Komentaryong Sumisipi para sa Ezekiel 16:8

רבי יהודה אוסר – as it is written (Deuteronomy 23:1): “No man shall marry his father’s former wife, so as to remove his father’s garment” (i.e., to lay claim to what his father had possessed: Cf. Leviticus 18:8, 20:11, Ezekiel 16:8 and Ruth 3:9). The garment that his father saw, he should not reveal. But the Halakha is not according to the Rabbi Yehuda. But the Sages prohibited those summoned on suspicion of intercourse from the woman. To marry her daughter, or her sister, or her mother or one of her relatives, because she is found with them always, and the come to get accustomed to sin. But if he transgressed and married one of these relatives of the woman he raped or seduced or of the relatives of his wife whom he was suspected of having relations with her, we don’t remove her from his hands. But our Mishnah which teaches: “They marry the kinswomen of a woman who one has raped or seduced,” that applies, even ab initio. We are speaking after the death of the raped or seduced woman, for now, there isn’t a suspicion lest after that he will marry her daughter, he will be faithless with the first.

והיה לכם למשמרת AND IT SHALL BE IN YOUR KEEPING (or watching) — This expresses the idea of examining, and the text therefore implies that it requires examination against any blemish during the four days before slaughter (Pesachim 96a). And why did He order that it should be taken from the flock four days before its slaughter, something which He did not command in respect to the paschal-lamb that was offered by succeeding generations? Rabbi Mathia, the son of Cheresh, said, in answer: Behold, it (Scripture) says, (Ezekiel 16:8) “And I passed over thee (an allusion to God’s passing over the Israelites in Egypt) and looked upon thee, and behold, thy time was the time of love” — there had arrived the time to fulfil the oath which I had sworn to Abraham to redeem his children. They, however, possessed no divine commands in which to engage in order that they should merit to be redeemed — as it is said (Ezekiel 16:7) “thou wast naked and bare” (i. e. bare of all merit earned through the fulfilment of God’s commands). He therefore gave them two commands, relating respectively to the blood of the paschal-lamb and the blood of the circumcision — for that night they circumcised themselves, as it is said (Ezekiel 16:6) “[When I passed over thee] I saw thee wallowing in thy bloods (בְּדָמַיִךְ is plural)” i. e. in two kinds of blood. Further it states, (Zechariah 9:11) “As for thee, also, because of the blood of the covenant I released thy prisoners out of the pit wherin there is no water”. And yet another reply to this question is, that because they were sunk in idolatry and had no merit gained by the practice of a divine command, He said unto them, (v. 21) משכו “Draw” — withdraw your hands from idols; וקחו לכם צאן “and take unto yourselves a lamb” to fulfil a divine command (Mekhilta).

