And a reminder during the media blitz about murdered babies in Gaza
In this week’s Torah class we learned beautiful insights about the seemingly mundane mitzvah to help a fellow Jew in distress, and a law making sure you eat that extra dried fig. The recording is embedded here and available on my Rumble channel here.
At this end of this post I shared a Dvar Torah on the subject that I wrote many years ago. As noted in yesterday’s class, my proposed reading of the pasuk is substantiated by the Midrash Tanchuma, Buber edition.
In the middle of the latest media propaganda blitz about how terrible Hamas is for killing babies, and how outraged we should all be, and how the world should be on our side, and how Israel, Inc. should do this, that, or the other thing…
Forget to be outraged that the IDF stood down on October 7, and that none of those responsible have been rounded up and prosecuted (executed) for treason, or at least reckless manslaughter. Forget about that completely. Keep supporting these same people, keep counting on them to protect you next time, and demand that “haredim” be forced into the same IDF, where these same people will have complete authority over their physical and spiritual welfare.
That’s a good little brainwashed subject. Now go back to the media and pump some more propaganda into whatever is left of your mind.
From the Arutz Sheva government propaganda site, here.
When laws are passed with 108 of 120 “democratically elected lawmakers” not even present, it’s time to admit that Israel is not a democracy, but a banana republic, and your vote matters only in your imagination.
By the way, fascist Covid regulations were passed with similarly “high” attendance.
משפטים — וחדלת מעזב לו
[כג:ד-ה]
כִּי תִפְגַּע שׁוֹר אֹֽיִבְךָ אוֹ חֲמֹרוֹ תֹּעֶה הָשֵׁב תְּשִׁיבֶנּוּ לֽוֹ: כִּֽי־תִרְאֶה חֲמוֹר שֹׂנַֽאֲךָ רֹבֵץ תַּחַת מַשָּׂאוֹ וְחָֽדַלְתָּ מֵֽעֲזֹב לוֹ עָזֹב תַּֽעֲזֹב עִמּֽוֹ:
רש"י (ד"ה מעזב לו)
בתמיה...ומדרשו דרשו רבינו, "כי תראה...וחדלת", פעמים שאתה חודל ופעמים שאתה עוזר. הא כיצד? זקן ואינו לפי כבודו, וחדלת, או בהמת נכרי ומשאו של ישראל, וחדלת:
Q: The wording of pasuk 5 is intrinsically difficult, which leads Rashi to explain it on a p’shat level as containing a question mark: “When you see the donkey of the one you hate collapsed under its burden, will you forbear from helping him? [Certainly not!] You shall surely help him.”
Inserting a question mark of astonishment into text to alleviate problems is a dangerous device, since it completely reverses the meaning of the words. Were one to take this device to albeit absurd extremes, it would rob the Torah of all meaning: “Don’t steal?”; “Don’t murder?”; “I am Hashem your God?”
However, Rashi feels compelled by the self-contradictory nature of the pasuk to resort to this device. Without it, the pasuk would seem to say, “...you will forbear from helping him. You will surely help him.” Obviously this is untenable on a p’shat level, and is a springboard for the Midrashic interpretation that Rashi immediately cites, which reconciles the otherwise conflicting statements.
Chizkuni understands the p’shat in line with the Targum, reading the pasuk as follows: “...you shall depart from what is in your heart [not to help him], but shall surely help him.”
I propose the following reading, which is slightly different but makes a dramatic point that greatly justifies the seemingly unnecessary phrase “וחדלת מעזב לו”: “When you see the donkey of the one you hate collapsed under its burden, and you hold back from helping him, you shall [instead] surely help him.” The Torah is acknowledging that one’s initial reaction in this situation will likely be to refrain from helping one’s adversary, then emphases that nevertheless one must surely help him. While perhaps some saintly people will instantly and lovingly rush to help their adversary, this is not a natural reaction that is expected of most people. The Torah allows one to feel what is natural, and commands one only to take the proper action.
This reading is preferable to the insertion of a question mark not only because of the last-resort nature of the device, but also because the question mark would be unfairly accusatory against a normal human instinct to turn away from an adversary. It is appropriate to instruct one to assist even an adversary, but unfair to express shock if that is not his immediate reaction.
The Targum, adopted by Chizkuni, acknowledges this as well in reading “וחדלת מעזב לו” as an instruction to depart from this reaction, and differs from my proposed reading only in making it a more direct instruction as opposed to part of the narrative. The downside of this reading is that the wording is difficult and also somewhat redundant.
Finally, the Torah does not make this point in the previous pasuk because there the enemy is not actually present. Hence, the initial repulsion will not be as strong, and the act of assistance will not be performed cooperatively. The Torah waited until pasuk 5, where so much more strength is required to overcome the animosity, to make its point that this animosity is understandable — and that even so it must be overcome.
Thanks for reading Chananya Weissman! This post is public so feel free to share it.
____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment