Komentarz do Liczb 5:10

ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו AND EVERY MAN’S HOLY THINGS SHALL BE HIS — Because the gifts due to the priests and the Levites are merely mentioned in the Torah (Deuteronomy 18:1—8) (without any statement as to how they are to come into possession of them), therefore one might think they may come and take them by force. On this account, it states here, ‘‘and every man’s holy things shall be his” — in some respect — thus it teaches us that the טובת הנאה, the gratification of using them in this respect as he wishes, belongs to the owner. — Many other Halachic rules have they (the Rabbis) deduced about it (this statement) in Sifrei Bamidbar 6:2. — An Agadic explanation of ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו is the following: Whosoever retains the tithes and does not give them to the Levite, only the tithes will be his, i.e., his field will ultimately yield no more than a tithe of what it was accustomed to yield (so that his whole possession will not exceed the gifts he should have given to the priests and the Levites; cf. Midrash Tanchuma, Re'eh 10).

AND EVERY MAN’S HALLOWED THINGS SHALL BE HIS; WHATSOEVER ANY MAN GIVETH THE PRIEST, IT SHALL BE HIS. The correct interpretation of this verse is that Scripture is saying that all hallowed things of a man shall be his, meaning to say that all hallowed things about which He has not commanded that they be given to the priest, [such as the Second Tithe, fourth-year produce of trees and the tithe of the cattle] shall be the owners’ [entirely], and they may have benefit from [and eat] them, even though they are called “holy.” But whatsoever any man giveth the priest as I have commanded him, it shall be his [partially], for even in the hallowed things about which Scripture commanded that they be given to the priest, the owners have a certain right, for although they belong to the priest to whom the owner gives them, as his personal property [but the owners have the right in these hallowed things to choose to whom to give them]. Thus the Second Tithe and the fourth-year produce of trees about which Scripture stated that they be holy to the Eternal⁶⁵Leviticus 27:30 (speaking of the Second Tithe): 19:24 (in reference to fourth-year produce of trees). Both of these “holy” things do not have to be given to the priest, but are to be eaten by the owner in Jerusalem. belong to the owner as his personal property, and likewise the tithe of cattle.⁶⁶Ibid., 27:32. The tithe of cattle likewise did not have to be given to the priest, but belonged wholly to the owner, after the blood and fat of the animal were offered upon the altar (see “The Commandments,” Vol. I, pp. 90-91). But as for all other hallowed things concerning which He commanded in the section of Vayikach Korach⁶⁷Further, 16:1. The reference here is to the section on the gifts given to the priests (ibid., 18:8-32). that they should give them to the priest, they are to be given to him directly by the owners, and the priests cannot take them from them by force. From this we may deduce ourselves that the right of choosing to whom to give them [with the consequent satisfaction of so doing] is that of the owners. This is the correct interpretation in accordance with the plain meaning of the verse. It is also the opinion of Onkelos [who rendered the verse: “and every man’s hallowed ‘tithe’ shall be his,” thus in dicating that he understood the verse as referring to a tithe which is the owner’s, for instance the Second Tithe].⁶⁸Onkelos’ expression “hallowed tithe” may also refer to the First Tithe [given to the Levites] or the Poorman’s Tithe (see my Hebrew commentary, p. 212), in which case Ramban understands that Onkelos supports the explanation he mentioned: namely, that these tithes, although given away by the owner, are still partially “his” inasmuch as the choice to whom to give them and satisfaction of so chosing, is his. It is interpreted in a similar manner in the Sifre, where the Rabbis have said:⁶⁹Sifre Naso 6. “All hallowed things are included in the general verse stating, And every man’s hallowed things shall be his. Scripture took away all hallowed things and gave them to the priests, leaving only the thanks-offering, the peace-offering, and the Passover-offering, because they too belong to the owners” [and they are permitted to eat them]. However, this verse is not necessary at all for these matters [i.e., to teach us that the thanks-offering, peace-offering, and Passover-offering belong to their owners, since in each of these cases Scripture clearly states that the meat is eaten by the owners, hence the verse before us must refer, as indicated above, to the Second Tithe, and fourth-year produce of trees].⁷⁰The Sifre, however, mentioned “the thanks-offering etc.” incidentally because it discusses all the hallowed things which belong to the owners.

ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו, however other kinds of “holy” gifts, namely ordinary tithes and trumot, may be given by the owner to whichever Levite or priest he chooses, not necessarily the priest officiating in the Temple at the time the gift is presented.

איש אשר יתן לכהן, something donated voluntarily which is appropriate to become the priest’s such as charamim, personal possessions sanctified to become the property of the Temple treasury.

ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו, “A man’s holies shall be his.” Nachmanides writes that the proper understanding of these somewhat enigmatic words is that all the holies someone has consecrated that were not obligatory are his to dispose of. The reason that the Torah had to write this was that we might have thought that as soon as something is described as קודש לה', “holy unto Hashem, it might have become the property of the Temple treasury or the priests administering same. Examples of this legislation are the second tithe, which the owners and his family consume in Jerusalem, or produce of a new orchard in the fourth year after it has been planted, known as נטע רבעי, which the owner may also consume in Jerusalem. Even the holies that have been given by the donor to the priest become the priest’s in the sense that anyone stealing them from the priest is not dealt with as if he had stolen from the Temple treasury, but is considered as having stolen the priest’s private property. Thus even other priests are not able to steal fro their colleagues claiming that it is all property of the Temple treasury.

Informing us that the executory benefits belong to the owner. Meaning that he can give them to any kohein to whom he wishes; this is termed טובת הנאה (executory benefits). Accordingly one may take a selah or more from an Israelite in order to give the produce to his daughter’s son who is a kohein, however one may not take money from a kohein in order to give the kohein these gifts. The Torah wrote “shall be his” meaning that the executory benefits belong to the owners.

V. 10. ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו. Nach der grammatischen Konstruktion sind dies zwei Sätze. ואיש את קדשיו, jeder seine Heiligtümer! d. h. jeder hat über seine Heiligtümer zu verfügen, לו יהיו: obgleich Gott geweiht und den Priestern überwiesen, so sind sie doch in gewisser Beziehung noch sein, und zwar insofern, dass איש אשר יתן לכהן לו יהיה, dass nur das dem Priester gehört, was jemand ihm gibt, d.h. es steht keinem Priester ein direkter Anspruch auf irgend ein der Priesterschaft im allgemeinen zugewiesenes Heiligtum zu; vielmehr kann es der zum Geben Verpflichtete geben, welchem Priester er will. Kein Priester kann es von ihm fordern. Dieses dem Verpflichteten zustehende Verfügungsrecht über seine Heiligtümer heißt טובת הנאה. So erläutert ספרי z. St.: כל תרומת הקדשים (Kap. 18, 19), ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו למה נאמר לפי שהוא אומר אשר ירימו בני ישראל שומע אני יטלום בזרוע ת׳׳ל ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו מגיד שטובת טובת הנאה .הנאת קדשים לבעליהם heißt die Vergünstigung des Genusses. Jeder kann mit dem Genusse seiner Heiligtümer den Priester seiner Wahl begünstigen.

ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיה, “and every man’s hallowed things shall be his;” this somewhat enigmatic phrase, teaches that if a priest has sanctified some of his animals as sacrifices, he need not hand them over to the group of priests on duty at the time, but can proceed to offer such animals personally, although this particular time is not one during which he is on duty. (Sifri)

איש אשר יתן לכהן, A MAN, HOWEVER, WHO GIVES TO THE PRIEST the gifts that are due to him,

איש אשר יתן לכהן, once the owner has given “his” holy portion to the priest it becomes secular, mundane, not encumbered with any restrictions. Rather, לו יהיה, it is exclusively “his,” neither the previous owners nor other priests can legally deprive him of it.

לו יהיה, it will become the property of the priests officiating on that date.

