Comentário sobre Deuteronômio 1:16

ואצוה את שפטיכם AND I COMMANDED YOUR JUDGES — I said to them: be deliberate in judgment: if a certain point of law comes before you once, twice, three times, do not say, "This point of law has already come before me several times”, but discuss it well on that occasion also (Sifrei Devarim 16:1).

בעת ההיא לאמוד, at that time, saying, etc. The word לאמור, as in many instances, indicates that the words to be communicated were not intended to be literally these words and immediate. In this instance Moses did not command the judges to say specific things; he informed them that an essential part of the judicial process was to listen to the arguments of a litigant only when the opposing side was present.

ואצוה את שפטיכם, “I commanded your judges.” This refers to the judges being cautioned that although they might feel that similar cases had been judged by them many times, each case has to be addressed as if it were the first of its kind.

Act with patience in judging, etc. It is written, “I commanded your judges,” but there has not been any previous mention of judges! It should say, “leaders.” Rather, “judges,” is intended for an exegesis. The verse should be interpreted as, “I commanded you regarding matters of judgment to act with patience.” However, Re”m explains that this is derived from, “between your brothers.” It would have been sufficient to say, “And you are to judge right between a man and his complainant.” Rather, “between your brothers,” is intended to teach us to act with patience in judging — to listen between your brothers and understand their statements well, so that if certain litigation is brought before you, etc.

V. 16. ואצוה .ואצוה את שפטיכם steht hier in seiner ganz eigentlichen mit צבא verwandten Bedeutung: jemanden auf seinen Posten anweisen, ihn für ein angewiesenes Amt in Pflicht nehmen. So Kap. 3, 28: וצו את יהושע וחזקהו. Sam. II. 6, 21: לצות אותי נגיד (siehe Bereschit S. 38). Es geht daher über die folgenden Sätze hinaus, die nur als spezielle Teile jener allgemeinen Verpflichtung hervorgehoben sind. So Sanhedrin 7 b: ואצוה וגו׳ ,כנגד מקל ורצועה תהאי זריז, nach תוספ׳ daselbst: שלא להטיל אימה על הצבור לרדתם יותר מדאי, die eingeräumte richterliche Gewalt nicht zu abschreckender Härte zu missbrauchen, und daselbst 8 a: אזהרה לדיין שיסבול את הצבור die Mühseligkeiten des Amtes und selbst Ausschreitungen der Volksgemeine mit Geduld zu ertragen, wissen, dass der Richter zum "Erzieher" des Volkes bestellt und von ihm die Geduld erwartet wird כאשר ישא האומן את היונק. So auch ספרי z. St.: אמרתי להם הוו מתונים בדין שאם בא דין לפניך פעם אחת שתים ושלש אל תאמר כבר בא דין זה לפני ושניתיו ושלשתיו אלא הוו מתונים בדין die Verpflichtung, vorsichtig und bedächtig im Urteil zu sein, nicht zu rasch zum Urteilsspruch zu schreiten, jeden Fall in besondere wiederholte Erwägung zu ziehen, selbst wenn er in ganz gleicher Weise schon oft zur Beurteilung gekommen wäre; überhaupt das Amt nicht als ein Hoheitsrecht, sondern als eine Dienstpflicht im Dienste der Gesamtheit zu betrachten: לשעבר הייתם עומדים ברשות עצמכם עכשיו הרי אתם משועבדים לצבור,

בעת ההוא [AND I COMMANDED YOUR JUDGES] AT THAT TIME — As soon as I appointed them, I said to them, "It is not now as heretofore: heretofore you were your own masters (lit., under your own control), now you are in the service of the Community!” (Sifrei Devarim 16:2).

שמוע בין אחיכם ושפטתם צדק, “listen among your brethren and judge righteously.” This means that the judges should attempt to settle conflicting claims by getting the litigants to agree to arbitration. Technically, the wording suggests: משפט, “judgment,” which is the result of צדק, “charitable attitudes” by both litigants.

In the past you were on your own, etc. It was your choice whether to learn and probe the depths of halacha or to sit idly, which is no longer the case.

Perhaps Moses also wanted to hint at something we have learned in Talmud Jerushalmi Sanhedrin 3,8. We are told there that when Rav Hunna watched litigation and observed that one of the defendants did not argue a point in his favour which he could have argued (out of ignorance) he interfered in the proceedings and drew the defendant's attention to an argument he should use. He based himself on Proverbs 31,9: "open your mouth, speak righteously." This is precisely what Moses may have alluded to when he said לאמור, "to say." No steps must be neglected if they help to establish true and fair judgment.

