Shemos
Book 2: Exodus
MISHPATIM - RASHI COMMENTARY
Chapter 21 - Rashi
Verse 1: These are the laws.
Wherever the word {Hebrew Ref} (without a vov) is used
it disqualifies that which preceded it
[But the word] {Hebrew Ref} (with a vov)
is a continuation of that which preceded it.1
[Here too {Hebrew Ref} conveys that] just as
the preceding words (the Ten Commandments)
were [received] from Sinai
these [following laws] also were [received] from Sinai.2
Then why was the section of judgments placed near
the section dealing with the altar?3
This is to teach you
that the chamber of the Sanhedrin should be placed
near the Beis Hamikdosh (some mss: the altar).4 5
That you shall set before them.6
G-d said to Moshe:
"Do not allow it to enter your mind to say,
'I will teach them the section or the law
two or three times
until it will become fluent in their mouths
exactly as it is taught,
but I will not bother myself
to make them understand the reasons for each thing
and its explanation.' "
It therefore states: "that you shall set before them"---
like a set table
with everything ready to be eaten, for the person.7
Before them---8
and not before the gentiles.
And even if you know of a particular law
that they render the same as Jewish law,
[nevertheless] do not bring the matter to their courts
for one who brings law cases of Bnei Yisrael
before [the courts of] gentiles
profanes the Name of G-d
and esteems the name of the idols
bringing [undue] praise to them
(other mss: to bring [undue] importance to them)
as it is said:
"For their rock is not as our Rock
that our enemies should be our judges,"9
[thereby indicating] that when our enemies
are our judges,
it is testimony to the superiority of their idols.10
Verse 2: If you buy a Hebrew slave.
[ {Hebrew Ref} here means:] a slave who is a Hebrew.
Or perhaps it means the slave of a Hebrew,
[i.e.,] a gentile slave bought from a Jew
and it is regarding him that it is said:
"He shall serve for six years?"
[Should you then ask:] how can I explain:
"And you shall leave them (the gentile slaves)
as an inheritance...?"11
[I would answer that it refers to a gentile slave]
who was bought from the gentiles,
but if bought from a Jew
he shall go free after six years.12
Therefore, it states:
"If your brother, the Hebrew, is sold to you
[he shall serve you six years]"13
I tell you this (that he serves six years) only
in regard to your brother [a Hebrew slave].14 15
If you buy---
from the hand of the court
that sold him for a theft he committed
as it is said:
"If he (the thief) has nothing [with which to
reimburse his victim], he must be sold for his theft."16
Or perhaps it refers to
[a slave] who sold himself
because of his dire need,17
but if the court sells him [for theft]
he would not go free after six years!18
[This is wrong] for when the Torah says:
"When your brother becomes destitute with you19
and is then sold to you"---
then the selling of oneself out of dire need
has already been discussed!
Then how do I explain [the verse] {Hebrew Ref} [here]?
When he is sold through the court!
Free.
[ {Hebrew Ref} means:] into freedom.
Summary of Rashi's conclusions in v. 2.
1. A Hebrew slave can be obtained when the court sells
him for a theft for which he cannot reimburse the victim.
2. He can also sell himself when he is destitute.
3. In both of the above cases he goes free after six years.
4. A gentile slave serves in perpetuity regardless of
whether he was bought from a Jew or a gentile.
Verse 3: If he came by himself.
[Meaning:] that he was unmarried,
as it is translated by Onkelos:
{Hebrew Ref} ---"if by himself."
The term {Hebrew Ref} is the same as {Hebrew Ref} ---
"with his skirt,"
i.e., he came in as is, alone,
wrapped in his garment, in the skirt of his garment.
He shall go out by himself.20
This teaches that if he was unmarried
at first (when he came into servitude),
his master may not give him a gentile handmaid
[against his will] so as to have slave-children from her.21
If he [was] married---
to a Jewish woman---22
his wife shall go out with him.
But who was it that brought her in
that [it has to be said that] she goes out?23
But the Torah teaches
that he who acquires a Hebrew slave
becomes obligated to support
his (the slave's) wife and children.24 25
Verse 4: If his master should give him a wife.
From here [we derive] that his master has the right
to give him a gentile handmaid
to beget slaves from her.
Or perhaps it is only a Jewish wife [that
he may give him]. Therefore the Torah says:
"The woman and her children belong to her master,"
indicating that it refers only to a gentile woman,
for a Hebrew handmaid too26 goes free after six years
and even earlier than six years,
if she shows signs of puberty, she goes free,
as it is said:
"[If] your Hebrew brother or sister
[be sold to you they shall serve you for six years]"27
which teaches that also a Hebrew handmaid
goes free after six [years].28
Verse 5: My wife.29
The handmaid.
Verse 6: To the judges.30
{Hebrew Ref} means---"to court."
He (the slave) should consult with those who sold him,31
for it was they who sold him to him (the master).32
To the door or to the doorpost.
This might lead you to think
that the doorpost is a proper place upon which to pierce.
The Torah therefore says:
"You shall put the awl in his ear and in the door"---33
in the door but not in the doorpost.
Then why does the Torah say:
"or to the doorpost?"
This is to compare the door with the doorpost:
just as the doorpost is upright,34
so too must the door be upright.35 36
And his master shall pierce his ear.
The right [ear].
Or perhaps it refers to the left one?
Therefore the Torah says:
" {Hebrew Ref} " [here and] {Hebrew Ref} [elsewhere]
so as to make an analogy [called a {Hebrew Ref} ]:37
here it states:
"And his master shall pierce {Hebrew Ref} (his ear),"
and regarding a metsorah it states:
"The right ear lobe of the one to be purified."38
Just as in the latter verse it refers to the right one,
here, too, it refers to the right one.
Why was the ear chosen to be pierced
rather than all the other limbs of the body?
Said Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai:
The ear, which heard upon Mount Sinai,
"You shall not steal!"39
and, he nevertheless, went ahead and stole,
should [have his ear] pierced!
And in the case where he sold himself:
The ear that heard on Mount Sinai:
"For to Me are the B'nei Yisrael servants"40
and he, nevertheless, went ahead
and acquired a master for himself,
should [have his ear] pierced!
Rabbi Shimon expounded this verse
in a beautiful manner:41
Why are the door and the doorpost different from
other objects of the house?
G-d, in effect, said:
"The door and doorpost were witnesses in Egypt
when I passed over the lintel and the two doorposts,
and I said:
'For to me are the B'nei Yisrael servants' "
---they are My servants, not servants of servants,
and this person went ahead
and acquired a master for himself,
he shall [have his ear] pierced in their presence.42
He then serves his master forever.
[This means] until yovel (the Jubilee year).
Or perhaps it means forever
as is its literal meaning?
The Torah therefore says:43
"And each man will return to his family."
This teaches that fifty years are referred to as forever.
This does not mean that he serves him
for the entire fifty years,
but rather he serves him till the Jubilee,44
whether it is near at hand, whether it is far off.45
Verse 7: If a man sell his daughter
to be a maidservant.
This verse speaks of a minor [daughter].
One might think [that the verse applies]
even if she shows signs [of puberty].
You must say [that this is not so] a fortiori:
Just as one who is sold beforehand (as a minor)
goes free upon showing signs [of puberty],
as is written:
"She goes out free, with no repayment of money,"46
which we expound
as referring to one who shows signs of adolescence,47
then one who has not yet been sold [at this age]
does logic not dictate
that she not be sold at all?48
She shall not go out [free]
in the manner of male slaves.
[I.e.,] in the manner that gentile slaves go free,
for they go free [for the loss] of a "tooth and an eye."49
But this woman
does not go free for the loss of "tooth and eye"
but rather she serves for six years or until the Jubilee,
or until she shows signs of puberty.
Whichever [of these] comes first
brings her freedom first.50
However, he (the master) must reimburse her
for the value of her eye or the value of her tooth.
Or perhaps this is not so,
but rather "she shall not go free
in the manner of the slaves"
[means in the manner of Hebrew slaves
who go free] after
six years or the Jubilee year?
The Torah therefore says:
"If there should be sold to you your Hebrew brother
or your Hebrew sister,"
thereby comparing the Hebrew woman
to the Hebrew man
in regard to all manners of their attaining their freedom:
Just as the Hebrew man goes free
after six years and the Jubilee year
so too the Hebrew woman goes free
after six years and the Jubilee year.
Then what is the meaning of {Hebrew Ref} ?
[It means:] she shall not go free [for the loss]
of the ends of the limbs
as do the gentile slaves.
One might think that the Hebrew slave
does go free for the loss of the ends of the limbs,
Therefore the Torah says:
"The Hebrew slave or the Hebrew maidservant,"
thereby comparing the Hebrew man
to the Hebrew woman:
just as the Hebrew woman does not go out free
for the loss of the ends of the limbs
so too does he (the Hebrew man) not go free
for the loss of the ends of the limbs.51
Verse 8: If she is displeasing to her master.
[Meaning:] she has not found favor in his eyes
so that he might marry her.52
Who had not designated her as his wife.53
[Meaning:] that he should have designated her
and should have married her.54
The money used for her purchase
serves as the "money" for executing the marriage.55
Here the Torah implies
that it is a mitzvah for him to marry her.56 57
It [also] indicates to you
that she requires no other marriage ritual.58
He must allow her to be redeemed.
[ {Hebrew Ref} means:] he must give her the opportunity
to be redeemed and to go free,
for he, too, must aid in her redemption.59
And what is this opportunity that he gives to her?
He deducts from her redemption price
according to the number of years that she has served him,
as if she had been hired by him.60
How is this [calculated]?
If [for example] he bought her for a maneh61
and she has worked for him for two years,
they say to him:
"You were aware that she was destined to go free
at the end of six years.
Consequently you have bought each year's work
for one-sixth of a maneh.
Now she has served you for two years.
Thereby [giving you]
one-third of a maneh's [worth of service].
Take therefore two-thirds of a maneh
and let her go free from your possession."62
He has no power to sell her to an alien people.63
[Meaning:] that he may not sell her to another man---
neither the master nor the father [may do so].64 65
For he has dealt deceitfully with her.
[Meaning:] if he (the master) intends
to deal deceitfully with her
by not fulfilling with her
the mitzvah of designating her as his wife.66
So too the father [may not sell her again],
since he has dealt deceitfully with her
by selling her to this one.67
Verse 9: If he has designated her as a wife for his son.
