Lo Sachmod-The prohibition against envy, jealousy, and coveting the item of another:[1]

A. Introduction:

The Torah prohibits jealousy and coveting the items of another, as listed as the tenth command of the 10 Commandments. This command is repeated twice in the Torah, once in Parshas Yisro, and the second in Parshas Vaeschanon. The Torah specifies the items which it is forbidden for one to be jealous of, and includes a friend’s house, wife, animal, slave, or any other item of his friend.

Its rampant nature: Jealousy, is arguably one of the most difficult and common emotions that people experience within a society of family and friends and coworkers. Siblings often become jealous of the success, accomplishments, or blessings of other siblings. People often become jealous of the success of their acquaintances, especially in the workforce. People are jealous of other people’s looks, of other people’s career, of other people’s fame, and of other people’s spouses and possessions.

Its trigger: The feeling of jealousy often comes instinctively, without resulting from any prior thought speech or action of the person experiencing the feeling. It is a natural human emotion and instinct embedded within the human psyche and animal soul. It is often triggered simply by seeing or hearing something about the person of whom the feelings of jealousy are targeted. The intensity and level of jealousy that one instinctively experiences is dependent on various factors, including one’s ego and temperament, being an extrovert versus an introvert, one’s social standing and own personal successes, one’s self-esteem and insecurities, having tendencies of OCD and obsessive nature, and other factors. Interestingly, women experience more jealousy than men.[2]

Its danger and consequences: Jealousy, and obsessing over it, is indeed a very dangerous emotion that can trigger hatred to the person who one is jealous of, and cause ruining of relationships, family estrangement, and in more severe cases, can lead to stealing and murder, and in marriage can lead to infidelity. It is no wonder that the Torah included this emotion as the 10th command, as controlling it is one of the gateways for preventing infidelity, stealing and murder, which is listed as the sixth through eighth command. Furthermore, even if the jealousy does not lead to any of the above due to one’s control of expressing it, or fear of doing so, nonetheless, it certainly causes the person who inhibits the jealousy to suffer and can sometimes even affect his daily life and productivity, almost similar to depression. Thus, getting rid of jealous behavior and learning how to control the emotion and not even entertain it, is a benefit for the person himself.

The difficulty of getting rid of jealousy: The truth must be asked, is it really possible to get rid of jealousy simply by following the command against jealousy? It’s not like one has a button in his heart to press to turn off the jealous nature. It’s instinctive. How can G-d command us against experiencing an instinct that He embedded within our animal soul? Furthermore, it states in Maimonides that only in the future era will jealousy and competition cease to exist, hence implying that it is here to stay and cannot be ridden of until the future era.[3]

The true definition of the jealousy prohibition: So, in this article we will see that the true halachic definition of the prohibition against jealousy has nothing to do with the emotion of jealousy, but rather with its expression. Indeed, the Torah does not command us not to feel feelings of jealousy, and although it is not virtuous and certainly there are many benefits in working on one’s jealousy, and doing so certainly fulfills the ethical and philosophical spirit of the Torah, it nonetheless does not transgress any prohibition. Linguistically, we can differentiate between jealousy and envy [i.e. Kinah], versus coveting [i.e. Sachmod]. The Torah prohibition against jealousy is specifically against coveting the item of another, and is not a general prohibition against being jealous or envious of another person [i.e. Kinah], which although may not be a proper character trait, is not under any prohibition.

Virtuous jealousy: Furthermore, jealousy and envy of another person’s stature can actually be virtuous if it motivates him to become more productive, and hence it states that “Kinas Sofrim Marbeh Chochmah” that the jealousy and envy amongst Torah scholars and authors of Torah books causes wisdom to increase, as competition is good for productivity.[4] Likewise, it states that even in the future era, and in Gan Eden, people will have envy of others portions in the world to come.[5]

B. The verses in scripture:[6]

Parshas Yisro – Lo Sachmod:[7] Do not covet [i.e. Sachmod] the house of a friend. Do not covet your friends wife, nor his male or female slave, or his ox, donkey, or any of his assets.

Parshas Vaeschanon – Lo Sisaveh:[8] Do not covet the wife of a friend [i.e. Sachmod], nor shall you desire [i.e. Sisaveh] his house, his field, male or female slave, ox, donkey or any of his possessions.

C. The mere feeling of envy or jealousy:

Halacha: In general, there are two negative commands associated with jealousy of the items of another; one dealing with the feelings of the heart [Lo Sisaveh] and the second dealing with bringing the coveted item into one’s possession [Lo Sachmod]. The Poskim[9], however, rule that the feeling of envy or jealousy alone does not transgress any of the negative commands, and likewise, jealousy of an item that a friend has which leads one to purchase that item from a different person [not the friend who one is jealous of] likewise does not transgress any prohibition. Hence, the command against jealousy is very specific to an action of taking the coveted item from the person who has it, either in actuality, or in one’s contemplation, as will be explained in C-D. However, not all Rishonim agree with this position, and some hold that the actual feeling of jealousy in the heart and coveting of the item of another person[10], or expressing it in speech[11], transgresses the prohibition, even without any contemplation of how to get the item from the person. Practically, the ruling in Halacha follows the former approach. Nevertheless, even the simple expression of the idea that one would like to have the item of another, is considered sinful.[12]

Midas Chassidus:[13]  Despite the above letter of the law clarification, it is certainly considered an act of piety for one not to covet the item of another person even in his heart, even if he does not contemplate how to purchase the item from him.

The ability to control feelings of jealousy:[14] A person should not believe that controlling feelings of jealousy is impossible[15], as the Torah would not command us in something that is impossible to fulfill. Rather, every individual has the choice to control his thoughts and feelings of his heart against coveting another’s items. Only the fools believe otherwise.

The mental exercise to prevent jealousy – G-d gives man exactly what he needs:[16] A person can contemplate that everything that is in the possession of another person, was given to that person by G-d Himself, and it is only relevant for that person to have. Thus, the same way he would not truly covet to marry the daughter of a King or president and become infatuated with this feeling until he achieves his goal, due to it being unrealistic for the kings or presidents daughter to marry a peasant like him, so too, he should view every aspect that someone else has as an impossibility and unrealistic goal to retrieve for himself. One should contemplate that G-d gives man whatever G-d desires him to have and he will not be able to get things that G-d does not want him to have. [Everything that G-d provides a Jew with is for the sake of him using it in divine service. Accordingly, all money that is in the possession of a Jew has an instruction and obligation of being used for a purpose in the service of G-d by that Jew. In the teachings of Chassidus this matter is taken a step deeper, as it is explained there that all the possessions of a Jew contains Divine sparks that relates specifically to his soul.  Accordingly, it is understood that one who covets the item of another and is successful in getting the coveted item from him, then he prevents that person from performing his divine mission with that item and perhaps that item will never receive elevation and rectification, as a result.[17]]

Jealousy results from lack of love for a fellow Jew:[18] The command of Lo Sachmod corresponds to the command of Veahavta Lereiacha Kamocha. The reason for this is because feelings of jealousy can only result if there is lack of love for a fellow Jew. If one indeed fulfills the command of Veahavta Lereicha Komacha then he will automatically be able to also fulfill the command of not coveting the item of his friend.

It states in the Midrash:[19] Whoever covets items that he is not meant to have, than that which he covets he will not get and that which he already has will be taken from him.

