Jewish tradition is full of stories exploring this very idea. Today, we're diving into a fascinating passage from Vayikra Rabbah, a Midrash on the book of Leviticus, that unpacks the profound impact of both giving and withholding kindness.
The passage opens with a statement by Rabbi Simon in the name of Rabbi Elazar, offering four different perspectives on this theme. The first example? None other than Abraham. We all know Abraham as a pillar of generosity. But this passage specifically calls out his hospitality towards the three ministering angels in (Genesis 18:8): "He stood over them beneath the tree, and they ate."
But…did they really eat? Rabbi Yudan chimes in with an interesting point: they only appeared to be eating and drinking. Each course vanished as soon as it was served. So, why is this considered such a monumental act of kindness? Because Abraham offered hospitality even when it wasn't strictly needed. He extended himself regardless.
And how was Abraham's kindness rewarded? According to this Midrash (rabbinic interpretive commentary), God showered his descendants with blessings in the desert: manna from heaven, a miraculous spring, quail for sustenance, protective clouds of glory, and a guiding pillar of cloud. It's a powerful a fortiori argument: If Abraham was rewarded for kindness to those who didn't need it, imagine the reward for kindness to those who do!
Now, let's flip the script. What happens when kindness is withheld? Rabbi Simon, again quoting Rabbi Elazar, points to the Ammonites and Moabites. Remember them? (Deuteronomy 23:5) tells us they "did not greet you with bread and with water" when the Israelites were wandering in the desert.
Hold on a second. Were the Israelites actually lacking bread and water? Not exactly. As the Midrash points out, they had manna, the miraculous well, quail, and all the divine provisions. But common courtesy dictates that travelers should be offered food and drink. The Ammonites and Moabites failed to extend this basic human decency.
And their punishment? "An Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assembly of the Lord" (Deuteronomy 23:4). Again, the a fortiori argument rings clear: If withholding kindness from those who weren't truly in need resulted in such a harsh decree, how much more severe is the consequence of withholding kindness from someone who genuinely needs it?
The passage then shifts to Yitro, Moses' father-in-law. Yitro invites Moses to eat bread (Exodus 2:20). Rabbi Simon suggests Yitro was simply paying Moses for his work drawing water for his daughters' flocks (Exodus 2:19). We then get a mini-debate between Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Nehemya, and the Rabbis about who exactly Moses was helping. Was it just Yitro's daughters? Their ancestors too? The shepherds? Or was Moses acting for the sake of peace?
Regardless of the exact recipient, the Midrash asks: When was Yitro's kindness repaid? Rabbi Yoḥanan, citing Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, says it was in the days of Saul. Remember when Saul tells the Kenites to "Go, withdraw and descend from the midst of the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them, and you acted with kindness with all the children of Israel when they came up from Egypt" (I Samuel 15:6)?
Wait a minute… Did the Kenites really show kindness to all of Israel? The Midrash explains that kindness shown to a prominent leader, like Moses, is considered kindness to the entire nation. The a fortiori argument continues to build: If Yitro was rewarded for kindness to someone he was beholden to, imagine the reward for kindness shown freely, without obligation!
Finally, the passage lands on the story of Boaz and Ruth. This is perhaps the most heartwarming example. Boaz shows Ruth kindness by inviting her to eat with him and the reapers (Ruth 2:14). He offers her bread, vinegar to dip it in (a common practice for fieldworkers), and toasted grain.
But get this: the Midrash zooms in on the seemingly insignificant detail of Boaz handing Ruth "a pinch of toasted grain." It sounds so small, doesn't it? Yet, Ruth eats, is satisfied, and even has leftovers! Rabbi Yitzḥak offers two explanations: either Boaz's hand was blessed, or Ruth's innards were blessed. The Midrash leans towards the latter, emphasizing Ruth's own righteousness.
Rabbi Yitzḥak then shares a profound insight: "The Torah teaches you etiquette. When a person performs a mitzva, a good deed, he should do so with a joyous heart." Imagine, the Midrash suggests, if Reuben knew he'd be remembered for saving Joseph, he would have carried him home himself! And if Boaz knew he'd be remembered for offering Ruth a pinch of grain, he would have given her the finest delicacies.
Rabbi Kohen (a priest) and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Rabbi Simon, quoting Rabbi Levi, add another layer: In the past, prophets recorded good deeds. Now, it's Elijah and the Messiah, with God Himself signing off on their record. This highlights the enduring significance of even the smallest acts of kindness.
The passage concludes with a powerful observation: Ruth tells Naomi, "The name of the man for whom I acted today is Boaz" (Ruth 2:19). The Midrash points out that Ruth doesn't say "for whom I worked," but "for whom I acted." By accepting Boaz's kindness, Ruth gave him the opportunity to perform a mitzva. In other words, the recipient of kindness also does a kindness for the giver!
So, what’s the takeaway from all this? It’s a potent reminder that kindness, in all its forms, creates ripples that extend far beyond the immediate moment. Whether it's offering hospitality to strangers, extending courtesy even when it's not strictly required, or performing a simple act with a joyous heart, every gesture matters. And sometimes, the smallest pinch of kindness can lead to the greatest blessings. What kind of ripples will we choose to create today?
