VaEtchanan 5727
RaMBaN broadens the Heter to include non-combatants, but limits it to only apply to the period of Kibush HaAretz and not at other times.
דברים פרק ו
(י) וְהָיָה כִּי יְבִיאֲךָ יְקֹוָק אֱלֹקיךָ אֶל־הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע לַאֲבֹתֶיךָ לְאַבְרָהָם לְיִצְחָק וּלְיַעֲקֹב לָתֶת לָךְ עָרִים גְּדֹלֹת וְטֹבֹת אֲשֶׁר לֹא־בָנִיתָ:
(יא) וּבָתִּים מְלֵאִים כָּל־טוּב אֲשֶׁר לֹא־מִלֵּאתָ וּבֹרֹת חֲצוּבִים אֲשֶׁר לֹא־חָצַבְתָּ כְּרָמִים וְזֵיתִים אֲשֶׁר לֹא־נָטָעְתָּ וְאָכַלְתָּ וְשָׂבָעְתָּ:
(יב) הִשָּׁמֶר לְךָ פֶּן־תִּשְׁכַּח אֶת־יְקֹוָק אֲשֶׁר הוֹצִיאֲךָ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם מִבֵּית עֲבָדִים:
(יג) אֶת־יְקֹוָק אֱלֹקיךָ תִּירָא וְאֹתוֹ תַעֲבֹד וּבִשְׁמוֹ תִּשָּׁבֵעַ:
(יד) לֹא תֵלְכוּן אַחֲרֵי אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים מֵאֱלֹהֵי הָעַמִּים אֲשֶׁר סְבִיבוֹתֵיכֶם:
(טו) כִּי קל קַנָּא יְקֹוָק אֱלֹקיךָ בְּקִרְבֶּךָ פֶּן־יֶחֱרֶה אַף־יְקֹוָק אֱלֹקיךָ בָּךְ וְהִשְׁמִידְךָ מֵעַל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה: ס
(טז) לֹא תְנַסּוּ אֶת־יְקֹוָק אֱלֹקיכֶם כַּאֲשֶׁר נִסִּיתֶם בַּמַּסָּה:
(יז) שָׁמוֹר תִּשְׁמְרוּן אֶת־מִצְוֹת יְקֹוָק אֱלֹקיכֶם וְעֵדֹתָיו וְחֻקָּיו אֲשֶׁר צִוָּךְ:
(יח) וְעָשִׂיתָ הַיָּשָׁר וְהַטּוֹב בְּעֵינֵי יְקֹוָק לְמַעַן יִיטַב לָךְ וּבָאתָ וְיָרַשְׁתָּ אֶת־הָאָרֶץ הַטֹּבָה אֲשֶׁר־נִשְׁבַּע יְקֹוָק לַאֲבֹתֶיךָ:
(יט) לַהֲדֹף אֶת־כָּל־אֹיְבֶיךָ מִפָּנֶיךָ כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר יְקֹוָק: ס
(כ) כִּי־יִשְׁאָלְךָ בִנְךָ מָחָר לֵאמֹר מָה הָעֵדֹת וְהַחֻקִּים וְהַמִּשְׁפָּטִים אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְקֹוָק אֱלֹקינוּ אֶתְכֶם:
Alef.
1. At the beginning of his comment , RaMBaN is explaining what is meant by “forgetting HaShem”—not His Existence, but rather the contrast between the individual’s present situation, which he should attribute to HaShem, and what pertained during the Egyptian enslavement, before HaShem’s Intervention.
2. The Rabbinic interpretation of these verses is that it is likely that within the various things that the Jews will inherit from the Canaanites, will be all sorts of things restricted by the Tora. Either until they are used up or until the seven years of conquest pass, all of these things will be permitted to their new inhabitants as long as they are not directly associated with or represent idolatry, which must always be avoided. 1
3. Since “pits” are not something that are eaten, but rather means by which to store things, it is harder to imagine how they would be intrinsically prohibited, in contrast to the contents of homes or produce being grown, which could have all sorts of prohibitions applied to them. Consequently, how “pits” might be prohibited is more speculative and RaMBaN supplies multiple possibilities.
4. Verses 7:25 “The graven images of their gods shall ye burn with fire; thou shalt not covet the silver or the gold that is on them, nor take it unto thee, lest thou be snared therein; for it is an abomination to the LORD thy God,” and 7:5 “But thus shall ye deal with them: ye shall break down their altars, and dash in pieces their pillars, and hew down their Asherim, and burn their graven images with fire,” are cited by RaMBaN to demonstrate that whatever leniencies might be applied temporarily to other prohibitions in the Tora, the prohibitions against benefiting from, or even allowing to remain in existence, anything associated with idolatry will always be in effect.
5. כמו שמפורש בענין—RaMBaN contends, against RaMBaM’s interpretation, that v.’s 10 and 11 are explicitly providing a Heter for people using the spoils from the Canaanites that would otherwise be considered prohibited, again provided they are not associated with idolatry, without relying upon the generic Heteirim of Pikuach Nefesh or leniencies that apply specifically during a time of war.