D. The prohibition of Lo Sachmod-Buying or taking a coveted item from its owner:[20]

Pressuring an individual to sell an item that is not for sale:[21] Whoever [man or woman[22]] covets the house, or vessels, or any other item which can potentially be purchased, from his friend [i.e. a Jew[23]], transgresses the negative command of Lo Sachmod if the item was not for sale, and he pressured the owner to sell him the item, until he finally sold it to him. [This command is listed as one of the 365 negative commands.[24] The prohibition is transgressed irrelevant of how much one pay for the item, even if he paid the full amount, and even if he paid more than the items value.[25] It is likewise transgressed if he traded the person’s item for another item which is of greater value.[26]]

The form and amount of pressure:[27] The prohibition is transgressed whether one pressured his friend to perform the sale through friends who acted as intermediaries to press and pressure him to make the sale[28], or whether one did so himself by personally pressuring his friend [i.e. Heftzer][29], or asking him to sell it [i.e. Bakasha[30]] until he finally sold it to him. In both scenarios one transgresses the prohibition of Lo Sachmod. [This applies even if those friends hired other friends to do the job of pressuring him until he agreed to do the sale.[31] Thus, if one is a powerful person, or one sends a powerful person, to ask the owner to sell the item, then even if only a slight amount of pressure is needed to force him into the sale, the prohibition is transgressed. Accordingly, one may not ask his friend who is intimidated by him to sell him his item, if one knows that his friend will not be able to refuse his request due to the intimidation.[32] Furthermore, based on this some Poskim[33] rule that one should never ask a private person who is not running a store to sell him an item, even if he does not exert pressure and simply wants to discover if he is interested in the sale. However, others rule that there is never a problem in simply asking a person one time if he is interested in selling an item if he does not intend to apply any pressure on him to make the sale, as explained in Q&A.]   

If the sale never took place despite the pressure:[34] The prohibition of Lo Sachmod is only transgressed if in the end of the day one was successful in purchasing the coveted item from his friend as a result of the pressure that he faced. However, if in conclusion one was not successful in purchasing from the owner the item which he coveted [and he thus did not take the item into his possession], then he does not transgress this negative command prohibition.[35] [However, one does transgress the command of Lo Sisaveh, as will be explained in C. Likewise, even the simple expression of the idea that one would like to have the item of another, is considered sinful.[36]]

If the seller was forced to do the sale:[37] If one forced the owner to sell him the item, such as through physical force, or threat and blackmail and the like, then he transgress the Biblical prohibition of Lo Sachmod.

If the seller consented to the sale:[38] It is evident from the above ruling, that the prohibition is transgressed even if at the end of the day the seller consented to sell the item and says “I want to sell it”, if this  consent was achieved as a result of the pressure. [Nonetheless, if the seller truly agreed with a full heart to sell the item as a result of the pressure which convinced him to do so after seeing that it is indeed for his benefit to sell the item, then it is disputed in Poskim[39] if the prohibition is still transgressed.]

If the owner gave the person the item as a present:[40] It is disputed amongst the Poskim whether the prohibition is transgressed only if the item was sold to the person pressuring the owner, in contrast to it being gifted to him as a present in which case perhaps there is no prohibition transgressed. Or, if it is transgressed even if the owner gave it to him as a present as a result of the pressure.

If the person lent or rented the item to the person:[41] There is no prohibition against pressuring the owner to lend one or rent one the item. However, some rule that one should not be lenient in this matter.

Took item without consent of owner but with intent to pay for it:[42] One who forcibly purchases the item from the owner without his consent, such as if the owner refuses to sell the item and he takes it by force and pays the owner for it, whatever its value may be, then although he does not transgress the stealing prohibition, he transgresses the prohibition of Lo Sachmod. Likewise, if he was paid to be a custodian to guard an object for its owner, and he lies and tells the owner that the item was lost and goes ahead and pays the owner for the item, then he transgresses the prohibition of Lo Sachmod.[43] This prohibition however only applies towards the item of a Jew, however, it is not transgressed if one takes an item from a gentile with intent of paying the gentile its full value, even if the item is not for sale and the Gentile does not agree to sell it.[44]

If one steals the item: In the event that one took the coveted item against the will of the owner without paying for it, and without intent of eventually doing so [i.e. stole it], then many Poskim[45] rule that he also transgresses the prohibition of Lo Sachmod, in addition to transgressing the stealing prohibition. However, it is disputed amongst the Poskim[46] if this additional transgression of Lo Sachmod only applies in the event that one first pressured the owner to sell him the item, and due to his refusal to do so, the person stole it, or if it even applies if one steals an item without prior  discussion with the owner about a possible sale. According to all opinions, if the item was taken accidentally, such as if he thought that the item belongs to him, then the prohibition is not transgressed.[47]

Returning the item to the owner as part of repentance:[48] One is not required to return the coveted item to the owner in the event that a consensual sale took place, even if the prohibition of Lo Sachmod was transgressed in the process.[49] However, if a consensual sale did not take place, such as he stole or took it by force in exchange for payment, then the item must be returned to the owner.[50]

If one purchases the coveted item from another owner – Does one transgress the prohibition if he purchases the item from a store or private seller:[51] The prohibition of Lo Sachmod is only transgressed if one covets the actual item that is owned by his friend and that it enter his possession, and he applies pressure to the owner until he retrieves his item. However, to simply covet an item that is similar to the item of the owner, does not transgressed any prohibition. Accordingly, there is no prohibition transgressed with one being envious of an item that a friend owns and then going and buying that item from a seller. [Thus, if one noticed that one’s friend purchased a brand-new phone, or garment, or car, or house, and he became jealous of him and decided to also purchase one for himself, then he does not transgress anything, and it is permitted for him to make the purchase. It is permitted for him to purchase it even from the same place that his friend purchased it from, and he does not need to find a different seller.]

Pressuring the owner to sell the item to another person:[52] It is disputed amongst the Poskim if the prohibition of Lo Sachmod is transgressed if one pressures an owner to sell his item to another person, and he does so due to this pressure.

Forcing or pressuring someone to purchase an item or service:[53] Some Poskim[54] rule that forcing or pressuring a person to purchase an item or service until he does so, transgresses the prohibition of Chamsan. Other Poskim[55], however, argue that no such prohibition is transgressed when a person agrees and consents to the purchase, even if it resulted from a salesman insisting and pestering the customer. Likewise, doing so does not contain the prohibition of Lo Sachmod, as so is the way of business. Nonetheless, it is certainly improper to put someone in a position that he is forced to agree to purchase an item and therefore even in business, over persistence and pestering of customers should be avoided.

E. The prohibition of Lo Sisaveh – Thinking of ways of purchasing the item:[59]

[In addition to the coveting prohibition of Lo Sachmod, there is a further prohibition of Lo Sisaveh. The difference between the two prohibitions are as follows: Although the prohibition of Lo Sachmod is not transgressed until one actually purchases [or takes] the coveted item from his friend as a result of his pressure, nonetheless,] from the moment that he begins to covet the item in his heart and thinks of ways of purchasing the item [i.e. thinks of ways of convincing the owner to sell him the item], then he transgresses the negative command of Lo Sisaveh.[60] [This command is listed as one of the 365 negative commands, independent of the negative command of Lo Sachmod.[61] However, if one simply covets the item in his heart and desires it to be his but does not actively contemplate a plan of how to get the item from the person and have him agree to sell it to him, or take it by force, or steal it, then there is no prohibition that is transgressed.[62] In summary, in all cases that one transgresses Lo Sachmod upon getting the coveted item, he already transgresses Lo Sisaveh the moment he begins contemplating how to accomplish getting the item. And, and all cases that getting the item does not transgress Lo Sachmod, contemplating getting it likewise does not transgress Lo Sisaveh. See Halacha D for all the cases that transgress Lo Sachmod.]

Contemplating buying the item from another owner:[63] The prohibition of Lo Sisaveh is only transgressed if one covets the actual item that is owned by his friend and that it enter his possession, and contemplates applying pressure to the owner until he retrieve his item. However, to simply covet an item that is similar to the item of the owner, does not transgress any prohibition. Accordingly, there is no prohibition transgressed with one being envious of an item that a friend owns and then contemplating how to buy that item from a seller.

