Comentários de Citação sobre Jó 15:21

‘EILEH HADEVARIM’¹These are the ‘words’ — The fifth book of the Torah thus received its title — Devarim — from the second Hebrew word of the book. The English title Deuteronomy, meaning a restatement of the law, is derived from the Septuagint — the first Greek translation of the Bible — which gave it that name because a major part of the book is devoted to such a restatement. (THESE ARE THE WORDS). This book is known to constitute a review of the Torah, in which Moses our teacher explains to the generation entering the Land most of the commandments of the Torah that pertain to Israelites [as distinguished from the priests]. He does not mention anything relative to the law of the priests, neither about their performance of the offerings nor the ritual purity of the priests and their functions [in the Sanctuary], having already explained these matters to them. The priests, being diligent in their duties,²Shabbath 20a. People who are known for having the quality of diligence in their work need not be reminded of the duties incumbent on them. do not require repeated admonitions. The Israelites, [i.e., the non-priests], however, are admonished time and again about the commandments that apply to them, sometimes to add further clarification and sometimes only to caution the Israelites with multiple warnings. Thus there are in this book many admonitions regarding idolatry that follow one after another, as well as chastisements and a sound of terrors³Job 15:21. Reference is obviously to the words of tochachah (reproof, or threat of punishment) mentioned further, 28:15-68. casting upon them the fear of all the punishments for the transgressions. Additionally, he proclaims commandments which have not been [previously] mentioned at all, such as the levirate marriage,⁴I.e., the duty to marry the widow of a brother who died without issue (further, 25:5-6). the law concerning the defamation of a virgin bride,⁵Further, 22:13-19. the divorcing of a wife,⁶Ibid., 24:1-3. [the punishment of] plotting witnesses,⁷Ibid., 19:16-20. and others besides. Now all these laws had in fact been declared to Moses, either on Sinai or in the Tent of Meeting within the first year⁸In the Tur: “In the second year,” i.e., from the exodus. Both versions are, strictly speaking, correct. It was the year of the erection of the Tabernacle, and the “second” from the exodus. See also Leviticus 7:38, (Vol. III, pp. 90-91), where Ramban discusses the problem as to where all of the commandments were declared to Moses. [of the erection of the Tabernacle] before the affair of the spies. Nothing new was revealed to Moses in the plains of Moab [where he held this review of the Torah] except the words of the covenant, as is expressly stated there.⁹Further, 28:69: These are ‘the words of the covenant’ which the Eternal commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel in the land of Moab … In other words, only the words of the covenant were newly declared by the Eternal to Moses in the plains of Moab. All the commandments, however, had previously been declared on Sinai or in the Tabernacle. It is for this reason that this book does not contain such statements as “And G-d spoke to Moses, saying:Command the children of Israel,” or “Speak to the children of Israel and say to them the following commandment” [since no new commandments were given in this book; they had all been previously declared to Moses either on Mount Sinai or in the Tent of Meeting]. These commandments, however, were not written in the preceding books wherein He speaks to those that came forth from Egypt. Perhaps this was because these commandments were obligatory only in the Land even though they affect personal conduct [and do not depend on the Land] such as Scripture mentions with reference to the drink-offerings;¹⁰Numbers 15:2. The law of drink-offering is not connected with the soil, yet it was enjoined only when ye are come into the Land of your habitations. or it may be that because these were not of common occurrence, he mentioned them only to the generation, the inheritors of the Land.

Am Markiertesten erscheint dies in der Wurzel בוא mit den Pronominalsuffixen des Akkusativs. אל תבואני רגל גאוה (Ps. 36, 12). כל יד עמל תבאנו (Job 20, 22), כל זאת באתנו (Ps. 44, 18) שוט שוטף וגו׳ לא יבואנו (Jes. 28, 15) חוסר יבואנו (Prov. 28, 22). שודד יבואנו (Job. 15, 21) חרב מלך בבל תבואך (Ezech. 32, 11), מגורת רשע היא תבואנו (Prov. 10, 24), דורש רעה תבואנו (das. 11, 27), תבואהו שואה (Ps.35, 8), ויאהב קללה ותבואהו (Ps. 109, 11). In allen diesen Stellen steht das Suffixum keineswegs für den Dativ oder die Präposition אל, wodurch nur ein Hingelangen zu jemanden ausgedrückt wäre, sondern es sind reine Akkusative und bezeichnen das von einem Verhängnis erzielte und erreichte Objekt. Auch bei heilvollen Gewährungen wie תבואתך טובה (Job. 22, 21), יבאוני הסדיך (Ps. 119, 41), רחמיך (daselbst 77) bezeichnet es das Objekt, welches Ziel und Augenmerk der göttlichen Barmherzigkeit und Güte sein möge. In ähnlicher Weise, erklären sich die übrigen Akkusative bei intransistiven Verben wie: ויבך אותו אביו (Bereschit 37, 35), ולבכותה (daselbst 23, 2), את מי דאגת (Jes. 57, 11), אני דואג את היהודים (Jirmij. 38, 19). חלה את רגליו (Kön. I. 15, 23), לא חסרת דבר (Dewarim 2, 7), הצום צמתוני אני (Secharj. 7, 5) u. a. m. Auch die Konstruktion ירא mit את. Denn ירא ist eigentlich intransitiv. In allen diesen Fällen bezeichnet der Akkusativ den Gegenstand, welcher das Ziel, die Ursache oder Beziehung einer äußeren oder inneren Bewegung, eines Zustandes oder einer nicht übergehenden Tätigkeit bildet, und zwar ist diese Beziehung eine viel innigere, als die Konstruktion mit einer Präposition ausdrücken würde.