New Source Sheet
Save
Copy
Add to Collection
Export to Google Docs
Share(כד) וַיִּ֨קָּחֻ֔הוּ וַיַּשְׁלִ֥כוּ אֹת֖וֹ הַבֹּ֑רָה וְהַבּ֣וֹר רֵ֔ק אֵ֥ין בּ֖וֹ מָֽיִם׃ (כה) וַיֵּשְׁבוּ֮ לֶֽאֱכָל־לֶחֶם֒ וַיִּשְׂא֤וּ עֵֽינֵיהֶם֙ וַיִּרְא֔וּ וְהִנֵּה֙ אֹרְחַ֣ת יִשְׁמְעֵאלִ֔ים בָּאָ֖ה מִגִּלְעָ֑ד וּגְמַלֵּיהֶ֣ם נֹֽשְׂאִ֗ים נְכֹאת֙ וּצְרִ֣י וָלֹ֔ט הוֹלְכִ֖ים לְהוֹרִ֥יד מִצְרָֽיְמָה׃ (כו) וַיֹּ֥אמֶר יְהוּדָ֖ה אֶל־אֶחָ֑יו מַה־בֶּ֗צַע כִּ֤י נַהֲרֹג֙ אֶת־אָחִ֔ינוּ וְכִסִּ֖ינוּ אֶת־דָּמֽוֹ׃ (כז) לְכ֞וּ וְנִמְכְּרֶ֣נּוּ לַיִּשְׁמְעֵאלִ֗ים וְיָדֵ֙נוּ֙ אַל־תְּהִי־ב֔וֹ כִּֽי־אָחִ֥ינוּ בְשָׂרֵ֖נוּ ה֑וּא וַֽיִּשְׁמְע֖וּ אֶחָֽיו׃ (כח) וַיַּֽעַבְרוּ֩ אֲנָשִׁ֨ים מִדְיָנִ֜ים סֹֽחֲרִ֗ים וַֽיִּמְשְׁכוּ֙ וַיַּֽעֲל֤וּ אֶת־יוֹסֵף֙ מִן־הַבּ֔וֹר וַיִּמְכְּר֧וּ אֶת־יוֹסֵ֛ף לַיִּשְׁמְעֵאלִ֖ים בְּעֶשְׂרִ֣ים כָּ֑סֶף וַיָּבִ֥יאוּ אֶת־יוֹסֵ֖ף מִצְרָֽיְמָה׃ (כט) וַיָּ֤שָׁב רְאוּבֵן֙ אֶל־הַבּ֔וֹר וְהִנֵּ֥ה אֵין־יוֹסֵ֖ף בַּבּ֑וֹר וַיִּקְרַ֖ע אֶת־בְּגָדָֽיו׃ (ל) וַיָּ֥שָׁב אֶל־אֶחָ֖יו וַיֹּאמַ֑ר הַיֶּ֣לֶד אֵינֶ֔נּוּ וַאֲנִ֖י אָ֥נָה אֲנִי־בָֽא׃
(כח) ויעברו אנשים מדינים. זוֹ הִיא שַׁיָּרָה אַחֶרֶת, וְהוֹדִיעֲךָ הַכָּתוּב שֶׁנִּמְכַּר פְּעָמִים הַרְבֵּה:,וימשכו. בְנֵי יַעֲקֹב אֶת יוֹסֵף מִן הַבּוֹר וַיִּמְכְּרוּהוּ לַיִּשְׁמְעֵאלִים, וְיִשְׁמְעֵאלִים לַמִּדְיָנִים, וְהַמִּדְיָנִים לַמִּצְרִים: (כט) וישב ראובן. בִּמְכִירָתוֹ לֹא הָיָה שָׁם, שֶׁהִגִּיעַ יוֹמוֹ לֵילֵךְ וּלְשַׁמֵּשׁ אֶת אָבִיו. דָּ"אַ עָסוּק הָיָה בְשַׂקּוֹ וּבְתַעֲנִיתוֹ עַל שֶׁבִּלְבֵּל יְצוּעֵי אָבִיו:
(1) וישב יעקב AND JACOB ABODE — After it (Scripture) has described to you the settlements of Esau and his descendants in a brief manner — since they were not distinguished and important enough that it should be related in detail how they settled down and that there should be given an account of their wars and how they drove out the Horites (see Deuteronomy 2:12) — it explains clearly and at length the settlements made by Jacob and his descendants and all the events which brought these about, because these are regarded by the Omnipresent as of sufficient importance to speak of them at length. Thus, too, you will find that in the case of the ten generations from Adam to Noah it states “So-and-so begat so-and-so”, but when it reaches Noah it deals with him at length. Similarly, of the ten generations from Noah to Abraham it gives but a brief account, but when it comes to Abraham it speaks of him more fully. It may be compared to the case of a jewel that falls into the sand: a man searches in the sand, sifts it in a sieve until he finds the jewel. When he has found it he throws away the pebbles and keeps the jewel (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayeshev 1). Another explanation of וישב יעקב AND JACOB ABODE: The camels of a flax dealer once came into a city laden with flax. A blacksmith asked in wonder where all that flax could be stored, and a clever fellow answered him, “A single spark caused by your bellows can burn up all of it.” “So, too, when Jacob saw (heard of) all these chiefs whose names are written above he said wonderingly, “Who can conquer all these?” What is written after the names of these chieftains? — and in this may be found the reply to Jacob’s question: These are the generations of Jacob — Joseph. For it is written (Obadiah 1:18) “And the house of Jacob shall be a fire and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau, for stubble: one spark issuing from Joseph will burn up all of these (descendants of Esau) (Genesis Rabbah 84:5). The passage beginning “Another explanation” is found in an old Rashi text. (2) אלה תלדות יעקב THESE ARE THE PROGENY OF JACOB — And these are an account of the generations of Jacob: these are their settlements and the events that happened to them until they formed a permanent settlement. The first cause is found in the narrative, “Joseph being seventeen years old, etc. etc.” — it was through this incident that it came about that they went down to Egypt. This is the real explanation of the text and in it each statement finds its proper setting. The Midrash, however, explains that by the words, “These are the progeny of Jacob — Joseph”, Scripture regards all Jacob’s sons as secondary to Joseph for several reasons: first, the whole purpose of Jacob in working for Laban was only for Rachel, Joseph’s mother, (and all his children were born only in consequence of this); then, again, Joseph’s facial features bore a striking resemblance to those of Jacob. Further, whatever happened to Jacob happened to Joseph: the one was hated, the other was hated; in the case of the one his brother wished to kill him so, too, in the case of the other, his brethren wished to kill him. Many such similarities are pointed out in (Genesis Rabbah 84:5-6; Genesis Rabbah 84:8). Another comment on this verse is: וישב AND HE ABODE — Jacob wished to live at ease, but this trouble in connection with Joseph suddenly came upon him. When the righteous wish to live at ease, the Holy one, blessed be He), says to them: “Are not the righteous satisfied with what is stored up for them in the world to come that they wish to live at ease in this world too! (Genesis Rabbah 84:3),והוא נער AND HE, BEING A LAD — His actions were childish: he dressed his hair, he touched up his eyes so that he should appear good-looking (Genesis Rabbah 84:7).,את בני בלהה WITH THE SONS OF BILHAH — meaning that he made it his custom to associate with the sons of Bilhah because his brothers slighted them as being sons of a hand-maid; therefore he fraternised with them.,את דבתם רעה THEIR EVIL REPORT — Whatever he saw wrong in his brothers, the sons of Leah, he reported to his father: that they used to eat flesh cut off from a living animal, that they treated the sons of the handmaids with contempt, calling them slaves, and that they were suspected of living in an immoral manner. With three such similar matters he was therefore punished. In consequence of his having stated that they used to eat flesh cut off from a living animal Scripture states, (Genesis 37:31) “And they slew a he-goat" after they had sold him and they did not eat its flesh whilst the animal was still living. And because of the slander which he related about them that they called their brothers slaves — (Psalms 105:17) “Joseph was sold for a slave.” And because he charged them with immorality (Genesis 39:7) “his master’s wife cast her eyes upon him etc.” (Genesis Rabbah 84:7).,דבתם THEIR REPORT — The word דבה always means in old French parleriz; English, gossip: whatever he could speak bad about them he told to his father. ,דבה has the same meaning as the verb of the same root in (Song 7:10) “(דובב) making speak the lips of those that are asleep”. (3) בן זקנים THE SON OF HIS OLD AGE — because he was a wise son to him” — all that he had learnt from Shem and Eber he taught him (Genesis Rabbah 84:8). Another explanation of בן זקנים— his facial features were similar to his (Jacob’s) (Genesis Rabbah 84:8).,פסים is a term for raiment of fine wool (Shabbat 10b). Similar is (Ester 1:6) כרפס “Fine linen and blue”. The same garment כתנת הפסים is mentioned (2 Samuel 13:18) in the story of Amnon and Tamar and we may therefore gather that it was made of very fine material. There is a Midrashic statement that in the word פסים we may find an allusion to all his misfortunes: he was sold to Potiphar (פוטיפר), to the merchants (סוחרים), to the Ishmaelites (ישמעאלים), and to the Midianites (מדינים) (Genesis Rabbah 84:8). (4) ולא יכלו