Exodus · Chapter 23

Do not accept a false report; do not join your hand with the wicked to be a false witness for him.

לא תשא שמע שוא THOU SHALT NOT HEAR A FALSE REPORT — Take it as the Targum renders it: thou shalt not accept (listen to) a false report. This is a prohibition addressed to one who is about to accept a slanderous statement, and it is addressed also to a judge — that he should not hear the pleadings of one party to a suit before the other appears (Mekhilta; Sanhedrin 7b). אל תשת ידך עם רשע SET NOT THINE HAND WITH THE WICKED — with him who makes a false claim against his fellow-man: that you promise him to give evidence for him that will result in wrong being done (להיות עד חמס).

"You shall not carry a false report" — that one should not bring forth from his heart a false matter so as to spread slander. The meaning of "do not put your hand with the wicked" is to join with him in false testimony, so as to do violence to the innocent — for perhaps a poor man would do this to fill his lack.

לא תשא...אל תשת ידך עם רשע. To sign with such people on the same document. According to Sanhedrin 23 the inhabitants of Jerusalem would not put their signature on any document unless they had satisfied themselves as to the integrity of co-signers on such documents. להיות עד חמס, to be the sole signatory seeing that the signature of wicked people is not worth anything. The result might be that the judge will confiscate money from the defendant based on a document with only one signature, something inadmissible under Jewish law.

לא תשא שמע שוא, “do not spread false rumours;” the expression תשא from the root נשא, ”to carry,” is used here as “carrying by mouth;” another example of the same expression being used in a similar context is found in Psalms 16,4: ובל אשא את שמותם על שפתי, “so that their names will not pass my lips.” In other words: “let me not utter a lie.” אל תשת ידך עם רשע, “do not join hands with a wicked person.” It follows automatically that you must not join him in giving false testimony.

לא תשא שמע שוא, “Do not accept a false report.” The instruction of the Torah to judges is that they shall not accept an oath from people whom they suspect of being prepared to violate it. They must first investigate the matter under dispute to evaluate if an oath would amount to perjury. Another way of explaining these words: “do not accept testimony by one litigant as he may change his testimony when confronted by his antagonist” (Mechilta Kasspa section 20). If the first party testifying in the absence of his antagonist had lied, he might feel forced to deny this by repeating his original statement and confirming it by an oath. Solomon says something along these lines in Proverbs 18,17: “the first one to plead his case appears to be right, until his neighbor comes and examines him.” Our sages (in the Mechilta already mentioned) understand our verse as a warning not to accept defamations from anybody concerning anybody else. This is also why Onkelos translates the words as: “do not accept untrue reports.” אל תשת ידך עם רשע, “do not extend your hand with the wicked.” This refers to a trumped up charge, to which someone undertakes to act as a false witness.”

לא תשא שמע שוא, this is parallel to the warning in the ninth of the Ten Commandments not to testify falsely against one’s fellow man. (Exodus 20,12) Just as the witness is warned not to perjure himself, the judges are warned not to accept such testimony. They must not listen to testimony which is patently a lie but make their own inquiries to determine if the testimony conforms to the facts. Even if there are two false witnesses already so that your testimony would not have any bearing on the outcome of the trial, you must not join them and reinforce their lies by testifying as they have done.

Do not follow the majority to do evil, and do not refrain from teaching what seems right to you in judgment — follow the majority in rendering a just verdict.

לא תהיה אחרי רבים לרעת THOU SHALT NOT FOLLOW THE MANY FOR EVIL — There are Halachic interpretations of this verse given by the Sages of Israel but the wording of the text does not fit in well with them. They derive from here that we must not decide a person’s guilt by a preponderance of one judge. And the end of the verse they explained thus: אחרי רבים להטות — but if the judges who declare the defendant guilty are two more than those who declare him innocent, then decide the matter as they declare — that he is guilty (Sanhedrin 2a). — The verse, they point out, speaks of capital cases. — The middle passage לא תענה על רב, they explained as though it were written על רַב, “thou shalt not speak against the chief of the judges, meaning that one should not give an opinion different from that given by the מופלא of the court (the most eminent among the judges, because this is disrespectful to the Presiding-judge). In consequence of this rule we begin to take the view of those in the side-benches first — we ask the youngest judges to express their opinion first (so that they may not be able to vote against the view expressed by the מופלא). Therefore the exegesis of the verse according to the words of our Rabbis is as follows: “thou shalt not follow a bare majority for evil” — to sentence a man to death on account of the one judge by whom those who condemn him are more in number than those who acquit him; “and thou shalt not speak against the chief inclining away” from his opinion. — They explained this latter phrase thus, because the word which is usually written רִיב is here written without and therefore may be read, אחרי רבים להטות — ;רַב, there is, however, a majority to whose view thou must incline. When is this the case? When there are two who preponderate amongst those who vote for condemnation over and above those who vote for acquittal. For from what is implied in, “thou shalt not follow a bare majority for evil”, I may infer: but thou shall follow it for good. Hence they (the Rabbis) said (i. e. they established the general rule): In capital cases we may decide by a majority of one for acquittal, but only by a majority of at least two to condemn. Onkelos translates the second phrase by: Do not refrain from teaching when you are being asked your opinion in a legal matter. The Hebrew text is to be explained according to the Targum as follows: לא תענה על רב לנטת If you are being asked your opinion in a legal matter do not give your answer just to incline to one particular side and so to withdraw yourself from the dispute, but decide the matter as truth requires. Such are the expositions that have been offered of this verse. But I think that if one wishes to explain the verse so that every thing should fit in properly, its exegesis must be as follows: לא תהיה אחרי רבים לרעת, If you see wicked men wresting judgment do not say: since they are many I will incline after them; ולא תענה על רב לנטת וגו׳, and if the defendant asks you about that judgment ...

"You shall not" — if you see that many are testifying about a matter that you do not know to be true, do not say in your heart: these cannot be lying. The Gaon [Saadia] said that there are two commandments in this verse — one a prohibition and one a positive commandment, for he held that one is obligated to incline after the majority, since he understood the word "to incline" (lehattot) as meaning to turn (linttot). But this is not so. Rather it is from the intensive-doubled conjugation, as in "cursed is he who perverts justice" (Deut. 27:19); it is also found in "and he who wrongs the stranger" (Malachi 3:5). The Sages explained that from this we derive that the law follows the majority, and what they have transmitted is the truth. Since the verse says "you shall not follow the majority to do evil," we derive from this that if the majority inclines toward the good, it is a commandment to follow them. "You shall not testify in a dispute" — this commandment is addressed to all of Israel, and all the more so to the judge before whom the dispute is brought, that he not aid his fellow wrongfully.

לא תהיה אחרי רבים לרעות, as the tie-breaking vote in a trial involving capital punishment. One cannot declare someone guilty of the death penalty on the basis of a solitary judge. A majority of one would be equivalent to a conviction by a single judge. ולא תענה על ריב, when your colleagues the other judges ask your opinion, לנטות אחרי רבים, do not be influenced by the fact that the majority thinks differently from you. Assuming that in a trial 10 of the 23 judges had expressed the view that the accused was innocent whereas eleven had expressed the view that the accused was guilty, להטות, if you were to cast your vote with the majority there would then be a majority of 2 out of a total of 23 voting guilty, and that decision would have been arrived at by your single vote. You are not allowed to salvage your conscience by voting with the majority unless this represented your absolute conviction. You must explain the reason for your vote. Unless there is a majority of two votes in favour of guilty no one can be convicted of the death penalty.

לא תהיה אחרי רבים לרעות, "Do not follow a multitude to do evil;" Our sages have offered a multitude of explanations on this verse none of which appear to address the plain meaning of the verse. I believe we need to understand this verse in terms of Numbers 35,24 and 25 ושפטו העדה…והצילו העדה. Our sages (Sanhedrin 4) comment there that when the court is to decide in matters which carry the death penalty there have to be a minimum of 23 judges in order that there could be a quorum (10) which indicts and a quorum which (may) exonerate. The extra number is designed to enable a majority to be present at all times. On folio 17 of the same tractate we are told that should all the judges indict unanimously the accused goes free. Our verse intends to remove two obstacles which may mislead a scholar when he ponders the meaning of this ruling. 1) When a judge sits in a collegium of judges and he notices that all his colleagues have made up their minds that the accused is guilty, whereas he feels that the accused is innocent, he may say to himself that by voting according to his conscience the accused will be executed seeing there are already two quorums, one which votes "guilty" and one which could vote "innocent;" this judge may say to himself that if he too votes "guilty" the accused would be freed seeing the guilty vote would be unanimous, the result he has been arguing for. He will justify his behaviour by recalling the dictum of the sages that when faced by a majority one must not insist on one's own opinion. The Torah instructs such a judge not to apply this dictum when voting to indict someone. One must only vote one's own conscience even if the result of such a vote does not correspond to one's wishes or convictions. The Torah uses the word לרעות advisedly, telling such a judge he would do something evil by voting with the majority in order to thwart their purpose. Such a judge is to remember that in the final analysis G'd is the judge; if G'd instructed the judges to let the accused go free in the event they agree unanimously that he is guilty, this does not give the dissenting judge the right to play G'd, i.e. to be the final arbiter of the fate of the accused. There is still a second obstacle that a judge may face in such situations. Assume that the judge in question is convinced of the guilt of the accused. He is aware that his opinion is shared by all his colleagues. The judge in question realises that if he votes his conscience, i.e. "guilty," this will make the vote unanimous and result in the accused (whom he thinks of as guilty) going free. In order to prevent this from happening our judge resolves to vote "innocent" in order to ensure that the accused will be convicted. By doing so our judge convinces himself that he merely ensures that the majority will prevail, a laudatory objective. However, morally speaking, this too is a way in which a single judge imposes the outcome of a trial on the majority. To prevent this from happening the T...

ולא תענה על ריב, “and do not ignore the majority view seeing you consider yourself as smarter than your colleagues, when this would result in perverting justice;” אחרי רבים להטות, “but make certain that the verdict is based on a majority of the judges’ opinions.”

לא תהיה אחרי רבים לרעות, “do not be a follower of the majority for evil;” the plain meaning of these words is that even if you see a vast majority of people acting in a forbidden manner, do not make the fact that they constitute the norm an excuse to follow in their footsteps. Our sages (Sanhedrin 20) explain the wording to mean that a majority of only a single vote in matters involving capital punishment is not sufficient to convict the accused. The meaning of the word לרעות, which is in the plural,- and a reference to the people voting “guilty”- is that such a verdict must be arrived at by a majority of at least two votes. However, a majority of one is sufficient to exonerate an accused. This is the meaning of the words following, i.e. אחרי רבים להטות. ולא תענה על רב, “and do not respond to a grievance, etc.” this is a warning to the judge not to argue on behalf of any of the litigants. It includes a warning to all other non-litigants present not to argue on behalf of either of the litigants. Only the actual litigant is allowed to present arguments on his own behalf. The claimant presents his arguments first and the accused replies to his arguments. Nobody else intervenes in a litigation to which he is not a direct party (Baba Kama 46). Sanhedrin 36 adds the comment that seeing the word for litigation, strife, ריב is spelled defectively, without the letter י so that it could also be read rav, i.e. a scholar, we derive from this that the customary courtesies of someone having to stand in front of a scholar, his Rabbi, etc., are dispensed with when both the Rabbi and the student are facing each other as litigants. The student does not have to display any deference for his opposite number. [Rabbi Chavell interprets our author to mean that junior members of the tribunal must not challenge a ruling made by senior members after it has been made. Ed.]

לא תענה על ריב, “do not respond to a grievance, etc.” The Torah speaks of a grievance that you are asked to get involved in as one of the arbiters, with the understanding that a majority opinion would be decisive. You must voice your opinion regardless of being outvoted. Some commentators understand the verse to mean that one must not decide such matters alone, but in a quorum in which the majority opinion is accepted.

לא תהיה אחרי רבים לרעות, if, in your opinion, the majority are about to commit an error in judgment, do not remain silent because they are the majority, but state your view. This applies even if you know beforehand that they will not accept your viewpoint but that of the majority. ולא תענה על (דברי) ריב לנטות אחרי רבימ להטות, contributing thereby to pervert justice. This rule applies even if because of your joining the majority the accused will be found innocent and saved from execution.

And a poor man you shall not show mercy toward in his judgment.

לא תהדר NEITHER SHALT THOU COUNTENANCE [THE INDIGENT IN HIS QUARREL] — You shall not pay regard to him by finding in his favour in the law suit, saying, “He is a poor man; I will find in his favour, and thus show him some measure of respect.”

"And a poor man" — this too is connected: do not think you are doing good by helping the poor man. Elsewhere it says: "nor shall you show deference to a great man" (Lev. 19:15).

ודל לא תהדר בריבו, "And do not favour the poor in his litigation." The extra word בריבו contains a moral/ethical message based on Vayikra Rabbah 34, that the poor is liable to engage in a confrontation with G'd asking Him why He supplies everyone else with their needs whereas he is hungry and naked. Everyone who gives even a copper coin to a poor and thereby stills his hunger prevents the poor from complaining to G'd and accusing Him that G'd is not gracious to the poor. On the other hand, at times when no one on earth is gracious to the poor, his argument is very powerful. The Torah therefore commands us not to contribute to strengthening the voice of the poor who accuse G'd of insensitivity to their fate.

ודל לא תהדר, “and do not favour the poor (because he is poor). This verse follows closely on the heels of not testifying falsely, in order that you do not think that it is your duty to assist a poor man in his dispute with a rich man.

ודל לא תהדר, as spelled out in greater detail in Leviticus 19,15 לא תשא פני דל ולא תהדר פני גדול, “do not favour the poor nor show deference to the rich.” The unvarying motto is בצדק תשפוט עמיתך, “judge your kinsman fairly.”

If you come upon the ox of your enemy or his donkey going astray, you shall surely return it to him.

"The ox of your enemy" — with a hiriq under the yod; it is a verb, for the word "and I will be an enemy" (v. 22) is from transitive verbs. The meaning is: even though you know he is your enemy — and likewise "one who hates you." It says "your enemy" because it is fitting to speak this way. "One who hates you" as well — perhaps this passage comes to say that if the ox and donkey belonged to a poor man, your reward would be very great indeed, since you have fulfilled the commandment of Hashem and also performed an act of kindness toward the poor.

השב תשיבנו לו, “make sure to restore it to him;” the Torah repeats this instruction to remind you that it may require that you perform this act for your enemy’s ox even repeatedly. (Compare Talmud, Baba Metzia folio 32.)

If thou meet the ox of thine enemy whom thou dislikest on account of the wickedness which thou only knowest is in him, or an ass that wandereth from the way, thou shalt surely bring it to him.

If you see the donkey of your enemy lying under its burden, and you would hold back from releasing it for him — you shall surely set aside what is in your heart against him, and unload it together with him.

כי תראה חמור שנאך וגו׳ IF THOU SEE THE ASS OF HIM THAT HATETH THEE etc. — כי here has the meaning of “possibly”, “perhaps”, which is one of the four meanings which the word כי serves to express. The sense of the verse is accordingly the following: Can you possibly see his ass crouching beneath his burden and forbear to help him? (The Hebrew word בתמיה in Rashi means “Say this in the intonation of a question”, and is nothing more than our question mark). עזב תעזב עמו — The root עזב has here the meaning of “helping”. It has a similar meaning in, (Deuteronomy 32:36) “assisted and helped (עזוב)”. Similar also is, (Nehemiah 3:8) “ויעזבו Jerusalem up to the wall” — i. e. they filled it up with earth in order to help and to support the strength of the wall. A similar use of כי is, (Deuteronomy 7:17, 18) כי תאמר בלבבך רבים הגוים האלה וגו׳ which means “Canst thou possibly (כי) speak thus? לא תירא מהם, Do not be afraid of them and speak thus”. Our Rabbis expounded it in a Halachic sense as follows: … כי תראה וחדלת “If thou seest etc. …וחדלת” — there are occasions when you may forbear and there are occasions when you must help. How so? If it is an old man who sees the ass in this condition and it is not compatible with his dignity to intervene, then וחדלת “thou mayest forbear” holds good; or if the animal belongs to a heathen and its burden to an Israelite then, also, וחדלת may be applied (cf. Mekhilta). עזב תעזב עמו THOU SHALT SURELY HELP HIM — to unload the burden (Mekhilta). Onkelos also translates it in this sense: מלמשקל ליה which means, [Thou shalt not keep back] from taking the load from off it.

"And you shall refrain" — like "cease for yourself" (2 Chron. 25:16) from doing a thing; and similarly "you shall observe" (Deut. 17:10). The meaning of "cease" is that you shall not leave the matter to him alone — rather you should help untie the cords and release the load, and it will fall to this side and that, and the donkey will rise. Some say it is like "they abandoned Jerusalem" (Neh. 3:5) — meaning to load the burden on a distant road.

וחדלת מעזוב לו, “and you feel like refraining from raising it;” you are warned not to remain inactive when faced with the animal’s distress, even if its owner is your enemy. This is also the way the Onkelos understands the word לו, seeing that he describes the Torah’s reflecting the first reaction of the finder here being that he is not called upon to do for his enemy’s property what he himself has failed to do, but that he at least has to assist him. This interpretation is also hinted at in Rashi’s commentary on Deuteronomy 13,9, where he emphasizes that one’s enemy is exempt from the commandment: “to love your fellow man as yourself.” He quotes Sifrey as his source for his interpretation of the words; .לא תאבה לו תעזוב עמו, these words have been interpreted in the Talmud Baba Metzia folio 32 as meaning that the Torah does not instruct the owner of that donkey to sit down while you alone attend to his donkey’s problem, but that you are called upon only not to abandon the animal but to assist the owner in relieving his donkey’s discomfort. If his owner has abandoned his beast, the enemy of his owner need not do the work by himself. [Torah legislation addresses human beings, not angels. Ed.] עמו, “with him;” it is impossible for one person alone to unload the burden carried by this animal while it is in a state of collapse. Two men have to work, one on each side of the animal.

עזוב תעזוב עמו, “you shall help him with it (even repeatedly).” This concerns the commandment to unload the beast (Baba Metzia 32). The interpretation is based on the verse being superfluous as we could have deduced this message from the words in Deut. 22,4 where the Torah writes about a similar situation הקם תקים עמו, “help him to stand it up.” If the Torah commands us to help someone load his beast, how much more would it be in place for the Torah to command us to help unload a beast which broke down under an overload! Nonetheless, the Torah writes both laws in order to teach that there are different considerations which determine the legislation in these two situations. Help in unloading must be extended without charge, whereas help in loading may be charged for. The reason one may not charge for helping to unload the beast in our verse is because alleviating pain of animals is a Biblical commandment, may have to be performed even without the assistance of the owner.

“And you shall refrain from helping him, [rather] you shall surely help with him.” This teaches you that specifically when he wants to work alongside you and wishes to lift [the burden] with you, then you are obligated to assist him. But if he sits idly and says, “Since the responsibility falls on you, you are obligated to lift it alone,” therefore it says you shall refrain from helping him, because the word him [lo] does not imply with him [imo]. For you are permitted to refrain from helping him when he does not want to join you in the work. From here we have a response regarding some of the poor among our people who impose themselves on the community and are unwilling to engage in any labor, even if they are capable of doing some work or anything else through which they could provide for their hungry households. They complain if they are not given enough for all their needs. But this is not what God commanded. Rather, you shall surely help with him, you shall surely lift up with him — meaning the poor person should do whatever is in His power to do, and if despite all this his hand cannot reach [sufficient livelihood], then every person in Israel is obligated to support him, strengthen him, and give him enough for what he lacks. You shall surely help — even up to a hundred times.

וחדלת מעזוב לו, “and you would refrain from assisting him;” this is a veiled warning that you must not dare abandoning him to his problems just because the owner of the beast has a record of being hostile to you. On the contrary, you must make every effort to assist such a person, provided he too does his share in enabling the overloaded beast to get rid of its burden.

חמור שנאך, the Torah uses the most likely scenario as its model. [Clearly, you are to do no less for the animal of a friend or relative.] עזוב תעזוב, an expression meaning assistance, support. The word occurs in this sense also in Nechemyah 3,8 ויעזבו ירושלים עד החומה, “they restored Jerusalem as far as the Broad wall.” We also find the word in this sense in Deuteronomy 32,36 ואפס עצור ועזוב, “and neither bond nor free is left.”

Do not pervert the judgment of your poor man in his case.

אבינך — from the root אבה “to long for”, “to desire” — one who is poverty-stricken and longs for all the good things which he lacks.

"You shall not pervert" — the verse addresses the judge. Similar to it is "before Hashem your God you shall eat it" (Deut. 15:20) — he speaks of what is fit to eat as though speaking to a priest and distinguishing him from all Israel, with whom he speaks differently. One who says this refers to the firstborn of the herd is speaking nonsense.

לא תטה משפט אביונך בריבו, an example of being lenient with one category of person and harsh with another. When litigants are facing you, you must not take account of any differences in their social standing. Not only this, if one of the litigants is standing during the proceedings whereas the other one is seated, this is already a form of inadmissible discrimination.

לא תטה משפט אביונך, "Do not subvert the right of your needy, etc." Perhaps the emphasis is on the ending "your" in the word אביונך. We have learned in Baba Metzia 71 that the poor of your family take precedence in their claim to handouts over the unrelated poor of your city, whereas the local poor take precedence over the poor from other cities. The Torah warns here that we must not pervert this rule when setting out to do charity. "Your own needy" must always be the first on your list of charities.

לא תטה משפט אביונך בריבו; “do not subvert the rights of your destitute people in their disputes.” The Torah means not to rule in his favour when in fact he is in the wrong. This warning of the Torah is addressed to the judge or judges of the court dealing with his dispute, even though the Torah did not spell this out specifically. We find another example of such implied meanings in Deuteronomy 15,20, where the Torah writes: לפני ה' אלוקיך תאכלנו “you are to eat it in the presence of the Lord your G-d,” (i.e. on the sacred precincts of the Temple compound) an instruction that can only be fulfilled by a firstborn who is also a priest at the same time, seeing that non priests are forbidden in that compound. The Torah has warned earlier in verse 3 of our chapter that the judges must not rule in favour of the poor out of sympathy for them. Here it warns that the judges must also not rule against the poor (for fear of angering the rich).

Keep far from a false matter; and one who is innocent and who has emerged acquitted from judgment, do not put to death — for I will not acquit the guilty.

