YE SHALL NOT DO SO UNTO THE ETERNAL YOUR G-D — “to burn offerings to G-d at any place [you choose], but only at the place He shall choose.¹⁵ Another interpretation: And ye shall break down their altars etc., and ye shall destroy their name¹⁶ — ye shall not do so unto the Eternal your G-d, this being an admonition against erasing the Name of G-d, or dismantling any stone of the altar or of the Sanctuary Court. Said Rabbi Yishmael: ‘Could it even occur to you that the Israelites would break down the altars [of G-d]? But the meaning of the verse is that you are not to imitate the deeds [of the idolators] lest your sins cause your ancestors’ Sanctuary to be destroyed.’” This is Rashi’s language. Now the words of Rabbi Yishmael are words of Agadah (homily) based on a Scriptural support [and they are not meant to be taken as the plain meaning of the verse]. However, the verse according to the opinion of our Rabbis, constitutes an admonition against erasing the Divine Name. It is so expressly stated in Tractate Makkoth:¹⁷ “But there is yet the penalty for erasing the Divine Name which is whipping, and the prohibition is to be found in these words, Ye shall not do so unto the Eternal.” And the language of the Sifre is as follows:¹⁸ 61. “Whence do I know that he who dismantles one stone [of the altar] etc.? Rabbi Yishmael says: ‘Whence do I know that he who erases one letter of the Divine Name transgresses a negative commandment? Because it is written, and ye shall destroy their name¹⁶ — Ye shall not do so unto the Eternal your G-d.’ Rabban¹⁹ Gamaliel the son of Rabbi²⁰ says: ‘But how could it occur to you [that the Israelites would dismantle] etc.’” Thus [it is clear that] the words of Rabbi Yishmael [quoted by Rashi] were not meant to dispute [the opinion of the unnamed First Sage];²¹ etc., to be only an admonition against erasing G-d’s Name, and that such is also the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Yishmael’s words quoted by Rashi are a clarification, teaching that “erasing the Divine Name is equivalent to dismantling a stone of the Divine altar.” Furthermore, the text quoted by Rashi in the name of Rabbi Yishmael is attributed by the Sifre to Rabban Gamaliel, which perforce is only a homiletic statement, that sinning is tantamount to destruction of G-d’s altar. Hence the same text in Rashi must also be understood in the same light (Mizrachi). rather, they are a clarification that erasing the Divine Name is equivalent to dismantling a stone of the altar. And if so, the meaning of the verses would be: “And ye shall break down their altars etc. and ye shall destroy their name out of that place — but ye shall not do so unto the Eternal your G-d to break down His altar, nor to destroy His Name. Instead, give glory to His Name²² and His altar, and to the place which He shall choose there to establish His altar; to [the place where] His Name dwells shall you seek, and bring your burnt-offerings before Him.”

footnotes: ¹⁵ Verse 5. According to this interpretation, Verse 4 before us is connected with the following Verse 5, which reads: But unto the place which the Eternal your G-d shall choose … ¹⁶ Above, Verse 3. Thus Verse 4 before us is connected with the preceding verse. ¹⁷ Makkoth 22a. See “The Commandments,” Vol. II, pp. 64-65. ¹⁸ Sifre, R’eih ¹⁶ Above, Verse 3. Thus Verse 4 before us is connected with the preceding verse. ¹⁹ The title “Rabban” (our teacher) indicates that he was the head of the Sanhedrin. ²⁰ See Vol. IV, p. 341, Note 231. ²¹ Ramban understood the text of Rashi as follows: The unnamed First Sage holds that the prohibition before us covers both erasing the Divine Name and dismantling His altar, whereas Rabbi Yishmael differs, holding the verse to be an admonition against imitating the deeds of the idolators which will cause the destruction of the Sanctuary. Ramban, however, holds the verse, Ye shall not do so ²² Malachi 2:2.

UNTO HIS HABITATION SHALL YE SEEK. The meaning thereof is that you are to come from distant countries asking, “Where is the road leading to the House of G-d?,” and you should say to one another, *‘Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Eternal, to the House of the G-d of Jacob,’*²³ similar to the expression, They shall inquire concerning Zion with their faces hit herward.²⁴ And in the Sifre it is stated:²⁵ 62. “Ye shall seek — seek [the place where G-d intended that His House be built] through the command of the prophet. I might think that you are to wait until the prophet tells you [when and where to build it]; Scripture therefore states, unto His habitation shall ye seek, and thither thou shalt come — seek and find [the place], and afterwards the prophet will tell you [whether your choice is the correct one]. And so you find it in the case of David etc.”²⁶” (Psalms 132:1-5). And whence do you know that he did it only by command of the prophet? Because it says, And Gad [the prophet] came that day to David, and said unto him: ‘Go up, rear an altar on the threshing-floor of Aravnah the Jebusite.’ (II Samuel 24:18) (Sifre, R’eih 62). And by way of the Truth, [the mystic teachings of the Cabala], l’shichno (unto His habitation) shall ye seek means that you are to inquire after His Glory [that abides there]; and thither thou shalt come to appear before the Lord, Eternal G-d, the G-d of Israel.²⁷ It is on the basis of this expression here [l’shichno — unto His habitation] that the Sages have spoken of the Shechinah (“Divine Presence”).