דברו לשלום AND THEY COULD NOT SPEAK PEACEABLY TO HIM — from what is stated to their discredit we may infer something to their credit: they did not speak one thing with their mouth having another thing quite different in their hearts (Genesis Rabbah 84:9).,דברו means TO SPEAK TO HIM. (5) (6) (7) מאלמים אלמים — Understand it as the Targum renders it: were binding bundles i.e. sheaves. Similar is (Psalms 126:6) “bearing (אלומותיו) its sheaves”. Similarly in Mishnaic Hebrew we have (Bava Metzia 22b) “and he takes (האלומות) the sheaves and makes public proclamation”.,קמה אלמתי means it raised itself erect.,וגם נצבה means remaining erect in its place. (8) ועל דבריו AND FOR HIS WORDS — for the evil report about them which he used to bring to their father. (9) (10) ויספר אל אביו ואל אחיו AND HE TOLD IT TO HIS FATHER AND TO HIS BRETHREN — After he had related it to his brothers (see 5:9) he again related it to his father in their presence.,ויגער בו AND HIS FATHER REBUKED HIM because he was arousing hatred against himself by relating the dream.,הבוא נבוא SHALL WE INDEED COME — “Is not your mother long since dead?” He did not, however, understand that the statement really alluded to Bilhah who had brought him up as though she were his own mother (Genesis Rabbah 84:11). Our Rabbis inferred from here that there is no dream but has some absurd incidents (Berakhot 55). Jacob’s intention in pointing out the absurdity of Joseph’s mother, who was dead, bowing down to him was to make his sons forget the whole matter so that they should not envy him, and on this account he said to him, “Shall we indeed come etc.” — meaning, just as it (the fulfillment of the dream) is impossible in the case of your mother so the remainder of the dream is absurd. (11) שמר את הדבר OBSERVED THE MATTER — He awaited and looked forward to the time when this would come to pass. In the same sense we have (Isaiah 26:2) “that watch (שומר) for faithfulness” (i.e., for the performance of a promise) and (Job 14:16) — “לא תשמור for my sin” — which means “thou dost not wait for my sin”. (12) לרעות את צאן TO FEED THE FLOCK — The word את has dots above it, to denote that they went only to feed themselves (Genesis Rabbah 84:13). (13) הנני HERE AM I — An expression denoting humility and readiness: he was zealous to perform his father’s bidding, although he was aware that his brothers hated him (Genesis Rabbah 84:13). (14) מעמק חברון FROM THE VALE OF HEBRON — But was not Hebron situated on a hill, as it is said (Numbers 13:22) “And they went up into the South and they came unto Hebron” why then does it state that Jacob sent him from the עמק, (the vale, the deep part) of Hebron? But the meaning is that Jacob sent him in consequence of the necessity of bringing into operation the profound (עמוקה) thought of the righteous man who was buried in Hebron (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayera 22) — in order that there might be fulfilled that which was spoken to Abraham when the Covenant was made ‘between the parts” (cf. 15:13), “thy seed shall be a stranger etc.”,ויבא שכמה AND HE CAME TO SHECHEM — A spot foredestined to be the scene of misfortunes: there the sons of Jacob sinned (by selling Joseph), there Dinah was maltreated, there the kingdom of the House of David was divided, as it said (1 Kings 12:1) “And Rehoboam went to Shechem etc.” (Sanhedrin 102a). (15) וימצאהו איש AND A MAN FOUND HIM — This was the angel Gabriel (Genesis Rabbah 84:14) as it is said, (Daniel 10:21) and the man (והאיש) Gabriel” (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayera 22). (16) (17) נסעו מזה THEY HAVE JOURNEYED HENCE — they have departed from all feeling of brotherhood.,נלכה דתינה LET US GO TO DOTHAN — “let us go to seek some legal (דתות) pretexts” to put you to death. According to the literal sense, however, it is the name of place, and Scripture never really loses its literal sense (Shabbat 63a). (18) ויתנכלו AND THEY CONSPIRED — The Hithpael form denotes that they became filled with plots and craft.,אֹתוֹ is here the same as אִתּוֹ which means “with him” — meaning אליו: they became filled with plots and craft directed towards him (אליו). (19) (20) ונראה מה יהיו חלמתיו AND WE SHALL SEE WHAT WILL BECOME OF HIS DREAMS — R. Isaac said, this verse calls for a homiletic explanation. The Holy Spirit said this latter part of the text. They say “let us slay him”, and Scripture (i.e. the Holy Spirit) breaks in upon their words concluding them by saying, “and we shall see what will become of his dreams”: we shall see whose words will be fulfilled — yours or mine. For it is impossible that they should have said, “and we shall see what will become of his dreams”, for as soon as they would kill him his dreams would be of no effect (Tanchuma Yashan 1:9:13). (21) לא נכנו נפש — supply the word מכת so that the meaning will be “Let us not smite him with a smiting of his life” — it means killing. (22) למען הציל אתו THAT HE MIGHT DELIVER HIM [OUT OF THEIR HAND] — The Holy Spirit (Scripture) bears witness for Reuben that he said this only for the purpose of saving his brother — that he would come afterwards and draw him up from there. He thought, “I am the first-born and the chief among them, and blame will attach to no one but myself” (Genesis Rabbah 84:15). (23) את כתנתו HIS GARMENT — this means his shirt.,את כתנת הפסים THE LONG SLEEVED GARMENT — this was the garment that his father had given him additional to those of his brothers (Genesis Rabbah 84:16). (24) והבור רק אין בו מים AND THE PIT WAS EMPTY, THERE WAS NO WATER IN IT — Since it states, “the pit was empty”, do I not know that “there was no water in it”? What then is the force of “there was no water in it”? Water, indeed it did not contain, but there were serpents and scorpions in it (Shabbat 22a). (25) ארחת means what the Targum says — A CARAVAN; this is called ארחת with reference to the travelers on the road (ארח) who compose it.,וגמליהם נשאים AND THEIR CAMELS WERE BEARING etc. — Why does Scripture specially announce what they were laden with? It is to tell you how great is the reward of the righteous: it is not usual for Arabs to carry anything but naphta and itran (tar) which are evil-smelling, but for this one (Joseph, the righteous) it was specially arranged that they should be carrying fragrant spices so that he should not suffer from a bad odour (Genesis Rabbah 84:17).,נכאת SPICERY — Every collection of many kinds of spices is called נכאת. So, too, (2 Kings 20:13) “and he showed them all the house of his נכתה which means the house where his spices were mixed. Onkelos translates it as meaning wax (perhaps an aromatic gum).,צרי AND BALM — a resin that exudes from the wood of the balsam-tree: it is the נטף that is enumerated among the ingredients of the incense used in the Tabernacle (Exodus 30:34; cf. Keritot 6a).,ולט AND LADANUM — This is called Lotos in the language of the Mishna. Our Rabbis have in treatise Niddah 8a explained that it is a vegetable root; it bears the name aristolochia (birthwort). (26) מה בצע means WHAT PROFIT— just as the Targum renders it.,וכסינו את דמו AND CONCEAL HIS BLOOD — this signifies and we hide the fact of his death (for they had not shed his blood, but had cast him into a pit to die). (27) וישמעו AND THEY HEARKENED — The Targum renders this by “and they accepted it from him” (i.e., they agreed with him). Wherever the verb שמע means agreeing with a person’s statement — obeying — as here, and as (28:7) “and Jacob had hearkened (וישמע) to his father”, and (Exodus 24:7) “We will do and we will obey (ונשמע)” it is translated in the Targum by קבל “accepting”, but wherever it merely means hearing with the ear, as e. g. (3:8) “And they heard (וישמעו) the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden”, and (27:5) “and Rebecca heard (שומעת;”, and (31:1) “And Israel heard (וישמע)”, and (Exodus 16:12) “I have heard (שמעתי) the murmurings of the children of Israel”, — all such cases are rendered by various forms of ושמעו: שמע “and they heard“, ושמעת “and she heard”, ושמע “and he heard”,שמיע ,קדמי “there is heard before Me” (I have heard). (28) ויעברו אנשים מדינים AND THERE PASSED BY MIDIANITES — This was another caravan: Scripture indicates that he was sold several times., וימשכו AND THEY DREW UP — the sons of Jacob drew up את יוסף מן הבור JOSEPH FROM THE PIT, and they sold him to the Ishmaelites, and the Ishmaelites to the Midianites and the Midianites into Egypt (Midrash Tanchuma 1:9:13). (29) וישב ראובן AND REUBEN RETURNED — When he (Joseph) was sold he had not been present, for it was his day (his turn) to go to attend to his father (Genesis Rabbah 84:19). Another explanation is: he had not sat with them at the meal because he was occupied with his sack-cloth and fast in penitence for having disturbed his father’s couch (Genesis Rabbah 84:19). (30) אנה אני בא WHITHER SHALL I GO? — Whither can I flee from my father’s grief? (31) שעיר עזים A KID OF THE GOATS — its blood resembles that of a human being (Genesis Rabbah 84:19).,הַכֻּתֹּנֶת THE COAT — This is the form of the noun in the absolute state, but when it is in the construct state — as e.g., Joseph’s coat”, “the coat of many colours”, “the coat of linen”, — it is punctuated as כְּתֹנֶת. (32) (33) ויאמר כתנת בני AND HE SAID, MY SON’S COAT —is this (i.e. supply the words היא זו after בני).,חיה רעה אכלתהו AN EVIL BEAST HATH EATEN HIM — The spirit of prophecy was enkindled within him, for these words may be taken to mean that at some future time Potiphar’s wife would attack him (Genesis Rabbah 84:19). Why did not the Holy One, blessed be He, make known to him (Jacob) that he was still living? Because they had placed under a ban and a curse anyone of them who would make it known, and they made the Holy One, blessed be He, a party with them to this agreement (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayeshev 2) Isaac, however, knew that he was living, but he thought, “How dare I reveal it since the Holy One, blessed be He does not wish to reveal it” (Genesis Rabbah 84:21). (34) ימים רבים MANY DAYS — twenty-two years (Genesis Rabbah 84:20) — from the time he left him until Jacob went down to Egypt. For it is said, (v. 2) “Joseph was seventeen years old” (when all these events happened), and he was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh; seven years of plenty and two years of famine had passed by the time Jacob came to Egypt — making in all 22 years. These correspond to the 22 years during which Jacob had not practised the duty of honouring his parents (that is, the period during which he did not reside with them and attend to their needs) (Megillah 17a): viz., the twenty years he stayed in Laban’s house and the two years on the journey when he was returning from Laban’s house — one and a half year at Succoth and six months at Bethel. This is what he meant when he said to Laban (31:41) “These twenty years that I have been in thy house are לי” — they are for me — the responsibility for them lies upon me (לי being taken as עלי) and at sometimes I shall be punished for a period equal to them. (35) וכל בנתיו AND ALL HIS DAUGHTERS — R Judah said: a twin-sister was born with each of Jacob’s sons and they each took a step-sister to wife (It was these daughters who comforted Jacob) R. Nehemiah said: their wives were Canaanite women and not their step-sisters; what is meant then “by all his daughters”? His daughters-in-law, for a person does not hesitate to call his son-in-law his son and his daughter-in-law his daughter (Genesis Rabbah 84:21).,וימאן להתנחם BUT HE REFUSED TO COMFORT HIMSELF — A person does not accept consolation for one living whom he believes to be dead, for with regard to the dead it is decreed that he be forgotten from the heart, but it is not so decreed with regard to the living (Genesis Rabbah 84:20).,ארד אל בני I WILL GO DOWN TO MY SON — This has the same meaning as על בני, on account of my son. There are many examples where אל is used in the sense of על: (2 Samuel 4:21) “(אל) because of Saul (ואל) and because of his bloody house”; (1 Samuel 4:21) “(אל) because the ark of God was taken (ואל) and because of the death of her father-in-law and her husband”.,אבל שאלה MOURNING INTO THE GRAVE — According to the literal meaning שאל means “the grave” — whilst I am still in a state of mourning I shall be interred (i.e. even to the day of my burial I shall mourn) and I shall not be comforted all my life. The Midrash explains it to refer to Gehinnom. “This omen has been given me by God: if none of my sons die during my lifetime I may be assured that I shall not see Gehinnom” (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayigash 9).,ויגש). ויבך אתו אביו THUS HIS FATHER WEPT FOR HIM — His father refers to Isaac: he wept for Jacob’s trouble, but he did not mourn for he knew that he (Joseph) was alive (Genesis Rabbah 84:21). (36) הטבחים— means the slaughterers of the kings animals.
(א) עוֹשִׂין פַּסִּין לַבֵּירָאוֹת אַרְבָּעָה דְיוּמְדִין, נִרְאִין כִּשְׁמֹנָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, שְׁמֹנָה, נִרְאִין כִּשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר, אַרְבָּעָה דְיוּמְדִין וְאַרְבָּעָה פְשׁוּטִין. גָּבְהָן עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים, וְרָחְבָּן שִׁשָּׁה, וְעָבְיָן כָּל שֶׁהוּא, וּבֵינֵיהֶן כִּמְלֹא שְׁתֵּי רְבָקוֹת שֶׁל שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁלֹשׁ בָּקָר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, שֶׁל אַרְבַּע אַרְבַּע, קְשׁוּרוֹת וְלֹא מֻתָּרוֹת, אַחַת נִכְנֶסֶת וְאַחַת יוֹצֵאת:
(ב) מֻתָּר לְהַקְרִיב לַבְּאֵר, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁתְּהֵא פָרָה רֹאשָׁהּ וְרֻבָּהּ בִּפְנִים וְשׁוֹתָה. מֻתָּר לְהַרְחִיק כָּל שֶׁהוּא, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיַּרְבֶּה בְּפַסִּין:
(ג) רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, עַד בֵּית סָאתָיִם. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לֹא אָמְרוּ בֵית סָאתַיִם אֶלָּא לְגִנָּה וּלְקַרְפֵּף, אֲבָל אִם הָיָה דִּיר אוֹ סַחַר, אוֹ מֻקְצֶה אוֹ חָצֵר, אֲפִלּוּ בֵית חֲמֵשֶׁת כּוֹרִין, אֲפִלּוּ בֵית עֲשָׂרָה כּוֹרִין, מֻתָּר. וּמֻתָּר לְהַרְחִיק כָּל שֶׁהוּא, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיַּרְבֶּה בְּפַסִּין:
(1) They may make posts for wells, [by setting up] four corner-pieces that have the appearance of eight [single posts], the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Meir says: eight that have the appearance of twelve, four corner-pieces and four single [posts]. Their height must be ten handbreadths, their width six, and their thickness [may be] of any size whatsoever. Between them [there may be] as much [space as to admit] two teams of three oxen each, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: [two teams] of four [oxen each] . [These teams being] tied together and not untied, [enough for] one to enter while the other goes out.
