Midrash su Esodo 21:40

Now these are the judgments (Exod. 21:1). Scripture states (elsewhere in reference to this verse): The strength also of the king who loveth justice. Thou hast established equity and righteousness in Jacob (Ps. 99:4). (That is to say,) all strength, praise, greatness, and might belong to the King of Kings, who loveth justice. Normally a powerful man is not concerned about executing his decisions in accordance with the demands of justice. In fact, he ignores justice and commits acts of violence and theft. He disregards the attitude of His Creator, favors his friends and his relatives, and acts unjustly toward his enemies. But the Holy One, blessed be He, loveth justice, and executes his decrees only justly. Hence it says: The strength also of the King who loveth justice.

(Exod. 21:1:) AND THESE ARE THE ORDINANCES (mishpatim)…. This text is related (to Ps. 99:4): AND A MIGHTY KING LOVES JUSTICE (mishpat).¹Tanh., Exod. 6:1; M. Pss. 99:2; Exod. R. 30:1. All strength, might, and glory belong to the Holy One. David said (in I Chron. 29:10): TO YOU, O LORD, BELONG THE GREATNESS AND THE MIGHT…. <Such> strength belongs to the Supreme King of Kings, the Holy One. You find that whoever is in a position of power does not accomplish his ends with justice (mishpat) but <instead> subverts justice. The Holy One, however, is in a position of power and <still> loves justice (mishpat). (Ps. 99:4, cont.:) YOU HAVE ESTABLISHED UPRIGHTNESS. R. Alexandri said: Two donkey drivers who hated each other were going along the road.²M.Pss.99:3. When the donkey belonging to one of them lay down, his companion saw it and passed by. After he had passed by, he thought: It is written in the Torah (in Exod. 23:5): WHEN YOU SEE THE DONKEY OF ONE WHO HATES YOU <LYING DOWN UNDER ITS BURDEN>…, [YOU MUST SURELY ASSIST HIM.]³Cf. ARN, A 23; Matthew 5:43–48; //Luke 6:27–28, 32–36; Romans 12:20. He immediately returned and shared the load with him. He began to consider <the matter > in his heart. He thought: So-and-so actually loves me,⁴The Buber text reads, “him.” and I did not know it! They entered an inn,⁵Gk.: pandokeion. to eat and drink. Who caused them to make peace? <It happened> because this person considered the Torah. (Ps. 99:4, cont.:) YOU HAVE ESTABLISHED UPRIGHTNESS…. What is this? This is justice (mishpat).

(Exod. 25:1–2:) THEN THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES, SAYING: SPEAK UNTO THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, AND LET THEM TAKE (rt.: LQH) FOR ME A PRIESTLY SHARE…. This text is related (to Prov. 4:2): FOR I GAVE YOU GOOD INSTRUCTION…. INSTRUCTION (LQH) <denotes> my Torah.¹Tanh., Exod. 7:2. <It was> customary for two traders²Gk.: pragmateutai. This interpretation follows the reading from the parallel text in Tanh., Exod. 7:2. The spelling, PRGMTYN, in the Buber text suggests the Greek pragmata (“affairs,” “business”) and does not fit the context. to be in the <same> district. One took in (rt.: LQH) raw silk,³Gk.: metaxa. and the other took in finished silk.⁴Gk.: holoserikon. Cf. the parallel Tanh. text, which reads “pepper” (pilpelin) here. They stood side by side. One said to his companion: Do you want to make a change? He said: Yes. <So> they changed <roles> with each other. The first handed over the raw silk and took the finished silk for himself. It turned out that a single commodity <remained> in the hands of the one, and a single commodity <remained> in the hands of the other. But Torah is not like that. One learns the <talmudic> order, "Seeds (Zera'im)," while another learns the order, "Damages (Neziqin)." Both of them stood side by side. One said to his companion: Teach me the order, "Seeds," and I shall teach you the order, "Damages." It turned out that the one had two <orders> in hand, and the other had two < orders > in hand. Is there <any> merchandise greater than this? Ergo (in Prov. 4:2): FOR I GAVE YOU GOOD INSTRUCTION….

“On my bed at nights I sought the one whom my soul loves; I sought him, but did not find him” (Song of Songs 3:1).
“On my bed at nights.” Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: What is “on my bed at nights”? During my illness, just as it says: “And he does not die but falls into bed” (Exodus 21:18). Rabbi Levi said: The congregation of Israel said before the Holy One blessed be He: Master of the universe, in the past You would illuminate for me between nights and nights; between the night of Egypt and the night of Babylon, between the night of Babylon and the night of Media, between the night of Media and the night of Greece, and between the night of Greece and the night of Edom.¹Edom refers to Rome. The meaning of Rabbi Levi’s statement is that there would be a bright period between periods of persecution. But now that I have slumbered from the Torah and the mitzvot, nights have become consecutive for me. “On my bed at nights,” Rabbi Alexandra said: When I slumbered from the Torah and the mitzvot, my nights became consecutive for me. “On my bed at nights [balelot],” the nights came [ba’u lelot].²The nights, meaning the periods of persecution, came consecutively.

(Fol. 23) Our Rabbis were taught (Deut. 15, 16) Because he (the servant) is well with thee; i.e., well with food and well with drinks with you (the employer). This means that thou shalt not eat white bread while thy servant eats dark bread; that thou shalt not drink old wine while thy servant drinks fresh wine; that thou shalt not sleep upon cushions while thy servant sleeps on straw. From this, remarked our Rabbis, we may infer that whoever buys a Hebrew slave, it is as if he were buying a master over himself, (Ib. b) (Ex." 21, 6) And his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, etc. R. Jochanan b. Zakkai interpreted this passage in a symbolical way (giving an ethical signification to the Biblical law about perforating the slave's ear). "Why was the ear chosen to be bored, above all the other members of the body? The Holy One, praised be He! said: 'The ear which heard on Mt. Sinai (Lev. 25, 55) For unto Me are the children of Israel servants, but not servants under servants, and this one went and purchased another master upon himself, therefore must the ear be bored for not remembering what it heard."' (Ex. 21, 6) And he shall bring him at the door, etc. Simon b. Rabbi interpreted this in a symbolical way: "Why was the door and the door-post upon which the slave's ear shall be bored chosen in preference to any other place in the house? The Holy One, praised be He, said: 'The door and the door-post which were witnesses in Egypt at the time when I passed over the lintel and the doorposts, when I said, all the children of Israel are My servants and not servants under servants, for which purpose I have also redeemed them from slavery unto freedom, and this one went and bought a master upon himself, therefore shall his ear be bored before the lintel and the door-posts.'"

Our Rabbis were taught: It is said (Ex. 20, 12) Honor thy father and thy mother, and again it is said (Pr. 3, 9) Honor the Lord with thy wealth; Scripture compares the honor of father and mother unto the honor of Heaven. Again it is said (Lev. 19, 3) Ye shall fear every man, his mother and his father; and again it is said (Deut. 10, 20) The Lord thy God shalt thou fear; Scripture compares the fear of father and mother unto the fear of Heaven. Agam it is said (Ex. 21, 17) And he that curses his father or his mother shall surely he put to death; and it is said (Lev. 24, 15) Whosoever curseth his God shall hear sin. Scripture compares here the blasphemy of father and mother unto that of Heaven. However, as far as beating is concerned the comparison is impossible; and so also should it be according to the logic of law; for these three — Heaven, father and mother — are partner in the child.

R. Elazar said in the name of R. Chanina: "Never shall the blessing of even a common man be considered insignificant in your eyes; for two great men of their generation were blessed by simple men and their blessings were fulfilled. They were David and Daniel. David, as it is written (II Sam. 24, 23) And Aravnah said unto the king, 'May the Lord thy God receive thee favorably.' Daniel was blessed by King Darius, as it is written (Dan. 6, 17) May thy God, whom thou worshippest continually, truly deliver thee." R. Elazar said again in the name of R. Chanina: 'Never shall the curse of even a common man be considered unimportant, for Abimelech cursed Sarah, saying (Gen. 20, 16) 'This is to thee a covering to the eyes, and it was fulfilled through her children as it is said (Gen. 27, 1) And Isaac's eyes became dim." Again said R. Elazar, in the name of R. Chanina: "Come and see how the custom of the Holy One, praised be He! differs from the custom of frail man! A frail man sets the pot [on the fire] first and then pours water into it, but the Holy One, praised be He! poureth the water first into the pot and then sets it on the fire, to sustain the passage (Jer. 10, 13) At the sound when he giveth a multitude of water." Another thing did R. Elazar say in the name of R. Chanina: "When the righteous is lost (dies) it is a loss to the generation only [not to himself]. This might be compared with a diamond which was lost by a man, wherever it is its name is there, the loss is merely to its owner." Again said R. Elazar in the name of R. Chanina: "What is the meaning of the passage (Ib. 5, 13) Yet all this profiteth me nothing. Infer from this that all treasures of that wicked (Haman) were engraved upon his heart, and as soon as he saw Mordecai sitting in the king's tower he said. Yet all this profiteth me nothing." Is it really because he (Haman) saw Mordecai sitting in the king's tower that he said this? Yes, as R. Chisda explained it: "The latter [Mordecai ] had come as a member of the Prosbul and the former [Haman] had come to court as a member of the Prosbuli" (Ib. b."); i.e., Buli signifies the rich, as it is said (Lev. 26, 19) I will break the pride of your power, and R. Joseph explains that this refers to the rich of Juda; Buli signifies poverty, and so reads the passage (Deut. 15, 8) Thou shalt surely lend him. R. Papa said: "Haman was called 'the slave that sold himself for a loaf of bread.'" R. Elazar said further in the name of R. Chanina: "In the future, the Holy One, praised be He! will put a crown on the head of every righteous man, as it is written (Is. 28, 5) On that day will the Lord of hosts he for a crown of glory and a diadem of beauty. What is the meaning of a crown of glory and a diadem of beauty? It is for those who do His will, and hope for His glory. One may think that this will be for all of them? Therefore it is said. Unto the residue of his people; i.e., for those who are so modest that they consider themselves like the remnant of the people. (Ib. 6) And for a spirit of judgment; i.e., to him who sitteth in judgment — and does justice. And for strength. It is to him who overcomes his inclination. To those that drive back the battle, this refers to those who debate over the Torah. To the gate, refers to the scholars who arise early to go to the gates of the houses of prayer and learning, and remain late there. The divine attribute of justice pleaded before the Holy One, praised be He! saying, 'Sovereign of the Universe! Wherein is the difference between this (Israel) and all other nations [that Thou art honoring Israel so much]?' Whereupon the Holy One, praised be He! answered 'Israel studied the Torah, and the idolaters did not.' To this the attribute of Justice replied (Ib. 7) But these also are now stumbling through wine, and reeling through strong drink — they are (Paku) unsteady in giving judgment. Paku (unsteady) refers to Gehenna, as it is said (I Sam. 25, 31) That this shall not be a cause of offence; and Pliliya [judgment] refers to the judges as it is said (Ex. 23, 21) And they shall pay this by the decision of (Phlilim) the Judges."

1) (Vayikra 24:17) ("And a man if he smite all the soul of a man shall be put to death.") "And a man if he smite": This tells me only of a man who smites. Whence do I derive (the same for) a woman who smites? From (Shemoth 21:12) "If one strikes a man (and he dies, then he shall be put to death") — anyone, whether a man or a woman. If "If one strikes a man," I would know only of one who struck a man. When would I derive (the same for) one who struck a woman or a minor? It is, therefore, written "if he smite the soul" — whether man, woman, or minor. I might think that he would be liable even if he smote a nefel (a child that is certain to die); it is, therefore, written "if he smite a man." Just as a man is a "survivor," (so all [of the victims] must inherently be "survivors") — to exclude a nefel, who is not a "survivor." "if he smite all the soul": to include an instance in which one was smitten and would die (as a result), and another came and gave him the death blow, he (the last) is liable.

1) (Vayikra 25:39) ("And if your brother grows poor with you, and he is sold to you, do not work with him the work of a servant.") Whence is it derived that one is not permitted to sell himself and place (the proceeds) in his money-bag to buy animals, vessels, or a house unless he became impoverished? From "And if your brother grows poor and he is sold" — He may not sell himself unless he becomes poor. And whence is it derived that when he is sold, he shall be sold only to you (and not to a gentile)? From "and he is sold to you." And whence is it derived that if beth-din sell him they sell him only to you? From (Devarim 15:12) "If there be sold to you." "your brother": You shall treat him as a brother. I might think that he should conduct himself as a brother; it is, therefore, written "a servant." I might think that you shall also conduct yourself to him as a servant; it is, therefore, written "your brother." How so? You conduct yourself to him with brotherhood (i.e., you call him "brother"); he conducts himself to you with servitude (he calls you "master").

Now these are the ordinances (Exod. 21:1). Scripture says elsewhere: The king by justice establisheth the land, but the man who sets himself apart (terumah)¹The word terumah means “something set aside,” as with the priestly offering. overthroweth it (Prov. 29:4). The Torah’s king rules through justice and thereby causes the earth to endure, but the man who sets himself apart (terumah) overthrows it. This implies that if a man acts as though he were a terumah (the portion separated, or set aside, for the priests) by secluding himself in the corner of his home and declaring: “What concern are the problems of the community to me? What does their judgment mean to me? Why should I listen to them? I will do well (without them),” he helps to destroy the world. Hence the man of separation (terumah) overthroweth it.

(Exod. 21:1:) AND THESE ARE THE ORDINANCES (mishpatim). This text is related (to Prov. 29:4): BY JUSTICE (mishpat) A KING SUSTAINS THE LAND.⁶Gen. R. 14:1; Exod. R. 30:13; cf. Tanh., Exod. 6:2. This refers to the Holy One. (Ibid., cont.:) BUT A PERSON OF REMOVALS (temurot) WILL DESTROY IT. This refers to the first Adam who was separated out in a removal (temurah). R. Jose ben Qetsartah said: Where is it shown that he was separated out in a removal?⁷Above, Gen. 2:1; Tanh., Gen. 2:1;yShab. 2:4 (5b); Gen. R. 17:8. Where it is stated (in Gen. 2:6–7): BUT A MIST WENT UP FROM THE EARTH <AND WATERED THE WHOLE FACE OF THE GROUND>. THEN THE LORD FORMED <THE HUMAN OUT OF DUST FROM THE GROUND>.⁸See above, Gen. 2:2; Tanh., Gen. 2:1. <It is> like the wife of a priest putting water into the midst of her dough and after that taking the hallah.⁹Cf. Numb. 15:20, which identifies hallah and temurot. Ergo, it says (in Prov. 29:4): BUT A PERSON OF REMOVALS (temurot) WILL DESTROY IT. When the Holy One commanded him to eat from this and not to eat from that, he transgressed the command. What did he bring about? (Gen. 3:17:) CURSED IS THE LAND BECAUSE OF YOU. Ergo, (in Prov. 29:4): <BUT A PERSON OF REMOVALS > WILL DESTROY IT.

(Deut. 16:18:) “[You shall appoint] judges and law officers,” “judges” are magistrates, and “law officers” are administrators that supervise the people.¹¹Cf. Sifre to Deut. 16:18 (144). R. Eleazar said, “If there is no law officer, there is no judge. How so? When someone is found by a court to have a legal obligation to his companion, if there is no law officer who will collect from him when he withdraws from the court, there is no power in the hands of the judge to do anything to him. If, however, [a law officer is present], he delivers him into the hand of the law officer, and the law officer extracts compliance from him.” R. Eleazar ben Pedat said, “If it had not been for the law-enforcing office¹²Siteno, which is being read as sitero, as suggested by Jastrow, s.v. of Joab, David could not have enforced justice.” And so it says (in I Chron. 18:14-15 // II Sam. 8:15-16), “So David administered judgment and righteousness to all his people. And Joab ben Zeruiah was over the army.” Were David and Joab judges together? It is simply that whenever someone did not heed the judge, they delivered him into the hands of Joab, and he extracted [compliance] from him against his will. And so Job said (in Job 29:16-17), “I was a father to the poor […]. I broke the jaws [of the evildoer].”

(Bamidbar 5:5-6) "And the L-rd spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the children of Israel: A man or a woman, if they do of all the sins of man": Why is this section mentioned? (i.e., it has already been mentioned elsewhere.) — It is written (Vayikra 5:20-22) "If a soul sin and commit a profanation against the L-rd … or if he find a lost object and swear falsely, etc." But the stolen property of a proselyte is not mentioned. It is, therefore, written (here) "Speak to the children of Israel: A man or a woman, if they do all of the sins of man." Scripture comes to teach us about the stolen property of a proselyte that if one swore to him falsely (that he did not steal it) and the proselyte died, he pays the principal and the fifth to the Cohanim and the guilt-offering to the altar, (a proselyte, halachically, not having any heirs). This is a rule in the Torah: Any section stated in one place in the Torah, missing one thing, and repeated in a different place is repeated only for the sake of the thing that is originated. R. Akiva says: Everything stated therein must be expounded. R. Yoshiyah (in explication of R. Akiva) says: Why is "a man or a woman" stated? From (Shemot 21:3) "And if a man open a pit or if a man dig a pit," I would know only of a man. Whence would I derive (the same for) a woman? From "a man or a woman," to liken a woman to a man in respect to all transgressions and damages in the Torah. R. Yonathan says: (The above derivation) is not needed, for it is already written (Ibid. 34) "The owner (whether man or woman) of the pit shall pay," and (Ibid. 22:5) "Pay shall pay the kindler (whether man or woman) of the fire." Why, then, is it stated "a man or a woman"? For its (own) teaching, (i.e., that the law of theft of the proselyte" obtains both with men and with women.) "if they do all of the sins of man to commit a profanation against the L-rd": Why is this stated? (i.e., it is already written [Vayikra 5:21] "If a soul sin and commit a profanation, etc.") Because it is written "If a soul sin and commit a profanation… (22) or find a lost object, etc.", I might think that only one who lies in respect to what is mentioned therein is regarded as one who lies against the L-rd Himself. Whence do I derive (the same for) one who lies in respect to all other things? It is, therefore, written "if they do all of the sins of man to commit a profanation against the L-rd." "to commit a profanation" ("limol ma'al"). "me'ilah" in all places is "lying." And thus is it written (I Chronicles 5:25) "Vayimalu ('and they lied') against the G-d of their fathers," and (Joshua 7:1) "And the children of Israel yimalu ma'al ('falsified') in respect to the ban," and (I Chronicles 10:13) "And Saul died because of his falsification ('bima'alo ma'al') against the L-rd." And, in respect to Uzziyahu (II Chronicles 26:18), "Leave the sanctuary, for you have acted falsely (ma'alta')," and (Bamidbar 5:12) "… and she be false (uma'ala) to him" — whence we see that "me'ilah" is "lying." (Ibid. 6) "and that soul shall be guilty": Why is this stated? (i.e., it seems redundant.) "a man or a woman" would seem to indicate specifically these. Whence would I derive (the same for) one whose sex is unknown or a hermaphrodite? From "and that soul shall be guilty" — All are included, even proselytes and servants. — But this would seem to include all, both the above and minors! — Would you say this? If a minor is exempt from (punishment for) the grave sin of idolatry, how much more so (is he exempt from punishment for) all the mitzvoth of the Torah! Whence is it derived that if one stole and swore (falsely) and went to bring the money (to repay) and the guilt-offering and could not manage to bring them before he died, that his heirs are exempt? From "and that soul shall be guilty." — But perhaps just as they are exempt from the guilt-offering, so, they are exempt from the principal. — It is, therefore, written (Ibid. 7) "and he shall give it (the principal) to the one to whom he is liable (for payment)." "and that soul shall be guilty": Why is this stated? Whence do you derive that if one burned his neighbor's grain sack on the Sabbath that beth-din does not exact payment from him because he is liable to the death penalty? From "and that soul shall be guilty" (i.e., in the aforementioned instance, the life alone is taken.) (Ibid. 7) "and they confess their sin which they have done": This tells me that a sin-offering requires confession. Whence do I derive (the same for) a guilt-offering? From "and that soul be guilty and they confess." R. Nathan says: This is a paradigm (binyan av) for all that are put to death that they require confession.