And when I passed by and saw you wallowing in your blood I said to you: In your blood, live. This is the blood of circumcision.
Yea, I said unto you: In your blood, live. This refers to the blood of the Passover offering.
“You have captured my heart, my sister, my bride; you have captured my heart with one of your eyes, with one coil of your necklace.” (Song of Songs 4:9) Rabbi Rabinowitz applies this verse to the Exodus of Egypt in a lengthy analysis of this verse. He explains that there were two evil inclinations that Israel had to overcome in Egypt: one was the inclination for sexual immorality and the other was the inclination toward idolatry. Israel had overcome the first inclination but not the second. They finally accomplished this through the two commandments which they observed in Egypt and this is what made them worthy of redemption.
How did Israel overcome idolatry and "capture the heart" of God? They did so by fulfilling two mitzvot, circumcision and the Passover offering. That is why the expression "capture the heart" is repeated twice. While people often perform good deeds with an interest in the reward they will receive, Israel performed these two commandments without any personal interest. These commandments involved a complete personal sacrifice on their part. First the Israelites underwent circumcision which left them in a weakened state so they could not defend themselves, and then they sacrificed the Passover offering enraging the Egyptians who revered the lamb and who might try to kill them. The Israelites did this without any concern for their own well being. God is said to have two eyes – one is for the quality of justice and the other for the quality of compassion. By acting in this fashion, Israel looked to God for His compassion and not for their just deserve; they looked to God with one eye as the verse says. Finally it was through the leadership of Moses that Israel was willing to do this. According to the Midrash, when the people smelled the Passover sacrifice of Moses (it had the aroma of the Garden of Eden) they all demanded that they be circumcised so that they could eat the Passover sacrifice. And who circumcised them – none other than Moses!
And when I passed by and saw you wallowing in your blood, I said to you: In your blood, live. Yea, I said unto you: In your blood, live: This statement is based on a passage in the Mechilta which asks why, in Exodus, Chapter 12, the Torah emphasizes the 'taking' of the Passover sacrifice before the offering of the sacrifice. Obviously the people had to take the offering before they could sacrifice it! Rabbi Matya ben Heresh quotes Ezekiel 16:8, “I passed by you and saw that your time for love had arrived…” This means that the time had come to fulfill God‟s promise to Abraham, but Israel did not have enough commandments to make them worthy of redemption. God, therefore, gave Israel two commandments and God also told them set aside the lamb four days before it was sacrificed.
It was through their actions that they became worthy of reward (and by setting aside the lamb four days early the people showed their intention to sacrifice it).
Yet elsewhere we learn that Israel did have other commandments to their credit. Rabbi Elazar Hakafar taught that Israel performed four mitzvot in Egypt: they were not suspected of sexual immorality, they did not gossip, they did not change their language or their names. Why, then, was it necessary to have two more mitzvot so the Israelites would be worthy of redemption? The reason why the extra two mitzvot of circumcision and the Passover offering were necessary has to do with a law regarding the status of a priest. If a kohen worships idols or bows down to an idol, he can never participate in the temple service again.
While the Talmud says that repentance can transform a willful act (zadon) into inadvertent sin (sh’gagah)26, the kohen is judged as a sinner and cannot participate in the Temple service again. Only if we can show his repentance to be completely sincere and out of love for God (and not out of self-interest) is his sin completely removed from him. But since we cannot know what is in a person's conscience, we can never know whether his repentance was sincere or simply convenient so he is disqualified from the priestly service.
We can now understand the reason for the extra two mitzvot that the Israelites were given before they left Egypt. The Israelites had worshiped idols – how could they now offer the Passover sacrifice? What is more they had not observed any positive commandments. The four mitzvot that they had already observed were all negative injunctions. These commandments were proof that Israel feared God but they did not prove that Israel loved God. They were, therefore, given two more mitzvot that were positive commandments which proved that they truly had abandoned idolatry and were prepared to devote themselves entirely to God even if it involved considerable self-sacrifice. By circumcising themselves, the Israelites were in a weakened state and could not defend themselves. By then setting aside the lamb for the Passover sacrifice they were showing the Egyptians that they were prepared to sacrifice their sacred animal – if the Egyptians became furious with the Israelites, Israel would not be able to defend themselves. These positive commandments were an expression of absolute love for and loyalty toward God. They were also a proof that Israel‟s repentance was repentance out of love rather than repentance out of fear of God. It also proved that they were now worthy of participating in the service of the divine.
We can now understand why Moses commands the people to set aside and also to take the Passover lamb. It wasn't simply enough for the people to have a lamb. They had to publicly take the lamb so that people would witness their repudiation of idolatry. The lamb would make much noise and it would be apparent to everyone that they had taken it for a sacrifice. This would arouse the Egyptians to kill the Israelites and, therefore, the Israelites actions would truly be self-sacrifice. Also the smell of the roasting meat would waft through the neighborhood so everyone would know what the Israelites were doing. The Israelites would have been convinced that the Egyptians would certainly want to kill them. Their willingness to risk martyrdom would certainly make them worthy of redemption. This also explains why the circumcision was also necessary. Without recovering from their circumcision the Israelites might have believed they could defend themselves. Now that they were in a weakened state they realized that they were totally dependent upon God. Prior to their circumcision they might have reasoned that the Egyptians had been weakened by the plagues – now they were weakened by the circumcision so that they were dependent upon God.