לא תשא שמע שוא, “Do not accept a false report.” The instruction of the Torah to judges is that they shall not accept an oath from people whom they suspect of being prepared to violate it. They must first investigate the matter under dispute to evaluate if an oath would amount to perjury. Another way of explaining these words: “do not accept testimony by one litigant as he may change his testimony when confronted by his antagonist” (Mechilta Kasspa section 20). If the first party testifying in the absence of his antagonist had lied, he might feel forced to deny this by repeating his original statement and confirming it by an oath. Solomon says something along these lines in Proverbs 18,17: “the first one to plead his case appears to be right, until his neighbor comes and examines him.” Our sages (in the Mechilta already mentioned) understand our verse as a warning not to accept defamations from anybody concerning anybody else. This is also why Onkelos translates the words as: “do not accept untrue reports.”

אל תשת ידך עם רשע, “do not extend your hand with the wicked.” This refers to a trumped up charge, to which someone undertakes to act as a false witness.”

לא תהיה אחרי רבים לרעות, “do not be a follower of the majority for evil;” the plain meaning of these words is that even if you see a vast majority of people acting in a forbidden manner, do not make the fact that they constitute the norm an excuse to follow in their footsteps. Our sages (Sanhedrin 20) explain the wording to mean that a majority of only a single vote in matters involving capital punishment is not sufficient to convict the accused. The meaning of the word לרעות, which is in the plural,- and a reference to the people voting “guilty”- is that such a verdict must be arrived at by a majority of at least two votes. However, a majority of one is sufficient to exonerate an accused. This is the meaning of the words following, i.e. אחרי רבים להטות.

ולא תענה על רב, “and do not respond to a grievance, etc.” this is a warning to the judge not to argue on behalf of any of the litigants. It includes a warning to all other non-litigants present not to argue on behalf of either of the litigants. Only the actual litigant is allowed to present arguments on his own behalf. The claimant presents his arguments first and the accused replies to his arguments. Nobody else intervenes in a litigation to which he is not a direct party (Baba Kama 46). Sanhedrin 36 adds the comment that seeing the word for litigation, strife, ריב is spelled defectively, without the letter י so that it could also be read rav, i.e. a scholar, we derive from this that the customary courtesies of someone having to stand in front of a scholar, his Rabbi, etc., are dispensed with when both the Rabbi and the student are facing each other as litigants. The student does not have to display any deference for his opposite number. [Rabbi Chavell interprets our author to mean that junior members of the tribunal must not challenge a ruling made by senior members after it has been made. Ed.]

עזוב תעזוב עמו, “you shall help him with it (even repeatedly).” This concerns the commandment to unload the beast (Baba Metzia 32). The interpretation is based on the verse being superfluous as we could have deduced this message from the words in Deut. 22,4 where the Torah writes about a similar situation הקם תקים עמו, “help him to stand it up.” If the Torah commands us to help someone load his beast, how much more would it be in place for the Torah to command us to help unload a beast which broke down under an overload! Nonetheless, the Torah writes both laws in order to teach that there are different considerations which determine the legislation in these two situations. Help in unloading must be extended without charge, whereas help in loading may be charged for. The reason one may not charge for helping to unload the beast in our verse is because alleviating pain of animals is a Biblical commandment, may have to be performed even without the assistance of the owner.

ונקי וצדיק אל תהרוג, “and do not execute the innocent or the righteous.” The word נקי, innocent, refers to a wicked person which the court was unable to convict. Subsequently, evidence turns up on the basis of which this person could be convicted on a second trial. The Torah prohibits a retrial. The Torah assures us that if a guilty person escapes human justice, not to be upset as he will not escape divine justice, i.e. כי לא אצדיק רשע, “I, G’d will see to it that the wicked will not wind up being considered as righteous.”

ושש שנים תזרע את ארצך, “and for six successive years you will sow your land.” It would have seemed appropriate to phrase this in the third person, i.e. את הארץ, “the land,” instead of ארצך, “your land.” Similarly, in the reference to the vineyard and olive plantation we would have expected the words כן תעשה לכרמים ולזיתים instead of כן תעשה לכרמך ולזיתיך (verse 11). You will note that the Torah uses direct language when speaking about either the Sabbath (day) or the Sabbath (year), whereas when speaking of the Jubilee year יובל, it uses the third person, speaking in more general terms. Compare Leviticus 25,11: “you shall not sow, you shall not harvest its aftergrowth, and you shall not pick what was set aside of it.” Seeing that immediately after the Sabbath one may resume work and immediately after the shmittah year the farmer may recommence his usual activities of ploughing, sowing, etc., the Torah used direct language as the farmer considers the land as his own. After he seventh year preceding the Jubilee year which was also a shmittah year, i.e. a year when he did not work his field, the farmer must now wait another year before he can again treat the land as if it were his own. That is why the Torah hinted at this factor by using indirect language in speaking of the land in question.” Even the manner in which the Torah describes abandoning the land during the shmittah, i.e.תשמטנה ונטשתה , “leave it untended and leave it unharvested,” indicates that the land has ceased to belong to the farmer (during that year). The relationship between us and the land during the shmittah year is that whereas we abandon it, it does not abandon us. The reason is that we will once again resume our activities on it demonstrating that it is ours. The same is not the case in the case of the Jubilee year, as many fields will return to owners who had previously been forced to sell them for one reason or another. It is therefore appropriate to speak of such land in the third person, i.e. not addressing a specific owner.