(2) It is permitted to bring [the posts] close to the well, provided that a cow’s head and the greater part of its body can be within [the enclosure] when drinking. It is permitted to remove [the posts] to any [distance] provided one increases the posts.
(3) Rabbi Judah says: [the enclosure may be only] as large as two bet se'ah. They said to him: they only prescribed [the limit of] two beth se’ah for a garden or a karpaf only, but if [the enclosure] was a pen, or sahar, a backyard or courtyard even if it is five or ten bet kor, it is permitted. And it is permitted to remove [the posts] to any [distance] provided one increases the posts.
(4) Rabbi Judah says: if a public road cuts through them it should be diverted to one side; But the sages say: this is not necessary. Both for a public cistern, a public well as well as a private well, they may make [an enclosure] of posts, but for a private cistern, they must make a partition ten handbreadths high, the words of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Judah ben Baba says: they make [an enclosure] of posts for a public well only while for the others they must make a belt ten handbreadths high.
(5) Rabbi Judah ben Bava further said: a garden or a karpaf whose [area does not exceed] seventy cubits and a fraction by seventy cubits and a fraction, which is surrounded by a fence ten handbreadths high, it is permitted to carry within it, provided there is in it a watchman’s hut or a dwelling place or it is near to a town. Rabbi Judah says: even if it contained only a cistern, a ditch or a cave it is permitted to carry within it. Rabbi Akiva says: even if it contained none of these it is permitted to carry within it, provided its area [does not exceed] seventy cubits and a fraction by seventy cubits and a fraction. Rabbi Eliezer says: if its length exceeded its breadth even by a single cubit it is not permitted to carry within it. Rabbi Yose says: even if its length is twice its breadth it is permitted to carry within it.
(6) Rabbi Ilai said: I heard from Rabbi Eliezer, even if it is as large as a bet kor. I also heard from him that if one of the residents of a courtyard forgot to join in the eruv, his house is forbidden to him for taking in or taking out any object but it is permitted to them. I also heard from him that people may fulfill their duty [for bitter herbs] at Pesach by eating hart’s tongue (akrevanim). I went round among all his disciples seeking a fellowstudent but I found none.
(ו) כִּֽי־יִתֵּן֩ אִ֨ישׁ אֶל־רֵעֵ֜הוּ כֶּ֤סֶף אֽוֹ־כֵלִים֙ לִשְׁמֹ֔ר וְגֻנַּ֖ב מִבֵּ֣ית הָאִ֑ישׁ אִם־יִמָּצֵ֥א הַגַּנָּ֖ב יְשַׁלֵּ֥ם שְׁנָֽיִם׃ (ז) אִם־לֹ֤א יִמָּצֵא֙ הַגַּנָּ֔ב וְנִקְרַ֥ב בַּֽעַל־הַבַּ֖יִת אֶל־הָֽאֱלֹהִ֑ים אִם־לֹ֥א שָׁלַ֛ח יָד֖וֹ בִּמְלֶ֥אכֶת רֵעֵֽהוּ׃ (ח) עַֽל־כָּל־דְּבַר־פֶּ֡שַׁע עַל־שׁ֡וֹר עַל־חֲ֠מוֹר עַל־שֶׂ֨ה עַל־שַׂלְמָ֜ה עַל־כָּל־אֲבֵדָ֗ה אֲשֶׁ֤ר יֹאמַר֙ כִּי־ה֣וּא זֶ֔ה עַ֚ד הָֽאֱלֹהִ֔ים יָבֹ֖א דְּבַר־שְׁנֵיהֶ֑ם אֲשֶׁ֤ר יַרְשִׁיעֻן֙ אֱלֹהִ֔ים יְשַׁלֵּ֥ם שְׁנַ֖יִם לְרֵעֵֽהוּ׃ (ס) (ט) כִּֽי־יִתֵּן֩ אִ֨ישׁ אֶל־רֵעֵ֜הוּ חֲמ֨וֹר אוֹ־שׁ֥וֹר אוֹ־שֶׂ֛ה וְכָל־בְּהֵמָ֖ה לִשְׁמֹ֑ר וּמֵ֛ת אוֹ־נִשְׁבַּ֥ר אוֹ־נִשְׁבָּ֖ה אֵ֥ין רֹאֶֽה׃ (י) שְׁבֻעַ֣ת יְהוָ֗ה תִּהְיֶה֙ בֵּ֣ין שְׁנֵיהֶ֔ם אִם־לֹ֥א שָׁלַ֛ח יָד֖וֹ בִּמְלֶ֣אכֶת רֵעֵ֑הוּ וְלָקַ֥ח בְּעָלָ֖יו וְלֹ֥א יְשַׁלֵּֽם׃ (יא) וְאִם־גָּנֹ֥ב יִגָּנֵ֖ב מֵעִמּ֑וֹ יְשַׁלֵּ֖ם לִבְעָלָֽיו׃
(1) If the thief is seized while tunneling, and he is beaten to death, there is no bloodguilt in his case. (2) If the sun has risen on him, there is bloodguilt in that case.—He must make restitution; if he lacks the means, he shall be sold for his theft. (3) But if what he stole—whether ox or ass or sheep—is found alive in his possession, he shall pay double. (4) When a man lets his livestock loose to graze in another’s land, and so allows a field or a vineyard to be grazed bare, he must make restitution for the impairment of that field or vineyard. (5) When a fire is started and spreads to thorns, so that stacked, standing, or growing grain is consumed, he who started the fire must make restitution. (6) When a man gives money or goods to another for safekeeping, and they are stolen from the man’s house—if the thief is caught, he shall pay double; (7) if the thief is not caught, the owner of the house shall depose before God that he has not laid hands on the other’s property. (8) In all charges of misappropriation—pertaining to an ox, an ass, a sheep, a garment, or any other loss, whereof one party alleges, “This is it”—the case of both parties shall come before God: he whom God declares guilty shall pay double to the other. (9) When a man gives to another an ass, an ox, a sheep or any other animal to guard, and it dies or is injured or is carried off, with no witness about, (10) an oath before the LORD shall decide between the two of them that the one has not laid hands on the property of the other; the owner must acquiesce, and no restitution shall be made. (11) But if [the animal] was stolen from him, he shall make restitution to its owner. (12) If it was torn by beasts, he shall bring it as evidence; he need not replace what has been torn by beasts. (13) When a man borrows [an animal] from another and it dies or is injured, its owner not being with it, he must make restitution. (14) If its owner was with it, no restitution need be made; but if it was hired, he is entitled to the hire. (15) If a man seduces a virgin for whom the bride-price has not been paid, and lies with her, he must make her his wife by payment of a bride-price. (16) If her father refuses to give her to him, he must still weigh out silver in accordance with the bride-price for virgins. (17) You shall not tolerate a sorceress. (18) Whoever lies with a beast shall be put to death. (19) Whoever sacrifices to a god other than the LORD alone shall be proscribed. (20) You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. (21) You shall not ill-treat any widow or orphan. (22) If you do mistreat them, I will heed their outcry as soon as they cry out to Me, (23) and My anger shall blaze forth and I will put you to the sword, and your own wives shall become widows and your children orphans. (24) If you lend money to My people, to the poor among you, do not act toward them as a creditor; exact no interest from them. (25) If you take your neighbor’s garment in pledge, you must return it to him before the sun sets; (26) it is his only clothing, the sole covering for his skin. In what else shall he sleep? Therefore, if he cries out to Me, I will pay heed, for I am compassionate. (27) You shall not revile God, nor put a curse upon a chieftain among your people. (28) You shall not put off the skimming of the first yield of your vats. You shall give Me the first-born among your sons. (29) You shall do the same with your cattle and your flocks: seven days it shall remain with its mother; on the eighth day you shall give it to Me. (30) You shall be holy people to Me: you must not eat flesh torn by beasts in the field; you shall cast it to the dogs.
