Chapter 15 - Text Notes
139 But
a pledge, as specified later in our passage. (S.C.)
140 The holiday obligations consist of olah-fire
offerings, but not shelamim-zevach-offerings [see chs. 28, 29].
(G.A.)
141 {Hebrew Ref} , "By verbalizing," applies only to
the pledge- and donation-offerings mentioned above, which become
binding only when the pledge is verbalized. The holiday-offerings,
however, are obligatory. (M.)
142 I have detailed the holiday
requirements elsewhere. This explains why Scripture does not elaborate
here at all concerning the holiday requirements. (M.)
143 Because
you performed the mitzvah. (Rashi to Shemos, 29:18)
144
Unlike the voluntary-offerings above (v. 3), this is a command. (M.)
145 On the altar.
146 48b. The wine was not poured over the
fire, but into a special bowl with an opening at the bottom, placed on
the altar. It flowed from the opening through the altar and into a
subterranean cavern. (G.A. from Succah, there)
147 Not just to
the wine stated in this passage. (G.A.)
148 The literal "or for a ram" would mean that the ram and
the sheep require the same libations. Since Scripture clearly
differentiates between the two, the interpretation is "if for a ram."
(M.)
149 Chulin, 23a. As if the text had stated "for the
palgas, or for the ram, etc." (G.A.)
150 The "palgas
" refers to a sheep in its thirteenth month. It is neither a {Hebrew Ref} , a sheep in its first year, nor an {Hebrew Ref} , a sheep aged
fourteen months or above. (Parah, 1:3) Palgas is an Aramaic word
meaning "nondescript" (M. From Rambam to Parah), or Hebrew, meaning
"immature." (Minchas Yehudah)
151 Although the palgas is
not defined as a ram, its libations are the same.
152 Parah, 1:3.
153 One libation is not sufficient for
several sacrifices. Each sacrifice must have its own libation. (G.A.)
154 Bereishis, 13:10.
155 Melachim 1, 22:4.
156 In
all of Rashi's examples, the first principal in the comparison is not
likened to the second. Still, the second principal may be compared with
the first. The land of Egypt with G-d's garden, you with me, your
people with mine. In our passage, too, "the proselyte" is compared
with "you." (S.C.)
157 Devorim, 17:14.
158 Sifri, 15:21.
159 This is derived from "your"
dough---the amount "you" generally knead. (G.A.)
160 Shemos,
16:18. The Israelites measured the manna to see if it matched the
omer, the amount generally used for a loaf.
161 Ibid, v. 16.
This was the amount of manna given to each Israelite.
162 The
first portion of all produce of Eretz Yisroel brought into the granary
must be given to the kohein as a terumah-gift. (Devorim,
18:4, Rambam, Terumos, 2:1) The Torah does not require a specific
amount for this terumah. Even a single grain is sufficient for
an entire silo. (Rambam there, 3:1) Like the granary terumah, the
loaf terumah in our passage may be of any amount.
163 One
tenth of the produce of Eretz Yisroel must be given to the Levite, who
is required, in turn, to give one tenth of his tithe to the kohein
as a terumah-gift (18:26). The loaf terumah in our
passage is unlike the Levite's tithe terumah, as it may be of
any amount.
164 No specific amount is required Biblically, but the sages
decreed that a specific amount should be given.
165 Challah, 2:7.
166 If there were a single loaf, one would be required to give
part of it to the kohein as terumah. If there were a
number of loaves, the requirement would be to give an entire loaf to
the kohein. (Emek Hanetziv)
167 Part of one loaf is
sufficient to absolve all the loaves from the terumah obligation.
(Ibid)
168 Sifri, 15:27. Why, then, does the Torah say, "the
first portion of your dough"? To teach that the loaf terumah
obligation applies even to loaves baked by the poor from grain
collected from fallen stalks (leket), forgotten sheaves (
shikchah), or the corner of the field (peiah). (Emek
Hanetziv, from Sifri, there)
169 One twenty-fourth for the home
maker, one forty-eighth for the commercial baker. (Sifri, 15:30) Rashi
above [v. 20], however, stated that no specific amount is required for
the challah-gift. Evidently, the amount specified here is not
required Biblically, but by Rabbinic decree. And the derivation from
"you shall give" serves only as a suggestive source of support (
asmachta) for the Rabbinic legislation. (M.)
170 Rashi below
explains why this refers to idol worship.
171 I.e., would have been categorized, were it not for our
passage, which indicates that it is totally different. (M.)
172 If
all the people sinned erroneously, each tribe brought an ox as a
sin-offering for all its members. (M., from Vayikra, 4:13, 14)
173
Sifri, 15:33.
174 "It was done erroneously" in verse 24
indicates that only a single commandment was actually transgressed.
(M.)
175 Casting off the yoke is directed against G-d Himself;
breaking the covenant, against the symbol of man's devotion to G-d;
brazenly defying the Torah, against the instrument by which man is
linked to G-d. (G.A.)
