וַיִּשְׁלַ֨ח הַמֶּ֜לֶךְ וַיִּקְרָ֣א לְשִׁמְעִ֗י וַיֹּ֨אמֶר אֵלָ֜יו הֲל֧וֹא הִשְׁבַּעְתִּ֣יךָ בַֽיהוָ֗ה וָאָעִ֤ד בְּךָ֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר בְּי֣וֹם צֵאתְךָ֗ וְהָֽלַכְתָּ֙ אָ֣נֶה וָאָ֔נָה יָדֹ֥עַ תֵּדַ֖ע כִּ֣י מ֣וֹת תָּמ֑וּת וַתֹּ֧אמֶר אֵלַ֛י ט֥וֹב הַדָּבָ֖ר שָׁמָֽעְתִּי׃
Le roi envoya appeler Séméi et lui dit: "Ne t’avais-je pas adjuré par l’Éternel et averti solennellement en disant: Le jour où tu sortiras de la ville et t’en iras d’un côté ou de l’autre, sache que tu encours la mort; et ne m’as-tu pas répondu: C’est bien, j’ai compris?
Rabbeinu Bahya
We have observed an example of the punishment which accrued to the Jewish people who had sworn an oath in public in the matter of פלגש בגבעה, (Judges 20,9) not to go home until they had punished the men of Givah for their vicious rape. This oath was a public declaration in the presence of Pinchas the High Priest (20,28). We find there that the people of Yavesh Gilead who had not participated in the punitive expedition against the people of Benjamin were killed, men, women and children because they had dishonoured their publicly given oath (Judges 21,10).This was a harsher punishment than is applied to people who desecrate the Sabbath. Another instance where the severity of not complying with a public oath is demonstrated was the edict of King Saul that no one was to taste any food until after the battle against the Philistines (Samuel I 14,24). Yonatan, King Saul’s eldest son, who had been unaware of his father’s decree and the public oath accepting it, had tasted a little honey in all innocence. In spite of Yonatan’s not having heard the prohibition the King was going to execute him had not the people intervened. (verses 44-45). At any rate, we learn from there that when someone deliberately violates his oath, (or an oath that he had agreed to though not initiated, he is subject to the death penalty.
I can show you that the Torah has compared the severity of violating an oath to the sin of adultery The Torah writes here in connection with swearing a false or unnecessary oath that G’d will never totally forgive a person guilty of this. You will also find the expression לא ינקה in Proverbs 6,29 where Solomon applies it to someone who indulges in sexual intercourse with someone else’s wife. We find that G’d punished the entire nation by a famine because King Saul had failed to honor an oath sworn to the Gibeonites by the leaders of the Jewish people under the rule of Joshua. G’d told David in Samuel II 21,1 that the famine was the punishment for Saul having killed some Gibeonites in contravention of an holy oath sworn to them at the time of Joshua. Only after this gross injustice had been wiped out by David handing over seven descendants of Saul did G’d again turn to His people with goodwill. (Samuel II 21,14).
Another tragedy involving non-compliance with an oath was the killing of Shimi ben Geyrah who had been sworn by Solomon on pain of death not to leave Jerusalem where he had been under house arrest since the death of David. Kings I 2,42 makes it clear that Solomon executed him for violating this oath. It is noteworthy that in all the Ten Commandments we find a specific reward promised for compliance only in connection with the commandment to honour father and mother, whereas a specific punishment is reserved for violation of the commandment not to worship idols and not to swear an unnecessary oath.
Many people think that the sin of murder and adultery are far worse than the sin of swearing a needless oath and they wonder why the Torah has reserved its condemnation for the sin of swearing an unnecessary oath rather than for committing murder or adultery. The answer is simple. Murder and adultery are the kinds of sins which cannot be committed all the time. One needs a special opportunity in order not to be caught; in the case of adultery one also needs a willing partner. Not only that; having murdered one person whom one hates is unlikely to lead to the same person again murdering other people against whom he harbors no ill will. Similarly, it is unlikely that someone wants to commit adultery again and again with different women as his libido may not have been aroused by them. Committing the sin of swearing unnecessary oaths, however, does not satisfy one’s evil urge and is not subject to special opportunities but is likely to become a way of life with a person who has indulged in that sin without being caught. The very fact that he who commits this sin generally does not even get a feeling of special satisfaction from doing it makes it such a dangerous sin, one which is liable to become a norm rather than the exception. This is why the Torah reserved the warning that G’d will never completely forgive someone who knowingly commits this sin. If Israel were guilty of no other sin than indulging in such oaths this would be enough to add years to our collective exile. Thus far the words of Ibn Ezra on this subject.
