תאוה נהיה תערב לנפש ותועבת כסילים סור מרע, “Desire realized is sweet for the soul; it is an abomination to the wicked to abandon evil.” (Proverbs 13,19).

In this verse Solomon warns man not to give in to his various physical urges but to suppress them and to vanquish them. Anyone who succeeds in banishing his physical urges is considered on the spiritual level of an angel. Conversely, anyone who encourages his physical urges and wants to indulge them is on the spiritual level of an animal. When we take a look at the creatures created on the sixth day of creation we find that all the creatures created prior to man can be divided into two groups: 1) abstract intelligences; 2) creatures bound to earth by their bodies. The first group comprises the angels, creatures which are totally disembodied, divorced from anything material. The second group, such as the trees and other kinds of vegetation as well as living creatures are all composed of matter, totally devoid of intelligence. Each of the two categories of creatures performs the tasks allotted to them by their Creator, the former group using their intelligence, the latter using their instinct. Both these groups are not free agents but have to obey the instructions received from their Creator, using either their natural instincts or their G’d - given intelligence but neither being overtly interfered with. It follows that on the sixth day a third category of creature was created, one which represents a blend of the previous two. It was a creature which embodied both intelligence similar to the disembodied angels, and at the same time is made up of a body and responds to natural urges similar to the animals. This category of creatures was the human species. Man is not dominated either by the dictates of his intelligence or those of his natural urges. The principal difference between man and other creatures it that he possess willpower, i.e. decisions made by him are free-willed. If he is circumspect he can successfully overcome the natural urges he has in common with the animals. In that event he frees himself of the influence exerted upon him by the physical raw material he is made of. If he fails to resist the urges which result from his being made up of physical matter, he negates the influence of his intelligence, the element which makes him similar to the angels. As long as Adam did not sin and as a result became enmeshed in the urges common to animals he was a true angel of the Lord although possessed of a body. He was all intelligence, unblemished. As a result, he was fit to live forever (compare author’s comments on Genesis 2,17), similar to the angels who reside in the celestial regions. He had been placed in Gan Eden, the choicest location on earth. Seeing that he did sin, decided to respond to physical urges, he was deprived of the intelligence which had covered him like a garment and was dressed in earth-grown material. As a result he was expelled from Gan Eden and given herbs as food, similar to the animals. This is the meaning of Genesis 3,18: “you shall eat the herbs of the field.” Prior to that he had been eating fruit grown on trees, products of plantings by G’d’s own hand. Keeping in mind how Adam was demoted, or demoted himself, we must realise that it is to our advantage to break the hold that these natural urges have on us, something which if achieved is תערב לנפש, “will be sweet for the soul;” Solomon speaks of greed and similar instincts which, if they have been “broken,” conquered by man, are something sweet and pleasant for man’s intellectual faculties. The word נהיה in that verse, an unusual word, is similar in construction to Daniel 8,27 נהייתי ונחליתי, “I was broken up and ill;” we also have a similar word in Exodus 9,3 הנה יד ה' הויה, “here the Lord’s hand is about to break, etc.” Solomon urges man to break the hold these natural instincts have over him seeing that they are רע, evil. The Torah already told us that such urges are evil in Genesis 8,21 כי יצר לב האדם רע מנעוריו, “for the instinctive urges man’s heart is exposed to are evil, ever since his early years.” Seeing that the person who does break the prison walls represented by these urges is in effect סר מרע, distancing himself from evil, Solomon adds that תועבת כסילים סור מרע, that “abandoning evil is something abominable in the eyes of the fools.” Whatever is pleasant for the soul is by definition an abomination for the body, the home of these baser instincts of man. It is a well known fact that he who allows himself to follow these base instincts is thereby violating all of the Torah’s precepts. Following one’s instincts may be divided into four categories, four levels; 1) one does so theoretically, allowing himself to feel the urge and be titillated by it. 2) One speaks about these urges, a form of coming closer to giving in to them; 3) one indulges these urges by consuming the object of the temptation with one’s mouth, tasting it; 4) one abandons one’s entire body to the delights offered by such allure. As to fantasizing about sin Solomon already taught us that such fantasies are culpable as if the sin had actually been committed in deed. In Proverbs 15,13 he told us that “a happy heart makes for a cheerful face, whereas a sad heart causes a despondent spirit.” Solomon did not want to tell us the obvious, rather he meant that there is a direct relationship between fantasizing about sin and translating the fantasy into practice. Just as the thoughts of the heart influence the body and its appearance, so sinful thoughts influence the organs with which these thoughts are carried out. The heart is to those organs what the root of a tree is to its branches. The second category of following one’s instincts, i.e. speaking about such fantasies involves such sins as gossiping, character-assassination, using foul language. It is forbidden by Biblical decree. Solomon refers to it when he said that “the mouth of fools expresses folly” (Proverbs 15,2). Immediately following that verse he wrote that “the eyes of G’d are everywhere; they behold the good and the wicked.” What Solomon meant was that G’d pays close attention to the power of speech being abused as well as to those who use that power judiciously and constructively. G’d will punish the guilty. The prophet Isaiah also castigated people who abuse their mouths to speak foul words when he said: “(G’d) will not spare their youths...for all are ungodly and wicked and every mouth speaks impiety” (Isaiah 9,16). The third category, i.e. eating forbidden things in response to one’s instincts, overriding G’d’s laws, is also a violation of a Biblical law. Concerning such lapses David said (Psalms 40,9) “Your teaching is in my entrails.” David congratulated himself that he never fell victim to the temptation to fill his entrails with forbidden food. David did not merely refer to food which was forbidden per se, but to gorging himself on permitted food, indulging his appetite instead of eating only in order to meet the requirements of his health. Solomon described a righteous person as someone who אוכל לשבוע נפשו, “eats in order to satisfy his soul (as opposed to his body)” Proverbs 13,25. In Proverbs 21,23 Solomon elaborates further saying that “he who guards his mouth and his tongue keeps his soul from troubles.” The fourth category of temptation one may fall victim to is the one involving one’s entire body. It concerns indulging one’s carnal instincts indiscriminately. There is no need to dwell on the list of incestuous relations the Torah has already outlawed. The temptation to overindulge in sexual activity with a partner who is officially permitted is what one has to suppress, conquer. This concludes the four categories of temptations that the body is exposed to and which it is incumbent upon us to resist. Whence do we know that if someone allows himself to pursue these various pleasures available to the flesh that he thereby violated the entire Torah legislation? Solomon provided us with the answer to this question when he wrote (Proverbs 18,1) לתאוה יבקש נפרד, בכל תושיה יתגלע, “a man exclusively concerned with satisfying his desires separates himself from all wisdom (Torah).” The word נפרד, “alone, abandoned,” used in that verse means that he who pursues physical gratification will find himself isolated, alone. He will lose his friends and companions in the process as his friends will not want to expose themselves to these temptations. A person guilty of such pursuits is in effect “kicking” at the Torah. This is what is meant by the words בכל תושיה יתגלע. This is why the Torah asks us not only to refrain from what is forbidden but to refrain from and to suppress desires as these might ultimately lead us to violate what is forbidden outright. Considerations such as this led our sages (Yevamot 20) to formulate the slogan: קדש עצמך במותר לך, “sanctify yourself by refraining from that which is permitted to you!” Anyone who deliberately separates himself from such urges is described as “holy.” The Torah applies this flattering description to the Nazir who undertook to abstain from intoxicating drink (wine) and all grape-products as well as from contact with ritual impurity, and who lets his hair grow to show that he is doing this. The Torah (Numbers 6,5) writes concerning such a person: “holy shall he be, the growth of his hair on his head shall grow.” Just as such a Nazir is holy, the Israelites at Mount Sinai were holy as we know from Exodus 19,6: “and you shall be unto me a Kingdom of Priests, an holy nation.” The Israelites were commanded to be holy in order that they should separate themselves from the cravings of this world.

