פרשת כי תצא

However, in the case of one who recites: Just as Your mercy is extended to a bird’s nest, why do they silence him? Two amora’im in Eretz Yisrael disputed this question; Rabbi Yosei bar Avin and Rabbi Yosei bar Zevida; one said that this was because he engenders jealousy among God’s creations, as it appears as though he is protesting the fact that the Lord favored one creature over all others. And one said that this was because he transforms the attributes of the Holy One, Blessed be He, into expressions of mercy, when they are nothing but decrees of the King that must be fulfilled without inquiring into the reasons behind them.

If the nest of a bird chances to be in front of you: Also this commandment is explained by "it and its son do not slaughter on one day" (Leviticus 22:28); since the reason in both of them is that we should not have a cruel heart and [then] not have mercy, or that the verse should not permit us to be destructive to destroy the species, even though it allowed slaughter within that species. And behold, one who kills the mother and the children on one day or takes them when they are 'free to fly' is as if he cuts off that species. And the teacher (Rambam) in the Guide for the Perplexed 3:48 wrote that the reason of sending [the mother away from] the nest and the reason of "it and its son do not slaughter on one day" is to prohibit killing the child in the eyes of the mother, as animals have great concern about this. And there is no difference between the concern of a person and the concern of animals for their children, since the love of a mother and 'the appeal of the children of its belly' does not stem from the intellect and the [faculty of] speech, but rather it is from the effects of the faculty of thought that is found in animals just as it is found in man. And if [it is as Rambam claims], the main prohibition of 'it and its son' is only [in the sequence] of its son and it, but [in other circumstances] it is all a distancing [from that main prohibition]. And more correct is [that the reason for the commandment is] so that we will not become cruel. And the teacher said: And don't answer me from the statement of the sages [that comes to explain] (Berakhot 33b), "We silence the one who says, 'Your mercy reaches the nest of the bird.' [is because this commandment is a decree that has nothing to do with mercy]," as this is one of two explanations - the explanation of the one to whom it appears that there is no reason for the commandments except for the will of the Creator - but we hold of the second explanation, [according to which] there should be an explanation for all of the commandments. And a further challenge to him is that which he found in Bereshit Rabbah 44:1, "And so what does the Holy One, blessed be He, care whether he slaughters from [the front of] the neck or slaughters from the back - behold, the commandments were only given to purify the creations through them, as it is stated (Proverbs 30:5), 'Every word of the Lord is purified.'" And this matter that the teacher asserted is very lucid regarding commandments that have a reason, as there is in each one a reason and a purpose and a refinement for the person, besides their reward from their Commander, may He be blessed. And the rabbis, may their memory be blessed, have already said (Sanhedrin 21b), "For what were the reasons of the Torah not revealed, etc." and they expounded (Pesachim 119a),

שלח תשלח את האם ואת הבנים תקח לך, “you must be sure to send away the mother and take the young for yourself.” According to the plain meaning of the text the Torah’s directive here is designed to protect the species from extermination. Even though the Torah permitted slaughtering of living creatures for the enhancement of man’s lifestyle, the Torah did not mean to give a carte blanche for exterminating any species thereby. If one were to take both mother bird together with her young (and eat them) it would be symbolically similar to exterminating that particular species (Nachmanides). The Torah adds the words: “in order that that it will be good for you,” i.e. if you will display concern for the survival of the species of these birds, G’d in turn will display His pity for you and will increase your days on earth as compensation for not having wiped out that family (species) of birds (Ibn Ezra).

(1) To not muzzle an animal at the time of its work: To not prevent an animal from eating that which it is working on, at the time of its work - for example, when it threshes grain or carries straw from place to place on its back - as we do not have permission to prevent it from eating from it. And about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 25:4), "You shall not muzzle an ox in its threshing."

(2) It is from the roots of the commandment [that it is] to teach ourselves that our souls be a good soul that chooses what is right and clings to it and pursues kindness and mercy. And in our accustoming it to this - even with animals that were only created to serve us, to be concerned for them to distribute to them a portion of the toil of their flesh - the soul will take for itself the way of this habit; to do good to people and to guard from taking access away from them for anything that is appropriate for them, and to repay their reward according to all the good that they do and to satiate them with that upon which they toiled. And it is fitting for the holy chosen nation to follow this way.

(5) And so it is with peret [separated fruit] that fell from the vine at the time of harvesting and with olélot [malformed grape clusters], as it is said, (Lev. 19:10) You shall not pick your vineyard bare [te'olél] or gather the fallen fruit [uferet] of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the poor and the stranger. So also with one who stacks sheaves and has forgotten a sheaf in the field. This person may not recover it, as it is said, (Deut. 24:19) And overlook a sheaf in the field, do not turn back to get it. If one does transgress [the negative mitzvah against picking up a forgotten sheaf] and gleans and even grinds and bakes, this one still must give to the poor, as it is said, (Deut. 24:19) It shall go to the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow. This is a positive mitzvah. Thus you learn that all these mitzvot are negative which are transformed into positive mitzvot, and if one does not fulfill a positive mitzvah, one deserves punishment.³Each one of these verses is two-fold; one part corresponds to the prohibition against gleaning or picking all of a crop while the other part is the injunction to give food to the poor. Each one of the gifts for the poor involves two acts: one of self-restraint and one of giving.

(6) Just as it is with forgotten sheaves [shikhecha, the "forgotten"], so it is with standing grain. If one has forgotten a portion of standing grain, one may not harvest it. It is for the poor. And just as with forgotten produce and their products, so also with forgotten fruit of trees altogether, as it is said, (Deut. 24:20) When you beat down the fruit of your olive trees, do not go over them again. So it applies to all other types of trees.⁴With regard to trees, however, there are exceptions, such as with carob trees. See 3:21.