|
Esnoga Bet Emunah 4544 Highline Dr. SE Olympia, WA 98501 United States of America © 2013 E-Mail: gkilli@aol.com |
|
Esnoga Bet El 102 Broken Arrow Dr. Paris TN 38242 United States of America © 2013 E-Mail: waltoakley@charter.net |
Triennial Cycle (Triennial
Torah Cycle) / Septennial Cycle (Septennial Torah Cycle)
|
Three and 1/2 year
Lectionary Readings |
Second Year of the
Triennial Reading Cycle |
|
Tammuz 21, 5773 – June
28/29, 2013 |
Fifth Year of the Shmita
Cycle |
Candle Lighting and Habdalah Times:
|
Conroe & Austin, TX, U.S. Fri. June 28 2013 – Candles at 8:19 PM Sat. June 29 2013 – Habdalah 9:18 PM |
Brisbane, Australia Fri. June 28 2013 – Candles at 4:45 PM Sat. June 29 2013 – Habdalah 5:41 PM |
Chattanooga, & Cleveland, TN,
U.S. Fri. June 28 2013 – Candles at 8:41 PM Sat. June 29 2013 – Habdalah 9:44 PM |
|
Jakarta, Indonesia Fri. June 28 2013 – Candles at 5:31 PM Sat. June 29 2013 – Habdalah 6:23 PM |
Manila & Cebu, Philippines Fri. June 28 2013 – Candles at 6:11 PM Sat. June 29 2013 – Habdalah 7:04 PM |
Miami, FL, U.S. Fri. June 28 2013 – Candles at 7:58 PM Sat. June 29 2013 – Habdalah 8:55 PM |
|
Olympia, WA, U.S. Fri. June 28 2013 – Candles at 8:53 PM Sat. June 29 2013 – Habdalah 10:12 PM |
Murray, KY, & Paris, TN. U.S. Fri. June 28 2013 – Candles at 8:00 PM Sat. June 29 2013 – Habdalah 9:05 PM |
San Antonio, TX, U.S. Fri. June 28 2013 – Candles at 8:20 PM Sat. June 29 2013 – Habdalah 9:18 PM |
|
Sheboygan &
Manitowoc, WI, US Fri. June 28 2013 – Candles at 8:19 PM Sat. June 29 2013 – Habdalah 9:32 PM |
Singapore, Singapore Fri. June 28 2013 – Candles at 6:55 PM Sat. June 29 2013 – Habdalah 7:47 PM |
St. Louis, MO, U.S. Fri. June 28 2013 – Candles at 8:11 PM Sat. June 29 2013 – Habdalah 9:17 PM |
For other places see: http://chabad.org/calendar/candlelighting.asp
Roll of Honor:
This Torah commentary comes to you courtesy of:
His Eminence Rabbi Dr. Hillel ben David and beloved wife HH Giberet
Batsheva bat Sarah
His Honor Paqid Adon David ben Abraham
Her Excellency Giberet Sarai bat Sarah & beloved family
His Excellency Adon Barth Lindemann & beloved family
His Excellency Adon John Batchelor & beloved wife
His Honor Paqid Adon Ezra ben Abraham and beloved wife HH Giberet Karmela
bat Sarah,
Her Excellency Giberet Laurie Taylor
His Eminence Rabbi Dr. Adon Eliyahu ben Abraham and beloved wife HH
Giberet Dr. Elisheba bat Sarah
Her Excellency Prof. Dr. Conny Williams & beloved family
His Excellency Adon Yoel ben Abraham and beloved family
For their regular and sacrificial
giving, providing the best oil for the lamps, we pray that G-d’s richest
blessings be upon their lives and those of their loved ones, together with all
Yisrael and her Torah Scholars, amen ve amen!
Also a great thank you and great blessings be upon all who send comments
to the list about the contents and commentary of the weekly Torah Seder and
allied topics.
If you want to subscribe to our list
and ensure that you never lose any of our commentaries, or would like your
friends also to receive this commentary, please do send me an E-Mail to benhaggai@GMail.com with your E-Mail or the E-Mail addresses of your friends. Toda Rabba!
1st
Sabath of Penitence
Shabbat: “Dibre Yirmeyahu” – Sabbath: “The words of Jeremiah”
|
Shabbat |
Torah Reading: |
Weekday Reading: |
|
וְכִי-יִגַּח
שׁוֹר |
|
|
|
“V’Ki
Yigach Shor” |
Reader 1 – Shemot 21:28-32 |
Reader 1 – Shemot 22:24-26 |
|
“And
when gores an ox” |
Reader 2 – Shemot 21:33-36 |
Reader 2 – Shemot 22:27-29 |
|
“Si
un buey acorneare” |
Reader 3 – Shemot 21:37-22:3 |
Reader 3 – Shemot 22:24-30 |
|
Shemot (Exod.) 21:28 – 22:23 |
Reader 4 – Shemot 22:4-8 |
|
|
Ashlamatah: Ezek
34:20-27, 30-31 |
Reader 5 – Shemot 22:9-12 |
|
|
Special:
Jeremiah 1:1 - 2:3 |
Reader 6 – Shemot 22:13-16 |
Reader 1 – Shemot 22:24-26 |
|
Psalm 57:7-12 |
Reader 7 – Shemot 22:17-23 |
Reader 2 – Shemot 22:27-29 |
|
Abot: 3:4 |
Maftir:
Shemot 22:17-23 |
Reader 3 – Shemot 22:24-30 |
|
N.C.: Mk 7:24-30; Acts 15:22-29 |
Jeremiah 1:1 – 2:3 |
|
Blessings Before
Torah Study
Blessed are You, Ha-Shem our G-d,
King of the universe, Who has sanctified us through Your commandments, and
commanded us to actively study Torah. Amen!
Please Ha-Shem, our G-d, sweeten the
words of Your Torah in our mouths and in the mouths of all Your people Israel.
May we and our offspring, and our offspring's offspring, and all the offspring
of Your people, the House of Israel, may we all, together, know Your Name and
study Your Torah for the sake of fulfilling Your desire. Blessed are You,
Ha-Shem, Who teaches Torah to His people Israel. Amen!
Blessed are You, Ha-Shem our G-d,
King of the universe, Who chose us from all the nations, and gave us the Torah.
Blessed are You, Ha-Shem, Giver of the Torah. Amen!
Ha-Shem spoke to Moses, explaining a
Commandment. "Speak to Aaron and his sons, and teach them the following
Commandment: This is how you should bless the Children of Israel. Say to the
Children of Israel:
May Ha-Shem bless you and keep watch
over you; - Amen!
May Ha-Shem make His Presence
enlighten you, and may He be kind to you; - Amen!
May Ha-Shem bestow favor on you, and
grant you peace. – Amen!
This way, the priests will link My
Name with the Israelites, and I will bless them."
These are the Laws for which the
Torah did not mandate specific amounts: How much growing produce must be left
in the corner of the field for the poor; how much of the first fruits must be
offered at the Holy Temple; how much one must bring as an offering when one
visits the Holy Temple three times a year; how much one must do when doing acts
of kindness; and there is no maximum amount of Torah that a person must study.
These are the Laws whose benefits a
person can often enjoy even in this world, even though the primary reward is in
the Next World: They are: Honouring one's father and mother; doing acts of
kindness; early attendance at the place of Torah study -- morning and night;
showing hospitality to guests; visiting the sick; providing for the financial
needs of a bride; escorting the dead; being very engrossed in prayer; bringing
peace between two people, and between husband and wife; but the study of Torah
is as great as all of them together. Amen!
Contents of the
Torah Seder
·
Injury Caused by a Beast – Exodus 21:28-32
·
Offences Against Propperty Through Neglect or an Animal – Exodus 21:33-36
·
Theft – Exodus 21:37 – 32:14
·
Seduction – Exodus 32:15-16
·
Witchcraft – Exodus 32:17
·
Bestiality – Exodus 32:18
·
Polytheism – Exodus 32:19
·
Oppression of the Weak – Exodus 32:20-23
Reading Assignment:
The Torah Anthology: Yalkut Me’Am Lo’Ez - Vol
VII: The Law
By: Rabbi Yaaqov Culi, Translated by: Rabbi
Aryeh Kaplan
Published by: Moznaim Publishing Corp. (New
York, 1979)
Vol. 7 – “The Law,”
pp. 84-248
Rashi & Targum Pseudo Jonathan
for: Shemot (Exod.) 21:28 – 22:23
|
RASHI |
TARGUM PSEUDO JONATHAN |
|
28. And if a bull gores a man or a woman and [that one] dies, the bull
shall surely be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten, and the owner of
the bull is clear. |
28. ¶ And if an ox gores a man or woman to cause death, the ox must be
stoned, but will not be killed that his flesh may be eaten; and the owner of
the ox will be exempt from the condemnation of death, and also from the price
of the servant or handmaid. |
|
29. But if it is a [habitually] goring bull since yesterday and the day
before yesterday, and its owner had been warned, and it puts to death a man
or a woman, the bull shall be stoned, and also its owner shall be put to
death, |
29. But if the ox (had been wont) to gore yesterday and before, and it
had been attested before his owner three times, and he (had neglected) to
restrain him, the ox, when he kills man or woman, will be stoned, and his
master also will die with a death sent upon him from heaven. |
|
30. insofar as ransom shall be levied upon him, he shall give the
redemption of his soul according to all that is levied upon him. |
30. Yet if a fine of money be laid upon him, he may give a ransom for
his life, according to what will be imposed on him by the sanhedrin of
Israel. |
|
31. Or if it gores a young boy or a young girl, according to this ordinance
shall be done to him. |
31. Whether the ox has gored a son or a daughter of Israel, according
to that judgment it will be done to him. |
|
32. If the bull
gores a manservant or a maidservant, he shall give silver [in the amount of] thirty
shekels to his master, and the bull shall be stoned. |
32. If an ox
gores a Kenaanite man-servant or handmaid, the master of the man or
woman-servant will give thirty sileen of silver, and the ox will be
stoned. |
|
33. And if a person opens a pit, or if a person digs a pit and does not
cover it, and a bull or a donkey falls into it, |
33. ¶ And if a man opens a pit in the street, and does not cover it,
and an ox or an ass fall therein; |
|
34. the owner of the pit shall pay; he shall return money to its owner,
and the dead body shall be his. |
34. the master of the pit will deliver silver to give to its owner the
price of the ox or the ass, and the dead body will be his. |
|
35. And if a man's bull strikes his friend's bull and it dies, they
shall sell the live bull and divide the money received for it, and they shall
also divide the dead body. |
35. ¶ And when an ox wounds his neighbor's ox, and he die, they will
sell the living ox, and divide the price, and the price of the dead one will
they also divide. |
|
36. Or if it was known that it was a [habitually] goring bull since
yesterday and the day before yesterday, and its owner does not watch it, he
shall surely pay a bull for a bull, and the dead body shall be his. |
36. But if it has been known that the ox was wont to gore in time past,
and his master did not restrain him, he will surely deliver ox for ox; but
the carcase and the skin will be his. |
|
37. If a man steals a bull or a lamb and slaughters it or sells it, he
shall pay five cattle for the bull or four sheep for the lamb. |
37. ¶ When a man steals an ox or a sheep, and kills or sells it, five
oxen will he make good for one ox, because he has hindered him from his plowing;
and four sheep for one, because he has impoverished him by his theft, and not
done service by it. |
|
|
|
|
1. If, while breaking in, the thief is discovered, and he is struck and
dies, [it is as if] he has no blood. |
1. 1 ¶ If a thief be found in a window of the wall, and be smitten
and die, there will not be on his account the guilt of the shedding of
innocent blood. |
|
2. If the sun shone upon him, [it is as if] he has blood; he shall
surely pay. If he has no [money], he shall be sold for his theft. |
2. ¶ If the thing be as clear as the sun that he was not entering to
destroy life, and one has killed him, the guilt of the shedding of innocent
blood is upon him; and if spared from his hand, restoring he will restore. If
he have not wherewith to restore, the Beth Din will sell him for his theft
until the year of release. |
|
3. If the stolen article is found in his possession whether a bull, a
donkey, or a lamb live ones he shall pay twofold. |
3. If before witnesses, the thing stolen was found in his possession,
from an ox or an ass, unto a sheep alive, he will restore two for one. |
|
4. If a man leads his animals into a field or a vineyard, or lets his
animal loose and it eats in another's field, the best of his field or the
best of his vineyard he shall pay. |
4. If a man break in upon a field or a vineyard, and send in his beast
to feed in another man's field, the best of his field and the best of his
vineyard he will restore. |
|
5. If a fire goes forth and finds thorns, and a stack of grain or
standing grain or the field be consumed, the one who ignited the fire shall
surely pay. |
5. ¶ If fire break out, and catch thorns, and consume the sheaves, or
whatever is standing, or the field, whoever kindled the fire will surely
restore. |
|
6. If a man gives his neighbor money or articles for safekeeping, and
it is stolen from the man's house, if the thief is found, he shall pay
twofold. |
6. ¶ When a man confides to his neighbor silver, or vessels to keep,
without recompense for the care, and they be stolen from the man's house, |
|
7. If the thief is not found, the homeowner shall approach the judges,
[to swear] that he has not laid his hand upon his neighbor's property. |
7. if the thief be found, he will restore two for one. If the thief be
not found, the master of the house will be brought before the judges, and
will swear that he has not put forth his own hand upon the property of his
neighbor. |
|
8. For any sinful word, for a bull, for a donkey, for a lamb, for a
garment, for any lost article, concerning which he will say that this is it,
the plea[s] of both parties shall come to the judges, [and] whoever the
judges declare guilty shall pay twofold to his neighbor. |
8. ¶ And about whatever is injured covertly, whether ox, or ass, or
sheep, or raiment, of whatever is (so) lost, he will make oath when he says
that so it is; and when the thing stolen will be afterward found in the hand
of the thief, the cause of both will be brought before the judges, the cause
of the householder and the cause of the thief; and whom the judges will
condemn, the thief will restore twofold to his neighbor. |
|
9. If a man gives his neighbor a donkey, a bull, a lamb, or any animal
for safekeeping, and it dies, breaks a limb, or is captured, and no one sees
[it], |
9. ¶ If a man deliver to his neighbor an ox, or a sheep, or any animal
to keep, (if) he is to keep it without recompense, and it die, or be torn by
wild beast, or be carried off, and no witness seeing who can testify it; |
|
10. the oath of the Lord shall be between the two of them provided that
he did not lay his hand upon his neighbor's property, and its owner shall
accept [it], and he shall not pay. |
10. an oath of the LORD will be between them both, that he has not put
forth his hand upon the property of his neighbor; and the owner of the thing
will accept his oath, and he will not (be required to) make it good. |
|
11. But if it is stolen from him, he shall pay its owner. |
11. But if it be stolen from him who was to receive recompense for the
care, he will make it good to its owner. |
|
12. If it is torn apart, he shall bring witness for it; [for] the torn
one he shall not pay. |
12. If it has been torn by a wild beast, let him bring witnesses, or
bring him to the carcass: because for that which is (so) torn he will not
make restitution. |
|
13. And if a person borrows [an animal] from his neighbor and it breaks
a limb or dies, if its owner is not with him, he shall surely pay. |
13. ¶ And if a man borrow anything of his neighbor, and the vessel be
broken, or the animal die, and the owner be not with it, he will certainly
make it good. |
|
14. If its owner is with him, he shall not pay; if it is a hired
[animal], it has come for its hire. |
14. If the owner be with it, he will not make it good: if it had been
lent for profit, its loss came on account of its hire. |
|
15. If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed and lies with her,
he shall provide her with a marriage contract as a wife. |
15. ¶ If a man seduce a virgin unbetrothed, and have criminal conduct
with her, endowing, he will endow her to be his wife. JERUSALEM: If a man seduce a virgin, unbetrothed, and have criminal conduct
with her, endowing, he will endow her to be a wife. |
|
16. If her father refuses to give her to him [in marriage], he shall
weigh out money according to the dowry of the virgins. |
16. If this does not appear to him (to be desirable), or if her father
be not willing to give her to him fifty sileen of silver will be laid upon
him, according to the endowment of a virgin. |
|
17. You shall not allow a sorceress to live. |
17. ¶ Sons of My people Israel, whosoever practices witchcraft you will
not suffer to live. Whosoever lies with a beast will be stoned to death. |
|
18. Whoever lies [carnally] with an animal shall surely be put to
death. |
18. |
|
19. He who slaughters [a sacrifice] to the gods shall be destroyed,
except to the Lord alone. |
19. ¶ Whosoever sacrifices to the idols of the Gentiles will be slain
with the sword, and his goods be destroyed; for you will worship only the
Name of the LORD. |
|
20. And you shall not mistreat a stranger, nor shall you oppress him,
for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. |
20. ¶ And the stranger you will not vex with words, nor distress him by
taking his goods: Remember, sons of Israel, My people, that you were
strangers in the land of Mizraim. |
|
21. You shall not oppress any widow or orphan. |
21. You will not impoverish the widow or the orphan. |
|
22. If you oppress him, [beware,] for if he cries out to Me, I will
surely hear his cry. |
22. If you impoverish her, beware; for if they rise up and cry against
you in prayer before Me, I will hear the voice of their prayer, and will
avenge them, |
|
23. My wrath will be kindled, and I will slay you with the sword, and
your wives will be widows and your children orphans |
23. and My anger will be kindled, and I will slay you with the sword,
and your wives will be widows, and your children be orphans. |
|
|
|
Welcome to the
World of P’shat Exegesis
In order to understand the finished work of the P’shat mode of
interpretation of the Torah, one needs to take into account that the P’shat is
intended to produce a catechetical output, whereby a question/s is/are raised
and an answer/a is/are given using the seven Hermeneutic Laws of R. Hillel and
as well as the laws of Hebrew Grammar and Hebrew expression.
The Seven Hermeneutic Laws of R. Hillel are as follows
[cf. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=472&letter=R]:
1. Ḳal va-ḥomer: "Argumentum a minori ad
majus" or "a majori ad minus"; corresponding to the scholastic
proof a fortiori.
2. Gezerah shavah: Argument from analogy. Biblical
passages containing synonyms or homonyms are subject, however much they differ
in other respects, to identical definitions and applications.
3. Binyan ab mi-katub eḥad: Application of a provision found in
one passage only to passages which are related to the first in content but do
not contain the provision in question.
4. Binyan ab mi-shene ketubim: The same as the preceding, except
that the provision is generalized from two Biblical passages.
5. Kelal u-Peraṭ and Peraṭ u-kelal: Definition of the general by the particular, and of the particular by the
general.
6. Ka-yoẓe bo mi-maḳom aḥer: Similarity in content to another Scriptural passage.
7. Dabar ha-lamed me-'inyano: Interpretation deduced from the
context.
Rashi’s Commentary
for: Shemot (Exod.) 21:28 – 22:23
28 And if a bull gores [This law refers to] either a bull or any
domestic animal, beast, or bird, but the text spoke of what usually occurs
[i.e., bulls usually gore]. -[From Mechilta, B.K. 54b]
and its
flesh shall not be eaten From the implication of what was stated: “the bull shall surely
be stoned,” do I not know that it will become carrion [i.e., meaning not killed
according to halachah], and carrion is forbidden to be eaten. For what purpose,
then, does the Torah state: “and its flesh shall not be eaten”? [To inform us]
that even if one slaughtered it [according to halachah] after it was sentenced,
it is forbidden to be eaten. How do we know that no benefit may be derived from
it [this animal sentenced to death]? Therefore, the Torah says: “and the owner
of the bull is clean (נָקִי)”, as one says to his friend, “So-and-so lost his property
[lit., was cleaned out (נָקִי) of his property], and he has no benefit at all from it” (B.K.
41a). This is its midrashic meaning. Its simple meaning is as its apparent
meaning. Since it says concerning a habitual gorer: “and also its owner shall
be put to death,” it had to say that in the case of a tame [bull]: “and the
owner of the bull is clean [i.e., clear of any charges].” [The tame bull (תָּם) is the bull that did not gore habitually, but only once or
twice. In the case of the bull that killed a person, this bull is put to death,
but the owner is clear; i. e., he does not have to pay ransom. Should the bull
gore three people and kill all of them, it is called מוּעָד,
warned. The fourth time it gores someone it is liable to death, and its owner
is also liable to death by the hands of Heaven. In order to clear himself of
this punishment he must pay ransom, as is delineated in verses 29 and 30.]
29 since yesterday and the day before yesterday This implies [a total
of] three gorings. [From Mechilta, B.K. 23b]
and its
owner has been warned Heb. וְהוּעַד, a word denoting a warning in front of witnesses (Mechilta,
B.K. 24a), like “The man warned us repeatedly (הָעֵד
הֵעִד)
” (Gen. 43:3).
and it
puts to death a man, etc. Since it stated: “if [a bull] gores,” I know only that [the bull
is liable to death] if it kills him [its victim] by goring [with its horns]. If
it killed him through biting, shoving, or kicking, how do we know [that it must
be killed]? Therefore, the Torah states: “and it puts to death,” [implying that
in whatever way it kills its victim, the bull is liable to death]. -[based on
Mechilta]
and
also its owner shall be put to death By the hands of Heaven [and not through a court]. I might think
that it [this verse] means [that he is liable to death] by the hands of man
[i.e., through the court]. Therefore, the Torah states: “The assailant shall
surely be put to death; he is a murderer” (Num. 35:21), [implying that] for his
[act of] murder you [must] kill him, but you do not kill him [i.e., anyone] for
his bull’s [act of] murder. -[From Sanh. 15b] 30
insofar
as ransom shall be levied upon him Heb. (אִם).
