(Exodus 22:30) "And men of holiness shall you be to me": R. Yishmael says: When you are holy, you are Mine. Issi b. Yehudah says: When the Holy One Blessed be He originates a mitzvah for Israel, He adds holiness to them. Issi b. Guriah says: It is written here (Devarim 14:21) "holy" ("for a holy people are you … You shall not cook a kid in its mother's milk"), and, elsewhere (Exodus, Ibid.) "holiness." Just as here ("a kid, etc.") the prohibition is eating, so, there, ("treifah") the prohibition is eating.
"and flesh in the field, treifah ("torn"): This tells me only of the field. Whence do I derive (that a treifah is forbidden also) in the house? From (Leviticus 22:8) "Neveilah (carrion) and treifah he shall not eat." Treifah is likened to neveilah. Just as neveilah is forbidden both in the house and in the field, so, treifah. If so, why is "field" (specifically) written here? Scripture speaks of the common instance.
Similarly (Ibid. 20:6) "Who is the man who has planted a vineyard?" This tells me only of a vineyard. Whence do I derive (the same for) all trees? Scripture speaks of the common instance.
"to the dog shall you throw it": "to the dog" — as to the dog (i.e., anything like a dog.) You say this, but perhaps it is to be taken literally? It is, therefore, written (Ibid. 14:21)"You shall not eat any neveilah, etc." (but you may derive benefit from it). Now does this not follow a fortiori, viz.: If it is permitted to derive benefit from neveilah, which causes "carrying uncleanliness," how much more so, from treifah, which does not cause "carrying uncleanliness!" Why, then, is it written "to the dog shall you throw it"?
To teach that a dog is of higher station than a slave, a treifah being relegated to a dog, but only neveilah, to a slave, and to teach that the Holy One Blessed be He does not withhold the reward of any creature, viz.: It is written (Exodus 11:7) "And against all the children of Israel (during the exodus) a dog will not sharpen its tongue." The Holy One Blessed be He says, as it were, "Give it its reward (treifah)" (for holding its tongue.) Now does this not follow a fortiori? If it is so — that He does not withhold "reward" — from animals, how much more so (does He not withhold it) from men! As it is written (Jeremiah 18:10) "… to repay every man according to his ways …" and (Ibid. 12) "the Throne of Glory … (13) the hope of Israel, the L–rd!"
Variantly: It is an exhortation to a judge not to hear the words of one litigant before the other arrives, as it is written (Exodus 22:8) "Unto the judges shall come the matter of both."
Variantly: an exhortation to one litigant not to state his case to the judge until his fellow litigant arrives, as it is written (Devarim 19:17) "And the two men shall stand."
Abba Chanin says, in the name of R. Elazar: to include the oath (administered) by the judge as requiring "Amen" (being answered after it), lacking which it is rendered a vain oath.
"Do not place your hand with an evildoer, etc.": If one said to him: "That man owes me two hundred dinars, and I have one witness. Come and join him, and you will get one hundred, and I, one hundred" — of this it is written "Do not place your hand, etc."
"Do not place your hand with an evildoer": This was the practice of the "clean-minded men of Jerusalem." They would not go to a feast until they knew who was going with them, and they would not sign a writ of divorce until they knew who was signing with them. R. Nathan says: "Do not place your hand, etc.": Do not make violence a witness — to exclude evildoers and robbers from being witnesses. As it is written (Devarim 19:16) "If a man of violence rise up against another to testify, etc. … (19) then you shall do to him as he schemed to do, etc."
(Exodus 23:2) "You shall not incline (judgment), after many for evil": The implication is that you do not rule with them (beth-din) for evil, but you do rule with them for good.
How so? If twelve (of the twenty-three judges) acquit and eleven incriminate, he is acquitted. If thirteen incriminate and ten acquit, he is incriminated. But perhaps if eleven acquit and twelve incriminate he is incriminated? It is, therefore, written (Ibid.) "Do not speak (solitarily) in a quarrel" — Scripture states: Kill by witnesses; kill by incliners — Just as witnesses, (a minimum of) two, so, incliners, two (and not one).
If eleven acquitted and eleven incriminated, and one said I do not know, another is to be added — an exhortation to the judge to incline (by one) only for acquittal. Thus "Do not speak (solitarily) in a quarrel."
(Exodus 23:3) "Do not honor a poor man in his quarrel": Why is this needed? (i.e., it is already written [Leviticus 19:15] "You shall not favor a poor man (in the verdict) and you shall not honor a great one.") (From that verse) I would know only these (i.e., favoring the poor and honoring the rich). Whence do I derive that they ("favoring" and "honoring") are interchangeable, (both applying to the rich and the poor)? From "Do not honor a poor man."