["He" refers to] the master.68
This teaches that the son, too,
may stand in his (the master's) place
for the purpose of designating her as his wife,
if his father consents,
and he will not require another marriage ritual,
but rather just says to her:
"You are hereby designated to me as a wife
for the money that your father accepted as your price."69
The same rights as daughters.
[The rights to] food, clothing, and marital relations.70
Verse 10: If he takes himself another [wife]---
besides her.71
Her sustenance, her clothing,
and her conjugal rights
he must not diminish---
from the maidservant
whom he had already designated as his wife.72
Her sustenance.
[ {Hebrew Ref} means:] food.
Her clothing.
[ {Hebrew Ref} is translated in] its literal sense.
Her conjugal rights.
[ {Hebrew Ref} refers to] marital relations.73
Verse 11: If he does none of these three things to her
If he does none of these three things to her---
what are the three things [referred to here]?74
[they are:] 1. He should designate her as his wife,
or, 2. [as the wife] of his son
or, 3. he shall deduct from her redemption price
and she would go out free.
But this man has not designated her as a wife,
neither for himself, nor for his son
nor did she have the means
to redeem herself, [then---]
she goes out free.
The Torah adds a way of going free for this woman
in addition to the ways provided for male slaves.
And what is this [additional] way of going free?
[The verse intends] to teach you
that she gains her freedom by showing signs [of puberty]
but she must stay with him
until she demonstrates signs [of puberty].
Should the six years [of her service] arrive
before her signs [of puberty]
then we have already learned the she goes free,
as it is said:
"[If a] Hebrew man or woman [be sold to you]
they shall serve you for six years,
[and in the seventh year you shall set him free]."75
Then what is meant by what is said here:
"She goes out for nothing?"
That if her signs [of puberty] appear before
[she completes] the six years [of service],
she goes free as a result of them.
Or perhaps the Torah means to say [here]
that she goes free only upon reaching adulthood?76
The Torah therefore states:
"With no repayment of money"---77
to add her being freed as a result of reaching adulthood.78
But if they were not both79 said
I would have assumed
that {Hebrew Ref} refers to the reaching of adulthood.80
Therefore they are both said
so as not to give an opening
to one who may want to oppose [the said conclusion]
to dispute it.81
Verse 12: If one strikes a man and he [the victim] dies.
Many verses were written82
in the sections concerning murderers
and whatever is in my ability to explain
I shall explain.
If one strikes a man and he dies.
Why was said?83
Since it is said:
"If a man should strike any human being
he shall be put to death,"84
I might conclude [from this:]
[even if it is] a blow which does not cause death.85
Therefore the Torah says [here]:
"If one strikes a man and he dies"
[thereby clarifying that] he is not liable
unless he struck a blow which caused death.86
If [only] {Hebrew Ref} ---"If one strikes a man" was
said,
and {Hebrew Ref} ---"If a man should strike" was
not said,
I would have concluded
that he is not liable unless he strikes an adult man;
but were he to strike a woman or a minor
how would we know [that he is liable]?
Therefore the Torah says:
"If he should strike any human being"---
even a minor, even a woman.87
Furthermore, had it said [only] {Hebrew Ref}
I would have concluded that
even were a minor to strike a blow and kill
he would be liable.88
Therefore the Torah says:
"If a man should89 strike a blow,"
but not a minor who struck a blow.90
Furthermore, [had it said only:]
"If he should strike any human being"
even the prematurely born would be included.
The Torah therefore says:
"If one strikes a man."
indicating that he is not liable
unless he kills a viable person
who is fit to be "a man."91
Verse 13: But if he did not lie in wait.
[I.e.,] he did not wait for him in ambush
and he had no intent [to kill him].92 93
Lie in wait.
{Hebrew Ref} "means to lie in ambush."
Similarly it states:
"You ( {Hebrew Ref} ) lie in ambush for my soul, to take it."94
It is impossible to say
that {Hebrew Ref} is derived from {Hebrew Ref} ---
["the one that has hunted game"],95
for the [verb for] "hunting" of animals
does not take the letter hey in its verb,96
and the noun [for hunting] is {Hebrew Ref}
whereas the other one's noun is {Hebrew Ref} (lying in wait
)
and its verb is {Hebrew Ref} (to lie in wait)
whereas this one's verb (to hunt) is {Hebrew Ref} .
[Therefore] I say that its meaning is
as Onkelos translates it:
"and if he did not lie in ambush for him."97
However, Menachem [Ibn Saruk] lists it in his Machberes98
under the section of {Hebrew Ref} (hunting)
but I do not agree with him.
If it is to be listed in one of the {Hebrew Ref} sections
we should preferably list it
in the section: "you will be carried on ( {Hebrew Ref} ) her
side"99
[or:] "I will shoot arrows ( {Hebrew Ref} ) on that side"100
[or:] "And he shall speak ( {Hebrew Ref} ) towards
the One Above."101
Here, too, {Hebrew Ref} [would mean]:
he has not taken any side (i.e., opportunity)
to find any side (i.e., occasion) for killing.
This explanation, too, is questionable
yet [this latter explanation is preferable
to Menachem's for] it has the connotation of "ambush."
But G-d brought it to his hand.
[ {Hebrew Ref} means:] prepared it for his hand,
from the same derivation as:
"No evil shall ( {Hebrew Ref} ) befall you,"102
[or:] "No iniquity ( {Hebrew Ref} ) shall befall a tzaddik,
"103
[or:] "( {Hebrew Ref} ) He makes himself ready for me."104
I.e., he prepares to find some opportunity against me.
But G-d brought it to his hand.
Why would such a thing result from Him?105
This is what David meant when he said:
"As the proverb of the Ancient One says:
'Wickedness emanates from the wicked.' "106
The "proverb of the Ancient One" refers to the Torah,
which is the "proverb" of G-d,
Who is the "Ancient One" (i.e., precedes) of the universe.
And where is it that the Torah said
that wickedness emanates from the wicked?
[Here where] "G-d brought it to his hand;"
for what is the case that this verse discusses?
[It concerns] two people---
one killed accidentally107
and the other killed with premeditation108
but there were no witnesses
who could testify [against them].
[Hence] the latter one was not executed
and the former was not sent into exile.109
G-d then causes them to meet at the same inn.
The one who killed with premeditation
is sitting under a ladder
and the one who killed accidentally
goes up the ladder
and falls upon the one who killed with premeditation,
and kills him, and witnesses testify against him
making him liable to be exiled.110
The result is that the one who killed accidentally
is exiled111
and the one who killed with premeditation is killed.112
Then I will designate for you a place.113
even [for now] in the desert114
so that [the murderer] can flee there.
Which was the place that gave him refuge?
It was the camp of the Levites.115
Verse 14: If he plots.
Why is this [verse] said?116
Because [from that which] it states:
"If one strikes a man, etc."
I might conclude [that all the following are liable to death:]
a doctor who killed [in the course of treatment],
and a court-officer who killed
[inadvertently, while adminstering] forty lashes,
and a father
who strikes his son [inadvertently killing him.]
and a teacher who disciplines
his student [thereby killing him]
and who [attempting to kill an animal] kills a man.
The Torah therefore says:
"If he plots," but not inadvertently;
"to kill him intentionally," but not a court officer,
or a doctor or one who disciplines his son or student,
for, though they [struck their blows] intentionally,
they did not plan [to kill].
From My altar.
Even if he is a kohein and wishes to perform the service
you must take him to be executed.117
Verse 15: Whoever strikes his father or his mother.
Since we have learned118
that one who wounds his fellow man
is liable to pay for damages
but he is not to be put to death,
it was necessary to state
that one who wounds his father
is to be put to death.
But he is liable only
with a blow which causes a wound.119
His father or his mother.
[Meaning:] either one or the other.
He shall be put to death---
by strangulation.120
Verse 16: Whoever steals a man and sells him.
Why is this said?121
Since it is said:
"If a man be found to have stolen
a person from among his fellow---men [he shall die]"122
I would know only [that this applies to]
a man who stole another person.
But a woman, or one whose gender is indistinguishable,
or a hermaphrodite who stole,
how would we know [that this law applies]?
Therefore the Torah says:
"Whoever steals a person and sells him."123
And since it is stated here:
"Whoever steals a man,"
I might think that [this applies]
only if he steals a man.
How would I know if he steals a woman?
Therefore the Torah says:
"If he steals a person."
It is for this reason that both [verses] are necessary,
what one omits the other reveals.124
If he is found in his hand.125
[Meaning:] that witnesses saw him
stealing him and selling him
and he was already in his (the thief's) possession
before he sold him.126
He shall be put to death---
by strangulation.
Wherever the Torah mentions an unspecified death
it refers to strangulation.127
(It [the Torah] interrupted the context and wrote:
"Whoever steals a man"
between "Whoever strikes his father or mother"
and "Whoever curses his father or mother."128
It seems to me that this is the basis for the dispute
[between the Sages],129 where one maintains
that we compare striking to cursing
and the other holds that we do not compare them130 131)
Verse 17: Whoever curses his father or his mother.
Why is this said?
Since it states:
"If a man curses his father"132
I might think that only a man
who cursed his father [is liable].
But if a woman cursed her father,
how would we know [that she is liable]?
The Torah therefore says:
"Whoever curses his father or mother,"
generalizing so as to include both man and woman.
If so then why is it necessary to state:
"If a man curses?"
It is to exclude a minor [from liability].133
He shall be put to death---
by stoning.134
Wherever it is said: "His blood is upon him"
[then the death penalty] is stoning.
The original verse [from which we know this to be]
in all cases 135
[is:] "They shall be stoned with rocks,
their blood is upon them,"136
and regarding one who curses his father or mother
it states: "His blood is upon him"137 138
Verse 18: When men quarrel.
Why is this said?139
From that which is said: "An eye for an eye"140
we would learn only [the requirement to compensate]
the value of his (the injured person's) limbs141
but [the requirement to compensate for]
the loss of work and medical costs
we would not have learned.
Therefore this section needed to be said.142
But becomes bed ridden.
As Onkelos translates it:
"And he will fall into idleness,"
[i.e.,] to illness that will keep him from his work.
Verse 19: On his own power.
[Meaning:] on his health and his strength.143
The one who struck him shall be acquitted.
Would it enter your mind
that this person, who has not killed would be killed?!
