IF A THIEF BE FOUND BREAKING IN. At night, as the thief would not break in during the day. If the sun he risen upon him in the verse which follows proves this.

[THERE SHALL BE NO BLOODGUILTINESS FOR HIM.] That is, the one who kills the thief is not guilty of bloodshed.¹ (literally, blood) means bloodshed. Hence en lo damim (there shall be no bloodguiltiness in him) means he is not guilty of bloodshed. One has to be amazed at those who interpret damim (bloodguiltiness) as life.² (there shall be no bloodguiltiness in him): “This is not murder. He is considered as dead to begin with.” Also see Rashi on verse 2. “Damim lo (there shall be bloodguiltiness for him): He is considered as a living person, and the owner of the house commits murder if he kills him.” If this is so, what is the meaning of because thou art a man of blood (damim) (II Sam. 16:8) and his blood (damav) shall be upon him (Lev. 20:9).

footnotes: ¹ In other words, damim ² The reference is to Rashi. Rashi interprets en lo damim

IF THE SUN BE RISEN UPON HIM…HE SHALL MAKE RESTITUTION. This³. refers to he shall pay five oxen for an ox, etc. (Ex. 21:37), which is written above.⁴ It is like unto a foreign people (Ex. 21:8)⁵ and And also unto thy bondwoman thou shalt do likewise (Deut. 15:17), which refers to thou shalt furnish him liberally (Deut. 15:14), which is written above it.

footnotes: ³ He shall make restitution ⁴ For the first part of our verse does not deal with what a thief steals. It deals rather with the circumstances under which an owner may kill a thief (Krinsky). ⁵ Which is connected to the first part of verse 8. See I.E. on Ex. 21:7,8.

HE SHALL BE SOLD FOR HIS THEFT. Because of his theft.⁶ prefaced to genevato (his theft) means because. Thus bi-genevato means because of his theft. The bet prefaced to a word usually means in. Hence I.E.’s comment.

footnotes: ⁶ I.E.’s point is that the bet

IF THE THEFT BE FOUND IN HIS HAND. This verse refers to all beasts.⁷ Our sages⁸. 38 reads: however, our sages, etc. received a tradition that Scripture decrees⁹. that the law concerning the payment of “four and five” applies only to oxen and sheep.¹⁰ 67b.

footnotes: ⁷ Not only to an ox, ass, or sheep. ⁸ Vat. Ebr ⁹ Hebrew, gezerat ha-katuv ¹⁰ See Baba Kama

IF A MAN CAUSE A FIELD OR A VINEYARD TO BE EATEN. This too is connected to what is written above¹¹ wherein the damage cause by an ox is mentioned. Scripture reads, ki yaver (if…cause…to be eaten). The word yaver (cause to be eaten) comes from the same root as be’irenu (our cattle) in we and our cattle (Num. 22:4).¹² means if a man sends his beast, i.e., he sends his beast to pasture. Indeed, this is how I.E. renders yaver in his short commentary. Similarly Rashi on verse 4. It¹³ (Krinsky, Weiser). However, see next note. is a pi’el.¹⁴, as I.E. points out in his short commentary, is a hifil. Some believe that our text is corrupt and that we should emend it accordingly. See Krinsky and Weiser. However, according to Filwarg, I.E.’s comment refers to bi’er (feed), which is the pi’el.

footnotes: ¹¹ That is, Ex. 21:28-36. ¹² Thus ki yaver ish ¹³ The reference is apparently to yaver ¹⁴ Yaver

[AND IT FEED IN ANOTHER MAN’S FIELD.] Bi-sedeh acker¹⁵ means in another man’s field.¹⁶ Ye that have eaten up the vineyard (Is. 3:4)¹⁷ means ye have eaten up the vineyard which belongs to another. is similar.

footnotes: ¹⁵ Literally, in another field. Hence I.E.’s comment. ¹⁶ In another field is short for in another man’s field. ¹⁷ Ye that have eaten up the vineyard

IF FIRE BREAK OUT. This too is connected to what is written above, for it speaks of damage caused to a field.

