Midrash su Levitico 24:78

(Numb. 8:1–2:) “Then the Lord spoke unto Moses saying, ‘Speak unto Aaron and say unto him, “When you set up the lamps.”’” Let our master instruct us: Is it permissible to light the Sabbath [lamp] with oil for burning¹I.e. defiled oil from the terumah (the priestly tithe on produce). So Shab. 23b. on a festival? Thus have our masters taught (in Shab. 2:2): One may not light with oil for burning on a festival. R. Ishmael says, “One may not light [it] with tar out of respect for the Sabbath.” But the sages permit all kinds of oil: Sesame oil, nut oil, radish oil, fish oil, colocynth oil, tar, or mineral oil. R. Tarfon says, “One may only make a light with olive oil alone.” R. Johanan ben Nuri rose to his feet and said, “What will the people of Babylon do, who have nothing but sesame oil? What will the people of Media do, who have nothing but nut oil? What will the people of Alexandria do, who have nothing but radish oil? And what will the people of Cappadocia do, who have neither the one nor the other but only mineral oil?” R. Tarfon said to them, “See we have found that the Holy One, blessed be He, loves olive oil in a lamp and in lighting more than all the other oils, as He repeated it and trebled it in several places. And from His great love [for it], He chose ‘clear oil of beaten olives for lighting’ (Exod. 27:20). ‘For lighting,’ but not for the offerings. And the rest of the olive was for the offerings that were sacrificed.” You know that [it is so]. See, with reference to all the [other] gifts it is only said of them (as in Lev. 2:15), “And you shall put oil upon it”;²Cf. Lev. 2:1, 6 where the same command is expressed with a different verb i.e. POUR. but with reference to the lighting of the lamp, it is written “oil of olives,” and not other oils, (in Exod. 27:20), “clear of beaten [olives] for lighting.” We find that in several places the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded about lighting the lamps with clear oil of beaten olives, and so it says (in Exod. 27:20) “And you shall command the Children of Israel to bring unto you clear oil of beaten olives.” So also it says (in Lev. 24:2, 4), “Command the Children of Israel to bring unto you clear oil of beaten olives for lighting.... Upon the unalloyed lampstand.” And here also it is written (in Numb. 8:2), “When you set up (literally, raise up) the lamps.”

(Numb. 8:1–2:) THEN THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES SAYING: SPEAK UNTO AARON AND SAY UNTO HIM: WHEN YOU SET UP THE LAMPS. Let our master instruct us. Is it legal to light <a Sabbath lamp> with oil for burning¹I.e. defiled oil from the terumah (the priestly tithe on produce). So Shab. 23b. on a festival?²Tanh. Numb. 3:1. Thus have our masters taught (in Shab. 2:2): ONE MAY NOT LIGHT <A SABBATH LAMP>³See Shab. 2:1 for the context. WITH OIL FOR BURNING ON A FESTIVAL. [R. ISHMAEL SAYS: ONE MAY NOT LIGHT <IT> WITH TAR] OUT OF RESPECT FOR THE SABBATH. BUT THE SAGES PERMIT ALL KINDS OF OIL: SESAME OIL, NUT OIL, RADISH OIL, [FISH OIL], COLOCYNTH OIL, TAR, OR MINERAL OIL. R. TARFON SAYS: ONE MAY ONLY MAKE A LIGHT WITH OLIVE OIL ALONE.⁴Similarly TShab. 2:1-4; Shab. 26a. R. Johanan ben Nuri rose to his feet and said: What will the people of Babylon do, who have nothing but sesame oil? What will the people of Media do, who have nothing but nut oil? [What will the people of Alexandria do, who have nothing but radish oil?] And what will the people of Cappadocia do, who have neither the one or the other but only mineral oil? R. Tarafon said to them: See we have found that the Holy One loves olive oil in a lamp more than all the other oils and more than all the gifts which are offered. You know that <it is so>: See, with reference to all the <other> gifts it is only said of them (as in Lev. 2:15): AND YOU SHALL PUT OIL UPON IT;⁵Cf. Lev. 2:1, 6 where the same command is expressed with a different verb i.e. POUR. but with reference to the lighting of the lamp, it is written (in Exod. 27:20): CLEAR OIL OF <BEATEN> OLIVES. [Therefore R. Tarafon said: ONE MAY ONLY MAKE A LIGHT WITH OLIVE OIL ALONE.] We also find that in several places the Holy One warned about lighting the lamps WITH CLEAR OIL OF < BEATEN > OLIVES and so it says (in Exod. 27:20): <AND YOU SHALL COMMAND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL> TO BRING UNTO YOU CLEAR OIL OF <BEATEN> OLIVES. So also it says (in Lev. 24:2, 4): [<COMMAND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL> TO BRING UNTO YOU CLEAR OIL OF <BEATEN OLIVES….:] HE SHALL SET UP THE LAMPS UPON THE UNALLOYED LAMPSTAND. And here also it warns about the lamps. Where? From what we have read about the matter (in Numb. 8:2): <SPEAK UNTO AARON AND SAY UNTO HIM:> WHEN YOU SET UP THE LAMPS….

(Numb. 8:1–2:) THEN THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES SAYING: SPEAK UNTO AARON AND SAY UNTO HIM: WHEN YOU SET UP THE LAMPS. Let our master instruct us. Is it legal to light <a Sabbath lamp> with oil for burning¹I.e. defiled oil from the terumah (the priestly tithe on produce). So Shab. 23b. on a festival?²Tanh. Numb. 3:1. Thus have our masters taught (in Shab. 2:2): ONE MAY NOT LIGHT <A SABBATH LAMP>³See Shab. 2:1 for the context. WITH OIL FOR BURNING ON A FESTIVAL. [R. ISHMAEL SAYS: ONE MAY NOT LIGHT <IT> WITH TAR] OUT OF RESPECT FOR THE SABBATH. BUT THE SAGES PERMIT ALL KINDS OF OIL: SESAME OIL, NUT OIL, RADISH OIL, [FISH OIL], COLOCYNTH OIL, TAR, OR MINERAL OIL. R. TARFON SAYS: ONE MAY ONLY MAKE A LIGHT WITH OLIVE OIL ALONE.⁴Similarly TShab. 2:1-4; Shab. 26a. R. Johanan ben Nuri rose to his feet and said: What will the people of Babylon do, who have nothing but sesame oil? What will the people of Media do, who have nothing but nut oil? [What will the people of Alexandria do, who have nothing but radish oil?] And what will the people of Cappadocia do, who have neither the one or the other but only mineral oil? R. Tarafon said to them: See we have found that the Holy One loves olive oil in a lamp more than all the other oils and more than all the gifts which are offered. You know that <it is so>: See, with reference to all the <other> gifts it is only said of them (as in Lev. 2:15): AND YOU SHALL PUT OIL UPON IT;⁵Cf. Lev. 2:1, 6 where the same command is expressed with a different verb i.e. POUR. but with reference to the lighting of the lamp, it is written (in Exod. 27:20): CLEAR OIL OF <BEATEN> OLIVES. [Therefore R. Tarafon said: ONE MAY ONLY MAKE A LIGHT WITH OLIVE OIL ALONE.] We also find that in several places the Holy One warned about lighting the lamps WITH CLEAR OIL OF < BEATEN > OLIVES and so it says (in Exod. 27:20): <AND YOU SHALL COMMAND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL> TO BRING UNTO YOU CLEAR OIL OF <BEATEN> OLIVES. So also it says (in Lev. 24:2, 4): [<COMMAND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL> TO BRING UNTO YOU CLEAR OIL OF <BEATEN OLIVES….:] HE SHALL SET UP THE LAMPS UPON THE UNALLOYED LAMPSTAND. And here also it warns about the lamps. Where? From what we have read about the matter (in Numb. 8:2): <SPEAK UNTO AARON AND SAY UNTO HIM:> WHEN YOU SET UP THE LAMPS….

(Lev. 6:2:) “This is the law of the burnt offering.” This text is related (to Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable to the Lord, is like the Lord among the children of the powerful ones?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “If I had [merely] desired an offering, would I not have told (the angel) Michael to bring me an offering? From whom do I desire sacrifice? From Israel.” And so it says about the shewbread (in Lev. 24:8), “on every Sabbath day shall he arrange it.” But it is written (in Micah 6:7), “Does the Lord want thousands of rams?” Balaam the wicked was an advocate¹Gk.: synegoros. for the nations of the world. It is in reference to the nations that that [Scripture] speaks (in Micah 6:7), “Does the Lord want thousands of rams with ten thousands of rivers of oil?” He wants what you offer to Him, [i.e.] a log²A log is a liquid measure that equals the contents of six eggs. of oil. We (gentiles) offer Him ten thousand times ten thousands rivers of oil. What did Abraham offer to Him? Was it not one ram? It is so stated (in Gen. 22:13), “Then [Abraham] lifted his eyes to look and there was a ram behind….” If He wants, we should offer Him thousands of rams; but what did Abraham offer Him? His son. I might offer Him my son and daughter, as stated (in Micah 6:7, cont.), “shall I give my first-born for my transgression,” this is my first-born son; “the fruit of my belly for the sin of my soul,” this is my daughter. See how crafty Balaam the wicked was! He began to say (in Numb. 23:4), “I have prepared the seven altars [and offered a ram and a bull on each altar].” He did not say, "seven altars," but, “the [seven] altars.” These are [all of the] seven altars, [which] they had built since the first Adam was created up to now. Now I am offering seven corresponding to the seven of them. And what did they offer? Twelve cakes, as stated (in Lev. 24:5), “Then you shall take fine white flour and bake it into twelve cakes.” When the Holy One, blessed be He, appeared to him, He said to him, “O wicked one, what are you doing?” He said to Him (in Numb. 23:4) “I have prepared the seven altars.” To whom is this wicked one comparable? To a butcher who sold [meat] in the market. When his store was full of meat, thieves saw [him] and looked at the meat. [When] that butcher saw that he was looking at the meat, he said to him, “Sir, I have already sent provisions³Gk.: opsonion. to your house.” So it was with Balaam. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “O wicked one, what are you doing here?” He said to Him (in Numb. 23:4), “I have prepared the seven altars with a bull and a ram on each altar.” He said to Him (in Micah 6:7), “Does the Lord want thousands of rams?” He said to Him (ibid., cont.), “Shall I give my first-born for my transgression?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “O evil one, if I had desired an offering, I would have spoken to Michael and Gabriel, and they would have presented offerings to me.” It is so stated (in Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable to the Lord, is like the Lord among the children of the powerful ones?” This is [referring to] Balaam, who desired to imitate [what is done by] the children of the powerful ones to the Holy One, blessed be He. [“Among the children of the powerful ones” is referring to] the children of Abraham [which] are Isaac and Jacob. [These are the ones] who are the rams of the world. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “What do you desire? To deceive yourself before Me? [To persuade] Me to accept offerings from the gentiles? You are not able. It is an oath (in the words of Lev. 24:8, cont.), ‘an everlasting covenant on the part of the Children of Israel.’ It is a stipulation that I only accept offerings from Israel.” It is so stated (in Lev. 6:2), “Command Aaron and his children, saying.” When the nations said, “What is this, whereby Israel is presenting offerings and sacrificing?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them (ibid.), “This is the law of the burnt offering (rt.: 'lh),” [referring to (Cant. 3:6),] “Who is this that comes up (rt.: 'lh) from the desert?” (Exod. 19:3:) “Then Moses went up (rt.: 'lh) unto God.” Another interpretation (of Lev. 6:1-2) “Then the Lord spoke…, ‘Command Aaron…, “This is the law of the burnt offering”’”: The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Fulfill what is written above on the matter. Then after that [comes,] ‘This is the law of the burnt offering.’” Why? (Is. 61:8) “Because I the Lord love justice, I hate robbery with a burnt offering,” [meaning] even with a burnt offering. What is written above on the matter (in Lev. 5:23)? “And it shall come to pass that, when one has sinned and is guilty, he shall restore the stolen goods which he robbed.” Then after that (in Lev. 6:2), “This is the law of the burnt offering.” If you desire to present an offering, you shall not rob anyone. Why? “Because I the Lord love justice, I hate robbery with a burnt offering.” So when do you present a burnt offering so that I accept it? When your hands are clean of robbery. David said (in Ps. 24:3-4), “Who may ascend (rt.: 'lh) the hill of the Lord, and who may stand in His holy place? One with clean hands and a pure heart.” “This is the law of the burnt offering,” the one who has hands clean of robbery, he “may stand in His holy place.” “From the beginning of [this book on] offerings you learn (in Lev. 1:2), “Speak unto the Children of Israel and say unto them, ‘When one (adam) of you presents an offering.” Why is Adam mentioned? It is simply that the Holy One, blessed be He, said, “When you sacrifice to Me, you shall be like the first Adam in that he did not rob from others, since he was alone in the world. So also you shall not rob people. Why? (Is. 61:8:) ‘Because I the Lord love justice, I hate robbery with a burnt offering.’” Another interpretation (of Lev. 6:2), “This is the Torah of the burnt offering”: Why is it named a burnt offering ('olah, rt.: 'lh)? Because it is the highest (rt.: 'lh) of all the offerings. It is that which ascends ('olah, rt.: 'lh). You should know that when someone brings a sin offering, the priest takes it, and likewise the meal offering. Moreover, the peace offerings belong to their owners and a guilt offering belongs to the priest. In the case of the burnt offering, however, no creature tastes it. Rather all of it belongs to the Holy One, blessed be He. Therefore, it is called burnt offering ('olah, rt.: 'lh), because it ascends ('olah) to the Holy One, blessed be He, who is [the] Most High (rt.: 'lh).

(Lev. 6:1–2 [8–9]:) THEN THE LORD SPOKE < UNTO MOSES SAYING >: COMMAND AARON…. This text is related (to Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE TO THE LORD, IS LIKE THE LORD AMONG THE CHILDREN OF GODS? The Holy One said: If I had < merely > desired an offering, would I not have told Michael to bring me an offering?¹Tanh., Lev. 2:1. From whom do I desire sacrifice? From Israel. And so it says about the shewbread (in Lev. 24:8) [HE SHALL ARRANGE IT BEFORE THE LORD REGULARLY] ON EVERY SABBATH DAY. But it is written (in Micah 6:7): DOES THE LORD WANT THOUSANDS OF RAMS WITH TEN THOUSANDS OF RIVERS OF OIL? Balaam the Wicked was an advocate²Gk.: synegoros. for the nations of the world. It is in reference to his place (as their advocate)³Cf. the parallels in Codex Vaticanus Ebr. 34 and in Tanhuma, which read: “It is in reference to the nations that….” that < Scripture > speaks (in Micah 6:7): DOES THE LORD WANT [THOUSANDS OF RAMS WITH TEN THOUSANDS OF RIVERS OF OIL]? He wants what you offer to him, < i.e. > a log⁴A log is a liquid measure that equals the contents of six eggs. of oil. We (gentiles) offer him ten thousand times ten thousands rivers of oil. What did Abraham offer to him? Was it not one ram? It is so stated (in Gen. 22:13): THEN [ABRAHAM] LIFTED HIS EYES TO LOOK AND THERE WAS A RAM BEHIND HIM…. If he wants, we should offer him thousands of rams; but what did Abraham offer him? His son. I might offer him my son and daughter, as stated (in Micah 6:7, cont.): SHALL I GIVE MY FIRST-BORN FOR MY TRANSGRESSION, THE FRUIT OF MY BELLY FOR THE SIN OF MY SOUL? MY FIRST-BORN FOR MY TRANSGRESSION? This is my first-born son. THE FRUIT OF MY BELLY FOR THE SIN OF MY SOUL? This is my daughter. See how crafty Balaam the Wicked was! He began to say (in Numb. 23:4): I HAVE PREPARED THE SEVEN ALTARS < AND OFFERED A RAM AND A BULL ON EACH ALTAR >. He did not say, "< seven > altars," but, THE < SEVEN > ALTARS. These are < all of the > seven altars, < which > they had built since the first Adam was created up to now. Now I am offering seven < sacrifices > corresponding to the seven of them. And what did they offer? Twelve cakes, as stated (in Lev. 24:5): THEN YOU SHALL TAKE FINE WHITE FLOUR AND BAKE IT INTO TWELVE CAKES. When the Holy One appeared to him, he said to him: O Wicked One, what are you doing? He said to him (In Numb. 23:4) I HAVE PREPARED THE SEVEN ALTARS. To whom is this wicked one comparable? To a butcher who sold < meat > in the market. When his store was full of meat, the market commissioner⁵Gk.: logistes. saw < him > and looked at the meat. < When > that butcher saw that he was looking at the meat, he said to him: Sir, I have already sent provisions⁶Gk.: opsonion. to your house. So it was with Balaam. The Holy One said to him: O Wicked One, what are you doing here? He said to him (in Numb. 23:4): I HAVE PREPARED THE SEVEN ALTARS WITH A BULL AND A RAM ON EACHALTAR. He said to him (in Micah 6:7): DOES THE LORD WANT THOUSANDS OF RAMS? He said to him (ibid., cont.): SHALL I GIVE MY FIRST-BORN FOR MY TRANSGRESSION? The Holy One said to him: O Evil One, if I had desired offering, I would have spoken to Michael and Gabriel, and they would have presented offerings to me. It is so stated (in Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE TO THE LORD, IS LIKE THE LORD AMONG THE CHILDREN OF GODS? Among the children of Abraham are Isaac and Jacob. < These are the ones > who are the rams of the world. The Holy One said to him: What do you desire? To deceive yourself before me? < To persuade > me to accept offerings from the gentiles? You are not able. He said to him: It is an oath, (in the words of Lev. 24:8, cont.) AN EVERLASTING COVENANT ON THE PART OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, they say, so that I only accept offerings from Israel. It is so stated (in Lev. 6:1–2 [8–9]): COMMAND AARON AND HIS CHILDREN, SAYING: < THIS IS THE TORAH OF THE BURNT OFFERING >…. When the nations said: What is this, whereby Israel is presenting offerings and sacrificing? the Holy One said to them (ibid.): THIS IS THE TORAH OF THE BURNT OFFERING (rt.: 'LH). (Cant. 3:6): WHO IS THIS THAT COMES UP FROM THE DESERT < LIKE COLUMNS OF SMOKE PERFUMED WITH MYRRH AND FRANKINCENSE >…? (Exod. 19:3:) THEN MOSES WENT (rt.: 'LH) UP UNTO GOD.

(Lev. 6:2:) “This is the law of the burnt offering.” This text is related (to Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable to the Lord, is like the Lord among the children of the powerful ones?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “If I had [merely] desired an offering, would I not have told (the angel) Michael to bring me an offering? From whom do I desire sacrifice? From Israel.” And so it says about the shewbread (in Lev. 24:8), “on every Sabbath day shall he arrange it.” But it is written (in Micah 6:7), “Does the Lord want thousands of rams?” Balaam the wicked was an advocate¹Gk.: synegoros. for the nations of the world. It is in reference to the nations that that [Scripture] speaks (in Micah 6:7), “Does the Lord want thousands of rams with ten thousands of rivers of oil?” He wants what you offer to Him, [i.e.] a log²A log is a liquid measure that equals the contents of six eggs. of oil. We (gentiles) offer Him ten thousand times ten thousands rivers of oil. What did Abraham offer to Him? Was it not one ram? It is so stated (in Gen. 22:13), “Then [Abraham] lifted his eyes to look and there was a ram behind….” If He wants, we should offer Him thousands of rams; but what did Abraham offer Him? His son. I might offer Him my son and daughter, as stated (in Micah 6:7, cont.), “shall I give my first-born for my transgression,” this is my first-born son; “the fruit of my belly for the sin of my soul,” this is my daughter. See how crafty Balaam the wicked was! He began to say (in Numb. 23:4), “I have prepared the seven altars [and offered a ram and a bull on each altar].” He did not say, "seven altars," but, “the [seven] altars.” These are [all of the] seven altars, [which] they had built since the first Adam was created up to now. Now I am offering seven corresponding to the seven of them. And what did they offer? Twelve cakes, as stated (in Lev. 24:5), “Then you shall take fine white flour and bake it into twelve cakes.” When the Holy One, blessed be He, appeared to him, He said to him, “O wicked one, what are you doing?” He said to Him (in Numb. 23:4) “I have prepared the seven altars.” To whom is this wicked one comparable? To a butcher who sold [meat] in the market. When his store was full of meat, thieves saw [him] and looked at the meat. [When] that butcher saw that he was looking at the meat, he said to him, “Sir, I have already sent provisions³Gk.: opsonion. to your house.” So it was with Balaam. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “O wicked one, what are you doing here?” He said to Him (in Numb. 23:4), “I have prepared the seven altars with a bull and a ram on each altar.” He said to Him (in Micah 6:7), “Does the Lord want thousands of rams?” He said to Him (ibid., cont.), “Shall I give my first-born for my transgression?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “O evil one, if I had desired an offering, I would have spoken to Michael and Gabriel, and they would have presented offerings to me.” It is so stated (in Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable to the Lord, is like the Lord among the children of the powerful ones?” This is [referring to] Balaam, who desired to imitate [what is done by] the children of the powerful ones to the Holy One, blessed be He. [“Among the children of the powerful ones” is referring to] the children of Abraham [which] are Isaac and Jacob. [These are the ones] who are the rams of the world. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “What do you desire? To deceive yourself before Me? [To persuade] Me to accept offerings from the gentiles? You are not able. It is an oath (in the words of Lev. 24:8, cont.), ‘an everlasting covenant on the part of the Children of Israel.’ It is a stipulation that I only accept offerings from Israel.” It is so stated (in Lev. 6:2), “Command Aaron and his children, saying.” When the nations said, “What is this, whereby Israel is presenting offerings and sacrificing?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them (ibid.), “This is the law of the burnt offering (rt.: 'lh),” [referring to (Cant. 3:6),] “Who is this that comes up (rt.: 'lh) from the desert?” (Exod. 19:3:) “Then Moses went up (rt.: 'lh) unto God.” Another interpretation (of Lev. 6:1-2) “Then the Lord spoke…, ‘Command Aaron…, “This is the law of the burnt offering”’”: The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Fulfill what is written above on the matter. Then after that [comes,] ‘This is the law of the burnt offering.’” Why? (Is. 61:8) “Because I the Lord love justice, I hate robbery with a burnt offering,” [meaning] even with a burnt offering. What is written above on the matter (in Lev. 5:23)? “And it shall come to pass that, when one has sinned and is guilty, he shall restore the stolen goods which he robbed.” Then after that (in Lev. 6:2), “This is the law of the burnt offering.” If you desire to present an offering, you shall not rob anyone. Why? “Because I the Lord love justice, I hate robbery with a burnt offering.” So when do you present a burnt offering so that I accept it? When your hands are clean of robbery. David said (in Ps. 24:3-4), “Who may ascend (rt.: 'lh) the hill of the Lord, and who may stand in His holy place? One with clean hands and a pure heart.” “This is the law of the burnt offering,” the one who has hands clean of robbery, he “may stand in His holy place.” “From the beginning of [this book on] offerings you learn (in Lev. 1:2), “Speak unto the Children of Israel and say unto them, ‘When one (adam) of you presents an offering.” Why is Adam mentioned? It is simply that the Holy One, blessed be He, said, “When you sacrifice to Me, you shall be like the first Adam in that he did not rob from others, since he was alone in the world. So also you shall not rob people. Why? (Is. 61:8:) ‘Because I the Lord love justice, I hate robbery with a burnt offering.’” Another interpretation (of Lev. 6:2), “This is the Torah of the burnt offering”: Why is it named a burnt offering ('olah, rt.: 'lh)? Because it is the highest (rt.: 'lh) of all the offerings. It is that which ascends ('olah, rt.: 'lh). You should know that when someone brings a sin offering, the priest takes it, and likewise the meal offering. Moreover, the peace offerings belong to their owners and a guilt offering belongs to the priest. In the case of the burnt offering, however, no creature tastes it. Rather all of it belongs to the Holy One, blessed be He. Therefore, it is called burnt offering ('olah, rt.: 'lh), because it ascends ('olah) to the Holy One, blessed be He, who is [the] Most High (rt.: 'lh).

(Lev. 6:1–2 [8–9]:) THEN THE LORD SPOKE < UNTO MOSES SAYING >: COMMAND AARON…. This text is related (to Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE TO THE LORD, IS LIKE THE LORD AMONG THE CHILDREN OF GODS? The Holy One said: If I had < merely > desired an offering, would I not have told Michael to bring me an offering?¹Tanh., Lev. 2:1. From whom do I desire sacrifice? From Israel. And so it says about the shewbread (in Lev. 24:8) [HE SHALL ARRANGE IT BEFORE THE LORD REGULARLY] ON EVERY SABBATH DAY. But it is written (in Micah 6:7): DOES THE LORD WANT THOUSANDS OF RAMS WITH TEN THOUSANDS OF RIVERS OF OIL? Balaam the Wicked was an advocate²Gk.: synegoros. for the nations of the world. It is in reference to his place (as their advocate)³Cf. the parallels in Codex Vaticanus Ebr. 34 and in Tanhuma, which read: “It is in reference to the nations that….” that < Scripture > speaks (in Micah 6:7): DOES THE LORD WANT [THOUSANDS OF RAMS WITH TEN THOUSANDS OF RIVERS OF OIL]? He wants what you offer to him, < i.e. > a log⁴A log is a liquid measure that equals the contents of six eggs. of oil. We (gentiles) offer him ten thousand times ten thousands rivers of oil. What did Abraham offer to him? Was it not one ram? It is so stated (in Gen. 22:13): THEN [ABRAHAM] LIFTED HIS EYES TO LOOK AND THERE WAS A RAM BEHIND HIM…. If he wants, we should offer him thousands of rams; but what did Abraham offer him? His son. I might offer him my son and daughter, as stated (in Micah 6:7, cont.): SHALL I GIVE MY FIRST-BORN FOR MY TRANSGRESSION, THE FRUIT OF MY BELLY FOR THE SIN OF MY SOUL? MY FIRST-BORN FOR MY TRANSGRESSION? This is my first-born son. THE FRUIT OF MY BELLY FOR THE SIN OF MY SOUL? This is my daughter. See how crafty Balaam the Wicked was! He began to say (in Numb. 23:4): I HAVE PREPARED THE SEVEN ALTARS < AND OFFERED A RAM AND A BULL ON EACH ALTAR >. He did not say, "< seven > altars," but, THE < SEVEN > ALTARS. These are < all of the > seven altars, < which > they had built since the first Adam was created up to now. Now I am offering seven < sacrifices > corresponding to the seven of them. And what did they offer? Twelve cakes, as stated (in Lev. 24:5): THEN YOU SHALL TAKE FINE WHITE FLOUR AND BAKE IT INTO TWELVE CAKES. When the Holy One appeared to him, he said to him: O Wicked One, what are you doing? He said to him (In Numb. 23:4) I HAVE PREPARED THE SEVEN ALTARS. To whom is this wicked one comparable? To a butcher who sold < meat > in the market. When his store was full of meat, the market commissioner⁵Gk.: logistes. saw < him > and looked at the meat. < When > that butcher saw that he was looking at the meat, he said to him: Sir, I have already sent provisions⁶Gk.: opsonion. to your house. So it was with Balaam. The Holy One said to him: O Wicked One, what are you doing here? He said to him (in Numb. 23:4): I HAVE PREPARED THE SEVEN ALTARS WITH A BULL AND A RAM ON EACHALTAR. He said to him (in Micah 6:7): DOES THE LORD WANT THOUSANDS OF RAMS? He said to him (ibid., cont.): SHALL I GIVE MY FIRST-BORN FOR MY TRANSGRESSION? The Holy One said to him: O Evil One, if I had desired offering, I would have spoken to Michael and Gabriel, and they would have presented offerings to me. It is so stated (in Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE TO THE LORD, IS LIKE THE LORD AMONG THE CHILDREN OF GODS? Among the children of Abraham are Isaac and Jacob. < These are the ones > who are the rams of the world. The Holy One said to him: What do you desire? To deceive yourself before me? < To persuade > me to accept offerings from the gentiles? You are not able. He said to him: It is an oath, (in the words of Lev. 24:8, cont.) AN EVERLASTING COVENANT ON THE PART OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, they say, so that I only accept offerings from Israel. It is so stated (in Lev. 6:1–2 [8–9]): COMMAND AARON AND HIS CHILDREN, SAYING: < THIS IS THE TORAH OF THE BURNT OFFERING >…. When the nations said: What is this, whereby Israel is presenting offerings and sacrificing? the Holy One said to them (ibid.): THIS IS THE TORAH OF THE BURNT OFFERING (rt.: 'LH). (Cant. 3:6): WHO IS THIS THAT COMES UP FROM THE DESERT < LIKE COLUMNS OF SMOKE PERFUMED WITH MYRRH AND FRANKINCENSE >…? (Exod. 19:3:) THEN MOSES WENT (rt.: 'LH) UP UNTO GOD.