קדושים תהיו כי קדוש אני ה' אלו-היכם, “You shall be holy for I am holy, Hashem, your G’d.” According to the plain meaning of the text the word קדוש, means isolating oneself, being apart. This is an exhortation to the entire Jewish people to be chaste, to practices noble character traits and to impress one’s children with the importance of these virtues. Children then will look up to their parents as if the parents truly were G’d’s representatives on earth. In turn they will testify thereby that the Creator Himself is their supreme authority, the original “patriarch” who has called this world into existence. In order to make this point, our paragraph immediately commences by telling us that we must revere mother and father and observe G’d’s Sabbaths. (verse 3). The linkage of these two commandments is that the Sabbath is testimony to the fact that G’d created the universe (Exodus 20,11). The reason the Torah writes the commandment to revere mother and father, letting the mother precede the father in importance (as opposed to a similar commandment in the decalogue where the Torah writes: “honour your father and your mother”), is that it is natural for children to love the mother more than the father and to fear the authority of the father more than that of the mother. The Torah wants to ensure that we do not make such distinctions in our relationship with our respective father and mother. If both parents were to agree that the child is to violate the Sabbath, the Torah adds immediately: “and you shall observe My Sabbath days,” meaning that this commandment overrides even a joint command by father and mother to the contrary. The addition of the words: “I am the Lord your G’d” at the end of verse three means that G’d is the supreme authority for both the child and his parents and thus has overriding authority when there is a conflict involving the loyalties of the child. Both the parents and the child are obligated to carry out His instructions. The Torah appends the commandment not to serve any other deities nor to make molten images for oneself to make the point that even if one recognises the Lord as the supreme authority but denies that He created the world out of no pre-existing raw material one is considered an heretic, guilty of idolatry. One must not turn to idols as this implies that one considers that they are a substantive force. The words אל תפנו, “do not turn,” are not so much an instruction not to face the idols but that in one’s heart one must not believe that there is anything to them and to what they purport to represent. We must consider idols as something devoid of any theological meaning, totally powerless to exert influence of any kind on anybody. The use of the root פנה here is similar in meaning to Deut. 29,17: “whose heart turns away today from the Lord, etc.,” or Deut. 30,17 “if you will turn away and not listen.” The Torah adds that “you must not construct molten images for yourselves,” i.e. even though you are aware that such images are totally meaningless in theological terms, have no power or value. The reason the Torah appends the words: “I am the Lord your G’d,” means that ‘I can be trusted to pay you your reward, i.e. Hashem, (attribute of Mercy) but eloheychem, (attribute of Justice) in the event you do something for which you will deserve punishment.’

It is also possible to explain the directive: “you shall be holy” at the beginning of our Parshah as applying to the sanctity of one’s thoughts, one’s intentions, similar to what the sages said (Shevuot 18) that when engaging in the act of marital relations with his wife both parties should harbour only pure thoughts, not wanting to merely indulge their libido. Seeing that such purity of thought at such a time has a genetic impact on the kind of children produced through the act of cohabitation, the Torah even referred to the children born as having been born “for Me” (compare Ezekiel 23,37: “and even their children which they had born to Me they passed before them the idols, -specifically the Moloch-that they may be consumed”). The prophet speaks of children conceived in holiness as children born to G’d. This is applicable to all the Israelites whose existence is dedicated to G’d. The reason this paragraph is addressed to כל עדת בני ישראל, “the entire community of the Children of Israel,” is because these laws apply to males and females equally. When Moses assembled the people and gave them the directive to build the Tabernacle and for the Israelites to donate materials for that project we also find the directive addressed to כל עדת בני ישראל, “the entire community of the Children of Israel” (Exodus 35,1). There too the directive was addressed directly to the males and the female members of the community. The reason for the formula איש אמו ואביו תיראו, is that there are three partners involved in bringing about the birth of a human being, G’d, father, and mother (Kidushin 30). The Torah mentions the mother first as it is a great achievement for the mother to attain the level of sanctity desired when she cohabits with her husband. The father, partner number two, is mentioned next as his contribution to the fetus is critical, i.e. his sperm is the most important ingredient. G’d is mentioned last as He contributes the soul, an essential component, (but only after husband and wife have already started the fetus). The words: “I am the Lord your G’d” at the end of the verse describe that G’d is the third party in the creation of the baby. The third partner, G’d, is alluded to in the words “and observe My Sabbaths,” seeing that amongst observant people cohabitation takes place primarily on Friday nights. The word תשמרו, is appropriately translated as “waiting.” We find the word שמר used in this sense in connection with Yaakov “waiting for something to occur” when told of a dream his son Joseph had which on the face of it defied interpretation (Genesis 37,11). Our sages in Berachot 3 use the word in a similar manner when they speak about שמר לי על הפתח, as the subject Elijah there waiting for Rabbi Yossi. The prophet Isaiah 56,4 speaks of the Lord having an encouraging message for the eunuchs and sterile men who observe the Sabbaths (although unable to sire children and hope for G’d’s partnership being manifest in the children they will father, resp. not father). The subject there are not people unable to produce viable sperm but people who deny themselves the opportunity of cohabiting with their wives except on Friday nights, thus observing the Sabbaths. Our sages interpret the words אשר פריו יתן בעתו, “someone (normally tree) who will give its fruit at its appropriate time” (Psalms 1,3) as an allusion to people who indulge in cohabitation with their wives only on Friday nights, thus observing the Sabbath in a special manner (compare Ketuvot 62). G’d rewards such people by granting them יד ושם טוב מבנים ובנות, “a memorial and name better that physical sons and daughters.” [This is the end of the verse in Isaiah 56,4 and ignores the literal promise of that verse which is understood as consoling people who have no children by suggesting that there are greater rewards than biological offspring. Ed.]

There are those who claim that the reason the prophet singles out Sabbath observance by males who are unable (biologically) to have offspring is because the commandment to observe the Sabbath is linked by the Torah to future generations, i.e. applicable to the children and children’s children of a person (Exodus 32,16). As a result, a person who is aware that he would never have any children might balk at observing all the laws of the Sabbath and requires special encouragement. G’d therefore promises them a reward which is greater than their merely having physical offspring. The next verse in our paragraph exhorts us not to turn to idols, (verse 4). The connection with the previous verse is that it is forbidden to look at females (in order to arouse one’s libido). Our sages (claim that when one looks at females because they are females one places oneself in the same company as people who turn to idols, deities, even if they only admire the artistry involved in their construction (compare Zohar Kedoshim 84,1). Seeing that it is also forbidden to fantasize about someone else’s wife, the words: “do not make a molten image for yourselves” in the same verse complement the thoughts we just mentioned.