This (אִם) is not [meant as a] conditional, but it is like “When (אִם) you lend money” (Exod. 22:24), a word meaning “that.” His
sentence is that the court levy ransom upon him.
he
shall give the redemption of his soul [This means] the value of the victim [as a slave]. This is the view
of Rabbi Ishmael. Rabbi Akiva says: The value of the damager, [i.e., the owner
of the goring bull]. -[From Mechilta]
31 Or if it gores a young boy Heb. בֵן, lit., a son A son
who is a minor.
or a
young girl Heb. בַת,
lit., a daughter who is a minor. Since it says (verse 29): “and it puts to
death a man or a woman,” I may think that he (the bull) is liable only for
[killing] adults. Therefore, the Torah states: “Or if it gores a young boy,
etc.” to make one liable for minors as [for] adults. -[From Mechilta, Mechilta
d’Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai, B.K. 43b, 44a]
32 …a manservant or a maidservant - Canaanites. -[From Mechilta]
thirty
shekels This is a decree of the Scriptures [that the bull’s owner pay
thirty shekels] whether he [the dead slave] was worth a thousand zuz or whether
he was worth no more than a dinar. The weight of the shekel is four pieces of
gold, which equal half an ounce according to the official weight of Cologne.
33 And if a person opens a pit which was covered, and he uncovered it.
or if…
digs
Why was this stated? If he is liable for opening [a pit that had already been
dug], is it not [true that he would be] even more [guilty] for digging [a new
pit]? But this is to include a digger [who digs deeper] after a digger, that he
is liable. [I.e., if one digs a pit nine handbreadths deep, which is capable of
injuring an animal but not killing it, and another digs one handbreadth more,
making the open pit capable of killing an animal, the second digger is liable
in all cases.] -[From B.K. 51a]
and
does not cover it intimating that if he covered it, he is exempt [from paying for
any damages that could occur], and the text speaks of one who digs in a public
domain. -[From B.K. 55b]
and a
bull or a donkey The same applies to all domestic animals and beasts, for wherever
it says: “a bull and a donkey,” we [can] derive [that it applies to all
domestic animals] through a גְּזֵרָה
שָׁוָה,
similar wording of שׂוֹר
שׁוֹר, [which is] from
[the law concerning the] Sabbath, as it is stated: “In order that your bull and
your donkey rest” (Exod. 23:12). Just as there [referring to the Sabbath] every
domestic animal and beast is like the bull [in reference to the law], for it
says elsewhere [regarding the Sabbath] (Deut. 5:14) “[…you shall not perform any
kind of work, neither you, nor your son…] and all your animals,” here, too, all
animals and beasts are like the bull [in reference to the law]. The bull and
the donkey are mentioned only [for us to understand that] for a bull [that
falls into a pit the owner is liable] but not for a man [who falls into a pit],
and [he is liable for] a donkey but not for utensils. -[From B.K. 10b]
34 the owner of the pit [This refers to] the creator of the obstacle
[i.e., the pit], although the pit is not his, for he made it in a public
domain, Scripture made him its owner, insofar as he is liable for its damages.
-[From B.K. 29b]
he
shall return money to its owner Heb. יָשִׁיב. [The word] יָשִׁיב [is written] to include [anything] worth money, even bran.
-[From B.K. 7a] (See Exod. 22:4: “the best of his field or the best of his
vineyard he shall pay,” which Rashi explains to mean that damages are paid from
the best land. Rav Huna the son of Rav Yehoshua in the Talmud (B.K. 7b) solves
this apparent discrepancy by concluding that it applies only if the defendant
prefers to pay the damages with land, but if he prefers to pay with movable
objects, everything is deemed the best, because if it cannot be sold here, it
can be sold elsewhere.) [Addendum to Rashi] [It can therefore be easily
converted to cash.]
and the
dead body shall be his - [The dead animal will belong to] the one [owner] who sustained the
damage. They assess the carcass, and he [the owner] takes it for its value, and
the damager pays him in addition to it [the carcass] payment for his damage.
-[From Mechilta, B.K. 10b]
35 And if… strikes Heb. יִגּֽף, shove, either with its horns, or with its feet, or whether he
bit him with his teeth All are included in נְגִיפָה, for נְגִיפָה is only an expression of striking. -[From Mechilta]
a man’s
bull
Heb. שׁוֹר-אִישׁ, a bull [belonging to] a man.
they
shall sell the live bull, etc. Scripture speaks of [two bulls] of equal value a bull worth two
hundred [zuz] that killed a bull worth two hundred [zuz]. Whether the carcass
is worth much or worth little, when this one takes half [the value of] the live
[bull] and half [the value of] the dead one, the result is that each one
sustains half the damage that death inflicted upon him. We learn that the tame
[bull] pays half the damage, for from the equal ones [the bulls of equal value]
you learn [how it is with] the unequal ones [bulls of unequal value], for the
law of the tame bull is to pay half the damage, not more or less. Or perhaps,
even if they were unequal when they were alive, Scripture mandates that they
sell them both [and divide the proceeds of the sale between them]? [This cannot
be true since] if you say that sometimes the damager would gain very much, or
sometimes the victim would receive much more than the amount of the complete
damage, for half the value of the damaging bull [may] exceed the entire value
of the bull that was damaged. If you say that, the [law regarding the] tame
bull is more stringent than the [law regarding the] habitual gorer [which is
illogical]. You are compelled to say that Scripture is referring only to the ones
[bulls] of equal value. It teaches you that the tame bull pays half the damage,
and from the [law concerning] equal ones, you learn about the unequal ones,
that for the one who is awarded half the damage they [the court] assess the
carcass, and the decrease of its value due to the death, [and] he receives half
the depreciation and leaves (B.K. 34a). Now why did Scripture state it in this
language? To teach [us] that the tame bull pays only with its body, and if it
gored and subsequently died, the one [owner] who sustained the damage receives
only the carcass, and if it does not equal half his damage, he has a loss. Or
if a bull worth a maneh [one hundred zuz] gored a bull worth five hundred zuz,
he [the owner] receives only the bull, for the tame bull did not become
obligated to obligate its owner to pay from the best of his property (B.K.
16b).
36 Or if it was known Or if it was not tame, but it was known that it
was a [habitually] goring bull today and from yesterday and the day before
yesterday, totaling three gorings. -[From Mechilta, B. K. 23b]
he
shall surely pay a bull The complete damage. [Midrash Hagadol from Mechilta d’Rabbi
Shimon ben Yochai]
and the
dead body shall be his [I.e.,] the victim’s, and in addition to that, the damager must
complete it until the victim is paid his entire damage [due to him]. -[From
B.K. 10b. 53b]
37 five cattle, etc. Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai said: The Omnipresent
was considerate of people’s honor. [For] a bull, which walks with its [own]
feet, and the thief was not disgraced by carrying it on his shoulder, he pays
fivefold. [For] a lamb, which he [the thief] carries on his shoulder, he pays
[only] fourfold because he was disgraced by it. Rabbi Meir said: Come and see
how great the power of work is. [For the theft of] a bull, which caused [the
owner] to stop working, he [the thief] pays five. [For the theft of] a lamb,
which did not cause [the owner] to stop working, [the thief pays] four. -[From
Mechilta, B.K. 79b, Tosefta B.K. 7:3]
for the
bull…for the lamb Scripture repeated them [i.e., the mentioning of the bull and the
lamb] to tell [you] that the rule of fourfold and fivefold payments applies
only to a bull and a lamb. [From B.K. 67b]
Chapter
22
1 If, while breaking in [I.e.,] when he was breaking into the house.
he has
no blood [This signifies that] this is not [considered] murder. It is as
though he [the thief] was [considered] dead from the start. Here the Torah
teaches you [the lesson]: If someone comes to kill you, kill him first. And
this one [the thief] has come to kill you, because he knows that no one [can]
hold himself back and remain silent when he sees people taking his money.
Therefore, he [the thief] has come with the acknowledgement that if the owner
of the property were to stand up against him, he [the owner] would kill him
[the thief]. -[From Sanh. 72a]
2 If the sun shone upon him This is nothing but a metaphor [meaning]
if the matter is clear to you that he [the thief] is peaceably disposed toward
you—similar to the sun, which represents peace in the world—so it is obvious to
you that he has not come to kill [you]. Even if the owner of the money rises
against him, for instance, if a father breaks in to steal his son’s property,
it is known that the father has mercy on his son, and he has not come with the
idea of murdering [him]. -[From Sanh. 72a, Mechilta]
he has
blood
He [the thief] is considered as a live person, and it is [considered] murder if
the property owner kills him.
he
shall surely pay The thief [shall pay] the money he stole, and he is not liable to
death. [The thief is considered to have been sentenced to death in cases where
the property owner is allowed kill him. In these cases the thief is exempt from
any monetary obligation incurred when he dug into the house. In cases where the
property owner may not kill him, however, the thief is not considered liable to
death, and thus must pay for what he stole.] Onkelos, who rendered: “If the eye
of witnesses fell upon him,” adopted another view, saying that if witnesses
discovered him [the thief] before the property owner came, and when the
property owner came against him, they warned him not to kill him, [the thief is
considered as if] he has blood; i.e., he [the owner] is liable for him [the
thief] if he kills him, because since [he has committed his crime when] people
can see him, this thief has not come with the intention to murder, and he would
not kill the property owner.
3 If the stolen article is found in his possession Heb. בְיָדוֹ, lit., in his hand, [meaning] in his possession, [meaning] that
he neither slaughtered nor sold [it]. -[From Mechilta]
whether
a bull, a donkey Everything is included in the [obligation to make a] twofold
payment, whether it is a living thing or something that is not alive, for it
says elsewhere (verse 8): “for a lamb, for a garment, for any lost article,…
[he] shall pay twofold to his neighbor.” -[From B.K. 62b]
live
ones he shall pay twofold And he shall not pay him dead ones, but either live ones or the
value of live ones. -[From Mechilta]
4 If… leads his animals (יַבְעֶר)… his animal (בְּעִירֽה) loose and it eats (וּבִעֵר) They are all terms signifying an animal, like “we and our
animals (וּבְעִירֵנוּ) (Num. 20:4).
If
leads his animals Heb. יַבְעֶר, [i.e.,] leads his animals into his neighbor’s field or
vineyard, and it damages it [the property] in one of these two [ways]: either
by sending (שִׁלּוּחַ) his animal or by eating (בִּעוּר). Our Sages explained [that] וְשִׁלַח
refers to the damages [made by] the treading of the foot, and וּבִעֵר refers to the damages of the tooth, which eats and destroys
[someone’s property]. -[From B.K. 2b]
in
another’s field Heb. בִּשְׂדֵה
אַחֵר,
in another person’s field. The vowelization of בִּשְׂדֵה
with the sheva under the “sin” denotes the construct state. Hence, it means “in
the field of another,” rather than “in another field.” Since the noun is
missing, Rashi explains that it means “another person’s field.” -[Mizrachi]
the
best of his field… he shall pay They [judges] assess the damage, and if he [the owner of this
animal] comes to pay him [the owner of the land] the amount of his damage with
land, he must pay him from the best of his fields. If his damage was [worth] a
sela, he must give him the value of a sela from the best [land] that he has.
Scripture teaches you that for the injured party, they assess [the damage] with
the best land. -[From Mechilta, B.K. 6b]
5 If a fire goes forth Even by itself. [From B.K. 22b]
and
finds thorns Heb. קֽצִים, chardons in French, [meaning] thistles.
and a
stack of grain… be consumed That it [the fire] caught onto the thorns until it reached a
stack of grain or standing grain still attached to the ground.
or the
field
That it [the fire] scorched the furrow that he had plowed, and he had to plow
it a second time. -[From B.K. 60a]
the one
who ignited the fire shall surely pay Although he ignited it within his own property, and it spread by
itself through thorns that it found, he is liable to pay because he did not
guard his burning coal so that it would not go forth and inflict damage.
6 and it is stolen from the man’s house According to his words.
if the
thief is found, he shall pay twofold The thief shall pay twofold [the value of the object] to its
[original] owners. -[From B.K. 63b]
7 If the thief is not found And this custodian, who is the owner of
the house, comes.
approaches
-
the judges to litigate with this one [the owner] and to swear to him that he
did not lay his hand upon his [property]. -[From B.K. 63b]
8 For any sinful word [i.e.,] that he is found to be lying in his
oath, for witnesses testify that he himself stole it, and the judges declare
him guilty because of [the testimony of] the witnesses.
shall
pay twofold to his neighbor The text teaches you that if one puts forth a claim concerning an
item entrusted to him, saying that it was stolen from him, and it is discovered
that he himself stole it, he must make twofold restitution. When [is this so]?
Only if he swore [that he did not take it] and afterwards witnesses came [and
testified that he had taken it for himself,] for so have our Rabbis, of blessed
memory, interpreted: “and the homeowner approaches the judges” (verse 7). This
approaching means [to make] an oath [that the custodian swore that the article
was stolen]. You say [that he approaches] for an oath, or perhaps it means [he
approaches] only for litigation. [In this case, if] he comes to litigate and he
denies [any responsibility] by saying that it [the object] was stolen, then is
he immediately liable for twofold restitution if witnesses come [and testify]
that it is in his possession? [The answer is that since the expression] laying
a hand is mentioned here (in verse 7), and below, laying a hand is [also]
mentioned: “the oath of the Lord shall be between the two of them provided that
he did not lay his hand upon his neighbor’s property.” (verse 10). Just as
[“lay his hand” written] further denotes an oath, so does [“laid his hand”
written] here denote an oath. -[From Mechilta, B.K. 63b]
concerning
which he will say that this is it According to its [the verse’s] simple meaning, concerning which
the witness will say that this is it, [i.e., the article] about which you swore
[was stolen but really] is in your possession. The pleas of both parties must
be brought to the judges and they [the judges] will interrogate the witnesses,
and if they [the witnesses] are acceptable and they [the judges] declare this
custodian guilty, he must pay twofold [to the owner]. If they declare the
witnesses guilty, namely that they were found collusive, they must pay twofold
to the custodian. Our Rabbis, of blessed memory, however, interpreted כִּי הוּא
זֶה, that this is it, to mean that [the judges]
do not demand an oath of him [the custodian] unless he admitted part [of the
claim against him], saying, “I owe you this much, but the rest was stolen from
me.” - [From B.K. 106b]
9 If a man gives his neighbor a donkey, a bull The first section was
stated concerning an unpaid custodian. Therefore, [the Torah] exempted him [the
custodian] from theft, as it is written: “and it is stolen from the man’s
house… If the thief is not found, the homeowner approaches the judges” (verses
6-7) for an oath. [Thus] you learn that he exempts himself with this oath. This
section, [however,] is stated concerning a paid custodian. Therefore, he is not
exempt if it [the deposit] was stolen, as it is written: “But if it is stolen
from him, he shall pay” (verse 10). But in the case of an accident beyond his
control, such as if it [the animal] died by itself or if it broke a limb, or if
it was forcibly captured by bandits, and no one [was there to] see it [and] to
testify concerning the matter [if he swears that this is the case, then he is
exempt].- [From B.M. 94b]
10 the oath of the Lord shall be He must swear that it is so, as he
says [that it was beyond his control] and that he did not lay his hand upon it
to use it for himself. Because if he laid his hand upon it, and afterwards,
something beyond his control happens to it, he is liable for [any damage
resulting from] accidents.
and its
owner shall accept the oath. [from B.K. 106a]
and he
shall not pay The custodian [shall not pay] him anything.
12 If it is torn By a ferocious beast.
he
shall bring witness for it He shall bring witnesses [to testify] that it [the animal] was
torn [apart] in a way that was beyond his control, and he is exempt. -[From
B.K. 10b, 11a]
[for]
the torn one he shall not pay [The Torah] does not say, “[for] a torn one he shall not pay,”
but, “[for]
the torn one.” For one
type of torn animal he pays, and for another type of torn animal he does not
pay. For an animal torn [apart] by a cat, a fox, or a marten, he must pay, but
for an animal torn by a wolf, a lion, a bear, or a snake, he does not pay. Now
who whispered to you to reason that way? [The proof is] that it is written:
“and it dies, breaks a limb, or is captured” (verse 9). Just as with death, he
cannot save it, so it is with breaking a limb and captivity, that he cannot
save [it. But in the case of less ferocious beasts, like a fox, since the
shepherd could have saved his charge, he is liable]. -[From Mechilta]
13 And if a person borrows This [verse] comes to teach you concerning
a borrower, that he is liable for incidents beyond his control.
if its
owner is not with him If the owner of the bull is not with the borrower doing his work.
-[From B.M. 95b]
14 If its owner is with him Whether he [the animal’s owner] is with
him [the borrower] doing the same work, or if he was with him doing a different
work. If he [the animal’s owner] was with him [the borrower] at the time of the
loan, he [the owner] need not be with him at the time the limb was broken or
the animal died [to make him exempt from payment]. -[From B.M. 95b]
if it
is a hired [animal] If the bull was not borrowed but hired, [and] it came to be hired
into the hands of this hirer [for a fee] not through lending And he [the hirer]
does not have complete benefit [of the animal] for he used it through its hire,
and he does not have the status of a borrower to be liable for accidents beyond
his control. [The Torah, however,] did not specify what his status is, whether
he is judged like an unpaid custodian or like a paid custodian. Therefore, the
Sages of Israel differed concerning him: How does a hirer pay [in the case of
an accident]? Rabbi Meir says: Like an unpaid custodian. Rabbi Judah says: Like
a paid custodian. -[From B.M. 90b]
15 If a man seduces Heb. יְפַתֶּה,
he speaks to her heart until she yields to him. And so is its Aramaic
translation: וַאֲרֵי
יְשַׁדֵּל.
שִׁדּוּל in Aramaic is the equivalent of פִּתּוּי
in Hebrew [and both signify persuasion].
he
shall provide her with a marriage contract He shall stipulate for her a dowry, as
is the custom of a man to his wife, that he writes for her a kethubah, and he
shall marry her. -[From Mechilta]
16 according to the dowry of the virgins which is fixed at fifty
silver shekels in the case of one who seizes a virgin and forcibly lies with
her, as it is said: “The man who lay with her shall give the maiden’s father
fifty silver shekels” (Deut. 22:29). -[From Keth. 10a]
17 You shall not allow a sorceress to live But she shall be executed
by the court. [This law applies equally to] both males and females, but the
text speaks of the usual, and those who practice sorcery are usually women.
-[From Mechilta, Sanh. 67a]
18 (Some editions: Whoever lies [carnally] with an animal
shall surely be put to death by stoning. A male who has carnal relations
with an animal [is just as liable] as a female who has carnal relations with an
animal, concerning whom it is written: “their blood is upon them [meaning they
will be killed]” (Lev. 20:16). -[From Sanh. 53, 54]) See Rashi on Exod. 21:17.
19 to the gods Heb. לָאֱלֽהִים, to pagan deities. If it were vowelized לֵאלֽהִים [the “lammed” with a “tzeirei”], it would have to specify
[which deities] and [it would need to be explained and] written אֲחֵרִים, other [gods]. Now that it says לָאֱלֽהִים, it does not have to specify [which gods are meant] because
every “lammed,” “beth,” and “hey” prefixed to a word, if it is vowelized with a
“chataf” (meaning a “sheva”), such as לְמֶלֶךְ, to a king, לְמִדְבָּר, to a desert, לְעִיר, to a city, one must specify to which king, to which desert, to
which city. Similarly, [with a “beth” or “lammed”] לִמְלָכִים, to kings, and לִרְגָלִים, to festivals, punctuated with a “chirik,” must be specified to
which ones. If it is not specified all kings are meant. So too, לֵאלֽהִים means all gods, even the divine, but when it is vowelized with
a “pattach,” like לַמֶּלֶךְ, to the king, לַמִּדְבָּר, to the desert, לָעִיר, to the city, [The “pattach” and the “kamatz” are in one
category in this context. There is also another way to explain this, as is
written in Dikdukei Rashi. See that source.] it is known about which king he is
speaking, and so לָאֱלֽהִים, to the gods, to those concerning which you were warned
elsewhere. Similarly, “There is none like You among the gods” (Ps. 86:8). Since
it is not specified, it had to be vowelized with a “pattach”.
shall
be destroyed Shall be put to death. Now why does it say “shall be destroyed”?
Is the death penalty not mentioned elsewhere: “And you shall take that man or
that woman [and you shall stone them… so that they will die], etc.” (Deut.