[HE THAT KINDLED.] The word ha-mavir (he that kindled) does not have the same meaning as the word yaver (cause to be eaten) in if a man cause…to be eaten (v. 4) even though they both come from the same conjugation.¹⁸ and yaver are both hifils. For the word fire indicates what ha-mavir means.¹⁹. It then goes on to say that the “mavir” shall surely make restitution. It is thus clear that ha-mavir means he that kindled [the fire]. It is considered beautiful Hebrew style to employ the same word with two meanings,²⁰ as in With the jawbone of an ass (ha-chamor), heaps upon heaps (chamor chamorotayim) (Jud. 15:16), and in that rode on thirty ass colts (ayarim), and they had thirty cities (u-sheloshim ayarim lahem) (Jud. 10:4). Now in the latter verse the second ayarim means cities, as which are called Havvoth-jair (Ibid.) proves.²¹ (ayarim), and they had thirty cities (ayarim), which are called Havvoth-jair (the villages of Jair) unto this day. It is highly unlikely that which are called Havvoth-jair refers to ass colts.

footnotes: ¹⁸ Mavir ¹⁹ Our verse opens with If fire break out ²⁰ In one verse or passage. ²¹ Jud. 10:4 reads: And he had thirty sons that rode on thirty ass colts

IF A MAN DELIVERS. This is also connected to what is written above.²² Scripture speaks of theft so as to complete the ordinances concerning theft.²³

footnotes: ²² The above verses 1-3 dealing with theft. ²³ Begun in the earlier verse.

WHETHER HE HAVE NOT PUT HIS HAND UNTO HIS NEIGHBOR’S GOODS. This indicates that then the master of the house shall come near unto God refers to an oath sworn before judges.²⁴ indicates an oath; i.e., then the master of the house shall come near unto God…[and shall swear] whether he have not put his hand unto his neighbor’s goods. So too Rashi. Hence, For every matter of trespass (v. 8) follows. This means that the one who swore sinned.²⁵ Rabbi Joshua says that pesha (trespass) means that it went out of the owner’s possession, as in “Then did Edom revolt from under the hand of Judah.”²⁶ (II Kings 8:22). For every matter of trespass (v. 8) includes everything that follows²⁷ and everything²⁸ that passes out of the owner’s possession,²⁹. whether stolen³⁰. or lost,³¹ with the finder denying and not admitting that he found it.

footnotes: ²⁴ Whether he have not put his hand unto his neighbor’s goods ²⁵ That is, swore falsely (see Rashi). Since the previous verse deals with an oath taken by the bailee, the verse that follows deals with instances where the bailee commits perjury. ²⁶ There is no such verse. II Kings 8:22 literally reads: “Yet Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah…Then did Libnah revolt at the same time.” I.E. probably quoted from memory and erred. ²⁷ That is, oxen, asses, sheep, or raiment. ²⁸ Else. ²⁹ I.E.’s paraphrase, For every manner of trespass ³⁰ This is implied in every manner of trespass ³¹ Explicitly mentioned in our verse.

WHEREOF ONE SAITH. The witness saith, This is it.

THIS IS IT…HE WHOM GOD SHALL CONDEMN. If God³² shall condemn the keeper, because he himself stole it, or one who found an object and denied finding it, and thus became a thief because of it.

footnotes: ³² That is, the judge.

IF A MAN DELIVER. Our verse speaks of a paid bailee.³³

footnotes: ³³ A bailee, or keeper, who is paid for his services. This bailee is obligated to pay if what is placed in his charge is stolen or torn. See verse 11.