But here you are taught [by {Hebrew Ref} ]
that he is imprisoned until it becomes clear
whether the other one (the victim) will recover.
And this is the meaning [of this verse]:
When the other (the victim) rises
and walks "with his cane" (i.e., his health returns)
then the one who struck the blow is acquitted144
but as long as the other has not risen,
then the one who struck the blow is not acquitted.145 146
Still he must pay for his loss of work.
His loss of work due to the illness.
[E.g.,] if he cut off the other's hand or foot,
we calculate his loss of work
due to the illness [caused by his injury]
as if he wore a watchman over gourds147
for even after his illness is over
he will not be fit for work that requires hands or feet
and he has already compensated him,
as a result of [his paying him] his damages,
the value of his hand or foot,148
as it is said:
"A hand for a hand, a foot for a foot."149 150
And must pay for his complete cure.
As Onkelos translates it: [ {Hebrew Ref} ]
---he must pay the doctor's fee.151
Verse 20: If a man strikes
his male or female slave.
This verse speaks of a gentile slave.
Or perhaps it speaks of a Hebrew [slave]?
Therefore the Torah states:
"For he is his master's property."
Just as his property is his forever
so too the slave [discussed here]
is the one that is his forever.152
But he was included in [the general rules]:
"Whoever strikes a man
who dies [shall be put to death]!"153
But [the answer is:] that this verse comes
and singles him out of the general rule,
to indicate that he (the struck slave) is to be judged
by the rule of "a day or two,"
that if he did not die beneath his hand
but lingered for a period of twenty-four hours,
[then the master is] free [from the death penalty].154
With a rod.
When it (the rod) is capable of causing death---
the Torah is speaking.
Or perhaps it refers even to [a rod]
which is incapable of causing death?155
Therefore the Torah says
concerning a Yisraelite [victim]:
"And if with a stone in his hand,
whereby he would die, did he strike him."156
Now in this matter does it not follow a fortiori.
Just as [when the victim is] a Yisraelite
[whose murder is] more stringent,157
and he (the murderer) is not liable [to be put to death]
unless he struck him with something
that is capable of causing death,
and upon a limb which is capable of causing death
with this sort of a blow,
then regarding [a victim who is] a slave,
whose killing is more lenient,158
it follows even more so.159 160
[The death] must be avenged.
Through death by the sword,
for the Torah similarly states:161 "a sword that avenges
the vengeance of the covenant."162 163
Verse 21: However, if he survives for a day or two
his death is not avenged.
If one day['s survival]
frees [the master from the death penalty,]
then is not two days' survival even more self-evident?
But [the answer is that {Hebrew Ref} is said to teach that]
"one day" should be as two days.
And how is this?
A full day of twenty-four hours.164 165
[The death] is not avenged for he is his property.
But if another person166 would strike him,
then even were he to linger for 24 hours
before dying,
he (the one who struck the slave) would be liable.167
Verse 22: If men will fight---
with one another,168
and one intended to strike the other
and [inadvertently] struck the woman.169
And they strike.
{Hebrew Ref} always has the meaning of "shoving" and
"striking,"
as in: "Lest you strike your foot against a rock,"170
[or:] "before your feet are struck,"171
[or:] "For a stone for striking."172
but their is no fatal injury---
to the woman.
He is to be punished---
by paying for the value of the offspring
to the husband.173
[How is their value determined?]
we evaluate what her price would be
if she were sold in the market place [as a slave],
increasing her value due to her pregnancy.174 175
He is to be punished.
They shall impose monetary compensation on him
as in: "( {Hebrew Ref} ) they shall impose upon him
a payment of one hundred silver [shekels]."176 177
When the husband demands etc.
[I.e.,] when the husband summons him
to the court [asking the court]
to place a penalty on him for this.
He shall pay.
I.e., the one who struck [the one woman]
[shall pay] the value of the offspring.
As determined by the judges.
[ {Hebrew Ref} means:] as determined by the judges.178
Verse 23: However if there is a fatal injury---
to the woman.
You shall give [up] a life for a life.
Our Sages have differing opinions regarding this matter.
Some say [that it means] literally, a life.179
Others, however, say [that it means]
monetary compensation
but not, literally, a life,
for one who intends to kill one person
and killed another, is exempt from the death penalty.
He must compensate the heirs
with his (the victim's) worth
as if he were someone sold in the marketplace.180
Verse 24: An eye for an eye.
If he blinded the eye of another person
he must compensate him for the worth of his eye,
[i.e.,] the amount his worth decreased
were he to be sold [as a slave] in the marketplace.
all the other cases are181 similar to this
and they do not refer to the actual removal of a limb,
as our Sages expounded in Chapter Hachovel.182
Verse 25: A burn for a burn.
[ {Hebrew Ref} means:] burn caused by fire.
Up to this point (i.e., the previous verse)
the Torah has spoken of a wound
whereby [the victim suffers] a lessening of worth
But now [it speaks of one]
whereby [the victim does not suffer] a lessening of worth,
but only pain,
for example, where one burnt another
on his nails with a hot spit,183
we would estimate how much [money] such a person
would be willing to accept to undergo such pain.184
A wound.
[ {Hebrew Ref} ] is a wound that draws blood
whereby his (the victim's) flesh was lacerated,
navrdure in Old French---"a wound."
[The liability of the one inflicting the wound] all depends
on what occurred:
If [the blow] causes a diminishing of [the victim's] worth
he must pay damages.
If [the victim] is confined to bed,
he must pay for loss of work,
and medical costs,
and the shame the victim suffers
and the pain the victim suffers.185
Actually this verse is superfluous.186
In the Chapter Hachovel187 our Sages expound it
to make him liable for inflicting pain
even where damages [have been paid],
i.e., although he has compensated him
for the value of his hand,
we do not absolve him from [paying for] the pain,
by suggesting that since he (the damager)
has, in effect, bought his (the victim's) hand188
he therefore should have the right to sever it
in whatever manner he wishes,189
But rather we say:
he should have severed it with an anesthetic,
whereby the victim would not endure so much pain.
But he, however, severed it with metal
and inflicted pain
[and he must therefore pay for that pain].190
A bruise.191
{Hebrew Ref} is a wound where the blood collects
but does not break through [the skin]
only that the flesh of that area becomes red.192
The term {Hebrew Ref} is taje193 in Old French
as in: "or the leopard ( {Hebrew Ref} ) his spots.
"194
Onkelos, however, translates it ( {Hebrew Ref} )
" {Hebrew Ref} ," meaning "a blow."
Batdure in Old French---"a blow, a beating."
Similarly " {Hebrew Ref} "195---"beaten by the
east-wind"
is translated by Onkelos: " {Hebrew Ref} "196
[which means:] "beaten by the wind."
Similarly {Hebrew Ref} ---"on the lintel,"197
so-called because the door beats against it.
Verse 26: The eye of his slave---
who is gentile.
But a Hebrew [slave] does not go out free
due to the loss of a tooth or an eye198
as we have already said regarding [the verse]
"She shall not go free as do the [gentile] male-slaves."199
As compensation for the eye.
The same [applies to the loss of] 24 tips of limbs:
the fingers of the hands and feet,
the two ears, the nose
and the {Hebrew Ref} which is the membrum.200
Then why are the tooth and eye both mentioned?201
Because if "the eye" was mentioned
and "the tooth" would not be mentioned
I would have said [that "the tooth" is excluded]:
Just as the eye was created together with him
so, too, any [limb] that was created together with him,
whereas "the tooth" was not created together with him.202
Had "the tooth" been mentioned
and "the eye" not been mentioned,
I would have said [that this law also includes]
even a "baby-tooth," though it replaces itself.
Therefore "the eye" is mentioned.203 204
Verse 28: If an ox gores.
Whether it be an ox or any animal, beast or bird.
But the Torah speaks of what is common.205
And its flesh may not be eaten.
From that which is implied by what is said:
"The ox shall be stoned"
would I not myself know that it is neveilah206
and the eating of neveilah is prohibited?
But then why does the Torah state [here]
"and its flesh may not be eaten?"
[To teach] that even were he to ritually slaughter it
after the sentence has been set by the court,207
nevertheless, its eating is prohibited.
From where do we derive that all benefit [is prohibited
as well]? The Torah states:
"The owner of the ox shall be {Hebrew Ref} (lit. clean
),"
which is to be understood as when a man says to another:
"So and so has ( {Hebrew Ref} ) been cleaned out
of his properties208
and has no benefit from them whatever."
That is its midrashic explanation (i.e., of {Hebrew Ref} ).
But its plain meaning is as it implies:
Since regarding a {Hebrew Ref} 209 it is stated:
"and the owner shall also die,"210
it was necessary to state, regarding a {Hebrew Ref} ,211
"And the owner of the ox shall go unpunished."
Verse 29: Yesterday and the day before---
making it a total of three gorings.212 213
And a warning was given to its owner.
[ {Hebrew Ref} is] a term denoting a warning given before
witnesses
as in: "The man has ( {Hebrew Ref} ) warned us."214
And it kills a man, etc.215
Since it has been stated [in the previous verse]:
"If [an ox] will gore"
I could only know [that this law applies]
when it killed him through goring.
Were it to kill him with biting, shoving, and kicking,
how would I then know it?
Therefore the Torah states:
[the extra] {Hebrew Ref} .216 217
And the owner also shall die---
by Divine decree.
One might think that [he dies] at the hand of man.218
The Torah therefore states:
"The one who struck the blow shall be put to death,
he is a murderer."219
For a murder committed by himself
you must put him to death,
but you do not put him to death
for the killing committed by his ox.220
Verse 30: When an atonement---fine
shall be imposed on him.
The word {Hebrew Ref} here is not conditional221
but, rather, is the same as in
"( {Hebrew Ref} ) when you shall lend money,"222
[where the word {Hebrew Ref} ] has the meaning "when."
Thus this is the law [regarding the
owner who is liable to death by Divine decree]:
that the court impose indemmity on him.
And he must give for the redemption of his soul.223
[This refers to] the worth of the injured party.
This is Rabbi Yishmael's opinion.224
But Rabbi Akiva says:
the worth of the one whose ox did the damage.225 226
Verse 31: Whether it is a son that is gored.