17:5) ? Since [there the Torah] did not specify for which type of worship he is
liable to death, so that you do not say that for all types of worship one is
liable to death, [the Torah] came and specified to you here: “He who slaughters
[a sacrifice] to the gods shall be destroyed,” to inform you that just as
slaughtering is a type of worship performed inside [the Temple] to Heaven, I
also include one who burns [incense or parts of an animal] or performs
libations, which are types of worship performed inside [the Temple], and
[people] are liable for performing them for idolatry whether or not it is
customary to worship that particular deity in that manner. However, [for] other
types of worship—for example, if one sweeps, sprinkles water on the sand floor
before it [the idol], embraces it or kisses it—he is not liable to death, but
he is warned against it [i.e., he is liable to receive lashes]. -[From
Mechilta, Sanh. 60b]
20 And you shall not mistreat By taunting with words, contralier in
Old French, [meaning] to vex, like “And those who taunt you (מוֹנַיִךְ), I will feed their flesh” (Isa. 49:26). -[From Mechilta,
Jonathan]
nor
shall you oppress him by robbing [him of his] money. -[From Mechilta, Jonathan]
for you
were strangers in the land of Egypt If you taunt him, he can also taunt you and say to you, “You too
emanate from strangers.” Do not reproach your neighbor with a fault that is
also yours (Mechilta, B.M. 59b). Every expression of a stranger (גֵּר) means a person who was not born in that country but has come
from another country to sojourn there.
21 You shall not oppress any widow or orphan The same applies to all
people, but the Scripture speaks of the usual situation, since they [widows and
orphans] are weak and [they] are frequently oppressed. - [From Mechilta]
22 If you oppress him This is an elliptical verse. It threatens
[punishment], but does not delineate his punishment. [This is] similar to
“Therefore, whoever kills Cain…!” (Gen. 4:15). It threatens, but does not
delineate his punishment. Here too, “If you oppress him” is an expression of a
threat: If you oppress him [the orphan], you will ultimately receive what is
coming to you. Why? “For if he cries out to Me, etc.”
23 and your wives will be
widows From the implication of what is said—“and I will slay you”—do I not
know that your wives will be widows and your children orphans? Rather, this is
another curse, namely that the wives will be bound in living widowhood -there
will be no witnesses to their husbands’ deaths, and [thus] they will be
forbidden to remarry. The children will be orphans because the court will not
allow them to have their fathers’ property, since they do not know whether they
died or were captured. -[From Mechilta, B.M. 38b]
Welcome to the World of Remes
Exegesis
Thirteen rules compiled
by Rabbi Ishmael b. Elisha for the elucidation of
the Torah and for making halakic deductions from it. They are, strictly
speaking, mere amplifications of the seven Rules of Hillel, and are collected in
the Baraita of R. Ishmael, forming the
introduction to the Sifra and reading a follows:
Rules
seven to eleven are formed by a subdivision of the fifth rule of Hillel; rule
twelve corresponds to the seventh rule of Hillel, but is amplified in certain
particulars; rule thirteen does not occur in Hillel, while, on the other hand,
the sixth rule of Hillel is omitted by Ishmael. These rules are found also on
the morning prayers of any Jewish Orthodox Siddur together with a brief
explanation for each one of them.\
Ramban’s
Commentary for: Shemot (Exodus) 21:28 – 22:23
29.
AND ITS OWNER SHALL BE PUT TO DEATH.
Our Rabbis have received by Tradition[1]
that this death means by the hand of Heaven. Similar cases are these verses: and
the common man that draws near will be put to death;[2] and
they die therein, if they profane it.[3]
I have noticed that where the
Torah speaks of those liable to be put to death by the court, it does not
mention just yumoth (he will be put to death), but always says, moth
yumoth (he will surely be put to death). Do not object to this rule from
the verse, and he that kills a man 'yumoth' (will be put to death),[4]
or from the verse about the Sabbath,[5] or
a prophet who misleads,[6]
for in each of these cases He has already dearly explained elsewhere about them
[that they are liable to death by the court, by using the phrase: moth
yumoth].[7]
Now I do not know the reason for
Onkelos' rendering yumoth as yithk'teil ["he will be
killed", which indicates that his death is to be by the court, instead of
by the hand of Heaven]. Perhaps his intention is to state that the owner, [who
had been previously warned that his ox had gored three times, but still did not
guard it, so that it went out and killed a man or woman], deserves to be put to
death, but is instead made liable to the payment of a ransom. Or perhaps
Onkelos means to explain that that which Scripture states, and its owner also will be put to
death means that the owner will perish in a similar manner to that by
which the gored person was killed, for his day will come to die, or he will go
down into battle, and be swept away:[8] the
Eternal will not hold him guiltless.[9]
Thus Onkelos wanted to teach us that the owner of the ox is liable, according
to the view of Heaven, to die by the hand of a killer, and not by a natural
death, something like it is said, and I will kill you with the sword.[10]
In the verse, and the common man that draws near shall be put to death,[11]
Onkelos also translated yumoth as yithk'teil ["he will
be killed," indicating that his death is to be by the court], because he agrees with the opinion of Rabbi Akiba who said that a
non-priest who performed the Divine service in the Sanctuary is put to death by
strangulation.[12]
30.
IF THERE BE LAID ON HIM A RANSOM, THEN HE WILL GIVE FOR THE REDEMPTION OF HIS
LIFE WHATSOEVER IS LAID UPON HIM.
Since the redemption is a form of atonement[13]
as are the offerings, and if the owner does not desire it we cannot force him
to come before the court to impose the ransom on him, and even if the court
ordered him to pay it, we cannot seize his goods as security, therefore He
said: "if."
31.
'O' (OR) HE HAVE GORED A SON, OR HAVE GORED A DAUGHTER ACCORDING TO THIS
JUDGMENT WILL IT BE DONE UNTO HIM.
Scripture uses the word a ('or' he have gored a son), because
it adds to a phrase mentioned above, the meaning of the whole phrase thus
being: "and he has put to death a man or a woman,[14]
or he have gored a son, or have gored a daughter, one ordinance will be for
them." Some scholars[15]
say that the word o comes in the place of im (if). Similarly: 'O'
(if) it be the carcass of an unclean beast;[16] 'O'
(if) I had dealt falsely against mine own life;[17] 'O'
(if) it be known that the ox was wont to gore.[18]
There are many such cases, in the opinion of these scholars.[19]
But all these proofs are false witnesses; you will understand them all in their
context.
According to our Rabbis,[20]
Scripture had to detail the ordinance [in the case of an ox goring] minors,
because it found it necessary to say above, And if an ox gore a man or a
woman,[21]
- in order to teach us that in all laws of the Torah
concerning damages G-d has treated woman equally to man - thus I
might have thought that one is only liable in the case of a grown man or woman;
therefore Scripture says, or he have gored a son, to make him
liable for the death of minors as for that of adults. The same method was
followed by Scripture in the verse, And he that smites any man mortally will
surely be put to death,[22]
as Rashi explained there.[23]
In line with the plain meaning of
Scripture, [the ordinance concerning an ox goring minors is stated] because an
ox that kills a grown-up person is extremely vicious, as a bear robbed of her cubs[24]
in the wilderness, thus if warning has been given to its owner, and
he hath not kept it in,[25]
he has committed a grave transgression, and deserves to be liable to death or
to pay a ransom [for the redemption of his life]; but an ox that kills minors
is not so vicious, for most oxen are not afraid of them, and one might
therefore think that their owners are not liable [to the same punishment],
therefore Scripture states that according to this judgment will it be
done unto him.
34.
AND THE DEAD BEAST WILL BELONG TO HIM - "to the one who suffered the damage. We make
an estimation of the value of the carcass and he takes it in part payment and
the one who caused the damage, [the owner of the pit], pays him in addition as
much as makes up the value of his damage." This is Rashi's language. But
he did not explain the law sufficiently. For there is no need for Scripture to
tell us concerning this carcass that the one who suffered the damage must take
it in part payment, when he brings it before the court to collect his damage;
for even if the one who caused the damage had other carcasses that were carrion,
or flesh that was trefah (torn and therefore not kosher)[26]
in his possession, he can give it to him in part payment, it being already
established[27]
that restitution for damages need not be in money, but may "include
anything of value, even bran." Rather, the meaning of the verse is to
state that the carcass belongs to the one who suffered the damage and is
considered his property] therefore if its value decreased after the damage was
caused, or it was stolen, the one who caused the damage, [the owner of the pit],
pays only the loss in value caused by the death of the animal. Thus if the ox
that was killed was worth when alive one hundred zuzim, and upon its death
became worth fifty, the one who caused the damage is liable to pay only fifty
zuzim, and the other attends to his carcass [removing it from the pit], and
keeps it for himself.[28] This law applies to all damages, and it is what the Sages call:
"the loss in the carcass' value," and is explained in the Gemara.[29]
36.
OR IF IT BE KNOWN THAT THE OX WAS WONT TO GORE IN TIME PAST, AND ITS OWNER HAS
NOT KEPT IT IN, HE WILL SURELY PAY AN OX FOR AN OX. It is known that if a Tam[30]
too is properly guarded by its owner, but through an accident it so happened
that it went out and caused damage, the owner is certainly not liable.[31]
Thus the reason why He states only with reference to a Muad, and
its owner has not kept it in, [when the same principle would apply to a
Tam as well] is, according to that Sage in the Talmud[32]
who says that a Muad needs better guarding than a Tam, as follows: Scripture
states that if the ox was wont to gore and warning had been given to its owner, and
he has not kept it in and guarded it better in view of its dangerous
nature, so that it went out and caused damage, the owner must pay the full
damage. According to the opinion of that Sage[33]
who holds that the degree of guarding necessary for both Tam and Muad
is alike, the meaning of the verse is as follows: If it be known to the owner that
the ox was wont to gore and now too [i.e., at the fourth time] he
has not kept it in, he is liable to pay the full damage on account of
his grave negligence.
AND
THE DEAD BEAST WILL BELONG TO HIM
- "to the one who suffered the damage, and the one who caused the damage
adds to it until he completes the amount, so that the one who was damaged will
have been paid for his entire loss." This is Rashi's language, and is in
accordance with the teaching of our Rabbis.[34]
And if so, it is proper that we explain the verse as follows: he will
surely pay ox for ox "with" the dead beast which will, belong
to him. Similarly, and Joseph was in Egypt,[35]
means: "with" Joseph who was in Egypt [they were
seventy souls]. Likewise, I cannot endure iniquity 'va'atzarah,[36]
[Literally: "and the solemn assembly"] means with the solemn assembly,
similar to that which He said, I hate robbery 'b'olah' -
"with" a burnt-offering.[37]
According to the simple meaning
of Scripture it is possible to explain the expression, and the dead will belong to him
- to the one who caused the damage, the verse thus stating: he will
surely pay ox for ox, but he may keep the carcass, so that in making monetary
compensation he can turn it over to the one who suffered the damage as part
payment. Thus according to both interpretations the law is alike - the owner of
the dead animal attends to the carcass, and its value is determined as at the
time of its death,[38]
to be taken by him as part payment, according to the words of our Rabbis.
22:2.
IF THE SUN HAS RISEN UPON HIM.[39]
"This is nothing but a metaphorical expression, [for did the sun rise upon
him alone? Does it not rise upon the whole world? It means etc.][40]
But Onkelos who rendered the phrase if the sun has risen upon him as:
'if the eye of the witnesses fell upon him' chose a different way of
interpreting the verse, which is as follows: if the witnesses found the thief
before the householder came, and when the householder came to resist the thief,
they warned him not to kill the thief, then damim lo, he is liable if
he killed him, for since there were witnesses watching him, the thief had no
thought of taking human life, and he would not have killed the householder."
Thus is Rashi's language.
But I wonder! When He said above
[in Verse 1], there will be no guilt of blood incurred for him, thereby
acquitting the householder for the murder of the thief, it must surely be
speaking of a case where the witnesses warned him not to kill him, for no
murderer is ever liable to death without prior warning. And if you say then
that in stating: there will be no guilt of blood incurred for him, Heaven
permitted the thief's blood to be shed, that is to say, it is permissible to kill
him - that is not true![41]
Rather, the first verse acquits the householder under all circumstances from
the hand of Heaven, [where he had no prior warning], and from the court if he
had prior warning, and the second verse [dealing as it does with another set of
circumstances], holds him guilty by the law of both. Perhaps the Rabbi's
intention [i.e., Rashi's intention in interpreting Onkelos' translation], was
to say that if the witnesses found the thief before the householder came, and recognized
him, and the thief knew of their presence, then the thief no longer could have
intended to take human life, since he saw that the witnesses recognized him and
knew that if he would kill, the witnesses would come to court and have him put
to death. And this is the reason for the expression, if the sun has risen upon him,
for at night, seeing that the witnesses did not recognize him, he would kill
the householder and escape.
In my opinion Onkelos intended to
say that if the thief has left the break-through, and the householder comes to
court to say that he has witnesses that he was found breaking through, damim
lo [literally: "he has blood"] as other living people do, and
it is not permissible to kill him, and if the householder did kill him, he is to
be put to death; but the thief is to pay if he took anything from there. Scripture
uses the expression, if the sun be risen upon him because
it speaks of the usual manner, for those who break into homes generally do so
at night when no one recognizes them, and the one who kills them there is free
and may do so with impunity. But if the thief stayed there until the sun had
risen upon him, and then left in a stealthy manner and ran for his life, then
if the householder comes to bring a charge against him with the help of
witnesses, he [i.e., the thief] is not liable to death, neither by the hands of
the court nor by the householder. If this is so, then - according to the opinion
of the Sage who says[42]
that a thief who broke into a house and took some of its vessels and went out,
is free from paying for them, because he acquired them with "blood"[43] -
we must say that the second half of the verse which states, he will
make restitution; if he have nothing, then he will be sold for
his theft, refers back to a previous verse [i.e., Verse 37 in the preceding
chapter]: if a man steal an ox etc. A similar case is the verse, And
also unto your bondwoman you will do likewise.[44]
The plain meaning of the verse is
known to be as follows: If a thief dug through into a home at dark, and was
found there at night, he may be killed; but if the sun shone upon the thief and
someone saw him and recognized him, he may not be killed, but he must pay for
what he stole and took from there at daytime. The meaning of the
term hashemesh (the sun) is "in
the sight of those who saw him." Similarly, in the sight of this sun[45]
means "openly." The reason for this law is as we have
mentioned, that one who comes at night will kill the householder, [and
therefore the householder may kill him], whilst one who comes at daytime will
flee from him [once he is recognized].
6.
IF A MAN DELIVER UNTO HIS NEIGHBOR MONEY OR VESSELS TO KEEP. This section [Verses 6-8] speaks
of an unpaid guardian, therefore He has freed him from payment in case the
money or vessels are lost or stolen, as is the Tradition of our Rabbis.[46]
Scripture mentioned it without specifying what the case is because those who
guard money or vessels generally do so without reward. The second section
[Verses 9-12] speaking of a paid guardian mentions an ass, or an ox, or a
sheep, or any beast,[47]
because it is the customary way to give over cattle into the hands of shepherds
who pasture them for payment.
AND
IT BE STOLEN OUT OF THE MAN'S HOUSE.
Rashi explained it as meaning that it was stolen out of the man's house
"according to his statement," meaning that this is what the unpaid
guardian claims.[48]
Scholars have brought parallel cases in Scripture [as proof to Rashi's
explanation]. Thus: If there arise in the midst of you a prophet;[49] Hananiah
the son of Azzur the prophet,[50]
for he is not referred to by that epithet ["prophet"] as a true
description, but only because he claimed to be so. But there is no need for
this. For Scripture is stating that if it was really stolen out of the man's
house and the thief be found, he will pay double; and
if the thief be not found,[51]
they will come to court and the guardian will swear concerning the stolen
article whether he have not put his hand unto his neighbor's goods,[52]
and he
whom the court condemns as the thief of this article will pay double,[53] as the court will not convict anyone and make him pay double unless he
stole it, since the law of twofold restitution applies only to a thief, as He
said above, If the theft be found in his
hand alive ... he shall pay double.[54]
7.
WHETHER HE HAVE NOT PUT HIS HAND UNTO HIS NEIGHBOR'S GOODS. In the opinion of Rashi this
means that the guardian is to come before the judges to swear that he has not
put his hand to his fellow-man's goods [i.e., that he is not guilty of
embezzlement]. The correct interpretation is that he is to come before the judges
to swear that it was stolen and thus substantiate his claim, but he can only
swear thus if he did not put his hand to make use of his neighbor's goods, for
he who puts to his own use what had been left in his keeping is answerable for
it as if he were a robber, and is liable to make restitution even if it was
lost through an unavoidable accident.[55]
8.
WHEREOF ONE SAYS: 'THIS IS IT.'
Rashi comments: "according to the literal sense it means: that which the
witness will say 'this is it - this is that article about which you have taken
an oath [that it was stolen from you] but see, it is in your possession!' And
our Rabbis have explained that the phrase this is it teaches us that an oath
cannot be imposed [by the court on a defendant] unless he admits part of the
claim, saying 'I owe you so and so much, but the rest was stolen from me.'
"[56]
But this principle of partial
admission which the Rabbi [Rashi] has written here, is in accordance with the
opinion of certain individual Rabbis [in the Talmud],[57]
but is not the accepted decision of the law, for guardians [to incur liability
to an oath] need not partially deny and partially admit the claim,[58]
but even if they claim that the whole article was stolen, they still have to
take the oath of the guardians, [unlike debts, which, if the debtor denies
completely, do not require an oath of the Torah]. Moreover, it has been
explained in the Gemara[59]
with convincing proofs, that when he denies the very fact that he ever became a
guardian, such as where he says "you have never given me the object to
keep," in that case if he denied it totally, he is free from taking an
oath, and if he admitted it partially he is obliged to take an oath, this being
the opinion of all Rabbis in the Talmud,[60]
even though the Rabbi [Rashi] has not written so in his commentaries to the
Gemara.[61]
If so, we may say that the phrase [this is it - from which we derive
the principle of partial admission, as explained above], speaks according to
the interpretation of the Sages of a case where the guardian's defense is:
"He never gave me anything to keep," in which case if he denied it
totally he is free of an oath, and if he partially admitted it and partially
denied it, he is liable to take an oath.[62]
Thus the verses are to be explained as follows: If the thief be not found, then
the master of the house shall come near unto the judges[63]
- for
every claim of trespass which he may claim against him, such as: "You
were negligent in your guarding it," or where the guardian says: "this
is it, - this is what you have deposited with me, and you did not
deposit any more with me" - then the one with whom the article was
deposited that the judges will condemn, [upon testimony given before them
that he embezzled it], will pay double unto his neighbor.
Thus, both [the debtor and the guardian] pay, but double restitution is only
where the guardian claims falsely that it was stolen, and the rule concerning
the plea of partial admission applies to all claims, even to loans, robbery and
other matters. In all these laws the verses of Scripture are few and the rules
many. But there is no need to explain them here, except in order to interpret
the verses.
12.
IF IT BE TORN IN PIECES
- "by a wild beast. 'Y'VIEIHU EID'
- let him bring witnesses that it has been torn in pieces by accident, and then
he will be free from paying." This is the language of Rashi.
But one may wonder. Why did
Scripture mention specifically here [in the case of the animal being torn to
pieces by a wild beast], the necessity of having witnesses, since in this [very
same section of the law of the paid guardian] it has already said above, [in
the cases where the animal dies, or is hurt, or captured], The oath of the Eternal will be
between them both[64]
[i.e., between the owner of the animal and the guardian] , and the law in all
cases is alike: if there are witnesses that the animal died, or was hurt, or
captured, he is free from paying and so also if it was torn in pieces by a wild
beast, and if there are no witnesses he must take an oath in all cases, and if
he does so, he does not pay? Perhaps Scripture speaks of the customary manner,
for when an animal dies in his master's crib[65]
or it goes up to the top of a crag and is hurt, there is usually no man seeing
it; so also if it was captured by armed bandits who came upon it and took it
from the flock and went away [there are usually no witnesses]. But when a lion
or bear attacks, a multitude of shepherds is called forth against it,[66]
and therefore Scripture says that he should bring the shepherds to court, and
[upon their testimony] he will be freed from the liability of payment.
Or we may explain that Scripture
intends to establish the law enunciated by Isi ben Yehudah,[67]
who says, "No-one seeing it - he is free [from payment but he must swear];
but if there are witnesses who could testify in this matter, let him bring the
witnesses and only then will he be free." And the explanation thereof is
as follows: If the accident happened [to the animal entrusted to his
guardianship] in a place where people are present the whole day, we do not rely
upon his oath but instead he must bring witnesses, and where an animal is torn
in pieces by a wild beast, it is generally the case [that other people are
present besides the guardian], and therefore Scripture required him to bring
witnesses.
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained:
y'vieihu
eid - "let him bring part of the torn animal as witness, two legs,
or a piece of an ear[68]
in proof of his statement." And I have seen it explained thus in the
Mechilta of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai:[69]
"Aba Shaul said, he should bring the carcass, as it is said, Thus
says the Eternal, as the shepherd rescues out of the mouth of the lion, two
legs etc."[70]
15.
AND IF A MAN 'Y'FATEH'
- "speaks to her emotions [until she submits to him]. And so did Onkelos
render it arei y'shadeil, the term shidul in Aramaic being like pitui
[persuasion, seduction], in the Sacred Language. 'MAHOR YIMHARENAH' (HE WILL
SURELY PAY A DOWRY FOR HER) TO BE HIS WIFE - he will assign her a marriage
portion as is the manner of a man to his wife by writing her a kethubah
(marriage contract), and he will marry her." Thus far is Rashi's language.