UNTO HIS NEIGHBOR’S GOODS. According to the pace of the cattle (Gen. 33:14.) is similar.³⁴ (goods) is similar to the word melakhah (cattle) in According to the pace of the cattle. The word melakhah literally means work. Hence I.E.’s comment that it sometimes connotes goods, property, or anything that is one’s “work.” See I.E. on Gen. 33:14. The owner takes nothing from the keeper except for the oath.

footnotes: ³⁴ Melekhet

IF IT BE TORN IN PIECES. He was paid for this.³⁵

footnotes: ³⁵ He was paid to make sure this did not happen.

LET HIM BRING IT FOR WITNESS. Let him bring a piece of the carcass as proof. This is in line with As a shepherd rescueth out of the mouth of the lion, Two legs, or a piece of an ear (Amos 3:12).

AND IF A MAN BORROW AUGHT. According to the plain meaning of the text, the owner thereof not being with it means that the owner can claim that the borrower overworked his animal.

IF THE OWNER THEREOF BE WITH IT. If the owner himself saw how the animal was hurt or died.³⁶ The same law applies to a hired animal accompanied on the way by its lessee and lessor.³⁷ (if it be a hireling he loseth his hire) as: if a hired animal, while being accompanied by its lessee and lessor, was hurt or died, the lessee is not obligated to pay. See Weiser. See also Rashi who interprets differently. Scripture concludes its dealing with theft of property and proceeds to discuss theft of confidence namely, seduction, for we often find men seducing young women of immature mind.³⁸

footnotes: ³⁶ The bailee does not have to pay for the animal, for the owner would not have permitted the bailee to overwork his animal. ³⁷ I.E.’s interpretion of im sachir hu ba bi-secharo ³⁸ Hence Scripture deals with this vice.

THAT IS NOT BETROTHED. For a betrothed woman is considered to be married³⁹ even though she has not slept with her husband.⁴⁰ (betrothal) and kiddushin (sanctification). In the first stage the woman lives with her parents and is prohibited from having intercourse with her husband. In the second stage the women leaves her parent’s home and takes up her domicile with her husband. In contemporary times the erusin and kiddushin take place at the same time. A woman who is an arusah is considered to be married even though she still lives with her parents. Thus a “betrothed woman” in Scripture does not refer to an engaged woman; it refers to a married woman.

footnotes: ³⁹ And the one who sleeps with her is punished by death. See Deut. 22:24. ⁴⁰ According to Rabbinic tradition there are two stages to marriage, erusin

[HE SHALL SURELY PAY A DOWRY FOR HER.] Mahor yimharennah (he shall surely pay a dowry for her) is similar to the word mohar used in the sense of attachment, as in acher maharu (that attach themselves unto another)⁴¹ (he shall surely pay a dowry for her) is to be rendered: he shall surely attach himself to her; that is, he must marry her. (Ps. 16:4). The root mem, heh, resh having the meaning of quickly (meherah) is only found in the pi’el in all of Scripture.⁴² is in the kal.

footnotes: ⁴¹ Translated according to I.E. According to I.E., mahor yimharennah ⁴² Whereas mahor yimharennah

HE SHALL PAY MONEY. For seducing her.

A SORCERESS. Scripture mentions the law of the sorceress after the law dealing with a seduced virgin because those who lust desire to satisfy their cravings through magic.⁴³ Scripture speaks of a sorceress because women practice sorcery more than men.⁴⁴

footnotes: ⁴³ By bewitching in one way or another the objects of their desire. ⁴⁴ The same law applies to a sorcerer. However, Scripture speaks of what is most usual.

WHOSOEVER LIETH WITH A BEAST. Scripture first mentions the laws dealing with the seduction of an immature young woman. It also mentions intercourse with an animal that, unlike a woman, cannot cry for help. It then mentions⁴⁵ the law concerning a woman who can cry for help.⁴⁶

footnotes: ⁴⁵ In Deut. 22:24-27. ⁴⁶ If raped.