(Fol. 19) "The king must not act as a judge, nor be summoned before court." R. Joseph said: This is concerning the kings of Israel; but the kings of the house of David may act as a judge, and can be summoned before court, as it is written (Jer. 21, 12) O house of David, thus said the Lord: Exercise justice on every morning. And if they were not be summoned before court, how could they judge? Behold! it is written (Zeph. 2, 1) Gather yourself together. And Resh Lakish said: "This means first correct thyself, then correct others." Why then is it prohibited to the Kings of Israel? Because of the incident which happened with the slave of King Janai, who murdered a person. Simon b. Shetach said to the sages: "Notwithstanding that he is the slave of the king, he must be tried." They sent word to the king: "Your slave has killed a man." And Janai sent his slave to them to be tried. Whereupon they sent to him: "You also must appear before the court, for the Torah says (Ex. 21, 29) Warning has been given to its owners — i.e., the owner of the ox must appear at the time the ox is tried." He then came and took a seat. "Arise King Janai," said Simon b. Chetach, "so that the witnesses shall testify while you stand; yet not for us do you rise, but for Him who commanded and the world came into being, as it is said (Deut. 19, 17) Stand before the Lord." And the king answered: "It must not be as you say, but as the majority of your colleagues shall decide." (Ib. b) Simon then turned to his right, but they cast their eyes down (were afraid to give their opinion). He turned to his left, and they also cast their eyes down. Simon b. Shetach exclaimed: "You are entertaining consideration [of fear] in your mind! May the One who knows [man's] thoughts take revenge upon you." Thereupon Gabriel came and smote them to the floor, and they died. At that time the sages decreed that a king should neither act as a judge nor appear before court; neither be a witness, nor can anyone testify against him.

R. Abbahu said: Wherever THESE is used, it cancels what precedes; and wherever AND THESE is written, it adds to what precedes.¹⁰Gen. R. 12:3; Exod. R. 30:3. It is written (in Gen. 2:4): THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF THE HEAVENS < AND THE EARTH. > What did <THESE> cancel? It canceled (Gen. 1:2:) AND THE EARTH WAS VOID AND WITHOUT FORM WITH DARKNESS. And so (in Exod. 21:1): AND THESE ARE THE ORDINANCES adds to what precedes (i.e., Exod. 15:25): THERE HE ESTABLISHED FOR THEM A STATUTE AND AN ORDINANCE….

We are taught in a Baraitha that R. Eliezer b. Jacob said: (Ib. b) The word refuge was written at every crossing so that the murderer might recognize the way to take." Said R. Cahana: "Where is the passage to prove this? (Deut. 19, 3) Thou shalt prepare thee the way, i.e., you shall establish all preparations needed on this way." R. Chamma b. Chanina, when he wanted to lecture on this case, used to begin with (Ps. 25, 8) Good and upright is the Lord: therefore does He instruct sinners in the [right] way. Now if He puts the sinners in the right way, how much more the upright. Resh Lakish used to begin his lecture on this case with (Ex. 21, 13) And if a man lie not in wait, but God caused it to come to hand; and (1 Sam. 24, 14) As sayeth the proverb of the ancients: Out of the wicked cometh forth wickedness. Of what case does the passage speak? Concerning two men each of whom killed a person; one of them unintentionally [the punishment of which is exile] and the other intentionally [the punishment of which is death], but there were no witnesses in either case. The Holy One, praised be He! causes them to meet at the same inn, and he who had killed intentionally [guilty of capital punishment] is placed under a ladder, while the other, who killed unintentionally [and guilty of being exiled] descends the steps, falls and kills the other [under the ladder]. Hence the outcome is: He who has killed intentionally was killed; and the unintentional murderer was exiled.

“…for your love is better than wine” (Song of Songs 1:2). We learned there (Mishna Avoda Zara 2:5): Rabbi Yishmael asked Rabbi Yehoshua as they were walking on the way: ‘Why did [the Sages] prohibit the cheese of the gentiles?’ [Rabbi Yehoshua] said to him: ‘Because they curdle it with the stomach contents of an animal carcass.’ He said to [Rabbi Yehoshua]: ‘But are the stomach contents of a burnt offering not more stringent than the stomach contents of an animal carcass, yet they said that a priest who is broad minded¹⁰⁹He is not particular about what he eats. swallows it raw.’ What is, swallows it raw? He gulps it down. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: They rendered it like a tainted cup; he may not benefit, but he is not liable for misuse of consecrated items.¹¹⁰Thus, if one eats the stomach contents of a consecrated animal, one is not liable for misuse of a consecrated item. This proves that it is not considered a food item, therefore its consumption is not a normal act of eating. Similarly, the stomach contents of an unslaughtered animal carcass should not be considered a food item, and should not render the cheese non-kosher. [Rabbi Yishmael] said to him:¹¹¹In the mishna, this is stated as a response to a second explanation given by Rabbi Yehoshua for the prohibition of eating the cheese of gentiles: They curdle it in the stomach contents of animals that have been slaughtered as an idolatrous sacrifice. ‘If so, why did they not prohibit benefit from it?’ [Rabbi Yehoshua] diverted his attention to another matter. He said to him: ‘Yishmael, my brother, how do you read it? For Your love [dodekha] is better than wine, or your love [dodayikh] [is better] than wine?’¹¹²Do you think that the term “your love” is stated in the masculine form [dodekha], indicating that it is being stated by the woman, representing Israel, to the man, representing God, or is it stated in the feminine form [dodayikh], indicating that it is stated by the man, representing God, to the woman, representing Israel. Rabbi Yishmael answered that it is vocalized dodayikh, in the feminine. He said to him: ‘The matter is not so, as its counterpart teaches in its regard: “Your oils [shemanekha] have a goodly fragrance”’ (Song of Songs 1:3).¹¹³Just as this verse is in the masculine, so, too, the previous verse, which is the verse under discussion, is also in the masculine.
Why did he not reveal it to him?¹¹⁴Why did he divert his attention rather than answering his question? Rabbi Yonatan said: It is because they had prohibited it only recently,¹¹⁵When the Sages issue a decree, for the first year they do not reveal the reason behind it, so that people will accept the decree without questioning its rationale. and Rabbi Yishmael was young. Rabbi Shimon ben Ḥalafta and Rabbi Ḥagai in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman [said]: It is written: “Lambs [kevasim] will be for your garments” (Proverbs 27:26). Kevashim, concealed items, is written.¹¹⁶The word, as written, can be read either kevasim or kevashim. When your students are young, conceal matters of Torah from them. When they grow and become Torah scholars, reveal the secrets of Torah to them. Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai taught: “These are the ordinances that you shall place [tasim] before them” (Exodus 21:1), just as this treasure [sima] is not revealed to every person, the same is true of matters of Torah.
Rav Huna raised a question and Rabbi Ḥama bar Ukva posed a difficulty:¹¹⁷Some suggest that the text should read: Rav Huna, citing Rabbi Hama bar Ukva, posed a difficulty (Etz Yosef). If he sought to divert him, he should have diverted him from the five verses in the Torah that require resolution.¹¹⁸In each of these cases there are two phrases, and it is unclear whether a particular word which appears at the border of the two belongs to the first or second phrase. These are they: “se’et” (Genesis 4:7); “cursed” (Genesis 49:7);¹¹⁹Does “cursed” belong to the previous verse: “And with their will they hamstrung an ox that is cursed” or does it belong to the beginning of this verse: “Cursed is their wrath, as it is fierce”? “tomorrow” (Exodus 17:9);¹²⁰Is it “Go out and battle Amalek tomorrow” or is it “Tomorrow I will stand at the top of the hill”? “crafted like almonds” (Exodus 25:34);¹²¹Is it “four cups crafted like almonds,” or is it “like almonds are its knobs and flowers”? “arise” (Deuteronomy 31:16).¹²²Is it “you will lie with your ancestors and arise,” or is it “this people will arise and it will stray”? Is it, “if you do well you will receive forgiveness [se’et],” or is it “you will bear your sin [se’et] if you do not do well”? Rabbi Tanḥuma said: I have another: “The sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard” or “when they heard [the men were saddened] and they came from the field” (Genesis 34:7). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: It is written: “And the Lord commanded me” (Deuteronomy 4:14); there are matters that He said to me myself, and there are matters that He told me to say to my children.¹²³Some matters of Torah are meant to publicized to all, and others are meant to be communicated only to those who are worthy. Rabbi Eila said: There are matters that one seals [meshikin]¹²⁴This is derived from yishakeni. Rabbi Yehoshua raised this verse to Rabbi Yishmael in order to allude to the fact that not everything is meant to be publicized (Matnot Kehuna). in one’s mouth.
How so? One verse says: “I store Your saying in my heart, so as not to sin against You” (Psalms 119:11), and one verse says: “With My lips I have recounted all the ordinances of Your mouth” (Psalms 119:13). In what sense can both these verses coexist? Rather, as long as Ira HaYa’iri, David’s mentor, was alive, “I store Your saying in my heart”; when he departed, “with my lips I have recounted.”¹²⁵David did not publicize halakhic matters during the lifetime of his teacher because a disciple is prohibited from issuing halakhic rulings in the presence of his teacher (Eruvin 63a).

2) "He has cursed his father and his mother": What is the intent of this? Because it is written (Shemoth 21:19) "And he who curses his father and his mother shall be put to death," I might think that he is not liable until he curses both of them; it is, therefore, written "He has cursed his father; ("He has cursed) his mother" — either one. A proselyte, then, is liable for (cursing) his mother, but not for (cursing) his father, (there being no "fatherhood" for a proselyte.) These are the words of R. Yossi Haglili. R. Akiva says: "He has cursed his father and his mother": One who is liable for (cursing) his father is liable for (cursing) his mother. One who is not liable for his father is not liable for his mother. R. Akiva concedes that a shtuki (an illegitimate child of unknown fatherhood) is liable for (cursing) his mother even though he is not liable for (cursing) his father.

2) "He has cursed his father and his mother": What is the intent of this? Because it is written (Shemoth 21:19) "And he who curses his father and his mother shall be put to death," I might think that he is not liable until he curses both of them; it is, therefore, written "He has cursed his father; ("He has cursed) his mother" — either one. A proselyte, then, is liable for (cursing) his mother, but not for (cursing) his father, (there being no "fatherhood" for a proselyte.) These are the words of R. Yossi Haglili. R. Akiva says: "He has cursed his father and his mother": One who is liable for (cursing) his father is liable for (cursing) his mother. One who is not liable for his father is not liable for his mother. R. Akiva concedes that a shtuki (an illegitimate child of unknown fatherhood) is liable for (cursing) his mother even though he is not liable for (cursing) his father.

Now these are the ordinances (Gen. 21:1). R. Abahu said in the name of R. Yosé the son of Zimra: Whenever the word eleh (“these”) is written, the lack of importance of the earlier generations is indicated, but whenever ve’eleh (“now these”) is written, it adds to the importance of later generations and bestows praise upon earlier generations. It is possible to explain every instance in which this phrase occurs in accordance with this statement. Hence the verse Now these are the ordinances adds praise to earlier generations, as it is said: There he made for them a statute and an ordinance (Exod. 15:25). That is, Which thou shalt set before them (Exod. 21:1)—but not before idolaters.

(Exod. 21:1:) AND THESE ARE THE ORDINANCES…. This text is related (to Ps. 147:19–20): HE DECLARES HIS WORDS TO JACOB, <HIS STATUTES AND ORDINANCES TO ISRAEL>. HE HAS NOT DONE SO FOR ANY NATION; <AND, AS FOR HIS ORDINANCES, THEY HAVE NOT KNOWN THEM>.¹¹Tanh., Exod. 6:5. Aquila the son of Hadrian's sister wanted to convert to Judaism, but he was afraid of his uncle Hadrian.¹²See Exod. R. 30:12. He said to him: I want to engage in a business. He said to him: Do you perhaps lack silver or gold? Here, you have the treasury¹³Gk.: thesauros. before you. He said to him: I want to engage in a business in order to gain knowledge of humanity, and I want to consult you on how to do it. He said to him: Go and engage in any business¹⁴Gk.: pragmateia. that you see established on earth, since in the end it will increase (hit'allah) <in value >. Now he intended to convert to Judaism. He came to the land of Israel and studied the Torah. When R. Eliezer and R. Joshua came to him after some time, they found him and saw his face transformed. They said to each other: Aquila has been studying the Torah. When they came to him, he began to ask them questions, and they would answer him. He went up to Hadrian. He said to him: Why is your face transformed? Has your business failed, or is someone troubling you? He told him: No. Then why has your face been transformed? He said to him: Because I have been studying Torah. And not only that, but I have been circumcised. He said to him: And who told you <to do so>? He said to him: I consulted with you. He said to him: When? He said to him: When I told you I wanted to engage in a business, you told me: Engage in any business that you see established on earth, since in the end it will increase (hit'allah) <in value>. So I went back over all the peoples and did not find <any> people established on earth like Israel. Now in the end they will be exalted (hit'allah), just as Isaiah has said (in Is. 49:7): THUS SAYS THE LORD, THE REDEEMER OF ISRAEL, HIS HOLY ONE, TO {ONE WHO DESPISES ONE's} [A DESPICABLE] SOUL, TO AN ABHORRENT NATION, TO A SLAVE OF RULERS: < KINGS SHALL SEE, AND NOBLES SHALL RISE UP. AND THEY SHALL PROSTRATE THEMSELVES ON ACCOUNT OF THE LORD, WHO IS FAITHFUL, EVEN THE HOLY ONE OF ISRAEL, BECAUSE HE HAS CHOSEN YOU.> His associate regent¹⁵Gk.: sygkathedros. said to him: Are these whom you have been annihilating going to be those before whom kings will stand, as stated (in Is. 49:7): KINGS SHALL SEE AND RISE UP; NOBLES ALSO SHALL PROSTRATE THEMSELVES? Hadrian hit him on the jaw. He said to him: One only puts a bandage on a wound. Would [someone] put it on sound flesh? Would he not put it on a wound? Now if one sees some common soldier,¹⁶Lat.: galearius (“solder’s servant,” “batman”). he does not stand in his presence.¹⁷The exact intent of the passage is doubtful. Enoch Zundel in his commentary, ‘Anaf Yosef, on the parallel in Tanh., Lev. 4:5, suggests that, as a bandage on a wound restores the flesh to normal without improving on it, so Israel may be restored to normal but not beyond to a position outranking kings. Similarly, the lowliest soldier may win promotion but will never outrank the emperor. Therefore, Hadrian need never fear the Jews. What did his associate regent do? He went up on the roof, fell down, and died. Thus the Holy Spirit cries out (in Jud. 5:31): SO SHALL ALL YOUR ENEMIES PERISH, O LORD. Hadrian said to Aquila: Why did you do this? He said to him: Because I wanted to learn Torah. He said to him: You could have learned it without becoming circumcised. He said to him: Without circumcising, one could not learn it, as stated (in Ps. 147:19): HE DECLARES HIS WORDS TO JACOB, [HIS STATUTES AND ORDINANCES (mishpatim) TO ISRAEL. TO JACOB:] To whoever from Jacob practices circumcision. HIS STATUTES: This means Torah. AND ORDINANCES: These are the laws. [Thus it is stated] (in Exod. 15:25): THERE HE ESTABLISHED FOR THEM [A STATUTE AND AN ORDINANCE (mishpat)]. The Holy One said to Moses: I have given them the Torah; you give them the ordinances (mishpatim). The Holy One said to them: If you desire to survive in this world, observe the ordinances (mishpatim), for {one} [a world] cannot survive without justice (mishpat). The generation of the flood would not have perished from the world, had they not transgressed against justice (mishpat). R. Eleazar ben Pedat said: What is written about them (in Job 4:20)? FROM MORNING TO EVENING THEY ARE SHATTERED; THEY PERISH FOREVER WITHOUT ANYONE NOTICING (rt.: SYM). Ergo (in Exod. 21:1): AND THESE ARE THE ORDINANCES (mishpatim) <THAT YOU SHALL SET (rt.: SYM) BEFORE THEM>.¹⁸See Gen. R. 26:6; 31:5; Exod. R. 30:13.

(Fol. 30) Abaye said: "The word Asson (accident) is used in connection with human accidents (Ex. 21, 22), and also in connection with Heavenly accidents (Gen. 44, 20); i.e., just as the word Asson used in connection with human accidents stands for the acquittal of pecuniary compensations, so also does the word Asson, used in connection with Heavenly accidents stand for acquittal of pecuniary compensations." R. Adda b. Ahaha raised the following objection: "Whence do you know that Jacob warned his sons concerning cold and heat, which are the consequences of Heavenly accidents" [Hence infer your theory,] perhaps his (Jacob's) warning was against lions and thieves, which are the consequence of human accidents? [Hence you have no inference.] Did then Jacob confine his warning against this and not against that? Jacob surely warned them against everything. [Hence the inference is understood.] And is then cold and heat the consequence of Heavenly acts? Behold, we are taught that everything is in the power of Heaven (comes through no human fault) except [sickness due to] cold and heat, as it is said (Pr. 22, 5) Thorns and snares are in the way of the froward; he that keepeth his soul holdeth himself far from them. And again a lion and thieves are then the consequence of human acts? Behold R. Joseph said, and so was also R. Chiya taught: "Since the Temple was destroyed, although the court of the Sanhedrin has ceased, nevertheless the punishment of four kinds of death described in the Scriptures did did not cease." How can you say that it has not ceased when we see that they are indeed abolished? We must therefore say that it refers to the Divine Judgment taking the place of the form of capital punishment has not ceased; for he who is liable to be stoned finds his death by falling down from a roof or by being trodden down by a wild beast, which equals stoning; he who is liable to be burned finds likewise his death by fire or by the bite of a snake; he who is liable to be slain by the sword falls either into the hand of the government, [where he is slain,] or [he meets his death] by murderers; and he who ought to be hung finds his death either by drowning in the river, or by diphtheria. [Hence a murderer is not liable to the bite of a snake?] We must therefore reverse the above; namely, the accidents of lions or thieves are the result of Heaven, while cold and heat are the results due to human neglect.