"Command": The command is immediately, for present performance and for future generations. You say thus, but perhaps it is only for future performance! It is, therefore, (to negate this) written "Command the children of Israel that they send … (Bamidbar 19:4) "And the children of Israel did so, sending them outside the camp" — whence we derive that the command is for immediate performance. And whence do we derive that it is (also) for future generations? From (Vayikra 24:2) "Command the children of Israel that they take to you clear olive oil … (3) … an eternal statute for your generations." — But how do we derive (the same) for all the commands in the Torah? R. Yishmael says: Since we find unqualified commands in the Torah, and one of them was qualified as being for present performance and for future generations, we derive the same for all the mitzvoth in the Torah. R. Yehudah b. Bethira says: "command" in all places connotes impulsion (to the act), as it is written (Devarim 3:28) "And command Joshua and strengthen him and fortify him" — whence we learn "We strengthen only the (internally) strengthened," and "We impel only the (internally) impelled." R. Shimon b. Yochai says: "Command" in all places entails expense, as it is written (Vayikra 24:2) "Command the children of Israel that they take to you pure olive oil," (Bamidbar 35:2) "Command the children of Israel that they give to the Levites from the inheritance, etc." (Bamidbar 28:2) "Command the children of Israel and say to them: My offering, My bread, for My fires" — whence we see that "command" in all places entails expense. Except in one; and which is that? (Bamidbar 34:2) "Command the children of Israel and say to them: When you come to the land of Canaan, etc." — where the intent is: Impel them to the division of the land. Rebbi says: "Command" in all places is exhortation, as it is written (Bereshit 2:16-17) "And the L-rd G-d commanded (i.e., exhorted) the man, saying … but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat."

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.

What happened with K'tiha b. Salum? There was a Caesar who disliked the Jews, and he asked the advice of his officers: Should he who has a fibre in his foot cut it off and be at ease, or should he allow it to remain and be afflicted? And the advice of them all was, that he should cut it off and remain at rest. K'tiha, however, who was one of his officers, objected, saying: "First you cannot get rid of all the Jews, as it is written (Zech. 2, 10) For as the four winds of the heaven have I spread you abroad, saith the Lord. And secondly, your kingdom will be called a kingdom that kills its own subjects." The king then said: "Thy advice is good, but there is a law that he who obstructs the wish of the king, must be thrown into the furnace. When they took him to be slain, he said: "I bequeath all my property to R. Akiba and his colleagues." R. Akiba based his division on the following passage (Lev. 24, 9) And it shall belong to Aaron and to his sons, i.e., one-half for Aaron and one-half for his sons. A heavenly voice was then heard: "K'tiha b. Salum has a share in the world to come." Rabbi then wept and said: "Here we have a man who has bought his world in one moment, while another one has to work for it all his life." Antoninus served Rabbi; Adarchan (a Persian Prince) served Rab. When Antoninus departed, Rabbi lamented: "The bond [of friendship] is severed," and when Adarchan died, Rab lamented: "The bond [of friendship] is severed."

Another interpretation: "And he saw their suffering" that they did not have rest. He went and said to Pharaoh, " One who has a slave, if he does not rest one day a week, he will die! While your slaves, if you don't allow them rest one day a week , they will die!" He said to them, "Go and do for them as you are saying." Moses went and established the Sabbath day for them to rest. "And he saw an Egyptian man." What did he see? R. Huna say in the name of Bar Kaprah, for 4 things the Israelites were redeemed from Egypt, one was for not changing their names (Shir ha-Shirim Rabbah, Vayikra Rabba 32). And from where do we learn that they didn't engage in adultery? Because it happened once and the verse publicized it, as it's written: And his mother's name was Shlomit bat Divri etc. (Lev 24:10). Our teachers say there were taskmasters among the Egyptians and officers from the Israelites, one taskmaster appointed over ten officers. One officer appointed over ten Israelites. And the taskmasters would go to the houses of the officers at daybreak to make them go call the workers. Once an Egyptian taskmaster went to [do so to] an Israelite officer and he set his eye on his wife who was beautiful without blemish. He called the man and brought him out of his house, then the Egyptian returned and had relations with his wife and she thought that he was her husband and became pregnant from him. Her husband returned and found the Egyptian leaving his house. He asked her, Did he touch you? She said yes, but I thought he was you. When the taskmaster saw that he suspected him he returned him to hard labor and struck him and sought to kill him. Moshe saw this and looked at him and saw with Ruah Hakodesh what he did in the house, and saw what would be done in the field, and said surely he deserves death, as it is written: One who strikes a man shall die. And not only this, but moreover he slept with the wife of Datan and therefore deserved killing, as it says: The adulterer and adulteress shall surely die (Lev 20:10), and that is why it is written: And he turned this way and that etc., he saw what he did to him at home and what he did to him in the field.

Another interpretation: "And he saw their suffering" that they did not have rest. He went and said to Pharaoh, " One who has a slave, if he does not rest one day a week, he will die! While your slaves, if you don't allow them rest one day a week , they will die!" He said to them, "Go and do for them as you are saying." Moses went and established the Sabbath day for them to rest. "And he saw an Egyptian man." What did he see? R. Huna say in the name of Bar Kaprah, for 4 things the Israelites were redeemed from Egypt, one was for not changing their names (Shir ha-Shirim Rabbah, Vayikra Rabba 32). And from where do we learn that they didn't engage in adultery? Because it happened once and the verse publicized it, as it's written: And his mother's name was Shlomit bat Divri etc. (Lev 24:10). Our teachers say there were taskmasters among the Egyptians and officers from the Israelites, one taskmaster appointed over ten officers. One officer appointed over ten Israelites. And the taskmasters would go to the houses of the officers at daybreak to make them go call the workers. Once an Egyptian taskmaster went to [do so to] an Israelite officer and he set his eye on his wife who was beautiful without blemish. He called the man and brought him out of his house, then the Egyptian returned and had relations with his wife and she thought that he was her husband and became pregnant from him. Her husband returned and found the Egyptian leaving his house. He asked her, Did he touch you? She said yes, but I thought he was you. When the taskmaster saw that he suspected him he returned him to hard labor and struck him and sought to kill him. Moshe saw this and looked at him and saw with Ruah Hakodesh what he did in the house, and saw what would be done in the field, and said surely he deserves death, as it is written: One who strikes a man shall die. And not only this, but moreover he slept with the wife of Datan and therefore deserved killing, as it says: The adulterer and adulteress shall surely die (Lev 20:10), and that is why it is written: And he turned this way and that etc., he saw what he did to him at home and what he did to him in the field.

1) (Vayikra 24:10) ("And the son of an Israelite woman went out; and he was the son of an Egyptian man in the midst of the children of Israel. And they strove within the camp, the son of the Israelite woman and the Israelite man.") "And the son of an Israelite woman went out": Whence did he go out From the beth-din of Moses. For he came to pitch his tent in the midst of the camp of Dan — whereupon they said to him: "Who are you that you would pitch your tent in the midst of the camp of Dan?" He: "My mother was of the tribe of Dan." They: "Scripture states (Bamidbar 2:2) 'The Israelites shall encamp; each with his standard by signs according to their fathers' house shall the children of Israel encamp'" — at which he entered the beth-din of Moses, emerged unvindicated, arose, and blasphemed. "and he was the son of an Egyptian man": Even though there were not mamzerim ("bastards") at that time, he was regarded as a mamzer. "in the midst of the children of Israel": We are hereby taught that he became a proselyte. "And they strove within the camp": over the affair of the encampment. "the son of the Israelite woman and the Israelite man": his antagonist. (Vayikra 24:11) ("And the son of the Israelite woman blasphemed the Name and he cursed. And they brought him to Moses. And the name of his mother was Shlomith the daughter of Divri of the tribe of Dan.")

1) (Vayikra 24:10) ("And the son of an Israelite woman went out; and he was the son of an Egyptian man in the midst of the children of Israel. And they strove within the camp, the son of the Israelite woman and the Israelite man.") "And the son of an Israelite woman went out": Whence did he go out From the beth-din of Moses. For he came to pitch his tent in the midst of the camp of Dan — whereupon they said to him: "Who are you that you would pitch your tent in the midst of the camp of Dan?" He: "My mother was of the tribe of Dan." They: "Scripture states (Bamidbar 2:2) 'The Israelites shall encamp; each with his standard by signs according to their fathers' house shall the children of Israel encamp'" — at which he entered the beth-din of Moses, emerged unvindicated, arose, and blasphemed. "and he was the son of an Egyptian man": Even though there were not mamzerim ("bastards") at that time, he was regarded as a mamzer. "in the midst of the children of Israel": We are hereby taught that he became a proselyte. "And they strove within the camp": over the affair of the encampment. "the son of the Israelite woman and the Israelite man": his antagonist. (Vayikra 24:11) ("And the son of the Israelite woman blasphemed the Name and he cursed. And they brought him to Moses. And the name of his mother was Shlomith the daughter of Divri of the tribe of Dan.")

1) (Vayikra 24:13-14) ("And the L–rd spoke to Moses, saying: Take the curser outside of the camp, and let all who heard place their hands on his head; and let all the congregation stone him.") "Take the curser outside of the camp": We are hereby taught that beth-din was within, and the stoning site outside of it. "and let "who heard": These are the witnesses. "all who heard": These are the judges. "their hands": the hands of each, individually.

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 24:2) ("Command (tzav) the children of Israel that they bring to you pure (zach) olive oil, crushed (katish) for the light, to raise a flame always.") "tzav": "tzav" connotes "impelling," immediately and for future generations. R. Shimon said: Especially where monetary loss is involved. "that they bring to you": You are appointed over this. "olive oil": and not sesame oil, and not radish oil, but olive oil which flows of itself (before pressing) — whence they ruled: There are three (periods in a year for picking the) olives, and from each of them come three kinds of oil. The first picking of the olives is from the top of the olive tree, and he gathers them into the olive press, and grinds them in the mill and places them in baskets and he presses them under the beam. What issues from them first is removed and ground a second time. What issues from them the second time is ground again, and so, a third time. The first (oil) is for the menorah and the rest for meal-offerings.

1) (Vayikra 24:5) ("And you shall take fine flour and you shall bake it (into) twelve chaloth; two-tenths (of an ephah) shall the one chalah be.") Whence is it derived that even wheat may be brought (from which flour is later taken)? From (the superfluous) "And you shall take (fine flour"). I might think that wheat could be brought for meal-offerings; it is, therefore, written "it" — It may be brought as wheat, but not other meal-offerings.

Rabbi Azarya, and some say Rabbi Elazar, Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Ḥanina, and the Rabbis, Rabbi Elazar says: This is analogous to a king who had a wine cellar. One came, the first guest; he poured him a cup and gave it to him. The second came, and he poured him a cup and gave it to him. When the king’s son came, he gave him the entire cellar. So too, Adam, the first man, was commanded with seven commandments.⁹⁰The commentaries write that the text should state “six commandments,” as the midrash goes on to list only six. This is also consistent with the text of Bereshit Rabba 16:6 (see Matnot Kehuna). That is what is written: “The Lord God commanded the man, saying: From all the trees in the Garden you shall eat” (Genesis 2:16). “He commanded [vaytzav],” this is [the prohibition against] idol worship, just as you say: “Because he willingly followed an order [tzav]” (Hosea 5:11).⁹¹In this verse, the prophet is expressing that the kingdom of Israel is oppressed because of the sin of idolatry. “The Lord,” this is [the prohibition against] blaspheming the name, as it is stated: “One who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely die” (Leviticus 24:16). “God [Elohim],” this is [the commandment to appoint] judges, as it is stated: “The statement of the two of them shall come to the judges [elohim]” (Exodus 22:8). “The man,” this is [the prohibition against] bloodshed, as it is written: “One who spills the blood of the man [by man shall his blood be shed]” (Genesis 9:6). “Saying,” these are forbidden sexual relations, as it is stated: “Saying: If a man divorces his wife and she goes from him [and becomes another man’s wife, may he return to her again?]” (Jeremiah 3:1). “From all the trees in the Garden,” this is robbery, as it is written: “[Did you eat] from the tree that I commanded you [not to eat?]” (Genesis 3:11).
Noah, [the prohibition against eating] a limb [detached] from a living animal was added for him, as it is written: “But flesh with its life, its blood [you shall not eat]” (Genesis 9:4). Abraham was commanded regarding circumcision. Isaac inaugurated it on the eighth day.⁹²Isaac was the first to have been circumcised on the eighth day of his life (see Genesis 21:4). Jacob [was commanded] regarding the [prohibition against eating the] sciatic nerve, as it is stated: “Therefore, the children of Israel shall not eat the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33). Judah [was commanded] regarding [levirate marriage with] a childless sister-in-law, as it is stated: “Judah said to Onan: Consort with your brother's wife, and consummate levirate marriage with her” (Genesis 38:8). [The children of] Israel [were commanded] regarding all the positive commandments and the negative commandments.
Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Ḥanina and the Rabbis say: This is analogous to a king who would distribute provisions to his troops by means of dukes, governors, and commanders. When his son came, he gave it to him directly.⁹³Similarly, God gave the commandments to Adam and Noah without direct and public Divine revelation, but He gave the Torah to Israel with direct and public Divine revelation. Rabbi Yitzḥak says: This is analogous to a king who was partaking of fine pastry; when his son came, he gave it to him directly.⁹⁴He shared the fine royal pastry with his son, and gave it to him directly. So too, God gave Israel the Divine Torah, and did so through direct revelation. The Rabbis say: This is analogous to a king who was partaking of slices [of food]; when his son came, he gave it to him directly.⁹⁵The king gave his son a slice of food from his own plate. Some say that he took it from his mouth and gave it to him, as it is stated: “For the Lord grants wisdom; from His mouth are knowledge and understanding” (Proverbs 2:6).
Rabbi Abahu, and some say Rabbi Yehuda, and Rabbi Neḥemya, Rabbi Neḥemya said: [This is analogous to] two friends who were engaged in a halakhic matter. This one says the source of the halakha and that one says the source of the halakha.⁹⁶Each one provided a source for his opinion as to the halakhic conclusion in the matter under discussion. The Holy One blessed be He says: ‘Their passion comes from Me.’⁹⁷Their commitment to arrive at the true halakha is for the sake of Heaven, and therefore, are the words of the living God (see Eiruvin 13b). Rabbi Neḥemya explains the meaning of the phrase: “Let him kiss me [yishakeni] with the kisses of his mouth” as related to “their passion” [shukeyotehon]. Rabbi Yehuda said: Even the vanity that emerges from his mouth,⁹⁸Even if those discussing the halakhic matter are mistaken in their analysis and claims. as it is stated: “Job opens his mouth in vanity” (Job 35:16), the Holy One blessed be He said: ‘His passion is from Me.’
The Rabbis say: The souls of these are destined to be taken with a kiss. Rabbi Azarya said: We find that the soul of Aaron was taken only with a kiss; that is what is written: “Aaron the priest ascended Mount Hor at the command of [al pi] God and he died there” (Numbers 33:38).⁹⁹The midrash interprets the phrase al pi according to its literal meaning, such that the verse states “with the mouth of God,” meaning with a Divine kiss. From where is it derived that the soul of Moses [also departed with a kiss]? As it is stated: “Moses, servant of the Lord, died there…at the command of [al pi] God” (Deuteronomy 34:5). From where is it derived that [the soul of] Miriam [departed with a kiss]? As it is written: “Miriam died there” (Numbers 20:1). Just as “there” that is written below, was with the mouth of God, so, too, here, it is the same, but it is improper to state it explicitly.¹⁰⁰Since the word “there” appears regarding the death of Moses, who died with a kiss, the use of the term “there” regarding the death of Miriam implies that she died in the same manner. However, the verse did not state this explicitly regarding Miriam because it would have been improper to indicate the kiss regarding a woman (see Bava Batra 17a). The rest of the righteous, from where is it derived? It is as it is stated: “Let him kiss me from the kisses of his mouth.” If you engaged in matters of Torah that kiss your lips, ultimately, everyone will kiss you on the mouth.¹⁰¹So too, God will collect your soul with a Divine kiss (Midrash HaMevoar).
Another matter, “let him kiss me [yishakeni] with the kisses”—He will arm me, He will purify me, He will cleave to me.¹⁰²All of these are connoted by the word yishakeni, as the midrash will explain. Yishakeni, He will arm me, from what is written: “Armed [noshekei] with bows, right-handed and left-handed” (I Chronicles 12:2). Rabbi Shimon bar Naḥman said: Matters of Torah were likened to weapons. Just as these weapons serve their owners in times of war, so, too, matters of Torah serve one who exerts sufficient effort in their study. Rabbi Ḥana bar Aḥa cites it from here: “Exaltation of God [is in their throats, and a double-edged [pifiyot] sword is in their hand]” (Psalms 149:6); just as this sword cuts with both its edges,¹⁰³It can thereby save the life of its owner on two planes. so too, Torah provides life in this world and life in the World to Come.
Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Neḥemya, and the Rabbis. Rabbi Yehuda says: The Torah that was stated by one mouth [peh] is stated by many mouths [piyot].¹⁰⁴This is based on the verse from Psalms cited above, which compares Torah to a double-edged [pifiyot] sword. Originally it was stated to Israel by Moses, and then all of the children of Israel spoke about it. Similarly, throughout the generations, when a scholar teaches a Torah insight, it is later repeated by his students (Maharzu). Rabbi Neḥemya said: Two Torahs were stated, one oral and one written.¹⁰⁵This is a continuation of the previous statement. The written Torah is stated in one matter, compared to one mouth, whereas the oral Torah, which was not given with one exact text, is communicated in different forms by different people. This is comparable to a plurality of mouths (Maharzu). The Rabbis say: They decree on the supernal, and they perform, on the earthly, and they perform.¹⁰⁶The Sages have multiple mouths in the sense of multiple audiences, as the angels and human beings both observe their decrees. Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: The reason of the Rabbis is as it is written: “As there were princes of sanctity and princes of God” (I Chronicles 24:5). “Princes of sanctity,” these are the ministering angels, as it is written: “I profaned the princes of sanctity” (Isaiah 43:28). “Princes of God, these are Israel, as it is written in their regard: “I said: You are divine” (Psalms 82:6), as they decree on the heavenly, and they perform, on the earthly, and they perform, when they conduct themselves in purity.
Another matter, “let him kiss me [yishakeni] with the kisses of his mouth”—let him purify me, like a person who causes two pools to meet [mashik] each other and unites them,¹⁰⁷If there is not enough water in one or both of the pools to serve as a ritual bath, which purifies, joining them together can allow them to serve in this capacity. as it is stated: “Like the meeting [mashak] of cascading pools he joins it” (Isaiah 33:4).
Another matter, “let him kiss me [yishakeni] with the kisses of his mouth”—yishakeni, He will cleave to me, as it is stated: “The sound of the wings of the creatures would touch [mashikot] one another” (Ezekiel 3:13). Alternatively, “let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth,” He will put forth for me the sound of kisses¹⁰⁸He will speak to me lovingly. from His mouth.

25..

2) "and the son of the Israelite woman blasphemed the Name": the ineffable Name that he heard at Sinai. "and he cursed": It is not written "And he 'blessed,'" as in (I Kings 21:13) "Navoth has 'blessed' (a euphemism for the opposite) G d and king," but "and he cursed" — to teach that there is no death penalty for (cursing) with an epithet.

2) "their hands on his head": They place their hands upon him and say to him: "Your blood is on your head for you brought yourself to this."

2) (Vayikra 24:18) "And one that smites a beast shall pay for it — a life for a life.": If it were written "And one who smites a soul a beast he shall pay," I would take it to mean: One who smites a man shall pay a beast. Now that it is written "shall pay for it," (I see that) the referent is the beast, (and the reading is [lit.,] "And one that smites the soul of a beast must pay for it.")

2) The second (gathering of) the olives — they are picked at roof-level and he gathers them into the olive press and grinds them in the mill and places them in baskets and he presses them under the beam. What issues from them first is removed and ground a second time. What issues from them a second time is ground again, and so, a third time. The first (oil) is for the menorah and the rest for meal-offerings.

2) "twelve chaloth": they must be alike; "two-tenths": each one must be two-tenths (of fine flour). "the one chalah. They must be kneaded and arranged one by one. Whence do we derive the same for the two loaves (of Shavuoth)? From "the one chalah shall be." (Vayikra 24:6) ("And you shall place them in two rows, six in a row, upon the pure table before the L–rd.") And whence is it derived that they are baked two by two? From "And you shall place them." I might think that the two loaves also are baked together; it is, therefore, written "them" — They are baked two by two, but the two loaves one by one. "And you shall place them": into a mould. There were three moulds: one into which the dough was put, one (in which they were baked) in one oven, and one in which they were taken from the oven so that they not come apart.

2) "twelve chaloth": they must be alike; "two-tenths": each one must be two-tenths (of fine flour). "the one chalah. They must be kneaded and arranged one by one. Whence do we derive the same for the two loaves (of Shavuoth)? From "the one chalah shall be." (Vayikra 24:6) ("And you shall place them in two rows, six in a row, upon the pure table before the L–rd.") And whence is it derived that they are baked two by two? From "And you shall place them." I might think that the two loaves also are baked together; it is, therefore, written "them" — They are baked two by two, but the two loaves one by one. "And you shall place them": into a mould. There were three moulds: one into which the dough was put, one (in which they were baked) in one oven, and one in which they were taken from the oven so that they not come apart.

(Exod. 38:23:) AND WITH HIM (i.e., with Bezalel) WASOHOLIAB BEN AHISAMACH [OF THE TRIBE OF DAN]. <Here is> glory for himself, glory for his father, glory for his family, and glory for his tribe, because he came from it. (Lev. 24:11, concerning an unnamed blasphemer): AND THE NAME OF HIS MOTHER WAS SHELOMITH BAT DIBRI <OF THE TRIBE OF DAN>. <Here is> a disgrace for himself, a disgrace for his father, a disgrace for his mother, a disgrace for his family, <and> a disgrace for his tribe, because he came from it. (Josh. 7:1): ACHAN BEN CARMI BEN ZABDI BEN ZERAH, OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH. <Here is> a disgrace for himself, a disgrace for his father, a disgrace for his family, <and> a disgrace for his tribe, because he came from it. (Exod. 38:22:) NOW BEZALEL BEN URI BEN HUR [OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH]. <Here is> glory for himself, glory for his father, glory for his family, glory for his tribe because he came from it.

MENACHOTH (Fol. 28b) Samuel said: "The height of the candle-stick was eighteen hand-breadths; the stem with the ornaments extended up to three hand-breadths; two hand-breadths were plain [without ornament], etc." (Fol. 29) (II Chr. 4, 21) And the flowers and the lamps of gold, of gold, and that perfect gold; why is the word Kaloth used here for 'perfect'? Said Rab: "Because they consumed all the closed gold of Solomon"; for R. Juda said in the name of Rab: "Solomon made ten candlesticks, and each one consumed one thousand gold talents. They applied it a thousand times into the smelting-furnace until it was refined and reduced to the weight of one talent." Is it then possible that the smelting-furnace should reduce such a quantity? Behold we are taught that R. Jose b. R. Juda says: "It happened that the candlestick of the Temple was heavier than that of Moses with one golden dinar; it was applied eighty times into the smelting-furnace until it was reduced to the weight of a talent." [Hence the smelting-furnace does not reduce to a quantity as stated above.] After it had been reduced [by Solomon] it was indeed hard to reduce it much more. R. Samuel b. Nachmeni said in the name of R. Jonathan: "What is the meaning of the passage (Lev. 24, 4) Upon the pure candlestick? This means that the manner of its workmanship came down directly from heaven. (Ib.) Upon the pure table, i.e., infer from this that the priests would lift up the show-bread and show them to those who came to Jerusalem during the holidays, saying to them: "See how beloved ye are before the Holy One, praised be He!" In what was such love visible? As R. Joshua b. Levi said, for R. Joshua b. Levi said: "A great miracle happened in connection with the show-bread that at the time of their removal they were [just as fresh and warm] as when they were placed upon the table, for it is said (I Sam. 21, 7) So as to put down hot bread on the day it was taken away."

3) R. Yehoshua b. Karchah said: The entire day )of deliberation) they would examine the witnesses (to blaspheming) with an epithet — "May Yossah smite Yossah." When the judgment was concluded (and beth-din came to pronounce him liable), they could not execute him (on the basis of the testimony that they had heard, for the had heard from their mouths only a curse) by epithet. But everyone is sent out, (it being demeaning to utter a "blessing of the Name" in public), and they ask the senior witness (what he heard) and say to him: "Repeat what you heard explicitly," and he does so. And the judges stand upon their feet, and they rend (their garments) and do not resew them. And the second witness says: "I, too, heard as he did." And the third witness says: "I, too, heard as he did." And the witnesses need not rend (their garments), for they already did so upon hearing it originally.

3) "and they shall stone him": and not his garment (i.e., he is stoned naked). "all the congregation": Now does all the congregation stone him? The meaning is, rather, that the witnesses (stone him) in the presence of the entire congregation. (Vayikra 24:15) ("And to the children of Israel, you shall speak, saying: A man, a man, if he curse his G d, then he shall bear his sin.") I might think that this (i.e., the stoning of the man in our instance) was (only) "a teacher for the time" (hora'ath sha'ah); it is, therefore, written "And to the children of Israel speak, saying "Let it obtain in all generations."

3) "and they shall stone him": and not his garment (i.e., he is stoned naked). "all the congregation": Now does all the congregation stone him? The meaning is, rather, that the witnesses (stone him) in the presence of the entire congregation. (Vayikra 24:15) ("And to the children of Israel, you shall speak, saying: A man, a man, if he curse his G d, then he shall bear his sin.") I might think that this (i.e., the stoning of the man in our instance) was (only) "a teacher for the time" (hora'ath sha'ah); it is, therefore, written "And to the children of Israel speak, saying "Let it obtain in all generations."

3) (Vayikra 24:19) ("And a man, if he inflicts an injury upon his neighbor; as he did, so shall it be done to him.") "And a man, if he inflicts an injury upon his neighbor": This tells me only of an (actual) injury). Whence do I derive (that the same halachah applies) if he screamed in one's ear, tore one's hair, spat at someone and hit him with his spittle, pulled off someone's garment, or uncovered a woman's head in the market place? From "as he did" (though no actual injury was inflicted), so shall it be done to him."

3) The third (gathering of) the olives — he packs it into the house until it begins to rot. Then he takes it up to the roof, until it forms a date-like excrescence, after which he gathers them into the house and grinds them in the mill and places them in baskets and presses them under the beam. What issues from them first is removed and ground a second time. What issues from them a second time is ground again, and so, a third time. The first (oil) is for the menorah and the rest for meal-offerings.

3) "two rows": (Why mention this?) Because it is written "twelve (chaloth"), I might think, three rows of four (each); it is, therefore, written "two rows." If "two rows," (why say "six in a row? It is understood.) For I might think (one row of) eight and one row of four; it is, therefore, written "two rows." If two rows and six in the row (let it not be written "twelve chaloth," (for it would be understood). (No, for then I might think, two rows of six (each). It must, therefore, be written twelve chaloth. The three verses are, therefore, needed; otherwise, we would not know.

(Lev. 27:1-2:) “Then the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, ‘Speak unto the Children of Israel [and say unto them], “When anyone explicitly vows to the Lord [the value (rt.: 'rk) of human beings (npshwt)].”’” This text is related (to Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (rt.: 'rk) to the Lord?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Whoever performs deeds like Mine shall be [considered] like Me.” R. Levi said, “[The matter] is comparable to a king who built a city and lit two lanterns¹³Gk.: phanoi, also panoi. within it, and [so] all of those multitudes [in the city] called him, Augustus.¹⁴Agustah, from the Lat.: Augusta. The king said, ‘When anyone builds a city like this and lights two lanterns in it, call him Augustus and I will not be jealous of him.’ Similarly, the Holy One, blessed be He, created the heavens and set in them [two lanterns, to give light to the world], the sun and the moon, as stated (in Gen. 1:17), ‘And God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth.’ The Holy One, blessed be He, said, ‘Whoever makes [lights] like these shall be equal to Me.’ Thus it is stated (in Ps. 89:7), ‘For who in the skies is comparable (rt.: 'rk) to the Lord?’ These words can only be words [referring to] light, since it is stated (in Lev. 24:4), ‘He shall set (rt.: 'rk) up [the lamps] upon the unalloyed lampstand.’ Ergo (in Ps. 89:7), ‘For who in the skies is comparable (rt.: 'rk) to the Lord?’” That is what is written (in Is. 40:25), “’Then unto whom will you liken Me that I should be equal,’ says the Holy [One].” Do not read it as “says [the Holy],” but as “holy, will be said” (meaning, the term holy is applied to him just as holy is applied to Me); in the same way that it is written (Isaiah 17:7), “to the holy.” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (ya'arok) to the Lord”; R. Eebon the Levite said, “Who like You enlightens the eyes of those in the dark, as it is stated (in Lev. 24:4), ‘He shall set (ya'arok) up [the lamps] upon the unalloyed lampstand…?’”¹⁵Above, 8:20. Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (ya'arok) to the Lord”: R. Eebon the Levite said, “Who like You clothes the naked”…. Another interpretation: “Who like you feeds the hungry?” “Is comparable (rt.: 'rk)” can only refer to the hungry, since it is stated (in Lev. 24:8-9), “[He shall arrange (rt.: 'rk) it (i.e., the shewbread) before the Lord regularly] on every Sabbath day […] And it shall belong to Aaron and his children, who shall eat it.” Ergo (in Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable to the Lord” (in feeding the hungry)? Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable to the Lord”: When the Holy One, blessed be He, created the world and wanted to create Adam, the ministering angels said to Him, (in Ps. 8:5), “’What is a human that You are mindful of him, and a person that You should think of him?’ What do You want from this human?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them, “Who is to fulfill my Torah and My commandments?” They said to Him, “We will fulfill Your Torah.” He said to them, “It is written in [the Torah] (in Numb. 19:14), ‘This is the Torah: When a person dies in a tent,’ but there are none among you who die. It is written in [the Torah] (in Lev. 12:2), ‘When a woman emits her seed and bears a male,’ but there are none among you who bear [children]. It is written in [the Torah] (in Lev. 11:21), ‘these you may eat,’ (and in Lev 11:4) ‘these you may not eat,’ but in your case there is no eating among you. Ergo, the Torah is not going forth to you,” as stated (in Job 28:13), “nor is it found in the land of the living.” [Rather] when the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel that they should make a tabernacle and an altar of burnt offering, they began to sacrifice within it. [Then] the Holy One, blessed be He, began to give them several commandments. These commands concerned every single thing, and they carried them out. The Holy One, blessed be He, began to say to the ministering angels, “’Who among you would prepare (rt.: 'rk)’ [everything] for Me just as Israel prepares (rt.: 'rk) for Me, that you were saying to Me (in Ps. 8:5), ‘What is a human that You are mindful of him…?’ They prepare (rt.: 'rk) sacrifices for Me, just as stated (in Lev. 1:12), ‘and the priest shall arrange (rt.: 'rk) them,’ (in Lev. 4:10), ‘upon the altar of burnt offering.’ They set (rt.: 'rk) tables for Me, just as stated (in Lev. 24:8), ‘He shall arrange (rt.: 'rk) it (i.e., the shewbread) before the Lord regularly on every Sabbath day.’ Or is there anyone among you that evaluates the value of human beings, as stated (in Lev. 27:2), ‘When anyone explicitly vows to the Lord the value (rt.: 'rk) of human beings (npshwt).’” Ergo (in Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies?”