( (ט) כי יתן איש אל רעהו חמור או שור. פָּרָשָׁה רִאשׁוֹנָה נֶאֶמְרָה בְּשׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם, לְפִיכָךְ פָּטַר בּוֹ אֶת הַגְּנֵבָה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (פסוק ו) וְגֻנַּב מִבֵּית הָאִישׁ, אִם לֹא יִמָּצֵא הַגַּנָּב וְנִקְרַב בַּעַל הַבַּיִת לִשְׁבוּעָה, לָמַדְתָּ שֶׁפּוֹטֵר עַצְמוֹ בִּשְׁבוּעָה זוֹ. וּפָרָשָׁה זוֹ אֲמוּרָה בְּשׁוֹמֵר שָׂכָר, לְפִיכָךְ אֵינוֹ פָּטוּר אִם נִגְנְבָה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב (פסוק יא) אִם גָּנֹב יִגָּנֵב מֵעִמּוֹ יְשַׁלֵּם, אֲבָל עַל הָאֹנֶס, כְּגוֹן מֵת מֵעַצְמוֹ, אוֹ נִשְׁבַּר אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה בְּחָזְקָה עַל יְדֵי לִסְטִים, וְאֵין רוֹאֶה שֶׁיָּעִיד בַּדָּבָר:
(1) אם במחתרת means when he was breaking in into the house (i. e. in the very act of forcing an entry, but at no other moment)., אין לו דמים THERE SHALL NO GUILT OF BLOOD BE INCURRED FOR HIM — This is not regarded as a murder; it is as though he (the thief) has been dead from the beginning of his criminal act (אין לו דמים is taken to mean: he, the thief, had no blood — no vitality). Here the Torah teaches you the rule: “If one comes with the intention of killing you, be quick and kill him”. — And this burglar actually came with the intention of killing you, for he knew full well that no one can hold himself in check, looking on whilst people are stealing his property before his eyes and doing nothing. He (the thief) therefore obviously came with this purpose in view — that in case the owner of the property would resist him, he would kill him (Sanhedrin 72a). (2) אם זרחה השמש עליו IF THE SUN SHONE UPON HIM — This is only a metaphorical expression signifying: if the fact is clear to you that he is peaceably disposed towards you. The simile is: just as the sun brings peace (happiness) to the world so if it is evident to you that he did not come with the intention of killing, even if the owner of the property would resist him (Sanhedrin 72a), as, for instance, when a father breaks in to steal the money of his son, for it is certain that the father cherishes feelings of pity for his child and the matter of taking human life is not in his thoughts at all, — then, דמים לו, then he is to be regarded as a living man (cf. Rashi’s explanation of אין לו דמים v. 1.), and it is murder if the householder kills him., שלם ישלם means the thief shall only restore the money he has stolen but is not subject to the death penalty. Onkelos who renders אם זרחה השמש עליו by, “If the eye of witnesses fall upon him” chose a different way of explaining the verse, namely, that if witnesses surprise him before the householder appears, and when the householder is going towards him they warn him not to kill him (the thief), then דמים לו, he is punishable if he kills him; for since there are people watching him the thief surely has no thought of taking human life and will not kill the owner of the property. (3) המצא תמצא IF THE THEFT BE CERTAINLY FOUND IN HIS HAND i. e. in his possession (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:3:2), he having neither sold it nor slaughtered it he shall pay only double.,משור עד חמור WHETHER IT BE AN OX OR AN ASS — Every thing stolen whether it be animate or inanimate comes under the category of things for which two-fold compensation (“kefel”) must be made, for it is said in another verse, (8) “[for every matter of tresspass whether it be for ox, for ass…], for sheep, for raiment or for any lost thing … he shall pay double unto his fellow-man”(Bava Kamma 62b).,חיים שנים ישלם means, two living animals (חיים שנים) shall he pay and he shall not give dead animals in payment (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:3:4) — but either living animals or the value of living animals. (4) כי יבער … בעירה ובער All these terms are connected with the word בעיר which signifies “cattle”, as in (Numbers 20:4) אנחנו ובעירנו “we and our cattle" .,כי יבער means accordingly, he takes his cattle into the field or the vineyard of his fellow-man and causes damage to him by one of these two ways: either by the mere fact that he lets his cattle go (tread) there (ושלח את בעירו), or by letting it graze there (ובער). Our Rabbis explained (Bava Kamma 2b), that ושלח refers to the damage done by “treading” (Rashi uses a Biblical phrase Deuteronomy 5:1. “treading of the hollow of the foot”) and ובער to the damage caused by the tooth that eats up and removes (מבערת) the crops (grazing)., בשדה אחר means בשדה של אחר IN THE FIELD OF ANOTHER MAN (not “in another field”, when it would be punctuated בְּשָׂדֶה, for בִּשְׁדֵה is the construct form). ,מיטב שדהו … ישלם THE BEST OF HIS FIELD SHALL HE PAY — We assess the damage, and if the defendant proposes to make restitution to him for the damage he has suffered with “land’” then he has to pay him with the best of his fields. If for instance the damage amounted to a Sela he has to give him a Sela-worth of the best of the fields he possesses). Scripture teaches you that in cases of damages (which it is proposed to pay with land) we assess and collect them from the best land of the defendant (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:4:6; Bava Kamma 6b). (5) כי תצא אש IF A FIRE GOETH FORTH — i. e. even if it goeth forth (extends) by itself (Bava Kamma 24b) from the field in which it has been lit into another persons field., ומצאה קוצים AND CATCH IN THORNS —chardons in old French, ונאכל גדיש SO THAT THE STACKS OF CORN [OR THE STANDING CORN] BE CONSUMED, because it (the fire) licked up the thorns and gradually reached the stacks of corn or the standing corn, i. e. corn that is still attached to the ground., או השדה OR THE FIELD — because it (the fire) liked up his furrow (the newly broken soil), so that it became hard and he (the owner) has to plough it again (Bava Kamma 60a)., שלם ישלם המבער HE THAT KINDLED [THE CONFLAGRATION] SHALL SURELY PAY — Although he has lit the fire on his own soil and it extended by itself through the thorns which it came across, he has to make restitution because he did not guard his fire (lit., burning coals) that it should not extend and cause damage. (6) וגנב מבית האיש AND IT BE STOLEN OUT OF THE MAN’S HOUSE — i. e. according to his statement),, אם ימצה הגנב ישלם IF THE THIEF BE FOUND HE — the thief — SHALL PAY שנים DOUBLE to the owner (to the bailor not to the bailee) (Bava Kamma 63b). (7) אם לא ימצא הגנב IF THE THIEF BE NOT FOUND then this bailee — who is בעל הבית “the owner of the house” for the time being (since the bailment is then in his possession although he is not really its owner) — shall come., ונקרב אל AND SHALL APPROACH UNTO THE אלהים — the judges, to put his case against the other and to swear unto him that he has not put forth his hands against his property (Bava Kamma 63b). (8) על כל דבר פשע FOR ALL MANNER OF TRESSPASS in which he (the bailee) is proved a liar in respect of his oath (i. e. is convicted of perjury), because witnesses testify that he himself has stolen it and the judges condemn him on the evidence of the witnesses,, ישלם שנים לרעהו HE SHALL PAY THE DOUBLE TO HIS FELLOW-MAN — Scripture teaches you that in a case of a bailment where one pleads that it has been stolen from him and it is proved that he himself has stolen it he is liable to pay “kefel” (twice the value of the article) to the owner. When, however, does this law hold good? In the case that he has taken an oath that it has been stolen from him and witnesses afterwards appear and testify to the contrary. For our Rabbis expound this phrase as follows: (Bava Kamma 63b) “and the owner of the house shall approach unto the judges” — this “approaching the judges” is an expression signifying the taking of an oath. You say that it means approaching the judges in order to take an oath, but perhaps this is not so, and it means that he approaches them to put his case, and that the meaning of the verse is. that as soon as the bailee appears before the court and denies any liability, saying, “it has been stolen” from me, he at once becomes