שמע בין אחיכם, nicht ׳שמע איש ואחיו וגו, der Richter hat nicht nur nicht bloß die eine Seite anzuhören, sondern überhaupt keine der Parteien allein, sondern nur in Gegenwart der Gegenpartei zu vernehmen, seine Stellung ist immer nur בין אחיכם, und soll auch keine Partei das Präveniere spielen und dem Richter ihre Angelegenheit vorzutragen versuchen, bevor auch die Gegenpartei anwesend ist. Es darf sich beim Richter kein einseitiges Vorurteil bilden. אזהרה לבית דין שלא ישמע דברי בעל דין קודם שיבא בעל דין חברו ואזהרה לבעל דין שלא יטעים דבריו לדיין קודם שיבא בעל דין חברו. Das Hören soll nur zwischen den Parteien geschehen, ist sowohl Warnung an die Richter, als an die Parteien.

שמע — This grammatical form expresses constant doing: oyant in old French, be hearing, just as זכור and שמור (see Rashi on Numbers 25:17).

ובין גרו, “and his litigant.” Our sages (Sanhedrin 7) derive the word from לגור, to sojourn; they mean that even if the dispute concerns minor matters such as arguments about use of a dwelling, a stove, between people who live in the same house.

Who accumulates words against him, etc. The word גרו is missing an alef, as if it said אוגרו (accumulates). Similarly, the phrase (v. 17) לא תגורו is like לא תאגרו. We should not say, as it apparently seems, that the term גרו is like the phrase (Vayikra 24:16) כגר כאזרח (as a resident or citizen). For if so, why is the letter vav of גרו necessary? However, there is a difficulty with this explanation, for then גרו is missing an aleph. Therefore, Rashi says: Another explanation — between his co-dweller, etc. According to this, גרו means “dwelling,” as in the verse (Bereishis 26:3), “Dwell (גור) in this land.” But, with the second explanation alone, there is also a difficulty: The verse should explicitly say כירו (his range). Therefore, both explanations are needed.

Another meaning of the word לאמור may be related to something we learned in Sanhedrin there and which is reflected in a ruling by Maimonides in chapter 21 of his treatise Hilchot Sanhedrin. Here is what he writes: "The judge must listen to the arguments of both litigants and repeat them as it is written in Kings I 3,23: 'the king said this woman says: "my son is alive and your son is dead," whereas this woman says: "my son is alive and your son is dead."' [The verse proves that Solomon himself repeated the arguments of both litigants. Ed.] This is what Moses alluded to when he said לאמור, i.e. that the judges themselves have to repeat the arguments of the litigants. The words לאמור שמוע are to be read together and mean that the judge has to articulate what he has heard from the litigants.

צדק .ושפטתם צדק ist die Rechtsidee, משפט die Ordnung der Personen- und Sachenverhältnisse nach diesem idealen Rechte, die Verwirklichung des Rechts in der Ordnung, daher צֵרֵק את הדין ואח׳׳כ חתכהו :ושפטתם צדק (Sanhedrin 7 b). דין ist das Ergebnis aus der allgemeinen Rechtsnorm für den besonderen Fall. Also: bringe erst das für den vorliegenden Fall aus dem allgemeinen Rechtsquell zu schöpfende Ergebnis dem entsprechend vollkommen in dir zum Abschluss, und dann sprich es präzis aus. So wird das משפט nichts als das in einem konkreten Fall verwirklichte צדק.

ובין גרו AND BETWEEN HIS גר — this is his opponent in the lawsuit who merely heaps up (אוגר) words against him. Another explanation of AND BETWEEN HIS גר — also in a matter concerning a dwelling house (גור = to dwell), — in the division of property amongst brothers, even if it be a dispute about an oven and a kitchen range (cf. Sifrei Devarim 16:8-9; Sanhedrin 7b).

Even [a dispute] about an oven and a range. Because it is written גרו, and the letters gimmel and kaf are interchangeable, as Rashi explains in Parshas Kedoshim (Vayikra 19:16), therefore, גרו is the same as כירו (his range). And since it is written ובין גרו, perforce it means: And between the division [of a house] between brothers, [even a dispute] about an oven and a range. For it is impossible that the division is between a range and a house.

שמוע בין אחיכם ושפטתם צדק, "listen to your brethren so that you can judge fairly." This whole verse is problematical. How could the judges arrive at a fair judgment unless they had first listened to the arguments of the litigants? Secondly, why did the Torah not simply write an imperative such as שמעו, instead of writing the word שמוע in the infinitive? Clearly, Moses' intention was to make the listening to the litigants' argument an ongoing rather than a one time process. The judges should not give way to the feeling that they had already listened to the litigant enough times so that they are sick and tired of hearing the same thing again and again. There are two aspects to the matter. 1) The judges should not display reluctance to hear renewed arguments by a litigant who claims that he has another point in his favour. 2) The judges should not postpone continuation of the hearing to another date as they are tired of hearing anymore on that particular day, but the proceedings should be wound up in one session if possible. Basically, the subject Moses instructs the judges on is what is called ענוי הדין, postponement of sentence.