למען ינוח שורך וחמורך,“in order for your ox and your donkey to enjoy rest.” The meaning of the words: “so that your ox and donkey can rest,” is the tail end of the legislation that you shall work for six days and shall rest on the seventh day. As a result of your resting, your man-servants, maid-servants, oxen and donkeys will rest also, as well as your stranger. The objective of the legislation is not aimed at rewarding your donkeys, etc., with rest but if you do all your work during six days so that you will rest on the seventh day, then also your labourers and your beasts of burden will rest on that day. We find a similar construction in Deut. 16,3 למען תזכור את יום צאתך ממצרים, “on account (of this) eating of unleavened bread, etc., you will remember the day you went out of Egypt.”

שלש רגלים תחוג לי בשנה, “three pilgrimage festivals shall you celebrate for Me during the year.” The Torah repeats this once more by legislating that the males of the nation have to make three appearances annually on those festivals in Jerusalem (or the place where the Tabernacle stood) on the festival of unleavened bread, on the festival of weeks, and on Tabernacles. In Deut. the Torah only writes; “Three times” without specifying on the festival of Tabernacles (Deut. 16,3). In Deut. 16,16 where the Torah writes שלש פעמים, the same once more, the reason the dates had to be spelled out once more for these appearances is that had the Torah only written the words שלש פעמים, I could have thought that as long as each male appears in the Sanctuary three times a year at times of his choosing, he would have complied with this commandment. This is why the Torah had to add: “on the festival of unleavened bread, etc., etc.” If so, why did the Torah in our verse write רגלים instead of פעמים, suggesting that coming by foot was of the essence? This was to exempt people who do not have feet or legs and have to travel on stumps or prostheses from this commandment. It is also to exempt the blind and the lame who are unable to make this pilgrimage on their own.

A Midrashic approach: we find the expressions שלש רגלים, as well as שלש פעמים, as well as the expression תרמסנה רגל רגלי עני פעמי דלים, ”to be trampled underfoot, by the feet of the needy, by the soles of the poor” (Isaiah 26,6). This is a warning to the Israelites not to make this pilgrimage in carriages but on foot. This is also alluded to in Song of Songs 7,2: “How lovely are your feet in sandals.”

למועד חודש האביב, “at the appointed time in the month of spring.” This wording prompted Pessikta Zutrata to state that the Passover must only be brought after the spring equinox. If the crops have not sufficiently advanced for the new barley offering of the Omer to be able to be offered the sages will have to insert an additional month of Adar. The words: “you shall not be seen before Me empty-handed,” refer to the sacrifice. Any pilgrim has to offer at least one burnt-offering and one peace-offering.

אל פני האדון ה’. “before the Lord, Hashem.” These three festivals occur during three separate seasons. Passover occurs in spring, Pentecost in summer, and Tabernacles in fall. All three festivals are also in recognition of different harvests. On those festivals we are to express our gratitude for the bounty of the earth. We must thank the Lord who provides sustenance for His creatures, and the entire universe. A Kabbalistic approach to the words את פני האדון (34,23): I have already explained this on 20,1.

לא תזבח על חמץ דם זבחי, “do not offer the blood of My sacrifice with leavened bread.” Nachmanides queries why the Torah did not write לא תשחט על חמץ זבחי, “do not slaughter My sacrifice with unleavened bread,” seeing that blood is not being “slaughtered.” The formulation of the Torah teaches that the Passover must not be slaughtered at a time when consumption of leavened bread is still permitted, i.e. on the morning of the 14th of Nissan (compare Mechilta Kaspa 20). The verse has to be understood as follows: “do not slaughter while leavened bread abounds in order that the blood of My sacrifice not be offered at a time when your leavened things have not yet been destroyed or sold.”

ראשית בכורי אדמתך,”The choicest first fruit of your soil.” These first fruit are forbidden for secular use by their owners. Our sages state that this is the reason that this legislation was written immediately prior to the prohibition of boiling a kid in the milk of its mother. Just as that legislation prohibits secular or any use by its owner of such a dish, so first ripe produce is also prohibited for profane purposes. Another reason offered for the aparently unrelated sequence of this verse and the one following it, is that first fruit must not be offered either when they have been boiled or in an unripe condition.

לא תבשל גדי בחלב אמו, “do not boil a kid in the milk of its mother.” This verse, identically worded, appears three times in the Torah (compare Exodus 34,26 and Deut. 14,21). Our sages (Chulin 115) interpret this to mean that the prohibition is threefold: 1) not to boil it together. 2) not to consume such a mixture. 3) not to use it in any other form, sell, it, etc. The reason that the Torah chose to word the prohibition in this way is that the Biblical injunction is boiling these two matters together. Consuming meat and milk which was boiled together is a Biblical prohibition punishable by 39 lashes if violated intentionally. Eating meat and drinking a glass of raw milk with it, while forbidden by rabbinic decree, does not carry this penalty. This is the opinion of my teacher (Rashba). We could ask why the Torah did not simply write the words לא תאכל, “you shall not eat,” a formula which traditionally includes the prohibition to enjoy such a substance in any other form (compare Pesachim 21). The reason is that if the Torah had written those words I would have assumed that culpability for eating such a mixture occurs only if one enjoys eating it, as is the case with other prohibitions of that kind. By not using the word: “do not eat,” the Torah implies that even if a mixture of cooked meat and milk was consumed while it was too hot to enjoy, or even burned one’s tissue, the prohibition and culpability for it still apply. Seeing that the Torah was unable to use the words לא תאכל, “do not eat,” It became necessary to write the same verse three times in order to convey to us all the aspects of this prohibition. Nonetheless, the penalty of 39 lashes is applied only to boiling it or eating it even without enjoying it. Other aspects of the prohibition such as selling the mixture is not punishable though prohibited (compare Pesachim 25). There are only two prohibitions of eating something which do not provide one with some enjoyment or satisfaction for which a Biblical culpability exists. One is our verse, the other is a mixture of grapes and some other seed planted too close to it. In accordance with this the sages in Pesachim 24 stated that all scholars are agreed that the penalty of 39 lashes is applicable to someone who deliberately eats from כלאי הכרם , this mixture of grapes and other species planted right next to the grapes even if eating from the mixture was of no benefit or pleasure to the person eating it. The reason advanced for that ruling is the fact that in prohibiting that mixture the Torah refrained from using the words: “do not eat,” but it wrote פן תקדש המלאה הזרע אשר תזרע ותבואת הכרם, “lest the growth of the seed that you plant and the produce of the vineyard become forbidden” (Deut. 22,9). In Kidushin 56 the words פן תקדש are understood as פן תוקד אש, “so that no light be lit with it,” i.e. so that no use be made of it.

According to the plain meaning of our text the reason for this whole commandment is that the practice of boiling the kid in the milk of its mother is apt to deaden feelings of compassion in the human heart. It coarsens one’s entire personality. After all, milk is a derivative of (the animal’s) blood. Consumption of blood coarsens a person’s personality, causing a person to develop feelings of cruelty. One of the reasons consumption of blood is prohibited to Jews by the Torah is the fact that contrary to other parts of the animal, blood does not become assimilated by the body of the person eating it in the same manner as do other parts of the animal’s tissue. In other words, the negative influence of blood remains in the body without being sublimated. Even though in the meantime this blood was been converted into milk and when by itself does not transport the negative elements of blood to people drinking the milk, the moment it is mixed again with flesh and boiled together it reverts to its original negative character-coarsening properties.

Doctors believe that the same is true when fish is mixed with cheese and boiled together. [This would account for the prohibition in Yoreh Deah item 87]. Not only would consuming a dish prepared by such ingredients in such a manner produce coarseness of character but it would also produce some form of leprosy. The reason that every time we find this verse it appears in connection with the pilgrimage festivals is in order to warn the pilgrims who come to Jerusalem three times a year,- the holy site where prophets are active,- not to coarsen their hearts by consuming forbidden foods but to ensure that their physical bodies remain as pure and conducive to positive character building influences as is possible. Their hearts must remain receptive to the positive spiritual influence which abounds in Jerusalem.

Maimonides, in his Moreh Nevuchim third part chapter 48, writes concerning this prohibition that seeing it was a custom of the pagans to eat milk and meat in their temples on their festivals the Torah forbade this practice and wrote it twice in connection with the three pilgrimage festivals in order to remind us not to behave on these festivals as did these pagans. The Torah is at pains to implant in us the awareness of how radically different the observance of festivals for our G’d is from the way the pagans worship their deities. This is what Maimonides writes as the reason for this commandment. Although I have not quoted his words verbatim I have presented his meaning faithfully.

It is fairly clear that these various reasons are not an adequate explanation for such a basic legislation. Maimonides did not mean to advance this as the deeper meaning of the legislation. He only wanted to show the questioner that this commandment could be understood in terms of weaning the Jewish people from pagan practices. The fact is that the entire legislation belongs to the category of חקים, the statutes for which no logical reason can be found, just as we cannot fathom a reason for the legislation of the red cow. The true meaning of these statutes will not be revealed to us until after the arrival of the messiah. The law about the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement is of a similar nature. All our attempts to understand it only touch the surface and do not reveal the true purpose G’d had in mind when He legislated it other than that by observing these laws we are to demonstrate our belief in His superior wisdom of what is good for us. Seeing that in the period following the arrival of the messiah there will neither be paganism nor coarseness of our character and bloodthirsty people, and there is no reason to believe that this legislation will then be abolished, it is clear that its true meaning is something far beyond what we have been given to understand. In the meantime we rely on the promise of Deut. 30,6 that there will come a time when the Lord will circumcise our hearts after the end of all exile and persecution when we will be able to comprehend what we cannot comprehend now. A similar promise has been spelled out in Tzefaniah 3,9: ”for then I will make the peoples pure of speech, so that they will all invoke the Lord by name and serve Him with one accord.” In the meantime it suffices to know that there is a mystical dimension to this commandment.

A Kabbalistic approach: You are aware that all the commandments are divine and reflect something parallel to conditions which exist in the celestial regions. The same applies to the commandments known as חקים. They are called thus as they reflect matters engraved, חקוק, in the celestial regions. The legislation of meat and milk is an example of this. Just as each of these components by itself is permissible and only mixing them is prohibited, so the Torah had to be especially stringent in its prohibition against mixing two perfectly permissible items with one another. Were this not so we would find it difficult to understand that joining two permitted substances and making one out of them is so harmful to the condition of G’d’s universe. It is like a lesson not to confuse the kind of holiness which exists in the celestial regions with the sanctity which exists, or is the aim of the Torah to establish, in our terrestrial world. Even when optimum conditions of sanctity exist in our part of the universe, this does not mean that these two types of holiness can be part of the same “brew,” can be mixed as if they were all the same. As long as there is a יצר הרע, an evil force at work in our world, G’d and His name are not one and the same. These two kinds of holiness are still apart and do not mix. It is our task to strive in this world to bring about a merging of these two kinds of holiness. When our sages (Masechet Gan Eden) said that in the future G’d will reveal to us the meaning of the legislation in His Torah including the reason for the prohibition of mixing milk and meat, what they meant was that although these commandments have been given to us to fulfill in this terrestrial world, the condition of this world is not such that it is appropriate to reveal to us the mystical dimension of this legislation as long as this world is infested with the יצר הרע. If G’d were to reveal this information to us in our present state of spiritual/intellectual imperfection it might sow doubt in our minds rather than an additional resolve to observe the commandment meticulously. We might, G’d forbid, conclude that there are two competing divine powers which control the universe. In the future, after the power of the evil urge will have been broken, and when there is no fear that we would therefore misunderstand the reasons for this legislation, G’d will reveal it to us. This will be the period when the deserving dead will be resurrected. Only then will the concept of והיה ביום ההוא יהיה ה’ אחד ושמו אחד, “on that day the Lord and His name will be one and the same, they i.e. the two levels of sanctity will merge.” In fact, at that time the prohibition of mixing meat and milk will become redundant. This explains why the angels who visited Avraham could eat butter and meat at the same time as it appears from Genesis 18,8 that Avraham served it both simultaneously. Seeing that the angels do not have an evil urge (Shabbat 89) this restriction does not apply to them. Once the evil urge will have been abolished there will therefore be no need for this commandment. This is what prompted our sages (Yuma 67) to say in explaining Leviticus 19,19 את חקותי תשמורו, “you shall observe My statutes,” as meaning: “I have engraved them and you have no right to investigate their meaning or criticize them as any such criticism would undermine this terrestrial universe in which the evil urge is still rampant.” This is why in a similar verse in Leviticus 18,4 the verse concludes with the “justification: “I am the Lord.” The plain meaning of the verse in Zecharyah 14,9: “on that day the Lord will be One and His name will be One,” is a reference to mankind worshipping. The message is that from that day onwards all of mankind will serve only the Lord, there will no longer be any competing religions. The word אחד means that at that time we will pronounce the tetragrammaton as we read it not by substituting the letters א-ד-נ-י because we are not worthy to utter the word י-ה-ו-ה (compare Pesachim 50).

הנה אנכי שולח מלאך לפניך, “Here I am about to send an angel ahead of you, etc.” The plain meaning of these words is that G’d announced to Moses that the Israelites would commit the sin of the golden calf at some time in the future; this is why He said that “this angel will not forgive your sin” (verse 22). He spoke of a single sin, פשעכם, not a variety of sins such as לחטאותיכם, sins committed inadvertently. The sin of the golden calf had been committed in full knowledge of it being a violation of the second of the Ten Commandments. G’d told Moses that seeing the people were not worthy that the Presence of the Lord, “Shechinah” would travel with them, He would send a lower ranking angel instead.

Due to the power of Moses’s prayer this decree was rescinded at least during his lifetime so that the angel spoken of here did not make his appearance until Joshua (Nachmanides) The words לשמרך בדרך, “to guard you on the journey,” mean that the angel would protect the Jewish people while they were in the desert. The words אשר הכינותי, “which I have prepared,” is a reference to the place G’d had readied for His own residence. The wording is similar to what we have found in the song Moses composed after crossing the Sea of Reeds, (Exodus 15,17). It is a reference to the Holy Temple. The wording is the one used by David when he said (Chronicles I 29,19) ולבנות הבירה אשר הכינותי, “to build the Temple for which I have made provision.” According to the opinion of Rabbeinu Chananel the angel spoken of here was the angel Michael, known as השר הגדול described in Daniel 12,1 “and at that time there will stand, Michael, the great heavenly prince, who stands to support the children of your people.” We also have a verse in Daniel 10,21: “And no one reinforces me against these, except your heavenly prince, Michael.” This was the angel who appeared to Joshua and said to him (Joshua 5,14) “I am the prince of the Hosts of the Lord, now I have arrived.” Our sages (in Tanchuma 18 Mishpatim) have said that the words כי שמי בקרבו, “for My name is within him” in our verse here mean that this is why he is called שר צבא ה’, “the prince of the army of the Lord.” This would be parallel to Kings I 8,15 כי שמך נקרא על הבית הזה, “because Your name has been associated with this house, which is called the house of the Lord.” As to the words כי לא ישא לפשעכם, “for he will not forgive your sin,” these words are a warning by G’d that although He is sending along this angel to protect the Israelites they must be careful not even to commit unintentional sins as this angel has no authority to forgive any sin. The reason is that the authority to forgive is one that G’d has reserved to Himself as we know from Isaiah 43,25: “it is I, I, who-for My own sake-wipe your trans-gressions away and remember your sin no more.” Thus far Tanchuma. Also Ibn Ezra understands the angel in this verse as being Michael.