3) (Vayikra 25:40) ("As a hired man and as a sojourner shall he be with you; until the Yovel year shall he work with you.") "As a hired man": Just as a hired man (Devarim 24:15) "On his day shall you give him his hire," so, this one, "On his day shall you give him his hire." "as a sojourner": Just as a sojourner (Devarim 23:17) "… what is good for him; you shall not oppress him," so, this one "… what is good for him; you shall not oppress him." "shall he be with you": "with you" in eating, "with you" in drinking, "with you" in covering — that you not eat a clean loaf and he eat a coarse loaf; that you (not) drink old wine and he drink new wine; that you (not) sleep on cotton and he sleep on straw. "shall he work with you": that he (the master) should not engage him for his craft to another. So that if he (the servant) were formerly a public bath-house attendant, a barber to the public, or a baker to the public, he should not do this (as a servant). R. Yossi says: If this were his trade (before he became a servant) he should do it; but his master should not bid him to do so ab initio. But the sages said: He cuts his (the master's) hair, and washes his garment, and bakes his dough. (Vayikra 25:41) ("Then he shall go out from you; and his children with him. And he shall return to his family, and to the holding of his fathers shall he return.") "Then he shall go out from you": (From this we may infer) that you (the servant) should not be in the village and he in the city, or you in the city and he in the village. "he and his children with him": (from which we may infer) Just as his master is obligated to feed him, so is he obligated to feed his wife and children. I might think, even if he married a woman without the knowledge of his master; it is, therefore, written "he (and his wife) and his children" — Just as he, with the knowledge of his master, so, his wife and children with the knowledge of his master.

3) (Vayikra 25:44) ("And your man-servant and your maid-servant, which will be to you, from the nations, which are around you; of them shall you buy a man-servant and a maid-servant.") Lest you say: If You forbade all of these to us, who shall serve us? It is, therefore, written "And your man-servant and your maid-servant, which will be to you from the nations." What is the intent of this? Whence is it derived that if a Jew lived with his maid-servant and begot a son by her you are permitted to make him your servant? From "which will be to you." "from the nations which are around you": and not from the Canaanites in the land, (whom it is a mitzvah to destroy). "from them shall you buy a man-servant and a maid-servant": "a man-servant and a maid-servant": man-servant is being compared to maid-servant. Just as there is no kiddushin (betrothal) for a maid-servant (with a Jew) (viz. Shemoth 21:4), so, there is no kiddushin for a man-servant (with a Jewess).

Now these are the ordinances (Exod. 21:1). Scripture says (elsewhere) in reference to this verse: These also are sayings of the wise. To have respect of persons in judgment is not good (Prov. 24:23). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel: Remember that I gave you the Torah, in which is written: These are the statutes and commandments. To have respect of persons in judgment is not good. What is meant by this? If a judge acts differentially toward a particular witness and perverts the law because of him, the Shekhinah departs (from him), for it is written: The Lord is good to all (Ps. 145:9). Because of that it is written: God standeth in a congregation of God; in the midst of judges He judgeth (ibid. 82:1).

R. Eleazar said: If there is judgement (din) below there is no judgement above; if there is no judgement above, there is judgement below.¹⁹Tanh., Exod. 6:5, cont.; M. Ps. 72:3; Gen. R. 26:6; Deut. R. 5:5; see also Gen. R. 35:3; 65:9. How so? If those below carry out a judgement, there is no judgement above? For this reason the Holy One said: Observe justice (mishpat) below so that you will not cause me to carry out justice (mishpat) above.²⁰See I Corinthians 11:32. Ergo (in Exod. 21:1): AND THESE ARE THE ORDINANCES (mishpatim). The Holy One said to them: Whatever I do, I do with justice (din). Thus, had I desired to transgress against justice (din) one time, the world would have been unable to survive. Isaiah has said (in Is. 27:4): THERE IS NO ANGER IN ME. [WOULD THAT HE WOULD GIVE ME THORNS AND THISTLES. I WOULD STEP FORTH AGAINST THEM IN BATTLE. I WOULD SET THEM ON FIRE ALL TOGETHER.] Had I walked one step and disregarded judgment (din), I WOULD SET THEM ON FIRE ALL TOGETHER, <i.e.> the world would have burned immediately. (Is. 27:5:) OR LET HIM TAKE HOLD OF MY PROTECTION, when my hand is seized in justice (din), [as stated (in Deut. 32:41):] MY HAND LAYS HOLD ON JUSTICE (mishpat). (Is. 27:5, cont.:) AND LET HIM MAKE PEACE FOR ME, <i.e.> LET HIM MAKE PEACE between me and the judgement (mishpat). (Deut. 32:41:) IF I SHARPEN (rt.: SNN) MY FLASHING SWORD, <i.e.> if I should change (rt.: SNH) the measure of judgement (din), a single flash of lightning would go forth to destroy the world. What should I do? (Deut. 32:41, cont.:) MY HAND LAYS HOLD ON JUSTICE (mishpat). The Holy One said: I am called the Lord of Justice (mishpat, rt.: ShPT), and I want to stretch out (rt.: PShT) my hand against Esau. Still I am unable <to do so> until I pay him a reward for a small favor which he did for me in this world. R. Pinhas bar Hama the Priest said:²¹Esther R. 1:6. Look at what is written (in Zech. 12:9): SO IT WILL COME TO PASS IN THAT DAY {SAYS THE LORD} THAT I WILL SEEK TO DESTROY ALL THE NATIONS. Israel says to him: Sovereign of the World, then who will stay your hand, since you are saying: I SEEK? The Holy One said: It is simply that, when I SEEK their merit and do not find it, then I WILL SEEK TO DESTROY ALL THE NATIONS. R. Levi said: What is written (in Dan. 7:9)? I LOOKED UNTIL THRONES WERE THROWN DOWN.²²Remaw. The word can mean “were set in place,” and this meaning better fits the biblical context. The context of the midrash, however, requires the translation, WERE THROWN DOWN. The Holy One said: When I acquit some of the nations of the world <for> a few simple commandments which they have carried out in my presence, <it is> during that < limited > time, UNTIL THRONES WERE THROWN DOWN. <It is those > thrones belonging to the nations of the world that the Holy One is going to overturn, as stated (in Hag. 2:22): THEN I WILL OVERTURN THE THRONES OF {THE}KINGDOMS [AND DESTROY THE MIGHT OF THE KINGDOMS] OF THE NATIONS. At that time I will <also> redeem you so that you shall be enslaved no more, as stated (in Nahum 1:12): THOUGH I HAVE AFFLICTED YOU, I WILL AFFLICT YOU NO MORE.

Another interpretation (of Deut. 3:23), “I besought [the Lord].” This text is related (to Is. 30:19), “Indeed, O people in Zion, inhabitants of Jerusalem, you shall surely weep no more, He will surely show you compassion (rt.: hnn)]….” What is written above the matter (in Deut. 3:12)? “And its cities I gave to the Reubenites [and to the Gadites].” Moses taught [all] who come into the world that one should not say that, whereas he is dangerously ill, has made a will¹³Gk.: diatheke. and divided all that he has; he should not say that whereas he has made a will, he will no longer pray. Rather he should pray, because the Holy One, blessed be He, does not disqualify the prayer of [any] creature. See here. Moses made a will, as stated (in Deut. 23:12-21), “and its cities I gave to the Reubenites and to the Gadites [….] Yair ben Manasseh received […]. To Machir I gave Gilead. And to the Reubenites and the Gadites I gave […]. Then I charged you at that time, saying [...]. I also charged Joshua at that time], saying.” Ergo, [Moses made] a will. Lest you say, “He ceased and did not pray,” the text reads (in Deut. 3:23) “I besought the Lord.” (Deut. 3:23:) “I besought the Lord.” For what? That he should enter the land. This text is related (to Ps. 61:2), “Hear my song of prayer, O God”; (Ps. 55:2) “Do not hide yourself from my beseeching.” He said to him, “What do you want.” He said to him (in vs. 3) “From the end of the earth (which can also be read as land), I call unto You when my heart is faint.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him (in Deut. 3:26), “Enough from you; do not [ever speak unto Me on this matter] again.” Moses said to him, “Master of the universe, You addressed me as, ‘My servant Moses,’ as stated (in Numb. 12:7), ‘Not so with My servant ('eved) Moses.’ I am a servant ('eved), and Leviathan is a servant ('eved). I act the suppliant before You, and he acts the suppliant before You, as stated (in Job 40:27), ‘Will he make many supplications unto you?’ The supplication of Leviathan You hear; for You have made a covenant with him and sustain him, as stated (in Job 40:28), ‘Will he make a covenant with You for You to take him as Your servant ('eved) forever?’¹⁴The standard translation of You here is that it referring to Job and not to God. But the midrash understands it otherwise. Now I am Your servant ('eved), You have said to me (in Exod. 34:10), ‘I hereby make a covenant….’ But You have not carried it out. Instead you have said to me (in Deut. 32:50), ‘And you shall die on the mountain that you [are ascending]….’ And not only that, but you have written in the Torah and said (in Exod. 21:5), ‘But if the slave ('eved) says, “I love [my master],”’ yet I loved You, and Your Torah and Your children, ‘I will not go away a free person,’ I do not wish to die. (Exod. 21:6:) ‘Then his master shall bring him [before God] …, and he shall serve him forever.’ But You have not carried it out with me. So now please, (Ps. 61:2) ‘Hear my song of prayer, O God’; (Ps. 55:2) ‘Do not hide yourself from my beseeching.’” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, (Deut. 3:26) “’Enough from you!’ The litigant against you has already made a decision over you that you and all creatures like you are to die. When the first Adam ate from the tree, he caused death for all.”

Another interpretation (of Deut. 3:23), “I besought [the Lord].” This text is related (to Is. 30:19), “Indeed, O people in Zion, inhabitants of Jerusalem, you shall surely weep no more, He will surely show you compassion (rt.: hnn)]….” What is written above the matter (in Deut. 3:12)? “And its cities I gave to the Reubenites [and to the Gadites].” Moses taught [all] who come into the world that one should not say that, whereas he is dangerously ill, has made a will¹³Gk.: diatheke. and divided all that he has; he should not say that whereas he has made a will, he will no longer pray. Rather he should pray, because the Holy One, blessed be He, does not disqualify the prayer of [any] creature. See here. Moses made a will, as stated (in Deut. 23:12-21), “and its cities I gave to the Reubenites and to the Gadites [….] Yair ben Manasseh received […]. To Machir I gave Gilead. And to the Reubenites and the Gadites I gave […]. Then I charged you at that time, saying [...]. I also charged Joshua at that time], saying.” Ergo, [Moses made] a will. Lest you say, “He ceased and did not pray,” the text reads (in Deut. 3:23) “I besought the Lord.” (Deut. 3:23:) “I besought the Lord.” For what? That he should enter the land. This text is related (to Ps. 61:2), “Hear my song of prayer, O God”; (Ps. 55:2) “Do not hide yourself from my beseeching.” He said to him, “What do you want.” He said to him (in vs. 3) “From the end of the earth (which can also be read as land), I call unto You when my heart is faint.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him (in Deut. 3:26), “Enough from you; do not [ever speak unto Me on this matter] again.” Moses said to him, “Master of the universe, You addressed me as, ‘My servant Moses,’ as stated (in Numb. 12:7), ‘Not so with My servant ('eved) Moses.’ I am a servant ('eved), and Leviathan is a servant ('eved). I act the suppliant before You, and he acts the suppliant before You, as stated (in Job 40:27), ‘Will he make many supplications unto you?’ The supplication of Leviathan You hear; for You have made a covenant with him and sustain him, as stated (in Job 40:28), ‘Will he make a covenant with You for You to take him as Your servant ('eved) forever?’¹⁴The standard translation of You here is that it referring to Job and not to God. But the midrash understands it otherwise. Now I am Your servant ('eved), You have said to me (in Exod. 34:10), ‘I hereby make a covenant….’ But You have not carried it out. Instead you have said to me (in Deut. 32:50), ‘And you shall die on the mountain that you [are ascending]….’ And not only that, but you have written in the Torah and said (in Exod. 21:5), ‘But if the slave ('eved) says, “I love [my master],”’ yet I loved You, and Your Torah and Your children, ‘I will not go away a free person,’ I do not wish to die. (Exod. 21:6:) ‘Then his master shall bring him [before God] …, and he shall serve him forever.’ But You have not carried it out with me. So now please, (Ps. 61:2) ‘Hear my song of prayer, O God’; (Ps. 55:2) ‘Do not hide yourself from my beseeching.’” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, (Deut. 3:26) “’Enough from you!’ The litigant against you has already made a decision over you that you and all creatures like you are to die. When the first Adam ate from the tree, he caused death for all.”

Now these are the ordinances (Exod. 21:1). Scripture says elsewhere in reference to this verse: He declareth His word unto Jacob … He hath not dealt so with any nation (Ps. 147:19–20). Aquila the convert, Hadrian’s nephew, desired to be converted to Judaism, but he feared his uncle’s wrath.³Aquila was credited with translating the Bible into Greek (see Gittin 56b). He was said to have been the son of Titus’ sister. Hadrian, who reigned from 117 to 138 C.E., promulgated a decree banning circumcision. He told his uncle: “I want to engage in business.” “If you need to do so,” his uncle replied, “silver or gold is available to you.” Aquila responded: “I want to go into business in other lands in order to become acquainted with other people and need only your advice on how to do so.” He responded: “Whatever merchandise you trade in that you find low in price because it is ignored, deal in it, for it will ultimately rise in price and you will profit from it.” Then he went to Israel and studied the Torah.

(Deut. 3:23:) I BESOUGHT THE LORD. For what? That he should enter the land. This text is related (to Ps. 61:2 [1]): HEAR {A JUST CAUSE}[MY SONG OF PRAYER],¹⁷Buber in a note suggests that there is a confusion here with Ps. 17:1. O GOD. He said to him: What do you want. He said to him (in vs. 3) FROM THE END OF THE EARTH I CALL UNTO YOU WHEN MY HEART IS FAINT. <LEAD ME TO A ROCK THAT IS HIGHER THAN I.> The Holy One said to him (in Deut. 3:26): ENOUGH FROM YOU! DO NOT <EVER SPEAK UNTO ME ON THIS MATTER> AGAIN. [Moses said to him:] Sovereign of the World, you addressed me as MY SERVANT MOSES (in Numb. 12:7): NOT SO WITH MY SERVANT ('eved) MOSES. I am a servant ('eved), and Leviathan is a servant ('eved). I act the suppliant before you, and he acts the suppliant before you, as stated (in Job 40:27 [41:3]): WILL HE MAKE MANY SUPPLICATIONS UNTO YOU? The supplication of Leviathan you hear, for you have made a covenant with him and sustain him, as stated (in Job 40:28 [41:4]): WILL HE MAKE A COVENANT WITH YOU FOR YOU TO TAKE HIM AS YOUR SERVANT ('eved) FOREVER? Now I am your servant ('eved), you have said to me (in Exod. 34:10): I HEREBY MAKE A COVENANT. But you have not carried it out. Instead you have said to me (in Deut. 32:50): AND YOU SHALL DIE ON THE MOUNTAIN <THAT YOU ARE ASCENDING>…. And not only that, but you have written in the Torah and said (in Exod. 21:5–6): BUT IF THE SLAVE ('eved) SAYS: I LOVE MY MASTER, <MY WIFE, AND MY CHILDREN>; I WILL NOT GO AWAY A FREE PERSON. THEN HIS MASTER SHALL BRING HIM BEFORE GOD, AND HE SHALL BRING HIM UNTO THE DOOR OR UNTO THE DOORPOST, WHERE HIS MASTER SHALL PIERCE HIS EAR WITH AN AWL, AND HE SHALL SERVE HIM FOREVER. > Now I love you and I love your children; (in accord with Exod. 21:5) I WILL NOT GO AWAY A FREE PERSON. I do not want to die. (Exod. 21:6:) THEN HIS MASTER SHALL BRING HIM BEFORE GOD …, AND HE SHALL SERVE HIM FOREVER. But you have not carried it out with me. So now please, (Ps. 61:2 [1]:) HEAR MY SONG OF PRAYER, O GOD. (Ps. 55:2 [1]:) DO NOT HIDE YOURSELF FROM MY BESEECHING. The Holy One said to me: Impossible! (Deut. 3:26:) ENOUGH FROM YOU! The litigant against you (Satan) has already made a decision over you that you and all creatures like you are to die.

(Deut. 3:23:) I BESOUGHT THE LORD. For what? That he should enter the land. This text is related (to Ps. 61:2 [1]): HEAR {A JUST CAUSE}[MY SONG OF PRAYER],¹⁷Buber in a note suggests that there is a confusion here with Ps. 17:1. O GOD. He said to him: What do you want. He said to him (in vs. 3) FROM THE END OF THE EARTH I CALL UNTO YOU WHEN MY HEART IS FAINT. <LEAD ME TO A ROCK THAT IS HIGHER THAN I.> The Holy One said to him (in Deut. 3:26): ENOUGH FROM YOU! DO NOT <EVER SPEAK UNTO ME ON THIS MATTER> AGAIN. [Moses said to him:] Sovereign of the World, you addressed me as MY SERVANT MOSES (in Numb. 12:7): NOT SO WITH MY SERVANT ('eved) MOSES. I am a servant ('eved), and Leviathan is a servant ('eved). I act the suppliant before you, and he acts the suppliant before you, as stated (in Job 40:27 [41:3]): WILL HE MAKE MANY SUPPLICATIONS UNTO YOU? The supplication of Leviathan you hear, for you have made a covenant with him and sustain him, as stated (in Job 40:28 [41:4]): WILL HE MAKE A COVENANT WITH YOU FOR YOU TO TAKE HIM AS YOUR SERVANT ('eved) FOREVER? Now I am your servant ('eved), you have said to me (in Exod. 34:10): I HEREBY MAKE A COVENANT. But you have not carried it out. Instead you have said to me (in Deut. 32:50): AND YOU SHALL DIE ON THE MOUNTAIN <THAT YOU ARE ASCENDING>…. And not only that, but you have written in the Torah and said (in Exod. 21:5–6): BUT IF THE SLAVE ('eved) SAYS: I LOVE MY MASTER, <MY WIFE, AND MY CHILDREN>; I WILL NOT GO AWAY A FREE PERSON. THEN HIS MASTER SHALL BRING HIM BEFORE GOD, AND HE SHALL BRING HIM UNTO THE DOOR OR UNTO THE DOORPOST, WHERE HIS MASTER SHALL PIERCE HIS EAR WITH AN AWL, AND HE SHALL SERVE HIM FOREVER. > Now I love you and I love your children; (in accord with Exod. 21:5) I WILL NOT GO AWAY A FREE PERSON. I do not want to die. (Exod. 21:6:) THEN HIS MASTER SHALL BRING HIM BEFORE GOD …, AND HE SHALL SERVE HIM FOREVER. But you have not carried it out with me. So now please, (Ps. 61:2 [1]:) HEAR MY SONG OF PRAYER, O GOD. (Ps. 55:2 [1]:) DO NOT HIDE YOURSELF FROM MY BESEECHING. The Holy One said to me: Impossible! (Deut. 3:26:) ENOUGH FROM YOU! The litigant against you (Satan) has already made a decision over you that you and all creatures like you are to die.

The generation of the flood was obliterated from the world because it transgressed the ordinances. R. Eleazar the son of Pedat said: It is written about them: Twixt morning and evening they are shattered; they perish forever without any regarding it (Job 4:20). Therefore it says: Now these are the ordinances which thou shalt set before them (Exod. 21:1). Another explanation. Because the generation of the flood did not perform the ordinances, it is written about them: My spirit shall not abide in man forever (Gen. 6:3).