(Lev. 27:1-2:) “Then the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, ‘Speak unto the Children of Israel [and say unto them], “When anyone explicitly vows to the Lord [the value (rt.: 'rk) of human beings (npshwt)].”’” This text is related (to Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (rt.: 'rk) to the Lord?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Whoever performs deeds like Mine shall be [considered] like Me.” R. Levi said, “[The matter] is comparable to a king who built a city and lit two lanterns¹³Gk.: phanoi, also panoi. within it, and [so] all of those multitudes [in the city] called him, Augustus.¹⁴Agustah, from the Lat.: Augusta. The king said, ‘When anyone builds a city like this and lights two lanterns in it, call him Augustus and I will not be jealous of him.’ Similarly, the Holy One, blessed be He, created the heavens and set in them [two lanterns, to give light to the world], the sun and the moon, as stated (in Gen. 1:17), ‘And God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth.’ The Holy One, blessed be He, said, ‘Whoever makes [lights] like these shall be equal to Me.’ Thus it is stated (in Ps. 89:7), ‘For who in the skies is comparable (rt.: 'rk) to the Lord?’ These words can only be words [referring to] light, since it is stated (in Lev. 24:4), ‘He shall set (rt.: 'rk) up [the lamps] upon the unalloyed lampstand.’ Ergo (in Ps. 89:7), ‘For who in the skies is comparable (rt.: 'rk) to the Lord?’” That is what is written (in Is. 40:25), “’Then unto whom will you liken Me that I should be equal,’ says the Holy [One].” Do not read it as “says [the Holy],” but as “holy, will be said” (meaning, the term holy is applied to him just as holy is applied to Me); in the same way that it is written (Isaiah 17:7), “to the holy.” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (ya'arok) to the Lord”; R. Eebon the Levite said, “Who like You enlightens the eyes of those in the dark, as it is stated (in Lev. 24:4), ‘He shall set (ya'arok) up [the lamps] upon the unalloyed lampstand…?’”¹⁵Above, 8:20. Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (ya'arok) to the Lord”: R. Eebon the Levite said, “Who like You clothes the naked”…. Another interpretation: “Who like you feeds the hungry?” “Is comparable (rt.: 'rk)” can only refer to the hungry, since it is stated (in Lev. 24:8-9), “[He shall arrange (rt.: 'rk) it (i.e., the shewbread) before the Lord regularly] on every Sabbath day […] And it shall belong to Aaron and his children, who shall eat it.” Ergo (in Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable to the Lord” (in feeding the hungry)? Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable to the Lord”: When the Holy One, blessed be He, created the world and wanted to create Adam, the ministering angels said to Him, (in Ps. 8:5), “’What is a human that You are mindful of him, and a person that You should think of him?’ What do You want from this human?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them, “Who is to fulfill my Torah and My commandments?” They said to Him, “We will fulfill Your Torah.” He said to them, “It is written in [the Torah] (in Numb. 19:14), ‘This is the Torah: When a person dies in a tent,’ but there are none among you who die. It is written in [the Torah] (in Lev. 12:2), ‘When a woman emits her seed and bears a male,’ but there are none among you who bear [children]. It is written in [the Torah] (in Lev. 11:21), ‘these you may eat,’ (and in Lev 11:4) ‘these you may not eat,’ but in your case there is no eating among you. Ergo, the Torah is not going forth to you,” as stated (in Job 28:13), “nor is it found in the land of the living.” [Rather] when the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel that they should make a tabernacle and an altar of burnt offering, they began to sacrifice within it. [Then] the Holy One, blessed be He, began to give them several commandments. These commands concerned every single thing, and they carried them out. The Holy One, blessed be He, began to say to the ministering angels, “’Who among you would prepare (rt.: 'rk)’ [everything] for Me just as Israel prepares (rt.: 'rk) for Me, that you were saying to Me (in Ps. 8:5), ‘What is a human that You are mindful of him…?’ They prepare (rt.: 'rk) sacrifices for Me, just as stated (in Lev. 1:12), ‘and the priest shall arrange (rt.: 'rk) them,’ (in Lev. 4:10), ‘upon the altar of burnt offering.’ They set (rt.: 'rk) tables for Me, just as stated (in Lev. 24:8), ‘He shall arrange (rt.: 'rk) it (i.e., the shewbread) before the Lord regularly on every Sabbath day.’ Or is there anyone among you that evaluates the value of human beings, as stated (in Lev. 27:2), ‘When anyone explicitly vows to the Lord the value (rt.: 'rk) of human beings (npshwt).’” Ergo (in Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies?”

Some are mentioned for praise, and others are referred to in scorn. One person mentioned in praise is found in the verse And with him was Oholiab the son of Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan (Exod. 38:23). It praises him, his mother, his family, and the tribe of Dan, from which he descended. One referred to in scorn is found in the verse And his mother’s name was Shelomith the daughter of Dibri of the tribe of Dan (Lev. 24:11). He was a disgrace to himself and is a disgrace to his mother, his family, and the tribe from which he descended.⁸The grandson of Dibri, who had been raped by an Egyptian, he blasphemed and cursed God. See Lev. 24:11. An illustration of one who is mentioned for ridicule is in the verse Akhan the son of Carmi, the son of Zabdi, the son of Zerah of the tribe of Judah (Josh. 7:1). This ridicules him,⁹Stoned to death at Jericho for his theft despite Joshua’s order to the Israelites not to take “devoted things.” He confessed his sin. his mother, his family, and the tribe from which he descended.

4) "And they brought him to Moses": But they did not bring the wood-gatherer (mekoshesh) with him (see Bamidbar 15:32). "And the name of his mother was Shlomith the daughter of Divri, of the tribe of Dan." a blemish to himself, a blemish to his mother, a blemish to his family, and a blemish to his tribe whence he came.

4) And whence is it derived (that the same applies) if he hit him with the back of his hand, with a tablet, with a board, or with a roll of papers in his hand? From "as he did, etc."

4) R. Yehudah says: He did not grind them in a mill, but he pounded them in a mortar. And he did not press them under a beam but under stones. And he did not place them in a basket, but around the basket and he bored (into them) from the midst of the basket, (into which the oil flowed).

4) "upon the pure table": on the surface of the table; the props did not lift the bread from the table. Concerning this they said: There were four props of gold there with projections on their tops on which they (the chaloth) were supported — two (props) for one arrangement and two for the other. And there were twenty-eight rods, (each like half a hollow reed), fourteen for one arrangement and fourteen for the other.

Rabbi Abbahu began: “But they, like men [ke’adam], have violated the covenant” (Hosea 6:7) – this is Adam the first man. The Holy One blessed be He said: I brought Adam the first man into the Garden of Eden, I commanded him, and he violated My command. I sentenced him to banishment and expulsion, and I lamented him with eikha. I brought him into the Garden of Eden, as it is stated: “He placed him in the Garden of Eden” (Genesis 2:15). I commanded him, as it is stated: “The Lord God commanded the man saying.… [but from the tree of knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat]” (Genesis 2:16–17). He violated My command, as it is stated: “Have [you eaten] from the tree from which I commanded you [not to eat?]” (Genesis 3:11). I sentenced him to banishment, as it is stated: “He banished the man” (Genesis 3:24). I sentenced him to expulsion, as it is stated: “The Lord [God] sent him from the Garden of Eden” (Genesis 3:23). I lamented him with eikha, as it is stated: “He said to him: Where are you [ayeka]” (Genesis 3:9); it is written eikha.¹¹Ayeka and eikha are each spelled alef, yod, kaf, heh. Thus, it is as though God used the word eikha, how, regarding Adam, as if to say: How did this come to be, just as the first word of Lamentations is how [eikha].
His descendants, too, I brought into the Land of Israel, as it is stated: “I brought you into a fruitful land” (Jeremiah 2:7). I commanded them, as it is stated: “Command the children of Israel” (Leviticus 24:2). They violated My command, as it is stated: “All Israel has violated your Torah” (Daniel 9:11). I sentenced them to banishment, as it is stated: “From My house I will banish them” (Hosea 9:15). I sentenced them to expulsion, as it is stated: “Send them from My presence and let them go” (Jeremiah 15:1). I lamented them with: “How does…sit solitary?” (Lamentations 1:1).

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) "if he curse his G d": What is the intent of this? I might think, because it is written (Vayikra 24:16) "And he who blasphemes the name of the L–rd shall die," that he is killed only (if he curses) the ineffable Name (i.e., the tetragrammaton). Whence is the same derived for all of the epithets (for His Name): It is, therefore, written "if he curse his G d" (an epithet for His Name). These are the words of R. Meir. The sages say: Cursing the Name itself is punishable by death, (whereas cursing through) an epithet is a transgression of an exhortation.

5) "if he curse his G d": What is the intent of this? I might think, because it is written (Vayikra 24:16) "And he who blasphemes the name of the L–rd shall die," that he is killed only (if he curses) the ineffable Name (i.e., the tetragrammaton). Whence is the same derived for all of the epithets (for His Name): It is, therefore, written "if he curse his G d" (an epithet for His Name). These are the words of R. Meir. The sages say: Cursing the Name itself is punishable by death, (whereas cursing through) an epithet is a transgression of an exhortation.

5) Whence is it derived that if he took hold of him and placed him in the sun, so that he was overcome by heat, or in the cold so that he was chilled, or if he held a dog or a snake to bite him? From "as he did, etc."

5) The first (oil) of the first (mode of extraction) — there is nothing finer than it. The second of the first (mode) and the first of the second are alike. The third of the first and the second of the second and the first of the third are alike. The third of the second and the second of the third are alike. The third of the third — there is nothing inferior to it.

5) Or, go in this direction. It is written here (Vayikra 23:13) "challoth," and, in respect to the show-bread, (Vayikra 24:5) "challoth." Just as there, two esronim for one challah, here, too, two esronim for one challah!

5) (Vayikra 24:7) ("And you shall place near the two pure frankincense; and it shall be a memorial for the bread, a fire-offering to the L–rd.") I might think that one row is intended. (But this is not so, for) it is written here "row," and above "two rows." Just as there, two rows are indicated, so, here.

(Exodus 12:6) "And it shall be to you for a keeping": Why does the taking of the Pesach precede its slaughtering by four days? R. Matia b. Charash says: It is written (Ezekiel 16:8) "And I passed by you and I saw you, and behold, your time was the time for love": There had arrived the (time for the fulfillment of the) oath that the Holy One Blessed be He had sworn to our father Abraham to redeem his children. But they had no mitzvoth to engage in, which would enable their redemption, viz. (Ibid. 7) "Your breasts were firm" (an allusion to Moses and Aaron), "and your hair had sprouted" (an allusion to the elders), but you were naked and bare" (of mitzvoth). And the Holy One Blessed be He gave them two mitzvoth — the blood of the Paschal lamb and the blood of circumcision to engage in for their redemption. Thus (Ibid. 6) "And I passed by you and I saw you steeped in your blood." And it is written (Zechariah 9:11) "You, too — By the blood of your covenant I have sent forth your bound ones from the waterless pit." Therefore, the Holy One Blessed be He commanded the taking of the Pesach four days before its slaughtering, for reward is given only for the act. R. Eliezer Hakappar Berebbi says: Did Israel not have four mitzvoth surpassing the worth of all the world? — not being suspect of illicit relations or of slander, not changing their names and not changing their language? Whence is it derived that they were not suspect of illicit relations? From (Leviticus 10:10) "And there went out the son of an Israelite woman, the son of an Egyptian man," the verse apprising us of Israel’s eminence, this being the only instance of its kind, wherefore Scripture singles it out. And it is said of them in the tradition (Song of Songs 4:12) "A locked garden is my sister, my bride, a fountain locked.": "a locked garden" — the women: "a fountain locked" — the men. R. Nathan says: "a locked garden" — the married women; "a fountain locked, a sealed up spring" — the betrothed women. Variantly: "a locked garden, a fountain locked" — an allusion to the two types of cohabitation. And whence is it derived that they were not suspect of slander and that they loved each other? From (Exodus 3:22) "And a woman shall ask of her neighbor, etc." Twelve months had already passed, and we do not find an instance of one informing against another. And whence is it derived that they did not change their names? Just as they were called in their descent (to Egypt) — Reuven, Shimon, Levi, and Yehudah (viz. Ibid. 1:2) — so, they were called upon their ascent (viz. Numbers 1:18). And it is written (Genesis 48:16) "The angel who redeems me … and let there be called in them my name and the name of my fathers, etc." And whence is it derived that they did not change their language? From (Ibid. 45:12) "… for the mouth that speaks to you" (speaks in the holy tongue), and (Exodus 5:3) "The G d of the Hebrews revealed Himself to us, etc." and (Genesis 14:13) "And the survivor came and he told Avram the Hebrew, etc." And why did the taking of the Pesach precede its slaughtering by four days? Because Israel was stepped in idolatry in Egypt, which countervails all of the mitzvoth, as it is written (Numbers 15:24) "And if from the eyes of the congregation it (idolatry) were done unwittingly, etc." Scripture singled out this (idolatry, as tantamount to transgression of all of the mitzvoth [viz. Ibid. 22]). He said to them (viz. Exodus 12:21) "Withdraw" from idolatry (The sheep was the idolatry of Egypt), and cleave to mitzvoth. R. Yehudah b. Betheira says: It is written (Exodus 6:9) "And they would not hearken to Moses (as to G d's delivering them), for shortness of spirit, etc." Now is there anyone who is given glad tidings and does not rejoice? (viz. Jeremiah 20:14) "A son has been born to you — Rejoice him!" His Master is freeing him from bondage and he does not rejoice? What, then, is the intent of "And they would not hearken to Moses, etc."? It was difficult for them to abandon their idolatry, viz. (Ezekiel 20:7) "And I said to them (in Egypt): Let every man cast away the detestations of his eyes and not defile himself with the idols of Egypt." This is the intent of (Exodus 6:13) "And the L rd spoke to Moses and to Aaron, and He charged them to the children of Israel. He charged them to abandon idolatry. "And it shall be to you for a keeping": What is the intent of this? It is written (Ibid. 12:21) "Draw forth and take for yourselves sheep, etc." Israel said to Moses (Ibid. 8:22) "Will we slaughter the abomination of Egypt before their eyes and they (the Egyptians) not kill us?" He said to them: From the miracle that He will perform for you in your drawing them forth (i.e., their not protesting), you can rest assured (that no ill will befall you) in slaughtering them. "And it shall be to you for a keeping": Keep it until the fourteenth (of Nissan) and slaughter it on the fourteenth. You say this, but perhaps (the meaning is) keep it and slaughter it until the fourteenth? It is, therefore, written (Numbers 9:5) "And they offered the Pesach in the first (month [Nissan]) on the fourteenth day of the month." Scripture specified it (the fourteenth day) as mandatory. It is not the second assumption, then, that is to be accepted, but the first. "And it shall be to you for a keeping": Scripture hereby apprises us that it was inspected (for possible blemishes) for (a period of) four days before being slaughtered. From here you learn (the same for) the tamid (the daily offering), viz. "keeping" is stated here, and "keeping" is stated in respect to the tamid. Just as the Pesach is observed four days before slaughtering, so, the tamid. From here they ruled: There are not to be fewer than six inspected lambs in the "chamber of lambs" (in the Temple), enough to suffice for a Sabbath accompanied by two festival days of Rosh Hashanah; and they are constantly replenished (as needed).

“Your head is upon you like the Carmel, and the locks of your head are like purple wool; the king is bound in the tresses” (Song of Songs 7:6).
“Your head is upon you like the Carmel,” the Holy One blessed be He said to Israel: “Your head [roshekh] is upon you like the Carmel”—the indigent [rashim] among you are as dear to Me as Elijah who climbed Mount Carmel, as it is stated: “Elijah climbed to the peak of the Carmel and he placed his face between his knees” (I Kings 18:42). Why did he place his face between his knees? He said before the Holy One blessed be He: We have no merit, look to the covenant.⁴⁰He put his head between his knees as an allusion to the covenant of circumcision.
“And the locks [dalat] of your head [roshekh] are like purple wool.” The Holy One blessed be He said: The poor [dalim] and the indigent [rashim] in Israel are as dear to me as David, as it is stated: “The feeble among them will on that day be like David” (Zechariah 12:8). Some say like Daniel, about whom it is written: “They clothed Daniel in purple wool” (Daniel 5:29).
“The king is bound in the tresses,” this is the King of kings, the Holy One blessed be He, in whose regard it is written: “The Lord reigns, He is clothed in grandeur” (Psalms 93:1). “Bound in the tresses [barehatim],” as He bound Himself with an oath that He would rest His Divine Presence in the midst of Israel, in the beams [barehatim] of Jacob our patriarch. By whose merit? Rabbi Abba bar Kahana and Rabbi Levi, one said: By the merit of Abraham our patriarch, as it is stated: “Abraham ran⁴¹The Aramaic translation of “ran” is rahat. to the cattle” (Genesis 18:7). And one said: By the merit of Jacob our patriarch, in whose regard it is written: “He displayed the rods [that he had peeled in the troughs [barehatim]]” (Genesis 30:38).
Rabbi Berekhya said: “King,” this is Moses, as it is stated: “He became king in Yeshurun” (Deuteronomy 33:5). “In the tresses [barehatim],” as it was decreed upon him that he would not enter the Land of Israel.⁴²In that sense Moses was “bound” by the decree against him. For what reason? It was due to the water troughs [barehatim] of the waters of contention. That is what is written: “They are the waters of contention” (Numbers 20:13). Rabbi Neḥemya said: “King,” this is Moses, as it is stated: “He became king in Yeshurun” (Deuteronomy 33:5). The Holy One blessed be He said to Moses: ‘I appointed you king over Israel and it is the way of a king to issue decrees and have others fulfill them. Thus, you shall issue decrees upon Israel and they will fulfill them.’ That is what is written: “Command the children of Israel” (Leviticus 24:2).

(Lev. 27:1–2:) THEN THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES, SAYING: SPEAK UNTO THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL [AND SAY UNTO THEM]: WHEN ANYONE EXPLICITLY VOWS TO THE LORD THE VALUE (rt.: 'RK) OF HUMAN BEINGS (NPShWT). This text is related (to Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE (rt.: 'RK) TO THE LORD, [IS LIKE THE LORD AMONG THE CHILDREN OF GODS]? The Holy One said: Whoever performs deeds like mine shall be like me.²¹Tanh., Lev. 10:4. R. Levi said: < The matter > is comparable to a king who built a city and lit two lanterns²²Gk.: phanoi, also panoi. within it. The king said: When anyone lights two lanterns like these, I will call him Augustus²³Agustah, from the Lat.: Augusta. and not be jealous of him. Similarly, the Holy One created the heavens and set in them [two lanterns, to give light to the world], the sun and the moon, as stated (in Gen. 1:17): AND GOD SET THEM IN THE FIRMAMENT OF THE HEAVENS TO GIVE LIGHT UPON THE EARTH. The Holy One said: Whoever makes < lights > like these shall be equal to me. Thus it is stated (in Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE (rt.: 'RK) TO THE LORD? These words can only be words < referring to > light, since it is stated (in Lev. 24:4): HE SHALL SET (rt.: 'RK) UP < THE LAMPS > UPON THE UNALLOYED LAMPSTAND. [Ergo²⁴The bracketed section, which extends to the end of this section (6), is missing from Buber’s main Oxford ms. He has added it from Codex Vaticanus Ebr. 34, and from the traditional published editions of Tanh., Lev. 1:3. (in Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE (rt.: 'RK) TO THE LORD, IS LIKE THE LORD AMONG THE CHILDREN OF GODS? That is what it is written (in Is. 40:25): THEN UNTO WHOM WILL YOU LIKEN ME THAT I SHOULD BE EQUAL? SAYS THE HOLY ONE. < The term > HOLY is applied to him just as HOLY is applied to me.

Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE (ya'arok) TO THE LORD? R. Abbin Berabbi the Levite said: Who like you enlightens the eyes of those in the dark, as it is stated (in Lev. 24:4): HE SHALL SET (ya'arok) UP < THE LAMPS > UPON THE UNALLOYED LAMPSTAND…?²⁵Above, 8:20. Ergo (in Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE (ya'arok) TO THE LORD? R. Abbin said: Who like you clothes the naked, as stated (in Jud. 17:10): A SUIT (rt.: 'RK) OF CLOTHES AND YOUR MAINTENANCE? Ergo (in Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE (rt.: 'RK) TO THE LORD?

Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE TO THE LORD? R. Abbin said: Who like you feeds the hungry? IS COMPARABLE (rt.: 'RK) can only refer to the hungry, since it is stated (in Lev. 24:8–9): HE SHALL ARRANGE (rt.: 'RK) IT (i.e., the shewbread) BEFORE THE LORD REGULARLY ON EVERY SABBATH DAY, AS AN EVERLASTING COVENANT FROM THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. AND IT SHALL BELONG TO AARON AND HIS CHILDREN, WHO SHALL EAT IT IN A HOLY PLACE. Ergo (in Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE TO THE LORD (in feeding the hungry)?

Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE TO THE LORD? When the Holy One wanted to create Adam, the ministering angels said to the Holy One (in Ps. 8:5 [4]): WHAT IS A HUMAN THAT YOU ARE MINDFUL OF HIM, AND A CHILD OF ADAM THAT YOU SHOULD THINK OF HIM? What do you want from this human? The Holy One said to them: Who is to fulfill my Torah and my commandments? They said to him: We will fulfill your Torah. He said to them: You are unable. They²⁶Although the Buber text reads “he” here, the context certainly requires the plural, “they.” said to him: Why? He said to them: It is written in < Torah > (in Numb. 19:14): < THIS IS THE TORAH: > WHEN A PERSON DIES IN HIS TENT, but there are none among you who die. It is written in < Torah > (in Lev. 12:2): WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED AND BEARS A MALE, but there are none among you who bear < children >. It is written in < Torah > (in Lev. 11:21): THESE YOU MAY EAT, but in your case there is no eating among you. Ergo, the Torah is not going forth to you, as stated (in Job 28:13): NOR IS < WISDOM > FOUND IN THE LAND OF THE LIVING. Rather when the Holy One said to Israel that they should make a tabernacle for him and < when > they had made it, they began to build the altar of burnt offering, the altar of incense, and to offer sacrifice within it. < Then > the Holy One began to give them several commandments. These commands concerned every single thing, and they carried them out. The Holy One began to say to the ministering Angels: Who among you would prepare (rt.: 'RK) < everything > for me just as Israel prepares (rt.: 'RK) for me? Now you were saying to me (in Ps. 8:5 [4]): WHAT IS A HUMAN THAT YOU ARE MINDFUL OF HIM…? They prepare (rt.: 'RK) sacrifices for me, just as stated (in Lev. 1:12): AND THE PRIEST SHALL ARRANGE (rt.: 'RK) THEM. They set (rt.: 'RK) tables for me, just as stated (in Lev. 24:8): HE SHALL ARRANGE (rt.: 'RK) IT (i.e., the shewbread) BEFORE THE LORD REGULARLY ON EVERY SABBATH DAY. They prepare (rt.: 'RK) human beings for me, just as stated (in Lev. 27:2): WHEN ANYONE EXPLICITLY VOWS TO THE LORD THE VALUE (rt.: 'RK) OF HUMAN BEINGS (NPShWT). Ergo (in Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE (rt.: 'RK) TO THE LORD (i.e., is capable of making preparations for the Lord)?]

6) "then he shall bear his sin": R. Yehudah said "bearing sin" is mentioned here, and elsewhere (Bamidbar 9:13). Just as there, the referent is kareth; here, too, it is kareth.

6) It is written (Shemoth 20:17) "And he who curses his father and mother shall be put to death" and (Vayikra 24:15) "A man, a man, if he curse his G d, shall bear his sin." Scripture likens cursing of father and mother to cursing of the L–rd.

6) "For a man, a man, who curses his father and his mother": by the Name (i.e., the tetragrammaton). — You say: by the Name. But perhaps (it means even) by epithet. It is, therefore, written (Vayikra 24:16) "If he blasphemes the Name, he shall die." Let it not be written "the Name," (for in that context it is obvious). (It must be written, then,) for the purpose of including one who curses his father and mother, that he is not liable until he curses them by the Name. These are the words of R. Achi b. Yoshiah. R. Chanina b. Iddi says: Since Scripture states "Swear" and "Do not swear," "Curse" and "Do not curse," just as "Curse" is by the Name, so, "Do not curse" is by the Name.

6) I might think (that the same applied) even if he said to him: Wait for me here in the sun and he was overcome by heat, or in the cold, and he was chilled, or if he "sicked" a dog or a snake on to him? It is, therefore, written "blemish." Why do you see fit to include the former (as liable) and to exclude the latter? After Scripture includes, it excludes. I include those which his hand is (directly) involved in, and exclude those which his hand is not involved in.

3b) binyan av mishnei kethuvim (a general rule derived from two verses). viz.: The topic of the lamps (on the menorah) is not like that of sending the unclean outside (of the encampment), and the latter is not like the former. What is common to them is that they are introduced by "Tzav" ("Command") — [the lamps, (Vayikra 24:2); sending, etc., (Bamidbar 5:2)] — and apply both immediately and for future generations. [The lamps: immediately — (Bamidbar 8:3): "And Aaron did so. He kindled its lamps towards the face of the menorah, etc."; for future generations — (Vayikra 24:3): "… an eternal statute throughout your generations." Sending the unclean outside: immediately — (Bamidbar 5:4): "And the children of Israel did so, and they sent them outside the camp"; for future generations — (Bamidbar 19:21): "And it shall be for them an everlasting statute."] So, all commandments introduced by "Tzav" apply both immediately and for future generations.

6) "zach": It must be pure. "katish" ("crushed") R. Yehudah says: There are no "crushed" olives except those pounded (in a mortar). "katish": (It must be) "crushed" for the light (of the menorah) but not for the meal-offerings.

3b) binyan av mishnei kethuvim (a general rule derived from two verses). viz.: The topic of the lamps (on the menorah) is not like that of sending the unclean outside (of the encampment), and the latter is not like the former. What is common to them is that they are introduced by "Tzav" ("Command") — [the lamps, (Vayikra 24:2); sending, etc., (Bamidbar 5:2)] — and apply both immediately and for future generations. [The lamps: immediately — (Bamidbar 8:3): "And Aaron did so. He kindled its lamps towards the face of the menorah, etc."; for future generations — (Vayikra 24:3): "… an eternal statute throughout your generations." Sending the unclean outside: immediately — (Bamidbar 5:4): "And the children of Israel did so, and they sent them outside the camp"; for future generations — (Bamidbar 19:21): "And it shall be for them an everlasting statute."] So, all commandments introduced by "Tzav" apply both immediately and for future generations.

6) "pure frankincense": it should be clear. "and it shall be for the bread": It is indispensable to the bread. "and it shall be for the bread": We are hereby taught that (piggul thoughts [thoughts effecting rejection of the offering] in respect to) the frankincense — hold back, render piggul, and invalidate the bread. "and it shall be for the bread": It is not placed on top of the bread, but into the censers with bottoms, which are placed on the table so as not to crack the bread.

6) Let us see which is (salt) is most like. We derive something (salt) which is offered with all sacrifices from something (wood) which is offered with all sacrifices — and this is not to be refuted by frankincense, which is not offered with all sacrifices — Or, go in this direction: We derive something (salt), which is offered with the meal-offering (the fistful). Itself, from something (frankincense), which is offered with the meal-offering itself (in one vessel) — and this is not to be refuted by wood, which is not offered with the meal-offering itself. It is, therefore, written: "And you shall not cut off the salt of the covenant of your G d from your meal-offering," and, elsewhere, (in reference to the show bread), (Ibid. 24:8): "from the children of Israel, an everlasting covenant." Just as there, the salt is provided communally, so, here.

