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