liable to pay double if witnessess appear who testify that the bailment is still in his possession? You certainly cannot argue thus! For “conversion” (שליחות יד) is mentioned here and later on (v. 10) it is mentioned again: “Then shall the oath of the Lord be between the two of them, if he hath not put his hand (אם לא שלח ידו) unto his fellow-man’s goods”. — Now, what is the meaning of the phrase in the latter case? It is evident from what precedes it that it is a matter of taking an oath! So also here it is a matter of taking an oath. (Bava Kamma 63b)., אשר יאמר כי הוא זה means, according to the literal sense, any article about which the witness will say: “this is the very article” about which you have taken an oath that it has been stolen from you; see, it is actually in your possession! — then the matter of dispute between the two of them shall come before the judges. These shall examine the witnesses, and if they prove to be trustworthy and they (the judges) condemn this bailee, then he has to pay double. If, however, they condemn the witnesses because these are found to be “plotting” witnesses (זוממין) then shall they (the witnesses) pay double to the bailee. Our Rabbis, of blessed memory, however, explained that כי הוא זה tells us that no oath can be imposed upon him (the defendant) except if he admits a part of the other’s claim asserting, “So-and-so much I owe you, and the rest has been stolen from me” (according to this explanation the phrase כי הוא זה is not a statement of the witnesses but that of the bailee himself; i. e. he says, כי הוא זה, “it is this only” that you have to claim and not as much as you say) (Bava Kamma 107b). (9) כי יתן איש אל רעהו חמור או שור IF A MAN GIVE UNTO HIS FELLOW-MAN AN ASS OR AN OX — The first section (v. 6—9) speaks of the gratuitous bailee and therefore (since the chattels are kept for the use of the bailor only) Scripture frees him of liability for theft, as it is written, (v. 6) “[If a man shall give … to keep] and it be stolen out of the man’s house, if the thief be not found, then the owner of the house shall approach the judges” to take an oath (cf. Rashi v. 7). You may learn from this that he (the bailee) frees himself from liability by this oath. This section (v. 9—12), however, speaks of a “bailee for payment” (שומר שכר) who is therefore not free from liability if the object has been stolen, as it is written, “but if it be certainly stolen from him, he shall pay [unto the owner thereof]” (Bava Metzia 94b). However, for any loss over which he has no control — if, for instance, the animal died a natural death or has been injured by a wild beast, or forcibly seized by robbers, and אין רואה NO ONE SEEING IT that could testify in this matter (10) שבעת ה׳ תהיה THEN SHALL THE OATH OF THE LORD BE BETWEEN THEM BOTH — i. e. he (the bailee) must take an oath that the case was as he says (that it died or was injured or captured), and also that he had not previously put forth his hand against it (the object), using it for his own purposes. For if he had thus “put forth his hand” and afterwards some accident, as described, happened to it he is held liable for loss by accident (Bava Metzia 94b), since he has broken the terms of the contract. —, ולקח בעליו AND THE OWNER OF IT SHALL ACCEPT IT — i. e. shall accept the oath (Bava Kamma 106a),, ולא ישלם AND HE — the bailee — SHALL NOT PAY HIM (the bailor) anything, not even the capital (קרן). (11) (12) אם טרף יטרף IF IT BE TORN IN PIECES — by wild beasts., יביאהו עד THEN LET HIM BRING WITNESSES that it has been torn in pieces by accident and he shall be freed from liability., הטרפה לא ישלם HE SHALL NOT PAY THAT WHICH HAS BEEN TORN — It does not say טרפה לא ישלם “one which has been torn he shall not pay for” — but it says “the torn one”, (the one mentioned here, viz., that which was torn without him being able to prevent it). Because there is a torn beast for which he has to pay and a torn beast for which he has not to pay. For an animal torn by a cat, a fox or a marten he has indeed to make restitution; but for one torn by a wolf, a lion, a bear or a serpent he is not liable to pay. But how do you come to make such a distinction (lit., who whispered to you to draw such a conclusion)? Because, you see, it states, “and if it die or be injured, or be captured”. Now what is the characteristic of natural death? One cannot save from it! Thus, also, the injury and the capture must be such that he was unable to save the animal from it (cf. Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:12). (13) וכי ישאל איש AND IF A MAN BORROWS — The purpose of this verse is to tell you that the borrower is liable for loss from whatever cause even from accident., בעליו אין עמו THE OWNER THEREOF NOT BEING WITH IT (lit., with “him”) — i. e. if the owner of the ox is not employed with the borrower in his work (Bava Metzia 95b). (14) אם בעליו עמו BUT IF THE OWNER THEREOF BE WITH IT (lit., with “him”) — whether he be employed in the very kind of work for which the animal has been borrowed, or whether he be employed in any other work of the borrower — provided that he (the owner) was employed by the borrower when the loan was effected it is not necessary, in order to free him from restitution that he should be employed by the bailee at the time when the injury or death took place (Bava Metzia 95b)., אם שכיר הוא IF IT BE HIRED — i. e. if the ox has not been borrowed but hired, בא בשכרו THEN IT CAME FOR ITS HIRE into the hand of this hirer and not by way of loan. For he does not get the entire benefit of the transaction since he is using it only because he has paid hire for it and consequently the owner benefits also; therefore the law applicable to a borrower does not apply in his case — that he should be held liable for loss by accident. Scripture, however, does not state explicity what his (the hirer’s) law actually is — whether he has to be treated as the gratuitous bailee (שומר חנם) or as the bailee for payment (שומר שכר), and therefore the Sages in Israel differ in their opinion as to how the hirer (שוכר) has to make restitution. R. Meir says he is responsible only as a gratuitous bailee, whilst R. Judah says, even as a bailee for payment (Bava Metzia 80b). (15) וכי יפתה AND IF A MAN ENTICE [A VIRGIN] — i. e. if he speaks kindly to her until she submits to him. Thus does also the Targum take it: ארי ישדל “if a man persuades”, the root שדל (the Pael conjugation) in Aramaic being the equivalent of פִּתָּה in Hebrew., מהר ימהרנה HE SHALL SURELY GIVE HER THE MARRIAGE PRICE — He shall assign her a marriage portion as is the practice of a man to do to his wife, i. e. he shall write her a Ketuba (marriage contract providing for a marriage portion) and shall marry her (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:15:3). (16) כמהר הבתולת AS THE MARRIAGE PRICE OF THE VIRGINS — which is limited to fifty shekels in the case of one who outrages a virgin, for it is said, (Deuteronomy 22:29) “Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver” (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:16:2; Ketubot 10a). (17) מכשפה לא תחיה THOU SHALT NOT SUFFER A WITCH TO LIVE — This does not mean that you may kill her but she shall be put to death by the court. Both men and women who practise witchcraft are included in this law but in using the feminine term מכשפה Scripture speaks of what is usually the case; for it is women who mostly practise witchcraft (Sanhedrin 67a). (18) כל שכב עם בהמה מות יומת — All who have carnal connection with beasts, whether men or women, shall surely be put to death — by stoning, for it states of such, (Leviticus 20:16) “their blood is upon them” (cf. Rashi on Exodus 21:17) (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:18)]. (19) לָאֱלֹהִים means TO IDOLS — If the word (a noun) were punctuated לֵאלֹהִים, with Tzéré under the first ל it would be necessary to define it more closely by adding the adjective אחרים = strange (gods — idols); now, however, that it says לָאֱלֹהִים it is not necessary to define it more