footnotes: ²³ Isaiah 2:3. ²⁴ Jeremiah 50:5. ²⁵ Sifre, R’eih ²⁶ “As it is said, O Eternal, remember unto David all his affliction, how he swore unto the Eternal, and vowed unto the Mighty One of Jacob, ‘Surely I will not come into the tent of my house … Until I find out a place for the Eternal, a dwelling-place for the Mighty One of Jacob’ ²⁷ Exodus 34:23.

YOUR TITHES — “the tithe of cattle and the Second Tithe which are to be eaten within the wall [of Jerusalem]. AND HEAVE-OFFERING OF YOUR HAND — these are the first-fruits of which it is said, And the priest shall take the basket out of thy hand. ”²⁸ This is Rashi’s language quoting the words of our Rabbis.²⁹ 63. In line with the plain meaning of Scripture the verse mentions the burnt-offerings, and the sacrifices that he is obligated to eat there within the boundary [of Jerusalem] before the Eternal.³⁰. It mentions also that he is to bring there the tithe and the heave-offering to give them to the priests and Levites who are the ministers of the Sanctuary so that they too, rejoice with you and your families, as it says, Bring ye the whole tithe into the store-house, that there be food in My house, and try Me now herewith, saith the Eternal of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall be more than enough.³¹) is given to the priest, the First Tithe (ma’aseir rishon) to the Levite. The Levite in turn sets aside a tenth of that tithe for the priest, which is called “the heave-offering of the tithe” (terumath ma’aseir). It is also referred to as “the tithe of the tithe.” And so indeed [the prophets and leaders] established an ordinance during the Second Temple concerning the heave-offering and the heave-offering of the tithe³¹) is given to the priest, the First Tithe (ma’aseir rishon) to the Levite. The Levite in turn sets aside a tenth of that tithe for the priest, which is called “the heave-offering of the tithe” (terumath ma’aseir). It is also referred to as “the tithe of the tithe.” that the people bring them to the Sanctuary, as it is said, and that we should bring the first of our dough, and our heave-offerings, and the fruit of all manner of trees, the wine and the oil, unto the priests, to the chambers of the House of our G-d,³² and it is further said, [and the Levites shall bring up the tithe of the tithes] unto the House of our G-d, to the chambers, into the treasure-house.³³, Verse 39. And the meaning of the expression and heave-offering of your hand is [in line with the simple meaning of Scripture a reference to the heave-offering and not to the first-fruits] because the Torah has set no fixed measure for the heave-offering [which the Israelite gives to the priest]; rather it consists of whatever his hand sets aside [for the priest]. Similarly, that which is said, Thou mayest not eat within thy gates the tithe of thy corn etc. or the heave-offering of thine hand³⁴ Second Tithes outside Jerusalem, and to a priest’s eating of first-fruits outside Jerusalem (Makkoth 18a); see also “The Commandments,” Vol. II, pp. 131-140, for various prohibitions included in this verse. Thus here again the heave-offering of thine hand is interpreted as referring to the first-fruits, as explained by Rashi in the verse before us. In line with the plain meaning of Scripture as explained by Ramban, however, the verse is a reminder to the Israelite etc. reminds the Israelite that he is not to eat in his own city the tithe, the firstlings, the vow-offerings, or the heave-offering. And then the verse proceeds to distinguish between them, but thou shalt eat them before the Eternal thy G-d etc. thou, and thy son, and thy daughter³⁵, Verse 18. whatever may be eaten by you [i.e., the Second Tithe]; and the Levite that is within thy gates³⁵, Verse 18. shall eat there in your gates [i.e., outside Jerusalem] what is due him [i.e., the First Tithe] as it is stated concerning them, And ye may eat in every place.³⁶ Scripture thus abbreviates concerning matters that are explained elsewhere. And I am further of the opinion regarding the plain meaning of this verse that the expression [in the verse before us] heave-offering of your hand denotes that which a person lifts up to the Eternal of his silver and gold to buy with it a burnt-offering or a [peace-]offering. And [the verse before us] mentions three kinds of offerings: the vow-offerings which are [assumed as obligations when a person says], “I pledge myself to bring an offering of a bullock, or a sheep, or a goat: ”³⁷ the freewill-offering when he says of a bullock or sheep, “This shall be a burnt-offering and I will bring it to the Sanctuary,” and terumah (the donation) which he lifts up, silver or gold from anything he has, or when he brings his unconsecrated animal to the Sanctuary Court and says to the priests, “This is [given] from my possession to G-d,” similar in expression to the verse, Every one that ‘meirim terumath’ (did lift up an offering) of silver and brass, brought the Eternal’s offering.³⁸ So also, All ‘terumoth’ of the holy things, which the children of Israel offer unto the Eternal³⁹ denotes “the offerings” [as explained above rather than, the heave-offering]. Similarly He states with reference to the shekels, half a shekel after the shekel of the Sanctuary etc. half a shekel for ‘terumah’ (an offering) to the Eternal,⁴⁰ these to be used for buying the communal offerings,⁴¹ is not limited to the heave-offering given to the priest from the produce of the field, but that it may also signify any donation or offering that a person gives to the Sanctuary. The expression in the verse before us heave-offering of your hand thus denotes the setting aside of any valuables for a sacred purpose. for whatever a person lifts up to G-d from whatever is his own — whether for offerings or for Temple maintenance, as it is stated, and they take for Me ‘terumah’ (an offering);⁴², 25:2. In this case the word terumah denotes “something set apart” for the construction of the Tabernacle. or for the priests, the ministers of the Eternal⁴³ — it is all called terumah. This is similar to what is written concerning the tax, and thou shalt give it unto Eleazar the priest as ‘terumath Hashem’ (a portion set apart for the Eternal),⁴⁴ which remained entirely unconsecrated in Eleazar’s possession [thus proving that terumah need not refer exclusively to the priestly tithe]. A similar usage [of the term terumah is found in the following verse]: And I weighed unto them the silver, and the gold, and the vessels, even ‘terumath’ (the donation for) the House of our G-d, which the king, and his counsellors had offered.⁴⁵ Now Scripture [here in the verse before us] does not state “your heave-offerings,” so that we should not mistake it to mean the heave-offering given to the priests [from the produce of the field]; instead it says, the heave-offering of your hand, what you set aside as a freewill offering from what has become your property. Now all things mentioned here must be consumed within a certain location,⁴⁶ refers to the Second Tithe and the tithe of cattle, and heave-offering of your hand denotes the donations for the offerings which also require a certain location where they may be eaten — the holiest offerings within the Sanctuary Court, and those of lesser holiness within the city of Jerusalem. for the expression your tithes denotes the tithe of cattle and the Second Tithe which are eaten before the Eternal [i.e., within the wall of the city of Jerusalem]. However, the First Tithe is the tithe of the Levites, and the Poorman’s Tithe belongs to them [the poor; and are the personal property of the recipients and may be eaten anywhere].

