(א) וְאֵ֙לֶּה֙ הַמִּשְׁפָּטִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר תָּשִׂ֖ים לִפְנֵיהֶֽם׃ (ב) כִּ֤י תִקְנֶה֙ עֶ֣בֶד עִבְרִ֔י שֵׁ֥שׁ שָׁנִ֖ים יַעֲבֹ֑ד וּבַ֨שְּׁבִעִ֔ת יֵצֵ֥א לַֽחָפְשִׁ֖י חִנָּֽם׃ (ג) אִם־בְּגַפּ֥וֹ יָבֹ֖א בְּגַפּ֣וֹ יֵצֵ֑א אִם־בַּ֤עַל אִשָּׁה֙ ה֔וּא וְיָצְאָ֥ה אִשְׁתּ֖וֹ עִמּֽוֹ׃ (ד) אִם־אֲדֹנָיו֙ יִתֶּן־ל֣וֹ אִשָּׁ֔ה וְיָלְדָה־ל֥וֹ בָנִ֖ים א֣וֹ בָנ֑וֹת הָאִשָּׁ֣ה וִילָדֶ֗יהָ תִּהְיֶה֙ לַֽאדֹנֶ֔יהָ וְה֖וּא יֵצֵ֥א בְגַפּֽוֹ׃ (ה) וְאִם־אָמֹ֤ר יֹאמַר֙ הָעֶ֔בֶד אָהַ֙בְתִּי֙ אֶת־אֲדֹנִ֔י אֶת־אִשְׁתִּ֖י וְאֶת־בָּנָ֑י לֹ֥א אֵצֵ֖א חָפְשִֽׁי׃ (ו) וְהִגִּישׁ֤וֹ אֲדֹנָיו֙ אֶל־הָ֣אֱלֹקִ֔ים וְהִגִּישׁוֹ֙ אֶל־הַדֶּ֔לֶת א֖וֹ אֶל־הַמְּזוּזָ֑ה וְרָצַ֨ע אֲדֹנָ֤יו אֶת־אָזְנוֹ֙ בַּמַּרְצֵ֔עַ וַעֲבָד֖וֹ לְעֹלָֽם׃ (ס) (ז) וְכִֽי־יִמְכֹּ֥ר אִ֛ישׁ אֶת־בִּתּ֖וֹ לְאָמָ֑ה לֹ֥א תֵצֵ֖א כְּצֵ֥את הָעֲבָדִֽים׃ (ח) אִם־רָעָ֞ה בְּעֵינֵ֧י אֲדֹנֶ֛יהָ אֲשֶׁר־לא [ל֥וֹ] יְעָדָ֖הּ וְהֶפְדָּ֑הּ לְעַ֥ם נָכְרִ֛י לֹא־יִמְשֹׁ֥ל לְמָכְרָ֖הּ בְּבִגְדוֹ־בָֽהּ׃ (ט) וְאִם־לִבְנ֖וֹ יִֽיעָדֶ֑נָּה כְּמִשְׁפַּ֥ט הַבָּנ֖וֹת יַעֲשֶׂה־לָּֽהּ׃ (י) אִם־אַחֶ֖רֶת יִֽקַּֽח־ל֑וֹ שְׁאֵרָ֛הּ כְּסוּתָ֥הּ וְעֹנָתָ֖הּ לֹ֥א יִגְרָֽע׃ (יא) וְאִם־שְׁלָ֨שׁ־אֵ֔לֶּה לֹ֥א יַעֲשֶׂ֖ה לָ֑הּ וְיָצְאָ֥ה חִנָּ֖ם אֵ֥ין כָּֽסֶף׃ (ס) (יב) מַכֵּ֥ה אִ֛ישׁ וָמֵ֖ת מ֥וֹת יוּמָֽת׃ (יג) וַאֲשֶׁר֙ לֹ֣א צָדָ֔ה וְהָאֱלֹקִ֖ים אִנָּ֣ה לְיָד֑וֹ וְשַׂמְתִּ֤י לְךָ֙ מָק֔וֹם אֲשֶׁ֥ר יָנ֖וּס שָֽׁמָּה׃ (ס) (יד) וְכִֽי־יָזִ֥ד אִ֛ישׁ עַל־רֵעֵ֖הוּ לְהָרְג֣וֹ בְעָרְמָ֑ה מֵעִ֣ם מִזְבְּחִ֔י תִּקָּחֶ֖נּוּ לָמֽוּת׃ (ס) (טו) וּמַכֵּ֥ה אָבִ֛יו וְאִמּ֖וֹ מ֥וֹת יוּמָֽת׃ (טז) וְגֹנֵ֨ב אִ֧ישׁ וּמְכָר֛וֹ וְנִמְצָ֥א בְיָד֖וֹ מ֥וֹת יוּמָֽת׃ (ס) (יז) וּמְקַלֵּ֥ל אָבִ֛יו וְאִמּ֖וֹ מ֥וֹת יוּמָֽת׃ (ס) (יח) וְכִֽי־יְרִיבֻ֣ן אֲנָשִׁ֔ים וְהִכָּה־אִישׁ֙ אֶת־רֵעֵ֔הוּ בְּאֶ֖בֶן א֣וֹ בְאֶגְרֹ֑ף וְלֹ֥א יָמ֖וּת וְנָפַ֥ל לְמִשְׁכָּֽב׃ (יט) אִם־יָק֞וּם וְהִתְהַלֵּ֥ךְ בַּח֛וּץ עַל־מִשְׁעַנְתּ֖וֹ וְנִקָּ֣ה הַמַּכֶּ֑ה רַ֥ק שִׁבְתּ֛וֹ יִתֵּ֖ן וְרַפֹּ֥א יְרַפֵּֽא׃ (ס)
(1) These are the rules that you shall set before them: (2) When you acquire a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years; in the seventh year he shall go free, without payment. (3) If he came single, he shall leave single; if he had a wife, his wife shall leave with him. (4) If his master gave him a wife, and she has borne him children, the wife and her children shall belong to the master, and he shall leave alone. (5) But if the slave declares, “I love my master, and my wife and children: I do not wish to go free,” (6) his master shall take him before God. He shall be brought to the door or the doorpost, and his master shall pierce his ear with an awl; and he shall then remain his slave for life. (7) When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not be freed as male slaves are. (8) If she proves to be displeasing to her master, who designated her for himself, he must let her be redeemed; he shall not have the right to sell her to outsiders, since he broke faith with her. (9) And if he designated her for his son, he shall deal with her as is the practice with free maidens. (10) If he marries another, he must not withhold from this one her food, her clothing, or her conjugal rights. (11) If he fails her in these three ways, she shall go free, without payment. (12) He who fatally strikes a man shall be put to death. (13) If he did not do it by design, but it came about by an act of God, I will assign you a place to which he can flee. (14) When a man schemes against another and kills him treacherously, you shall take him from My very altar to be put to death. (15) He who strikes his father or his mother shall be put to death. (16) He who kidnaps a man—whether he has sold him or is still holding him—shall be put to death. (17) He who insults his father or his mother shall be put to death. (18) When men quarrel and one strikes the other with stone or fist, and he does not die but has to take to his bed— (19) if he then gets up and walks outdoors upon his staff, the assailant shall go unpunished, except that he must pay for his idleness and his cure.
(א) אם אדניו יתן לו אשה. מִכָּאן שֶׁהָרְשׁוּת בְּיַד רַבּוֹ לִמְסֹר לוֹ שִׁפְחָה כְנַעֲנִית לְהוֹלִיד מִמֶּנָּה עֲבָדִים. אוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא בְיִשְׂרְאֵלִית? תַּ"לֹ הָאִשָּׁה וִילָדֶיהָ תִּהְיֶה לַאדֹנֶיהָ, הָא אֵינוֹ מְדַבֵּר אֶלָּא בִּכְנַעֲנִית, שֶׁהֲרֵי הָעִבְרִיָּה אַף הִיא יוֹצְאָה בְשֵׁשׁ – וַאֲפִלּוּ לִפְנֵי שֵׁשׁ אִם הֵבִיאָה סִימָנִין יוֹצְאָה – שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר אָחִיךָ הָעִבְרִי אוֹ הָעִבְרִיָּה (דברים ט"ו), מְלַמֵּד שֶׁאַף הָעִבְרִיָּה יוֹצְאָה בְשֵׁשׁ (מכילתא):
(1) אם אדניו יתן לו אשה IF HIS LORD HAS GIVEN HIM A WIFE — From this we learn that if he has already an Israelite wife the master has the right to give him a Canaanitish handmaid with the object of raising slaves. Or perhaps this is not so, but Scripture by אשה is speaking about an Israelite woman?! Scripture, however, states: “the wife and her children shall be the master’s”, consequently the text can only be speaking of a Canaanitish woman, for a Hebrew maidservant goes free at the end of six years just as a Hebrew man-servant does — yea, even before the termination of six years she goes free if she shows symptoms of incipient puberty (cf. Rashi v. 7) — for it is said, (Deuteronomy 15:12) “[and if] thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, [be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years, then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee]”, which statement teaches you that a Hebrew woman also goes free after six years’ service (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 21:3:1; Kiddushin 14b).
(א) מכאן שהרשות ביד רבו כו'. וא"ת דלמא אסור לו בשפחה כנענית משום לא יהיה קדש בבני ישראל והא דכתיב ואם אדוניו יתן לו אשה היינו ישראלית גדולה שמכרה עצמה. וי"ל דס"ל דאין אשה מוכרת את עצמה דהא כתיב וכי ימוך אחיך ונמכר לך דמשמע אחיך ולא אחותך:
(ב) או אינו אלא בישראלית כו'. וא"ת והלא צריך ליעדה לו או לבנו ולא לעבדו. וי"ל דה"א דיכול למוסרה לעבדו בתורת זנות ולא בתורת אישות והא דכתיב לא ימשול למוכרה וגו' אאב קאי לחודיה ולא אאדון:
(1) From here. . . his master has the right. . . You might ask: Perhaps “his master should give him a wife” means giving him an adult Jewess who sold herself as a slave. [The verse stating that the Hebrew handmaid shall go free after six years refers only to a minor who was sold by her father. Thus it is possible to have an adult Jewess as a slave]? And a gentile handmaid would then be forbidden to a Hebrew slave, [as she is to other Jewish men,] for it is written: “There shall not be a male prostitute from the B’nei Yisrael” (Devarim 23:18). The answer is: Rashi holds that a woman may not sell herself as a slave, because it is written (Vayikra 25:39), “If your brother becomes impoverished and sells himself to you,” implying: your brother and not your sister.
(2) Or perhaps it is only a Jewish wife (that he may give him). You might ask: [Why think that the master may give his slave a Hebrew handmaid?] The master may designate a Hebrew handmaid only to himself or his son, and not to his slave [see verses 8 and 9]. The answer is: We might think that he may indeed give her to his slave, but not in marriage, only out of wedlock. And when it says (v. 8), “He has no power (right) to sell her. . .” we would say that this refers only to her father and not to her master.
(א) אם אדניו יתן לו אשה פרש״י שפחה כנענית. מכאן שהרשות ביד רבו למסור לו שפחה כנענית להוליד ממנה בנים. שמאחר שהרב חייב במזונות אשתו ובניו הרשות ביד הרב למסור לו שפחה כנענית להוליד ממנה עבדים. חז״ק הא כתיב בפרשת כי תצא לא יהיה קדש ומתרגם אונקלוס לא יסב גבר ישראל איתתא אמה. ושם פרש״י שאף הוא נעשה קדש על ידה שכל בעילותיו בעילת זנות שאין קדושין תופסין בה.יתן לו אשה הלשון מוכיח שהיא כנענית שהיה בידו לתתה לו שאם היא עברית אין לו כח להשיאה שלא לדעתה רק בתו קטנה דכתיב בה את בתי נתתי.
(1) אם אדוניו יתן לו אשה, “If his ‘master’ will give him a wife;” according to Rashi, the “wife” is a gentile slave of his master, and this verse is the halachic source that this is not only permitted, but that he may insist on his servant having a woman with whom he, and only he, performs marital union. (Mechilta, chapter 2, on this verse) The logic according to our author appears to be that seeing that the master is at any rate obligated to provide for the wife and children of such a “slave,” [and the children having a gentile mother are not Jewish, Ed.] he may recover some of the expense he had by keeping the children of such a union. Targum Onkelos adds to his translation that the master is not permitted to “give” such a “slave” a Jewish wife, as no Jewish woman may be forced to marry someone. If the “slave” had married a Jewish slave of his master during his stay there she will leave with him without the master receiving any compensation. Rashi points out here that proof that the master has no control over the body of a Jewish slave is that the Torah legislates that if such a Hebrew slave sold by her father reaches earlier than usual puberty, she immediately can leave her master. He quotes 21,7 as well as Deuteronomy 15,12 as his proof.
(א) אם אדוניו. מגיד שרשות ביד רבו למסור לו שפחה כנענית להוליד ממנה כשהוא נשוי ישראלית מקודם לכן אבל כשאינו נשוי אינו יכול לכופו ולמסור לו שנא' אם בגפו יבא בגפו יצא. והטעם הוא שכשהוא נשוי ישראלית אינו נמשך אחר השפחה אבל כשאינו נשוי יהיה נמשך אחריה:
(1) אם אדוניו, “if his master etc.” here the Torah authorises the master of this Hebrew (unmarried) servant to give him one of his Canaanite slave-women as a “wife” to have children with, provided he had previously been married to a Jewish wife. If this “servant” had previously not been married, he cannot force him to enter into such a relationship with a Canaanite woman. This ruling is based on the words in verse 3: אם בגפו יבא בגפו יצא, ”if he came as a bachelor, he will leave as a bachelor.” The reason underlying this legislation is that if he had previously been married to a Jewish woman he will not feel attracted to a Canaanite slave woman.
(ג) ורצע אדניו את אזנו במרצע. הַיְמָנִית, אוֹ אֵינוֹ, אֶלָּא שֶׁל שְׂמֹאל? תַּ"לֹ אֹזֶן אֹזֶן לִגְזֵרָה שָׁוָה, נֶאֱמַר כָּאן וְרָצַע אֲדֹנָיו אֶת אָזְנוֹ, וְנֶאֱמַר בִּמְצֹרָע תְּנוּךְ אֹזֶן הַמִּטַּהֵר הַיְמָנִית (ויקרא י"ד), מַה לְּהַלָּן הַיְמָנִית, אַף כָּאן הַיְמָנִית; וּמָה רָאָה אֹזֶן לֵרָצַע מִכָּל שְׁאָר אֵבָרִים שֶׁבַּגּוּף? אָמַר רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי: אֹזֶן זֹאת שֶׁשָּׁמְעָה עַל הַר סִינַי לֹא תִגְנֹב, וְהָלַךְ וְגָנַב, תֵּרָצַע. וְאִם מוֹכֵר עַצְמוֹ, אֹזֶן שֶׁשָּׁמְעָה עַל הַר סִינַי כִּי לִי בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל עֲבָדִים, וְהָלַךְ וְקָנָה אָדוֹן לְעַצְמוֹ, תֵּרָצַע. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הָיָה דּוֹרֵשׁ מִקְרָא זֶה כְּמִין חֹמֶר: מַה נִּשְׁתַּנּוּ דֶּלֶת וּמְזוּזָה מִכָּל כֵּלִים שֶׁבַּבַּיִת? אָמַר הַקָּבָּ"ה דֶּלֶת וּמְזוּזָה שֶׁהָיוּ עֵדִים בְּמִצְרַיִם כְּשֶׁפָּסַחְתִּי עַל הַמַּשְׁקוֹף וְעַל שְׁתֵּי הַמְּזוּזוֹת וְאָמַרְתִּי כִּי לִי בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל עֲבָדִים – עֲבָדַי הֵם וְלֹא עֲבָדִים לַעֲבָדִים – וְהָלַךְ זֶה וְקָנָה אָדוֹן לְעַצְמוֹ, יֵרָצַע בִּפְנֵיהֶם (קידושין כ"ב):
(3) ורצע אדניו את אזנו במרצע AND HIS LORD SHALL BORE HIS EAR THROUGH WITH THE AWL — “His ear” means his right ear. Or perhaps this is not so, but Scripture means his left ear? Scripture however uses the term אזן here and it uses אזן in another passage, thereby suggesting an analogy based upon verbal similarity; viz., here it is said “and his lord shall bore his ear (אזנו) through”, and of the leper it is said, (Leviticus 14:25) “and the priest shall put it upon the tip of the right ear (אזנו הימית) of him that is to be cleansed”. — How is it in that latter passage? It is the right ear! So here, too, it is the right ear. — What is the reason that the ear had to be pierced rather than any other limb of the servant’s body? Rabban Jochanan ben Zaccai said: That ear which heard on Mount Sinai, (Exodus 20:13) “Thou shalt not steal” and yet its owner went and stole and was therefore sold as a slave — let it be pierced! Or, in the case of him who sold himself from destitution, having committed no theft, the reason is: That ear which heard on Mount Sinai what I said, (Leviticus 25:55) “For unto Me the children Israel are servants” and yet its owner went and procured for himself another master — let it be pierced! (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 21:6:3; Kiddushin 22b). Rabbi Simeon interpreted this verse like a jewel (i. e. giving it an ethical signification): In what respect are door and doorpost different from all other objects in the house that they should be singled out for this purpose? God, in effect, said: door and doorpost that were eye-witnesses in Egypt when I passed over the lintel and the two doorposts, freeing Israel from slavery, and when I said, (Leviticus 25:55) “For unto Me the children of Israel are servants” — servants to Me but not servants of servants (of human beings), and yet this man went and procured another master for himself — let him be pieced in their presence (i. e. let them be eye-witnesses now when this man voluntarily prolongs his state of slavery)! (Kiddushin 22b.)
(ג) ורצע אדניו מה שצוה הקב״ה לרצוע עבד עברי היינו טעמא שלא יטעו בו העולם לומר כנעני הוא כשיראו שיעבוד כל כך. (ד) את אזנו ולא יוכל לומר אני נגפתי את עצמי שם. (ה) את אזנו שכן דרך לעשות לבני אדם שעושין דבר שאינו הגון וממנו למדו לעשות כן לגנבים. (ו) במרצע שמעתי מדרש אמר הקב״ה אני גזרתי על ישראל שעבוד של ארבע מאות שנה ואחר כך דלגתי את הקץ בשבילם וקצרתי את השעבוד והלך זה ושעבד את עצמו ירצע בכלי שהוא עולה בגימטריא ד׳ מאות והוא מרצע.
(3) ורצע אדוניו, “and his master will proceed to pierce his ear;” the practical use of this procedure is that if he were to escape from his master during the years to come, the mark left on his ear will serve as evidence that he is an escaped slave. He will also not be confused with a Canaanite, as Jewish law forbids mutilating any part of a gentile’s body. Besides, when it comes to proving this when the escaped slave is positioned against the door where his ear had been pierced, the height of the hole in the door will match the hole in the slave’s ear when he is positioned there. (4) את אזנו, “his ear;” the reason why this part of the body has been chosen by the Torah for this procedure is that if the slave were to protest that he had inflicted this hole upon himself, he would not be believed, as it is impossible for him to have done so. (5) את אזנו, it was customary to mark someone who had not conducted himself as he should, by piercing his ear. From this custom evolved the practice to do this to thieves. (6) במרצע, “with an awl;” I have heard the following allegorical explanation of why this tool was chosen by the Torah for this procedure; (Compare Torah shleymah by Rabbi Menachem Kasher on the source item # 137) The cost of an awl used to be 400 coins of a certain denomination. G-d had decreed 400 years for Abraham’s descendants to be strangers and slaves, but He had subsequently decreased the length of their serfdom. This slave who could have gotten his freedom, instead volunteered to lengthen his period of serfdom.