[This refers to] a son who is a minor
Or a daughter---
who is a minor.227
Since it states:
"If it kills a man or a woman,"228
I might have thought
that he is liable only for [the deaths of] adults.229
Therefore the Torah states:
"Whether it is a son that is gored, etc.
to indicate that he is liable for [the deaths of] minor
just as [he is liable for the deaths of] adults.230
Verse 32: If a male or female slave---
gentile [slaves].231 232
[Its owner] must give thirty silver shekalim.
This is a decree of the Torah,233
whether he is worth one thousand zuz
or if he is worth but a dinar.
A shekel has the weight of four gold coins
which total half an ounce
according to the correct weight
of [the province of] Cologne.234
Verse 33: If a man uncovers a pit---
which was covered and he uncovered it.
Or if [a man] digs.
Why need this be said?
If he is liable for uncovering it,235
then he certainly [is liable] for digging it.
But the answer is: [the intent here is] to include
one who digs a pit [to completion] after another has dug:
he (the one who completed the pit) is liable.236
And does not cover it.
But if he covers it, he is not liable.237
The Torah speaks of digging in the public domain.238 239
An ox or a donkey.
The same law applies to any animal or beast,
because wherever it says {Hebrew Ref}
we derive it [from a {Hebrew Ref} ]
that " {Hebrew Ref} " [is the same as] " {Hebrew Ref} "
regarding Shabbos,
where it is said:
"So that your ox and donkey may rest."240
And just as in the latter case all animals and beasts
are [to be treated the same] as the ox,
for it says elsewhere:
"And all your animals;"241
here, too, all animals and beasts
[have the same rules] as the ox.
The only reason it does state {Hebrew Ref} is
[so that you may infer]: "an ox," but not a man242
a "donkey," but not vessels.243
Verse 34: The owner of the pit.244
[This means:] the one who instigated the damage.
Even though the pit does not belong to him,
i.e., where he made it in the public domain,
[nevertheless] the Torah considers him the owner
for the purpose of making him liable for damages.245
He must compensate its owner with money.246
The word {Hebrew Ref} comes to include
[that he may pay with] anything that is worth money247
even "bran" (i.e., a low-quality commodity).248
And the dead [animal] remains his.
I.e., the injured party's.
We evaluate the carcass
and he (the injured party) takes it as [partial] payment.
Then the one who caused the damage pays him
the remainder, so as to make up for his loss.249
Verse 35: If it injures.
[ {Hebrew Ref} means:] it will shove,
whether with its horns, or with its body,
or its legs, or whether it bit [the other ox].
These are all included in the term: {Hebrew Ref} ,
for {Hebrew Ref} means nothing but "striking a blow."250
A man's ox.
[ {Hebrew Ref} here means:] the ox of a man.
They shall sell the ox, etc.
(Where both oxen are) of equal value
is (the case of which) the Torah is speaking.
For example: An ox worth 200 zuz
killed an ox also worth 200 zuz,
regardless whether the carcass is worth a lot
or it is worth a little:
when this one (the {Hebrew Ref} ) takes half the live animal
and half the dead one
and the other (the {Hebrew Ref} ) [takes] half the live one
and half the dead one,
it follows that each one of them
suffers half the loss
that was caused by the killing [of the animal].251
[Consequently] we learn from this
that a {Hebrew Ref} 252 (the damaging animal in this case)
[always] pays [only] half the damages.
For from [the case where both animals] are equal in value
you may infer [a case] where they are of unequal value
that the law of the {Hebrew Ref}
is to pay half the damages,
not more and not less.253
Or perhaps I might think otherwise:
that even if they (the oxen) were not of equal value
when they were both alive
the Torah states: they divide them both.
[This cannot be so for] if you would say this
then there would be times
when the one causing the damage
may profit a great deal---
in a case where the carcass
is worth much more, when sold to gentiles,
than the worth of the damaging ox.254
And it is inconceivable that the Torah should state
that the one causing the damage should profit.
Or sometimes [it will result]
in the damaged party getting
much more than the worth of full damages---
where the half the value of the goring ox
is worth more
than the full value of the damaged ox.255
If you would accept this,
then a {Hebrew Ref} would be more stringent
than a {Hebrew Ref} (an ox who had already gored three times).
Hence you are forced to admit
that the Torah here speaks only in a case
where [both animals] are of equal value,
and it teaches you that a {Hebrew Ref} pays half the damages.
And from [the case] where they are of equal value
you derive [the law] to where they are of unequal value,
that the one who collects for half damages
we evaluate the carcass for him
and whatever loss he incurred
due to the death [of the animal]
he takes half the value of his loss256
and goes on his way.257
Why is it that the Torah puts it in these terms
and does not simply say: "He shall pay half?"
To teach that a {Hebrew Ref} pays only
to the extent of its own worth.
And if it (the {Hebrew Ref} ) gored and died afterwards,
the damaged party gets only the carcass
and if [the carcass] does not amount
to half his damages, he suffers the loss.
Or, if an ox worth 100
gored an ox worth 500 zuz,
he (the injured party) gets no more than the ox,258
for the owner of a {Hebrew Ref} is not responsible to pay
from his other properties.259 260
Verse 36: If it was known.
[Meaning:] if it was not a {Hebrew Ref}
but rather it was known
that it is a goring ox,
[having gored] today, yesterday, and the day before,
thereby establishing three gorings.261
Then he must pay an ox.
[Meaning:] full compensation.
The dead animal shall be his.
[I.e., shall belong] to the damaged party,
and the one causing the damage shall add to it
until the damaged party will have been compensated
for his full damages.262
Verse 37: Five oxen, etc.
Said Rabbon Yochanan ben Zakkai:
G-d respects the honor of his creatures:
An ox, which walks on its own legs,
[when it is stolen] and the thief was not demeaned
by having to carry it on his shoulders,
he must pay back fivefold.
[Whereas, if he steals] a sheep,
which he has to carry on his shoulders,
he must pay [only] fourfold,
since he was demeaned in the process.
Said Rabbi Meir:
Come and see how great is the power of work:
[The thief, who by stealing] an ox, kept it from its work,
must pay five fold.
[whereas, if he steals] a sheep,
whereby he did not keep it from its work,
[he pays only] fourfold.263
For each ox . . . . for each sheep.
The Torah repeats them, (i.e., {Hebrew Ref} and {Hebrew Ref} )
to indicate that the payments of four or five fold
apply only to an ox or a sheep.
Chapter 22 - Rashi
Verse 1: If while breaking in.
If he was actually in the act of breaking in.
There is no liability for his blood.
This is not considered murder.
It is as if he (the thief) had already been dead.
Here the Torah teaches:
if someone comes to kill you, kill him first.
This [thief] came with the intention of killing you
for he knows full well
that man cannot control himself
while seeing his property being taken from him,
and remain silent.
Therefore it is with this intention that he came
---that if the owner of the property will resist him
he will kill him.264
Verse 2: If the sun shone on him.
This is nothing but an allegory:
If the issue is clear to you
that his intentions towards you are peaceful
---just as this sun represents peace in the world
so, too, if it is obvious to you
that he has not come with the intention of killing,
even should the owner of the property resist,
for example: a father who breaks in
to steal the property of the son,
where it is known that a father has pity for his child
and has not come with any intentions of taking a life---
[then] there is liability for his blood.
[I.e.,] he is considered alive
and it would be murder
were the owner of the house to kill him.
He must make full restitution.
The thief [shall pay back] the money that he stole,
but he is not liable to the death penalty.
Onkelos, who translates ( {Hebrew Ref} ):
"If witnesses saw him [break in],"
chose for himself an alternate explanation:
it tells us that if witnesses discovered him
before the owner of the house arrived
and when the owner of the house comes to attack him
they warned him (the owner) not to kill him
then he is responsible for his blood---
[i.e.] he will be liable [to the death penalty]
if he will kill him.
For since there are people watching him,
then this thief has not come
with the intention of taking anyone's life
and will not kill the property owner.
Verse 3: If the stolen article was found in his hand.
[Meaning:] in his possession,
for he had not slaughtered it nor sold it.
Whether it is an ox or donkey.
Any item [that is stolen] is included in
the liability to pay twofold restitution,
whether it is an animate object
or whether it is an inanimate object,
for elsewhere it is stated:265
"for a sheep, a garment,266
or any lost object, etc.
he must pay two-fold to his fellow man."267
He must pay two live animals.268
He may not pay him with dead ones,
but only with live ones
or with money that is equivalent to live ones.269 270
Verse 4: {Hebrew Ref} .271
These are terms relating to cattle
as in: "We ( {Hebrew Ref} ) and our cattle."272
{Hebrew Ref} .
[ {Hebrew Ref} means:] he leads his cattle
into the field or vineyard of his fellow man
and causes him damage in one of the two following ways:
either by sending in his cattle [to trample on things]
or [by allowing them] to feed there.
[Accordingly] our Sages explained that {Hebrew Ref}
is damage caused by trampling with the foot,
whereas {Hebrew Ref} is damage caused by the "tooth"
which eats and consumes.273
In another man's field.
[ {Hebrew Ref} means:] in another man's field.
From his prime field
he must compensate [the owner].
We evaluate the damage
and, if he intends to pay with land
as compensation for his damage,
he must pay him from the best of his fields;
[e.g.] if [the damages] was a sela,
then he should give him a sela's worth
from the best of the land that he owns.
This verse teaches you
that [when land is used as compensation for] damages
we evaluate them [to be collected from]
the best lands [of the one who caused the damages].274
Verse 5: If a fire goes out of control---
even by itself.275 276
And [catches on] thorns.
{Hebrew Ref} are chardons (thistles) in Old French.
And consumes bound grain.
It (the flames) licked the thorns
until it reached the bound grain or the standing grain
which is still attached to the ground.
Or a field---277
whereby [the flame] licked up his plowing
and he now needs to plow it a second time.278
Full restitution must be made
by the one who started the fire.
Though he lit the fire on his own property
and it spread of its own accord
by means of thorns which it found
he is nevertheless obligated to make restitution
for not keeping his burning coal
from breaking out and causing damage.279
Verse 6: And they are stolen
from the house of the [watch]man---280
according to his own testimony.281
If the thief is found he must pay---
the thief shall pay two-fold to the owners.282
Verse 7: If the thief is not found---
then this watchman, who is the owner of the house---
must come---
to the judges,
so as to adjudicate the case between him (the watchman)
and the other (the original owner of the object),
and he must swear to him
that he did not in any way misappropriate his property.283
Verse 8: In every question of dishonesty.