I have seen one of the Kabbalists who believes that the angel mentioned here is identical with the Seraph seen in a vision of Isaiah, i.e. Michael. He writes: it is most likely that this is the angel normally charged with forgiveness, displaying loving kindness, the שר החסד. G’d had to state that in this instance this angel would not have authority to extend forgiveness precisely because on other occasions that is his function. Had this angel not normally been charged with doing just that, i.e. forgiving sins, there would not have been any need for the Torah to tell us that this time he would not be allowed to do this. This angel had appeared to Isaiah in Isaiah 6,6 where the prophet writes: ויעף אלי אחד מן השרפים אשר בידו רצפה, “and one of the Seraphim flew to me and he had a live coal in his hand;” it is clear that this was Michael as our sages in Berachot 4 explained that the description of the power of Michael is of an angel with greater powers than the archangel Gavriel seeing he is described as flying, whereas Gavriel is described as needing two flights, i.e. resting in between as we know from the words Of Daniel 9,21: “he was lifted in flight” (compare Berachot 4, Rashi). The reason Michael is described in Daniel as Seraph, an angel which is associated with water, is no problem. This angel is associated with different elements according to the context in which he appears. Moreover, we must consider the timing of when Michael was referred to as a Seraph. Here in the Torah, when G’d tells Moses about the consequences of the sin of the golden calf, the attribute of Mercy which had guided them had been exchanged for the attribute of Justice. This is what the angel Michael’s arrival at that time would represent. In Isaiah the very reverse process is the subject of the prophet’s vision. In verse seven the prophet has been advised that the time had arrived when he could represent the attribute of Mercy and lead people to repentance. We know that as G’d had said to Isaiah (Isaiah 6,10) “dull that people’s mind, stop its ears, and seal its eyes- lest seeing with its eyes and hearing with its ears it also grasps with its mind and repents (regresses in view of what its eyes and ears will be tempted by) and weakens itself.” Previously, in verse 7 the Seraph had said: “now that this (flaming coal, רצפה has touched your lips your guilt shall depart and your sin will be purged away.” There is therefore no contradiction in the appearance of Seraphim on both occasions and their respective functions being different. At any rate, the verses in Isaiah prove that far from being by definition “unforgiving,” the angel Michael is usually the one who introduces repentance and forgiveness. In our verses the Torah reminds the people that such a benevolent function of the angel occurs only with G’d’s prior approval. In this instance G’d warns that no such prior approval has been given so that the Israelites should not count on the forgiving nature of this angel that they had been used to. Perhaps there is an allusion to the function of the angel Michael in the wording of our verse, i.e. G’d saying (verse 23) כי ילך מלאכי לפניך, seeing that the letters in the word מלאכי are the same as those in the name of the angel מיכאל. It may be a hint that G’d Himself will accompany that angel.

At any rate, the negative fallout of this decree was neutralised all the time during which Moses remained alive until this angel presented himself to Joshua as we have already mentioned. The words עתה באתי, “now I have come,” with which the angel introduced himself to Joshua were a reminder that he had been supposed to take up his duties 40 years earlier but that the time for his intervening in the progress of the Jewish people had been put off until now.

