Tafsiran yang Mengutip untuk Kejadian 9:6

Our sages of old considered the sin of submitting inter-Jewish disputes to gentile jurisdiction as consisting of a number of violations of the Torah. The author proceeds to illustrate this by means of an example:
It is generally admitted that murder is one of the most severe offenses that man can commit and the Torah punishes it severely. It is a facet of the seven Noachide commandments concerning which the Torah wrote that he who spills the blood of a human being will have his own blood spilled by the hands of humans (Genesis 9,6). Sanhedrin 37 points out that by killing a single human being, very often all his potential offspring is also “killed,” i.e. prevented from ever being born. In other words, it is impossible to know the number of potential human beings who are denied life through the murder of a single human being. There was a time when Adam was the only inhabitant of the universe. Had someone, even an animal, killed him at that stage the human race would have been wiped out through a single act of murder. This puts into perspective the famous saying of our sages that anyone who kills a single human being is viewed as if he had murdered a whole world full of human beings (Sanhedrin 37). The reverse is true of someone who saves the life of even a single person. By doing so, he may be equivalent to saving the entire human race. All of this brings home to you the enormity of the crime of killing a single human being without due process of law. In spite of the severity of the crime of murder, the crime of robbery and desecration of the Holy Name of G’d is considered as even more serious. The sin of murder is subject to forgiveness if the murderer repents truly as we know from Kayin who murdered his brother Hevel and who repented and was forgiven (compare Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer who takes the words (Genesis 4,13: “my guilt is too heavy to bear” as proof of Kayin’s repentance). Not so the sin of robbery. Repentance does not wipe out the sin of robbery unless the robber had first restored the property in question to the victim. If no restitution is made his sin will never be forgiven. The same applies to the sin of desecrating the name of the Lord. This is a sin more serious than any of those punishable by death at the hands of a human tribunal or even at the hands of G’d, i.e. karet. Our sages (Yuma 86) state that if someone is guilty of a sin for which the death penalty by execution or karet is mandatory (but has not been carried out) and the sinner has repented and Yom Kippur has passed before he died or has been executed, (if there were no witnesses, or similar) then his repentance may achieve a suspended sentence and the afflictions he suffers in this world may eventually wipe out his guilt. If, however, he is guilty of desecrating the name of the Lord, none of these measures will help him achieve atonement. Only his death may eventually atone for his sin. Our sages base this on Isaiah 22,14: “then the Lord of Hosts revealed to my ears; this iniquity shall never be forgiven you until you die.” Anyone who submits inter-Jewish disputes to a gentile tribunal thereby becomes guilty (at least inadvertently) of both the sin of robbery and the sin of desecrating the Lord’s name (whose judges he rejected by implying that G’d’s justice is defective). By going to pagan judges to seek justice one enhances the reputation of pagan religions and their deities in whose name justice is meted out.
The Torah (Deut. 32,31 ) has said: “for their Rock is not like our Rock, yet our enemies judge us.” The Torah means: “when our enemies act as our judges.” Anyone who voluntarily chooses non-Jewish courts and has read the passage we cited displays drunkenness and total confusion in his thinking. This is what Isaiah 29,9 had in mind when he spoke of: ”they are drunk but not from wine, they stagger but not from liquor.” People who act in this manner abandon primary pillars of Judaism in the hope of securing or retaining secondary values (the money or property under dispute). This is considered robbery in the true sense of the word. David (Psalms 16,4) had this to say about this kind of behavior: ירבו עצבותם אחר מהרו, “those who have other gods will suffer many afflictions for the sake of mohar, financial gain” (compare Rashi on that verse).
Turning to non-Jewish courts is also considered an act of robbery. One commits unknowingly complete robbery if he is awarded money or property by that court. Seeing the recipient of such a reward considers the money so obtained as rightfully his, he will never restore it to the true owner and will remain guilty of this act of robbery. This is why he will never be forgiven.
Concerning the word תשים, “you will place,” an unusual word to say the least, this is to teach the judges to whom this paragraph is primarily addressed, to explain the basis for their judgment to the litigants. They have to explain which proof convinced them to rule as they did. Our sages (Sanhedrin 31) say that the word תשים is equivalent to the loser telling the judge: “please write down for me on the basis of which halachah in the Torah you have decided in favor of my adversary.”