בין איש ובין אחיו ובין גרו: es soll dir gleich sein, ob der von dir zu entscheidende Rechtsstreit zwischen zwei eingeborenen Nationalen, oder zwischen einem eingeborenen Nationalen und einem aus der Fremde Eingetretenen sich bewegt. Mit seinem Eintritt ist der גרו :גר geworden, jedem Nationalen gleichgestellt (siehe Wajikra 24, 22 und Schmot 20, 10). Jebamoth 46 b wird daran noch die Lehre geknüpft, dass auch die Erlangung des גר-Charakters, d. i. der legale Eintritt in das Judentum nur vor einem ב׳׳ד geschehen könne. גר צריך ג׳ משפט כתיב ביה (siehe תוספו׳ daselbst und 47 a). Sanhedrin 7 b wird גרו als Mithausbewohner verstanden und der ganze Passus בין איש ובין אחיו ובין גרו, beispielsweise אפילו בין בית לעלייה ,אפילו בין תנור לכירים erläutert, nach ערוך unter בית עלייה: Auseinandersetzung der Rechtsverhältnisse zweier Stöcke eines Hauses zu einander oder des gesetzlichen Entfernungsunterschiedes eines Ofens oder eines Herdes von der Mauer oder dem Estrich, und bemerkt ערוך dabei: es soll dem Richter kein Verhältnis zu geringfügig sein. Er soll sich von allem die erforderliche Sachkenntnis. aneignen, um überall das Recht als Regulator aller gegenseitigen Verhältnisse zur Geltung zu bringen.

Moses also wanted to warn the judges to be astute enough to detect from between the lines of what the litigants had to say whether they spoke truthfully. It is true that the verdict must be based on what the litigants said (and not on what they did not say or how they said it). If it became clear during their testimony and from their demeanour that the truth appeared to be the reverse of what they actually said, then Moses instructed the judges שמוע בין אחיכם, to listen to what is the difference between what the litigants say and what is obviously a distortion. This would enable them to ושפטתם צדק, "to arrive at a fair verdict," i.e. what appears to the judges to be the true state of affairs. On occasion, such judgment may appear to contradict what is written in the lawbooks. A judge cannot rule fairly except if the verdict is in line with his perception of the truth. The word שמוע addresses itself not merely to the ears of the judge but also to his brain.

Still another meaning of these words is based on what we learned in Makkot 6 that a court must not accept testimony from the mouth of an interpreter but that the judges must understand and be fluent in the language of the litigant who appears before them. This is implied in the words בין אחיכם, "directly between your brethren."

Yet another meaning of the words בין אחיכם is to warn the judge not to appear to pay more attention to one of the litigants, to appear to look at one litigant while avoiding looking at the second litigant, etc. The judges must project absolute neutrality in their demeanour vis-a-vis both parties. שמוע בין means that if a judge has occasion to raise his head, he must do so in the direction of both litigants. If, on the other hand, he has occasion to lower his head, he must also do so in equal measure vis-a-vis both litigants.

בין איש ובין אחיו, "between a man and his brother." This expression refers to three separate aspects of fair judgment. 1) It refers to a statement by Maimonides in chapter 22 of his treatise Hilchot Sanhedrin. "A judge must not be influenced by fear that the litigant whom he will. declare guilty will revenge himself on members of his family." Concerning such a situation Moses said: בין איש. Our sages in Sanhedrin 6 referred to the words לא תגורו מפני איש (verse 17) as the basis for this ruling.

2) When two brothers appear before a judge in litigation the judge must not reason that he does not have to be so exact in his judgments seeing these men are brothers. The Torah writes ובין אחיו, "and between his brother," i.e. the same yardsticks which apply to litigants who are not related to one another also apply to brothers. These words also apply to what we have learned in Shavuot 31 and the ruling based on this by Maimonides in chapter 21 of his treatise Hilchot Sanhedrin. Maimonides rules that when two litigants appear before a judge, one of whom in fancy dress, the other in shabby garments, the judge is to tell the one dressed in finery to either provide similar finery for his opposite number or to change his own clothing to bring it into line with that of the poorer litigant. This is what Moses alluded to with the words ובין אחיו, the two litigants should give the appearance as if they were brothers, alike in dress.

Maimonides also writes at the beginning of chapter 3 in the above-mentioned treatise that the words בצדק תשפוט עמיתך, "you shall judge your colleague with righteousness" (Leviticus 19,15), mean that one of the litigants should not be seated while the other one is standing. Moses added ובין גרו, "and between his stranger," to allude to this distinction. Either both litigants are to remain seated or both are to stand in front of the judges. Unless all these conditions are observed there cannot be a judgment based on righteousness.