A Midrashic approach to our verse (Shemot Rabbah 32,2). From the words: “Here I am about to send an angel ahead of you,” we learn that G’d meant that had the Israelites been worthy He Himself would have continued to be at their head as He had been at the Exodus when the Torah testified “and the Lord Himself was walking ahead of them by day,” etc., (13,21). Now that they had proven unworthy G’d handed them over to an agent. This is the meaning of: “Here I am sending an angel ahead of you.” You will observe that as soon as the Jewish people had said כל אשר דבר ה’ נעשה ונשמע, “all that G’d has said we shall do and we shall hear (learn it)” in 24,7, G’d responded by saying: “I granted Adam eternal life for performing the single commandment I had given him not to eat from the tree of knowledge.” This is the meaning of Genesis 3,22: “here this Adam who had been just like one of Us, (i.e. immortal celestial being).” “These Jewish people who have undertaken to observe 613 of My commandments are surely entitled to eternal life!” The Midrash derives this from the words חרות על הלוחות, “freedom on the tablets” instead of reading it merely as “engraved on the Tablets” (32,16). We find a disagreement between Rabbi Yehudah and Rabbi Nechemyah in the above quoted Midrash as to the precise meaning of the word חרות if read as meaning “freedom.” Rabbi Yehudah understands it as freedom from the oppression of mortal rulers, i.e. exile, whereas Rabbi Nechemyah understands it as freedom from the authority of the angel of death. He bases this on Numbers 21, 18-19 וממדבר מתנה, וממתנה נחליאל, ומנחליאל במות, “and from the wilderness- a gift. From “the gift”- my heritage became G’d. From the heritage called G’d- elevated heights.” Rabbi Nechemyah understands the verse not as describing physical landmarks describing where the Israelites rested on the way, but as spiritual landmarks and the gradual recapture by the entire people of Adam’s spiritual stature before the sin when he had still been immortal. The progression was as follows: through the experience of marching in the desert the Israelites merited the gift (מתנה) of Torah. Through the gift of Torah they inherited a relationship to divinity אל)) forever. Through this relationship they acquired immortality. After they had said to the golden calf: “these are your gods O Israel,” they again forfeited this new-found immortality. G’d said to them: ”you followed the same foolishness that Adam was guilty of who had proven unable to resist the temptation of the tree of knowledge for more than three hours. I had said: ‘you are divine (Psalms 82,6-7)-however you will have to die like humans.” In the past you were able to experience the Holy Spirit directly through Me. From now on you will be able to experience it only through the intermediary, the angel.” This is the meaning of “here I will send My angel ahead of you.” This is reflected in what Jeremiah 3,19 had in mind when he said: “I had resolved to adopt you as My child, and I gave you a desirable land- the fairest heritage of all nations; and I thought you would surely call Me “Father,” and never cease to be loyal to Me. Instead, you have broken faith with Me, as a woman breaks faith with a paramour, O House of Israel- declares the Lord.” G’d laments the fact that the Israelite people allowed Him to interpose the Gentile nations between Himself and the Jewish people. The words איך אשיתך mean a separation being established. The word is used in that sense in Genesis 30,40: “he set a separation between each flock.” When G’d referred to the “desirable land,” ארץ חמדה, He meant that it is a land which the great men of the world (the patriarchs) expressed a desire for. Avraham had pleaded with the sons of Chet to sell him a burial plot (Genesis 23,4). G’d had told Yitzchak: “reside in this land” (Genesis 26,3). Yaakov had expressed the wish to be buried in that land and claimed to have dug it with his own hands (Genesis 50,5). The reason Jeremiah quoted G’d as referring to the land of Israel as נחלת צבי, is that just as the skin of a deer shrinks after it has been removed from its carcass so that it does not cover it anymore, so the land of Israel displays similar lack of elasticity, not being able to accommodate itself to G’d’s bountiful harvests but flowing over with it. The expression צבאות גויים, “of the hosts of the world,” is a reference to the fact that all the kings on earth expressed a desire for this land. How do we know this? We find that the city of Jericho had its own king and that the town of Ai less than three miles removed also had its own king. The kingdoms in the land of Canaan each covered very small amounts of territory. In fact if a king ruled over a vast tract of land outside of the land of Israel but did not have a small kingdom inside the boundaries of the land of Israel he was not even considered as entitled to describe himself as “king.” [Proof of the truth of this is the fact that Joshua made war against and defeated no fewer than 31 Kings all in the narrow land called “the land of Israel,” not even including the coastal areas inhabited by the Philistines. Ed.] There is an interesting comment by Rabbi Parnach in the name of Rabbi Yochanan (Tanchuma Mishpatim 17). The words spoken by Achan ben Carmi in Joshua 7,21: וארא בשלל אדרת שנער, “I have seen amongst the loot (of the city of Jericho) a cloak from Shinor.” He understands the words literally as a cloak belonging to the King of Babylon (Shinor). He considered it as so valuable that he wore it only in Jericho. When Jeremiah 3,19 continues: “I had hoped you would call Me father,” he referred to G’d thinking that seeing He had taken the Israelites out of Egypt, and split the sea for them that surely He was entitled to the respect of a father. Instead, they had made the golden calf. Considering further that G’d had provided the Israelites with all their needs in the desert, they in turn had been unfaithful to him. When the Gentile nations had become unfaithful to G’d, He had appointed agents to look after their welfare instead of doing so Himself. Similarly, with the Jews. Now that they had become unfaithful, He would appoint this angel to look after them instead of continuing to do so Himself. This then is the meaning of the words: “Here I am going to send an angel ahead of you.”

