사무엘상 14:45의 Halakhah

Hatam Sofer finds a source for the exercise of such power in Ramban's comments on Leviticus 27:29, "Kol ḥerem asher yeḥeram min ha-adam lo yipadeh, mot yamut." The standard translation of the verse, "None devoted, that may be devoted of men, shall be ransomed; he shall surely be put to death," renders its meaning utterly incomprehensible. Little wonder, then, that medieval rabbinic exegetes and commentaries struggled to arrive at a proper interpretation of the verse. Ramban understands the term "ḥerem" as used in this context as connoting societal proscription of certain acts upon pain of death. Understood in this manner, the verse, by inference, serves to confer legislative power upon society for the purpose of achieving socially desirable goals and also to confer penal authority to enforce such decrees. According to Ramban, the verse must be understood as an elliptical reference to the violation of a ḥerem pronounced by society and serves to forbid substitution of a financial penalty for capital punishment incurred in violation of a communal edict. The verse then should be rendered as "No [violation] of a ḥerem, pronounced as a ḥerem by man, shall be ransomed; he [the violator of the ḥerem] shall surely be put to death." The biblical narrative, I Samuel 14:24–45, recounting the actions of Jonathan and his incurrence of capital liability is explained by Ramban as predicated upon this scriptural provision. In eating honey Jonathan violated the communal edict pronounced by King Saul against partaking of food on the day of battle against the Philistines; hence Jonathan was subject to the death penalty. The verse "So the people rescued Jonathan, that he died not" (I Samuel 14:45) is understood by Ramban as meaning that the community retroactively nullified its edict and, pursuant to that nullification, Jonathan was exonerated. Such edicts may be promulgated, asserts Hatam Sofer, either by the community as a whole or by the sovereign as the executive authority of the community. It is quite apparently Hatam Sofer's opinion that such authority is vested only in the Jewish community and hence only in a Jewish monarch. To be sure, the Jewish community in any country, utilizing its power of ḥerem, could promulgate an edict making lèse majesté against the gentile sovereign a culpable offense as a violation of Jewish law. However, no such edict was ever promulgated. Accordingly, only the sovereign of a Jewish state may legitimately impose penal sanctions upon violators of his decrees.