I can show you that the Torah has compared the severity of violating an oath to the sin of adultery The Torah writes here in connection with swearing a false or unnecessary oath that G’d will never totally forgive a person guilty of this. You will also find the expression לא ינקה in Proverbs 6,29 where Solomon applies it to someone who indulges in sexual intercourse with someone else’s wife. We find that G’d punished the entire nation by a famine because King Saul had failed to honor an oath sworn to the Gibeonites by the leaders of the Jewish people under the rule of Joshua. G’d told David in Samuel II 21,1 that the famine was the punishment for Saul having killed some Gibeonites in contravention of an holy oath sworn to them at the time of Joshua. Only after this gross injustice had been wiped out by David handing over seven descendants of Saul did G’d again turn to His people with goodwill. (Samuel II 21,14).
Another tragedy involving non-compliance with an oath was the killing of Shimi ben Geyrah who had been sworn by Solomon on pain of death not to leave Jerusalem where he had been under house arrest since the death of David. Kings I 2,42 makes it clear that Solomon executed him for violating this oath. It is noteworthy that in all the Ten Commandments we find a specific reward promised for compliance only in connection with the commandment to honour father and mother, whereas a specific punishment is reserved for violation of the commandment not to worship idols and not to swear an unnecessary oath.
Many people think that the sin of murder and adultery are far worse than the sin of swearing a needless oath and they wonder why the Torah has reserved its condemnation for the sin of swearing an unnecessary oath rather than for committing murder or adultery. The answer is simple. Murder and adultery are the kinds of sins which cannot be committed all the time. One needs a special opportunity in order not to be caught; in the case of adultery one also needs a willing partner. Not only that; having murdered one person whom one hates is unlikely to lead to the same person again murdering other people against whom he harbors no ill will. Similarly, it is unlikely that someone wants to commit adultery again and again with different women as his libido may not have been aroused by them. Committing the sin of swearing unnecessary oaths, however, does not satisfy one’s evil urge and is not subject to special opportunities but is likely to become a way of life with a person who has indulged in that sin without being caught. The very fact that he who commits this sin generally does not even get a feeling of special satisfaction from doing it makes it such a dangerous sin, one which is liable to become a norm rather than the exception. This is why the Torah reserved the warning that G’d will never completely forgive someone who knowingly commits this sin. If Israel were guilty of no other sin than indulging in such oaths this would be enough to add years to our collective exile. Thus far the words of Ibn Ezra on this subject.
Ramban
THOU SHALT NOT EAT OF IT. He admonishes him against eating the fruit, for the tree itself is not edible. And so it says further on: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden.328Genesis 3:3. Similarly, And eat ye every one of his vine, and every one of his fig tree348II Kings 18:31. [means “of the fruit of his vine and of the fruit of his fig-tree].” Likewise, In toil shalt thou eat it349Genesis 3:17. means “eat its fruit.”
Ramban
IN THE DAY THOU EATEST THEREOF THOU SHALT SURELY DIE. At the time you eat of it, you will be condemned to die. Similarly, we find: On the day thou goest out, and walkest abroad any whither, thou shalt surely die.350I Kings 2:42. Said by Solomon to Shimi, that on the day he goes outside of the limits of Jerusalem he shall surely die. This does not mean that he [Shimi] is to die immediately on that day; nor does it refer to his mere knowledge thereof, namely that he is to know that he will die eventually for all the living know that they shall die.351Ecclesiastes 9:5. But it does mean that at the time he [Shimi] goes forth from Jerusalem, he is liable to death at the hand of the king, and he will slay him when he pleases. [Similarly, in the verses:] But they shall not go in to see the holy things as they are being covered, lest they die;352Numbers 4:20. And they shall not bear sin for it, and die thereby.353Leviticus 22:9. Their intent is [not that those who transgress against these prohibitions will die immediately], but only that they will be liable to death and will die on account of this sin of theirs.