(Lev. 5:1:) “And if a soul sins in that it hears a voice swearing […, if he does not speak out, he shall bear his iniquity].” This text is related (to Eccl. 5:1), “Do not be rash with your mouth, and let not your heart hasten to bring forth a word before God.” These [words refer to] people who vilify the name of the Holy One, blessed be He. Come and see, when the celestial beings were created, those below were created with half of the [divine] name, as stated (in Is. 26:4), “for through Yh,³⁸YH is the first half of the divine name, which the Hebrew spells out where the translation reads THE LORD. the Lord formed the worlds.”³⁹The midrash interprets tsur ‘olamim as FORMED THE WORLDS (i.e., this world and the world to come) rather than as the more usual EVERLASTING ROCK. For similar interpretations, see yHag. 2:1 (77c); Men. 29b; Gen. R. 12:10; M. Pss. 62:1; 114:3; cf. also M. Pss. 118:14. But why were they not created with all of it? So as not to mention the full name [of the Holy One, blessed be He] with him. Woe to those creatures who vilify the name of the Holy One, blessed be He, in vain. See what is written about offerings (in Lev. 1:2), “When one of you presents an offering to the Lord.” It does not say "to the Lord, an offering," but “an offering to the Lord” (so that who changes his mind about an offering in mid-sentence not mention God’s name for no reason).⁴⁰Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 1:6; Ned. 10ab; Sifra to Lev. 1:2, Wayyiqra, Parashah 2; Sifre, Deut.32:3 (306); Gen. R. 1:13. And [yet] people vilify the name of the Lord in vain. It is therefore stated (in Eccl. 5:1), “Do not be rash with your mouth…. for God is in heaven and you are on earth.” For who would say that God is not in heaven and that people are not on earth? [Accordingly], Solomon has said, “Every time that the weakest of the weak is above, he defeats the warrior below.” Go and learn from Abimelech (in Jud. 9:53), “But a certain woman dropped an upper millstone on Abimelech's head and cracked his skull.”⁴¹Since the woman was above the warrior Abimelech in the tower of Thebez, her killing him is an example of a relatively weak person defeating a warrior from above. And if he was a warrior among warriors and there was none like him, and [yet] a woman [was able to] kill him from above, how much the more so in the case of the Holy One, blessed be He! See what is written about Him (in Dan. 4:32), “All the inhabitants of the earth are of no account, and He does as He wishes [with the host of heaven and with the inhabitants of the earth].” It is also written (in Ps. 47:3), “For the Lord most high is awesome, a great King over all the earth,” and people are below. (Eccl. 5:1:) “Therefore let your words be few.” So what is there for you to do? To put your hand upon your mouth and upon your ear in order to neither speak nor hear. Ergo (in Lev. 5:1), “If a soul sins.”⁴²These words also appear in Lev. 5:21 [6:2]. (Lev. 5:1:) [“And if a soul sins in that it hears a voice swearing,] when he is a witness to what he has either seen or come to know, [if he does not speak out, he shall bear his iniquity].” This text is related (to Prov. 29:24), “The one who shares with a thief hates his own soul; he hears swearing and does not speak out.” What has caused anyone to say of him, “If a soul sins?” [It is] simply because he did not come and tell a sage, “So-and-so blasphemed the name of the Holy One, blessed be He.” He therefore shares his iniquities with him, as stated (in Lev. 5:1), “if he does not speak out, he shall bear his iniquity.” Therefore Solomon has said (in Prov. 29:24), “The one who shares with a thief hates his own soul.” Just as when the thief is caught, his partner is convicted along with him;⁴³Cf. Lev. R. 6:2. so whoever hears blasphemy of the Holy One, blessed be He, and does not speak out is convicted along with him. And let no one say, “What denunciation (lashon hara’ah) do I say?” The Holy One, blessed be He, has said (in Lev. 5:1ff.), “’On every matter,’ there is a denunciation in it. [But] with cursing the name, there is no denunciation.” Why? Because [it is] just like a case of a person cursing his companion. When he hears him, it is of no concern to him. But if he has cursed his father in his presence, he puts his life on the line and says, “You have cursed my father.” Moses said (in Deut. 32:6), “Is He not your Father who created you?” (Lev. 5:1:) [“And if a soul sins in that it hears a voice swearing,] when he is a witness to what he has seen.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “If you want to bear witness, bear witness; but if not, I will bear witness.” Thus it is stated (ibid.), “when he (He) is a witness.” And where is it shown that the Holy One, blessed be He, is called a witness? Where it is stated (in Jer. 29:23), “I am the One who knows and bears witness, says the Lord.” Come and see. All the parashioth written in this book have “mistake” written in them, except for this parashah, in which “mistake” is not mentioned.⁴⁴In fact, MISTAKE (shegagah), i.e., UNINTENTIONAL SIN, does appear in this parashah (in 5:15, 18). Elsewhere in Lev. the word only appears in 4:2, 22, 27; 22:4.) About him Solomon has said (in Eccl. 5:5), “Do not let your mouth cause your flesh to sin, and do not say before the angel that it was a mistake,” (in Eccl. 5:1), “for God is in the heavens.” It is comparable to two people who threw stones at an image of a king.⁴⁵Gk.: eikonion, a diminutive form of eikon. One was drunk, and one was in possession of his senses. Both of them were caught and went to trial. [The judge] rendered a [guilty] verdict⁴⁶Gk.: apophasis. against the one with his senses and acquitted the one who was drunk. So it is in the case of whoever sins. It is concerning him that “mistake” is written (in Lev. 4:2) – “When a soul sins by mistake (rt.: shgg) [against any of the Lord's commandments]….”; (and likewise in Lev. 4:13) “And if the whole congregation of Israel should err (rt.: shgg).” And [about] all of them; because they sinned by mistake, they bring an offering and it shall be forgiven them. It is so stated (in Numb. 15:26), “The whole congregation of the Children of Israel and the stranger who resides in their midst shall be forgiven because [it happened] to all the people by mistake.” But the one who blasphemes receives a [guilty] verdict, as stated (in Lev. 24:16) “And the one who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death.” It is also written (in Jer. 4:2), “And you shall swear, ‘As the Lord lives,’ in truth, in justice, and in righteousness; then shall nations bless themselves in Him, and Him shall they glory.” Scripture also says (in Deut. 10:20), “The Lord your God you shall fear, Him you shall serve, to Him you shall hold fast”; then after that, “and by Him you shall swear.”⁴⁷See Tanh. (Buber), Numb. 9:1; Numb. R. 9:1. (Ibid.:) “The Lord your God you shall fear,” so that you will be like those three of whom it is written, “he feared God (yr' 'lhym)”: Abraham, Joseph and Job. About Abraham it is written (in Gen. 22:12), “for now I know that you fear God (yr' 'lhym).” About Joseph it is written (in Gen. 42:18), “I fear (yr') God ('lhym).” About Job it is written (in Job 1:2), “he feared God (yr' 'lhym) and shunned evil.” (Deut. 10:20, cont.:) “Him you shall serve,” in that you will be busy with the Torah and with [fulfilling] the commandments. (Ibid. cont.:) “To him you shall hold fast,” in that you will honor the Torah scholars and benefit them with your property. Moses said to Israel, “Do not think that I have allowed you to swear by His name, even in truth. It is only, if all these conditions (mentioned earlier in the verse) abide with you, that you are entitled to swear; and if not, you are not entitled to swear [by His name], even in truth.” You shall not be like those of whom it is written (in Jer. 7:9), “[Will you …] swear falsely and sacrifice to Baal?” Rather, fulfill all these conditions and after that you are Mine, as stated (in Jer. 4:1), “If you return, O Israel, says the Lord, if you return unto Me [….]” Then after that [it says] (in vs. 2), “And you shall swear, ‘as the Lord lives’….” Our masters have said, “Even in truth one cannot swear.” Why? Thus have our masters taught (in Dem. 2:3): Let not someone from Israel be unrestrained in vows⁴⁸See also Ned. 20a. or in jesting, (or to lead one's companion astray with an oath by saying it is not an oath). There is a story about the royal mountain where there were two thousand towns, and all of them were destroyed because of a truthful oath that was unnecessary.⁴⁹Tanh. (Buber), Numb. 9:1; Numb. R. 9:1; cf. also Git. 57a. Now if one who swears in truth has this happen, how much the more so in the case of one who swears to a lie? How did they act? One would utter an oath to his companion that he was going to such and such a place to eat and drink. Then they would go and act to fulfill their oath. It is therefore stated (in Lev. 5:1), “If a soul sins in that it hears a voice swearing.” Now when the Holy One, blessed be He, comes to judge all people in the world to come, He will judge them along with sorcerers and adulterers. Where is it shown? Where it is stated (in Mal. 3:5), “Then I will draw near to you in judgment; and I will be a swift witness against sorcerers, against adulterers, against those who swear to a lie (in My name).” And I am finding them guilty and bringing them down to Gehinnom. The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “With the mouth that I gave you to be praising and glorifying My name, you are reproaching, blaspheming, and swearing to a lie in My name? Since I created all people to praise Me, as stated (in Prov. 16:4), “The Lord has made everything for His own purpose.” So is it not enough for you that you do not praise Me, but [that] you blaspheme [Me as well]! The Scripture has said (in Is. 57:20), “But the wicked are like the troubled sea, [for it cannot rest (rt.: shqt)].” [They are] just like this [kind of] sea which has waves in its midst exalting themselves upward. When each and every one of them reaches the sand, it is broken and returns (hozer).⁵⁰The word also means “repents.” And its companion also looks at it breaking, and [yet] exalts itself upward without repenting (hozer). So are the wicked, who look at one another and exalt themselves. Therefore, they are likened to the sea, as stated (in Is. 57:20), “But the wicked are like the troubled sea….” So did all the generations, the generation of Enosh, the generation of the flood, and the generation of the dispersion (i.e., of the Tower of Babel), not learn from each other. Instead they were exalting themselves. Therefore they are compared to the sea (in Is. 57:20), “But the wicked are like the troubled sea.” (Is. 57:20, cont.:) “For it cannot rest (rt.: shqt).” The wicked have no rest in the world, but the righteous have serenity (shqt), as stated (in Jer. 30:10), “and Jacob shall again have peace (shqt) and quiet with none to make him afraid.” Another interpretation (of Is. 57:20), “But the wicked are like the troubled sea.” Just as the sea has its dirt and mud in its mouth, so the wicked have their stench in their mouth. Thus it is stated (at the end of Is. 57:20), “and its waters toss up slime and mud.” It is not from choice that one hears blasphemies and invectives, but from the midst of the sins which are within him. Thus it is stated (in Lev. 5:1), “If a soul sins and hears a voice swearing….”⁵¹Most translations equate the sinning with the swearing. This more literal translation illustrates the point that the swearing comes from a soul which has already sinned. You find [that there are] three things under human control and three things not under human control ….⁵²Tanh., Gen. 6:12 (i.e., Toledot 12); Gen. R. 67:12. And not only [now] but even in the world to come. [So it is stated] (in Job 12:23), “He exalts (msgy') nations and destroys them.” The written text (ketiv) is “mshg'” (which means, misleads).⁵³In unpointed Hebrew the Sin (S) and the Shin (Sh) look alike. Since MShG’, which is pointed mashge’, can also be spelled with the extra yod (i.e., Y), the two words are interchangable in an unpointed text. Then He destroys them [and] brings them down to Abaddon,⁵⁴Abbadon is a name for Hell, which means “destruction.” while the righteous watch them. Thus it is stated (in Is. 66:24), “Then they shall go out and look at the corpses of the people who have rebelled against Me; their worms shall not die nor shall their fire be quenched”.

7) (Vayikra 24:16) ("And he who blasphemes the Name of the L–rd shall die. All the congregation shall stone him. Proselyte, as born Jew — if he blasphemes the Name, he shall die.") "All the congregation": All the congregation shall act as if they were his accusers. "Proselyte (ger)": This is the proselyte himself. "as the proselyte" (ka get) — to include the wives of proselytes. "born Jew" — this is the male. "as born Jew" — to include the wives of born Jews. "if he blasphemes the Name he shall die": R. Menacheh b. R. Yossi says: To include one who curses his father and mother, that he is not liable (for the death penalty) until he curses them by name.

7) "to raise a flame always": so that the flame rise (of itself). "to raise a flame": so that the western light burn continuously; he (the kindler) would begin with it and end with it. And when his brother Cohanim entered to bow down, he would precede them. How so? He would enter and find the two eastern lights burning. He would clean the eastern (lamp) and leave the western burning, from which the menorah was lit at twilight. If he found it to have dimmed, he cleans it and kindles it from the altar of the burnt-offering. "always": even on the Sabbath;

7) (Vayikra 24:21) ("And one who strikes a beast shall pay, and one who strikes a man shall be put to death.") I might think that if one blinded another's eye, his eye should be blinded; that if he cut off his hand, his hand should be cut off; that if he broke his leg, his leg should be broken; it is, therefore, written "one who strikes a beast," "one who strikes a man" — Just as one who strikes a beast pays, so, one who strikes a man pays. And if you would object: (But it is written [Bamidbar 35:31]) "You shall not take kofer (monetary payment) for the life of a murderer" — for a murderer you do not take kofer, but you do take kofer for (injury to) the limbs.

7) "as a memorial": "memorial" is written here, and elsewhere (Vayikra 5:12, in respect to a meal-offering.) Just as there a fistful, here, too, a fistful — whereby we are taught two fistfuls are needed: one, for one row, and another for the other.

(Gen. 44:18:) AND < JUDAH > SAID: PRAY, MY LORD…. FOR YOUR SERVANT HAS BECOME SURETY FOR THE LAD. When did Judah discharge his surety? In the days of Goliath. At that time, when Israel was in trouble, what is written (in I Sam. 17:16)? THEN THE PHILISTINE DREW NEAR AT DAWN AND IN THE EVENING. < He was > cursing and reviling. Saul began sending out a herald < to proclaim > (as implied in I Sam. 17:25): AND IT SHALL COME TO PASS FOR THE MAN WHO KILLS HIM THAT THE KING SHALL ENRICH HIM < WITH GREAT RICHES >…. Now you find that anyone who curses is liable for death, as stated (in Lev. 24:16): AND THE ONE WHO BLASPHEMES THE NAME OF THE LORD SHALL SURELY BE PUT TO DEATH … but that wicked man had been cursing (according to I Sam. 17:16): FOR FORTY DAYS. Moses said (in Deut. 7:10): AND < GOD > INSTANTLY REPAYS THOSE WHO HATE HIM WITH DESTRUCTION. In the case of someone wicked who performs a righteous act, the Holy One renders it unfit < by giving him his reward > during his life in this world in order to destroy him in the world to come; but for the righteous, he sets aside their righteous acts for the world to come.²²M. Pss.94:4. What < righteous act > did this wicked man (i.e., Goliath) do for him to curse for forty days? R. Isaac and R. Levi differ.²³Ruth R. 2:20. R. Levi said: Because his mother, Orpah ('RPH), walked four miles²⁴Lat.: mille. with her mother-in-law (cf. Ruth 1:7, 14), [the Holy One repaid her for it]. So from her the Holy One raised four heroes. Thus it is stated (in II Sam. 21:22): THESE FOUR WERE BORN TO THE GIANT (HRPH) OF GATH.²⁵According to vss. 15-20, the four heroes were Ishbi-benob, Saph, Goliath, and a fourth man with twelve fingers and twelve toes. R. Isaac said: She walked forty paces²⁶Lat.: passus. with her; therefore, the Holy One granted her her reward and gave her Goliath.²⁷Ruth R. 2:20 states more specifically that in return for her forty paces the Holy One granted her son a forty-day reprieve. So he was cursing before the Holy One forty days, as stated (in I Sam. 17:16): AND HE (the Philistine) TOOK HIS STAND FOR FORTY DAYS. Jesse said to his son David: Now is the time to make good on the surety of your ancestor who became surety for Benjamin under the hand of his father, as stated (in Gen. 43:9): I MYSELF WILL BE SURETY FOR HIM. Now go and discharge him from his surety. Thus it is stated (in I Sam. 17:18): SEE ALSO TO THE WELFARE OF YOUR BROTHERS, AND TAKE THEIR TOKEN. Now THEIR TOKEN ('RBH) is nothing but a surety ('RBWT). What did David do? He went and made good on the surety by killing Goliath. The Holy One said to him: By your life, just as you have risked your life for Saul, since he is from the tribe of Benjamin, even as your ancestor Judah did for Benjamin < himself >, as stated (in Gen. 44:33): AND NOW PLEASE LET YOUR SERVANT REMAIN AS A SLAVE TO MY LORD INSTEAD OF THE LAD … so I am placing the Sanctuary < both > within your territory and within the territory of Benjamin. And where is it shown that the Sanctuary is < both > within the inheritance of Benjamin and within the inheritance of Judah? Where one text (Gen. 49:27) says: BENJAMIN IS A RAVENOUS WOLF; IN THE MORNING HE CONSUMES PREY, i.e., the dawn tamid (sacrifice), AND IN THE EVENING HE DIVIDES THE SPOIL, i.e., the twilight tamid; while another text (Ps. 48:3 [2]) says: BEAUTEOUS LANDSCAPE, JOY OF THE WHOLE EARTH, < EVEN MOUNT ZION >. By your life, moreover, when all the tribes are going into exile, the tribes of Judah and Benjamin are not going into exile along with them. Why? Because these two tribes believed in me and sanctified my name in the sea with Moses. R. Abba bar Kahana said in the name of R. Levi: When the sea was split open for Israel, there was mire in it. Now the tribe of Reuben said to the tribe of Simeon: From mud you have come and to mud you are going. Thus it is stated (in Hos. 12:1): EPHRAIM SURROUNDS ME WITH DECEIT, THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL WITH FALSE-HOOD…. What did the tribes of Judah and Benjamin do? They sanctified the name of the Holy One, as stated (in Ps. 68:28 [27]): LITTLE BENJAMIN IS THERE RULING OVER THEM, THE PRINCES OF JUDAH IN THEIR GLORY….

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.

8) (Vayikra 24:3) ("Outside the veil (parocheth) of the testimony, in the tent of meeting, shall Aaron order it, from evening until morning, before the L–rd always, an everlasting statute throughout your generations.") "outside the veil (parocheth) of the testimony": What is the intent of this? (i.e., it is already written) From (Shemoth 40:24) "And he put the menorah in the tent of meeting opposite the table, "I do not know if close to the parocheth or close to the entrance. "Outside the parocheth of the testimony in the tent of meeting tells us that it was closer to the parocheth than to the entrance.

8) (Vayikra 24:8) ("On the day of Sabbath, on the day of Sabbath, he shall place it before the L–rd always; from the children of Israel, an everlasting covenant.") "On the day of Sabbath": On the day of Sabbath he arranges the new (incense vessel), and on the day of Sabbath he smokes the previous one. He does not set up the props on the Sabbath, but enters before the Sabbath and removes them and places them along the length of the table. Al the objects in the Temple (were set) lengthwise (east to west) parallel with the length of the Temple, except the ark, (whose length was parallel with the breadth of the Temple).

And he saw an Egyptian smiting a Hebrew (Exod. 2:11). Who was this Egyptian? He was the father of the blasphemer, concerning whom it is said: And the son of the Israelitish woman blasphemed the Name (Lev. 24:11).¹¹He was the offspring of the rape of Shelomith, an Israelite woman, by an Egyptian. The Egyptian was beating the Hebrew who was the husband of Shelomith the daughter of Dibri. Why was he beating him? This overseer was in charge of one hundred and twenty men, whom he would dispatch to their labors every morning, at the time of the crowing of the cock. Since he was wont to send them to their respective tasks, he would enter their homes. He noticed that Shelomith the daughter of Dibri was perfectly beautiful, without blemish, and he was anxious to possess her. (So one morning,) at the time of the crowing of the cock, after he (the Egyptian) had sent the Hebrew from his home, he had intercourse with the Hebrew’s wife, who thought that it was her husband who was still with her. Her husband returned (from his tasks) and observed the Egyptian leaving the house. He asked her: “Did he perhaps touch you?” “Yes, he did,” she replied, “but I thought it was you.” When the taskmaster learned that the man was angered by what had occurred, he forced him to work harder and would beat him.

And he saw an Egyptian smiting a Hebrew (Exod. 2:11). Who was this Egyptian? He was the father of the blasphemer, concerning whom it is said: And the son of the Israelitish woman blasphemed the Name (Lev. 24:11).¹¹He was the offspring of the rape of Shelomith, an Israelite woman, by an Egyptian. The Egyptian was beating the Hebrew who was the husband of Shelomith the daughter of Dibri. Why was he beating him? This overseer was in charge of one hundred and twenty men, whom he would dispatch to their labors every morning, at the time of the crowing of the cock. Since he was wont to send them to their respective tasks, he would enter their homes. He noticed that Shelomith the daughter of Dibri was perfectly beautiful, without blemish, and he was anxious to possess her. (So one morning,) at the time of the crowing of the cock, after he (the Egyptian) had sent the Hebrew from his home, he had intercourse with the Hebrew’s wife, who thought that it was her husband who was still with her. Her husband returned (from his tasks) and observed the Egyptian leaving the house. He asked her: “Did he perhaps touch you?” “Yes, he did,” she replied, “but I thought it was you.” When the taskmaster learned that the man was angered by what had occurred, he forced him to work harder and would beat him.

(Fol. 86b) (Lev. 24, 2) Command the children of Israel, that they bring unto thee pure olive oil. R. Samuel b. Nachmeni said: "It says unto thee, but not unto Me, for I need not its light. The table was in the north side [of the Temple] and the candlestick was at the south side. R. Zerika in the name of R. Elazar remarked: 'He said neither do I need eat food nor its light [of the Temple]'." (I Kings 6, 4) And for the house he made windows broad within, and narrow without. We are taught in a Baraitha concerning this passage that it was purposely made broad within and narrow without, because 'I need not its light.' (Lev. 24, 3) Without the veil of the testimony in the tent of meeting, i.e., this is a testimony for the entire world that the Shechina rests upon Israel. And if thou wilt claim that I need its light; how is it possible? Behold during the entire period which Israel wandered in the deserts they did go after My light. You must therefore admit that this is a testimony for the entire world that the Shechina rests upon Israel. What was the unusual thing which served as testimony? Said Raba: "This refers to the extreme western candle in which the quantity of oil was as much as in all other candles, yet it was this candle from which all other candles were kindled and this was also the last one [to burn until the priest fixed it] ."

(Fol. 86b) (Lev. 24, 2) Command the children of Israel, that they bring unto thee pure olive oil. R. Samuel b. Nachmeni said: "It says unto thee, but not unto Me, for I need not its light. The table was in the north side [of the Temple] and the candlestick was at the south side. R. Zerika in the name of R. Elazar remarked: 'He said neither do I need eat food nor its light [of the Temple]'." (I Kings 6, 4) And for the house he made windows broad within, and narrow without. We are taught in a Baraitha concerning this passage that it was purposely made broad within and narrow without, because 'I need not its light.' (Lev. 24, 3) Without the veil of the testimony in the tent of meeting, i.e., this is a testimony for the entire world that the Shechina rests upon Israel. And if thou wilt claim that I need its light; how is it possible? Behold during the entire period which Israel wandered in the deserts they did go after My light. You must therefore admit that this is a testimony for the entire world that the Shechina rests upon Israel. What was the unusual thing which served as testimony? Said Raba: "This refers to the extreme western candle in which the quantity of oil was as much as in all other candles, yet it was this candle from which all other candles were kindled and this was also the last one [to burn until the priest fixed it] ."

9) (Vayikra 24:22) "One judgment shall there be for you": As the judgment of capital cases, so, the judgment of monetary litigations. Jut as capital cases require thorough cross-examination (of the witnesses), so, monetary litigations. If so, (why not say:) Just as capital cases require twenty-three (judges), so, monetary litigations? It is, therefore, written "en eye for an eye," to include (monetary litigations as requiring only three judges).

9) "Outside the parocheth of the testimony": Now was the light of the menorah required? Was it not with His light (i.e., that of the Shechinah) by which the Jews traveled all forty years in the desert? Rather (it is to be understood as meaning that) it served as testimony to the inhabitants of the world that the Shechinah resided in Israel. What is the testimony? Rava said: It is the western lamp, into which he would place as much oil as in all the other lamps, and yet would commence (lighting all the other lamps) with it and conclude (servicing the lamps) with it.

9) After the Sabbath he enters and places three (rods) under each (loaf) and two under the top (loaf) because there is no weight on top of it. "from the children of Israel": by their will. "an everlasting covenant": by the Master of the covenant.

10) (Vayikra 24:23) ("And Moses spoke to the children of Israel, and they took the curser outside the camp, and they stoned him with a stone; and the children of Israel did as the L–rd commanded Moses.") "And Moses spoke to the children of Israel, and they took the curser outside the camp. As mentioned earlier (Chapter 19:1), we are hereby taught that beth-din was within, and beth-din, outside of it. "and they stoned him," and not his garment (viz. Chapter 19:3). "a stone": We are hereby taught that if he died with one stone, it is sufficient. "and the children of Israel did as the L–rd commanded Moses": both in respect to semichah (placing of the hands, viz. Vayikra 24:14), in respect to dechiyah (casting him from the stoning platform, viz. Shemoth 19:13), in respect to hanging (his body on a tree) (viz. Devarim 21:22), and in respect to (Devarim 21:23) "His corpse shall not remain on the tree."

7) kllal shehu tzarich lifrat ufrat shehu tzarich lichllal (general requiring specific and specific requiring general): (Shemoth 13:2): "Sanctify unto Me every bechor (first-born), the opener of each womb." I might think that even females are included; it is, therefore, written (Devarim 15:19): "the male." If "the male," (I would think that) even a yotze dofen (Caesarian birth) were a bechor. It is, therefore, written "the opener of the womb." This is an instance of "general" (bechor) requiring "specific." I might think that even if it were born after a yotze dofen it were a bechor (being the first opener of the womb); it is, therefore, written "bechor," (which connotes first in all respects; not only first opener of the womb, but also first in birth). This is an instance of "specific" ("opener of the womb") requiring "general" (bechor).

10) (Vayikra 24:23) ("And Moses spoke to the children of Israel, and they took the curser outside the camp, and they stoned him with a stone; and the children of Israel did as the L–rd commanded Moses.") "And Moses spoke to the children of Israel, and they took the curser outside the camp. As mentioned earlier (Chapter 19:1), we are hereby taught that beth-din was within, and beth-din, outside of it. "and they stoned him," and not his garment (viz. Chapter 19:3). "a stone": We are hereby taught that if he died with one stone, it is sufficient. "and the children of Israel did as the L–rd commanded Moses": both in respect to semichah (placing of the hands, viz. Vayikra 24:14), in respect to dechiyah (casting him from the stoning platform, viz. Shemoth 19:13), in respect to hanging (his body on a tree) (viz. Devarim 21:22), and in respect to (Devarim 21:23) "His corpse shall not remain on the tree."

7) kllal shehu tzarich lifrat ufrat shehu tzarich lichllal (general requiring specific and specific requiring general): (Shemoth 13:2): "Sanctify unto Me every bechor (first-born), the opener of each womb." I might think that even females are included; it is, therefore, written (Devarim 15:19): "the male." If "the male," (I would think that) even a yotze dofen (Caesarian birth) were a bechor. It is, therefore, written "the opener of the womb." This is an instance of "general" (bechor) requiring "specific." I might think that even if it were born after a yotze dofen it were a bechor (being the first opener of the womb); it is, therefore, written "bechor," (which connotes first in all respects; not only first opener of the womb, but also first in birth). This is an instance of "specific" ("opener of the womb") requiring "general" (bechor).

10) (Vayikra 24:9) ("And it shall be for Aaron and for his sons. And they shall eat it in a holy place; for holy of holies it is to him, of the fire-offerings of the L–rd, an everlasting statute.") "And it shall be for Aaron and for his sons. And they shall eat it in a holy place": This tells me why that its eating must be in a holy place. Whence do I derive the same for its kneading and its arrangement? From "And it shall be" (connoting extension of application). Whence do I derive that the kneading and arrangement of the two loaves must also be in a holy place? From "for holy of holies" (which is also the status of the two loaves). R. Yehudah says: All of their operations must be performed within. R. Shimon says: Always be accustomed to say: "The two loaves and the showbread are kasher in the azarah (the Temple court and are kasher in Beth Pagel (i.e., even outside the walls of Jerusalem).

11) ("for holy of holies) it (is to him"): If one of the loaves crumbles, they are all invalidated, ("it" connoting "in its complete state"). "to him": I might think, to him alone; it is, therefore, written "and for his sons." If "and for his sons," I might think, for his sons and not for him. It is, therefore, written "for Aaron and for his sons." If "for Aaron and for his sons," I would think, for all of them (equally). How is this to be resolved? For Aaron, without sharing (i.e., he selects his own half); and for his sons, with sharing (the half that is left). Just as Aaron eats without sharing, so, his sons (i.e., his descendants), the high-priests, eat without sharing. "of the fire-offerings of the L–rd": hey may not (eat it until after the fistful of frankincense has been burned. "an everlasting statute": for the eternal house (the Temple, and not for a bamah [a temporary altar], there being no meal-offering on a bamah.)