F. The severity of jealousy of another person’s item:[64]

Leads to stealing and murder:[65] Coveting another person’s item [in one’s heart] leads one to think of ways of how to purchase the item from him, which in turn can lead to stealing [as if the owner refuses to sell it even after they are offered a lot of money and pressured into the sale, then one may come to steal it from him[66]], which in turn can lead to murder [as if the owner tries to physically prevent him from stealing the item, then one may come to murder him as indeed occurred in the story of Achav and Navos[67] as is brought in  the end of the article, and from Geichazi and Achan[68]]. [Furthermore, this can lead one to transgress all of the 10 Commandments, and for this reason it was brought as the last of the 10 Commandments.[69]]

The transgressions:[70] Thus, we learn that one who covets the item of another transgresses one negative command [i.e. Lo Sisaveh], and one who purchases the coveted item from the owner either through pressuring him or asking him, either personally or through friends, transgresses two negative commands, and therefore the verse states “Lo Sachmod” and “Lo Sisaveh.” [And, if he steals the item, then he transgresses three negative commands.[71]]

Losing that which you have:[72] It states in the Midrash:[73] Whoever covets that which he is not meant to have, than that which he covets he will not get and that which he already has will be taken from him.

G. The objects and items of which of the coveting prohibition applies to:[74]

The prohibition of Lo Sachmod only applies towards items that can be purchased from its owner, such as a house, a slave, an animal, and other objects and belongings of the like [i.e. phone, car, etc]. Thus, it applies to all items that have a monetary value[75], and are able to be purchased on the market[76] and change from one hand of ownership to another. However, things that are not of monetary value and are unable to be handed from one person to another, to leave the possession of the current owner and enter the possession of a new owner, are not relevant to the prohibition of Lo Sachmod.

Envy of someone’s Torah knowledge:[77] Accordingly, there is no prohibition in being envious of another person’s Torah knowledge, even if one desires to learn from him and gain all the knowledge that he has. It is even permitted for one to pressure the Torah scholar until he agrees to teach him.

Envy of someone’s occupation:[78] Likewise, it is permitted for one to be envious of another Jews occupation and career even if one desires for him to teach and train him in the occupation. It is even permitted for one to pressure the individual until he agrees to teach him.[However, one should not scheme to take over the job of another individual and doing so transgresses Lo Sachmod, at least in its spirit.[79]]

Envy of another person’s looks and beauty:[80] Likewise, it is permitted for one to be envious of another Jews beauty, such as his or her eyes or hair.

Real estate:[81] The prohibition of Lo Sachmod and Lo Sisaveh applies towards real estate, whether it be a house or field, or other property, as explicitly stated in Scripture.

Employee:[82] It is permitted for one to be envious of another Jews skills even if one desires to hire him as one’s employee. It is even permitted for one to pressure the individual until he agrees to take the job.

Items that are for sale:[83] The prohibition of Lo Sachmod and Lo Sisaveh is only transgressed when one convinces an owner who is not interested in selling the item into selling it to him. If, however, the person wants to sell it to make money and is actually looking for buyers, then nothing is transgressed and this is the regular way of business. [Furthermore, even if the owner is not interested in selling it to a specific customer, it is permitted for the customer to pressure the owner until he agrees to sell it to him.[84]]

Money and wealth:[85] It is disputed if one transgresses the prohibition of Lo Sachmod and Lo Sisaveh if one covets the money and wealth of another person, and not a specific object that he owns.

Items that are jointly owned:[86] The prohibition of Lo Sachmod and Lo Sisaveh applies even to jointly owned items, such as if one covets an item that is jointly owned by two people or more, [such as in a Corporation or public company, or real estate that has many investors]. However, it is disputed as to whether a co-owner and partner transgresses the prohibition if he covets the portion that is owned by his other partner or partners.

Rented items:[87] It is disputed if one transgresses the prohibition of Lo Sachmod if one covets the rented item of another person, [such as if he applies pressure to his friend to rent to him his leased car].

Coveting a Mitzvah item:[88] The prohibition of Lo Sachmod does not apply towards a Mitzvah item which the owner is obligated according to Jewish law to provide to another. Thus, it is permitted to pressure a wealthy man to give charity, or to pressure a person who has excess Matzah to give from his Matzah to a Jew who does not have any. However, some Poskim[89] rule that the prohibition of Lo Sachmod does apply towards the mitzvah item of a person if that person is not obligated to provide it to another. Thus, it is forbidden for one to pressure the owner of a beautiful Esrog, or unique pair of tefillin, to sell it to him.

Coveting one’s organ:[90] One does not transgress the prohibition of Lo Sachmod if he applies pressure to someone to donate an organ on his behalf and certainly if it is on the behalf of another.

Jealousy of spiritual matters: Jealousy and envy of another person’s stature can actually be virtuous if it motivates him to become more productive, and hence it states that “Kinas Sofrim Marbeh Chochmah” that the jealousy and envy amongst Torah scholars and authors of Torah books causes wisdom to increase, as competition is good for productivity.[91] Likewise, it states that even in the future era, and in Gan Eden, people will have envy of others portions in the world to come.[92]

H. Coveting another man’s wife:[93]

The prohibition of Lo Sachmod[94] and Lo Sisaveh[95] applies towards another man’s wife, as explicitly stated in Scripture.

The definition of the prohibition of Lo Sachmod: Many Poskim[96] learn that the prohibition is against causing and influencing the husband to divorce his wife in order so he can marry her. However, it is not transgressed if one commits adultery with another man’s wife, which is independently forbidden due to the prohibition of “Lo Sinaf.” Other Poskim[97], however, learn to the contrary, that the prohibition is not transgressed if one influences the husband to divorce his wife in order to marry her. Rather, the prohibition is transgressed if one commits adultery with another man’s wife, with some[98] learning that it is transgressed the moment he brings her into his home, and others[99] learning that it is only transgressed if he has relations with her. According to this latter approach, committing adultery transgresses two negative commands; Lo Sinaf and Lo Sachmod. Other Poskim[100] learn that the prohibition is transgressed the moment one covets another man’s wife even in his mind and heart [and hence according to this approach there is no difference between the prohibition of Lo Sachmod and Lo Sisaveh upon coveting another man’s wife].

The definition of the prohibition of Lo Sachmod:[101] In addition to the coveting prohibition of Lo Sachmod, there is an additional prohibition of Lo Sisaveh. The difference between the two prohibitions are as follows: Although the prohibition of Lo Sachmod is not transgressed until one actually takes the wife of his friend [either in an adulterous relationship or after convincing him to divorce his wife, as explained above], nonetheless, from the moment that he begins to covet another man’s wife in his heart and thinks of ways of having her [either in an adulterous relationship or after convincing him to divorce his wife, as explained above], then he transgresses the negative command of Lo Sisaveh.[102] [However, if one simply covets the wife in his heart and desires her but does not actively contemplate a plan of how to get her from the husband, then according to many Poskim, this prohibition is not transgressed.]

Arrusa:[103] The prohibition of Lo Sachmod and Lo Sisaveh applies even towards a man’s Arrusa, whom she is Halachically engaged to, even if they have yet to wed.

Single:[104] The prohibition of Lo Sachmod  and Lo Sisaveh does not apply towards a single girl, and hence is permitted for one to apply pressure to a girl to have her agree to marry him.

Man’s daughter:[105] The prohibition of Lo Sachmod  and Lo Sisaveh does not apply towards a man’s daughter  and hence it is permitted for one to apply pressure to the father of a girl until he agrees to give his daughter to him for marriage.

Not to cause others to be jealous:[106] It is forbidden for a man to beautify himself in order so he  appear attractive in the eyes of a married woman and cause her to be infatuated with him in her heart. Likewise, it is forbidden for one to praise the beauty of a married woman in front of other men as doing so can lead them to covet her.[107]

May a woman covet another woman’s husband? The prohibition of Lo Sachmod is not transgressed if a woman covets another woman’s husband, as according to Jewish law, polygamy is allowed, and so was done by our matriarchs.

J. The law regarding Gentiles, Apikores, Hekdish:

Seven Noahide laws – Are Gentiles prohibited from transgressing Lo Sachmod:[109] Some Poskim[110] rule that Gentiles are included within the prohibition of Lo Sachmod, and it is hence forbidden for a Gentile to covet the item of another person, whether Jew or Gentile, in a way that is prohibited for a Jew, as explained above.[111]

A Jew coveting the item of a Gentile:[112] One who covets the item of a gentile does not transgress the prohibitions of either “Lo Sachmod” or “Lo Sisaveh.” Accordingly, one who forcibly purchases the item from a gentile owner without his consent, such as if the if the owner refuses to sell the item and he takes it by force and pays the owner for it, whatever its value may be, then he does not transgress neither the stealing prohibition, nor the prohibition of Lo Sachmod. Likewise, it is not transgressed if one takes an item from a gentile with intent of paying the gentile its full value, even if the item is not for sale and the Gentile does not agree to sell it.[113]

Coveting an item jointly owned by a Jew and Gentile: Some Poskim[114] rule that the prohibition of Lo Sachmod does not apply to an item that is jointly owned by a Jew and Gentile, just as it does not apply to an item owned by a gentile.