ונקי וצדיק אל תהרג AND THE GUILTLESS AND RIGHTEOUS SLAY THOU NOT — Whence may we infer that in the case that one who left the court after being found guilty and one says, “I have something to plead in his favour”, he has to be brought back in order that the court may listen to this? From what Scripture states, “and the נקי thou shalt not slay”. Although he is not a צדיק — for he has not been acquitted by the court — he is however “free” (נקי) from the death penalty, for it is your duty to plead — as far as possible — in his favour. And whence may we infer, on the other hand, that in the case of one who left the court after having been acquitted and one says, “I have something to say against him” he is not to be brought back that the judges may hear this? From what Scripture states: “and the צדיק slay thou not” — and this man is a צדיק since he has been acquitted by the court (Sanhedrin 33b). כי לא אצדיק רשע FOR “I” WILL NOT JUSTIFY THE WICKED — It is not your duty, in the latter case, to bring the man back to the court, for if he is really guilty, “I” will not acquit him in My court. Altough he has left your hands as innocent “I” have many agents (many means) to inflict upon him the death to which he has made himself liable (Mekhilta).

"From a false matter" — the verse addresses the judge: that he shall not render a false judgment. Similar to it is "justice, justice you shall pursue" (Deut. 16:20). "An innocent and righteous man do not put to death" — in that case, even if you know he is wicked in some other matter, do not say: since this man is a wicked offender, it would be better to kill him and remove the stumbling block from the road, for I will exact punishment from him and he will not escape my hand.

מדבר שקר תרחק, the Torah addresses the judge, telling him to stay clear of anything which could create the impression that he has dealings with something corrupt. Our sages enlarge on this, cautioning that the judge must be careful with all his utterances so that a liar cannot exploit his words for his own nefarious purposes. (Avot 1,9)

כי לא אצדיק רשע, "for I will not acquit the wicked." According to Sanhedrin 33 the term נקי refers to someone who testifies that he knows of evidence in favour of a person who has been convicted of a certain misdemeanour. In such a case the trial is re-opened. The expression צדיק in our verse, on the other hand, refers to a person against whom accusations are levelled after he has been acquitted. The Torah states therefore, that once a person has been acquitted of a certain crime he cannot be tried for it a second time. G'd reassures the reader that in the event the acquittal by the court was based on an error, He, G'd, will not allow the person who parades as a צדיק to go scot free. The Torah does not want us to think that seeing a person has been found guilty, "how can the verdict be overturned by fresh evidence?" The Torah answers simply: If the original conviction was fair and corresponded to the facts, I, G'd, will not allow such a person to get away with it even if he is found innocent in his second trial. The testimony on his behalf will not ultimately result in a perversion of justice. If, on the other hand, the original conviction was based on error, why should the person who can offer testimony on behalf of the convicted be ignored? Concerning the person who had been acquitted and against whom fresh evidence has been found, the Torah simply states that the fact that the court declared someone innocent does not necessarily mean that he is innocent in the eyes of G'd too. G'd has His own court and it is quite inconceivable that G'd would seal a decree by a human court which is erroneous. We are taught in Ketuvot 21 that it is forbidden for anyone to sign a document which appears to be fraudulent. You may well ask why we do not apply the same principle, i.e. that a court erred, and re-open the trial of someone who had been freed before new evidence against him had come to light? I believe we can best answer this by recalling that G'd "regrets" something evil on occasion. He does not, however, "regret" a decision which was favourable. As a result of this consideration, if a person has once been acquitted he is not subjected to a trial again for the same alleged offence. When a person has been found guilty in his first trial, the suffering he endured until he was finally exonerated in a second trial may even approximate the suffering experienced while he faced execution for a sin not comitted. He may therefore ultimately be exonerated by a Heavenly tribunal even for sins committed for which he had not been tried at all.

ונקי וצדיק, “and the ones free from sin, and the “just,” i.e. the ones who have been acquitted by the court;” according to the translation it is hard to see the difference between the נקי and the צדיק in this commandment. Our author understands the word נקי as applying to someone who had been free from sin, as opposed to the צדיק, someone who had committed the sin but could not be convicted through lack of witnesses acceptable by the Torah, or who had not been legally warned before committing the sin he had been accused of.

ונקי וצדיק אל תהרוג, “and do not execute the innocent or the righteous.” The word נקי, innocent, refers to a wicked person which the court was unable to convict. Subsequently, evidence turns up on the basis of which this person could be convicted on a second trial. The Torah prohibits a retrial. The Torah assures us that if a guilty person escapes human justice, not to be upset as he will not escape divine justice, i.e. כי לא אצדיק רשע, “I, G’d will see to it that the wicked will not wind up being considered as righteous.”

מדבר שקר תרחק, [these words are addressed to the judges Ed.] if you feel that that a perversion of justice is about to take place, aided and abetted by witnesses who perjure themselves, disqualify yourself from participating or presiding in such proceedings unless you know that you can convincingly prove the perversion of justice about to take place. ונקי וצדיק, if the guilty party has been exonerated at his trial you cannot subsequently “kill him,” i. e. reopen the proceedings seeing that you had accepted the testimony of the witnesses at the trial and brought the trial to a close. The reason is that if you mistakenly exonerated a guilty party, I. G’d, am the last recourse and will see to it that the guilty party will not remain perceived as righteous. We have had Exodus 21,13 והאלוהים אנה לידו as an example of G’d taking corrective action, causing someone who had been wrongly exonerated to be killed by his fellow man (though inadvertently).

And a bribe you shall not accept, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and corrupts upright words.

ושחד לא תקח AND THOU SHALT TAKE NO GIFT, even if you mean to give a true judgment in favour of the giver, and it is a matter of course that you must not accept one to wrest judgment, and therefore there is no need for Scripture to forbid this, for with regard to wresting judgment, whether you take a bribe or not, it is distinctly stated, (Deuteronomy 16:19) “Thou shalt not wrest judgment” (Ketubot 105a). יעור פקחים [FOR THE BRIBE] BLINDETH THE OPEN-EYED — Even if he be well-versed in the Torah and takes a bribe, in the end his mind will become confused, what he has learnt will be forgotten, and the light of his eyes will become dim (Mekhilta; Ketubot 105a). ויסלף — render it as the Targum does: ויקלקל “makes bad”, “perverts”. ... דברי צדיקים means, the words which have been described by the term “righteous”, viz., the judgments of truth uttered on Sinai. Thus, too, does the Targum take it: words that are תריצין, upright.

"And a bribe" — this too is mentioned because the wealthy man gives a bribe to the judge to pervert the case of the poor. "And it perverts the words of the righteous" — the Gaon said that "righteous" here is an adjective modifying "words," but this cannot be, since "words" (divrei) is in the construct state. The meaning of "righteous" here is: righteous in judgment, not righteous in commandments.

ושחד לא תקח, “and you must not accept a bribe;” the reason why this has been repeated here is that even if the judge would accept a bribe in order to rule justly, he must not accept such a bribe. His decisions must not be influenced by a bribe. Although judges in Jewish jurisprudence did not receive salaries in order to make them independent, they were allowed to accept from the two disputants payment for the wages lost while sitting in court, each according to his respective vocation. [Three judges might receive three vastly different amounts of compensation according to the salary scale payable of people of his profession. Ed.] The reason why this subject came up here again is that the wealthy litigants are likely to bribe the judges to rule in their favour. ויסלף דברי צדיקים, “for bribes even blind the righteous judges.” changing their decision from innocent to guilty.

יעור פקחים, the expression עור, blind, is appropriate as a contrast to someone with good vision. On the other hand, the opposite of the virtue of צדיק is סילוף, perversion, distortion.

And a convert you shall not oppress; you know the soul of the convert, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt.

וגר לא תלחץ AND THOU SHALT NOT OPPRESS THE STRANGER — In numerous passages (36 in number) does the Torah offer a caution about the ill-treatment of the stranger, because his original character is bad (Bava Metzia 59b). אח נפש הגר [FOR YE KNOW] THE SOUL OF A STRANGER — how hard it is for him when people oppress him.

ואתם ידעתם את נפש הגר, "and you are familiar with the way a stranger feels." Compare what I have written on 22,20 "you must not disadvantage the stranger." The present verse is proof of the truth of what I have written there.

וגר לא תלחץ, “and do not oppress the stranger.” Here too the Torah speaks about the treatment strangers may have to endure at court. In the earlier reference to the stranger, (22,2), the Torah referred to how we are not to treat the stranger in every day life, not when he is involved in litigation. It is repeated here as he is also one of the sections of society that is likely to be taken advantage of as they have no one to stand up on their behalf. It is easy to get away with taking advantage of them.

And six years you shall sow your land and gather in its produce.

ואספת את תבואתה AND SHALT GATHER IN THE INCREASE THEREOF — אסף is a term denoting “bringing into the house”, like, (Deuteronomy 22:2) “thou shalt gather it (ואספתו) into thine house” (cf. Rashi on Genesis 49:29).

"And for six years" — this is mentioned also on account of "and the poor of your people shall eat" (v. 11).

ושש שנים תזרע את ארצך, and for six years you will seed your land, etc. This commandment is connected to the previous one warning us how to avoid the taste of being an alien, i.e. an exiled person similar to what is written in Leviticus 26,34: "then the land will make up for its sabbaths, etc."

ושש שנים, “and for six consecutive years, etc.” the reason why this legislation is repeated here is because the Torah allocates the produce of the seventh year to the poor, the underprivileged (verse 11).

ושש שנים תזרע את ארצך, “and for six successive years you will sow your land.” It would have seemed appropriate to phrase this in the third person, i.e. את הארץ, “the land,” instead of ארצך, “your land.” Similarly, in the reference to the vineyard and olive plantation we would have expected the words כן תעשה לכרמים ולזיתים instead of כן תעשה לכרמך ולזיתיך (verse 11). You will note that the Torah uses direct language when speaking about either the Sabbath (day) or the Sabbath (year), whereas when speaking of the Jubilee year יובל, it uses the third person, speaking in more general terms. Compare Leviticus 25,11: “you shall not sow, you shall not harvest its aftergrowth, and you shall not pick what was set aside of it.” Seeing that immediately after the Sabbath one may resume work and immediately after the shmittah year the farmer may recommence his usual activities of ploughing, sowing, etc., the Torah used direct language as the farmer considers the land as his own. After he seventh year preceding the Jubilee year which was also a shmittah year, i.e. a year when he did not work his field, the farmer must now wait another year before he can again treat the land as if it were his own. That is why the Torah hinted at this factor by using indirect language in speaking of the land in question.” Even the manner in which the Torah describes abandoning the land during the shmittah, i.e.תשמטנה ונטשתה , “leave it untended and leave it unharvested,” indicates that the land has ceased to belong to the farmer (during that year). The relationship between us and the land during the shmittah year is that whereas we abandon it, it does not abandon us. The reason is that we will once again resume our activities on it demonstrating that it is ours. The same is not the case in the case of the Jubilee year, as many fields will return to owners who had previously been forced to sell them for one reason or another. It is therefore appropriate to speak of such land in the third person, i.e. not addressing a specific owner.

ואספת את תבואתה. Into your house, and you need not abandon it to all and sundry except in the seventh year of the cycle, the Sh’mittah year. In that year you must leave it untouched, neither sowing your field nor harvesting it.

And six years you shall sow, etc. It says in the Midrash that even if a person has only one ruin in the midst of his garden, he is obligated to work it every day. And it appears to Rabbi Moshe that this applies specifically in the Land of Israel in order to increase the separation of terumot and maasrot.

But in the seventh year you shall release it and let it go untended, and the poor of your people shall eat from it, and what remains the wild animals of the field shall eat. So shall you do with your vineyard and your olive grove.

תשמטנה THOU SHALT LET IT REST — by not tilling it (Mekhilta), ונטשתה AND THOU SHALT ABANDON IT — by not eating of its produce (Mekhilta) after “the time of removal” of the produce has arrived. Another explanation is: תשמטנה THOU SHALT LET IT REST, from what is real work, as, for example, ploughing and sowing, ונטשתה AND LEAVE IT ALONE — not even to manure and to hoe it. ויתרם תאכל חית השדה AND WHAT THEY LEAVE THE BEASTS OF THE FIELD (the wild animals) SHALL EAT — This cannot be a command that the wild animals shall eat it, viz., that you shall permit them to eat it. No such command is necessary since you have no control over wild animals; it intends by juxtaposition with the preceding words to place in the same category (more lit., to compare) the food of the poor with that of the beast. For how is it in the case of the wild animal? It eats food without the tithe having been separated from it! So too, the poor may in the seventh year eat food without the tithe having been separated from it. From this juxtaposition they (the Rabbis) derived the rule that the law of tithe is not to be observed in the seventh year (Mekhilta). כך תעשה לכרמך IN LIKE MANNER THOU SHALT DO WITH THY VINEYARD — The first member of the verse, however, speaks of a “white field” (i. e. a bright, shadeless field — a grain field or a vegetable field — in contrast to a שדה אילן which casts shade), as it is said above, (v. 10) “thou shalt sow thy land”.

BUT THE SEVENTH YEAR ‘TISHM’TENAH U’N'TASHTAH’ (THOU SHALT LET IT REST AND LIE FALLOW). “Tishm’tenah — by not tilling it. U’n'tashtah by not eating of its produce after ‘the time of removal.’ Another interpretation: Tishm’tenah — from real work, such as plowing and sowing; u’n'tashtah — from hoeing or manuring it.” This is Rashi’s language. But it is not correct, for according to the law of the Torah we have only been warned against plowing and sowing in the seventh year, but hoeing and manuring, and even weeding, hoeing under the vines, and cutting away thorns, and all other forms of agricultural work, are not forbidden by law of the Torah. This is the conclusion that the Rabbis came to [after a discussion of this matter] at the beginning of Tractate Moed Katan in the Chapter Mashkin: that the Merciful One forbade only plowing and sowing in the seventh year, but did not prohibit secondary kinds of work [such as hoeing, manuring, etc.], which are all forbidden only by Rabbinic ordinance, and the verse mentioned [there in the Talmud] in connection with these secondary kinds of work is a mere support in the Scriptural text. Similarly, the law of “removal” is not derived from this verse [as Rashi explained here].Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote: “Tishm’tenah means: every creditor ‘shamot’ (shall release) that which he hath lent unto his neighbor. — U’n'tashtah means that you should not sow your field.” But it is not a correct comment. Instead, [the true explanation is that] Scripture first said, six years thou shalt sow and gather in the increase thereof, but the seventh year ‘tishm’tenah’ — you should not sow your land; u’n'tashtah — you should not gather in its increase, but instead you are to leave it so that the poor of your people and the beasts of the field may eat the fruits of the tree and the produce of the vineyard. In a similar sense is the verse, ‘v’nitash’ the seventh year, [which thus means: “and we will not gather in the increase of the field in the seventh year”].

"But the seventh year you shall release it" — this is what is called the shemitah, for Hashem; no man shall press his poor neighbor for payment. "And you shall let it lie" — that you shall not sow it; similarly, "and we will leave the seventh year" (Neh. 10:32).

תשמטנה, a reference to sh’mittat kessaphim, relinquishing outstanding overdue debts at the end of the agricultural Sh’mittah year. The legislation is spelled out in greater detail in Deuteronomy 15,2 . ונטשתה ואכלו אביוני עמך, during the agricultural sh’mittah year the poor will also share in all the crops. ויתרם, after the poor have taken what they want, תאכל חית השדה, the poor people had first claim. We have been taught in Taanit 20 that one must not feed the dogs food which is fit for human consumption.

ונטשתה, “you are to let it lie fallow;” in practice this means that you are not to collect the grain that has grown during that season in your field for your own use. ואכלו אביוני עמך, “whereas the destitute people of your nation shall consume it.” In another verse the Torah writes in Leviticus 25,6: לך, ולעבדך ולאמתך ולשכירך ולתושבך, “for you, your male servant, your female servant, your hired hands and your residents.” How do we reconcile this? Answer: when there is an abundance of grain, etc., everyone is entitled to eat from it (so that it does not go to waste); when there is a scarcity only you and your household (servants male and female) (Mechilta on this verse.) An alternate interpretation: as long as the time for finally disposing of that crop has not arrived, both the poor and the rich may avail themselves of it. Once that time has expired, only the poor are allowed to avail themselves of it.

תשמטנה ונטשתה, “you shall leave it untended and unharvested.” You must neither plough and seed it nor fertilise the earth for future use. Nachmanides questions that the only work prohibited by Biblical decree is ploughing and seeding. Other work in the field during that year is prohibited by Rabbinic decree. He therefore explains that what the Torah speaks about here, [seeing that the first mentioned prohibition of seeding and harvesting has been spelled out in Leviticus 25. Ed.] is the subject dealt with in the previous verse where seeding for 6 consecutive years has been permitted or even ordained. During the seventh year, neither seeding nor harvesting is allowed. Whatever has grown in the field during that year must be left for the poor, and if there are not enough poor it must be left for the beasts roaming the fields. Ibn Ezra understands the word תשמטנה to refer to the foregoing of seeding, planning, the root שמוט implying withdrawal from activity. This is the way in which an owner signals that ultimately his field is G’d’s.

לכרמך ולזיתך, parallel to what the Torah legislated concerning the grain harvest. It is a rule in the Torah to mention these agricultural products under the headings of דגן, תירוש, יצהר, meaning different types of grain, orchard products, and oil produced by the olive trees. The legislation includes all food products grown from the soil.

Six days you shall do your work, and on the seventh day you shall rest — so that your ox and your donkey may rest, and the son of your handmaid and the convert may have relief.

וביום השביעי תשבת [SIX DAYS SHALT THOU DO THY WORK] AND ON THE SEVENTH DAY THOU SHALT LEAVE OFF — Even in the Sabbatical year you shall not abrogate the weekly Sabbath: you shall not say, “Since the whole year bears the name of ‘Sabbath’, the weekly Sabbath need not to be observed” (Mekhilta). למען ינוח שורך means, give it (the animal) some satisfaction (ניח) by permitting it to pull up and eat grass from the ground as it pleases. Or, perhaps, this is not the meaning but it means that is must rest: that one must tie it up in its stall so that it does no work in the field! You will, however, admit this is no satisfaction but a source of annoyance (Mekhilta). בן אמתך THE SON OF THY HANDMAID — Scripture speaks of an uncircumcised Canaanitish servant; (that the circumcised servant should rest is already mentioned in Deuteronomy 5:14: עבדך ואמתך כמוך) (cf. Mekhilta). והגר means a גר תושב, a proselyte settler (one who renounces idolatry and thus acquires limited citizenship in Palestine).

L’MA’AN’ (THAT) THINE OX AND THINE ASS MAY HAVE REST. Because the word l’ma’an is like ba’avur (“in order that”), we must explain that the verse is stating: “Six days you shall do all your work in the house and in the field, in order that the ox and the ass may have rest on the seventh day. And the son of thy handmaid, and the stranger, may be refreshed — in order that they all be witnesses to the Creation.” The verse here is then similar in meaning to: Bake that which ye will bake. Similarly He said, Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work, as I have explained there.

"Six days" — this too is mentioned on account of "and the son of your maidservant and the sojourner who is within your gates may be refreshed" — for he is a poor man and a hired worker in your employ.

תשבות, you must even refrain from doing things which are not prohibited under the heading of מלאכה, the kind of activity associated with construction of the Tabernacle, if these activities represent strenuous exertion customary on weekdays. We have been taught in Shabbat 113 that one of the ways of honouring the gift of the Sabbath is to refrain from engaging in activities that remind one of weekdays. The Talmud bases this on Isaiah 58,13 who defines proper Sabbath observance as distinct from merely formal Sabbath observance, with these words: “if you refrain from trampling the Sabbath, from pursuing your affairs on My holy day; if you call the Sabbath ‘delight,’ the Lord’s holy day ‘honored,’ and if you honour it and go not your ways nor look to your affairs nor strike bargains, then you can seek the favour of the Lord.” למען ינוח שורך וחמורך, as a result of your Sabbath observance also your beasts of burden will enjoy rest. וינפש בן אמתך והגר, as a corollary of your own Sabbath observance also your personnel will enjoy physical respite from their weekday chores. The Torah describes the contrast with your own experience while you were slaves in Egypt, when you did not enjoy rest on your master’s holidays. We have proof of this in Exodus 5,9 when Pharaoh ordered a further intensification of the hard labour performed by the Israelites as a response to their request for a brief vacation in order to attend to their religious obligations. This is part of the national aspect of the Sabbath, stressed in Deuteronomy 5,14, as opposed to the universal aspect of Sabbath observance stressed in Exodus 20,11.

תעשה מעשיך, "you shall do your work, etc." The Torah was careful not to write: "all your work" as in the Ten Commandments (concerning the Sabbath). The reason is that during the Shmittah year the farmer cannot do his regular work even on the six days of the week.

ששת ימים תעשה מעשיך, “during six days you may pursue your usual pursuits, etc.;” why is this verse inserted at this juncture? It is because of the commandment to allow also the son of your maidservant and the stranger to rest on the Sabbath, seeing that generally they are poor people. וביום השביעי תשבת “and on the seventh day you shall rest” – since work is prohibited in the Sabbatical Year I might have thought that no additional weekly rest day is necessary – therefore the Torah commands to rest on the seventh day.

למען ינוח שורך וחמורך,“in order for your ox and your donkey to enjoy rest.” The meaning of the words: “so that your ox and donkey can rest,” is the tail end of the legislation that you shall work for six days and shall rest on the seventh day. As a result of your resting, your man-servants, maid-servants, oxen and donkeys will rest also, as well as your stranger. The objective of the legislation is not aimed at rewarding your donkeys, etc., with rest but if you do all your work during six days so that you will rest on the seventh day, then also your labourers and your beasts of burden will rest on that day. We find a similar construction in Deut. 16,3 למען תזכור את יום צאתך ממצרים, “on account (of this) eating of unleavened bread, etc., you will remember the day you went out of Egypt.”

In all that I have said to you, take heed; and the name of the idols of the nations you shall not invoke — let it not be heard upon your mouth.