footnotes: ²⁸ Further, 26:4. ²⁹ Sifre, R’eih ³⁰ Verse 7: And there ye shall eat before the Eternal ³¹ Malachi 3:10. The heave-offering (terumah ³¹ Malachi 3:10. The heave-offering (terumah ³² Nehemiah 10:38. ³³ Ibid. ³⁴ Further, Verse 17. Now, in view of the fact that the First Tithe and the heave-offering may be eaten everywhere, the Rabbis apply this verse — which prohibits eating them outside Jerusalem — to the eating of unredeemed ³⁵ Ibid. ³⁵ Ibid. ³⁶ Numbers 18:31. ³⁷ Leviticus 22:27. See Ramban there on Verses 18 and 23. ³⁸ Exodus 35:24. ³⁹ Numbers 18:19. ⁴⁰ Exodus 30:13. ⁴¹ This is further proof that the word terumah ⁴² Ibid. ⁴³ Joel 2:17. ⁴⁴ Numbers 31:29. ⁴⁵ Ezra 8:25. ⁴⁶ In this concluding sentence Ramban reiterates the central theme of his interpretation — that the entire verse refers to categories that require consumption within the wall of Jerusalem. Thus the tithes

YE SHALL NOT DO AFTER ALL THAT WE DO HERE THIS DAY, EVERY MAN WHATSOEVER IS RIGHT IN HIS OWN EYES. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote by way of the plain meaning of Scripture, “they⁴⁷ have explained it [as follows]: Because they were journeying from stage to stage, [they brought no offerings from the time they left Mount Sinai until after the death of Aaron in the fortieth year after the exodus. Even after his death] a person could bring an offering at any stage as he wished; there were some who gave the firstling of their flock [to the priest] and others who did not give, since the commandment [to give the firstborn] is dependent on the Land.⁴⁸ [Hence the verse before us says that after arriving in the Land we are no longer to do whatever is right in the eyes of each individual.] But this is not my own opinion [continues Ibn Ezra]. Rather, the meaning of the verse is that they were not all G-d-fearing [and they sacrificed to the host of heaven; hence Moses warned them against continuing to do so in the Land of Israel]. And the reason Moses used the word ‘we’ [Ye shall not do after all that ‘we’ do — implying that he, too, participated in such transgressions] is because many commandments relating to the offerings apply only within the Land”⁴⁹ [and not in the wilderness; hence, Moses himself had never fulfilled those commandments. He, therefore, included himself among the people]. This is Ibn Ezra’s language. But it is not correct, since it is out of context for the section to speak in terms of reproof [that they were sacrificing to the host of heaven] and to say to them now that they were not observing the commandments of G-d, every man doing what was right in his own eyes. [On the contrary, Verses 4-15 contain a positive discussion of the chosen place that awaited them in the Land of Israel.] And how could Moses our teacher say “We are committing sins!” Forbid it! Instead he should have said “You shall not do after all that ‘you’ have done to this day, every man whatsoever is right in his own eyes.” And what sense was there to include among the sins the commandments that depend on the Land? Rather, the meaning of the verse is as follows: “When the Israelites were in the wilderness they were commanded to slaughter all their cattle and sheep as peace-offerings before the Tabernacle, but they would perform [the Service of the offerings] in whatever place the Tabernacle was [that is, wherever it halted rather than in a fixed location]. And if someone did not care to eat the meat of bullocks or sheep he was not at all obligated to bring an offering. He was also not obligated to bring firstlings, nor the tithe of cattle and the Second Tithe. Thus a person was not bound, ever to bring an offering to the Tabernacle as an obligation, and even on the festivals they were not obligated to come there.⁵⁰. Since that condition was not fulfilled in the desert, they were not yet obligated to observe this commandment. For more on this matter see my Hebrew commentary, p. 399. So also in the wilderness, after the sprinkling of the blood and the burning of the sacrificial fat of the peace-offering [on the altar], the owner might eat it wherever he wished because Scripture did not stipulate a location for it, and therefore they could eat [the peace-offerings both] within the camp and without. Thus there was nothing obligatory upon them in the matter of the offerings; instead every man did that which was right in his own eyes.⁵¹ Therefore he commanded here that after [they would come to] the rest and [to] the inheritance they should not do so. Instead, they are obliged to come to a certain specific place chosen by G-d and bring there the offerings, the tithes, and the firstlings, and eat them there within the precinct before the Eternal. What our Rabbis have said⁵² [based on the verse before us] concerning offerings that are not vowed or freely offered [for example, the obligatory Passover-offering], that they may not be offered on a bamah [a private altar set up by an individual, a practice that was permitted during certain periods prior to the erection of the Holy Temple],⁵³ is an interpretation based on the redundancy of the verse, as explained in the last chapter of Tractate Zebachim,⁵² [but the plain meaning of the verse is as we have explained above].

footnotes: ⁴⁷ I.e., commentators. In our texts of Ibn Ezra this expression is missing. Ramban’s version, however, is correct, since Ibn Ezra himself later refutes that explanation. Therefore, it is obvious that he refers to an opinion previously quoted. ⁴⁸ See my Hebrew commentary p. 399. ⁴⁹ Such as the heave-offering, and the tithes which apply only within the Land of Israel. He, therefore, included himself etc. ⁵⁰ The pilgrimage on the three festivals depends on the place which the Eternal your G-d shall choose to cause His Name to dwell there ⁵¹ Judges 21:25. ⁵² Zebachim 117a. ⁵³ See Vol. IV, p. 180, Note 138. ⁵² Zebachim 117a.

WHEN THE ETERNAL THY G-D SHALL ENLARGE THY BORDER. The meaning of this “enlargement” is not like that which he stated, And if the Eternal thy G-d enlarge thy border⁵⁴ [by giving you the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, and Kadmonites] etc. then shalt thou add three cities more for thee,⁵⁵, Verse 9. for if it were, then meat of desire [meaning a meat meal prepared solely to satisfy the appetite rather than as a product of a peace-offering] would not have been permissible upon coming into the Land [but only after the enlargement of the border, an event that has yet to take place]. But there it is said, When the Eternal thy G-d shall cut off the nations, whose land the Eternal thy G-d giveth thee,⁵⁶, Verse 1. these being the seven nations that he mentions in all places,⁵⁷ and then we are to separate three cities [as cities of refuge], and so Joshua did.⁵⁸ Afterwards he said, when the Eternal thy G-d enlarge thy border, as He hath sworn unto thy fathers,⁵⁴ this being a reference to the ten nations that were given to Abraham.⁵⁹ But here he said, as He hath promised thee, meaning these [seven] nations whose land the Eternal your G-d gives you [now], thus indicating that immediately after they captured and apportioned the Land, a secular meal of meat became permitted to them. Now, the purport of the expression If the place which the Eternal thy G-d shall choose to put His Name there be too far from thee⁶⁰ is not that meat of desire [i.e., meat from an animal that has been slaughtered for food rather than as an offering] is permissible only at a distance from the Sanctuary, for if so, dwellers in Jerusalem would have been forbidden to eat meat of desire. Instead he [Moses] speaks to all Israel, saying to them that “when G-d will enlarge your border and not all of you will be dwelling around the Tabernacle as you are today in the wilderness, unconsecrated meat will be permitted, because it will be impossible for all of you to go from a distant place to the place that G-d will choose and slaughter sacrifices of peace-offerings as much as you wish to eat.”

footnotes: ⁵⁴ Further, 19:8. ⁵⁵ Ibid. ⁵⁶ Ibid. ⁵⁷ See above, 7:1. ⁵⁸ Joshua 20:7-9. ⁵⁴ Further, 19:8. ⁵⁹ Genesis 15:19-21. Hence the command to establish an additional three cities of refuge becomes obligatory at the time when we shall have enlarged the border of our Land to include the territory of the remaining three of the ten nations promised to Abraham — the Kenites, Kenizzites, and Kadmonites. But here etc. ⁶⁰ Verse 21.