Coveting the item of an apostate Jew [i.e. Apikores]: Some Poskim[115] rule that an apostate Jew who is in the category of Moridin Velo Maalin, has the same status as a Gentile regarding the prohibition of Lo Sachmod.

Coveting an item of Hekdish: Some Poskim[116] rule that the prohibition of Lo Sachmod does not apply to an item that is owned by Hekdish.

E. Not to cause others to be jealous:

Not to cause others to be jealous:[118] It is forbidden for a man to beautify himself in order so he  appear attractive in the eyes of a married woman and cause her to be infatuated with him in her heart. Likewise, it is forbidden for one to praise the beauty of a married woman in front of other men as doing so can lead them to covet her.[119] [Seemingly, the same should apply to other objects of the person, that one should not show off his assets and belongings and cause others to be envious of him and covet his objects.]

Not to cause Gentiles to be jealous of a Jews Jewelry:[120] The Sages enacted that in commemoration for the destruction, upon a woman dressing herself with jewelry, she is not to wear all the types of jewelry that she usually wears and is rather to leave one out. [Thus, if she owns and wears a necklace, rings, earrings, and bracelet she is not to wear all of them at the same time.[121] Those that wear all of their jewelry, aside for transgressing this law, also cause jealousy amongst the gentiles.[122] On Shabbos and Yom Tov, some Poskim[123] rule it is permitted to wear all the available jewelry. Other Poskim[124] however rule it applies even on Shabbos and Yom Tov. Although the above ruling is recorded in the Poskim[125] without argument, practically, today the women are no longer accustomed to leave out a piece of jewelry even during the week.[126]]

G. Practical examples:

1. A son-in-law should not pressure his father-in-law to give him gifts and items that he owns.[127]
2. One should not pressure a friend to give him some of his snack or food, and therefore a child may not pressure another child to give him a lick of his ices.[128]

Melachim 1 Chapter 21: the story of Achav & the vineyard of Navos HaYizraeili

1. Achav desires the vineyard of Navos:

• Achav asks Navos to sell him his vineyard: The following event occurred [which brought the death of Achav even closer[129]]. Navos the Yizraelite had a vineyard in Yizrael, next to the palace of Achav, the king of Shomron. Achav approached Navos with the following proposition: “Give me your vineyard so I can use it for a vegetable garden since it is near my house, and in exchange for it I will give you a vineyard which is of even better quality, and if you want money instead, I will give you money.”
• Navos declines the offer: Navos replied to Achav, “Heaven forbid that I should give up the inheritance of my forefathers to you.”
• Izevel persuades Achav to take the vineyard by force: Achav arrived home very upset due to the response of Navos the Yizraelite. He lay on his bed and turned his face away, and did not eat bread [due to the state of sadness]. Izevel his wife came to him, and asked him as to why he seems so down and as to why he is not eating any bread. Achav told her of the proposition that he gave to Navos the Yizraelite and the fact that he refused it. Izevel his wife said to him, “Why don’t you exercise your kingly power over Israel? Get up and eat bread and let your heart be merry, I will give you Navos the Yizraelite’s vineyard.”

2. Navos is framed and promptly killed, and Achav takes possession of his vineyard:

• A letter is sent instructing for false witnesses to testify against Navos: Izevel wrote letters in Achav’s name and sealed them with his seal, and she sent the letters to the elders and the officials of the city of Yizrael, where Navos lived. The letter stated that the elders should proclaim a fast day [on which it was accustomed to search for the sins of the people[130]] and place Navos in the forefront of the people. It instructed them to set up two wicked men opposite him for them to testify against him that he had cursed G-d and the king, in order so they can put him to death through stoning.
• Navos is killed due to the false testimony: The men of the city, the elders and the officials that dwelled in his city, did as they were instructed in the letter that was sent to them by Izevel. They proclaimed a fast, and they set Navos at the head of the people. Two wicked men came forward and sat opposite him, and the wicked men testified against Navos in front of the people saying, that Navos had cursed G-d and the king. They took him out of the city and stoned him and he died.
• Achav takes possession of the vineyard of Navos: Messengers were sent to Izevel informing her that Navos had been stoned and has died. When Izevel heard the news that Navos was stoned and killed she told Achav that he should get up and take possession of the vineyard of Navos the Yizraelite, being that he is now dead [and the assets of those killed by capital punishment go to the king, as well as that Navos was the nephew of Achav, and Izevel had him and all of his sons killed making Achav the heir[131]]. When Achav heard that Navos had died, he got up and went to the vineyard of Navos the Yizraelite to take possession of it.

3. Eliyahu prophesizes to Achav of the annihilation of him and his descendants:

• Eliyahu receives a prophecy to confront Achav with: Hashem spoke to Eliyahu the Tishbite saying, “Arise and go down toward Achav the king of Israel, who is in Shomron. Behold! he is in Navos’s vineyard where he has gone down to take possession of it. You shall confront him by saying, So said Hashem: “Haratzachta Vegam Yarashta/Have you murdered and also inherited?” You shall then say to him: In the place that the dogs have licked the blood of Navos, so shall the dogs lick your blood.”
• Eliyahu confronts Achav and relates the prophecy of his demise: [Eliyahu went down to the vineyard and met Achav] and Achav said to him: “Have you found me even here, my enemy?” Eliyahu replied to him saying, “I have found you because you have sold yourself to do what is bad in the eyes of Hashem. I will bring disaster upon you, and I will obliterate you and your descendants. I will cut off from Achav every male child. I will make your house as the house of Yeravam, the son of Nevat, and the house of Basha the son of Achiyah, because of the anger which you have angered Me, and that you have caused Israel to sin.”
• A prophecy of the demise of Izevel: Also regarding Izevel, Hashem gave Eliyahu a prophecy saying that “The dogs will eat Izevel in the valley of Yizrael. The corpses of Achav which are in the city will be eaten by the dogs, and the corpses which are in the fields will be eaten by the fowl of the sky.

4. The aftermath [Melachim 2 Chapter 9]:

• Yehoram goes himself to greet the entourage together with Achaziyahu: Yehoram the king of Israel [the son of Achav and Izevel] decided to personally ride in his chariot to greet Yeihu and see what was going on. Achaziyahu, the king of Yehuda, also joined him in his own chariot. They rode towards Yeihu, and found him in the territory of Navos the Yizralite. When Yehoram saw Yeihu, he asked him as to how he was doing, “Is there peace, Yeihu?” Yeihu replied to the king with insolence saying, “You are not worthy of peace. Is there peace with the harlotries of Izevel your mother and her numerous sorceries?”
• Yehoram flees and is killed in the process: Yehoram realized that Yeihu has rebelled against him and so he turned his hands around on the harness of the horse and began to flee. As he was fleeing, he quickly warned Achaziyahu that he should flee as well as Yeihu has rebelled. Yeihu then put all of his strength into his bow, and struck Yehoram between his arms, and the arrow penetrated through his heart. Yehoram [died and] fell in his chariot, onto his knees in a prostrating position.
• Yeihu has the body of the king thrown into the field of Navos: Yeihu told his minister named Bidkar to carry the body of the king and discard it in the territory of the field of Navos the Yizralite. “For you remember when you and I were riding together behind Achav his father, when Hashem said a prophecy against him [through his prophet Eliyahu[132]] saying, “I indeed saw the blood of Navos and the blood of his children [who were also killed, or who could have been born and were not able to[133]] last night? I will seek retribution from you on this very plot of land.” Now [said Yeihu to his minister], pick up the corpse of Yehoram and throw him into this plot of land as Hashem had instructed.”