(א) ואם שלש אלה לא יעשה לה. אִם אַחַת מִשְּׁלֹשׁ אֵלֶּה לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה לָהּ; וּמָה הֵן הַשָּׁלֹשׁ? יִיעָדֶנָּה לוֹ, אוֹ לִבְנוֹ, אוֹ יְגָרֵעַ מִפִּדְיוֹנָהּ וְתֵצֵא, וְזֶה לֹא יְעָדָהּ, לֹא לוֹ וְלֹא לִבְנוֹ, וְהִיא לֹא הָיָה בְיָדָהּ לִפְדּוֹת אֶת עַצְמָהּ:
(1) ואם שלש אלה לא יעשה לה means IF HE DO NOT one of THESE THREE UNTO HER. What are these three? He should designate her to himself as his wife, or to his son, or allow her a deduction from the ransom so that she may go free (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 21:11:1). This man, however, has neither betrothed her to himself, nor to his son, and she herself does not possess the entire sum paid for her originally that she might buy herself out, therefore shall she go out free without money.
(א) ואם. אחז דרך קצרה כמו שלש סאים. כי הנכון השלש האלה. ורבים חשבו כי השלש האלה הם שארה כסותה ועונתה. וזה לא יתכן. כי אחר שאמר כמשפט הבנות יעשה לה. וחיוב הבנות אלה השלש ואין צורך להזכיר זה. ועוד כי יפת תואר שהיא נכריה כתוב עליה ומכור לא תמכרנה בכסף. ואף כי זאת. רק הנכון שהוא ואם אחת משלש אלה שהוא לא ישאנה ולא לבנו ייעדנה ולא יפדנה תצא חנם בהיותה ברשותה. וכמוהו אם יגע טמא נפש בכל אלה היטמא. פי' באחת מאלה וכמוהו רבים. ואמר הגאון מה טעם לומר אין כסף אחר שאמר ויצאה חנם. והוא השיב כי אם חלתה בביתו והוציא עליה ברפואות לא תפרע לו כלום. ולפי דעתי אין צורך כי הוא תוספת ביאור. כדרך כי מת אתה ולא תחיה
(כ) וְכִֽי־יַכֶּה֩ אִ֨ישׁ אֶת־עַבְדּ֜וֹ א֤וֹ אֶת־אֲמָתוֹ֙ בַּשֵּׁ֔בֶט וּמֵ֖ת תַּ֣חַת יָד֑וֹ נָקֹ֖ם יִנָּקֵֽם׃ (כא) אַ֥ךְ אִם־י֛וֹם א֥וֹ יוֹמַ֖יִם יַעֲמֹ֑ד לֹ֣א יֻקַּ֔ם כִּ֥י כַסְפּ֖וֹ הֽוּא׃ (ס) (כב) וְכִֽי־יִנָּצ֣וּ אֲנָשִׁ֗ים וְנָ֨גְפ֜וּ אִשָּׁ֤ה הָרָה֙ וְיָצְא֣וּ יְלָדֶ֔יהָ וְלֹ֥א יִהְיֶ֖ה אָס֑וֹן עָנ֣וֹשׁ יֵעָנֵ֗שׁ כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֨ר יָשִׁ֤ית עָלָיו֙ בַּ֣עַל הָֽאִשָּׁ֔ה וְנָתַ֖ן בִּפְלִלִֽים׃ (כג) וְאִם־אָס֖וֹן יִהְיֶ֑ה וְנָתַתָּ֥ה נֶ֖פֶשׁ תַּ֥חַת נָֽפֶשׁ׃ (כד) עַ֚יִן תַּ֣חַת עַ֔יִן שֵׁ֖ן תַּ֣חַת שֵׁ֑ן יָ֚ד תַּ֣חַת יָ֔ד רֶ֖גֶל תַּ֥חַת רָֽגֶל׃ (כה) כְּוִיָּה֙ תַּ֣חַת כְּוִיָּ֔ה פֶּ֖צַע תַּ֣חַת פָּ֑צַע חַבּוּרָ֕ה תַּ֖חַת חַבּוּרָֽה׃ (ס) (כו) וְכִֽי־יַכֶּ֨ה אִ֜ישׁ אֶת־עֵ֥ין עַבְדּ֛וֹ אֽוֹ־אֶת־עֵ֥ין אֲמָת֖וֹ וְשִֽׁחֲתָ֑הּ לַֽחָפְשִׁ֥י יְשַׁלְּחֶ֖נּוּ תַּ֥חַת עֵינֽוֹ׃ (ס) (כז) וְאִם־שֵׁ֥ן עַבְדּ֛וֹ אֽוֹ־שֵׁ֥ן אֲמָת֖וֹ יַפִּ֑יל לַֽחָפְשִׁ֥י יְשַׁלְּחֶ֖נּוּ תַּ֥חַת שִׁנּֽוֹ׃ (פ)
(20) When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod, and he dies there and then, he must be avenged. (21) But if he survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, since he is the other’s property. (22) When men fight, and one of them pushes a pregnant woman and a miscarriage results, but no other damage ensues, the one responsible shall be fined according as the woman’s husband may exact from him, the payment to be based on reckoning. (23) But if other damage ensues, the penalty shall be life for life, (24) eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, (25) burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise. (26) When a man strikes the eye of his slave, male or female, and destroys it, he shall let him go free on account of his eye. (27) If he knocks out the tooth of his slave, male or female, he shall let him go free on account of his tooth.
(ב) ונתתה נפש תחת נפש. רַבּוֹתֵינוּ חוֹלְקִים בַּדָּבָר, יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים נֶפֶשׁ מַמָּשׁ, וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים מָמוֹן אֲבָל לֹא נֶפֶשׁ מַמָּשׁ, שֶׁהַמִּתְכַּוֵּן לַהֲרֹג אֶת זֶה וְהָרַג אֶת זֶה פָּטוּר מִמִּיתָה, וּמְשַׁלֵּם לְיוֹרְשָׁיו דָּמָיו כְּמוֹ שֶׁהָיָה נִמְכָּר בַּשּׁוּק (שם):
(2) ונתת נפש תחת נפש THEN THOU SHALT GIVE SOUL FOR SOUL. Our Rabbis differ as to the explanation of the word נפש the first time it occurs here. There are some who say that it actually signifies “life” (i. e. life for life), others say that it means monetary compensation but not literally life, and they say that this must be so because he who intends to kill a certain person and inadvertently kills another instead, (as is the case here), is exempt from the death penalty, and has only to pay to his heirs his value estimating this as though he were sold as a slave in the market (Sanhedrin 79a).
(א) ונתתה נפש וגו'. נחלקו רבותינו ז''ל במכילתא יש אומרים מיתה הגם שנתכוין להרוג את זה והרג את זה ויש אומרים ממון. ולדבריו ידוייק אומרו ונתתה על נכון שהוא דבר הניתן מיד ליד. ולמאן דאמר נפש ממש אמר ונתתה לומר כי במקום נתינה האמורה בסמוך כשלא יהיה אסון תהיה זו ואין כאן נתינה אחרת כי פטור מדמי ולדות זולת אם היה אסון והוא בדרך שאינו חייב כגון שאמדו המכה שאינה כדי להמית הרי זה חייב וכמו שכתבתי בפסוק (י''ח) וכי יריבון:
(1) ונתתה נפש תחת נפש, "you shall give life for life." The meaning of these words is disputed. The Mechilta quotes opinions according to which the Torah speaks of an actual death penalty even though the killer had intended to kill another party, whereas other sages hold that the Torah speaks of monetary compensation for such a life (unborn child). According to the latter opinion the words ונתתה, "you shall give," are most appropriate seeing that monetary compensation is something that is given from one hand to another. According to the opinion that the Torah speaks of an actual death penalty, we must understand the word ונתתה as contrast to the situation described in verse 22 when no fatality occurred; instead of monetary compensation for the injury described in verse 22, something involving several types of payments such as for pain, shame, etc; in this instance there is only one exchange, i.e. the life of the guilty party for the harm done. We have learned previously that whenever a party is guilty of the death penalty no additional fines are imposed. The exception is a situation we have described in verse 18 when death did not occur promptly.
(ב) ונתתה נפש. תניא, נפש הוא משלם ואינו משלם ממון תחת נפש קסטלאפוקי מדעת רבי דס"ל בכ"מ בגמרא דנפש שבכאן פירושו ממון, ואזלי לשיטתייהו דרבנן ס"ל נתכוין להרוג את זה והרג את זה חייב לכן מפרשי ונתתה נפש תחת נפש ממש, ורבי ס"ל דבכהאי גונא פטור ולכן הוי פירוש ונתתה נפש – ממון, וצ"ל דלא קשה אליבא דחכמים ממה דמפרשינן בסמוך עין תחת עין אינו אלא ממון, וכן ביתר הפרטים שם, שן, כויה, פצע וחבורה, וכאן אנו מפרשין ממש, יען דסמכינן בזה על הדרשה דדרשינן בפ' מסעי ולא תקחו כופר לנפש רוצח, לנפש רוצח אי אתה לוקח כופר אבל אתה לוקח כופר לראשי אברים [עיין ב"ק פ"ג ב'] ולכן בהמית את הנפש דרשינן נפש ממש, משא"כ בסימא עין ושארי נזקין דרשינן תחת – ממון, ודו"ק. .
(שם)
(שם)
(א) עין תחת עין. סִמֵּא עֵין חֲבֵרוֹ נוֹתֵן לוֹ דְּמֵי עֵינוֹ כַּמָּה שֶׁפָּחֲתוּ דָּמָיו לִמְכֹּר בַּשּׁוּק, וְכֵן כֻּלָּם; וְלֹא נְטִילַת אֵבֶר מַמָּשׁ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁדָּרְשׁוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ בְּפֶרֶק הַחוֹבֵל (בבא קמא דף פ"ג):
(1) עין תחת עין EYE FOR EYE — If one blinded the eye of his fellow-man he has to pay him the value of his eye, i. e. he pays him how much his value would be diminished if he were to be sold as a slave in the market. In the same way all other cases are to be dealt with, but it does not mean the actual cutting off of the offender’s limb — just as our Rabbis have explained in the chapter beginning with the word החובל (Bava Kamma 84a).
(א) עין תחת עין כך היה ראוי כפי הדין הגמור שהיא מדה כנגד מדה, ובאה הקבלה שישלם ממון (קמא פרק החובל) מפני חסרון השערתנו, פן נסכל ונוסיף על המדה לאשמה בה:
(1) עין תחת עין; this is what ought to be the judgment against the offender, if we were to apply the principle of the punishment fitting the crime in all its severity. However, according to tradition only financial compensation is exacted as we cannot accurately measure how to apply the principle of “an eye for an eye” literally.
(א) עין תחת עין. קבלת רז"ל בזה דמי עין ולא עין ממש, והראיה מה שהזכיר למעלה רק שבתו יתן ורפא ירפא ואם נעשה באיש אשר יכה את רעהו כאשר עשה בו מה ישלם אחרי כן והוא גם הוא צריך שבת ורפוי, ועוד כי זה שהוציא עין חברו אילו עשינו לו כן והוציאנו את עינו לא כל הטבעים שוים ואולי השני יומת בהוצאת עינו מפני שטבעו רך מן הראשון והתורה אמרה עין תחת עין ולא עין ונפש תחת עין וא"כ אין בזה השואת היושר והמשפט לכל טבעי בני אדם זולתי בדמים, ועוד הכתוב שאמר ואיש כי יתן מום בעמיתו כאשר עשה כן יעשה לו שבר תחת שבר עין תחת עין שן תחת שן כאשר יתן מום באדם כן ינתן בו אי אפשר שיתקיים הכתוב הזה אלא כפי קבלת רז"ל בדמים ולא נטילת אבר ממש לפי שאי אפשר לאדם לעשות חבורה כאותה שעשה לו חברו באורך וברוחב ובעומק ולא יתכן לו לצמצם, ואם יעשה פחות או יותר לא קיים כאשר עשה כן יעשה לו, אלא מכאן שאינו ממש אלא דמים כדמי מה שעשה לא פחות ולא יותר.
(1) עין תחת עין, “an eye for an eye.” Mechilta Nezikin section 8 understands these words as “the value of an eye for an eye,” and not that the guilty party is being deprived of his own physical eye. Proof that this interpretation is correct can be deduced from verse 19 where the Torah had legislated financial compensation for injuries caused to a fellow human being. If we would inflict upon a person who had struck and caused injury to another person a similar injury to the one he had inflicted, what would there be left for him to pay? He himself would then be in need of medical attention and he himself would then suffer loss of income while laid up?
Furthermore, if we were to apply the principle of “an eye for an eye” literally, this would often not be justice at all. If a man ruins the only eye of a one-eyed individual and he had an eye of his removed as a penalty, the former would remain blind whereas the guilty party would still have a good eye to see with. What kind of justice would this be? Moreover, a weak individual might not survive having his eye gouged out so that he would pay with his life for having ruined a strong person’s eye. Surely this would not be justice! The only way a semblance of justice could be arrived at in the situations described in verses 24-27 is to make financial compensation for the damage caused.
Furthermore, the Torah writes in Leviticus 24,19-20: “and if a man inflicts a wound on his fellow, as he did so shall be done to him; fracture for fracture, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth; just as he will have inflicted a wound on a person, so shall be inflicted upon him!” It is quite impossible to carry out the instructions in this verse except by accepting the ruling of our sages that what is meant is financial compensation.
(א) עין תחת עין. קבלת רז"ל בזה דמי עין ולא עין ממש. והראיה מה שהזכיר למעלה רק שבתו יתן ורפא ירפא. ואם נעשה באיש אשר יכה את רעהו כאשר עשה בו. מה ישלם אחר כן. והוא גם הוא צריך שבת ורפוי. ועוד כי זה שהוציא עין חברו. אלו עשינו לו כן והוצאנו את עינו. לא כל הטבעים שוים. ואולי השני ימות בהוצאת עינו מפני שטבעו רך מן הראשון. והתורה אמרה עין תחת עין ולא עין ונפש תחת עין. ואם כן אין בזה השוואת היושר והמשפט לכל טבעי בני האדם. זולתי בדמים. ועוד הכתוב שאמר ואיש כי יתן מום באדם כאשר עשה כן יעשה לו שבר תחת שבר עין תחת עין שן תחת שן כאשר יתן מום באדם כן ינתן בו (ויקרא כ"ד) אי אפשר שתקיים אלא כפי קבלת רז"ל בדמים ולא נטילת אבר ממש. לפי שאי אפשר לאדם לעשות חבורה כאותה שעשה לו חברו באורך וברוחב ובעומק ולא יתכן לו לצמצם. ואם יעשה פחות או יותר לא קיים כאשר עשה כן יעשה לו. אלא מכאן שאינה ממש אלא דמים כדמי מה שעשה לא פחות ולא יותר. ויש לשאול היאך נקיים כאשר עשה כן יעשה לו, ויש לומר כי פירוש כאשר עשה כן יעשה לו כאשר הרע כן ירעו לו. והראיה מדברי שמשון שאמר (שופטים ט"ו) כאשר עשו לי כן עשיתי להם, והלא הם גזלו את אשתו והוא שרף את תבואתם. והרי מעשה שלהם לא היה כמעשה שלו. אלא ודאי כיון שהרעו זה לזה כאלו השתלמו הגמול. וכן מצינו בדברי הנביא שמתנבא על עשו (עובדיה א' ט"ו) כאשר עשית יעשה לך גמולך ישוב בראשך כי כאשר שתיתם על הר קדשי וגו' והא למדת מן הדעת ומן הכתוב ומדברי חכמים שאין פירושו עין תחת עין עין ממש אלא דמים:
(1) עין תחת עין, there is a tradition by our sages (Baba Kamma 84) concerning this that the meaning is: “the value of an eye for the value of an eye.” The Torah does not speak of the person inflicting the loss of someone’s eye paying with his losing an eye of his own. The proof that this could not have been what the Torah meant is verse 19 in our chapter רק שבתו יתן ורפא ירפא, “he must only pay for his loss of income and his medical expenses.”
If we were to do to a person who has caused the loss of another’s limb exactly as he had done, why would he have to pay something in addition to that? After all, he himself loses pay due to absence from work and he also incurs medical expenses for treatment of his severed limb!?
Furthermore, even assuming that the Torah’s words here were to be interpreted literally, not all situations are alike so that the literal application would resemble any kind of “tit for tat.” If the eye which a healthy person gouged out belonged to a person who had only one good eye, how would the loss of one of two good eyes by the person who caused the injury even come close to “fair retribution?” Not only that. Some people’s constitution would not be able to survive the loss of an organ whereas others would. If a person had had a kidney ruined beyond repair by someone who only had a single kidney left, taking that person’s kidney would be equivalent to a death sentence!
Furthermore, in Leviticus 24,19-20 we read כאשר עשה כן יעשה בו, “just as he has done (to another), so shall be done to him.” This verse cannot be applied in any other way than the way our sages have seen fit to understand it. The thrust of the verses is to indemnify the injured party in a manner commensurate to the injury he has sustained, not by depriving him of a limb of his own. It would be physically impossible to cause a person an exact duplicate of the injury he himself has suffered. If he were to cause either a lesser or a greater injury than the one he had sustained, he would be in violation of what the Torah wrote as he would not have complied with the Torah’s demand “as he had done so should be done to him.” In the case of monetary compensation, experts can evaluate the precise amount of the value of the loss sustained.
It is possible to understand the line כאשר עשה כן יעשה לו, as meaning: “just as he has caused harm, harm shall be caused to him.” Proof of this being the meaning of the words can be found in Judges 15,11 where Shimshon said: “as they have done to me so I have done to them.” The dispute had begun when the Philistines had taken Shimshon’s wife and in retaliation he burned their crops. Seeing that the retaliation by Shimshon did not match the harm done to him by the Philistines, it is clear that the meaning of the line is merely that harm done will be requited. Any retaliation therefore would be considered as “as he has done so shall be done to him.”
We also find that the prophet Ovadiah 15-16 prophesies concerning the future of Esau “as you did so shall be done to you. Your conduct shall be requited.” He goes on to spell out what precisely this involves: “the same cup that you drank from on My Holy Mount shall all nations drink evermore; drink till their speech grows thick and they become as though they had never been.” I have provided you with proof based both on logic and on verses from Scripture that it is impossible to translate the line עין תחת עין, as meaning “an eye for an eye.”
(ד) והנה הכתוב הזכיר ז' דברים, עין, שן, יד, רגל, כויה, פצע, חבורה, שיש בכל אחד דבר שאינו בחבירו ואי אפשר שנלמוד האחד משאר, עין נברא עמו אבל שן לא נברא עמו ואינו מן המנין של רמ"ח אברים שיש באדם כי כל אבר ואבר מרמ"ח אברים יש לו בשר וגידין ועצמות ולפיכך לא היינו יכולים ללמוד שן מעין שאין השן מכלל האברים אלא שהוא מכלי הטחינה וכן בכולן.
(4) The verse mentions injury of seven different kinds: 1) eye; 2) tooth; 3) hand; 4) foot; 5) burn wounds; 6) פצע, an “injury.” 7) חבורה, “a bruise.” Each of this injuries contains at least one element not contained in all the other six, thus making it impossible to omit any of these seven examples. An eye is something we have from birth; teeth we are not borne with; their loss might be considered as less serious. Teeth are also not included in the 248 organs which make up man as a healthy specimen. All the 248 organs are covered with tissue and flesh whereas the teeth appear in our mouth completely exposed. The function of the teeth is not to help man survive as a viable human being, but they are merely a tool to break down the food we eat. Just as we could not have assumed that the legislation contained in our verse applies to teeth unless the Torah had made a point of writing it, so the loss of none of the seven examples cited by the Torah would have been presumed to be a cause for the freeing of a slave forthwith.