AND THOU SHALT SLAUGHTER etc. AS I HAVE COMMANDED THEE. The meaning thereof according to the opinion of our Rabbis⁶¹ is as follows: “As I have commanded thee — orally, by law declared to Moses on Sinai This teaches us that he was commanded with regard to [severing] the windpipe and the gullet, and [severing] the greater part of one [either the windpipe or the gullet] in a bird, and [severing] the greater part of both in an animal.” Know that the term shechitah in the Sacred Language denotes the severing of the two organs in the neck [the windpipe and the gullet], and be not apprehensive because of what it says ‘vayishchateim’ (and He slew them) in the wilderness⁶² [which clearly does not signify severing the organs of the neck], for it is but a euphemism [as if to say] that He slaughtered them like sheep. Thus He commanded regarding the offerings, ‘v’shachat’ (and he shall slaughter),⁶³ ‘v’shachatu’ (and they shall slaughter),⁶⁴ which refer to the organs of the neck. Now at first [in the wilderness] He commanded that whatever [meat] they eat be of peace-offerings, that they be slaughtered according to the law of the offerings. Now, when he proceeded to permit the meat of unconsecrated animals, he said, and thou shalt slaughter of thy herd and of thy flock as I have commanded thee when such animals were brought as offerings, and you may eat them unconsecrated after all the desire of thy soul, meaning that He permits unconsecrated animals to be eaten everywhere, provided that they be slaughtered as He had commanded originally, when they were all [permitted only as] offerings. This is the correct meaning of the verse in line with the plain sense of Scripture. Perhaps our Rabbis intended this [thought] when they said in the Sifre:⁶⁵ 75. “As I have commanded thee — just as the consecrated animals are slaughtered [in accordance with the traditional regulations] so must also the unconsecrated animals be slaughtered [with the same regulations].” Thus the commandment of slaughtering [animal and fowl] is here expressly stated and is explained in the words of our Rabbis on the basis of tradition.

footnotes: ⁶¹ Chullin 28a. ⁶² Numbers 14:16. ⁶³ Leviticus 1:5. ⁶⁴ Exodus 12:6. ⁶⁵ Sifre, R’eih

