ובחוקתיהם לא תלכו

You shall not copy the practices of the land of Egypt where you dwelt, or of the land of Canaan to which I am taking you; nor shall you follow their laws.

You shall not copy the practices of the land of Egypt where you dwelt, or of the land of Canaan to which I am taking you; nor shall you follow their laws.

8) If "As the deed of the land of Egypt and as the deed of the land of Canaan, you shall not do," I might think they should not build or plant as they do; it is, therefore, written (Joshua 11:15) "and in their statutes you shall not walk." I have proscribed for you only those statutes which were instituted for them and for their forefathers and for the fathers of their forefathers. What did they do? A man would wed a man, and a woman, a woman. A man would wed a woman and her daughter, and a woman would wed two — wherefore Scripture states "and in their statutes you shall not walk."

8) (Vayikra 18:3) "and in their statutes you shall not walk": What did Scripture leave unsaid (that this need be stated)? Is it not already written (Devarim 18:10) "There shall not be found among you one who passes his son or daughter through fire … (Devarim 18:11) and a chover chaver, etc."? What, then, is the intent of "and in their statutes you shall not walk"? In their customs — those things that are established for them — such as theatres, circuses, and sports. R. Meir says: These are "the ways of the Emorites," which the sages enumerated. R. Yehudah b. Betheira says: that you not preen yourself (to attract women), and not cultivate locks, and not wear the hair komi (a gentile fashion). And lest you say: "They have statutes and we have no statutes" — It is, therefore, written (Vayikra 18:9) "My judgments shall you do and My statutes you shall heed to walk in them; I am the L–rd your G d." — But there is still "hope" for the yetzer hara to reflect and say "But theirs are more beautiful than ours!" — It is, therefore, written (Devarim 4:6) "And you shall heed and you shall do. For this is your wisdom and your understanding."

We may not follow the statutes of the idolaters or resemble them in their [style] of dress, coiffure, or the like, as [Leviticus 20:23] states: "Do not follow the statutes of the nation [that I am driving out before you]," as [Leviticus 18:3] states: "Do not follow their statutes," and as [Deuteronomy 12:30] states: "Be careful, lest you inquire after them."[All these verses] share a single theme: they warn us not to try to resemble [the gentiles]. Instead, the Jews should be separate from them and distinct in their dress and in their deeds, as they are in their ideals and character traits. In this context, [Leviticus 20:26] states: "I have separated you from the nations [to be Mine]."[Thus,] one may not wear a garment which is unique to them or grow the tresses of our hair as they do. We may not shave our heads from the sides and leave hair in the center as they do. This is called a blorit. We may not shave the hair on the front of our faces from ear to ear and leave a growth at the back of our heads as they do. We may not build Temples in order that many people may enter as they do. Whoever performs one of the above or a deed of this nature is [liable for] lashes.

The rule is the same for idolators and for Samaritans. One may entrust to them shorn fields, harvested grain, and cut trees. Rabbi Yehuda says, low growth for shearing on the condition that he will shear it, grain to harvest on condition that he will harvest it, trees for cutting on the condition of cutting them. He who visits gentile camps (s’rat’ya’ot), it is prohibited, because of idolatry according to Rabbi Meir, but the Sages say, in a time when they are [actually] making offerings to idols it is prohibited because of idolatry but if they are not making offerings to idols it is prohibited because of “a session of scorners” (Ps 1:1). The one who goes theater and sees the snakes and the members of the muleteers in the saeculares, the saeculare is prohibited because of “a session of scorners” as it says, “And in a session of scorners he did not sit” (Ps 1:1), you learn that these bring a man to neglect studying Torah. The one who visits the theater of the idolators, if he cries out because someone is in need, he is permitted, but if he does it in alliance [with the Romans] it is prohibited. The one who sits in the theater, this is one who sheds blood. Rabbi Natan permits because of two things: because of crying and saving a life and testifying for a woman that would remarry. One may go to the theater in order to cry out and save the life or a camp of besiegers because of the welfare of the town, but if he is counted among them, it is forbidden.

The mitzva of those who are killed, i.e., the process of execution by decapitation, is carried out in the following manner: The executioners cut off his head with a sword, the way that the monarchy does when a king sentences a person to death. Rabbi Yehuda says: This manner of execution is improper, as it degrades him. Rather, they place the head of the condemned on the block, and chop it off with a cleaver [bekofitz]. The Rabbis said to him: If you are concerned about his degradation, there is no death penalty more degrading than that. It is better for him to be executed in the manner described first. The mitzva of those who are strangled is carried out in the following manner: The agents of the court submerge the condemned one in dung up to his knees so he cannot move, and one of them places a rough scarf within a soft one, and wraps it around his neck. This one, i.e., one of the witnesses, pulls the scarf toward him, and that one, the other witness, pulls it toward him, until the soul of the condemned one departs.