closely by adding the word אחרים. For wherever ל or ב are prefixed to a word if it (the prefix) be punctuated with Chataph (שוא), as e. g., לְמֶלֶךְ a king, לְמִדְבָּר, to a desert, לָעִיר, to a city, it must be explained to which king, to which desert, to which city. The same is the case if the ל or ב has a Chirik instead of a Sheva which happens when they are placed before a word beginning with Sheva, as e .g., in לִמְלָכִים for kings, לִרְגָלִים, for festivals, (quoted from Mishnah Rosh Hashanah 1:1) it is necessary to state for which kings or festivals, and if he does not state this, all kings and festivals are implied by these words. Similarly here: the word לַאלֹהִים “to gods”, would imply “all gods”, including even Him of Whom the term אלהים is used in a holy sense (i. e. the Most High God). When, however, it (the prefix) is vowelled with Patach (or Kametz if the following letter cannot take Dagesh), as לַמֶּלֶךְ and לַמִּדְבָּר and לָעִיר it is quite plain which king one is speaking of, and similarly in the case of לָעִיר “to the city”, it is quite plain of which city one is speaking. In the same way, לָאֱלֹהִים, to the gods, means to those gods which in another passage you have been forbidden to worship. A similar instance is, (Psalms 86:8) אין כמוך בָאֱלֹהִים, “there is none like unto Thee among the gods” — because he did not more closely define it by the addition of some word like אחרים, it was necessary for him to vowel the ל with Patach (Kametz)., יחרם means SHALL BE PUT TO DEATH — Why is this verse with its predicate יחרם said at all? Was not the death penalty for him (the idolator) stated in another passage: (Deuteronomy 17:5) “Thou shalt bring forth that man or that woman [who have done that evil thing … and stone them]”? But the reason is: because Scripture does not specify there for what form of worship he (the idolator) is liable to death and it merely states, “and hath gone and served other gods” — now, in order that you might not say that any kind of worship offered to idols is punishable with death, Scripture comes and definitely tells you here: “one who sacrificeth unto any god [shall surely be put to death]”, to teach you that all kinds of worship which have a certain characteristic of “sacrifice” are meant here. What is this characteristic of sacrifice? It is an act of worship performed in honour of the Lord in the “Interior” (i. e. in the Temple)! So I mean to include as punishable by death anyone offering incense and libation since these are also acts of worship performed in the Temple, and that one is liable for these acts if he performed them in honour of any idol, whether this be the usual way of worshipping it or whether this be not the usual way of worshipping it. But other forms of adoration which are shown to some idols but which are not peculiar to the worship of the idol which one happens to be worshipping, — if, e. g., one sweeps the place before the idol in its honour, or one lays the dust in front of it by sprinkling water there, or one embraces or kisses it, — are not punishable by death (cf. Sanhedrin 60b). (20) וגר לא תונה — means, do not vex him with words (referring to the fact that he is a stranger); contrarier in old French Similar is, (Isaiah 49:26) “And I will feed them that vex thee (מוניך) with their own flesh”., ולא תלחצנו NOR OPPRESS HIM — by robbing him of money (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:20)., כי גרים הייתם FOR YE WERE STRANGERS — If you vex him he can vex you also by saying to you: “You also descend from strangers”. Do not reproach thy fellow-man for a fault which is also thine (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:20). Wherever גר occurs in Scriptures it signifies a person who has not been born in that land (where he is living) but has come from another country to sojourn there. (21) כל אלמנה ויתום לא תענון YOU SHALL NOT AFFLICT ANY WIDOW, OR FATHERLESS CHILD — That is also the law regarding any person, but Scripture is speaking of what usually happens and therefore mentions these in particular, for they are feeble in defensive power (i. e. they have no one to protect them) and it is a frequent occurrence for people to afflict them (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:21). (22) אם ענה תענה אתו IF THOU AFFLICT THEM IN ANY WISE — This is an elliptical phrase — the text threatens but breaks off and does not specify immediately the punishment which will fall upon those who do this. We have the same in, (Genesis 4:15) “Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain …” it threatens but does not specify the punishment. So, here, too: “If thou afflict them in any wise”, — this is a threat, as much as to say: “in the end you will get your deserts!” Why are you certain to get them? “Because (כי) if (אם) they cry at all unto Me, I will surely hear their cry”. (23) והיו נשיכם אלמנות AND YOUR WIVES SHALL BE WIDOWS [AND YOUR CHILDREN FATHERLESS] — From what is implied in the words, “I will kill you with the sword” do I not know that “your wives shall be widows and your children orphans”? But the explanation of the latter words is not that implied by your question; it is quite a different curse: that the wives will be “fettered” for life — “as living widows” (Rashi is imitating a Biblical phrase, II Samuel 20:3, used in a somewhat similar sense) — that there will be no witnesses who can testify to the death of their husbands, and so they will be forbidden to re-marry. In which case the children will be destitute orphans, for the court will not allow them to take possession of the chattels of their fathers, since they do not know whether they have died or have only been taken captives (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:23; Bava Metzia 38b). (24) אם כסף תלוה את עמי IF THOU LEND MONEY TO ANY OF MY PEOPLE — R. Jishmael said: wherever אם occurs in Scripture it is used of an act the performance of which is optional, except in three instances, of which this is one (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:24:1; cf. Rashi on Exodus 20:22 - the translation therefore is: “When thou lendett etc.”)., את עמי TO ANY OF MY PEOPLE — If thou hast to choose between lending money to My people and a heathen, My people come first; if between a poor man and one who is better off, the poor man comes first; if between thine own poor (poor relatives) and other poor of thy city, thine own poor come first; if between the poor of thine own city and the poor of another city, the poor of thine own city come first (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:24:3; Bava Metzia 71a). And this is how the above explanation is implied in the text: “If thou lend money” — את עמי “lend it to My people”, and not to a heathen; and to which one of My people? את העני, to the poor; and to which poor? עמך to him that is with thee (i. e. who is with thee in relationship and is with thee in thy city). [Another explanation of את עמי is: Thou shalt not treat him disrespectfully when lending him money, for he is עמי — though in need he is still “My people”! ,את העני עמך Look at thyself as though thou art the poor man (Midrash Tanchuma 6:15)]., לא תהיה לו כנשה THOU SHALT NOT BE UNTO HIM AS AN EXACTOR — you shall not demand the debt of him forcibly. The comparative כ of כנשה suggests thou shalt not be like a נשה: if you know that he has no money do not appear in your attitude towards him as though you had lent him, but as though you had not lent him — it means as much as, do not humble him.,נשך is what is called in Rabbinical Hebrew רבית (from רבה to increase). It is called נשך “biting”, because it resembles the bite of a snake: it bites, inflicting a small wound in a person’s foot which he does not feel at first, but all at once it swells and distends the whole body up to the top of his head. So it is with interest: at first one does not feel the drain it makes on him and it remains unnoticed until the interest mounts up and suddenly makes the person lose a big fortune (Exodus Rabbah 31:6). (25) אם