A Midrashic approach: The “be holy for I am holy,” with which our portion commences reflects the fact that the concept of a nation such as Israel inspired G’d to create the universe in the first place. Expressed differently: Israel shared G’d’s holiness already before the universe or the people were created. At this time G’d decided that the time had come for the people of Israel to demonstrate this latent holiness in actual visible fashion (compare Tanchuma Kedoshim 2). If we were to illustrate this concept in a parable the matter is similar to a king who has become engaged to a bride, i.e. she has become designated for him exclusively. This prompts the king to say: “seeing that I am the king and you are going to become my queen you ought to share my glory. Seeing that my glory is my title “king,” you ought to share this glory of mine.” Applied to G’d and Israel respectively, G’d’s glory being His being holy, He is now (immediately prior to the revelation at Mount Sinai) desirous of His fiancee the Jewish people sharing this holiness. The way to achieve this is to observe the laws of the Torah, plus. This is precisely what happened prior to the revelation at Mount Sinai when G’d told Moses to “sanctify” the people (Exodus 19,10), whereas G’d Himself sanctified the people when He said: “you will be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exodus 19,6). Rabbi Levi (Vayikra Rabbah 24,5) claimed that the entire Ten Commandments are recorded in this portion. Whereas in the Decalogue we read אנכי ה' אלוקיך, “I am the Lord your G’d,” in our portion (19,4) we read אני ה' אלוקיכם. Whereas in the Decalogue we are told לא יהיה לך אלוהים אחרים, “do not have any other gods and do not make yourselves a hewn image, etc.,” we are told here (verse 4) “do not make yourselves a molten image.” Whereas in the Decalogue we are told not to utter the name of the Lord in vain, we are told here not to swear a false oath using the Lord’s name (verse 12). Whereas we are told in the Ten Commandments to observe the Sabbath, we are told here to observe the Lord’s Sabbath days (verse 3). Whereas we are told in the Decalogue to honour father and mother, we are told here to revere mother and father (verse 3). Whereas we are told in the Ten Commandments not to commit murder, we are told here “not to stand idly by when we see someone being murdered.” (19,16). In the Ten Commandments we are told not to commit adultery, whereas in our portion here we are being told: “do not desecrate your daughter to make her a harlot” (verse 29). The Decalogue commands us not to steal, whereas here we are told: “do not steal” (19,11). In the Decalogue the Torah warns against bearing false witness against someone, whereas in our portion we are warned: “do not commit character assassination, defamation” (19,16). In the Decalogue we are exhorted not to covet other people’s possessions, especially his wife, whereas here the Torah commands us to: “love what is your neighbor's just as what is yours,” i.e. not to covet what is his” (19,18).

A Kabbalistic approach: ...

אל תפנו אל האלילים “do not turn to the “non-deities.” The verse speaks about disembodied spirits beneath the (domain) of the ten emanations; the reason they are called אלילים is that they do possess certain god-like powers. The reason the word is repeated, i.e. אלילים instead of אלים, is to remind the reader that whatever power is displayed by these disembodied spirits is not an independent power but merely something accorded to them by the Creator. They derive their power from another source. This fact prompted the psalmist to say in Psalms 96,5 כי כל אלוהי העמים אלילים וה' שמים עשה, “all the gods of the peoples are mere idols, but the Lord made the heavens.” The psalmist means that the supremacy of Hashem is clearly evident in that He created the Heaven (the entire universe) single-handedly. ואלהי מסכה, “and molten images, etc.” this refers to images of stars, zodiac signs, etc., which are below the level of these disembodied spirits just mentioned. These molten images are perceived as receiving their power from these stars, etc. The name אלוהי מסכה is appropriate and comparable to what the prophet Isaiah 40,19 described as הפסל נסך חרש, “the molten image is poured by the artisan.” אני ה' אלוקיכם, “I am the Lord your G’d.” “I exercise control over all levels of phenomena.” We have a similar thought expressed more unmistakably by Solomon in Kohelet 5,7 where he wrote: “for there is One higher than the high Who watches and there are high ones above them.” The words אל תפנו also include a concept described by David as בידך עתותי, “in Your hand are my times.” (Psalms 31,16). We read in Exodus 3,15 that G’d told Moses concerning hidden meaning in His name, זה שמי לעלם, “normally translated as: ‘this is My name forever.” The fact is that the word forever, לעולם is spelled defective in that verse, the letter ו being missing. This means that G’d has kept something concealed, hidden. Briefly, G’d’s message was that although the believers in the stars and zodiac signs attribute significance to the timing of any action in order to ensure that they will be successful, i.e. under the influence of the horoscope, Jews do not. This is what David had in mind when he spoke about his “fate” being in G’d’s hands, calling his fate עתותי, “what is meant to happen to me at any predetermined point in time.” He expresses his absolute trust in leaving such matters to G’d, not to consulting horoscopes. When G’d concludes our verse by writing אני ה', this is a reminder to the Jewish people that their fate at least is not subject to אלילים, and it would be not only wrong but foolhardy of them to turn to cheap imitations of the real Power in this world.

לא תעשו לכם אני ה' אלוקיכם, ”do not construct for yourselves, I am the Lord your G’d.” These words are the conclusion of the three verses 2-3-4. We find a similar ending (signature) in 19,34 which concludes the subject of the treatment of strangers (converts). This type of signature is used again in verse 36 concluding the warning not to use false weights, etc., There are still a few other commandments which are signed by G’d saying: “I am the Lord your G’d.” (verses 10-25-31). The reason underlying these statements is that all the commandments originate with G’d, but that only performance of them testifies to the fact that G’d is the lawgiver. This is what the sages meant when they said that if someone spends his entire time only studying the Torah he is comparable to a person who does not have a personal G’d” (Avodah Zarah 17). Their meaning is very clear. We are to demonstrate the existence of G’d and His law by carrying it out in practice. If we do not leave a corner of our fields for the poor, or if we do not treat the convert as an equal, or if we do not ensure that our weights and measures are fair, how do we testify to the fact that G’d whom we believe in has formulated these laws and that we have accepted them? In order to make this point the Torah keeps repeating the “signature” אני ה' אלוקיכם, “I am the Lord your G’d, as if to say: “demonstrate that I am the Lord your G’d”

וכי תזבחו זבח שלמים לה, “When you slaughter a peace-offering to the Lord, etc.” The Torah means that “when you have the need to perform sacrificial service to a higher power, do not sacrifice to these aforementioned disembodied spirits, etc., but address your peace-offerings exclusively to Hashem.” The word לה' includes that such sacrificial offerings should not be motivated by your desire to receive some kind of gift or reward in return. Your motivation must be לרצונכם, to express your innermost desire (to come closer to your G’d). The reason that in this instance the Torah writes the formula תזבחהו instead of תזבחו such as in Leviticus 22,29 when we have similar sounding legislation, is explained by our sages in Chulin 29. The absence of the letter ו in the parallel word in Parshat Emor is to teach us that that when a Priest slaughters a sacrificial animal, the same Priest must not slaughter the next sacrificial animal to be offered; neither must two Priests combine to slaughter one single sacrificial animal. In the case of slaughtering animals which are not sanctified and not intended for the altar but merely for private consumption such restrictions do not apply. This is why the word תזבחהו is spelled with the extra letter ה in our verse. [I do not understand why the author speaks about a missing letter ו, when in our editions of the Torah the difference between the two verses is the letter ה. Ed.] At any rate, the Talmud derives from the spelling here that if one slaughterer severed the heads of two animals at the same time, (i.e. in one stroke) both animals are considered as having been ritually slaughtered.]

It is also possible to say, in accordance with a kabbalistic approach, that the addition of the two letters הו in our verse here in the word תזבחהו are a deliberate reminder of the last two letters in the tetragram, i.e. symbolising the two attributes Mercy and Justice. (compare author’s comments on Genesis 46,1). This is why there was a need here to add these two letters. It is similar to the same two letters being written in Exodus 2,6 where the Torah describes the reaction of Pharaoh’s daughter when she saw young Moses in the basket as ותראהו את הילד, instead of ותרא את הילד which is what could have been expected. In that instance our sages commented that the extra letters meant that the princess also saw a manifestation of the Lord’s presence, Shechinah, when she looked at the baby (compare Sotah 12). Seeing that the תודה offering which is the subject of the word תזבחו in Leviticus 22,29 was addressed to only one attribute, i.e. Hashem, there was no reason to append the letter ה in addition.