But this is not correct, for the
term pitui
[does not mean "speaking to her feelings," as Rashi put it], but
winning over another person's will by falsehood. A similar usage of the term is
found in these verses: 'yifteh l'vavchem' (your
heart will be deceived);[71] 'vayift'
(and he seduced) my heart secretly;[72] if my
heart 'niftah' (have been enticed) unto a woman.[73]
This is why people whose minds are not adroit in discriminating matters, and
whose hearts can be easily bent by a few words at the beginning of a
discussion, are called p'ta'im (simple-minded ones), just
as it is said, 'peti' (the simple-minded) believes every word,[74]
and he who seduces a virgin in order to have sexual relations with her, bends
her will to his desire by words of falsehood, and is therefore called m'fateh
[seducer].
Onkelos, however, divided the term
pitui
into two meanings. Thus here he translated it: y'shadeil, which is an
expression for cunning and effort that a person exercises towards another in
order to do with him as he pleases, regardless of whether this effort is by
means of words or deeds. Thus Onkelos translated: 'vayei'aveik' a man with
him[75] -
v'ishtadeil
(and a man 'wrestled craftily' with him). And Yonathan ben Uziel[76]
translated: 'v'shovavticho' (and I will turn you about), and put hooks
into your jaws[77]
- 'v
'ishtadlinoch.' And in the Targum of the Scroll of Ruth we find: Where
have you gleaned to-day? 'v'anah asit' (and where have you worked)?[78]
- 'u'lan
ishtadalt l'me'bad' (and where have you 'endeavored' to work)? -
And she said: The man's name with whom 'asithi' (I worked) to-day is Boaz,[79]
is translated in the Targum: 'd'ishtadalith imei' (with whom I
'endeavored'). For all effort involving skill, with which a person attempts to
achieve something, is called hishtadluth (endeavoring). Thus the
Rabbis have said in the Mishnah:[80]
"And where there are no men, hishtadeil (strive) to be a man."
And in the Gemara[81]
we find: "A man should always yishtadeil (strive) to go out
to welcome kings of Israel." And in Scripture it is written: and
he [i.e., the king] 'mishtadar' (labored) to rescue him,[82] -
employing every skill [to save Daniel].
In my opinion, associated with
this term [hishtadluth - striving] is the expression, rebellion 'v'eshtadur'
(and sedition) have been made therein,[83]
meaning, rebellion and "much striving." For even in the Sacred
Language these letters [the lamed and the resh of y'shadeil,
y'shadeir] interchange. Thus we find: mazaloth (constellations)[84]
and mazaroth;[85] niml'tzu
(sweet),[86]
and nimr'tzu
(forcible);[87]
'mifl'sei'
(the balancing of) the clouds,[88]
and 'mifr'sei'
(the spreadings of) the clouds.[89]
Similarly in Aramaic: va'alu (and behold),[90]
and va'aru.[91] Sharshereth
(chain)[92]
is termed by the Sages shalsheleth.[93]
There are Mishnaic texts where it is written, "hishtadeir [instead
of hishtadeil
- both terms meaning 'strive'] to be a man…[94]
It is for this reason that Onkelos renders ki y'fateh - arei y'shadeil (he will
endeavor); he will attempt by devious means to invest the virgin with a sense
of trust in him, by many ruses, until she submits to him. And since seduction
may be achieved in many ways - sometimes with words, sometimes with money,
sometimes by falsehood to mislead her, and sometimes even by truth, as when he
really wishes to marry her - therefore Onkelos did not use a precise term for
it, but rendered it as an expression of "endeavor." However, in the
verse, lest your heart be 'yifteh,'[95]
he used the other meaning and translated it: 'dilma yit'ei,' for there
it means, "perhaps you will be misled."
And that which the Rabbi [Rashi]
explained: "'Mahor yimharenah' (he shall surely pay a dowry for her) to be his wife - he will assign her a
marriage portion as is the manner of a man to his wife, by writing her a kethubah
(marriage contract)" - this is not correct, for if the seducer marries
her, he pays no penalty,[96]
and if he divorces her after the marriage, there is no monetary obligation upon
him by law of the Torah, since a kethubah is a matter of Rabbinic
ordinance. Rather, mohar means gifts - the gifts which a man sends to his
betrothed, jewels of silver and jewels of gold[97]
and clothes for the wedding ceremony and marriage, these being called sivlonoth
in the language of the Rabbis.[98]
Thus they said: "Mohan go back [upon the death of the wife]."[99]
And Onkelos rendered the verse, And Shechem said... Multiply upon me greatly
'mohar' and gift[100]
- "multiply
upon me greatly moharin [in the plural] and gifts," and Shechem
would not have vowed to write Dinah many kethuboth. Instead, mohar
means gifts, as I have explained. It is possible that the word is derived from the
expression 'm'heirah chushah' (hasten, stay not),[101]
because the mohar is the first thing which hastens the wedding, as the
groom hurries and sends these presents ahead of him in eager haste and then he
comes to his father-in-law's house to make the wedding or the feast, just as
the Sages have spoken of "parties of sivlonoth" (when presents are
presented to the betrothed).[102]
The meaning of 'mahor yimharenah' to be his wife is then, that the
seducer should send her presents and necessities for the wedding in order to
become his wife. There is thus a hint here that both the seducer and the
seduced can prevent the marriage, since Scripture uses such language rather
than saying expressly that he should take her to him as his wife; for there is
no commandment upon him to marry her unless he so desires, and if he does not
want her to begin with, he is to pay fifty shekels of silver.[103]
After that Scripture states[104]
that if the father refuses to give her unto him, he will pay him money according to the
'mohar' which men give to virgins whom they marry. The reason for this
fine is that the seducer has spoiled her reputation in the eyes of young men,
thus the father will have to give her many presents and they will not give her
any dowry, therefore it is right that the seducer should pay it. Our Rabbis
have said[105]
that the amount of this mohar was determined by Scripture in the case of the violator to be
fifty shekels of silver,[106]
the law of the violator and of the seducer being alike in this respect.
Scripture, however, did differentiate between them in that in the case of the
violator it says, and she will be his wife ... he may not put her away all his days,[107]
the reason [for this distinction between the violator, who must marry the
maiden whom he has raped, and is forbidden to divorce her ever, and the
seducer, who does not have to marry the seduced girl, but may instead pay the
penalty mentioned in the Torah], is that usually it is handsome young men[108] who
seduce virgins, and the beautiful daughters of prominent families, [in the hope
of marrying them]. But since it is not proper that he should gain from his sin,
[i.e., that the girl should have to marry the seducer], therefore He explained
that he cannot marry her against their will [hers and that of her father], but
instead must pay them. Also, because she too sinned in this matter, He did not
impose it on him to have to marry her against his will, but instead it is
enough if he pays the penalty [of the fifty shekels of silver], and if he
marries her with her consent and that of her father, she has the same status in
relation to him as all women, having no claim to a kethubah from him by law
of the Torah [but only by Rabbinic ordinance]. Similarly, it is usually the
sons of prominent families who rape the daughters of those less-known families
who have no power against them. Therefore He said in the case of the violator, and
she will be his wife[109]
- against his will. And in the opinion of our Rabbis,[110]
there too [in the case of the violator] the maiden and her father can withhold
consent, as it would not be correct that he should marry her against her will,
and thus do her two evils. Sometimes she may be of a more honorable family than
he, and it is inconceivable that she should be further disgraced by his sinful
act. The fair law is thus that the decision as to the marriage of the raped
maiden be left to her discretion and that of her father, and not to the
violator; instead, [if she desires it] he must marry her against his will,[111]
in order that violent men should not take liberties with the daughters of
Israel.
Now this law of seduction only
applies to a na'arah,[112]
as does the law of violation [which applies only to a girl between the ages of
twelve years and a day, and twelve and a half], for there Scripture expressly
stated, if a man find a 'n'arah' that is a virgin,[113]
but here He did not mention na'arah. The reason for this is that
the term na'arah mentioned there [in the case of a violator], is used in
order to exclude the bogereth [a woman who has passed the
stage of maidenhood], who is considered an adult woman, whereas a girl who is a
minor [between the ages of three years and a day and twelve years and a day],
is also included under the terms of the law of violation. But here [in the case
of seduction], it was not necessary to exclude a bogereth, for it is
self-understood that one who seduces a bogereth pays nothing, as he did it
with her mature consent. Besides, a father has no rights
at all in his daughter after the days of her maidenhood, as it is
written, 'bin'ureihah' (in her maidenhood) in her father's house,[114]
and here He said, If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him,[115]
thus indicating that he [the father] can give her to him as a wife, seeing that
he has the authority to take her betrothal-money, and this applies only when
she is a minor or a na'arah,[116]
just as the Rabbis interpreted:[117] "All benefits which accrue during maidenhood belong to her
father."[118]
But in the case of a violation it was necessary to write na'arah, in order to
exclude a bogereth from that law, because we might have thought that if
she were a bogereth he should pay the fifty shekels of silver to her,
[instead of to her father; it was therefore necessary to state] that it is a
Scriptural decree [that if she is a bogereth he is free from that
penalty], the reason being that since she is in full control of herself, she
should guard herself against such a mishap.
Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra
explained mohar as being an expression of "binding" [that he
should bind her to him as a wife], similar in usage to the verse, Let
the idols of them be multiplied 'acheir maharu' (who bind themselves to another
god).[119]
But this is not correct; instead, the meaning of mohar is as I have
explained it on the basis of the words of our Rabbis, of blessed memory. And in
my opinion acheir maharu[120]
means, "those who are 'hasty' in thought, [from the root maheir
- fast] and follow another god precipitately, without consideration and without
knowledge." In the writings of the grammarians[121]
[acheir
maharu is explained as meaning]: "those who give mohar
(gifts) to another god," meaning that they bring him sacrifice and
offering.
17.
YOU WILL NOT SUFFER A SORCERESS TO LIVE. In connection with all those who are guilty of
death, He has said above: moth yumoth (he will be surely put
to death),[122]
meaning he is liable to death, and it is a positive commandment upon us to slay
him, based upon the verse which says, And you will put away the evil from the
midst of you,[123]
or it may be that this obligation on us is derived from the very expression yumoth
(he
will be put to death) which He used in these cases.[124]
But here, however, He did not say, "a sorceress will be put to
death," but in this case He warned us in a stricter manner by means of a
negative commandment, that we should not suffer her to live.[125]
The reason for this is that the sorceress is defiled of name and full of
tumult,[126]
and fools are mislead by her, therefore He was more stringent and admonished us
with a prohibition. We find a similar severity in relation to all those who
cause snares for many people, such as that which He said in the case of the
misleader after idols, neither will you spare, nor will you conceal
him,[127]
and in the case of a murderer He said, And you will take no ransom for the life of
a murderer, that is guilty of death.[128]
19.
HE THAT SACRlFICES 'LO'ELOHIM YOCHARAM' (WILL BE UTTERLY DESTROYED). "Lo'elohim means to the
idols, for since the word is voweled with a patach,[129]
it means those gods which in another place you have been warned not to
worship." This is Rashi's language. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that
in accordance with the plain meaning of Scripture, this command is not directed
to Israel, as they had already been warned in the second of the Ten
Commandments against the worship of idols. Instead it was said to "the
stranger" mentioned in the following verse, that he may live in our land
only on condition that he should not sacrifice to his gods as he was wont to
do. - But he [i.e., Ibn Ezra] opens his mouth in vanity.[130]
For in the Ten Commandments He warned against idolatry by a prohibition, and
here He explained the punishment and the law that we are to apply to he who
transgresses that commandment, just as He did in the case of You
will not murder; You will not commit adultery,[131] for
these are the ordinances which He set before them [with respect to
these commandments].[132]
Thus He is hereby declaring that one who sacrifices to idols is guilty of
death, for the term yocharam means death by the court. Similarly we find, All
'cherem' that may be 'yocharam' of men may not be ransomed; he will surely be
put to death.[133]
He uses the term yocharam [of the root cherem - unlawful, anathema],
because he who sacrifices to that which is anathema, deserves destruction,
similar to that which is said in the verse, And you will not bring an
abomination into your house, and be 'cherem ' (accursed) like unto it; you will
utterly detest it, and you will utterly abhor it; for it is an accursed thing.[134]
It is possible that the verse includes
the slaughterer and the animal slaughtered, to tell us that they both go to cherem (destruction), thus hinting that
it is forbidden to derive any benefit from that which has been offered to the
idols. It mentioned sacrificing, but the same law applies to bowing down before
the idol, and to all other acts of worship performed in the Sanctuary,[135]
but other acts of worship - such as sweeping it, or besprinkling it, or putting
his arms around it, or kissing it - are not punishable by death, provided that
the idol is not usually worshipped in that manner, but if it is the customary
way of worshipping it, he is liable to death under all circumstances, even if
excreting to Baal Peor.
The correct interpretation of the
term lo'elohim
with the lamed voweled with a patach, [or a kamatz as in this instance],
is that it refers to the angels of above who are called elohim in many places of
Scripture, as it is written: There is none like unto You among 'elohim,'
O Eternal;[136] He is
G-d of 'elohim' and Lord of lords;[137] Bow
down to him, all you 'elohim.'[138]
They are also called eilim (the mighty ones),[139]
as I have already mentioned. 290 And He said here, save unto the Eternal only,
because those who sacrifice to His angels think that thereby they do His will,
and that the angels will be the intermediaries to obtain His favor for them,
and that it is as if they sacrifice to G-d and His ministers; therefore He said
[that sacrifices must not be brought] save unto the Eternal only.[140]
Inherent in this interpretation is also a profound secret, from which one can
understand the concept of offerings, and the student learned in the secrets of
the Cabala can understand it from that which we have written elsewhere.[141]
Onkelos hinted at it here.[142]
We will yet allude to it in Torath Kohanim[143]
with the help of G-d, may His Name forever be blessed to all eternity.
20.
AND A STRANGER WILL YOU NOT WRONG, NEITHER WILL YOU OPPRESS HIM; FOR YOU WERE
STRANGERS IN THE LAND OF EGYPT. There
is no reason why all strangers [from countries outside the land of Egypt]
should be included here because of our having been strangers in the land of
Egypt! And there is no reason why they be assured forever against being wronged
or oppressed because we were once strangers there! Now Rashi explained that
this is a reason for the prohibition against annoying a stranger. G-d warned
against vexing him with words, for "if you vex him he can also vex you, by
saying to you, ‘You also descend from strangers.' Do not reproach your fellow
man with a fault which is also in you." Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained the
verses: "Remember that you were strangers as he is now." But there
is in all these comments no real reason for the law.
The correct interpretation
appears to me to be that He is saying: "Do not wrong a stranger or oppress
him, thinking as you might that none can deliver him out of your hand; for you
know that you were strangers in the land of Egypt and I saw the oppression wherewith
the Egyptians oppressed[144]
you, and I avenged your cause on them, because I behold the tears of such who
are oppressed and have no comforter, and on the side of their oppressors there
is power,[145]
and I deliver each one from him that is too strong for him.[146]
Likewise you will not afflict the widow and the fatherless child,[147]
for I will hear their cry,[148]
for all these people do not rely upon themselves but trust in Me." And in
another verse He added this reason: for you know the soul of a stranger, seeing
you were strangers in the land of Egypt.[149]
That is to say, you know that every stranger feels depressed, and is always
sighing and crying, and his eyes are always directed towards G-d, therefore He
will have mercy upon him even as He showed mercy to you, just as it is written,
and
the children of Israel sighed by reason of the bondage, and they cried, and
their cry came up unto G-d by reason of the bondage,[150]
meaning that He had mercy on them not because of their merits, but only an
account of the bondage [and likewise He has mercy on all who are oppressed].
21.
ANY WIDOW - even
a rich one of quite considerable wealth - YOU
WILL NOT AFFLICT, for her tears are frequent and her soul is depressed. He
states, If you afflict 'otho'[151]
["him" in the singular], meaning anyone [who is a widow or a
fatherless child]. Therefore it is written after that, and your wives will be widows,[152]
in punishment for your causing the cry of the widow, and your children
fatherless, in punishment for the cry of the orphan.
This punishment [And
My wrath will glow, and I will kill you with the sword etc.][153]
is not counted by our Rabbis amongst those brought upon people who are liable
to death by the hand of Heaven, as listed in the Baraitha,[154]
"These are the people who are liable to death by the hand of Heaven" taught
in Tractate Sanhedrin.[155]
The reason for this is that the death mentioned here is unlike the usual death
of people by the hand of Heaven, of whom it is said, and they die therein, if they
profane it;[156] and
you die not.[157]
But here the punishment is that they will die by the enemy's sword, or he will
go down into battle, and be swept away[158]
without anyone knowing it, and their wives will thus have to remain forever
widows, and their children always be fatherless.
22.
IF YOU AFFLICT HIM IN ANY WISE.
"This is an elliptical verse; it threatens, but does not explain the
punishment needed to complete the sense of the verse. It is like the verse, therefore,
whosoever slays Cain,[159]
which does not explain what the punishment is. Here too, if you afflict him in any wise,
is an expression of determination to inflict punishment, as if to say: 'In the
end you will get your deserts. Why? For if he cry unto Me I will hear him, and I
will avenge him.' " This is Rashi's language. But it is not
correct [to interpret a verse on the basis of such a long omission, in order to
complete the sense]. The witness he brings [i.e., the verse about Cain] also
does not testify to that [kind of long omission]. But it is possible that the
word ki
[generally translated "for"], here means "if," for this is one
of the usages of the word ki,[160]
and the verse thus states: "if if he cry at all unto Me, I will surely
hear his cry," the repetition of the word "if" being used in
order to show the gravity and importance of the matter, similar in usage to
these phrases; hamiblie ein k'varim [generally translated: "Was it
because there were no graves ... ?" - but literally: "was it because
there were 'no no' graves ... ?"];[161] harak
ach b'Mosheh [generally translated: "has the Eternal indeed spoken
only with Moses", but literally: "'only only' with
Moses]."[162]
The correct interpretation
appears to me to be that He is stating: "If you afflict him in any wise, if
he will only just cry at all unto Me I will at once hear his cry: he
does not need anything else at all, for I will save him and avenge his cause
from you. And the reason for this is that you oppress him because [you
think] he has no one to help him against you, but behold he has more help than
anyone else. For other people will try to find saviors to save them, and
helpers to avenge their cause, and perhaps they cannot profit nor deliver,[163]
while this one will be saved by the Eternal merely through his crying out, and
He will take vengeance from you, for The Eternal is a jealous and avenging
G-d."[164]
There are many verses to a similar effect. Thus, that which He said, Rob
not the weak, because he is weak, neither crush the poor in the gate; for the
Eternal will plead their cause,[165]
means: "rob not the poor merely because he is poor and has no helpers, nor
crush the poor in your gates, for the Eternal will plead on their behalf."
Similarly He said, And enter not into the fields of the fatherless, for their Redeemer is
strong;[166] the
Eternal of hosts is His Name,[167]
for they have a Redeemer Who is stronger and closer to them than all people
have. Here also He said, that just by his cry, the fatherless will be saved. Likewise:
For
as the rain comes down and the snow from heaven, and returns not thither,
except it water the earth, and make it bring forth and bud, and give seed to
the sower and bread to the eater; so will My word be that goes forth out of My mouth;
it will not return unto Me void, except it accomplishes that which I please.[168]
In both phrases [except it water - except it accomplish] He is stating that they[169]
will do nothing else other than to water the earth immediately,
and so also will My word do that which I please. Thus the meaning of the
word ki
[ki
im hirvalz- hi im asah: except it water - except it accomplish] has the
sense of "but." And so also: 'hi im' (but) I will depart to mine own
land, and to my kindred.[170]
Ketubim:
Tehillim (Psalms) 57:7-12
|
Rashi |
Targum |
|
1. For the
conductor, al tashcheth, of David a michtam, when he fled from before Saul in
the cave. |
1. For praise, concerning the
distress at the time when David said, "Do not harm." It was spoken
by David, humble and innocent, when he fled from Saul's presence in the cave.
|
|
2. Be gracious to me, O God, be gracious to me, because my soul took
refuge in You, and in the shadow of Your wings I will take refuge until the
destruction passes. |
2. Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me, for in Your word my soul
has trusted, and in the shade of Your Presence I will be confident until the
turmoil passes. |
|
3. I will call upon the Most High God, upon the God Who completes
[what He promised] for me. |
3. I will pray before God Most High, the mighty one, who commanded the
spider who completed a web for me. |
|
4. He will send from Heaven and save me from the disgrace of him who
yearns to swallow me up forever; God will send His kindness and His truth. |
4. He will send His angel from heaven above, and He will redeem me; He
has put to shame the one who bruises me, forever; God will send His goodness
and His truth. |
|
5. My soul is among lions; I lie among men who are aflame; their teeth
are [like] spears and arrows, and their tongue is [like] a sharp sword. |
5. My soul glows while in the midst of flames; I will sleep among
coals that burn, the sons of men whose teeth are like lances and arrows, and
whose tongue is like a sharp sword. |
|
6. Be exalted above the heavens, O God; over all the earth be Your glory. |
6. Be exalted over the angels of heaven, O God; Your glory is over all
those who dwell on earth. |
|
7. They
prepared a net for my steps, he bent down my soul; they dug a pit before me, they
will fall into it forever. |
7. They have set a net for my footsteps; my soul is bowed down; they
dug before me a pit, they have fallen into the middle of it forever. |
|
8. My heart is steadfast with God, my
heart is steadfast; I will sing, yea, I will sing praises. |
8. My heart is turned to Your Torah, O
LORD; my heart is turned to fear You; I will praise and sing! |
|
9. Awaken, my honor; awaken [me], lyre and harp; I will awaken
the dawn. |
9. Wake up, my glory! Wake up to praise by means of the harp and lyre;
wake up for the prayer of morning. |
|
10. I will thank You among the peoples, O Lord; I will sing Your
praises among the kingdoms. |
10. I will give thanks before You among the peoples, O LORD; I will
praise You among the Gentiles. |
|
11. For Your kindness is great up to the heavens, and Your truth is up
to the skies. |
11. For Your goodness is high to reach the heavens, and Your truth, to
the clouds. |
|
12. Be exalted above the heavens, O God, over all the earth be Your
glory. |
12. Be exalted, O LORD, above the angels of heaven; O God, above all the
inhabitants of the earth is Your glory. |
|
|
|
Rashi’s Commentary for: Psalms
57:7-12
7 he bent down my soul i.e., the enemy.
they will fall into
it They will
ultimately fall into it. stk is cline, or clina in Old French, bent, bent down,
an expression of (below 145:14): “and straightens all who are bent down (הכפופים).”
