Just as a person must be careful with his body not to lose [ie kill] it or destroy it or damage it, as it says “”[Just] guard for yourself and guard your life-soul a lot…” (Devarim 4:9; as discussed in the previous se’if) similarly he must be careful with his money not to lose it, ruin it, or damage it. Anyone who breaks a utensil or tears a garment or destroys food or drink or makes them disgusting [inedible] or throws money out to waste, and similarly anyone who ruins any other thing that is fitting for people to enjoy violates a prohibition. As it says, “[When you besiege a city for a long time, in making war against it to take it] do not destroy its trees by wielding an axe against them, because you could eat from them — so do not cut them down” etc… (Devarim 20:19)

Why did Yaakov go back for a small jug? Didn’t he just gratefully leave Eisav behind in that area, happy that there was no fighting? Doesn’t that mean it was dangerous?

Rashi on Vayishlach quotes Chazal that Yaaqov went back because the righteous consider their money precious, because they earn their money honestly. Proper business ethics isn’t “just” the permissable way to conduct business, it actually sanctifies the activity. And therefore, the pachim qetanim were sacred to Yaaqov, not to be simply left behind.

Eisav’s role in the ideal universe was mastered by Yaaqov — he internalized the notion of the role of the physical and how to sanctify the physical. Of course at that point Yaaqov is challenged by Eisav’s guardian and succeeds.  …

Sha’ul’s mission for his kingship [after he is annointed using the same jug] is to vanquish Amaleiq. Amaleiq is a nation whose namesake forefather was Eisav’s grandson. …

The Shunamit was supported in her time of need by the rewards of Yaaqov’s sacred toiling in this world [through oil Elisha poured from that jug into all the vessels she could find or borrow]. The money which was earned through honest and forthright business dealings will always suffice.

Which brings us to Chanukah. … And then they find the jug of oil. The jug of holy wordliness, of sanctifying the universe through halakhah. Not disdain for the physical or the beautiful, but knowing its value — as a tool. And with that concept the Chashmonaim revived Jewish loyalty, disbanded Hellenist oppression, and restored the concept of Jewish autonomy for the next two centuries. And when we couldn’t maintain that, we still had the notion that there was a role for Yefetic culture but not a clear idea of what that role was, in stepped Edom. Through that struggle with Edom, we can restore the world to “two great lights” — Yisrael and Eisav working in harmony.

Similarly, any stumbling block [or danger in general] that has some risk to lives, there is an obligation to remove it, to guard from it, and to be very careful in the matter. As it says, “[Just] guard for yourself and guard your life-soul a lot…” (Devarim 4:9). If he put it down and did not move the hazards that bring one to sanger, he neglected the obligation and violated “do not place [in your home] blood” (Devarim 22:8 [as discussed in the previous se'eif]). For example, if he leaves a broken ladder standing in his home or yard, or if he raises an evil dog.

190: Laws of [Railings,] Personal Care, and Not Wasting

There is a positive obligation to make a railing for his roof, as it says “[When you build a new house], you will make a railing for your roof [and you will not place blood in your house if someone were to fall from it.]” (Devarim 22:8). The height of the railing can not be less than 10 tefachim [31.4"-37.7"] and must be strong enough that someone can rest against it and not fall.

Our roofs, which people do not use, are exempted.

However, not only the roof alone requires a railing, but also any thing which has a danger that someone can trip-up on and die, requires a railing and fixing. Anyone who leaves it wirhout a railing, ignored an obligation and violated a prohibition, as it says “and you will not place blood in your house.” (ibid) For example, someone who has a pit in his yeard, he is obligated to make a ring for it 10 tefachim high or to make a cover for it so that no one would fall into it.

Rather, “do not stand by your friend’s blood” would be sufficient to obligate such railings in cases where there is a real danger. Here the issue is to inculcate a culture of safety in the property owner, tooturn even cases where the danger is negligable into a mussar exercise in caring for others’ safety. This is why the obligation depends on the existence of a private owner (or owners — partnerships are also obligated).

The entire message of the mitzvah is encoded in a single letter of the verse “לְגַגֶּ֑ךָ — your roof”.

Members of a group [from context: a caravan] in which one of them happened to have his donkey split its hooves, the members of the group are not allowed to separate [from him] with their donkeys and leave him alone on the way. But, if his donkey fell, and is not able to walk anymore at all, then they are permitted to separate from him, and they do not have to be held up for him overly much. Similarly people in a group who are traveling with wagons, and one of them happen to have some problem that he must wait a little to fix it, his partners are no allowed to separate from him, but [they may] if he is held up for a lot.