Where he is found to have lied under oath---
where witnesses testify that he (the watchman)
stole it himself
and the court finds him guilty [of perjury],
based on the testimony of the witnesses, [then---]
He must pay double restitution to his neighbor.284
The Torah teaches you that if one makes a claim,
regarding an object left for safekeeping,
saying that it was stolen from him,
and then it is discovered that he himself stole it,
he must pay double restitution.
However, when does this apply?
In a case where he swears
and afterwards witnesses come [and contradict him]
for our Sages expounded [this verse] thus:
The owner of the house shall approach the Beis Din
this "approaching" refers to taking an oath.
You claim that it refers to taking an oath,
or perhaps it refers only to presenting the case,
and when he presents his case
and denies any obligation by claiming it was stolen
he is immediately liable to pay twofold
once witnesses come [and testify]
that it is in his possession?
[That this is not the case here is indicated by a {Hebrew Ref}
:]
The term {Hebrew Ref} is stated here
and further on the term {Hebrew Ref} is also used:
"An oath to G-d shall be between them
that he did not lay his hand ( {Hebrew Ref} )."285
Just as in the latter case it ( {Hebrew Ref} ) refers to
taking an oath,
here, too, it refers to taking an oath.
Of which [a witness] says, "This is it!"
According to its plain meaning [it means]:
of which a witness says,
"this object, about which you swore
[that it was stolen]; is [really] in your possession."
Then their dispute shall come before the judges,
and they will examine the testimony.
If they [turn out to] be honest
and they [Beis Din] find the watchman guilty,286
he must pay twofold.
But if the witnesses perjure themselves
for they are found to be conspiring witnesses ( {Hebrew Ref} ),
287
they must then pay twofold to the watchman.288 289
However, our Sages of blessed memory
expounded it [that the watchman claims:]
"This is it!" [i.e., "this is what remains of the object,
the rest was stolen], which teaches us
that we do not obligate him to take an oath
unless he made a partial admission
by saying: So much and so much I owe you
but the rest was stolen from me."290
Verse 9: If a man gives his neighbor
a donkey or an ox.
The first section291 deals with
a {Hebrew Ref} ---a watchman who receives no
compensation.
He is, therefore, not held responsible
for theft (i.e., if the item is stolen from him),
as is written: "[If a man gives his neighbor . . .]
and they are stolen from the house of the watchman."292
"If the thief is not found
then the house-owner (the watchman) must come,"293
to swear.
You learn from this that he (the watchman) frees himself
[from any responsibility] with this oath.
But this section294 deals
with a {Hebrew Ref} (a watchman compensated for his work),
who is not freed from responsibility
if [the item to be watched] is stolen,
as is written:
"But if it was indeed stolen from him
he must make restitution."295 296
However, for something over which he has no control,
as in a case where it (an animal) died of itself,
or was injured, or was forcibly taken by robbers,
and there is no one who saw it happen
so as to be able to testify about the matter, then---
Verse 10: An oath to Ad-noy shall be.297
He shall swear that it is as he claims
and that he did not lay a hand on it
to make any personal use of it.298
For had he laid a hand on it
and afterwards an accident happened to it
he is liable for those accidents.299
The owner must accept it.
[I.e., he must accept] the oath.300
And he need not make restitution.
[I.e., the watchman need not make restitution] to him.
Verse 12: If it was torn---
by a wild animal.
He must provide witnesses.
[I.e.,] he shall bring [two] witnesses
that it was torn apart
[in a way that was] beyond his control
and he will then not be liable to pay restitution.
He need not pay for that which was torn apart.
It does not say: {Hebrew Ref} (he need not
pay for [any] one which was torn): but, rather, it says:
{Hebrew Ref} [for this one that was torn).
[This indicates that] there is a torn one
for which he must pay,
and there is a torn one
for which he need not pay:
For one that was torn apart by a cat, fox, or marten
he must pay restitution.301
Whereas, for one that was torn apart by a wolf,
lion, bear, or snake, he need not pay.302
But who whispered to you
to come to these conclusions?303
Because it is written:
"and it dies, or is injured, or is captured."304
Just as [the animal's] dying naturally
is something he cannot prevent,
so, too, the case of injury and captivity [must be such]305
that he had no way of preventing it.306
Verse 13: If [a man] borrows.
[This section] comes to teach you regarding the borrower
that he is liable even for accidents.
If the owner is not with it.
[Meaning:] if the owner of the ox
is not employed by the borrower to do his work.307
Verse 14: If the owner is with it.308
[This teaches that] whether [he is employed]
in that work (i.e., the same work as the animal)
or whether he [is employed] in other work,
as long as he was employed by him
at the time he borrowed [the ox],
he need not be employed by him
at the time of
the injury to, or the death [of, the animal].
If it was hired.
[I.e.] if the ox was not borrowed
but rather hired,
then, since it ( {Hebrew Ref} ) came for its rental fee
into the hands of the lessee,
and not through borrowing,
and the benefit is not his entirely
for it is in return for its rental fee
that he uses it,309
the rule of the borrower does not apply to him
---to make him liable even for accidents.
The Torah does not make it clear
what rule applies to him (the hirer),
whether [he is considered] a {Hebrew Ref} 310
or a {Hebrew Ref} .311
Therefore the Sages of Yisrael disputed this matter:
What manner of restitution does a hirer make?
Rabbi Meir said: as a {Hebrew Ref} .
Rabbi Yehudah said: as a {Hebrew Ref} ."312
Verse 15: If [a man] seduces.
He speaks "to her heart (softly and kindly)"
until she consents to him.
Onkelos translates it similarly: {Hebrew Ref} ,
{Hebrew Ref} in Aramaic having the same meaning
as {Hebrew Ref} (seducing) in Hebrew.
He must give the dowry.313
He must set aside a dowry for her
as is the law regarding a man and his wife,
i.e., he must write a kesubah (marriage contract)
and then marry her.314
Verse 16: Equal to the dowry
usually given to virgins---
which is set at fifty silver shekalim
in regard to someone who forcibly takes a virgin
and lies with her against her will,
as it is said:
"The man that lay with her must give
to the maiden's father fifty silver shekalim."315 316
Verse 17: You shall not allow a witch to live.
But she must be put to death by the court.
[This applies] whether they are male or female
but the Torah [uses the feminine] because it speaks
of what is usual,
for it is women who are most commonly witches.
Verse 18: Whoever lies with an animal
must be put to death---
by stoning.
Both man and woman [who are guilty are stoned],
for it is written about them:
"Their blood is upon them."317
Verse 19: To a god.
[Meaning:] to idols.
If it were vocalized {Hebrew Ref} [instead of {Hebrew Ref} ]
it would have been necessary to explicitly write:
{Hebrew Ref} [ {Hebrew Ref} ]---other
[gods].
However, now that it is vocalized {Hebrew Ref}
it is not necessary to define it with the word "other."
For wherever the letters {Hebrew Ref} or {Hebrew Ref} or
{Hebrew Ref}
are used as a prefix,
and are vocalized with a sheva
for example: {Hebrew Ref} (to a king),
{Hebrew Ref} (to a desert), {Hebrew Ref} (to a city),
it is necessary to define which king,
which desert, which city.
Similarly, (when these letters precede a sheva such as):
{Hebrew Ref} (for kings), {Hebrew Ref} (for
holidays)
[when the vowel of the prefix is] a chirick,
it is necessary to define which ones,
for if it ( {Hebrew Ref} ) were not defined
it would refer to all kings.
Similarly {Hebrew Ref} (to gods) would include all gods
even [the One of whom the use of {Hebrew Ref} is] holy.
But when [one of these letters] is vocalized with a patach
as in: {Hebrew Ref} (to the king), {Hebrew Ref} (to
the desert)
{Hebrew Ref} (to the city),
then it is known which king is spoken of.
So, too, regarding {Hebrew Ref} ,
it is known which city is spoken of.
So, too, {Hebrew Ref} refers to those [gods]
that were forbidden to you elsewhere.
Similarly: "There is none like You
( {Hebrew Ref} ) amongst the gods,"318
since {Hebrew Ref} is not defined [with {Hebrew Ref} ]
it was necessary to vocalize it with a patach.319
Must be condemned.
[Meaning:] he must be put to death.
Why is {Hebrew Ref} written here?
Has not the penalty of death already been stated
elsewhere:320
"You shall take out that man
or that woman, etc., [and stone them]"?321
But [the answer is:] since there it was not made clear
what form of worship carries the death penalty,
and so that you not think
that all forms of [idolatry] worship
carry the death penalty,
the Torah comes and makes it clear to you here
"Whoever sacrifices to a god must be condemned [to die],
thereby telling you
that just as sacrificing is a service
that is performed inside [the Mikdosh]
when it is done to [the One] in Heaven,
so, too, do I include one who burns incense
and one who pours libation,
which are also services performed inside [the Mikdosh;]
and one is liable [for performing]
any of these services to idolatry,
whether it is the usual way of worshipping it
or is not the usual way of worshipping it.
But other forms of worship,322
such as: one who sweeps the floor [before an idol]
or one who sprinkles water so as to settle the dust,
or one who hugs or kisses [the idol],
his penalty is not death,
but he transgresses a {Hebrew Ref} ---a negative precept.323
324
Verse 20: You must not abuse a stranger.
[This refers to] abusive words
contralier (to taunt, aggravate) in Old French.
as in: "I will feed ( {Hebrew Ref} ) those that abuse you
with their own flesh."325
Do not oppress him.
[This refers to] robbing him of his money.326
For you were strangers.
If you abuse him,
he, too, is capable of abusing you
by saying to you:
"You, too, descend from strangers."
With a fault which is your own
do not reproach your fellow man.327
Wherever the term {Hebrew Ref} is used [it denotes]
a person who was not born in that country,
but came from another land to reside there.328
Verse 21: Do not mistreat any widow or orphan.329
The same applies to any person
but the Torah speaks of what is usual,
for they are weak
and are frequently mistreated.330
Verse 22: If you do mistreat him.
This is a shortened verse.331
It threatens but does not make clear his punishment,
as in: "Therefore whoever kills Kayin."332
[There, too] there is a threat
but does not make clear his punishment.
Here, too: "If you do mistreat him"
conveys a threat,
[i.e.] "In the end you will get yours."
Why?
"when he cries out to Me, etc."
Verse 23: Your wives will become widows.