ביום זבחכם יאכל, “on the day (and the morrow of the day) you slaughter it must be eaten.” The preferred method is to eat the meat of the offering on the actual day the animal has been slaughtered. On the second day it is permitted to eat it still, but it is not the Torah’s choice that the eating be spread over two days or not be commenced until the day after the slaughter. When the Talmud in Zevachim 55 speaks of peace-offerings being permitted to be eaten on two days and one night, this means the day of the slaughter, the night following, and the following day. On the night following the second day the offering is already in the category of נותר, “left over,” and must not be eaten anymore, the remains to be burned. This is the meaning of the words: “and what remains of it on the third day must be burned by fire.” These words simply mean that the burning has to take place on the third day, not the eating.

ובקצרכם, “When you reap the harvest, etc.” The reason the word ובקצרכם is in the plural is because the portion commenced with Israel being addressed in the plural, i.e. as the community. Moreover, it was the custom in those days that many people began the harvesting process simultaneously. By contrast the words לא תכלה, “do not completely harvest the corner, etc.” are in the singular seeing the warning is addressed to the individual owner of the field in question. We find that the Torah uses the singular in other parallel legislation where the onus is on the individual owner (compare verse 10). Our sages in Chulin 135 comment that seeing the Torah spoke about שדך, “the field belonging to you the individual,” I might have thought that fields owned jointly by two or more partners could escape the application of this legislation. To ensure that we do not draw such conclusions the Torah employs the plural in our verse here, speaking about a number of people harvesting.

וכרמך לא תעולל, “and your vineyard you must not pick undeveloped fruit.” The Torah means that when you come across unripe single grapes during the process of harvesting the vineyard you must leave those for the stranger, the poor, etc. The reason these single unripe grapes are known as עוללות, a word usually describing babies, is that these grapes are to regular clusters of grapes as these babies in relation to fully grown men. They must be left as gleanings for the poor. ופרט כרמך, “and the fallen fruit of your vineyard you shall not gather.” The individual ripe grapes which for one reason or another fall off the clusters are called פרט. Individual ears of corn are also known by that name once they have been separated from the stalk. Compare Yoel 1,17 עבשו פרדות תחת מגרפותיהם, “the seeds have shriveled under their clods.” When the prophet predicts desolation due to crop failure both of grain and fruit trees, he refers to the immediate cause being the shriveling up of these individual ears of corn used as seed. The word עבשו is similar to the word עפשו, “turned moldy.” The word מגרפותיהם used by the prophet is derived from אגרף, “fist.” The prophet uses the comparison between the whole, the combined and the separate, the individual. He describes the whole stalk full of ears as similar to a “fistful,” whereas the individual ears of corn he describes as having shriveled, עבשו. The word פרט is always found in Talmudic Hebrew as the contrast to the כלל, the community, the all-inclusive rule, for instance.

In Megillah 26 the Talmud speaks of האי תיבותא דארפט, “a holy ark in the Synagogue which is disintegrating,” and from the usable parts of which it is permitted to make a similar smaller ark, although not something to hold secular books or scrolls. The letters רט in the word in the Talmud, though inverted, do not change the meaning of the word, i.e. that it fell apart into its components which were previously held together. In connection with defining the word פרט more closely, our sages (Peyah 6,8) stated that if one or two grapes fell off a cluster the definition פרט applies, whereas if three or more grapes fell off together this definition does not longer apply and the grower may retrieve them. The same definition applies to individual stalks of corn as opposed to sheaves.

לא תגנובו , “you shall not steal!” At this point the Torah reverts to using the plural seeing that a similar commandment in the Ten Commandments had been addressed to the individual, i.e. לא תגנוב. The Torah did not want us to think that the commandment here was merely a repetition of what has already been written in the Decalogue. In the Decalogue the Torah speaks of someone stealing somebody for which the penalty is execution, whereas here the Torah speaks about objects or even animals for which financial compensation with or without a penalty is in place. The reason we know that in the Decalogue we speak about a different category of theft, i.e. kidnapping, is that the other commandments there i.e. “do not commit adultery, and do not murder,” are also sins punishable by execution of the person violating them deliberately. Here the Torah speaks of stealing money, or the equivalent of money, something that can be expiated by means of payments to the party concerned. We were told in Baba Metzia 61 that the wording לא תגנובו implies that stealing is prohibited even if one committed the theft only in order to annoy the person from whom one stole without the intention of keeping the stolen money. The reason the sages in Baba Metzia had to come up with this explanation is that seeing the Torah already wrote לא תגזול, “do not commit robbery,” and everyone who steals is automatically guilty of violating the commandment not to commit robbery, the words לא תגנובו had to contain an additional dimension.

לא תכחשו ולא תשקרו, ולא תשבעו בשמי לשקר, “do not deny falsely, do not lie, and do not use My name to swear a false oath.” The Torah, with its infinite psychological insight, describes a sequence of events. One starts by stealing, then denies that one has stolen, then denies it on oath. In the end one is guilty of desecrating the Lord’s name (when others hear about it). The Torah speaks particularly of invoking the tetragram in any oath. “Desecrating the name of the Lord your G’d,” means desecrating the One name from which all the attributes, כנוים, are derived.

The first time this injunction appears was in the Ten Commandments where the Torah also mentioned שם ה' אלוקיך, “the name of the Lord your G’d” (Exodus 20,7). At the time the Torah had added that the sin of desecrating His name by using it in a false oath was so severe that He would never completely forgive such a person for that sin.

לא תקלל חרש, “do not curse the deaf.” The reason the Torah used the example of the deaf person in this verse was to teach you to apply logic. If the Torah forbids you to curse the deaf person who does not hear it and therefore does not feel angry or saddened by such treatment of him on your part, how much more so must we not curse someone whose faculties of hearing are not impaired. All of these directives are designed to improve a person’s basic character traits and to ensure that he will not become the victim of bad and addictive habits. The prohibition to curse the deaf is not based on the Torah’s consideration of the victim, rather it is for the protection of the person doing the cursing. The Torah does not want such a person even to mouth curses where these have no visible effect; otherwise, the same person, being already in the habit of uttering curses will do so where they do immediate harm. When one has trained oneself not to curse even the deaf, one will be doubly careful not to curse those who can hear. The example of not cursing the deaf is a precedent applying to any situations of a similar nature. The Torah chooses examples from real life; similarly the Torah exhorts not to put obstacles in the path of the blind because they are not able to identify of who tried to cause them harm. Unfortunately, people who do have the habit of taking advantage of the helpless tend to be guilty of such examples as mentioned by the Torah. The words: “you shall fear the Lord,” after the warning not to place obstacles in the path of those who cannot see is a reminder that G’d can see what you do. The use of the expression ויראת מאלו-היך occurs usually when the matter is left to your heart, i.e. there is no police restraining your behaviour. Similar comments were made by Solomon in Proverbs 24,12: “if you say: ‘we did not know anything about this,’ surely He who looks into the hearts will understand (the truth), the One who preserves your life will know; will He not repay everyone according to his deeds?” This is also the reminder of our sages in Avot 2,1: “know what is above you, a seeing eye, an ear that listens, and all your deeds are being recorded in a book.”

בצדק תשפוט עמיתך, “with righteousness you shall judge your fellow.” The verse speaks about the fairness to be applied in the judicial process. Justice must not be perverted. He who applies fair rules thereby strengthens the throne of the Almighty. It is said of G’d’s throne that “righteousness and justice are the foundation of Your throne,” (Psalms 89,16); if someone perverts the judicial system he thereby undermines G’d’s throne. This is a demeaning of G’d’s glory. The Midrash Tehillim 82 phrases the thought in these words: “if the judge judges righteously the Shechinah will be with him;” we know this as David said in Psalms 82,1: “the Lord is present in a community of true judges.” If the judges fails to apply these standards the Shechinah withdraws. We have another verse in Psalms 12,6 confirming this where it is written: “due to the groans of the plundered poor and needy, I will now act, says the Lord,” and the Holy Spirit is reported as exclaiming (Psalms 108,6) ”exalt Yourself over the heaven let Your glory be all over the earth!”.