(א) כויה תחת כויה - אף על פי שאין בכלל אלו חסרון אבר, חייב דמי צער ובשת ורפוי.
(1) כויה תחת כויה; even though the examples mentioned here do not involve loss of an entire organ or limb, the principles applying to compensating the victim are based on the same considerations
(כח) וְכִֽי־יִגַּ֨ח שׁ֥וֹר אֶת־אִ֛ישׁ א֥וֹ אֶת־אִשָּׁ֖ה וָמֵ֑ת סָק֨וֹל יִסָּקֵ֜ל הַשּׁ֗וֹר וְלֹ֤א יֵאָכֵל֙ אֶת־בְּשָׂר֔וֹ וּבַ֥עַל הַשּׁ֖וֹר נָקִֽי׃ (כט) וְאִ֡ם שׁוֹר֩ נַגָּ֨ח ה֜וּא מִתְּמֹ֣ל שִׁלְשֹׁ֗ם וְהוּעַ֤ד בִּבְעָלָיו֙ וְלֹ֣א יִשְׁמְרֶ֔נּוּ וְהֵמִ֥ית אִ֖ישׁ א֣וֹ אִשָּׁ֑ה הַשּׁוֹר֙ יִסָּקֵ֔ל וְגַם־בְּעָלָ֖יו יוּמָֽת׃ (ל) אִם־כֹּ֖פֶר יוּשַׁ֣ת עָלָ֑יו וְנָתַן֙ פִּדְיֹ֣ן נַפְשׁ֔וֹ כְּכֹ֥ל אֲשֶׁר־יוּשַׁ֖ת עָלָֽיו׃ (לא) אוֹ־בֵ֥ן יִגָּ֖ח אוֹ־בַ֣ת יִגָּ֑ח כַּמִּשְׁפָּ֥ט הַזֶּ֖ה יֵעָ֥שֶׂה לּֽוֹ׃ (לב) אִם־עֶ֛בֶד יִגַּ֥ח הַשּׁ֖וֹר א֣וֹ אָמָ֑ה כֶּ֣סֶף ׀ שְׁלֹשִׁ֣ים שְׁקָלִ֗ים יִתֵּן֙ לַֽאדֹנָ֔יו וְהַשּׁ֖וֹר יִסָּקֵֽל׃ (ס) (לג) וְכִֽי־יִפְתַּ֨ח אִ֜ישׁ בּ֗וֹר א֠וֹ כִּֽי־יִכְרֶ֥ה אִ֛ישׁ בֹּ֖ר וְלֹ֣א יְכַסֶּ֑נּוּ וְנָֽפַל־שָׁ֥מָּה שּׁ֖וֹר א֥וֹ חֲמֽוֹר׃ (לד) בַּ֤עַל הַבּוֹר֙ יְשַׁלֵּ֔ם כֶּ֖סֶף יָשִׁ֣יב לִבְעָלָ֑יו וְהַמֵּ֖ת יִֽהְיֶה־לּֽוֹ׃ (ס) (לה) וְכִֽי־יִגֹּ֧ף שֽׁוֹר־אִ֛ישׁ אֶת־שׁ֥וֹר רֵעֵ֖הוּ וָמֵ֑ת וּמָ֨כְר֜וּ אֶת־הַשּׁ֤וֹר הַחַי֙ וְחָצ֣וּ אֶת־כַּסְפּ֔וֹ וְגַ֥ם אֶת־הַמֵּ֖ת יֶֽחֱצֽוּן׃ (לו) א֣וֹ נוֹדַ֗ע כִּ֠י שׁ֣וֹר נַגָּ֥ח הוּא֙ מִתְּמ֣וֹל שִׁלְשֹׁ֔ם וְלֹ֥א יִשְׁמְרֶ֖נּוּ בְּעָלָ֑יו שַׁלֵּ֨ם יְשַׁלֵּ֥ם שׁוֹר֙ תַּ֣חַת הַשּׁ֔וֹר וְהַמֵּ֖ת יִֽהְיֶה־לּֽוֹ׃ (ס) (לז) כִּ֤י יִגְנֹֽב־אִישׁ֙ שׁ֣וֹר אוֹ־שֶׂ֔ה וּטְבָח֖וֹ א֣וֹ מְכָר֑וֹ חֲמִשָּׁ֣ה בָקָ֗ר יְשַׁלֵּם֙ תַּ֣חַת הַשּׁ֔וֹר וְאַרְבַּע־צֹ֖אן תַּ֥חַת הַשֶּֽׂה׃
(28) When an ox gores a man or a woman to death, the ox shall be stoned and its flesh shall not be eaten, but the owner of the ox is not to be punished. (29) If, however, that ox has been in the habit of goring, and its owner, though warned, has failed to guard it, and it kills a man or a woman—the ox shall be stoned and its owner, too, shall be put to death. (30) If ransom is laid upon him, he must pay whatever is laid upon him to redeem his life. (31) So, too, if it gores a minor, male or female, [the owner] shall be dealt with according to the same rule. (32) But if the ox gores a slave, male or female, he shall pay thirty shekels of silver to the master, and the ox shall be stoned. (33) When a man opens a pit, or digs a pit and does not cover it, and an ox or an ass falls into it, (34) the one responsible for the pit must make restitution; he shall pay the price to the owner, but shall keep the dead animal. (35) When a man’s ox injures his neighbor’s ox and it dies, they shall sell the live ox and divide its price; they shall also divide the dead animal. (36) If, however, it is known that the ox was in the habit of goring, and its owner has failed to guard it, he must restore ox for ox, but shall keep the dead animal. (37) When a man steals an ox or a sheep, and slaughters it or sells it, he shall pay five oxen for the ox, and four sheep for the sheep.—
(א) אִם־בַּמַּחְתֶּ֛רֶת יִמָּצֵ֥א הַגַּנָּ֖ב וְהֻכָּ֣ה וָמֵ֑ת אֵ֥ין ל֖וֹ דָּמִֽים׃ (ב) אִם־זָרְחָ֥ה הַשֶּׁ֛מֶשׁ עָלָ֖יו דָּמִ֣ים ל֑וֹ שַׁלֵּ֣ם יְשַׁלֵּ֔ם אִם־אֵ֣ין ל֔וֹ וְנִמְכַּ֖ר בִּגְנֵבָתֽוֹ׃ (ג) אִֽם־הִמָּצֵא֩ תִמָּצֵ֨א בְיָד֜וֹ הַגְּנֵבָ֗ה מִשּׁ֧וֹר עַד־חֲמ֛וֹר עַד־שֶׂ֖ה חַיִּ֑ים שְׁנַ֖יִם יְשַׁלֵּֽם׃ (ס) (ד) כִּ֤י יַבְעֶר־אִישׁ֙ שָׂדֶ֣ה אוֹ־כֶ֔רֶם וְשִׁלַּח֙ אֶת־בעירה [בְּעִיר֔וֹ] וּבִעֵ֖ר בִּשְׂדֵ֣ה אַחֵ֑ר מֵיטַ֥ב שָׂדֵ֛הוּ וּמֵיטַ֥ב כַּרְמ֖וֹ יְשַׁלֵּֽם׃ (ס) (ה) כִּֽי־תֵצֵ֨א אֵ֜שׁ וּמָצְאָ֤ה קֹצִים֙ וְנֶאֱכַ֣ל גָּדִ֔ישׁ א֥וֹ הַקָּמָ֖ה א֣וֹ הַשָּׂדֶ֑ה שַׁלֵּ֣ם יְשַׁלֵּ֔ם הַמַּבְעִ֖ר אֶת־הַבְּעֵרָֽה׃ (ס) (ו) כִּֽי־יִתֵּן֩ אִ֨ישׁ אֶל־רֵעֵ֜הוּ כֶּ֤סֶף אֽוֹ־כֵלִים֙ לִשְׁמֹ֔ר וְגֻנַּ֖ב מִבֵּ֣ית הָאִ֑ישׁ אִם־יִמָּצֵ֥א הַגַּנָּ֖ב יְשַׁלֵּ֥ם שְׁנָֽיִם׃ (ז) אִם־לֹ֤א יִמָּצֵא֙ הַגַּנָּ֔ב וְנִקְרַ֥ב בַּֽעַל־הַבַּ֖יִת אֶל־הָֽאֱלֹקִ֑ים אִם־לֹ֥א שָׁלַ֛ח יָד֖וֹ בִּמְלֶ֥אכֶת רֵעֵֽהוּ׃ (ח) עַֽל־כָּל־דְּבַר־פֶּ֡שַׁע עַל־שׁ֡וֹר עַל־חֲ֠מוֹר עַל־שֶׂ֨ה עַל־שַׂלְמָ֜ה עַל־כָּל־אֲבֵדָ֗ה אֲשֶׁ֤ר יֹאמַר֙ כִּי־ה֣וּא זֶ֔ה עַ֚ד הָֽאֱלֹקִ֔ים יָבֹ֖א דְּבַר־שְׁנֵיהֶ֑ם אֲשֶׁ֤ר יַרְשִׁיעֻן֙ אֱלֹקִ֔ים יְשַׁלֵּ֥ם שְׁנַ֖יִם לְרֵעֵֽהוּ׃ (ס) (ט) כִּֽי־יִתֵּן֩ אִ֨ישׁ אֶל־רֵעֵ֜הוּ חֲמ֨וֹר אוֹ־שׁ֥וֹר אוֹ־שֶׂ֛ה וְכָל־בְּהֵמָ֖ה לִשְׁמֹ֑ר וּמֵ֛ת אוֹ־נִשְׁבַּ֥ר אוֹ־נִשְׁבָּ֖ה אֵ֥ין רֹאֶֽה׃ (י) שְׁבֻעַ֣ת ה' תִּהְיֶה֙ בֵּ֣ין שְׁנֵיהֶ֔ם אִם־לֹ֥א שָׁלַ֛ח יָד֖וֹ בִּמְלֶ֣אכֶת רֵעֵ֑הוּ וְלָקַ֥ח בְּעָלָ֖יו וְלֹ֥א יְשַׁלֵּֽם׃ (יא) וְאִם־גָּנֹ֥ב יִגָּנֵ֖ב מֵעִמּ֑וֹ יְשַׁלֵּ֖ם לִבְעָלָֽיו׃ (יב) אִם־טָרֹ֥ף יִטָּרֵ֖ף יְבִאֵ֣הוּ עֵ֑ד הַטְּרֵפָ֖ה לֹ֥א יְשַׁלֵּֽם׃ (פ)
(1) If the thief is seized while tunneling, and he is beaten to death, there is no bloodguilt in his case. (2) If the sun has risen on him, there is bloodguilt in that case.—He must make restitution; if he lacks the means, he shall be sold for his theft. (3) But if what he stole—whether ox or ass or sheep—is found alive in his possession, he shall pay double. (4) When a man lets his livestock loose to graze in another’s land, and so allows a field or a vineyard to be grazed bare, he must make restitution for the impairment of that field or vineyard. (5) When a fire is started and spreads to thorns, so that stacked, standing, or growing grain is consumed, he who started the fire must make restitution. (6) When a man gives money or goods to another for safekeeping, and they are stolen from the man’s house—if the thief is caught, he shall pay double; (7) if the thief is not caught, the owner of the house shall depose before God that he has not laid hands on the other’s property. (8) In all charges of misappropriation—pertaining to an ox, an ass, a sheep, a garment, or any other loss, whereof one party alleges, “This is it”—the case of both parties shall come before God: he whom God declares guilty shall pay double to the other. (9) When a man gives to another an ass, an ox, a sheep or any other animal to guard, and it dies or is injured or is carried off, with no witness about, (10) an oath before the LORD shall decide between the two of them that the one has not laid hands on the property of the other; the owner must acquiesce, and no restitution shall be made. (11) But if [the animal] was stolen from him, he shall make restitution to its owner. (12) If it was torn by beasts, he shall bring it as evidence; he need not replace what has been torn by beasts.
(א) אם זרחה השמש עליו. אֵין זֶה אֶלָּא כְמִין מָשָׁל: אִם בָּרוּר לְךָ הַדָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ שָׁלוֹם עִמְּךָ, כַּשֶּׁמֶשׁ הַזֶּה שֶׁהוּא שָׁלוֹם בָּעוֹלָם, כָּךְ פָּשׁוּט לְךָ שֶׁאֵינוֹ בָא לַהֲרֹג אֲפִלּוּ יַעֲמֹד בַּעַל הַמָּמוֹן כְּנֶגְדּוֹ, כְּגוֹן אָב הַחוֹתֵר לִגְנֹב מָמוֹן הַבֵּן, בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁרַחֲמֵי הָאָב עַל הַבֵּן וְאֵינוֹ בָא עַל עִסְקֵי נְפָשׁוֹת (שם):
(1) אם זרחה השמש עליו IF THE SUN SHONE UPON HIM — This is only a metaphorical expression signifying: if the fact is clear to you that he is peaceably disposed towards you. The simile is: just as the sun brings peace (happiness) to the world so if it is evident to you that he did not come with the intention of killing, even if the owner of the property would resist him (Sanhedrin 72a), as, for instance, when a father breaks in to steal the money of his son, for it is certain that the father cherishes feelings of pity for his child and the matter of taking human life is not in his thoughts at all, — then
(א) אם ברור לך הדבר כו'. כלומר אם הסברא מוכחת שיש לו שלום וכו' כגון האב החותר לגנוב מן הבן וכו' הא אם הסברא מוכחת שבא להרוג שהרי יודע שאין אדם מעמיד עצמו על ממונו שנוטלים בפניו ושותק השכם והרגו. רא"ם: (ב) שיש לו שלום עמך כשמש כו'. (הרא"ם) יש לתמוה על רש"י האיך הביא המכילתא והניח הברייתא דפרק בן סורר ומורה דפירשו אם ברור לך הדבר כשמש שיש לו שלום עמך וכו' דמשמע דאם זרחה לא קאי אלא על ברור דברים ולא על שלום וכו'. ונראה דק"ל למה לא נאמר אם יאיר עליו כיום או היום כמו מכרה כיום שהוא מורה על ברור דברים ל"פ מה שמש שלום בעולם וא"ל מ"מ ל"ל להביא המכילתא י"ל כיון שהמכילתא קרובה לפשוטו וגם יתורץ קושיות הקרא:
(1) If the issue is clear to you. . . That is, if reason dictates that his intentions are peaceful. For example, a father who is breaking in to steal money from the son. But if reason dictates that he has intention of killing, since he knows that a man does not remain silent while seeing his property being taken — then you should kill him first. (Re’m) (2) That his intentions. . . are peaceful — just as this sun. . . The Re’m was puzzled why Rashi cited the Mechilta, [which says that the sun is an allegory for peace,] and ignored the Baraisa in Sanhedrin 72a, which says: “If it as clear to you as the sun that his intentions towards you are peaceful. . .” For according to the Baraisa, the sun is an allegory for the issue being clear, not for peace. [To resolve this,] it seems that Rashi was answering a question: [If the simple meaning of the verse is as the Baraisa said,] why does the verse not say, “If it shines on him like day,” or simply “day,” as in, “Sell, as the day, your birthright to me” (Bereishis 25:31)? This would have meant that the issue is clear. Therefore Rashi explains [the verse according to the Mechilta:] “Just as the sun represents peace. . .” Yet you might object: Why does Rashi cite the Mechilta, [which does not follow the plain meaning of the verse either]? The answer is: The Mechilta is close to the verse’s plain meaning, and also resolves various difficulties in the verses.
(א) אם זרחה השמש עליו שיצא מן המחתרת לאויר העולם למקום זריחת השמש.
(1) אם זרחה השמש עליו, “if the thief had remained in full view of his potential victim;” (and the owner had killed him)
(א) אם זרחה השמש עליו. כלומר שנכנס שם ביום או שנתעכב שם עד הבקר שהתפשטה השמש בעולם.
(1) אם זרחה השמש עליו, “if the sun shone upon him, etc.” If the thief entered in broad daylight or remained in the house of the victim till morning,
(יג) וְכִֽי־יִשְׁאַ֥ל אִ֛ישׁ מֵעִ֥ם רֵעֵ֖הוּ וְנִשְׁבַּ֣ר אוֹ־מֵ֑ת בְּעָלָ֥יו אֵין־עִמּ֖וֹ שַׁלֵּ֥ם יְשַׁלֵּֽם׃ (יד) אִם־בְּעָלָ֥יו עִמּ֖וֹ לֹ֣א יְשַׁלֵּ֑ם אִם־שָׂכִ֣יר ה֔וּא בָּ֖א בִּשְׂכָרֽוֹ׃ (ס) (טו) וְכִֽי־יְפַתֶּ֣ה אִ֗ישׁ בְּתוּלָ֛ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר לֹא־אֹרָ֖שָׂה וְשָׁכַ֣ב עִמָּ֑הּ מָהֹ֛ר יִמְהָרֶ֥נָּה לּ֖וֹ לְאִשָּֽׁה׃ (טז) אִם־מָאֵ֧ן יְמָאֵ֛ן אָבִ֖יהָ לְתִתָּ֣הּ ל֑וֹ כֶּ֣סֶף יִשְׁקֹ֔ל כְּמֹ֖הַר הַבְּתוּלֹֽת׃ (ס) (יז) מְכַשֵּׁפָ֖ה לֹ֥א תְחַיֶּֽה׃ (ס) (יח) כָּל־שֹׁכֵ֥ב עִם־בְּהֵמָ֖ה מ֥וֹת יוּמָֽת׃ (ס) (יט) זֹבֵ֥חַ לָאֱלֹקִ֖ים יָֽחֳרָ֑ם בִּלְתִּ֥י לַה' לְבַדּֽוֹ׃ (כ) וְגֵ֥ר לֹא־תוֹנֶ֖ה וְלֹ֣א תִלְחָצֶ֑נּוּ כִּֽי־גֵרִ֥ים הֱיִיתֶ֖ם בְּאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם׃ (כא) כָּל־אַלְמָנָ֥ה וְיָת֖וֹם לֹ֥א תְעַנּֽוּן׃ (כב) אִם־עַנֵּ֥ה תְעַנֶּ֖ה אֹת֑וֹ כִּ֣י אִם־צָעֹ֤ק יִצְעַק֙ אֵלַ֔י שָׁמֹ֥עַ אֶשְׁמַ֖ע צַעֲקָתֽוֹ׃ (כג) וְחָרָ֣ה אַפִּ֔י וְהָרַגְתִּ֥י אֶתְכֶ֖ם בֶּחָ֑רֶב וְהָי֤וּ נְשֵׁיכֶם֙ אַלְמָנ֔וֹת וּבְנֵיכֶ֖ם יְתֹמִֽים׃ (פ)
(13) When a man borrows [an animal] from another and it dies or is injured, its owner not being with it, he must make restitution. (14) If its owner was with it, no restitution need be made; but if it was hired, he is entitled to the hire. (15) If a man seduces a virgin for whom the bride-price has not been paid, and lies with her, he must make her his wife by payment of a bride-price. (16) If her father refuses to give her to him, he must still weigh out silver in accordance with the bride-price for virgins. (17) You shall not tolerate a sorceress. (18) Whoever lies with a beast shall be put to death. (19) Whoever sacrifices to a god other than the LORD alone shall be proscribed. (20) You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. (21) You shall not ill-treat any widow or orphan. (22) If you do mistreat them, I will heed their outcry as soon as they cry out to Me, (23) and My anger shall blaze forth and I will put you to the sword, and your own wives shall become widows and your children orphans.