Abba Chanan says in the name of R. Elazar: Scripture speaks of leket, shikchah, and peah (i.e., it is "in his quarrel" that you are not to honor a poor man, but you are to honor him by deciding in his favor in instances of doubt as to whether something is leket, shikchah or peah, [which revert to the poor] viz. Leviticus 23:22.)
(Exodus 23:4) "If you encounter (the ox of your foe, or his ass, straying, return shall you return it to him."): I might think that this is to be taken literally (as indicating bodily contact); it is, therefore, written (Ibid. 5) "If you see." — But this would imply even at a distance of a mil. It is, therefore, written "If you encounter." How are these two verses to be reconciled? The sages estimated it as one seventh and a half of a mil, i.e., a ris.
We find him, then, (if he does not return the animal) as transgressing both a positive commandment ("return shall you return") and a negative commandment (Devarim 22:1) ("You shall not see, etc.")
"the ox of your foe": Here we find that idolators are called "foes" to Israel in all instance, as in (Devarim 23:10) "When you go out as a troop against your foes," and (Ibid. 21:10) "When you go out to war against your foes." R. Eliezer says: Scripture here speaks of a proselyte who backslid. R. Yitzchak says: It speaks of an Israelite. Why, then, is he called your foe? If he hit your son or quarreled with you he becomes "your foe" for the moment.
"straying": "straying" in all instances connotes outside of the boundary. Though there is no proof for this, there is support for it in (Genesis 37:15) "and, behold, he was straying in the field."
"return shall you return it to him": (Devarim 22:2) "If your brother is not near you" implies that until now Scripture has been speaking of one who is either near you or far from you, (but whom you know.) Whence do we derive (the procedure for) one whom you do not know? From (Ibid. 2) "If you do not know (to whom it belongs), then you shall take it in, etc." (The verse speaks of) an animal that it is customary to take in, to exclude a broken one (that one must carry on his back.) (Devarim, Ibid.)
"and it shall be with you" — in your domain. (Ibid.) "until drosh your brother": until you inquire after your brother to ascertain whether or not he is trustworthy. (Ibid.) "then you shall return it to him": We find there to be a lost animal which works (for the finder) and eats (in compensation for its work), but not one which is fed without working.
(Exodus 23:5) "lying (under its burden"): and not a (habitual) "lier." "under its burden": and not (under) more than its (customary) burden. Variantly: "under its burden": and (he is) not (required to help gratis) if its burden is at its side. "and you forbear to help him": There are times that you forbear and times that you help.
How so? The ass of a Jew and the burden of a gentile — "help shall you help with him." The ass of a gentile and the burden of a Jew — "and you forbear to help him."
If he (who saw the animal) were a Cohein and it (the animal) were in the cemetery, he does not become unclean for it. ( might think that if his father said to him "Make yourself unclean" (in the cemetery), he should do so because a positive commandment overrides a negative commandment; it is, therefore, written "and you forbear to help him."
If his father said to him: Do not load with him; do not unload with him; do not return his lost object, he should not heed him, because his father and mother are obligated to perform the mitzvoth.
"help shall you help with him": What is the intent of this? From (Devarim 22:4) "Lift up shall you lift up with him" I might think that only loading (is commanded). Whence do I derive (the same for) unloading? From "help shall you help with him." R. Yoshiyah says: In both instances Scripture speaks of unloading. This tells me only of unloading. Whence do I derive (the same for) loading. It follows a fortiori, viz.: If unloading, which he (the owner of the animal) can do by himself, the other is commanded to assist him with, how much more so loading, which he cannot do by himself! Scripture speaks of the less obvious instance to derive therefrom the more obvious (by a fortiori reasoning)
"Help shall you help with him": What is the intent of this? From (Devarim 24:4) "Lift up shall you lift up with him," I would know only of unloading and loading (the load itself). Whence do I derive (the same for lifting) the animal itself? From "lift up shall you lift up with him." — when you are like him (i.e., when he also does his part).