[1] See Admur Hilchos Gezeila Ugeneiva Halacha 5; Michaber C.M. 359:10-12; Tur 359:10; Rambam Gezeila 1:9-12; Bava Metzia 5b; Shemos 20:14; Imrei Yaakov on Admur ibid; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech “Lo Sachmod” vol. 34 pp. 449-484; Sefer Lereiacha Kamocha; Piskeiy Teshuvos 156:5 p. 328

[2] Females are predominately associated with emotion, which may be why they are thought of as being more jealous than males.

[3] Rambam end of Hilchos Melachim 5:5

[4] Bava Basra 21a and 22a

[5] Bava Basra 75a; Hayom Yom 19^th Nissan

[6] Differences between the two versions of the command: 1) The first version of the command in Yisro uses the term Sachmod while the second use of the word Sisaveh. 2) The first version mentions wife as its second example, while the second version mentions it as its first example.

[7] Shemos 20:14

[8] Devarim 5:18

[9] All Poskim in C-D, including: Admur ibid; Michaber C.M. 359:10 and 12; Tur ibid; Rambam ibid; Sefer Hamitzvos L.S. 265-266; Yireim Mitzvah 115; Mordechai Bava Kama 66; Ralbag Shemos 20:14 and Devarim 5:18; Mechilta Yisro 8; Zohar 3:261; Smeh 359:17; Aruch Hashulchan 359:8; See Har Melech 7:544; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 450 footnote 8

[10] See Even Ezra Shemos 20:1; Yehuda Yaaleh C.M. 33; Semak Mitzvah 19; Kad Hakemach Erech Chemda; Menoras Hamaor; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 451 footnote 20 and 22

[11] See Chizkuni Devarim; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 451 footnote 21

[12] See Derisha C.M. 371:9; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 458 footnote 69

[13] Aruch Hashulchan 359:8

[14] Sefer Hachinuch Mitzvah 416

[15] Sefer Hachinuch Mitzvah 416; Even Ezra Shemos 20:14 “Many people question this mitzvah as how is it possible for a person not to covet a beautiful item that he sees..”

[16] Even Ezra Shemos 20:14; See also Seforno 20:14; Perisha 359:10

[17] See Likkutei Sichos Vol. 12 Sicha 2

[18] Ramban 20:14

[19] Midrash Raba Bereishis 20:10; Sotah 9b; Kad Hakemach ibid

[20] Admur Hilchos Gezeila Ugeneiva Halacha 5; Michaber C.M. 359:10; Tur 359:10; Rambam Gezeila 1:9; Bava Metzia 5b; Kitzur SHU”A 182:5; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech “Lo Sachmod” vol. 34 pp. 449-484

Lashes: Lashes is not given for transgressing the prohibition of Lo Sachmod. [Rambam ibid; Raavad ibid; Chinuch ibid; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid pp. 463-467 footnotes 112-148] Some rule this is because it is a Lav without a Maaseh. [Rambam ibid; See Maggid Mishneh on Rambam Gezeila Veaveida 1:9 that it does not have a Maaseh because in Rambam’s opinion, as opposed to Raavad’s, the transgression applies even if the owner consents to the sale; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 463-464 footnotes 112-122] Others rule it is a Lav with a Maaseh but is exempt from lashes because one must return the item. [Raavad ibid “I have not seen something more preposterous than this, as there is no greater action then taking the item. Rather there are no lashes because he has to pay back and return the object to the person whom he took the item from”; Maggid Mishneh on Rambam Gezeila Veaveida 1:9 that the Raavads opinion is more acceptable than the Rambam’s; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 464-467 footnotes 123-148]

[21] Admur ibid; Michaber ibid; Tur ibid; Rambam ibid; Bava Metzia ibid; Kitzur SHU”A ibid; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that the prohibition is only transgressed if one did not get the consent of the seller to sell the item, as they learn that the prohibition of Lo Sachmod is specifically against taking an item with intent to pay for it without the permission of the owner. However, if the owner consents, even if this is the result of immense pressure, then there is no prohibition transgressed as this is part of the world of business. [Hasagas HaRavad on Rambam ibid; Tosafus Sanhedrin 25b; Semag L.S. 158; Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 454 footnotes 37-42 and in Imrei Yaakov ibid] Other Poskim rule that the prohibition is only transgressed if one takes the coveted item without paying for it [hence transgressing both the stealing and Lo Sachmod prohibition]. However, if one pays for the item, even if he does so without the consent of the owner, then no prohibition is transgressed. [Tosafus Sanhedrin 25b; See Ir Shushan, brought and negated in Smeh ibid and Beir Heiytiv 359:6 in defense of Ir Shushan, brought and negated in Imrei Yaakov Biurim that the Biblical prohibition of Lo Sachmod does not apply anytime he pays for the item and it is only Rabbinical; See Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 454-455 footnotes 43-44] However, some of these Poskim rule that the Rabbinical prohibition of Lo Sachmod does apply even if he pays for the item. [Ir Shushan and Beir Hieytiv ibid]

[22] Pashut; Chinuch Mitzvah 416 “Kol Baeiy Olam”; Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 38

[23] See D!

[24] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvos L.S. 265; Bahag 33; Yireim; Semag; Semak; Chinuch Mitzvah 38; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 449 footnote 5

[25] Rambam ibid

[26] See Sefer Hamitzvos L.S. 266; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 452 footnotes 25-28

[27] Admur ibid; Michaber ibid; Tur ibid; Rambam ibid; Bava Metzia ibid; Kitzur SHU”A ibid; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 457- footnotes 58-

[28] Admur ibid; Michaber ibid; Rambam ibid; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 449 footnote 3

[29] Admur ibid; Omitted from Rambam ibid

[30] In the beginning of this Halacha, Admur and Rambam 1:9 omit the idea that simply asking him to sell a transgresses the command. However in the conclusion of the Halacha, Admur and Rambam 1:12 includes simply asking the person to sell it as part of the prohibition. Vetzaruch Iyun as to the previous omission and later inclusion of this word. All in all, however, it is clear that simply asking without pressure to see if the person is at all interested in selling the item does not transgress anything, and it is only if the request comes after pressuring the person, that the transgression takes place. Perhaps, one can suggest the difference between Heftzer and Bakasha; [Imrei Yaakov ibid 45 and in Biurim ibid]

[31] Toldos Shmuel Mitzvah 38 1:4; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 450 footnote 12

[32] See Shaareiy Teshuvah of Rabbeinu Yona 3:43; Orchos Chaim 2:43; Likkutei Sefas Emes 17; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 452-453 footnote 36 and p. 457 footnote 59; Imrei Yaakov on Admur ibid 40

[33] Aruch Hashulchan C.M. 359:13; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 457 footnote 60

[34] Admur ibid; Michaber C.M. 359:10 and 12; Tur ibid; Rambam ibid “He does not transgress until he takes the item that he coveted”; Sefer Hamitzvos L.S. 265-266; Yireim Mitzvah 115; Mordechai Bava Kama 66; Ralbag Shemos 20:14 and Devarim 5:18; Mechilta Yisro 8; Zohar 3:261; Smeh 359:17; Aruch Hashulchan 359:8; See Har Melech 7:544; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 450 footnote 8

[35] The reason: One only transgresses this negative command if he actually purchases the coveted item, as the verse [Devarim 7:25] states “Lo Sachmod Kesef Vezahav Aleihem Velakachta Lecha.” [Admur ibid; Smeh ibid; Rambam ibid; Aruch Hashulchan ibid] Hence showing that the concept of Sachmod is connected with taking and purchasing.