Rabbi Simon in the name of Rabbi Elazar says four approaches in this regard: Who was it who performed kindness with those who were not in need? Abraham, with the ministering angels. It is written: “He stood over them beneath the tree, and they ate” (Genesis 18:8). Were they eating? Rabbi Yudan said: They appeared as though they were eating and drinking, and each course disappeared in turn. How did the Holy One blessed be He reward his descendants? The manna fell for them, the spring arose for them, the quail was present for them, the clouds of glory surrounded them, and the pillar of cloud traveled before them. The matters can be inferred a fortiori. For one who performed kindness for those who were not in need of kindness, the Holy One blessed be He rewarded his descendants; one who performs kindness for those who are in need, all the more so. Rabbi Simon in the name of Rabbi Elazar said another approach in this regard: Who was it who did not perform kindness for those who were not in need of kindness? The Amonites and Moavites, with Israel, as it is written: “Because they did not greet you with bread and with water” (Deuteronomy 23:5). Did Israel need them? Is it not so that all those forty years that Israel was in the wilderness, the manna fell for them, the spring arose for them, the quail was present for them, the clouds of glory surrounded them, and the pillar of cloud traveled before them? Rather, it is common courtesy that those who come from the way, one greets them with food and drink. How did the Holy One blessed be He repay them as a result? “An Amonite or a Moavite shall not enter [into the assembly of the Lord]” (Deuteronomy 23:4). The matters can be inferred a fortiori. For those who did not perform kindness for those who were not in need of kindness, see how He repaid them in punishment; one who does not perform kindness for one who is in need of kindness, all the more so. Rabbi Simon in the name of Rabbi Elazar says another approach in this regard: Who was it who performed kindness with one to whom he was beholden? Yitro, with Moses. “He said: Call him and let him eat bread” (Exodus 2:20). Rabbi Simon said: He fed him for his wages, as it is written: “He drew water for us” (Exodus 2:19).17Yitro was merely repaying Moses for having drawn water in order to help Yitro’s daughters give it to the sheep. Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Neḥemya, and the Rabbis, Rabbi Yehuda said: He drew water for us and for our ancestors.18This is based on the doubled Hebrew term employed in the verse “He drew water [dalo dala] for us.” Apparently, the daughters of Yitro had their own sheep, in addition to tending to their father’s sheep (Etz Yosef; cf. Matnot Kehuna). Rabbi Neḥemya said: He drew water for us and for the shepherds. The Rabbis said: He drew water for us due to the merit of our ancestors, and for the shepherds in order to make peace. When did the Holy One blessed be He pay his reward? Rabbi Yoḥanan says in the name of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili: In the days of Saul. That is what is written: “Saul said to the Kenite: Go, withdraw and descend [from the midst of the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them, and you acted with kindness with all the children of Israel when they came up from Egypt]” (I Samuel 15:6). Did he perform kindness for all Israel? Did he not perform kindness only for Moses alone? Rather, it is to teach you that anyone who performs kindness for one of the prominent leaders of Israel, it is ascribed to him as though he performed kindness for all Israel. The matters can be inferred a fortiori. For one who performed kindness for one to whom he was beholden, see how the Holy One blessed be He repaid him one who performs kindness for one to whom he is not beholden, all the more so. Rabbi Simon in the name of Rabbi Elazar says another approach in this regard. He said: Who was it who performed kindness with one who was in need of kindness? It was Boaz, with Ruth. That is what is written: “Boaz said to her at mealtime: Come here” (Ruth 2:14); draw near. “Eat of the bread” (Ruth 2:14); of the bread of the reapers. “Dip your morsel in vinegar” (Ruth 2:14); as it is the way of the reapers to dip their morsel in vinegar during the dry heat. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: From here [it may be derived] that one takes out food containing vinegar to the threshing floors.19Harvesting and threshing are performed in the summer, and vinegar helps the workers find some relief from the heat. “She sat alongside the reapers” (Ruth 2:14); in its plain sense. “He handed her a pinch of toasted grain” (Ruth 2:14); he gave her a minute pinch with his fingertips. But is it not written: “She ate, she was satisfied, and she left over”? (Ruth 2:14). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: We derive from this one of two matters: Either a blessing rested on the hand of that righteous man, or a blessing rested in the innards of that righteous woman. But from what is written: “She ate, she was satisfied, and she left over,” we know that a blessing rested in the innards of that righteous woman. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: The Torah teaches you etiquette. When a person performs a mitzva, he should do so with a joyous heart. Had Reuben known that the Holy One blessed be He would dictate in his regard: “Reuben heard and he rescued him from their hand” (Genesis 37:21),20Reuben rescued Joseph from his brothers, who had conspired to kill him. he would have carried him and taken him to his father. Had Boaz known that the Holy One blessed be He would dictate in his regard: “He handed her a pinch of toasted grain,” he would have fed her fattened calves. Rabbi Kohen and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Rabbi Simon said in the name of Rabbi Levi: In the past, a person would perform a mitzva and the prophet would record it, but now, when a person performs a mitzva, who records it? It is Elijah and the messianic king, and the Holy One blessed be He signs it for them, like that which is written: “Then those who fear the Lord spoke one to another, and the Lord listened and heeded; a book of remembrance was written before Him” (Malachi 3:16). Rabbi Yehoshua taught: More than what the homeowner does for the poor person, the poor person does for the homeowner, as Ruth says to Naomi: “The name of the man for whom I acted today is Boaz” (Ruth 2:19).21This verse would ordinarily be translated “for whom I worked.” However, the term used for worked [asiti] does not literally mean worked. It is a more general term that can also be translated “did,” or “acted.” “Who acted for me” is not written here, but rather, “for whom I acted.” She said to her: ‘I performed many actions and favors with him today for the piece of bread that he gave me.’22Meaning, by taking the bread that he gave me, I did him a favor by giving him the merit of the mitzva of charity.