“A locked garden is my sister, my bride; a locked fountainhead, a sealed spring. Your branches are an orchard of pomegranates, with delicious fruit, henna with nard” (Song of Songs 4:12–13).
“A locked garden is my sister, my bride” – Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: [This is analogous] to a king who had two daughters, one older and one younger, and he did not devote attention to arranging their marriages. The king left them for many years and went overseas. The girls arose and asserted themselves and married themselves to men. Each of them would take her husband’s seal and his signet. Years later, the king returned from overseas and he heard the voices of the people slandering his daughters and saying that the king’s daughters had engaged in licentiousness. What did he do? He issued a proclamation and said: The entire people shall go out to the assembly hall. He came and sat in the vestibule. He said to them: ‘My daughters, is this what you have done; have you tainted yourselves?’ Immediately, each of them produced her husband’s seal and his signet. He called his son-in-law and said to him: ‘To whom are you a bridegroom?’ He said to him: ‘I am your first son-in-law, [married] to your older daughter.’ He said to him: ‘What is this?’ He said to him: ‘This is my seal and this is my signet,’ and likewise [occurred with] the second [son-in-law].
At that moment, the king said: My daughters are sheltered from immorality and you slander and demean them? By your lives, I will administer justice against you. So it is with the nations, because they would taunt Israel and say: “Egypt enslaved the children of Israel [with harshness]” (Exodus 1:13); if they compelled them to perform labor, all the more so [they must have dominated] their bodies and their wives. At that moment, the Holy One blessed be He said: My sister, My bride, a locked garden. What is a locked garden? The Holy One blessed be He said: My garden is locked and it is being condemned?¹³³This is a metaphor meaning: The women of Israel have not had relations with anyone other than their husbands, and yet they are being maligned? Rabbi Pinḥas said: At that moment the Holy One blessed be He called the angel appointed over pregnancy and said: Go and shape [the children] with all the features of their fathers. Who did the fathers themselves resemble? The paterfamilias of the families. That is what is written regarding Reuben: “The families of the Reubenites [haReuveni]” (Numbers 26:7). Rabbi Hoshaya said: Reuben, Reubenite [haReuveni], Simeon, Simeonite [haShimoni].¹³⁴See Numbers 26:14. The members of the tribes are referred to in this way in order to imply that they looked like Reuben and Simeon. This was proof that they were actually the descendants of their fathers. Rabbi Marinos ben Rabbi Hoshaya said: Like you say: Baronite, Savronite, Sivoyite.¹³⁵These were names common at the time of the writing of the midrash. Just as Baronite means a member of the Baron family, the same is true of Reubenite. Alternatively, Rabbi Marinos is disputing Rabbi Hoshaya’s point and saying that just as members of any family can be referred to in this manner, the term Reubenite does not mean anything special (Etz Yosef). Rabbi Huna in the name of Rabbi Idi: Heh at the beginning of the word and yod at the end; God [yod-heh] attests for them that they were indeed the sons of their fathers.
Rabbi Pinḥas said: “A locked garden” – these are the virgins. “A locked fountainhead” – these are the non-virgins.¹³⁶Although there is an opening – gal means door in Aramaic – it remains locked before men other than her husband. “A sealed spring” – these are the males.¹³⁷They did not engage in illicit sexual activity. It was taught in the name of Rabbi Natan: “A locked garden, a locked fountainhead” – why was it [written] twice? Rather, it connotes two acts of intercourse for the woman; one in the typical manner and one in the atypical manner.¹³⁸Vaginal intercourse and anal intercourse.
Rabbi Huna said in the name of bar Kappara: By virtue of four matters, Israel was redeemed from Egypt: That they did not change their name, they did not change their language, they did not speak slander, and not one of them was steeped in licentiousness. They did not change their name: Reuben and Simeon descended [to Egypt]; Reuben and Simeon ascended. They did not call Reuben Rufus, they did not call Simeon Luleyani, Joseph, Listis, or Benjamin, Alexandra.
They did not change their language. There, it is written: “The survivor came and told Abram the Hebrew” (Genesis 14:13), and here it is written: “The God of the Hebrews has called upon us” (Exodus 5:3), and it is written: “That it is my mouth speaking to you” (Genesis 45:12), in the sacred tongue.
They did not speak slander, as it is stated: “Speak now in the ears of the people, and let them ask each man from his neighbor” (Exodus 11:2). You find that this matter had been entrusted to them for twelve months, and not one of them was found to have informed on his counterpart.¹³⁹The Israelites knew twelve months before the Exodus that they would ask to borrow goods from the Egyptians and that they would then leave Egypt never to return. Nonetheless, none of them told the Egyptians about this plan.
Not one of them was steeped in licentiousness, as it is stated: “The son of an Israelite woman, [whose father was an Egyptian.…] the son of the Israelite woman blasphemed” (Leviticus 24:10–11), to apprise in praise of Israel that not one of them was found except for this one, and the verse publicized her.¹⁴⁰The verse specifies that this woman had conceived from an Egyptian man in order to emphasize that she was the exception; no other Israelite women had intercourse with Egyptian men.
Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: Sarah descended to Egypt¹⁴¹See Genesis 12:10–20. and sheltered herself from licentiousness, and all the [Israelite] women were sheltered by her merit. Joseph descended to Egypt and sheltered himself from licentiousness, and all the males were sheltered by his merit.
Rabbi Pinḥas in the name of Rabbi Ḥiyya: The sheltering from licentiousness was itself sufficient that by its merit Israel would have been redeemed from Egypt. What is the reason? “A locked garden is my sister, my bride.” What is written thereafter? “Your branches [shelaḥayikh]¹⁴²They merited to be sent [lehishalaḥ] from Egypt. are an orchard of pomegranates.”
Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai taught: [This is analogous] to one to whom an inheritance fell at the site of a garbage dump. The heir was indolent and he sold it at a minimal price. The purchaser went and industriously excavated there and found a treasure. He built a large palace. The purchaser began walking in the marketplace with servants following him [all due] to the treasure that he had purchased there. The seller saw and was sorrowful, saying: Woe is me over what I lost. So too, when Israel was in Egypt, they were enslaved in mortar and bricks and they were contemptible in the eyes of the Egyptians. When they saw their flags encamped at the sea in the array of a royal army, the Egyptians became sorrowful, saying: Woe are we, what did we send from our land? This is as it is stated: “It was [vayhi] when Pharaoh sent (Exodus 13:17).¹⁴³Pharaoh shouted woe [vay] is me.
Rabbi Yonatan said: [This is analogous] to one who had a field capable of producing a kor, and he went and sold it at a minimal price. The purchaser went and excavated springs and planted gardens and orchards there. The seller saw and was sorrowful, saying: Woe is me over what I lost. So too, when Israel was in Egypt, they were enslaved in mortar and bricks and they were contemptible in the eyes of the Egyptians. When they saw their flags encamped at the sea in the array of a royal army, the Egyptians became sorrowful, saying: Woe are we, what did we send from our land? This is as it is stated: “It was [vayhi] when Pharaoh sent” (Exodus 13:17).
Rabbi Yosei said: [This is analogous] to one who had chopped-down cedars, and he sold it at a minimal price. The purchaser went and crafted from them trunks, closets, chests, and wagons. The seller saw and was sorrowful, saying: Woe is me over what I lost. So too, when Israel was in Egypt, they were enslaved in mortar and bricks and they were contemptible in the eyes of the Egyptians. When they saw their flags encamped at the sea in the array of a royal army, the Egyptians became sorrowful, saying: Woe are we, what did we send from our land? This is as it is stated: “It was [vayhi] when Pharaoh sent” (Exodus 13:17).

(Ibid. 12) "Honor your father and your mother": I would think (that they are to be honored) with words. It is, therefore, written (Mishlei 3:9) "Honor the L rd from your wealth." Just as there, "wealth," here, too, food, drink, and a new garment (are understood). Variantly: "Honor your father and your mother': (Leviticus 19:3) "A man, his mother and his father shall you fear," this tells me only of a man. Whence do I derive (the same for) a woman/ Whence do I derive (the same for) a tumtum (one of indeterminate six) or a hermaphrodite? It is, therefore, written "Honor your father and your mother," — in any event. Just as with honor (of parents) there is no distinction between a man or a woman, so, with fear. R. Yehudah b. Betheira says: It is written: "A man, his mother and his father shall you fear and My Sabbaths shall you keep." Just as with (keeping of) Sabbath, there is no distinction between a man or a woman, so, with honor (of parents), there is no distinction between man or woman, tumtum or hermaphrodite. Rebbi says: Beloved is the honoring of parents by Him who spoke and brought the world into being, His having equated their honor and fear to His honor, and their curse (i.e., their being cursed) to His. It is written "Honor your father and your mother" and, correspondingly, "Honor the L rd from your wealth" — their honor being equated. It is written "A man, his mother and his father shall you fear" and (Devarim 6:13) "The L rd your G d shall you fear" — their fear being equated. I is written (Exodus 21:17) "And one who curses his father and his mother" and "A man, if he curse his G d" — their cursing (i.e., their being cursed) being equated. Come and see their reward. It is written "Honor the L rd from your wealth" and, correspondingly, (Ibid. 10) "And your bread will be filled with grain"; Honor your father and your mother" and correspondingly, (Ibid.) "so that your days be prolonged." The L rd your G d shall you fear" — (Malachi 3:20) "And there shall shine for you, who fear My name, a sun of bounty." "A man, his mother and his father shall you fear and My Sabbaths shall you keep." It (fear of mother and father) is likened to Sabbath. What is written of Sabbath? (Isaiah 58:13) "If you keep your feet from (dishonoring) the Sabbath … (14) then you will find pleasure in the L rd and I will set you on the heights of the earth, etc." R. Eliezer says; It is revealed and known to Him who spoke and brought the world into being that a man honors his mother more than he does his father because she cajoles him with words — wherefore he placed father before mother vis-à-vis honor (i.e., "Honor your father and your mother"). And it is revealed and known to Him who spoke and brought the world into being that a man fears his father more than he does his mother because he teaches him Torah — wherefore he placed mother before father vis-à-vis fear (i.e., "A man, his mother and his father shall you fear"), "compensating," as it were, for the lack. __ But perhaps whoever comes first in Scripture takes precedence in practice? (This is not so,) for it is written "A man, his mother and his father shall you fear," (the Hebrew phrasing implying that) they are equivalent vis-à-vis practice.

(Exodus 21:12) "If one strikes a man and he dies, he is to be put to death." What is the intent of this? From (Leviticus 24:17) "And a man, if he strike any soul of a man, etc.", I might think (that he is to be put to death) even if he slapped him; it is, therefore, written "If one strikes a man and he dies." He is not liable (for the death penalty) unless he kills him.

(Exodus, Ibid.) "If one strikes a man": This tells me (that he is liable) only if he strikes a man. Whence is it derived (that he is likewise liable) if he strikes a woman or a minor? From (Leviticus 24:17) "And if a man strikes any soul of a man" — to include his striking a woman or a minor. "If one strikes a man": This (i.e., both verses) tells me only of a man or a woman who kills a man or of a man who kills a woman or a minor. Whence do I derive (the same for) a woman who kills a minor or (another) woman? It is, therefore, written (Numbers 35:16-17) "The murderer shall be put to death … he is a murderer." It comes for this teaching (i.e., that a woman, too, is liable for killing a woman or a minor). "And if a man strikes any soul of a man": I might think that an eight-month birth, (who is destined to die,) is also included. It is, therefore, written "If one strikes a man" — whereby we are apprised that he is not liable unless he kills one who is destined to live.

2) the LORD — this is blessing the LORD, as said: or blaspheming the name of the LORD (Leviticus 24:16)

12) (Vayikra 2:2): "its remembrance" (the fistful): The owners are "remembered" (for good) thereby (i.e., by its presentation to the altar), by (the smoking of) the fistful, and by (the smoking of) the frankincense. R. Shimon says: "remembrance" is mentioned here, and "remembrance" is mentioned elsewhere (in reference to the show bread [Vayikra 24:7]). Just as the "remembrance" here is a full fistful, so, the "remembrance" there.

(Exodus 21:14) "And if a man be deliberate against his neighbor to kill him, etc.": What is the intent of this section? From (Leviticus 24:17) "And a man if he strike any soul of man shall be put to death," I might think, even if he kills others (i.e., gentiles), or if he were a deaf-mute or an imbecile who killed (another), or if he were a doctor (who killed while) engaged in his profession, of (if he killed while) administering stripes by authority of beth-din, or (if he killed while) chastising his son or his disciple. It is, therefore, written "And if a man be deliberate" — to exclude one who kills unwittingly;

(Lev. 5:1:) AND IF A SOUL SINS IN THAT IT HEARS A VOICE SWEARING, [WHEN HE IS A WITNESS TO WHAT HE HAS EITHER SEEN OR COME TO KNOW.] The Holy One said: If you want to bear witness, bear witness; but if not, I will bear witness. Thus it is stated (ibid.): WHEN HE IS A WITNESS. And where is it shown that the Holy One is called a witness? Where it is stated (in Jer. 29:23): I AM THE ONE WHO KNOWS AND BEARS WITNESS, SAYS THE LORD. Come and see. All the parashioth written in this book have MISTAKE written in them, except for this parashah, in which MISTAKE is not mentioned.⁵⁷In fact, MISTAKE (shegagah), i.e., UNINTENTIONAL SIN, does appear in this parashah (in 5:15, 18). Elsewhere in Lev. the word only appears in 4:2, 22, 27; 22:4.) About him Solomon has said (in Eccl. 5:5 [6]): DO NOT LET YOUR MOUTH CAUSE YOUR FLESH TO SIN, [AND DO NOT SAY BEFORE THE ANGEL THAT IT WAS A MISTAKE]. It is comparable to two people who threw stones at an image of a king.⁵⁸Gk.: eikonion, a diminutive form of eikon. One was drunk, and one was in possession of his senses. Both of them were caught and went to trial. <The judge> rendered a <guilty> verdict⁵⁹Gk.: apophasis. against the one with his senses and acquitted the one who was drunk. So it is in the case of whoever sins. It is concerning him that MISTAKE is written (in Lev. 4:2): WHEN A SOUL SINS BY MISTAKE (rt.: ShGG) < AGAINST ANY OF THE LORD'S COMMANDMENTS >…. (Lev. 4:13:) AND IF THE WHOLE CONGREGATION OF ISRAEL SHOULD ERR (rt.: ShGG), because they all sinned by mistake, they bring an offering, and shall be forgiven them. It is so stated (in Numb. 15:26): THE WHOLE CONGREGATION OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL AND THE STRANGER WHO RESIDES IN THEIR MIDST SHALL BE FORGIVEN BECAUSE <IT HAPPENED > TO ALL THE PEOPLE BY MISTAKE. But the one who blasphemes receives a < guilty> verdict, as stated (in Lev. 24:16) AND THE ONE WHO BLASPHEMES THE NAME OF THE LORD SHALL SURELY BE PUT TO DEATH. [It is also written] (in Jer. 4:2): AND YOU SHALL SWEAR: AS THE LORD LIVES, IN TRUTH, IN JUSTICE, AND IN RIGHTEOUSNESS. [THEN SHALL NATIONS BLESS THEMSELVES IN HIM, AND HIM SHALL THEY GLORY.] The Scripture also says (in Deut. 10:20): THE LORD YOUR GOD YOU SHALL FEAR, HIM YOU SHALL SERVE, TO HIM YOU SHALL HOLD FAST, then after that, AND BY HIM YOU SHALL SWEAR.⁶⁰See below, Tanh. (Buber), Numb. 9:1; Numb. R. 9:1. (Ibid.:) THE LORD YOUR GOD YOU SHALL FEAR, so that you will be like those three of whom it is written: HE FEARED GOD (YR' 'LHYM). About Abraham it is written (in Gen. 22:12): FOR NOW I KNOW THAT YOU FEAR GOD (YR' 'LHYM)…. About Joseph it is written (in Gen. 42:18): FOR I FEAR (YR') GOD ('LHYM). About Job it is written (in Job 1:2): HE FEARED GOD (YR' 'LHYM) AND SHUNNED EVIL. (Deut. 10:20, cont.:) HIM YOU SHALL SERVE, in that you will be busy with the Torah and with <fulfilling> the commandments. (Ibid., cont.:) TO HIM YOU SHALL HOLD FAST, in that you will honor the disciples of the wise and share your property with them. Moses said to Israel: Do not think that I may have allowed you to swear by my name, even in truth. It is only, if all these conditions (mentioned earlier in the verse) abide with you, that you are entitled to swear by my name; and if not, you are not entitled to swear by my name, even in truth. You shall not be like those of whom it is written (in Jer. 7:9): WILL YOU <…> SWEAR FALSELY AND SACRIFICE TO BAAL? Fulfill all these conditions and after that you are mine, as stated (in Jer. 4:1): IF YOU RETURN, O ISRAEL, SAYS THE LORD, IF YOU RETURN UNTO ME…. Then after that <it says> (in vs. 2): AND YOU SHALL SWEAR: AS THE LORD LIVES….

(Exodus 21:15) "And if one strikes his father and his mother, he shall be put to death": What is the intent of this? Because it is written (Leviticus 24:20) "an eye for an eye, etc.", and Scripture took it (striking father or mother) out of its category to make it more stringent, to make it liable to the death penalty, this section was, therefore, stated.

(Lev. 22:27), “And from the eighth day on [it shall be acceptable for an offering by fire to the Lord].” So that your [evil] drive not lead you astray by saying that there is eating and drinking in front of Him. Who sacrificed to Him before Israel arose? David said (in Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (ya'arokh) to the Lord?” [This is to mean], who offered sacrifices to Him? R. Abbin the Levite said, “[This verse means,] who is like unto the Holy One, blessed be He, in sustaining orphans and feeding the hungry? After all, this word (ya'arokh) can only be a word concerning sustenance, since it is stated (in Lev. 24:8), ‘On [every] Sabbath day he shall [regularly] arrange (ya'arokh) it (i.e., the bread).’” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (ya'arokh) to the Lord”: Who is like unto the Holy One, blessed be He, in bringing light to the eyes of those in the dark?⁷⁵Below, 10:6. After all, this word (ya'arokh) can only be a word denoting light, since it is stated (Lev. 24:4), “He shall set up (ya'arokh) the lamps upon the unalloyed lampstand.” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (rt.: 'rk) to the Lord”: Who is like unto the Holy One, blessed be He, in clothing the naked? After all, this word (rt.: 'rk) can only be a word denoting a garment, since it is stated (in Jud. 17:10), “a suit (rt.: 'rk) of clothes and [your] maintenance.” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies [is comparable (ya'arokh) to the Lord]”: Who is like unto the Holy One, blessed be He, in waging war for Israel? After all, the word, ya'arokh, can only be a word denoting war, since it is stated (in Gen. 14:8), “and they marshalled (ya'arokh in the plural) for battle with them.” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable to the Lord”: The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “If your [evil] drive comes and says to you, ‘Who sacrificed to (fed) the Holy One, blessed be He, before the world was created,’⁷⁶See PR 48:3. say to him, ‘Consider that Moses ascended to the sky and spent a hundred and twenty days there. Let him tell you whether they were sacrificing to the Holy One, blessed be He. And in addition he was accustomed to eat; but when he ascended to Me, he saw that there is no eating and drinking in front of Me, and so he also did not eat, as stated (in Exod. 34:28), “And he was there with the Lord [forty days and forty nights; he neither ate bread nor drank water].”’” R. Simeon ben Laqish said, “If your [evil] drive comes to say to you, ‘If there were no eating and drinking before Him, He would not have told me to sacrifice and offer libations to Him’; [then ponder] what is written (in Numb. 28:6), ‘The continual burnt offering instituted at Mount Sinai’: Did they offer sacrifices on Mount Sinai? [No.] Rather observe that it was Moses who went up onto Mount Sinai. Let him tell you whether there were food and drink before Me. And so why did I trouble you and tell you to bring a daily sacrifice? In order to benefit you.” R. Hiyya bar Abba said, “When a mighty man who is walking on the road is thirsty and goes to drink water, how much does he drink with his hands? Ten handfuls? Six handfuls? Four handfuls? Less than two he does not drink. Now all the water that is in the world would be a filling for the hollow of the Holy One, blessed be He's, hand, as stated (in Is. 40:12), ‘Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand?’ [It is so written] in order to make known that for Him there is no eating or drinking. [Then] why did He tell me to offer a sacrifice? In order to benefit you.” Ergo (in Lev. 22:27), “When a bull or a sheep or a goat [is born… and from the eighth day on it shall be acceptable for an offering by fire to the Lord].” (Lev. 22:27), “And from the eighth day.” This text is related (to Eccl. 3:19), “As for the fate of humans and the fate of beasts, [they have the same fate; as the one dies, so does the other die. They all have the same lifebreath, but the superiority of the human over the beast is nil ('yn)].”⁷⁷This is the translation required by the latter part of this section. A more traditional translation would be AND THE HUMAN IS NO BETTER THAN THE BEAST. It is written concerning the human (in Deut. 22:11), “You shall not wear interwoven stuff, wool and flax together.” It is also written concerning the beast (ibid., vs. 10), “You shall not plough with an ox and an ass together.” (Eccl. 3:19:) “[They] all have the same fate.” Just as the human contracts uncleanness, the beast also contracts uncleanness. It is written concerning the human (in Numb. 19:11), “One who touches the corpse of any human being shall be unclean.” Also concerning the beast (in Lev. 11:39), “whoever touches its carcass shall be unclean [...].” (Eccl. 3:19:) “As the one dies, so does the other die.” Concerning the human (in Lev. 20:16), “you shall kill the woman”; and concerning the beast (in vs. 15), “and you shall kill the beast.” (Eccl. 3:21:) “Who knows the lifebreath of a human that rises upward and the lifebreath of a beast that goes down into the earth?”⁷⁸This translation is required by the midrash. A more traditional translation in the biblical context would be this: WHO KNOWS WHETHER IT IS THE LIFEBREATH OF A HUMAN THAT RISES UPWARD, WHILE IT IS THE LIFEBREATH OF A BEAST THAT GOES DOWN INTO THE EARTH? Because the lifebreath of the human is given from above, concerning it, a rising up is written. And because the beast is given from below, concerning it, a going down is written. (Eccl. 3:19, cont.:) “But the superiority of the human over the beast is 'yn (i.e., nil).” What is the meaning of 'yn?⁷⁹Eccl. R. 3:19(1). That [the human] speaks, but [the beast] does not ('yn) speak. And moreover, while there is knowledge in the human, in the beast there is no ('yn) knowledge. And moreover, while the human knows the difference between good and evil, the beast does not ('yn) know the difference between good and evil. And moreover, the human gets a reward for his works, but the beast does not ('yn) get a reward for its work. And moreover, when the human dies they care for him and he is buried, while the beast is not ('yn) buried. Ergo (in Eccl. 3:19), “but the superiority of the human over the beast is 'yn.” What is written concerning the human (in Lev. 12:2-3)? “When a woman emits her seed…. And on the eighth day [the flesh of his foreskin] shall be circumcised.” But about the beasts it is written (in Lev. 22:27), “When a bull or a sheep or a goat… and from the eighth day on it shall be acceptable [for an offering by fire to the Lord].”

(Lev. 22:27), “And from the eighth day on [it shall be acceptable for an offering by fire to the Lord].” So that your [evil] drive not lead you astray by saying that there is eating and drinking in front of Him. Who sacrificed to Him before Israel arose? David said (in Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (ya'arokh) to the Lord?” [This is to mean], who offered sacrifices to Him? R. Abbin the Levite said, “[This verse means,] who is like unto the Holy One, blessed be He, in sustaining orphans and feeding the hungry? After all, this word (ya'arokh) can only be a word concerning sustenance, since it is stated (in Lev. 24:8), ‘On [every] Sabbath day he shall [regularly] arrange (ya'arokh) it (i.e., the bread).’” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (ya'arokh) to the Lord”: Who is like unto the Holy One, blessed be He, in bringing light to the eyes of those in the dark?⁷⁵Below, 10:6. After all, this word (ya'arokh) can only be a word denoting light, since it is stated (Lev. 24:4), “He shall set up (ya'arokh) the lamps upon the unalloyed lampstand.” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (rt.: 'rk) to the Lord”: Who is like unto the Holy One, blessed be He, in clothing the naked? After all, this word (rt.: 'rk) can only be a word denoting a garment, since it is stated (in Jud. 17:10), “a suit (rt.: 'rk) of clothes and [your] maintenance.” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies [is comparable (ya'arokh) to the Lord]”: Who is like unto the Holy One, blessed be He, in waging war for Israel? After all, the word, ya'arokh, can only be a word denoting war, since it is stated (in Gen. 14:8), “and they marshalled (ya'arokh in the plural) for battle with them.” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable to the Lord”: The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “If your [evil] drive comes and says to you, ‘Who sacrificed to (fed) the Holy One, blessed be He, before the world was created,’⁷⁶See PR 48:3. say to him, ‘Consider that Moses ascended to the sky and spent a hundred and twenty days there. Let him tell you whether they were sacrificing to the Holy One, blessed be He. And in addition he was accustomed to eat; but when he ascended to Me, he saw that there is no eating and drinking in front of Me, and so he also did not eat, as stated (in Exod. 34:28), “And he was there with the Lord [forty days and forty nights; he neither ate bread nor drank water].”’” R. Simeon ben Laqish said, “If your [evil] drive comes to say to you, ‘If there were no eating and drinking before Him, He would not have told me to sacrifice and offer libations to Him’; [then ponder] what is written (in Numb. 28:6), ‘The continual burnt offering instituted at Mount Sinai’: Did they offer sacrifices on Mount Sinai? [No.] Rather observe that it was Moses who went up onto Mount Sinai. Let him tell you whether there were food and drink before Me. And so why did I trouble you and tell you to bring a daily sacrifice? In order to benefit you.” R. Hiyya bar Abba said, “When a mighty man who is walking on the road is thirsty and goes to drink water, how much does he drink with his hands? Ten handfuls? Six handfuls? Four handfuls? Less than two he does not drink. Now all the water that is in the world would be a filling for the hollow of the Holy One, blessed be He's, hand, as stated (in Is. 40:12), ‘Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand?’ [It is so written] in order to make known that for Him there is no eating or drinking. [Then] why did He tell me to offer a sacrifice? In order to benefit you.” Ergo (in Lev. 22:27), “When a bull or a sheep or a goat [is born… and from the eighth day on it shall be acceptable for an offering by fire to the Lord].” (Lev. 22:27), “And from the eighth day.” This text is related (to Eccl. 3:19), “As for the fate of humans and the fate of beasts, [they have the same fate; as the one dies, so does the other die. They all have the same lifebreath, but the superiority of the human over the beast is nil ('yn)].”⁷⁷This is the translation required by the latter part of this section. A more traditional translation would be AND THE HUMAN IS NO BETTER THAN THE BEAST. It is written concerning the human (in Deut. 22:11), “You shall not wear interwoven stuff, wool and flax together.” It is also written concerning the beast (ibid., vs. 10), “You shall not plough with an ox and an ass together.” (Eccl. 3:19:) “[They] all have the same fate.” Just as the human contracts uncleanness, the beast also contracts uncleanness. It is written concerning the human (in Numb. 19:11), “One who touches the corpse of any human being shall be unclean.” Also concerning the beast (in Lev. 11:39), “whoever touches its carcass shall be unclean [...].” (Eccl. 3:19:) “As the one dies, so does the other die.” Concerning the human (in Lev. 20:16), “you shall kill the woman”; and concerning the beast (in vs. 15), “and you shall kill the beast.” (Eccl. 3:21:) “Who knows the lifebreath of a human that rises upward and the lifebreath of a beast that goes down into the earth?”⁷⁸This translation is required by the midrash. A more traditional translation in the biblical context would be this: WHO KNOWS WHETHER IT IS THE LIFEBREATH OF A HUMAN THAT RISES UPWARD, WHILE IT IS THE LIFEBREATH OF A BEAST THAT GOES DOWN INTO THE EARTH? Because the lifebreath of the human is given from above, concerning it, a rising up is written. And because the beast is given from below, concerning it, a going down is written. (Eccl. 3:19, cont.:) “But the superiority of the human over the beast is 'yn (i.e., nil).” What is the meaning of 'yn?⁷⁹Eccl. R. 3:19(1). That [the human] speaks, but [the beast] does not ('yn) speak. And moreover, while there is knowledge in the human, in the beast there is no ('yn) knowledge. And moreover, while the human knows the difference between good and evil, the beast does not ('yn) know the difference between good and evil. And moreover, the human gets a reward for his works, but the beast does not ('yn) get a reward for its work. And moreover, when the human dies they care for him and he is buried, while the beast is not ('yn) buried. Ergo (in Eccl. 3:19), “but the superiority of the human over the beast is 'yn.” What is written concerning the human (in Lev. 12:2-3)? “When a woman emits her seed…. And on the eighth day [the flesh of his foreskin] shall be circumcised.” But about the beasts it is written (in Lev. 22:27), “When a bull or a sheep or a goat… and from the eighth day on it shall be acceptable [for an offering by fire to the Lord].”

1 (Numb. 8:2) When you set up the lamps: We find that in several places the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded about lighting the lamps with clear oil of beaten olives, and so it says (in Exod. 27:20) “And you shall command the Children of Israel to bring unto you clear oil of beaten olives.” So also it says (in Lev. 24:2, 4), “[Command the Children of Israel to bring unto you clear oil of beaten olives for lighting....] Upon the unalloyed lampstand shall he set up the lamps.” And here also it is written (in Numb. 8:2), “When you set up (literally, raise up) the lamps.”

1 (Numb. 8:2) When you set up the lamps: We find that in several places the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded about lighting the lamps with clear oil of beaten olives, and so it says (in Exod. 27:20) “And you shall command the Children of Israel to bring unto you clear oil of beaten olives.” So also it says (in Lev. 24:2, 4), “[Command the Children of Israel to bring unto you clear oil of beaten olives for lighting....] Upon the unalloyed lampstand shall he set up the lamps.” And here also it is written (in Numb. 8:2), “When you set up (literally, raise up) the lamps.”