From that which is implied by its saying:
"and I will kill you,"
would I not know myself that "your wives will be widows
and your children will be orphans"?
But the answer is that this is an additional curse:333
that the women will be bound
as living widows---334
that there will be no witnesses who can testify
to the death of their husbands
and they will thus be prohibited from remarrying.
And the children will be orphans,
[i.e.] the Beis Din will not allow them
to take possession of the fathers' estates,
for they do not know
whether they died or were taken captive.
Verse 24: When335 you lend money.
Rabbi Yishmael said:
Each and every time {Hebrew Ref} appears in the Torah
[it refers to] something optional
except in three instances336
of which this is one.337
My people.
[I.e. if you are faced with a choice of lending money to]
one of My people or to a gentile,
then "one of My people" has priority.338
[If the choice is between] a poor person and a rich one,
then the poor person has priority.
[If the choice is between] the poor of your city
and the poor of another city,
then the poor of your city have priority.339
And this is the way it is implied [in the text]:
"When you lend money, [then,]
lend it "to one of My people"
and not to the gentile.
And to which particular one of My people?
"The poor one."
And to which particular poor one?
To the one that is "with you."
(An alternate explanation of {Hebrew Ref} :
"Do not act disrespectfully towards him
when lending him money,
for he is one of My people"---
the poor that is with you---
[saying, in effect:] "Look at yourself
as if you were the poor person.")340
Do not act toward him as a creditor.
[I.e.] do not forcibly demand payment from him.
If you know that he has no money
do not appear towards him
as if you have lent him money
but, rather, as if you have not lent him,
in other words: Do not embarrass him!
Interest.
[ {Hebrew Ref} has the meaning of:] "interest"
because it is ( {Hebrew Ref} ) like the bite of a snake
which bites [inflicting] a small wound in his foot
which he does not feel
and, suddenly, it burgeons and swells
[his entire body] till his head.
So it is with interest:
He (the borrower) feels nothing
and it is not noticeable [at first]
until the interest accumulates
and causes him a great loss of money.341
Verse 25: If you take security.342
Wherever the term {Hebrew Ref} appears
it does not refer to security [taken]
at the time the loan is made
but rather the security that is taken from the borrower
when the loan comes due
and he does not pay.
( {Hebrew Ref} : [The Torah asks]
that you repeat taking the security
even many times over.
G-d [in effect] says:
"How much do you owe Me?
and see for yourself that your soul
ascends to Me each and every night
and gives an accounting of itself
and thereby becomes beholden to Me,
and yet I return it to you [every morning].
So shall you, too, take the security
and return it, take it [again] and return it.)343
You must return it till sunset.344
Return it to him [for] the entire day
[so that he may have it] till sunset.
And when the sun sets take it again
until the morning of the following day.
This verse deals with a garment worn by day
which he (the borrower) does not need at night.345 346
Verse 26: For this is his covering.347
This refers to the outer-garment.
His garment.
This refers to the shirt [worn on the flesh].
With what shall he lie down?
This includes the bed-covering.348
Verse 27: Do not curse judges (or G-d).
Here is the prohibition against cursing G-d
as well as the prohibition against cursing judges.349 350
Verse 28: Your fullness.
[Meaning:] the obligation that was placed upon you
when your grains reach their full ripeness.
This refers to {Hebrew Ref} ---"the first
fruits."351
And your terumah-offering.
[ {Hebrew Ref} refers to] the terumah-offering,352
but, I do not know why it is called {Hebrew Ref} .353
You must not delay.
[Meaning:] Do not alter
their order of separating them354 [from their fruits],
by separating later what should be separated earlier,
i.e., he may not [separate] the terumah before
[separating] the bikkurim,
or the tithe offering before the terumah.355 356
The first-born of your sons, you shall give to Me---
[by redeeming him for five sela'im from the kohein.
But has [the Torah] not given this command elsewhere?357
But [the reason it is repeated here is]
so as to juxtapose it to:
"You must do likewise with your oxen
and with your sheep,"
[thereby teaching that] just as the first-born of man
is redeemed after thirty days [from birth],
as it is said:
"And those that need to be redeemed,
you shall redeem from a month old."358
So, too, regarding the first-born of the smaller cattle:
he (the owner) occupies himself with it for 30 days
and, afterwards, gives it to the kohein.359
Verse 29: Seven days it shall remain with its mother.360
This is a warning to the kohein361
that if he wishes to hurry his sacrifice [of the {Hebrew Ref} ]
he may not rush to do so before the eighth day
because it is "lacking in time" (i.e., premature).
On the eighth day you must give it to Me.
One might think that it is obligatory on that day!362
[This is not so for] it states here:
"the eighth day", and it states further on:
"and from the eighth day onward it shall be accepted."363
Just as "the eighth day" mentioned later
intends to declare [the animal] fit [for sacrifice]
from the eighth day and on,
so, too, "the eighth day" mentioned here
intends to declare [the animal] fit
from the eighth day and on.
Hence, this is the intended meaning of it:364
"And on the eighth day you are permitted
to give it to Me" (i.e., to sacrifice it).365
Verse 30: You shall be men of holiness to Me.
[This is meant as a promise:] "If you will be holy
and abstain from the abhorrence of
[eating] neveilah366 and tereifah,367
then you are ( {Hebrew Ref} ) Mine.
But if not, then you are not Mine.368
Flesh that was torn off in the field.369
Actually the same applies within the house,
but [the reason "the field" is mentioned is]
the Torah speaks of what is common---
the place where it is usual for animals
to be torn apart [by wild beasts].370
Similarly: "For he found her in the field,"371
Similarly: "One who is unclean
as a result of a nocturnal emission,"372
where the same rule would apply
to an emission during the day.
The Torah just speaks of what is most common.373
However, Onkelos translates [ {Hebrew Ref} ] as:
"Flesh torn from a living animal,"
i.e., flesh that was torn off
as a result of an attack by a wolf or lion
from a permitted beast, or from permitted cattle,
while it was alive ["you must not eat"].374
Throw it to the dog.
[You may sell it] also to a gentile.
Or perhaps it refers only to a dog?
The Torah therefore says regarding neveilah:
"or sell it to a gentile."375
[Then we may assume] a fortiori regarding tereifah:376
that all benefits are permitted
[including selling to a gentile].377
If so, why does it state: "to the dog"?!
To teach you
that the dog gets more respect than he.378
And the verse [also] teaches
that G-d does not withhold
the reward that is due to any creature.
[And the dog has a reward coming] for its said:
"But against any of the B'nei Yisrael
no dog wagged its tongue (i.e., barked),"379
so G-d said, "Give it its due reward."380
Chapter 23 - Rashi
Verse 1: Do not accept a false report.
As Onkelos translates it:
"Do not accept a false report."
This is an admonition
directed to one who accepts (i.e., believes)
slanderous talk,381
and to a judge,
that he not listen to the claims of one party
until the other party arrives.382 383
Do not join hands with a wicked man.
One who makes a demand on his fellow man
by means of a false claim,
and you promise him
that you will be a corrupt witness.384
Verse 2: Do not follow the majority to do evil.
Regarding this verse, there are
various expositions by the Sages of Yisrael
but they do not fit the arrangement of the verse:
From here they derived
that a guilty verdict385 should not be arrived at
by a majority of one judge.386
And they explain the end of the verse as follows:
"It must be decided by a majority",
[meaning] that if there are two more for conviction
than there are for acquital,
then decide the case according to them (the majority)
for a guilty verdict.
[According to this explanation]
this verse is dealing with capital crimes.387
And they explained the middle of the verse as follows:
{Hebrew Ref} [should be understood]
[as if it were written] {Hebrew Ref} (against the elder),
i.e., that one must not contradict
a more eminent member of the court.
It is for this reason that
in capital cases we begin
[hearing the opinions of the judges] from
the side [benches],
i.e., the youngest among them
are the first ones asked to state their opinion.388 389
According to [the above] words of our Sages,
the interpretation of the verse is as follows:
Do not follow the majority to do evil---
to sentence [a defendant] to death
on account of the judge [whose vote]
causes those favoring conviction to outnumber
those who vote for acquital.
Do not dispute an elder---
by veering from his opinion.
It is because [the word {Hebrew Ref} ] is missing the
letter yod
that they explained it thus.390
It must be decided by the majority.
There is a majority to whose view you may lean.
When is this so?
When the majority for conviction outnumber by two
those who vote to acquit.
From that which is implied by what is said:
"Do not follow the majority [of one] to do evil"
I may derive:
But, you may be with them (i.e., rule like them)
if it is for good (i.e., to acquit the defendant).
It is from here that they (the Sages) said:
In case of capital offenses,
the decision to acquit may be based on a majority of one
but to convict there must be a majority of two.
Onkelos translates [ {Hebrew Ref} ]:
"Do not refrain from conveying your opinion
when asked about anything pertaining to a court case."
The Hebrew, according to Onkelos,
should be explained as follows:
Do not respond in a dispute to lean.
[I.e.] if your opinion is asked in a court case
do not respond by leaning to one side
in order to remove yourself from the dispute,
but decide the matter based on the truth.
[The above are the explanations
of the Sages and Onkelos . . .]
But I offer an explanation to fit the verse's arrangement
according to its plain meaning.
And this is its interpretation:
Do not follow the majority to do evil.
If you see wicked men distorting justice,
do not say: "since they are the majority
I may as well lean towards them."391
Do not respond, in dispute, to lean, etc.
And if the defendant should ask you
[your opinion] regarding that judgment,
do not respond to him, about the dispute,
with a statement that leans towards the majority opinion,
thereby distorting the judgment from the truth.
But rather render the decision as it really is
and let the collar (i.e., the responsibility) hang
from the necks of the majority.
Verse 3: Do not show favor.
Do not show special regard for him
by finding in his favor in a lawsuit,
and say, "He is poor.
I will find in his favor and show him regard."
Verse 5: If you see the donkey of your enemy, etc.392
Here you have the word {Hebrew Ref} being used
to mean: "perhaps" (or "possibly"),
which is one of the four meanings
that the word {Hebrew Ref} is used to express.
This is, then, how [the verse] is to be interpreted:
It is possible that you might see his donkey
lying under its burden---
and you might not want to help him?
Incredulously, with amazement.
Make every effort to help him.393
This word {Hebrew Ref} has the meaning of "helping."