ובכל אשר אמרתי אליכם תשמרו AND IN ALL THAT I HAVE SAID TO YOU TAKE HEED — This statement is intended to bring every positive command (מצות עשה) also under the category of a prohibition (לאו); for wherever the term שמר, “take heed”, is used in the Torah it is an admonition in the place of (having the force of) a prohibition (cf. Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 355). לא תזכירו MAKE NO MENTION [OF THE NAME OF OTHER GODS] — This means that one must not say to another: “Wait for me near such-and-such an idol”, or, “Stay with me on the festival of such-an-such an idol’” (mentioning its name) (cf. Mekhilta; Sanhedrin 63b). Another explanation of verse 13 is: the juxtaposition of “Be heedful in respect of everything that I have spoken to you” with “and the names of other gods ye shall not mention” is intended to teach you that the practise of idol-worship is of equal heinousness as though one had infringed every command (cf. Horayot 8a); and that one who avoids it may be regarded as though he had observed every one of them (cf. Chullin 5a). לא ישמע IT SHALL NOT BE HEARD from a heathen, THROUGH THINE AGENCY — i. e. you shall make no business partnership with a heathen through which it might happen that he will take an oath by the name of his god, for consequently you will have brought it about that it has been mentioned through your agency (cf. Sanhedrin 63b).

AND IN ALL THINGS THAT I HAVE SAID UNTO YOU TAKE YE HEED. Rashi explained: “This verse is intended to bring every positive commandment also under the term of a prohibition, for wherever the term shmirah (taking heed) or shvithah is used in the Torah, it signifies an admonition in the place of an express prohibition.”Now according to his explanation, Rashi will have to say that this verse is a lav sh’bichlaluth [a negative admonition expressed in general terms, so that violation of any or all of the prohibitions included under it does not render one liable to punishment]. For if that were not so, the court would have to administer whipping to anyone who fails to fulfill any of the positive commandments of the Torah; but in such a prohibition which includes many matters without mentioning specifically any particular transgression, everyone would agree that no whipping is incurred on account of its breach. But [if so, there is the following difficulty with Rashi’s explanation]: the Rabbis have already said that the term hishamer (take heed) used in connection with a positive commandment, carries the force of an additional positive commandment; in that case, He has added here [not a negative commandment as Rashi has it], but a mere positive one [since the statement, and in all things that I have said unto you ‘tishameru’ (take ye heed), refers to the positive commandments mentioned in the preceding Verses 10-12]! In the Mechilta the Sages differed as to the explanation of this verse and interpreted it in many ways. In accordance with the plain meaning of Scripture, the explanation of the verse is: “and in all things that I have said unto you concerning other gods take ye heed,” for the verse is to be connected with its continuation, [which states: and make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard out of thy mouth]. Thus He is stating: Of all the many admonitions that I have said to you concerning other gods, take great heed; do not worship them, nor bow down to them, condemn to death anyone who sacrifices to them, and make no graven image, nor any manner of likeness. Moreover, take heed not to mention the name of their gods, such as Chemosh the god of Moab, and Milkom the god of the children of Ammon, and Ashima the god of Hamath. Neither let there be heard out of thy mouth their name, even without the epithet of deity, such as merely mentioning Milkom or Ashima; instead you are to mention them in a manner of condemnation: “the abhorrent thing of Moab,” “the abomination of the children of Ammon.” Or, the expression lo yishama (neither let there be heard), means: let it not be heard from its worshipper through your dealings with him, similarly to that which our Rabbis have said, that one should not make a business—partnership with an idolator, for it might lead to him swearing by his deity. It is possible that lo tazkiru (make no mention) is transitive, meaning: do not mention the name of other gods to their worshippers, such a...

"And in all that" — here he mentions idolatry. The meaning is: everything I have said consists of My commandments and ordinances, and not so the ordinances of other gods. He says "you shall not mention" — that you shall not invoke their names to swear by them, nor shall their worshippers cause others to swear by them. This is "it shall not be heard upon your mouth" — that you should cause others to swear by it: that you should not say to an idolater, 'Swear to me by your god.'

כל אשר אמרתי אליכם תשמרו, ושם אלוהימ אחרים לא תזכירו, the Israelites are cautioned not only not to violate G’d’s commandments, but to construct safeguards to ensure that they do not violate these commandments inadvertently. A prime example of this is the caution not to only not to worship idols, but not even to mention their names. לא ישמע על פיך, you must not even be the cause of others mentioning the names of these idols. If they do mention these names it must not be with your approval.

ובבל אשר אמרתי, "and in all things that I have said, etc." The reason the Torah writes ובכל ..תשמרו instead of simply וכל אשר…תשמרו, is connected to the statement of the sages (Makkot 23) that the number of positive commandments is 248, corresponding to man's limbs, whereas the 365 negative commandments correspond to the number of sinews in the human body (compare Zohar volume one page 78). A person should not say: "I am going to observe a sufficient number of commandments in order to safeguard the health of my body. By writing ובכל, the Torah hints strongly that our good health and well being will depend on our observing all of the commandments. ושם אלוהים אחרים לא תזבירו, "and you shall not mention the name of other deities, etc." The Torah means that just as the observance of all the commandments will help man to make all of his 248 limbs and 365 sinews function properly, so there is also an overall protection for man which results from his denial of any form of idolatry. Anyone denying idolatry is considered as if he had accepted the entire Torah and would actively assist all those who are engaged in observing Torah and its commandments. As a result, all the various parts of such a person's body will enjoy protection even if he had not performed certain commandments (because the opportunity did not arise), or he had not been able to demonstrate that he would not violate certain of the Torah's injunctions if given a chance to do so. Such "overall" protection of a person due to his denial of idolatry would not accrue to him if he had ignored or violated one or more of the commandments deliberately, however. The limb or sinew which is "connected" to fulfilment of that particular commandment may then experience pain or malfunction.

ובכל אשר אמרתי אליכם, “concerning all that I have told you.” All the regulations pertaining to the Sabbath days in normal years also apply in the seventh year.”An alternate explanation: “I am not warning you only concerning that your servants and domestic beasts have to observe a rest on the Sabbath, but these are only examples; all the other rules concerning work prohibitions on the Sabbath apply, regardless of the fact that you do not work the field a whole week during the seventh year. Your vessels, stoves, vats, etc., have to observe rest on the Sabbath.”A third explanation: All the details that I have commanded you ever since the revelation at Mount Sinai concerning the observance of the Sabbath remain in force indefinitely without interruption. The verse is a repetition of warnings the Torah had issued on previous occasions. We have other examples of this type in Deuteronomy 27,26: ארור אשר לא יקים את דברי התורה הזאת לעשות אותם, “cursed be he who fails to observe the words of this Torah;”Yet another explanation of our verse: this is a warning concerning the meticulous observance of all the positive commandments. According to Rashi, this was necessary as the vast majority of the Sabbath regulations concern what is forbidden, and do not require us to actually perform an activity, only to desist from performing it. The verse also is a hint at the rule that when a positive and a negative commandment appear to be in conflict, the performance of the positive commandment takes precedence. (Talmud Yevamot folio 3.) The logic behind this is that by performing the positive commandment one automatically fulfils the negative commandment attached to it. A different interpretation: the verse applies only to negative commandments as the grammar in the verse, i.e. the word: תשמורו, warns against violating something by a contrary activity. This is what the Rabbis had in mind when they said in Eyruvin 96: “wherever the expression השמר פן, or אל appears, it is always a warning not to do something that the Torah had forbidden. These expressions only occur when a negative commandment had already been the subject of discussion. ושם אלוהים אחרים לא תזכירו, “and you must not (even) mention the name of other deities.” The reason why this warning appears next to the previous laws is to remind us that G-d had already warned us about this also. In other words, “you are to remember all the other commandments except this one which is in essence something that must not be remembered.”

ובכל אשר אמרתי אליכם תשמרו, “be careful concerning all that I have said to you.” According to Rashi this is a warning concerning every positive commandment, i.e. each positive commandment implies violation of a negative commandment if it is ignored. [based on Mechilta chapter 20 by Rabbi Eliezer. Ed.] Nachmanides questions this whole concept, claiming that contrary to the meaning of the word השמר when used in connection with a negative commandment, when used with a positive commandment it leaves the positive commandment intact as such. He adds that unless, according to Rashi, this would be a general negative commandment, it would follow that every violation, i.e. failure to observe a positive commandment would automatically be punishable by 39 strokes. According to the plain meaning of the text, this line covers all the words commencing with ושם אלוהים אחרים in our verse. ולא ישמע על פיך. “your mouth shall not cause it to be heard.” The Torah means that even if the name of such a deity is mentioned without any attribute identifying it as such, it is still prohibited to mention it as such in the presence of people who worship such a deity. These considerations prompted our sages to advise not to enter into a business partnership with a gentile, in order not to inadvertently violate this commandment. (Sanhedrin 63) It is possible to understand the word תזכירו here as a transitive verb, meaning that you must not mention the name of the deity to the person who worships such a deity anyway by, for instance, saying to him: “why don’t you pray to your god for help?”

וככל אשר אמרתי אליכם, since the revelation at Mount Sinai until now, be careful to observe all these commandments. According to our sages in Shabbat 18 the reason for the apparent repetition is to include the need for one’s vessels (inert objects) to observe Sabbath rest. [a reference to those vessels which are used only on weekdays in connection with work prohibited on the Sabbath. Ed.]

Three times each year you shall celebrate a festival before Me.

רגלים means TIMES. Similar is, (Numbers 22:28) “that thou hast smitten me these three times (רגלים)”.

"Three pilgrim-feasts" — that is, three times. To Me alone shall you be as a servant, in that you shall serve three pilgrim-feasts in a year and come before Me as a servant who brings a gift to his master. Therefore it is written afterward "before the Master, Hashem" (v. 17), meaning: before the Master, Hashem. Likewise, "and they shall not appear before Me empty-handed" (v. 15). This is mentioned because there are fixed days on which the pagans go to their vanities; therefore it is written that you shall hold a festival to Me alone. The word "tachog" means to sacrifice, as in "bind the festival offering with cords" (Ps. 118:27). "Pilgrim-feasts" — derived from regel (foot), since most of them come on foot.

תחוג לי, as we find in Psalms 149,2 ישמח ישראל בעושיו, “the people of Israel rejoice in their Maker.” Such joy on the festivals legislated by G’d is to offset the joy displayed on the occasion of the making of the golden calf, when the Torah reported “when he saw the calf and the people dancing, etc.” (Exodus 32,19).

שלש רגלים, “three times (a year);” you need not exert yourself by coming to Jerusalem and the Temple more than three times a year, i.e. to have to “lose” valuable time from your agricultural activities by having to travel long distances, etc; other religions are far more demanding of their worshippers. תחוג לי, “you will celebrate for Me.” You will mention My name in connection with your joyful celebration. On Passover you will celebrate the anniversary of your redemption from Egypt; on Pentecost you will celebrate the giving of the Torah on Mount Sinai; and on the festival of huts you will celebrate in thanks for a bountiful harvest.

שלש רגלים תחוג לי בשנה, “three pilgrimage festivals shall you celebrate for Me during the year.” The Torah repeats this once more by legislating that the males of the nation have to make three appearances annually on those festivals in Jerusalem (or the place where the Tabernacle stood) on the festival of unleavened bread, on the festival of weeks, and on Tabernacles. In Deut. the Torah only writes; “Three times” without specifying on the festival of Tabernacles (Deut. 16,3). In Deut. 16,16 where the Torah writes שלש פעמים, the same once more, the reason the dates had to be spelled out once more for these appearances is that had the Torah only written the words שלש פעמים, I could have thought that as long as each male appears in the Sanctuary three times a year at times of his choosing, he would have complied with this commandment. This is why the Torah had to add: “on the festival of unleavened bread, etc., etc.” If so, why did the Torah in our verse write רגלים instead of פעמים, suggesting that coming by foot was of the essence? This was to exempt people who do not have feet or legs and have to travel on stumps or prostheses from this commandment. It is also to exempt the blind and the lame who are unable to make this pilgrimage on their own. A Midrashic approach: we find the expressions שלש רגלים, as well as שלש פעמים, as well as the expression תרמסנה רגל רגלי עני פעמי דלים, ”to be trampled underfoot, by the feet of the needy, by the soles of the poor” (Isaiah 26,6). This is a warning to the Israelites not to make this pilgrimage in carriages but on foot. This is also alluded to in Song of Songs 7,2: “How lovely are your feet in sandals.”

The Festival of Unleavened Bread you shall observe — seven days you shall eat unleavened bread, as I commanded you, at the appointed time of the month of Aviv, for in it you went out from Egypt. And none shall appear before Me empty-handed.

חודש האביב THE MONTH OF אביב — it is the month when the grain becomes full in its ripe state (באביה). The word אביב is connected with אַב which signifies maturity, and being the first of the fruit to ripen (cf. Rashi on Exodus 9:31). ולא יראו פני ריקם AND NONE SHALL APPEAR BEFORE MY FACE EMPTY — When you come to appear before My face on the festivals, bring Me burnt-offerings (Mekhilta; Chagigah 7a).

"The Festival of Matzot" — He begins with it because it is the first of the months of the year. It is written "seven days you shall eat matzot," like "the Festival of Sukkot you shall make for yourself seven days" (Deut. 16:13) — this is an obligation. It is not like "six days you shall do your work" (v. 12), for after that it is written that you shall rest on the seventh day; but that is not the case with "seven days you shall eat matzot" — for why does it not say "seven days you shall not eat leavened bread"? "The month of the Aviv" — I have explained this elsewhere. Many have thought that "they shall not appear before Me empty-handed" is like "and My face shall not be seen" (33:23), but this is not correct, for those who come to the house of Hashem are seen, as the proof-verse shows: "and we shall appear before Hashem" (1 Sam. 1:22), and also "every male of yours shall appear before the face of Hashem" (Deut. 16:16) — meaning: before Hashem.

את חג המצות תשמור, the word תשמור is meant in the same sense as שמור את חודש האביב ועשית פסח, “observe the month of spring to prepare the Passover.” (Deut. 1,1.) למועד חודש האביב, a subtle hint to the authorities to ensure that the calendar dates given for this festival coincide with the season of spring. This may be accomplished by an extra day in certain months, or in more drastic situations by the insertion of a second month of Adar.

כאשר צויתיך, "as I have commanded you." These words refer to details of commandments which have not been spelled out in the written Torah, such as that Matzah must be made of dough which could rise if allowed to stand. If it is made made of flour made out of rice for instance, it could not be used to fulfil the commandment that we must eat unleavened bread on Passover night. There are many other examples of such details of commandments not spelled out in the written Torah.

את חג המצות, “The festival of the unleavened bread.” to remind you of your release from slavery and your leaving Egypt as a free people. שבעת ימים תאכל מצות, “you will eat unleavened bread for seven days.” This line refers back to the words: חודש האביב, “the month of spring;” the reason for this is to remind you that regardless of the fact that the festival commences on the fifteenth day of the month of Nissan you must make sure that this date occurs after the spring equinox, i.e. that in certain years you will have to add an extra month of Adar to ensure that this will occur. If you were not to do that the firstling offering of the new barley harvest on the 16th of that month would not be acceptable as such. You would then have to appear before the Lord ריקם, “emptyhanded,” without fulfilling the specific commandment connected to that date. ולא יראו פני ריקם, “they shall not appear before Me emptyhanded;” the “they,” are the males who have been commanded to make these three annual pilgrimages. They and their sons are viewed by Me as “My children.”

למועד חודש האביב, “at the appointed time in the month of spring.” This wording prompted Pessikta Zutrata to state that the Passover must only be brought after the spring equinox. If the crops have not sufficiently advanced for the new barley offering of the Omer to be able to be offered the sages will have to insert an additional month of Adar. The words: “you shall not be seen before Me empty-handed,” refer to the sacrifice. Any pilgrim has to offer at least one burnt-offering and one peace-offering.

And the Festival of the Harvest, of the first fruits of your labor that you sow in the field; and the Festival of the Ingathering, at the going out of the year, when you gather in your labor from the field.

וחג הקציר AND THE FESTIVAL OF HARVEST — this is the Feast of Weeks, בכורי מעשיך which is the time for bringing the first-fruits, for the offering of the two loaves that were brought on the Feast of Weeks made it permissible for the first time during the year to use the new harvest of wheat for the meal offerings (Menachot 68b), and to bring the first fruits into the Temple, (Mishnah Bikkurim 1:3) for it is said, (Numbers 28:26) “And on the day of the first fruits etc., [בשבעתיכם on your weeks etc.]” (cf. Rashi on that verse). וחג האסף AND THE FESTIVAL OF THE INGATHERING — that is the Feast of Tabernacles. באספך את מעשיך WHEN THOU HAST GATHERED IN THY LABOURS — For during the whole summer-time the fruits are drying in the fields and about the Festival (הָחָג is a Talmudical term for the Feast of Tabernacles) they are gathered into the barns on account of the rain that is then due.

AND THE FEAST OF HARVEST, THE FIRST-FRUITS OF THY LABORS, AND THE FEAST OF INGATHERING AT THE END OF THE YEAR. I do not know why Scripture mentions the names of the festivals with the definite article since He has not yet commanded about or mentioned them at all till now, and it ought to have said first: “and you shall keep a feast of harvest, the first-fruits of your labors,” just as He said in the Book of Deuteronomy, And thou shalt keep a festival of weeks unto the Eternal thy G-d. But perhaps because He had already said, Three times thou shalt keep a feast unto Me in the year, and further explained, The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep… in the mouth of Aviv, meaning that you are to make sure that the Passover festival is observed at the beginning of the month of Aviv, He referred back [to these verses] and said, “And as for the other festival, make sure that it be the feast of harvest, the first-fruits of thy labors, and as for the third one, make sure that it be the feast of ingathering, at the end of the year. Now all these festivals are thus named with reference to man’s activities in the field, in order that he give thanks for them to G-d who guards the ordinances of heaven, and brings forth bread out of the earth to satisfy the longing soul, and the hungry soul He hath filled with good. This is Scripture’s intention in using here the expression: el pnei Ha’adon Hashem (three times in the year shall all thy males appear — ‘before the Master, the Eternal’), for He is the Master who provides the needs of His servants, and when they take their part from before Him, they come to Him to see what He commands them to do. Thus the expression el pnei is like ‘liphnei’ (“before”) — before the Master. But by way of the Truth, [the mystic teachings of the Cabala], the word pnei is derived from the term panim [literally: “face”], and I have already alluded to the explanation of panim in the Ten Commandments. This is why He said Ha’adon Hashem (the Master, the Eternal), just as He said the second time, the Master, the Eternal, the G-d of Israel. Similarly: Behold, the ark of the covenant of the Master of all the earth; Tremble, thou earth, ‘miliphnei’ (at the presence) of the Master.

"And the Festival of the Harvest" — the firstfruits of the wheat harvest. The Festival of Matzot will always fall in the time of the barley firstfruits, and the interval between the barley firstfruits and the wheat firstfruits is, as it says, "seven weeks you shall count for yourself" (Deut. 16:9). "And the Festival of Ingathering at the going out of the year" — as one year ends and another begins, starting from Marcheshvan to sow.

בצאת השנה. After all the harvests have been gathered in.

בכורי מעשיך, "the first fruits of your labours." This excludes crops raised by a Gentile. His work is not considered a Jew's accomplishment. We are taught in Rosh Hashanah 13 that if the crop has grown to one third of its final size while still under the care or ownership of a Gentile, it does not qualify as something from which this gift of בכורים can be presented to the Priest. This ruling is based on Leviticus 23,10: "the first of your harvests."

וחג הקציר, “and the festival of the harvest. (Wheat harvest around Shavuot)” The Torah spelled this festival out as especially intended as one of being joyful, (compare also Isaiah 9,2: כאשר יגילו בחלקם שלל, “as they exult when dividing spoil.”) אשר תזרע, “which you will sow;” you are perceived by the Torah as sowing in G-d’s field; this is why He commanded you to donate the first ripe produce to Him, as a sort of tax. וחג האסיף, "and the festival of ingathering (all the fruit of the orchards and vineyards)". When a person gathers in all his fruits, it makes him happy. When this happiness is directed toward My commandments, the entire festival becomes dedicated to My Name. בצאת השנה, “at the conclusion of the year, which is the beginning of the following year.”

חג הקציר. “the harvest festival.” Nachmnanides explains why the name of this festival has not been mentioned here. It is because all the legislation about festivals does not appear in the Torah until much later in Leviticus and in Numbers, at this point the Torah only alluded to it, without naming something we are not yet familiar with. Nonetheless, it was important to indicate that as soon as the harvest has begun, the duty to set aside for G’d or His representative on earth, i.e. the priest or Levite, whatever is due to Him. The command to “make” such a festival resurfaces in Deut. 16,10, i.e. ועשית חג שבועות לה', “you are to make a festival of weeks for Hashem.” Perhaps, in view of the fact that the Torah writes here already that there are to be three festivals involving pilgrimage to the place where G’d is in residence on earth, and the Torah had mentioned that the matzah festival occurs in the spring, the second such festival occurring during the harvest season, mention of the third such festival is related to the end of the harvest season, the Torah introduces already the first such festival with the warning, i.e. תשמור, meaning that we must make certain that all of these festivals are observed according to the seasons, i.e. the solar calendar. [with a certain degree of latitude. Ed.] They are named here in accordance with agricultural activities which predominate around the calendar dates when these festivals are being observed. Each progressive stage in food production from the earth which G’d has put at the farmer’s disposal, qualifies for an expression of thanksgiving by the farmer that he has been fortunate enough to reach that stage without his potential or actual crop having failed. To remind us of this aspect of farming, the Torah describes the address to which the gratitude is to be addressed as אל פני האדון ה', “in the presence of the Master i.e. Hashem.” It is in this capacity as the “boss” of nature that He has supervised your activities and blessed them with success.

וחג הקציר, the Shavuot festival on which the sacrifices mentioned in Leviticus 23,16-20 including the offering of the two loaves of the first wheat harvest are listed. בכורי מעשיך, in order to permit use of the new wheat harvest products in the Temple for the gift offerings. וחג האסיף, the Sukkot festival, a period immediately after the last harvest of the summer has been brought in. The Torah commanded us to sit in the huts in commemoration of the times when instead of having their own crops, the Israelites were in the desert depending on the daily ration of manna. Observance of the festival of חג האסיף, an aspect of the Sukkot festival therefore is a form of thanksgiving. We have learned therefore that all of the three pilgrimage festivals are directly related to the produce of the Holy Land.

Three times a year all your males shall appear before the Master of the Universe, Hashem.

שלש פעמים וגו׳ THREE TIMES etc. — Because this section speaks mainly of the Sabbatical year, it was necessary to state that the sequence of the festivals should not be disturbed even in this year of agricultural rest (Mekhilta; cf. Rashi on v. 12). כל זכורך means all the male population among you.

"Three times" — and these three times that I have told you, that they shall not appear before Me empty-handed — this refers only to the males, who are subject to commandments and are not ill such that they cannot come.

