Vayeitzei - Shishi and Shvi'i

Geneiva- The word is usually translated as "theft".  Yet this week's parsha demonstrates that the word actually means deception.   Even when it means theft, it is the deceptive aspect of theft.  This is related to the Gemara that explains the distinction between Geneiva and Gezeila, the former defined as stealing at night.  The distinction always seemed like an arbitrary one: Who cares when a theft takes place?! Theft is theft!  Yet Halacha makes a very big deal of it.  There are two distinct verses, two distinct penalties, geneiva seen as worse evidenced by the requirement to pay double.  The Rambam has "Hilchos Gezeila V'Aveida" and also "Hilchos Geneiva". So he clearly sees them as two different concepts.

I have given this matter a lot of thought.  Here is a summary of my conclusions:

Man relates to this world by possessing things.  The first possession that takes place is from a state of legal ownerlessness. AKA Hefker.  Once possession is taken by one person, the relationship between that person and that thing can only be sundered by that person's will. So the act of possession is an act of will.  Taking possession of something from another with that person's will is a gift, or trade.  Taking possession without that person's will is impossible to tolerate in society.  

That act manifests itself in two distinct forms or crime:
1) The physical taking of possession with no will, or
2) A falsely caused act of will.

The first, gezeila, is the more primitive form of taking, which animals possess as well.
The second is more refined, and can only by done by human beings.  It uses the accepted forms of society living to take that which is not yours.  It is therefore a greater sign of corruption of the human spirit.

More later...

Rambam - Hilchos Melachim Chapter Six

We just finished learning Chapter Six of the Rambam's Hilchos Melachim. The chapter is about the Rules of Engagement in War time. Two mitzvos that are mentioned at the end of the chapter are the Sin of Bal Tashchis, which starts off as the injunction against destroying fruit trees. the Rambam expands it so that it includes a prohibition to destroy anything for the sake of destruction. The second Mitzvah is the requirement to leave the confines of the military camp to go to the bathroom and to then cover up the waste with a Yated.

Bal Tashchis is ultimately unrelated to a wartime setting,
and maintaining a clean environment is also required for most mitzvos. So why does the Torah connect these mitzvos to war? Or perhaps more academically stated, why do the Rabbis apply these wartime mitzvos to all situations?

Here's what I'm thinking:
War is an ugly dehumanizing experience. People who are expected to be ethical and kind go out to war, and they kill and rape and pillage and destroy. I can't imagine anything uglier than civilized men becoming worse than animals. Yet the Torah expects that war will happen, and be justified. Even offensive wars for the purpose of imperial expansion are countenanced by halacha. Yet the fear of turning into animals is still real.

So the Torah tells us that even in wartime, when killing and destroying are expected, wanton destruction for the sake of destruction are off limits. You might have to kill the people, the soldiers who are fighting you, but don't destroy life, withhold the drive to rampage.

Regarding hygiene, the Torah's point is that even the Machaneh, camp of war, must maintain the minimum standard of human civilization which is aversion to excrement. A writer whose name escapes me once wrote that the extent of a society's development can be measured by the extent of its aversion to filth. Even at our worst and most animalistic, when we resole our territorial disputes through violence, like animals, the Torah tells us to remain human in any way we can.