ACH’ (BUT) ONLY AS THE GAZELLE AND AS THE HART IS EATEN, SO THOU SHALT EAT THEM. This means as he explains [at the end of this verse], the unclean and the clean may eat thereof alike. Since He had commanded in the wilderness that they may not eat of the herd and flock except as peace-offerings and He warned them that the soul that eateth of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace-offerings, that pertain unto the Eternal, having his uncleanness upon him, that soul shall be cut off,⁶⁶ he states here that [upon coming into the Land] one may eat the meat of unconsecrated animals with the full desire of his soul, and [further that] he may eat it from one vessel together with an unclean person just as, in the wilderness, they may eat the gazelle and the hart which may not be offered upon the altar. Now, the expression as the gazelle and as the hart does not mean that one may eat the fat of unconsecrated animals just as he may eat the fat of the gazelle and the hart [from which all the fat may be eaten], since the verse speaks only of the manner of eating [as if to say:] in the same way that you eat the gazelle and the hart so may you eat the meat which you slaughter in all places. The verse does not state “whatever is eaten of the gazelle and the hart, you may eat of the unconsecrated animals.” Therefore, [in order to avoid the misconception that all fat of unconsecrated animals may be eaten] he explains everywhere the unclean and the clean may eat thereof alike,⁶⁷ and says nowhere [only] “they may eat it as the gazelle and the hart,” in order [to make it clear] that the fat should not be included [in the comparison of unconsecrated animals to the hart and gazelle]. Now the word ach [but — ‘But’ only as the gazelle etc.] constitutes an admonition: since at first it was forbidden to eat [meat] except for the peace-offerings that were slaughtered in [the court of] the Tabernacle, and now, when he made it permissible to slaughter and eat in their cities after all the desire of thy soul, it might have appeared that one may eat it as unconsecrated meat and [if one wishes] even as consecrated meat, as was originally permitted [before the Tabernacle was erected], offering [the blood and the fat] on a bamah (high place). Therefore he stated and warned, But only as the gazelle and the hart, so thou shalt eat them, meaning that you may offer of them neither fat nor blood [on the bamah] and that you should not handle it in the manner of consecrated meat and not warn unclean people away from them at all. He had to mention Only you should not eat the blood⁶⁸ for many reasons. For at first He said with reference to the prohibition of eating blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls,⁶⁹ from which it might appear that blood that does not atone, [such as that of] an unconsecrated animal, would not be prohibited; therefore, it was necessary to prohibit it clearly. In the case of fat, however, Scripture did not mention [such a reason for] its prohibition thereof; and [in the case of an unconsecrated animal] not all fat which is burned on the altar as the sacrificial portion of the offering is forbidden, nor is every part [of an offering] that is not burned on the altar permitted to be eaten [in the case of an unconsecrated animal], as I have written in its place.⁷⁰, 3:9. Hence it was unnecessary to say that certain fats of an unconsecrated animal may not be eaten. Moreover, since he commanded here that we slaughter [the unconsecrated animal] and warned that we eat it in the same manner as the gazelle and the hart, it might have appeared that we are to cover its blood just as we have been commanded concerning the gazelle and the hart;⁷¹, 17:13). This law does not apply to cattle. Now, since Scripture compares the unconsecrated animal to the gazelle and the hart which are in the class of wild animals we might have reasoned that the law of covering the blood also applies to unconsecrated animals; therefore it became necessary etc. therefore it became necessary [to repeat the prohibition against blood in order] to permit the pouring out of the blood upon the earth as water⁷² without covering it, [a permissibility that was not apparent in the original prohibition in Leviticus 17:11]. This is the sense of the expression ‘upon’ the earth,⁷² not “into” the earth [which would have implied] that “we cover it with dust.” And since it was necessary to mention the permission of [pouring out] the blood [without covering it] he introduced it by stating the prohibition [against eating it]. Additionally, Scripture feared lest we [mistakenly] reason concerning blood as follows: In the wilderness at a time when all their herds and flocks were peace-offerings, the meat was forbidden to be eaten until the priest would sprinkle the blood upon the altar, for such is the law of the offerings; thus the blood prevented them from eating the meat; and He further commanded concerning the gazelle and the hart that, because they are not brought as offerings, we must cover their blood with dust, and so also the blood of a fowl⁷³ because a fowl may not be offered as a peace-offering. And if so [it would logically follow that] we be required to cover the blood of cattle that were slaughtered because one desired meat, or that we eat [the blood] together with the meat by stabbing the animal [instead of ritual slaughtering, in which case a large flow of blood would be avoided] and the blood would not be seen in the open field,⁷⁴, Verse 5. for it would be more seemly that it be permissible even to eat pure blood than to pour it out upon the ground so that they shall not offer their sacrifices unto the satyrs, after whom they go astray.