(שמות כב,ל) ["וְאַנְשֵׁי קֹדֶשׁ תִּהְיוּן לִי, וּבָשָׂר בַּשָּׂדֶה טְרֵפָה לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ, לַכֶּלֶב תַּשְׁלִכוּן אֹתוֹ."] "וְאַנְשֵׁי קֹדֶשׁ תִּהְיוּן לִי". רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר: כְּשֶׁאַתֶּם קְדוֹשִׁים, הֲרֵי אַתֶּם שֶׁלִּי. אִיסֵי בֶן יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: כְּשֶׁהַמָּקוֹם מְחַדֵּשׁ מִצְוָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, הוּא מוֹסִיף לָהֶן קְדֻשָּׁה. אִיסֵי בֶן גּוּר אַרְיֵה אוֹמֵר: נֶאֱמַר כָּן קְדֻשָּׁה, וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן קְדֻשָּׁה, מַה קְּדֻשָּׁה אֲמוּרָה לְהַלָּן אֲסוּרָה בַאֲכִילָה, אַף קְּדֻשָּׁה אֲמוּרָה כָּן אֲסוּרָה בַאֲכִילָה.
(Exodus 22:30) "And men of holiness shall you be to me": R. Yishmael says: When you are holy, you are Mine. Issi b. Yehudah says: When the Holy One Blessed be He originates a mitzvah for Israel, He adds holiness to them. Issi b. Guriah says: It is written here (Devarim 14:21) "holy" ("for a holy people are you … You shall not cook a kid in its mother's milk"), and, elsewhere (Exodus, Ibid.) "holiness." Just as here ("a kid, etc.") the prohibition is eating, so, there, ("treifah") the prohibition is eating.
"וּבָשָׂר בַּשָּׂדֶה טְרֵפָה", אֵין לִי אֶלָּא בַּשָּׂדֶה, בַּבַּיִת מְנַיִן? תִּלְמֹד לוֹמַר (ויקרא יז,טו) "נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה", הִקִּישׁ טְרֵפָה לִנְבֵלָה: מַה נְּבֵלָה, לֹא חָלַק בָּהּ בֵּין בַּבַּיִת בֵּין בַּשָּׂדֶה, אַף טְרֵפָה, לֹא נַחְלֹק בָּהּ בֵּין בַּבַּיִת בֵּין בַּשָּׂדֶה. וּמַה תִּלְמֹד לוֹמַר "וּבָשָׂר בַּשָּׂדֶה טְרֵפָה לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ"? דִּבֵּר הַכָּתוּב בַּהוֹוֶה.
"and flesh in the field, treifah ("torn"): This tells me only of the field. Whence do I derive (that a treifah is forbidden also) in the house? From (Leviticus 22:8) "Neveilah (carrion) and treifah he shall not eat." Treifah is likened to neveilah. Just as neveilah is forbidden both in the house and in the field, so, treifah. If so, why is "field" (specifically) written here? Scripture speaks of the common instance.
כַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ אַתָּה אוֹמֵר: (דברים כב,כז) "כִּי בַשָּׂדֶה מְצָאָהּ, צָעֲקָה הַנַּעֲרָ", אֵין לִי אֶלָּא בַשָּׂדֶה, בַּבַּיִת מְנַיִן? דִּבֵּר הַכָּתוּב בַּהוֹוֶה.
Similarly, (in respect to a ravished maiden) (Devarim 22:27) "For in the field he found her" — Scripture speaks of the common instance.
כַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ אַתָּה אוֹמֵר: (דברים כג,יא) "כִּי יִהְיֶה בְךָ אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר לֹא יִהְיֶה טָהוֹר מִקְּרֵה לָיְלָה". אֵין לִי אֶלָּא מִקְּרֵה לַיְלָה, מִקְּרֵה יוֹם מְנַיִן? דִּבֵּר הַכָּתוּב בַּהוֹוֶה.
כַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ אַתָּה אוֹמֵר: (דברים כ,ו) "מִי הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר נָטַע כֶּרֶם וְלֹא חִלְּלוֹ". אֵין לִי אֶלָּא כֶּרֶם, שְׁאָר כָּל אִילָנוֹת מְנַיִן? דִּבֵּר הַכָּתוּב בַּהוֹוֶה.
Similarly (Ibid. 20:6) "Who is the man who has planted a vineyard?" This tells me only of a vineyard. Whence do I derive (the same for) all trees? Scripture speaks of the common instance.
כַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ אַתָּה אוֹמֵר: (שמות כג,יט) "לֹא תְבַשֵּׁל גְּדִי בַּחֲלֵב אִמּוֹ." אֵין לִי אֶלָּא גְּדִי, וּשְׁאָר כָּל בְּהֵמָה מְנַיִן? דִּבֵּר הַכָּתוּב בַּהוֹוֶה.