HE THAT SACRIFICETH UNTO THE GODS. According to the plain meaning of the text the verse does not speak of an Israelite, for Scripture already warned against this in the second statement.⁴⁷ (Ex. 20:3). It is only mentioned because of the stranger who is mentioned in the next verse. It is because of the stranger⁴⁸ that Scripture reads, Whosoever lieth with a beast (v. 18), for this is the manner of the foreign nations. Now a stranger may live in the Land of Israel on the following conditions: that he does not lie with a beast and that he does not sacrifice unto idols. Scripture reads, la-elohim (unto the gods) because the reference is to the gods that the stranger was previously accustomed to worship.⁴⁹ beneath the lamed indicates the definite article, namely, the gods that the stranger was accustomed to worship. The term la-elohim (the gods) also takes in the angels.⁵⁰ also refers to angels.

footnotes: ⁴⁷ Of the Decalogue, viz., Thou shalt have no other gods before Me ⁴⁸ Some texts read, for it is on account. ⁴⁹ The kamatz ⁵⁰ For the term elohim

UNTO THE LORD ONLY. Only unto the glorious name⁵¹. which is a common noun not used for any other being.⁵²

footnotes: ⁵¹ YHVH ⁵² May one offer sacrifices.

AND A STRANGER. When a stranger commits himself not to worship idols you shall not wrong him in your country because you are more powerful than he is. Remember that you were strangers like him. When Scripture makes mention of the stranger who is powerless, it similarly takes note of the orphan and widow who are powerless Israelites. After saying lo te’annun (ye shall not afflict) (v. 21) which is in the plural, Scripture says im te’anneh (if thou afflict) (v. 22)⁵³ because whoever sees a person afflicting the orphan and the widow and does not aid them, is also considered an afflicter.

footnotes: ⁵³ Which is the singular.

IF THOU AFFLICT THEM. Note the punishment.⁵⁴ If a person afflicts an orphan or a widow and no one comes to their aid, all are punished. The next verse therefore reads, My wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you, that is, all of you. Scripture says, “for if he cry at all unto me”⁵⁵ in regard to the orphan. The same applies to a widow. However, it is possible that the orphan is very young and cannot articulate his pain like the widow.⁵⁶

footnotes: ⁵⁴ For afflicting a widow or orphan. ⁵⁵ Translated literally. ⁵⁶ That is, he can only cry out.

IF THOU LEND MONEY. If the Lord gave you enough wealth so that you are able to lend to the poor.⁵⁷ implies that lending money to the poor is not an obligation. However, it is clear from Deut. 15:7-11 that one is obligated to lend money to the poor. Hence I.E. points out that one is obligated to lend money only if one has money to lend. This section⁵⁸ is mentioned here because the poor are like the stranger, the orphan, and the widow.⁵⁹ God calls the poor My people because the pious do not seek to acquire wealth in this world, as can be seen from Elijah’s behavior.⁶⁰ (II Kings 1:8) and fed by ravens (I Kings 17:6). This, and the general description of Elijah’s life in Scripture, led I.E. to conclude that Elijah was poor. Elisha, who did not want to accept Naaman’s gift (II Kings 5:16), also proves this point.⁶¹ So does Samuel from Ramah.⁶²

footnotes: ⁵⁷ If thou lend ⁵⁸ Verses 21-23. ⁵⁹ In that they are defenseless. ⁶⁰ Scripture tells us that Elijah was girt with a girdle of leather about his loins ⁶¹ For money was not important to Elisha. ⁶² Who did not use his position to gather wealth. See I Sam. 12:3.

[WITH THEE.] Its meaning is, in the place where you dwell.