MISHNA: The mitzva of those who are killed, i.e., the process of execution by decapitation, is carried out in the following manner: The executioners cut off his head with a sword, the way that the monarchy does when a king sentences a person to death. Rabbi Yehuda says: This manner of execution is improper, as it degrades him. Rather, they place the head of the condemned on the block, and chop it off with a cleaver [bekofitz]. The Rabbis said to him: If you are concerned about his degradation, there is no death penalty more degrading than that. It is better for him to be executed in the manner described first. GEMARA: It is taught in a baraita (Tosefta 9:3): Rabbi Yehuda said to the Rabbis: I too, know that it is a degrading death, but what shall I do, as the Torah states: “And you shall not follow their statutes” (Leviticus 18:3), i.e., it is prohibited to adopt the practices of the gentiles. The Gemara asks: And how do the Rabbis respond to this claim? The Gemara answers: Since decapitation by the sword is written in the Torah, it is not from the gentiles that we learn it. This is Torah law, and the custom of the gentiles is not taken into consideration. It is of no import that they have a corresponding type of execution. As, if you do not say so, that a Jewish custom is not forbidden even if the gentiles have the same custom, then that which is taught in a baraita poses a difficulty. The baraita teaches: One burns vessels and clothes over the deaths of kings as an expression of grief, and this is not forbidden for being of the ways of the Amorites. How can we perform this burning? But isn’t it written: “And you shall not follow their statutes”? Rather, since burning items over the death of a king is written in the Torah, as it is written: “And with the burnings of your fathers, the first kings who came before you, so shall they make a burning for you” (Jeremiah 34:5), it is not from the gentiles that we learn it. And here too, since decapitation by the sword is written in the Torah, it is not from them that we learn it.

§ The mishna teaches that according to Rabbi Meir the birthday of the king and the day of the death of the king are considered gentile festivals, whereas the Rabbis hold that only a death that includes public burning is considered a festival that includes idol worship. The Gemara comments: By inference, this means that Rabbi Meir holds that there is no difference whether it is a death that includes public burning, and there is no difference whether it is a death that does not include public burning; in either case, they engage in idol worship on that occasion. Evidently, Rabbi Meir holds that the burning performed at the death of the king is not an idolatrous custom, as it is not the cause of the prohibition. The Gemara continues: From here, one can conclude by inference that the Rabbis hold that the burning upon the death of the king is an idolatrous custom. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: We burn items upon the death of kings as an expression of grief, and this is not of the ways of the Amorites, but rather a Jewish custom? And if this is an idolatrous custom, how could we perform this public burning? But isn’t it written: “And you shall not walk in their statutes” (Leviticus 18:3)? Rather, everyone agrees that the public burning itself is not an idolatrous custom. Rather, it is performed due to the great importance of the king who passed away. And here, in the mishna, they disagree about this: Rabbi Meir holds that there is no difference whether it is a death that includes public burning and there is no difference whether it is a death that does not include public burning; in either case, in practice they engage in idol worship on that occasion. And the Rabbis hold that a death that includes public burning is important to the gentiles, and therefore they engage in idol worship on that occasion, but a death that does not include public burning is not important to them, and they do not engage in idol worship on that occasion.

If It's a Chukah, How Can We Burn? Why is this a question? Perhaps it is a Chukah (ritual), and since it's in the Torah, we're not bound by the prohibition against following their rituals. Sanhedrin 52b discusses execution. The Rabbis say to use a sword as the kings do. Rebbi Yehudah prefers an axe, citing the prohibition against following their rituals. The Rabbis counter that since "killing" is in the Torah, we're not emulating them. [If so, why question burning for kings?] Perhaps our Mishnah's Rabbis follow Rebbi Yehudah, who does consider it following their rituals. [But we conclude burning isn't a Chukah!] Rabbeinu Yitzhak explains there are two types: those for idolatry, and those out of silly custom. Our Gemara refers to idolatry. Rebbi Meir holds burning for kings isn't idolatrous, hence the question. If it were idolatrous, it'd be forbidden, even if mentioned in the Torah, like the matzeivah (stone altar), loved when the Patriarchs used it, but hated when the Amorites made it idolatrous. The Gemara concludes it's not idolatrous, just silly custom. Sanhedrin 52b understands "Chukah" as something important, based on this conclusion. Thus, even Rebbi Yehudah agrees it's permitted if in the Torah and not idolatrous. If not in the Torah, we wouldn't follow it, even if just silly. "Killing" doesn't specify "sword," so an axe is fine. Even for a condemned city, "by the sword" might include an axe. The Rabbis there prefer a sword to avoid a gruesome death.