אַף כָּן "וּבָשָׂר בַּשָּׂדֶה טְרֵפָה לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ", אֵין לִי אֶלָּא בַשָּׂדֶה, בַּבַּיִת מְנַיִן? דִּבֵּר הַכָּתוּב בַּהוֹוֶה, מָקוֹם שֶׁדֶּרֶךְ הַטְּרֵפָה לְהִטָּרֵף.
Here, too, "in the field treifah" — Scripture speaks of the common instance.
"לַכֶּלֶב תַּשְׁלִכוּן אֹתוֹ", לַכֶּלֶב וְכַכֶּלֶב.*לַכֶּלֶב וְכַכֶּלֶב: מוסרים את הנבלה לאכילה על ידי כלב ועל ידי אלה שככלב אוכלים נבלות. אַתָּה אוֹמֵר לַכֶּלֶב וְכַכֶּלֶב, אוֹ לַכֶּלֶב כִּשְׁמוּעוֹ? כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר: (דברים יד,כא) "לֹא תֹאכְלוּ כָל נְבֵלָה, לַגֵּר אֲשֶׁר בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ תִּתְּנֶנָּה וַאֲכָלָהּ, אוֹ מָכֹר לְנָכְרִי". וַהֲרֵי הַדְּבָרִים קוֹל וָחֹמֶר: וּמַָה, אִם נְבֵלָה, שֶׁהִיא מְטַמָּא בְמַשָּׂא, הֲרֵי הִיא מֻתֶּרֶת בַּהֲנָיָה, וּטְרֵפָה, שֶׁאֵינָהּ מְטַמָּא בְמַשָּׂא, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁתְּהֵי מֻתֶּרֶת בַּהֲנָיָה? וּמַה תִּלְמֹד לוֹמַר "לַכֶּלֶב תַּשְׁלִכוּן אֹתוֹ"? לַכֶּלֶב וְכַכֶּלֶב.
"to the dog shall you throw it": "to the dog" — as to the dog (i.e., anything like a dog.) You say this, but perhaps it is to be taken literally? It is, therefore, written (Ibid. 14:21)"You shall not eat any neveilah, etc." (but you may derive benefit from it). Now does this not follow a fortiori, viz.: If it is permitted to derive benefit from neveilah, which causes "carrying uncleanliness," how much more so, from treifah, which does not cause "carrying uncleanliness!" Why, then, is it written "to the dog shall you throw it"?
לְלַמְּדָךְ שֶׁהַכֶּלֶב מְכֻבָּד מִן הַגּוֹי, שֶׁהֲרֵי הַנְּבֵלָה לַגּוֹי, הַטְּרֵפָה לַכֶּלֶב, לְלַמְּדָךְ שֶׁלֹּא קִפֵּחַ הַמָּקוֹם שְׁכַר חַיָּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (שמות יא,ז) "וּלְכֹל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, לֹא יֶחֱרַץ כֶּלֶב לְשֹׁנוֹ". אָמַר הַמָּקוֹם 'תְּנוּ לוֹ שְׂכָרוֹ!' וַהֲרֵי הַדְּבָרִים קוֹל וָחֹמֶר: וּמָה, אִם שְׁכַר חָיָה לֹא קִפֵּחַ הַמָּקוֹם, שְׁכַר אָדָם, עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה! וְכֵן יִרְמְיָה אוֹמֵר: (ירמיה יז,יא) "קֹרֵא דָגַר וְלֹא יָלָד, עֹשֶׂה עֹשֶׁר וְלֹא בְמִשְׁפָּט,*קֹרֵא דָגַר וְלֹא יָלָד: העוף הנקרא קורא, הדומה לשְׂלָו, דוגר על ביצים שלא הטיל. בַּחֲצִי יָמָו יַעַזְבֶנּוּ, וּבְאַחֲרִיתוֹ יִהְיֶה נָבָל." וּמַה כָּתוּב אַחֲרָיו? (ירמיה יז,יב) "כִּסֵּא כָבוֹד מָרוֹם מֵרִאשׁוֹן מְקוֹם מִקְדָּשֵׁנוּ."
To teach that a dog is of higher station than a slave, a treifah being relegated to a dog, but only neveilah, to a slave, and to teach that the Holy One Blessed be He does not withhold the reward of any creature, viz.: It is written (Exodus 11:7) "And against all the children of Israel (during the exodus) a dog will not sharpen its tongue." The Holy One Blessed be He says, as it were, "Give it its reward (treifah)" (for holding its tongue.) Now does this not follow a fortiori? If it is so — that He does not withhold "reward" — from animals, how much more so (does He not withhold it) from men! As it is written (Jeremiah 18:10) "… to repay every man according to his ways …" and (Ibid. 12) "the Throne of Glory … (13) the hope of Israel, the L–rd!"