THOU SHALT NOT BE TO HIM AS A CREDITOR. In that he favors you because of your kindness. Scripture reads, tesimun (shall ye lay) because the lender, the scribe, and the witnesses all violate the law.⁶³ is a plural. Hence I.E.’s comment. According to the Talmud the borrower also violates the law. See Baba Metzia 75b. I.E. apparently held that according to the plain meaning of Scripture the borrower is not included, for tisimun cannot apply to him.

footnotes: ⁶³ Tesimun

IF THOU AT ALL TAKE THY NEIGHBOR’S GARMENT TO PLEDGE. After saying salmat re’ekha (thy neighbor’s garment), which is the feminine,⁶⁴ is in the feminine. and similarly, after saying, ki hi kesuto levaddah (for that is his only covering) (v. 26).⁶⁵ (his covering) is in the feminine. Actually, ki hi kesuto levaddah follows teshivennu. Scripture says, teshivennu (thou shalt restore it).⁶⁶ is masculine. Scripture should have used teshevennah since both salmat and kesut are feminine nouns. Scripture reads teshivennu because it refers to the pledge.⁶⁷ (pledge) is masculine. Teshivennu (thou shalt restore it) does not mean thou shalt return the garment but rather thou shalt return the pledge (see previous note). It should be noted that the noun chavul is not explicitly stated in the verse but is implied in the verbs chavol tachbol (take to pledge). Saadiah Gaon asks, what reason is there to take the pledge during the day and to return it at night? He answers, because the lender fears that the borrower might secure an additional loan from someone else and give him the pledge as security for the loan.

footnotes: ⁶⁴ That is, salmat ⁶⁵ Kesuto ⁶⁶ Teshivennu ⁶⁷ Chavul

FOR THAT IS HIS ONLY COVERING. Its meaning is, you should pity him.

[FOR I AM GRACIOUS.] According to the Gaon the term chanun (gracious) is similar in meaning to channuni channuni (Have pity upon me, have pity on me) (Job 19:21).⁶⁸ means gracious. Thus Job 19:21 should be rendered: be gracious to me, be gracious to me. Its meaning is, I will give him money and take away your money. I believe that this is not the meaning of chaninah (graciousness). What did David seek in saying, Be gracious unto me, O God. according to Thy mercy (Ps. 51:3)?⁶⁹ Chanun rather has the same meaning as the word rachum (merciful) although there is a difference between them,⁷⁰ as I will note in the Torah portion Ki Tissa.

footnotes: ⁶⁸ According to Saadiah the word chanun ⁶⁹ The context makes it clear that David was not seeking a monetary gift from God. ⁷⁰ In nuance.

Now the phrase that I will hear which follows and it shall come to pass, when He crieth unto Me is similar to for if they cry at all unto Me, I will surely hear their cry — My wrath shall wax hot (v. 22,23).⁷¹ in verse 22 also applies here, viz., My wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless (v. 23). How shall you know that I will surely hear their cry? You will know it from My wrath which follows.⁷²

footnotes: ⁷¹ Scripture tells us that when the orphan shall cry unto God, the Lord will hear his cry. It does not state what will happen next. I.E. thus points out that what follows I will surely hear their cry ⁷² In verse 23.

THOU SHALT NOT REVILE⁷³. GOD. The reference is to the judges,⁷⁴ (God) means judges. Thus, Thou shalt not revile God, means thou shalt not revile a judge or judges. namely, the priests, the sons of Levi, who have the Torah with them. NOR CURSE⁷⁵.

footnotes: ⁷³ Hebrew, tekalel ⁷⁴ Elohim ⁷⁵ Hebrew, ta’or

A RULER OF THY PEOPLE. In secret or in public. The Geonim differentiated between revile and curse.⁷⁶ refers to an insult, me’erah (curse) refers to a defect in a person’s body or fortune (Weiser). The ruler spoken of in our verse is the king noted in Deuteronomy. When we examined all the verses that come one after the other until And in all things that I have said unto you take ye heed (Ex. 23:13), we discovered that most of them deal with the poor. They appear to be connected to the section If thou lend money…to the poor (v. 24). Yefet says the reason Scripture mentions Thou shalt not revile God is that if the lender should violate the law and not return the pledge,⁷⁷ the poor man, while in pain during the night, might revile the judge who ruled that the lender should take the pledge.

footnotes: ⁷⁶ See notes 73 and 75. Kelalah ⁷⁷ At night.