Vergegenwärtigen wir uns die neuen Momente, die hier in פרשת גול הגר zum Ausspruch gekommen: das für חומש und אשם erforderliche Selbstgeständnis, והתודו, und die Bestimmung, dass selbst wenn kein Berechtigter mehr unter den Lebenden ist, das im Eide abgeschworene Gut Gott zurückzuerstatten ist: so begreifen sich beide offenbar als Momente, durch welche Gottes Gegenwart im Volksverkehr, mit anderen Worten: die Heiligkeit des Volkslagers, קדושת מחנה ישראל, in praktischer Folgenschwere zur Anwendung kommt. Schon die Berufung auf Gott im Eide, die Unterstellung seiner ganzen Güterwelt unter Gottes Gericht zum Erweis seiner Rechtschaffenheit in einem speziellen Fall seines Verkehrslebens, setzt Gottes Gegenwart bei jedem Worte und jeder Handlung voraus, die Mensch gegen Mensch im gewöhnlichsten Verkehre spricht und übt und stellt Gottes Schauen und Walten als die Macht hin, deren Richteramt da beginnt, wo das menschliche Gericht in seiner Geistes- und Machtkürze endet. Und wenn nun mit dem Geständnis diese Gottesmacht sich auch im Innern des Menschen, in der Gottesstimme sich gegenwärtig erweist, die wir "Gewissen" nennen, und die das Weisheitswort die "Gotteslampe" nennt, "mit welcher Gott die geheimsten Kammern unseres Innern suchend durchleuchtet" (Prov. 20, 27), und wenn das mit Berufung auf Gott abgeleugnete Gut damit ein Gottesheiligtum wird, das Ihm, mit dem wie bei jedem Heiligtum hinzuzufügenden Fünftel, auch dann noch zurückzugeben ist, wenn auch der Berechtigte von dannen geschieden und keinen Rechtsnachfolger hinterlassen: so erscheint das ganze Gesetz als die vollste Verkündigung und Verherrlichung Gottes in seiner das ganze soziale Leben tragenden und heiligenden Gegenwart. —

איש אשר יתן לכהן לו יהיה, “whatsoever any man gives (prematurely) to a priest shall be (remain) his, the donor’s.” This verse or phrase, is understood to mean that if a father of a firstborn son had given a priest the money for his son’s redemption before said son was thirty days old, and in the interval that son had died before reaching the age of thirty days, (when it had become due) the priest is to return the money he has received to the deceased son’s father. (Sifri)

לו יהיה HE SHALL HAVE great riches (Berakhot 63a).

An aggadic Midrash (B’rachot 63) the words איש אשר יתן לכהן mean that he who meticulously gives to the priest his due, will eventually find himself becoming rich. The Talmud derives this exegesis from the apparent redundancy of the words in our verse.

Auch der Antagonismus zwischen כפל und חומש, dass, wie zu V. 7 bemerkt, ממון המחיבו כפל פוטרו מן החומש, beide in einem Klageobjekte nicht zusammentreffen können, begreift sich nach diesem leicht. כפל ist ja, wie zu Schmot 21, 37 entwickelt, Anerkennungsausdruck gleichsam der Allgegenwart der menschlichen Gerechtigkeit im sozialen Leben, welcher der Eigentümer sein Gut anvertraut und welche der Dieb missbraucht und gehöhnt hat; während חומש die wahrhaftige Allgegenwart der göttlichen Gerechtigkeit und gerade in solchen Fällen zu vergegenwärtigen hat, wo, wie im Eide, die menschliche nicht ausreicht. Weshalb ja auch חומש Geständnis voraussetzt, קנס aber gerade bei selbstanklagendem Geständnis wegfällt. קנס ist daher ein spezifisches Attribut menschengerichtlicher Wirkung. Hat also ein Klageobjekt bereits diese in erfolgreicher Weise provoziert, wie dies in קנס zu Tage tritt, so schließt dies von selbst חומש aus.

פרשת גול הגר ist nichts als konkrete Konsequenz des שלוח מצורע ממחנה ישראל.