Komentaryong Sumisipi para sa Job 36:14

YE ARE THE CHILDREN OF THE ETERNAL YOUR G-D: YE SHALL NOT CUT YOURSELVES, NOR MAKE ANY BALDNESS BETWEEN YOUR EYES FOR THE DEAD. This also is an explanatory commandment of what He said in the Torah with reference to the priests, They shall not make baldness upon their head etc., nor make any cuttings in their flesh,¹⁹²Leviticus 21:5. and now he [Moses] will explain that it is not merely because of the distinction of the priests which He mentioned there, They shall be holy unto their G-d,¹⁹³Ibid., Verse 6. that they were thus commanded. Rather, all the congregation are holy, every one of them,¹⁹⁴Numbers 16:3. and all of you are the children of the Eternal your G-d like the priests; if so, you too, take heed to yourselves regarding this commandment like them. This explanation is in accordance with the opinion of our Rabbis¹⁹⁵Yebamoth 13b. that both verses [the one here and the one in Leviticus] relate only to the practice [of cutting and making baldness as signs of mourning] for the dead, [although “the dead” is not mentioned in the priestly injunction in Leviticus]. But it is possible that the first commandment [in Leviticus was stated] in relation to priests to state that if the priest had his hair torn out and his flesh cut, he was not fit for the Divine Service, just as He said, and they shall not profane the Name of their G-d,¹⁹³Ibid., Verse 6. and their Service is thus profaned [i.e., invalidated]. Here he explained that the commandment applies also to the Israelites, both prohibitions being necessary.¹⁹⁶By combining both statements we deduce that the prohibition against making baldness relates to the whole head and not only between the eyes, that it relates to the practice in connection with mourning for the dead, and finally that a separate penalty is incurred for each incision into the flesh (Makkoth 20 a-b).
And Rashi wrote: “Because you are the children of the Eternal it is becoming for you to be comely and not be cut about and bald [due to the tearing out of hair].” But it is not correct, for if so this commandment should be binding even [if the deeds were done] not for the dead! And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented: “Once you realize that you are the children of the Eternal and that He loves you more than a father loves his child, you should not cut yourselves [in bereavement] for anything that He does, because whatever He has done is for your good although you may not understand it, just as little children do not understand their father, yet rely on him. For thou art a holy people,¹⁹⁷Verse 2. and you are not like all the other nations; therefore you shall not do as they do.”
In my opinion the purport of the expression for thou art a holy people¹⁹⁷Verse 2. [is to state] an assurance of the eternal existence of the souls before Him, blessed be He. The verse declares: “Since you are a holy people and the treasure of G-d — neither doth G-d respect any person, but He deviseth means that he that is banished be not an outcast from Him¹⁹⁸II Samuel 14:14. — therefore it is improper for you to make incisions in your flesh and tear your hair for the dead even if he perisheth in youth.¹⁹⁹Job 36:14. Scripture, however, did not prohibit weeping for the dead since it is natural to cry when parting from beloved ones, and when they go on a journey even in life. From this verse, there is support for our Rabbis in prohibiting excessive mourning for the dead.²⁰⁰Moed Katan 27b.

