ציטירנדיקער פּירוש אויף מלכים ב 2:23

לנפשותיכם, the meaning of this word is that if an animal kills a human being it becomes guilty of death itself, unless I use the animal to exact retribution form wicked people, as in the case of the bears who killed the youngsters who had mocked the prophet Elisha (Kings II 20,23, or Kings I 13, entire chapter). [the fact that the lion had not touched the corpse of the man he had killed, showed that the lion had acted as G’d’s messenger, had not acted from impulse in order to still its hunger. Ed] Also in the תוכחה in Leviticus 26,22 G’d specifically announces that He would use the free roaming beasts as His agents to wreak vengeance of the Jewish people who had sinned deliberately and for a long period of time. Our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 34,13) explain the words דמכם לנפשותיכם, as a warning not to commit suicide (especially to people who thereby expect to escape G’d’s retribution) The message is that the person who killed himself will be held accountable in the hereafter. They said further that the word אך at the beginning of the verse excludes such apparent suicides as Chananyah, Mishael, and Azaryah, being prepared to become martyrs to demonstrate their faith in the G’d in heaven

ידינו לא שפכה, “our hands have not spilled this blood;” it is peculiar that the last letter in the word ושפכה is the letter ה when we would have expected it to be the plural ending ו. [It is read as if it had been spelled with the letter ו. Ed.] Our sages drive from this spelling that there are five items=ה, that must be provided by a host worthy of that name. They are: food, drink, overnight lodging, accompanying the guest at his departure for a certain distance, and providing him with some food for the journey. (Talmud Sotah, folio 45) The Talmud raises the question of how could anyone have thought that the members of the elders of the town near which the body had been found could have been responsible for the death of the person described in our paragraph? Why would they have to publicly declare their innocence? What these Elders really declared was that they had never been remiss in providing the five items mentioned in the Talmud to anyone who had been their guest. In other words, if that person had been a guest in their houses, they could state categorically, that he would have been treated in the manner that is appropriate. We have a saying by Rav Yehudah who quoted in the name of Rav, that anyone who has enjoyed as little as even four cubits of accompaniment from his host on his way out will not come to harm on the journey on which he set out. This saying has been illustrated by an actual occurrence. The scholar Ravinah accompanied Rava bar Yitzchok, when he became involved in a dangerous, potentially fatal situation, and he was saved from it (Talmud, Sotah folio 46) The Talmud sets the distances that a guest has to be accompanied by the host on his departure, commencing with a relatively short distance when a teacher had hosted a student, and a much greater distance when the student had hosted a teacher. (1200 meters in the latter case) Rabbi Meir considers the subject of such accompaniment one that the host can be enforced by a court to observe. [Naturally, the assumption is that the host is able-bodied. Ed.] According to Judges 1,24 there is no fixed limit for this, and the Israelites who had been in the process of conquering parts of the Holy Land that had not yet been conquered while Joshua had been alive showed a Canaanite gratitude for his showing them the way, similar to the spies promising Rahav of Jericho complete protection including her family for having protected them while on their mission. [The prophet explains how many parts of the land of Canaan remained unconquered on account of this for hundreds of years. Ed.] [If I understand correctly, when gentiles, even those under decree of death by the Torah unless they left the land, saved Israelites, our gratitude takes tangible form. In the example quoted from the Book of Judges, the Canaanite had not even personally accompanied the Israelites in question but had merely showed them the way. Ed.] In verse 26 of the incident quoted, the person whom they saved went forth to another part of the land of the Canaanites and successfully built a new city which he named Luz, [the name of Beyt El, before Yaakov had renamed it in Genesis 28,19. [Yaakov had been totally exposed there and had been saved miraculously. Ed.]. According to Rabbi Yoshua, Mitzrayim, (Pharaoh, in Genesis chapter 12,20, who gave Avraham a military escort to protect him, since he had become so wealthy) who accompanied Avraham for a distance of only 4 cubits beyond the border was rewarded, so that the Israelites had to wait four hundred years before being redeemed from Egypt. (Compare Talmud, tractate Sotah, folio 46) According to another view in the Talmud, when mention is made of לוויה, escorting someone, without any further detail, the distance meant is approx 1,2 km. This is also supposed to be the meaning of Psalms 91,11: כי מלאכיו יצוה לך לשמרך בכל דרכיך, “for He will order His angels to protect you wherever you go.” The distance of 1,2 k.m. equal to the Hebrew word מיל, is based on the first letters in the three words מלאכיו יצוה לך. When enjoying this level of escort one is certain to be successful in all one’s undertakings. Nonetheless the sages said that giving a departing guest money without also giving him some bread, is not sufficient. They base themselves on Proverbs 28,21: ועל פת לחם יפשע גבר, “sin sometimes originates from the lack of a piece of bread.” Solomon means that having not ensured that a departing guest has access to some food immediately, may become the cause of his suffering from an attack of בולמוס, “ravenous hunger,” which if not dealt with immediately may result in the death of the afflicted person. Rabbi Yochanan went as far as to say that anyone who fails to escort a departing guest is guilty of bloodshed. He based himself on the fact that if the people of Jericho had escorted the prophet out of their city and provided him with basic necessities, he would not have caused the bears to kill 42 young people of that town. (Kings II 2,23) Rabbi Elazar in dealing with that incident, claims that the word ונערים in that verse should not be understood as teenagers, but as מן עורים persons who abstain from performing G–d’s commandments, and the word קטנים which follows, means as being “small” in that they had little faith in G–d. Elisha was supposed to have seen through prophetic insight that the mothers of all of these youngsters who had made fun of him had all become pregnant with them on Yom Kippur, on a day when having marital relations is strictly prohibited. This is why he felt free to curse them in the name of the Lord, as described there. Furthermore, the subject of escorting departing guests is of greater significance than handing out a gift. Handing out gifts is not something involving one’s body, whereas escorting a departing guest involves a physical effort, showing that one is personally involved. In fact the performance of this commandment is of such significance that the benefits promised for the recipient are also applied to the host who performs this act, who will be protected until he comes home again. This is based on Isaiah 57,19: שלום שלום לרחוק ולקרוב, “welcome, welcome both to the one as yet distant and to the one already closer to us.” The one described as “distant,” is the departing guest, and the one described as “near” is the host, who is on his way home. [Our author concludes with one or two additional blessings that is in store for people performing this commandment, which I have decided not to bother with. Ed.]