A Kabbalistic approach: The words הנה אנכי שולח מלאך לפניכם לשמרך, “Here I will send a messenger ahead of you to protect you,” do not refer to a disembodied being which we usually call “angel.” These “angels,” though disembodied, are sometimes sinful as we know from Job 4,18 ובמלאכיו ישים תהלה, “and He casts reproach against His angels.” The reproach concerned the fact that these angels in saying to Lot (Genesis 19,13) “we are about to destroy the city (Sodom),” made it appear as if it were up to them to decide if and when to destroy the city instead of their acting under G’d’s instructions. Rather, the agent G’d is speaking about in our verse here is one of those known as נטיעות, a superior kind of angel who is not subject to sin [and therefore has no understanding for sinful creatures? Ed.] This is why Tanchuma Mishpatim 18 explains the words: “for he will not forgive your sin” as “because he belongs to the category who do not sin.” This is the angel Mattatron, the one appointed to generally run G’d’s universe on His behalf. He is also known in kabbalistic lore as שר הפנים, “the Minister of the Interior.” This is why the Torah adds the words לשמרך בדרך which are translated by Onkelos as למטרך, i.e. the same as Leviticus 5,35 משמרת, This angel is in effect the executive arm of the attribute of Justice. This explains why G’d added the word לפניך, which suggests the same as in Chabakuk 3,5: לפניו ילך דבר ויצא רשף לרגליו, “Pestilence marches before him and plague comes forth at his heels.” When the Torah says in verse 23 כי ילך מלאכי לפניך, “for My angel will walk ahead of you,” this reference to “My angel” indicates that it is the one most beloved of G’d, the one by means of whom G’d has become well known in the world. It is about this angel that the Torah says in 33,14 פני ילכו, “My Presence will go,” in response to Moses’ request in 33,14 הודיעני נא את דרכך, “please let me know (understand) Your ways.” Moses requested an attribute by means of which G’d had manifested Himself, and he was told פני ילכו, that indeed this attribute would travel alongside the Jewish people. This is what Isaiah 63,9 had in mind when he said ומלאך פניו הושיעם, “and the angel known as פניו (His Presence) delivered them.” In order to make this point clear G’d says (verse 22) וצרתי את צורריך, “I will be the enemy of your enemies (by means of this angel), and the Torah continues והכחדתיו, “and I will annihilate them.” It requires the attribute of Justice to completely annihilate the enemies. As to this agent being called מלאך, we must appreciate that this is not a reference to the disembodied beings because it is used to be active in our terrestrial part of the universe on a regular basis, i.e. it is a manifestation of the attribute of Justice. The words השמר לך, “take heed,” are most appropriate as a person always has to take heed not to become a target of the attribute of Justice which would punish him for sins committed. This is why the Torah uses the root שמר, as well as the word פנים saying ושמע בקולו, “and listen to his instructions.” This is a specific warning not to commit sins of a heretical nature. In order that we do not misunderstand, the Torah adds immediately אל תמר בו, “do not rebel against him.” Seeing that the word תמר is very similar to אל תמירני, “do not trade Me,” i.e. do not treat any other deity as if it were divine, we might be correct in translating the words אל תמר בו as “do not exchange Him.” In other words: “this “angel” and I Myself are quite inseparable from one another.” The words כי לא ישא פשעכם are a continuation of the warning; although this angel does have the power to forgive your sins he will not do so if your sin is of the type described by the words אל תמר בו. The message is that anyone who rebels against this angel is in effect rebelling against Me Myself seeing My name is within him. When David said in Psalms 130,4 כי עמך הסליחה, “for forgiveness is something with You, (reserved for You),” and our sages in Tanchuma Mishpatim 18 say that this means that G’d did not authorize any angel to dispense forgiveness, this simply means that the angels known as נפרדים, “disembodied beings,” the ones who are able to sin (as we explained earlier) have not been authorized to extend forgiveness. The words כי שמי בקרבו, “for My name is within him,” is a reference to the tetragrammaton, the one normally described as כי ביה י-ה-ו-ה. This is also how Onkelos translates it when he writes ארי בשמי מימריה. The meaning of these words is that “whatever this angel says he says only in My name.” in other words: “his voice is the voice of the Supreme G’d.” This explains why our verse (22) speaks about listening to the “voice” of this angel rather than “listening to what he says;” he does not have anything of his own to say. By writing ושמע בקולו, the Torah wants to make clear that G’d Himself is the active part of the message, the משפיע, whereas the angel is only the echo, i.e. the מושפע. You will find that when dealing with creatures in our terrestrial world man is the active force whereas woman is the passive force as we know from Adam saying when he first beheld his wife as a separate entity לזאת יקרא אשה כי מאיש לוקחה זאת, “this (one) will be called woman for she was taken from man.” He did not say anything about his wife being someone initiating things. Woman’s role is essentially responsive. In this connection it is interesting to note that the מנחה offering, though feminine, is always spelled as if it were masculine when the Torah refers to it as מנחה הוא instead of as we would expect מנחה היא. [Compare Leviticus 2,6 and 2,15 for example. The same is true of אשה הוא in Exodus 29,28 describing the fire-offering, where we would have expected that the spelling should have been אשה היא. Compare also Leviticus 8,21 and 8, 28 where we read about עולה הוא, although we read the word as היא. In the case of the מנחה the anomaly is even greater as the Torah when referring to it refers to אותה not אותו which would have been appropriate if we were to treat it as masculine. Perhaps the most telling example of this phenomenon is found in Deut. 17,5 where the Torah speaks of the death penalty being administered to both the man and the woman who have committed a similar sin, writing והוצאת את האיש ההוא או את האשה ההוא instead of את האשה ההיא]. This whole matter becomes clearer when you consider that our verse starts with the letter ה in the word השמר and ends with the letter ו at the end of the word בקרבו. These two letters represent the female and the male elements respectively. Their position in this verse may be designed to teach us that in this instance there is no difference between the masculine and the feminine attributes of G’d, that essentially they are all one. This whole subject has been alluded to by Nachmanides in connection with Leviticus 2,11: כל המנחה ...לא תקטירו ממנו אשה לה’. When the Israelites committed the sin of the golden calf this angel who had previously accompanied them disappeared. This is the true meaning of the words in 33, 3 כי לא אעלה בקרבכם, “for I will not ascend in your midst.” As long as this angel of whom we have been told that the Holy Name of G’d was בקרבו, within him, in his midst, G’d never said כי לא אעלה בקרבך. As long as that angel was by our side He Himself was by our side. The angel who made his appearance during the time of Joshua and who would assist in driving out the Canaanites was Gavriel, one of the disembodied beings. As soon as the people had been informed that G’d would not ascend in their midst they went into mourning (33,4) seeing that the angel who carried within him the Holy Name of G’d had left them. They became afraid for their own survival fearing that they were now potential prey for their enemies as their enemies also could call on the support of those angels whom we have described as the נפרדים, the ones who had been assigned, one each, to each of the seventy nations.

The statement by Tanchuma Mishpatim 18 that as long as Moses was alive the Israelites had no angel with them, is in full agreement with this Kabbalistic view, meaning that the angel called שר הצבא was not with them seeing that they had a superior angel, the one we described as one of the נטיעות, a category of angel unable to sin. When the Torah writes in 33,2 ושלחתי לפניך מלאך וגרשתי את הכנעני, “and I will send ahead of you an angel and I will drive out the Canaanite,” etc., this refers to a category of angels belonging to the נפרדים. This promise/threat by G’d was never carried out during Moses’ lifetime as his prayer succeeded in cancelling this decree. He, Moses, became the substitute for that angel. After Moses died, this void had to be filled and the angel spoken of by G’d in 33,2 then appeared to Joshua announcing that he had at that time begun to assume the task assigned to him already originally in Exodus 33,2.

