פרשת כי תצא תש"כ - "נקי יהיה לביתו"

No man shall take the mill or the upper millstone to pledge; for he taketh a man’s life to pledge.

for it is taking a life in pawn because it produces life’s sustenance. We need not address those who rely excessively on the juxtaposition of passages, since every commandment stands on its own, and explaining their connection is for homiletical purposes only [cf. comment on 16: 18]. However, one notices the following connections in this region of the text: Scripture mentions that one may not steal another’s grapes, to take into one’s bag [23: 25], nor lift up a sickle against another’s grain [23: 26]. It then discusses one’s taking of a wife — at which point she becomes his [: 1] — and mentions that even if she is divorced from him [: 1], another man who marries her must still rejoice with her, and must not be pressed into military service [: 5]. The taking of a millstone in pledge is a form of oppression , as is kidnapping. Moreover, the symptom of ṣara‘at [: 8] comes about through inattention to one’s speech, which is extremely harmful to those who are closest to one. Accordingly one must not mistreat a poor person regarding his pledge [: 10], nor may one mistreat a hireling [: 14], in order that one’s small children shall not die from their fathers’ sins [: 16]. This also relates to discriminating against an alien, or an orphan, or to the taking of a widow’s garment as a security [: 17], as well as to forgotten grain [: 19], since it belongs to the destitute, as do the fruit which “you may not glean” [: 21]. This leads to the concept of “lest he continue”, and thus “be degraded” [25: 3]. To muzzle an ox [25: 4] is a mistreatment of the animal, which cannot eat as it toils; a man who refuses his levirate duties [25: 7] perpetrates a form of mistreatment, as does the woman who grabs genitalia [25: 11]. Keeping two different measures of weight [25: 13], or two different measures of volume [25: 14], is certainly a form a mistreatment. And finally, Amalek mistreated Israel [25: 17].

When a man taketh a new wife, he shall not go out in the host, neither shall he be charged with any business; he shall be free for his house one year, and shall cheer his wife whom he hath taken.

The Sages taught with regard to the verse: “He shall not go out with the army” (Deuteronomy 24:5); one might have thought it is with the army that he does not go out, but he does go to supply water and food to the army and to repair the roads for them. Therefore, the verse states: “Neither shall he be charged with any business.” One might have thought that I include even one who has built a house and has not dedicated it, or one who has planted a vineyard and has not used its fruit, or one who has betrothed a woman and has not taken her as his wife? The verse states: “Neither shall he be charged with any business”; you do not charge him with any responsibilities, but you do charge others. The Gemara asks: And since the Torah states: “Neither shall he be charged with any business,” why do I need to be taught: “He shall not go out with the army”? The Gemara answers: The Torah adds this clause so that he will violate two prohibitions if he goes out to war: “He shall not go out with the army,” and: “Neither shall he be charged.”

ולא יעבר lit., NEITHER SHALL PASS UPON HIM (i.e., be obligatory upon him) any army matter,

לכל דבר AS REGARDS ANYTHING that is a requirement of the army: not to supply water and food, nor to repair the roads, whilst those who returned from the battle array at the bidding of the priest, e.g., one who had built a new house and had not yet dedicated it, or one who had betrothed a woman and had not yet taken her to wife (Deuteronomy 20:5—7), are bound to supply water and food and to repair roads (Sifrei Devarim 271:2; Sotah 44a).

יהיה לביתו [HE SHALL BE FREE] AT HOME (or, as it may be literally translated: [FREE] FOR HIS HOUSE) — i.e., also on account of his new house (not only on account of his recent marriage, as stated in the text): if he has built a new house and only just dedicated it (not lived in it a full year), and similarly, if he has planted a vineyard and has only just begun to eat of its fruits (not enjoyed its produce the full fourth year), he need not leave his house for the requirements of war. This Halacha is derived from the text as follows:

The lamed in anything is extraneous (as in “the third, Avshalom” [I Chronicles 3: 2]).

All those who are returned from the battle array, return when they hear the words of the Kohen. They will, however, supply the water and food for the soldiers, and repair the roads. These are those who do not go out to the battlefront at all, and they are not troubled for any reason at all: The one who builds a house and dedicates⁶¹I.e., he moves in. it; the one who marries his fiancée or performs Yibum; and the one who redeems⁶²In the fourth year after planting. The redemption monies are brought up to Jerusalem. his vineyard. These do not go out until the end of the year, as it says, “he shall be free unto his house for one year, and he shall make his wife happy, she who he has taken” (Deut. 24:5). By Tradition we have learned that a person is given one undisturbed year⁶³Free from communal responsibilities. after buying a house or marrying a woman or beginning to eat from a vineyard.

When a man taketh a new wife, he shall not go out in the host, neither shall he be charged with any business; he shall be free for his house one year, and shall cheer his wife whom he hath taken.

When a man taketh a new wife, he shall not go out in the host, neither shall he be charged with any business; he shall be free for his house one year, and shall cheer his wife whom he hath taken.

When a man taketh a new wife, he shall not go out in the host, neither shall he be charged with any business; he shall be free for his house one year, and shall cheer his wife whom he hath taken.

ושמח means HE SHALL GLADDEN [HIS WIFE], its correct Targum rendering therefore is: וְיַחְדֵי יַת אִיתְּתֵהּ which expresses this; One who reads in the Targum וְיַחְדֵי עִם אִיתְּתֵהּ “he shall rejoice with his wife” is in error, for this is not the Targum equivalent of וְשִׂמַּח (Piel) but of וְשָׂמַח (Kal).