And Rabbi Pinchas’s opinion is derived from the statement that with a linen belt he shall gird which atones for sinful thoughts; certainly they had such thoughts in their hearts, as we explained [the issue as it relates to the service on Yom Kippur] in the words of Rabbi Aivo. Rabbi Aivo [however] held that the belt atones for thoughts of forbidden sexual relations, because Aaron’s sons did not have wives, and one who is without a wife is full of sinful thoughts. Rabbi Pinchas held that the tunic, which atones for bloodshed, refers to their not engaging in procreation, which is comparable to bloodshed, as concluded in Yevamot (63b): “It was taught: Rabbi Eliezer says, anyone who does not engage in procreation is as if he sheds blood, as it says Whoever sheds the blood of man (Genesis 9:6), and it is written And you, be fruitful and multiply (Genesis 9:7).” The reason for this is that the blood of his seed is required of him. And the linen pants, which atone for sexual immorality, [were needed] because they entered [the sanctuary] drunk with wine, which leads to sexual impropriety, as our Sages said (Yoma 75a), “Anyone who fixes his gaze on his cup, all forbidden sexual relations appear level to him, as it says When he puts his eye on the cup, he goes straight ahead (Proverbs 23:31).” And the linen turban atones for haughtiness, which includes several types of sins that our Sages attributed to them that are connected to haughtiness: that they gazed at the Divine Presence with an arrogant heart, that they issued rulings in the presence of Moses their teacher, and several other sins that we mentioned above in Parshat Shemini (10:1). And since Aaron’s sons died because they beheld God while they were still defiled with these sins, therefore He commanded Aaron that when he comes to see the glory of God, he should be clean of all the defilement of these sins, and he should wear these four white garments that whiten these sins — though they be red as crimson, they shall be as [white] wool. Furthermore, just as he comes to see the face of the Divine Presence, whose raiment was white as snow, so too he comes to be seen in white garments.

AT THE HAND OF EVERY BEAST WILL I REQUIRE IT. I wonder: if “the requiring” is here meant in its usual sense, i.e., from the hand of the beast as well as from the hand of man, in both cases there will be punishment in the matter, but the beast has no reason [with which to discern between good and evil] so that it should be punished or rewarded! Perhaps this principle applies only to spilling man’s blood; every beast that will devour him will itself be devoured, for such is the decree of the King. And this is the reason [why Scripture says of an ox that killed a human being], the ox shall surely be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten.¹⁹²Exodus 21:28. This is not a form of monetary punishment for the owner since even an ownerless ox is subject to the death penalty,¹⁹³Baba Kamma 44b. and the command applies alike to the sons of Noah⁶⁴See Seder Bereshith, Note 222. and to the Israelites. The meaning of Who so sheddeth man’s blood¹⁹⁴Verse 6. would thus be, “all shedders” whether beast or man, their blood will be required by the Court on earth and¹⁹⁵“And.” The Tur, quoting Ramban, has “or.” by the hand of Heaven.
It is possible that the meaning of the expression, at the hand of every beast, is that the vengeance upon the shedder of blood will be at the hand of every beast, just as it is said, That she hath received of the Eternal’s hand double of all her sins.¹⁹⁶Isaiah 40:2. Thus He says, “Surely your blood will I require and avenge at the hand of every beast for I will send against the murderer all beasts of the earth, and I will also send against him the hand of man, and he will not escape them.” Similarly, Because of all mine adversaries I am become a reproach,¹⁹⁷Psalms 31:12. meaning “because of the hand of all mine adversaries;” This is the portion of a wicked man from G-d, and the heritage appointed unto him by G-d,¹⁹⁸Job 20:29. [meaning this is the portion of a wicked man by the hand of G-d].
Perhaps the requiring at the hand of the beast means that she should not devour man for so He established their nature. The secret of the matter is that at the time of creation He gave man every herb bearing seed… and every tree in which is the fruit of a tree… for food,¹⁹⁹Above, 1:29. and to the beast He gave every green herb for food,²⁰⁰Ibid., Verse 30. and Scripture says, and it was so,²⁰⁰Ibid., Verse 30. meaning that such was their nature and habit. But now when He said of man that he may slaughter the lower living creatures for food and it was so placed in nature or habit that living creatures should eat each other, it became necessary to command that the other living creatures be unto men a prey to their teeth²⁰¹Psalms 124:6. while they are to fear men and not devour them. And He said, And surely, your blood of your lives will I require, in order to hint that He will not require the blood of one beast from the hand of another. This being so, it was thus left to them to devour one another. And this is the reason why He mentioned here the prohibition of spilling the blood of man; it is on account of the permission given here for slaughtering, which became the customary way of spilling blood since in the opinion of our Rabbis,²⁰²Sanhedrin 56b. Adam had already been admonished against spilling blood. But on account of the permission for slaughtering, it became necessary for Him to say, “I have permitted you to spill the blood of every living thing except your own blood. This is forbidden to you as well as to all living things for it will not be their nature to spill it.”

but in darkness Heb. בצלם, in darkness. Dunash explained it as an expression of darkness (צלמות) (Teshuvoth Dunash p. 89), but Menachem (p. 150) explained it as an actual image, as (in Gen. 9: 6) “for in the image of God He made man.” His view is impossible, however.

For his Possessor - For his Possessor's honor, as it is written (Genesis 9:6) "that He made...in the Divine image." And further, when one sees beautiful creatures, one says, "Blessed is the One who has such things in His world."