We know that Moses fulfilled the role of that angel during his own lifetime from the fact that whenever he raised his hands in supplication the Jewish people succeeded in driving back Amalek (Exodus 17,11). When this angel materialized before the eyes of Joshua with a drawn sword in his hand he made it amply clear what his function was to be. When, subsequently, we read in the Book of Joshua (10,11) of gigantic rocks dropping out of the sky (heaven) upon the fleeing Canaanites this was part of that angel’s doing. When the kings were killed (Joshua 10,28) the description of the utter destruction wrought upon all the living souls in these various cities was beyond anything Moses had done during his own lifetime. When Moses conducted war the Torah mentions that the victims’ bodies were destroyed. We never find, as we do constantly in the Book of Joshua, that the souls of the victims were destroyed also (contrast description of Deut. 3,6 with Joshua 10,28-39). In order that we do not misunderstand the word נפש in those verses as applying only to the animalistic life-force of the Canaanites, we are told in Joshua 10,40 ואת כל הנשמה החרים, “he utterly wiped out every soul.” This was why this angel had to accompany Joshua on his campaign.

והביאך אל האמורי והחתי והפריזי והכנעני החוי והיבוסי, “and He will bring you to the Amorite, etc. etc.” The seventh tribe, the Girgashite, was not mentioned here as, according to our tradition recorded in Jerusalem Talmud Sheviit 6,1 that tribe emigrated, nort waiting for a disastrous confrontation with Joshua and the Jewish people. There was therefore no need for the Israelites to campaign against them.

ועבדתם את ה' אלוהיכם, “and you will serve the Lord your G’d.” Seeing that the Gentiles believe that if they serve their various deities this in turn will assure them of success in their lives on earth, the Torah added the words: “but you will serve the Lord your G’d” as a contrast at this point. It is simply a reminder that it is not appropriate for the Israelites to serve any other deity which cannot grant them their desires anyway. The Torah adds: “for He blessed your bread and your water.” והסירותי מחלה מקרבך, “and I will remove illness from amongst you.” There are certain sicknesses which result from the intake of certain foods, illnesses not visible on the surface of one’s body. There are other external illnesses which are due to changes in climate, etc. This is why the Torah assures the Jewish people that when they serve the Lord G’d will bless their food and water so that their bodies will be able to resist the sickness which may normally result from the consumption of food and drink containing invisible but harmful ingredients. This means that the righteous person will not have to have recourse to a physician. This is the meaning of Chronicles II 16,12: “but even though he (King Assa) was ill, he did not turn to the Lord but to physicians.” (This was sinful and the reason he was not cured.) The word מחלה, “sickness,” includes such deficiencies as sterility, propensity to not carry out an embryo for its full term, etc. Actually, the verse should have written the word והסיר, “and He will remove (in the third person) instead of והסירותי, “I will remove.” After all the previous reference to G‘d in that verse such as וברך, “and He will bless,” is in the third person. However, the correct interpretation of the whole verse is: “for the Lord will remove all manner of disease from our midst if we serve Him by addressing ourselves to His exclusive attribute, the tetragrammaton” (compare Nachmanides on the end of verse 25).

את אימתי, “the fear of Me, etc.” This is the attribute of Justice. The word is the same as in Exodus 15,16 תפול עליהם אימתה ופחד, “may fear and terror befall them.” The צרעה which verse 28 speaks of is a kind of flying insect similar but bigger than a bee. The term צרעה includes many species of a similar type all of which sting people. Just as there were many different kinds of locust during the plague of locust in Egypt, so there are many different kinds of צרעה. The Talmud Sotah 36 claims that this insect injected its poison into the Canaanites who became its victim, blinding them and killing them almost instantly. This insect entered the Holy Land together with Joshua, crossed the Jordan as is reported in Joshua 24,12: “I sent a plague ahead of you.” The reason that in verse 28 only three of the Canaanite tribes are mentioned as being driven out by this צרעה is that these three tribes were the strongest ones amongst the seven tribes residing in tall fortresses and fortified towns. The Torah wanted to inform us that such mighty warriors in such protected habitats became the victims of such tiny creatures as the hornets. It is an object lesson for us demonstrating that G’d will bring down the strong by using the weakest of His creatures as His agent.

מעט מעט אגרשנו מפניך, “little by little will I drive them out before you.” The meaning of the verse is that the hornet will drive these people out due to the power of the attribute of Justice so that they will constantly decrease in numbers (in contrast with you who will steadily increase in numbers). This process will continue until you can take possession of the whole country.

מים סוף ועד ים פלשתים, “from the Sea of Reeds as far as the Sea of the Philistines.” The Sea of Reeds is in the South and the Sea of the Philistines is in the West (Mediterranean). We know this also from Joshua 1,4: “as far as the great Sea where the sun sets will be your borders.” The sea described as the “great Sea” is not the ocean (Atlantic or Indian ocean) as the ocean surrounds all land masses. The words וממדבר refer to the eastern side whereas the words עד הנהר refer to the river Euphrates in the north.