Musar su Deuteronomio 19:19

The Arizal explains the reason that the Torah (Deut. 20,16) has demanded that the Jewish people kill every member of these seven Canaanite nations: לא תחיה כל נשמה. When the Torah instructs us how to relate to other nations (such as שעיר, i.e. אדום, עמון, and מואב however), it only commanded (Deut. 2,9 et al) the Jewish people under Moses not to make war against those nations. The seven Canaanite nations represent seven קליפות, i.e. שבעה כלים שנשברו, negative aspects of the seven emanations which comprise what we called בנין, the constructive forces enabling the creation of a perfect physical universe. Although, as we explained in connection with the name "Samael," even Satan had his root in something holy, i.e. א-ל, the spiritual decline of these descendants of the original Canaan, the cursed, was such that no vestige of sanctity was left in them. This meant automatically that no נשמה, spiritually elevated soul of theirs, would survive. The other three nations whose land G–d had promised as part of ארץ ישראל still retained vestiges of holiness. These were the קיני, קניזי and קדמוני, whose lands G–d had also promised Abraham (Genesis 15,19) when He promised us the Holy Land. These nations had their origin in the "upper" three emanations. The promise that we will inherit their lands in the future can be fulfilled when the last vestiges of sanctity will have vanished from these three nations. At such a time the commandment not to let a soul survive will also be applicable to those three nations. The Arizal wants to equate the three nations Edom, Ammon and Moab with the Keynee, Kenizi and Kadmoni respectively. The very names of these three nations allude to their having had a superior origin, שעיר alludes to Deut. 33,2, where G–d is portrayed as coming from Se-ir to give Israel the Torah. The name Moab means "from the אב, "the father," another allusion to the higher emanation חכמה, seat of undiluted holiness. The name Ammon is close to the word נועם, an allusion to the emanation בינה. שעיר is none other than אדום. The seven kings whom the Torah describes in the Torah (Genesis 36,31-39) as having ruled in the land of Edom before Israel had a king were not part of that nation. Apparently they had subjugated the country. This is why the Torah, when telling us that a particular king ruled over Edom, informs us of his country of origin. We are told in 2,20: והעמונים קראו להם זמזומים, that the Ammonites called the Refa-im Zamzumim. The word זמזום is derived from זמם, planned, thought out. In other words these רפאים had the "superior" emanation חכמה somewhere in their background. Their descendants were the mixed multitude who joined the Jewish people at the Exodus and converted to Judaism. This explains why they still had enough of a spark of sanctity in them to recognize the spiritual rejuvenation that was taking place at the time of the Exodus. On the other hand, anyone who plans something evil and uses his superior intelligence negatively, is similarly descended from them. The name סיחון, one of the kings of the Canaanite nations, suggests the word סייח, a young ass. The Hebrew word for donkey is חמור, the same letters as חומר, matter. The Canaanites were concerned with matter to the exclusion of the spirit. The name Og, king of Bashan, evokes similar considerations. The Arizal concludes that because the lands of these kingdoms were situated East of the river Jordan which symbolized the foundation of the feminine aspect in the emanations, these kingdoms could not have been subdued by anyone but Moses. Spiritually speaking, Moses represented the "middle" line between the left (feminine) side of the diagram of the emanations and the right (masculine) side. Moses was the carrier of the symbol of the Holy Covenant. He broke the tablets and salvaged the sanctity contained in them. When the Torah describes the defeat of the שני מלכי האמורי, "the two kings of the Emorite" (3,8), the first letters of these three words form the name משה. G–d said to Moses (2,31): ראה החילותי תת לפניך את סיחון, "See, I have begun to hand over to you Sichon, etc." This means that the patron of this kingdom, the שר, had been subjugated by Moses. The land of Israel is perceived as the "feminine" part of the union between the people of Israel and its land. Taking possession of the land of Israel, ביאת הארץ, is a euphemism for the union between Israel and its land as husband and wife. [I have rephrased some of this. Ed.]

We have a perfect example of the principle of מדה כנגד מדה, that retribution fits the crime, in the legislation about עדים זוממים, false witnesses trying to frame someone. These "witnesses" who testify to something they have not seen must suffer the fate their intended victims would have suffered had it not been that the truth was revealed in time (19,19). People must be judged by applying the same yardstick by which they judge others. The hidden message in this legislation is that when G–d created the universe, He created opposites. Just as He created domains of sanctity, He also created the alternative, i.e. a domain of impurity, קליפה. He who performs good deeds establishes his affinity to the domain of sanctity, whereas he who engages in sinful conduct establishes ties with the domain of impurity. All this is part of the concept: שכר מצוה מצוה, ושכר עברה עברה, that the "reward" of a good deed is another good deed and vice versa (Avot 4,2). The reward is the spiritual impact of the performance of the good deed. When the Torah ties the punishment of such a "witness" to כאשר זמם לעשות, "what he intended to accomplish" instead of to "what he did accomplish," it is to teach us the rule that we are measured by the same yardstick we apply to others. The Rekanati endeavors to explain how our sages dared arrive at the conclusion that if the intention of the עדים זוממים had in fact been accomplished, (i.e. that their victim had already been executed before discovery of the fact that they had not been at the scene of the crime to which they testified), that they then go out scot-free from a human tribunal (Chulin 11). This is what he writes: "I have to explain to you why the sages in Chulin arrived at such a ruling from something the Torah did not actually state. Did they presume to know everything that was in G–d's mind? First of all, let us be clear that the statement in Chulin כאשר זמם ולא כאשר עשה applies only in cases where a death penalty had been administered. If the subject of the testimony was something not involving a possible death penalty the witnesses in question will have to make restitution even if their victim has already been convicted. This is why our sages used as their example the words: הרגו אין נהרגים, "if they have killed they will not be executed." Having said this, know that G–d does not allow miscarriages of justice, i.e. that an innocent person be put to death by a Court. Anyone who has not committed a sin carrying the death penalty will not be convicted by the testimony of false witnesses. If such an accused is executed this merely proves that he was guilty of another sin for which he deserved to die, but that the other sin he was guilty of had not been witnessed, and that therefore no judicial proceedings could have been instituted. In view of this the false witnesses had actually accomplished G–d's purpose when they testified against the accused in question. They had actually merely caused the death of a person who -legally speaking- was already considered "dead" in G–d's books. How could we execute a witness for having caused the execution of someone already legally dead? All of the foregoing is based on our conviction that the Sanhedrin only confirm judgments already made in Heaven, that they are the representatives of the שכינה. If the witnesses were found out before their victim was executed, it is clear in retrospect that they were about to shed innocent blood. Clearly, for such a crime they must face retribution in kind. When judges perceive themselves as agents of G–d, it can be said of them that אלוקים נצב בעדת א-ל, 'G–d stands in the divine assembly'" (Psalms 82,1). Thus far the Rekanati.