"And if one strikes his father and his mother": This tells me only of (one who strikes both) his father and his mother. Whence do I derive (liability for one who strikes) his father and not his mother, or (one who strikes) his mother and not his father? It follows, viz.: Just as with cursing — each one, individually (viz. Leviticus 20:9), so, with striking, each one, individually. __ No, this may be true of cursing, for which he is liable both for (cursing) the dead as well as the living, wherefore he is liable for each individually, as opposed to striking for which he is not liable for striking the dead as well as the living, wherefore he should not be liable for striking each individually. It is, therefore, written (Leviticus 24:21) "And one who strikes a man shall be put to death." Let it not, then, be written "And if one strikes his father and his mother he shall be put to death." (The meaning must be, then,) even if he strikes only one of them. These are the words of R. Yoshiyah. R. Yonathan says: ("and") implies both together and each by itself unless Scripture specifies otherwise. R. Yitzchak says: "his mother" must be added for purposes of stringency (i.e., he is liable even for striking his mother). But (if you understand it as "and his mother") you will be implying leniency instead of stringency (i.e., that he is not liable until he strikes both his father and his mother). Perforce, then, it must be understood as "or" his mother.

(Numb. 25:1:) “While Israel was staying at Shittim, [the people began to go whoring].” Let our master instruct us: By virtue of how many things was Israel redeemed from Egypt?⁸⁵Numb. R. 20:22. Thus have our masters taught: Israel was redeemed from Egypt by virtue of four things: (1) that they did not change their names, (2) that they did not change their language, (3) that they did not disclose their secrets,⁸⁶Gk. and Lat.: mysteria. and (4) that they were not unbridled in unchastity.⁸⁷Lev. R. 32:5; Cant. R. 4:12:1; PRK 11:6; M. Pss. 114:4; also Mekhilta de Rabbi Ishmael, Pisha 5; Exod. R. 1:28. They did not change their names. Thus Reuben and Simeon went down (to Egypt), and Reuben and Simeon (with no name change) came up (from Egypt). They did not change their language, as stated (in Gen. 45:12), “that it is my mouth (i.e., my language) which is speaking unto you.” Thus they were talking in the sacred tongue. They did not reveal their secrets, as stated (in Exod. 3:22), “But each woman shall borrow [objects of silver, objects of gold, and clothing] from her neighbor [and from the woman who sojourns in her house].” Now the command was entrusted to them for twelve months, but they never revealed it to the Egyptians. And they were not unbridled in unchastity, as stated (in Cant. 4:12), “A locked garden is my sister my bride,” these are the males; “a locked fountain, a sealed spring,” these are the virgins (the females). You yourself know that it is so, since there was [but] one exception and Scripture aired her case (in Lev. 24:10), “Now there went out the son of an Israelite woman….”⁸⁸If he were not a bastard, his father’s name would have been given. Now in all those forty years that they were in the desert, they never committed the sin of unchastity, until they came to Shittim. It is therefore stated (in Numb. 25:1), “While Israel was staying at Shittim, [the people began to go whoring].” At Shittim, because they had committed folly (shetut),⁸⁹The word can also mean “idolatry.” as stated (in Prov. 6:32), “One who commits adultery with a woman has no sense.”

16 "and the fire of the altar shall be kindled thereby": Whence is it derived that the fire of the inner (incense) altar is to be kindled only from that of the outer altar? From: "the fire of the altar shall be kindled thereby." Whence is it derived that the same applies to the fire (i.e., the coals) of the coal pan (which were brought into the holy of holies for the burning of the incense of Yom Kippur) and to the (fire of) the menorah? It follows, viz.: "Burning" is stated in respect to the inner altar, viz. (Shemoth 30:7): "shall he burn it" (the incense, on the inner altar), and "burning" is stated in respect to the coal pan and the menorah. Just as the fire for the inner altar comes from the outer altar, so the fire for the coal pan and the menorah comes from the outer altar. — But why not go in this direction: "Burning" is stated in respect to the inner altar and "burning" is stated in respect to the coal pan and to the menorah — Just as the fire for the inner altar comes from the altar outside of it, so the fire for the coal pan and the menorah should come from the altar (directly) outside of them (i.e., the inner altar)! It is, therefore, (to negate this) written (in respect to the outer altar, Vayikra 6:6): "A continuous fire shall burn upon the altar; it shall not be extinguished" — The continuous fire, too, that I told you of (in respect to the menorah, Shemoth 27:20) should be only from the outer altar. This suffices for the fire of the menorah. Whence do I derive the same for (that of) the coal pan? It follows, viz.: "Fire" is written in respect to the menorah, and "fire" is written in respect to the coal pan. Just as there (the menorah, the fire is taken from that) on the outer altar; here, too, (in respect to the coal pan, the fire is taken from that) on the outer altar. — But why not go in this direction: "Fire" is stated in respect to the incense, and "fire" is stated in respect to the coal pan. Just as there (in respect to the incense (altar), the fire is taken from that) nearest it (i.e., the outer altar); here, too, (in respect to the coal pan, the fire should be taken from that altar) nearest it (i.e., the inner altar)! It is, therefore, (to negate this) written(Vayikra 16:12): "And he shall take a full coal pan of coals of fire from off the altar before the L–rd." Which is the altar, part of which, but not all of which, is "before the L–rd"? The outer altar, (which faces the sanctuary, as opposed to the inner altar, which is entirely in the sanctuary).

"And if one curses his father and his mother": with the explicit Name (i.e., the Tetragrammaton). __ But perhaps an epithet is intended? Let it not be written redundantly, (Leviticus 24:16) "When he blasphemes the Name he shall be put to death." (It is written thus) to include one who curses his father and mother. He is not liable until he curses them with the explicit Name. These are the words of R. Achai. R. Chanina b. Iddi says: Since Scripture states "Swear" and "Do not swear," "Curse" and "Do not curse," since swearing is by the Name, so, not swearing is by the Name (i.e., "Do not swear by the Name of"); just as cursing is by the Name, so not cursing is by the Name.

[Another interpretation] (of Lev. 22:27): AND FROM THE EIGHTH DAY ON [IT SHALL BE ACCEPTABLE FOR AN OFFERING BY FIRE TO THE LORD]. But will not your < evil > drive lead you astray by saying that he has food and drink?⁸⁴Tanh., Lev.8:15. Who sacrificed to him {until} [before] Israel arose? David said (in Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE (ya'arokh) TO THE LORD? Who offered sacrifices to him? R. Abbin the Levite said: < This verse means: > Who is like unto the Holy One in sustaining orphans and feeding the hungry? After all, this word (ya'arokh) can only be a word concerning sustenance, since it is stated (in Lev. 24:8): ON < EVERY > SABBATH DAY HE SHALL < REGULARLY > ARRANGE (ya'arokh with a suffix) IT (i.e., the bread) < BEFORE THE LORD >.

Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE (ya'arokh) TO THE LORD? Who is like unto the Holy One in bringing light to the eyes of those in the dark?⁸⁵Below, 10:6. After all, this word (ya'arokh) can only be a word denoting light, since it is stated (Lev. 24:4): HE SHALL SET UP (ya'arokh) THE LAMPS UPON THE UNALLOYED LAMPSTAND.

“And Israel abode in Shittim…” (Bamidbar 25:1) This is the law. Israel was redeemed from Egypt in the merit of many things. Our Rabbis taught: Israel was redeemed from Egypt in the merit of four things. They did not change their names, they did not change their language, they did not reveal their secrets. Moshe said to them “…and every woman shall ask of her neighbor, and of her that live in her house, vessels of silver and vessels of gold…” (Shemot 3:22) They kept this command hidden between them for twelve months and not one of them revealed it to the Egyptians. They did not breakdown into forbidden sexual relationships, as it is written “A locked up garden is my sister, my bride…” this refers to the men, “…a locked up spring, a sealed fountain,” (Shir HaShirim 4:12) and this refers to the virgins. You should know this, because there was one who transgressed and the Torah publicized it “Now, the son of an Israelite woman and he was the son of an Egyptian man went out among the children of Israel…” (Vayikra 24:1) All the forty years in the wilderness they did not go astray until they came to Shittim. Therefore it says “And Israel abode in Shittim, and the people began to commit harlotry…” (Bamidbar 25:1) It was called Shittim because there they did foolishness (shtut), “He who commits adultery with a woman lacks understanding…” (Mishle 6:32) ‘the people began to commit harlotry’ There are springs which raise mighty people and there are those that raise weaklings, those that raise beautiful people and those that raise ugly ones, those that raise modest people and those that raise people steeped in licentiousness. The spring of Shittim was one of harlotry, and it watered Sodom. You find that they said “Where are the men who came in to you? Bring them out to us…” (Bereshit 19:5) Since that spring was accursed, in the future the Holy One will dry it out, as it says “…and a spring will issue from the house of the Lord and will water the valley of Shittim…” (Yoel 4:18) From the days of Avraham no one had broken out in harlotry. Once they arrived at Shittim and drank from its waters, they burst forth.

“And Israel abode in Shittim…” (Bamidbar 25:1) This is the law. Israel was redeemed from Egypt in the merit of many things. Our Rabbis taught: Israel was redeemed from Egypt in the merit of four things. They did not change their names, they did not change their language, they did not reveal their secrets. Moshe said to them “…and every woman shall ask of her neighbor, and of her that live in her house, vessels of silver and vessels of gold…” (Shemot 3:22) They kept this command hidden between them for twelve months and not one of them revealed it to the Egyptians. They did not breakdown into forbidden sexual relationships, as it is written “A locked up garden is my sister, my bride…” this refers to the men, “…a locked up spring, a sealed fountain,” (Shir HaShirim 4:12) and this refers to the virgins. You should know this, because there was one who transgressed and the Torah publicized it “Now, the son of an Israelite woman and he was the son of an Egyptian man went out among the children of Israel…” (Vayikra 24:1) All the forty years in the wilderness they did not go astray until they came to Shittim. Therefore it says “And Israel abode in Shittim, and the people began to commit harlotry…” (Bamidbar 25:1) It was called Shittim because there they did foolishness (shtut), “He who commits adultery with a woman lacks understanding…” (Mishle 6:32) ‘the people began to commit harlotry’ There are springs which raise mighty people and there are those that raise weaklings, those that raise beautiful people and those that raise ugly ones, those that raise modest people and those that raise people steeped in licentiousness. The spring of Shittim was one of harlotry, and it watered Sodom. You find that they said “Where are the men who came in to you? Bring them out to us…” (Bereshit 19:5) Since that spring was accursed, in the future the Holy One will dry it out, as it says “…and a spring will issue from the house of the Lord and will water the valley of Shittim…” (Yoel 4:18) From the days of Avraham no one had broken out in harlotry. Once they arrived at Shittim and drank from its waters, they burst forth.

... “For, like the earth, which gives forth its plants…” (Isaiah 61:11) R’ Pinchas and R’ Chilkiya in the name of R’ Simon: like someone who says to his friend ‘may the Holy One make you grow, may you win your judgment, “And nations shall see your righteousness…” (Isaiah 62:2) R’ Levi said: since in this world anyone who explicitly pronounces the name of the Holy One is liable for death, as it says “And one who blasphemously pronounces the Name of the Lord, shall be put to death…” (Leviticus 24:16) so too in the time to come anyone who explicitly pronounces the name of Jerusalem is liable for death, as it says “…and you shall be called a new name…” (Isaiah 62:2) R’ Levi said: there are six things which the Holy One will renew in the time to come and they are: heavens and earth, the heart, the spirit, the name of the Messiah and the name of Jerusalem. From where do we learn the heavens and earth? “For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth…” (Isaiah 65:17) From where do we learn the heart and the spirit? “And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit will I put within you…” (Ezekiel 36:26) And from where do we learn the name of the Messiah? “May his name be forever; before the sun, his name will be magnified…” (Psalms 72:17) And from where do we learn the name of Jerusalem? “…and you shall be called a new name…” (Isaiah 62:2) R’ Levi said: happy is the city whose name is the same as that of her king and whose king’s name is the same as that of her God. Whose name is the same as her king? “…and the name of the city from that day will be ‘The Lord is There.’” (Ezekiel 48:35) Whose king’s name is the same as that of her God? “…and this is his name that he shall be called, The Lord is our righteousness.” (Jeremiah 23:6)

(Lev. 24:10:) “Now there went out the son of an Israelite woman.” From where did he go out?¹⁰³Lev. R. 32:3. R. Levi says, “He went out from his world, just as it is stated (in I Sam. 17:4), ‘And there went out a champion.’”¹⁰⁴I.e., Goliath, who was about to leave this world. R. Berekhyah said, “He went out from the preceding Parashah, where it is written (in Lev. 24:5), ‘Then you shall take fine flour and bake it into twelve loaves.’ He said, ‘It is customary for a king to eat warm bread. Would [he eat it] cold?’” It is like that which we learn there (in the latter part of Men. 11:9), “The shewbread was eaten no earlier than the ninth day [after baking] and no later than the eleventh day. How so? It was baked on the eve of the Sabbath and eaten on the Sabbath [of the following week, i.e.,] on the ninth day. [If] a holiday happened to fall on the eve of the Sabbath, it was eaten on the tenth. [In the case of] the two-day holiday of the new year, it was eaten on the eleventh, for [the baking] overrides neither the Sabbath nor a holiday. R. Simeon b. Gamaliel says in the name of R. Simeon the son of the Assistant [High Priest], ‘[The baking] overrides a holiday but does not override the fast day.’”¹⁰⁵The Day of Atonement. (According the first part of Men. 11:9,) the two loaves of bread [offered at Pentecost] were eaten no earlier than the second day and no later than the third. How so? They were baked on the eve of the festival [of Pentecost and] eaten on the festival, [i.e.,] on the second day. If the festival happened to fall on the day after the Sabbath, they were eaten on the third day.

(Numb. 4:18:) “Do not cut off.” Let our master instruct us: In the case of one who commits a transgression punishable with excision according to the Torah, how do they receive pardon [and] become freed from their excision?¹¹⁹See Numb. R. 5:4. Thus have our masters taught (in Mak. 3:15): All who are liable to excision, when they have been scourged, are exempt from their excision, as stated (in Deut. 25:2-3), “then the judge shall have him lie down…. He may give him forty lashes but no more…; then your brother would be degraded.” When he has been scourged, then he is [again] your brother. And why forty lashes? It is simply that, because this adam was forty days in creation¹²⁰The Rabbis believed that the fetus takes forty days to develop into a human shape. See Nid. 3:7; Ber. 60a; Men. 99b; also Philo, Quaestiones, Gen. 1:25. and transgressed against the Torah, which was forty days in the giving, he will be given forty lashes and be exempt from his punishment (i.e., from excision). And so you find in the case of the first Adam. When he was commanded and told (in Gen. 2:17), “But from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat …,” he incurred the sentence of death; and the world was scourged with forty punishments: ten for Adam, ten for Eve, ten for the serpent, ten for the land. Therefore, when a person commits one of the transgressions [punishable by death], he is scourged with forty lashes. And so you find with each and every thing that the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded Moses, [there were] warnings and punishments. It is written concerning the Sabbath (Exod. 20:8), “Remember the Sabbath day,” as a warning; and as a punishment (there is Exod. 31:14), “whoever profanes it shall surely be put to death.” They came to the desert and (according to Numb. 15:32) found one gathering [wood on the Sabbath], but Moses did not know by what death he should be killed. However, (according to Lev. 24:12) “They left him in custody [because it was not clear what should be done to him.]” The Holy One, blessed be He, said (in vs. 35), “The person shall surely be put to death; [all the congregation] shall stone him with stones.” Immediately Moses rose in prayer and said, “Sovereign of the world, if a man should so sin, should he [really] be stoned? Behold, they would be destroyed. Make an [other] arrangement for them.” He said to him, “Let them be scourged with forty lashes, and they will be exempt from excision.” Similarly when the children of Aaron died, the tribe of Kohath saw them. They began yelling to Moses, saying, “Are we to die like that?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, “Just as I have made an [alternate] arrangement for Aaron, as stated (in 16:3), ‘In this way shall Aaron come [into the sanctuary]…’; so also for the Kohathite families I am making a similar arrangement, lest they die, as stated (Numb. 4:19), ‘Do this for them (i.e., for the Kohathites) that they may live and not die….’” Where is it shown? From what they read on the matter (in Numb. 4:18), “Do not cut off….”

(Lev. 24:10:) “Now there went out the son of an Israelite woman.” From where did he go out?¹⁰³Lev. R. 32:3. R. Levi says, “He went out from his world, just as it is stated (in I Sam. 17:4), ‘And there went out a champion.’”¹⁰⁴I.e., Goliath, who was about to leave this world. R. Berekhyah said, “He went out from the preceding Parashah, where it is written (in Lev. 24:5), ‘Then you shall take fine flour and bake it into twelve loaves.’ He said, ‘It is customary for a king to eat warm bread. Would [he eat it] cold?’” It is like that which we learn there (in the latter part of Men. 11:9), “The shewbread was eaten no earlier than the ninth day [after baking] and no later than the eleventh day. How so? It was baked on the eve of the Sabbath and eaten on the Sabbath [of the following week, i.e.,] on the ninth day. [If] a holiday happened to fall on the eve of the Sabbath, it was eaten on the tenth. [In the case of] the two-day holiday of the new year, it was eaten on the eleventh, for [the baking] overrides neither the Sabbath nor a holiday. R. Simeon b. Gamaliel says in the name of R. Simeon the son of the Assistant [High Priest], ‘[The baking] overrides a holiday but does not override the fast day.’”¹⁰⁵The Day of Atonement. (According the first part of Men. 11:9,) the two loaves of bread [offered at Pentecost] were eaten no earlier than the second day and no later than the third. How so? They were baked on the eve of the festival [of Pentecost and] eaten on the festival, [i.e.,] on the second day. If the festival happened to fall on the day after the Sabbath, they were eaten on the third day.

(Exodus 21:22) "And if men fight, etc." What is the intent of this section? From (Ibid. 14) "And if a man be bent against his neighbor to kill him," we hear only that one who intends to smite his foe and does so is to be put to death; but we do not hear the same for one who intends to smite his foe and smites his friend. It is, therefore, written (to this effect) "And if men fight … and if there be death (in his friend) then you shall give a life for a life." Rebbi says: If one intends to smite this foe and smites a different foe it follows that he should be liable; but if one intends to smite his foe and smites his friend, should he not be exempt? The verse, rather, comes to teach that payment for a wife's injury belongs to the husband, and payment for (the death of) fetuses belongs to the husband. R. Yitzchak says: Even a man who intends to smite one and smites another is not liable — until he makes it clear that it is this man that he wishes to smite, as it is written (Devarim 19:11) "and he rise up against him and he smite him, etc." What, then, is the intent of "and if men fight, etc."? From (Leviticus 24:17) "And if a man smite any soul of man" I would understand even an eight-month birth, (who is destined to die); it is, therefore, written ("and if men fight," to indicate that) he is not liable unless he kills one who is (otherwise) destined to live.

(Lev. 24:10:) “Now there went out the son of an Israelite woman, [whose father was Egyptian].” From where did he go out? R. Hiyya bar Abba said, “He went out from the Parashah on genealogies.¹⁰⁶Lev. R. 32:3; Sifra to Lev. 14:10 (242: Emor, Parashah 14). When he came to pitch his tent in the camp of Dan, they rejected him. Now they said to him, ‘You have an Egyptian father, but it is written (in Numb. 2:2), ‘each with his standard, under the banners of their fathers' houses,’ and not ‘of their mothers' houses.’ Immediately (according to Lev. 24:11), he began to utter the name [of God] and curse it.” R. Levi said, “He was clearly a bastard.¹⁰⁷See Enoch Zundel’s ‘Ets Yosef commentary on Tanchuma here, as such a case is not included in the legal definition of a bastard (mamzer). How so? Taskmasters were from Egypt, and the officers were from Israel.¹⁰⁸Exod. R. 1:28; Lev. R. 32:4. The taskmaster was in charge of ten officers, and the officer was in charge of ten Israelites. [Thus,] it turned out that the taskmaster was in charge of a hundred and ten Israelites. On one occasion a taskmaster met an officer. He said to him, ‘Go gather your groups of ten.’ When he had gone, he entered his house and sullied Shelomith, the officer's wife. [When] her husband returned, he found him leaving his house. When [the taskmaster knew that her husband] noticed him, he beat him every day and said to him, ‘Toil properly, toil properly.’ The holy spirit was kindled in Moses. He raised his eyes to the sky. He said, ‘Was it not enough for this wicked man to rape his wife, but that he should return and beat him?’ Immediately (according to Exod. 2:12), ‘he smote the Egyptian and hid him in the sand.’” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “In this world you are delivered through sins into the hands of the nations of the world. However, in the world to come (according to Is. 49:23), ‘Kings shall be your guardians; their ladies, your wet nurses; they shall bow down before you, nose to the ground, and lick the dust of your feet; then you shall know that I am the Lord; those who trust Me shall not be ashamed.’”

(Lev. 24:10:) “Now there went out the son of an Israelite woman, [whose father was Egyptian].” From where did he go out? R. Hiyya bar Abba said, “He went out from the Parashah on genealogies.¹⁰⁶Lev. R. 32:3; Sifra to Lev. 14:10 (242: Emor, Parashah 14). When he came to pitch his tent in the camp of Dan, they rejected him. Now they said to him, ‘You have an Egyptian father, but it is written (in Numb. 2:2), ‘each with his standard, under the banners of their fathers' houses,’ and not ‘of their mothers' houses.’ Immediately (according to Lev. 24:11), he began to utter the name [of God] and curse it.” R. Levi said, “He was clearly a bastard.¹⁰⁷See Enoch Zundel’s ‘Ets Yosef commentary on Tanchuma here, as such a case is not included in the legal definition of a bastard (mamzer). How so? Taskmasters were from Egypt, and the officers were from Israel.¹⁰⁸Exod. R. 1:28; Lev. R. 32:4. The taskmaster was in charge of ten officers, and the officer was in charge of ten Israelites. [Thus,] it turned out that the taskmaster was in charge of a hundred and ten Israelites. On one occasion a taskmaster met an officer. He said to him, ‘Go gather your groups of ten.’ When he had gone, he entered his house and sullied Shelomith, the officer's wife. [When] her husband returned, he found him leaving his house. When [the taskmaster knew that her husband] noticed him, he beat him every day and said to him, ‘Toil properly, toil properly.’ The holy spirit was kindled in Moses. He raised his eyes to the sky. He said, ‘Was it not enough for this wicked man to rape his wife, but that he should return and beat him?’ Immediately (according to Exod. 2:12), ‘he smote the Egyptian and hid him in the sand.’” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “In this world you are delivered through sins into the hands of the nations of the world. However, in the world to come (according to Is. 49:23), ‘Kings shall be your guardians; their ladies, your wet nurses; they shall bow down before you, nose to the ground, and lick the dust of your feet; then you shall know that I am the Lord; those who trust Me shall not be ashamed.’”

"an eye for an eye" money. You say "money," but perhaps an eye (literally) is intended? R. Elazar was wont to say (Leviticus 24:21) "One who strikes a beast shall pay for it, and one who strikes a man shall be put to death." Scripture likens the injuries of a man to the injuries of a beast, and the injuries of a beast to the injuries of a man. And just as the injuries of a beast are subject to monetary payment, so, the injuries of a man. R. Eliezer says: It is written (Exodus 21:30) "When kofer ('atonement payment') is imposed upon him, he shall give the redemption of his soul." Now does this not follow a fortiori, viz.: If where Scripture makes him liable for death, he only pays money, then here (re an eye), where Scripture does not make him liable for death, how much more so does he pay only money! R. Yitzchak says: "an eye for an eye": I understand this to mean that whether or not he intends (to blind him), he pays only money. And, indeed, Scripture limits one who intends to cause a blemish to monetary payment, as it is written (Leviticus 24:19) "And a man if he maims his neighbor" — general; "an eye for an eye" — particular. general-particular. (The rule is:) The general subsumes only what exists in the particular. Then, in (20) "as he maims a man," there is a reversion to the general. Perhaps the first general is generalized (i.e., all maimings are to be included.) Would you say that? We have here an instance of general-particular-general, where (the rule is that) you judge in accordance with the particular, viz.: Just as the particular specifies permanent maimings, external organ prominences, and intended (injuries) as paying only money (and not being punishable by death) (so, all such maimings are included.) Thus, "as he maims a man" — when he intends to maim him.

"an eye for an eye" money. You say "money," but perhaps an eye (literally) is intended? R. Elazar was wont to say (Leviticus 24:21) "One who strikes a beast shall pay for it, and one who strikes a man shall be put to death." Scripture likens the injuries of a man to the injuries of a beast, and the injuries of a beast to the injuries of a man. And just as the injuries of a beast are subject to monetary payment, so, the injuries of a man. R. Eliezer says: It is written (Exodus 21:30) "When kofer ('atonement payment') is imposed upon him, he shall give the redemption of his soul." Now does this not follow a fortiori, viz.: If where Scripture makes him liable for death, he only pays money, then here (re an eye), where Scripture does not make him liable for death, how much more so does he pay only money! R. Yitzchak says: "an eye for an eye": I understand this to mean that whether or not he intends (to blind him), he pays only money. And, indeed, Scripture limits one who intends to cause a blemish to monetary payment, as it is written (Leviticus 24:19) "And a man if he maims his neighbor" — general; "an eye for an eye" — particular. general-particular. (The rule is:) The general subsumes only what exists in the particular. Then, in (20) "as he maims a man," there is a reversion to the general. Perhaps the first general is generalized (i.e., all maimings are to be included.) Would you say that? We have here an instance of general-particular-general, where (the rule is that) you judge in accordance with the particular, viz.: Just as the particular specifies permanent maimings, external organ prominences, and intended (injuries) as paying only money (and not being punishable by death) (so, all such maimings are included.) Thus, "as he maims a man" — when he intends to maim him.

(Numb. 4:18:) “Do not cut off.” This text is related (to Ps. 33:18), “Behold, the eye of the Lord is on those who fear Him….” The text speaks along many lines of thought.¹²¹Shittim. For this use of the word, Buber, n. 209, cites Lev. R. 34:8. For the other interpretations, see above, Gen. 6:5. For what we need, however, it is speaking about the tribe of Levi.¹²²Numb. R. 5:1. And where is it shown? Where the tribe of Levi is called those who fear the Lord, as stated (in Mal. 2:5), “and I gave them (i.e., life and peace) as well as fear, and he feared Me.” (Ps. 33:19) “On those who wait for His steadfast love,” because they are always waiting for the name of the Holy One, blessed be He. (Ps. 33:19:) “To deliver their soul from death and to keep them alive in famine,” through the twenty-four gifts which the Holy One, blessed be He, has given them.¹²³THal. 2:7-9; BQ 110b (bar.); Hul. 133b (bar.); cf. Hal. 4:9. These are them: ten in the sanctuary, ten within the borders, and four in Jerusalem. The ten in the sanctuary: the sin offering (Lev. 6:17-23; Zev. 5:3), the guilt offering (Lev. 5:14-16, 20-26; 19:20-22; Zev. 5:5), the peace sacrifices and the community peace sacrifices (Lev. 23:19-20; Zev. 5:5), the sin offering of a fowl (Lev. 5:8), the guilt offering for a doubtful sin (Lev. 5:17-19; Zev. 5:5), the leper's log of oil (Lev. 14:12), the two loaves (Lev. 23:17), the shewbread (Exod. 25:30; Lev. 24:5-9), the remnant of the omer (Lev. 23:10-12; Men. 10:4), and the remainder of the meal offering (Lev. 2:3).
The ten within the borders: the terumah (Numb. 18:12), the terumah of the tithe (Numb. 18:25-29), the hallah (Numb. 15:18-21), the first of the shorn wool (Deut. 18:4), the shoulder, the cheeks, and the stomach (Deut. 18:3), the redemption of the [first-born] son (Numb. 18:15-16), [the redemption of] a firstling ass (Exod. 13:13), [the payment for] the robbery of a proselyte (Thal. 2:9; Bq 110b; Hul. 133b), things consecrated (Numb. 18:14; Bik. 3:12), and a field of possession (Lev. 27:16-21)
The four in Jerusalem: the firstlings [of animals] (Numb. 18:17-18), the first fruits (Exod. 23:19; Numb. 18:13; Hal. 4:9), the priest's share from the thank-offering ram and from the nazarite ram, the breast of the peace offerings, and the thigh (Exod. 29:27-28; Lev. 7:12-14; 31-34; 10:14-15; Numb. 6:13-20; 18:18), and skins of [burnt, sin, and guilt] offerings (Lev. 7:8; Zev. 12:3)
Behold, these are twenty-four gifts. Ergo (in Ps. 33:19), “and to keep them alive in famine. (Numb. 4:18) “Do not cut off [the tribe of the Kohathite families from the Levites].” The Holy One, blessed be He, foresaw that Korah was going to arise and disagree about the priesthood.¹²⁴Cf. Numb. R. 5:5. The Holy One, blessed be He, said. “I will not destroy the Levites because of Korah.” (Numb. 4:18:) “Do not cut off [the tribe of the Kohathite families from the Levites].” This text is related (to Is. 48:9), “For the sake of My name I will delay My anger, and for My praise I will hold back for you so as not to cut you off.” To what is the matter comparable?¹²⁵Numb. R. 5:6. To a king who had a son that was associated with bandits;¹²⁶Gk.: lestai. and when they were captured, his son was captured with them. The king said, “What shall I do? Shall I execute the robbers? Possibly my son is with them. Instead, for the sake of my son, I will exonerate them for now.” Similarly, the Levites carried the tabernacle. Thus it is stated (in Numb. 7:9), “But to the Children of Kohath he gave no [wagons], because they had the service of the holy.” When the Holy One, blessed be He, saw that Korah and his assembly were going to be opposed to Moses and Aaron, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, “What shall I do with these? To kill them in the desert is not possible.” Why? Because the Holy One, blessed be He, had taken half of His name and bestowed it upon them, the yh (of yhwh) in the Kohathite (hqhty in Numb. 4:18).¹²⁷Numb. R. 5:6, and Yalqut Shim‘oni, Is. 48:9, 326 (466) add that the letters from the divine name appear at the end and the beginning of HQHTY, and Numb. R. explains further that the Holy One added the definite article (H) to the name, Kohathite, for this very reason. It therefore says (in Is. 48:9), “For the sake of My name I will delay¹²⁸Literally: LENGTHEN. This verb may have suggested that the Holy One deliberately lengthened the name, Kohathite, with the addition of the article. My anger….”