[36] See Derisha C.M. 371:9; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 458 footnote 69

[37] Smeh 359:14; See Michaber C.M. 359:10; Seemingly, this is no different than the case of one who takes the item with intent to pay without the owner’s consent, of which Admur and other Poskim rule that Lo Sachmod is transgressed, and is a Kal Vechomer from one who gets the owner to consent to the sale; See Tosafos Bava Metzia 5a and Sanhedrin 25b and Rashi there that such a person is a Chamsan; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Chamsan

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that he does not transgress a Biblical prohibition of Lo Sachmod in such a case and he is simply called a Chamsan, which is Rabbinical. [Ir Shushan, brought and negated in Smeh ibid; Beir Heiytiv 359:6 in defense of Ir Shushan and negation of Smeh]

[38] Implication of Admur ibid and Michaber ibid; Rambam ibid as explained in Magid Mishneh and Megilas Sefer ibid; Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 452-453 footnotes 29-33; See Imrei Yaakov ibid 44

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that the prohibition is only transgressed if one did not get the consent of the seller to sell the item, as they learn that the prohibition of Lo Sachmod is specifically against taking an item with intent to pay for it without the permission of the owner. However, if the owner consents, even if this is the result of immense pressure, then there is no prohibition transgressed as this is part of the world of business. [Hasagas HaRavad on Rambam ibid “Velo Amar Rotzeh Ani”; Tosafus Sanhedrin 25b in 2^nd answer; Semag L.S. 158; Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 454 footnotes 37-42 Poskim in Imrei Yaakov ibid] Other Poskim rule that the Biblical prohibition of Lo Sachmod does not apply anytime he pays for the item and it is only Rabbinical. [Ir Shushan, brought and negated in Smeh ibid and Beir Heiytiv 359:6 in defense of Ir Shushan, brought and negated in Imrei Yaakov Biurim] Other Poskim rule that the prohibition is only transgressed after consent, if the individual was unable to refuse the request due to the immense pressure. However, if he could have refused the request being that the pressure was not so great, then the prohibition is not transgressed. [See Likkutei Sefas Emes 17; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 454 footnotes 36]

Chamsan: Although it is evident that one transgresses Lo Sachmod in such a case, nonetheless, he’s not considered a Chamsan, as one is only considered a Chamsan if he does not receive the consent of the owner to go through with the sale. [See Bava Kama 62a; Tosafos Bava Metzia 5a and Sanhedrin 25b and Rashi there; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Chamsan; Imrei Yaakov on Admur Biurim  “Sheiyn Dato”]

[39] See Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 38:2 [transgresses]; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 452 footnotes 34-36;

[40] See Shaareiy Teshuvah 3:6 that he transgresses also by a gift and so writes Shemiras Halashon 2 and Sefer Hamitzvos Hakatzar L.S. 40; Betzel Hachochma 3:44-10; Eretz Tzevi 3:6; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 455 footnote 45 and p. 456 footnotes 52-55; See regarding pressuring the owner to disown the item so one can acquire it that doing so does not transgress the prohibition: Maharil Diskin Devarun 5:18; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 452 footnotes

[41] Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 470 footnote 166

[42] Admur Kuntrus Achron 440:11 [See there that if one takes the item on his own accord, without knowledge or permission of the owner, with intent to pay for it that he transgresses Lo Sachmod, and not Lo Sigzol/Signov]; Smeh 359:14 regarding a forced sale that it transgresses Lo Sachmod Biblically; The following Poskim rule that Lo Sachmod is transgressed specifically in this case, and not in the case where the seller agrees: Hasagas HaRavad on Rambam ibid “Velo Amar Rotzeh Ani” and Tosafus Sanhedrin 25b in 2^nd answer and Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 454 footnotes 37-4; See Bava Kama 5b and Tosafus Sanhedrin 25b in his question regarding Shomer paying for Pikadon and keeping it for himself under claim it was lost or stolen [See Michaber C.M. 359:9 that such a person who keeps a Pikadon for pay is called an Oshek]; See Tosafos ibid and Sanhedrin 25b and Rashi there that such a person is a Chamsan; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 450-452; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Chamsan; Imrei Yaakov ibid in Biurim

Other opinions: From some sources it is implied that the prohibition of Lo Sachmod is only transgressed if one takes the item without pay [i.e. stealing!]. [Ir Shushan, brought and negated in Smeh ibid and Beir Heiytiv 359:6 in defense of Ir Shushan and negation of Smeh, that the Biblical prohibition of Lo Sachmod does not apply if he pays for the item and it is only Rabbinical; See Tosafos Sanhedrin 25b in his first answer that the Lo Sachmod prohibition is implied to only be transgressed if one doesn’t pay money for the item; See however Bava Kama 5b and question of Tosafus ibid and so brings Smeh 359:14 that this is the mistake of people in their interpretation of the prohibition, as in truth the prohibition is transgressed even in such a case that money is paid.]

[43] Bava Kama 5b; See Michaber C.M. 359:9 that such a person who keeps a Pikadon for pay is called an Oshek; See Tosafus Sanhedrin 25b

[44] Admur KU”A ibid

The reason: As when one intends to pay the owner for the value of the stolen object there is no prohibition of stealing, but rather of Lo Sachmod [Admur KU”A ibid based on Bava Metzia 5b; Avnei Nezer 44:4; 324:5; 325:15; See Chikrei Halachos 1:23b], and the prohibition against Lo Sachmod [force sales] was never said regarding the items of gentiles. The reason for this is because the verse states “Lo Sachmod … Reiecha”, your friend, which comes to include only a Jew. [Admur KU”A ibid based on ruling that Lo Sashok does not apply to item of Gentile due to that the verse says Reiacha; See Admur Gzeila Ugineiva 4 who excludes the money of a gentile from the prohibition of Lo Sashok, however in Halacha 5 Admur makes no mention of exclusion of item of gentile from the prohibition of Lo Sachmod; Other Poskim who also rule Lo Sachmod does not apply to a gentile: Chasan Sofer in Shaar Hamakneh p. 92; Poskim brought in Sdei Chemed Mareches Lamed 130; See Avnei Nezer 44:4; 324:5; 325:15; Emek Sheila 82; Tehila Ledavid 3:31; Chikrei Halachos ibid]

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule the prohibition of Lo Sachmod applies even against the property of a gentile, and hence it is forbidden to steal his items even if one has intent to pay. [Devar Moshe Tinyana 98; Poskim in Sdei Chemed ibid; See Perisha 604] Other Poskim leave this matter in question. [P”M 604 M”Z 1]

[45] See Michaber C.M. 359:11 and Rambam 1:12 and Aruch Hashulchan C.M. 359:12 that one who steals the coveted item transgresses three negative commands [omitted from Admur ibid], hence making it clear in his opinion that even stealing item transgresses the Lo Sachmod prohibition; Tosafos Sanhedrin 25b in his first answer that this is the only prohibition of Lo Sachmod; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 450-451 and Poskim in footnotes 13-19 and p. 454-456 and footnotes 43-57

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that the prohibition of Lo Sachmod is not transgressed in such a case, and one only transgress the prohibition of stealing. [See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 450-451 and Poskim in footnotes 13-19 for a dispute regarding if the item must be Halachically acquired by the person who took it in order to transgress Lo Sachmod and p. 454-456 and footnotes 43-57 for a dispute regarding if stealing the coveted item also transgresses Lo Sachmod and for a dispute if this is the main intent of Lo Sachmod; See Bava Kama 5b that people are mistaken to think that Lo Sachmod is transgressed if one takes the item without pay [i.e. stealing!] and see Tosafus ibid that according to this approach one transgresses two prohibitions, although it is unclear if their mistake is only in the fact that they attribute the prohibition of Lo Sachmod to only this case or if the mistake is the fact that they attribute the prohibition of Lo Sachmod at all to this case and in truth it does not apply when one steals an object; However, see Tosafos Sanhedrin 25b in his first answer that the Lo Sachmod prohibition is implied to only be transgressed if one doesn’t pay money for the item. This concluding wording of the Rambam was completely omitted from Admur ibid, hence implying unlike the above opinion. Vetzaruch Iyun;]

[46] See Aruch Hashulchan ibid and Maharam Shick 38:3 that is only transgressed after trying to convince the owner to sell it; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 457-458 footnotes 62-67

[47] See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 458 footnotes 70-76

[48] See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 459

[49] Maggid Mishneh on Rambam Gezeila Veaveida 1:9 in explanation of opinion of Rambam the by a consensual sale there is no need to return and the object even though a transgression took place

