Midrash sobre Josué 7:1

(Bamidbar 5:5-6) "And the L-rd spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the children of Israel: A man or a woman, if they do of all the sins of man": Why is this section mentioned? (i.e., it has already been mentioned elsewhere.) — It is written (Vayikra 5:20-22) "If a soul sin and commit a profanation against the L-rd … or if he find a lost object and swear falsely, etc." But the stolen property of a proselyte is not mentioned. It is, therefore, written (here) "Speak to the children of Israel: A man or a woman, if they do all of the sins of man." Scripture comes to teach us about the stolen property of a proselyte that if one swore to him falsely (that he did not steal it) and the proselyte died, he pays the principal and the fifth to the Cohanim and the guilt-offering to the altar, (a proselyte, halachically, not having any heirs). This is a rule in the Torah: Any section stated in one place in the Torah, missing one thing, and repeated in a different place is repeated only for the sake of the thing that is originated. R. Akiva says: Everything stated therein must be expounded. R. Yoshiyah (in explication of R. Akiva) says: Why is "a man or a woman" stated? From (Shemot 21:3) "And if a man open a pit or if a man dig a pit," I would know only of a man. Whence would I derive (the same for) a woman? From "a man or a woman," to liken a woman to a man in respect to all transgressions and damages in the Torah. R. Yonathan says: (The above derivation) is not needed, for it is already written (Ibid. 34) "The owner (whether man or woman) of the pit shall pay," and (Ibid. 22:5) "Pay shall pay the kindler (whether man or woman) of the fire." Why, then, is it stated "a man or a woman"? For its (own) teaching, (i.e., that the law of theft of the proselyte" obtains both with men and with women.) "if they do all of the sins of man to commit a profanation against the L-rd": Why is this stated? (i.e., it is already written [Vayikra 5:21] "If a soul sin and commit a profanation, etc.") Because it is written "If a soul sin and commit a profanation… (22) or find a lost object, etc.", I might think that only one who lies in respect to what is mentioned therein is regarded as one who lies against the L-rd Himself. Whence do I derive (the same for) one who lies in respect to all other things? It is, therefore, written "if they do all of the sins of man to commit a profanation against the L-rd." "to commit a profanation" ("limol ma'al"). "me'ilah" in all places is "lying." And thus is it written (I Chronicles 5:25) "Vayimalu ('and they lied') against the G-d of their fathers," and (Joshua 7:1) "And the children of Israel yimalu ma'al ('falsified') in respect to the ban," and (I Chronicles 10:13) "And Saul died because of his falsification ('bima'alo ma'al') against the L-rd." And, in respect to Uzziyahu (II Chronicles 26:18), "Leave the sanctuary, for you have acted falsely (ma'alta')," and (Bamidbar 5:12) "… and she be false (uma'ala) to him" — whence we see that "me'ilah" is "lying." (Ibid. 6) "and that soul shall be guilty": Why is this stated? (i.e., it seems redundant.) "a man or a woman" would seem to indicate specifically these. Whence would I derive (the same for) one whose sex is unknown or a hermaphrodite? From "and that soul shall be guilty" — All are included, even proselytes and servants. — But this would seem to include all, both the above and minors! — Would you say this? If a minor is exempt from (punishment for) the grave sin of idolatry, how much more so (is he exempt from punishment for) all the mitzvoth of the Torah! Whence is it derived that if one stole and swore (falsely) and went to bring the money (to repay) and the guilt-offering and could not manage to bring them before he died, that his heirs are exempt? From "and that soul shall be guilty." — But perhaps just as they are exempt from the guilt-offering, so, they are exempt from the principal. — It is, therefore, written (Ibid. 7) "and he shall give it (the principal) to the one to whom he is liable (for payment)." "and that soul shall be guilty": Why is this stated? Whence do you derive that if one burned his neighbor's grain sack on the Sabbath that beth-din does not exact payment from him because he is liable to the death penalty? From "and that soul shall be guilty" (i.e., in the aforementioned instance, the life alone is taken.) (Ibid. 7) "and they confess their sin which they have done": This tells me that a sin-offering requires confession. Whence do I derive (the same for) a guilt-offering? From "and that soul be guilty and they confess." R. Nathan says: This is a paradigm (binyan av) for all that are put to death that they require confession.

Now Jericho was straitly shut up because of the children of Israel, none went out and none ‎came in. And it came to pass in the second month, on the first of the month, that the Lord said ‎unto Joshua: Arise, for behold I have given Jericho into thy hands with all the people therein; ‎and all your host shall go around the city once each day and blow trumpets, for six days, and ‎the priests shall blow trumpets. And when you hear the sound of the trumpets all the people ‎shall utter a great shout, and the walls of the city shall fall down flat, and all the people shall ‎ascend up, every man straight before him; and Joshua did as the Lord had commanded him, ‎and on the seventh day he went around the city seven times, and the priests blew their ‎trumpets. And at the seventh circuit, Joshua said unto the people: Shout ye, for the Lord hath ‎delivered the whole city into your hands, but let the city with all that is in it be accursed unto ‎the Lord, and keep ye away from the accursed thing, lest ye bring curse and affliction into the ‎camp of Israel; and let all the gold and silver, the brass and iron, be consecrated unto the Lord, ‎to come into the treasury of the Lord. And the priests blew their trumpets, and the people ‎gave a great shouting, and the walls of Jericho fell down flat, and every man went into the city ‎straight before him. And they took the city, and they exterminated all that was in it, men and ‎women, young and old, oxen, sheep and asses, at the edge of the sword, and they burned the ‎entire city with fire, only the vessels of silver, and gold, and of brass, and of iron, they put into ‎the treasury of the Lord. And Joshua swore at that time, saying: Cursed be the man who ‎buildeth Jericho; he shall lay the foundation thereof in his first born, and in his youngest son ‎shall he set up the gates of it. But Achan, the son of Carmi, the son of Zabdi, the son of Zerah, ‎the son of Judah, committed a trespass on the accursed thing, and he took thereof and hid it in ‎his tent, and the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel. And after the children of Israel ‎had returned from the burning of Jericho, Joshua sent men to search the city of Ai, and the ‎men went and they spied out the city, and they returned, saying: Let not all the people go up; ‎let about three thousand men go up to smite Ai, for they are but few. And Joshua did so, and ‎he took with him about three thousand men, and they fought with the men of Ai. But the ‎battle was adverse to Israel, and the men of Ai smote of Israel thirty-six men, and the children ‎of Israel fled from before the men of Ai. And Joshua rent his clothes and fell to the ground ‎upon his face before the Lord, with all the elders of Israel, and threw dust upon their heads.

(Exod. 38:23:) AND WITH HIM (i.e., with Bezalel) WASOHOLIAB BEN AHISAMACH [OF THE TRIBE OF DAN]. <Here is> glory for himself, glory for his father, glory for his family, and glory for his tribe, because he came from it. (Lev. 24:11, concerning an unnamed blasphemer): AND THE NAME OF HIS MOTHER WAS SHELOMITH BAT DIBRI <OF THE TRIBE OF DAN>. <Here is> a disgrace for himself, a disgrace for his father, a disgrace for his mother, a disgrace for his family, <and> a disgrace for his tribe, because he came from it. (Josh. 7:1): ACHAN BEN CARMI BEN ZABDI BEN ZERAH, OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH. <Here is> a disgrace for himself, a disgrace for his father, a disgrace for his family, <and> a disgrace for his tribe, because he came from it. (Exod. 38:22:) NOW BEZALEL BEN URI BEN HUR [OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH]. <Here is> glory for himself, glory for his father, glory for his family, glory for his tribe because he came from it.