Similarly: "aided and ( {Hebrew Ref} ) helped"394
Similarly: "( {Hebrew Ref} ) They helped Jerusalem
up to the wall,"395
[meaning:] they filled it with earth
to help and support the strength of the wall.
A similar [use of the word {Hebrew Ref} as "possibly"]:
" {Hebrew Ref} you will say in your heart,
'These nations are many more than I, etc.' "
[meaning:] "Could you possibly say this?!
incredulously, with amazement . . .
[therefore] "Do not be afraid of them."396
As for its midrashic explanation,
this is the way our Sages expounded it:
"If you will see . . . you may refrain."
[This indicates that] there are times
that you may refrain [from helping]
and there are times that you must help.
When does this apply?
If he is an elderly man
and it is beneath his dignity397
[then] {Hebrew Ref} ---"you may refrain" [applies].
Or if it is the animal of a gentile
and the load of a Jew
[then] {Hebrew Ref} [applies].398
You should make every effort to help him---
to unload the burden,
[as Onkelos translates the words {Hebrew Ref} ]:
"from removing a load from it."
Verse 6: Your needy.
[ {Hebrew Ref} is] from the root {Hebrew Ref} ---
"longing,"
for he is destitute and longs for anything good.399
Verse 7: Do not kill an innocent righteous man.400
From where do we derive [that in a case]
where one has left the court after having been convicted
and a person says:
"I have evidence to suggest his innocence!"
that we bring him (the defendant) back?401
Because the Torah states (addressing the court):
"Do not kill an innocent man."
And though he may not be a righteous man
for he has not yet been acquitted in court,
nevertheless he is ( {Hebrew Ref} ) innocent from a death verdict
for you must try to vindicate him.
And from where do we derive [that in a case]
where one has left the court
after having been found innocent,
and a person says:
"I have evidence to suggest his guilt,"
that we do not bring him back to court?
Because the Torah states:
"Do not kill a righteous person!"
And this [defendant] is considered righteous
for he has been acquitted by the court---402
for I will not acquit a wicked person.
There is no need for you to bring him back403
for I will not vindicate him when I judge him",
[because even] if he has left your hands acquitted,
I have many agents to put him to death,
with that death to which he is actually liable.
Verse 8: Do not accept bribery.
Even if you intend to judge truthfully.404
And it is certainly [prohibited]
[when you take the bribe] to pervert justice.
For regarding the perversion of justice
it has already been stated:
"Do not distort justice!"405 406
Blinds the clear-sighted.407
Even if he is wise in the Torah and takes a bribe,
his mind will ultimately become muddled
and he will forget his learning
and the light of his eyes will dim.408
And perverts.
As Onkelos translates it: "ruins."
The words of justice.409
[ {Hebrew Ref} means:] words that are just,
i.e., the judgments of truth (viz., the Torah).
So, too, does Onkelos translate it:
"words that are {Hebrew Ref} ---righteous."
Verse 9: Do not oppress a stranger.410
In many places,
the Torah issues warnings regarding the {Hebrew Ref}
because his inclination411 is bad.412
The soul of the stranger.
How hard it is for him when he is oppressed.
Verse 10: And gather its crops.
[ {Hebrew Ref} is] a term for "bringing into the house,"
"You shall gather it into your house."413
Verse 11: You must let it rest---
from working [the fields]---
and abandon it---
from eating [its crops] after "the time of removal".414
An alternate explanation [of {Hebrew Ref} ]:
"You must let it rest" from real work,
such as plowing and sowing;
"and abandon it" from fertilizing and hoeing.415
What they leave over, beasts of the field can eat.
This is to compare the food of the poor
to the food of the wild beast.
Just as the wild beast eats without tithing
so, too, do the poor eat without tithing.
It is from here that they (the Sages) stated
that there is no obligation to tithe
during the seventh year.416
Do the same with your vineyard.417
But the beginning of the verse [ {Hebrew Ref} ]
deals with a grain-field,418
as it says, preceding that:
"You may sow your land."419
Verse 12: But on the seventh day you must cease.420
Even during the shemittah-year
do not cancel the weekly Shabbos
from its rightful place.
Do not say that since the entire year is called Shabbos
there is no need for you to observe
the weekly Shabbos.421 422
So that your ox and your donkey may rest.
[Meaning:] allow it to relax, permitting it
to tear up and eat the grass from the ground.423
Or perhaps this is not so,
but rather he must tie it within the house.
To this say: this is not relaxation but suffering.424
The son of your female slave.
The verse here deals with an uncircumcised slave.425
And the stranger.
This refers to a {Hebrew Ref} ---"a settler."426
Verse 13: Preserve everything that I have said to you.
This intends to make every positive precept
[as stringent in its requirements] as a negative precept.
For wherever the Torah uses a form of {Hebrew Ref}
it is intended as an admonition for a negative precept.427
Do not mention.
[Meaning:] that one may not say [to another]:
"Wait for me next to such and such an idol,"
or: "Stay with me on the holiday
of such and such an idol."428 429
An alternate explanation:430
"Preserve everything that I have said to you,"
[next to:] "Do not mention the name of other gods,"
comes to teach you that idol-worship is equal
[in severity] to all the precepts in their entirety.
And that one who is scrupulous in not transgressing it
is equal to one who observes them all.431
You must not cause it to be heard---
from the gentile.
Through your mouth [responsibility].
Do not make a [business] partnership with the gentile,
whereby he may [ultimately] swear to you
in the name of his idol,
for consequently you will have caused
[the idol's name] to be mentioned
through your actions.432
Verse 14: Times.
[ {Hebrew Ref} means:] "times."
Similarly: "that you have struck me three ( {Hebrew Ref} )
times".433
Verse 15: The month of aviv---
when the grain ripens in its ( {Hebrew Ref} ) stalks.
[An alternate explanation:]
{Hebrew Ref} is from the word {Hebrew Ref} i.e.,
"mature"
and the first month to ripen its fruit.
Do not appear before My Presence empty handed.
"When you come to appear before Me at the festivals,
bring Me burnt-offerings.434
Verse 16: The Festival of Harvest.
This refers to the holiday of Shavuos . . . 435
The first fruits of your Labor---
which is the time for bringing the first fruits436
because the offering of the "two loaves"
which are brought on Shavuos,
permit the new crop [to be used] for meal offerings
and to bring bikkurim to the Beis Hamikdosh,
as it is said:
"On the Day of Bikkurim, etc. . . ."437 438
The Festival of Ingathering.
This refers to the holiday of Succos---
when you gather in [the fruits] of your labor.
Because the entire summer
the grains dry in the fields
and during the Succos [season]
it is gathered indoors out of the rains.
Verse 17: Three times, etc.439
Since the subject here deals with shemittah,
it was necessary to state
that the Three Festivals will not be cancelled
from [taking place at] their allocated times.440
Every male among you.
[ {Hebrew Ref} means:] the males among you.
Verse 18: You must not sacrifice---
while chametz is present---etc.
Do not slaughter the Pesach korbon
on the fourteenth day of Nisan
until you remove your chametz.441
You must not allow to remain overnight---
the fat of My festival-offering, etc.---
away from the altar---
Until morning.442
One might think that even [if it were]
on the wood-pile [of the altar],443
it would nevertheless become unfit
due to it having remained overnight.
Therefore the Torah says:
"On the fireplace, on the altar all night."444
You must not allow to remain overnight.
It is not considered [unfit due to] {Hebrew Ref}
unless it [was not placed on the altar] by dawn,
as it is said: "Until morning."
But the entire night he may lift it up
from the ground onto the altar.445
Verse 19: The beginning of the first fruits of your land.
Even during the seventh year bikkurim is obligatory.
It is for this reason that [the Torah] states
even here [regarding the seventh year]:
"The first fruits of your land."
What is the procedure [for setting aside bikkurim]?
A man who, upon entering his field,
sees a fig that has ripened.
He ties a reed around it to identify it
and thereby designates it [as bikkurim].
Bikkurim need to be brought only from the seven species
which are listed in Scripture:
"A land of wheat, barley, etc; (grapes, figs
pommegranates, olives, dates.)"446 447
You must not cook a young animal.
A calf and a sheep are also implied in " {Hebrew Ref} "
because " {Hebrew Ref} " represents any tender, newborn animal,
[as can be inferred] from the fact that you find
in a number of places in the Torah
that {Hebrew Ref} is written, and it is necessary to explain
afterward: {Hebrew Ref} ---goats, for example:
"I will send {Hebrew Ref} ---a goat,"448
or: "the {Hebrew Ref} ---goat,"449
or: "two {Hebrew Ref} ---goats,"450
thereby teaching you
that wherever {Hebrew Ref} is mentioned without specification,
then a calf and a sheep are also implied.451
[The prohibition of {Hebrew Ref} ]
is written three times in the Torah:
once to prohibit the eating [of meat cooked with milk],
another to prohibit deriving any benefit from them,
and once to prohibit cooking them.452
Verse 20: Behold, I will send an angel.
Here they are foretold that they are destined to sin,453
and the Shechinah would then say to them:
"For I will not go up among you."454
That I have prepared.
That I have prepared to give to you (i.e., Eretz Yisrael).
That is its plain meaning.455
But its midrashic explanation is:
"to the place that I have established [for the Temple]
[for] My Place (i.e., the Temple of Heaven) has already
been set up in line with it.
This is one of the verses [in Scripture]
which indicate that the Beis Hamikdosh of Heaven
is directly in line with the Beis Hamikdosh below.
Verse 21: Do not rebel against him.
{Hebrew Ref} is from the same root as {Hebrew Ref} ---
"robbing",
as in: "Whoever ( {Hebrew Ref} ) will rebel against your
order."456
For he cannot bear your transgression.
He is not accustomed to this (the act of sinning)
for he is of the group [of beings] who do not sin.
An alternate explanation: [He has no power to forgive]
for he is only a messenger
and can only to do his mission.457
As My Name is in him.458
This follows the beginning of the verse:
"Be careful in his presence . . .
for My Name is linked with him."
Our Sages said that this angel is Metatron
whose name is the same as his Master's (G-d)
for {Hebrew Ref} has the same numerical value as {Hebrew Ref} (314).459
Verse 22: And I will attack.
As Onkelos translates it: {Hebrew Ref} ---"I will
oppress."
Verse 24: You must [totally] destroy---
their idols.
Their monuments.
The stones that they set up
[for the purpose] of bowing down to them.
Verse 26: No woman will suffer miscarriage---
if you act according to My will.