(א) וכי יפתה. מְדַבֵּר עַל לִבָּהּ עַד שֶׁשּׁוֹמַעַת לוֹ, וְכֵן תַּרְגּוּמוֹ וַאֲרֵי יְשַׁדֵּל, שִׁדּוּל בִּלְשׁוֹן אֲרַמִּי כְּפִתּוּי בִּלְשׁוֹן עִבְרִי:
(1) וכי יפתה AND IF A MAN ENTICE [A VIRGIN] — i. e. if he speaks kindly to her until she submits to him. Thus does also the Targum take it: ארי ישדל “if a man persuades”, the root שדל (the Pael conjugation) in Aramaic being the equivalent of פִּתָּה in Hebrew.
(א) וכי יפתה איש לאחר שהשלים לדבר על גנבת ממון התחיל לדבר על גנבת הלב הוא המפתה.
(1) .כי יפתה איש, “if a man seduces, etc.” having concluded dealing with the subject of stealing animals or chattel, the Torah turns next to the subject of “stealing someone’s heart;” such a thief is called: .מפתה
(ב) אשר לא ארשה הא אם אורסה חייב סקילה.
(2) אשר לא אורשה, “who had not been betrothed.” If the girl had been betrothed the penalty would be death by stoning.
(ב) מהר ימהרנה. יִפְסֹק לָהּ מֹהַר כְּמִשְׁפַּט אִישׁ לְאִשְׁתּוֹ – שֶׁכּוֹתֵב לָהּ כְּתֻבָּה וְיִשָּׂאֶנָּה (מכילתא):
(2) מהר ימהרנה HE SHALL SURELY GIVE HER THE MARRIAGE PRICE — He shall assign her a marriage portion as is the practice of a man to do to his wife, i. e. he shall write her a Ketuba (marriage contract providing for a marriage portion) and shall marry her (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:15:3).
(א) יפסוק לה מוהר. פי' דאם הוא לשון מהירות היה לו לינקד בפת"ח תחת המ"ם שהרי המהירות לא בא בכל המקרא אלא מבנין פועל הדגש:
(ב) כמשפט איש לאשתו כו'. ולא שיתננה לה מעכשיו בדרך קנס דא"כ מאי אם מאן ימאן וגומר הא כבר נתן לה הקנס:
(1) He must set aside a dowry for her. Rashi explains [as he does] because if מהר ימהרנה denoted מְהִירוּת (speed) rather than מוֹהַר (dowry), then there should be a patach under the mem [ מַהֵר יְמַהֲרֶנָּה ]. Because in all of Scripture, מְהִירוּת is written in the verbal form that has a dagesh [i.e., in the pi’el form].
(2) As is the law regarding a man and his wife. [Rashi is explaining that the dowry comes only with their marriage,] rather than him giving it to her immediately as a fine. For otherwise, why does it say [in the next verse], “If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he must give the weight of silver. . .”? But he already gave her the fine!
(ג) מהר ימהרנה לו בעל כרחו כדי שלא יכלימנה איש אחר אם יקחנה ויזכור לה גנותה והיא היתה נערה ולא ידעה להשמר מפתוי אלא שיכול להוציאה בגט מאחר שנתרצית לו.
(3) מהור ימהרנו לו, “he must make her his wife by paying the accepted price for brides. The reason for this is in order to restore her dignity in the eyes of her peers, so that she will not be married by another man at bargain basement prices reducing her status permanently, and being permanently reminded of her inferiority. Since she had not reached the age of 12 and a half, she had been too young to realise the consequences of being seduced. After having gone through the formalities, her husband can divorce her, seeing he had not raped her but she had consented.
(ב) מהר ימהרנה - כמוהר הבתולות. חמשים כסף באונס את הבתולה ונתן לאבי הנערה חמשים כסף. והוא הדין למפתה.
(2) מהר ימהרנה כמהר הבתולות, 50 shekel, just like someone raping a virgin. The penalty money is to be given to the victim’s father as spelled out in Deuteronomy 22,29. Seduction results in the same compensation as rape.
(א) מהר ימהרנו לו לאשה. פי' הרמב"ן ישלח לה סבלונות כלי כסף וכלי זהב ובגדים לצרכי החופה והנישואין והוא מגזרת מהרה חושה לפי שהוא דבר הראשון הנמהר בנישואין כי החתן ממהר ומקדים לשלוח לפניו המנחה ההוא ואחרי כן עושה חופה. ואמר בלשון הזה ולא אמר שיקחנה לו לאשה כי אין מצוה עליו שישאנה אלא אם ירצה ואם לא ירצה לישאנה ישלח מוהר כי פסלה בעיני הבחורים ויצטרך אביה להרבות לה מתן והם לא יתנו לה לכך ראוי שיתן לה הוא. ואמרו רבותינו שמוהר המפתה קצוב חמשים כסף כמו האונס אין ביניהם אלא שהאונס לא יוכל לשלח' כל ימיו ומפתה תלוי גם בו אם ירצא לישא אותה והטעם לפי שדרך הבחורים לפתות בנות גדולים על כן לא יהא חוטא נשכר שישאנה בעל כרחה ומ"מ גם היא חטאת שנתפתית לו לכן לא החמירה עליו שישאנה בעל כרחו ודי לו בקנס הלכך כל אחד מהם מעכב אבל האונס דרך בני הגדולים לאנוס בנות הקטנים הלכך קנסו הכתוב להיות לו לאשה בעל כרחו אם תרצה ומ"מ היא ואביה יכולין לעכב שאינו נכון שישאנה בעל כורחם ויעשה עמם שתים רעות וגם לפעמים שתהי' נכבד' ממנו על כן משפט הישר שיהיו הנישואין בידם ולא בידו שלא יהיו בנות ישראל הפקר לבעלי זרוע. ודין שניהם אינו אלא בנערה ולא בבוגרות כדכתיב בהדיא באונס נערה והכא לא הוצרך נערה למעט בוגרות דפשיט' שהוא פטור שהרי אין קנסה לאביה אלא לעצמה והרי מדעתה עשה אבל באונס הוצרך למעט בוגרות שלא תאמר ישלם לה הקנס כיון שאנסה בעל כרחה אלא שגזירת הכתוב היא שפטור והטעם כי בעמדה על דעתה תשמור עצמה מן אונס:
(1) מהר ימהרנו לו לאשה, “he shall make all the preparations required to marry her.” Nachmanides understands this as the seducer (groom) sending the girl the customary gifts סבלונות, a groom sends prior to the wedding. These are expensive gifts, not boxes of chocolate or a bunch of flowers. They are items that the bride needs as part of her outfits to prepare her for a dignified wedding ceremony. The wedding canopy would usually be erected after the bride had received these gifts from her husband to be. The reason why the Torah phrased this procedure in the way it did, instead of writing: “he must marry her forthwith,” is because it is not the seducer’s duty to marry her unless she has indicated her willingness to become his wife. If she does not agree to marry her seducer, the latter must still send her these gifts, as by seducing her he has greatly diminished the chances that another young man would want to marry this girl whose virginity has been jeopardized. Such a girl‘s father would have to tempt prospective suitors with a much larger dowry in order to make them consent to marry his daughter.
Our sages say that the value of the mohar described in our verse is 50 shekel (Ketuvot 38), similar to the amount payable by a rapist to the father of the girl whom he had raped. The difference in law between the rapist and the seducer is merely that the former cannot ever divorce his wife (whom he had raped before she became his wife) against her will The seducer has a choice both in marrying his “victim” and eventually divorcing her if he so desires. The reason suggested for this rule is that it is not uncommon for young men to seduce girls who are of marriageable age. It would not be appropriate that the sinner should benefit by his deed in forcing marriage of his “victim” against her will. We must not forget that the girl who allowed herself to be seduced had been guilty of frivolous conduct also. This is why the Torah did not apply the same harsh rules to him that it applied to the rapist who forced himself on his victim. It suffices that he is made to pay a hefty financial fine. Moreover, rapists, as a rule, force their attentions on girls who are minors, and it would not be fair to force such a victim to be married to her violator against her will. If we were to do this she would become a victim of the same person a second time. Both she and her father can object to the rapist marrying her, whereas the rapist himself has no choice in the matter. In both situations the Torah limits these rules to when the girl in question is not yet older than 12 and a half years. In the verses dealing with rape this is spelled out in detail, i.e. הנערה (Deut. 22,28) Fully adult girls, (12 and a half+ receive the compensation themselves, not their father). In our verse here the Torah does not need to write the word נערה to indicate that this is the oldest girl to whom this legislation applies, seeing that if she were older the father would not be in the picture as the recipient of the fine stipulated by the Torah. She would not herself qualify as a potential recipient of a fine, seeing no crime had been committed against her interests. All she had had to do was to decline the invitation to engage in intimacies with the man in question.
(א) מכשפה לא תחיה סמכה אכי יפתה לפי שהמתאוים מחשבתם הרעה יבקשו דרך כשפים למלאת תאותם.
(1) מכשפה לא תחיה, “You must not allow asorceress to remain alive.” The reason why this apparently unrelated subject follows on the heels of how to deal with seducers is that people who seek ways and means to gratify their illegal sexual urges, turn to sorceresses to help them do so.
(א) מכשפה לא תחיה. ענין הכשוף הוא חבור דברים חלוקים זה מזה וכאשר יחבר אותם הדברים למטה זה עם זה כן יתחברו ויתערבו הכחות אשר למעלה זה עם זה ותצא מביניהם פעולה נפלאה נכרית, ואיסור כלאים נוטה לזה קצת כי הוא מערבב הכחות למעלה אשר הפרוד והרחוק ראוי בהם והחבור בהם מזיק מאד.
(ב) והנה חרטומי מצרים עיקר חכמתם היה ענין הכשוף והיו עושים בהם דברים נפלאים בדרך טבע, ודרשו רז"ל למה נקרא שמן כשפין שמכחישים פמליא של מעלה, והכחשת הפמליא הוא כשאדם עושה למטה הרכבת דברים שהם הפך הכחות הפשוטים הנגזרים בתנועת הגלגלים ובגזרת עירין שהם נפש להם והם הנקראים פמליא של מעלה, וראוי לאדם שיניח העולם שיתנהג כמנהגו וכפי טבעו הפשוט שהוא רצון בוראו יתברך שבראו כך ואם תתעסק בכשפים יש בזה צד הכחשה וכן דעת הרמב"ן.
(ג) אבל דעת רבינו חננאל ז"ל בפירושו במסכת סנהדרין מכחישין נראין כאלו מכחישין ואמר כי אין לכשפים פעולה כ"א מה שיגזור הש"י וכענין שאמר ר' חנינא לאותה אשה אין עוד מלבדו כתיב ואע"ג דמשני התם שאני ר' חנינא דנפיש זכותיה שנויא הוא ולא סמכינן עליה ואדרבי חנינא אתי תברן.
(ד) ואם תשאל כיון שאין לכשפים פעולה אלא במקום שהקב"ה גוזר למה אסרתה תורה ולמה חייבה מיתה למכשף, והטעם מפני שעבר על גזרתו של הקב"ה לעשות מה שמנע ממנו, השתא מה מי שעבר על גזרת מלך בשר ודם חייב מיתה על גזרתו של מלך מלכי המלכים הקב"ה עאכ"ו, ע"כ דבריו ז"ל. ומפני שישראל היו מורגלים בחכמה הזאת כי הם היוצאים ממצרים עתה מחדש וקרוב הדבר מאד שיטעו בני אדם אחריה על כן הוצרך הכתוב למנוע מהם לאסור החכמה הזאת, וכדי להוסיף חומרא בדבר לא אמר הכתוב מכשפה מות תמות אלא לא תחיה, כי רצה הכתוב להחמיר הענין בלאו שלא להחיותה כשם שהחמיר בשבעת עממין ואמר (דברים כ׳:ט״ז) לא תחיה כל נשמה. והזכיר מכשפה לא תחיה ולא מכשף מפני שהכשפים מצויים בנשים יותר ואין מעשה האוב נעשה כי אם באשה, ולכך אמר הכתוב (ויקרא כ׳:כ״ז) ואיש או אשה כי יהיה בהם אוב או ידעוני, וכבר הזכירו בספרי הכשפים כי ענין האוב אשה עומדת בקבר המת על מראשותיו והאיש מרגלותיו ונער באמצע והקשקוש בידו מצלצל ומקשקש בו, והנה זה הורגל בין האומות באותם הזמנים במאד מאד, ממנו נעתק במקומות שלהם ואין זה לאומה אחרת יצא להם מן השורש הזה שהוא שורש פורה ראש ולענה.
(1) מכשפה לא תחיה, “You must not let a sorceress live.” The whole subject of sorcerers and their activities centers around the linking of phenomena which ought to be separate and distinct from one another. Sorcerers preoccupy themselves with establishing a link between phenomena reserved for our terrestrial world and phenomena from a higher world. When such phenomena are linked (illegally) the result represents a challenge and danger to the continued functioning of G’d’s universe. (2) The חרטומים of Egypt, the Egyptian sorcerers, engaged in such activities and their principal knowledge consisted of producing miraculous phenomena based on their intricate knowledge of the laws of nature.
When the Torah forbade the joining of linen and wool and the wearing of such products by Jews (except the fringes with the blue wool thread in a four-cornered garment) this is a small hint that there are elements which Torah law wants to keep apart (compare Nachmanides on Leviticus 19,19). The Talmud Sanhedrin 67 explains that the reason these people are מכשפים and the products of their activities are called כשפים is that they deny the פמליא של מעלה, the existence and effectiveness of celestial forces. A denial of such forces consists of combining elements in our terrestrial world which were clearly meant not to be joined together. The orbit of the various celestial spheres and their failure to collide are proof of things existing in the universe which are meant to remain apart. It is appropriate for human beings to allow the world to function as it was meant to function as this clearly reflects the will of the Creator. Interference with G’d’s blueprint for the functioning of the universe is an act of heresy and insurrection (compare Nachmanides on Deut. 18,9). (3) Rabbeinu Chananel in his commentary on that folio in Sanhedrin explains the matter of מכשפים differently. He claims that such sorcerers cannot perform any supernatural feats unless G’d specifically wants them to succeed. He bases his view on a reply given by Rabbi Chaninah to a woman who was trying to extract soil from beneath the feet of that Rabbi in order to perform acts of sorcery. Rabbi Chaninah told her that in the event she would enjoy help from G’d in her efforts and succeed he would still not be concerned as there is no one beside the Lord (Deut. 4 4,35). Rabbi Yochanan questioned this saying that the reason these sorcerers are called מכשפים is because they deny the power of celestial forces. In that case, Rabbi Chaninah did have something to be concerned about! The answer given by the Talmud is that Rabbi Chaninah had so many merits that he personally did not have what to worry about. Concerning the above, Rabbeinu Chananel writes that although the Talmud gave such an answer it is not to be taken seriously. (4) If you were to ask that assuming, as Rabbi Chaninah said, these activities of the sorcerers can succeed only if especially approved by G’d, why does the Torah bother to outlaw these activities and to make their practitioners subject to the death penalty? The answer is simply that by doing so, or even attempting to do what they have in mind they commit an act of rebellion against G’d and the rules He has established for His universe. Consider simply this: if an act of rebellion against a mortal king of flesh and blood is punishable by death, surely an act of rebellion against the King of Kings must carry the death penalty! Thus far Rabbeinu Chananel.
Seeing that during their long stay in Egypt the Israelites had been constantly exposed to acts of sorcery and it was likely that some of them at least would have a tendency to credit these sorcerers with knowledge of matters of substance, the Torah had to come out explicitly forbidding such practices and legislating the death penalty for people ignoring the Torah’s prohibition. In order to show us how seriously the Torah views these activities the Torah was not satisfied with the usual command to execute such practitioners of sorcery but it wrote: “you must not allow a sorceress to remain alive!” In other words, inactivity, not bringing such a sorceress to justice, is an additional sin committed by anyone who is aware of such people practicing their nefarious art. The only other place where the Torah uses such strong language is in connection with the seven nations occupying what was to be the land of Israel. There too the Torah writes: לא תחיה כל נשמה, “you must not allow a single soul to remain alive” (Deut. 20,16).
The reason the Torah writes not to let a sorceress live instead of writing “do not let a sorcerer live,” is that most of the people practicing this art are women. Certain activities such as those attributed to אוב are carried out exclusively by women. This is what the Torah writes (Leviticus 20,27) “and any man or woman in whom there shall be the sorcery of Ov or of Yidoni shall be put to death, etc.” [Apparently a man cannot perform these tricks unless he is assisted by a woman. Ed.] According to information available to us from books dealing with such practices a woman is required to stand over (in) the grave of the dead person above his head whereas her male partner takes up his position at the feet of the deceased. A youth must stand in the middle; the lad holds a kind of rattle with which he makes rattling sounds. In previous ages this appears to have been a widespread practice. The rattles (church bells) which are common in the Kingdom of Edom (Roman Empire) and which are pealed in their towers (cathedrals) appear to have their origin in that practice.
When the Torah forbade the joining of linen and wool and the wearing of such products by Jews (except the fringes with the blue wool thread in a four-cornered garment) this is a small hint that there are elements which Torah law wants to keep apart (compare Nachmanides on Leviticus 19,19). The Talmud Sanhedrin 67 explains that the reason these people are מכשפים and the products of their activities are called כשפים is that they deny the פמליא של מעלה, the existence and effectiveness of celestial forces. A denial of such forces consists of combining elements in our terrestrial world which were clearly meant not to be joined together. The orbit of the various celestial spheres and their failure to collide are proof of things existing in the universe which are meant to remain apart. It is appropriate for human beings to allow the world to function as it was meant to function as this clearly reflects the will of the Creator. Interference with G’d’s blueprint for the functioning of the universe is an act of heresy and insurrection (compare Nachmanides on Deut. 18,9). (3) Rabbeinu Chananel in his commentary on that folio in Sanhedrin explains the matter of מכשפים differently. He claims that such sorcerers cannot perform any supernatural feats unless G’d specifically wants them to succeed. He bases his view on a reply given by Rabbi Chaninah to a woman who was trying to extract soil from beneath the feet of that Rabbi in order to perform acts of sorcery. Rabbi Chaninah told her that in the event she would enjoy help from G’d in her efforts and succeed he would still not be concerned as there is no one beside the Lord (Deut. 4 4,35). Rabbi Yochanan questioned this saying that the reason these sorcerers are called מכשפים is because they deny the power of celestial forces. In that case, Rabbi Chaninah did have something to be concerned about! The answer given by the Talmud is that Rabbi Chaninah had so many merits that he personally did not have what to worry about. Concerning the above, Rabbeinu Chananel writes that although the Talmud gave such an answer it is not to be taken seriously. (4) If you were to ask that assuming, as Rabbi Chaninah said, these activities of the sorcerers can succeed only if especially approved by G’d, why does the Torah bother to outlaw these activities and to make their practitioners subject to the death penalty? The answer is simply that by doing so, or even attempting to do what they have in mind they commit an act of rebellion against G’d and the rules He has established for His universe. Consider simply this: if an act of rebellion against a mortal king of flesh and blood is punishable by death, surely an act of rebellion against the King of Kings must carry the death penalty! Thus far Rabbeinu Chananel.
Seeing that during their long stay in Egypt the Israelites had been constantly exposed to acts of sorcery and it was likely that some of them at least would have a tendency to credit these sorcerers with knowledge of matters of substance, the Torah had to come out explicitly forbidding such practices and legislating the death penalty for people ignoring the Torah’s prohibition. In order to show us how seriously the Torah views these activities the Torah was not satisfied with the usual command to execute such practitioners of sorcery but it wrote: “you must not allow a sorceress to remain alive!” In other words, inactivity, not bringing such a sorceress to justice, is an additional sin committed by anyone who is aware of such people practicing their nefarious art. The only other place where the Torah uses such strong language is in connection with the seven nations occupying what was to be the land of Israel. There too the Torah writes: לא תחיה כל נשמה, “you must not allow a single soul to remain alive” (Deut. 20,16).