8 My heart is steadfast with God, my heart is steadfast Faithful to
You in the Divine standard of justice and faithful to You in the Divine
standard of mercy.
9 Awaken, my honor and let me not sleep until three hours [of the day
have passed], as other kings do.
awaken [me], lyre
and harp Awaken
me, you lyre and harp hanging on my bed, open to the north side. And as soon as
midnight arrived, the north wind would blow on it, and David would get up and
engage in Torah.
I will awaken the
dawn I awaken
the dawn; the dawn does not awaken me.
Meditation from the Psalms
Psalms 57:7-12
By: H.Em. Rabbi Dr. Hillel ben
David
As
we wrote last week, David
composed this psalm, this michtam when he fled from[171]
Saul in the cave. We are reading this psalm on Shabbat
Dibre Yirmeyahu.
David composed three psalms
(57-59) that expressed his feelings on the matter. Each psalm opens with the
words, “Do not destroy,” beseeching
HaShem to protect David from all harm. Additionally, it is a play on words
expressing David’s plea not to have to kill Saul as well.[172] What is interesting
is that David was also expressing a most important principle here. Do not learn
from the evil actions of Shaul and come to do what is morally incorrect. David
felt that it was important to think matters through based on the light of logic
and morality and not to simply learn from societal influences. David showed
himself to possess deep rooted moral integrity.
Since
we looked at this psalm in some detail last week, I would like to spend a bit
of time examining a very interesting subject that is introduced by:
Tehillim
(Psalms) 57:11 For Your mercy is great
unto the heavens, and Your truth unto the skies (Shehakim).
The subject I would like to
explore in greater detail, is the subject of heaven.
The Hebrew word normally
translated as ‘heaven’ is shamayim. This Hebrew word is always
in the plural so our translation should also be plural: Heavens. The Sages
teach us that Shamayim is a combination of two words: Aish (fire) and Mayim
(water).
So, the word shamayim, “heavens” = “fire and water”. If you are accustomed to
the concept that heaven is a place of fluffy clouds, then this might be a bit
of a different perspective. It is also instructive to know that Our Sages teach
that Shamayim comes from the
Hebrew word sham which mean There. This suggests that when
the righteous/generous reach the Olam HaBa, the renewed earth, they will
finally be There. Thus we see
that heaven has the connotation as the place where HaShem dwells, as we can see
from the Tanach[173]:
I
Melachim (Kings) 8:22-28 Then Solomon stood before the altar of the HaShem
in front of the whole assembly of Israel, spread out his hands toward heaven
And said: "O HaShem, God of Israel, there is no God like you in heaven
above or on earth below--you who keep your covenant of love with your servants
who continue wholeheartedly in your way. You have kept your promise to your
servant David my father; with your mouth you have promised and with your hand
you have fulfilled it--as it is today. "Now HaShem, God of Israel, keep
for your servant David my father the promises you made to him when you said,
'You shall never fail to have a man to sit before me on the throne of Israel,
if only your sons are careful in all they do to walk before me as you have
done.' And now, O God of Israel, let your word that you promised your servant
David my father come true. "But will God really dwell on earth? The
heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you. How much less this
temple I have built! Yet give attention to your servant's prayer and his plea
for mercy, O HaShem my God. Hear the cry and the prayer that your servant is
praying in your presence this day.
Now that we understand that
Heaven is where HaShem dwells, it is important for us to realize that people do
not dwell there.
Yochanan (John)
3:13 And no man has ascended up to heaven, but
he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
The Tanach and the Nazarean
Codicil[174]
are replete with references to the fact that the righteous will dwell on earth
forever. It does not contain any references to suggest that they will “inherit
heaven”. Here are a few of those references:
Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 60:20-21 Thy sun shall no more go down, Neither shall thy
moon withdraw itself; for HaShem shall be thine everlasting light, and the days
of thy mourning shall be ended. 21 Thy
people also shall be all righteous, they shall inherit the land for ever;
the branch of My planting, the work of My hands, wherein I glory.
Tehillim (Psalms)
37:28-29 For the
HaShem loves the just and will not forsake his faithful ones. They will be
protected forever, but the offspring of the wicked will be cut off; The
righteous will inherit the land and dwell in it forever.
Shamayim
is used of
heaven in the first part of our verse, however, the Hebrew word used later in
our psalm and translated as ‘skies’, is the Hebrew word שְׁחָקִים, Shehakim.[175]
So what is the proper translation of Shehakim? This is a difficult
question given that it is plural and comes from a root that means ‘grind’.
Sefer Bahir, a mystical work, defines it as ‘skies’. Whatever the name we
translate for this word, the fact of the matter is that it is just one of the
seven firmaments that make up shamayim, heavens. The Talmud speaks
of these seven:
Chagigah 12b R. Judah said: There are two firmaments, for it is
said: Behold, unto the Lord your God belongs heaven, and the heaven of
heavens.[176] Resh Lakish said: [There
are] seven, namely, Wilon,[177]
Rakia’,[178]
Shehakim,[179]
Zebul,[180]
Ma’on,[181]
Makon,[182]
‘Araboth.[183] Wilon serves no purpose except that it enters in the morning
and goes forth in the evening[184] and renews every day the
work of creation, for it is said: That stretches out the heavens as a curtain,[185] and spreads them out as a
tent to dwell in.[186] Rakia’ is that in which
sun and moon, stars and constellations are set, for it is said: And God set
them[187] in the firmament [Rakia’] of the heaven.[188] Shehakim is that in which millstones stand and grind[189]
manna for the righteous for it is said: And He commanded the skies [Shehakim]
above, and opened the doors of heaven; and He caused manna to rain upon them
for food etc.[190]
Zebul is that in which [the
heavenly] Jerusalem[191] and the Temple and the
Altar are built, and Michael, the great Prince,[192]
stands and offers up thereon an offering, for it is said: I have surely built
You a house of habitation [Zebul],
a place for You to dwell in forever.[193]
And whence do we derive that it is called heaven? For it is written: Look down
from heaven, and see, even from Your holy and glorious habitation.[194] Ma’on is that in which there are companies of Ministering
Angels, who utter [divine] song by night, and are silent by day for the sake of
Israel’s glory,[195] for it is said: By day
the Lord does command His lovingkindness,[196]
and in the night His song is with me.[197]
Thus we learn that there are
seven ‘heavens’, namely: Wilon,
Rakia’, Shehakim, Zebul, Ma’on, Makon, ‘Araboth. The third
of the seven heavens is called Shehakim, the word used in v11 of our psalm.
The Tanach has seven different
designations for heaven; therefore there must be seven heavens. The following lists tells us where these seven names
are to be found:
Vilon -וילון,
Isaiah 40:22 Vilon is the name of Jalon extrapolated unto Isaiah 40:22.
Rakia - רקיע, Genesis 1:6-8, Genesis 1:17,
Genesis 1:20, and Psalms 19:1-2, Psalms 150:1, Ezekiel 1:22-23.
Shehakim - שחקים,
Deuteronomy 33:26, 2 Samuel 22:12, Psalm 18:11-12, Psalms 36:5-6, Psalms
57:10-11, Psalms 77:17-18, Psalms. 78:23, Psalms 89:37-38, Psalms 108:4-5,
Proverbs 8:28, Job 35:5, Job 36:28, Job 38:37.
Zebul - זבול,
Isaiah 63:15, 1 Kings, 8:13, 2 Chronicles 6:2.
Ma'on - מעון, Deuteronomy 26:15, Psalms 26:8, Psalm 71:3, Psalm 90:1, and
Zechariah 2:17 {Zechariah 2:13}.
Makon - מכון,
Deuteronomy 28:12, 1 Kings 8:39, 2 Chronicles 6:30, Psalms 89:14-15,
Psalms 97:2, Isaiah 4:5.
Araboth - ערבות, Psalms 68:4-5.
Now lets examine, briefly, each
of these seven, according to Resh
Lakish:[198]
Wilon,
[I.e.,
‘Curtain’, from Lat. Velum.] - Wilon serves no purpose except that it enters in
the morning and goes forth in the evening
According to Rashi, Wilon
(‘Curtain’) draws in every morning, and thus causes the light of day to become
visible; in the evening it draws out and hides the daylight. This process
constitutes the renewal of the work of creation. But Tosafot. explains that
Wilon produces the light of day, and when it withdraws at night darkness
prevails.
and
renews every day the work of creation, for it is said: That stretcheth out the
heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in.[199]
Several heavens were created,
seven in fact, each to serve a purpose of its own. The first, the one visible
to man, has no function except that of covering up the light during the night
time; therefore it disappears every morning.
Rakia’,
[I.e., ‘Expanse,
firmament’.] - Rakia’ is that in which sun and moon, stars and constellations
are set, for it is said: And God set them in the firmament [Rakia’] of the
heaven.[200]
The planets are fastened to the second of the heavens;
Midrash
Rabbah - Beresheet (Genesis) VI:6 Where are the spheres of the sun
and the moon set? In the second heaven (raki'a), as it says, AND GOD SET THEM
IN THE RAKI'A OF THE HEAVEN. R. Phinehas said in R. Abbahu's name: This verse
is explicit, and the men of the Great Assembly further explained, Thou art the
Lord, even Thou alone; Thou hast made the heaven, the heaven of heavens, with
all their host:[201]
thus where are all their hosts set? In the second ‘ raki'a ‘, which is above
the heaven. From the earth to the ' raki'a ‘
Shehakim,
[Lit., ‘Clouds’,
from eja, ‘dust’[202]]
- Shehakim is that in which millstones stand and grind manna for the righteous
for it is said: And He commanded the skies [Shehakim] above, and opened the
doors of heaven; and He caused manna to rain upon them for food etc.[203]
Why are they [the clouds] called
shehakim? Resh Lakish said: Because they break up (shohakim) the [mass of]
water [into rain drops]. In the third the manna is made for the pious in the
hereafter;
Zebul,
[B.D.B.:
‘Elevation, height, lofty abode’; N.H., ‘Temple’. Jastrow: ‘(place of offering
or entertainment) residence, especially Temple’.] - Zebul is that in which [the
heavenly] Jerusalem[204]
and the Temple and the Altar are built, and Michael, the great Prince,[205] stands and offers up thereon an offering, for
it is said: I have surely built Thee a house of habitation [Zebul], a place for
Thee to dwell in for ever.[206]
And whence do we derive that it is called heaven? For it is written: Look down
from heaven, and see, even from Thy holy and glorious habitation.[207]
The fourth contains the celestial
Jerusalem together with the Temple, in which Michael ministers as high priest,
and offers the souls of the pious as sacrifices.
Ma'on,
[I.e.,
‘Dwelling, habitation’.] - Ma'on is that in which there are companies of
Ministering Angels, who utter [divine] song by night, and are silent by day for
the sake of Israel's glory, for it is said: By day the Lord doth command His
lovingkindness, and in the night His song is with me.[208]
In the fifth heaven, the angel
hosts reside, and sing the praise of God, though only during the night, for by
day it is the task of Israel on earth to give glory to God on high.
Makon,
[I.e., ‘Fixed or
established place, foundation, residence’.] - Makon is that in which there are
the stores of snow[209]
and stores of hail, and the loft of harmful dews and the loft of raindrops, the
chamber of the whirlwind and storm, and the cave of vapour, and their doors are
of fire, for it is said: The Lord will open unto thee His good treasure,[210]
But are these to be found in the firmament? Surely, they are to be found on the
earth, for it is written: Praise the Lord from the earth, you sea-monsters, and
all deeps; fire and hail, snow and vapor, stormy wind, fulfilling His word![211]
— Rab Judah said in the name of Rab: David entreated concerning them, and
caused them to come down to the earth. He said before Him: Lord of the universe,
You are not a God that has pleasure in wickedness; let not evil sojourn with
You; righteous are You, O Lord, let not evil sojourn in Your abode. And whence
do we derive that it is called heaven? For it is written: Then hear You in
heaven, Your dwelling place [Makon].[212]
The sixth heaven is an uncanny
spot; there originate most of the trials and visitations ordained for the earth
and its inhabitants. Snow lies heaped up there and hail; there are lofts full
of noxious dew, magazines stocked with storms, and cellars holding reserves of
smoke. Doors of fire separate these celestial chambers, which are under the
supervision of the archangel Metatron. Their pernicious contents defiled the
heavens until David's time. The pious king prayed God to purge His exalted dwelling
of whatever was pregnant with evil; it was not becoming that such things should
exist near the Merciful One. Only then they were removed to the earth.
Araboth.
[V. Tehilim
(Psals) 68:5. Levy: Perhaps from crg, ‘to be dark’ (cf. crg evening) and syn.
with kprg: (thick darkness, heavy cloud, in which God dwells; cf. Shemot XX,
18).] - ‘Araboth is that in which there are Right and Judgment and
Righteousness, the treasures of life and the treasures of peace and the
treasures of blessing, the souls of the righteous and the spirits and the souls[213]
which are yet to be born, and dew wherewith the Holy One, blessed be He, will
hereafter revive the dead. Right and Judgment, for it is written: Right and
judgment are the foundations of Thy throne.[214]
Righteousness, for it is written: And He put on righteousness as a coat of
mail.[215]
The treasures of life, for it is written: For with Thee is the fountain of
life.[216]
And the treasures of peace, for it is written: And called it, ‘The Lord is
peace’.
[Shoftim
VI, 24. Rashi renders: He (the Lord) called it (peace) unto Him.]
And
the treasures of blessing, for it is written: he shall receive a blessing from
the Lord.[217]
The souls of the righteous, for it is written: Yet the soul of my lord shall be
bound up in the bundle of life with the Lord thy God.[218]
The spirits and the souls which are yet to be born, for it is written: For the
spirit that enwrappeth itself is from Me, and the souls which I have made.[219]
And the dew wherewith the Holy One, blessed be He, will hereafter revive the
dead, for it is written: A bounteous rain didst Thou pour down, O God; when
Thine inheritance was weary, Thou didst confirm it.
[Tehilim
68:10. The verse refers to the Revelation at Sinai, when, according to the
Midrash, the souls of the children of Israel momentarily left their bodies, but
God with His bounteous rain or dew of resurrection revived them. Cf. Cant. Rab.
to Cant. V, 6.]
There
[too] are the Ofanim and the Seraphim,[220]
and the Holy Living Creatures,[221]
and the Ministering Angels, [Apparently distinct from those dwelling in Ma'on]
and the Throne of God; and the King, the Living God, high and exalted, dwells
over them in ‘Araboth, for it is said: Extol Him that rideth upon Araboth whose
name is the Lord.[222]
And whence do we derive that it is called heaven? From the word ‘riding’, which
occurs in two Biblical passages. Here it is written: ‘Extol Him that rideth
upon Araboth’. And elsewhere it is written: Who rideth upon the heaven as thy
help.[223]
And darkness and cloud and thick darkness surround Him, for it is said: He made
darkness His hiding-place, His pavilion round about Him, darkness of waters,
thick clouds of skies.[224]
But is there any darkness before Heaven? For behold it is written: He revealeth
the deep and secret things; He knoweth, what is in the darkness, and the light
dwelleth with Him.[225]
— There is no contradiction: the one [verse] ‘The seventh heaven’, on the other
hand, contains naught but what is good and beautiful: right, justice, and
mercy, the storehouses of life, peace, and blessing, the souls of the pious,
the souls and spirits of unborn generations, the dew with which God will revive
the dead on the resurrection day, and, above all, the Divine Throne, surrounded
by the seraphim, the ofanim, the holy Hayyot, and the ministering angels.
Now that we have examined the
seven, lets return to the third heaven - Shehakim. Hakham Shaul speaks of
this part of ‘heaven’:
2
Corinthians 12:1 It is not expedient for me doubtless
to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. 2 I knew a man in
Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or
whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the
third heaven. 3 And I knew such a
man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;)
4 How that he was caught up into paradise,
and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.
The apparent parallelism of the
passage equates the Third Heaven with "Paradise".[226]
Now I believe we can begin to appreciate what David said in our psalm:
Tehillim
(Psalms) 57:11 For Thy mercy is great unto the heavens,
and Thy truth unto the skies (Shehakim).
I pray that our little excursion through
the heavenly realms has been enlightening.
Ashlamatah: Yechezqel (Ezek) 34:20-27, 30-31
|
Rashi |
Targum |
|
20. Therefore,
so said the Lord God to them: Behold I am here, and I will judge between a
strong lamb and a lean lamb. |
20. ¶ Therefore, thus says the LORD God to them: Behold I am about to
reveal Myself, and I will judge between the rich man and the poor man. |
|
21. Because you push with flank and with shoulder,
and with your horns you gore all the frail ones until you have scattered them
abroad. |
21. Because you oppressed with wickedness and force,
and with your strength you crushed all of the weak ones until you scattered
them abroad among the countries. |
|
22. I shall save My flocks, and they will no longer
become a prey, and I shall judge between one lamb and another lamb. |
22. I will redeem My people and they will no longer
be handed over as spoil; and I will judge between man and man. |
|
23. And I shall put up over them one shepherd and he
will shepherd them, namely My servant David; he will shepherd them, and he
will be for them as a shepherd. |
23. And I will set up over them one leader who will
provide for them, My servant David; he will provide for them and he will be
their leader. |
|
24. And I, the Lord, shall be to them for a God, and My servant David
[will be] a prince in their midst; I, the Lord, have spoken. |
24. And I, the Lord, will be their God, and My servant David will be
king among them. I, the LORD, have decreed it by My Memra. |
|
25. And I shall make with them a covenant of peace, and I shall
abolish the wild beasts from the land, and they will dwell securely in the
desert and grow old in the forests. |
25. I will make a covenant of peace with them, and remove the wild
beast from the land, so that they may live securely in the wilderness, and
grow old in the forests. |
|
26. And I shall make them dwell around My hill for a blessing, and I
shall bring down rain in its time; they will be rains of blessing. |
26. I will settle them all around My Holy Temple. and they will be
blessed; and I will send down for them the early rain in its season; they will
be rains of blessing. |
|
27. And the tree of the field will give forth its fruit and the land
will give forth its produce, and they will know that I am the Lord when I
break the bars of their yoke and rescue them from those who enslave them. |
27. The tree of the field will yield its fruit, and the earth will
yield its harvest, and they will be secure in their land; and they will know
that I am the LORD, when I break the mighty yoke of their servitude and
rescue them from the hand of those who are enslaving them. |
|
28. And they will no longer be a prey to the
nations, and the beasts of the earth will not devour them, and they will
dwell securely, with no one frightening them. |
28. They shall no longer be the spoil of the
Gentiles, and the kingdoms of the earth will not destroy them, but they will
dwell securely, with none to frighten them. |
|
29. And I shall establish for them a plantation for
renown, and they will no longer be hidden because of hunger in the land, and
they will no longer bear the disgrace of the nations. |
29. And I will raise up for them a planting which
will be firm and they will never again be
wanderers because of famine in the land, and they will never again suffer the
humiliation of the Gentiles. |
|
30. And they will know that I, the Lord their God, am with them, and
they are My people, the house of Israel, says the Lord God. |
30. And they will know that I am the LoRD their God, that Mv Memra
comes to their aid, and that they are My people, the House of Israel, says
the LORD God. |
|
31. And you are My flocks, the flocks of My pasture, you are man; I am
your God," says the Lord God. |
31. And you My people, the people over whom My name is called, you are
the House of Israel, and I am your God, says the LORD God." {P} |
|
|
|
Rashi’s
Commentary on Yechezqel (Ezek) 34:20-27, 30-31
20 a strong lamb [Heb. בְרִיָה,] strong. lean [Heb.
רָזָה,] maigre in French.
23 My servant David A king [who will come] from his descendants.
25 and grow old in the forests [Heb. וְיָשְּׁנוּ.] Jonathan renders: and they will age [from יָשָׁן]
in the forest. It may also be interpreted as an expression of sleep (שִּׁינָה).
26 And I shall make them dwell around My hill [Heb. וְנָתַתִּי.] Their dwelling shall be blissful. וְנָתַתִּי, and I shall place, is like וְהִשְּׁכַּנְתִי and I shall cause to dwell.