שלש פעמים בשנה יראה, to give thanks to the Lord for the attainment of freedom from bondage, in spring, in summer and in fall. All our achievements stem from Him. אל פני האדון, to appear in the presence of the אדון. The term אדון is applied to someone who is in control of perishable things, mortals, etc. The Torah, by using this name of G’d, reminds us that He is the master of the people who present themselves each as an individual. When they make such an appearance before the Lord, they are as if each making an obeisance before his Master. This “Master” is simultaneously the master of the soil they toil which provides their livelihood, seeing that G’d is on record as כי לי כל הארץ כי גרים ותושבים אתם עמדי, “all of the earth is Mine for you are strangers or at best resident strangers with Me.” (Leviticus 25,23). In view of the above, it is clearly appropriate to express our gratitude to Him during the three aforementioned seasons. Therefore, (19) ראשית בכורי אדמתך, a reference to the choicest of our respective fruit. The word ראשית is used in the sense of “the choicest,” in Amos 6,6 וראשית שמנים ימשחו, “they anoint themselves with the choicest oils.” Similarly, Amos 6,1, נקובי ראשית הגויים, “you notables of the leading nation.” The products qualifying for this commandment are the 7 listed in Bikkurim 1,Mishnah 3

שלש פעמים בשנה, “three times during the year;” the reason this is repeated as it is part of the commandment for the males to make three pilgrimages to the Temple annually.

אל פני האדון ה’. “before the Lord, Hashem.” These three festivals occur during three separate seasons. Passover occurs in spring, Pentecost in summer, and Tabernacles in fall. All three festivals are also in recognition of different harvests. On those festivals we are to express our gratitude for the bounty of the earth. We must thank the Lord who provides sustenance for His creatures, and the entire universe. A Kabbalistic approach to the words את פני האדון (34,23): I have already explained this on 20,1.

'האדון ה, seeing that the whole earth is His, no one will covet your land when you come to Jerusalem to perform the commandment of making these pilgrimages. We have been promised this in Exodus 34,23, when the Torah speaks about expanding our territory, requiring that all the males come up to Jerusalem on three occasions. The names which the Torah attributes to G’d usually fit the subject matter under discussion, seeing that G’d has as many names as He has attributes. Wherever the attribute אדון is used it is connected with tenancy of the land of which G’d is the ultimate owner. We find the term אדון used for G’d also by Isaiah 10,33

You shall not slaughter the blood of My Passover-offering over leavened bread; and the fat of My festival-offering shall not remain outside the altar until morning.

לא תזבח על חמץ וגו׳ means, you shall not sacrifice the Passover-lamb on the fourteenth day of Nisan before you have removed the leavened bread from your house (Mekhilta). (This verse is to be connected with v. 15). ולא ילין חלב חגי NEITHER SHALL THE FAT OF MY SACRIFICE REMAIN away from the altar (cf. the Targum). UNTIL MORNING. One might think, however, that the meaning is, that it shall not remain overnight on the altar and that the sacrifice would therefore become invalid even through the fat remaining overnight on the “wood-pile” of the altar! Scripture, however, states, (Leviticus 6:2) “[This is the law of the burnt-offering; it is that which may go up] on the fire-place of the altar all the night, [any time until the morning]”(Mekhilta), — Therefore the statement ולא ילין means, that this law of leaving the fat away from the altar overnight is infringed only if it has not been placed on the altar by the dawn of the morning, for it says, “[neither shall the fat remain] until morning”, but any time during the whole night one may lift it up from the pavement on to the altar (cf. Megillah 20b).

THOU SHALT NOT OFFER THE BLOOD OF MY SACRIFICE WITH LEAVENED BREAD. “You shall not slaughter the Passover-offering on the fourteenth day of Nisan before you have removed the leavened bread [from your possession].” This is Rashi’s language. Do not interpret the meaning of this statement of Rashi to refer to the removal of unleavened bread, [and that the verse tells us] that this must take place before the time of slaughtering the Passover-offering, just as is mentioned in the first chapter of Tractate Pesachim: “The Merciful One has declared a time for the slaughtering of the Passover-offering for all alike” — for this interpretation is not the real point of the verse in accordance with the final decision of the law mentioned there. For there is no prohibition according to the law of the Torah requiring the removal of unleavened bread on the day before Passover, not even is there a prohibition against eating it [but the violation of a positive commandment]. But the subject of the verse as established according to the final decision of the law, is an admonition against slaughtering the Passover-offering with leavened bread, meaning that none of the company who have been counted to eat of this Passover-offering, may have leavened bread remaining in their possession at the time it is slaughtered. And so Rashi explained it in the section of Ki Thisa. Now the verse should have read, “Thou shalt not slaughter with unleavened bread My sacrifice” [omitting the word: dam — blood], for the blood is not “slaughtered.” But in the opinion of our Rabbis this comes to include the sprinkling, so that the priest who sprinkles the blood of the offering is also forbidden to have leavened bread in his possession. The verse thus states: “Do not slaughter the Passover-offering with unleavened bread, and neither [sprinkle] the blood of My sacrifice,” That is, and neither let the blood of My sacrifice be with unleavened bread. It is an elliptical verse.

"The blood of My sacrifice" — this is the Passover offering, which is eaten with matzot and bitter herbs. "The fat of My festival offering" — this is the unblemished lamb, which is obligatory, as it is written: "when the burnt-offering and the fats were being offered" (2 Chron. 35:14) — until the morning.

ולא ילין חלב חגי; “and the fat of My festival offering must not be allowed to be left lying until the morning.” This is applicable only to the Passover offering, the fat of which was destined for the altar. עד בקר, “until morning;” it has the same rule as the meat of the Paschal lamb, concerning the edible parts of which, the Torah had already written in Exodus 12,10 that none must be left over until morning, and if for some reason some was left over it must be burned. חגי, “My festival;” another word for “My offering,” the offering tendered to Me. This expression is not unique; we find it also in Psalms 118,27: אסרו חג בעבותים, “bind the festival offerings to the horns of the altar;” In chapter 12 the Torah had decreed this as applicable to the original Paschal lamb in Egypt. (Not allowing any to remain by morning) Here the Torah repeats the instruction as applicable to the annual Passover offering serving as a reminder of the original one.

לא תזבח על חמץ דם זבחי, “do not offer the blood of My sacrifice with leavened bread.” Nachmanides queries why the Torah did not write לא תשחט על חמץ זבחי, “do not slaughter My sacrifice with unleavened bread,” seeing that blood is not being “slaughtered.” The formulation of the Torah teaches that the Passover must not be slaughtered at a time when consumption of leavened bread is still permitted, i.e. on the morning of the 14th of Nissan (compare Mechilta Kaspa 20). The verse has to be understood as follows: “do not slaughter while leavened bread abounds in order that the blood of My sacrifice not be offered at a time when your leavened things have not yet been destroyed or sold.”

לא תזבח על חמץ, the elimination of leavened products must take place before it is legally possible to slaughter the Passover, i.e. not later than the 6th hour, before noon. The seventh hour already qualifies for the description בין הערבים, (Exodus 12,6) חלב חגי, a reference to the Passover; just as you are not allowed to leave over part of the meat which is yours to eat until morning, the parts which are consumed on the altar must likewise have been burned up before then.

The choicest first fruits of your land you shall bring to the Sanctuary of Hashem your God. You shall not eat flesh in milk.

ראשית בכורי אדמתך THE FIRST OF THE FIRST-FRUITS OF THY GROUND [THOU SHALT BRING etc.] — Even in the seventh year the offering of the first fruits is obligatory in some cases, therefore here also (where Scripture mainly deals with the laws of the Sabbatical year) it is stated: “the first of the first-fruits of thy land [shalt thou bring, etc.]”. How was the procedure at the setting apart of the first fruits? A man goes into his field and sees a fig which was the first to ripen; he ties a piece of reed-grass round it to distinguish it and so marks its sacred character (Mishnah Bikkurim 3:1). The law of the first fruits applies only to the seven kinds of produce that are mentioned in Scripture: (Deuteronomy 8:8) “a land of wheat and barley etc.”, for which Palestine is praised in that verse (Mishnah Bikkurim 3:1). לא תבשל גדי THOU SHALT NOT COOK A KID — A calf and a lamb also are comprehended under the term גדי, for גדי means nothing more than a young tender animal, as you may gather from the fact that you will find in several passages in the Torah that the term גדי is used and that the writer felt it necessary specially to explain it by adding after it the word עזים, as, e. g., (Genesis 38:17) “I will send forth a גדי of the goats”; (Genesis 38: 20) “the גדי of the goats”; (Genesis 27:9) “two kids of the goats (גדיי עזים)”. This fact serves to show you that wherever גדי is mentioned without further description the term implies also a calf and a lamb. — In three different passages the law לא תבשל גדי is written: once for the purpose of prohibiting the eating of meat-food with milk-food, once to prohibit us from deriving any other benefit (besides eating) from such mixture, and once to prohibit the boiling of meat with milk (Mekhilta; Chullin 115b).

"The first" — this refers to "if you bring a meal-offering of firstfruits" (Lev. 2:14), for it is speaking with an individual, as I will explain in its place. This is mentioned after "you shall not slaughter the blood of My sacrifice over leavened bread," for from that point the firstfruits begin. Certain foolish people have said that "kid" (gedi) derives from the word megad (fruit/bounty), but this cannot be so, for the mem of megad is part of the root, as the reliable evidence shows: "with choice fruits" (Song 4:13), which follows the same form — and no such form exists in the holy tongue. Furthermore, what would be the meaning of "you shall not cook," for man has no power to cook fruit? Moreover, it is written "and the choice fruits of the sun" (Deut. 33:14) — and what sense would it make to say "in milk"? And where have we ever found such an expression? And further, what is the meaning of "its mother" — where do we find a tree called the mother of fruit? All of this they inferred because this commandment is found alongside "the first of the firstfruits of your soil." But in another passage it appears together with "you shall not eat any carcass" (Deut. 14:21), which is the proper reading. Rather, it is mentioned with the firstfruits because that is when kids are numerous and fully grown. There is another who says that "you shall not cook" means do not delay — that you should not keep it with its mother more than seven days; but if so, why would the commandment be mentioned a second time? Furthermore, their proof-text is "ripe for the harvest" (Joel 4:13) — but that means only "ripening," for the sun ripens just as fire does; similarly, "its clusters ripened" (Gen. 40:10). Rabbi Solomon [Rashi] said that gedi refers to any young and tender animal, and this name applies to the young of the ox and the sheep, citing as proof "a kid of the goats" (Gen. 38) — saying, what need is there to specify? But this is not so, for gedi is called that only when it is from the goats; in Arabic it is gadi and is not applied to any other kind. There is, however, a distinction between gedi and gedi izzim (kid of the goats): the gedi is older than the gedi izzim, since the latter still needs to be with the goats. Similarly there is "se'ir" and "se'ir izzim." The Sages received the tradition that Israel shall not eat meat cooked in milk. Now I will explain: Know that it is the practice of the Torah to speak of the common case — as with "the daughter of the ostrich" (Lev. 11:16): why does Scripture specify the daughter rather than saying it covers the entire species? Know that the flesh of the ostrich is as dry as wood and it is not customary for a person to eat it, for it has no moisture; of the entire species, only the female is eaten, since she is a female and small, and has a little moisture — not so the young male. In the same way, no one eats meat cooked in milk, for it is not a pleasant food: meat requires a long time to cook, while milk does not. Indeed, the custom to this day in the land of Ishmael is that no one eats a lamb cooked in milk, because the lamb has a great deal of moisture — and combined with the milk it is harmful, and therefore one does not eat it. But because the flesh of the kid has no excess moisture, and when young it is warm, they cook the kid in milk. Do not be surprised that the people of those lands do not customarily eat kid-goat, for all physicians agree that there is no better meat — and even for the sick they permitted eating it. Thus it is eaten in Spain, Africa, the Land of Israel, Persia, and Babylon, and so was the custom of the ancients: "two good kids of the goats" (Gen. 27:9), "let us prepare a kid of the goats for you" (Judg. 13:15), and the priest eats a kid-goat as a sin-offering. Since it is not customary to eat raw meat, it is forbidden to cook the kid in its mother's milk. And some say there is no cooking except over fire — but it is written "boiled in water" (Ex. 12:9) and in Chronicles "they boiled them in pots" (2 Chron. 35:13). We have no need to seek the reason for the prohibition, for it is hidden from the eyes of the discerning; perhaps it is because it is cruelty to cook the kid in its mother's milk, in the manner of "an ox or a sheep, it and its offspring, you shall not slaughter on the same day" (Lev. 22:28), and also "you shall not take the mother upon the offspring" (Deut. 22:6). Now the practice of most people, who do not have flocks of their own, is to buy milk in the market — and the milk will have been collected from many ewes. Perhaps the buyer of the kid will not know where its mother is; and if he buys milk, perhaps it contains the milk of the kid's own mother, and he would be violating the prohibition. Any doubt arising from the Torah is to be treated stringently. The Ishmaelites themselves admit that if a kid is cooked in its own mother's milk — since their natures are the same — then it tastes the best; and Scripture spoke of the common case. The ancient Sages of blessed memory were stringent in order to remove all doubt, and forbade all meat with milk. May Hashem, who gave them wisdom, grant them their full reward. I will yet explain why Scripture mentioned this commandment a second time, and also a third time, in each of its places.

לא תבשל גדי בחלב אמו, do not practice these procedures which the idolaters believe are apt to improve the earth’s productivity. But, on the contrary, ראשית בכורי אדמתך תביא, if you really want to attract G’d’s blessing on your agricultural endeavours you will present G’d with a gift of the very first and finest of your respective crops. (compare Ezekiel 44,30 וראשית בכורי כל, וכל תרומת כל,...להניח ברכה אל ביתך, “all the choice first fruits of every kind, and all the gifts of every kind,- of all your contributions,- shall go to the priests,,,,that a blessing may rest upon your home.”

ראשית בכורי אדמתך, "The choicest first-fruits of your soil, etc." Perhaps the Torah hints here that one must not destroy one's seed (semen) and that the son born of one's first seminal emission should be dedicated to the service of the Lord (compare Yuma 2 according to which the word ביתו is an oblique reference to one's wife) The Torah emphasises "the house of the Lord your G'd," to exclude that such a son be brought to a brothel. Jacob performed this commandment as he said of himself when blessing Reuven: "you are my strength and the first fruit of my virility" (Genesis 49,3). The conclusion of our verse in which the Torah directs us not to boil the kid in the milk of its mother contains another important moral/ethical lesson. When a man deliberately destroys his semen he is the cause of infants dying while they still suckle at the breast of their mother. I have explained this matter in connection with Michah 6,7: "Shall I give my first-born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for my sins?" When man destroys his semen he creates a destructive force. This destructive force gains control later over a son who is born to such a father. The souls of such children are considered as עשוקות, "oppressed or deprived," as explained in the Zohar volume one page 219. The reason for this is that their father failed to dedicate his first emission of semen for the creation of a life devoted to the service of the Lord. According to the opinion that the legislation of mixing milk and meat results in a prohibition of any benefit from such a mixture, this would explain why this legislation adjoins that of the bringing of the first-fruits to the Temple seeing that such first-fruits are also totally prohibited to their owner (compare Chulin 114 and Maimonides Hilchot Bikkurim 2, who declares that one must not use בכורים which have become ritually defiled for heating the stove). I have written more about this in my book פרי תואר.

ראשית בכורי אדמתך, “the first choice fruits of your soil, etc.;” why did this verse have to be written? Seeing that in Deuteronomy 26,2, the Torah had written: ולקחת מראשית כל פרי האדמה, “you are to take from the first fruit of the soil, etc.,” I might have thought that the word פרי refers only to the actual fruit; how would I know that the commandment also applies to the liquids squeezed from the fruit? The word: תביא, “you are to bring,” is the clue. What is the difference between the fruit itself and its liquids? When bringing the fruit itself the passage written in the paragraph referred to from Deuteronomy is to be recited by the farmer, whereas when presenting only their liquids this passage does not have to be recited. This legislation has been written after the Torah had written in verse 18 that the Passover sacrifice must not be offered when it is still permissible to eat leavened matters, to tell us that the earliest possible time for offering such first ripened fruit is after the Passover, i.e. the day after when the first of the barley harvest is offered. (Compare Leviticus 23,914). לא תבשל גדי בחלב אמו, “Do not boil a kid in its mother’s milk.” The reason this verse has been inserted here is that generally speaking during the pilgrimage festivals a great amount of meat is consumed, the Torah reminds us that this law is not to be ignored. [It has been written on two other occasions also. Ed.].

ראשית בכורי אדמתך,”The choicest first fruit of your soil.” These first fruit are forbidden for secular use by their owners. Our sages state that this is the reason that this legislation was written immediately prior to the prohibition of boiling a kid in the milk of its mother. Just as that legislation prohibits secular or any use by its owner of such a dish, so first ripe produce is also prohibited for profane purposes. Another reason offered for the aparently unrelated sequence of this verse and the one following it, is that first fruit must not be offered either when they have been boiled or in an unripe condition. לא תבשל גדי בחלב אמו, “do not boil a kid in the milk of its mother.” This verse, identically worded, appears three times in the Torah (compare Exodus 34,26 and Deut. 14,21). Our sages (Chulin 115) interpret this to mean that the prohibition is threefold: 1) not to boil it together. 2) not to consume such a mixture. 3) not to use it in any other form, sell, it, etc. The reason that the Torah chose to word the prohibition in this way is that the Biblical injunction is boiling these two matters together. Consuming meat and milk which was boiled together is a Biblical prohibition punishable by 39 lashes if violated intentionally. Eating meat and drinking a glass of raw milk with it, while forbidden by rabbinic decree, does not carry this penalty. This is the opinion of my teacher (Rashba). We could ask why the Torah did not simply write the words לא תאכל, “you shall not eat,” a formula which traditionally includes the prohibition to enjoy such a substance in any other form (compare Pesachim 21). The reason is that if the Torah had written those words I would have assumed that culpability for eating such a mixture occurs only if one enjoys eating it, as is the case with other prohibitions of that kind. By not using the word: “do not eat,” the Torah implies that even if a mixture of cooked meat and milk was consumed while it was too hot to enjoy, or even burned one’s tissue, the prohibition and culpability for it still apply. Seeing that the Torah was unable to use the words לא תאכל, “do not eat,” It became necessary to write the same verse three times in order to convey to us all the aspects of this prohibition. Nonetheless, the penalty of 39 lashes is applied only to boiling it or eating it even without enjoying it. Other aspects of the prohibition such as selling the mixture is not punishable though prohibited (compare Pesachim 25). There are only two prohibitions of eating something which do not provide one with some enjoyment or satisfaction for which a Biblical culpability exists. One is our verse, the other is a mixture of grapes and some other seed planted too close to it. In accordance with this the sages in Pesachim 24 stated that all scholars are agreed that the penalty of 39 lashes is applicable to someone who deliberately eats from כלאי הכרם , this mixture of grapes and other species planted right next to the grapes even if eating from the mixture was of no benefit or pleasure to the person eating it. The reason advanced for that ruling is the fact that in prohibiting that mixture the Torah refrained from using the words: “do not eat,” but it wrote פן תקדש המלאה הזרע אשר תזרע ותבואת הכרם, “lest the growth of the seed that you plant and the produce of the vineyard become forbidden” (Deut. 22,9). In Kidushin 56 the words פן תקדש are understood as פן תוקד אש, “so that no light be lit with it,” i.e. so that no use be made of it. According to the plain meaning of our text the reason for this whole commandment is that the practice of boiling the kid in the milk of its mother is apt to deaden feelings of compassion in the human heart. It coarsens one’s entire personality. After all, milk is a derivative of (the animal’s) blood. Consumption of blood coarsens a person’s personality, causing a person to develop feelings of cruelty. One of the reasons consumption of blood is prohibited to Jews by the Torah is the fact that contrary to other parts of the animal, blood does not become assimilated by the body of the person eating it in the same manner as do other parts of the animal’s tissue. In other words, the negative influence of blood remains in the body without being sublimated. Even though in the meantime this blood was been converted into milk and when by itself does not transport the negative elements of blood to people drinking the milk, the moment it is mixed again with flesh and boiled together it reverts to its original negative character-coarsening properties. Doctors believe that the same is true when fish is mixed with cheese and boiled together. [This would account for the prohibition in Yoreh Deah item 87]. Not only would consuming a dish prepared by such ingredients in such a manner produce coarseness of character but it would also produce some form of leprosy. The reason that every time we find this verse it appears in connection with the pilgrimage festivals is in order to warn the pilgrims who come to Jerusalem three times a year,- the holy site where prophets are active,- not to coarsen their hearts by consuming forbidden foods but to ensure that their physical bodies remain as pure and conducive to positive character building influences as is possible. Their hearts must remain receptive to the positive spiritual influence which abounds in Jerusalem. Maimonides, in his Moreh Nevuchim third part chapter 48, writes concerning this prohibition that seeing it was a custom of the pagans to eat milk and meat in their temples on their festivals the Torah forbade this practice and wrote it twice in connection with the three pilgrimage festivals in order to remind us not to behave on these festivals as did these pagans. The Torah is at pains to implant in us the awareness of how radically different the observance of festivals for our G’d is from the way the pagans worship their deities. This is what Maimonides writes as the reason for this commandment. Although I have not quoted his words verbatim I have presented his meaning faithfully. It is fairly clear that these various reasons are not an adequate explanation for such a basic legislation. Maimonides did not mean to advance this as the deeper meaning of the legislation. He only wanted to show the questioner that this commandment could be understood in terms of weaning the Jewish people from pagan practices. The fact is that the entire legislation belongs to the category of חקים, the statutes for which no logical reason can be found, just as we cannot fathom a reason for the legislation of the red cow. The true meaning of these statutes will not be revealed to us until after the arrival of the messiah. The law about the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement is of a similar nature. All our attempts to understand it only touch the surface and do not reveal the true purpose G’d had in mind when He legislated it other than that by observing these laws we are to demonstrate our belief in His superior wisdom of what is good for us. Seeing that in the period following the arrival of the messiah there will neither be paganism nor coarseness of our character and bloodthirsty people, and there is no reason to believe that this legislation will then be abolished, it is clear that its true meaning is something far beyond what we have been given to understand. In the meantime we rely on the promise of Deut. 30,6 that there will come a time when the Lord will circumcise our hearts after the end of all exile and persecution when we will be able to comprehend what we cannot comprehend now. A similar promise has been spelled out in Tzefaniah 3,9: ”for then I will make the peoples pure of speech, so that they will all invoke the Lord by name and serve Him with one accord.” In the meantime it suffices to know that there is a mystical dimension to this commandment. A Kabbalistic approach: You are aware that all the commandments are divine and reflect something parallel to conditions which exist in the celestial regions. The same applies to the commandments known as חקים. They are called thus as they reflect matters engraved, חקוק, in the celestial regions. The legislation of meat and milk is an example of this. Just as each of these components by itself is permissible and only mixing them is prohibited, so the Torah had to be especially stringent in its prohibition against mixing two perfectly permissible items with one another. Were this not so we would find it difficult to understand that joining two permitted substances and making one out of them is so harmful to the condition of G’d’s universe. It is like a lesson not to confuse the kind of holiness which exists in the celestial regions with the sanctity which exists, or is the aim of the Torah to establish, in our terrestrial world. Even when optimum conditions of sanctity exist in our part of the universe, this does not mean that these two types of holiness can be part of the same “brew,” can be mixed as if they were all the same. As long as there is a יצר הרע, an evil force at work in our world, G’d and His name are not one and the same. These two kinds of holiness are still apart and do not mix. It is our task to strive in this world to bring about a merging of these two kinds of holiness. When our sages (Masechet Gan Eden) said that in the future G’d will reveal to us the meaning of the legislation in His Torah including the reason for the prohibition of mixing milk and meat, what they meant was that although these commandments have been given to us to fulfill in this terrestrial world, the condition of this world is not such that it is appropriate to reveal to us the mystical dimension of this legislation as long as this world is infested with the יצר הרע. If G’d were to reveal this information to us in our present state of spiritual/intellectual imperfection it might sow doubt in our minds rather than an additional resolve to observe the commandment meticulously. We might, G’d forbid, conclude that there are two competing divine powers which control the universe. In the future, after the power of the evil urge will have been broken, and when there is no fear that we would therefore misunderstand the reasons for this legislation, G’d will reveal it to us. This will be the period when the deserving dead will be resurrected. Only then will the concept of והיה ביום ההוא יהיה ה’ אחד ושמו אחד, “on that day the Lord and His name will be one and the same, they i.e. the two levels of sanctity will merge.” In fact, at that time the prohibition of mixing meat and milk will become redundant. This explains why the angels who visited Avraham could eat butter and meat at the same time as it appears from Genesis 18,8 that Avraham served it both simultaneously. Seeing that the angels do not have an evil urge (Shabbat 89) this restriction does not apply to them. Once the evil urge will have been abolished there will therefore be no need for this commandment. This is what prompted our sages (Yuma 67) to say in explaining Leviticus 19,19 את חקותי תשמורו, “you shall observe My statutes,” as meaning: “I have engraved them and you have no right to investigate their meaning or criticize them as any such criticism would undermine this terrestrial universe in which the evil urge is still rampant.” This is why in a similar verse in Leviticus 18,4 the verse concludes with the “justification: “I am the Lord.” The plain meaning of the verse in Zecharyah 14,9: “on that day the Lord will be One and His name will be One,” is a reference to mankind worshipping. The message is that from that day onwards all of mankind will serve only the Lord, there will no longer be any competing religions. The word אחד means that at that time we will pronounce the tetragrammaton as we read it not by substituting the letters א-ד-נ-י because we are not worthy to utter the word י-ה-ו-ה (compare Pesachim 50).