[50] See Raavad Gezeila Veaveida 1:9 “I have not seen something more preposterous than this, as there is no greater action then taking the item. Rather there are no lashes because he has to pay back and return the object to the person whom he took the item from” However, in his opinion the transgression only applies if the owner did not agree to the sale; See Maggid Mishneh ibid

[51] Rav Avraham Ben Harambam on Shemos 20:14; Betzel Hachochmah 3:43; Imrei Yaakov on Admur ibid 41; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 462 footnotes 104-108

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that one transgresses even in such a case. [Derech Pikudecha Mitzvah 38; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnotes 108]

[52] See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 467-468 footnotes 152-156; Even Yisrael 5:105 [no Lo Sachmod]

[53] See Imrei Yaakov on Admur ibid Biurim “Sheiyn Daato” in length

[54] Pischeiy Chosehn Geneiva 1:26

[55] Imrei Yaakov on Admur ibid

[56] Betzel Hachochmah 3:43 that only if one asks three times does he transgress as we learn regarding other matters

[57] Yehuda Yaleh C.M. 33 based on Sefer Chareidim Mitzvos Hateluyos Beleiv 21; Shaareiy Tehsuvah 3:43; Betzel Hachochmah 3:43; Imrei Yaakov ibid 45 and in Biurim

[58] Aruch Hashulchan C.M. 359:13; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 457 footnote 60

[59] Admur ibid; Michaber C.M. 359:10 and 12; Tur ibid; Rambam Gezeila Veaveida 1:10 and 12; Sefer Hamitzvos of Rambam L.S. 266; Midrash Michilta Derashbi Shemos ibid; Maggid Mishneh on Rambam Gezeila Veaveida 1:10; Bach 359; Minchas Pitim in name of Zohar; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 459-460 footnotes 81-88; Imrei Yaakov ibid 43

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that the prohibition of Lo Sisaveh is only transgressed if one actually takes the item. [See Moshav Zekeinim Shemos 20:14 in name of Rabbeinu Tam; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 88] Likewise, some Poskim rule that there is no difference between the prohibition of Lo Sachmod and Lo Sisaveh, and they are the same exact prohibition simply being said in different words by the Torah. [Even Ezra Shemos 11:5 and 20:1; Yireim Mitzvah 115; Semag; Many Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 89; Imrei Yaakov ibid 43]

[60] The reason: As the prohibition against coveting referred to in the words Lo Sisaveh, applies simply to the desire of the heart. [Admur]

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that the prohibition of Lo Sisaveh is only transgressed if one contemplates ways of taking the item from the owner without his consent for the sale. However, if he contemplates ways of convincing the owner to sell it to him until the owner will agree, then there is no prohibition that is transgressed. [See Maggid Mishneh on Rambam 1:10 in opinion of Raavad ibid; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 98] Other Poskim rule that the prohibition of Lo Sisaveh is only transgressed if one actually takes the item. [See Moshav Zekeinim Shemos 20:14 in name of Rabbeinu Tam; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 88] Other Poskim rule that the Biblical Lo Sachmod prohibition only applies if one actually steals the item [see Ir Shushan and Beir Hieytiv ibid], and the same would apply here regarding Lo Sachmod, and it is only transgressed if one contemplates stealing the item.

If one knows he will not be able to buy it: It is disputed amongst the Poskim as to whether this prohibition is transgressed even if one knows that he will not be successful in getting the owner to sell it to him, such as of the owner is very powerful, but one nevertheless fantasizes about doing so. [See Smeh 359:18; Perisha 359; Ramban Devarim 5:18; Encyclopedia Talmudit p. 474 footnotes 201-208]

[61] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvos L.S. 266; Chinuch Mitzvah 416; Maggid Mishneh on Rambam Gezeila Veaveida 1:10 based on Mechilta ibid; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 449 footnote 81

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that there is no difference between the prohibition of Lo Sachmod and Lo Sisaveh, and hence they are not to be counted as two separate mitzvah’s of the 613 and are all considered one mitzvah. [Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 93]

[62] Implication of Admur and all Poskim ibid; Aruch Hashulchan 359:8 as learned from the Misoninim in Parshas Behalosecha; Sdei Chemed Lamed Kelal 130; Sefer Chareidim Mitzvos Hateluyos Baleiv p. 30; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 461 footnote 95-101

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that the actual feeling of jealousy in the heart and coveting of the item of another person  transgresses the prohibition, even without any contemplation how to get the item from the person. [Even Ezra Shemos 11:5 and 20:1; Yireim Mitzvah 115; Semag; See Yehuda Yaleh C.M. 33 that so is implied from Rambam in Sefer Hamitzvos Lav 266 and Chinuch and Ralbag, brought in Sdei Chemed Lamed Kelal 130; Pela Yoeitz Erech Chemda; Many Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 462 footnotes 102-103]

[63] Rav Avraham Ben Harambam on Shemos 20:14; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 462 footnotes 104-108

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that one transgresses even in such a case. [Derech Pikudecha Mitzvah 38; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnotes 108]

[64] Admur ibid; Michaber 359:11-12; Rambam ibid 1:11-12; See also Rabbeinu Bechayeh Kad Hakemach Erech Chemda

Lashes: See Halacha D in footnote!

Invalidation for testimony: See Michaber 359:9 that one who forces somebody to sell his item is not Biblically invalidated for testimony, but Rabbinically; Smeh 259:14 and Bava Metzia 5b and Sanhedrin 25b and Beis Shmuel 28:2 that people think the prohibition is only if you don’t pay and hence anytime someone paid for the item, he is not biblically invalid for testimony; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Chamsan; See Imrei Yaakov ibid 44

[65] Admur ibid; Michaber 359:11; Rambam ibid 1:11

[66] Michaber ibid and Rambam ibid as the verse states “and you coveted homes and stole them”

[67] Michaber ibid and Rambam ibid

[68] Kad Hakemach ibid

[69] Kad Hakemach ibid

[70] Admur ibid; Michaber 359:12; Rambam ibid 1:12

[71] Michaber ibid; Rambam ibid; Omitted from Admur ibid, Vetzaruch Iyun! See Halacha D for a dispute regarding if one transgresses Lo Sachmod if he steals an item

[72] Kad Hakemach Erech Chemda

[73] Midrash Raba Bereishis 20:10; Sota 9b

[74] Admur Hilchos Gezeila Ugeneiva Halacha 5; Michaber C.M. 359:10; Tur 359:10; Rambam Gezeila 1:9;  Mechilta Yisro Parsha Ches; Smeh 359:18; Aruch Hashulchan 359:10; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid Os 2 pp. 471-473

[75] The status of an item that its value is less than a Peruta: It is disputed amongst the Poskim as to whether the prohibition is transgressed if one covets an item whose value is less than a Peruta. [See Minchas Chinuch 38; Sdei Chemed Lamed Kelal 130; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid pp. 475-476 footnotes 211-220]

[76] Items available for purchase on the market: Some Poskim suggest that the prohibition only applies to items that are not readily available on the market to purchase, for if one desires the specific item owned by the individual for whatever reason. However, if he desires the general item and it just happens to be his friend owns one, then he does not transgress Lo Sachmod if he pressures him to sell it to him, if it is readily available on the market. [Eretz Tzevi 4 in name of Imrei Emes; Imrei Yaakov ibid in Biurim “Over Belo Sachmod”; See Betzel Hachochma 3:44]

[77] Mefarshim on Mechilta ibid; Aruch Hashulchan 359:10; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 472 footnotes 184-186

[78] Aruch Hashulchan C.M. 359:10; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 472 footnotes 187

[79] See Sefer Lereiacha Kamocha 7 that so is understood from Semak ibid regarding Korach

[80] Mechilta Derashbi 20:14; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 472 footnotes 189

[81] Mechilta Yisro ibid; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 473 footnotes 190-196

Other opinions: Some suggest that there are Poskim who will learn that the prohibition against coveting another person’s real estate property such as a field, excluding a house, is only regarding Lo Sisaveh and not regarding Lo Sachmod. [See Encyclopedia ibid]