That they did not change their name. Thus Reuben and Simeon went down (to Egypt), and Reuben and Simeon (with no name change) came up (from Egypt).
And they did not change their language, as stated (in Gen. 45:12): THAT IT IS MY MOUTH (i.e., MY LANGUAGE) WHICH IS SPEAKING UNTO YOU. Thus they were talking in the sacred tongue.
That they did not reveal their secrets, when Moses said to them (in Exod. 3:22): BUT EACH WOMAN SHALL BORROW <OBJECTS OF SILVER, OBJECTS OF GOLD, AND CLOTHING> FROM HER NEIGHBOR <AND FROM THE WOMAN WHO SOJOURNS IN HER HOUSE>. Now the command was entrusted to them for twelve months, but they never revealed it to the Egyptians.
And they were not unbridled in unchastity, as stated (in Cant. 4:12): A LOCKED GARDEN IS MY SISTER, MY BRIDE, A LOCKED FOUNTAIN,¹⁰⁷Gal. The word can also mean “door” and the midrash may well have this meaning in mind. A SEALED SPRING. (ibid.:) A LOCKED GARDEN. These are the males. A LOCKED FOUNTAIN, A SEALED SPRING. These are the females. You yourself know that it is so, since there was <but> one exception and Scripture aired her case (in Lev. 24:10–11): NOW THERE WENT OUT THE SON OF AN ISRAELITE WOMAN, <WHOSE FATHER WAS AN EGYPTIAN > […. AND THE NAME OF HIS MOTHER WAS SHELOMITH BAT DIBRI OF THE TRIBE OF DAN.]¹⁰⁸If he were not a bastard, his father’s name would have been given. Now in all those forty years that they were in the desert, they never committed the sin of unchastity, until they came to Shittim. It is therefore stated (in Numb. 25:1): WHILE ISRAEL WAS STAYING AT SHITTIM, <THE PEOPLE BEGAN TO GO WHORING>. AT SHITTIM, because they had committed folly (shetut),¹⁰⁹The word can also mean “idolatry.” as stated (in Prov. 6:32): ONE WHO COMMITS ADULTERY WITH A WOMAN HAS NO SENSE.

(Bamidbar 6:6) "All the days of his Naziritism to the L-rd, upon the soul of a dead one he shall not come." Scripture now leaves the subject of shaving and comes to speak of tumah. "upon the soul … he shall not come": I might think that even beasts are herein subsumed, as in (Vayikra 24:18) "One who strikes the soul of a beast, etc."; it is, therefore, written: "upon the soul of a dead one he shall not come," Scripture referring to a human being. R. Yishmael says: This (proof) is not needed, for it is written "he shall not come." Scripture is speaking of a (dead) soul that confers tumah by entry (into his tent, [i.e., the soul of a man, and not that of a beast]). (6:7) "For his father and his mother … he shall not become tamei" — but he does become tamei for a meth-mitzvah (one who has no one to bury him). Why need this be stated? It is understood a fortiori, viz.: If the high-priest, whose holiness is permanent, becomes tamei for a meth-mitzvah, how much more so, a Nazirite, whose holiness is temporary! — No, this may be true of a high-priest, who does not bring an offering for his uncleanliness — wherefore he becomes tamei for a meth-mitzvah, as opposed to a Nazirite, who does bring an offering for his uncleanliness — wherefore he should not become tamei for a meth-mitzvah! It must, therefore, be written "For his father and his mother he shall not become tamei" — but he does become tamei for a meth-mitzvah. — But perhaps the intent of the verse is: "For his father and his mother … he shall not become tamei," but he does become for other dead! — Would you say such a thing? If an ordinary Cohein, who does become tamei for his kin, may not become tamei for other dead, how much more so a Nazirite, who may not become tamei for his kin! What, then, is the intent of "For his father and his mother … he shall not become tamei? He does not become tamei for his father and his mother, but he does become tamei for a meth-mitzvah. — But even without this verse, I can derive it by reasoning, viz.: There is a general rule for a high-priest (Vayikra 21:11: "And upon all souls of the dead he shall not come"), and there is a general rule for a Nazirite ("Upon the soul of a dead one he shall not come.") Just as with the general rule for the high-priest, he may not become tamei for kin, so with the general rule for the Nazirite, he may not become tamei for kin. You derive it from the high-priest, but I can derive it from an ordinary priest, viz.: There is a general rule for an ordinary priest and there is a general rule for a Nazirite. Just as with the general rule for the ordinary priest he does become tamei for kin, so, with the general rule for the Nazirite, he should become tamei for kin. It must, therefore, be written "For his father and his mother; for his brother and for his sister, he shall not become tamei, etc." R. Akiva says (on Vayikra 21:11): "souls" — these are the distant (i.e., non-kin); "the dead" — these are kin; "for his (the high-priest's) father and his mother" — For his father and his mother he does not become tamei, but he does become tamei for a meth-mitzvah. (Bamidbar 6:7) "for his brother": If he were a high-priest or a Nazirite, he may not become tamei, but he does become tamei for a meth-mitzvah. "and for his sister": What is the intent of this? If one (an ordinary Cohein) were going to slaughter his Paschal lamb or to circumcise his son, and he hears that one of his kin had died, I might think that he should become tamei for them; it is, therefore, written (Ibid.) "he shall not become tamei." I might think that he should (also) not become tamei for a meth-mitzvah; it is, therefore, written "and for his sister" — He does not become tamei for his sister, but he does become tamei for a meth-mitzvah. But (a verse) is not needed for his (young) son and daughter; for minors cannot become Nazirites. "he shall not become tamei for them in their death": In their death he does not become tamei for them, but he does become tamei for them in their leprous or zivah (genital discharge) state. This tells me only of a Nazirite. Whence do I derive (the same for) a high-priest? It is written in respect to a high-priest (Vayikra 21:11) "for his mother (he shall not) become tamei." This is superfluous, for I can derive it a fortiori, viz.: If in an instance where an ordinary Cohein may become tamei for his father's brother, a high-priest may not become tamei for his father, then in an instance where an ordinary Cohein may not become tamei for his father's brother, how much more so may a high-priest not become tamei for his father! If I can derive it, then, a fortiori, why is the verse "for his mother, etc." needed in respect to a high-priest? It is "extra," to the end of formulating an identity (gezeirah shavah ), viz.: It is written "his mother" here (in respect to a high-priest), and it is written "his mother" elsewhere (in respect to a Nazirite). Just as there he does become tamei (for them) in their leprous or zivah state, so, here. Variantly: "He shall not become tamei for them in their death": In their death he may not become tamei for them, but he may stand at their eulogy and in the mourner's row. (Bamidbar, Ibid.) "for the crown of his G-d is on his head": whether or not he has hair. These are the words of R. Yonathan.

Rav Naḥman began: “Oh, Ariel, Ariel” (Isaiah 29:1) – lion, mighty lion.¹¹⁰He understands the term Ariel to mean mighty lion [ari el]. “The city where David encamped” (Isaiah 29:1) – the city in which David encamped, a city in which no one other than David encamped,¹¹¹The city became the everlasting capital city of the Davidic kingdom. the city that David made his royal fortress. “Add year to year, festivals [ḥagim] will come around [yinkofu]” (Isaiah 29:1) – a year began and a year departed, but they did not ascend on the pilgrimage festivals. The roads were growing thorn bushes [higim]. That is what is written: “Ḥagim yinkofu.”¹¹²Ḥagim yinkofu is expounded to mean that travelers would have to remove the thorns [yinkofu higim]. “I will distress Ariel” (Isaiah 29:2) – Rabbi Nisa of Caesarea said: From here, that it had been a place of contentment for Israel. “There will be mourning and moaning” (Isaiah 29:2) – mortification upon mortification. “It will be for Me like Ariel” (Isaiah 29:2) – the second destruction will be like the first destruction. When they sinned they were exiled. When they were exiled, Jeremiah began lamenting over them, eikha.

(Exodus 22:27) "Elokim you shall not curse": What is the intent of this? From (Leviticus 24:16) "One who utters blasphemously the name of the L rd shall be put to death" we hear the punishment. Whence the exhortation? "Elokim you shall not curse." Variantly: This tells me only of the distinctive Name (the Tetragrammaton [i.e., "Yod-keh-vov-keh"]). Whence do we derive (the same for cursing Him with) one of His epithets? From "Elokim you shall not curse" — in any event. These are the words of R. Yishmael. R. Akiva says: Scripture (in "elohim") speaks of judges, as in (Exodus 22:8) "Until the judges ("elohim") shall come the matter of both."

Rabbi Pinḥas began: “If after these you will not heed Me…” (Leviticus 26:18). Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua: Rabbi Eliezer says: The Holy One blessed be He does not bring punishment upon Israel until He first warns them. That is what is written: “If after these.” Rabbi Yehoshua says: So Israel would not say: The blows have ceased; He has no others to bring upon us, the verse states: “If after these [ad],” if there are more [od] of these, He has other [punishments] and more like these to bring [upon you]. “I will punish you further, seven ways for your sins” (Leviticus 26:18) – You violated seven transgressions before Me; come and accept upon yourselves seven punishments. You violated seven transgressions before Me, so Jeremiah comes to recite lamentations over you which are seven alphabetic [acrostics], eikha.¹¹³The book of Lamentations contains three alphabetical acrostics, in chapters 1,2, and 4, each beginning with the word eikha. Additionally, chapter 3 contains a triple alphabetical acrostic. Chapter 5 is not written in an acrostic, but since it has twenty-two verses, which are the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet, the midrash refers to this too as alphabetical in the sense that it corresponds to the number of letters in the alphabet (Matnot Kehuna).

[(Numb. 4:18:) DO NOT CUT OFF.] Let our master instruct us: In the case of one who commits a transgression punishable with excision according to the Torah, how do they receive pardon <and> become freed from their excision?¹⁴³Tanh., Numb. 1:23; see Numb. R. 5:4. Thus have our masters taught (in Mak. 3:15): ALL WHO ARE LIABLE TO EXCISION, WHEN THEY HAVE BEEN SCOURGED, ARE EXEMPT FROM THEIR EXCISION, AS STATED (in Deut. 25:2-3): THEN THE JUDGE SHALL HAVE HIM LIE DOWN…. HE MAY GIVE HIM FORTY LASHES BUT NO MORE…; THEN YOUR BROTHER WOULD BE DEGRADED. WHEN HE HAS BEEN SCOURGED, THEN HE IS <AGAIN> YOUR BROTHER. And why forty lashes? It is simply that, because this adam was forty days in creation¹⁴⁴The Rabbis believed that the fetus takes forty days to develop into a human shape. See Nid. 3:7; Ber. 60a; Men. 99b; also Philo, Quaestiones, Gen. 1:25. and transgressed against the Torah, which was forty days in the giving, he will be given forty lashes and be exempt from his punishment (i.e., from excision). And so you find in the case of the first Adam. When he was commanded and told (in Gen. 2:17): BUT FROM THE TREE OF THE KNOWLEDGE [OF GOOD AND EVIL YOU SHALL NOT EAT …], he incurred the sentence of death; and the world was scourged with forty punishments: ten for Adam, ten for Eve, ten for the serpent, ten for the land. Therefore, when a person commits one of the transgressions <punishable by death>, he is scourged with forty lashes. And so you find with each and every thing that the Holy One commanded Moses, < there were> warnings and punishments. It is written concerning the Sabbath (Exod. 20:8): REMEMBER THE SABBATH DAY, as a warning; and as a punishment (there is Exod. 31:14): WHOEVER PROFANES IT SHALL SURELY BE PUT TO DEATH. They came to the desert and (according to Numb. 15:32) found one gathering <wood on the Sabbath>, but Moses did not know by what death he should be killed. However, {(according to Lev. 24:12) THEY LEFT HIM IN CUSTODY <WHILE WAITING> FOR A CLARIFICATION TO THEM FROM THE MOUTH OF THE LORD.} [(according to Numb. 15:34) AND THEY LEFT HIM IN CUSTODY <BECAUSE IT WAS NOT CLEAR WHAT SHOULD BE DONE TO HIM.>] The Holy One said (in vs. 35): THE PERSON SHALL SURELY BE PUT TO DEATH; <ALL THE CONGREGATION> SHALL STONE HIM WITH STONES <OUTSIDE OF THE CAMP>. Immediately Moses rose in prayer and said: Sovereign of the World, if someone from Israel should so sin, should he <really> be stoned? Behold, <Israel> would be destroyed. Make <another> arrangement for them. He said to him: Let them be scourged with forty lashes, and they will be exempt from excision. Similarly when the children of Aaron died, the tribe of Kohath saw them. They began yelling at Moses, saying: Are we to die like that? The Holy One said to Moses: Just as I have made an <alternate> arrangement for Aaron, as stated (in 16:3): <ONLY> IN THIS WAY SHALL AARON COME <INTO THE SANCTUARY>: …; so also for the Kohathite families I am making a similar arrangement, lest they die when they come unto the Holy of Holies. (Numb. 4:19): DO THIS FOR THEM (i.e., for the Kohathites) THAT THEY MAY LIVE AND NOT DIE…. Where is it shown? From what they read on the matter (in Numb. 4:18): DO NOT CUT OFF THE TRIBE OF THE KOHATHITE FAMILIES <FROM THE LEVITES>.

The sin offering (Lev. 6:17-23; Zev. 5:3),
The guilt offering (Lev. 5:14-16, 20-26; 19:20-22; Zev. 5:5),
The community peace sacrifices (Lev. 23:19-20; Zev. 5:5),
The sin offering of a fowl (Lev. 5:8),
The guilt offering for a doubtful sin (Lev. 5:17-19; Zev. 5:5),
The leper's log of oil (Lev. 14:12),
The two loaves (Lev. 23:17),
The shewbread (Exod. 25:30; Lev. 24:5-9),
The remnant of the omer (Lev. 23:10-12; Men. 10:4), and
The remainder of the meal offering (Lev. 2:3).

Rabbi Yehuda opened in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi, "'Listen my son and take my words' (Proverbs 4:10). Many takings have I commanded you in order to give you merit. I said to you (Numbers 19:2), 'and you will take to you a pure red cow.' [Was it] maybe for My sake? But rather it was for your sake, to purify you, as it is written (Numbers 19:19), 'And the pure one will sprinkle on the impure one.' I said to you (Exodus 25:2), 'and they shall take an offering for Me' in order that I will dwell among you: 'And make for Me a sanctuary' (Ibid., verse 8). As if it were possible, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, 'take Me and I will dwell among you' - it does not say, 'and they shall take an offering,' but rather, 'and they shall take (for) Me:' they are taking Me. I said to you (Leviticus 24:2), 'and they shall take to you pure olive oil.' And do I need your light - behold, it is written (Daniel 2:22), 'and light dwells with Him?' But rather to give you merit and to atone for your souls which is compared to a candle, as it is stated (Proverbs 20:27), 'The candle of God is the soul of a man, it searches all of the chambers of the innards.' And now that I have said to you, 'And you shall take for yourselves on the first day,' it is to give you merit, so that I will bring down the rain for you. Hence Moshe warned Israel, 'And you shall take for yourselves on the first day.'"

[(Lev. 24:10:) NOW THERE WENT OUT THE SON OF AN ISRAELITE WOMAN. From where did he go out?¹¹⁸Tanh., Lev. 8:23; Lev. R. 32:3. R. Levi says: He went out from his world, just as it is stated (in I Sam. 17:4): AND THERE WENT OUT A CHAMPION.¹¹⁹I.e., Goliath, who was about to leave this world. R. Berekhyah said: He went out (i.e., became excluded from Israel) because of (literally: from) the preceding parashah, where it is written (in Lev. 24:5): THEN YOU SHALL TAKE FINE FLOUR AND BAKE IT INTO TWELVE LOAVES. He said: It is customary for the king to eat warm bread. Would < he eat it > cold? It is like that which we learn there (in the latter part of Men. 11:9): THE SHEWBREAD WAS EATEN NO EARLIER THAN THE NINTH DAY < AFTER BAKING > AND NO LATER THAN THE ELEVENTH DAY. HOW SO? IT WAS BAKED ON THE EVE OF THE SABBATH AND EATEN ON THE SABBATH < OF THE FOLLOWING WEEK, I.E., > ON THE NINTH DAY. < IF > A HOLIDAY HAPPENED TO FALL ON THE EVE OF THE SABBATH, IT WAS EATEN ON THE TENTH. < IN THE CASE OF > THE TWO-DAY HOLIDAY OF THE NEW YEAR, IT WAS EATEN ON THE ELEVENTH, FOR < THE BAKING > OVERRIDES NEITHER THE SABBATH NOR A HOLIDAY. R. SIMEON B. GAMALIEL SAYS IN THE NAME OF {RABBI} SIMEON THE SON OF THE SAGAN: < THE BAKING > OVERRIDES A HOLIDAY BUT DOES NOT OVERRIDE THE FAST DAY.¹²⁰The Day of Atonement. (According the first part of Men. 11:9) THE TWO LOAVES OF BREAD < OFFERED AT PENTECOST > WERE EATEN NO EARLIER THAN THE SECOND DAY AND NO LATER THAN THE THIRD. HOW SO? THEY WERE BAKED ON THE EVE OF THE FESTIVAL < OF WEEKS AND > EATEN ON THE FESTIVAL, < I.E., > ON THE SECOND DAY. IF THE FESTIVAL HAPPENED TO FALL ON THE DAY AFTER THE SABBATH, THEY WERE EATEN ON THE THIRD DAY.]

"Command the Children of Israel and they shall take olive oil to you, etc." (Leviticus 24:2). This is [the understating of] "Your charity O God is until the heavens." Rabbi Ami asked Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachman: He said to him, "Because I have heard about you that you are a master of aggadah (homiletics), what is [the understanding of] 'Your charity O God is until the heavens' (Psalms 71:19)?" He said to him, "Just as the lower beings require charity one from the other, so [too] do the upper beings require charity from one another." This is [the understanding of] that which is written (Ezekiel 71:18), "He spoke to the man clothed in linen, etc." And all of [this] opening is [found] in the beginning of Parshat Emor el Hakohanim. "Who has done great things" (Psalms 71:19) - these are [referring to] the two great luminaries, as it is stated (Genesis 1:16), "the two great luminaries." "O God, who is like You" (Psalms 71:19) - Who is like You among the upper beings and who is like You among the lower beings? Who is like You, that You suppress Your attribute of (strict) justice. You give light to the upper beings and to the lower beings; You give light to all who come to the world. And [yet] You desire the light of Israel. This is [the understanding of] that which is written (Leviticus 24:2), "Command the Children of Israel."

[(Lev. 24:10:) NOW THERE WENT OUT THE SON OF AN ISRAELITE WOMAN. From where did he go out?¹¹⁸Tanh., Lev. 8:23; Lev. R. 32:3. R. Levi says: He went out from his world, just as it is stated (in I Sam. 17:4): AND THERE WENT OUT A CHAMPION.¹¹⁹I.e., Goliath, who was about to leave this world. R. Berekhyah said: He went out (i.e., became excluded from Israel) because of (literally: from) the preceding parashah, where it is written (in Lev. 24:5): THEN YOU SHALL TAKE FINE FLOUR AND BAKE IT INTO TWELVE LOAVES. He said: It is customary for the king to eat warm bread. Would < he eat it > cold? It is like that which we learn there (in the latter part of Men. 11:9): THE SHEWBREAD WAS EATEN NO EARLIER THAN THE NINTH DAY < AFTER BAKING > AND NO LATER THAN THE ELEVENTH DAY. HOW SO? IT WAS BAKED ON THE EVE OF THE SABBATH AND EATEN ON THE SABBATH < OF THE FOLLOWING WEEK, I.E., > ON THE NINTH DAY. < IF > A HOLIDAY HAPPENED TO FALL ON THE EVE OF THE SABBATH, IT WAS EATEN ON THE TENTH. < IN THE CASE OF > THE TWO-DAY HOLIDAY OF THE NEW YEAR, IT WAS EATEN ON THE ELEVENTH, FOR < THE BAKING > OVERRIDES NEITHER THE SABBATH NOR A HOLIDAY. R. SIMEON B. GAMALIEL SAYS IN THE NAME OF {RABBI} SIMEON THE SON OF THE SAGAN: < THE BAKING > OVERRIDES A HOLIDAY BUT DOES NOT OVERRIDE THE FAST DAY.¹²⁰The Day of Atonement. (According the first part of Men. 11:9) THE TWO LOAVES OF BREAD < OFFERED AT PENTECOST > WERE EATEN NO EARLIER THAN THE SECOND DAY AND NO LATER THAN THE THIRD. HOW SO? THEY WERE BAKED ON THE EVE OF THE FESTIVAL < OF WEEKS AND > EATEN ON THE FESTIVAL, < I.E., > ON THE SECOND DAY. IF THE FESTIVAL HAPPENED TO FALL ON THE DAY AFTER THE SABBATH, THEY WERE EATEN ON THE THIRD DAY.]

"Command the Children of Israel" (Leviticus 24:2). This is [the understanding of] that which is written (Job 4:15), "You would call and I would answer You," as you would say (Isaiah 58:9), "Then, when you call, the Lord will answer." "You would long for your handiwork" (Job 4:15) - Your soul desires the work of Your hands, as you would say (Genesis 31:1), "because you were longing." Job said in front of the Holy One, blessed be He, "Master of the world, the higher beings and the lower beings are in Your control, and [yet] You long for the work of Your hands? Rather, oversee the work of Your hands. This is [the understanding of] "Command the Children of Israel" (Leviticus 24:2).

Another interpretation of "Command the Children of Israel" (Leviticus 24:2): Bar Kapparah opened [his discourse]: "It is You who light my lamp" (Psalms 18:29) - the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Adam, "Your light is in My hands and My light is in your hands." Your light is in My hands, as it is stated (Proverbs 20:27), "The lamp of the Lord is the soul of man"; and My light is in your hands, as it is stated (Leviticus 24:2), "to light a continual lamp." Rather, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, "If you light My lamp, I will certainly light your lamp." This is [the understanding of] "Command the Children of Israel" (Leviticus 24:2). This is [the understanding of] that which is written (Song of Songs 7:6), "Your head (roshekha) upon you is like crimson wool (karmel), the locks of your head are like purple" - the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, "The poor (rashim) among you are as beloved to Me as Eliyahu, when he went up to [Mount] Carmel." This is [the understanding of] "and Elijah climbed to the top of Mount Carmel, crouched on the ground, and put his face between his knees." And why did he put his face between his knees? He said, "Master of the world, if we do not have any merit, look to the covenant of circumcision." "The locks (dalat) of your head are like purple" (Song of Songs 7:6) - the Holy One, blessed be He, said, "The indigent (dalim) among you are beloved to me like David, as it is stated (Zechariah 12:8), 'and the feeblest of them shall be in that day like David.'" And some say, "Like Daniel, as it is stated (Daniel 5:29), 'they clothed Daniel in purple.'" "A king is held captive in the tresses (rehatim)" (Song of Songs 7:6) - the Holy One, blessed be He, bound Himself with an oath that he has His Divine Presence dwell within the boards (rehitin) of Yaakov our father. In whose merit? Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said, "In the merit of Avraham our father, as it is written (Genesis 30:38), 'And Avraham ran (which in Aramaic is rahat) to the cattle.'" Rabbi Levi said, "In the merit of Yaakov, as it is written (Geneis 30:38), 'The rods that he had peeled he set up in the troughs (rehatim).'" Rabbi Berakhiah said, "'A king is held captive in the tresses'" - that is [referring to] Moshe. For about him is it written (Deuteronomy 33:5), 'And he was a king in Yeshurun'; 'in the tresses (rehatim),' as the Holy One, blessed be He, decreed upon him that he would not enter the land. Because of [what]? Because of the troughs of the Waters of Merivah. This is [the understanding of] that which is written (Numbers 20:13) 'These are the waters of Meribah upon which the Children of Israel quarreled.'" Rabbi Yehudah [said], "They compared this to a parable: To what is this thing similar? To a king that made a decree and said, 'Anyone who plucks and eats fruits of the seventh-year [that are forbidden] will be placed upon the [town] platform.' A women of noble lineage came and plucked and ate from fruits of the seventh-year. [So] they began to place her on the platform. She was [then] yelling out, 'I plead with you, my master the king, hang these unripe figs from my neck so that the creatures do not say, "It appears to us that there is a matter of licentiousness or a matter of sorcery with her." Rather from that which they see the unripe figs on my neck, they will know that I am placed [here] on account of them.' So did Moshe say in front of the Holy One, blessed be He. 'Master of the world, write in Your Torah why I am not entering the Land, so that Israel will not say, "It appears to us that Moshe forged the Torah or said something that he was not commanded."' The Holy One, blessed be He, said, 'By your life, I shall write that it was only for the water.'" This is [the understanding of] that which is written (Numbers 27:14), "as you rebelled against My [word] in the Wilderness of Tsin." Rabbi Shimon [said], "They compared this to a parable: To what is this thing similar? To a king, when the king was on the road and his son was with him in a carriage. When they reached a narrow place, the carriage overturned on his son. His eye was blinded, his hand was cut off [and] his foot was broken. When the king would reach that place, he would remember and say, 'His eye was blinded here; his hand was cut off here, his foot was broken here.' So [too] the Holy One, blessed be He, mentions the Waters of Merivah three times in His Torah, meaning to say, 'I killed Moshe here; I killled Aharon here; I killed Miriam here.'" This is [the understanding of] that which is written (Psalms 141: 6), "May their judges slip on the rock, but let my words be heard, for they are sweet." Rav Nachman said, "'A king' - that is [referring to] Moshe, as it is written (Deuteronomy 33:5), 'And he was a king in Yeshurun.' The Holy One, blessed be He, said 'I have appointed you king over Israel. The way of a king is to decree and others observe [his decree]. So [too] shall you decree and Israel observe [it].'" This is [the understanding of] that which is written, "Command the Children of Israel" (Leviticus 24:2).

Rabbi Yehoshua of Sakhnin said in the name of Rabbi Acha, "'One wise man prevailed over a city of warriors (giborim)" (Proverbs 21:22) - it is written gevarim (men), as they were all men and there is no female among them (hence referring to angels that do not reproduce). 'One wise man prevailed' - this is [referring to] Moshe, as it is stated (Exodus 19:3), 'and Moshe ascended to God.'" "And brought down its certain stronghold" (Proverbs 21:22) - Rabbi Yehudah, Rabbi Nechemiah and the Rabbis [differed about this]: Rabbi Yehudah said, "'Stronghold' - that is [a reference to] Torah; 'certain,' as it was the certainty of the angels, since they reasoned the Torah would be given to them; until the Holy One, blessed be He, said to them (Job 28:13), 'It cannot be found in the land of the living.'" And Rabbi Nechemiah said, "'Stronghold' - that is [a reference to] Torah; 'certain,' as its protection is [found] in it and the giving of its reward is on its side (an extra benefit)." And the Rabbis said, "'Stronghold' - that is [a reference to] Torah; 'certain,' as anyone who toils in it is certain that he shall decree and others shall observe [it]. So did the Holy On, blessed be He, say to Moshe, 'You have toiled much in Torah. Rather, you shall decree and Israel will observe [it].'" This is [the understanding of] that which is written, "Command the Children of Israel" (Leviticus 24:2).

Another interpretation of "Command the Children of Israel" (Leviticus 24:2). Rabbi (Yehudah Hanassi) and the Rabbis [differed about this]. Rabbi said, "One Scripture states (Job 25:3), 'Can His troops be numbered'; but another Scripture states (Daniel 7:10), 'Thousands upon thousands served Him'; and a [third] Scripture states (Pslams 68:18), 'God’s chariots are myriads upon myriads, thousands upon thousands; the Lord is among them as in Sinai in holiness.' Rather this is surely the number of one troop, but [all of] his troops are without number." And the Rabbis say, "One Scripture states (Job 25:3), 'Can His troops be numbered'; but another Scripture states (Daniel 7:10), 'Thousands upon thousands served Him.' Rather until the Temple was destroyed, the lauding of the Holy One blessed be He, would go up complete; once the Temple was destroyed, the Holy One blessed be He - as if it were possible - reduced His entourage. And the Holy One, blessed be He, said, 'It is not appropriate that My lauding would rise as it rose [before].'" "On whom does His light not shine" (Job 25:3) - Who of all those who come to the world can say, "The sun did not give me light during the day and the moon did not give light during the night." You give light for the upper beings and the lower beings. This is [the understanding of] that which is written, "Command the Children of Israel" (Leviticus 24:2).