יין נסך—Wine that has been dedicated for use as a libation for idolatry, which the Tora itself clearly prohibits.
סתם יינם—Wine produced by a non-Jew and which has possibly been dedicated for idolatrous purposes, but this is not known. Consequently the Rabbis prohibited in addition to יין נסך which was already explicitly prohibited by the Tora, also סתם יינם, due to the mere possibility.
אסורי תורה הותרו, גזירות של דבריהם יהיו אסורות?—If RaMBaM’s intention was not to allow יין נסך, which is more severely prohibited via a Tora prohibition, but rather only to permit סתם יינם, this would not make sense. If יין נסך, the more restricted substance, was permitted in this context, it would not be logical to insist upon the continuation of the Rabbinic prohibition of סתם יינם, which is on a lower level of prohibition. Furthermore, if the Rabbis are empowered only to distance a person from a Tora prohibition, if the Tora prohibition in this instance did not apply, then there would be no reason to insist upon the observance of their prohibition!
6. RaMBaM views the leniencies that applied during the conquest of Canaan as not specific to that situation, but rather are practices that always pertained to anyone engaged in warfare. RaMBaN sees this as a unique event with respect to the spoils of Canaan that had been promised to the Jews upon their entry into the land. A practical difference would be what could be done by non-combatants, i.e., those not engaged in actual fighting? Would RaMBaM deprive them of this leniency, as opposed to RaMBaN who would say that it included everyone and not just fighters?
7. RaMBaM narrows the leniency as stated in #6, i.e., that it would apply only to those actually engaged in fighting. His expansion is that it does not pertain only to the case of the entry into the land of Israel, but in all wartime situations.
RaMBaN broadens the Heter to include non-combatants, but limits it to only apply to the period of Kibush HaAretz and not at other times.
8. RaDVaZ wishes to understand why combatants should be given such a leniency. Why would it not be possible for them to find food that was permitted? Understandably, if it was an issue of Pikuach Nefesh (one’s life is in danger) then short of violating idolatry, murder and sexual immorality, one can preserve one’s life. But how does this apply when someone is not directly involved in fighting? RaDVaZ explains that foraging for permitted foods during a time when there continues to be insurgency due to the unsettled nature of the ongoing conquest could cause risks to one’s life and therefore the leniency applies.
Beit.
1. HaEmek Davar, by invoking the issue of Briyut (health) and the consideration of endangering oneself, would seem to be more in the spirit of RaMBaM than RaMBaN with respect to why leniencies will apply to the consumption of substances that usually are prohibited, when the Jews come to Israel.
2. Whereas RaMBaN uses the contents of v.’s 10-14 to explain why things that are associated with idolatry remain prohibited even to those first coming to Israel, HaEmek Davar sees those verses as constituting caution regarding even the things that are permitted, i.e., if a person becomes accustomed to using things that ordinarily are prohibited, it will be so much more difficult for him to return to a mindset where he will discipline himself to observe God’s Laws and Prohibitions.
Gimel.
דברים פרק י
(יב) וְעַתָּה יִשְׂרָאֵל מָה יְקֹוָק אֱלֹקיךָ שֹׁאֵל מֵעִמָּךְ כִּי אִם־לְיִרְאָה אֶת־יְקֹוָק אֱלֹקיךָ לָלֶכֶת בְּכָל־דְּרָכָיו וּלְאַהֲבָה אֹתוֹ וְלַעֲבֹד אֶת־יְקֹוָק אֱלֹקיךָ בְּכָל־לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל־נַפְשֶׁךָ:
(יג) לִשְׁמֹר אֶת־מִצְוֹת יְקֹוָק וְאֶת־חֻקֹּתָיו אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוְּךָ הַיּוֹם לְטוֹב לָךְ:
(יד) הֵן לַיקֹוָק אֱלֹקיךָ הַשָּׁמַיִם וּשְׁמֵי הַשָּׁמָיִם הָאָרֶץ וְכָל־אֲשֶׁר־בָּהּ:
(טו) רַק בַּאֲבֹתֶיךָ חָשַׁק יְקֹוָק לְאַהֲבָה אוֹתָם וַיִּבְחַר בְּזַרְעָם אַחֲרֵיהֶם בָּכֶם מִכָּל־הָעַמִּים כַּיּוֹם הַזֶּה:
(טז) וּמַלְתֶּם אֵת עָרְלַת לְבַבְכֶם וְעָרְפְּכֶם לֹא תַקְשׁוּ עוֹד:
(יז) כִּי יְקֹוָק אֱלֹקיכֶם הוּא אֱלֹקי הָאֱלֹקים וַאֲדֹנֵי הָאֲדֹנִים הָקל הַגָּדֹל הַגִּבֹּר וְהַנּוֹרָא אֲשֶׁר לֹא־יִשָּׂא פָנִים וְלֹא יִקַּח שֹׁחַד:
(יח) עֹשֶׂה מִשְׁפַּט יָתוֹם וְאַלְמָנָה וְאֹהֵב גֵּר לָתֶת לוֹ לֶחֶם וְשִׂמְלָה:
(יט) וַאֲהַבְתֶּם אֶת־הַגֵּר כִּי־גֵרִים הֱיִיתֶם בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם:
(כ) אֶת־יְקֹוָק אֱלֹקיךָ תִּירָא אֹתוֹ תַעֲבֹד וּבוֹ תִדְבָּק וּבִשְׁמוֹ תִּשָּׁבֵעַ:
In light of what HaEmek Davar said regarding Devarim 6:12 in particular, i.e., “that this thing (where usually prohibited things are permitted for a time) should not cause one to forget HaShem”, once order is restored and there are no longer blanket exceptions to the law, it will become possible to truly “cling to HaShem” in every regard. The danger that being permitted to ignore certain Halachot will no longer apply, and therefore total clinging to HaShem will again be possible.