⁷⁵, Verse 7. To pour blood upon the ground would give the appearance of a sacrifice to satyrs. Therefore he said that one should slaughter the herd and flock [by means of ritual slaughtering despite the abundant flow of blood] and not eat the blood with the meat through stabbing or by cutting a limb from a living animal; instead, one is to pour the blood upon the earth and not be apprehensive over it, but he must not eat it, neither alone nor with the meat. For this reason it was necessary to mention this law once more⁷⁶. in the case of a blemished firstling, because at first [when the firstling was yet perfect] the blood thereof was to be sprinkled upon the altar, and, therefore, it was necessary to state that when it is blemished [and thus no longer fit for the altar] they should not treat its blood with sanctity, nor with permissibility, but they are to pour it out like water and not eat it. It appears to me as a reason for this matter that at first when they were in the desert, a howling wilderness,⁷⁷, 32:10. a place where satyrs dance there,⁷⁸ and all those who came forth from Egypt were accustomed [to sacrifice to these satyrs], He forbade that the blood be seen in the open field and also to slaughter at all, except before the Tabernacle of G-d in order to wean them from that sin. But upon coming into the Land, when it was necessary to permit them meat of desire due to the distance from the Sanctuary, he did not fear that the blood of the herd and flock might be poured upon the ground in their homes. However, in the case of the wild animal and fowl which one traps in the field and forest, and it is customary to slaughter them there and bring them home already slaughtered, he left the commandment as it was, to cover their blood with dust, in order that they should not offer it to the satyrs. Now the Midrash of our Rabbis on the verses, Only be steadfast in not eating the blood,⁷⁹ and Thou shalt not eat it, that it may go well with thee⁸⁰ is a very fitting one and is appropriate to the language of Scripture, that they had a great passion for [eating blood].⁸¹ 76. Therefore all these admonitions were necessary, and so much more was it necessary to mention the prohibition [against eating blood] although he did not mention the prohibition of eating [forbidden] fat. Now, it is true that this comment of our Rabbis suffices as a reason for the many admonitions that Scripture states [about blood]. Yet the expression which he said, Only be steadfast in not eating the blood⁷⁹ is not clear to me, for what steadfastness and courage are there required to guard against [eating] blood? It would have been proper that he indicate its stringency by stating, “Take heed to yourself not to eat the blood.” Now, we find the term “steadfastness” with reference to [all] the commandments, as the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Joshua, Only be steadfast and very courageous, to observe to do according to all the law, which Moses My servant commanded thee,⁸² and so did Joshua say to Israel, Therefore be ye very courageous to keep and to do all that is written in the Book of the Law of Moses.⁸³, 23:6. Now these expressions [found in Joshua] refer to all the commandments, to keep, alluding to the negative commandments, and to do, alluding to the positive commandments. But pertaining to a single commandment there is nowhere found such an expression, for, indeed, what need is there for “steadfastness” in a matter which requires only “to sit and not do” something forbidden by one of the negative commandments? But it appears to me that he mentioned steadfastness [in this prohibition against eating blood] for the reason that they were attached to blood in Egypt: that they always slaughtered their sacrifices to the satyrs, as it is written, And they shall no more offer their sacrifices unto the satyrs, after whom they go astray⁷⁵, Verse 7. To pour blood upon the ground would give the appearance of a sacrifice to satyrs. and it is further stated, They sacrificed unto demons, no-gods.⁸⁴ Now, the worship [of these satyrs] consisted of eating from the blood of the sacrifices, because the blood would cause the demons to assemble and they [the worshippers] would eat over it and from it, as if they were invited by the demons to eat at the table of those demons and they become attached to them. This has already been mentioned in the book Moreh Nebuchim.⁸⁵ This is not the main reason for the prohibition of eating blood, for Scripture itself explains the reason thereof, that the blood is the life, as is mentioned in the section Acharei Moth.⁸⁶ But from this verse here it is clear that they were engrossed in it, and very much in pursuit of it, and they used to prophesy by means of it and tell of things to come. Therefore the verse proceeds and warns that if one should hear from blood-eaters any future event and the sign or the wonder come to pass⁸⁷ his heart should not be enticed but instead hold fast to his integrity⁸⁸ and his belief in G-d, and he should by no means eat of the blood nor cover up this practice [i.e., justifying it by some means]; he is not to be afraid of their words, nor be dismayed at their looks,⁸⁹ for they are vanity, a work of delusion.⁹⁰ Thus he warned here in the same manner that was used in admonishing concerning the false prophet⁹¹ because of his deceptions.