The reason the Torah writes not to let a sorceress live instead of writing “do not let a sorcerer live,” is that most of the people practicing this art are women. Certain activities such as those attributed to אוב are carried out exclusively by women. This is what the Torah writes (Leviticus 20,27) “and any man or woman in whom there shall be the sorcery of Ov or of Yidoni shall be put to death, etc.” [Apparently a man cannot perform these tricks unless he is assisted by a woman. Ed.] According to information available to us from books dealing with such practices a woman is required to stand over (in) the grave of the dead person above his head whereas her male partner takes up his position at the feet of the deceased. A youth must stand in the middle; the lad holds a kind of rattle with which he makes rattling sounds. In previous ages this appears to have been a widespread practice. The rattles (church bells) which are common in the Kingdom of Edom (Roman Empire) and which are pealed in their towers (cathedrals) appear to have their origin in that practice.
(א) מכשפה לא תחיה - לפי שדרך נשים כשפניות לעשות מעשיהם בסתר במחבואות במערות, כמו שמצינו בשמונים נשים באשקלון שתלה שמעון בן שטח, לכן הוא אומר: לא תחיה - לא תתיאש מלחקור אחריהם. לא תניחם לחיות ע"י עצלות, אלא חקור אחריהם להורגן.
(1) מכשפה לא תחיה. Seeing that it is the custom of women engaging in witchcraft to practice their art in hidden places such as caves as we find in the case of the 80 witches executed by Shimon ben Shetach in Ashkelon on a single day. (Sanhedrin 45). The unusual formulation לא תחיה is meant to tell the authorities not to despair of bringing these culprits to justice in spite of their practicing their craft in hideouts. They should be hunted down until found.
(א) מכשפה לא תחיה. אֶלָּא תּוּמַת בְּבֵית דִּין; וְאֶחָד זְכָרִים וְאֶחָד נְקֵבוֹת, אֶלָּא שֶׁדִּבֵּר הַכָּתוּב בַּהוֹוֶה, שֶׁהַנָּשִׁים מְצוּיוֹת מְכַשֵּׁפוֹת (סנהדרין ס"ז):
(1) מכשפה לא תחיה THOU SHALT NOT SUFFER A WITCH TO LIVE — This does not mean that you may kill her but she shall be put to death by the court. Both men and women who practise witchcraft are included in this law but in using the feminine term מכשפה Scripture speaks of what is usually the case; for it is women who mostly practise witchcraft (Sanhedrin 67a).
(א) אלא תומת בב"ד. ולא כמו לא תחיה כל נשמה שכל אדם מותר להורגו אלא תומת בב"ד ונחלקו בו חכמי ישראל י"א בסייף כמו לא תחיה כל נשמה וי"א בסקילה כמו אם בהמה אם איש לא יחי': (ב) וא' זכרים וא' נקבות כו'. דהא גבי אוב וידעוני דמכשפים הם לא חילק בין איש לאשה דכתיב איש או אשה. רש"י סוף פרק ד' מיתות:
(1) But she must be put to death by the court. [Rashi is explaining that] it is not like, “You shall not allow any soul to live” (Devarim 20:16), where [it means that] any person may kill that individual. Rather, a witch is put to death by the court. And the Sages disagreed as to what method of death is the witch punished; some say it is death by the sword, as [described in the verse,] “You shall not allow any soul to live,” and some say it is death by stoning, as [described] in (Shemos 19:13), “Neither man or beast shall be allowed to live.” (2) Whether they are male or female. . . [Rashi knows this] because regarding אוב וידעוני , which are types of witches, the Torah made no difference between man and woman. For it is written, “Man or woman” (Vayikra 20:27). (Rashi, Sanhedrin 67a)
(א) מכשפה לא תחיה. בשאר חייבי מיתות כתיב מות יומת שאינו אלא מצות עשה להורגם ובכאן הזהירה תורה לא תחיה שהוא בלאו שלא נחיה אותה כלל והטעם שהיא טמאת השם רבת המהומה שהרשעים נפתים אחריה תמיד וכן החמיר במיתת המסית לומר לא תחמול ולא תכסה עליו וברוצח ולא תקחו כופר לנפש רוצח הכל לפי גודל החטא ולא פי' הכתוב מיתתה לומר שאם היא תעשה בכשפיה שלא יוכלו להמיתה ימיתוה בכל מיתה שיוכלו:
(1) מכשפה לא תחיה, “Do not allow a witch to remain alive. Contrary to other examples of people guilty of the death penalty, where the Torah describes their fate in positive terms, i.e. “you must execute them,” in this instance the Torah chooses a negative way of describing its objective writing “must not be allowed to live.” In practice this appears to mean that failure to execute someone guilty of a capital offence is accounted merely as the failure to observe a positive commandment, i.e. negligence by the court, whereas here failure to execute a witch is described as the violation of a negative commandment, i.e. an act of insubordination against G’d. The reason the practice of witchcraft is so abhorrent in the eyes of G’d, is that these people not only sin but cause all those whom they mislead into believing in their powers to abandon their faith in the true G’d; in other words they present themselves as G’d’s competition. Another such category of sinner is the מסית, the person who actively solicits others to abandon the faith of his fathers. There the Torah categorically demands that no possible ameliorating circumstances be allowed to be presented in defense of the accused. (compare Deut. 13,7-12) In our case, the wording of the Torah implies that all means of killing such a witch must be employed if it proves impossible to convict her by the normal legal processes and the stringent demands of testimony normally applied in prosecutions that can result in the death penalty
(כד) אִם־כֶּ֣סֶף ׀ תַּלְוֶ֣ה אֶת־עַמִּ֗י אֶת־הֶֽעָנִי֙ עִמָּ֔ךְ לֹא־תִהְיֶ֥ה ל֖וֹ כְּנֹשֶׁ֑ה לֹֽא־תְשִׂימ֥וּן עָלָ֖יו נֶֽשֶׁךְ׃ (כה) אִם־חָבֹ֥ל תַּחְבֹּ֖ל שַׂלְמַ֣ת רֵעֶ֑ךָ עַד־בֹּ֥א הַשֶּׁ֖מֶשׁ תְּשִׁיבֶ֥נּוּ לֽוֹ׃ (כו) כִּ֣י הִ֤וא כסותה [כְסוּתוֹ֙] לְבַדָּ֔הּ הִ֥וא שִׂמְלָת֖וֹ לְעֹר֑וֹ בַּמֶּ֣ה יִשְׁכָּ֔ב וְהָיָה֙ כִּֽי־יִצְעַ֣ק אֵלַ֔י וְשָׁמַעְתִּ֖י כִּֽי־חַנּ֥וּן אָֽנִי׃ (ס) (כז) אֱלֹקִ֖ים לֹ֣א תְקַלֵּ֑ל וְנָשִׂ֥יא בְעַמְּךָ֖ לֹ֥א תָאֹֽר׃ (כח) מְלֵאָתְךָ֥ וְדִמְעֲךָ֖ לֹ֣א תְאַחֵ֑ר בְּכ֥וֹר בָּנֶ֖יךָ תִּתֶּן־לִּֽי׃ (כט) כֵּֽן־תַּעֲשֶׂ֥ה לְשֹׁרְךָ֖ לְצֹאנֶ֑ךָ שִׁבְעַ֤ת יָמִים֙ יִהְיֶ֣ה עִם־אִמּ֔וֹ בַּיּ֥וֹם הַשְּׁמִינִ֖י תִּתְּנוֹ־לִֽי׃ (ל) וְאַנְשֵׁי־קֹ֖דֶשׁ תִּהְי֣וּן לִ֑י וּבָשָׂ֨ר בַּשָּׂדֶ֤ה טְרֵפָה֙ לֹ֣א תֹאכֵ֔לוּ לַכֶּ֖לֶב תַּשְׁלִכ֥וּן אֹתֽוֹ׃ (ס) (א) לֹ֥א תִשָּׂ֖א שֵׁ֣מַע שָׁ֑וְא אַל־תָּ֤שֶׁת יָֽדְךָ֙ עִם־רָשָׁ֔ע לִהְיֹ֖ת עֵ֥ד חָמָֽס׃ (ס) (ב) לֹֽא־תִהְיֶ֥ה אַחֲרֵֽי־רַבִּ֖ים לְרָעֹ֑ת וְלֹא־תַעֲנֶ֣ה עַל־רִ֗ב לִנְטֹ֛ת אַחֲרֵ֥י רַבִּ֖ים לְהַטֹּֽת׃ (ג) וְדָ֕ל לֹ֥א תֶהְדַּ֖ר בְּרִיבֽוֹ׃ (ס) (ד) כִּ֣י תִפְגַּ֞ע שׁ֧וֹר אֹֽיִבְךָ֛ א֥וֹ חֲמֹר֖וֹ תֹּעֶ֑ה הָשֵׁ֥ב תְּשִׁיבֶ֖נּוּ לֽוֹ׃ (ס) (ה) כִּֽי־תִרְאֶ֞ה חֲמ֣וֹר שֹׂנַאֲךָ֗ רֹבֵץ֙ תַּ֣חַת מַשָּׂא֔וֹ וְחָדַלְתָּ֖ מֵעֲזֹ֣ב ל֑וֹ עָזֹ֥ב תַּעֲזֹ֖ב עִמּֽוֹ׃ (ס) (ו) לֹ֥א תַטֶּ֛ה מִשְׁפַּ֥ט אֶבְיֹנְךָ֖ בְּרִיבֽוֹ׃ (ז) מִדְּבַר־שֶׁ֖קֶר תִּרְחָ֑ק וְנָקִ֤י וְצַדִּיק֙ אַֽל־תַּהֲרֹ֔ג כִּ֥י לֹא־אַצְדִּ֖יק רָשָֽׁע׃ (ח) וְשֹׁ֖חַד לֹ֣א תִקָּ֑ח כִּ֤י הַשֹּׁ֙חַד֙ יְעַוֵּ֣ר פִּקְחִ֔ים וִֽיסַלֵּ֖ף דִּבְרֵ֥י צַדִּיקִֽים׃ (ט) וְגֵ֖ר לֹ֣א תִלְחָ֑ץ וְאַתֶּ֗ם יְדַעְתֶּם֙ אֶת־נֶ֣פֶשׁ הַגֵּ֔ר כִּֽי־גֵרִ֥ים הֱיִיתֶ֖ם בְּאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם׃ (י) וְשֵׁ֥שׁ שָׁנִ֖ים תִּזְרַ֣ע אֶת־אַרְצֶ֑ךָ וְאָסַפְתָּ֖ אֶת־תְּבוּאָתָֽהּ׃ (יא) וְהַשְּׁבִיעִ֞ת תִּשְׁמְטֶ֣נָּה וּנְטַשְׁתָּ֗הּ וְאָֽכְלוּ֙ אֶבְיֹנֵ֣י עַמֶּ֔ךָ וְיִתְרָ֕ם תֹּאכַ֖ל חַיַּ֣ת הַשָּׂדֶ֑ה כֵּֽן־תַּעֲשֶׂ֥ה לְכַרְמְךָ֖ לְזֵיתֶֽךָ׃ (יב) שֵׁ֤שֶׁת יָמִים֙ תַּעֲשֶׂ֣ה מַעֲשֶׂ֔יךָ וּבַיּ֥וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֖י תִּשְׁבֹּ֑ת לְמַ֣עַן יָנ֗וּחַ שֽׁוֹרְךָ֙ וַחֲמֹרֶ֔ךָ וְיִנָּפֵ֥שׁ בֶּן־אֲמָתְךָ֖ וְהַגֵּֽר׃ (יג) וּבְכֹ֛ל אֲשֶׁר־אָמַ֥רְתִּי אֲלֵיכֶ֖ם תִּשָּׁמֵ֑רוּ וְשֵׁ֨ם אֱלֹקִ֤ים אֲחֵרִים֙ לֹ֣א תַזְכִּ֔ירוּ לֹ֥א יִשָּׁמַ֖ע עַל־פִּֽיךָ׃ (יד) שָׁלֹ֣שׁ רְגָלִ֔ים תָּחֹ֥ג לִ֖י בַּשָּׁנָֽה׃ (טו) אֶת־חַ֣ג הַמַּצּוֹת֮ תִּשְׁמֹר֒ שִׁבְעַ֣ת יָמִים֩ תֹּאכַ֨ל מַצּ֜וֹת כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֣ר צִוִּיתִ֗ךָ לְמוֹעֵד֙ חֹ֣דֶשׁ הָֽאָבִ֔יב כִּי־ב֖וֹ יָצָ֣אתָ מִמִּצְרָ֑יִם וְלֹא־יֵרָא֥וּ פָנַ֖י רֵיקָֽם׃ (טז) וְחַ֤ג הַקָּצִיר֙ בִּכּוּרֵ֣י מַעֲשֶׂ֔יךָ אֲשֶׁ֥ר תִּזְרַ֖ע בַּשָּׂדֶ֑ה וְחַ֤ג הָֽאָסִף֙ בְּצֵ֣את הַשָּׁנָ֔ה בְּאָסְפְּךָ֥ אֶֽת־מַעֲשֶׂ֖יךָ מִן־הַשָּׂדֶֽה׃ (יז) שָׁלֹ֥שׁ פְּעָמִ֖ים בַּשָּׁנָ֑ה יֵרָאֶה֙ כָּל־זְכ֣וּרְךָ֔ אֶל־פְּנֵ֖י הָאָדֹ֥ן ׀ ה'׃ (יח) לֹֽא־תִזְבַּ֥ח עַל־חָמֵ֖ץ דַּם־זִבְחִ֑י וְלֹֽא־יָלִ֥ין חֵֽלֶב־חַגִּ֖י עַד־בֹּֽקֶר׃ (יט) רֵאשִׁ֗ית בִּכּוּרֵי֙ אַדְמָ֣תְךָ֔ תָּבִ֕יא בֵּ֖ית ה' אֱלֹקֶ֑יךָ לֹֽא־תְבַשֵּׁ֥ל גְּדִ֖י בַּחֲלֵ֥ב אִמּֽוֹ׃ (ס) (כ) הִנֵּ֨ה אָנֹכִ֜י שֹׁלֵ֤חַ מַלְאָךְ֙ לְפָנֶ֔יךָ לִשְׁמָרְךָ֖ בַּדָּ֑רֶךְ וְלַהֲבִ֣יאֲךָ֔ אֶל־הַמָּק֖וֹם אֲשֶׁ֥ר הֲכִנֹֽתִי׃ (כא) הִשָּׁ֧מֶר מִפָּנָ֛יו וּשְׁמַ֥ע בְּקֹל֖וֹ אַל־תַּמֵּ֣ר בּ֑וֹ כִּ֣י לֹ֤א יִשָּׂא֙ לְפִשְׁעֲכֶ֔ם כִּ֥י שְׁמִ֖י בְּקִרְבּֽוֹ׃ (כב) כִּ֣י אִם־שָׁמֹ֤עַ תִּשְׁמַע֙ בְּקֹל֔וֹ וְעָשִׂ֕יתָ כֹּ֖ל אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֲדַבֵּ֑ר וְאָֽיַבְתִּי֙ אֶת־אֹ֣יְבֶ֔יךָ וְצַרְתִּ֖י אֶת־צֹרְרֶֽיךָ׃ (כג) כִּֽי־יֵלֵ֣ךְ מַלְאָכִי֮ לְפָנֶיךָ֒ וֶהֱבִֽיאֲךָ֗ אֶל־הָֽאֱמֹרִי֙ וְהַ֣חִתִּ֔י וְהַפְּרִזִּי֙ וְהַֽכְּנַעֲנִ֔י הַחִוִּ֖י וְהַיְבוּסִ֑י וְהִכְחַדְתִּֽיו׃ (כד) לֹֽא־תִשְׁתַּחֲוֶ֤ה לֵאלֹֽהֵיהֶם֙ וְלֹ֣א תָֽעָבְדֵ֔ם וְלֹ֥א תַעֲשֶׂ֖ה כְּמַֽעֲשֵׂיהֶ֑ם כִּ֤י הָרֵס֙ תְּהָ֣רְסֵ֔ם וְשַׁבֵּ֥ר תְּשַׁבֵּ֖ר מַצֵּבֹתֵיהֶֽם׃ (כה) וַעֲבַדְתֶּ֗ם אֵ֚ת ה' אֱלֹֽקֵיכֶ֔ם וּבֵרַ֥ךְ אֶֽת־לַחְמְךָ֖ וְאֶת־מֵימֶ֑יךָ וַהֲסִרֹתִ֥י מַחֲלָ֖ה מִקִּרְבֶּֽךָ׃ (כו) לֹ֥א תִהְיֶ֛ה מְשַׁכֵּלָ֥ה וַעֲקָרָ֖ה בְּאַרְצֶ֑ךָ אֶת־מִסְפַּ֥ר יָמֶ֖יךָ אֲמַלֵּֽא׃ (כז) אֶת־אֵֽימָתִי֙ אֲשַׁלַּ֣ח לְפָנֶ֔יךָ וְהַמֹּתִי֙ אֶת־כָּל־הָעָ֔ם אֲשֶׁ֥ר תָּבֹ֖א בָּהֶ֑ם וְנָתַתִּ֧י אֶת־כָּל־אֹיְבֶ֛יךָ אֵלֶ֖יךָ עֹֽרֶף׃ (כח) וְשָׁלַחְתִּ֥י אֶת־הַצִּרְעָ֖ה לְפָנֶ֑יךָ וְגֵרְשָׁ֗ה אֶת־הַחִוִּ֧י אֶת־הַֽכְּנַעֲנִ֛י וְאֶת־הַחִתִּ֖י מִלְּפָנֶֽיךָ׃ (כט) לֹ֧א אֲגָרְשֶׁ֛נּוּ מִפָּנֶ֖יךָ בְּשָׁנָ֣ה אֶחָ֑ת פֶּן־תִּהְיֶ֤ה הָאָ֙רֶץ֙ שְׁמָמָ֔ה וְרַבָּ֥ה עָלֶ֖יךָ חַיַּ֥ת הַשָּׂדֶֽה׃ (ל) מְעַ֥ט מְעַ֛ט אֲגָרְשֶׁ֖נּוּ מִפָּנֶ֑יךָ עַ֚ד אֲשֶׁ֣ר תִּפְרֶ֔ה וְנָחַלְתָּ֖ אֶת־הָאָֽרֶץ׃ (לא) וְשַׁתִּ֣י אֶת־גְּבֻלְךָ֗ מִיַּם־סוּף֙ וְעַד־יָ֣ם פְּלִשְׁתִּ֔ים וּמִמִּדְבָּ֖ר עַד־הַנָּהָ֑ר כִּ֣י ׀ אֶתֵּ֣ן בְּיֶדְכֶ֗ם אֵ֚ת יֹשְׁבֵ֣י הָאָ֔רֶץ וְגֵרַשְׁתָּ֖מוֹ מִפָּנֶֽיךָ׃ (לב) לֹֽא־תִכְרֹ֥ת לָהֶ֛ם וְלֵאלֹֽהֵיהֶ֖ם בְּרִֽית׃ (לג) לֹ֤א יֵשְׁבוּ֙ בְּאַרְצְךָ֔ פֶּן־יַחֲטִ֥יאוּ אֹתְךָ֖ לִ֑י כִּ֤י תַעֲבֹד֙ אֶת־אֱלֹ֣הֵיהֶ֔ם כִּֽי־יִהְיֶ֥ה לְךָ֖ לְמוֹקֵֽשׁ׃ (פ)
(24) If you lend money to My people, to the poor among you, do not act toward them as a creditor; exact no interest from them. (25) If you take your neighbor’s garment in pledge, you must return it to him before the sun sets; (26) it is his only clothing, the sole covering for his skin. In what else shall he sleep? Therefore, if he cries out to Me, I will pay heed, for I am compassionate. (27) You shall not revile God, nor put a curse upon a chieftain among your people. (28) You shall not put off the skimming of the first yield of your vats. You shall give Me the first-born among your sons. (29) You shall do the same with your cattle and your flocks: seven days it shall remain with its mother; on the eighth day you shall give it to Me. (30) You shall be holy people to Me: you must not eat flesh torn by beasts in the field; you shall cast it to the dogs. (1) You must not carry false rumors; you shall not join hands with the guilty to act as a malicious witness: (2) You shall neither side with the mighty to do wrong—you shall not give perverse testimony in a dispute so as to pervert it in favor of the mighty— (3) nor shall you show deference to a poor man in his dispute. (4) When you encounter your enemy’s ox or ass wandering, you must take it back to him. (5) When you see the ass of your enemy lying under its burden and would refrain from raising it, you must nevertheless raise it with him. (6) You shall not subvert the rights of your needy in their disputes. (7) Keep far from a false charge; do not bring death on those who are innocent and in the right, for I will not acquit the wrongdoer. (8) Do not take bribes, for bribes blind the clear-sighted and upset the pleas of those who are in the right. (9) You shall not oppress a stranger, for you know the feelings of the stranger, having yourselves been strangers in the land of Egypt. (10) Six years you shall sow your land and gather in its yield; (11) but in the seventh you shall let it rest and lie fallow. Let the needy among your people eat of it, and what they leave let the wild beasts eat. You shall do the same with your vineyards and your olive groves. (12) Six days you shall do your work, but on the seventh day you shall cease from labor, in order that your ox and your ass may rest, and that your bondman and the stranger may be refreshed. (13) Be on guard concerning all that I have told you. Make no mention of the names of other gods; they shall not be heard on your lips. (14) Three times a year you shall hold a festival for Me: (15) You shall observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread—eating unleavened bread for seven days as I have commanded you—at the set time in the month of Abib, for in it you went forth from Egypt; and none shall appear before Me empty-handed; (16) and the Feast of the Harvest, of the first fruits of your work, of what you sow in the field; and the Feast of Ingathering at the end of the year, when you gather in the results of your work from the field. (17) Three times a year all your males shall appear before the Sovereign, the LORD. (18) You shall not offer the blood of My sacrifice with anything leavened; and the fat of My festal offering shall not be left lying until morning. (19) The choice first fruits of your soil you shall bring to the house of the LORD your God. You shall not boil a kid in its mother’s milk. (20) I am sending an angel before you to guard you on the way and to bring you to the place that I have made ready. (21) Pay heed to him and obey him. Do not defy him, for he will not pardon your offenses, since My Name is in him; (22) but if you obey him and do all that I say, I will be an enemy to your enemies and a foe to your foes. (23) When My angel goes before you and brings you to the Amorites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Canaanites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, and I annihilate them, (24) you shall not bow down to their gods in worship or follow their practices, but shall tear them down and smash their pillars to bits. (25) You shall serve the LORD your God, and He will bless your bread and your water. And I will remove sickness from your midst. (26) No woman in your land shall miscarry or be barren. I will let you enjoy the full count of your days. (27) I will send forth My terror before you, and I will throw into panic all the people among whom you come, and I will make all your enemies turn tail before you. (28) I will send a plague ahead of you, and it shall drive out before you the Hivites, the Canaanites, and the Hittites. (29) I will not drive them out before you in a single year, lest the land become desolate and the wild beasts multiply to your hurt. (30) I will drive them out before you little by little, until you have increased and possess the land. (31) I will set your borders from the Sea of Reeds to the Sea of Philistia, and from the wilderness to the Euphrates; for I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hands, and you will drive them out before you. (32) You shall make no covenant with them and their gods. (33) They shall not remain in your land, lest they cause you to sin against Me; for you will serve their gods—and it will prove a snare to you.