Our Rabbis taught: "What was the method of learning the traditional Torah in the days of Moses? Moses learned it from the mouth of God, then Aaron entered and Moses taught him the chapter; when Aaron had finished, he left the seat of study, taking a seat at the left of Moses, and then his sons entered. Moses then taught them the chapter. When they finished, they departed, Elazar assuming a seat at the left of Moses and Ithamar at Aaron's right. R. Juda says: 'Aaron was always at the right of Moses.' The elder then entered and Moses taught them the same chapter. When the elders were through, they departed and the people entered and Moses taught them the chapter. Thus it is found that Aaron studies the chapter four times, his sons, three times, the elders twice, and the people once. Moses then departed and Aaron studied the same chapter with them all. When Aaron finished, he departed, and his sons studied the chapter with them; after the sons finished, they departed and the elders studied the chapter with the people. It is thus found that every one repeated the chapter four times. 'From this.' says R. Eliezer, 'we learn that it is the duty of a man to repeat a lesson with his disciple four times.' For if Aaron who learned it from Moses and if Moses, who learned it from God Himself, had to repeat the chapter four times, then, surely, an ordinary man who learns from another ordinary man, should repeat it much more frequently." R. Akiba said: "Whence do we infer that a man must learn the lesson with his disciple until his disciple knows it? It is said (Deu. 31, 19.) And teach it the children of Israel. Whence do we know that he must teach him until he knows it? It is said (Ib. ib. ib.) Put it in their mouths. Whence do we infer that the he must show him the reasons for every law? It is said (Ex. 21, 1.) And these are the laws which thou shouldst place before them." Why should not all enter and learn directly from Moses? In order to show honor to Aaron, his children and the elders. If that be so, then why should not Aaron enter and learn it from Moses, Aaron's children from Aaron, the elders from Aaron's children, and the people from the elders? Because Moses learned from the Almighty, he was therefore more capable of explaining the Torah. The master said above: R. Juda says "Aaron was always sitting to the right of Moses." In accordance with whose opinion is the following Baraitha? "When three men are walking on the road the teacher shall walk in the middle, the junior disciple to his right and the senior to his left." Is this not in accordance with B. Juda [who says Aaron was sitting at the right of Moses]? We can say it is in accordance even with the opinion of the Rabbis, yet Aaron occupied his seat to the right of Moses in order to save him trouble [as he occupied the seat at the right of Moses in the beginning, so he remained].

5) (Vayikra 24:12) ("And they put him in confinement, to be explained to them at the mouth of the L–rd.") But they did not place the mekoshesh with him, though their situations were concurrent. And they knew that the mekoshesh was liable to the death penalty, viz. (Shemoth 21:14) "Those who desecrate it (the Sabbath) shall die, but they did not know which death penalty, viz. (Bamidbar 15:34) "for it was not clear what should be done to him," but here it is written "to be explained to them at the mouth of the L–rd" — whereby we are taught that they did not know whether he was liable to the death penalty or not.

5) (Vayikra 20:9) "For a man, a man": What is the intent of this? To include a daughter, a tumtum, and a hermaphrodite. "who curses his father and his mother shall be put to death": This tells me only of his father and his mother. Whence do I derive the same for (one who curses) his mother without (cursing) his father, or his father without his mother? From "He has cursed his father and his mother," in any event. These are the words of R. Yoshiyah. R. Yonathan says: ("His father and his mother) implies both together or each by itself unless Scripture explicitly states "together" (as it does in the case of kilaim).

A question: An Israelite involved in a litigation with his neighbor, is prohibited from going to a heathen judge for judgment,⁴See Rashi on the beginning of Exod. 21:1 and above Tan. Ex. Ordinances, 3. since it is said: now these are the ordinances which thou shalt set before them (Exod. 21:1). It is taught by R. Simeon the son of Azzai: Even if you should discover a non-Jewish court where the law is identical with the law in an Israelite court, you are prohibited from bringing the case before them, since it is said: Which thou shalt set before them. Before them, and not before non-Jews, before them, and not before ignorant men.

(Exod. 30:12): WHEN YOU TAKE A CENSUS <…, EACH SHALL GIVE A RANSOM FOR HIS LIFE…,> SO THAT NO PLAGUE COME UPON THEM. When Moses heard this, he was afraid, and said (as Job. 2:4): SKIN FOR SKIN! ALL THAT ONE HAS HE WILL GIVE FOR HIS LIFE.¹⁸Tanh., Exod. 9:11; cf. below, Numb. 2:19. R. Judah b. R. Il'ay said: Moses said: We have already found that a ransom for a person's life is a talent of silver. It is so stated (in I Kings 20:39): IT WILL BE YOUR LIFE FOR HIS LIFE OR YOU WILL PAY A TALENT [OF SILVER]. R. Johanan said: From whom did he learn <about the ransom >? From the one who commits libel. Thus it is stated (concerning the man who commits libel against his virgin bride in Deut. 22:19): AND THEY SHALL FINE HIM A HUNDRED <SHEKELS OF> SILVER. Now we have committed libel against the Holy One¹⁹PR 10:12. and said (of the golden calf in Exod. 32:4): THIS IS YOUR GOD, O ISRAEL. <Therefore,> each and every one of us must give a hundred <shekels> of silver. Resh Laqish said: Moses learned <about the ransom> from <the law concerning > the rapist. It is written (concerning the rapist in Deut. 22:29): THE MAN WHO LAY WITH HER SHALL GIVE [TO THE YOUNG WOMAN'S FATHER FIFTY <SHEKELS OF> SILVER]. Now we have raped the <divine> word. Thus it is written (in Exod. 20:3): YOU SHALL HAVE NO [OTHER GODS] <BESIDES ME>; and we have committed idolatry. <Therefore,> each and every one of us must give fifty < shekels of> silver. R. Judah bar Simon said: Moses learned from <the law concerning> a goring bull, since it is stated (in Exod. 21:32): IF A BULL GORES A MALE [OR FEMALE] SLAVE, [HE SHALL GIVE THIRTY SHEKELS OF SILVER TO THE MASTER]. Now we have exchanged his glory for a bull. It is so stated (in Ps. 106:20): THUS THEY EXCHANGED THEIR GLORY FOR THE IMAGE OF A BULL. Does every one of us have to give thirty shekels? The Holy One knew what was in Moses' heart. He said to him: By your life, <the ransom will be> not a talent of silver, not a hundred < shekels of> silver, not fifty shekels of silver, and not thirty shekels, but (as in Exod. 30:13): <EVERYONE WHO IS ENTERED IN THE RECORDS > SHALL GIVE THIS: <A HALF SHEKEL >.

(Numb. 1:1) “Then the Lord spoke unto Moses in the Sinai desert.” [Sinai] was called by six names: Mountain of God (as in Ps. 68:16), Mount Bashan (ibid.), Mountain of Peaks (ibid.), Mountain of Desire (hmd), Mount Horeb (Exod. 3:1; 33:6; etc.), and Mount Sinai.³¹Numb. R. 1:8. The Mountain of God is [so called] because on it God sat in judgment, as stated (in Exod. 21:1), “Now these are the judgments³²Mishpatim. In the biblical context the word would more normally be translated ordinances. which you shall set before them.” Mount Bashan is the mountain where (sham) Holy One, blessed be He, came (ba').³³In the Hebrew text sham and ba’ appear in the opposite order and next to each other as ba’ sham. The Mountain of Peaks (gavenunnim, rt.: gbn) is the mountain where He disqualified all the [other] mountains,³⁴See Gen. R. 109:1, which depicts the mountains contending with each other to host the revelation of the Torah and generally expands what follows. just as you say (in Lev. 21:20), “or a hunchback (gbn) or a dwarf.”³⁵The context is a list of those rejected from serving in the priesthood. The implication here is that, unlike Sinai where the ordinances for priesthood where given, the other mountains were hunchbacks or dwarfs and therefore rejected. Mountain of Desire (rt.: hmd) is [so called], because on it the Holy One, blessed be He, desired (hmd) to dwell, as stated (in Ps. 68:17), “the mountain God desired for His dwelling.” Mount Horeb (rt.: hrb) is [so called], because upon it the sword (rt.: hrb) [of judgment] was unsheathed, as stated (in Lev. 20:10), “the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death,” [and] (in Numb. 35:16), “the murderer shall surely be put to death.” Mount Sinai is [so called], because on it the peoples of the world became hateful (rt.: sn') to the Holy One, blessed be He; and He rendered a verdict³⁶Gk.: apophasis. against them, as stated (in is. 60:12), “and the gentiles shall be utterly (hrb) destroyed (rt.: hrb).” R. Abba bar Kahana said in the name of R. Johanan, “’And the gentiles shall be utterly destroyed’ – it was where they received a verdict.”

Another interpretation (of Numb. 1:1): THEN THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES IN THE SINAI DESERT. <Sinai> was called by six names: Mountain of God (as in Ps. 68:16 [15]), Mount Bashan (ibid.), mountain of peaks (ibid.), mountain of desire (HMD), Mount Horeb (Exod. 3:1; 33:6; etc.), Mount Sinai.⁴⁴Tanh., Numb. 1:7; Numb. R. 1:8. The mountain of God is <so called> because on it God sat in judgment, as stated (in Exod. 21:1): NOW THESE ARE THE JUDGMENTS⁴⁵Mishpatim. In the biblical context the word would more normally be translated ORDINANCES. WHICH YOU SHALL SET BEFORE THEM. Mount Bashan is the mountain where (sham) Holy One came (ba').⁴⁶In the Hebrew text sham and ba’ appear in the opposite order and next to each other as ba’ sham. The mountain of peaks (gavenunnim, rt.: GBN) is the mountain where he carved out and rejected⁴⁷Pasal. The word can mean both “carved” and “rejected.” In carving a statue one rejects what is chipped away. The statue itself, like Israel, is what remains. all the <other> mountains.⁴⁸See Gen. R. 109:1, which depicts the mountains contending with each other to host the revelation of the Torah and generally expands what follows. Where is it shown? <It is> just as you say (in Lev. 21:20): OR A HUNCHBACK (GBN) OR A DWARF.⁴⁹The context is a list of those rejected from serving in the priesthood. The implication here is that, unlike Sinai where the ordinances for priesthood where given, the other mountains were hunchbacks or dwarfs and therefore rejected. The mountain of desire (rt.: HMD) is <so called>, because on it the Holy One desired (HMD) to dwell, as stated (in Ps. 68:17 [16]): THE MOUNTAIN GOD DESIRED FOR HIS DWELLING. Mount Horeb (rt.: HRB) is <so called>, because upon it the sword (rt.: HRB) <of judgment> was unsheathed, as stated (in Lev. 20:10): THE ADULTERER AND THE ADULTERESS SHALL SURELY BE PUT TO DEATH, <and> (in Numb. 35:16): THE MURDERER SHALL SURELY BE PUT TO DEATH. Mount Sinai is <so called>, because on it the peoples of the world became hateful (rt.: SN') to the Holy One, and he rendered a verdict⁵⁰Gk.: apophasis. against them, as stated (in Is. 60:12): AND THE GENTILES SHALL BE UTTERLY (HRB) DESTROYED (rt.: HRB). R. Abba bar Kahana said in the name of R. Johanan: AND THE GENTILES SHALL BE UTTERLY⁵¹In this repetition of Is. 60:12 the Buber text alters the word translated UTTERLY from harov to mehurav. This change also appears in the parallel text of ySot. 7:5 (21d), but not in the traditional parallel texts of Tanh., Numb. 1:7, and Numb. R. 1:8. DESTROYED. <It was> where they received a verdict.

[(Exod. 30:13:) <EVERYONE WHO IS ENTERED IN THE RECORDS> SHALL GIVE THIS (ZH): <A HALF SHEKEL>.] R. Meir said: The Holy One took something like a coin of fire²⁰Perhaps the word THIS (ZH) in Exod. 30:13 suggested the biblical Aramaic root, ‘ZH (“light a fire,” “heat”), found in Dan. 3:19, 22. For an explicit connection between the two roots, see M. Pss. 68:5. Cf. also PR 10:12. from under the throne of glory and showed it unto Moses.²¹Below, Tanh. (Buber), Numb. 2:19; Tanh., Exod. 9:9 (at the end); ySheq. 1:6 (46b); PRK 2:10; Numb. R. 12:3; M. Pss. 91:1. Then he said to Moses <EVERYONE WHO IS ENTERED (ha'over, rt.: 'BR) IN THE RECORDS > SHALL GIVE THIS. Moses said: Who shall give? The Holy One said to him: Everyone who crossed over (ha'over) in the sea.

R. Samuel the son of Nahmani said that R. Jonathan stated: Whoever rebukes his companion for religious reasons earns a share of divine grace, as it is said: He that rebuketh a man shall in the end find more favor (Prov. 28:23). And furthermore a thread of divine favors will be drawn about him, as is said: He shall find favor. Scripture says: Mine ordinance shall ye do (Lev. 18:4). These are ordinances which, if they were not enumerated in the Torah, ought to have been. Scripture is speaking here of idolatry and blasphemy. My statutes shall ye keep, to walk therein (ibid.). These are the commandments against which the evil inclination contends, and against which the peoples of the earth rebel. These are: the wearing of garments made of wool and linen,¹²The law of shatnez; see Lev. 19:19. This commandment and all the following ones are disregarded as irrational by non-Jews. the eating of pig,¹³See Lev. 11:7. the spittle of a childless sister-in-law,¹⁴After one has refused to marry his brother’s widow under the law of levirate marriage; see Deut. 25:5–10. mixing seeds,¹⁵Deut. 22:9–11. stoning an ox for killing a human being,¹⁶Exod. 21:29. the heifer whose neck was broken,¹⁷Lev. 14:1–21. the bird sacrifice brought by a leper,¹⁷ a firstling of an ass,¹⁸Exod. 13:13. meat prepared in milk,¹⁹Exod. 23:9. and the goat that has been sent away (the scapegoat).²⁰Lev. 16:1–34. Azazel, the area where the scapegoat would perish. You might maintain that these are unimportant prohibitions. Hence Scripture says: I am the Lord: I have decreed them, and you art not permitted to repudiate them.

7) But it is impossible to write of striking vis-à-vis the L–rd, (as it is written vis-à-vis parents [Shemoth 21:15]). (And one's honoring parents) is justly (compared to his honoring the L–rd), for the three of them are partners in his creation.

... Teach us, oh master – may one light a lamp for personal use from the Channukah lights? Our masters taught us – R’ Acha said in the name of Rav ‘it is forbidden to light a lamp to use from the Channukah lights, but one may light a Channukah light from a Channukah light.’ From where did they learn that it is permissible to light a Channukah light (from it)? R’ Yaakov ben Aba said, they learned it from the menorah that was in the Holy of Holies, as our rabbis taught that if one found they had gone out, they should be cleaned out and re-lit from those that are still lit. (Tamid 3) If we would relight an extinguished lamp of the menorah, which was placed in the innermost sanctum, from the lamps still burning all the more so it is permissible to light a Channukah light from the lights still burning.’ The Holy One said, just as in this world lamps were lit in the Holy of Holies, so too I will do when I rebuild Jerusalem. From where do we know this? From the words of the prophet “And it shall come to pass on that day, that I will search Jerusalem with candles…” (Tzephaniah 1:12)

When someone sins, what does the Holy One do to him first? He brings poverty upon him so that he sells his field, as stated (in Lev. 25:25): WHEN YOUR RELATIVE BECOMES POOR AND SELLS SOME OF HIS PROPERTY.²⁵T‘Arakh. 5:9; above, 9:2. If he repents, then fine; but if not he sells his house, as stated (in Lev. 25:29): AND WHEN SOMEONE SELLS A DWELLING HOUSE. If he repents, then fine; but if not he sells his daughter, as stated (in Exod. 21:7): AND IF SOMEONE SELLS HIS DAUGHTER AS A SLAVE. If he repents, then fine; but if not he sells himself, as stated (in Deut. 15:12): IF THERE IS SOLD TO YOU A FELLOW HEBREW. Why all this? Because they became poor through < their > iniquities. (Lev. 25:25:) WHEN YOUR RELATIVE BECOMES POOR.

... “And David went and he took the bones of Saul and the bones of Jonathan his son from the men of Jabesh- gilead… And he brought up from there the bones of Saul and the bones of Jonathan his son…” (Shmuel II 21:12-13) What did David do? He went and gathered all the elders and great ones of Israel, crossed the Jordan River, and came to Yavesh-gilead. He found the bones of Shaul and his son Yonatan, placed them in a casket and crossed back over the Jordan, as it says “And they buried the bones of Saul and Jonathan his son in the country of Benjamin in Zela, in the tomb of Kish his father and they did all that the king commanded…” (Shmuel II 21:14) What does ‘in Zela, in the tomb of Kish his father’ mean? It comes to teach us that they brought them to the border of Jerusalem and buried them there. Zela is next to Jerusalem, as it says “And Zelah, Eleph, and the Jebusite, which is Jerusalem…” (Yehoshua 18:28) ‘and they did all that the king commanded’ And what did the king command? He commanded that they carry Shaul’s casket from tribe to tribe. As Shaul’s casket entered each tribe’s territory all the men, women and children came out in order to perform an act of loving kindness to Shaul and his sons and thereby all of Israel would fulfill its obligation to loving kindness. This went on until they reached the land of his portion on the border of Jerusalem. Since the Holy One saw that they did loving kindness to Shaul and fulfilled the judgement of the Givonites He was immediately filled with mercy and sent rain upon the land, as it says “And God was entreated for the land after that.” (Shmuel II 21:14) From this we learn how close the Holy One brings those that are far away, even though they converted not for the sake of heaven. There is no need to even mention how he draws near righteous converts, “O Lord, all the kings of the earth will acknowledge You…” (Tehillim 138:4)

8) "one who strikes a man": What is the intent of this? Because it is written (Shemoth 21:15) "And one who strikes his father and mother (shall be put to death"), I might think that he is not liable until he strikes both of them together; it is, therefore, written "and one who strikes a man shall be put to death" — even one of them. I might think that even if he struck them and did not cause an injury he is liable; it is, therefore, written "And one who strikes a beast … and one who strikes a man." Just as one who strikes a beast (is not liable) until he causes an injury, so, he who strikes a man. I might think that even if he struck them (his father or his mother) after (their) death, he is liable, (just as he is if he curses them after their death); it is, therefore, written "one who strikes a beast" and "one who strikes a man" — Just as the first, while it is living, so, the second, while he is living.