את חקותי תשמורו, “observe My statutes!” What are these “statutes” the Torah speaks of here? They are primarily such laws as: “you must not mate your animal into another species, and you shall not plant your field with mixed seed, and a garment of a mixture of wool and flax fibres shall not come upon you.”

According to the plain meaning of the text the reason for these prohibitions is that all the things G’d created be they living creatures or merely vegetable matter each have their own mazzal, or representative in the celestial regions; each species was created as such, a principle underlying the whole creative process, where again and again G’d speaks of their being למיניהם, “according to their species.” Anyone who mixes species contravenes the expressed wish of the Lord. It is as if he denied the fact that the universe and all there is in it was created by the directives of the Lord. It is tantamount to expressing the view that G’d did not know how to best exploit the potential of the species He created. Adding new species through grafting is like second-guessing G’d. The prohibition of using both a donkey and an ox to pull a ploughshare simultaneously is another law based on the same type of consideration. The farmers usually bring the team of animals which ploughed into the same stable thus leading them to mating with each other. If they were to produce offspring constituting a new species this would contravene G’d’s laws on maintaining the purity of the respective species.

A Midrashic approach: based on Tanchuma Shelach 15: The words: “do not seed your field using a mixture of species of seed,” represents the verse ה' חפץ למען צדקו יגדיל תורה ויאדיר, “The Lord desires His (servant’s) vindication, that He may magnify and glorify (His) teaching” (Isaiah 42,21). This means that there is no major area of life which has not been regulated by the Torah’s issuing commandments in order for the Jewish people to earn the right to a brilliant future after death due to their having fulfilled all these commandments. Our lives have been regulated concerning ploughing, seeding, harvesting, weaving fibres and even wearing mixtures of clothing containing certain mixtures of fibres. We are not allowed to eat all kinds of animals, etc., etc. By observing all these laws we truly “blanket” all our activities so that they represent obedience to G’d’s commandments.

According to a kabbalistic approach, the legislation which is part of the group known as chukkim is an example of something not only related to matters physical, terrestrial, and this is why G’d speaks of חקות שמים, “laws of heaven” (Job 38,33). Statutes which are known as “laws of heaven” have been addressed only to the people of Israel. The psalmist speaks of: “His statutes and laws to Israel” (Psalms 147,19), and in psalm 81,4 he speaks of: “for it is a statute for Israel.” In other words, just as every species on earth has been assigned by G’d its specific function, so in the celestial regions too each category of angel, etc., has been assigned its specific function. These functions include insuring that terrestrial earth is supplied with the celestial input enabling it to function optimally. We know that the concept of peace and harmony is as important in the celestial spheres as it is on earth as we have been told in Job 28,2 that G’d makes peace in the heavenly regions as well as on earth. In other words, contrary to what we may think “peace” in the heavenly domains is not a given, something inviolate, but it may have to be restored from time to time having been fractured. When the beings in those heavenly regions each carry out their assigned tasks there is “peace.” In short, when these celestial forces stick to their assigned tasks, i.e. do not overlap with one another, all is well in heaven. Similarly, we on earth must refrain from mixing species that should not be mixed so as to maintain peace and harmony in the celestial regions. Anyone producing “bastard” species destroys the balance in the celestial regions also. The meaning of the word כלאים is “restraining something, denying something.” It means restraining existing powers from exercising their functions. One verse which expresses this idea is the prayer לא תכלא רחמיך ממני, where David asks G’d: “do not withhold Your compassion from me” (Psalms 40,12). Another occasion when this word appears in that form is in Jeremiah 37,18: בית הכלא, “a house of detention,” a jail where one‘s movements are restricted. Anyone placed in such a jail is unable to pursue the functions assigned to him. By the same token the word חקים is derived also from חקיקה, “engraving,” i.e. making a visual image of abstract concepts. When someone mates two different species of animals, i.e. מין בשאינו מינו, or he plants two different species of plants closely together so that both feed upon each other this is equivalent to mixing two separate celestial forces together which each provide that species with the ability to reproduce, i.e. which instruct that species to reproduce itself. This is what is meant when the sages said (Bereshit Rabbah 10,7) “there is no herb on earth in the terrestrial universe which does not have a patron in the celestial spheres which encourages it to reproduce.” The Midrash bases this on Job 38,33: “do you know how the laws of heaven work, can you impose its authority on earth?” Seeing that the first two human beings who were born on earth were of different species, (Kayin and Hevel), one being the result of the evil genes of the serpent, the other that of Adam’s divinely inspired spirit, and we are commanded to keep our distance from the spirit of impurity, mixing the species has been forbidden for us as we have learned the fatal consequences which this could have. Basically, mixing species is mating opposites. It does not take superior wisdom to realise that this is likely to have devastating consequences. Whoever makes a point of separating or keeping different species apart contributes to peace and harmony on earth. Conversely, he who joins opposites, i.e. different species drives peace and harmony further away from earth. The reason is also that by doing so, one causes friction in the celestial regions from where separate input to the different species on earth originated in order to promote the continued existence of these species. כלאים, mixing species, has been forbidden on three different levels: 1) Different animals must not be mated with one another (regardless of whether biologically such mating could produce offspring). 2) Plants must not be mixed (planting seed together or grafting branches on to tree trunks). 3) certain clothing, i.e. flax and sheep’s wool must not be woven together and worn, stitched together and worn or serve as sheets, pillows, etc. The reason that regardless of outcome animals must not be mated together is because animals mate much in the same way as humans. Plants must not be mixed together at the point of planting or grafting as the woman of the human species is compared to the field (i.e. it receives input of seed passively). The reason that the mixing of the two fibres flax (linen) with lamb’s wool is prohibited is that Kayin offered flax as his offering to the Lord and Hevel offered sheep, i.e. wool. Seeing Kayin’s offering was rejected this was a hint that these two species were not fit to be mixed with one another. (compare Tanchuma Bereshit 9). The fact that Kayin murdered his brother is seen as a warning that they could not have been full brothers genetically speaking. Hence the Torah’s prohibition of mixing flax and wool is a warning that genetic incompatibility is fraught with extreme danger. Seeing that it is Israel’s task to be a holy nation we must not do anything which would undermine accomplishing our task. When the Torah chose the wording לא יעלה עליך, “it must not ascend on you,” as the way it describes the prohibition not to wear garments containing a mixture of wool and linen, this wording alludes to the spirit of impurity which the wearer is not to “put upon his person” when he wears such a garment. [The wording reflects that of the Zohar Kedoshim 86,2]. This leaves us with the question why the Torah not only permitted but commanded the mixture of these two fibres when it ordered that the blue tzitit (fringe) of the four strings of fringes be made of wool even if the bulk of the garment it is attached to is made of linen (Yevamot 4). [The word תכלת does not only mean a certain shade of blue, it means wool dyed this shade of blue. Ed.] The garments of the priests contained mixtures of wool and linen as a matter of routine, especially the ones worn when they performed the service in the Tabernacle (Kilayim 9,1). In fact this is the mystical dimension of Solomon describing the ideal wife/mother weaving wool and linen in Proverbs 31,13. According to that mystical dimension, the words in that verse, i.e. “she seeks wool and flax, and works with her hands willingly,” reflect the mystique of the entire poem Solomon composed here about such a woman. When the entire orientation of a person is to fulfill the will of the Creator, as is the orientation of the eyshet chayil described by Solomon, then, and only then, joining these symbolically diverse characteristics is permitted or even commanded. It is the task of man to sublimate the “evil” influences in our universe, to place them directly into the service of the Lord. The eyshet chayil is so named because this is what she does. Performing service in the Tabernacle is designed to achieve optimal sanctity on earth, i.e. to sublimate impurity. The blue wool thread on the tzitit is the reminder of the task of each one of us to make earth such a place where all evil has been sublimated, has been rehabilitated. Whatever goes on in the terrestrial Temple on earth reflects what goes in its counterpart in the celestial spheres.

