Today's Learning Sotah 2:5-6 Sponsored by O.C. 236:3-237:1 the Kramer family Shevuot 10 in honor of Yerushalmi-- Yaakov's bar mitzvah Ketubot 47 The Meth family in honor of Nachum's birthday Professor and Mrs. Gilbert Ginsburg in memory of his father Hamaayan/The Torah Spring edited by Shlomo Katz Shoftim Vol. IX, No. 47 (431), 7 Elul 5755, September 2, 1995 The first mitzvah in this week's parashah is to appoint judges and police officers. Commentaries explain that the purpose of these judges is two-fold, i.e., to teach the people and to enforce the laws. Regarding one of the criminal laws which the courts must enforce, Rav Avraham Yitzchak Kook zatz'l offered the following insight. It was after the Arab riots of 1920, when the British imposed light fines on the Arabs and announced a curb on Jewish immigration to Palestine. When the British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel asked for Rav Kook's thoughts on these developments, Rav Kook said: The Torah states that a thief must pay back double what he stole, and then he goes free. Why such a light punishment? Why is he not whipped? The answer is that thieves do not fear corporal punishment. A thief knows that his victim might beat him, or even kill him, but he takes that chance. What a thief understands is money, and he is punished through his money. That is a deterrent. "So, too," said Rav Kook, "I am not upset by the Arab's light punishment, but by the fact that they have gained politically from their acts. The only punishment that the Arabs would understand is political [i.e., if their acts would cause the British to increase immigration.]" (Malachim K'vnei Adam p.155) ************************************ "Righteousness, righteousness shall you pursue . . ." (16:20) Rav Avraham (the Slonimer Rebbe) zatz'l writes: A person must stand up to the yetzer hara, the evil inclination, and not fall for his tricks. At a minimum, a person should not compound the sin. For example, the midrash says that Adam was expelled from Gan Eden not because he ate of the Tree of Knowledge; that was the yetzer hara's doing. Rather, Adam was expelled because he compounded his sin by showing ingratitude to G-d and saying, "The woman which You gave me, she served [the fruit to] me and I ate." The yetzer hara can only entice a person, but it cannot make him act. This is why the verse says, "Righteousness, righteousness shall you pursue"--the first form of "righteousness" is to stand up to the yetzer hara entirely; the second is to minimize the damage done by the yetzer hara and not to compound the sin. (Be'er Avraham) ************************************ "You shall place a king over yourself." (17:15) In the first Book of Shmuel (ch. 8) we read that the prophet was angry when the Jewish people asked for a king. Why did he feel that way--isn't this one of the Torah's commandments? Rav Menachem Mendel of Lubavitch zatz'l (the Tzemach Tzedek; died 1866) explains that a Jewish king has two missions. The obvious one is to judge the people and maintain order. Also, the king aids man in recognizing his own insignificance before G-d. (In Hebrew this is called, "Bitul ha'yesh"--literally, "Nullification of matter.") How so? When the king's subjects humble themselves before the king and he humbles himself before G-d, those subjects realize that they too must humble themselves before G-d. (This is why the Jewish kings, especially David, were called "G-d's chariot". Just as a chariot has no reason to exist except to serve its rider, the righteous kings knew that they had no reason to exist except to serve Hashem.) It's true, says the Tzemach Tzedek, that there is a mitzvah to appoint a king. However, the time to perform that mitzvah is only when the Jewish people need a king to carry out the two missions described above. Ideally, however, a Jew can teach himself the above lessons. Thus, the prophet Shmuel was not angry that they wanted a king, he was angry that they needed a king. (Derech Mitzvotecha: Ta'amei Hamitzvot) ************************************ "You shall do to him as he conspired to do to his fellow. . ." (19:19) This pasuk teaches the law of the eid zomem, a particular kind of false witness. Specifically, a pair of witnesses becomes zomemim (the plural form) if another pair of witnesses testifies that the first pair could not possibly have seen the crime or the transaction (loan, sale, etc.) about which they testified because they were somewhere else at that time. In such a case, the first pair's punishment is to suffer whatever monetary or physical consequences would have befallen the defendant against whom they