footnotes: ⁶⁶ Leviticus 7:20. ⁶⁷ Here in Verse 22 before us, and further, 15:22. ⁶⁸ Verses 16, 23-25. ⁶⁹ Leviticus 17:11. ⁷⁰ Ibid. ⁷¹ When a clean fowl or a permissible wild animal is slaughtered, the blood must be covered with dust (ibid. ⁷² Verse 24. ⁷² Verse 24. ⁷³ Leviticus 17:13. ⁷⁴ Ibid. ⁷⁵ Ibid. ⁷⁶ Further, 15:23: Only thou shalt not eat the blood thereof; thou shalt pour it out upon the ground as water ⁷⁷ Ibid. ⁷⁸ Isaiah 13:21. ⁷⁹ Verse 23. ⁸⁰ Verse 25. ⁸¹ Sifre, R’eih ⁷⁹ Verse 23. ⁸² Joshua 1:7. ⁸³ Ibid. ⁷⁵ Ibid. ⁸⁴ Further, 32:17. ⁸⁵ Guide of the Perplexed III, 46. ⁸⁶ Leviticus 17:11-12. ⁸⁷ Further, 13:3. ⁸⁸ Job 2:3. ⁸⁹ Ezekiel 2:6. ⁹⁰ Jeremiah 10:15. ⁹¹ Further, 13:2-6.

OBSERVE AND HEAR ALL THOSE WORDS WHICH I COMMAND THEE. He [Moses] did not mention here the statutes and ordinances, nor His testimonies and His commandments, but said all those words in order to include in this observance the good and the right, as I have explained in the section of Va’ethchanan.⁹²

footnotes: ⁹² Above, 6:18.