You shall not cook a kid in its mother’s milk. Regarding the reason for this commandment, most commentators have sought to explain but have not found a sufficient reason. Some say that this commandment is among the divine decrees [chukim] that have no reason known to us, and others say that it was originally a law of idolatry to cook meat in milk during their festivals, which is why this commandment is placed adjacent to the annual festivals. Some bring evidence from what is written And Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat (Genesis 4:4) [chelvehen, which is here understand as their milk], suggesting that they were accustomed to perform a service using meat with milk. It seems reasonable that this commandment relates to the prohibition of diverse kinds [kilayim] and the mixing of forces, because it is known that the flesh of the embryo is formed from the red blood of the female which produces all redness, for that is its source. Similarly, the milk of the animal also has its source in blood, as blood is transformed and becomes milk. According to this, both the flesh of the embryo and the milk come from the animal’s blood, as that is where they separate from. It is not proper to recombine them through cooking or through eating, since eating is also a form of cooking in the stomach. If one soaks meat in milk all day long, there is no violation of You shall not cook because they do not return to their original mixed state through soaking as they do through cooking in a pot or cooking in the stomach. This specifically applies when one eats meat first, as it does not cook quickly in the stomach before the milk arrives, but milk cooks quickly before the meat arrives, so there is not as much mixing. Therefore, there is no prohibition against eating meat after milk. The reason for this prohibition applies to all animal meat, but a kid in its mother’s milk is mentioned as the prime example because in this case the mixing is most fundamental and direct. And in the portion of Re’eh, He [God] juxtaposed this commandment with forbidden foods, to tell you that the Torah did not only prohibit cooking [meat with milk] but also eating it. And here He juxtaposed it with the commandment of first fruits, because the fruits that ripened first should not be mixed with fruits that ripened later. Rather, those that ripened first should be brought to the house of the Lord your God, and the remainder shall be for you. Similarly, one should not mix the blood that was first “cooked” and from which the fetus was formed, with the blood that was “cooked” later and from which the milk was formed. For since God desired their separation, He does not want them to be mixed.

ראשית בכורי אדמתך, this includes the seven types of products (Deut. 8,8) considered as the land of Israel’s choicest as per Deuteronomy 26,2 where you are commanded to bring the respective first ripe specimen of these seven products to Jerusalem as a gift. Ascent to Jerusalem with these products is to be on foot. לא תבשל גדי בחלב אמו, it is usual for goats to give birth to two kids at the same time, and it was customary for people to slaughter one of them right away. Seeing that mother goats have an abundance of milk (expecting to nurse at least two young kids) they used the excess milk to boil the young kid in after it had been slaughtered. (Proverbs 27,27 “the goat’s milk will suffice for your food, the food of your household and the maintenance of your maids.”) It is something distasteful, revolting, something akin to gluttony, to consume the mother’s milk together with the young animal that this milk was intended to nourish. We find a parallel in the legislation not to slaughter mother animal and her young on the same day, as well as the prohibition not to take the young chicks while the mother bird is present. (Leviticus 22,25 and Deuteronomy 22,6-7) The Torah teaches you these matters as a matter of elementary culture, i.e. respecting life. Seeing that on the festivals many animals are consumed, the Torah included this legislation in the paragraph dealing with other aspects of these festivals. If the consuming of these animals is prohibited under such circumstances, how much more so are mixture of milk and meat prohibited as discussed in Chulin 113.

Behold, I am sending an angel before you to guard you on the way and to bring you to the place that I have prepared.

הנה אנכי שלח מלאך BEHOLD, I SEND A MESSENGER [BEFORE THEE] — Here they were informed that they would once sin and that the Divine Majesty would have to tell them, (Exodus 33:3) “for ‘I’ will not go up among thee” (cf. Exodus Rabbah 32:3). אשר הכנתי means, WHICH I HAVE PREPARED in order to give unto you. This is the literal meaning of the verse. The Midrash (taking the word as connected in meaning with the term כִּוֵן “to put a thing in a line with” or “to make it correspond with” another thing) explains אל המקום אשר הכנתי to signify “to the place opposite to which I have long since established the seat of my Glory” (“the place” therefore denotes the Temple; cf. Rashi on Exodus 15:17). This is, according to the Midrash, one of the verses which implicitly state that the Temple in Heaven is situated exactly opposite (מְכֻוָּן) that on the earth (Midrash Tanchuma, Mishpatim 18)

BEHOLD, I SEND AN ANGEL BEFORE THEE. “Here they were informed that they would sin [by worshipping the golden calf] and that the Divine Glory would be saying to them, For I will not go up in the midst of thee. FOR MY NAME IS IN HIM. This is connected with the beginning of this verse: Take heed of him, for My Name is associated with him. Our Rabbis explained that the angel referred to is Mattatron whose name in numerical value is equal to that of his Master, for the sum of the letter-numbers of the name Mattatron is equal to that of Sha-dai (Almighty).” All this is the language of Rashi. In Eileh Shemoth Rabbah I have likewise seen that one of the Sages interprets the verse in this way, referring to the worshipping of the calf. But one must ask that [we find that] this decree of I send an angel before thee did not actually take place, for the Holy One, blessed be He, had said to Moses, And I will send an angel before thee… for I will not go up in the midst of thee, but Moses pleaded for mercy on this and said, If Thy presence go not, carry us not up hence. For wherein now shall it be known that I have found grace in Thy sight, I and Thy people? is it not in that Thou goest with us? And the Holy One, blessed be He, consented to him and told him, I will do also this thing that thou hast spoken. Thus also did the Rabbis interpret it: “Even as a guide we refused to accept him, as it is written, If Thy presence go not, carry us not up hence.”The answer according to this opinion of the Rabbis is that this decree was not fulfilled in the days of Moses, and it is with reference to this that Moses said, So that we are distinguished, I and Thy people, and G-d answered him, For thou hast found grace in My sight, and I know thee by name, and He further said, And all the people among which thou art shall see the work of the Eternal [that I am about to do]; however, after the death of Moses our Teacher He did send with them the angel. It is with reference to this that Scripture states: And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood a man over against him with his sword drawn in his hand, and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him: ‘Art thou for us, or for our adversaries? ‘And he said: ‘Nay, but I am captain of the host of the Eternal; I am now come.’ And there you will see that Joshua asked him, What saith my lord unto his servant? Now the angel did not command Joshua anything in connection with his appearance to him, but merely told him, Put off thy shoe from off thy foot, nor did he explain why he came. But the vision was for the purpose of informing Joshua that from now on there would be an angel sent before them to go out in the host in battle. It is with reference to this that he said, I am now come. And so did the Sages say in the Tanchuma: “The angel said to Joshua: ‘I am he who came in the days of Moses your master, and he pushed me away and did not want me to go with him.’” The Rabbi...

"Behold, I" — Hashem said to Moses that he should also tell this to Israel: that if they accept all the words and ordinances from the beginning of "You yourselves have seen" (Ex. 20:19), then He will bring them to the Land. Many have gone astray in this. Some say the angel is the Torah scroll, because "My name is within him" — others say he is the Ark of the Covenant, and they interpret "hearken to his voice" as meaning to what is written in it, saying "for he will not pardon your transgression." But all of these are words of wind, for the entire Torah and Scripture are full of this same meaning: "He will send His angel before you" (Gen. 24:7); "the angel who redeems me from all evil" (Gen. 48:16); and Moses said, "He sent an angel and brought us out of Egypt" (Num. 20:16); "the angel of His presence saved them" (Isa. 63:9); "an angel of Hashem went out" (Isa. 37:36); "and He said to the destroying angel" (2 Sam. 24:16); "God sent His angel" (Dan. 6:23); "one like a son of God" (Dan. 3:25) — and many such cases. In the book of Daniel: the prince of Greece and the prince of Persia (Dan. 10), but "Michael is your prince" (Dan. 10:21) — he is called the great one because he is more honored than many others. It is also written of him: "one of the chief princes came to help me" (Dan. 10:13) — meaning in rank, like "those who sat first in the kingdom" (Esther 1:14). This angel is Michael. "To guard you on the way" — that no evil shall befall you. "Which I have prepared" — for you, in the manner of "when the Most High assigned nations their portions" (Deut. 32:8), as I will explain there.

הנה אנכי שולח מלאך לפניך, "Here I am sending an angel ahead of you, etc." The author feels that the angel described here is not an intermediary, one of G'd's ministering angels, but the "great angel," the one who redeemed the patriarchs, a concept familiar to Kabbalists. He says that by definition we do not recognise a force as an intermediary, i.e. an independent power to whom we have to show respect and obeisance. [I believe that the reason for this statement is that reading verses 21 and 22 could lead one to believe that G'd inserted some angel between Himself and us. Ed.] Only at the end of time, will the world recognise that G'd and His name (those speaking in His name, such as angels) are One; compare Zachariah 14,9.

הנה אנכי שולח מלאך לפניך, “I am about to send an angel ahead of you, etc.” This is a departure from what had been the case up until now. G-d announces that as long as all the Israelites remain loyal to Him, He personally will lead them on their journey to the Holy Land; when they are guilty of trespassing, instead of leading them personally, He will assign that task to an angel. An alternate explanation of this verse: The “angel” referred to is Joshua, who after the Israelites’ 40 year stay in the desert and Moses’ death will, take over from him. In other words, G-d does not continue with a celestial creature after Moses’ death, but with a human one. [It is a hint that the period of the Israelites’ lives being guided by supernatural forces only, to wit the manna from heaven, will come to an end at that time. Ed.] Actually, G-d had not spoken of sending an angel until after the episode with the golden calf. (Exodus 33,2) Moses, i.e. the people were not content with this even then. (Exodus 33,12)

