idly by one’s neighbor’s blood] is to save one’s fellow-man from monetary loss. This is applicable everywhere, in every time, and [applies] to both men and women.”
The Ralbag (Gersonides), in regard to the traditional understanding of this mitzvah, writes that one must try to rescue his fellow man to the best of his ability – whether by utilizing words, cunning, or direct action – and if one has the ability to act but chooses not to, that person is counted as a transgressor. As rescuing one’s neighbor from financial loss is included in the mitzvah, it can be inferred that one must display such passion even when somebody’s property is at stake.
The inviolability of private property is, as I discuss in the third chapter of my book Orthodox Judaism, Liberalism, and Libertarianism, very much a Torah concept. And such an attitude toward property was adopted by later thinkers.
For instance, John Locke, in his An Essay Concerning the True Original Extent and End of Civil Government, made clear the purpose of government. “[It] has no other end but the preservation of property.”
Founding Father and second president John Adams, in his A Defence of the Constitutions of the United States, wrote: “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If ‘Thou shalt not covet’ and ‘Thou shalt not steal’ were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free.”
And Founder and fourth president James Madison, in his “Essay on Property,” remarked that “Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government which impartially secures to every man whatever is his own.”
Clearly, with the Torah’s emphasis on the division of Eretz Yisrael into ancestral territories, the prohibition of theft, and rigorous business ethics, ownership and private property are indeed precious things.
Still, it is easy to ignore the plight of those who might lose their homes or businesses when it does not directly concern us. I believe that is why, at the end of the commandment, it is necessary for God to emphasize, “I am God.”
No doubt, it is hoped that the average person, seeing his neighbor’s property at risk, would respond: “What kind of neighbor would I be if I have the ability to protest or help in some way but don’t? Without becoming a crusader, such help can easily be given with a minimum of time and effort by exercising one’s privilege to vote, or by voicing one’s opinion at a planning board meeting.