(א) וגר לא תלחץ. בְּהַרְבֵּה מְקוֹמוֹת הִזְהִירָה תּוֹרָה עַל הַגֵּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁסּוּרוֹ רָע (בבא מציעא נ"ט):
(1) וגר לא תלחץ AND THOU SHALT NOT OPPRESS THE STRANGER — In numerous passages (36 in number) does the Torah offer a caution about the ill-treatment of the stranger, because his original character is bad (Bava Metzia 59b).
(א) מפני שסורו רע. י"מ כמו שאור דהיינו היצה"ר כלומר שיצה"ר קשה ורע ונח לפתות. וי"מ כיון שסר מן הדרך שוב אינו חוזר ע"י פיתוי דברים:
(1) Because סורו is bad. Some explain סורו as שְׂאוֹר (leaven), referring to his evil inclination — which is strong and bad, thus the stranger is easy to tempt [away from the path of the Torah]. Others explain [ סורו as סָר (stray). This means that] once he strays from the path [of the Torah], he cannot be [easily] persuaded to return.
(א) וגר לא תלחץ להטות דינו. ולמעלה הזהיר עליו אפילו שלא בשעת הדין סמכו כאן לפי שאין לו גואלים וקל ונוח הוא ללחצו ולעוותו בדין.
(1) וגר לא תלחץ, “and do not oppress the stranger.” Here too the Torah speaks about the treatment strangers may have to endure at court. In the earlier reference to the stranger, (22,2), the Torah referred to how we are not to treat the stranger in every day life, not when he is involved in litigation. It is repeated here as he is also one of the sections of society that is likely to be taken advantage of as they have no one to stand up on their behalf. It is easy to get away with taking advantage of them.
(א) תשבות אפילו מדברים שאינם מלאכה, אבל הם טורח כדרך חול, כאמרו וכבדתו מעשות דרכיך, ממצא חפצך ודבר דבר: (ב) למען ינוח שורך וחמורך כשתשבות גם מכמו אלה: (ג) וינפש בן אמתך והגר ומזה ימשך שינפש גם כן אמתך והגר, על הפך מה שקרה לך במצרים כשהיית שם עבד שלא היתה לך מנוחה, כאמרו תכבד העבודה על האנשים ובזה תזכור יציאת מצרים, כמו שאמר בדברות משנה תורה וזכרת כי עבד היית:
(1) תשבות, you must even refrain from doing things which are not prohibited under the heading of מלאכה, the kind of activity associated with construction of the Tabernacle, if these activities represent strenuous exertion customary on weekdays. We have been taught in Shabbat 113 that one of the ways of honouring the gift of the Sabbath is to refrain from engaging in activities that remind one of weekdays. The Talmud bases this on Isaiah 58,13 who defines proper Sabbath observance as distinct from merely formal Sabbath observance, with these words: “if you refrain from trampling the Sabbath, from pursuing your affairs on My holy day; if you call the Sabbath ‘delight,’ the Lord’s holy day ‘honored,’ and if you honour it and go not your ways nor look to your affairs nor strike bargains, then you can seek the favour of the Lord.” (2) למען ינוח שורך וחמורך, as a result of your Sabbath observance also your beasts of burden will enjoy rest. (3) וינפש בן אמתך והגר, as a corollary of your own Sabbath observance also your personnel will enjoy physical respite from their weekday chores. The Torah describes the contrast with your own experience while you were slaves in Egypt, when you did not enjoy rest on your master’s holidays. We have proof of this in Exodus 5,9 when Pharaoh ordered a further intensification of the hard labour performed by the Israelites as a response to their request for a brief vacation in order to attend to their religious obligations. This is part of the national aspect of the Sabbath, stressed in Deuteronomy 5,14, as opposed to the universal aspect of Sabbath observance stressed in Exodus 20,11.
(א) תעשה מעשיך. ולא כל מעשיך כמו שאמר בעשרת הדברות כי בששת ימים של שנת השמיטה שעליה חוזר צווי שבת כאן אינו יכול לעשות כל מלאכתו כי מלאכת אדמה אסורה לו כאמור בסמוך:
(1) תעשה מעשיך, "you shall do your work, etc." The Torah was careful not to write: "all your work" as in the Ten Commandments (concerning the Sabbath). The reason is that during the Shmittah year the farmer cannot do his regular work even on the six days of the week.
(א) הנה אנכי שלח מלאך. כָּאן נִתְבַּשְּׂרוּ שֶׁעֲתִידִין לַחֲטֹא, וּשְׁכִינָה אוֹמֶרֶת לָהֶם כִּי לֹא אֶעֱלֶה בְּקִרְבְּךָ (שמות ל"ג):
(ב) אשר הכנתי. אֲשֶׁר זִמַּנְתִּי לָתֵת לָכֶם, זֶהוּ פְּשׁוּטוֹ; וּמִדְרָשׁוֹ אל המקום אשר הכנתי כְּבָר מְקוֹמִי כְּנֶגְדּוֹ, וְזֶה אֶחָד מִן הַמִּקְרָאוֹת שֶׁאוֹמְרִים שֶׁבֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ שֶׁל מַעְלָה מְכֻוָּן כְּנֶגֶד שֶׁל מַטָּה (תנחומא):
(1) הנה אנכי שלח מלאך BEHOLD, I SEND A MESSENGER [BEFORE THEE] — Here they were informed that they would once sin and that the Divine Majesty would have to tell them, (Exodus 33:3) “for ‘I’ will not go up among thee” (cf. Exodus Rabbah 32:3).
(2) אשר הכנתי means, WHICH I HAVE PREPARED in order to give unto you. This is the literal meaning of the verse. The Midrash (taking the word as connected in meaning with the term כִּוֵן “to put a thing in a line with” or “to make it correspond with” another thing) explains אל המקום אשר הכנתי to signify “to the place opposite to which I have long since established the seat of my Glory” (“the place” therefore denotes the Temple; cf. Rashi on Exodus 15:17). This is, according to the Midrash, one of the verses which implicitly state that the Temple in Heaven is situated exactly opposite (מְכֻוָּן) that on the earth (Midrash Tanchuma, Mishpatim 18)
(א) כי לא אעלה בקרבך. ואע"פ שמרע"ה בטל אותה גזירה שנא' פני ילכו וגו' מ"מ בימי יהושע חזר שנ' אני שר צבא ה' עתה באתי עיין בהרמב"ן:
(1) For I will not go up among you. Although Moshe Rabbeinu nullified this decree, as it says, “My Presence will go [with you]” (Shemos 33:14), the decree nevertheless returned in Yehoshua’s time — as [the angel] said [to Yehoshua]: “I, the prince of Hashem’s legion, have now come” (Yehoshua 5:14). See Ramban.
(א) הנה אנכי שלח מלאך לפניך כל זמן שאתם עושים רצוני אני מהלך לפניכם בעמוד ענן אבל כשתשובו מאחרי אין אני משלח אלא מלאך. ד״א הנה אנכי שלח מלאך נביא ושליח. ועל יהושע נאמר וליכא למימר מלאך ממש שהרי הקב״ה לא אמר לשלוח מלאך עד שעשו העגל ואעפי״כ לא קבלוהו.
(1) הנה אנכי שולח מלאך לפניך, “I am about to send an angel ahead of you, etc.” This is a departure from what had been the case up until now. G-d announces that as long as all the Israelites remain loyal to Him, He personally will lead them on their journey to the Holy Land; when they are guilty of trespassing, instead of leading them personally, He will assign that task to an angel. An alternate explanation of this verse: The “angel” referred to is Joshua, who after the Israelites’ 40 year stay in the desert and Moses’ death will, take over from him. In other words, G-d does not continue with a celestial creature after Moses’ death, but with a human one. [It is a hint that the period of the Israelites’ lives being guided by supernatural forces only, to wit the manna from heaven, will come to an end at that time. Ed.] Actually, G-d had not spoken of sending an angel until after the episode with the golden calf. (Exodus 33,2) Moses, i.e. the people were not content with this even then. (Exodus 33,12)
(א) הנה אנכי שולח מלאך לפניך. ע"ד הפשט ענין הפרשה הזאת שהקב"ה הודיע למשה כי ישראל עתידים שיחטאו בעגל ולכך אמר כי לא ישא לפשעכם בלשון יחיד ולא אמר לחטאתיכם. ועל כן אמר להם שישלח עמהם מלאך מאחר שאינם ראוים שתלך שכינה עמהם.
(1) הנה אנכי שולח מלאך לפניך, “Here I am about to send an angel ahead of you, etc.” The plain meaning of these words is that G’d announced to Moses that the Israelites would commit the sin of the golden calf at some time in the future; this is why He said that “this angel will not forgive your sin” (verse 22). He spoke of a single sin, פשעכם, not a variety of sins such as לחטאותיכם, sins committed inadvertently. The sin of the golden calf had been committed in full knowledge of it being a violation of the second of the Ten Commandments. G’d told Moses that seeing the people were not worthy that the Presence of the Lord, “Shechinah” would travel with them, He would send a lower ranking angel instead.
(א) הנה אנכי שולח מלאך לפניך. המלאך הזה הוא מיכאל השר הגדול כענין שאמר גבריאל לדניאל (דניאל י"ב) ובעת ההיא יעמוד מיכאל השר הגדול העומד על בני עמך, וכתיב (שם י') אין אחד מתחזק עמי על אלה כי אם מיכאל שרכם והוא שנראה ליהושע והוא שאמר לו (יהושע ה') אני שר צבא ד' עתה באתי. ופירשו רז"ל (סנהדרין ל"ח ב') כי מי שיזכור בו כי שמי בקרבו ביאורו שנקרא שר צבא ד' כענין שכתוב (מלכים א' ח') כי שמך נקרא על הבית הזה. שנקרא בית ד'.
(1) הנה אנכי שולח מלאך לפניך, the angel of which the Torah speaks here is Michael, the great prince, the one of whom Gavriel said to Daniel: “at that time Michael the great prince who stands beside the sons of your people will appear.” (Daniel 12,1). It is also written in Daniel 10,21 ואין אחד מתחזק עמי על אלה כי אם מיכאל שרכם, ”No one is helping me against them except your prince Michael.” This is also the angel who said to Joshua “I am the prince of the hosts of the Lord, now I have come.” (Joshua 5,14)
Our sages explained in connection with this verse that the words כי שמי בקרבו, are equivalent to G’d saying that the name of the angel mentioned in our verse is “the prince (commander in Chief) of the Lord’s hosts.” We find another reference (oblique) to this when Solomon during his inaugural prayer of the Temple he had just completed, (Kings I 8,43) said: כי שמך נקרא על הבית הזה, “for Your name is attached to this house.”
Our sages explained in connection with this verse that the words כי שמי בקרבו, are equivalent to G’d saying that the name of the angel mentioned in our verse is “the prince (commander in Chief) of the Lord’s hosts.” We find another reference (oblique) to this when Solomon during his inaugural prayer of the Temple he had just completed, (Kings I 8,43) said: כי שמך נקרא על הבית הזה, “for Your name is attached to this house.”
(ג) את מספר ימיך אמלא. שלא ימותו במלחמה או במגפה בשנוי האויר רק בזקנה שימלא הימים וכל אלה הם נסים שיעשה השם בשמים ובארץ בשביל עושי רצונו ואמר כאשר יעשה עמנו אות לטובה כן יעשה בשונאינו אות לרעה שיתן להם לב רגז ומחדרים אימה וישלח בהם הצרעה לגרשם מארצם מלפניך והזכיר החוי והיבוסי והחתי דרך קצרה וה"ה לכולם. ויתכן כי גם אלה לא יצאו רובם במלחמה ולא נפלו להם בחרב והיו בהם נשגבים במבצריהם ושלח בהם הצרעה והוא מין ידועה מפיל בהם ארס וממיתם. ור אברהם פי' הוא מין חולי בגוף מגזרת צרעת:
(3) את מספר ימיך אמלא, “I will fill the number of your days.” You will not die in war, through disease, through adverse climactic effects, but you will live out your years as envisaged at the time of your birth. These promises require supernatural intervention by G’d in your lives, i.e. miracles. G’d will perform these miracles on behalf of people who have made a point of living according to G’d’s revealed wishes. G’d adds that just as He will make plain that we are the beneficiaries of His goodwill, so will He make it plain that the sinners, i.e. His and our enemies, will become the victims of His wrath. They will be afflicted with a number of natural disasters, such as invasions of crop destroying insects, etc. These poisonous insects will even drive out the population of part of the land of Canaan in advance of your arrival there. The tribes mentioned are only representative of all the Canaanite tribes.
Quite possibly, under ideal circumstances, there might not even be many Canaanite tribes left to make war against, after these plagues had afflicted them.
According to Ibn Ezra the צרעה mentioned here is a disease afflicting the body, not an insect infesting the grain. The word would be related to the dreaded skin disease צרעת.
(א) מעט מעט אגרשנו מפניך. יאמר הכתוב הצרעה תגרש אותם מכח מדת הדין מעט מעט והם יהיו מתמעטים והולכים ואתם מוסיפים ופרים ורבים עד שתנחלו את הארץ.
(1) . מעט מעט אגרשנו מפניך, “little by little will I drive them out before you.” The meaning of the verse is that the hornet will drive these people out due to the power of the attribute of Justice so that they will constantly decrease in numbers (in contrast with you who will steadily increase in numbers). This process will continue until you can take possession of the whole country.