(שמות כג,א) ["לֹא תִשָּׂא שֵׁמַע שָׁוְא, אַל תָּשֶׁת יָדְךָ עִם רָשָׁע לִהְיֹת עֵד חָמָס."] "לֹא תִשָּׂא שֵׁמַע שָׁוְא", הֲרֵי זֶה אַזְהָרָה לְכָל מִי שֶׁהוּא מְקַבֵּל לָשׁוֹן הָרָע עַל חֲבֵרוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (תהלים קמ,ד) שָׁנְנוּ לְשׁוֹנָם כְּמוֹ נָחָשׁ", וְכָתוּב: (תהלים קמ,יב) "אִישׁ לָשׁוֹן בַּל יִכּוֹן בָּאָרֶץ, אִישׁ חָמָס רָע יְצוּדֶנּוּ לְמַדְחֵפֹת."*יְצוּדֶנּוּ לְמַדְחֵפֹת: רעתו תלכוד אותו ותדחוף אותו לפול.
(Exodus 23:1) "Do not bear a false report": This is an exhortation against receiving slander.
דָּבָר אַחֵר: הֲרֵי זֶה אַזְהָרָה לַדַּיָּן, שֶׁלֹּא יִשְׁמַע מִבַּעַל דִּין עַד שֶׁיְּהֵי בַעַל דִּינוֹ עוֹמֵד עִמּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (שמות כב,ח) "עַד הָאֱלֹהִים יָבֹא דְּבַר שְׁנֵיהֶם".
Variantly: It is an exhortation to a judge not to hear the words of one litigant before the other arrives, as it is written (Exodus 22:8) "Unto the judges shall come the matter of both."
דָּבָר אַחֵר: הֲרֵי זֶה אַזְהָרָה לְבַעַל דִּין, שֶׁלֹּא יַשְׁמִיעַ לַדַּיָּן עַד שֶׁיְּהֵי בַעַל דִּינוֹ עִמּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (דברים יט,יז) "וְעָמְדוּ שְׁנֵי הָאֲנָשִׁים אֲשֶׁר לָהֶם הָרִיב לִפְנֵי יי, לִפְנֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַשֹּׁפְטִים אֲשֶׁר יִהְיוּ בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם."
Variantly: an exhortation to one litigant not to state his case to the judge until his fellow litigant arrives, as it is written (Devarim 19:17) "And the two men shall stand."
אַבָּא חֲנִין אוֹמֵר מִשֵּׁם רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: לְהָבִיא שְׁבוּעַת הַדַּיָּן בֵּינֵיהֶן שֶׁתְּהֵי בְ'אָמֵן', שֶׁאִם אֵין אַתְּ עוֹנֶה אַחֲרָיו 'אָמֵן', עוֹשֶׂה אַתְּ שְׁבוּעָתוֹ שָׁוְא.
Abba Chanin says, in the name of R. Elazar: to include the oath (administered) by the judge as requiring "Amen" (being answered after it), lacking which it is rendered a vain oath.
"אַל תָּשֶׁת יָדְךָ עִם רָשָׁע". אָמַר לָךְ: אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי חַיָּב לִי מָאתַיִם, וְלִי עֵד אֶחָד, בֹּא וְהִצְטָרֵף לִי עִמּוֹ, וְטוֹל לָךְ אַתְּ מָנֶה וַאֲנִי מָנֶה! לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר: "אַל תָּשֶׁת יָדְךָ עִם רָשָׁע לִהְיֹת עֵד חָמָס."
"Do not place your hand with an evildoer, etc.": If one said to him: "That man owes me two hundred dinars, and I have one witness. Come and join him, and you will get one hundred, and I, one hundred" — of this it is written "Do not place your hand, etc."
אָמַר לוֹ רַבּוֹ: יוֹדֵעַ אַתְּ, שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ אָדָם נוֹתֵן לִי כָּל מָמוֹן שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם, אֵינִי מְבַדֶּה. אֶלָּא אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי חַיָּב לִי מָנֶה, וְלִי עֵד אֶחָד, בֹּא וְהִצְטָרֵף לִי עִמּוֹ עַל מְנָת שֶׁאֶטֹּל אֶת שֶׁלִּי! לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר: "אַל תָּשֶׁת יָדְךָ עִם רָשָׁע לִהְיֹת עֵד חָמָס." עֵד חָמָס הוּא זֶה.