29 a plantation for renown an existence that will obtain
everlasting fame.
hidden
because of hunger hidden because of hunger, because of the disgrace
of hunger and poverty.
31 you are man You are
not like animals in My eyes.
Special
Ashlamatah: Yirm’yahu (Jeremiah) 1:1 – 2:3
|
Rashi |
Targum |
|
1. ¶ The words of Jeremiah son of Hilkiah,
of the priests who were in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin. |
1. ¶ The words of the prophecy of Jeremiah
the son of Hilqiah, one of the leaders of the course of the priests, of the
temple officers who were in Jerusalem: the man who received his inheritance
in Anathoth in the land of the tribe of Benjamin, |
|
2. To
whom the word of the Lord came in the days of Josiah son of Amon, king of
Judah, in the thirteenth year of his reign. |
2. with
whom was the word of prophecy from before the LORD in the days of Josiah
the son of Amon, the king of the tribe of the house of Judah, in the thirteenth
year of his reign. |
|
3. And he was in the days of Jehoiakim son
of Josiah, king of Judah, until the end of eleven years of Zedekiah son of Josiah, king of
Judah, until the exile of Jerusalem in the fifth month. |
3. And it continued in the days of
Jehoiakim, the son of Josiah, the king of the tribe of the house of Judah,
until the eleventh year of his brother Zedekiah, the son of Josiah, the king
of the tribe of the house of Judah, was completed; until Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon came
and besieged Jerusalem for three years and took the people who were in it
into exile, in the fifth month. |
|
4. And the word of the Lord came to me,
saying: |
4. And the word of prophecy from before the
LORD was with me, saying: |
|
5. When I had not yet formed you in the
womb, I knew you (Heb. Y’da’trikha), and when you had not yet emerged
from the womb, I had appointed you (Heb. Hiq’dash’tikha); a prophet to
the nations I made you. |
5. "Before I created you from the womb
I established you, and before you came into the world I appointed you; I
designated you as a prophet who should make the nations drink a cup of cursing,” |
|
6. And I said, "Alas, O Lord God! Behold, I know not to speak
for I am a youth. {S} |
6. But I said: “Receive my petition, O LORD
God. See, I do not
know how to prophesy. because I am a youth; and from my beginning
I have been prophesying trouble and exile about this people.” {S} |
|
7. And the Lord said to me; Say not, "I
am a youth," for wherever I send you, you
shall go,
and whatever I command you, you shall speak. |
7. And the LORD said to me: “Do not say, ‘I
am a youth’; for you will go to every place I send you, and all that I
command you, you will prophesy. |
|
8. Fear them not, for I am with you to save
you, says the Lord. |
8. Do not be afraid from before them, for My
Memra will be at your assistance to deliver you, says the LORD.” |
|
9. And the Lord stretched out His hand and
reached my mouth, and the Lord said to me; Behold, I have placed My words in
your mouth. |
9. And the LORD sent the words of his
prophecy. and set them in order in my mouth; and the LORD said to me;
“Behold. I have put the words of My prophecy in your mouth. |
|
10. Behold, I have appointed you over the
nations and over the kingdoms, to uproot and to crush, and to destroy and to
demolish, to build and to plant. {P} |
10. See that I have appointed you today over
the nations and over the kingdoms - to uproot and to tear down, and to
destroy and to break up; and over the house of Israel - to build and to
establish.” {P} |
|
11. ¶ And the word of the Lord came to me,
saying: What do you see, Jeremiah? And I said, "I see a rod of an almond
tree." |
11. ¶ And the word of prophecy from before
the LORD was with me, saying: “What do you see, Jeremiah?” And I said: “I see
a king hastening to do evil.” |
|
12. And the Lord said to me; You have seen
well, for I hasten My word to accomplish it. {S} |
12. Then the LORD said to me: “You have seen
well; for I am hastening concerning My Word, to do it.” {S} |
|
13. And the word of the Lord came to me a
second time, saying: What do you see? And I said, "I see a bubbling pot,
whose foam is toward the north." |
13. And the word of prophecy from before the
LORD was with me a second time, saying: “What do you see?” And 1 said: “I see
a king who seethes like a cauldron. and the arrangement of his troops who are
advancing and coming from the direction of the north.” |
|
14. And the Lord said to me; From the north the misfortune
will break forth upon all the inhabitants of the land. |
14. And the LORD said to me: “From the north evil will
begin to come upon all the inhabitants of the land. |
|
15. For, behold I am summoning all the
families of the kingdoms of the north, says the Lord, and they will come and
place, each one his throne at the entrance of the gates of Jerusalem and
against all its walls around and against all the cities of Judah. |
15. For behold, I am summoning all the
descendants of the kingdom of the north, says the LORD; and they will come
and each set up his throne in front of the gates of Jerusalem, and against
all her walls round about, and against all the cities of the house of Judah. |
|
16. And I will utter My judgments against
them concerning all their evil, that they left Me and offered up
burnt-offerings to other gods and they prostrated themselves to the work of
their hands. |
16. And I will utter the punishment army
judgment on them concerning all their wickedness; for they have forsaken my
worship and have offered up incense to the idols of the nations and have
become enslaved to the works of their hands. |
|
17. And you shall gird your loins and arise
and speak to them all that I command you; be not dismayed by them, lest I
break you before them. |
17. But you, strengthen your loins and stand
up and prophesy to them all that I command you: do not hold back from
reproving them, lest I should break you before them. |
|
18. And I, behold I have made you today into
a fortified city and into an iron pillar, and into copper walls against the
entire land, against the kings of Judah, against its princes, against its
priests, and against the people of the land. |
18. And behold, I have made you today as
strong as a fortified city, and like a pillar of iron, and like a bronze
wall, so that you may give a cup of cursing to drink to all the inhabitants
of the land. to the kings of the house of Judah, to her princes, to her
priests, and to the people of the land. |
|
19. And they shall fight against you but
they shall not prevail against you, for I am with you says the Lord, to save
you. {P} |
19. And they will dispute and fight before
you so as to destroy the words of your prophecy; but they will not prevail
over you, because My Memra will be at your assistance to deliver you, says
the LORD." {P} |
|
|
|
|
1. ¶ And the word of the Lord came to me,
saying: |
1. ¶ And a word of prophecy from before the
LORD was with me, saying: |
|
2. Go and call out in the ears of Jerusalem,
saying: so said the Lord: I remember to you the lovingkindness of your youth,
the love of your nuptials, your following Me in the desert, in a land not
sown. |
2. “Go, and prophesy before the people who
are in Jerusalem, saying: Thus says the LORD. I remember in your favor the
good things of the days of old, the love of your fathers who believed in My Memra
and followed My two messengers. Moses and Aaron, in the wilderness for forty
years without provisions in a land not sown. |
|
3. Israel is holy to the Lord, the first of
His grain; all who eat him shall be guilty, evil shall befall them, says the
Lord. {P} |
3. The house of Israel are holy before the
LORD - in respect of those who plunder them - like fruits of heave-offering
of harvest of which whoever eats is guilty of death; and like firstlings of
harvest, the sheaf of the heave-offering, of which everyone who eats, before
the priests the sons of Aaron offer it as a sacrifice upon the altar is
guilty. {P} |
|
|
|
Rashi’s
Commentary on Yirm’yahu (Jeremiah) 1:1 – 2:3
Chapter
1
1 The words of Jeremiah son of Hilkiah Let the son of the corrupt
woman, whose deeds are proper Jeremiah was descended from Rahab the harlotand
let him reprove the son of the righteous woman whose deeds are corrupt these
are Israel who corrupted their deeds who are descended from legitimate seed.
2 To whom the word of the Lord came Upon whom the Shechinah commenced
to rest at that time.
3 And he was in the days of Jehoiakim And he was a prophet all the
remaining days of Josiah, the days of his son Jehoiakim, and the days of his
son Zedekiah, until the end of the eleventh yearthat is the yearuntil the exile
of Jerusalem in the fifth month.
5 When I had not yet formed you in the womb, etc. Since the days of
the first man. The Holy One, blessed be He, showed Adam each generation and its
prophets.
I...formed
you
Heb. אצרך, an expression of צורה,
a form.
I knew
you
connois toi in O.F. Comp. (Exodus 6:3), “I was not known (נודעתּי) to them.”
I
appointed you I appointed you for this.
a
prophet to the nations To Israel, who behave like the nations. In this manner it is
expounded in Sifrei on the verse: “A prophet from your midst, etc.” (Deut.
18:15), will set up for you and not for those who deny the Torah. How then do I
fulfill “A prophet to the nations I made you”? To the children of Israel who
deport themselves with the customs of the nations. It can further be
interpreted: “A prophet for the nations,” like “About the nations,” to give
them to drink the cup of poison, to prophesy retribution upon them, as it is
said: “Take this cup of the wine of wrath from My hand, you shall give all the
nations to drink of it” (infra 25:15). Another explanation of “When you had not
yet emerged from the womb I appointed you” is: Concerning you I said to Moses:
“I will set up a prophet...like you” (Deut. 18:18). This one reproved them, and
this one reproved them. This one prophesied for forty years and this one
prophesied for forty years.
6 Alas This is an expression of wailing (konpljjnt in 0.F.).
for I
am a youth I am not worthy to reprove them. Moses reproved them shortly
before his death, when he was already esteemed in their eyes through the many
miracles that he had performed for them. He had taken them out of Egypt, split
the Reed Sea for them, brought down the manna, caused the quails to fly, given
them the Torah, brought up the well. I come to reprove them at the beginning of
my mission.
7 wherever I send you to the heathens.
and
whatever I command you to Israel, you shall speak.
9 And the Lord stretched forth His hand Every sending mentioned
concerning a hand is an expression of stretching forth. Another explanation is
like the Targum: And the Lord sent the words of His prophecy.
10 I have appointed you I have appointed you over the heathens.
to
uproot and to crush (depayser in French, to uproot) and over Israel to build and to
plant if they heed. So did Jonathan paraphrase it.
11 a rod of an almond tree (amendleer in O.F.) Jonathan, however,
renders: A King who hastens to do evil.
12 You have seen well This almond tree hastens to blossom before all
other trees. I, too, hasten to perform My word. And the Midrash Aggadah (Ecc.
Rabbah 12:8) explains: An almond tree takes twenty-one days from its blossoming
until it is completely ripe, as the number of days between the seventeenth of
Tammuz, when the city was broken into, until the ninth of Ab, when the Temple
was burnt.
13 a bubbling pot [lit. blown up,] seething (boillant in French).
whose
foam
[lit. and its face,] its seething (et ses ondes in O.F.) [and its waves].
14 From the north the misfortune will break forth Babylon is on the
north of Eretz Israel.
16 And I will utter My judgments against them I will debate with them,
with Judah and Jerusalem.
17 And you shall gird your loins This is an expression of quickening
like a man of valor.
18 against the Kings of Judah lit. to the Kings of Judah.
19 And they shall fight against you They shall quarrel and fight
against you to refute the words of your prophecy.
Chapter
2
2 I remember to you Were you to return to Me, I would desire to have
mercy on you for I remember the loving kindness of your youth and the love of
the nuptials of your wedding canopy, when I brought you into the wedding
canopy, and this (כלולתיך) is an expression of bringing in. Your nuptials (Noces in O.F.).
Now what was the loving kindness of your youth? Your following My messengers,
Moses and Aaron, from an inhabited land to the desert without provisions for
the way since you believed in Me.
3 Israel is holy like terumah.
the first of His grain Like the first of the harvest before the Omer, which it is
forbidden to eat, and whoever eats it is liable, so will all those who eat him
be guilty. So did Jonathan render it.
Pirqe Abot
Mishnah
3:4
Rabbi
Shimeon said: When three people have eaten at a table and did not speak words
of Torah there, it is as if they had eaten sacrifices of dead [idols]. It is
thus written, "For all their tables are filled with putrid vomit, without
God" (Isaiah 28:8). But when three people eat at a table and speak words
of Torah there, it is as if they eat at the table of God, Blessed be He. It is
thus written, "He said to me: this is the table that is before God"
(Ezekiel 41 :22).
Rabbi Shimeon is speaking of the
category of action. The most innocent act imaginable is to sit down and eat a
strictly kosher meal. The person is very careful that nothing forbidden is
eaten, and no forbidden conversation takes place at the table."
Rabbi Shimeon warns that such a
meal is not as innocent as it seems. Since there is no conversation involving
Torah at the table, the meal is considered sinful. Having eaten at a table
without discussing Torah concepts, the meal is considered the same as eating a
sacrifice (korban) of idols (avodah zarah), which are referred
to as "the dead" (metim).
It is thus written, "For
all their tables are filled with putrid vomit, without God (Makom)"
(Isaiah 28:8). [The word Makom denotes God as the Omnipresent
and All-Encompassing.] A table is without God (B’Li Makom) when God's
name has not been mentioned at it, and when it has not been the place where
words of Torah have been discussed. That table is then considered to be covered
with putrid vomit (Qi'Tzo'ah), which denotes idolatry.
Of course, the converse is also
true. When words of Torah are spoken at a table, it is considered God's table,
and the meal is counted as if it were an offering to God. It is thus written, "He
spoke of Me, This is the table that is before God" (Ezekiel 41:22).
This means that a table where there is "he spoke of Me" (VaY’Daber
Elai), denoting a discussion of words of Torah, is considered God's
table.
For this reason, extreme care
should be exercised not to speak idle words (Devarim Betelim) at the
table. One should be all the more careful to avoid speaking badly about another
(Lashon
HaRa), frivolity (Letzanuth) and vulgarity. Any of
these things said at the table is more sinful than if they were said or done at
any other time.
When you are at the table it is
also a good practice to read a Psalm, a Mishnah, or something from Pirqe Abot.
You can go through it in order or choose any page you wish. No matter what you
read, you should be aware that you are reading something from the Talmud,
Midrash or other sacred books. Thus, no one can have the excuse that he does
not know how to study Torah, since anyone can read Pirqe Abot, which is in Hebrew
and Ladino [the vernacular].
A table at which words of Torah
are spoken is very precious. There is an angel assigned to this, who receives
these words of Torah, and brings them in the form of a table before God, Such a
table may justly be called "the
table that is before God." From this we understand that the table in
which we eat food is likened to an altar devoted to God in which sacrifices are
offered.
Verbal Tallies
By: HH Giberet Dr. Elisheba bat
Sarah
& H.Em. Rabbi Dr. Hillel
ben David
Shemot (Exodus) 21:28 – 22:23
Yehezechel (Ezekiel)
34:20-27, 30-31
Tehillim (Psalms) 57:7-12
Mk 7:24-30, Acts 15:22-29
The verbal tallies between the Torah and the Ashlamata
are:
Gore / Pushed - נגח, Strong’s number 05055.
The verbal tallies between the Torah and the Psalm
are:
Life / Soul - נפש, Strong’s number 05314.
Shemot
(Exodus) 21:28 If an ox <07794> gore
<05055> (8799) a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox will
be surely stoned, and his flesh will not be eaten; but the owner of the ox will
be quit.
29 But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it
has been testified to his owner, and he has not kept him in, but that he has
killed a man or a woman; the ox will be stoned, and his owner also will be put
to death.
30 If there be laid on him a sum of money, then
he will give for the ransom of his life
<05315> whatsoever is laid upon him.
Yehezechel
(Ezekiel) 34:21
Because you have thrust with side and with shoulder, and pushed <05055> (8762) all the diseased with
your horns, till you have scattered them abroad;
Tehillim
(Psalms) 57:7 They have prepared a net for my steps; my soul <05315> is bowed down: they have dug a
pit before me, into the midst whereof they are fallen themselves. Selah.
Hebrew:
|
Hebrew |
English |
Torah Seder Ex 21:28 – 22:23 |
Psalms Psa 57:7-12 |
Ashlamatah Ezek 34:20-27, 30-31 |
|
yn"doa] |
Lord |
Ps 57:9 |
Ezek 34:30 Ezek 34:31 |
|
|
~yhil{a/ |
judges, GOD |
Exod 22:8 Exod 22:9 Exod 22:20 |
Ps 57:7 Ps 57:11 |
Ezek 34:24 Ezek 34:30 Ezek 34:31 |
|
rm;a' |
says |
Exod 22:9 |
Ezek 34:20 |
|
|
#r,a, |
land, earth |
Exod 22:21 |
Ps 57:11 |
Ezek 34:25 Ezek 34:27 |
|
rv,a] |
whatever, which, who |
Exod 21:30 Exod 22:9 Exod 22:16 |
Ezek 34:21 |
|
|
tyIB; |
house |
Exod 22:7 Exod 22:8 |
Ezek 34:30 |
|
|
dy" |
possession , hand |
Exod 22:4 Exod 22:8 Exod 22:11 |
Ezek 34:27 |
|
|
[d'y" |
known, know |
Exod 21:36 |
Ezek 34:27 Ezek 34:30 |
|
|
hwhy |
LORD |
Exod 22:11 Exod 22:20 |
Ezek 34:20 Ezek 34:24 Ezek 34:27 Ezek 34:30 Ezek 34:31 |
|
|
lKo |
all, every, whatever |
Exod 21:30 Exod 22:9 Exod 22:10 Exod 22:19 Exod 22:22 |
Ps 57:11 |
Ezek 34:21 |
|
aol |
whether, no |
Exod 22:8 |
Ezek 34:22 |
|
|
!t;n" |
give, given |
Exod 21:30 Exod 21:32 Exod 22:7 Exod 22:10 Exod 22:17 |
Ezek 34:26 Ezek 34:27 |
|
|
db,[, |
male slave |
Exod 21:32 |
Ezek 34:23 Ezek 34:24 |
|
|
d[; |
or, before, until |
Exod 22:4 Exod 22:9 |
Ezek 34:21 |
|
|
l[; |
above, over |
Ps 57:11 |
Ezek 34:23 |
|
|
!aoc |
sheep, flock |
Exod 22:1 |
Ezek 34:22 Ezek 34:31 |
|
|
rb;v' |
hurt, injured, broken |
Exod 22:10 Exod 22:14 |
Ezek 34:27 |
|
|
hd,f' |
field |
Exod 22:5 Exod 22:6 |
Ezek 34:27 |
|
|
hf, |
a sheep |
Exod 22:1 Exod 22:4 Exod 22:9 Exod 22:10 |
Ezek 34:20 Ezek 34:22 |
|
|
~[; |
people |
Ps 57:9 |
Ezek 34:30 |
Greek:
|
Greek |
English |
Torah Seder Ex 21:28 – 22:23 |
Psalms Psa 57:7-12 |
Ashlamatah Ezek 34:20-27, 30-31 |
Peshat Mk/Jude/Pet Mk 7:24-30 |
Remes 1 Luke |
Remes 2 Acts/Romans Acts 15:22-29 |
|
ἀκούω |
hear, |
Mark 7:25 |
Acts 15:24 |
||||
|
ἀνήρ |
men |
Exo 21:28 |
Acts 15:22 |
||||
|
ἄνθρωπος |
man |
Exo 22:7 |
Acts 15:26 |
||||
|
ἀνίστημι |
raise up |
Eze 34:23 |
Mark 7:24 |
||||
|
ἀφίημι |
let |
Exo 22:5 |
Mark 7:27 |
||||
|
γίνομαι |
became |
Exo 22:10 |
Acts 15:25 |
||||
|
γινώσκω |
know, known |
Exod 21:36 |
Ezek 34:27 |
Mark 7:24 |
|||
|
γυνή |
woman |
Exo 21:28 |
Mark 7:25 |
||||
|
ἔθνος |
nation |
Psa 57:9 |
Acts 15:23 |
||||
|
ἐξέρχομαι |
went forth, go forth |
Exo 22:6 |
Mark 7:29 |
||||
|
ἔρχομαι |
coming |
Exo 22:9 |
Mark 7:25 |
||||
|
εὑρίσκω |
find |
Exo 22:2 |
Mark 7:30 |
||||
|
θυγάτηρ |
daughter |
Exo 21:31 |
Mark 7:26 |
||||
|
κύριος |
LORD |
Exod 22:11 |
Ezek 34:20 |
Mark 7:28 |
Acts 15:26 |
||
|
λέγω |
saying |
Eze 34:20 |
Mark 7:27 |
||||
|
λόγος |
word, answer |
Mark 7:29 |
Acts 15:24 |
||||
|
μηδείς |
no one |
Exo 22:10 |
Acts 15:28 |
||||
|
οἰκία |
families |
Exo 22:7 |
Mark 7:24 |
||||
|
ὅλος |
all, whole |
Exo 22:8 |
Acts 15:22 |
||||
|
πνεῦμα |
breath |
Mark 7:25 |
Acts 15:28 |
||||
|
ψυχή |
souls |
Exo 21:23 |
Acts 15:24 |
Nazarean
Talmud
Sidra
of Shmot (Ex.) 21:28 – 22:23
“V’Ki
Yigach Shor” “And when gores an ox”
By:
H. Em Rabbi Dr. Adon Eliyahu ben Abraham &
H.