בקרת תהיה, “there shall be an investigation.” The court has to investigate the matter and clarify the circumstances in order to prevent an execution of the participant or participants as would be the case in a clear case of adultery involving a fully fledged Jewess. In this instance, though her betrothal corresponded to Jewish norms, she is nonetheless not yet fully Jewish and as such her sin is not subject to the death penalty. כי לא חפשה, “for she had not been totally set free.” In other words, as long as this woman was not totally free her status was not yet that of a full wife to the Jew who married her. Whereas she was out of bounds to everyone else, she was not yet her husband’s either. This unusual status is also reflected in the choice of the word בקר by the Torah. “Morning” is the time when everything becomes quite clear. The word ערב, evening, is the opposite, a time when things become unclear, confused. Our sages (Keritot 11) interpret the words בקרת תהיה to mean תהא בקראי, “she (not he) will be subject to lashes;” had the Torah written בקרת תהיו the penalty of lashes would apply to both the male and the female partner in that incidence. One of the reasons is that the male has already become subject to a guilt-offering as the Torah writes in verse 22. This guilt-offering is referred to in Zevachim 54 as the אשם שפחה חרופה, “the guilt-offering on account of sleeping with a slave-woman who has been partially freed.” Seeing that the woman in question was not a partner to that sacrifice, she is subjected to 39 lashes.

It has been explained in the name of Rav Saadiah Gaon that the word בקר, with the vowel pattern kametz, kametz, means bakar, cattle; the lashes administered are made of calf-hide. It is also possible that the letter ב in the word בקרת is used instead of the letter פ to hint that the status of the woman is one of הפקר, “she was ownerless, no one had authority over her, not her former master nor her not truly wedded husband.” This is why she does escape the death penalty. However, she is guilty of the penalty of lashes for her unchaste conduct.

שלש שנים יהיה לכם ערלים, “for three years it shall be forbidden to you (literally: uncircumcised);” the expression ערלה describes something which is covered up. It is as if the fruit on these trees are covered up, i.e. have not been released to the owner by the Torah. They are out of bounds for any use, such as selling them.

According to the plain meaning of the text the idea underlying this commandment is that we give glory to G’d by putting at G’d’s disposal the first fruit which grows in our land and not to eat from it until we have brought all its fruit as an offering (symbolic) to the Lord (the fruit of the fourth year). It is well known that the ability of the tree to produce during the first three years after it has been planted is very limited, its yield very meagre. The fruit does not yet taste well and does not yet have much of a fragrance. As such it is not suitable as an “offering” to the Lord to whom we offer only our choicest. In fact, most trees do not even produce fruit until the fourth year as its potential has not been fully realised until he end of the third year. We find something similar reflected in the development of the human species. According to halachah, i.e. the view of the sages, a girl of under three years of age is incapable of becoming impregnated, so much so that if her hymen had been penetrated at an age of less than three years and a day, it will grow back and she remains a virgin to all intents and purposes (Niddah 44). A tree, until it is 24 hours into its fourth year is not considered as one whose fruit becomes holy as described in our portion. This is why we are not permitted to taste of any of the fruit of such trees until after the first day of its fourth year. Presentation of its fruit of that year in Jerusalem is similar to the treatment of the second tithe, something while sanctified yet permitted to the owner in the holy city of Jerusalem. Bringing the fruit to Jerusalem is considered as sanctifying it to the Lord, as the procedure is linked to praising the Lord.

A further aspect worth mentioning, something which is known to botanists, to people familiar with agriculture. Fruit grown on a tree during the first three years of its existence is harmful to the human body as the tree has not yet enjoyed the warmth of the sun to an adequate degree and it still contains acidic juices absorbed by it roots from the earth. Until these forces of the earth have been counterbalanced by the heat in the air, they represent danger to the human species. It is similar to the fish which have no scales. Such fish contain an excess of the habitat of the fish in question and such excess of that element is apt to be harmful to the human body. [— Taken from the writings of Nachmanides who bases it on the writings of a well known Kabbalist by the name of Rabbi Ezra mentioned in the notes of Rabbi Chavell].

A Midrashic approach: (based on Tanchuma 14 Kedoshim). The reason that the fruit of the tree is forbidden for the first three years is that we consider such fruit as in a class similar to babies who are unable to speak properly for the first three years of their lives, i.e. their intellect is not yet fully formed. In the fourth year, when such a child is introduced to Torah study by its father all the father’s fruit is sanctified (i.e. a child when it starts learning Torah suddenly is of sacred nature). The word הלולים לה' describes the praises of the father to the Lord who has granted him a son who has started to learn Torah. The words: “In the fifth year you may eat” (verse 25), describe the time when the child can study the written text of the Torah already, i.e. from then on the child will add new dimensions of Torah. This is the meaning of the words להוסיף לכם תבואתו, “so that it will increase its crop for you.” This verse served our sages who said that the child is to study מקרא, i.e. the written text of the Torah from the age of five, progressing to Mishnah at the age of ten, etc. (Avot end chapter 5) as the model for their pronouncement. Seeing that in this imperfect world a father begets a son, takes him to the Torah Academy, invests time and toils indefatigably teaching him Torah and sometimes the child dies (as a minor) because of sins committed by its father, the Torah here said to the father (allegorically speaking) “in this present world, seeing that the evil urge is to be found all over and you fall victim to his lure and you sin and your children die, know that there will be a better world in the future when I will remove the evil urge and you will beget children and live happily to see them attain their potential.” This is what Isaiah 65,23 had in mind when he said: “they shall not toil to no purpose; they shall not bear children for terror, but they shall be a people blessed by the Lord, and their offspring shall remain with them.”

An intellectual/investigative approach: Heaven and Earth jointly are the cause that the trees produce their fruit. The two may be viewed as similar to the male and the female. Heaven is the active ingredient (factor), earth the passive. Isaiah 55,10 speaks of the rain or snow dropping from heaven and soaking the earth so that it becomes impregnated.” During the first three years the earth is not mature enough to make the fruit ripen whereas heaven is not agreeable to imbue it with the power to make the fruit ripen. As a result, anyone who eats of the fruit which has grown during the first three years is as if he neither had a share in heaven nor a share on earth, seeing that he had eaten without permission from either earth or G’d. This is why the Torah prohibited the fruit during the first three years. Maimonides, in his Moreh Nevuchim 3,37, claims that in those days the pagans engaged in some hocus pocus at the times when trees were planted. They had some material which they threw at the new saplings which they believed would hasten such trees producing fruit sooner than was the custom in the rest of the world. In order to counter this the Torah ordered that fruit which matured during the first three years must not be eaten. This would deprive the people (Jews bent on economic advantage) practicing this form of pagan practice, as the ones perpetrating it would not benefit by it. Most trees produce fruit in the fourth year. The directive to eat the fruit of the fourth year in Jerusalem was to counter the practice of the pagans to eat the first fruit of their trees at sites dedicated to their deities. Negative influences exerted by various horoscopic forces cannot be neutralised except by performance of rites which are the reverse of those performed under the aegis of such horoscopic forces.