had testified. Why is the second pair of witnesses believed automatically? One possible reason is as follows: The Torah always believes two kosher witnesses, whether they are testifying against one defendant or against 100 defendants. The reason is that the defendants, no matter how numerous, have a personal stake in the trial's outcome; the witnesses, we assume, absent evidence to the contrary, have no stake. But what happens when the witnesses are challenged by another pair of objective witnesses? Now, it is the original witnesses themselves who have a stake in the outcome, because they are on trial. Thus, the second set of witnesses has more credibility. (Sefer Hachinuch and others) ************************************ One of the seemingly illogical aspects of the halachah of eidim zomemim is that they receive the designated punishment only if the court has reached a judgment based upon their testimony but the judgment has not been carried out. If the defendant has been executed--some say also if he received lashes--the false witnesses go free. Why? Rav Yosef Karo zatz'l suggests two answers. Firstly, he says, if the witnesses wrongly caused the death of another, death at the hands of the court is too good for them. The purpose of punishing them would be that their deaths might be an atonement for their sin, but these do not deserve atonement. Alternatively, we assume that "G-d is standing in the congregation of judges" (Tehilim 82:1). If the defendant was put to death based upon false testimony, that was G-d's will. These sinners who testified against him were merely the agents of G-d's will. [Of course, this does not mean that Hashem will not punish them, just as He punished Pharaoh despite the fact that G-d had told Avraham that the Jews would be enslaved in an unspecified foreign land. Note, too, that no one says this defendant is innocent; all we know is that this pair of witnesses did not witness the crime.] (Kesef Mishneh, Hil. Edut 20:2) ************************************ Rav Reuven Margaliot zatz'l died 7 Elul 5731 (1971) Among the most remarkable, yet barely known, sages of this century is surely Rav Reuven Margaliot. His works cover all areas of Torah study, and in a style which is truly unique. One biographer said: "If any writer in this century gave the impression of knowing the entire Torah, it was Rav Reuven Margaliot." His admirers included gedolim (Torah sages) from perspectives as diverse as Rav Avraham Yitzchak Kook and Rav Chaim Eliezer Shapira (the Munkatcher Rebbe). Many of Rav Margaliot's works adopt the tools of "Bible criticism" and so-called "Bible scholars" and use them in the service of true Torah study. Some of his works discuss the behavior of Talmud sages, including behavior which is seemingly unusual, and explain it in light of those sages' halachic opinions. Rav Margaliot also wrote biographies and history books. Other works are straight-forward commentaries, unusual only in the breadth of the sources they rely upon. It truly appears that there was no section of the Talmud, no midrash, no rishon (medieval commentary), no acharon (post-medieval commentary), and no aspect of kabbalah which was not at Rav Margaliot's finger tips. Among his works currently in print: Mechkarim Bedarchei Hatalmud--"Studies in Talmudic Methodology"; Malachei Elyon--an encyclopedia on angels; Yesod Hamishnah Va'arichatah--history of the mishnah; Hamikra Ve'hamesorah--essays on Tanach; Le'cheker Sheimot Vekinuyim Batalmud--"Studies on Names and Nicknames in the Talmud"; Shem Olam--an attempt to identify the authors of anonymous statements in the Talmud; Margaliot Hayam--an immensely popular commentary on Tractate Sanhedrin; Nefesh Chayah--commentary on Shulchan Aruch; Be'er Miriam and Kohelet Moshe--commentaries on the Pesach Haggadah; Ohr Habahir--on the kabbalistic midrash, Sefer Habahir; Nitzotzei Zohar--commentary on the Zohar and Tikunei Zohar. Sha'arei Zohar--commentary on the Talmud, with an emphasis on comparing the Talmud to the Zohar; and Olelot--miscellaneous essays on Tanach, Talmud, liturgy and history. Rav Margaliot also edited the work She'eilot U'teshuvot Min Hashamayim, a 12th century compilation of halachic discussions between the sage Rav Yaakov of Marves (France) and an angel. Rav Margaliot's edition begins with a comprehensive analysis of the relationship between prophecy and the halachic process. Another work which he edited is Milchamot Hashem by Rav Avraham, the son of Rambam (Maimonides). To this work, Rav Margaliot added a biography of the author. ************************************ Donations to Hamaayan are tax-deductible.