(Numb. 35:11:) WHERE A KILLER MAY FLEE WHO HAS TAKEN A LIFE BY MISTAKE, and not on purpose. If someone goes and kills on purpose, then says: It was by mistake that I killed, and flees to <one of the> cities of refuge, the Holy One says: Even if he comes in and flees to my altar, kill him, according to what is stated (in Exod. 21:14): BUT WHEN SOMEONE PLOTS AGAINST <HIS COMPANION AND KILLS HIM TREACHEROUSLY>, YOU SHALL TAKE HIM AWAY <EVEN> FROM MY ALTAR <FOR EXECUTION>. Who was this person who fled to the altar and was killed? This was Joab, of whom it is stated (in I Kings 2:28): WHEN THE NEWS CAME TO JOAB,…. <JOAB FLED UNTO THE TENT OF THE LORD> AND SEIZED THE HORNS OF THE ALTAR. You find that Joab was a great sage and the head of the Sanhedrin,³³Gk.: Synehedrion. as stated (in II Sam. 23:8): ONE WHO SITS IN THE SEAT OF WISDOM.³⁴These words are commonly understood as the proper name, JOSHEB-BASSHEBETH, A TAHCHEMONITE, but this and other citations of the verse in rabbinic literature tend to understand the verse as translated here. See above, Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 4:12, and the note there; also below, Tanh. (Buber), Deut. 1:3. Cf. MQ 26b, for an interpretation that identifies this sage with David himself. But did he not know what is written in the Torah (in Exod. 21:14): <BUT WHEN SOMEONE PLOTS AGAINST HIS COMPANION AND KILLS HIM TREACHEROUSLY>, YOU SHALL TAKE HIM AWAY <EVEN> FROM MY ALTAR FOR EXECUTION, [when he went and seized the horns of the altar]?³⁵yMakk. 2:7 [6] (31d); Sanh. 48b; see Makk. 12b. It is simply that [Joab] had said: Those killed by a court of law are not buried in the graves of their ancestors but by themselves. It is better to die here, so that I may be buried with my ancestors. (I Kings 2:30–31:) THEN BENAIAH BROUGHT BACK WORD UNTO THE KING, SAYING: THUS HAS JOAB SPOKEN AND THUS DID HE ANSWER ME. SO THE KING SAID TO HIM: DO AS HE HAS SPOKEN, STRIKE HIM DOWN AND BURY HIM. Why was he killed? Because his (Solomon's) father, David, had ordered him <to do> so (in I Kings 2:5–6): MOREOVER, YOU ALSO KNOW WHAT JOAB BEN ZERUIAH DID TO ME…. <SO ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH YOUR WISDOM, AND DO NOT LET HIS GRAY HAIR GO DOWN TO SHEOL IN PEACE.> What did he do to him? You find that, when David wrote to Joab (in II Sam. 11:15): SET URIAH IN THE FRONT LINE WHERE THE FIGHTING IS THE FIERCEST, he did so, and he was killed. All the army leaders assembled against Joab, as stated of him (in II Sam. 23:39): URIAH THE HITTITE, <was one of> ALL <those> {THIRTY-SIX} [THIRTY-SEVEN} <leaders>. He showed them the document. It is therefore stated (in I Kings 2:5): [YOU KNOW] WHAT [JOAB BEN ZERUIAH] DID TO ME AND WHAT HE DID TO THE TWO COMMANDERS OF ISRAEL's FORCES, TO ABNER BEN NER <AND TO AMASA BEN JETHER> [….] They had been of the opinion that David had ordered him to kill him because Abner was Saul's cousin, and for that reason David arose and cursed Joab, when he said (in II Sam. 3:29): MAY THE HOUSE OF JOAB NEVER LACK <ONE WITH A DISCHARGE, A LEPER, ONE WHO GRASPS THE CRUTCH,³⁶Modern translations commonly understand these words to mean, A MALE WHO HANDLES THE SPINDLE, but the midrash understands them in the sense given here. ONE WHO FALLS BY THE SWORD, AND ONE LACKING BREAD>. Then all Israel was appeased,³⁷Rt.: PYS. Cf. Gk.: peisai (“to have persuaded”). when they knew that there was no <authorization> from David. So David ordered his son, Solomon, to kill him, because Joab was the son of David's sister, and he wanted him to approach the world to come.³⁸If he received punishment is this world, his deed would no longer bar him from doing so. When Solomon desired to kill him, Joab said to Benaiah: Go and tell Solomon: Do not sentence me with two judgments. If you are killing me, take off from me the curses with which your father, David, cursed me; and if not, leave me with his curses. Immediately (in I Kings 2:31): SO [THE KING] SAID TO HIM: DO AS HE HAS SPOKEN. [STRIKE HIM DOWN AND BURY HIM.] R. Judah has said: All curses with which David cursed Joab were all fulfilled in David's seed. [(II Sam. 3:29:) MAY THE HOUSE OF JOAB NEVER LACK ONE WITH A DISCHARGE, A LEPER, ONE WHO GRASPS THE CRUTCH, ONE WHO FALLS BY THE SWORD, AND ONE LACKING BREAD.]³⁹yQid. 1:7 (61a); cf. above, Gen. 7:7; ‘Arakh. 16a. ONE WITH A DISCHARGE <was fulfilled in> Rehoboam ben Solomon (according to I Kings 12:18 = II Chron. 10:18): THEN KING REHOBOAM SUCCEEDED IN MOUNTING HIS CHARIOT (merkavah) <AND FLED TO JERUSALEM>. It also says concerning ONE WITH A DISCHARGE (in Lev. 15:9): AND ANY SADDLE (merkav) ON WHICH THE ONE WITH A DISCHARGE RIDES <SHALL BE UNCLEAN>. (II Sam 3:29, cont.:) A LEPER <was fulfilled in> Uzziah, of whom it is stated (in II Kings 15:5): AND HE WAS A LEPER UNTIL THE DAY OF HIS DEATH. (II Sam 3:29, cont.:) ONE WHO GRASPS THE CRUTCH <was fulfilled in> Asa, of whom it is written (in I Kings 15:23): HOWEVER IN HIS OLD AGE HE BECAME DISEASED IN HIS FEET, where gout⁴⁰Gk.: podagra; Lat.: podagra. had seized him. (II Sam 3:29, cont.:) ONE WHO FALLS BY THE SWORD <was fulfilled in> Josiah, of whom it is written (in II Chron. 35:23): THEN THE ARCHERS SHOT KING JOSIAH. Moreover, Rav Judah has said: Rav said: they thrust three hundred iron lances⁴¹Gk.: longchai. into him, until they had perforated him like a sieve. (II Sam 3:29, cont.:) AND ONE LACKING BREAD <was fulfilled in> Jehoiachin, of whom it is stated (in II Kings 25:30 = Jer. 52:34): AND FOR HIS FOOD ALLOWANCE A REGULAR FOOD ALLOWANCE WAS GIVEN TO HIM FROM THE KING, from the table of Evil-merodach. You also find that as long as Jehoiada lived, Joash did the will of his creator, as stated (in II Kings 12:3 [2] // II Chron. 24:2): AND JEHOASH DID WHAT WAS RIGHT IN THE EYES OF THE LORD ALL HIS DAYS AS THE PRIEST JEHOIADA INSTRUCTED HIM. (II Chron. 24:17:) NOW AFTER THE DEATH OF JEHOIADA, THE PRINCES OF JUDAH CAME {UNTO HIM} AND BOWED LOW TO THE KING. THEN THE KING HEARKENED UNTO THEM, in that he took it upon himself to make an idol. Therefore (According to vs. 24): <THE ARMY OF ARAM CAME WITH A FEW MEN….> SO THEY INFLICTED JUDGMENTS ON JOASH. Now for what was Abner punished. It was because he had made the blood of the young men an amusement (rt.: SHQ), as stated (in II Sam. 2:14): THEN ABNER SAID UNTO JOAB: PLEASE LET THE YOUNG MEN ARISE AND PLAY (rt.: SHQ) BEFORE US. SO JOAB SAID: LET THEM ARISE.⁴²The result of their “playing” was that they all killed each other. See above, Gen. 6:5; Exod. 1:24; Numb. 6:8. There are also those who say it was because he put his name before the name of David, as stated (in II Sam. 3:12): THEN ABNER SENT MESSENGERS UNTO DAVID WHERE HE WAS, SAYING: TO WHOM DOES THE LAND BELONG? But the sages say: It was because he did not [wait] for Saul to be reconciled with David. Moreover, he had the power to protest <the massacre> at Nob, the city of priests, and did not protest.

We are taught in a Baraitha that R. Tarphon was accustomed to say: "Whereever you find heathenish courts, even though they decide judgements in accordance with the law of Israel, one must not appeal to them; for it is said: (Ex. 21, 1) And those are the laws of justice which thou shalt set before them; i.e., before them (the Sanhedrian) and not before private persons.

(Exod. 23:20:) BEHOLD, I AM SENDING AN ANGEL <BEFORE YOU TO GUARD YOU ON THE WAY>…. This text is related (to Jer. 3:19): THEN I SAID: HOW WOULD I⁴¹This translation fits the context of the midrash. PUT (rt.: ShYT) YOU AMONG THE CHILDREN,… !⁴²Tanh., Exod. 6:17; see below, Tanh. (Buber), Numb. 4a:15. R. Eleazar ben Pedat says: What is this <expression>: WOULD I PUT (rt.: ShYT) YOU? It had occurred to me that we, I and you, would be < alone > in the world.⁴³Tanh., Exod. 6:17, adds, “I as father and you as children.” How did you manage for me to bring the peoples of the world in among you?⁴⁴Cf. Tanh., Exod. 6:17: “How did you manage to bring the peoples of the world in between me and you?” This expression is nothing but an expression of setting apart (as in Gen. 30:40): AND HE PUT (rt.: ShYT) HIS OWN FLOCKS <APART>…. R. Hama bar Hanina said: What is the meaning of WOULD I PUT (rt.: ShYT) YOU?⁴⁵Cf. Exod. R. 32:2. There was a great love between me and you.⁴⁶Below, Tanh. (Buber), Lev. 7:12; Numb. 4a: 15; Exod. R. 32:2. How did you manage that I should hate you? (Jer. 3:19:) HOW WOULD I PUT (rt.: ShYT) YOU AMONG THE CHILDREN! This expression is nothing but an expression of hatred, as used (in Gen. 3:15): I WILL PUT (rt.: ShYT) ENMITY <BETWEEN YOU AND THE WOMAN>. Another interpretation (of Jer. 3:19:) HOW WOULD I PUT (ShYT) YOU AMONG THE CHILDREN ! R. Joshua ben Levi said: I spoke in <your> defense.⁴⁷Gk.: synegoria. You behaved toward me so that I denounced you and pronounced you guilty (rt.: HYB). The expression (rt.: ShYT) is nothing but an expression of guilt (rt.: HYB), as used (concerning one guilty of negligence in Exod. 21:30): IF A RANSOM IS PUT (rt.: ShYT) UPON HIM, <HE SHALL GIVE WHATEVER IS PUT (rt.: ShYT) UPON HIM TO REDEEM HIS LIFE>. Another interpretation (of Jer. 3:19:) HOW WOULD I PUT (ashit; rt.: ShYT) YOU AMONG THE CHILDREN! R. Berekhyah the Priest said: You were as dear to me as someone who has a single field, which he fertilizes, cultivates, and weeds. So dear were you to me. Your behavior toward me was for you to commit lawlessness. Now this word (ashit) is nothing but an expression for lawlessness, as used (in Is. 5:6): AND I WILL MAKE (ashit) IT (i.e., the Holy One's vineyard) A DESOLATION. (Jer. 3:19, cont.:) AND GIVE YOU A DESIRABLE LAND, a land that the great ones of the world (i.e., the patriarchs) desired.⁴⁸Below, Tanh. (Buber), Numb. 4a: 16. Abraham said to the Hittites (in Gen. 23:4): GIVE ME A BURIAL SITE. The Holy One also endeared it to {the children of} Isaac, as stated (in Gen. 26:3): RESIDE IN THIS LAND, <AND I WILL BE WITH YOU AND BLESS YOU>…. Jacob said (according to Gen. 50:5): IN MY GRAVE WHICH I DUG FOR MYSELF <IN THE LAND OF CANAAN, THERE YOU SHALL BURY ME>. Ergo (in Jer. 3:19): A DESIRABLE LAND. (Ibid., cont.:) <THE MOST> [BEAUTIFUL HERITAGE] <OF ALL THE NATIONS>. What is the meaning of <THE MOST> BEAUTIFUL (tsevi) HERITAGE? Just as in the case of a deer (tsevi), when one slaughters it, strips off its hide, and tries to return the flesh into the hide, it does not contain it, so the land of Israel does not contain its produce. What is written (in Is. 30:24)? AS FOR THE OXEN AND ASSES THAT WORK THE GROUND, THEY SHALL EAT FERMENTED FODDER, WHICH HAS BEEN WINNOWED WITH SHOVEL AND PITCH FORK. First they winnow with the SHOVEL and after that with the PITCH FORK. Why? Because there was more grain than straw. Even so there was produce in <further> winnowing the straw. Where is it shown? Where it is stated (ibid.): FERMENTED MASH, WHICH HAS BEEN WINNOWED WITH SHOVEL AND PITCH FORK. Mashes are from produce. Ergo (in Jer. 3:19): [A DESIRABLE LAND,] <THE MOST> BEAUTIFUL (tsevi) HERITAGE (understood in the sense of THE MOST DEERLIKE HERITAGE), a land which does not contain its produce, a land which was so good that all the kings of the world desired it. It is written (in Josh. 12:9): THE KING OF JERICHO, ONE; THE KING {FOR AI} [OF AI WHICH IS BESIDE BETHEL], ONE. Now there are only three miles⁴⁹Lat.: mille. between Jericho and Ai; yet it says: THE KING OF JERICHO. It is simply that whoever has a possession outside of the land without having a possession in the land of Israel was not called a king.⁵⁰Sifre, to Deut. 7:12 (37); Gen. R. 85:14. Why? Because they longed for the land of Israel. R. {Isaac} [Johanan] said: What is written (in Josh. 7:21): I SAW AMONG THE SPOILS A <FINE> SHINAR MANTLE, <i.e.> a Babylonian⁵¹Gk.: Babylonikon; Lat.: Babylonicum. robe of royal purple,⁵²Gk.: porphura; Lat.: purpura. which the king of Babylon wore to rule in Jericho. Ergo (in Jer. 3:19): THE MOST BEAUTIFUL HERITAGE OF THE NATIONS.⁵³According to this reasoning, the various kingships were so close to each other in Israel because every king needed a seat in Israel in order to be regarded as a king. (Ibid., cont.:) AND I SAID YOU SHALL CALL ME FATHER. Just as a father is obliged <to provide > for his daughter's enjoyments, so did I bring down rain for you. (Exod. 16:14:) WHEN THE LAYER OF DEW HAD GONE UP, <THERE ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH LAY SOMETHING FINE AND FLAKY>…. (Jer. 3:20:) SURELY AS A WOMAN BREAKS FAITH WITH HER LOVER <SO YOU HAVE BROKEN FAITH WITH ME, O HOUSE OF ISRAEL>. R. Judah bar Simon said: Oh that <you were> like an unfaithful wife. This <kind of> a woman, who has a lover, gives him food, drink, and love. When his power is diminished, she leaves him and goes away. SURELY AS A WOMAN BREAKS FAITH WITH HER LOVER. I have not done so to you. The manna came down for you, and the well rose up. I did not deprive you of anything when you were unfaithful with me. See, I gave you an angel who watched over you. (Exod. 23:20:) SEE, I AM SENDING YOU AN ANGEL <TO WATCH OVER YOU>. When you became worthy and received the Torah, I went before you in person. But now, when you have been found guilty, here I am <merely> (ibid.:) SENDING AN ANGEL BEFORE YOU. [Another interpretation:]⁵⁴Tanh., Exod. 6:18. The Holy One said to Moses: I am sending <an angel> before you but not before them. He said: If you send <him> out before me, I do not want <him>; but Joshua saw the angel and fell down before him. What did he say to him (in Josh. 5:13)? ARE YOU FOR US OR FOR OUR ADVERSARIES? When he said to him: ARE YOU FOR US? he began to cry in great anguish.⁵⁵Literally: “From under the nails of his feet.” (Ibid., vs. 14:) Then he said: NO, BUT [I] AM THE CAPTAIN OF THE LORD'S HOST. NOW I HAVE COME.⁵⁶Gen. R. 97:3 (traditional text only). Here are two times that I have come to give Israel an inheritance. I am the one who came in the days of your master, Moses; but he rejected me. (Ibid., cont.:) NOW I HAVE COME. THEN JOSHUA FELL ON HIS FACE. He saw him and fell on his face, but when Moses saw <him>, he rejected him. The Holy One said (in Exod. 23:20): SEE, I AM SENDING AN ANGEL BEFORE YOU, to you and to whomever observes the Torah [as you <do>. Resh Laqish said: It is written (in Ps. 91:4): HE WILL COVER YOU WITH HIS PINIONS AND YOU WILL FIND REFUGE UNDER HIS WINGS, <i.e.> all who observe the Torah.] (Ibid., cont.:) HIS FIDELITY IS A SHIELD AND BUCKLER. Therefore (in Exod. 23:20): < I AM SENDING MY ANGEL BEFORE YOU > TO GUARD YOU ON THE WAY….

R. Judah the son of Simon contended that he learned it from the law concerning the ox that gored. It is said: If the ox gore a bondman or a bondwoman, he shall give thirty shekels of silver (Exod. 21:32), and since we replaced Him with an ox (i.e the golden calf), as is said: Thus they exchanged their glory for the likeness of an ox that eateth grain (Ps. 106:20), each one shall give thirty shekels of silver. The Holy One, blessed be He, knew what was in Moses’ heart, and so He showed him with His finger, as is said: Moses, this they shall give, that is, this amount they shall give.

(Numb. 35:11:) “Where a killer may flee who has taken a life by mistake.” “By mistake,” and not on purpose. If someone goes and kills on purpose, then says, “It was by mistake that I killed,” and flees to [one of the] cities of refuge, the Holy One, blessed be He, says, “Even if he comes in and flees to My altar, kill him, according to what is stated (in Exod. 21:14), ‘[But when someone plots against his companion and kills him treacherously], you shall take him away [even] from My altar [for execution].’” Who was this person who fled to the altar and was killed? This was Joab, of whom it is stated (in I Kings 2:28), “When the news came to Joab,… [Joab fled unto the tent of the Lord and seized the horns of the altar].” You find that Joab was a great sage and the head of the Sanhedrin,³³Gk.: Synehedrion. as stated (in II Sam. 23:8), “one who sits in the seat of wisdom.”³⁴These words are commonly understood as the proper name, JOSHEB-BASSHEBETH, A TAHCHEMONITE, but this and other citations of the verse in rabbinic literature tend to understand the verse as translated here. See Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 4:12, and the note there; also below, Tanh. (Buber), Deut. 1:3. Cf. MQ 26b, for an interpretation that identifies this sage with David himself. [So] when he went and seized the horns of the altar, did he not know what is written in the Torah (in Exod. 21:14), “But when someone plots against his companion [and kills him treacherously, you shall take him away (even) from my altar for execution]?”³⁵yMakk. 2:7 [6] (31d); Sanh. 48b; see Makk. 12b. It is simply that [Joab] had said, “Those killed by a court of law are not buried in the graves of their ancestors but by themselves. It is better to die here, so that I may be buried with my ancestors.” (I Kings 2:30–31:) “Then Benaiah brought back word unto the king.... So the king said to him, ‘Do as he has spoken, strike him down and bury him.’” Why was he killed? Because his (Solomon's) father, David, had ordered him [to do] so (in I Kings 2:5), “Moreover, you also know what Joab ben Zeruiah did to me.” What did he do to him? You find that, when David wrote to Joab (in II Sam. 11:15), “Set Uriah in the front line [where the fighting is the fiercest]...,” he did so, and he was killed. All the army leaders assembled against Joab, as [Uriah] was the head of the warriors, as stated of him (in II Sam. 23:39), “Uriah the Hittite, [was one of all] thirty-seven [leaders].” He showed them the document. It is therefore stated (in I Kings 2:5), “What Joab ben Zeruiah] did to me.” (I Kings 2:5, cont.:) “And what he did to the two commanders of Israel's forces, to Abner ben Ner and to Amasa ben Jether, he killed them.” All of Israel had been of the opinion that David had ordered him to kill [Abner] because Abner was Saul's cousin. And for that reason David arose and cursed Joab, when he said (in II Sam. 3:29), “may the house of Joab never lack [one with a discharge, a leper, one who grasps the crutch,³⁶Modern translations commonly understand these words to mean, A MALE WHO HANDLES THE SPINDLE, but the midrash understands them in the sense given here. one who falls by the sword, and one lacking bread].” Then all Israel was appeased,³⁷Rt.: PYS. Cf. Gk.: peisai (“to have persuaded”). when they knew that there was no [authorization] from David. So David ordered his son, Solomon, to kill him, because Joab was the son of David's sister, and he sought to approach him to the world to come.³⁸If he received punishment in this world, his deed would no longer bar him from doing so. When Solomon sought to kill him, Joab said to Benaiah, “Go and tell Solomon, ‘Do not sentence me with two judgments. If you are killing me, take off from me the curses with which your father, David, cursed me; and if not, leave me with his curses.’” Immediately (in I Kings 2:31), “So the king said to him, ‘Do as he has spoken, strike him down and bury him.” R. Judah has said, “All curses with which David cursed Joab were all fulfilled in David's seed.”³⁹yQid. 1:7 (61a); cf. above, Gen. 7:7; ‘Arakh. 16a. One with a discharge [was fulfilled in] Rehoboam ben Solomon (according to I Kings 12:18 = II Chron. 10:18), “then King Rehoboam succeeded in mounting his chariot (merkavah).” It also says concerning one with a discharge (in Lev. 15:9), “And any saddle (merkav) on which the one with a discharge rides [shall be unclean].” A leper [was fulfilled in] Uzziah, of whom it is stated (in II Kings 15:5), “and he was a leper until the day of his death.” One who grasps the crutch [was fulfilled in] Asa, of whom it is written (in I Kings 15:23), “however in his old age he became diseased in his feet,” where (he became like a woman, as) gout⁴⁰Gk.: podagra; Lat.: podagra. had seized him. One who falls by the sword [was fulfilled in] Josiah, of whom it is written (in II Chron. 35:23), “Then the archers shot King Josiah.” Moreover, Rav Judah has said that his whole body was like a sieve. And Rav said, “They thrust iron lances⁴¹Gk.: longchai. into him, until they had perforated him like a sieve.” And one lacking bread [was fulfilled in] Jehoiachin, of whom it is stated (in II Kings 25:30 = Jer. 52:34), “And for his food allowance a regular food allowance was given to him from the king, from the table of Evil-Merodach.” You also find that as long as Jehoiada lived, Joash did the will of his Creator, as stated (in II Kings 12:3 // II Chron. 24:2), “And Jehoash did what was right in the eyes of the Lord all his days as the priest Jehoiada instructed him.” (II Chron. 24:17:) “Now after the death of Jehoiada, the princes of Judah came and bowed low to the king, and the king hearkened unto them,” in that he took it upon himself to make an idol. Therefore (according to vs. 24), “they inflicted judgments on Joash.” Now for what was Abner punished? It was because he had made light and an amusement (rt.: shq), the blood of the young men, as stated (in II Sam. 2:14), “Then Abner said unto Joab, ‘Please let the young men arise and play (rt.: shq) before us.’”⁴²The result of their “playing” was that they all killed each other. And there are also those who say it was because he put his name before the name of David, as stated (in II Sam. 3:12), “Then Abner sent messengers unto David where he was, saying, ‘To whom does the land belong?’” But the sages say, “It was because he did not let Saul be reconciled with David.” And our masters say, “He had the power to protest [the massacre] at Nob, the city of priests, and did not protest.”