כָּךְ הָיוּ נְקִיֵּי הַדַּעַת בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם עוֹשִׂין: לֹא הָיָה אֶחָד מֵהֶם הוֹלֵךְ לְבֵית הַמִּשְׁתֶּה, עַד שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ מִי הוֹלֵךְ עִמּוֹ, וְלֹא הָיָה חוֹתֵם בְּגֵט, עַד שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ מִי הָיָה חוֹתֵם עִמּוֹ. רַבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר: "אַל תָּשֶׁת יָדְךָ עִם רָשָׁע... עֵד", 'אַל תָּשֶׁת חָמָס עֵד', לְהוֹצִיא אֶת הַחַמְסָנִין וְהַגַּזְלָנִין, שֶׁהֵן פְּסוּלִין מִן הָעֵדוּת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (דברים יט,טז) "כִּי יָקוּם עֵד חָמָס בְּאִישׁ לַעֲנוֹת בּוֹ סָרָה." וּמַה הוּא אוֹמֵר? (דברים יט,יט) "וַעֲשִׂיתֶם לוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר זָמַם לַעֲשׂוֹת לְאָחִיו, וּבִעַרְתָּ הָרָע מִקִּרְבֶּךָ."
"Do not place your hand with an evildoer": This was the practice of the "clean-minded men of Jerusalem." They would not go to a feast until they knew who was going with them, and they would not sign a writ of divorce until they knew who was signing with them. R. Nathan says: "Do not place your hand, etc.": Do not make violence a witness — to exclude evildoers and robbers from being witnesses. As it is written (Devarim 19:16) "If a man of violence rise up against another to testify, etc. … (19) then you shall do to him as he schemed to do, etc."
(שמות כג,ב) ["לֹא תִהְיֶה אַחֲרֵי רַבִּים לְרָעֹת, וְלֹא תַעֲנֶה עַל רִב לִנְטֹת אַחֲרֵי רַבִּים לְהַטֹּת."] "לֹא תִהְיֶה אַחֲרֵי רַבִּים לְרָעֹת". מִמַּשְׁמָע, שֶׁאֵין אַתְּ הוֹוֶה עִמָּהֶן לְרָעָה, הוֹוֶה אַתְּ עִמָּהֶן לְטוֹבָה.
(Exodus 23:2) "You shall not incline (judgment), after many for evil": The implication is that you do not rule with them (beth-din) for evil, but you do rule with them for good.
כֵּיצַד? שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר מְזַכִּין וְאַחַד עָשָׂר מְחַיְּבִין, זַכַּי. שְׁלֹשָׁה עָשָׂר מְחַיְּבִין וַעֲשָׂרָה מְזַכִּין, חַיָּב. אוֹ שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר מְחַיְּבִין וְאַחַד עָשָׂר מְזַכִּין, שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי, יְהֵי חַיָּב! תִּלְמֹד לוֹמַר: "וְלֹא תַעֲנֶה עַל רִב לִנְטֹת אַחֲרֵי רַבִּים לְהַטֹּת." אָמְרָה תוֹרָה, הֲרֹג עַל פִּי עֵדִין, הֲרֹג עַל פִּי מַטִּין: מָה עֵדִין בִּשְׁנַיִם, אַף מַטִּין בִּשְׁנַיִם.
How so? If twelve (of the twenty-three judges) acquit and eleven incriminate, he is acquitted. If thirteen incriminate and ten acquit, he is incriminated. But perhaps if eleven acquit and twelve incriminate he is incriminated? It is, therefore, written (Ibid.) "Do not speak (solitarily) in a quarrel" — Scripture states: Kill by witnesses; kill by incliners — Just as witnesses, (a minimum of) two, so, incliners, two (and not one).
אוֹ אַחַד עָשָׂר מְזַכִּין וְאַחַד עָשָׂר מְחַיְּבִין, וְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר 'אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ', הֲרֵי זוֹ אַזְהָרָה לַדַּיָּן, שֶׁלֹּא יַטֶּה אֶלָּא לְכַף זְכוּת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: "וְלֹא תַעֲנֶה עַל רִב לִנְטֹת אַחֲרֵי רַבִּים לְהַטֹּת."
If eleven acquitted and eleven incriminated, and one said I do not know, another is to be added — an exhortation to the judge to incline (by one) only for acquittal. Thus "Do not speak (solitarily) in a quarrel."