FOR WHATSOEVER MAN THERE BE THAT CURSETH HIS FATHER OR HIS MOTHER. The meaning thereof is that it refers back to the beginning of the section where He stated, Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father,²³³Above, 19:3. and He now states here, for whatsoever man there be that does not obey [this commandment] and curseth his father, or his mother, he shall surely be put to death, and by way of the Truth, [the mystic teachings of the Cabala], this verse is here stated because He had said [above], Sanctify yourselves therefore, and by ye holy; for I am the Eternal your G-d,²³⁴Verse 7. and I am the Eternal Who sanctify you,²³⁵Verse 8. meaning that it is the Glorious Name²³⁶Deuteronomy 28:58. Who sanctifies us, for He is our Father, and our Redeemer from everlasting,²³⁷Isaiah 63:16. and it is His Name; therefore he who curses those who participated in his formation, is liable to death. This is the reason for the law [of the punishment] of the adulterer and adulteress, [in the following verse], which He placed near here before [the law of] all forbidden relations [mentioned further on in this section].²³⁸Ramban’s meaning, as clearly indicated by his commentary (see following note) is that as a result of committing adultery the children of the union may come to transgress the laws relating to parental honor, as they will not know who their fathers are. It is for this reason that the law of the adulterer and adulteress is identical to that of one who curses his parents [who is liable to death by the hand of the court], as the one leads to the other, and therefore too, it is mentioned in juxtaposition to that law. I have already alluded to this above.²³⁹Exodus 20:13 (Vol. II, p. 320).
Now Scripture mentions here some of the forbidden relations in order to make [one who has intercourse with them] liable to death, these being a man’s wife,²⁴⁰Verse 10. a father’s wife,²⁴¹Verse 11. a daughter-in-law,²⁴²Verse 12. a male,²⁴³Verse 13. a woman and her mother,²⁴⁴Verse 14. and the same law applies to a woman and her daughter and her daughter’s daughter, for He mentioned here only some of the relations of a wife, but the same punishment applies to all those mentioned there²⁴⁵Above, 18:17. in the admonition. And surely this applies all the more so to one’s own relatives, such as his son’s daughter and his daughter’s daughter mentioned there,²⁴⁶Ibid., Verse 10. and needless to say, his [own] daughter. On all these matters there are also Rabbinical interpretations to establish their punishment. Similarly He mentioned here the punishment of death for lying with a beast.²⁴⁷Verse 15. He mentioned excision again in the case of a menstruant²⁴⁸Verse 18. [although this has already been included in a general statement above, 18:29], in order to declare him liable for mere sexual contact without completion of the act, this being the sense of the expression, he hath bared her fountain.²⁴⁸Verse 18. Similarly [He has stated] in the case of a mother’s sister and a father’s sister, for he hath bared his near kin.²⁴⁹Verse 19. He mentioned an uncle’s wife²⁵⁰Verse 20. and also a brother’s wife,²⁵¹Verse 21. in order to declare them liable to [the punishment of] dying childless, whether he had no children at the time when he commits the sin, or he did have [in which case none will survive him]. But the excision mentioned in the case of one’s sister²⁵²Verse 17. is redundant [being included in the general statement above, 18:29], and has therefore been interpreted by our Rabbis:²⁵³Makkoth 13 b. “Why was excision specified in the case of a sister etc.” In line with the plain meaning of Scripture [excision was specified in the case of a sister] in order that Scripture should add [that it will be done] in the sight of the children of their people,²⁵²Verse 17. meaning to state that their soul will perish in youth²⁵⁴Job 36:14. in such a way that people will see, understand and realize that the hand of the Eternal hath done this,²⁵⁵Isaiah 41:20. and that the Holy One of Israel has decreed it.
The meaning of the expression he shall bear his iniquity,²⁵²Verse 17. is that this sin will cleave to him from that time onwards, his deeds will not prosper, and the curse shall lie upon him,²⁵⁶See Deuteronomy 29:19. for G-d will strike him with sore sicknesses until He will destroy him with excision, something similar to what the Rabbis have said:²⁵⁷Shabbath 37 a. “A sign of [this type of] sin is one affected with dropsy.” It was not necessary for Scripture to mention the other people who are liable to excision, such as one’s mother²⁵⁸Above, 18:7. and a wife’s sister,²⁵⁹Ibid., Verse 18. because all that is needed to be stated about them we have already derived from those mentioned [here in this section].

The passage involving a prostitute comes next, because of the connection through the male slave. The Exegetes of our religion have asserted [Sanhedrin 54b] that a male prostitute denotes a catamite (as evidenced by the preposition from the sons of Israel). Moreover, when Elihu said “…and their life as that of the male prostitutes” [Job 36: 14], the word “their soul” was parallel to “their life”, and thus the word “male prostitutes” was parallel to “youth”. In addition, there are the verses “there was male prostitution in the land” [I Kings 14: 24], and “the houses of the male prostitutes” [II Kings 23: 7] (where the latter are distinct from the “women”, who were “weaving there”). I do not understand the etymology of the word prostitute . However, when one inquires thoroughly into the meaning of the word, it becomes clear that it denotes a woman who is receptive to any man (this is evidenced by “where is the prostitute?” [Genesis 38: 21]). If so, then a male prostitute is someone who performs the acts of the Egyptians — verbum sat sapienti. After mentioning harlotry, Scripture then proceeds to discuss