176 Sifri, 15:33.
177 Our verse
states that this is a mitzvah which G-d said 'to' Moshe,
inferring that it was heard by the Israelites when G-d spoke to Moshe.
Verse 23 says that G-d commanded this mitzvah 'through' Moshe,
indicating that it was first told to Moshe alone, then conveyed by him
to the Israelites. The prohibition against idolatry fits both
categories. The first two of the Ten Commandments, "I am ...
[your G-d]" and "You must not have ... [any other G-ds]"
(Shemos, 20:2, 3) were heard by the Israelites when G-d said them to
Moshe. They prohibit idolatry. In addition, a number of prohibitions
against idolatry were told to Moshe alone, and then conveyed by him to
the Israelites. (Horayos, 8a, Rashi there.)
178 Tehillim, 62:12. G-d uttered all of the Ten Commandments at
once to Moshe (see Rashi to Shemos, 20 :1), but I (the nation) heard
only the first two. After hearing the first two commandments, the
people were afraid, and asked that G-d speak to Moshe alone [Shemos,
20:16]. (M.)
179 Sifri, 15:33.
180 The Sanhedrin.
181 The error was not on the part of those who actually committed the
offense, but 'through' the erroneous ruling by the Sanhedrin.
(M.)
182 Bowing, etc. But if they ruled that all idolatry is
permitted, there is no sacrificial obligation. (M. from Horayos, 3b)
183 From the word {Hebrew Ref} , "as a sin-offering."
184 Vayikra, 5:10.
185 Horayos, 13a. Generally, the
olah is offered as a gift, whereas the sin-offering is brought for
forgiveness. As it is appropriate for a penitent to first seek
forgiveness, and then bring his gift, the sin-offering precedes the
olah. (Rashi to Vayikra, 5:8) Sometimes, however, the olah is
not a gift, but is brought as atonement for sinful thoughts, as in the
case of idolatry, where G-d punishes the sinful in thought (Kidushin,
40a). There, the olah precedes the sin-offering, just as the
sinful thought preceded the sinful act of idolatry. (G.A.)
186 In
verse 24, and not some new sacrificial obligation, as Scripture nowhere
explains the nature of such an additional obligation. (G.A.)
187
Sifri, 15:37.
188 Sifri, 15:41. From the opening word "and" which links our
verse with the preceding chapter. (M.)
189 Ibid, 40. This
indicates that our verse does not refer to the other transgressions,
but to idolatry. (G.A. See fn. [48].)
190 Yechezkel, 5:15.
191
Yeshayah, 37:6.
192 To the interpretation that the reference is
to the blasphemy inherent in idol worship.
193 Karesos, 7b. Since
idolatry is obviously blasphemous, Scripture need not have mentioned
that the idolator blasphemes G-d. The apparent redundancy indicates
that another blasphemy is included---that of cursing G-d. (G.A.)
194 The cutting off of the soul mentioned here.
195 Horayos,
8a. All of the Torah is the word of G-d. However, the first two of the
Ten Commandments were heard by the Israelites from G-d himself, while
the rest were revealed to Moshe, who then taught them to the
Israelites. (See v. 22, fn. 38) Because the first two commandments
prohibit idol worship, the prohibition against idolatry is described as
"the word of G-d," i.e., the word heard directly from Him by the
Israelites. (M.)
196 Sanhedrin, 90b. Obviously, the idolator's
sin is within him. Why does Scripture mention it? To teach that
koreis applies only if he has not repented. (G.A.)
197 Why is
the desert mentioned? To teach that almost immediately after they
arrived in the desert during the second Shabbos the desecration
incident occurred. (G.A.) Accordingly, "the desert" in our passage
refers to the desert of Sin, where the Israelites camped in the second
month after the exodus. (Shemos, 16:1) In response to their complaint,
the manna fell there, and they kept the first Shabbos by refraining
from gathering it. (Ibid., v.30) Although our parshah appears
after the incident of the spies, which took place during the second
year after the exodus, it actually occurred more than a year earlier,
at the desert of Sin. {Hebrew Ref} , Scripture
does not always follow the chronological order of events. Cf. Rashi to
9:1.
198 Even during the first Shabbos the people went out to
gather manna (Shemos, 16:27). Indeed, the Rabbis attribute the
subsequent attack by Amalek to this first Shabbos transgression
(Shabbos, 118b). Still, the transgressors were not specifically
forewarned, and were not subject to the death penalty. In our
parshah, however, the desecrator flagrantly disregarded a warning
and was put to death. (G.A.)
199 Perhaps our incident occurred
during the first Shabbos? But Scripture states, concerning the first
Shabbos, (Shemos, 16:30) "the people rested on the seventh day."
(G.A.)
200 Sifri, 15:52. The Rabbis (Shabbos, 87b) assert that
the people had already been commanded to keep Shabbos at Marah (Shemos,
15:25), several weeks before. Why, then, is the manna Shabbos
considered the first (Tosafos to Shabbos, 87b)? Because it was the
first after the Torah was given at Sinai, where the Shabbos laws were
presented in full detail. Only the general rules were given at Marah.