Another interpretation (of Lev. 19:23), “When you come into the land.” This text is related (to Jer. 3:19), “But I said how I would put you among the children and give you a desirable land!” The situation is comparable to a king who had concubines and had a lot of children. But he had one child by a certain matron,³⁵Lat.: matrona. and he loved him to excess. The king gave fields and vineyards to all the children of the concubines, and after that he gave his [beloved] son a garden³⁶Pardes, which can also denote paradise. from which all his food³⁷This Latin words mean “food provisions,” “food receptacle,” or “larder.” The passage uses the word in more than one of these senses. came. The son sent and said to his father, “To the children of the concubines you have given fields and vineyards, but to me you have [only] given one garden?” The king said to him, “By your life, all my food (cellaria) comes to me from this garden; and because I love you more than your brothers, I have given it to you.” Similarly the Holy One, blessed be He, created the peoples of the world, just as it is stated (in Cant. 6:8), “There are sixty queens and eighty concubines and damsels without number,” these are the peoples; (vs. 9), “[Only ] one is my dove, my perfect one,” this is the congregation of Israel. Now the Holy One, blessed be He, has distributed fields and vineyards to the peoples of the world, as stated (in Deut. 32:8), “When the Most High gave the gentiles an inheritance”; but to Israel He has given the Land of Israel, the larder (cellaria) of the Holy One, blessed be He. The offerings come from it; the shewbread comes from it; the first fruits come from it; the omer comes from it; all the good things in the world come from it. Why all this? In order to make a distinction between the son of the matron and the children of the concubines, as stated (in Jer. 3:19), “But I said how I would put you among the children and give you a desirable land!” There was great love between the Holy One, blessed be He, and Israel; so how did they bring in the enmity.³⁸Above, Exod. 6:10; below, Numb. 4a: 15. The Holy One, blessed be He, said (ibid.), “how I would put (ashit) you,” and this language can only be the language of enmity. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 3:15), “I will put (ashit) enmity between you and the woman.” Another interpretation (of Jer. 3:19), “how I would put (ashit) you.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them, “I have spoken in your defense.³⁹Gk.: synegoria, “advocacy”. How have you made Me bring charges⁴⁰QTRG. Cf. Gk.: kategorein. against you?” Now this can only be the language of an accuser,⁴¹Gk.: kategor. as stated (concerning one guilty of negligence in Exod. 21:30), “If a ransom is put (rt.: shyt) upon him.”

Another interpretation (of Jer. 3:19): HOW I WOULD PUT YOU AMONG THE CHILDREN. The Holy One said to them: I have spoken in your defense.⁴⁹Gk.: synegoria, “advocacy”. How have you made me bring charges⁵⁰QTRG. Cf. Gk.: kategorein. against you? (Ibid.:) HOW I WOULD PUT (rt.: ShYT) YOU AMONG THE CHILDREN. Now this can only be the language of an accuser,⁵¹Gk.: kategor. as stated (concerning one guilty of negligence in Exod. 21:30): IF A RANSOM IS PUT (rt.: ShYT) UPON HIM….

Thereupon Noah cursed his seed, saying: Cursed be Canaan (Gen. 9:25). Because Ham had glanced at his naked father, his eyes became red. Because he related (what he had seen) to others with his mouth, his lips became twisted. Because he turned his face away (ignored his father’s condition), the hair of his head and beard was singed. And because he neglected to cover his naked father, he went about naked, with his prepuce extended. This happened to him because the Holy One, blessed be He, exacts retribution measure for measure. Nevertheless, the Holy One, blessed be He, relented and had mercy upon him, for His tender mercies are over all His works (Ps. 145:9). The Holy One, blessed be He, said: Inasmuch as he caused himself to be sold into slavery,²⁰His penalty for his actions: A servant of servants shall he be to his brothers (Gen. 9:25). let him go free because of the eye that sees and the mouth that speaks. Hence, the law states: A slave must be freed because of the loss of a tooth or an eye, as it is written: And if a man smite the eye of his bondman, or the eye of his bondwoman, and destroy it, he shall let him go free for his eye’s sake. And if he smite out his bondman’s tooth, or his bondwoman’s tooth, he shall let him go free for his tooth’s sake (Exod. 21:26–27). May we not logically conclude a fortiori:²¹That is, kal va-homer (a conclusion drawn from a minor to a major), one of the hermeneutical rules for expounding the Written Law. If a servant, purchased with money, must be released from bondage if his master blinds him or knocks out his tooth, should not the seed blessed of the Lord (Isa. 65:23), the planting of the Lord that He might be glorified (Ps. 61:3), be freed after their deaths from their sins? Hence, free among the dead (Ps. 88:6), indicating that they should go free (from sin) with all their two hundred and forty-eight limbs.

Thereupon Noah cursed his seed, saying: Cursed be Canaan (Gen. 9:25). Because Ham had glanced at his naked father, his eyes became red. Because he related (what he had seen) to others with his mouth, his lips became twisted. Because he turned his face away (ignored his father’s condition), the hair of his head and beard was singed. And because he neglected to cover his naked father, he went about naked, with his prepuce extended. This happened to him because the Holy One, blessed be He, exacts retribution measure for measure. Nevertheless, the Holy One, blessed be He, relented and had mercy upon him, for His tender mercies are over all His works (Ps. 145:9). The Holy One, blessed be He, said: Inasmuch as he caused himself to be sold into slavery,²⁰His penalty for his actions: A servant of servants shall he be to his brothers (Gen. 9:25). let him go free because of the eye that sees and the mouth that speaks. Hence, the law states: A slave must be freed because of the loss of a tooth or an eye, as it is written: And if a man smite the eye of his bondman, or the eye of his bondwoman, and destroy it, he shall let him go free for his eye’s sake. And if he smite out his bondman’s tooth, or his bondwoman’s tooth, he shall let him go free for his tooth’s sake (Exod. 21:26–27). May we not logically conclude a fortiori:²¹That is, kal va-homer (a conclusion drawn from a minor to a major), one of the hermeneutical rules for expounding the Written Law. If a servant, purchased with money, must be released from bondage if his master blinds him or knocks out his tooth, should not the seed blessed of the Lord (Isa. 65:23), the planting of the Lord that He might be glorified (Ps. 61:3), be freed after their deaths from their sins? Hence, free among the dead (Ps. 88:6), indicating that they should go free (from sin) with all their two hundred and forty-eight limbs.

R. Elazar said: "Whoever lives in the land of Israel lives without sin, as it is said (Is. 33, 24) And no inhabitant shall say, 'I am sick; the people that dwell therein, their iniquities shall be forgiven." Said Raba unto R. Assi: "We have explained the above passage in connection with those who suffer sickness." R. Annan said: "Whoever is buried in the land of Israel is considered as if he were buried under the altar; it is written here (Ex. 21, 24) An altar of earth (Adama) shall thou make unto Me; and it is written there (Deut. 32, 43) And forgive his land (Admatho) and his people." Ulla was accustomed to visit the land of Israel, and nevertheless died outside of the land of Israel. When R. Elazar was informed about it he exclaimed: "O thou Ulla! (Amos 7, 17) And thou shall die in an unclean land!" "But his coffin is being brought here," remarked the people to him, whereupon R. Elazar said: "The benefit of having remained in the land of Israel before dying is not like one who was brought after his death." There was a certain man who had a Yabama in Chuzaa, outside of the land of Israel. When he came to R. Chanina and asked him: "What is the law, is one permitted to leave the land of Israel in order to marry a Yebama?" The latter replied: "His brother married a Samaritan and therefore died. Praised be Heaven that He killed him and yet he wishes to go after him." R. Juda said in the name of Samuel; "Just as it is forbidden to leave the land of Israel for Babylon, so is it forbidden to leave Babylonia for any other country." Raba and R. Joseph both said: "It is even forbidden to leave from Pumpaditha to Be-kubi." There was a certain man who left Pumpaditha to live at Be-kubi, and R. Joseph put him under a ban. There was another man who left Pumpaditha for Istonia, where he died. Abaye then remarked: "Had the scholar desired he might have lived." Raba and R. Joseph both say: "The righteous of Babylonia will be admitted in the land of Israel; the righteous of other countries will be admitted only in Babylonia." Concerning what does he say this? Shall I assume it refers to genealogy? Has not the master said that all other countries are like an Issah in comparison with the land of Israel, and the land of Israel is in return an Issah in comparison with Babylon? [Hence we see that Babylon is more purified than the land of Israel.] We must therefore say that it refers to being buried there.

(Lev. 20:9:) “For anyone whatever who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.” So too is it stated (Exod. 21:17), “He who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.” Solomon said (in Prov. 20:20), “[If someone] curses his father or mother, his light will go out [at the approach of darkness].” Our masters said, “Because Ham saw his father's nakedness, even though he did not utter a curse at him, he and his descendants have been alienated until the end of the whole world. How much the more so for one who does curse his father!” Scripture says (in Prov. 24:20), “For there will be no future for the evil one, the lamp of the wicked goes out.” Come and see the honoring of father and mother, how dear it is before the Holy One, blessed be He; for the Holy One, blessed be He, does not withhold the reward, either from the righteous or from the wicked. Where is it shown? From Esau the wicked. Because he honored his father, the Holy One, blessed be He, gave him all this honor. R. Eleazar says, “Esau the wicked shed three tears, [one] from his right eye, one from his left eye, and the third was attached in his eye and did not run down. When? When Isaac blessed Jacob, as stated (in Gen. 27:38), ‘and Esau lifted up his voice and wept.’” Come and see how much prosperity the Holy One gave him. Thus it is stated (in Ps. 80:6), “You have fed them the bread of tears and have had them drink a shalish of tears.” Shalosh (three) is not written but shalish (a third), because there were not three (shalosh) whole ones. So if the Holy One, blessed be He, recompensed this wicked one, because he honored his father, how much the more [will He do so] in the case of one who honors his fathers and fulfills other commandments. The Holy One, blessed be He, said (in Job 41:3), “’Who has welcomed (hiqdim) Me that I should repay him; everything under the heavens is Mine’; who is this one who has advanced (hiqdim) honor to his father, and I have not given him children?” And so it says in Job (11:5-7), “O that God would speak […]; And that He would tell you the secrets of wisdom…! Would you discover the mystery of God…?” To what is Job comparable? To whoever is put in a collare,⁴²The Latin word denotes a band or chain, in particular one put around the neck of a prisoner. and said, “I know what is within the palace⁴³Lat.: palatium. of the king.” They said to him, “Free yourself from the collare, and we shall know that you are speaking the truth.” So also Job was clothed in seven kinds of boils and in need of alms, as stated (in Job 19:21), “Have pity on me, have pity on me, O you my friends, for the hand of God has afflicted me.” And [yet] he says, “I have gotten to the bottom of the works of the Holy One, blessed be He.” Thus it is stated (in Job 23:5), “I would know words He would answer me and understand what He would say to me.” His companions said to him (in Job 11:7), “Would you discover the mystery of God…?” (Job 12:14:) “Behold, whatever He destroys will not be rebuilt, whoever He shuts in cannot be set free.” Who, after he had destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah and had overthrown them, who has rebuilt them? Who, after he is shut the ground in front of Korah and his assembly, can reopen it? No creature can fathom His works, as stated (in Eccl. 7:13), “See the work of God; for who can make straight what He has made crooked?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “In this world the people are afflicted because of the evil drive; but in the world to come I will remove the evil drive from them.”⁴⁴Above, 7:14. It is so stated (in Ezek. 36:26–27), “then I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh [and give you a heart of flesh]. And I will put My spirit within you….”

Another interpretation (of Jer. 3:19): HOW I WOULD PUT YOU AMONG THE CHILDREN! R. Joshua the Levite said: The Holy One said: I argued in your defense³⁰Gk.: synegoria., but you made me one who argues your prosecution.³¹Gk.: kategoria. HOW I WOULD PUT (rt.: ShYT) YOU AMONG THE CHILDREN? This language can only be the language of guilt, since it is stated (concerning one found guilty of negligence in Exod. 21:30): IF A RANSOM IS PUT (rt.: ShYT) UPON HIM, <HE SHALL GIVE WHATEVER IS PUT (rt.: SHYT) UPON HIM TO REDEEM HIS LIFE>.

R. Simeon the son of Lakish maintained: Shem’s descendants also became slaves, as it is said: And if thy brother, a Hebrew man or a Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee (Deut. 15:12). Shem’s descendants, however, are freed at the expiration of six years, of servitude, as it is written: Then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free (ibid.), while the descendants of Ham are never freed, as is said: You may hold them to service forever (Lev. 25:46). Therefore, he remains a lifelong slave and does not go forth into the world a free man. Why was this curse imposed upon him? Because he was responsible for his father’s degradation. Thus, the Holy One, blessed be He, brought retribution upon the descendants of Ham by humiliating them by means of the king of Asshur, as it is said: So shall the king of Assyria lead away the captives of Egypt and the exiles of Ethiopia, young and old, naked and barefoot (Isa. 20:4).

R. Hama the son of Hanina stated: How would I put thee among the sons is an expression that indicates enmity, as in the verse: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman (ibid. 3:15). A great love existed between Me and you, as it is said: I have loved you (Mal. 1:2), but ye have engendered hatred upon yourselves. R. Joshua the son of Levi said: How would I put thee among the sons implies that though I defended you, you have condemned yourselves, for the word put thee is an expression that indicates guilt, as in the verse If there is put upon him a ransom (Exod. 21:30). R. Berechiah argued: Put thee is an expression that implies neglect, as in the verse And I will put it to waste; it shall not be pruned nor hoed, but there shall come up briars and thorns (Isa. 5:6). You were as precious to Me as a beautiful vineyard is to the man who plows it, clears it of stones, and hoes it, but then you declared yourselves free of Me. Wherefore, when I looked at it that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes (ibid., v. 4).

25 (Numb. 25:7) “When Phinehas [ben Eleazar ben Aaron the priest] saw”: But did they all not see it? And is it not written (in vs. 6), “before the eyes of Moses and the eyes of the whole congregation of the Children of Israel?” It is simply that when he saw the deed, he remembered the ruling (halakhah); that one who cohabits with an Aramean woman will have zealots strike him down. (Numb. 25:7, cont.) “He arose from the midst of the congregation”: From where did he stand up? It is simply that, while they were involved in give and take on the matter of whether or not [the culprit] was liable for death, that man (Phinehas) stood up from the midst of the congregation and volunteered [to carry out the sentence]. (Numb. 25:7, cont.) “And [he] took a spear in his hand”: He put the iron prong in his hand, which he put in his bosom. Then he began [to approach] leaning on the wood like a staff,⁷⁵I.e., with the iron prong hidden, the spear shaft seemed like a mere staff. because he was afraid of [the culprit's] tribe, as they surrounded him. When he reached them, they said to him, “Why have you come?” He said to them, “I also have come to fulfill my needs.” So they gave him permission, and he entered. For otherwise they would not have given him permission. (Numb. 25:8) “Then he went after the man of Israel into the tent, [and pierced both of them]”: He pierced both of them, the one on top of the other, through the unclean place (i.e., the private parts) of the both of them; lest Israel say there was no defilement there. He was zealous for the name of the Holy One, blessed be He. And twelve miracles occurred for him: The first miracle is that it is common that they would separate one from the other, but the angel adhered them together. The second miracle is that the angel closed their mouths that they not yell out. The third miracle is that [Phinehas was able to] direct [the spear precisely so that] the male genitals of [Zimri] were visible in the genitals of [Cozbi]; because they would have [otherwise] said, “[Phinehas] also went in and fulfilled his needs.” The fourth is that the iron expanded so that he could stab both of them. The fifth is that [the angel] gave him strength in his arm to raise both of them up. The sixth is that there was strength in the pole [of the spear] to lift both of them up. The seventh is that [Zimri and Cozbi] did not fall from the spear, but stayed in their place. The eighth is that the angel raised them up in the manner [of intercourse] on top of the spear for all to see their disgrace. The ninth is that they did not trickle blood, so that Phinehas would not become impure. The tenth is that the Holy One, blessed be He, kept their spirit [alive] so that he would not become impure. The eleventh is that the angel raised the lintel of the house chamber so that both of them would come out suspended in front of the eyes of everyone. The twelfth is when all the members of his tribe were ready to strike him down, an angel went down and smote them before him. When Phinehas saw that [the Holy One, blessed be He,] sought to destroy them, he struck [Zimri and Cozbi] on the ground. When he arose and prayed, [the plague] was removed. That is what is written (in Ps. 106:30), “Then Phinehas arose and interceded,”⁷⁶The verse continues: AND THE PLAGUE WAS STOPPED. in that he gave the judicial verdict (din). Interceded (rt.: pll) can only denote a judicial verdict (din), since it is stated (in reference to making a reparation Exod. 21:22), “and he shall pay as the judges (rt.: pll) determine.” (Numb. 25:9) “And those who died from the plague […]”: [This is] to inform you that, on every occasion when they fell, they were numbered. There is a parable about a wolf who fell upon a flock of sheep. The owner of the sheep said to the shepherd, “Count how many were lost.” [This] is to inform you how much unchastity distances [from God]; as this was [just one] individual, and [yet] twenty-four thousand fell on his account. This is related to (in Prov. 16:14), “The king’s wrath is a messenger of death, but a wise man can appease it, etc.” There is a parable about a king who was passing by when a group of youths were standing in front of him. [When] one of them cursed him, the king was filled with anger against [all of] them. [Then] one of them came and socked the one who cursed the king, [and] the king’s anger was immediately subdued. So too, who caused the Holy One, blessed be He, to go back from His anger and not to destroy all of Israel? One would say it was Phinehas. Ergo, “but a wise man can appease it.” The Holy One, blessed be He, has said, “In this world it is on account of gross misconduct that they were counted; but in the world to come (according to Hos. 2:1), “The number of the Children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered.” Amen, may it be [His] will.