Now in the opinion of men versed in the sciences of nature, man was destined to die from the beginning of his formation, on account of his being a composite [of the four elements, and everything that is composite must revert to its original components]. But now He decreed that if he will sin he will die on account of his sin, like those who are liable to death at the hands of Heaven for such sins as a non-priest eating the Heave-offering, or a priest who has drunk wine or who does not wear the [required number of priestly] garments when performing the Service in the Sanctuary, and other cases. There the intent is that they will die prematurely on account of their sin. This is why in stating the punishment [after Adam ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge] He said, Till thou return to the ground; for out of it wast thou taken; for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return,354Genesis 3:19. by your nature. In the beginning before he sinned, Adam also ate of the fruit of the tree and of the seeds of the earth; and if so, there was bound to be depletion in his body, and he was subject to the cause of existence and destruction. [Thus the opinion of the men of science.]
But in the opinion of our Rabbis,355Shabbath 58b. if Adam had not sinned he would have never died, since the higher soul bestows life forever, and the Will of G-d which is in him at the time of his formation would always cleave to him and he would exist forever, as I have explained in the verse, And G-d saw that it was good.356Above, 1:10.
Know that composition indicates destruction only in the opinion of those wanting in faith, who hold that creation came by necessity. But in the opinion of men of faith who say that the world was created by the simple Will of G-d, its existence will also continue forever as long as it is His desire. This is clear truth. That being so, In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die means that then you will be condemned to die since you will no longer exist forever by My Will. And the matter of eating [from the other trees] was to Adam at first only a source of enjoyment.357Ramban is aiming to answer the question: If Adam was destined at first to exist forever on account of his superior soul, what purpose did his eating serve? Ramban answers that, according to this theory, he ate not out of necessity but for enjoyment. And it is possible that the fruits of the garden of Eden were absorbed in his limbs as the Manna, and they sustain those that eat them. But when He decreed upon him, And thou shalt eat the herb of the field358Genesis 3:18. and with the sweat of his face he shall eat bread of the earth,359Ibid., Verse 19. this [the food] became a cause for decomposition since he is dust, and dust he eats, and unto dust he shall return.
Now in the opinion of men versed in the sciences of nature, man was destined to die from the beginning of his formation, on account of his being a composite [of the four elements, and everything that is composite must revert to its original components]. But now He decreed that if he will sin he will die on account of his sin, like those who are liable to death at the hands of Heaven for such sins as a non-priest eating the Heave-offering, or a priest who has drunk wine or who does not wear the [required number of priestly] garments when performing the Service in the Sanctuary, and other cases. There the intent is that they will die prematurely on account of their sin. This is why in stating the punishment [after Adam ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge] He said, Till thou return to the ground; for out of it wast thou taken; for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return,354Genesis 3:19. by your nature. In the beginning before he sinned, Adam also ate of the fruit of the tree and of the seeds of the earth; and if so, there was bound to be depletion in his body, and he was subject to the cause of existence and destruction. [Thus the opinion of the men of science.]
But in the opinion of our Rabbis,355Shabbath 58b. if Adam had not sinned he would have never died, since the higher soul bestows life forever, and the Will of G-d which is in him at the time of his formation would always cleave to him and he would exist forever, as I have explained in the verse, And G-d saw that it was good.356Above, 1:10.
Know that composition indicates destruction only in the opinion of those wanting in faith, who hold that creation came by necessity. But in the opinion of men of faith who say that the world was created by the simple Will of G-d, its existence will also continue forever as long as it is His desire. This is clear truth. That being so, In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die means that then you will be condemned to die since you will no longer exist forever by My Will. And the matter of eating [from the other trees] was to Adam at first only a source of enjoyment.357Ramban is aiming to answer the question: If Adam was destined at first to exist forever on account of his superior soul, what purpose did his eating serve? Ramban answers that, according to this theory, he ate not out of necessity but for enjoyment. And it is possible that the fruits of the garden of Eden were absorbed in his limbs as the Manna, and they sustain those that eat them. But when He decreed upon him, And thou shalt eat the herb of the field358Genesis 3:18. and with the sweat of his face he shall eat bread of the earth,359Ibid., Verse 19. this [the food] became a cause for decomposition since he is dust, and dust he eats, and unto dust he shall return.