[82] See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 473 footnote 197

[83] See Admur ibid Halacha 5 “if the owner did not have intent to sell it”; Rambam Sefer Hamitzvos L.S. 258; Chareidim L.S.; Kitzur SHU”A 182:5; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 474 footnotes 209-210

[84] Netziv on Mechilta ibid; See Encyclopedia ibid

[85] See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 476 footnotes 221-222

[86] See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 476-477 footnotes 223-230

[87] See Sdei Chemed Lamed Kelal 130; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 477-478 footnotes 221-236

[88] See Eretz Tzevi 4; Betzel Hachochma 3:43-12-14; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 468-470 footnotes 157-165

[89] Chidushei Harim Bava Kama 66b; Betzel Hachochma ibid; Many Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 469 footnotes 163

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that one does not transgresses even in such a case. [Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 164]

[90] See Even Yisrael 5:105

[91] Bava Basra 21a and 22a

[92] Bava Basra 75a; Hayom Yom 19^th Nissan

[93] Michaber 259:10 and Rambam Gezeila 1:10 regarding Lo Sisaveh; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech “Lo Sachmod” vol. 34 #3 p. 479-484 footnotes 248-297; Completely Omitted from Admur. Vetzaruch Iyun Gadol! Omitted from Michaber 359:10 and Rambam 1:9 regarding Lo Sachmod but included in Michaber ibid and 1:10 regarding Lo Sisaveh! [See Encyclopedia ibid footnote 261]

Lashes: One who covets another man’s wife in a way that transgresses the prohibition of Lo Sachmod is liable for the penalty of lashes. [Minchas Chinuch ibid; Encyclopedia ibid footnote 262-266]

[94] As explicitly stated in Scripture both in Shemos and Devarim; Omitted from Admur, Michaber, and Rambam ibid! See Smeh 359:19

[95] Michaber 259:10; Rambam Gezeila 1:10

[96] Smeh 359:19; Shut Harameh 255; Many Poskim in Encyclopedia ibid footnote 249; See there 248-255; See Gittin 58a, brought next!

[97] Minchas Chinuch ibid; Poskim in Encyclopedia ibid footnotes 258-261

[98] Maharam Shick; Poskim in Encyclopedia ibid footnote 260

[99] Minchas Chinuch ibid;

[100] Poskim in Encyclopedia ibid footnote 261

[101] See Michaber 259:10; Rambam Gezeila 1:10; Encyclopedia ibid pp. 481-483 footnotes 267-279; Omitted from Admur!

[102] The reason: As the prohibition against coveting referred to in the words Lo Sisaveh, applies simply to the desire of the heart. [Admur]

[103] Shut Harameh 255; Encyclopedia ibid footnote 248

[104] Shut Harameh 255; Aruch Hashulchan C.M. 359:11; Encyclopedia ibid p. 483 footnotes 280-285

[105] Mechilta Yisro Parsha 8; Aruch Hashulchan C.M. 359:11; Encyclopedia ibid p. 483-484 footnotes 286-293

[106] Sefer Chassidim 99; Sefer Hayirah; Mishneh Halachos 7:143; Encyclopedia ibid p. 483-484 footnotes 295-297

[107] The reason: as the words Lo Sachmod can be read as Lo Sichameid, which means not to cause others to be jealous.

[108] See Gittin 58a

[109] See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 470-471 footnotes 170-177

[110] Chinuch Mitzvah 416 regarding Lo Sisaveh “Kol Boeiy Olam”; Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 38 [that is life stealing and is liable for death and even for less than Peruta]; See Encyclopedia footnote 171; See Avnei Nezer Neos Desha Chayeh Sarah that Avraham was allowed to pressure Efron to sell in the plot of land in Chevron because it really belonged to him in the first place

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that Gentiles are not commanded against transgressing the prohibition of Lo Sachmod. [See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 177]

[111] The reason: The reason for this is because the prohibition of Lo Sachmod is a subcategory of the stealing prohibition, of which Gentiles are commanded against.

[112] Admur Hilchos Gezeila Ugeneiva Kuntrus Achron 6 and Admur Kuntrus Achron 440:11 based on Bava Kama 113b ; Implication of Admur Hilchos Gezeila Ugeneiva Halacha 5 “Shel Chaveiro”; Implication of verse in Shemos ibid and Devarim ibid “Reiacha – Your friend”; Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 38; Chasan Sofer in Shaar Hamakneh p. 92; Machaneh Chaim 2:32; Hamakneh Kuntrus Achron 28:1; Poskim brought in Sdei Chemed Mareches Lamed 130; See Avnei Nezer 44:4; 324:5; 325:15; Emek Sheila 82; Tehila Ledavid 3:31; Chikrei Halachos ibid; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 478-479 footnotes 237-246 and many Poskim in footnote 240

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule the prohibition of Lo Sachmod applies even against the property of a gentile, and hence it is forbidden to steal his items even if one has intent to pay. [Aveni Nezer ibid in name of Chelkas Yoev; Devar Moshe Tinyana 98; Poskim in Sdei Chemed ibid; Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 478-479 footnote 243; See Perisha 604;] Other Poskim leave this matter in question. [P”M 604 M”Z 1]

[113] Admur KU”A ibid

The reason: As when one intends to pay the owner for the value of the stolen object there is no prohibition of stealing, but rather of Lo Sachmod [Admur KU”A ibid based on Bava Metzia 5b; Avnei Nezer 44:4; 324:5; 325:15; See Chikrei Halachos 1:23b], and the prohibition against Lo Sachmod [force sales] was never said regarding the items of gentiles. The reason for this is because the verse states “Lo Sachmod … Reiecha”, your friend, which comes to include only a Jew. [Admur KU”A ibid based on ruling that Lo Sashok does not apply to item of Gentile due to that the verse says Reiacha; See Admur Gzeila Ugineiva 4 who excludes the money of a gentile from the prohibition of Lo Sashok, however in Halacha 5 Admur makes no mention of exclusion of item of gentile from the prohibition of Lo Sachmod]

[114] See Betzel Hachochma 3:46; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 478 footnote 242

[115] See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 478 footnote 241

[116] See Minchas Chinuch 416; Betzel Hachochma 3:46; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 479 footnote 245

[117] So is evident from Admur ibid 1 who writes the stealing prohibition applies equally against a Jew and non-Jew and in Halacha 2-3 Admur makes no distinction between Jew:gentile, and only in Halacha’s 4-5 is a distinction made regarding the prohibitions of Lo Sashok and Lo Sachmod, hence clearly implying that Lo Signov and Lo Sigzol have same law by both Jew and gentile.

[118] Sefer Chassidim 99; Sefer Hayirah; Mishneh Halachos 7:143; Encyclopedia ibid p. 483-484 footnotes 295-297

[119] The reason: as the words Lo Sachmod can be read as Lo Sichameid, which means not to cause others to be jealous.

[120] Michaber 560:2; Bava Basra 60b

[121] See M”A 560:6

[122] Shlah 200a; M”B 560:8; Kaf Hachaim 560:20

[123] Mor Uketzia 560; Birkeiy Yosef 560:5; M”B 560:5

[124] Mor Uketzia 560; M”B 560:5 in Shaar Hatziyon 560:13

[125] M”B ibid; Aruch Hashulchan 560:6; Piskeiy Teshuvos 560:8

[126] See Shulchan Gavoa 560:5; Chayeh Adam 137:2; M”B in Biur Halacha 560:2 “Vichein Hiskinu”; Kaf Hachaim 560:18 and 21; Sefer Eretz Yisrael of Rav Tukechinsky 23

[127] Shemiras Halashon 2 and Sefer Hamitzvos Hakatzar L.S. 40; This matter subject to the debate brought above in D regarding if pressuring someone to give you a gift transgressed the prohibition; See Betzel Hachomah 3:44; Even Yisrael 5:105

[128] Sefer Lereiacha Kamocha; This matter subject to the debate brought above in D regarding if pressuring someone to give you a gift transgressed the prohibition

[129] Rashi 21:1

[130] Rashi 21:9

[131] Rashi 21:15; Sanhedrin 48b

[132] Metzudos Dovid 9:24

[133] See Radak and Metzudos Dovid 9:26