(Gen. 9:22:) THEN HAM, THE FATHER OF CANAAN, SAW < THE NAKEDNESS OF HIS FATHER AND TOLD HIS TWO BROTHERS OUTSIDE >. R. Judah bar Shallum said in the name of R. Jacob bar Zavday, who had said in the name of R. Abbahu:⁷⁹Gen. R. 36:5. Ham saw with his eyes and told with his mouth. For that reason, the Holy One said: If one of the slaves is struck in his eye or in his tooth, he is to go free, as stated (in Exod. 21:26f.): IF SOMEONE STRIKES [THE EYE OF] HIS SLAVE, < MALE OR FEMALE, AND DESTROYS IT, HE SHALL LET HIM GO FREE…. AND IF HE KNOCKS OUT THE TOOTH OF HIS SLAVE, MALE OR FEMALE, HE SHALL LET HIM GO FREE >….

(Numb. 25:7:) “When Phinehas [ben Eleazar ben Aaron the priest] saw.” But did they all not see it?¹⁰⁰Numb. R. 20:25. And is it not written (in vs. 6), “before the eyes of Moses and the eyes of the whole congregation of the Children of Israel?” It is simply that when he saw the deed, he remembered the ruling (halakhah); that one who cohabits with an Aramean woman will have zealots strike him down. (Numb. 25:7, cont.:) “He arose from the midst of the congregation.” From where did he stand up? It is simply that, while they were involved in give and take on the matter of whether or not [the culprit] was liable for death, that man (Phinehas) stood up from the midst of the congregation and volunteered [to carry out the sentence]. (Numb. 25:7, cont.:) “And took a spear in his hand.” He put the iron prong in his hand, which he put in his bosom. Then he began [to approach] leaning on the wood like a staff,¹⁰¹I.e., with the iron prong hidden, the spear shaft seemed like a mere staff. because he was afraid of [the culprit's] tribe, as they surrounded him. When he reached them, they said to him, “Why have you come?” He said to them, “I also have come to fulfill my needs.” So they gave him permission, and he entered. For otherwise they would not have given him permission. (Numb. 25:8:) “Then he went after the man of Israel into the tent, and pierced both of them.” He pierced both of them, the one on top of the other, through the unclean place (i.e., the private parts) of the both of them; lest Israel say there was no defilement there. He was zealous for the name of the Holy One, blessed be He. And twelve miracles occurred for him: The first miracle is that it is common that they would separate one from the other, but the angel adhered them together. The second miracle is that the angel closed their mouths that they not yell out. The third miracle is that [Phinehas was able to] direct [the spear precisely so that] the male genitals of [Zimri] were visible in the genitals of [Cozbi]; because they would have [otherwise] said, “[Phinehas] also went in and fulfilled his needs.” The fourth is that the iron expanded so that he could stab both of them. The fifth is that [the angel] gave him strength in his arm to raise both of them up. The sixth is that there was strength in the pole [of the spear] to lift both of them up. The seventh is that [Zimri and Cozbi] did not fall from the spear, but stayed in their place. The eighth is that the angel raised them up in the manner [of intercourse] on top of the spear for all to see their disgrace. The ninth is that they did not trickle blood, so that Phinehas would not become impure. The tenth is that the Holy One, blessed be He, kept their spirit [alive so that he would not become impure]. The eleventh is that the angel raised the lintel of the house chamber so that both of them would come out suspended in front of the eyes of everyone. The twelfth is when all the members of his tribe were ready to strike him down, an angel went down and smote them before him. When Phinehas saw that the Holy One, blessed be He, sought to destroy them, he struck [Zimri and Cozbi] on the ground. When he arose and prayed, they were removed. That is what is written (in Ps. 106:30), “Then Phinehas arose and interceded,”¹⁰²The verse continues: AND THE PLAGUE WAS STOPPED. in that he gave the judicial verdict (din). Interceded (rt.: pll) can only denote a judicial verdict (din), since it is stated (in reference to making a reparation Exod. 21:22), “and he shall pay as the judges (rt.: pll) determine.” (Numb. 25:9:) “And those who died from the plague.” And afterwards [it is written] (in Numb. 26:2), “Count the head (take a census).” [This is] to inform you that, on every occasion when they fell, they were numbered. There is a parable about a wolf who fell upon a flock of sheep. The owner of the sheep said to the shepherd, “Count how many were lost.” [This] is to inform you how much unchastity distances [from God]; as this was [just one] individual, and [yet] twenty-four thousand fell on his account. This is related to (in Prov. 16:14), “The king’s wrath is a messenger of death, but a wise man can appease it.” There is a parable about a king who was passing by when a group of youths were standing in front of him. [When] one of them cursed him, the king was filled with anger against [all of] them. [Then] one of them came and socked the one who cursed the king, [and] the king’s anger was immediately subdued. So too, who caused the Holy One, blessed be He, to go back from His anger and not to destroy all of Israel? One would say it was Phinehas. Ergo, “but a wise man can appease it.” The Holy One, blessed be He, has said, “In this world it is on account of gross misconduct that they were counted; but in the world to come (according to Hos. 2:1), “The number of the Children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered.” Amen, may it be [His] will.

...An eye for an eye - one pays damage(s), the value of his eye. ...... Ben Azai says: behold here it says "a wound for a wound" and further on (verse 18) it says "if a man hits his neighbor with a stone or with the fist" - behold, this is the wound spoken. Just as the wound spoken of above "he will pay for his idleness and for his cure", here too "he will pay for his idleness and his cure". The wound is included in the general idea, and is expressed [lit. comes out] to teach (in general) and not about itself (specifically) - but it does come to teach regarding the general principle: just as the wound of which it is said "due to" is about payment, so too (here) [everything] of which it is said "due to" is about payment. Or - is it possible that this applies even for "life for life"? [No,] the text says (Numbers 35:31) "and you will not take ransom for the life of a murderer". [For the life of a murderer] you do not take payment, but you do take payment for limbs.

Burn for burn - if with wound it was already said, but if even though there is no wound [inflicted], such as he hit him with a [towel?] or a nail on his nail, on a place that does not make a wound, from here you say that one who diminishes the limb of his fellow, he pays five things: damages, and pain, and idleness, and healing, and shame. Damages and pain are spoken of here. Idleness and healing [are spoken of] above. And shame in another place, as it is written (Deut. 25:11) "and she stretches her hand and seizes him by his genitals [lit. shames]." Damages - we assess him: how much is he worth complete, and how much he is worth after he made him lose a limb. Pain - we appraise how much a person would want that would be given to him to have his hand cut with a narcotic or not cut at all, [cut]with a slaughtering knife. Idleness - we see him as if he is a guard. Healing - we appraise in how many days he will heal, and how many are needed. And shame - All goes according to who shames and who is shamed. And if he did not make him lose a limb, he is exempt from damages; and if there is no pain, he is exempt of [paying for] pain; and if there is no idleness, he is exempt of [paying for] idleness; and if there is no healing he is exempt of [paying for] healing; and if there is no shame, he is exempt of [paying for] shame.

"And you shall provide yourselves with cities" (Numbers 35:11), this is what the verse says, "Good and upright is the Lord, therefore He shows sinners the way." (Psalms 25:8) "Remember Your mercy, O God, and your lovingkindness." (Psalms 25:6). David said, Master of the Universe, were it not for the fact that Your lovingkindness preceded the First Man, he would not have been able to stand, as it says "For the day you eat of it [the tree of knowledge of good and evil] you will surely die" (Genesis 2:17). And You did not do this; rather, You brought him out from the Garden of Eden and he lived for 930 years(!) and only after that did he die. Why did you do that to him, to drive him out from the Garden of Eden, as it says (Genesis 3:24) "and He drove out the man"? Why was he driven out, since he brought death upon the generations, and he was sentenced to immediate death? Rather, You had mercy upon him and drove him off, just as the accidental killer is exiled to a city of refuge. Thus it says, "Remember Your mercy, O God, and Your lovingkindness, etc." Once Moshe stood and the Holy Blessed One told him, "Provide yourselves with cities...", Moshe said "Master of the Universe, this one killed by accident in the south or the north; how will he know where the city of refuge is, that he may flee to it?" God replied, "'Set for yourselves the path... [i.e. to the cities of refuge]' (Deuteronomy 19:3), orient for yourselves the path so that you will not be mistaken and find the blood avenger and he will kill you "and there will be for him no death penalty" (Deuteronomy 19:6)." He [Moshe] said again, "How?" He [God] said to him, set up for yourselves signs [istlayot] pointing to the cities of refuge, that they will know where to travel. And on every sign write "Killer to the city of refuge", as it says "prepare for yourselves the way". Thus said David, "Good and upright is the Lord, therefore He shows sinners the way." If for killers He makes a path and a road for them to flee by and be saved, all the more so for righteous! "He guides the humble in justice, and teaches the humble His way" (Psalms 25:9). "And the killer shall flee there who has killed a soul by accident" -- but not on purpose. If he kills on purpose and he says "I accidentally killed" and flees to the cities of refuge, the Holy Blessed One says, even if he flees and enters to My altar, you shall kill him, as it says (Exodus 21:14) "And if a person schemes, etc [against another, and kills him treacherously, you shall take him from My very altar to be put to death]". And who was it who fled to the altar and was killed? Yoav, as it says (I Kings 2:28) "When the news reached Joab, he fled to the Tent of the LORD [and grasped the horns of the altar]...". And it says (II Samuel 23:8) "Tahchemonite, the chief officer" -- he did not know that it is written in the Torah "And if a person schemes, etc" that he went and grasped the horns of the altar. Rather it says "Those killed by the court are not buried in the graves of their fathers, rather they alone; it is better for me that I die here and be buried in the graves of my fathers". (I Kings 3:30-31) "Benaiah reported back to the king that Joab had answered thus and thus, and the king said, 'Do just as he said; strike him down and bury him, and remove guilt from me and my father’s house for the blood of the innocent that Joab has shed.'" And why was he killed? For so David his [Shlomo's] father had commanded him -- "Further, you know what Joab son of Zeruiah did to me, what he did to the two commanders of Israel’s forces, Abner son of Ner and Amasa son of Jether: he killed them" (I Kings 2:5). What did he do to him...

(Exodus 12:25) "And it shall be, when you come to the land": The service is contingent upon their entering the land and thereafter. (In the desert they were obliged to observe only one Pesach, in the second year, by Divine command.) "as He has spoken": And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 6:8) "and I shall bring you to the land, etc." Similarly, (Ibid. 16:23) "This is what the L rd has spoken: 'A resting, a holy Sabbath, etc.'" And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 5) "And it shall be on the sixth day that they shall prepare, etc." Similarly, (Leviticus 10:3) "This is as the L rd spoke: With My near ones I will be sanctified." And where did He speak it? (Exodus 29:43) "And I will be appointed there for the children of Israel and it (the mishkan) will be sanctified by My glory" (i.e., by My glorifiers). Similarly, (Devarim 11:25) "The L rd your G d will put the dread and fear of you over the whole land … as He spoke to you." And where did He speak it? (Exodus 23:27) "My fright shall I send before you, and I shall confound all the people, etc." (Devarim 12:20) "When the L rd your G d broadens your boundary, as he spoke to you, etc." And where did He speak it? (Exodus 34:24) "for I shall drive out nations from before you and I shall broaden your boundary," (Ibid. 23:31) "And I shall set your boundary from the Red Sea, etc." Similarly, (Devarim 15:6) "for the L rd your G d will bless you as He spoke to you." And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 7:14) "Blessed shall you be over all other peoples." Similarly (Ibid. 26:18) "and the L rd has affirmed this day to make you His chosen people as He spoke to you." And where did He speak it? (Exodus 19:5) "then you shall be to Me chosen above all the peoples." Similarly (Devarim 26:19) "and to place you higher than all the nations … as He spoke." And whence did He speak it? (Ibid. 28:13) "And the L rd will make you the head, and not the tail. Similarly, (Isaiah 1:2) "Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth, as the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Devarim 32:1) "Hear, O heavens, and I shall speak." Similarly, (Isaiah 40:5) "The glory of the L rd shall appear, and all flesh will behold as one, for the mouth of the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Devarim 32:39) "See, now, that I — I am He, and there is no god beside Me." Similarly, (Isaiah 1:19-20) "If you acquiesce and pay heed, the good of the earth will you eat. But if you refuse and rebel, the sword will devour you; for the mouth of the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Leviticus 26:25) "… I will bring against you an avenging sword, etc." Similarly, (Isaiah 25:8) "He will destroy death forever … for the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Devarim 32:39) "I put to death and I bring to life, etc." Similarly, (Isaiah 58:14) "then you will rejoice in the L rd, and I will 'ride' you on the heights of the earth, etc." And where did He speak it? (Devarim 32:13) "He will 'ride' him on the heights of the earth, etc." Similarly, (Ezekiel 39:8) "Behold, it has come; it has arrived, says the L rd G d. This is the day of which I spoke." And where did He speak of it? (Devarim 32:42) "I will make My arrows drunk with blood, etc." Similarly, (Michah 4:4) "and each man will sit under his grapevine … for the mouth of the L rd of hosts has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Leviticus 26:6) "And I will place peace in the land, etc." Similarly, (Ovadiah 1:18) "And there will be no survivor of the house of Esav, for the mouth of the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Numbers 24:18-19) "And Edom (Esav) will become an inheritance … and a victor will issue from Jacob and will destroy all trace of Ir." Similarly, (Genesis 21:1) "And the L rd remembered Sarah (for motherhood) as He had said." "And where did He say it? (Ibid. 17:19) "And G d said: But Sarah your wife will bear, etc." Similarly, (Ibid. 21:1) "And the L rd did for Sarah as He had spoken." And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 15:4) "And the 'speaking' of the L rd was to him. This one (Ishmail) will not inherit you, etc." Similarly, (Yoel 4:8) "and I will sell your sons and your daughters, etc." And where did he speak it? (Genesis 9:25) "And he (Noach) said: Cursed is Canaan. A servant of servants will he be to his brothers." Similarly, (Devarim 17:16) "And the L rd said to you: You will not go back this way (to Egypt) again." And where did He say it? (Exodus 14:13) "For your seeing Egypt is (only) this day. You will see them no more forever." Similarly, (Isaiah 65:25) "The wolf and the lamb will graze together…said the L rd." And where did He say it? (Leviticus 26:6) "I will cut off wild beasts from the land." Similarly, (I Kings 11:2) "… of the nations of which the L rd said … You shall not come among them, etc." And where did He say it? (Devarim 7:3) "And you shall not intermarry with them, etc." Similarly, (I Kings 8:12) "The L rd has said that He will dwell in a thick cloud." And where did He say it? (Leviticus 16:2) "For in a thick cloud will I appear upon the (ark) cover." Similarly, (Malachi 3:17) "'and they will be Mine,' said the L rd." And where did He say it? (Exodus 19:5) "And you will be unto Me, chosen, etc." Similarly, (Yoel 3:5) "And all who call in the name of the L rd … as the L rd said." And where did He say it? (Devarim 28:10) "And all the peoples of the earth will see that the L rd's name is called upon you, etc." Similarly, (Isaiah 66:20-21) "And they will bring all your brothers from all the nations as an offering to the L rd … And also from them will I take Cohanim and Levites, the L rd said." And where did He say this? (Devarim 29:28) "What is concealed (from us [e.g., who is a Cohein and who, a Levite]) is known to the L rd our G d." Here, too, (Exodus 12:25) "And it shall be, when you come to the land that the L rd will give you, as He has spoken, etc." And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 6:8) "And I shall bring you to the land, etc." (Exodus 12:26) "And it shall be, when your sons say to you, etc.": At that time, Israel was receiving bad tidings, that the Torah was destined to be forgotten. Others say they were receiving good tidings, that they were destined to see sons and sons of sons. (Exodus 12:27) "And the people bowed down and prostrated themselves": Why did they bow down? For it is written (Ibid. 13:18) "And the children of Israel went out of Egypt chamushim" — one out of five ("chamishah"). Others say one out of fifty ("chamishim"). And others say one out of five hundred ("chamesh me'oth"). R. Nehorai says; Upon my oath, not one in five hundred went out. For it is written (Ezekiel 16:7) "Numerous as the spouts of the field did I make you" (in Egypt), and (Exodus 1:7) "And the children of Israel were fruitful, and teemed" — One woman would bear six in one womb. And you say one in five hundred went out? And when did they die? In the three days of darkness, of which it is written (Exodus 10:23) "One man could not see another." The Jews buried their dead, and they were thankful and praised (the L rd) that their foes could not see (the dead) and rejoice in their downfall. (Ibid. 12:27) "Then you shall say that it is a Paschal sacrifice to the L rd.": R. Yossi Haglili said: The Jews would have deserved to die in Egypt (if not for the merit of the Paschal sacrifice) whereby the last of them consummated his sacrifice (and lived.) "Then you shall say that it is a Paschal sacrifice." We are hereby apprised that all who hear of or see the miracles that the Holy One Blessed be He wrought in Egypt must give praise. And thus is it written (Exodus 18:8-9) "And Moses related to his father-in-law all that the L rd did to Pharaoh and to Egypt. And Yithro rejoiced, etc." (Ibid. 28) "And the children of Israel went and they did": Reward is given for both the going and the doing. "and they did": Now did they already do? __ Their taking it upon themselves to do is regarded as their doing. "as the L rd commanded": We are hereby apprised of their eminence. Exactly as Moses and Aaron commanded them thus did they do. What is the intent of (the seemingly superfluous) "Thus did they do"? Moses and Aaron, too, did thus.

Another interpretation (of the oral text to Ps. 139:16): AND ONE OF THEM WAS [HIS OWN]. This refers to the Sabbath day, as stated (in Exod. 21:11): WHEREFORE THE LORD HAS BLESSED THE SABBATH DAY AND HALLOWED IT.

Why is it written above "Do not ascend My altar by steps" (Exodus 20:23) and [below] "These are the judgements" (Exodus 21:1)? What has one to do with the other? Since the nakedness of the kohanim would be revealed -- and behold it is written (Exodus 28:42) "And make for them trousers of linen to cover the flesh of their nakedness". Rather, Rabbi Avina says: Just as the Holy Blessed One warned the kohanim not to take large steps to the altar, rather to walk heel to toe, so the Holy Blessed One warned the judges not to take large steps in judgement.