Rav said, "At the time that the spheres of the sun and the moon enter to get permission from in front of the Holy One, blessed be He, their eyes are dimmed from the radiance of the Divine Presence. Then they request to go out to give light to the world, but they do not see anything. So what does the Holy One, blessed be He, do for them? He shoots arrows in front of them and they go by their light." This is [the understanding of] that which is written (Habakkuk 3:11), "Sun [and] moon stand still on high as Your arrows fly in brightness, Your flashing spear in brilliance"; and it is written (Joel 2:10) "Sun and moon are darkened, and stars withdraw their brightness." Rabbi Hoshaya the son of Rabbi Simlai of Caesarea said in the name of Rabbi Yitschak bar Zeira, "The sun never sets until it becomes like a type of mustard seed of blood." What is the reason? "[The sun] is like a groom coming forth from the chamber, like a hero, eager to run his course (orach)." And a path is only that of women, like you would say (Genesis 18:11), "Sarah had stopped having the way (orach) of women." Rabbi Levi said, "Each and every day, the Holy One, blessed be He, sits in judgement over the spheres of the sun and the moon, as they request not to go out to give light to the world. What do they say? 'The creatures prosecute us, the creatures bow down to us.'" Rabbi Yosta bar Shunam said, "What does the Holy One, blessed be He, do to them? He sits over them in judgement and they always go out and give light against their will." This is [the understanding of] that which is written (Zephaniah 3:5) "He issues judgment every morning, as unfailing as the light." What is [the understanding of] unfailing? Not ceasing. "The wrongdoer knows no shame" (Zephaniah 3:5). They are not embarrassed, but rather bow down to them - they see them eclipsed and they are not embarrassed.This is [the understanding of] that which is written (Leviticus 24:2), "and they shall take olive oil to you."

Rabbi Chiya taught, "'Olive oil,' and not sesame oil, nut oil, radish oil or almond oil. But rather olive oil, from your olive tree." Rabbi Avin said, "[There is a relevant] parable about a king whose legions had revolted against him, but one of his legions had not revolted against him. The king said, 'I will make dukes, governors and generals from that legion that did not rebel against me.' So [too] did the Holy One, blessed be He, say, 'This olive tree brought light to the world in the days of Noach.'" This is [the understanding of] that which is written (Genesis 8:11), "The dove came back to him toward evening, and there in its bill was a plucked-off (taraf) olive leaf! What s [the understanding of] taraf? Killed, as you would say (Genesis 37:33), "Yosef was surely torn apart (taraf.)" Rabbi Berakhiah said, "If it had not killed it, it would have made a large tree." And from where did [the dove] bring it? Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said, "It brought it from the Mount of Olives." Rabbi Levi said, "It brought it from the branches of the Land of Israel." This is [the understanding of] what they say, "The Land of Israel was not struck by the waters of the flood." This is what the Holy One, blessed be He, said to it through Yechezkel (Ezekiel 22:24), "O mortal, say to her, 'You are an uncleansed land, not washed [by rain on the day of fury.]'" Rabbi Yochanan said, "Even the lower wheels of mills were dissolved by the waters (of the flood)." Rabbi Berakhiah said, "The gates of the Garden of Even opened for it, and it brought it from there." Rabbi Eyebu said to him, "If it brought it from the Garden of Eden, did it not have something better to bring, such as cinnamon or balsam? Rather it hinted a hint to him and said to him, 'My master, Noach, [better something] more bitter than this from the hand of the Holy One, blessed be He, [than something] sweet from your hand!'"

"He shall set it up in the tent of meeting outside the curtain of the pact" (Leviticus 24:3). Rabbi Elazar said, "In the merit of, 'set up,' they were saved from 'It has been set up for a long time' (Isaiah 30:33)." Rabbi Chanin said, "In the merit of the perpetual light, you have merited to receive the face of the lamp of the King Messiah." What is the reason? "There I will make a horn sprout for David; I have prepared a lamp for My anointed one" (Psalms 132:17); and it states (Psalms 122:1), "I rejoiced when they said to me, 'We are going to the House of the Lord.'"

"He shall set it up in the tent of meeting outside the curtain of the pact" (Leviticus 24:3). Rabbi Elazar said, "In the merit of, 'set up,' they were saved from 'It has been set up for a long time' (Isaiah 30:33)." Rabbi Chanin said, "In the merit of the perpetual light, you have merited to receive the face of the lamp of the King Messiah." What is the reason? "There I will make a horn sprout for David; I have prepared a lamp for My anointed one" (Psalms 132:17); and it states (Psalms 122:1), "I rejoiced when they said to me, 'We are going to the House of the Lord.'"

"He shall set it up in the tent of meeting outside the curtain of the pact" (Leviticus 24:3). Rabbi Elazar said, "In the merit of, 'set up,' they were saved from 'It has been set up for a long time' (Isaiah 30:33)." Rabbi Chanin said, "In the merit of the perpetual light, you have merited to receive the face of the lamp of the King Messiah." What is the reason? "There I will make a horn sprout for David; I have prepared a lamp for My anointed one" (Psalms 132:17); and it states (Psalms 122:1), "I rejoiced when they said to me, 'We are going to the House of the Lord.'"

(Lev. 24:10:) NOW THERE WENT OUT THE SON OF AN ISRAELITE WOMAN, < WHOSE FATHER WAS EGYPTIAN >. From where did he go out? R. Hiyya bar Abba said: he went out (i.e., became excluded from Israel) because of (literally: from) the parashah on genealogies.¹²¹Tanh., Lev. 8:24; Lev. R. 32:3; Sifra to Lev. 14:10 (242: Emor, parashah 14). When he came to pitch his tent in the camp of Dan, they rejected him. Now they said to him: You have an Egyptian father, but it is written (in Numb. 2:2): < THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL SHALL CAMP, > EACH WITH HIS STANDARD, UNDER THE BANNERS OF THEIR FATHERS' HOUSES, and not of their mothers' houses. [Immediately,] (according to Lev. 24:11) he began to utter the Name and curse it. R. Levi said: He was a bastard. How so? Taskmasters were from Egypt, and the officers were from Israel.¹²²Exod. R. 1:28; Lev. R. 32:4. The taskmaster was in charge of ten officers, and the officer < was in charge > of ten Israelites. < Thus, > it turned out that the taskmaster was in charge of a hundred {and ten} Israelites. On one occasion a taskmaster met an officer. He said to him: Go gather your groups of ten. When he had gone, he entered his house and seduced Shelomith, the officer's wife. < When > her husband returned, he found him leaving his house. When < the taskmaster > knew that < her husband > noticed him, he beat him every day. The Holy Spirit was kindled in Moses. He raised his eyes to the sky. He said: Was it not enough for this wicked man to rape his wife, but that he should return and beat him? Immediately (according to Exod. 2:12) HE SMOTE THE EGYPTIAN AND HID HIM IN THE SAND. The Holy One said: In this world you are delivered through sins into the hands of the nations of the world. However, in the world to come (according to Is. 49:23): KINGS SHALL BE YOUR GUARDIANS; THEIR LADIES, YOUR WET NURSES; [THEY SHALL BOW DOWN BEFORE YOU, NOSE TO THE GROUND, AND LICK THE DUST OF YOUR FEET. THEN YOU SHALL KNOW THAT I AM THE LORD. THOSE WHO TRUST ME SHALL NOT BE ASHAMED.]

(Lev. 24:10:) NOW THERE WENT OUT THE SON OF AN ISRAELITE WOMAN, < WHOSE FATHER WAS EGYPTIAN >. From where did he go out? R. Hiyya bar Abba said: he went out (i.e., became excluded from Israel) because of (literally: from) the parashah on genealogies.¹²¹Tanh., Lev. 8:24; Lev. R. 32:3; Sifra to Lev. 14:10 (242: Emor, parashah 14). When he came to pitch his tent in the camp of Dan, they rejected him. Now they said to him: You have an Egyptian father, but it is written (in Numb. 2:2): < THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL SHALL CAMP, > EACH WITH HIS STANDARD, UNDER THE BANNERS OF THEIR FATHERS' HOUSES, and not of their mothers' houses. [Immediately,] (according to Lev. 24:11) he began to utter the Name and curse it. R. Levi said: He was a bastard. How so? Taskmasters were from Egypt, and the officers were from Israel.¹²²Exod. R. 1:28; Lev. R. 32:4. The taskmaster was in charge of ten officers, and the officer < was in charge > of ten Israelites. < Thus, > it turned out that the taskmaster was in charge of a hundred {and ten} Israelites. On one occasion a taskmaster met an officer. He said to him: Go gather your groups of ten. When he had gone, he entered his house and seduced Shelomith, the officer's wife. < When > her husband returned, he found him leaving his house. When < the taskmaster > knew that < her husband > noticed him, he beat him every day. The Holy Spirit was kindled in Moses. He raised his eyes to the sky. He said: Was it not enough for this wicked man to rape his wife, but that he should return and beat him? Immediately (according to Exod. 2:12) HE SMOTE THE EGYPTIAN AND HID HIM IN THE SAND. The Holy One said: In this world you are delivered through sins into the hands of the nations of the world. However, in the world to come (according to Is. 49:23): KINGS SHALL BE YOUR GUARDIANS; THEIR LADIES, YOUR WET NURSES; [THEY SHALL BOW DOWN BEFORE YOU, NOSE TO THE GROUND, AND LICK THE DUST OF YOUR FEET. THEN YOU SHALL KNOW THAT I AM THE LORD. THOSE WHO TRUST ME SHALL NOT BE ASHAMED.]

... And the son of an Israelite woman came out — From where did he go out? [Surely not from the camp, since the text “and a fight broke out in the camp”] Rabbi Levi said, “He went out from his eternal life (עולמו; R. Levi connects ויצא with the last word of v. 8: the everlasting covenant, ברית עולם - ie, by his blasphemy he lost his eternal life). R. Berachya said: “he came out (יצא) (with an argument) from the above section. He said: it is written 'You shall take choice flour and bake of it twelve loaves [...every Shabbat] (Lev. 24:5-9)'. Surely it is the way of a king to eat warm bread every day; is it perhaps His way to eat bread that has been cold for nine days?! [technical explanation from the Tanchuma] Rabbi Chyia taught: “he came out (יצא) (with an argument) from the section regarding family connections. He had gone to pitch his tent in the camp of the tribe of Dan. They told him: "what [claim] do you have to pitch your tent in the camp of Dan?" He replied: "I am from one of the daughters of the tribe of Dan". They said to him: "It is written (Numbers 2:2) 'Every man [of the children of Israel shall encamp] by his own standard, that bears the signs of their father's house' - and not the mother's!" He went in to the judicial court of Moses to have the matter decided and came out (יצא) declared to be in the wrong. He then stood up and blasphemed.

... And the son of an Israelite woman came out — From where did he go out? [Surely not from the camp, since the text “and a fight broke out in the camp”] Rabbi Levi said, “He went out from his eternal life (עולמו; R. Levi connects ויצא with the last word of v. 8: the everlasting covenant, ברית עולם - ie, by his blasphemy he lost his eternal life). R. Berachya said: “he came out (יצא) (with an argument) from the above section. He said: it is written 'You shall take choice flour and bake of it twelve loaves [...every Shabbat] (Lev. 24:5-9)'. Surely it is the way of a king to eat warm bread every day; is it perhaps His way to eat bread that has been cold for nine days?! [technical explanation from the Tanchuma] Rabbi Chyia taught: “he came out (יצא) (with an argument) from the section regarding family connections. He had gone to pitch his tent in the camp of the tribe of Dan. They told him: "what [claim] do you have to pitch your tent in the camp of Dan?" He replied: "I am from one of the daughters of the tribe of Dan". They said to him: "It is written (Numbers 2:2) 'Every man [of the children of Israel shall encamp] by his own standard, that bears the signs of their father's house' - and not the mother's!" He went in to the judicial court of Moses to have the matter decided and came out (יצא) declared to be in the wrong. He then stood up and blasphemed.

Rabbi Hun stated in the name of Bar Kappara: Israel were redeemed from Egypt on account of four things; because they did not change their names, they did not change their language, they did not go tale-bearing, and none of them was found to have been immoral. 'They did not change their name', having gone down as Reuben and Simeon, and having come up as Reuben and Simeon. They did not call Reuben 'Rufus' nor Judah 'Leon', nor Joseph 'Lestes', nor Benjamin 'Alexander'. 'They did not change their language', as may be inferred from the fact that it is written elsewhere, 'And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew' (Genesis 14:13), while here it is written, 'The God of the Hebrews has met with us' (Exodus 15:3), and it is written 'It is my mouth that speaks unto you' (Genesis 45:12), which means that he spoke in Hebrew.

Rabbi Hun stated in the name of Bar Kappara: Israel were redeemed from Egypt on account of four things; because they did not change their names, they did not change their language, they did not go tale-bearing, and none of them was found to have been immoral. 'They did not change their name', having gone down as Reuben and Simeon, and having come up as Reuben and Simeon. They did not call Reuben 'Rufus' nor Judah 'Leon', nor Joseph 'Lestes', nor Benjamin 'Alexander'. 'They did not change their language', as may be inferred from the fact that it is written elsewhere, 'And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew' (Genesis 14:13), while here it is written, 'The God of the Hebrews has met with us' (Exodus 15:3), and it is written 'It is my mouth that speaks unto you' (Genesis 45:12), which means that he spoke in Hebrew.

Another teaching about "A son of an Israelite woman went out" - Regarding that which is written "I returned and saw all of the oppression" (Kohelet 4:1), Daniel the Tailor interpreted the verse as referring to Mamzerim. "The tears of the oppressed", the fathers of these sinned, and these [the children] are shamed, how does it concern them? So too, this one's father committed incest, what is the child's sin, and how does it concern him? "And they have no comforter", rather "their oppressors are empowered", this refers to Israel's Great Sanhedrin, who comes at them with the power of Torah, and pushes them away in the name of "a mamzer will not enter the community of the Lord." (Devarim 23:3). "They have no comforter" - says the Holy Blessed One: it is upon me to comfort them; in this world they are cast aside, but in the future, as Zecharia said, "I see a people all of gold", as it is written (Zechariah 4:2) “I see a menorah all of gold, with a bowl [gulah] above it". Two speak; one says "an exile [gulah]" and one says "a redeemer [goalah]". According to the one who says exile, that they were exiled to Babylon and the Shechina was exiled with them, as it says (Isaiah 43:14) "For your sake I send to Babylon". And according to the one who says a redeemer [goalah], a redeemer [paroka], as it says (Isaiah 47:4 "Our redeemer, the LORD of Hosts is Their Name", and it is written (Micah 2:14) "One who makes a breach goes before them; they enlarge it to a gate... [and leave by it]. Their king marches before them, God at their heads".

Rabbi Joseph said: The Egyptians defiled the Israelites and their wives with them. Bedijah, the grandson of Dan, married a wife from his tribe, Shelomith, daughter of Dibri, and in that night the taskmasters of Pharaoh came in unto her, for they slew him and came in unto her, and she conceived and bare a son. In every case the offspring follows the (nature of) the seed: if it be sweet, it will be due to the sweet (seed); if it be bitter, it will be due to the bitter (seed). And when Israel went forth from Egypt, he began to blaspheme and revile the Name of the God of Israel, as it is said, "And the son of the Israelitish woman blasphemed the Name, and cursed" (Lev. 24:11).

What is the intent of this section? From (Shemot 25:37) "and he (the artificer) shall fashion its lamps so that it shall light across its face," I might think that all the lamps should light across all of the menorah (i.e., from all directions); it is, therefore, written (Bamidbar 8:2) "towards the face (the central shaft) shall the seven lamps light" — that the lamps parallel the menorah (the central lamp), and the menorah, the (other) lamps. How so? Three in the north, three in the south and one (the menorah) in the middle, so that all (of the lamps) are parallel to the middle — whence R. Nathan says: "The middle one is honored." "Speak to Aaron": Because the entire section deals with Aaron, the words are directed to him. "and say to him": This is an exhortation to Aaron. "Beha'alothecha (lit., "when you raise) the lamps": Make steps (ma'aloth) for it. "towards (mul) the face (panim) of the menorah": Make for it "mul" (the three on each side facing) "towards" and "face" (i.e., the central shaft). "shall the seven lamps light": I might think that they light forever; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 24:3) "from evening until morning." If "from evening until morning" (alone were written), I would think that this applied to all of them. It is, therefore, written (Ibid. 2) "to cause a lamp to light continuously" — This is the western lamp, which burned continuously and from which the menorah was kindled towards evening.

(Bamidbar 8:3) "And Aaron did so": This is in praise of Aaron. As Moses told him, thus did he do, without any change. He made "mul" and "panim" (see above). "He'elah" (lit., "he raised") its lamps" — whence they said: There was an ascent before the menorah of three steps on which the Cohein stood and tended to the lamps, (after which) he placed the oil jug on the second step and left. "as the L-rd had commanded Moses" (i.e., half a log for each lamp, etc.) This tells me only of Aaron (the high-priest). Whence do I derive the same for his sons (i.e., ordinary Cohanim)? From (Vayikra 24:3) "Aaron and his sons shall arrange it." This tells me only of the menorah, that the sons were equated with the father. Whence do I derive the same for the (offering of the) incense? (viz. Shemot 34:7) "It follows, viz.: "Service in the tent of meeting" is written in respect to the menorah, and it is also written in respect to the incense. If I have learned of the first that sons are equated with the father, so, do I learn with the second. — (No,) this is refuted by the service of Yom Kippur, in which instance, even though "service in the tent of meeting" is written in respect to it, the sons are not equated with the father. And this refutes (the argument for) incense, which, even though "service in the tent of meeting" is written thereof, we would not equate the sons with the father. — Would you say that? There is a (strategic) difference! "service in the tent of meeting in golden vestments" is written both in respect to the menorah and in respect to the incense, and this is not to be refuted by the service of Yom Kippur, which, even though "service in the tent of meeting" is written thereof, is not in golden (but in linen vestments). — This (argument) is refuted by the instance of the bullock of "forgetfulness" of the anointed (high-priest [viz. Vayikra 4:3]) whereof "service in the tent of meeting in golden vestments" is written, and in respect to which sons were not equated with the father. And this will refute (the argument for) incense, which even though "service in the tent of meeting in golden vestments" is written thereof, we would not equate the sons with the father. Would you say that? There is a difference! I would derive it from three terms together. In respect to the menorah it is written "service in the tent of meeting," and "golden vestments," and also "continuously" (tamid), and thus is it written of incense. And this is not to be refuted by the service of Yom Kippur, where, even though "service in the tent of meeting" is written thereof, it is not in golden vestments. Nor (is it to be refuted) by the bullock of forgetfulness of the anointed (high-priest), where, even though "service in the tent of meeting in golden vestments" is written thereof, "continuously" is not written thereof. I will learn a thing from a (similar) thing, and I will derive a thing from a (similar) thing. I will learn a thing from another thing which is similar to it in three ways, but not from a thing that is not similar to it in three things, but only in one or two. Therefore, if I have learned in respect to the menorah that sons are equated with the father, so, I will learn in respect to the incense that the sons are equated with the father.

(Devarim 13:11) "And you shall stone him with stones and he shall die": I might think, with many stones; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 24:23) "and they stoned him with a stone." If "with a stone," I would think with one stone! Say, then, if he did not die with the first, he is to be put to death with a second.

(Bamidbar 15:27) "And if one soul sin (the sin of idolatry) in error": Idolatry was in the category of all the mitzvoth — for which the individual brings a ewe-lamb or a she-goat; the leader (nassi), a he-goat; and the high-priest and beth-din, a bullock. And here (in respect to idolatry) Scripture removes them from their category, to have an individual, a Nassi, and the high-priest bring "a she-goat of the first year as a sin-offering" — for which reason this section was stated. You say that it speaks of idolatry, but perhaps it speaks of (any) one of all the mitzvoth written in the Torah! Would you say that? What is the subject under discussion? Idolatry! R. Yitzchak says: Scripture (here) speaks of idolatry. — But perhaps it speaks of (any) one of all the mitzvoth written in the Torah! — You reason as follows: The congregation was in the general category (of all of the mitzvoth, to bring a bullock), and (in respect to idolatry) its offerings were changed (to bring a bullock for a burnt-offering and a he-goat for a sin-offering.) And the individual was in the general category (of all the mitzvoth, etc.), and (in respect to idolatry) its offerings were changed, etc. Just as there (in respect to the congregation) Scripture speaks of idolatry; here, too, it is understood to be speaking of idolatry. "And if one soul sin (the sin of idolatry) in error": to exclude (from the offering) one who sins willfully (without witnesses or warning). For it would follow (otherwise), viz.: If "light" mitzvoth are liable (for an offering), willful (transgression) as unwitting, how much more the "grave" (transgression of idolatry)! It is, therefore, written "in error" — to exclude willful (transgression). "he shall bring a she-goat of the first year as a sin-offering." This is a prototype, viz.: Wherever "goat" is written, it must be of the first year. (Ibid. 28) "And the Cohein shall make atonement for the soul that is unwitting in sinning": It is the sins that he has done (willfully), which have caused him to err. "unwitting in sinning": to exclude unwittingness of (its being) idolatry, (e.g., mistaking a church for a synagogue and bowing down to it.) For it would follow (otherwise), viz.: If he is liable (to bring an offering) for unwitting transgression of other mitzvoth, how much more so for the "grave" transgression of idolatry! It is, therefore, written "unwitting in sinning," but not unwitting as to (its being) idolatry. "to atone for him": to exclude an instance of doubt (as to whether or not he had sinned). For it would follow (otherwise), viz.: If he must bring an offering for an instance of possible transgression of "light" mitzvoth, how much more so for an instance of possible transgression of idolatry (e.g., if there is a possibility of his having bowed down to an asheirah [a tree devoted to idolatry])! It is, therefore, written "And he shall atone" (implying that there has been a sin), to exclude (an instance of) doubt (as to whether a sin has been committed.) "and he shall be forgiven": absolute forgiveness, as with all of the other "forgivings" in the Torah, (even though the sin of idolatry [though unwitting] has been committed). (Ibid. 15:29) "The native-born among the children of Israel, etc." What is the intent of this? Because it is written (Vayikra 24:22) "All of the native-born in Israel shall sit in succoth," I might think that only Israelites are intended. Whence do I derive the same for proselytes? It is, therefore, written "the native-born among the children of Israel and for the stranger that sojourns among them." This is a prototype: wherever "native-born" is written, proselytes are also included. Variantly: What is the intent of "the native-born among the children of Israel"? For it would follow otherwise, viz.: Israelites are commanded against idolatry, and gentiles are commanded against idolatry. If I have learned that Israelites bring (an offering) for unwitting idolatry, so, gentiles should bring an offering for unwitting idolatry. It is, therefore, written "the native-born among the children of Israel": Israelites bring (an offering) for unwitting idolatry, but not gentiles. (Ibid.) "One Torah shall there be for you for him who acts unwittingly": for the individual, and for the Nassi, and for the high-priest. For I would think (otherwise), viz.: Since the congregation bring a bullock for (unwitting transgression of) all of the mitzvoth, and the high-priest brings a bullock for transgression of all of the mitzvoth, then if I have learned about the congregation that just as they bring a bullock for all of the mitzvoth, so, they bring a bullock for idolatry, then the high-priest, (too,) who brings a bullock for all of the mitzvoth, should bring a bullock for idolatry. And, furthermore, it follows a fortiori, viz.: If (in the Yom Kippur service), where the congregation does not bring a bullock, the high-priest does bring a bullock, then here, (in unwitting transgression of idolatry), where the congregation does bring a bullock, how much more so should the high-priest bring a bullock! It is, therefore, written "One Torah (a she-goat of the first year) shall there be for you": for the individual, and for the Nassi, and for the high-priest. "for him who acts unwittingly": R. Yehudah b. Betheira says: One who acts unwittingly (re idolatry) is (in principle) like one who serves idolatry, viz.: Just as serving idolatry is distinct in that it is an act in which deliberate transgression is punishable by kareth (cutting-off [viz. Vayikra 20:3]), and unwitting transgression, by a sin-offering (viz. Bamidbar 16:27) so, (the act of) all who act unwittingly, (in order to be liable to a sin-offering), must be an act where deliberate transgression is punishable by kareth and unwitting transgression by a sin-offering.

(Bamidbar 15:34) "And they placed him in ward": We are hereby apprised that all who are liable to krithuth ("cutting off") are put in ward (pending judgment). "for it was not made clear what should be done with him": But is it not written (Shemot 31:14) "He who profanes it shall be put to death"? What, then, is the intent of "For it was not made clear"? He did not know with what specific type of death until it was told to Him by the Holy One. (Ibid. 35) "And the L-rd said to Moses: Die, shall die the man": (i.e., this is the judgment) for all the generations (and not just in this particular instance.) "stone him with stones": in this particular instance. "the entire congregation": in the presence of the entire congregation. You say this, but perhaps it is to be understood literally (i.e., that the entire congregation is to stone him.) It is, therefore, written (Devarim 17:7) "The hand of the witnesses shall be against him first to put him to death." How, then, am I to understand "the entire congregation"? As in the presence of the entire congregation. (15:36) "And the entire congregation took him outside the camp": We are hereby taught that all those who are liable to the death penalty are put to death outside of beth-din. "And they stoned him with stones": One verse states "with stones," and another, (Vayikra 24:23) "with a stone." How are these two verses to be reconciled? The stoning site was two stories high. One of the witnesses pushes him on his thighs. If he turns over on his heart, he is turned over on his thighs. If he dies thereby, it is sufficient. If not, the second witness takes a stone and places it on his heart. If he dies thereby, it is sufficient. If not, all of Israel stone him with stones, in fulfillment of "the hand of the witnesses shall be against him first to put him to death, and the hand of all the people thereafter." There are thus reconciled "stone him with stones" and "and they stoned him with a stone." (Bamidbar, Ibid.) "as the L-rd commanded Moses": He said to them "Stone him," and they stoned him; "Hang him up," and they hung him up. But we have not (yet) heard that they were to hang him up (after he had been killed.) It is, therefore, written (Devarim 21:22) "If there be in a man a sin punishable by death, then he is to be put to death and you shall (thereafter) hang him on a tree." These are the words of R. Eliezer. R. Chidka said: Shimon Hashikmoni was a friend of mine, of the disciples of R. Akiva, and he said: Moses knew that the mekoshesh was to be put to death, but he did not know with which specific kind of death. It were fitting that the section of the mekoshesh be stated (entirely) through Moses but the mekoshesh, being liable had it stated through him. For "merit resolves itself through the meritorious, and liability through the liable."

(Bamidbar 28:5) "and a tenth of an ephah": one of ten in an ephah. "flour": of wheat. You say this, but perhaps it may be of barley, spelt, oats or shifon (a kind of spelt). It is, therefore, written (Shemot 29:2) "Of wheat flour shall you make them." Since "flours" are mentioned in the Torah unqualified, and in one instance it is specified that it must be wheat flour, so, all "flours" in the Torah are to be only of wheat. (Bamidbar 28:5) "for the meal-offering mixed with oil of crushing": to exclude (oil that is exuded from) what is cooked. This tells me only of (oil that is kasher for) meal-offerings. Whence do I derive (the same for) the menorah? It is written (in that regard) (Vayikra 24:2) "Command the children of Israel that they take to you clear oil of beaten olives" — to exclude what is cooked.

(Bamidbar 35:22) "And if of a sudden, without hatred, he thrust him": to exclude (his killing) unwittingly. "or he cast upon him some instrument, but not in prey": without "hunting" or intent to kill. (22) "Or with any stone, whereby one can die," "without seeing": to include (for exile) a blind man and one who throws (a stone) at night. R. Yehudah says: "without seeing": to exclude a blind man. "and he not be his foe": Issi b. Akiva says: We find his stringency to be his lenity, and his lenity, his stringency, viz.: You cannot make him liable for the death penalty — Perhaps he killed him unwittingly. And you cannot make him liable for exile — Perhaps he killed him wittingly. "and he not be his foe" (juxtaposed with [24] "Then the congregation shall judge"): to exclude haters from sitting in judgment. This tells me of haters. Whence do we derive the same for kin? From (24) "between the slayer and the avenger" (with no other "relationship" intervening). Whence do I derive the same for witnesses? It follows, viz.: The Torah states: Kill through (the agency of) judges, kill through witnesses. Just as judges who are (their) haters or kin are unfit (to judge in their case), so, witnesses (who are haters or kin). Furthermore, it follows a fortiori, viz.: If judges — who do not decide (the facts of the case) — haters and kin are unfit to serve (as judges), then witnesses — who decide (the facts of the case) — how much more so are haters and kin unfit to serve (as witnesses)! This tells me only of (the instance of a murderer). Whence do I derive (the same for) all other instances of the death penalty? From [the superfluous] (Ibid.) "according to these judgments." This tells me only of Israelites. Whence do I derive the same for proselytes? From (Vayikra 24:22) "for proselytes and native-born (Israelites) alike." This tells me only of capital cases. Whence do I derive (the same for) monetary cases? From (Ibid.) "One (standard of) judgment shall there be for you," — But perhaps just as capital cases (are adjudicated) by twenty-three, so, monetary cases? It is, therefore, written (here) "according to these (capital) judgments." These are (adjudicated) by twenty-three, and not monetary judgments, of which it is written (Shemot 22:8) "Until elohim (counting three judges) shall come the dispute of both." And whence is it derived that capital cases (are adjudicated) by twenty-three? From (Bamidbar 35:24) "And the congregation (ten) shall judge" (25) And the congregation (ten) shall rescue" — twenty all together. And whence is it derived that three are added? From (Shemot 23:2) "Do not be after the many to do evil," I understand that I should be with them to do good. If so, what is the intent of (Ibid.) "After the many (i.e., the majority to incline" (judgment)? Let your judgment for good (i.e., acquittal) not be like your judgment for evil (i.e., incrimination). I still would not know how many, (but the Torah states: Kill by witnesses; kill by the inclination of the judges. Just as witnesses are two, so, the inclination of the judges (i.e., acquittal, is with a majority of one, and incrimination by a majority of two); and since the verdict of beth-din cannot be evenly balanced, three most be added to them (the twenty). The expounders of metaphor stated: The three "eduyoth" ("congregants") written in this section (one in [24] and two in [27]) signal that capital cases are adjudicated by thirty.