Em. Hakham Dr. Yosef ben Haggai
|
School of Hakham
Tsefet Remes Mordechai (Mk) 7:24-30 Mishnah
א:א |
|
And from there he arose and went to the region of Tyre. And when he entered into a house, he wanted no
one to know, and yet he was not able to
escape notice. But immediately
a woman whose young daughter was possessed by a shade[227] (unclean she heard about him, she came
and showed him the proper respect. Now the woman was a Greek Syrophoenician,[228] when by nationality, and she was asking him to expel the shade (demon) from her daughter. And he said to her,
“Let the children (B’ne Yisrael) be
satisfied first, for it is not right to take the children's bread and throw it
to the dogs (Gentiles)!” But she answered and said to him,
“master, even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs.” And he
said to her, “Because of this statement, go! The shade (demon) has gone out of your daughter.” And when she went to her home, she found the child lying on the bed and the shade (demon) had departed. |
|
School
of Hakham Shaul Remes 2
Luqas (Acts) 15:22-29 Mishnah א:א |
|
Then it seemed best to the Sheliachim
and the Zechanim, together with the whole Nazarean Bet Din, to send men appointed from among
them to Antioch with Hakham Shaul and Bar-Nechamah,
Yehudah who was called (Yosef)
Bar-Shabbat[229] and Hillel, men who were Paqidim among the
brothers writing these letters (to be delivered by them): The Sheliachim and the Zechanim, chief
among the brethren. To the brethren who are from among the Gentiles[230] in Antioch and Syria
and Cilicia.
Shalom! Because we have heard that some (certain
men) have gone out from among us, to
whom we (The Nazarean Bet Din) gave
no orders, and have thrown you into confusion by words
upsetting your (minds), it seemed
best to us, having reached a unanimous decision, and having ordained
men, to send to you together with
our beloved Bar-Nechamah and
Hakham Shaul, men who have risked their lives for the sake of our Master,
Yeshua HaMashiach’s authority. Therefore we have sent Yehudah who is called
Yosef bar Shabbat and Hillel (who in the Greek is called Lukas/Silas), and they will report the same things by word of mouth. For it seemed best to the Ruach HaKodesh (the
spirit of prophecy) and to us to place
on you no greater burden except these necessary things: that you abstain from food sacrificed to idols (i.e. participating in
idolatrous practices), and from blood (murder,
trespass of Niddah, and eating the limb of a living animal), and from what has been strangled (non-kosher
killed animals, and other laws of Kashrut), and from sexual immorality (fornication, adultery, incest, and
bestiality, as well as apostasy). If you keep (Shomer – Shabbat)
yourselves from these things,[231] (in turning to G-d) you will be made strong.
Shalom. |
Nazarean Codicil to be read in conjunction
with the following Torah Seder
|
Ex
21:28-22:23 |
Ps.
57:7-12 |
Ezek
34:20-27, 30-31 |
Mk
7:24-30 |
Acts
15:22-29 |
Commentary to Hakham
Tsefet’s School of Peshat
Crumbs and Dogs
The life of the Jewish people is
paradoxical, as we have stated before. Here we have the antithesis of “that
which enters” rendering a person unclean, followed by the in the daughter of
the Syrophoenician woman who has a daughter possessed with an “unclean spirit.”
Therefore, we must understand the previous pericope to be a riddle rather than
an absolute literal statement. The contaminating spirit is “within” the young
girl rendering her unclean. Therefore, the previous pericope must be a riddle
rather than an absolute literal statement.
The use of πνεῦμα
ἀκάθαρτον (unclean spirit) in
this case is amazing. The amazement is that Yeshua is dealing with an “unclean
spirit,” which inhabits and controls the daughter of the Greek, Syrophoenician
woman, who by the Shammaite School is unclean
already. Therefore, it would be pointless to “cast out” an “unclean
spirit” of an unclean girl. Yeshua as the representative of the School of
Hillel shows us that they do not accept the Shammaite view that Gentiles are
“unclean” by nature. Furthermore, we are not given the details of where Yeshua
is staying. While we must be very certain that he is in a Jewish home, we make
note that he has travelled to regions that are heavily populated by Gentiles.
That the Greek, Syrophoenician woman is a Gentile is deduced by the phrase
Yeshua presents to the Grecian woman, “Let the children (B’ne Yisrael) be satisfied first, for it is not right to take the children's bread
and throw it to the dogs (Gentiles)!”
The amazement is that Hakham Tsefet has
laid the foundation for the Remes comments. Not only Yeshua is addressing a
Gentile, but he speaks to a “woman.” Yeshua most certainly made room for all
who would accept the Torah. We might relate the “crumbs from the children’s
table” with the Seven Laws of Noach, which we will address in the Remes portion
of our commentary. Whilst the Seven Laws of Noah are given to Noah at first to
be obeyed by all humanity, these laws received new vigour and force by the
revelation at Sinai and were further amplified by the Master himself as we will
see. It is certain that the Greek, Syrophoenician woman was a Gentile and that
she is aware that Yeshua is a Jewish Rabbi. Her appeal also shows her awareness
of Jewish halakhah.
Commentary to Hakham
Shaul’s School of Remes
Introduction
We have seen from the last pericope II Luqas 15:19-21 that
The Nazarean Bet Din was being addressed by Hakham Ya’aqob. We have also seen
the four elemental categories that Gentiles turning to G-d must abandon immediately! In the present
Remes comentary we will look at some of these details with a closer eye.
The Oracles[232]
of G-d
Romans
3:1 What
advantage then has the Jew? Or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way:
chiefly, because that to them
(i.e. the Jews not the Gentiles) were
committed the oracles of God.
Bereans (Heb.) 5:12 For by this time
you ought to be Rabbis Hakhamim, you have need that one teach you again which be the first principles[233] of the oracles of God;
and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.
Rom. 9:4 Who are
B’ne Yisrael; the ones to whom pertains the adoption (the makings of sons – disciples), and the glory (the Shekhinah),
and the covenants, and the giving of the Torah (Oral and written), and the service of God, and the promises;
What
are the “Oracles of G-d”?
The
Oracles of G-d given at Har-Sinai are the Oral Torah. This is the true meaning
of λόγιον logion
in the Nazarean Codicil. An “oracle” λόγιον logion is always a spoken word and
therefore the Oral Torah. This means that the Oracles given to the B’ne Yisrael
are to be sought after by the Gentiles.
In
the previous pericope, we see that Hakham Ya’aqob mentions the fact that “Moshe
is read in the Esnoga (Synagogue) each Sabbath.”
II Luqas 15:21 For [the rest you have] Moshe
who has those proclaiming him in every city from ancient generations, because he is read aloud
and proclaimed [and explained] in
the synagogues every Sabbath.”
While
we may miss the point, made by Hakham Ya’aqob we must come to realize that
being in the Esnoga (Synagogue) would bring the Gentiles “turning to G-d” in
direct contact with the mitzvoth. While the Gentile most likely spoke Greek,
the Esnoga (Synagogue) services were in Biblical Hebrew. However, this would
not have caused a problem because each Esnoga (Synagogue) has a “meturgeman” (translator). As for the
Tanakh (Hebrew Scriptures), they had the LXX (Septuagint). Therefore, why did
Hakham Ya’aqob, the Sheliachim, and the Zechanim not just tell the Gentiles to
“read the Bible”? The Oracles of G-d are
not only the Tanakh, they are also the Oral Torah! That Ya’aqob, the
Sheliachim, and the Zechanim say that “Moshe” is read in the Esnoga weekly
teaches us that the Gentiles needed more than just the Tanakh (i.e. thye
literal Bible)!
The
fact that the Sheliachim and the Zechanim require attendance at the Esnoga
(Synagogue) is telling, Hakham Shaul mentions this in his address to the Roman
congregation.
Romans
13:1 ¶ Let every gentile soul be subject to the governing
authorities of the Jewish
Synagogue. For there is no
authority from G-d except the
Jewish Bet Din, and the
authorities of the Bet Din that exist are appointed by G-d.
Attendance
at the Jewish Synagogue means that the Gentile is subject to Jewish Authority.
Each Synagogue had its own Bet Din, this being true the entire system was
interconnected. The Bench of the three Hakhamim never deviated from
precedential establishments of the Divine order received in the “Oracles of
G-d” because of the fear of Heaven. In other words, the Nazarean Bet Din would
agree with the halakhot of other Congregations as well as know what “judgments”
the Sanhedrin Gadol (Great Sanhedrin) decided in Yerushalayim. The role
reversal was precarious for the B’ne Yisrael, especially in Diaspora just as it
is today. Yet, one must be amazed as we see the “hand of Providence” preserving
this order and content of the Oral Law with minimal differences for the last
2,000 years throughout the whole world – a most wonderful miracle of HaShem,
most blessed be He!
Therefore,
for the Gentile to “turn to G-d” he must turn to the Jewish Hakhamim – the
repository of the Oral Law. Their words give life, which is another definition
for the “Oracles of G-d.” Another point that is being overlooked is the fact
that the Gentiles were readily taking upon themselves the mitzvoth. Even though
the Master told his talmidim to “talmudize the Nations/Gentiles,” we have their
voluntary attendance at the Synagogue as well as their own desire to “turn to
G-d.” The general appeal to the Gentiles was from within the Synagogue. And the
Gentiles were not being coerced into halakhic observance. Therefore, the
excessive remarks of all who believe that the Gentiles are subject to some
undue justice are sadly mistaken. The Nazarean Codicil presents the Nazarean
Bet Din going out of its way to bring the Gentiles to G-d. The scenario would
not be any different that finding a Ben Yisrael who did not know his heritage.
To bring him into relationship with G-d and the Torah would be tantamount to
walking him into the Olam HaBa. To offer the Gentile the opportunity to have
the same relationship with G-d that the B’ne Yisrael has is prodigious.
(Yosef/Yehudah) Bar-Shabbat
and Hillel
Hakham
Shaul has beautifully laced his Remes with “hints. The astute Hakham places in
his Remes two converts that
have been elevated to the level of prophecy, i.e. the ministry of the Darshan from among the Gentiles. We would
have imagined that these two converts would have raised a great deal of havoc
had they felt that some injustice was being placed upon the Gentiles turning to
G-d. The Remes of these two converts is incredible.
(Yosef/Yehudah) Bar-Shabbat
bespeaks the Convert who is Shomer Shabbat. Shomer Shabbat is a title given to
those Jewish Souls who are meticulous about keeping (shomer-guarding) Shabbat.
As a result, we know that they are also meticulous in keeping all the mitzvoth.
Hillel/Luke/Silas
was the amanuensis[234]
(scribe) of Hakham Tsefet. His is now placed under the care of Hakham Shaul.
Furthermore, we see from the narrative that Hakham Shaul has received his Igret
Reshut (letter of Ordination). Being ordained as a Hakham, Shaul is now
assigned a scribe (amanuensis). Paqid Hillel most likely served as a sofer
and Chazan
– Sheliach in a Nazarean Congregation.
The Animal Soul
Each
of the categories deserves special attention. However, space and time do not
permit us the opportunity to delve into each category in depth. We will look at
one special aspect of keeping Kosher from the four categories in the Igeretim
(letters) sent to the Gentiles. However, it should be noted that these
categories overlap in the same way that the mitzvot (613) overlap and infringe
upon other commandments and halakhot.
The
Gentiles are called upon to abstain from
what has been strangled (non-kosher killed animals).That, which has been
“strangled”, is an animal that has not been properly slaughtered. This is
attested to in the nomenclature of the text. Πνικτός
– pniktos[235] is killing an animal without appropriately
slaughtering (according to Jewish Oral Law) and draining its blood. This
mitzvah is one of the most important of the mitzvoth. Why should we be so
concerned with the appropriate slaughter of the animals that we consume? And,
why is it that the Sheliachim and the Zechanim, of the Nazarean Bet Din place
so much emphasis on Kosher? Philo in his Remes/Allegorical commentary makes the
point abundantly clear.
(Spec.
4:122) But some men, with open mouths,
carry even the excessive luxury and boundless intemperance of Sardanapalus to
such an indefinite and unlimited extent, being wholly absorbed in the invention
of senseless pleasures, that they prepare sacrifices which ought never be
offered, strangling their victims, and stifling the
essence of life [Leviticus 17:11,13], which they ought to let depart free and
unrestrained, burying the blood, as it were, in the body.
For it ought to have been sufficient for them to enjoy the flesh by itself, without touching any of those parts which have a connection with the
soul or life.
Vayikra (Lev). 17:12-13 “Therefore I
said to the B’ne Yisrael, No one among you will eat blood, or will any Gentile
who dwells among you eat blood. Whatever man of the B’ne Yisrael, or of the
Gentiles who dwell among you, who hunts and catches any animal or bird that may
be eaten, he will pour out its blood and cover it with dirt/earth.”
We
see criminal offences in failure to slaughter animals appropriately, according
to the Oral Torah.[236]
Firstly, as Philo shows, rather than blood being buried in the earth, as the
Levitical code shows, they “burry the blood in the body” of the beast.
Secondly, the blood is consumed because it is buried inside the beast and
ultimately buried inside the man who consumed that animal. Furthermore, the
trauma the animal suffered at death is infused into the consumer. Likewise, the
soul of that animal is “touched” by the consumer as he eats its blood. Does
this leave a lasting mark on the “soul” of the man who has communed with the
soul of the animal in violation of what the Torah mandates? We would opine that
the communion between the soul of the man and animal results in the
strengthening of the Yetser HaRa. Is it any wonder that humanity has declined
to the level of the animal?
When
G-d questioned Qayin (Cain) he said that the “blood of his brother cried out.”
Did Qayin do the right thing by burying the blood of his brother Chevel (Able)
or was this only an attempt to hide his sin? The murder of Chevel was heinous
and monstrous. However, burying the blood of his brother was both an attempt to
hide his sin and do what was correct. Now the question would arise as to how
Qayin knew to bury his brother’s blood. One need not ponder long to realize
that the Oral Torah came before the written Torah which explains these things.
By
communing with the animal soul, humanity has tapped into something like the
opening of Pandora’s Box. The animal soul (Yetser HaRa) grows with every
mouthful of strangled meat. In the human being with body and Neshamah (soul), we understand that a
special energy is required to keep them together. Furthermore, a special energy
is requisite to keep them in harmonious balance. If the body is not appropriately
fed, the Neshamah will leave the body. Lack of proper diet and nutrition
damages the body and the Neshamah. Fasting has its special place, as we should
have learned from the past weeks fast (17th of Tammuz). Furthermore,
these weeks of rebuke tell us that the balance between body and Neshamah must
be attended to with great care. However, the point here is not to derive
medical benefits from keeping Kosher. If this were the case, we would have
totally missed the point. The case at hand is that communion with the animal
soul has “strangled” the human soul by burying the blood of the animal in the
wrong adamah (earth-dirt). The human body made of earth/adamah, is the wrong
receptacle for animal blood. Encountering the animal soul humanity has acquired
a desire for animal bliss. The resultant drug frenzy is a pursuit of euphoria.
Likewise, the Neshamah is impaired by this encounter.
The Remes
We
have acknowledged the Remes of several aspects of our pericope. However, we
would be remiss if we did not point out one of the more prominent Remes hints
of this pericope. Remes/Hint – Allegory
means a hint to something not said in the text or, another interpretation of
the text. Here we will offer both.
Reading
II Luqas in the order it is written hid the “hint” very cleverly. We will
unravel the hint by reordering the text for the sake of exposing the other
interpretation of the narrative.
Because
we have heard that some (certain men)
have gone out from among us, to whom we (The Nazarean Bet Din) gave no
orders, and have thrown you into confusion by words upsetting your (minds),
Then
it seemed best to the Sheliachim and the Zechanim, together with the whole Nazarean Bet Din, to send men ordained from among them to
Antioch with Hakham Shaul and Bar-Nechamah, Yehudah who was called (Yosef)
Bar-Shabbat and Hillel, men who were Paqidim among the brethren by writing these letters…
We
see a delegation of “certain men” with no authorized credentials or mission;
have disturbed the gentiles with “troubling words.” The juxtaposition is
obvious. The Sheliachim and the Zechanim solve the problem of the unlawful
delegation by sending a commissioned/ordained delegation with Irgetim
Reshut (letters of Ordination).
The responsa is in the form of duly appointed Paqidim and Hakhamim.
Therefore,
the Remes hint and other interpretation is how the courts of Jewish authority
are conducted. Hakham Shaul follows protocol very meticulously. This brings to
mind another letter seeker.
And Paqid Shaul,
still breathing out murderous threats of annihilation against the Master’s (Yeshua’s) talmidim,[237] went to the Kohen Gadol
and asked letters from him to Dammesek to the Esnogas (synagogues); so that if he found any of the Way[238],
The
Remes hint is about Jewish authority and protocols. An unauthorized delegation
can only stir up trouble. Authorized delegations bring peace.
Prov. 29:2 When the righteous (Hakhamim)
are in authority, the people rejoice;
But when a wicked man rules, the people groan.
This
passage may also be read as follows…
Prov. 29:2 When the righteous (Hakhamim)
are greater (in number), the people rejoice; But when a wicked man
rules, the people groan.
Hakham
Shaul has given us a lesson in Jewish authority. Therefore, the implicit mitzvoth are found in the Mishnah,
Talmud and Mishneh Torah readings of the Talmudic Tractate Sanhedrin.
Questions for Reflection
Blessing After Torah Study
Barúch Atáh Adonai,
Elohénu Meléch HaOlám,
Ashér Natán Lánu Torát
Emét, V'Chayéi Olám Natá B'Tochénu.
Barúch Atáh Adonái,
Notén HaToráh. Amen!
Blessed is Ha-Shem our
God, King of the universe,
Who has given us a
teaching of truth, implanting within us eternal life.
Blessed is Ha-Shem,
Giver of the Torah. Amen!
“Now unto Him who is
able to preserve you faultless, and spotless, and to establish you without a
blemish,
before His majesty,
with joy, [namely,] the only one God, our Deliverer, by means of Yeshua the
Messiah our Master, be praise, and dominion, and honor, and majesty, both now
and in all ages. Amen!”
Next Shabbat
2nd
Sabath of Penitence
Shabbat: “Shim’u” – Sabbath: “Hear”
&
Shabbat
Mevar’chim HaChodesh Ab
Proclamation
of the New Moon of the Month of Ab
(Sunday
Evening 7th of July – Monday Evening 8th of July)
|
Shabbat |
Torah Reading: |
Weekday Reading: |
|
אִם-כֶּסֶף
תַּלְוֶה |
|
Saturday Afternoon |
|
“Im
Kesef Talveh” |
Reader 1 – Shemot 22:24-26 |
Reader 1 – Shemot 23:20-22 |
|
“If
money you lend” |
Reader 2 – Shemot 22:27-30 |
Reader 2 – Shemot 23:23-25 |
|
“Si
dinero prestas” |
Reader 3 – Shemot 23:1-5 |
Reader 3 – Shemot 23:20-25 |
|
Shemot (Exod.) 22:24 – 23:19 B’Midbar (Num.) 28:9-15 |
Reader 4 – Shemot 23:6-8 |
|
|
Ashlamatah: Isaiah
48:10-20 |
Reader 5 – Shemot 23:9-12 |
Monday & Thursday Mornings |
|
Special: 1
Sam. 20:18,42 Jeremiah
2:4 - 3:28 |
Reader 6 – Shemot 23:13-16 |
Reader 1 – Shemot 23:20-22 |
|
Psalm 58:1-6 |
Reader 7 – Shemot 23:17-23 |
Reader 2 – Shemot 23:23-25 |
|
Abot: 3:5 |
Maftir:
B’midbar 28:9-15 |
Reader 3 – Shemot 23:20-25 |
|
N.C.: Mk 7:31-37; Acts 15:30-41 |
Jeremiah 2:4 - 3:28
1 Sam. 20:18,42 |
|
Coming Fast
Fast of the 9th of Ab
Sunset July 15, 2013 – Sunset July 16, 2013
Forth
further info. Please see:
http://www.betemunah.org/mourning.html
&
http://www.betemunah.org/tishabav.html
Shabbat Shalom!
Hakham Dr. Yosef ben Haggai
Rabbi Dr. Hillel ben David
Rabbi Dr. Eliyahu ben Abraham
[1] Mechilta here on the Verse.
[2] Numbers 18:7. Punishment for a non-priest who performs
the Divine service in the Sanctuary is death by the hand of Heaven (Sanhedrin
83a).
[3] Leviticus 22:9. This is with reference to an unclean
priest who ate clean heave-offering [which is forbidden to him as long as he
remains in his state of uncleanness], and the punishment is death by the hand
of Heaven (Sanhedrin 83a).
[4] Leviticus 24:21. In this case his punishment is death
by the court, and yet it says only yumoth!
[5] Of the Sabbath it is said, Whosoever does any work therein 'yumoth' (will be put to death) (further 35:2), and his punishment is death by the court!
[6] And that prophet... 'yumoth' (will be put to
death) (Deuteronomy 13:6), and there too his punishment is by the court
(Sanhedrin 84a).
[7] In the case of smiting a man - see above Verse 12; for the Sabbath, see further, 31:14. For a prophet who misleads, see Deuteronomy 13:10: ki harog tahargenu (for you will surely kill him).
[8] I Samuel 26:10.
[9] Above, 20:7.
[10] Further,22:23.
[11] Numbers 18:7. Punishment for a non-priest who performs
the Divine service in the Sanctuary is death by the hand of Heaven (Sanhedrin
83a).
[12] Sanhedrin 84a. The Sages, however, are of the opinion
that his death is by the hand of Heaven.
[13] "An atonement for the owner whose ox killed a
man" (Rashi Makkoth 2b).