(Numb. 25:8:) THEN HE WENT AFTER THE MAN OF ISRAEL INTO THE TENT, AND PIERCED BOTH OF THEM. He pierced both of them, the one on top of the other, through the unclean place (i.e., the private parts) of the both of them, lest Israel say there was no defilement there. Come and see how many miracles happened there!¹²⁶Some versions of the traditional Tanh. 7:21 and Numb. R. 20:25 have twelve miracles. Sanh. 82b and ySanh. 10:2 (28d-29a) have six miracles, but not all of them correspond to the six mentioned here. (1) He put power in his arm for lifting them up and (2) power in the shaft to stay in them. (3) The opening (of the tent) was raised so that both of them might come out raised up (on the spear). (4) When they came out, the members of his tribe were ready to strike him down, but an angel arose and smote those before him. (5) When Phinehas saw that <an angel had arisen> to destroy them, he struck them on the ground. (6) Then when he had arisen and prayed, he removed them. That is what is written (in Ps. 106:30): THEN PHINEHAS AROSE AND INTERCEDED,¹²⁷The verse continues: AND THE PLAGUE WAS STOPPED. in that he gave the judicial verdict (din). INTERCEDED (rt.: PLL) can only denote a judicial verdict (din), since it is stated (in reference to making a reparation Exod. 21:22): AND HE SHALL PAY AS THE JUDGES (rt.: PLL) DETERMINE.

... one who kills a person/nefesh . . . it is as if he removed the icons of the king, and he is sentenced and has no life, for the human is created in the d’mut of the ministering angels

... one who kills a person/nefesh . . . it is as if he removed the icons of the king, and he is sentenced and has no life, for the human is created in the d’mut of the ministering angels

... one who kills a person/nefesh . . . it is as if he removed the icons of the king, and he is sentenced and has no life, for the human is created in the d’mut of the ministering angels

R’ Elazar said: the whole Torah hangs on judgment. That is why the Holy One gave the laws of justice after the Ten Commandments - because people cross the line of justice, are punished and this teaches the whole world. Sodom was not overturned until it crossed the line of justice, as it says “…pride, abundance of bread, and careless ease…“ (Ezekiel 16:49) Even Jerusalem was not exiled until she crossed the line of justice, as it says “…the orphan they do not judge, and the quarrel of the widow does not come to them.” (Isaiah 1:23) And why did the Holy One give the crown to Yehudah? He is not the sole mighty one from among his brothers, are not Shimon, Levi and the others mighty as well? Rather, it was because he gave true judgment to Tamar, therefore he was made judge of the world. This is like a judge before whom an orphan’s judgment comes and he finds in her favor. So too Yehudah – Tamar’s judgment that she should be burned came before him, and he found in her merit because he found merit in her. How? Yitzchak and Yaakov were sitting there, and all his brothers were covering for him. Yehudah acknowledged Gd (HaMakom) and spoke the truth of the matter, saying “She is more in the right than I…” (Bereshit 38:26) and the Holy One made him prince. So Ben Zoma used to say and explain: if you were ashamed in this world, you will not be ashamed of the Holy One, who is a consuming fire, in the coming world. Why? Because the shame of this world is nothing other than the shame of one’s standing in the coming world, as it says “For this let every pious man pray to You…” (Tehillim 32:6)

...'And Avram said to Sarai: do it her what is good in your eyes!' (Gen. 19:6) He said to her: "what do I care about her well being or her harm? [But] It is written: 'You will not deal with her as a slave since you humbled her' (Deuteronomy 21:14), and this one, after we made her suffer, we will enslave her? I don't care about her well being or her harm. [But] It is written 'he shall not have the right to sell her to foreigners, since he broke faith with her' (Exodus 21:8) and this one, after we made her a master we will make her a slave? I don't care about her well being or her harm." 'Then Sarai treated her harshly, and she ran away from her.' Rabbi Aba bar Kahana said: she forbade her from having sexual relations. Rabbi Berachia said: she slapped her face with a slipper. Rabbi Berachia in the name of Rabbi Aba Bar Kahana said: She made her carry water buckets and bath towels to the baths."A

He arose like a great spiritual leader and he judged Israel, as it is said, "Then stood up Phineas, || and he executed judgment" (Ps. 106:30). What is the meaning of this expression, "And he executed judgment"? Like a great judge. Just as thou dost say, "And he shall pay as the judges determine" (Ex. 21:22). And he smote the young men of Israel so that all Israel should see and fear, as it is said, "And all Israel shall hear, and fear" (Deut. 21:21). The Holy One, blessed be He, saw what Phineas had done, and forthwith was He filled with compassion; the plague was stayed, as it is said, "And so the plague was stayed" (Num. 16:50).

(Ibid. 12) "If there be sold, to you, etc.": Whence is it derived that if you buy (a servant), you should buy only a Hebrew servant? From (Shemoth 21:2) "When you buy a Hebrew man-servant." Whence is it derived that if he sells himself, he should sell himself only to you? From (Vayikra 25:39) "And if your brother grows poor with you and he is sold to you…" Whence is it derived that if beth-din sells him, he is sold only to you? From (Ibid. 12) "If there be sold to you (by beth-din, for his theft) your brother …"

"then he shall serve you": — and not your heir. I might think, not even your son; it is, therefore, written (Shemoth 21:2) "Six years shall he serve" (implying that he does serve your son). And why do you see fit to include the son and to exclude the heir (i.e., the daughter)? I include the son for he stands in place of his father for yeidah (living with his father's handmaid), and for (acquiring his) field of holding (viz. Vayikra 25:25), and I exclude the daughter, who does not.

(Devarim 15:16) "And it shall be, if he say to you: I shall not leave": I might think (that he says this) one time; it is, therefore, written (Shemoth 21:5) "And if the slave say, will say" — He must say it and repeat it.

"and to your maid-servant, too, shall you do thus": to bestow. I might think, also to bore the ear; it is, therefore, written (Shemoth 21:5) "And if the man-servant say, etc." The man-servant, and not the maid-servant.

(Bamidbar 19:1-2) "And the L-rd spoke to Aaron and to Moses saying: This is the statute of the Torah, which the L-rd has commanded, saying: Speak to the children of Israel and let them take unto you a red heifer, complete, which does not have a blemish, upon which a yoke has not come." There are sections (of the Torah), which are general in the beginning and particular at the end, and (others), which are particular in the beginning and general at the end: (Shemot 19:3) "Thus shall you say to the house of Jacob and declare to the children of Israel" — particular; (Ibid. 6) "These are the things, etc." — general. (Ibid. 12:43) "This is the statute of the Pesach" — general; (Ibid.) "Every stranger shall not eat of it" — particular. (Bamidbar 19:2) "This is the statute of the Torah" — general; (Ibid.) "and let them take for you a red heifer, complete" — particular. General-Particular. (The rule is:) There exists in the general only what is found in the particular. R. Eliezer says: It is written here "statute" and (relative to the Yom Kippur service, Vayikra 16:34) "statute." Just as there, (the Cohein ministers) in the white vestments; here, too, in the white vestments. R. Yochanan b. Zakkai was asked by his disciples: In which vestments was the red heifer processed? He: In the golden vestments. They: But did our master not teach us (that it was processed) in the white vestments? He: If I have forgotten what my eyes have seen and what my hands have ministered, how much more so, what I have taught! And why all this? To strengthen the disciples (in application to their learning). Others say: It was Hillel the Elder, but (not being a Cohein), he could not have said "what my hands have ministered." "and let them take": from the Temple treasury. "unto you": that you be appointed over it. And just as Moses was appointed over it, so, was Aaron. Similarly, in respect to the oil for lighting, (Shemot 21:20) "and let them take unto you" — that you be appointed over it. "a red heifer (parah)": R. Eliezer says: "eglah" signifies of the first year; "parah" signifies of the second year. The sages say: "eglah" — of the second year; "parah" — of the third or fourth year. R. Meir says: One of the fifth year, too, is valid. An old one is valid, but it is not waited for lest it sprout black hairs and become unfit. "parah": I understand black or white; it is, therefore, written "red." "whole": in redness or in (absence of) blemishes? "which does not have a blemish" accounts for blemishes. How, then, am I to understand "whole"? That it be "whole" in redness. "which does not have a blemish": Why need this be stated? Even if it were not stated, I would know it a fortiori, viz.: If offerings, which are not invalidated by work (having been done with them), are invalidated by a blemish, then the heifer, which is invalidated by work, how much more so should it be invalidated by a blemish! — No, this may be true of offerings, which must be processed (by the Cohein) in a state of cleanliness, wherefore a blemish invalidates them, as opposed to the heifer, which may be processed in a state of tumah (i.e., when the Cohein is a tvul yom), wherefore a blemish would not invalidate it. (So that the verse is needed to tell us otherwise.) — (No,) this is refuted by (the instance of) the Paschal lamb, which though it may be processed in a state of tumah, a blemish invalidates it, and this would indicate of the heifer that even though it is processed in tumah, a blemish invalidates it. (Why, then, is a verse needed to tell us this?) — No, this may be true of the Paschal lamb, which must be sacrificed at a fixed time, wherefore it is invalidated by a blemish, as opposed to the heifer, which, not having a fixed time (for its processing), should not be invalidated by a blemish. It must, therefore, (to tell us otherwise) be written "which does not have a blemish." Issi b. Akiva says: "which does not have a blemish": Why need this be stated? Even if it were not stated, I would know it a fortiori, viz.: If offerings, which are not invalidated by black or white (hairs), are invalidated by a blemish, then the heifer, which is invalidated by black or white, how much more so should it be invalidated by a blemish"! If I know this a fortiori, why need it be stated "which does not have a blemish"? To exclude (from invalidation by a blemish) the heifer of the broken neck (eglah arufah [viz. Devarim 21:4]). For it would follow (if not for this verse) that blemishes should invalidate the eglah arufah, viz.: If offerings, which are not invalidated by work, are invalidated by a blemish, then eglah arufah, which is invalidated by work, how much more so should it be invalidated by a blemish! It is, therefore, written (in respect to the red heifer), "which does not have a blemish" — It (the red heifer) is invalidated by a blemish, but the eglah arufah is not invalidated by a blemish. R. Yehudah b. Betheira says: If the sin-offering of a bird, whose offerers must be tahor, is not invalidated by a blemish, then the red heifer, whose processors may be tamei (tvul yom), how much more so should it not be invalidated by a blemish! (The verse, then, is needed to tell us that it is invalidated by a blemish.) — No, this may be true of the sin-offering of a bird, which is valid if either male or female, as opposed to a heifer, (where only a female is valid.) Why, then, need it be stated "which does not have a blemish"? (lit., "when there is no blemish in it") When the blemish is in it (it is invalid), but when it has passed, it is valid. R. Yoshiyah Numithi asked before R. Yehudah b. Betheira: What is a blemish which has passed, in which instance it is valid? And he showed me between his two fingers — when(flesh) protrudes or when it has two tails. "upon which a yoke has not come": Scripture speaks of a yoke not in (the time of its) working. And if you would say, a yoke in (the time of its working), would you say that? It follows a fortiori, viz.: If eglah arufah, which is not invalidated by a blemish, is invalidated by a yoke (in its time of working), then the red heifer, which is invalidated by a blemish, how much more so should it be invalidated by a yoke (in the time of its working!) — (No,) this is refuted by the offerings, which are invalidated by a blemish, but not by a yoke (in the time of working), and they would indicate about the red heifer that even though it is invalidated by a blemish, it should not be invalidated by a yoke (in the time of its working). — No, this may be true of offerings, which are not invalidated by black and white hairs, wherefore a yoke does not invalidate them, as opposed to the red heifer, which is invalidated by black and white, wherefore a yoke (in the time of its working) should invalidate them. What, then, is the intent of "upon which a yoke has not come"? A yoke not in the time of its working. Whence is it derived that other labors are equated with a yoke (to invalidate the red heifer)? It follows a fortiori, viz.: If (in the instance of) eglah arufah, which is not invalidated by a blemish, other labors are equated with a yoke, (viz. Devarim 21:3 "which has never been worked, which has never pulled under a yoke"), then (in the instance of) the red heifer, which is invalidated by a blemish, how much more so should other labors be equated with a yoke! — But perhaps it should be transposed, viz.: If (in the instance of) the red heifer, which is invalidated by a blemish, other labors were not equated with a yoke, then (in the instance of) eglah arufah, which is not invalidated by a blemish, how much more so should other labors not be equated with a yoke! It is, therefore, written "which has never been worked." I have reasoned a fortiori and I have transposed. The transposition has been refuted and I have emerged with the original a fortiori argument, viz.: If (in the instance of) the eglah arufah, which is not invalidated by a blemish, other labors are equated with a yoke, then (in the instance of) the red heifer, which is invalidated by a blemish, how much more so should other labors be equated with a yoke!

(Bamidbar 35:9-10) "And the L-rd spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the children of Israel … When you cross the Jordan, etc.": What is the intent of this section (on the cities of refuge)? From (Devarim 4:41) "Then Moses set aside three cities on the east side of the Jordan," we know only of these. Whence is it derived that Moses commanded Joshua to set aside cities of refuge (on the other side)? From (Bamidbar 35:11) "then you shall designate cities for yourselves." Scripture speaks of (the time) after inheritance and settlement. — But perhaps, upon their entry to the land? It is, therefore, written (Devarim 12:29) "When the L-rd your G-d has cut down the nations, etc." Scripture speaks of (the time after inheritance and settlement). (Bamidbar 35:10) "When you cross the Jordan to the land of Canaan": From here R. Yonathan derived: The Jordan is not part of the land of Canaan. R. Shimon b. Yochai says (Ibid. 26:3) "at the Jordan. Jericho": Just as Jericho is part of Canaan, so is Jordan. (Ibid. 35:11) "Then you shall call out cities (arim) for yourselves." "Calling out" connotes "designation." "cities": I might think, large cities; it is, therefore, written "arim" (connoting small cities). If so, I might think villages. It is, therefore, written "arim." How was this implemented in effect? They were of such size as to have markets and a food store. "And there shall flee there a slayer": I might think, any slayer. It is, therefore, written "a slayer, one who smites a soul unwittingly." If "one who smites a soul," I would think, even one who wounds his father and mother (unwittingly, viz. Shemot 21:15). It is, therefore, written "a slayer, one who smites a soul," Scripture hereby excluding from exile one who (unwittingly) wounds his father and mother.

(Bamidbar 35:16) "And if with an iron implement he kill him (intentionally) and he die, he is a murderer.": What is the intent of this? From (17) "And if with a hand-stone … (18) Or if with a wooden implement, etc.", I might think that he is liable only if he killed him with one of these. Whence would I derive (the same for) iron? It is, therefore, written "And if with an iron implement he kill him, he is a murderer." — But (even) without this I can derive it a fortiori, viz.: If he is liable for killing him with stone or wood, how much more so with iron! — But if so, I would say: Just as a stone must fill the hand (thus "hand-stone"), so, iron. It is, therefore, written with an implement of iron, (of any size). It is revealed before the Holy One Blessed be He that iron of any size can kill, wherefore "hand" is not written (in that connection) — even a needle or a pin sufficing. This tells me only of his killing him with iron. Whence do I derive the same for his throwing at him metal balls or lumps? From (16) "He is a murderer; die shall die the murderer" — in any event. (17) "And if with a hand-stone, whereby he can die, he strike him and he die, he is a murderer. Die shall die the murderer.": What is the intent of this? From (Shemot 21:18) "And if men quarrel and a man strike his neighbor, etc." I might think (that this obtains) whether he strikes him with something which is or which is not lethal. It is, therefore, written "And if with a hand-stone (i.e., one which fills the hand), whereby he can die, he strike him." Scripture hereby apprises us that he is not liable unless he strikes him with something which is potentially lethal. I might think, even (if he strike him) on a (body) site (a blow to) which is not mortal. It is, therefore, written (Devarim 19:11) "And if a man hate his neighbor … and he strike him mortally" — whereby we are apprised that he is not liable unless he strikes him with something which is potentially lethal and on a (body) site, injury to which may result in his death. This ("And if with a hand-stone") tells me that he is liable only if he kills him with a stone. Whence do I derive (the same for) his rolling rocks or pillars over him? From (17) "he is a murderer — die shall die the murderer" — in any event.

(Bamidbar 35:18) "Or if with a wooden hand-implement, whereby he can die, he strike him, and he die, he is a murderer." What is the intent of this? From (Shemot 21:20) "And if a man strike his (Canaanite) man-servant or maid-servant with a rod, and he die under his hand, vengeance (by the sword) shall be taken," I might think, whether or not it is of killing potential. It is, therefore, written "Or if with a wooden hand-implement, whereby he can die, he strike him, etc." — only if it is of killing potential. I might think, even on a (body) site injury to which does not result in death. It is, therefore, written (Devarim 19:11) "And if a man hate his neighbor and lie in wait for him, and he rise up against him and he strike him mortally," Scripture hereby apprising us that he is not liable unless he strikes him on a (body) site injury to which may result in death. This ("Or, if with a wooden implement") tells me that he is liable only if he struck him with wood. Whence do I derive (the same for) his throwing beams or poles at him? From "he is a murderer — die shall die the murderer" — in any event.

(Bamidbar 35:29) "And these shall be for you a statute of judgment": to obtain throughout the generations": in Eretz Yisrael and outside of it. (30) "Whoever would kill a soul, by the testimony of witnesses shall he kill the slayer": What is the intent of this? From (19) "The avenger, he shall kill him," I might think that he may kill him in beth-din without witnesses. It is, therefore, written "Whoever would kill a soul, by the testimony of witnesses, etc." He kills him only in beth-din and by witnesses. "and one witness shall not testify against a soul to have him put to death": (but) he can testify towards acquittal. And one witness can testify towards (imposing) an oath. "and one witness": This is a prototype, viz.: Wherever "witness" is written, two are understood, unless "one" is specified. (31) "And you shall not take ransom for the soul of a murderer": What is the intent of this? From (Shemot 21:30) "When ransom is set for him" (one whose ox killed a man), I might think that just as "redemption" is given for those subject to death at the hands of Heaven, so, is it given for those liable to death by man (i.e., beth-din). It is, therefore, written "And you shall not take ransom." R. Yoshiyah says: If one were taken out to be executed and he injured others, he is liable. If others injured him, they are not liable for (injuring) his person, (for he is considered "dead"), but they are liable for (damage to) his property. Whence is this derived? From "And you shall not take ransom," (indicating that he is regarded as "dead.") — But perhaps this obtains even if his verdict has not yet been consummated? It is, therefore, written "who is liable to die." Until his verdict has been consummated, he (i.e., one who injures him) is liable. Once his verdict has been consummated, he is not liable. R. Yonathan says: If one were being taken out to be executed, and another came forward and killed him, he is not liable. Even if his verdict has not yet been consummated? It is, therefore, written "until he is liable to die." Until his verdict has been consummated, he (i.e., one who kills him) is liable. Once his verdict has been consummated, he is not liable.

R. Yehudah says: It is written here (19:21) "hand" and "foot," and elsewhere (Shemoth 21:24) "hand" and "foot." Just as "hand" and "foot" here refer to monetary payment, so, "hand" and "foot" there.

"and she shall be to you as a wife": as it is written (Shemoth 21:10) "her food, her clothing, and her (conjugal) time he shall not diminish."