When it says “When you see the donkey of one you hate struggling under its burden” etc… (Shemos 23:5), this “hated person” isn’t from the non-Jews, for they aren’t within the mitzvah of loading and unloading [animals] except because [of the prohibition against causing "pain to living things" -- only a Jew is.

How is it possible for a Jew to be hated by another Jew, since the verse says "Do not hate your brother in your heart[, you shall surely rebuke your compatriot, and not carry a sin for him]” (Vayiqra 19:17)? The sages said, for example, if he personally and alone saw the person commit [a heinous] sin, and he warned him of it and he did not repent, it is a mitzvah to hate him until he does teshuvah and returns from his evil.

Even though he didn’t yet do teshuvah, if you find in in pain because of his burden [on an animal] it is a mitzvah to unload and load [the animal] with him and not leave him thus. For maybe he will wait for the sake of his money and come to danger, and the Torah is careful about the lives of Jews, whether evil whether righteous, since they are consecrated to Hashem and believe in the essence of the faith, as it says “Tell them: As I ‘Live’, says the L-rd Hashem, if I had any desire for the death of the wicked, rather, that the wicked return from his way and live; [return, return from your evil ways; for why must you die, house of Israel?” (Yechezqeil 33:17)

1. The assumption is that since the Torah doesn’t allow a Jew to hate another (under normal circumstances), there is no way the verses pertaining to loading and unloading animals could possibly refuse to someone who hates another despite the prohibition. This is interesting as hatered is an emotion, and thus many people will inadvertantly violate the prohibition of “you shall not hate”.
2. The need for the person to be a solitary witness is so that:
   1. he knows that the person is a sinner without relying on lashon hara or rumor and
   2. he has no recourse to testify in beis din as that requires two witnesses.
3. Even while the person still embraces evil, we must love him as Hashem does, as we see our brother’s still untapped potential to return to the nation’s calling. “That the wicked turn from his way and live.”

The animal of a non-Jew, if the non-Jew is driving one of his animals, whether the burden is a Jews or whether it’s a non-Jews, he is not obligate [in the above two prohibitions]. He only has to remove the load, because of [the prohibition against causing] “pain to living things”, and he is permitted to accept pay for it. However, to load [the animal], he is not obligated at all — except if there is a possibility of enmity [by not helping].

But if there is no non-Jew there, rather a Jew who is driving the animal, he is also obligated to load [the animal] because of the pain of the Jew. Similar if it’s a Jew’s animal and a non-Jew’s burden [being carried by it], he must both unload and load [the animal] because of the pain of the Jew.

If he unburdened and loaded [the animal] and it fell again, he is obligated to unburden and load it another time, even 100 times, as it says “you shall surely release it”, “you shall surely put it up with him”. [Literally, "release you shall release", and "set up, you shall set up with him"; this lesson is being derived from the doubling of the language used to denote "surely".]

Therefore, you must go with him up to a parsah [2.4-2.88 miles], because maybe he will need him, unless the person with the package to be carried says to him “I do not need you.”

The mitzvah of unloading [an animal] must be done [even] for free. However, to load [an animal], he is not obligated unless he is paid, and similarly for his traveling with him [see above], he must pay him. [Presumably because unloading the animal is an exercise in compassion for the animal, but reloading it is more a service for its owner.]

189: Laws of Loading and Unloading Animals

Someone who encounters his friend on the way, and his animal is struggling under its burden, whether it was a burden that is appropriate for it, whether it was a burden that was more than appropriate for it, there is a mitzvah to help him remove it from her, as it says, “[When you see the donkey of someone who hates you struggling under its burden and you pause from helping it,] you shall surely help it with him.” (Shemos 23:5)

After you remove [the burden] do not leave your friend in trouble and go off from him, rather help him put it back and burden the animal [correctly], as it says, “[You shall not see your brothers donkey or his ox fallen on the road, and you hide yourself from them] you shall surely pick it up [with him].” (Devarim 22:4)

And if someone leaves his friend, and didn’t unburden or burden [the animal in need], he neglected an obligation and violated a prohibition, as it says “You shall not see your brothers donkey or his ox fallen on the road…” (Ibid.)

When he comes to return the desposit, he should give it to someone of the depositor’s household without his knowledge. Similar, when he comes to return any item that was lent to him, or repay his loan. But he can return it to [the depositor's] wife, because by default she buys and sells in the home, and the husband appoints all his property to her control.

One is obligated to guard the deposit in a manner that is better than he would guard his own property. And even if he isn’t all that careful with the guarding of his own items, with a deposit he must be very careful.

The one who receives the deposit is not allowed to deposit the item in the hands [control] of others — even [people] who are more kosher and trustworthy than he is. Except if the depositor is also accustomed to deposit items similar to these with them.