(שמות כג,ג) "וְדָל לֹא תֶהְדַּר בְּרִיבוֹ." לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר? לְפִי שֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר: (ויקרא יט,טו) "לֹא תִשָּׂא פְנֵי דָל, וְלֹא תֶהְדַּר פְּנֵי גָדוֹל, בְּצֶדֶק תִּשְׁפֹּט עֲמִיתֶךָ." אֵין לִי אֶלָּא אֵלּוּ, חִלּוּפֵיהֶן מְנַיִן? תִּלְמֹד לוֹמַר "וְדָל לֹא תֶהְדַּר בְּרִיבוֹ."
(Exodus 23:3) "Do not honor a poor man in his quarrel": Why is this needed? (i.e., it is already written [Leviticus 19:15] "You shall not favor a poor man (in the verdict) and you shall not honor a great one.") (From that verse) I would know only these (i.e., favoring the poor and honoring the rich). Whence do I derive that they ("favoring" and "honoring") are interchangeable, (both applying to the rich and the poor)? From "Do not honor a poor man."
אַבָּא חֲנִין אוֹמֵר מִשֵּׁם רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: בְּלֶקֶט שִׁכְחָה וּפֵאָה הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר.
Abba Chanan says in the name of R. Elazar: Scripture speaks of leket, shikchah, and peah (i.e., it is "in his quarrel" that you are not to honor a poor man, but you are to honor him by deciding in his favor in instances of doubt as to whether something is leket, shikchah or peah, [which revert to the poor] viz. Leviticus 23:22.)
(שמות כג,ד) ["כִּי תִפְגַּע שׁוֹר אֹיִבְךָ אוֹ חֲמֹרוֹ תֹּעֶה, הָשֵׁב תְּשִׁיבֶנּוּ לוֹ."] "כִּי תִפְגַּע". שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי, כִּשְׁמוּעוֹ! תִּלְמֹד לוֹמַר (שמות כג,ה) "כִּי תִרְאֶה". אוֹ "כִּי תִרְאֶה", שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי, אֲפִלּוּ בְּרִחוּק מִמֶּנּוּ מְלֹא מִיל!*מיל רומי=כמעט 1500 מטר. תִּלְמֹד לוֹמַר "כִּי תִפְגַּע". כֵּיצַד יִתְקַיְּמוּ שְׁנֵי כְתוּבִין? שִׁעֲרוּ חֲכָמִים, אֶחָד מִשִּׁבְעָה וּמַחְצָה בְּמִיל, הֱוֵי אוֹמֵר רֵיס.*ריס =כ- 200 מטר.
(Exodus 23:4) "If you encounter (the ox of your foe, or his ass, straying, return shall you return it to him."): I might think that this is to be taken literally (as indicating bodily contact); it is, therefore, written (Ibid. 5) "If you see." — But this would imply even at a distance of a mil. It is, therefore, written "If you encounter." How are these two verses to be reconciled? The sages estimated it as one seventh and a half of a mil, i.e., a ris.
נִמְצֵינוּ לְמֵדִין, שֶׁהוּא עוֹבֵר עַל מִצְוַת 'עֲשֵׂה', וְעַל מִצְוַת 'לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה'.
We find him, then, (if he does not return the animal) as transgressing both a positive commandment ("return shall you return") and a negative commandment (Devarim 22:1) ("You shall not see, etc.")
"שׁוֹר אֹיִבְךָ". רַבִּי יֹאשִׁיָּה אוֹמֵר: אֹיִבְךָ זֶה גּוֹי. וְכֵן מָצִינוּ, שֶׁהַגּוֹיִם קְרוּיִים אוֹיְבִים לְיִשְׂרָאֵל בְּכָל מָקוֹם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (דברים כג,י) "כִּי תֵצֵא מַחֲנֶה עַל אֹיְבֶיךָ". (דברים כא,י) "כִּי תֵצֵא לַמִּלְחָמָה עַל אֹיְבֶיךָ". רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: בְּגֵר שֶׁחָזַר לִסְאוֹרוֹ הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר.*סְאוֹרוֹ=שְׂאוֹרוֹ, בדרך כלל בצורה: סוּרוֹ, השאור שלו, שורשו הרע, עבודה זרה. רַבִּי יִצְחָק אוֹמֵר: בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל מְשֻׁמָּד הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר. רַבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר: בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל עַצְמוֹ הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר, וּמַה תִּלְמֹד לוֹמַר "אֹיִבְךָ"? אֶלָּא אִם הִכָּה אֶת בְּנוֹ, אוֹ שֶׁעָשָׂה עִמּוֹ מְרִיבָה, נֶעֱשָׂה אוֹיְבוֹ לְשָׁעָה.
