וּשְׁמַרְתֶּ֤ם אֶת־כָּל־חֻקֹּתַי֙ וְאֶת־כָּל־מִשְׁפָּטַ֔י וַעֲשִׂיתֶ֖ם אֹתָ֑ם וְלֹא־תָקִ֤יא אֶתְכֶם֙ הָאָ֔רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֨ר אֲנִ֜י מֵבִ֥יא אֶתְכֶ֛ם שָׁ֖מָּה לָשֶׁ֥בֶת בָּֽהּ׃
Kamu harus menjaga segala ketetapan-Ku dan segala peraturan-Ku, dan melakukannya, supaya kamu tidak dimuntahkan oleh negeri yang ke sana Aku membawa kamu untuk tinggal di dalamnya.
Rabbeinu Bahya
You need to appreciate that there is a difference in meaning between the word חק and the word חקה. Any commandment described as חק has its origin in the attribute זכור. [The author refers to the two aspects of Sabbath legislation described by the Torah as זכור and שמור respectively, Ed.]. The former refers to an emanation on the right side of the diagram of the emanations, whereas the latter is part of the left side of that diagram. We find in connection with the laws of Passover (Exodus 12,25) that the Torah categorises that legislation as לחק לך ולבניך, “as a statute for you and your children.” A חק is something definitive, decisive. We find the word in the benedictions recited at the circumcision, i.e. חק בשארו שם, “He set a חק (seal) on the flesh of his offspring.” In our prayers on New Year’s Day we speak of the requirement to blow the shofar on that day as being חק לישראל, (Psalms 81,5) a very definitive requirement. This point is also made in the Sefer Yetzirah 2,1 where the author writes כי חק הוא מכריע, that the word חק reconciles conflicting concepts [between the right and the left side of the emanations. Ed.].
A commandment described as חקה, is derived from the attribute שמור. Examples are such statements as Leviticus 19,19 את חוקותי תשמורו, “you are to observe My statutes.” The statutes referred to are not to mix certain species, not to marry the wife of a brother while the brother is alive (The word שמירה is used in connection with that commandment). Here too the Torah couches the legislation in the word חקה rather than חק, similar to the wording in Leviticus 20,22 summing up the legislation involving forbidden sexual unions. [The difference between the two words used for these various legislations may perhaps be defined as the difference between positive and negative commandments. The former are described as חק, the latter as חקה. Ed.].
A commandment described as חקה, is derived from the attribute שמור. Examples are such statements as Leviticus 19,19 את חוקותי תשמורו, “you are to observe My statutes.” The statutes referred to are not to mix certain species, not to marry the wife of a brother while the brother is alive (The word שמירה is used in connection with that commandment). Here too the Torah couches the legislation in the word חקה rather than חק, similar to the wording in Leviticus 20,22 summing up the legislation involving forbidden sexual unions. [The difference between the two words used for these various legislations may perhaps be defined as the difference between positive and negative commandments. The former are described as חק, the latter as חקה. Ed.].
Rabbeinu Bahya
Tanchuma goes on (on verse 7) that there are four pieces of Torah legislation which are targeted by the evil urge especially, all of which have been defined by the Torah as חקה, statute. They are: 1) the prohibition of marrying the wife of one’s brother (as a divorcee or widow with children, whereas she is to become the wife of that same brother-in-law if her husband had not sired children). 2) the prohibition of wearing wool and linen in one garment or sowing different species of seed in the same field. Seeing that it is permitted to make a talit of linen and attach woolen tzitziyot, the evil urge targets this legislation presenting it to us as illogical. 3) the law of the scapegoat which apparently carries the sins of the people as a gift to Satan. The Torah demands that the person accompanying said scape-goat purifies himself (as if the sins of these people “carried” by the beast had contaminated him whereas the scapegoat itself is killed while conferring life (forgiveness) on the sinners whose sins the beast “carries” (Leviticus 16,26). 4) The legislation of the red cow. What arouses the ire of the evil urge is the fact that all those who are involved in the ritual of the red cow, though of superior degree of ritual purity, are contaminated by it, whereas the ash of the same beast sprinkled on a ritually impure person has the power to purify such a person. According to that Midrash, Job 14,4 had this legislation in mind when he said: “Who can produce a clean thing out of an unclean one? No One!” (only G’d). Examples of G’d being able to produce the clean out of the unclean are 1) Avraham sired by an arch idolater such as his father Terach. 2) The king Chizkiyah of Yehudah whose father Achaz was a confirmed heretic. 3) Mordechai who was descended from Shimi of the tribe of Binyamin who had cursed David in the vilest terms. The people of Israel who emerged from amongst all the idolatrous Gentile nations are another example of the seemingly impossible becoming reality. So is the promise of the world of the future which will be the outcome of a transformation of this present world of lies and deceit. Job meant that the only one able to orchestrate such totally unlikely phenomena is the Unique One, the Lord! The Midrash adds the fact that the minimum size which makes an afflicted person subject to the tzoraat disease and contamination being the size of half a bean, while if the entire surface of the skin is covered by the eczema the person thus afflicted remains ritually pure.
