Commento su Deuteronomio 27:24

מכה רעהו בסתר [CURSED BE] HE THAT SMITETH HIS FELLOW SECRETLY — It is of slander that it here speaks (slander may be termed “smiting in secret”) (Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer 53). — I have seen in the Work of R. Moses the Preacher; There are here eleven verses beginning with the words “cursed be” corresponding to eleven tribes. In allusion to Simeon, however, he (Moses) did not write down a formula beginning with “cursed be”, because he had no intention to bless him before his death when he blessed the other tribes (the tribe of Simeon is the only one not mentioned in chapter XXXIII. which contains the blessings that Moses bestowed on the tribes), therefore he did not want to curse him either.

This refers to slander, etc. Otherwise, why is it written “in secret”? If one would hit someone in public would it be permitted?! Is it not written, “He may not add; lest he additionally [flog him over these],” in parshas Ki Seitzei (above 25:3)?

On this verse Rashi comments that there are eleven sins which have been introduced here with the word: “cursed be.” They correspond to eleven tribes. No such “curse” is written concerning the tribe of Shimon, as Moses did not have in mind to give this tribe a blessing, Zimri, its leader, having announced publicly that Moses had violated this law by marrying a Midianite woman, thus making him and the whole tribe guilty of “badmouthing” Moses. Thecourt had ample evidence of convicting him of that sin. According to Rashi’s commentary, the last of the list, referring to people who do not uphold Torah law, would refer to people guilty of lashon hara, i.e. badmouthing others. There is no one who is not guilty of this at one time or another. There are scholars who claim that there are twelve sins to which the introductory word: “cursed be” applies, so that Moses did not make an exception concerning the tribe of Shimon. The word: “cursed be,” therefore had to be used only eleven times.

I have seen [this] in R’ Moshe Hadarshan’s commentary, etc. You might ask: Why does Rashi mention [the comment of] R. Moshe Hadarshan for [the verse] “whoever strikes his fellow in secret”? The answer is that without this comment [i.e., saying that this verse is in regard to slander] the fact that the Torah writes eleven curses is no difficulty, as one could suggest it was done in order to remove Reuvein from [being represented among] the cursed because it is written, “Cursed is whoever has relations with his father’s-in-law wife,” and he disturbed his father's sleeping arrangement (Bereishis 35:22). Therefore there are only eleven curses in order to exclude Reuvein [who in any case is hinted at in this curse]. But now that we explain that striking one's fellow in secret refers to slander, if so, the Torah should have only said ten curses and [also] exclude Yoseif who slandered his brothers and spoke slander against them. Rashi answers, “I have seen, etc.” This is easy to understand. I have seen texts where Rashi writes “I have seen, etc.” on (v. 26), “Cursed is whoever does not uphold, etc.” The explanation of this [why he cites R' Moshe Hadarshan there] is as follows: “I have seen [this] in R’ Moshe Hadarshan’s commentary: There are eleven curses, etc. he, therefore, did not want to curse him.” [Rashi is answering that] you might ask: There are twelve curses, etc. if you include “Cursed is whoever does not uphold, etc.” Rashi explains that the verse here, “Cursed is whoever does not uphold etc,” encompasses the entire Torah and all the above curses are included in “Cursed is whoever does not uphold, etc.” But if so, you might ask that the above curses are superfluous and why were they written? But certainly [the answer is] as “I have seen in R’ Moshe Hadarshan’s commentary,” [that the eleven curses correspond to the tribes].