A kabbalistic approach: The three years during which consumption of fruit during the first three years is forbidden correspond to the (three highest) emanations, כתר, חכמה, בינה. which are lumped together as one as we have no clear understanding of their workings. This concept corresponds to the period preceding creation of light, a period described in the Torah as tohu vavohu vachoshech, (Genesis 1,2) something which we also cannot fathom exactly with our minds. The fourth year of the tree yielding fruit corresponds to the emanation גבורה, (nowadays known as דין); this corresponds to what the Torah describes as “the spirit of G’d hovering over the expanse of the water,” {Genesis 1,3). This was a period not completely hidden from our ability to comprehend but also not completely revealed, made accessible to our faculties to comprehend. As a result, the Torah demands some form of פדיון, “redemption,” i.e. a process by which that which is beyond our normal capacities is made accessible before we may treat such produce as completely secular, “natural.” The fifth year corresponds to the era commencing with the creation of light, the first part of our material world. As pointed out on earlier occasions the word אור, “light” appears five times in the Torah’s report about its creation. The fifth year of a fruit-bearing tree is compared to the era of world history ushered in with the creation of light. The Torah alludes to this by writing of the fifth year להוסיף לכם תבואתו, with the letter ה added at the end [instead of the letter ו as is the spelling in our versions of the Torah, the pronoun ו “its” referring to the masculine word עץ in verse 23. The author views the letter ה which we do not have and which would be a grammatical inconsistency as an allusion to the five times the word אור, “light,” appears at the beginning of Genesis. Ed.]. In order to remind us of the relationship between the emanations and this legislation the Torah mentions the word ערלה three times in verse 23. In other words, each one of these three first years symbolizes a different concept.

לא תאכלו על הדם, “You shall not eat over the blood;” here too the Torah warns about Jews not indulging in pagan practices which were current at the time the Torah was given. People used to dig a hole and pour blood into it and the demons would congregate around such holes. While in the company of these demons they would consume their meal. Seeing that they fraternized with the demons the demons would reciprocate by revealing future events to the people eating there with them. This was a wide-spread practice amongst the Egyptians and the Israelites had learned from them until they too began to believe in the power of these demons and they would seek out their company. In order to wean the Israelites of such idolatrous practices the Torah forbade eating a meal in the presence of blood (which had not been covered up, buried or poured out). Our sages (Berachot 10) understand this verse as a warning not to eat breakfast before one has recited the morning prayer. They phrased it thus; “do not eat before you have prayed concerning your blood (guilt).” [i.e. have asked forgiveness for your sins. Ed.] They also used this verse to arrive at the ruling that capital offenses must not be judged except during the morning hours of the day (Sanhedrin 63). The judges were not allowed to try such cases after they had already filled their stomachs so as not to approach the accused’s fate in a smug manner. Seeing that they could not be expected to fast a whole day and not be affected by their hunger pains or a desire to prematurely conclude their deliberations in order to have a meal, the sages ruled that such trials must take place in the mornings. When the Torah decreed that we fast on the Day of Atonement this may also reflect that our lives are at stake on that day. If we had eaten already when commencing to pray we might not relate to the day with the appropriate gravity of mind that it deserves. We are more likely to repent sincerely and throw ourselves on G’d’s mercy when we have deprived ourselves of customary creature comforts such as food. If one is commanded to be careful to be in a fit state of mind when judging others, how much more so must one be in the right frame of mind when one’s own life hangs in the balance, such as on the Day of Atonement! This is what Solomon meant when he wrote (Proverbs 6,32) “he who causes his own life’s destruction will do it” (commit the aforementioned crime of adultery; i.e. sinning is like self-destruction). There was perhaps no need to stress this point when it concerns life and death decisions; but even when matters of monetary values are at stake they should be dealt with during the morning seeing we have a verse in Jeremiah 21,12: “render just verdicts morning by morning; rescue him who is robbed from him who defrauded him.” We have a saying: “he who ate and drank should not pronounce judgments or rulings on religious matters.” [Rabbi Chavell cites a Zohar Mishpatim 122 that “anyone who passed judgment after he ate and drank did not pass a true verdict.” Ed.]

לא תקיפו פאת ראשכם, “do not round off the edge of your scalp, etc.” This is a warning not to shave the temple with a razor whether in conjunction with the hair on the rest of the head or by themselves. If one shaves both temples one is liable for the penalty separately for each temple.

ולא תשחית את פאת זקנך, “and do not destroy the edge of your beard.” According to the plain meaning of the text the reason is that the visible sign which G’d has given man to distinguish him from the females of the species should not be destroyed. By destroying one’s beard one commits an act of rebellion against what G’d had intended. Violating this commandment is in a similar class to violating the commandment not to mate different species. During the report of the creation the Torah stresses again and again that G’d created all the species each according to their respective species, i.e. there is to be no cross-breeding. Had the Torah written את זקנך, I would have thought that one is not liable for the penalty of 39 lashes unless one had destroyed one’s entire beard; seeing that the Torah writes את פאת זקנך, “the edge of your beard,” it is clear that even partial destruction of one’s beard makes one liable to the penalty. The beard has five edges which are subject to this prohibition. two are on the right side of the face, two on the left side of the face, and one below the mouth. The beard is considered as starting immediately below the ear. If someone shaved off all the five corners he would be liable to five times the penalty of 39 lashes. This is the reason the Torah wrote the word פאת, “an edge of,” to indicate that each edge is forbidden individually.

A logical approach: all of man’s activities are related to the five senses with which he perceives things, and it is not appropriate for him to eliminate (totally fail to use) even one of these senses completely as this might prove fatal for him; therefore he should make judicious use of each of these senses, i.e. seeing, hearing, touching, smelling, and tasting. He must, however, be careful to employ these senses only for matters permitted for him to enjoy. The prohibition to destroy 5 edges of the beard are a symbolic reminder that one cannot do completely without even a single one of these five senses. Otherwise the result would be destruction of one’s body. It is permitted to perform beard-trimming with scissors or instruments other than a razor as some of the hair above the skin remains and the beard is not destroyed completely. (compare Makkot 21)

A kabbalistic approach: the reason that destruction of this hair is prohibited is that the letters of the Holy Name, tetragram, are concealed within the structure of the body; the respective letters י-ה-ו are featured as part of the מילה, the organ which is circumcised, the mouth, and the tongue. This is why (according to the view of Rabbi Yochanan in Nazir 59) anyone who shaves his pubic hair with a razor is guilty of the same transgression as someone who shaves the hair of the “upper” beard, i.e. the facial beard. According to our author there are textbooks on anthropology which claim that the supreme intelligence with which our body has been constructed by Divine design is manifest in the way the areas where hair sprouts freely (face and pubic area) are interrelated. It is interesting that people who are unable to beget children, are sterile, do not have pubic hair and do not grow a beard. There are tendons which originate in either area of the body where such hair grows. Women and eunuchs do not grow hair in these areas of the body as both do not possess the facility of generating male sperm. Neither of them have tendons which originate in those areas and which link these two areas of the body to each other. They are (for people who possess them) a symbol of unity, i.e. an allusion to G’d. Hence it is proper for men engaging in marital relations to sanctify themselves beforehand. This whole commandment is a warning that through improper use of these organs one is not to become guilty of “erasing” the letters of the Holy Name which are part of one’s body (compare Shevuot 18).

וכתבת קעקע, “nor a tatoo.” Rashi understands this to mean something engraved on one’s flesh (skin) in an indelible manner. The word would be related to תקוע, “firmly in place.” The procedure is that one “writes” with a needle beneath the skin. The area remains black forever. Our sages in Sifra Kedoshim 6,9 remark that seeing one might have thought that the mere writing on the skin would have been culpable, the Torah adds the word קעקע, to tell us that unless this writing is of such a permanent nature no penalty is incurred. At the same time, had the Torah written only the word קעקע I would have thought that the fact that an indelible mark had been made this would already have been a culpable offense, therefore the Torah had to write the words כתבת קעקע, “an indelible inscription performed with a needle-like instrument.” According to Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, as long as the writing did not include the tetragrammaton one is not liable to the penalty for violating this commandment. He derives this rule from the ending of our verse, אני ה', meaning that unless the name of G’d was part of the inscription there is no penalty. The whole verse could be translated as: “do not inscribe My name on your flesh in an indelible manner.”