TAKE HEED TO THYSELF THAT THOU BE NOT ENSNARED TO FOLLOW THEM, AFTER THEY ARE DESTROYED FROM BEFORE THEE. “After you see that I destroy them from before you, [you should] pay attention as to why these [nations] were destroyed — because of their corrupt practices. So you too, should not do the same so that others should not come and destroy you.” This is Rashi’s language. And if so, this verse becomes an admonition and warning against idol-worship. And Rashi also wrote on the expression [in the verse before us]: “How did these nations serve their gods, even so will I do likewise. Because Scripture has punished idolatry only for sacrificing, burning incense, pouring a libation, and bowing down, as it is written, [He that sacrificeth unto the gods] save unto the Eternal only, [shall be utterly destroyed,⁹³ thus establishing the penalty only for those] acts which are performed in the service of G-d, therefore it comes and teaches you here that if the method of worshipping a [particular] idol was something other [than the four ways specified above,] — for example, excreting to [Baal] Peor or throwing a stone to Merkulis, this being its customary manner of worship — he is liable [to the death penalty]. One is also liable for [worshipping any idol whatever, in any one of the four specified ways] sacrificing, burning incense, pouring a libation, and bowing down even if it is not the customary way.” Thus far Rashi’s language. But this is not correct, for the [following] verse states, Thou shalt not do so unto the Eternal thy G-d.⁹⁴ If so, the verse [before us] is not an admonition against worshipping their gods, [for it would be incongruous to follow this prohibition with an admonition not to worship G-d] but only that we should not worship the Glorious G-d⁹⁵ with their forms of worship, just as he gave the reason, for every abomination to the Eternal, which He hateth, have they done unto their gods etc.⁹⁴ Rather, the meaning of this section is as follows: Up to here he has commanded many times that when we come into the Land we are to uproot the idols and their appurtenances, and destroy their names, and he further commanded that we do this immediately upon dispossessing the nations. Now he stated that when the Eternal will cut off these nations from before us, and the names of the idols will be forgotten in the Land, and we shall dwell in their land securely, we should not think in our hearts thus: “Now G-d has cut away from before us the worshippers of other gods because they gave honor and reverential service to [the idols, which are] the work of men’s hands.⁹⁶ And it is not proper to give His glory to another, neither His praise to graven images,⁹⁷ for so He prohibited sacrificing, burning incense, pouring a libation, and bowing down, save unto the Eternal only,⁹³ and it is customary among kings that anyone who glorifies himself with their honor, putting the crown on his own head or wearing the royal raiment like kings there is one law for him, that he be put to death.⁹⁸ If so, I will do unto the Glorious Name⁹⁵ just as the nations did to their gods and it will be pleasing unto Him.” Therefore he warned, Thou shalt not do so,⁹⁴ for they would do to their gods things that are abominable to Him. He did not prohibit them [these ways with which they worshipped the idols] because of those acts that are reputable and appropriate to be done before G-d alone [i.e. sacrificing, burning incense, pouring a libation, and bowing down]; rather, because of the intent they had in performing them to serve idols [they had to be prohibited]. For even their sons and their daughters do they burn in the fire to their gods,⁹⁴ it being an abominable thing before G-d to shed innocent blood,⁹⁹ and all the more to be cruel and have no pity on the fruit of the womb.¹⁰⁰, 13:18. [Hence any form of service instituted by people capable of such cruelty is considered an abomination by G-d and no ceremony of theirs is to be adopted by us.] Therefore, he stated All this word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do,¹⁰¹ the reference being to the performance of the offerings and the Service in the Sanctuary that thou art not to add thereto, nor diminish from it.¹⁰¹ This is in truth the purport of this section. Our Rabbis, however, have deduced¹⁰² from here that for worshipping an idol in its normal manner, one is always guilty even if he excreted to [Baal] Peor, [an act that would be an expression of contempt everywhere except in the temple of Peor]. The principle is derived from the expression, how did these nations serve their gods?,¹⁰³ teaching that if it is considered “worship” in terms of that [idol] it is included in the prohibition nor shalt thou serve them.¹⁰⁴ But if he throws a stone at [Baal] Peor [which is a manner of worship peculiar only to Merkulis] or even if it be some manifestation of respect, such as sweeping or sprinkling [before the idol] he is not guilty of a capital offense [since that is not a mode of “worship”]. In line with the plain meaning of Scripture, he warned at the beginning of the section, Ye shall not do so unto the Eternal your G-d¹⁰⁵ meaning that we are not to worship Him like [they worship] the gods of the nations upon the high mountains¹⁰⁶, Verse 2. with offerings to Him, and now in this section he warned, Thou shalt not do so unto the Eternal thy G-d⁹⁴ — to worship Him in His Sanctuary with their manners of worship.

footnotes: ⁹³ Exodus 22:19. ⁹⁴ Verse 31. ⁹⁵ Further, 28:58. ⁹⁴ Verse 31. ⁹⁶ Psalms 135:15. ⁹⁷ Isaiah 42:8. ⁹³ Exodus 22:19. ⁹⁸ Esther 4:11. ⁹⁵ Further, 28:58. ⁹⁴ Verse 31. ⁹⁴ Verse 31. ⁹⁹ Isaiah 59:7. ¹⁰⁰ Ibid. ¹⁰¹ Further, 13:1. ¹⁰¹ Further, 13:1. ¹⁰² Sanhedrin 60b. See my translation of “The Commandments,” Vol. II, pp. 6-8. ¹⁰³ In Verse 30 before us. ¹⁰⁴ Exodus 20:5. ¹⁰⁵ Above, Verse 4. ¹⁰⁶ Ibid. ⁹⁴ Verse 31.