(G.A.)
201 More than observing him from a distance, they "found"
him, i.e., they stood close by and warned him. (G.A.) Or, the present
tense, they found him 'gathering,' rather than the past, they found
that he 'had gathered,' indicates that they accosted him in the act of
gathering. This is important, as corporal punishment applies only when
a warning was issued at the time of the offense. By indicating that the
circumstances for a warning were in place, Scripture implies that they
warned him. (Rashi to Sanhedrin, 41a)
202 Sanhedrin, 41a.
203
Sifri, 15:57. They did not know whether to apply the general rule that
unspecified execution is by choking, or, since Shabbos desecration is
compared with idolatry, to stone him, as with idolators. (M.)
204
This is the ongoing action form, denoting constant activity. The
commandment to stone the Sabbath desecrator applies for all
generations. (M.) Even then, they were commanded to continue with the
stoning until he died. (G.A.)
205 Bereishis, 8:3. The flood
waters continuously receded.
206 Shemos, 20:8. Remember the
Shabbos constantly. See Rashi there.
207 Devorim, 5:12. Keep
Shabbos constantly.
208 Sifri, 15:59. This applies to the other forms of execution
as well. (M., from Sifri.)
209 Yechezkel, 8:3.
210 Shir
Hashirim, 2:15.
211 A rare fish with greenish-blue blood which
comes up from the sea once in seventy years. (M. from Menachos, 44a)
212 But the word appears here as {Hebrew Ref} , without the
second " {Hebrew Ref} " (Ramban). Still, the calculation follows the
general spelling, {Hebrew Ref} . (G.A.)
213 The five knots
are Rabbinically decreed, but only two knots are required Biblically.
Thus, Rashi's calculation here does not explain the meaning of "when
you see it, you will remember all of G-d's commandments." The Torah's
meaning is that the fringes themselves will serve as a reminder for the
mitzvos. Rashi's calculation explains why the Rabbis chose the
five knot sum---to complete the 613 total, suggesting all the
mitzvos. (M.)
214 13:25.
215 Tanchuma, 15.
216 The
Name {Hebrew Ref} denotes compassion. (M.)
217 The Name {Hebrew Ref} denotes judgement (M. cf. Rashi to Bereishis, 1:1, and
Shemos, 6:2)
218 But not on condition that I will be your G-d. That is
unconditional. (M.)
219 Sifri, 15:73.
220 See Shabbos 88a.
(M. cf Rashi to Shemos, 19:17.)
221 Yechezkel, 20:33.
222
Sifri, 15:74.
223 This indicates that nothing is too lowly or
trivial for G-d's interest and involvement, thereby refuting the
evil-doers who claim that G-d is too exalted to take interest in their
wicked activities. (G.A.)
224 A greenish-blue dye
indistinguishable from the "techeiles" dye required for
tzisis. "Indigo" was easily available, and, therefore, far less
costly than true "techeiles," which was extracted from a fish
which appeared only once in seventy years. (M. from Rashi to Bava
Metziya, 61b)
225 Bava Metziya 61b. The very act of attaching the
"indigo" fringes is sinful, even if the garment is not worn.
(Tosafos, there)
226 Vs. 32--35.
227 Vs. 22--31.
228 Idol worship is equivalent to denial of the entire Torah.
See Rashi to v. 22.
229 The idolator denies G-d himself. The
Shabbos desecrator, by refusing to rest as G-d rested on the concluding
day of creation, denies G-d's role as creator. (S.C. from Rashi to
Chulin, 5a.)
230 Nechemiah, 9:13.
231 Rashi conveys the
sense of the passages in Nechemiah. The text reads: "You descended on
mount Sinai ... You gave them righteous laws and true
teachings, and statutes and commandments [for] good. You made Your
sacred Shabbos known to them, and commanded them commandments,
statutes, and teachings through Your servant Moshe."
232 Shemos,
19:4. {Hebrew Ref} , "corners," corresponds with {Hebrew Ref} ,
"wings."
233 This is from Devorim, 22:12. After commenting on
our verse, Rashi turns to a related passage. (N.Y.)
234 Zevachim,
18b. The garment with three corners is completely absolved from the
tzitzis obligation. The garment with five requires fringes on four
corners, but not on the fifth. (G.A.)
235 Shemos, 6:6.
236
Ibid.
237 Ibid.
238 Ibid., v. 7.
239 Four threads are inserted into each corner
and knotted together, forming a fringe with eight threads.
240
Although Rashi (Shemos, 14:5) asserts that they crossed the sea and
sang on the seventh day after leaving Egypt (M.), the freedom from
Egyptian rule actually began the day before their departure, on the
fourteenth day of Nisan. On that day they freely slaughtered the
Pascal lamb, despite the Egyptian deification of sheep. Indeed, the day
is halachically recognized as the beginning of the exodus, as the
Torah's chametz prohibition begins then, rather than at the
evening of the fifteenth. Eight days after the fourteenth, they crossed
the sea and sang. (G.A.)
Return to Main Search Form
Sources