(א) וְאֶל־מֹשֶׁ֨ה אָמַ֜ר עֲלֵ֣ה אֶל־ה' אַתָּה֙ וְאַהֲרֹן֙ נָדָ֣ב וַאֲבִיה֔וּא וְשִׁבְעִ֖ים מִזִּקְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוִיתֶ֖ם מֵרָחֹֽק׃ (ב) וְנִגַּ֨שׁ מֹשֶׁ֤ה לְבַדּוֹ֙ אֶל־ה' וְהֵ֖ם לֹ֣א יִגָּ֑שׁוּ וְהָעָ֕ם לֹ֥א יַעֲל֖וּ עִמּֽוֹ׃ (ג) וַיָּבֹ֣א מֹשֶׁ֗ה וַיְסַפֵּ֤ר לָעָם֙ אֵ֚ת כָּל־דִּבְרֵ֣י ה' וְאֵ֖ת כָּל־הַמִּשְׁפָּטִ֑ים וַיַּ֨עַן כָּל־הָעָ֜ם ק֤וֹל אֶחָד֙ וַיֹּ֣אמְר֔וּ כָּל־הַדְּבָרִ֛ים אֲשֶׁר־דִּבֶּ֥ר ה' נַעֲשֶֽׂה׃ (ד) וַיִּכְתֹּ֣ב מֹשֶׁ֗ה אֵ֚ת כָּל־דִּבְרֵ֣י ה' וַיַּשְׁכֵּ֣ם בַּבֹּ֔קֶר וַיִּ֥בֶן מִזְבֵּ֖חַ תַּ֣חַת הָהָ֑ר וּשְׁתֵּ֤ים עֶשְׂרֵה֙ מַצֵּבָ֔ה לִשְׁנֵ֥ים עָשָׂ֖ר שִׁבְטֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ (ה) וַיִּשְׁלַ֗ח אֶֽת־נַעֲרֵי֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וַיַּֽעֲל֖וּ עֹלֹ֑ת וַֽיִּזְבְּח֞וּ זְבָחִ֧ים שְׁלָמִ֛ים לַה' פָּרִֽים׃ (ו) וַיִּקַּ֤ח מֹשֶׁה֙ חֲצִ֣י הַדָּ֔ם וַיָּ֖שֶׂם בָּאַגָּנֹ֑ת וַחֲצִ֣י הַדָּ֔ם זָרַ֖ק עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּֽחַ׃ (ז) וַיִּקַּח֙ סֵ֣פֶר הַבְּרִ֔ית וַיִּקְרָ֖א בְּאָזְנֵ֣י הָעָ֑ם וַיֹּ֣אמְר֔וּ כֹּ֛ל אֲשֶׁר־דִּבֶּ֥ר ה' נַעֲשֶׂ֥ה וְנִשְׁמָֽע׃ (ח) וַיִּקַּ֤ח מֹשֶׁה֙ אֶת־הַדָּ֔ם וַיִּזְרֹ֖ק עַל־הָעָ֑ם וַיֹּ֗אמֶר הִנֵּ֤ה דַֽם־הַבְּרִית֙ אֲשֶׁ֨ר כָּרַ֤ת ה' עִמָּכֶ֔ם עַ֥ל כָּל־הַדְּבָרִ֖ים הָאֵֽלֶּה׃ (ט) וַיַּ֥עַל מֹשֶׁ֖ה וְאַהֲרֹ֑ן נָדָב֙ וַאֲבִיה֔וּא וְשִׁבְעִ֖ים מִזִּקְנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ (י) וַיִּרְא֕וּ אֵ֖ת אֱלֹקֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וְתַ֣חַת רַגְלָ֗יו כְּמַעֲשֵׂה֙ לִבְנַ֣ת הַסַּפִּ֔יר וּכְעֶ֥צֶם הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם לָטֹֽהַר׃ (יא) וְאֶל־אֲצִילֵי֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א שָׁלַ֖ח יָד֑וֹ וַֽיֶּחֱזוּ֙ אֶת־הָ֣אֱלֹקִ֔ים וַיֹּאכְל֖וּ וַיִּשְׁתּֽוּ׃ (ס) (יב) וַיֹּ֨אמֶר ה' אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֗ה עֲלֵ֥ה אֵלַ֛י הָהָ֖רָה וֶהְיֵה־שָׁ֑ם וְאֶתְּנָ֨ה לְךָ֜ אֶת־לֻחֹ֣ת הָאֶ֗בֶן וְהַתּוֹרָה֙ וְהַמִּצְוָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר כָּתַ֖בְתִּי לְהוֹרֹתָֽם׃ (יג) וַיָּ֣קָם מֹשֶׁ֔ה וִיהוֹשֻׁ֖עַ מְשָׁרְת֑וֹ וַיַּ֥עַל מֹשֶׁ֖ה אֶל־הַ֥ר הָאֱלֹקִֽים׃ (יד) וְאֶל־הַזְּקֵנִ֤ים אָמַר֙ שְׁבוּ־לָ֣נוּ בָזֶ֔ה עַ֥ד אֲשֶׁר־נָשׁ֖וּב אֲלֵיכֶ֑ם וְהִנֵּ֨ה אַהֲרֹ֤ן וְחוּר֙ עִמָּכֶ֔ם מִי־בַ֥עַל דְּבָרִ֖ים יִגַּ֥שׁ אֲלֵהֶֽם׃ (טו) וַיַּ֥עַל מֹשֶׁ֖ה אֶל־הָהָ֑ר וַיְכַ֥ס הֶעָנָ֖ן אֶת־הָהָֽר׃ (טז) וַיִּשְׁכֹּ֤ן כְּבוֹד־ה' עַל־הַ֣ר סִינַ֔י וַיְכַסֵּ֥הוּ הֶעָנָ֖ן שֵׁ֣שֶׁת יָמִ֑ים וַיִּקְרָ֧א אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֛ה בַּיּ֥וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֖י מִתּ֥וֹךְ הֶעָנָֽן׃ (יז) וּמַרְאֵה֙ כְּב֣וֹד ה' כְּאֵ֥שׁ אֹכֶ֖לֶת בְּרֹ֣אשׁ הָהָ֑ר לְעֵינֵ֖י בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ (יח) וַיָּבֹ֥א מֹשֶׁ֛ה בְּת֥וֹךְ הֶעָנָ֖ן וַיַּ֣עַל אֶל־הָהָ֑ר וַיְהִ֤י מֹשֶׁה֙ בָּהָ֔ר אַרְבָּעִ֣ים י֔וֹם וְאַרְבָּעִ֖ים לָֽיְלָה׃ (פ)
(1) Then He said to Moses, “Come up to the LORD, with Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy elders of Israel, and bow low from afar. (2) Moses alone shall come near the LORD; but the others shall not come near, nor shall the people come up with him.” (3) Moses went and repeated to the people all the commands of the LORD and all the rules; and all the people answered with one voice, saying, “All the things that the LORD has commanded we will do!” (4) Moses then wrote down all the commands of the LORD. Early in the morning, he set up an altar at the foot of the mountain, with twelve pillars for the twelve tribes of Israel. (5) He designated some young men among the Israelites, and they offered burnt offerings and sacrificed bulls as offerings of well-being to the LORD. (6) Moses took one part of the blood and put it in basins, and the other part of the blood he dashed against the altar. (7) Then he took the record of the covenant and read it aloud to the people. And they said, “All that the LORD has spoken we will faithfully do!” (8) Moses took the blood and dashed it on the people and said, “This is the blood of the covenant that the LORD now makes with you concerning all these commands.” (9) Then Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy elders of Israel ascended; (10) and they saw the God of Israel: under His feet there was the likeness of a pavement of sapphire, like the very sky for purity. (11) Yet He did not raise His hand against the leaders of the Israelites; they beheld God, and they ate and drank. (12) The LORD said to Moses, “Come up to Me on the mountain and wait there, and I will give you the stone tablets with the teachings and commandments which I have inscribed to instruct them.” (13) So Moses and his attendant Joshua arose, and Moses ascended the mountain of God. (14) To the elders he had said, “Wait here for us until we return to you. You have Aaron and Hur with you; let anyone who has a legal matter approach them.” (15) When Moses had ascended the mountain, the cloud covered the mountain. (16) The Presence of the LORD abode on Mount Sinai, and the cloud hid it for six days. On the seventh day He called to Moses from the midst of the cloud. (17) Now the Presence of the LORD appeared in the sight of the Israelites as a consuming fire on the top of the mountain. (18) Moses went inside the cloud and ascended the mountain; and Moses remained on the mountain forty days and forty nights.
(א) ונגש משה לבדו. כתב ר' אברהם היה ראוי שיאמר ונגשת אתה לבדך אלא שכן דרך המקראות וה' המטיר על סדום ועל עמורה מאת ה' ולא אמר מאתי. והרמב"ן כתב הנכון בעיני בכאן שהדבור הזה היה גם לאהרן שהוא ג"כ שמע כשאמר השם למשה עלה אלי ההרה אתה ואהרן וא"כ היה צריך למשה ועל כן אמר ונגש משה והם לא יגשו ואמר עוד לבדו למעט אהרן אע"פ שנכלל עמו בדבר:
(1) ונגש משה לבדו, “only Moses, alone, is to approach close to Hashem.” Ibn Ezra comments that actually the Torah should have addressed Moses in direct speech, i.e. ונגשת אתה לבדך, “you are to approach alone.” However, the pattern of the Holy Scriptures is to frequently use indirect speech when we nowadays would use direct speech. G’d even refers to Himself in the third person, as in Genesis 19,24 וה' המטיר על סדום ועמורה גפרית ואש, מאת ה' מן השמים, “The Lord made it rain on Sodom and Gomorrah sulphur and fire, from the Lord from heaven.” The Torah does not quote G’d saying: “מאתי,” emanating from Me.
Nachmanides writes that G’d’s comments in this case were also addressed to Aaron, who was to hear that G’d wanted only Moses to ascend the Mountain. On a previous occasion Aaron had also heard G’d say that both Moses and he were “to ascend to Me on the Mountain, but that he and the elders were to prostrate themselves from afar. (verse 1).” Seeing that on one occasion Moses was accompanied by his dignitaries, the Torah had to spell out that at some point only Moses could proceed beyond that threshold. Having eliminated the elders by the words ונגש משה, the word לבדו was needed to make plain that also Aaron was prohibited from advancing toward the Mountain any more closely.
(א) כל הדברים אשר דבר ד' נעשה. נעשה הוא כוללת מצות עשה ומצות לא תעשה. כי הנמנע מלעשות דבר שהוזהר עליו שלא לעשותו יקרא שעשה מצוה שהרי קיים האזהרה שהוזהר עליה, ומקרא מלא הוא (תהלים קיט ג) אַף לֹא פָעֲלוּ עַוְלָה בִּדְרָכָיו הָלָכוּ. באר הכתוב כשלא פעלו עולה הרי הוא כאלו בדרכיו הלכו:
(1) כל הדברים אשר דבר ה' נעשה. The word נעשה, “we will do,” here includes all the commandments of the Lord, negative commandments as well as positive ones, the ones requiring an exertion, an activity. The reason why this is not a misnomer is that if someone refrains from violating a negative commandment he is considered as having “performed” a commandment, i.e the commandment not to violate G’d’s legislation in that matter. We have a complete verse confirming this in Psalms 119,3 אף לא פעלו עולה, בדרכיו הלכו, “they have done no wrong, but have followed His ways.” In other words, not doing evil is considered equivalent to doing good.
(ג) ויען כל העם. כאילו הוא איש אחד
(ב) קול אחד. כאן לא כתיב יחדיו כמו ביום הראשון שביארנו לעיל י״ט ח׳ שע״פ דעת כולם השיב אחד מהם בלשון קצר שתוכו נכלל שתים כמ״ש שם אבל היום כבר היה מורגל בלשון הכל דבור פשוט ואמרו כולם כל הדברים וגו׳:
(א) נעשה. בגימטריא בכתב נעשה ונשמע בגימטריא מאה ועשרים ר[י]בוא. ק״ך רבוא מלאכי השרת באו והכתירו אותם והלבישום כסות העולם הבא וחגרו אותם כלי זיין ששם המפורש חקוק עליו ושם עולם אתן לו אשר לא יכרת ואין מלאך המות שולט בהם ולא אומות הורגים בהם כלל. רבינו הנזכר ז״ל:
(ג) נעשה ונשמע נעשה לתכלית שנשמע בקולו כעבדים המשמשים את הרב שלא על דרך לקבל פרס כענין עושי דברו לשמוע בקול דברו:
(3) נעשה ונשמע, a reference to action designed to ensure that they could obey G’d’s directives without thought of any reward that might be in store for them by doing this. We find a similar construction in Psalms 103,20 עושי דברו לשמוע בקולו, “who do His bidding, ever obedient to His bidding.”
(ב) נעשה ונשמע - נעשה מה שדיבר וגם נשמע מה שיצונו עוד מכאן ולהבא ונקיים.
(2) נעשה ונשמע, “we will carry out what G’d has said already, and we are also prepared to listen (obey) to what He will command from here on in.
(א) ויראו את אלקי ישראל. נִסְתַּכְּלוּ וְהֵצִיצוּ וְנִתְחַיְּבוּ מִיתָה, אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא רָצָה הַקָּבָּ"ה לְעַרְבֵּב שִׂמְחַת הַתּוֹרָה וְהִמְתִּין לְנָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא עַד יוֹם חֲנֻכַּת הַמִּשְׁכָּן, וְלַזְּקֵנִים עַד וַיְהִי הָעָם כְּמִתְאוֹנְנִים, וַתִּבְעַר בָּם אֵשׁ ה' וַתֹּאכַל בִּקְצֵה הַמַּחֲנֶה (במדבר י"א) – בַּקְּצִינִים שֶׁבַּמַּחֲנֶה (תנחומא):
(1) ויראו את אלהי ישראל NOW THEY SAW THE GOD OF ISRAEL — They gazed intently and failing in this they peeped in their attempt to catch a glimpse of the Supreme Being, and thereby made themselves liable to death. But it was only because God did not wish to disturb the joy caused by the Giving of the Torah, that He did not punish them instantly, but waited (postponed the punishment) for Nadab and Abihu until the day when the Tabernacle was dedicated, when they were stricken with death, and for the elders until the event of which the text relates, (Numbers 11:16) “And when the people complained …. and the fire of the Lord burned among them and destroyed בקצה המחנה” — those who were the קצינים “nobles” of the camp (Midrash Tanchuma, Beha'alotcha 16).
(א) נסתכלו והציצו כו'. ר"ל נסתכלו בלב כדפירש רש"י בסמוך אבל לא ראייה ממש שהרי כתיב כי לא יראני אדם וחי. ונתחייבו מיתה על שנכנסו לפנים ממחיצתן:
(1) They intentionally looked and intently gazed. . . This means that they intellectually perceived, as Rashi explains on the next verse: [ היו מסתכלין בו בלב גס ]. But it cannot mean actually looking, because it is written (33:20), “For no man can see My Presence and live.” And they became liable for death because [through this “looking”], they entered past their designated area.
(א) ויראו את אלקי ישראל. הכוונה בזה על הכבוד האחרון שהזכירו למעלה ולכך הוסיף בו את שהוא השכינה, שה' המיוחד שהוא אלקי ישראל כתוב בו (שמות ל״ג:כ׳) כי לא יראני האדם וחי ולכך תרגם אונקלוס וחזו ית יקר אלהא דישראל, והוא הכבוד שראה יחזקאל (א) כמראה אדם עליו מלמעלה כי ראה תחלה חיות הקדש והאופנים למטה אצל החיות וחזר וראה הרקיע הנטוי על ראשי החיות וראה הכסא על הרקיע ועל דמות הכסא דמות כמראה אדם עליו מלמעלה.
(1) ויראו את אלו-הי ישראל, “and they ‘saw’ the G’d of Israel, etc.” The Torah refers to the attribute כבוד which we have discussed at length earlier saying that according to Pessikta Zutrata this is another name for what is popularly known as Shechinah. We know that it is impossible to experience a vision of the attribute of Hashem, as Hashem told Moses specifically that His attribute of Hashem cannot be seen by any living human being (Exodus 33,20). This is why Onkelos translates these words as וחזו ית יקר אלהא דישראל. This is the same attribute כבוד which the prophet Ezekiel experienced in a vision in Ezekiel 1,26 as the appearance of a human being above (the other chayot). First he had seen the חיות הקודש, and the אופנים beneath next to the חיות. When he looked again he saw the sky suspended above the heads of the חיות. Then he saw the throne of the Lord above the sky. Above that he saw a likeness resembling that of a human being, still higher above the throne.
(א) ויראו את אלקי ישראל - כעין: וראית את אחורי.
(1) ויראו את אלו-הי ישראל, just as the Torah described “G’d’s “back” becoming visible to Moses in Exodus 33,23 so the meaning of the elders “seeing” means that the manifestations of G’d’s attributes they had experienced made Him as real to them as if they had seen Him with their physical eyes.
(א) ויראו את אלקי ישראל. פי' ר' אברהם ראו במראה הנבואה ולא במראית העין. והיא המראה שראה יחזקאל כמראה אבן ספיר דמות כסא וזהו שכתוב כאן ויראו את אלקי ישראל ושם כתוב ג"כ היא החי' אשר ראיתי תחת אלקי ישראל. וכתב הרמב"ן על דרך הפשט טעם לאלקי ישראל לומר כי זכות ישראל אביהם הי' עמהם לזכותם במראה הזאת:
(1) ויראו את א-לוהי ישראל, “they experienced a vision of the G’d of Israel.” Ibn Ezra explains that the word ויראו here describes a prophetic vision, not perception with their physical eyes. This vision would be similar to that seen by the prophet Ezekiel when he described the appearance of G’d’s throne. (Ezekiel 1,26) He described it as made of אבן ספיר, whereas here the Israelites due to their familiarity with bricks, described it as לבנת ספיר, as a brick made of sapphire. In verse 28 in that chapter in Ezekiel, the prophet spells out that what he saw was not the actual throne but a דמות, an image of such a throne. Nachmanides writes that according to the plain meaning of the text the words א-לוהי ישראל mean that the merit of the patriarch Israel was the catalyst that enabled them to be granted such a vision.
(ב) ותחת רגליו כמעשה לבנת הספיר. ע"ד הפשט יבאר הכתוב כי משה ואהרן ובניו ושבעים הזקנים ראו עתה במעמד הר סיני אלקי ישראל על הכסא והכסא על הרקיע והוא הרקיע הנטוי על ראשי החיות אמר תחלה ותחת רגליו שהוא הכסא וכן תרגומו כורסי יקריה, והזכיר כמעשה לבנת הספיר כי כן כתוב (שם א) כמראה אבן ספיר דמות כסא, וספיר הוא אבן יקרה לבנה לדעת רבינו סעדיה גאון ז"ל, וע"כ אמר לבנת מלשון לובן וענינו זכות גדול שהאור נראה מאחריו.
(ג) אבל דעת החכם ר"א ז"ל כי ספיר הוא תכלת ואמר כי לבנת אינו מלשון לובן אלא כלשון (שם ד) ואתה קח לך לבנה ואמר לבנת הספיר כמו שראה יחזקאל אבן ספיר, והעד על פירושו זה שאמר כמעשה ולא אמר כמראה לבנת או כעין לבנה כי על גוון הלובן אין לשון כמעשה נופל בו, ויהיה באור הכתוב כי היו רואים כסא הכבוד כמעשה לבנת של ספיר זך ובהיר, ותחת אותו כסא שהוא כמעשה לבנת הספיר ראו עצם השמים לטוהר והוא הרקיע כעין הקרח הנורא הנטוי על ראשי החיות, ומזה הזכיר יחזקאל (שם י) היא החיה אשר ראיתי וגו', רצונו תחת הרקיע והרקיע תחת הכסא והכסא תחת אלקי ישראל אבל הכתוב קצר בזה.
(ד) וכן כתב הרמב"ן ז"ל בפירושו כי הכתוב תפש דרך קצרה שהרי למעלה מן החיה רקיע, למעלה מן הרקיע הכסא, למעלה מן הכסא אלקי ישראל.
(ה) ומה שהזכיר עצם השמים ולא הזכיר חיות הקדש אשר תחתיו, יתכן לפרש כי רצה להסתירם לפי שמשם היה החטא לישראל ששמטו אחד מטטרמולין שלו והכעיסוהו בו.
(ו) וע"ד המדרש כמעשה לבנת הספיר כדי לזכור שעבוד של ישראל בלבנים. ובאור הענין ללמד שהקב"ה מצר כשהאומות מצירין לישראל והוא מה שאמרו כל המשעבדם מלמטה כאלו משעבדם מלמעלה. ומזה הענין הוא מה שכתוב (שמות ג׳:ז׳) כי ידעתי את מכאוביו, ומזה אמרו בירושלמי דמסכת סוכה מעשה אין כתיב אלא כמעשה היא וכל ארגליא שלה היא והסל והמגרפה ע"כ, ושבעים זקנים אלו הם השוטרים המוכים על הצבור להקל מעליהם עול הלבנים ולכך זכו מדה כנגד מדה להשיג כמעשה לבנת הספיר.
(ז) וע"ד החכמה כמעשה לבנות הספיר, היא השגה במראה הנבואה אמתת החומר הראשון התחתון שהיה משלג שתחת כסא הכבוד, והוא שדרשו ז"ל שמים מהיכן נבראו מאור לבושו שנאמר (תהילים ק״ד:ב׳) עוטה אור כשלמה נוטה שמים כיריעה, הארץ נברא משלג שתחת כסא הכבוד שנאמר (איוב ל״ז:ו׳) כי לשלג יאמר הוא ארץ וגו', ואונקלוס שתרגם ותחות כורסי יקריה, עשה רגליו שבים אל הכסא. ומלת רגליו סבותיו כמו (יחזקאל א׳:ז׳) ורגליהם רגל ישרה, (זכריה י״ד:ד׳) ועמדו רגליו, והכוונה בו שהחומר ההוא מאצלו והוא סבתו המחייב מציאותו והוא בראו וחדשו אחר העדרו. ואמר כמעשה לפי שהחומר מתפעל ומקבל צורה, ואמר לבנת כי הלובן ההוא שתחת הכסא היה חומר לארץ, ולא אמר כלבנת הספיר לפי שאין הכוונה במראה הלובן כי הספיר איננו לבן כי אם היה לו מראה לובן לא היה מראה המראים כלן ולא היה מקבלן מאחריו, אבל הוא נעדר מכל מראה ולפיכך הוא מקבל כל מראה, כן החומר הוא נעדר הצורות כלן ואין לו דמות וצורה כלל על כן הוא מקבל כל צורה וצורה, וזה דעת הרמב"ם ז"ל בספר המורה בחלק שני פרק כ"ו ע"ש.