הנה אנכי שולח מלאך לפניך, “Here I am about to send an angel ahead of you, etc.” The plain meaning of these words is that G’d announced to Moses that the Israelites would commit the sin of the golden calf at some time in the future; this is why He said that “this angel will not forgive your sin” (verse 22). He spoke of a single sin, פשעכם, not a variety of sins such as לחטאותיכם, sins committed inadvertently. The sin of the golden calf had been committed in full knowledge of it being a violation of the second of the Ten Commandments. G’d told Moses that seeing the people were not worthy that the Presence of the Lord, “Shechinah” would travel with them, He would send a lower ranking angel instead. Due to the power of Moses’s prayer this decree was rescinded at least during his lifetime so that the angel spoken of here did not make his appearance until Joshua (Nachmanides) The words לשמרך בדרך, “to guard you on the journey,” mean that the angel would protect the Jewish people while they were in the desert. The words אשר הכינותי, “which I have prepared,” is a reference to the place G’d had readied for His own residence. The wording is similar to what we have found in the song Moses composed after crossing the Sea of Reeds, (Exodus 15,17). It is a reference to the Holy Temple. The wording is the one used by David when he said (Chronicles I 29,19) ולבנות הבירה אשר הכינותי, “to build the Temple for which I have made provision.” According to the opinion of Rabbeinu Chananel the angel spoken of here was the angel Michael, known as השר הגדול described in Daniel 12,1 “and at that time there will stand, Michael, the great heavenly prince, who stands to support the children of your people.” We also have a verse in Daniel 10,21: “And no one reinforces me against these, except your heavenly prince, Michael.” This was the angel who appeared to Joshua and said to him (Joshua 5,14) “I am the prince of the Hosts of the Lord, now I have arrived.” Our sages (in Tanchuma 18 Mishpatim) have said that the words כי שמי בקרבו, “for My name is within him” in our verse here mean that this is why he is called שר צבא ה’, “the prince of the army of the Lord.” This would be parallel to Kings I 8,15 כי שמך נקרא על הבית הזה, “because Your name has been associated with this house, which is called the house of the Lord.” As to the words כי לא ישא לפשעכם, “for he will not forgive your sin,” these words are a warning by G’d that although He is sending along this angel to protect the Israelites they must be careful not even to commit unintentional sins as this angel has no authority to forgive any sin. The reason is that the authority to forgive is one that G’d has reserved to Himself as we know from Isaiah 43,25: “it is I, I, who-for My own sake-wipe your trans-gressions away and remember your sin no more.” Thus far Tanchuma. Also Ibn Ezra understands the angel in this verse as being Michael. I have seen one of the Kabbalists who believes that the angel mentioned here is identical with the Seraph seen in a vision of Isaiah, i.e. Michael. He writes: it is most likely that this is the angel normally charged with forgiveness, displaying loving kindness, the שר החסד. G’d had to state that in this instance this angel would not have authority to extend forgiveness precisely because on other occasions that is his function. Had this angel not normally been charged with doing just that, i.e. forgiving sins, there would not have been any need for the Torah to tell us that this time he would not be allowed to do this. This angel had appeared to Isaiah in Isaiah 6,6 where the prophet writes: ויעף אלי אחד מן השרפים אשר בידו רצפה, “and one of the Seraphim flew to me and he had a live coal in his hand;” it is clear that this was Michael as our sages in Berachot 4 explained that the description of the power of Michael is of an angel with greater powers than the archangel Gavriel seeing he is described as flying, whereas Gavriel is described as needing two flights, i.e. resting in between as we know from the words Of Daniel 9,21: “he was lifted in flight” (compare Berachot 4, Rashi). The reason Michael is described in Daniel as Seraph, an angel which is associated with water, is no problem. This angel is associated with different elements according to the context in which he appears. Moreover, we must consider the timing of when Michael was referred to as a Seraph. Here in the Torah, when G’d tells Moses about the consequences of the sin of the golden calf, the attribute of Mercy which had guided them had been exchanged for the attribute of Justice. This is what the angel Michael’s arrival at that time would represent. In Isaiah the very reverse process is the subject of the prophet’s vision. In verse seven the prophet has been advised that the time had arrived when he could represent the attribute of Mercy and lead people to repentance. We know that as G’d had said to Isaiah (Isaiah 6,10) “dull that people’s mind, stop its ears, and seal its eyes- lest seeing with its eyes and hearing with its ears it also grasps with its mind and repents (regresses in view of what its eyes and ears will be tempted by) and weakens itself.” Previously, in verse 7 the Seraph had said: “now that this (flaming coal, רצפה has touched your lips your guilt shall depart and your sin will be purged away.” There is therefore no contradiction in the appearance of Seraphim on both occasions and their respective functions being different. At any rate, the verses in Isaiah prove that far from being by definition “unforgiving,” the angel Michael is usually the one who introduces repentance and forgiveness. In our verses the Torah reminds the people that such a benevolent function of the angel occurs only with G’d’s prior approval. In this instance G’d warns that no such prior approval has been given so that the Israelites should not count on the forgiving nature of this angel that they had been used to. Perhaps there is an allusion to the function of the angel Michael in the wording of our verse, i.e. G’d saying (verse 23) כי ילך מלאכי לפניך, seeing that the letters in the word מלאכי are the same as those in the name of the angel מיכאל. It may be a hint that G’d Himself will accompany that angel. At any rate, the negative fallout of this decree was neutralised all the time during which Moses remained alive until this angel presented himself to Joshua as we have already mentioned. The words עתה באתי, “now I have come,” with which the angel introduced himself to Joshua were a reminder that he had been supposed to take up his duties 40 years earlier but that the time for his intervening in the progress of the Jewish people had been put off until now. A Midrashic approach to our verse (Shemot Rabbah 32,2). From the words: “Here I am about to send an angel ahead of you,” we learn that G’d meant that had the Israelites been worthy He Himself would have continued to be at their head as He had been at the Exodus when the Torah testified “and the Lord Himself was walking ahead of them by day,” etc., (13,21). Now that they had proven unworthy G’d handed them over to an agent. This is the meaning of: “Here I am sending an angel ahead of you.” You will observe that as soon as the Jewish people had said כל אשר דבר ה’ נעשה ונשמע, “all that G’d has said we shall do and we shall hear (learn it)” in 24,7, G’d responded by saying: “I granted Adam eternal life for performing the single commandment I had given him not to eat from the tree of knowledge.” This is the meaning of Genesis 3,22: “here this Adam who had been just like one of Us, (i.e. immortal celestial being).” “These Jewish people who have undertaken to observe 613 of My commandments are surely entitled to eternal life!” The Midrash derives this from the words חרות על הלוחות, “freedom on the tablets” instead of reading it merely as “engraved on the Tablets” (32,16). We find a disagreement between Rabbi Yehudah and Rabbi Nechemyah in the above quoted Midrash as to the precise meaning of the word חרות if read as meaning “freedom.” Rabbi Yehudah understands it as freedom from the oppression of mortal rulers, i.e. exile, whereas Rabbi Nechemyah understands it as freedom from the authority of the angel of death. He bases this on Numbers 21, 18-19 וממדבר מתנה, וממתנה נחליאל, ומנחליאל במות, “and from the wilderness- a gift. From “the gift”- my heritage became G’d. From the heritage called G’d- elevated heights.” Rabbi Nechemyah understands the verse not as describing physical landmarks describing where the Israelites rested on the way, but as spiritual landmarks and the gradual recapture by the entire people of Adam’s spiritual stature before the sin when he had still been immortal. The progression was as follows: through the experience of marching in the desert the Israelites merited the gift (מתנה) of Torah. Through the gift of Torah they inherited a relationship to divinity אל)) forever. Through this relationship they acquired immortality. After they had said to the golden calf: “these are your gods O Israel,” they again forfeited this new-found immortality. G’d said to them: ”you followed the same foolishness that Adam was guilty of who had proven unable to resist the temptation of the tree of knowledge for more than three hours. I had said: ‘you are divine (Psalms 82,6-7)-however you will have to die like humans.” In the past you were able to experience the Holy Spirit directly through Me. From now on you will be able to experience it only through the intermediary, the angel.” This is the meaning of “here I will send My angel ahead of you.” This is reflected in what Jeremiah 3,19 had in mind when he said: “I had resolved to adopt you as My child, and I gave you a desirable land- the fairest heritage of all nations; and I thought you would surely call Me “Father,” and never cease to be loyal to Me. Instead, you have broken faith with Me, as a woman breaks faith with a paramour, O House of Israel- declares the Lord.” G’d laments the fact that the Israelite people allowed Him to interpose the Gentile nations between Himself and the Jewish people. The words איך אשיתך mean a separation being established. The word is used in that sense in Genesis 30,40: “he set a separation between each flock.” When G’d referred to the “desirable land,” ארץ חמדה, He meant that it is a land which the great men of the world (the patriarchs) expressed a desire for. Avraham had pleaded with the sons of Chet to sell him a burial plot (Genesis 23,4). G’d had told Yitzchak: “reside in this land” (Genesis 26,3). Yaakov had expressed the wish to be buried in that land and claimed to have dug it with his own hands (Genesis 50,5). The reason Jeremiah quoted G’d as referring to the land of Israel as נחלת צבי, is that just as the skin of a deer shrinks after it has been removed from its carcass so that it does not cover it anymore, so the land of Israel displays similar lack of elasticity, not being able to accommodate itself to G’d’s bountiful harvests but flowing over with it. The expression צבאות גויים, “of the hosts of the world,” is a reference to the fact that all the kings on earth expressed a desire for this land. How do we know this? We find that the city of Jericho had its own king and that the town of Ai less than three miles removed also had its own king. The kingdoms in the land of Canaan each covered very small amounts of territory. In fact if a king ruled over a vast tract of land outside of the land of Israel but did not have a small kingdom inside the boundaries of the land of Israel he was not even considered as entitled to describe himself as “king.” [Proof of the truth of this is the fact that Joshua made war against and defeated no fewer than 31 Kings all in the narrow land called “the land of Israel,” not even including the coastal areas inhabited by the Philistines. Ed.] There is an interesting comment by Rabbi Parnach in the name of Rabbi Yochanan (Tanchuma Mishpatim 17). The words spoken by Achan ben Carmi in Joshua 7,21: וארא בשלל אדרת שנער, “I have seen amongst the loot (of the city of Jericho) a cloak from Shinor.” He understands the words literally as a cloak belonging to the King of Babylon (Shinor). He considered it as so valuable that he wore it only in Jericho. When Jeremiah 3,19 continues: “I had hoped you would call Me father,” he referred to G’d thinking that seeing He had taken the Israelites out of Egypt, and split the sea for them that surely He was entitled to the respect of a father. Instead, they had made the golden calf. Considering further that G’d had provided the Israelites with all their needs in the desert, they in turn had been unfaithful to him. When the Gentile nations had become unfaithful to G’d, He had appointed agents to look after their welfare instead of doing so Himself. Similarly, with the Jews. Now that they had become unfaithful, He would appoint this angel to look after them instead of continuing to do so Himself. This then is the meaning of the words: “Here I am going to send an angel ahead of you.” A Kabbalistic approach: The words הנה אנכי שולח מלאך לפניכם לשמרך, “Here I will send a messenger ahead of you to protect you,” do not refer to a disembodied being which we usually call “angel.” These “angels,” though disembodied, are sometimes sinful as we know from Job 4,18 ובמלאכיו ישים תהלה, “and He casts reproach against His angels.” The reproach concerned the fact that these angels in saying to Lot (Genesis 19,13) “we are about to destroy the city (Sodom),” made it appear as if it were up to them to decide if and when to destroy the city instead of their acting under G’d’s instructions. Rather, the agent G’d is speaking about in our verse here is one of those known as נטיעות, a superior kind of angel who is not subject to sin [and therefore has no understanding for sinful creatures? Ed.] This is why Tanchuma Mishpatim 18 explains the words: “for he will not forgive your sin” as “because he belongs to the category who do not sin.” This is the angel Mattatron, the one appointed to generally run G’d’s universe on His behalf. He is also known in kabbalistic lore as שר הפנים, “the Minister of the Interior.” This is why the Torah adds the words לשמרך בדרך which are translated by Onkelos as למטרך, i.e. the same as Leviticus 5,35 משמרת, This angel is in effect the executive arm of the attribute of Justice. This explains why G’d added the word לפניך, which suggests the same as in Chabakuk 3,5: לפניו ילך דבר ויצא רשף לרגליו, “Pestilence marches before him and plague comes forth at his heels.” When the Torah says in verse 23 כי ילך מלאכי לפניך, “for My angel will walk ahead of you,” this reference to “My angel” indicates that it is the one most beloved of G’d, the one by means of whom G’d has become well known in the world. It is about this angel that the Torah says in 33,14 פני ילכו, “My Presence will go,” in response to Moses’ request in 33,14 הודיעני נא את דרכך, “please let me know (understand) Your ways.” Moses requested an attribute by means of which G’d had manifested Himself, and he was told פני ילכו, that indeed this attribute would travel alongside the Jewish people. This is what Isaiah 63,9 had in mind when he said ומלאך פניו הושיעם, “and the angel known as פניו (His Presence) delivered them.” In order to make this point clear G’d says (verse 22) וצרתי את צורריך, “I will be the enemy of your enemies (by means of this angel), and the Torah continues והכחדתיו, “and I will annihilate them.” It requires the attribute of Justice to completely annihilate the enemies. As to this agent being called מלאך, we must appreciate that this is not a reference to the disembodied beings because it is used to be active in our terrestrial part of the universe on a regular basis, i.e. it is a manifestation of the attribute of Justice. The words השמר לך, “take heed,” are most appropriate as a person always has to take heed not to become a target of the attribute of Justice which would punish him for sins committed. This is why the Torah uses the root שמר, as well as the word פנים saying ושמע בקולו, “and listen to his instructions.” This is a specific warning not to commit sins of a heretical nature. In order that we do not misunderstand, the Torah adds immediately אל תמר בו, “do not rebel against him.” Seeing that the word תמר is very similar to אל תמירני, “do not trade Me,” i.e. do not treat any other deity as if it were divine, we might be correct in translating the words אל תמר בו as “do not exchange Him.” In other words: “this “angel” and I Myself are quite inseparable from one another.” The words כי לא ישא פשעכם are a continuation of the warning; although this angel does have the power to forgive your sins he will not do so if your sin is of the type described by the words אל תמר בו. The message is that anyone who rebels against this angel is in effect rebelling against Me Myself seeing My name is within him. When David said in Psalms 130,4 כי עמך הסליחה, “for forgiveness is something with You, (reserved for You),” and our sages in Tanchuma Mishpatim 18 say that this means that G’d did not authorize any angel to dispense forgiveness, this simply means that the angels known as נפרדים, “disembodied beings,” the ones who are able to sin (as we explained earlier) have not been authorized to extend forgiveness. The words כי שמי בקרבו, “for My name is within him,” is a reference to the tetragrammaton, the one normally described as כי ביה י-ה-ו-ה. This is also how Onkelos translates it when he writes ארי בשמי מימריה. The meaning of these words is that “whatever this angel says he says only in My name.” in other words: “his voice is the voice of the Supreme G’d.” This explains why our verse (22) speaks about listening to the “voice” of this angel rather than “listening to what he says;” he does not have anything of his own to say. By writing ושמע בקולו, the Torah wants to make clear that G’d Himself is the active part of the message, the משפיע, whereas the angel is only the echo, i.e. the מושפע. You will find that when dealing with creatures in our terrestrial world man is the active force whereas woman is the passive force as we know from Adam saying when he first beheld his wife as a separate entity לזאת יקרא אשה כי מאיש לוקחה זאת, “this (one) will be called woman for she was taken from man.” He did not say anything about his wife being someone initiating things. Woman’s role is essentially responsive. In this connection it is interesting to note that the מנחה offering, though feminine, is always spelled as if it were masculine when the Torah refers to it as מנחה הוא instead of as we would expect מנחה היא. [Compare Leviticus 2,6 and 2,15 for example. The same is true of אשה הוא in Exodus 29,28 describing the fire-offering, where we would have expected that the spelling should have been אשה היא. Compare also Leviticus 8,21 and 8, 28 where we read about עולה הוא, although we read the word as היא. In the case of the מנחה the anomaly is even greater as the Torah when referring to it refers to אותה not אותו which would have been appropriate if we were to treat it as masculine. Perhaps the most telling example of this phenomenon is found in Deut. 17,5 where the Torah speaks of the death penalty being administered to both the man and the woman who have committed a similar sin, writing והוצאת את האיש ההוא או את האשה ההוא instead of את האשה ההיא]. This whole matter becomes clearer when you consider that our verse starts with the letter ה in the word השמר and ends with the letter ו at the end of the word בקרבו. These two letters represent the female and the male elements respectively. Their position in this verse may be designed to teach us that in this instance there is no difference between the masculine and the feminine attributes of G’d, that essentially they are all one. This whole subject has been alluded to by Nachmanides in connection with Leviticus 2,11: כל המנחה ...לא תקטירו ממנו אשה לה’. When the Israelites committed the sin of the golden calf this angel who had previously accompanied them disappeared. This is the true meaning of the words in 33, 3 כי לא אעלה בקרבכם, “for I will not ascend in your midst.” As long as this angel of whom we have been told that the Holy Name of G’d was בקרבו, within him, in his midst, G’d never said כי לא אעלה בקרבך. As long as that angel was by our side He Himself was by our side. The angel who made his appearance during the time of Joshua and who would assist in driving out the Canaanites was Gavriel, one of the disembodied beings. As soon as the people had been informed that G’d would not ascend in their midst they went into mourning (33,4) seeing that the angel who carried within him the Holy Name of G’d had left them. They became afraid for their own survival fearing that they were now potential prey for their enemies as their enemies also could call on the support of those angels whom we have described as the נפרדים, the ones who had been assigned, one each, to each of the seventy nations. The statement by Tanchuma Mishpatim 18 that as long as Moses was alive the Israelites had no angel with them, is in full agreement with this Kabbalistic view, meaning that the angel called שר הצבא was not with them seeing that they had a superior angel, the one we described as one of the נטיעות, a category of angel unable to sin. When the Torah writes in 33,2 ושלחתי לפניך מלאך וגרשתי את הכנעני, “and I will send ahead of you an angel and I will drive out the Canaanite,” etc., this refers to a category of angels belonging to the נפרדים. This promise/threat by G’d was never carried out during Moses’ lifetime as his prayer succeeded in cancelling this decree. He, Moses, became the substitute for that angel. After Moses died, this void had to be filled and the angel spoken of by G’d in 33,2 then appeared to Joshua announcing that he had at that time begun to assume the task assigned to him already originally in Exodus 33,2. We know that Moses fulfilled the role of that angel during his own lifetime from the fact that whenever he raised his hands in supplication the Jewish people succeeded in driving back Amalek (Exodus 17,11). When this angel materialized before the eyes of Joshua with a drawn sword in his hand he made it amply clear what his function was to be. When, subsequently, we read in the Book of Joshua (10,11) of gigantic rocks dropping out of the sky (heaven) upon the fleeing Canaanites this was part of that angel’s doing. When the kings were killed (Joshua 10,28) the description of the utter destruction wrought upon all the living souls in these various cities was beyond anything Moses had done during his own lifetime. When Moses conducted war the Torah mentions that the victims’ bodies were destroyed. We never find, as we do constantly in the Book of Joshua, that the souls of the victims were destroyed also (contrast description of Deut. 3,6 with Joshua 10,28-39). In order that we do not misunderstand the word נפש in those verses as applying only to the animalistic life-force of the Canaanites, we are told in Joshua 10,40 ואת כל הנשמה החרים, “he utterly wiped out every soul.” This was why this angel had to accompany Joshua on his campaign.

הנה אנכי שולח מלאך, “Behold I send an angel, etc.” According to Rashi the Torah hints at this point already that the Israelites will become guilty of a sin which will cause the present proximity of G’d the essence, to be replaced by an intermediary, an angel (compare Exodus 33,2). Rashi mentions this, although at the insistence of Moses, (Exodus 33,17) the presence of G’d eventually did accompany the people, until under Joshua, it was replaced by the angel mentioned here. (compare Joshua, 5,14)

שולח מלאך, as we know from Joshua 5,14 where the angel introduced himself as having been sent to decisively assist Israel.

Behold, I am sending an angel. By merit of the Ten Commandments that begin with "I am", I am sending an angel before you to guard you. Alternatively, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, "Behold I am sending an angel." Moses said to Him, "I am not asking for an angel to go with us, but You in Your glory. And if Your presence does not go with us, we will not move from here." The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, "I am not even sending an angel, just the hornet," as it is written, (Deuteronomy 7:20) "And also the hornet." And specifically in this world He sends the hornet, but in the future world (Malachi 3:23) "Behold I am sending Elijah the prophet to you", as it says, "Behold I am sending an angel before you."

Be on guard before him and obey his word; do not rebel against him, for he will not pardon your sins, for My Name is in his word.

אל תמר בו EXASPERATE HIM NOT — This verb is a term denoting rebellion (המראה), similar to, (Joshua 1:18) “Whosoever he be that rebel (ימרה) against thy commandment”. כי לא ישא לפשעכם FOR HE WILL NOT PARDON YOUR TRESPASS — He is not accustomed to it (to sin) for he is one of a class of beings who never sin. Besides he is only a messenger and only carries out the mission entrusted to him (i. e. he has no right to pardon you, for this is My prerogative: it is his only to insist upon obedience to My commands) (Midrash Tanchuma, Mishpatim 18). כי שמי בקרבו FOR MY NAME IS IN HIM — This passage must be connected with the beginning of the verse: Take heed of him etc. — for (כי) My Name is associated with his (i. e. whatever he does, he does in My Name). Our Rabbis said that he (the angel) is Mattatron (מטטרון) whose name is even as the name of his Master, for מטטרון has the numerical value of שדי “the Almighty” (Sanhedrin 38b).

For he will not pardon your transgression; for My Name is in him. He is saying: “Be not rebellious against him, for he will not pardon your transgression if you rebel against his word, for he who rebels against him, rebels against the Great Name which is in him, and he deserves to be cut off by the attribute of justice.” It is possible that the expression My Name is in Him, is connected to the above verses: hearken to his voice, for My Name is in him, and his voice is the voice of the Supreme One.

"Take heed" — every angel that carries out the word of Hashem neither adds nor diminishes. So too, the Satan of Job was an angel, and so too the one who went out to meet Balaam, "to be an adversary to him." Thus one who hearkens to the voice of the angel hearkens to the voice of Hashem the Glorious. The expression "do not rebel against him" (al tamer bo) is difficult; it appears to mean what is expressed in "and they rebelled against Me" (Ezek. 20:8), but one would expect the form timreh. The grammarians of Spain were therefore compelled to say that it is from the class of doubled-root verbs, in the manner of "and God turned the people" (Ex. 13:18), for the entire root is from the doubled class; for "and it went around and wound upward" (Ezek. 41:7) is in the niphal form, like "let us confuse" (Gen. 11:7) from the root balal, and "the spirit of Egypt will be drained" (Isa. 19:3) from the root bokek (Isa. 24:1). Do not be surprised that two roots share the same meaning — for there is "he lorded it over his household" (Esther 1:22) and "for you have striven with God" (Gen. 32:29), and similarly al tamer bo, and also "he who is rebellious toward his mother" (Prov. 17:25), on the pattern of makhes (Num. 31:28) which derives from "you shall count against the sheep" (Ex. 12:4) — from the doubled-root class. Know that "for My name is within him" is linked with "take heed of him and hearken to his voice," in the manner of "and so you shall also do for your maidservant" (Deut. 15:17). I have already explained that Hashem's glorious Name is the Name of essence, for He alone exists; it also appears as an attribute of Hashem, meaning that He is all things and all proceeds from Him. The meaning of "within him" is like a circle whose center point is equidistant from every point on its circumference — therefore the glory of Hashem dwelt within the camp and traveled in the midst of the camps, as it is written: "for You, Hashem, are in the midst of this people" (Num. 14:14), and it is written: "and He forms the spirit of man within him" (Zech. 12:1). Do not be confounded by the fact that it says "if you hearken to his voice" and then "and you do all that I speak" — I will give you a parable: all the scientists of natural philosophy have brought conclusive proofs that the body of the moon is a body that receives the sun's light, since of itself it has no radiance; and because of this the sun is eclipsed when the moon conjoins with it by day. Both travel in orbits resembling the orbit of the zodiac; the eclipse is simply that the moon passes beneath the sun, and since both are spheres, the side of the moon facing the sun is entirely light, while the side facing away from the sun is dark and without light. The moon likewise hides the sun's light at mid-month when the shadow of the earth intervenes between the sun and the moon, leaving the moon without light. Now we know that the moon's light illuminates the air by night — so if Reuven says "this is the moon's light" he speaks truly, and if Shimon says "this is the sun's light" he also speaks truly.

השמר מפניו, not to offend his dignity. The word is used in a sense similar to Joshua 5,9 (the angel speaking) “remove your shoe from your foot!” ושמע בקולו, to follow in his footsteps, the reverse of what the Israelites had done (as reported) in Deuteronomy 1,28 when they were willing to listen and to follow the 10 spies who had declared that it was impossible to attain their objective, i.e. the conquest of the land of Canaan. אל תמר בו כי לא ישא לפשעכם, if even a single individual will sin, the punishment will include his fellow Jews. This is precisely what happened when Achan had stolen from the loot of Jericho and, because his sin had been covered up, Israel lost the first battle of Ai. (Joshua refers to this as a warning in Joshua 22,20. He reminds the people that Achan was not the only one punished for this sin but that G’d [presumably because He had invested His angel with such authority. Ed.] vented His anger at the entire nation.) כי שמי בקרבו, and it is not in his power to forgive offenses against My honor.

השמר מפניו, "Take heed of him, etc." In this verse G'd defines our relationship with this angel as involving both a positive and a negative commandment. The negative commandment is contained in the words השמר מפניו, just as in all other places where the word השמר introduces a negative commandment. The positive commandment is contained in the words ושמע בקולו, "listen to his voice." אל תמר בו, "do not rebel against him;" Here too the Torah contains a moral/ethical lesson in addition to the plain meaning of the words. The Torah hints that exchanging good for evil will result in the king being replaced by a slave and the maidservant inheriting the authority of the mistress (compare Proverbs 30,23). The message is that when Israel is sinful it will be subject to an attribute of G'd which takes "revenge" rather than elevates sins to a lesser level. The angel under discussion is not authorised to do this. When the Torah speaks of כי שמי בקרבו, this means that man has forfeited the presence of G'd in his midst because of his sins, and G'd's former presence within man is now centred in that angel. Sanhedrin 38 teaches that the numerical value of מטטרון, Mattaron (the angel G'd appointed in charge of running the universe), is the same as that of his Master, G'd's attribute שדי,=314. When man sins, G'd no longer considers Himself as "his" G'd, i.e. שדי. This is the mystical dimension of Isaiah 19,5: ונהר יחרב ויבש, "the river will fail and dry up." The intelligent reader will comprehend that the words כי אם שמוע תשמע בקולו, "if you will surely listen to his voice," sounds as if G'd is speaking about a third person, whereas the Torah continues: ועשית את אשר אדבר, "and you will do what I say." G'd was careful not to say אשר ידבר, "which he will say," in order to remind us that His name is in the midst of the Jewish people.

כי לא ישא לפשעכם כי שמי בקרבו, “for he has no authority to forgive your deliberate sins, as My Name is within him.” G-d means that even though he (that angel) is a celestial creature, and therefore Divine, He cannot “forgive” any trespass against Him. Another place in the Bible where we encounter a similar thought is Psalms 25,11, למען שמך וסלחת לעוני כי רב הוא, “as befits Your name, o Lord, pardon my iniquity.” Other examples of “irregularities” in treatment, are Genesis 48,14, where Yaakov insisted in giving preferential treatment to Ephrayim although Menashe was the firstborn. Another example is found in Psalms 74,20-21: הבט לברית כי מלאו מחשכי ארץ נאום חמס וגו', “Look to the covenant, for the dark places of the land are full of the haunts of lawlessness. Let not the downtrodden turn away disappointed, let the poor and needy praise Your name.” [Here the people ask to be promoted instead of being demoted. Ed.] כי שמי בקרבו, seeing that My name is within him, he has the right to speak of himself by proclaiming: “'אני ה,” “I am the Lord,” meaning I am His general manager of the universe, known in kabbalistic parlance as Mattatron. That name can be understood as “chief of the angels,” or “G-d in miniature.” (Compare a book by Rabbi Reuben Margolies, in which all the names of the angels and their functions are listed, pages 73-108.)

אל תמר בו, the word תמר is a derivative of the root המר as in המר ימירנו (Leviticus 27,33) When the same word appears without a dagesh in the letter מ, is derived from the root נמר as in Jeremiah 48,11 וריחו לא נמר, “and his fragrance is unspoiled.” The construction of אל תמר is parallel to the construction of אל תפל, “do not omit,” in Esther 6,10 an imperative in the transitive conjugation hiphil of the root נפל. It does not have anything to do with the “refusal” implied in the root מרה in the sequence מרה מריתי in Lamentations 1,3. If the construction תמר in our verse were related to that root the Torah should have written אל תמרה without the dagesh in the letter מ, just as it did in Joshua I,18 where it does have that meaning and the text reads אל ימרה את פיך, “let no one show disobedience to him,” without the dagesh in the letter מ of the word ימרה. כי שמי בקרבו, whatever the angel commands you to do he does in My name. He does not have permission, however, to forgive anything wrong you do.

For he will not pardon your transgression. Wherever he is sent, he performs his mission but is unable to show favor, as it is written "May the Lord lift up His countenance", and not an angel. For My name is within him, therefore I warn you not to rebel against him as if you were rebelling against Me, since My name is within him and he will not be able to pardon your transgression, for the rebellion depends on Me. An analogy is one who rebels against the word of the treasurer who does not have the power to pardon, for the rebellion depends on the king. Rashi explains that "My name is within him" refers to Metatron whose name is like his Master's name, for Metatron has the same numerical value as Shaddai. And a reminder of this is a computation in אתב"ש coding. And Rabbi Moshe says the reason I state about him that his name is like his Master's name is that his name is spelled out in the Aleph-Beta of Rabbi Akiva, and there it enumerates the 72 names that belong to him.

For if you truly obey his word and do all that I speak, I will be an enemy to your enemies and will oppress those who oppress you.

וצרתי — render this as the Targum does: I will distress.

The grammarians of Spain found [the root] enmity (ayevah) with its yod concealed, as in the form "and I will be an enemy" (ve-ayavti) to your enemies. Likewise "prey of an animal" (tzeid chayah, Lev. 17:13) is paralleled by "hunters" (tzayyadim, Jer. 16:16), and "the cause of the poor they did not plead" is paralleled by "and Hashem will be a judge" (dayyan, 1 Sam. 24:16). Therefore they said: no verb stem has fewer than three letters — hence the form ayevah (enmity) is a root with its middle letter (ayin) concealed.

כי אם שמוע תשמע בקולו...ואיבתי את אויביך, My relationship to you then will not be protective, defensive, i.e. that I need to protect you, but aggressive, by treating your enemies as My enemies. This is the reverse of G’d’s attitude to Nineveh in Jonah 4,11 where G’d asked Jonah: “how can I not relate protectively to a city of over 120.000 people?”

ואיבתי את אויביך, "For I will be an enemy unto your enemies, etc." Perhaps the Torah hints here that by means of busying oneself with Torah and the performance of its commandments G'd will uproot the source of the קליפה, i.e. Satan, as well as the various branches which are constantly active trying to seduce people and thereby to degrade and dishonour the banner of Torah. You are advised to read what I have written in connection with the confrontation between Cain and G'd in Genesis 4,9-15.

כי אם שמוע תשמע, “for if you will carefully obey his instructions, I will be the enemy of your enemies, etc.” A king expects that his subjects will treat his representative as if he himself were present. ואיבתי את אויבך, “I will be an enemy to your enemies;” G-d does not refer here to the Canaanite tribes of whom He says He will annihilate them, as He will give their land to the Israelites, but He speaks of enemies upon whom the Israelites have no designs at all. Elsewhere, the Torah has instructed the Israelites not to leave a single soul alive in the Canaanite cities of the seven tribes mentioned. (Deuteronomy 20,16).