חבל תחבל IF THOU TAKE TO PLEDGE — The root חבל never signifies “taking a pledge” at the time when the loan is transacted, but it means taking the goods of the debtor when the date of payment arrives and he does not pay (Bava Metzia 114b). [חבל תחבל — Scripture bids you take the pledge repeatedly — even many times (that is, repeatedly to defer the time of payment). The Holy One, blessed be He, says as it were: “How much do you owe Me! See, your soul ascends night by night to Me and renders account of its doing and so becomes My debtor, and should be kept as a pledge; and yet I return it to you every morning. Thus, too, you should do: take the pledge and restore it, take it again and again restore it!”) (Midrash Tanchuma, Mishpatim 16)]., עד בא השמש תשיבנו לו RESTORE IT UNTO HIM TILL THE GOING DOWN OF THE SUN — Restore it unto him for the whole day until the sun-set, and at night-fall you may take it again till the day-break of the next morning. Scripture speaks here of garment which is worn during the day and which is not required during the night (Bava Metzia 114b). (26) כי הוא כסותה FOR THAT IS HIS RAIMENT — i. e. his upper garment; ,שמלתו means HIS SHIRT (the שמלה for the skin);, במה ישכב WHEREIN SHALL HE LIE DOWN — These words are used to include amongst the articles which must be returned to him during the day the couch and its coverings on which he rests during day-time (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:26:3). (27) אלהים לא תקלל THOU SHALT NOT EXECRATE GOD — Here you have the prohibition of blasphemy (the penalty being stated in Leviticus 24:16) and the prohibition of cursing a judge (who is also termed אלהים, cf. Exodus 22:7) (cf. (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:27:1 and Sanhedrin 66a). (28) מלאתך [THOU SHALT NOT DELAY TO OFFER FROM] THY FULLNESS — The duty which falls upon you as soon as your crop becomes fully ripened: this refers to the first fruits (בכורים). ,ודמעך means THE HEAVE OFFERING, — thus do our Rabbis explain it (cf. Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:28), but I do not know what the expression דמע means (i. e. I do not know how it comes to have the meaning of (תרומה). ,לא תאחר THOU SHALT NOT DELAY — i. e. thou shalt not alter the prescribed sequence of separating them from the crops, setting aside last what should be first and setting aside first what should be last — i. e. that one should not set aside the heave-offering before the first fruit nor the tithe before the heave-offering (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:28)., בכור בניך תתן לי THE FIRST BORN OF THY SONS SHALT THOU GIVE UNTO ME — by redeeming him from the priest by the payment of five Sela’im. Scripture, it is true, has already given an ordinance concerning him (the firstborn) in another passage (Numbers 18:16), but it is stated here again in order to bring it into juxtaposition with the next verse: “Likewise shalt thou do with that of thine ox”, and to illustrate the latter command by the former. How is it in the case of a human being? He (the father) redeems it after thirty days, for it is said, (Numbers 18:16) “and those that are to be redeemed, from a month old shalt thou redeem”! So, too, has the owner of small cattle to look after it for 30 days and only afterwards must he give it to the priest (cf. Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:28 and Bekhorot 26b). (29) שבעת ימים יהיה עם אמו SEVEN DAYS IT SHALL BE WITH ITS DAM — This is an admonition for the priest (for the Israelite himself does not sacrifice the firstborn animal) that if he wishes to bring his offering of this at an earlier date (i.e. in the case of the Israelite having given it to him before the thirtieth or fiftieth day) he is not allowed to offer it before it is eight days old because it is then “short in time” (i. e. too young for sacrifice; cf. Leviticus 22:27)., ביום השמיני תתנו לי ON THE EIGHTH DAY THOU SHALT GIVE IT ME — One might think that it is obligatory to offer it on that day! Scripture, however, uses here the words “eighth day” and uses them again later on, (Leviticus 22:27) “and from the eighth day and henceforth it shall be favourably accepted”, in order to suggest an analogy. Now what is the meaning of the “eighth day” mentioned in the latter passage? It intends to declare the first-born fit for sacrifice from the eighth day and henceforth (i. e. it is intended to fix the earliest possible time on which it may be sacrificed). This, too, in the purpose of the word שמיני used here: to declare it fit for sacrifice from the eighth day and henceforth. The text therefore implies: “on the eighth day thou mayest give it to Me” (and not “thou shalt give it to Me”) (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:29:3). (30) ואנשי קדש תהיון לי AND YE SHALL BE MEN OF HOLINESS UNTO ME — If you will be holy and keep yourselves aloof from the loathsomeness of carrion and Trefa you are Mine, if not you are not Mine (cf. Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:30:1)., ובשר בשדה טרפה [NEITHER SHALL YE EAT] ANY FLESH THAT IS TORN IN THE FIELD – The same holds good in case the animal has been torn in the house, only that Scripture speaks of what usually happens mentioning the field because it is the place where it is usual for cattle to be torn. A similar instance is, (Deuteronomy 22:27) “for he found her in the field”, but the same law would apply if he found her elsewhere. Another example is, (Deuteronomy 23:11) “Any man that is unclean by reason of uncleanliness that chanceth him by night”; the same law, however, applies to an uncleanliness that happens by day, but night is mentioned because Scripture speaks of what usually happens (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 22:30:3). The Targum renders ובשר בשדה טרפה by ובשר תליש מן חיוא חיא “flesh that is torn off from a living animal”, i. e. flesh that has been torn off through a laceration caused by a wolf or a lion, from a living beast which is permitted to be eaten (e. g., a stag), or from cattle permitted to be eaten., לכלב תשלכון אתו YE SHALL CAST IT TO THE DOGS — You may give it to a heathen as well as to the dog. Or, perhaps this is not so, but כלב is to be taken literally? Scripture, however, states with regard to carrion, (Deuteronomy 14:21) “Thou shalt give it to a stranger or sell it unto an alien”, from which it follows by a conclusion à fortiori that you may derive whatever benefit you like from the Trefa (and so you also may give it to heathen). But if this be so, what is the force of Scripture expressly saying “to the dog”? It is to teach you that the dog is to be given preference in this respect and Scripture tells you at the same time that God does not withhold the reward due to any of His creatures. The dog is entitled to reward because it is stated, (Exodus 11:7) “But against the children of Israel shall not a dog move its tongue”, and this happened. The Holy One, blessed be He, said: Give it the reward it deserves (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 32:30:3).
וְאַף בְּצַלְאֵל שֶׁבָּנָה אוֹתוֹ, נִשְׁתַּבַּח לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא וְלִפְנֵי הַמַּלְאָכִים, נִשְׁתַּבַּח בָּעֶלְיוֹנִים וּבַתַּחְתּוֹנִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: רְאֵה קָרָאתִי בְשֵׁם (שמות לא, ב). וְכָתוּב אֶחָד אוֹמֵר, רְאוּ קָרָא ה' (שמות לה, ל). רְאֵה אָמַר בָּעֶלְיוֹנִים, וּרְאוּ אָמַר בַּתַּחְתּוֹנִים. וּלְפִיכָךְ אָמַר הַכָּתוּב, וּמְצָא חֵן וְשֵׂכֶל טוֹב בְּעֵינֵי אֱלֹהִים וְאָדָם (משלי ג, ד).
For example, Bezalel, who built the ark, was extolled before the Holy One, blessed be He, and the angels. He was praised in the upper regions and in the terrestrial regions, as it is said: See, I have called by name Bezalel (Exod. 31:2) and See, the Lord hath called by name Bezalel (ibid. 35:30). The word see in the former verse speaks of the upper regions, and the word see in the latter verse refers to the terrestrial regions. Thus Scripture says: So shalt thou find grace and favor in the sight of God and man (Prov. 3:4).