(ח) וע"ד הקבלה כמעשה לבנת הספיר, ידוע אצל חכמי המרכבה כי כסא הכבוד מיוסד מג' יסודות, אש, רוח, מים, שהם נאצלים מג' מדות, חסד, דין, רחמים, והם ג' מראות, לבן, אודם, תכלת, ותן אל לבך כי הזכיר לבנת על מראה הלובן, וספיר על מראה האודם, וכעצם השמים על מראה התכלת, ולכך תרגם אונקלוס ותחות כורסי יקריה, והוא שאמר התכלת דומה לים וים דומה לרקיע ורקיע דומה לכסא הכבוד.
(ט) וראוי שתתבונן איך הזכיר ותחת רגליו כמעשה לבנת הספיר שהוא באור גמור כי יש תחת הכסא כמעשה לבנת הספיר שהוא כסא אחר וזהו יורה על שני כסאות, והנה הדבר אמת ויציב כי יש כסא לכסא, ועל כן גלה לך הכתוב בפירוש כי תחת הכסא העליון יש כסא אחר שהוא כמעשה לבנת הספיר וכעצם השמים, ושלשה יסודות לכל כסא וכסא הרי ו', וזהו סוד הכתוב הנזכר בכסא שלמה (מלכים א י׳:י״ט) שש מעלות לכסא וגו', וכתיב (דברי הימים א כ״ט:כ״ג) וישב שלמה על כסא ה', כי רצה שלמה בחכמתו הגדולה לכלול בכסאו מעלות שני הכסאות שעליהם נאמר בעת רצון (תהילים קכ״ב:ה׳) כי שמה ישבו כסאות למשפט כסאות לבית דוד, ונאמר בשעת הכעס (דניאל ז׳:ט׳) עד די כרסון רמיו.
(י) ויש שפירשו כמעשה לבנת הספיר כי המשיל השגת האצילות לענין הספיר הלבן שהוא מראה מה שבתוכו שהוא פנימי ונסתר שם, והפנימי הזה הנסתר הוא נראה מתוך החיצון אבל עצמותו אינו נראה ואינו נודע לעצמו, וזהו (שמות ו׳:ג׳) וארא אל אברהם וגו', כי הפנימי הנסתר נראה אל הרואים כספיר אבל לא נודע להם, ועל כן יבאר הכתוב השגתה במשל יפה מאד יובן ממנו הנמשל, וזהו לשון כמעשה בכ"ף הדמיון כי ענין ההשגה בהם גם בכל הנביאים כלן גם בישראל בהר סיני היא הנקראת פנים בפנים כח לפנים מכח, ולכך אמר כמעשה כענין מה שיעשה הספיר הלבן שהפנימי הנעלם נראה מתוך החיצון אבל עצמותו אינו נראה כי הוא נסתר ונעלם מן ההשגה, וזה מבואר.
(2) ותחת רגליו כמעשה לבנת הספיר, “and beneath his feet the likeness of a brick made of sapphire.” According to the plain meaning of the text the meaning of this entire verse is that Moses, Aaron, his sons, as well as the elders now experienced a vision of G’d, the G’d of Israel, seated on His throne above the sky. This was the same sky which had previously been described as an expanse covering the חיות. The words ותחת רגליו refer to what was beneath the throne, i.e. the sky. This corresponds to the translation by Onkelos who writes: כורסא יקיריה כעובד אבן טבא, “a splendid throne just like the work of a gemstone.” The reason that the elders saw something looking like כמעשה לבנת הספיר is that this is the way Ezekiel describes what he saw (1,26). ספיר is a whitish gem-stone according to the opinion of Rav Saadyah Gaon quoted by Ibn Ezra. This is why the Torah writes the word לבנת, i.e. a derivative of לובן, the translucent whiteness of the white in the egg. The remarkable thing the Torah tells us then is that it was a great compliment for these people to behold something which emits its light behind it. (3) However, the opinion of Ibn Ezra is that ספיר is blue. He does not agree that the word לבנת is a derivative of the word לובן, but that we must understand it as similar to Ezekiel 4,1 ואתה קח לך לבנה, “and now take for yourself a brick.” According to Ibn Ezra the elders and Aaron saw instead of an ordinary brick, a brick-like image made of the finest blue sapphire. Whereas in Ezekiel 1,26 Ezekiel had seen אבן ספיר כמראה, something like a sapphire stone, the elders saw an image of something like that. Proof of the fact that this is the correct interpretation is the fact that Ezekiel compared what he saw to אבן ספיר “a sapphire-coloured stone,” clearly not the white of an egg. Proof for Ibn Ezra is the fact that our verse describes the structure of the object as כמעשה, “like the work of,” a description which would not fit something fluid like לובן. According to Ibn Ezra then the meaning of the whole verse is that these people saw the throne of G’d’s glory as a structure made of sapphire-like brick of the utmost clarity and purity and beneath this sapphire-based structure they saw the pure and clear sky. This was the same as the sky seen by Ezekiel in his famous vision which was above the heads of chayot described there as “awesome ice” (Ezekiel 1,22). The sky mentioned here was also beneath the throne, and the throne beneath the G’d of Israel, just as in the vision of Ezekiel, except that the Torah did not bother to write all these details in our verse. (4) The idea that our verse was shorter and more concise is the opinion of Nachmanides who states that above the chayah is the sky (heaven), and above the heaven the throne, and above the throne is the G’d of Israel. (5) The reason that in our verse instead of רקיע the Torah describes the appearance of that phenomenon as like עצם השמים and the chayot are not mentioned at all, may be that the Torah deliberately wanted to conceal these aspects of the vision of these אצילי ישראל, “nobles of Israel” (verse 11), seeing that these additional words were the ones that led to the sin of Israel and the removal of one of the four supports of the Merkavah supporting the Shechinah as a result of their worshipping the golden calf(compare our author’s comment on Exodus 32,4). (6) A Midrashic approach (based on Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 4,3) to the words: “like the structure of a brick made of sapphire.” This image recalled to them the fact that the Israelites’ heavy slave labour in Egypt consisted of their making mud bricks. Seeing such an image in the heavens proved to the people viewing it that when the Israelites suffer persecution by the Gentile nations in the terrestrial world the Shechinah shares their suffering in the celestial spheres. This reflects the statement by Sifra Parshat Behar 9,4 that whenever the Israelites are being enslaved in our world it is as if the oppressor does the same to the Shechinah in the heavenly regions. This explains Exodus 3,3 where G’d said to Moses כי ידעתי את מכאוביו, “for I am intimately familiar with its (Israel’s) pains.” This is why the Jerusalem Talmud in Sukkah had drawn our attention to the fact that the Torah did not write מעשה לבנת ספיר, but כמעשה לבנת ספיר, i.e. not merely an actual brick made out of sapphire but something additional such as the molds and tools required to make such bricks. Thus far the Jerusalem Talmud in Sukkah.
The seventy elders of which the Torah speaks here were the overseers of the Israelites in Egypt who had allowed themselves to absorb beatings by the Egyptians rather than enforce harsher conditions imposed after Pharaoh responded cruelly to Moses’ first interview by making brick making harder for the people (5,16). This is why they were rewarded by having this vision of bricks made of sapphire. (7) A scientific approach to the words כמעשה לבנת ספיר: this is a reference to a vision of the original substantive matter in the universe, which exists immediately beneath the throne of G’d (compare Maimonides Moreh Nevuchim section 1 chapter 28). It looked to them like snow. Our sages in Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer 3 ask the rhetorical question: “whence (from what raw material) was the heaven created?” Answer: “from the light of His (G’d’s) garments.” This is what David meant when he said (Psalms 104,2) “You are wrapped in a robe of light. You spread the heavens like a tent cloth.” The earth was created out of the snow beneath the throne of glory. We have proof of this from Job 37,6: “He would command the snow: ‘become earth!’”
Onkelos, who translated the words as ”a splendid throne like the work of a gem stone,” understands the words “under His (its) feet” as a reference to the oceans which form the legs of that throne. The words רגליו means “its causes.” We encounter the words רגל in that sense in Ezekiel 1,7 ורגליהם רגל ישרה, or ועמדו רגליו in Zecharyah 14,4. The meaning in these verses is that the raw material emanates from beside it (G’d’s throne) and its proximity is the reason (cause) that it exists and endures.
Applied to our verse here, the word כמעשה, means that just as in the instances mentioned by Ezekiel and Zecharyah, these prophets were granted insights, these אצילי בני ישראל were granted these insights by means of the visions they experienced at this time. The word לבנת is a reference to the white of the egg which was beneath the throne of G’d and formed the original raw material from which earth was constructed. The reason the Torah did not write כלבנת ספיר but כמעשה לבנת ספיר, was to warn us that raw material is something passive, subject to outside influences, but unable to exert its own influences. It may have one colour one day and another colour on a different day depending on external stimuli. A ספיר is not white. If it were white it could not then have become all kinds of colours. Similarly, a raw material does not have a specific shape or form. This is why potentially it can assume any shape or form. This is the opinion of Maimonides in chapter 26 of the second part of his Moreh Nevuchim. I have copied his words. [a perusal of that chapter will reveal that Maimonides understands Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer as distinguishing two basic raw materials, one “beneath the throne,” i.e. materials used to create what is in the terrestrial universe, and the other “materials” used for the creation of the celestial universe. Maimonides came to this conclusion in order for the wording of Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer not to mislead us into thinking that he thought that the raw material preceded G’d the Creator. Ed.] (8) A kabbalistic approach on the words כמעשה לבנת הספיר. It is well known in the circles of the scholars dealing with celestial beings that the throne of G’d is based on three foundations: they are; אש, רוח, מים, “fire, wind, and water.” These three materials are emanated from three attributes of G’d חסד, דין, רחמים. They have three different colours, i.e. white, red, blue. Remember that the word לבנת in our verse refers to the colour “white.” The word ספיר alludes to the colour “red.” The word שמים in the expression כעצם השמים לטוהר refers to the colour “blue.” This is why Onkelos translated as he did. His translation reflects what our sages said in Sotah 17: “the blue of the ציצית is similar to the blue colour of the ocean; the blue colour of the ocean is similar to the blue of the sky. The blue of the sky is similar to the colour of the throne of G’d.” (9) It is important that you understand how Onkelos’ translation reflects the fact that there were actually two thrones, one underneath the other, and that the words תחת רגליו כמעשה לבנת ספיר refer to the lower of the thrones which is described here as “beneath its feet,” i.e. beneath the feet of the higher throne. The lower throne appeared to these nobles of The Children of Israel as מעשה לבנת ספיר. (The concept of the two thrones appears already in Chagigah 14) It is a fact that there are two thrones. This is why our verse wanted to make clear to you that beneath the upper throne there is a lower throne to which the description of the vision seen by the nobles of the Children of Israel became privy as a result of their vision.
The three foundations of G’d’s throne which we mentioned earlier are actually six and this is the mystical dimension of the verse in the Book of Kings dealing with details of Solomon’s throne (Kings I, 10,19). We read שש מעלות לכסא, “six steps were leading up to the throne.” The reason for this was that Solomon in his wisdom wanted to include in the construction of his own throne the מעלות, “advantages or virtues” of both the thrones in the celestial regions concerning which it has been written in Psalms 122,5: “for there the throne of judgment stood, thrones of the house of David.” This is the meaning of Chronicles I 29,23: “Solomon sat on the ‘throne of the Lord.’” This description applies to times when Israel enjoyed G’d’s goodwill. On the other hand, in times of Divine anger at Israel, the applicable verse is Daniel 7,9: עד די כרסון רמיו, “I watched until thrones were set in place and the Ancient of Days took His seat....His throne was tongues of flame, etc.” (10) There are some other commentators who explain the words כמעשה לבנת הספיר as describing the achievement of the nobles who could view the interior of the white sapphire, i.e. behold what is hidden from normal eyes inside it. Normally, this gem reveals only what is on its outside, preserving the mystery of its essence. All that becomes visible is a reflection of its inner essence. Its essence itself is not understood even by the beholder of its reflection. This would be similar to what G’d said to Moses in Exodus 6,3 וארא אל אברהם .....באל שדי, “I appeared to Avraham...as the G’d Shaddai.” He added: “but My name Hashem, i.e. My essence, I did not acquaint them (the patriarchs) with.” This is why our verse actually describes the vision of the nobles in the form of a parable which is designed to make us understand the נמשל, the moral lesson of the fable. Proof that we are speaking about a parable, “fable,” is the letter כ before the word מעשה which describes an approximation of the insight these people achieved at that time. Whenever prophets achieve insights, when the Israelites achieved insights at Mount Sinai, something the Torah described as פנים בפנים, “face to face” in Deut. 5,4, the reference is to “a spiritual force within another spiritual force.” The recipient of that revelation was granted to enter an interior chamber of a hidden mystical domain without penetrating to its core. In order to illustrate this the Torah wrote the word כמעשה to describe a process similar to the viewing of the luster of the sapphire without seeing its true interior.
The seventy elders of which the Torah speaks here were the overseers of the Israelites in Egypt who had allowed themselves to absorb beatings by the Egyptians rather than enforce harsher conditions imposed after Pharaoh responded cruelly to Moses’ first interview by making brick making harder for the people (5,16). This is why they were rewarded by having this vision of bricks made of sapphire. (7) A scientific approach to the words כמעשה לבנת ספיר: this is a reference to a vision of the original substantive matter in the universe, which exists immediately beneath the throne of G’d (compare Maimonides Moreh Nevuchim section 1 chapter 28). It looked to them like snow. Our sages in Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer 3 ask the rhetorical question: “whence (from what raw material) was the heaven created?” Answer: “from the light of His (G’d’s) garments.” This is what David meant when he said (Psalms 104,2) “You are wrapped in a robe of light. You spread the heavens like a tent cloth.” The earth was created out of the snow beneath the throne of glory. We have proof of this from Job 37,6: “He would command the snow: ‘become earth!’”
Onkelos, who translated the words as ”a splendid throne like the work of a gem stone,” understands the words “under His (its) feet” as a reference to the oceans which form the legs of that throne. The words רגליו means “its causes.” We encounter the words רגל in that sense in Ezekiel 1,7 ורגליהם רגל ישרה, or ועמדו רגליו in Zecharyah 14,4. The meaning in these verses is that the raw material emanates from beside it (G’d’s throne) and its proximity is the reason (cause) that it exists and endures.
Applied to our verse here, the word כמעשה, means that just as in the instances mentioned by Ezekiel and Zecharyah, these prophets were granted insights, these אצילי בני ישראל were granted these insights by means of the visions they experienced at this time. The word לבנת is a reference to the white of the egg which was beneath the throne of G’d and formed the original raw material from which earth was constructed. The reason the Torah did not write כלבנת ספיר but כמעשה לבנת ספיר, was to warn us that raw material is something passive, subject to outside influences, but unable to exert its own influences. It may have one colour one day and another colour on a different day depending on external stimuli. A ספיר is not white. If it were white it could not then have become all kinds of colours. Similarly, a raw material does not have a specific shape or form. This is why potentially it can assume any shape or form. This is the opinion of Maimonides in chapter 26 of the second part of his Moreh Nevuchim. I have copied his words. [a perusal of that chapter will reveal that Maimonides understands Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer as distinguishing two basic raw materials, one “beneath the throne,” i.e. materials used to create what is in the terrestrial universe, and the other “materials” used for the creation of the celestial universe. Maimonides came to this conclusion in order for the wording of Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer not to mislead us into thinking that he thought that the raw material preceded G’d the Creator. Ed.] (8) A kabbalistic approach on the words כמעשה לבנת הספיר. It is well known in the circles of the scholars dealing with celestial beings that the throne of G’d is based on three foundations: they are; אש, רוח, מים, “fire, wind, and water.” These three materials are emanated from three attributes of G’d חסד, דין, רחמים. They have three different colours, i.e. white, red, blue. Remember that the word לבנת in our verse refers to the colour “white.” The word ספיר alludes to the colour “red.” The word שמים in the expression כעצם השמים לטוהר refers to the colour “blue.” This is why Onkelos translated as he did. His translation reflects what our sages said in Sotah 17: “the blue of the ציצית is similar to the blue colour of the ocean; the blue colour of the ocean is similar to the blue of the sky. The blue of the sky is similar to the colour of the throne of G’d.” (9) It is important that you understand how Onkelos’ translation reflects the fact that there were actually two thrones, one underneath the other, and that the words תחת רגליו כמעשה לבנת ספיר refer to the lower of the thrones which is described here as “beneath its feet,” i.e. beneath the feet of the higher throne. The lower throne appeared to these nobles of The Children of Israel as מעשה לבנת ספיר. (The concept of the two thrones appears already in Chagigah 14) It is a fact that there are two thrones. This is why our verse wanted to make clear to you that beneath the upper throne there is a lower throne to which the description of the vision seen by the nobles of the Children of Israel became privy as a result of their vision.
The three foundations of G’d’s throne which we mentioned earlier are actually six and this is the mystical dimension of the verse in the Book of Kings dealing with details of Solomon’s throne (Kings I, 10,19). We read שש מעלות לכסא, “six steps were leading up to the throne.” The reason for this was that Solomon in his wisdom wanted to include in the construction of his own throne the מעלות, “advantages or virtues” of both the thrones in the celestial regions concerning which it has been written in Psalms 122,5: “for there the throne of judgment stood, thrones of the house of David.” This is the meaning of Chronicles I 29,23: “Solomon sat on the ‘throne of the Lord.’” This description applies to times when Israel enjoyed G’d’s goodwill. On the other hand, in times of Divine anger at Israel, the applicable verse is Daniel 7,9: עד די כרסון רמיו, “I watched until thrones were set in place and the Ancient of Days took His seat....His throne was tongues of flame, etc.” (10) There are some other commentators who explain the words כמעשה לבנת הספיר as describing the achievement of the nobles who could view the interior of the white sapphire, i.e. behold what is hidden from normal eyes inside it. Normally, this gem reveals only what is on its outside, preserving the mystery of its essence. All that becomes visible is a reflection of its inner essence. Its essence itself is not understood even by the beholder of its reflection. This would be similar to what G’d said to Moses in Exodus 6,3 וארא אל אברהם .....באל שדי, “I appeared to Avraham...as the G’d Shaddai.” He added: “but My name Hashem, i.e. My essence, I did not acquaint them (the patriarchs) with.” This is why our verse actually describes the vision of the nobles in the form of a parable which is designed to make us understand the נמשל, the moral lesson of the fable. Proof that we are speaking about a parable, “fable,” is the letter כ before the word מעשה which describes an approximation of the insight these people achieved at that time. Whenever prophets achieve insights, when the Israelites achieved insights at Mount Sinai, something the Torah described as פנים בפנים, “face to face” in Deut. 5,4, the reference is to “a spiritual force within another spiritual force.” The recipient of that revelation was granted to enter an interior chamber of a hidden mystical domain without penetrating to its core. In order to illustrate this the Torah wrote the word כמעשה to describe a process similar to the viewing of the luster of the sapphire without seeing its true interior.