For My angel will go before you and bring you to the Amorites and the Hittites and the Perizzites and the Canaanites, the Hivites and the Jebusites, and I will destroy them.

"For" — He commanded them that when they arrive at the Land they should remove all idolatry. He named six nations, and was not concerned to mention the least among them; for this reason it says "and I will destroy it at once," since the others He would drive out only little by little. Alternatively, "I will destroy it" means each one individually, as in "the daughters of the bough striding over a wall" (Gen. 49:22).

כי ילך מלאכי לפניך, who will not waive any of the sins of your enemies. [the angel, by definition, will not forgive, tolerate insubordination, but this would boomerang on the Jewish people to whom he will not show special favour either. Ed.]

והביאך…והכחדתיו, "and he will bring you there…and I will cut them off." The Torah means that the Jewish people will become the insrument by means of which these nations will be cut off. Please read what I have written on Numbers 14,9 in connection with the words: "their protective shadow has departed from them (while G'd is with us)." The reason is that sanctity will suck up the nutritients (of people who are wicked) so that those lacking sanctity will remain like defeated corpses. This is the mystical dimension of Shabbat 34 "he set his eye on him and the victim turned into a pile of bones." This happened as a result of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai "sucking" up the nutrients of the body of the person who had accused him of declaring cemeteries as ritually pure.

כי ילך, for he will walk, etc.’” והאביאך אל האמורי ואל החתי וגו, “and He will bring you to the Emorite, the Hittite, etc.;” the Torah did not bother to include the smallest of these tribes i.e. the Girgashite.

והביאך אל האמורי והחתי והפריזי והכנעני החוי והיבוסי, “and He will bring you to the Amorite, etc. etc.” The seventh tribe, the Girgashite, was not mentioned here as, according to our tradition recorded in Jerusalem Talmud Sheviit 6,1 that tribe emigrated, nort waiting for a disastrous confrontation with Joshua and the Jewish people. There was therefore no need for the Israelites to campaign against them.

כי ילך, “for he will walk, etc.”

You shall not bow down to their idols, and you shall not serve them, and you shall not act according to their deeds; for you shall utterly demolish them and utterly break down their standing pillars.

הרס תהרסם [BUT] THOU SHALT UTTERLY OVERTHROW THEM — those gods. מצבתיהם THEIR MONUMENTS — stones which they set up (root נצב) before which to prostrate themselves.

THOU SHALT NOT BOW DOWN TO THEIR GODS, NOR SERVE THEM. The Torah has warned against idolatry in many places, and even though there are excessive verses on this subject, the redundancy is not a matter to be concerned about, for because the matter is so stringent — since he who acknowledges the divine nature of the idols, thereby denies the whole Torah — therefore the Torah warns against it again and again, like one who says to his servant: “remember continually and do not forget the great principle which I have commanded you, since everything depends on it.” It is possible that in the Ten Commandments He warned against making an idol and worshipping it, and now He warned that if they find a ready-made idol which is worshipped by the nations in the land, that they should not worship it at all, but they should uproot it from the land. NOR DO AFTER THEIR DEEDS. This may possibly be an admonition against adopting the “ways of the Amorites” [i.e., superstitious practices] which the Sages have enumerated, just as He warned against them in another place, saying, Neither shall ye walk in their statutes, on which the Rabbis commented: “These statutes refer to the ‘ways of the Amorites’ which the Sages have enumerated.” A more all acceptable interpretation is that He is warning here against worshipping an idol in the particular manner in which it is ordinarily worshipped, even if it is a disgraceful act [such as excreting to Baal Peor], just as the Rabbis have interpreted the verse, Take heed… that thou enquire not after their gods, saying: ‘How used these nations to serve their gods? Even so will I do likewise.’ Thus the meaning of the verse here is as follows: He said, [in the Ten Commandments 20:5], Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, “serving” usually being an act of honor that a servant does to his master, and then He said, additionally that even if that act is not one of honor but is disgusting, such as in connection with Baal Peor which one worships by excreting before it, or throwing a stone at Merkulis, nonetheless if that is the customary manner of worshipping them, you may not do such acts at all. Similarly the Rabbis have said: “Even if he intends to worship Peor in this ignominious way, and even if he intends to throw a stone to Merkulis in a contemptible manner [he is still liable].”

"You shall not" — this is what I mentioned: the beginning of the Book of the Covenant, "you yourselves have seen" (20:19), warned against idolatry, and the end of the Book warns against idolatry — for it is the ultimate consequence, "for it will be a snare to you" (v. 33). However there is a difference: at the beginning of the Book He commanded that they not make alongside Hashem gods of silver; but at the end of the Book of the Covenant He commanded them to destroy the idolatry found in the land of Canaan, which was made by its inhabitants — for one who worships idolatry is as though he transgresses all the negative commandments, and no positive commandments in this world or the world to come will avail him.

לא תשתחוה לאלוהיהם, do not do what King Amatziah is reported to have done after he had conquered the land of Se-ir. It is reported in Chronicles II 25,14 that after having defeated the Edomites he installed their deities in Jerusalem bowed to them and offered sacrifices to them. He may have wanted to appease their feelings for having defeated the Edomites.

לא תשתחוה לאלוהיהם, "Do not bow down to their deities, etc." Why did the Torah have to record this prohibition once more when it has already been recorded several times? Seeing that the Torah just forbade even mentioning the name of these deities why was there any need to state once more that one must not bow down to them? Nachmanides writes that the more serious a sin the more frequently the Torah warns us not to commit it. This is not very satisfactory in light of the fact that Nachmanides has himself equated the sin of idol worship as equivalent to a violation of all the commandments of the Torah both with respect to the punishment due, and for the reward due for rejecting such idol worship. Seeing a person who bowed down to idols has already been guilty of violating 613 commandments, what point is there in adding one more commandment for such a person to violate? I believe there are three reasons why the Torah saw fit to write this verse. 1) The Torah warns us not to appear as comparable to the nations of the world in their deeds. Had the Torah not first mentioned that we must not bow down to and worship their deities, it would never have occurred to anyone that kneeling or prostrating oneself on the floor even for a perfectly secular activity would be forbidden. We would have been convinced that the Torah merely forbade a Jew to prostrate himself for idolatrous purposes. Now that the Torah writes: "Do not prostrate yourself and serve their deities" the Torah reveals what had been meant by the words: "do not act as they do." It refers to activities which were intended to be perfectly secular in character if such activities represented a religious rite for the pagans. We are not to wear the kind of garments idol worhipers wear (as a religious symbol) nor are we to sport the kind of haircut which they use in deference to some religious belief of theirs. The Torah here includes a variety of activities listed in Shabbat 67. The second reason why the words we have in verse 24 are necessary is because the Torah informs us that everything the pagans do contains an idolatrous element. G'd knows man's thoughts and the root of everything he does. If a Jew were to perform deeds which are exclusively the domain of the Gentiles he would unconsciously savour the taste of idol worship. The third reason why the Torah has to warn us here again is that G'd does not only want us not to practice any semblance of idol worship but He wants us to uproot its traces wherever and whenever we are able to do so. This is why He had to introduce the commandment to destroy all such deities by first forbidding us to prostrate ourselves in front of them. G'd implies that if a Jew does not prostrate himself in front of an idol but does not destroy it either, he is considered as if he had actually worshiped this idol. G'd is alert to our thinking, and He interprets the reasons for our not destroying such idols as a reluctance to uproot the philosophies symbolised by such de...

לא תשתחוה, “Do not prostrate yourself, etc.” in Exodus 20,5 the Torah had warned the Israelites not to prostrate themselves to their own deities, whereas now it warns them not to do so to the deities of these other nations.

לא תשתחוה לאלוהיהם, “do not prostrate yourselves before their deities.” The warning not to become guilty of any form of idolatry is repeated in the Torah again and again, in spite of the Torah’s refraining from any unnecessary verbiage. This only proves how seriously any form of idolatry is considered by G’d, so much so that He repeats such warnings again and again to impress us with His great concern that we not become victims of such philosophies. The Torah, representing our Master, does what any human master does when he warns a servant repeatedly not to forget some basic task that he has to perform. The human master also does not like to have to repeat himself constantly, but he does so in light of the importance of the message he conveys. Perhaps, in the Ten Commandments G’d issued a general command, but now that the Israelites are liable to come face to face with the idolaters in the land of Canaan, they need especial reminders not only not to copy any of their practices but to completely uproot any residue of such idolatry. ולא תעשו כמעשיהם, “and do not act in accordance with any of their practices.” This is the basic law not to adopt symbols of any gentiles that identify the practitioners as idolaters, even if the practice does not appear to have a religious significance. Generally, these prohibitions are known as not to copy דרכי האמורי, “the customs of the Emorite.” Perhaps the Torah warns here not to copy these religious practices even if in our eyes the practice appears as the very opposite of an act of deference and worship, such as the custom of defecating in front of the “Baal Peor,” a revolting practice, in our eyes.

כי הרס תהרסם, the author discusses the version taharssem or the version tehorssem, as we have it in our versions of the Torah, different, according to him from versions in France extant in his time, but different from the versions circulating in Germany and Spain. The difference in pronunciation derives from if the conjugation is strong (the author calls it with dagesh) or “weak (without such a dagesh) We have similar parallels in Deuteronomy 13,10 where the word tahargenu has a dagesh in the letter ג. Similar differences would also be shabber teshabber. The author argues that the correct vocalisation is the one based on the “strong” conjugation with the dagesh.

And you shall serve before Hashem your God, and He will bless your food and your drink, and I will remove evil diseases from among you.

AND YE SHALL SERVE THE ETERNAL YOUR G-D, AND HE WILL BLESS THY BREAD, AND THY WATER. The intention of this verse is as follows. Most idolators acknowledge and know that the revered G-d is G-d of gods, and Lord of lords, and they do not intend to worship the idols themselves, but they think that because of these acts of worship they will have success in their endeavors. Thus when they worship the sun it is because they have found it to have a beneficial power over their crops, and they find the moon to have influence over fountains and all deep waters, and similarly [they attribute powers] to all the hosts of heaven. They are even more inclined to think that they will be greatly benefitted by worshipping the angels, since they are invested with dignity through ministering before the Great G-d. Therefore this verse states that only through the worship of the Holy One, blessed be He, can you have success and protection, and the uprooting of idolatry will not cause damage; on the contrary, it will add goodness and blessing to you, for the Holy One, blessed be He, will bless your “bread,” this being a term which includes all manner of food, and will bless your “water,” which is a generic term for all liquids that people drink. The blessing referred to means increase, so that you will have an exceeding abundance of them. AND I WILL TAKE SICKNESS AWAY FROM THE MIDST OF THEE. That is to say, through them [the bread and water that I will bless], I will free you from disease, for when your food and drink are good and healthy, they do not cause sicknesses but, on the contrary, heal you. And He states furthermore that there will not be amongst you a woman that miscarries, a miscarrying womb nor one barren of the womb and with dry breasts, for when food and drink and the air are blessed, human bodies become healthy and the organs of reproduction are able to function properly. The verse singles out women because they are liable to miscarriage, and sterility too is more common amongst them than amongst men. It is possible that [male sterility] is included in the expression, and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee, for barrenness is a sickness in bodies. He addresses Himself without specifications to men, and afterwards He mentioned the women, as He said, there shall not be male or female barren among you. The meaning of the expression in thy land, [None shall miscarry, nor be barren, in thy land], is to include also the animals, just as He said there, or amongst your cattle. The number of thy days I will fulfill means that one will not die prematurely in battle, nor through an epidemic caused by a change in the atmosphere, but only at a ripe age, whatever happens to be the normal span of life during that particular generation, such as seventy or eighty years as in the generation of King David. I have already mentioned that these are all miracles, G-d showing wonders in the heavens and in the earth for the sake of those who do His will. And then ...

"And you shall serve" — the meaning is: you shall serve none but Hashem who brought you out of the house of bondage and brought you into the land of the nations who served other gods, who could not save them from your hand. The service of Hashem consists of doing all that He commanded — to love Him and cleave to Him, to swear by His name, to pray to Him, to sacrifice before Him daily and additional offerings, and to honor Him by giving tithes. Behold, his reward is with him, and it consists of four things in this world: First, "He will bless your bread and your water." Second, "and I will remove sickness from your midst." Third, "there shall be no miscarrying nor barren woman in your land." Fourth, "and I will fulfill the number of your days." All of these concern the person's body. Furthermore, the opposite of these blessings He will do to all your enemies — that is, "My terror" and also "the hornet." The author Abraham says: there are great sages, scholars of both Torahs, who have not engaged in natural philosophy, and therefore I could not explain these blessings without mentioning a little of these sciences. Since the human body belongs to the lower world and the higher soul is bound to it, there are intermediaries between the soul and the body; and these are two faculties, which in the holy tongue are mostly called ruach (spirit) and nefesh (soul). The neshamah is intellect and dwells in the brain; from it issues the power of all the senses and the faculty of volitional movement. The ruach is in the heart and it is the life of man; it seeks dominion, to overpower all that stands against it, and it is the seat of anger — as Solomon said, "do not be hasty in your spirit to be angry" (Eccl. 7:9), and "a fool lets out all his spirit" (Prov. 29:11). The nefesh is in the liver and desires food — thus it is written "whenever your soul desires" (Deut. 12:20) — and sexual desire comes from it as well. Some men are made such that all three of these are strong, or all are weak, or one is strong and another weak, or neither strong nor weak — thus human beings differ in some twenty-seven types. The Glorious Hashem gave the Torah to strengthen and uplift and magnify the higher soul (neshamah), so that the body should not rule over it. But if the Torah is not kept, the body overpowers the soul. I will give you a parable: we know from natural philosophy that every man in whom red bile is dominant by constitution will be quick-tempered, since such is the nature of fire, and the red bile resembles it — for the soul pursues the body when it is not wise enough to endure. Consider also a man who has no excess heat in his body; if another comes and mocks and curses him until he becomes angry, he has generated in his body a heat that was not there before his anger. Hashem, may He be exalted, in His gracious mercy has chosen Israel and taught them His Torah; and when they observe it, their wisdom guides them and directs them on a straight path in every matter that will not harm them — in sum, their body becomes subservient to the soul rather than the reverse. When the soul is strengthened, the protective force of the body that a person receives from heaven — called constitution — is also strengthened, and the blessing will be upon all food and drink. For there is a curse that comes to diminish the power of the constitution, as in the manner of "you shall eat and not be satisfied" (Micah 6:14). Now all illnesses come from food that enters the body — and the one who guards the Torah need not fear them. This is the meaning of "He will bless your bread." There are also illnesses that come from outside the body due to changes in the air, following the changes in the configuration of the celestial servants — about this it is written "and I will remove sickness from your midst." Thus the keeper of the Torah has no need of a physician along with Hashem the Glorious; therefore it is written: "yet in his sickness he did not seek Hashem, but the physicians" (2 Chron. 16:12). Having spoken of medical science, I will now speak of astrology. Know that everything that happens to a person from birth follows the configuration of the celestial servants at the moment of his birth and their relationship to one another — the matter is very deep. Now it may be that according to a woman's birth-configuration she will lose her children, since it is the nature of the womb to bring children to term, or she will be barren and not give birth. But if one who is attached to Hashem was born in such a configuration that he should not beget children, Hashem the Glorious — if he is attached to Him — will strengthen the generative force and correct the seed so that he will beget children. This is why Hashem said to Abraham: "I am God Almighty, walk before Me and be wholehearted" (Gen. 17:1). This is what our ancient Sages of blessed memory said: "Abandon your astrology," meaning: if you make a covenant with Me to serve Me, I will multiply you exceedingly, for I will overcome the constitutional nature — and this is not a conquest over the configuration of the stars, for they were not created to benefit or harm the lower world, but always travel in Hashem's service for their own need; and in their motion, the inhabitants of the lower world receive one thing or its opposite through them. If we keep the Torah, we shall not receive the harm. I will speak further about this in the portion of Ki Tissa. The third blessing is that each of them will beget children and their children will not die in their fathers' lifetime.

ועבדתם את ה' אלוקיכם, the manner in which you will demonstrate that you indeed serve Him is by destroying all the idols as mentioned in the previous verse. As a corollary of having destroyed idolatry and its representatives you will not need to worry about anyone in your midst trying to convert Jews to such alien religions and to thereby estrange them from serving Me. וברך את לחמך, so that it will prove nutritious instead of the source of a variety of intestinal ailments. והסירותי מחלה מקרבך, diseases caused by polluted air or climactic conditions.

ועבדתם את ה׳ אלוקיכם, "and you will serve the Lord your G'd, etc." Perhaps we should understand this verse as related directly to what the Torah wrote in 23,24. If Jews are careful to destroy all remnants of the idolatry practiced by the pagans in the Holy Land the result will be that they will serve the Lord with all their hearts and that G'd will bless them and protect them. The Torah writes ואת מימיך, "and your water;" seeing that water is the source of all weakness, carrier of bacteria and origin of most serious diseases, G'd promises that He will ensure that our water will be turned into a source of healthy growth. We all know the importance of מים חיים, i.e. springwater, and man's efforts to reside near the source of such water. For all these reasons G'd's blessing is of such importance here. You may do well to study what the Talmud (Berachot 59) has to say about the quality of the water in the river Euphratus. והסרותי מחלה מקרבך. "And I will remove sickness from your midst." G'd characterised the blessing as composed of three components. 1) Man (the Israelites) will be healthy in order to enjoy G'd's bounty. The Torah speaks about: "I will remove sickness," i.e. G'd will do this as an act of providence. Unless there is physical health and wellbeing all food will become repulsive instead of enjoyable. 2) There will not be a woman who miscarries, i.e. nature will co-operate; 3) people will live out their allotted years. In all these matters G'd demonstrated His blessing; without these conditions G'd's usual gifts, i.e. health, food, etc., His blessings would not be recognisable as true blessings.

וברך את לחמך ואת מימך, “He will bless your bread and your water.” A blessing of a general nature; the term לחם is a synonym for food of any kind, and the term מים for any drinkable liquids. Compare the use of these words in Hoseah 2,7: לחצי ומימי, “my food and drink.” In the same book in chapter 2,11, the prophet speaks of G-d retaliating by taking away from the sinful Israelites: ולקחתי בעתו את דגני ואת תירושי במועדי, “I will deprive them at the appropriate time of My grain (harvest) and My grape (harvest).” If only water had been meant, the prophet should have quoted G-d as saying: “My water.” והסירותי מחלה מקרבך, “I will remove sickness from your midst.” In other words, “you will be healthy;” for what good is food to a sick person who cannot enjoy it?”

ועבדתם את ה' אלוהיכם, “and you will serve the Lord your G’d.” Seeing that the Gentiles believe that if they serve their various deities this in turn will assure them of success in their lives on earth, the Torah added the words: “but you will serve the Lord your G’d” as a contrast at this point. It is simply a reminder that it is not appropriate for the Israelites to serve any other deity which cannot grant them their desires anyway. The Torah adds: “for He blessed your bread and your water.” והסירותי מחלה מקרבך, “and I will remove illness from amongst you.” There are certain sicknesses which result from the intake of certain foods, illnesses not visible on the surface of one’s body. There are other external illnesses which are due to changes in climate, etc. This is why the Torah assures the Jewish people that when they serve the Lord G’d will bless their food and water so that their bodies will be able to resist the sickness which may normally result from the consumption of food and drink containing invisible but harmful ingredients. This means that the righteous person will not have to have recourse to a physician. This is the meaning of Chronicles II 16,12: “but even though he (King Assa) was ill, he did not turn to the Lord but to physicians.” (This was sinful and the reason he was not cured.) The word מחלה, “sickness,” includes such deficiencies as sterility, propensity to not carry out an embryo for its full term, etc. Actually, the verse should have written the word והסיר, “and He will remove (in the third person) instead of והסירותי, “I will remove.” After all the previous reference to G‘d in that verse such as וברך, “and He will bless,” is in the third person. However, the correct interpretation of the whole verse is: “for the Lord will remove all manner of disease from our midst if we serve Him by addressing ourselves to His exclusive attribute, the tetragrammaton” (compare Nachmanides on the end of verse 25).

“And you shall serve the Lord your God, and He will bless your bread.” The verse begins in plural form and concludes in singular form because all of Israel are responsible for one another, and God will not bless the bread of each individual until there are many who serve God, and all the descendants of Jacob serve Him as one. Then the bread of each and every person will be blessed. Some say that the service of God is better when many gather to pray together, for God is mighty and does not despise [read here as God does not despise the many] (Job 36:5). However, regarding matters of eating, it is better when each person eats their bread alone. And since most illnesses come either through foods from the outside, or through the overpowering of one element over another from within, therefore the verse says, And He will bless your bread and your water, and I will remove illness from your midst.

ועבדתם את ה' אלוקיכם, “You shall worship the Lord your G’d.” Nachmanides writes that seeing most of the idolaters are fully aware that the Creator in heaven is the supreme G’d, and they do not pay respects to such forces of nature as for instance the sun, except because they believe that some benefit will accrue to them on account of that, as they think that the sun influences the ripening of the respective crops in their fields, and that G’d has delegated some of His power to the sun for that purpose, the Torah is at pains to remind us that only exclusive dependence of the Creator directly is permissible. We are to realize that by wiping out traces of idolatry in the country this will not only not harm our interest, but, on the contrary will ensure that G’d’s blessing will be even more bountiful. This is why the Torah adds that our bread and our water will receive its blessing directly from Hashem, without recourse to any intermediary. והסירותי מחלה מקרבך, “I will remove disease from your midst.” This is a promise that the food and drink grown or taken from existing sources will not be contaminated and will be healthy.

והסירותי מחלה, diseases caused by drinking polluted waters as I explained in connection with Marah (Exodus 15,25-26).

There shall be no bereaved or barren woman in your land; the number of your days I will make full.

לא תהיה משכלה THERE SHALL NOTHING BE BEREAVED OF YOUNG, if you will act according to My will. משכלה BEREAVED OF YOUNG — A woman who miscarries or who buries her children at a very early age is called משכלה.