[14] Above, Verse 29.
[15] Rashi in Leviticus 4:23, and R'dak in Sefer
Hashorashim, root o.
[16] Leviticus 5:2.
[17] II Samuel 18:13.
[18] Further, Verse 36.
[19] Rashi in Leviticus 4:23, and R'dak in Sefer
Hashorashim, root o.
[20] Baba Kamma 44a.
[21] Verse 28.
[22] Leviticus 24:17.
[23] "Because it is said, He that smites a man, so that he
dies, will surely be put to death (above Verse 12), I know only about a
man. How do I know that the same applies to a woman and to a minor? Scripture
therefore says, kol nefesh adam (and he that smites 'any man ') ~ [literally:
'the soul of any human being'] " (Rashi, Leviticus 24: 17).
[24] II Samuel 17:8.
[25] Above, Verse 29.
[26] Any animal suffering from a serious organic disease,
whose meat is forbidden even if ritually slaughtered.
[27] Baba Kamma 7a.
[28] He may use its hide for leather, and its flesh to feed
the animals, or he may sell it for such uses.
[29] Ibid., 34 a. [See in my translation of Hameniach,
Shulsinger Bros., New York, 5729, p. 65.]
[30] A Tam is an animal which has not
injured, or killed [an animal] more than three times and whose owner has not
been warned that it is dangerous and must be guarded. For whatever damages a Tam
does, its owner pays only half the loss. The Tam is distinguished from
a Muad,
an animal which has killed or injured at least four times, and whose owner has
been warned that it is dangerous and must be guarded. For whatever damage it
does, the owner must pay in full.
[31] But if so, the question arises why the Torah mentions
the guarding of the animal only in the case of the Muad, (see Note above)
since the same law applies to a Tam as well. Ramban proceeds to
remove this difficulty.
[32] Baba Kamma 45b. See in my Hebrew commentary p. 426,
that the reference is to Rabbi Meir.
[33] This is the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov
(ibid.).
[34] Ibid., l0b.
[35] Above, 1:5.
[36] Isaiah 1:13.
[37] Ibid.,61:8.
[38] If its value decreases after the time of its death, he
must bear that loss alone (Baba Kamma 34 b).
[39] The verses read: 1. If a thief be found breaking in, and be smitten so that he dies 'ein lo damim' (there will be no guilt of blood incurred for him). 2. If the sun be risen upon him 'damim lo' (there shall be guilt of blood incurred for him). He will make restitution; If he have nothing, then he will be sold for his theft.
[40] The Hebrew text shortens here Rashi's interpretation,
since Ramban's intention here is not to comment on Rashi's own explanation, but
upon Rashi's understanding of Onkelos.
[41] I.e., such an interpretation cannot be the true
meaning of this particular verse. For while the law itself is true [that the
owner is permitted to kill him], but here the verse speaks of a case where he
has already killed him! So how can you say that the intent of the verse is to
give him permission to kill him, when he has already killed him! Moreover,
since damim lo [in Verse 2] declares the householder culpable both by
the court and at the hand of Heaven, then ein lo damim [in the preceding
verse, stating the opposite case], must as a counterpart free him from both,
and the way Rashi interpreted Onkelos ein lo damim frees him only from
punishment at the hand of Heaven! In other words, Verse 2 must be a case where
there were witnesses, as is indicated by the phrase if the sun be risen upon him,
as Rashi understands Onkelos. In contrast Verse 1 speaks of a case where there
were no witnesses, and hence it cannot refer at all to freeing him from the
death by the court, for the court can never act anyway without witnesses; but
instead it refers only to freeing him from death by the hand of Heaven. But in
that case, the ein lo damim [of Verse 1] and damim lo [of Verse 2] are
not in exact contrast: ein lo damim frees him only from
punishment by Heaven, and damim lo holds him guilty in both!
(Mizrachi). Rather etc.
[42] The opinion is that of Rav (Sanhedrin 72a).
[43] Had he been found by the householder while still in
the house and he were killed by him, the householder would be free from
punishment.
[44] Deuteronomy 15:17. This is to be connected with Verse
14 there, which states that the master must present gifts to a
manservant who goes out free, and here it states that the same must
also be done to a maidservant. But it does not refer to the first half of that
verse [17] which speaks of the piercing of the ear of a manservant, since that
law does not apply to a woman.
[45] II Samuel 12:11
[46] Baba Metzia 94b.
[47] Verse 9.
[48] It cannot mean that it was admittedly stolen, for then
how could Scripture say in the next verse that if the thief was not found, the
guardian must swear, since it is admitted that it was stolen from him? Hence
the verse must mean that he claims it was stolen.
[49] Deuteronomy 13:2. The case there speaks of a false
prophet. The term "prophet" must therefore be understood as "one
who claims to be a prophet."
[50] Jeremiah 28:1. [The reasoning is as in the previous
Note.]
[51] Verse 7.
[52] Ibid.
[53] Verse 8.
[54] Verse 3.
[55] Baba Metzia 41a.
[56] But if he denied the claim altogether, he is free from
having to take an oath of the Torah. The Rabbis, however, instituted a
consuetude oath in such cases (Shebuoth 40b).
[57] Rabbi Chiya bar Aba in the name of Rabbi Yochanan, and
Rami bar Chama (Baba Kamma 106-107a).
[58] In other words, while the principle of partial
admission applies to claims of debts, in the case of claims in guardianship,
the accepted decision of the law is that the guardians need not partially admit
the claim in order to be liable an oath of the Torah. The above interpretation
of Rashi agrees therefore only with the opinion of certain individual Rabbis,
but is not the accepted opinion.
[59] Baba Kamma 107a.
[60] Ramban is here making an important distinction [in accordance with the teaching of the masters of the Tosafoth - see my Hebrew commentary, p. 430]: If the guardian sets up the kind of defense which can apply to cases of guardianship, such as where he says "an unavoidable accident happened to it" [such a defense has no place naturally where one is sued for a plain debt], then there is no distinction between total and partial admission - he is liable to an oath in either case. But where he puts up the kind of defense which can apply also to a debt, such as where he says, "You have never given me the object to keep" [which can apply to a debt as well: "You have never lent me"], then the law of partial admission applies to a guardian as well as to a debtor: if he denies it totally he is free of an oath, and if he admits it partially he is subject to an oath. - A re-reading of Ramban's words ["Moreover, etc."] will yield this thought clearly.
[61] Baba Kamma 107a.
[62] Such as where the claimant said, "I gave you two
vessels to keep," and he replies, "You gave me one to keep, but the
other you never gave to me." Had the defendant claimed so on both vessels,
he would be free of an oath of the Torah. However, if his defense had been that
an unavoidable accident happened, even if he claimed so on both of them, he
would have had to swear [see preceding Note].
[63] Verse 7.
[64] Verse 10.
[65] Isaiah 1:3.
[66] Ibid., 31:4.
[67] Baba Metzia 83a.
[68] Amos 3:12.
[69] In Hoffman's edition of that Mechilta, p. 147. See
Vol. 1. p. 603, Note 245.
[70] Amos 3:12.
[71] Deuteronomy 11:16.
[72] Job 31:27.
[73] Ibid., 9.
[74] Proverbs 14:15.
[75] Genesis 32:25. See Vol. I, pp. 404-405 where Ramban
discusses in brief the same theme as here.
[76] See Vol. I, p. 127 Note 152.
[77] Ezekiel 38:4.
[78] Ruth 2:19. It is of interest to note that Ramban
refers to "the Targum of the Scroll of Esther" instead of ascribing
it as he had done in the preceding reference to the Targum on the Book of
Ezekiel. This indicates that Ramban held them to be of different authorship.
Such indeed is the prevailing opinion in modern scholarship (see P. Churgin,
Targum Kethuvim, pp. 140-151).
[79] Ibid.
[80] Aboth 2:5.
[81] Berachoth 58a.
[82] Daniel 6:15.
[83] Ezra 4:19.
[84] II Kings 23:5.
[85] Job 38:32.
[86] Psalms 119:103.
[87] Job 6:25.
[88] Ibid., 37:16.
[89] Ibid., 36:29.
[90] Daniel 7:8.
[91] Ibid., Verse 7.
[92] Further, 28:14.
[93] Mikvaoth 10:5.
[94] Aboth 2:5.
[95] Deuteronomy 11:16.
[96] Verse 16, and Kethuboth 39a.
[97] Genesis 24:53.
[98] Kiddushin 50a.
[99] Baba Bathra 145a. This applies to a case where the
marriage was not consummated (Even Ha'ezer 50,4).
[100] Genesis 34:12.
[101] I Samuel 20:38.
[102] Pesachim 49a.
[103] Deuteronomy 22:29. As explained further on in Ramban,
this fine [stated in the case of a violator] applies also to a seducer - if he
or she refuses marriage.
[104] Verse 16 here.
[105] Mechilta here in the verse, and Kethuboth 10 a.
[106] Deuteronomy 22:29.
[107] Ibid.
[108] Ezekiel 23:6.
[109] Deuteronomy 22:29.
[110] Kethuboth 39b.
[111] "Even if she be lame, even if she be blind, and
even if she is afflicted with boils" (ibid., 39a).
[112] A na'arah is a maiden between the age
of twelve years and a day and twelve and a half. After that she counts as a bogereth
- past her maidenhood. The period of yalduth (childhood) is from three
years and a day to twelve years and a day.
[113] Deuteronomy 22:28.
[114] Numbers 30:17.
[115] Verse 16 here.
[116] A na'arah is a maiden between the age
of twelve years and a day and twelve and a half. After that she counts as a bogereth
- past her maidenhood. The period of yalduth (childhood) is from three
years and a day to twelve years and a day.
[117] Kiddushin 3b.
[118] There was no need for Scripture here to write na'arah
to exclude a bogereth from the law of seduction, since the verse if her
father utterly refuse etc. could not possibly speak of a bogereth. Hence it is
self-understood that the section deals here with a na'arah, and there was no
need to mention it. But in the case of violation etc.
[119] Psalms 16:4. It is generally translated: "that
make suit unto another." According to Ibn Ezra: "that bind (or
connect) themselves with another god." Ramban's own interpretation of that
verse follows later in the text.
[120] Ibid.
[121] R'dak in Sefer Hashorashim, root acheir.
[122] Above 21:15-17.
[123] Deuteronomy 17:7. Ramban is here intimating that this
verse is the basis for the one commandment of the execution of all four modes
of death penalties. Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam) counted them as four
separate commandments. See my translation, "The Commandments," Vol.
I, p. 240.
[124] This opinion corresponds closely to that of the author
of 'Hilchoth Gedoloth' which Rambam in his Sefer Hamitzvoth criticised, and
Ramban in his notes to that work defended. See "The Commandments,"
Vol. II, p. 420.
[125] See ibid., pp. 285-286.
[126] Ezekiel 22:5.
[127] Deuteronomy 13:9.
[128] Numbers 35:31.
[129] The patach and kamatz are in this sense
alike, as both indicate the definite article - "those gods which in
another place you have been forbidden to worship." The word lo'elohim
is voweled with a kamatz.
[130] Job 35: 16. Here in the sense of "worthless"
or "unsubstantial."
[131] Above, 20:13.
[132] See Ramban above 21:12 (towards the end) for further
explanation.
[133] Leviticus 27:29. See Ramban there for full
explanation. But here he merely brings proof from this verse that the word yocharam
signifies death by the court.
[134] Deuteronomy 7:26.
[135] Such as offering incense and libation. Since these
acts are performed in the worship of G-d, they come under the terms of this
law, so that he who performs them in the worship of the idols is liable to
death by the court.
[136] Psalms 86:8.
[137] Deuteronomy 10:17.
[138] Psalms 97:7.
[139] Above, 15:11.
[140] See also Ramban above, 20:3.
[141] In Seder Shemoth 5:3. and Seder Yithro 18:13.
[142] Onkelos rendered the verse thus: "save unto the
name of the Eternal only." With this translation Onkelos indicated that
the intention of the sacrifice is to the proper Name of G-d (Abusaulah, and
Ma'or V'shamesh).
[143] Leviticus 1:9.
[144] Above 3:9.
[145] Ecclesiastes 4:1.
[146] Psalms 35:10.
[147] Verse 21.
[148] Verse 22.
[149] Further, 23:9.
[150] Above, 2:23.
[151] Verse 22.
[152] Verse 23.
[153] Verse 23.
[154] See Seder Bo Note 209.
[155] Sanhedrin 83 a.
[156] Leviticus 22:9.
[157] Numbers 18:32.
[158] I Samuel 26:10.
[159] Genesis 4:15.
[160] Rosh Hashanah 3a. The verse here reads: ki im
tza'ok yitzak, and is generally translated: "for if he cry."
But with the word ki understood as "if", the verse would read: "if if
he cry," as explained further on in the text.
[161] Exodus 14:11.
[162] Numbers 12:2.
[163] I Samuel 12:21.
[164] Nachum 1:2.
[165] Proverbs 22:22-23.
[166] Ibid., 23:10-11.
[167] Jeremiah 110:34: Their Redeemer is strong, the Eternal of
hosts is His Name.
[168] Isaiah 55:10-11.
[169] I.e., the rain and the snow.
[170] Numbers 10:30.
[171] The verbal tally between the Torah and the Psalm is: Before / From - פנים, Strong’s
number 06440.
[172] Alshich
[173] Tanakh is an acronym for Torah (Law), Neviim
(Prophets), and Ketuvim (Writings), and is how Jews refer to the so called Old
Testament.
[174] The Nazarean Codicil is how we will refer to
the so called New Testament which is neither new, nor a testament.
[175] Shehakim has
a root which means "to grind". ” It is so named, we are taught,
because manna is ground in that section of the heavens, and is prepared to be
fed to the tzadikim in the next world. Accordingly, it is
possible that we eat
food symbolizing manna not to commemorate the manna eaten by our ancestors in
the desert, but rather to commemorate the manna that will be fed to the
righteous in the future. On Shabbat, when we are given a glimpse into the
everlasting Shabbat of the next world, we eat food resembling the manna that
will be fed to those
deserving of basking in
the glory and enjoying the delights of the “Yom She’kulo Shabbat.
[176] Devarim (Deuteronomy) 10:14.
[177] I.e., ‘Curtain’, from Lat. Velum.
[178] I.e., ‘Expanse, firmament’.
[179] Lit., ‘Clouds’, from שחק, ‘dust’ (cf.
Isa. XL, 15).
[180] B.D.B.: ‘Elevation, height, lofty abode’; N.H.,
‘Temple’. Jastrow: ‘(place of offering or entertainment) residence, especially
Temple’.
[181] I.e., ‘Dwelling, habitation’.
[182] I.e., ‘Fixed or established place, foundation, residence’.
[183] Tehillim (Psalms) 68:5. Levy: Perhaps from ערב, ‘to be
dark’ (cf. ערב evening) and syn. with ערפל: (thick
darkness, heavy cloud, in which God dwells; cf. Ex. XX, 18).
[184] According to Rashi, Wilon (‘Curtain’) draws in every
morning, and thus causes the light of day to become visible; in the evening it
draws out and hides the daylight. This process constitutes the renewal of the
work of creation. But Tosaf. explains that Wilon produces the light of day, and
when it withdraws at night darkness prevails.
[185] Thus there is a curtain-like heaven.
[186] Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 40:22.
[187] I.e., the heavenly luminaries.
[188] Bereshit (Genesis) 1:17.
[189] There is probably a play here on the meaning of שחק (the root of
shehakim), which means ‘to rub away, pulverize, grind’ (cf. Shemot (Exodus)
30:36 and Job, 14:19).
[190] Tehillim (Psalms) 78:23, 24.
[191] Cf. Ta’an. 5a: ‘The Holy One blessed be He, said: I
shall not enter the Jerusalem which is above, until I enter the Jerusalem which
is below’.
[192] Michael is Israel’s Guardian Angel; cf. Dan. 12:1 and
Yoma 77a. Num. Rab. s. 2, Hul. 40a.
[193] I Kings 8:13; the earthly Temple corresponds to the
heavenly Sanctuary.
[194] Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 63:15.
[195] Because Israel utters God’s praise by day.
[196] By silencing the angels by day. God shows lovingkindness
to the children of Israel, who are thus permitted to win divine grace by their
prayer. Cf. also A.Z. 3b on the same verse.
[197] Tehillim (Psalms) 42:9. I.e., by night the song of the
angels joins mine (says Israel), which I uttered by day (Rashi).
[198] Chagigah 12b
[199] Yeshayahu
(Isaiah) 40:22
[200] Bereshit
(Genesis) 1:17
[201] Nehemiah 9:6
[202] cf. Yeshayahu 40:15
[203] Tehilim (Psalms) 78:23-24
[204] Cf. Ta’anith. 5a: ‘The Holy One blessed be He, said: I
shall not enter the Jerusalem which is above, until I enter the Jerusalem which
is below’.
[205] Michael is Israel's Guardian Angel; cf. Daniel 12:1
and Yoma 77a. Num. Rab. s. 2, Hul. 40a.
[206] I Melachim (Kings) 8:13; the earthly Temple
corresponds to the heavenly Sanctuary.
[207] Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 63:15
[208] Tehilim (Psalms) 42:9. I.e., by night the song of the
angels joins mine (says Israel), which I uttered by day (Rashi).
[209] For these stores cf. Job 38:22f also Yeshiyahu 29:6.
[210] Devarim (Deuteronomy), 28:12; implying also the
existence of a bad store, i.e., of punishments; but the "Ein Jacob’ reads
here Yirmeyahu (Jeremiah) 50:25.
[211] Tehilim (Psalms) 148:7-8
[212] Melachim alef (I Kings) 8:39
[213] Rashi explains that either ‘spirits’ and ‘souls’ are
synonymous, or else ‘spirit’ means the soul that has bodily form (ectoplasm?).
[214] Tehilim (Psalms) 89:15
[215] Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 59:17
[216] Tehilim (Psalms) 36:10
[217] Tehilim (Psalms) 24:5
[218] Shmuel alef (1 Samuel) 25:29
[219] Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 57:1
[220] Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 6:2; in Rabbinic literature they
are understood to be angels of fire, cf. Devarim (Deuteronomy) Rab.11
[221] Yehezechel (Ezekiel) 1:5f.
[222] Tehilim (Psalms) 68:5
[223] Devarim (Deuteronomy) 33:2625.
[224] Tehilim (Psalms) 18:12
[225] Daniel 2:22
[226] Henry, Matthew, Commentary on the Whole Bible
Volume VI (Acts to Revelation): Second Corinthians Chapter 12.
[227] Note here that she has an “unclean spirit.”
[228] The use of πνεῦμα ἀκάθαρτον (unclean spirit) in this case is amazing.
[229] Yosef Bar-Shabbat, Yosef, son of the Sabbath.
[230] From among the Gentiles meaning that the “Brothers” are now Jewish, not Gentiles who have only kept the seven laws of Noach.
[231] Each category serves as a “pars pro toto” for a number
of categorical mitzvoth.
[232] προτίθημι – protithemai also contains the idea of Divine
design which occurred in the beginning or before the beginning. Therefore, the
idea is forwarded that G-d gave the mystery of His plan to the Jewish people
who received the oracles of G-d before they were enacted. Some manuscripts
conclude this verse with “in Messiah.” Not finding this statement in the
majority of Greek texts, we have left it out.
[233] The fundamentals of Messiah, is translated “first” in
Hebrews 5:12, “of the first (principles of the oracles of G-d),” lit., ‘(the
principles) of the beginning (of the oracles of G-d);’ in 6:1 “the first
(principles) of Messiah,’ i.e., the elementary teaching concerning Messiah. In
Acts 26:4, where the word is preceded by apo,
from, the A.V., has “at the first,” the R.V., “from the beginning.” We need to
understand these “fundamentals of Messiah” as the principal teaching of the
Mesorah, i.e. the Peshat of Hakham Tsefet’s Mishnaic Import.
[234] Amanuensis – is a person employed to write or type what another
dictates or to copy what has been written by another, and also refers to a
person who signs a document on behalf of another under their authority.
[235] Meat from animals that have not been properly
slaughtered) Ac 15:20, 29; 21:25. Strong, J. (1996). The exhaustive
concordance of the Bible : Showing every word of the text of the common English
version of the canonical books, and every occurrence of each word in regular
order. (H2614). Ontario: Woodside Bible Fellowship.
[236] We say “Oral Torah” here because there is no
Scriptural methodology for killing animals. The correct procedure must be
derived from the Oral Torah. Cf. Deut. 12:21 – “If the place where the LORD has
chosen to establish His name is too far from you, you may slaughter any of the
cattle or sheep that the LORD gives you, as I have commanded you;
and you may eat to your heart's content in your settlements.” The laws
regarding the precise method of slaughter are not stated in the Bible, but were
given orally to Moses on Mount Sinai, as indicated in the verse by the statement,
"as I have commanded you," that is, as I
have already instructed you. [The function of this previous sentence is to make
a link between rabbinically developed laws regarding implementation of these
laws and what is traditionally understood as the revelation—of both oral and
written Torah.
[237] A superficial reading will cause the reader to miss
the whole point. The “threats of annihilation” of the Master’s talmidim from
Paqid Shaul seeking consent from the defunct Kohen Gadol speaks of Purim.
[238] The Nazarean converts who were Shomer Shabbat.