Ramban
PASS NOT AWAY, I PRAY THEE, FROM THY SERVANT. Abraham spoke to each one of the angels, as is the way of the whole Torah: Ye shall keep all My statutes… and do them;75Leviticus 20:22. According to the author of Kesef Mezukak, the verse here should be [ibid. 18:5]: Ye shall keep My statutes, and Mine ordinances, which if a man do…. Here, as in the succeeding examples, the verse begins with a plural and ends with a singular because the Torah speaks to each person. The nakedness of thy father, and the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover;76Ibid., 18:7. And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not wholly reap the corner of thy field;77Ibid., 19:9. And from thence ye will seek the Eternal thy G-d, and thou shalt find Him, if thou search after Him with all thy heart and with all thy soul.78Deuteronomy 4:29. The greater part of the Mishneh Torah79The book of Deuteronomy. See ibid., 17:18, for origin of the expression. is written in this manner. A counter-example to the above is the verse: Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse.80Ibid., 11:26. Here He speaks to the whole congregation as a unit and not to each person individually.
Now our Rabbis have said,81Bereshith Rabbah 48:9. “Abraham spoke to the chief of the angels.”82According to this opinion, the word Adonay does not refer to G-d. It is also possible that he said to the chief, “Pass not away, I pray thee, [in the singular sense], and thou and thy companions who will remain with thee wash your feet,” [the verb “wash” being in the plural form].
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that he called them all “lords,” and he turned to each individual, saying to the first one: If now I have found favor in thy eyes, pass not away, and to the second one he said the same, and the same to the third one. He begged each one individually: If now I have found favor in thy eyes, pass not away, and, let now a little water be fetched, and all of ye wash your feet.83Verse 4 here. This was by way of ethical conduct and respect out of his great desire to show kindness towards them. Now he recognized them as transients who did not have the desire to lodge there. This is why he asked of them only that a little water be fetched to wash their feet a little from the heat, to give cold waters to a faint soul,84Proverbs 25:25. and that they recline under the tree in the cool of the day without coming into the tent and the tabernacle.
Now our Rabbis have said,81Bereshith Rabbah 48:9. “Abraham spoke to the chief of the angels.”82According to this opinion, the word Adonay does not refer to G-d. It is also possible that he said to the chief, “Pass not away, I pray thee, [in the singular sense], and thou and thy companions who will remain with thee wash your feet,” [the verb “wash” being in the plural form].
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that he called them all “lords,” and he turned to each individual, saying to the first one: If now I have found favor in thy eyes, pass not away, and to the second one he said the same, and the same to the third one. He begged each one individually: If now I have found favor in thy eyes, pass not away, and, let now a little water be fetched, and all of ye wash your feet.83Verse 4 here. This was by way of ethical conduct and respect out of his great desire to show kindness towards them. Now he recognized them as transients who did not have the desire to lodge there. This is why he asked of them only that a little water be fetched to wash their feet a little from the heat, to give cold waters to a faint soul,84Proverbs 25:25. and that they recline under the tree in the cool of the day without coming into the tent and the tabernacle.