THE FULNESS OF THY HARVEST, AND OF THE OUTFLOW OF THY PRESSES. Mele’atekha (the fulness of thy harvest) is another name for wine and dimakha (the outflow)⁷⁸ another name for oil. However, Saadiah Gaon says that mele’atekha refers to both the fullness of the seed and the fullness of the winepress. He says that dimakha alludes to oil, because when an olive is pressed the oil drips like a tear (dema). Now this verse is explained elsewhere, namely, The first-fruits of thy corn, of thy wine, and of thine oil, and the first of the fleece of thy sheep (Deut. 18:4).⁷⁹ Scripture therefore couples The first-born of thy sons shalt thou give unto Me with it.⁸⁰ For the first-born are the first of one’s strength.⁸¹ Ben Zuta says that mele’atekha (the fulness of thy harvest) refers to pregnancy and dimakha (the outflow of the press) is another term for sperm, which is a drop. He also says that Thou shalt not delay means that one should not delay taking a wife. Hence, The first-born of thy sons shalt thou give unto Me follows it. However, this is sheer insanity. Why did Scripture mention mele’atekha before dimakha? According to Ben Zuta, dimakha refers to the ejaculation of semen into a woman, which is then followed by pregnancy. Furthermore, pregnancy is not in the hand of man. It depends only upon God.⁸². I.E. claims that there cannot be a command to have children, for while a man can marry and attempt to have children, there is no guarantee that he will. See I.E. on Gen. 1:22 and the notes thereto. Yefet says that this verse is mentioned so that the poor person does not delay to give that which he is obligated to give.⁸³ SHALT THOU DO WITH THINE OXEN, AND WITH THY SHEEP.] Likewise thou shalt give the first-born⁸⁴ and thy sheep. to the priest.

footnotes: ⁷⁸ Literally, weeping, or trickling. ⁷⁹ Deut. 18:4 is parallel to our verse and indicates that our verse deals with the first fruits. ⁸⁰ That is, it follows the law dealing with the first fruits of the fullness of the harvest and the outflow of the presses. ⁸¹ They are thus similar to the first fruits. ⁸² According to Ben Zuta our verse commands a man to marry and have children, viz., The first-born of thy sons shalt thou give unto Me ⁸³ In other words, this verse is addressed to the poor. Yefet comments thus because most of our verses deal with the poor. See I.E.’s notes on the previous verse. ⁸⁴ Of thine oxen

AND YE SHALL BE HOLY MEN UNTO ME. Since Scripture mentions thine oxen and thy sheep, which are permitted to be eaten, it warns one not to eat meat which is torn, for it is possible that a poor person might eat torn meat because of his poverty.⁸⁵

footnotes: ⁸⁵ I.E. comments thus because most of our verse deals with the poor. See I.E.’s note on verse 27.

[IN THE FIELD.] Scripture speaks of what is most common. The same law applies if the animal was torn in the midst of a city. That chanceth him by night (Deut. 23:11)⁸⁶ is similar.⁸⁷

footnotes: ⁸⁶ The reference is to a seminal emission. ⁸⁷ Scripture speaks of a nocturnal emission because that is when most involuntary emissions take place. However, the same law applies to an emission that occurs during the day.

[TO THE DOGS.]⁸⁸ The lamed prefaced to kelev (dogs) was vocalized with a pattach⁸⁹. because the reference is to the dog who guards the oxen and the flock.⁹⁰ beneath the lamed indicates the definite article. Torn meat is not fit for anyone, only for a dog Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen says that torn meat is unhealthier than meat from an animal that dies of natural causes. There is something poison-like in torn meat that is harmful to the health of a human being. Hence Scripture does not permit one to give torn meat unto the stranger that is within thy gates (Deut. 14:21) or to sell it unto a foreigner (Ibid.) as it does to meat from an animal that dies of natural causes (Ibid.).

footnotes: ⁸⁸ Literally, to the dog. ⁸⁹ Rather than with a sheva ⁹⁰ The pattach