(כ) את ה' אלקיך תירא וגו'. קאי על דרך החסידות. ואי' במ"ר פ' מטות ונשבעת חי ה' באמת ובמשפט ובצדקה והתברכו בו גוים ובו יתהללו. אמר הקב"ה לישראל לא תהיו סבורים שהותר לכם להשבע בשמי אפילו באמת אין אתםרשאים להשבע בשמי אא"כ יהיו בכם כל המדות האלו. את ה' אלקיך תירא שתהא כאותן שנקראו יראי אלקים אברהם איוב ויוסף כו' ואתו תעבוד. אם אתה מפנה עצמך לתורה ולעסוק במצות ואין לך עבודה אחרת. ובו תדבק וכי כלאדם יכול לידבק בשכינה כו' אלא כל המשיא בתו לת"ח שקורא בושנה ועשה פרקמטיא ומהנהו מנכסיו. אם יש בך כל המדות הללו אז ובשמו תשבע. הרי דמפרשי חז"ל זה המקרא על דרך החסידות והקדימו במ"ר מקרא בירמיה ג'ונשבעת חי ה' באמת במשפט ובצדקה וגו' דפי' באמת היינו ביראת ה' העומדת ולא תנוד בחליפות הזמנים שעוברים על האדם מרעה לטובה או להיפך וכמו אברהם איוב ויוסף שבכל שנוי עתים עמדו בשם ירא אלקים. וזהו הכנוי אמתדקושטא קאי במשפט היינו ואותו תעבוד שדייק מופנה לה' ולא לעצמו ואשה ובנים אלא שופטים במדת הצמצום כדי להיות מופנה לה'. ובצדקה היינו ובו תדבק שתהא הצדקה מקרבת את העושה לאביו שבשמים והיינו ע"י שמתקרבלת"ח. וכ"ז הוא דרך החסידות. אלא שלפי לשון המדרש מתפרש כל המקרא בתורת תנאי ומסובב אם את ה' אלקיך תירא ואותו תעבוד וגו' אז ובשמו תשבע. הוא מ"ע ג"כ שזהו כבודו ית' שיהא אדם כזה נשבע בשמו ומראה בזהשאין לו דבר יקר בעולם כהזכרת שמו יתברך כמש"כ בספר בראשית כ"א כ"ב. ומכ"מ נוח לפרש כל המקרא בתורת אזהרה ולימוד לדרך החסידות שיהא כך וכך. ומקרא כזה כתיב לעיל ו' י"ג בשנוי מעט מכו שנתבאר במקומו לפיהענין:
(I do not see the actual connection between what HaEmek Davar says re 6:11 ff. and 10:20! A typo?)
Daled.
1. RaShI emphasizes their complaining about a lack of water.
Ibn Ezra interprets that the trial was about God’s Immanence.
2. Ibn Ezra addresses the change in the vowel under the Beit serving as a preposition for Masa, from a Sheva to a Patach.
3. Perhaps the change is created when one contrasts what the place was originally called, when it was not associated with any particular event, and after the fact, when the place becomes iconic, forever linked to the event(s) that took place there. Then it is “the place” indicated by the Heh HaYedia indicated by the Patach.
“And Saul summoned the people, and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand footmen, and ten thousand men of Judah.”
Makot 23b-24a
[THEREFORE GAVE HE THEM TORAH (TEACHINGS) AND MANY COMMANDMENTS .
. . ] R. Simlai when preaching said: Six hundred and thirteen precepts were communicated to Moses, three hundred and sixty-five negative precepts, corresponding to the number of solar days [in the year], and two hundred and forty-eight positive precepts, corresponding to the number of the members of man's body. Said R. Hamnuna: What is the [authentic] text for this? It is, Moses commanded us torah, an inheritance of the congregation of Jacob, ‘torah’ being in letter-value, equal to six hundred and eleven, ‘I am’ and ‘Thou shalt have no [other Gods]’ [not being reckoned, because] we heard from the mouth of the Might [Divine].
MaHaRShA derives from R. Hamnuna’s Derasha that the two most central Mitzvot are believing in HaShem and rejecting idolatry—this is why HaShem Himself Commanded them to the Jewish people at Sinai—and therefore it is understandable within the context of Devarim Chapter 6 that is being discussed in the Gilayon, that even under the most extreme conditions, there will be no leniency with respect to these two principles.
Posts
