EN ES
The Laws › Commandment #360
Commandment #360 · Negative · Inner Life · Covenant Community

Do Not Harbor a Grudge

לֹא לִנְטֹּר
Source: Leviticus 19:18  ·  Maimonides, Sefer HaMitzvot, Negative #609
לֹא תִקֹּם וְלֹא תִטֹּר אֶת בְּנֵי עַמֶּךָ וְאָהַבְתָּ לְרֵעֲךָ כָּמוֹךָ אֲנִי יְהוָה
“Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.”

The Grudge — Subtler Than Revenge

Leviticus 19:18: “Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge.” Revenge (#359) and grudge (#360) are addressed in the same verse because they describe adjacent points on the same spectrum of unresolved grievance. Revenge acts out the grievance in explicit retaliation. The grudge maintains the grievance while outwardly complying — the axe is lent, but the reminder of the past wrong is always audible.

The grudge is more dangerous than revenge in certain respects because it is harder to identify and harder to address. The person bearing the grudge appears cooperative; the relationship continues; but the account is never closed. The grudge keeps the original harm alive as a claim against the person — a debt that cannot be paid because the person bearing the grudge never specifies what payment would look like. Unlike formal debt (which can be discharged by payment) or a rebukable grievance (which can be addressed and resolved), the grudge has no mechanism of payment. It is kept alive by the will of the person who holds it, indefinitely.

Esau and Jacob — The Grudge and Its Release

The most sustained grudge narrative in the Torah. Jacob stole Esau's blessing (Gen 27). Genesis 27:41: “And Esau hated Jacob because of the blessing wherewith his father blessed him: and Esau said in his heart, The days of mourning for my father are at hand; then will I slay my brother Jacob.” The grudge and the plan coexist: Esau was biding his time. Jacob fled to Haran. Twenty years of separation followed — years during which Esau had unlimited time to cultivate or release the account.

Genesis 33:4: “And Esau ran to meet him, and embraced him, and fell on his neck, and kissed him: and they wept.” Jacob had prepared for the worst — gifts sent ahead, camp divided, a night of wrestling at Peniel (32:24–32). What he received was an embrace. The text does not explain Esau's internal resolution — it simply records the outcome. Whatever process Esau worked through in those twenty years produced, at the reunion, the release of a grudge that had been twenty years in the keeping. The Torah preserves both: the grudge declared in the heart (27:41) and the embrace that showed it had been released (33:4).

"Love Thy Neighbour" — What Fills the Space

Leviticus 19:18 closes with “ve'ahavta l'rei'akha kamokha ani YHVH” — “thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.” The commandments #359 (no revenge) and #360 (no grudge) are the negative preparation for this positive command. The sequencing is not accidental: the Torah does not command love and then add “also, don't take revenge.” It removes the obstacles first — revenge, grudge — and then commands the positive. Love of neighbor cannot coexist with the active maintenance of a score against them.

Genesis 50:19–21 is the Torah's fullest illustration of commandment #360's positive vision: “And Joseph said unto them, Fear not: for am I in the place of God? But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive. Now therefore fear ye not: I will nourish you, and your little ones. And he comforted them, and spake kindly unto them.” Joseph acknowledged the wrong (“ye thought evil against me”) — he did not pretend it had not happened. He released the account (“am I in the place of God?” — vengeance belongs to God, not me). And he then actively cared for the people who had wronged him. This is commandment #360 fully discharged: no grudge carried, which makes space for the “love thy neighbour” that follows.

For reflection and group study
The grudge is subtler than revenge: the person bearing it still performs the positive action (lends the axe) but poisons it with the reminder of the past wrong. Why does the Torah prohibit the poisoned positive action? If the axe is being lent, what is the harm in noting that the past wrong has not been forgotten?
Leviticus 19:18 closes with “love thy neighbour as thyself” immediately after the prohibitions on revenge and grudge. The verse removes the obstacles first, then commands the positive. What does this sequencing reveal about the Torah's understanding of what “love” requires as its precondition? Is love of neighbor achievable while revenge and grudge are maintained, or do they fundamentally preclude it?

Read the source passage in the Torah reader.

Read in the Torah Reader — Leviticus 19:18