את שבתותי תשמרו ומקדשי תיראו, “you are to observe My Sabbath days and you are to revere My Sanctuary.” According to the plain meaning of the text the verses which repeat the warnings to observe the Sabbath are similar to those that warn not to commit idolatry. The reason for this is that Sabbath observance is equivalent to not serving idols. By the same token, failure to observe the laws of the Sabbath is considered as sufficiently heretical to be equivalent to the practice of idolatry.

A Midrashic approach: why did the Torah use different verbs when describing our relationship to the Sabbath on the one hand and to the Sanctuary on the other? We could have thought that the Torah wants us to be afraid of that which is holy, i.e. of the Sanctuary. To ensure we do not make this mistake the Torah wrote: “observe My Sabbath days,” i.e. we are not to be afraid of the Sanctuary but of who the Sanctuary belongs to, i.e. G’d. He who commanded us to observe the Sabbath is the One who commands us to relate with a feeling of awe and reverence to the Sanctuary seeing it is His. In the event I might think that this law applies only while the Sanctuary is actually standing, the Torah writes this law in the same breath as that of Sabbath observance. Just as the Sabbath is an eternal institution, so the commandment to relate with awe and reverence to the Sanctuary (i.e. its site) is not dependent on the actual building which serves as the Sanctuary. A further exegesis mentioned in Torat Kohanim (Sifra Kedoshim chapter 7, 7-8) is: “I could have thought that at a time when the Sanctuary is to be erected this commandment supersedes that of the Sabbath laws, therefore the Torah wrote “you must observe My Sabbath days“ (in the same verse).

A kabbalistic approach: I have already explained the words את שבתתי תשמרו when they were first written in Exodus 31,13, as well as at the beginning of this paragraph in 19,3. At this point an additional exegesis is called for due to the Torah adding the words ואת מקדשי תיראו, “and revere My Sanctuary.” We have to remember that the first time the Sabbath observance is mentioned it refers to the “great” Sabbath, i.e. the observance under the heading of זכור, “to remember,” i.e. an active Sabbath observance. The second time it refers to the מקדש, i.e. the passive observance by the כנסת ישראל, the concept of the Jewish people, the “bride” of the Sabbath. When that aspect of Sabbath observance by the כנסת ישראל is described the Torah employs the term שמר, i.e. את שבתתי תשמרו. Seeing that the passive aspect of the Sabbath observance is meant there obviously cannot be a question of the building of the Sanctuary (something active) taking place on the Sabbath.

מפני שיבה תקום, “in the presence (arrival) of a biologically old person you shall rise.” This regulation applies even to an aged person who is totally uneducated, unaware of Torah laws and consequently often contravenes them. Onkelos translates the word לא תשם in Genesis 47,19 as לא תבור, “let it not become like a בור, “uncouth, uncultured.” In other words, he thinks that all biologically aged people deserve this measure of respect.

The words והדרת פני זקן, “you shall honour the presence of a sage,” on the other hand, is a sign of much greater respect. Our sages understand the very word זקן as an acronym of the words זה שקנה חכמה, someone who has acquired wisdom. They base this interpretation on Proverbs 8,22: ה' קנני ראשית דרכו, “the Lord has acquired me (endowed me with wisdom) at the beginning of His way.” At any rate at this point the words of Onkelos suggest that he understands both the word שיבה and זקן as people possessed of varying degrees of wisdom due to their age, the former less than the latter. The former may be proficient only in the written Torah, the latter also in the oral Torah.

לא תעשו עול במשפט, “Do not commit a perversion of justice.” This prohibition has already appeared in almost the identical words in 19,15 in connection with the poor who was not to be given preferential treatment. In that instance the “justice” referred to was in connection with social legislation which had been spelled out by the Torah (legislating nationally). Here the Torah writes a similar warning concerning internationally accepted norms such as weights and measures. It is reminiscent of Exodus 15,25 “there He gave them statutes and social laws.” That legislation too preceded the giving of the Torah, i.e. laws designed to regulate the people’s life in the desert.

במדה, “concerning measure.” This applies to division of the land in Eretz Yisrael (Baba Metzia 61). The Talmud there discusses brothers who share in their father’s inheritance and who have measured the tract of land of one brother in the winter using a rope which is wet because of the time of year. When measuring the tract of land for the second brother in the summer, they must not use the same rope as the sun would have shortened the length of that rope to the disadvantage of the second brother.

במשקל, “concerning weights.” One must not dunk one’s weights in salt causing them to lose actual weight due to corrosion (compare Baba Metzia 61 and Baba Batra 89). Dunking the weights in salt would result in loss to the purchaser. There are variant readings which suggest that the weights become heavier; in that event this warning would be addressed to the purchaser and not to the seller.

ובמשורה, “or volume measures.” Our sages in Baba Batra 89 explain that the seller must not heat up the item (liquid) he is selling to give it an inflated measure by volume. As soon as the liquid cools down it will be found deficient in measure. According to Rashbam there this may apply to the foam which forms on top of a heated liquid filling the measure deceptively. Therefore, the seller has to wait after he has filled the measuring device until the liquid in question has cooled before making sure that he has measured fairly. He needs to make good any shrinkage due to previous overheating. Another aspect of this law is that the seller must not pour at great speed into the measuring device as this too would create foam depleting the real amount of liquid given to the buyer. Air bubbles are not allowed to be counted as part of the liquid dispensed. According to our sages the measuring tube called משורה is used to measure small quantities. If even when the loss to the purchaser in objective terms is minimal the Torah is concerned with such a loss, how much more will the Torah frown on someone dispensing in a similar manner into a large measuring container where the total loss to the purchaser is much greater! The reason the Torah mentioned משורה as an example was that one transgresses this law already at the time one heats the product in question even if no sale had been made as yet and one cannot be accused of trying to defraud a specific person, prospective purchaser. Even when the seller has not yet poured into his משורה, the fact that he heated the product he was going to sell makes him guilty of attempted fraud. Just as the sages said that one is guilty for possessing faulty weights from the time one has manufactured them, even if one has not used them, so one is guilty of tampering with the liquids to be sold even if no buyer is at hand. It recalls what Solomon said in Proverbs 20,9: ”who can say I have made my heart pure, I am free from sin ?” “False weights and false measures are both alike, an abomination to the Lord.” Just as man becomes culpable for evil intentions [if they were subsequently carried out, Ed.] even while he had not yet carried out the felony, so he will be held responsible for making false weights and measures. Our sages said in connection with idolatry that a person is subject to the curse of G’d already at the time he fashions an idol even though he has not yet worshipped it (compare Avodah Zarah 52 and Deut. 27,15). In the case of idolatry culpability also commences with construction of the idol based on Deut. 9,21 where he Torah writes: ואת חטאתכם אשר עשיתם את העגל, “and your sin that you committed- the calf.” The Torah therefore wrote משורה, to let us know that if an amount as little as a פרוטה, a tiny coin, is affected by the inaccurate measuring device, the person involved is liable to punishment as soon as he heated the liquid involved. Rabbi Levi said in Baba Batra 88 that penalties applied to people cheating with weights and measures are more severe than those applied to people guilty of sexual offenses, seeing that such people can repent their sins as long as no mamzer, “bastard,” has been born out of such a union [at which time the sin becomes irreversible, Ed.] Seeing that the practice of unfair weights and measures is indiscriminate in its application, the guilty party does not know whom he has cheated and he therefore cannot make restitution. Repentance without restitution is no proper repentance.