The word "barren" (aqarah) includes a man's wife and his animals. The fourth blessing is that he himself shall also live many years. Now we know that every person has an allotted span and a known time that he can live, according to the abundance of his innate heat and innate moisture — not alien fire and foreign moisture, which are contrary to the constitution. One who cleaves to Hashem will strengthen the heat and moisture through the power of the soul (neshamah), and then the person will live beyond the allotted span — as it is written: "the fear of Hashem adds days, but the years of the wicked will be shortened" (Prov. 10:27), and it is written: "in the middle of his days he will leave it" (Jer. 17:11), and it is written: "for Hashem may strike him, or his day may come" (1 Sam. 26:10). One who dies in battle or by plague does not die on his own day in the allotted span set by his innate heat and moisture — for the causes came to him from outside. But Hashem, if one cleaves to Him, will save him from all of them. The Torah also says: "lest he die in battle" (Deut. 20:5). Solomon said: "why should you die before your time?" (Eccl. 7:17). This is not contrary to the science of astrology, for the astrological fate depends on many factors, as I will explain in the portion of "and we shall be distinguished" (Ex. 33:16). Therefore it is written: "Behold, I will add to your days" (Isa. 38:5). What need have I to say more on the matter?

לא תהיה משכלה ועקרה, so that you will have an opportunity to teach the children that have been born to you. את מספר ימיך אמלא, so that you will live as a result of the heavenly oil in the lamp of G’d. [the physical phenomenon perceived as sustaining life once it exists is a certain inherent source of moisture, described as celestial oil, as oil does not dry up on its own. Usually, life is cut short due to diseases caused by external causes which are not due to this vital oil having become depleted. When a person is granted a lifespan not cut short by disease caused by external causes, he will usually live long enough to pass on his aims in life to his children. This is the meaning of Deuteronomy 4,9 והודעתם לבניך ולבני בניך, “you will make them known to your children and to your grandchildren.” A prominent example of such a blessing was the fact that Levi lived long enough to pass on his heritage to Kehot, his son, and Amram his grandson. They each became leaders of their generation.

את מספר ימיך אמלא, “I will let you enjoy the full number of days of your lives.” You will die at a ripe old age, ready to do so as was described at the death of Avraham and Yitzchok [Genesis 25,8 and Genesis 35,29. Ed.] Concerning the lifetime of the wicked, Solomon quotes G-d as saying: ושנות רשעים תקצורנה, “but the years of the wicked will be shortened;” (Proverbs 10,27).

לא תהיה משכלה, ”there will not be a woman who prematurely loses her fetus.” Seeing that the water and other drinks will be healthy thanks to G’d’s blessing, the bodies of the people will be healthy, and the organs responsible for reproduction will be able to carry out their function without hindrance. The reason why the Torah singles out the female population for this promise is that premature abortions occur with women, while a dysfunction of impregnating a woman with healthy sperm occurs generally with men, hence if a woman is barren this may not be her dysfunction but her husband’s, although the visible effect is the fact that she does not bear children. It is also possible that premature death of a fetus is a disease, one that originated with the male sperm, so that the promise of לא תהיה משכלה may actually be addressed to the man who will not suffer disease, מחלה, whereas the promise that there will not be an עקרה is addressed to the mothers to be. בארצך, “in your land.” This includes the livestock. את מספר ימיך אמלא, “I will fill the number of your days.” You will not die in war, through disease, through adverse climactic effects, but you will live out your years as envisaged at the time of your birth. These promises require supernatural intervention by G’d in your lives, i.e. miracles. G’d will perform these miracles on behalf of people who have made a point of living according to G’d’s revealed wishes. G’d adds that just as He will make plain that we are the beneficiaries of His goodwill, so will He make it plain that the sinners, i.e. His and our enemies, will become the victims of His wrath. They will be afflicted with a number of natural disasters, such as invasions of crop destroying insects, etc. These poisonous insects will even drive out the population of part of the land of Canaan in advance of your arrival there. The tribes mentioned are only representative of all the Canaanite tribes. Quite possibly, under ideal circumstances, there might not even be many Canaanite tribes left to make war against, after these plagues had afflicted them. According to Ibn Ezra the צרעה mentioned here is a disease afflicting the body, not an insect infesting the grain. The word would be related to the dreaded skin disease צרעת.

לא תהיה משכלה, even when the baby has gown up it will not die in adolescence, but, את מספר ימיך אמלא, they will all reach ripe old age.

My terror I will send before you, and I will confound all the people against whom you come to do battle, and I will deliver all your enemies before you, turning their backs to you.

והמתי I WILL CONFOUND — This is equivalent to וְהָמַמְתִּי (i. e. the root is המם). Its rendering in the Targum is ואשנש “and I will confound”. Similar is every verb the root of which has its last letter doubled (verbs ע"ע): when it is changed (conjugated) to express the idea of “I have done something” (i. e. the first person singular perfect of the Kal; the same really applies to some inflected forms of other conjugations also) there are occasions when one omits the doubled letter (it is actually the first of the two similar letters) and dageshes the remaining letter of these two and vowels it with מלאפום (our חולם). Examples are: וְהַמֹּתִי which is of the same derivation as, (Isaiah 28:28) “and the wheel of his cart makes a confused noise (המם)”; (Ecclesiastes 2:20) וְסַבֹּתִי, “and I turned about” which is of the same derivation as, (I Samuel 7:16) “and he went round (וסבב) to Bethel”; (Psalms 116:6) דַלֹּתִי “I was low”, of the same derivation as, (Isaiah 19:6) “The waters shall become low (דללו) and dried up”; (Isaiah 49:16) “I have graven thee (חַקֹּתִיךְ) upon the palms of my hand”, of the same derivation as, (Judges 5:15) “things engraved (חקקי) in the heart”; (I Samuel 12:3) את מי רַצֹּתִי “whom have I crushed”, of the same derivation as, (Job 20:19) “because he hath crushed (רצץ) and hath forsaken the poor”. He, however, who translates it in the Targum by וְאֶקְטַל , is in error. For if it were derived from the root denoting death (מות), the ה in it would not be vowelled with Patach and its מ would not be dageshed nor vowelled with חולם, but it would read וְהַמַתִּי, as, (Numbers 14:15) “Now if Thou shalt kill (וְהַמַתָּ) this people”, the ת being dageshed because it would come in place of two ת’s, one being a root-letter — for no form of מות can be written without at least one ת (that in the root) — and the other being a servile letter (part of the suffix), just as תִּי in אמר-תי and חמא-תי and עשי-תי. Similarly with נתתי: the second ת is dageshed because it comes in the place of two ת’s — since it (the word) really requires three ת’s, two for the root, as in, (Joshua 10:12) “the day when the Lord giveth (תת)”, and in, (Ecclesiastes 3:13) “it is the gift (מתת) of God”, — and the third as a servile letter. ערף NAPE OF THE NECK — i. e. they will flee before you and so turn the napes of their necks to you.

"My terror" — this is dread in the soul, and from it comes immediate weakness in the body. This is the meaning of "I will set all your enemies with their necks turned to you" — that they will show you their backs, meaning they will flee from before you when they see you.

ונתתי את כל אויביך אליך עורף, they will turn their backs to you out of fear and the confusion in accordance with My promise את אימתי אשלח לפניך והמותי, the same had happened when the Egyptians were at the bottom of the sea bed when the waves began crashing down on them, and they said” I will flee from the Israelites for G’d is fighting for them.” (Exodus 14,25)

את אימתי אשלח לפניך, "I will send My terror before you, etc." Even though G'd had said in verse 23 that He would cut off the inhabitants of the land of Canaan, G'd tells the Israelites here that this would not happen immediately but that He would first terrorise the Canaanite population during the time required for the Israelites to increase in numbers sufficiently to take over the country without leaving large areas empty of human beings. G'd hinted here that the conquest of the land of Canaan would proceed gradually, something spelled out in greater detail in verse 29.

את אימתי, “the fear of Me;” this is G-d’s reply to Moses’ request in Exodus 15,16: תפול עליהם אימתה ופחד, “may fear and terror befall them!”כל העם אשר תבא בהם, “any nation that you will come upon;” even those nations that are not part of the seven Canaanite tribes. The end of this paragraph proves that this is the correct meaning, when the Torah writes about the nations other than the Canaanites (verse 33) “they must not live on your land lest they lead you into sin so that you would worship their deities”, while about the seven Canaanite tribes it writes “you shall not permit any person to live (Deuteronomy 20.16).”

את אימתי, “the fear of Me, etc.” This is the attribute of Justice. The word is the same as in Exodus 15,16 תפול עליהם אימתה ופחד, “may fear and terror befall them.” The צרעה which verse 28 speaks of is a kind of flying insect similar but bigger than a bee. The term צרעה includes many species of a similar type all of which sting people. Just as there were many different kinds of locust during the plague of locust in Egypt, so there are many different kinds of צרעה. The Talmud Sotah 36 claims that this insect injected its poison into the Canaanites who became its victim, blinding them and killing them almost instantly. This insect entered the Holy Land together with Joshua, crossed the Jordan as is reported in Joshua 24,12: “I sent a plague ahead of you.” The reason that in verse 28 only three of the Canaanite tribes are mentioned as being driven out by this צרעה is that these three tribes were the strongest ones amongst the seven tribes residing in tall fortresses and fortified towns. The Torah wanted to inform us that such mighty warriors in such protected habitats became the victims of such tiny creatures as the hornets. It is an object lesson for us demonstrating that G’d will bring down the strong by using the weakest of His creatures as His agent.

את אימתי, the fear of the Lord will take hold of those engaged in fighting you. והמותי, I will cause these people to become utterly confused by the overpowering noises they will hear which I cause. Such effects of sounds orchestrated by celestial forces are reported in Samuel I 7,10 as well as in Samuel II 22,15. The word is not related to מות, death; if it would mean “I will kill,” it would have to be vocalised differently, i.e veheymatti.”

And I will send the hornets before you, and they will drive out the Hivites, the Canaanites, and the Hittites from before you.

הצרעה THE HORNETS — This is a kind of insect which wounded their eyes and injected poison in them, so that they died. The hornets did not cross the Jordan and the Hittite and the Canaanite whom Scripture mentions here as being driven out by them were the inhabitants of the land of Sichon and Og (on the east side of the Jordan). It is for this reason that Scripture enumerates here of all the seven nations that Israel fought against when entering Palestine only these two (cf. Joshua 24:12, where the text expressly states that the peoples driven out by the hornets were those of שני מלכי האמרי, “of the two kings of the Amorites” who are identical with Sihon and Og). But the Hivites lived on the other bank of the Jordan and somewhat beyond it and yet it states here that the hornets would drive them out! They were indeed driven out by the hornets, for our Rabbis have explained in Treatise Sotah 36a that the hornets placed themselves on the east bank of the Jordan and from there cast the poison against them.

"And I will send the hornet" — a blow to the body, from the same root as tzara'at (skin disease), which weakens the strength of the body. He mentioned three of the seven nations, but the same applies to all of them; and it may also be that this affliction was more severe upon those mentioned than upon the others.

ושלחתי את הצרעה, “I will dispatch the hornets, etc.; according to Rashi, this is a category of stinging wasp which never crossed the river Jordan. Concerning what is written in the Talmud Sotah folio 36, that we read here that G-d will drive out the hornets from the land of the Chivi and the Canaanite, who lives on the West bank of the Jordan, so that they must first have been there or how else could be driven out from there?, The Talmud suggests two different solutions to this apparent contradiction; one that there were two different types of hornets, one in Moses’ time, another in Joshua’s time; (Joshua 24,12). one scholar in the Talmud claims that when the Israelites were on the east bank of the river Jordan ready to cross, the Lord caused the hornets on the other side to become frightened and to leave. Alternately, the entire verse is a simile telling the Jewish people that they will not have to expel the local inhabitants by fighting them with the sword, but that G-d will see to it that they need not worry about sustaining casualties when trying to conquer these lands.

I will not drive them out from before you in a single year, lest the land become desolate and the wild animals of the field multiply against you.

שממה DESOLATE — empty of human beings, for you are but few and not sufficient to fill it all up. ורבה עליך means, [LEST THE ANIMALS OF THE FIELD] MULTIPLY AGAINST THEE.

"Not" — the Gaon said this is a sign: that when you see that you have been fruitful and multiplied, then all seven nations will be cut off. But there is no need for this interpretation, for the reason is stated: why He would not drive them out in a single year — namely, lest the land become desolate, for the Land of Israel is very vast and those who went out of Egypt would not be able to settle all of it. This is comparable to "lest it become sacred" (Deut. 22:9).

I will not expel them before thee in one year, lest the land become a wilderness, and the beasts of the field multiply upon thee, when they come to eat their carcasses, and injure thee.

Little by little I will drive them out from before you, until you increase and take possession of the land.

עד אשר תפרה UNTIL THOU BE FRUITFUL — i. e. until you become many. תפרה is of the same root and meaning as no fruit, as, (Genesis 1:28) פרו ורבו “be fruitful and multiply”.

"Little by little" — until you are fruitful and able to inhabit the entire land. And now he explains the length and breadth of the land.

מעט מעט אגרשנו מפניך, “little by little will I drive them out before you.” The meaning of the verse is that the hornet will drive these people out due to the power of the attribute of Justice so that they will constantly decrease in numbers (in contrast with you who will steadily increase in numbers). This process will continue until you can take possession of the whole country.

And I will set your border from the Sea of Reeds to the Sea of the Philistines, and from the wilderness to the Euphrates; for I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hands, and you shall drive them out from before you.

ושתי is of the root שית or שות. The ת is dageshed, because it comes in place of two ת’s (ושת-תי) — one is necessary because no grammatical form of שות can be without the ת of the root, and the other is a servile letter (part of the suffix). עד הנהר UNTO THE RIVER — the Euphrates. וגרשתמו means AND THOU SHALT DRIVE THEM OUT.

"I will set your boundary" — as in "and he shall have dominion from sea to sea and from the river to the ends of the earth" (Ps. 72:8). The river is the Euphrates.

כי אתן בידכם את יושבי הארץ וגרשתמו, the matter is delivered into your hands, i.e. you have to carry it out. You must not display undue tardiness, laziness. We read in Joshua 18,3 that Joshua was complaining to his people about their being deliberately slow in carrying out the task of disposing of all the Canaanites. (“how long are you going to be dragging your feet to take possession of the land which the G’d of your fathers has given to you?” Joshua speaking to the people at a time when 7 tribes had not yet received portions of the land.).

ושתי את גבולך מים סוף ועד ים פלשתים, “I will set your boundaries from the Sea of Reeds until the Sea of thePhilistines.” The “Sea of Reeds” is the eastern boundary and the “Sea of the Philistines, is the western boundary. This has also been expressed differently in Isaiah 9,11: as ארם מקדם ופלשתים מאחור “Aram in the front and the Philistines in the rear.” וממדבר, “and from the desert;” this refers to the desert in the south which the Israelites were crossing for 40 years. ועד הנהר, and as far north as the river Euphrates. Some commentators say that what is written from verse 10 in our chapter i.e. שש שנים תזרע until verse 33 כי יהיה לך למוקש, “for it will become a snare for you,” has been added after Moses had returned from the Mountain the third time when G-d had forgiven the Jewish people for the sin of the golden calf, whereas what has been written in Parshat Ki Tissa: “here My angel will walk ahead of you,” all the way until verse 26,in chapter 34: “do not boil a kid in its mother’s milk” had been written at the end of Moses’ stay on Mount Sinai during the first 40 days. Whereas what has been written here is because Moses wished to conclude the subject with the legislation of the sh’mittah year and the pilgrimage festivals, followed by the injunction not to boil a kid in its mother’s milk, followed by the passage about the angel and the arrival in the Holy land. This is parallel to what he had done at the end of the first 40 days. From here on the paragraphs follow a haphazard pattern.

מים סוף ועד ים פלשתים, “from the Sea of Reeds as far as the Sea of the Philistines.” The Sea of Reeds is in the South and the Sea of the Philistines is in the West (Mediterranean). We know this also from Joshua 1,4: “as far as the great Sea where the sun sets will be your borders.” The sea described as the “great Sea” is not the ocean (Atlantic or Indian ocean) as the ocean surrounds all land masses. The words וממדבר refer to the eastern side whereas the words עד הנהר refer to the river Euphrates in the north.

ושתי, as if the Torah had written ושתתי (from the root שים, “to set, place.”) Similar constructions are found from the root כרת as וכרתי ברית, “I established a covenant” (Psalms 89,4) where the word כרתי is used instead of כרתתי. מים סוף, which is located at the beginning of the eastern boundaries of the land of Israel as we can prove from Deuteronomy 1,1. ועד ים פלשתים, which is situated on the western side as we know from Isaiah 9,11 ופלשתים מאחור “and the Philistines from behind.” וממדבר, seeing that the Israelites were marching from the south. עד הנהר, the river Euphrates in the north. Compare Jeremiah 1,14 מצפון תפתח הרעה, “disaster will break loose from the north.” Babylon is to the north of the land of Israel.

You shall not make a covenant with them nor with their idols.

THOU SHALT MAKE NO COVENANT WITH THEM, NOR WITH THEIR GODS. He warned here against making a covenant with them [the seven nations] to save them and keep them alive; nor with their gods, this being a warning against making a covenant with the nations to leave them their idols, but instead we are to destroy them and break their pillars in pieces. It is possible that the verse is stating that we are not to make a covenant with them and their gods together, but we are to destroy them and break their idols in pieces, and the intention is to state that as long as they worship their gods we are not to make any covenant with them, but if they accepted upon themselves not to worship the idols, we may leave them unharmed.

"In any case" — you shall not make a covenant with them. "Nor to their gods" — meaning you shall destroy them.

לא תכרות להם..ברית, "Do not enter into a covenant with them and their deities." Why does the Torah have to prohibit such covenants since G'd had already commanded the Jewish people (verse 24) to destroy these people? Besides, what would be the purpose of concluding a covenant with the deities rather than the people? Actually, we must understand the verse as teaching us that the entire prohibition of concluding treaties with the Gentile nations is applicable only as long as the Gentile nations still adhere to their deities. Once they have denied their former deities this prohibition becomes void. This is why the Torah linked the prohibition by the words להם ולאלוהיהם, "with them and their deities." The wording of the prohibition also indicates that G'd views anyone who enters into a covenant with an idol worshiper as if he had made a covenant with idolatry. There are two reasons for this. 1) In the end the Jew will stumble and become guilty of idol worship as a result of obligations he took upon himself; the Torah spells this out in verse 33: "lest they will cause you to sin." 2) The second consideration is that the clothing worn by pagans reflects and symbolises their deities. When making a covenant with such people it appears as if one makes the covenant with their beliefs, G'd forbid. It is not sufficient that one had intended to conclude the deal only with the person and not with his beliefs. If the Torah had been content with that, the wording would have been: לא תכרות להם ברית ולאלוהיהם instead of the word ולאלוהיהם appearing before the word ברית, covenant. The mention of the word "covenant" at the end of the verse confirms our opinion that the prohibition is valid only when the Gentiles still recognise these deities. It is perfectly permissible to conclude a covenant with an atheist, for instance. This is why the covenant with the Gibeonites was perfectly admissible. If the Israelites subsequently felt cheated and had remorse about that covenant this is explained by the Jerusalem Talmud Shevi-it chapter 6. The Gibeonites originally were in a position of rebels against the Israelites and were guilty of death under the directive: "do not allow anyone to survive" (Deut. 20,16).

לא תכרות להם ולאלוהיהם ברית, “You must not enter into any covenant with them or their deities.” The plain meaning is that the inhabitants will not be promised that their lives will be spared if they surrender, and there will be no understanding that the Israelites will accept any part of their religious practices. Nachmanides writes that one could also interpret the Torah as meaning that no agreement of any kind with the local inhabitants must include retaining any of their religious practices. In other words, as long as the local inhabitants have not completely abandoned their idolatrous practices. In the event that the inhabitants convert to Judaism they may be allowed to survive.

They shall not dwell in your land, lest they cause you to sin before Me; for if you serve their idols, they will be a snare to you.

כי תעבד וגו׳ FOR IF THOU SERVE etc. — Both particles כי in this verse have the meaning of אשר “that”. It has this meaning in several passages. This is really the sense of the Aramaic word אי (Hebrew אם) which itself is one of the four meanings in which כי is used (cf. Gittin 90a. where the four usages of כי are given). In fact we find אם (אי) used in many passages in the sense of אשר, e. g., (Leviticus 2:14) ואם תקריב where it certainly should not be translated “if” — but ”when thou offer an offering of thy first-fruits”, for this offering is not optional but is obligatory (cf. Rashi on that verse).

KI’ (FOR) THOU WILT SERVE THEIR GODS, ‘KI’ (FOR) THEY WILL BE A SNARE UNTO THEE. “Both words ki here have the meaning of asher (that), and we find this in many places. This is the meaning of the [Aramaic word] ie which is one of the four usages of the word ki as we find in many places, and this [Aramaic word ie is the Hebrew] im which in many verses has the meaning of asher (that), etc.” Thus far is Rashi’s language. But it is not so. Instead, the meaning of the verse is: “They shall not dwell in thy land for they will be a snare unto thee lest they make thee sin against Me, for you will serve their gods.” Similarly He said, Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest, lest they be a snare in the midst of thee. The meaning of this verse is that their dwelling in your land will be a snare unto you and a source of stumbling, lest they make you sin against Me through their evil ways and their corrupt doings, for you will serve their gods when they will persuade and beguile you to do so.

"They shall not dwell in your land" — when you are fruitful, you shall destroy and exterminate all seven nations. Here ends the Book of the Covenant.

לא ישבו בארצך. In the area which you have conquered and take up residence in. Unfortunately, the Israelites ignored this warning of the Torah as we know from Judges 1,29 וישב הכנעני בקרבו בגזר, as well as Judges 1,33 וישב בקרב הכנעני יושבי הארץ, [the Israelites lived in mixed communities, in some they were the majority, in others even only the minority. Ed.] כי יהיה לך למוקש, their very presence as inhabitants in that land will become a snare for you, i.e. you will begin to worship their deities.

פן יחטיאו אתך לי, "lest they make you sin against Me." The Torah reveals here that imperfection by the Jewish people impacts on the Creator. The logic is as follows: Seeing that the Israelites represent a certain amount of sanctity, they diminish that level of sanctity if they worship idols. Diminishing the amount of sanctity weakens the Israelites' ties with their holy roots, i.e. it impacts on the root of sanctity, i.e. G'd Himself. כי יהיה לך למוקש, "for it will become a snare for you." The Torah explains why there is a suspicion that the Israelites could ever agree to trade their honour for such useless forms of religion as these Canaanite deities. G'd explains that it is in the nature of idols to mislead those who worship them into being trapped by them. Our sages in Avodah Zarah 55 explain that there are religions (oracles) which reveal the future to their adherents and which inform them about hidden treasures. G'd was afraid that Jews too would fall victim to such enticements as obtaining knowledge of the future by means of worshiping such oracles.