출애굽기 22:30의 Musar

והיו לי הלוים . Anyone whose roots are in a holy domain must also sanctify himself in an increased measure. This is why the tribe of Levi who was chosen specifically underwent an additional sanctification. G–d had previously said in Exodus 22,30, of all the Israelites "ואנשי קודש תהיו לי," "you shall be holy people to Me!" Afterwards G–d sanctified the Levites and added "the Levites will belong to Me." Since G–d had done this at that time, it behooves the Levites to apply stricter rules of sanctity to themselves also in our times.

He also diminishes his stature as a human being thereby [(by speaking lashon hara)] until he emerges "worse than a dog," as Chazal have said (Pesachim 118a): "One who speaks lashon hara … deserves to be thrown to the dogs, it being written (Shemoth 23:1): 'You shall not receive a false report,' which is read as you shall not spread, which is preceded by (Ibid. 22:30): '…to the dog shall you throw it.'" The rationale is obvious, as written by the Maharal of Prague: "For the dogs guarded themselves when necessary, from 'sharpening their tongues,' as it is written (Ibid. 11;7): 'And against all the children of Israel, a dog shall not sharpen its tongue' — and he [(a human being)], whom the L-rd accorded understanding and knowledge could not restrain his yetzer from this [(lashon hara)] — wherefore he is 'worse' than a dog."

And, likewise, one who is accustomed to eat unkosher meat or to feed it to a Jew. And this is intimated in the Torah, it being written (Shemoth 23:1): "And men of holiness shall you be to Me, and flesh torn in the field you shall not eat. To the dog shall you throw it," after which it is written (Ibid. 23:1): "You shall not spread a false report." It emerges, then, that the verse of "To the dog shall you throw it" is found between these two sins — eating treifah [torn flesh] and speaking lashon hara, to teach us that for these two sins, a man may be reincarnated as a dog. And this is what King David, may peace be upon him, intimated in (Psalms 22:21): "Rescue from the sword, my soul; [rescue] from the dog, my soul," followed by "I will speak Your name to my brothers, etc." That is, I do not use my tongue to speak lashon hara, to be punished therefor by this dreadful reincarnation, but I use it to praise You and to exhort Israel, that they should fear You and praise You. And know that the Kabbalists have said that even though when a man is reincarnated in the form of another man he is unaware of his prior state, still when he is reincarnated as an animal or as a bird, he is aware of his prior state and suffers terribly at having descended from heaven from the form of a man to the form of a beast. Therefore, every man should fear and tremble and be soft of heart while he yet lives, while he yet has free will and knows his G-d, so that He forgives his sins and removes His wrath from him. And when his soul leaves him he will rest in peace and repose in His shade in Gan Eden. For He is gracious and merciful and abundant in lovingkindness. And (Berachoth 34b): "In the place where penitents stand, absolute Tzaddikim cannot stand." Until here, the words of the Sefer Charedim, in short.

He also brings himself to eminence in this world, as it is written in Mechilta, Parshath Mishpatim on Shemoth 32:30: "And flesh torn in the field you shall not eat. To the dog shall you throw it" — to teach us that the Holy One Blessed be He does not withhold reward from any creature, as it is written (Shemoth 11:17): "And to all the children of Israel a dog will not sharpen its tongue." Now is this not a kal vachomer [i.e., Does it not follow a fortiori]: If it is so [i.e., that He does not withhold reward] from an animal, how much more so from a human being!

(Ibid. 17): "For I heard them [the brothers] saying: 'Let us go to Dothan [nelchah dotainah],' which Rashi interprets: 'to seek against you nichlei datoth [legal devices (suggested by 'nelchah dothainah')] to kill you with." The explanation: It was decided by them that Joseph was a man of lashon hara, who provoked their father to hate them. And who knows how much contention he would stir up among them? They, therefore, sought some pretext to rid themselves of him in a way which would not make them "murderers" legally. As far as his being killed indirectly through them, this did not concern them. And as to their saying (Ibid. 60): "Let us go and kill him," this was meant in the same indirect sense. As stated in the well known Gemara, Makkoth 23a): "If one speaks lashon hara, he is fit to be cast to the dogs, it being written (Shemoth 23:1): 'You shall not bear a false report,' preceded by (Ibid. 22:39): 'To the dog shall you cast it.'" And we find in the Gemara (Bava Kamma 24b): "If one sicked a dog against someone, he is not guilty [of murder]." And even though by the law of Heaven, he is certainly liable for "indirection," too, they thought that in this instance they would not be liable by the law of Heaven because Joseph was a man of lashon hara and contention.

And know further that one who desires to merit the quality of peace must guard himself also against the accepting of lashon hara and rechiluth. For aside from the punishment itself (Chazal having said (Pesachim 118a): "If one accepts lashon hara, he is fit to be thrown to the dogs, it being written (Shemoth 23:1): 'Do not bear a false report,' preceded by (Ibid. 22:30): 'To the dog shall you throw it'"), one further comes through it to vain hatred, quarrels, and contention. For since he accepts the thing at the outset as true, that Ploni spoke against him or did this and this to him, it is almost impossible for him afterwards not to cause his friend suffering or to quarrel with him because of this. And in the end, this results in their becoming great foes, each one wanting to "swallow the other's blood," and rejoicing in his misfortune. And all of this resulted from acceptance, his acceptance of the speaker's words at the outset as absolute truth. If he had followed the way of the Torah, he would not have come to this. For when someone comes to him and tells him what Ploni did or said to him, he should have thought: Perhaps the thing is an outright lie, or perhaps he added something that changed the complexion of the thing entirely. Or even if he added nothing, perhaps he did not relate the entire thing as it was, but left out several words. Or perhaps he varied his intonation, and thereby entirely changed things. Or perhaps he should have thought of something in defense of the one spoken of, that he did what he did unwittingly, or the like. And [if he had proceeded thus], as a matter of course, things would not have come to quarreling and contention and vain hatred.

Concerning this concept, Solomon says in Kohelet 3,21, מי יודע רוח בני אדם, העולה היא למעלה, ורוח הבהמה היורדת היא למטה לארץ, "Who knows under which conditions man's spirit rises on high, and when the animal spirit descends to the nether regions." Solomon means that there are occasions when the animal's spirit ascends, such as when man consumes בהמה טהורה, and such a בהמה is fit to eat according to the criteria of what is kasher according to Jewish dietary laws. On the other hand, when man indulges in animal food forbidden to him, his own spiritual force descends to the level of the animal instead of the spiritual level of the animal being raised to his level. All this is alluded to in our פרשה in the words לכלב תשליחון אותו, throw it to the dog; i.e. man is relegated to the "hard" קליפה. (a Kabbalistic term denoting forces in the universe not susceptible to sanctity)

This is the meaning of ובשר בשדה טרפה, "in the field," which is outside the confines of קדושה holiness, like the "field" of Esau who is described in the Torah as a man of the "field," as distinct from his brother, the איש תם (Genesis 25,27). We know of seventy categories of impurities corresponding to the seventy spiritual counterparts or "princes" of the seventy Gentile nations. This is why we must not consume any of these animals infested with "impurity," in order to maintain our destiny of אנשי קודש תהיון לי.