{Hebrew Ref} .
[A woman] who suffers miscarriages
or buries her children is called a {Hebrew Ref} .
Verse 27: I will bring panic.
{Hebrew Ref} is the same as {Hebrew Ref} .460
Onkelos translates it {Hebrew Ref} ---"I will confuse."
This is true of any word whose verb-root
has its last root-letter doubled,
when it is conjugated in the {Hebrew Ref} 461 form.
There are instances where the doubled letter is taken
and given a dagesh
and vocalized with a melopum (cholam),
for example: {Hebrew Ref} from the root:
"( {Hebrew Ref} ) A confused sound was made by the wheel
of his cart,"462
[or:] {Hebrew Ref} ---"I circled"463 from the same
root as:
"( {Hebrew Ref} ) He circled Beth El,"464
[or:] {Hebrew Ref} ---"I was brought low"465
from the root: "( {Hebrew Ref} ) They became low and dried up,"
466
[or:] "( {Hebrew Ref} ) I have engraved you on the hands,"467
from the same root as: "( {Hebrew Ref} ) engraved in the
heart,"468
[or:] "whom have ( {Hebrew Ref} ) I crushed,"469
from the same root as: ( {Hebrew Ref} ) He has crushed
and abandoned the poor."470
Whoever translates {Hebrew Ref} as: "I will kill"471
is in error, for if it were from the root {Hebrew Ref}
then its {Hebrew Ref} would not receive a patach
nor would its {Hebrew Ref} get a dagesh,
and its vowel would not be a melopum (cholam),
but [would take the form:] {Hebrew Ref} ,472
as in "( {Hebrew Ref} ) You shall kill this nation".473
And [the reason that] the {Hebrew Ref} [of {Hebrew Ref} ]
is with a dagesh
is because it is in place of two letters {Hebrew Ref} ,474
one of them being part of the root
for no form of the word {Hebrew Ref} exists without a {Hebrew Ref} ,
and the other one serving as [a suffix-letter],
as in: {Hebrew Ref} ---"I said," {Hebrew Ref} ---
"I sinned,"
{Hebrew Ref} ---"I did."
Similarly: the {Hebrew Ref} of {Hebrew Ref} has a dagesh
because it comes in the place of two [letters {Hebrew Ref} ],
for it should have been written with three letters {Hebrew Ref} :
two as part of the root, as in:
"On the day ( {Hebrew Ref} ) that G-d gave",475
[or:] "It is ( {Hebrew Ref} ) a gift from G-d;"476
and the third [letter {Hebrew Ref} ] serves as a suffix.
Their Backs.477
[I.e.] that they will flee from you
and thereby turn the backs of their neck to you.
The hornets.
It is a kind of flying insect
which would strike them in their eyes
and inject a poison into them,
and they would die.
The hornets did not cross the Jordan River
and the Chittites and Canaanites [mentioned here
as being driven out] were from Sichon and Og.478
It is for this reason that of all seven nations,479
only these [three] are enumerated here.
[The fact that] the Chivites [are mentioned here],
though they resided on the other side of the Jordan
and somewhat further on,480
is explained by our Sages in Maseches Sotah:481
It (the hornet) stood at the edge of the Jordan
and hurled the poison into them.
Verse 29: Desolate.
[I.e.,] empty of people,
since you are few
and there are not enough of you to fill it.
Will multiply against you.
{Hebrew Ref} is to be understood as {Hebrew Ref}
.482
Verse 30: Until you have increased.
[ {Hebrew Ref} meaning:] increased, from the word {Hebrew Ref} (fruit),
as in: "( {Hebrew Ref} ) Be fruitful and multiply."483
Verse 31: I will set.
[ {Hebrew Ref} is] from the word {Hebrew Ref} ---
"setting."
The letter {Hebrew Ref} carries a dagesh
because it comes in the place of two [letters {Hebrew Ref} ],
for any form of {Hebrew Ref} must have a {Hebrew Ref}
while the other one is a suffix.484
To the river.
The Euphrates.485
{Hebrew Ref} .
And you will drive them away.
Verse 33: That you [might] worship.486
Here you have the word {Hebrew Ref}
used in the sense of {Hebrew Ref} .487
This is also true in various places.488
This (the usage here) is actually {Hebrew Ref} 489
which is one of the four meanings of {Hebrew Ref} .
We often find [the word] {Hebrew Ref}
being used to convey {Hebrew Ref} ,
as in: " {Hebrew Ref} you will offer
a minchah of the first fruit"490
which is actually obligatory.491
Chapter 24 - Rashi
Verse 1: He (G-d) had said to Moshe, "Go up . .
."
This section492 was said before [the giving] of
the Ten Commandments
and it was on the 4th of Sivan
that, "Go up!" was said to him.493 494
Verse 2: Moshe alone shall approach---
to the dense cloud (above, 20, 18).495
Verse 3: Moshe came and told the people---
on that same day.496
All the words of Ad-noy.497
[I.e.] the command to separate [from their wives]
and the setting up of boundaries [at Mount Sinai].498
And all the laws.
[I.e.] the seven mitzvos
given to the descendants of Noach499
[as well as the mitzvos of:]
Shabbos, honoring one's parents
the red heifer, and administering justice
which were given to them in Marah.500 501
Verse 4: Moshe wrote down---
[everything] from Bereishis until the giving of the Torah
and he also wrote down the mitzvos
that they were commanded at Marah.
He arose early in the morning---
on the fifth of Sivan.502
Verse 5: The young men.
[I.e.] the first-born.503 504
Verse 6: Moshe took half the blood.505
Who divided it?!
An angel came and divided it.506
In the basins.
There were two basins---
one for half the blood of the burnt-offering,
and one for half the blood of the peace-offerings
so as to sprinkle them both on the people.
It is from here that our Sages concluded
that our forefathers entered the Covenant
through circumcision, immersion
and the sprinkling of sacrificial blood.
[Immersion is indicated by the fact that]
there is no sprinkling [that is valid]
which is not preceded by immersion.507
Verse 7: The Book of the Covenant---
from Bereishis till the Giving of the Torah
and the mitzvos they were commanded in Marah.508
Verse 8: He sprinkled.509
[ {Hebrew Ref} has] the meaning of sprinkling.
However, Onkelos translates it [literally]:
"He poured it on the altar
to atone for the people."510
Verse 10: They saw [a vision of] the G-d of Yisrael.
They intentionally looked and intently gazed
and thereby became liable to death.
But G-d did not want to disturb
the joy [of the receiving ] of the Torah511
and therefore waited to punish Nadav and Avihu
until the day that the Mishkon was dedicated.512
As for the elders [He waited] until:
"The people were as complainers, etc.
and a fire from G-d burnt among them
and consumed {Hebrew Ref} 513 of the camp,"514
[ {Hebrew Ref} meaning] the leaders of the camp.515 516
Like a brickwork of sapphire.
This was before Him at the time of their enslavement,
as a reminder of the oppression of Israel,
for they were subjugated to do brick-work.
And like the essence of heaven in purity.
[This symbolizes that] when they were redeemed
there was light and joy before Him.517
And like the essence.
{Hebrew Ref} should be translated as Onkelos does---
a term meaning appearance.
In purity.
{Hebrew Ref} has the meaning of bright and clear.
Verse 11: But against the nobility.
These were Nadav, Avihu and the elders.
He did not send His hand (i.e., punish).
Suggesting thereby that they actually deserved
that a hand be sent against them.518
They envisioned G-d.
They gazed at Him insolently
[as someone who converses with a king] while engaged
in eating and drinking.
This is how Midrash Tanchuma519 explains it.
But Onkelos does not translate it so.520
{Hebrew Ref} means "the great ones,"
as in: "I called you ( {Hebrew Ref} ) from its great
ones,"521
[or:] "( {Hebrew Ref} ) He made great some of the
spirit,"522
"six ammos (cubits) in its great size."523
Verse 12: Ad-noy then said to Moshe---
after the giving of the Torah.524
Come up to Me to the mountain and remain there---
for forty days.525
The tablets of stone,
the Torah and the Commandments
which I have written [in order] to teach them.526
All 613 commandments
are implicitly contained in the Ten Commandments.527
Rabbeinu Saadiah specifically shows,
in the {Hebrew Ref} 528 which he composed,
for each and every one of the Commandments,
the mitzvos which are associated with it.
Verse 13: Moshe and Yehoshua, his attendant, set out.
I do not know what Yehoshua's purpose was here.529
But I think that the disciple was accompanying the master
until the place
where the bounds of the mountain indicated
that he was not permitted to go from there and on.530
And from there "Moshe went up" himself
"to the mountain of G-d."
There Yehoshua pitched his tent
and remained there the entire forty days
for we find that when Moshe came down:
"Yehoshua heard the voice of the people yelling,"531
indicating to us that Yehoshua was not with them.532
Verse 14: He said to the elders---
when he left the camp.
"Wait here for us---
and remain here
with the rest of the people in the camp
so as to be prepared to render decisions
for each person's dispute.
Chur.
He was Miriam's son,533
and his father was Koleiv ben Yefuneh,
as it is said:
"Koleiv took Efras [for a wife]
and she bore him Chur."534
Efras is Miriam, as is cited in Sotah.535
Whoever has a claim.
[Meaning:] whoever has a lawsuit.
Verse 16: And the cloud covered it (or Him).
There is a dispute among our Sages regarding this:
There are some who say [that these six days]
were from Rosh Chodesh---the first day [of Sivan]
[until the Festival of Shavuos---
the day that the Torah was given
---from an old Rashi manuscript].
[and] the cloud covered it [refers---]
to the mountain---[whereupon]
He called to Moshe on the seventh day---
to proclaim the Ten Commandments.
Really, Moshe and all the B'nei Yisroel
were standing there,
[yet the verse states only, "He called to Moshe"].
But [in this way] Scripture gives honor to Moshe.
But there are others who say that . . .
The cloud covered Him
---
refers to Moshe [and this occurred]
six days after the [giving of] the Ten Commandments.
And they (these six days) were
at the beginning of the forty days
when Moshe went up to receive the Tablets.536
This teaches you
that whoever intends to enter the camp of the Shechinah537
requires seclusion for six days.538
Verse 18: Into the midst of the cloud.539
This cloud was like thick smoke,
but G-d made a path for Moshe
in the midst of it.540
Return to Main Search Form
Sources