"the ox of your foe": Here we find that idolators are called "foes" to Israel in all instance, as in (Devarim 23:10) "When you go out as a troop against your foes," and (Ibid. 21:10) "When you go out to war against your foes." R. Eliezer says: Scripture here speaks of a proselyte who backslid. R. Yitzchak says: It speaks of an Israelite. Why, then, is he called your foe? If he hit your son or quarreled with you he becomes "your foe" for the moment.
"שׁוֹר אֹיִבְךָ אוֹ חֲמֹרוֹ", לְחַיֵּב עַל זֶה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְעַל זֶה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ.
"the ox of your foe or his ass": to impose liability for each in itself.
"תֹּעֶה". וְאֵין תּוֹעֶה בְּכָל מָקוֹם אֶלָּא חוּץ לַתְּחוּם. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין רְאָיָה לַדָּבָר, זֵכֶר הוּא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: (בראשית לז,טו) "וַיִּמְצָאֵהוּ אִישׁ וְהִנֵּה תֹעֶה בַּשָּׂדֶה".
"straying": "straying" in all instances connotes outside of the boundary. Though there is no proof for this, there is support for it in (Genesis 37:15) "and, behold, he was straying in the field."
"הָשֵׁב תְּשִׁיבֶנּוּ לוֹ." לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר? לְפִי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כב,ב) "וְאִם לֹא קָרוֹב אָחִיךָ", אֵין לִי אֶלָּא בִזְמַן שֶׁרָחוֹק וְקָרוֹב. וְאֵין אַתְּ מַכִּירוֹ, מְנַיִן? תִּלְמֹד לוֹמַר: (דברים כב,ב) "וְלֹא יְדַעְתּוֹ וַאֲסַפְתּוֹ אֶל תּוֹךְ בֵּיתֶךָ", מְצִיאָה שֶׁדַּרְכָהּ לְהֵאָסֵף, לְהוֹצִיא אֶת הַשְּׁבוּרָה.
"return shall you return it to him": (Devarim 22:2) "If your brother is not near you" implies that until now Scripture has been speaking of one who is either near you or far from you, (but whom you know.) Whence do we derive (the procedure for) one whom you do not know? From (Ibid. 2) "If you do not know (to whom it belongs), then you shall take it in, etc." (The verse speaks of) an animal that it is customary to take in, to exclude a broken one (that one must carry on his back.) (Devarim, Ibid.)
(דברים כב,ב) "וְהָיָה עִמְּךָ", עִמָּךְ בִּרְשׁוּתָךְ. "עַד דְּרֹשׁ אָחִיךָ אֹתוֹ", עַד שֶׁתִּדְרֹשׁ לְאָחִיךָ. "עַד דְּרֹשׁ אָחִיךָ אֹתוֹ", עַד שֶׁיּוֹצִיא עָלָיו כָּרוֹז. "עַד דְּרֹשׁ אָחִיךָ אֹתוֹ", אַתְּ צָרִיךְ לִבְדֹּק אֶת אָחִיךָ, אִם רַמַּי הוּא, אִם אֵינוֹ רַמַּי. "וַהֲשֵׁבֹתוֹ לוֹ." מְצִיאָה שֶׁהִיא עוֹשָׂה וְאוֹכֶלֶת, וְלֹא מְצִיאָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ עִמָּהּ הֶפְסֵד.
"and it shall be with you" — in your domain. (Ibid.) "until drosh your brother": until you inquire after your brother to ascertain whether or not he is trustworthy. (Ibid.) "then you shall return it to him": We find there to be a lost animal which works (for the finder) and eats (in compensation for its work), but not one which is fed without working.
(שמות כג,ה) ["כִּי תִרְאֶה חֲמוֹר שֹׂנַאֲךָ רֹבֵץ תַּחַת מַשָּׂאוֹ, וְחָדַלְתָּ מֵעֲזֹב לוֹ, עָזֹב תַּעֲזֹב עִמּוֹ."] "כִּי תִרְאֶה", שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי, אֲפִלּוּ רָחוֹק מִמֶּנּוּ מְלֹא מִיל! תִּלְמֹד לוֹמַר (שמות כג,ד) "כִּי תִפְגַּע". אוֹ "כִּי תִפְגַּע", שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי, כִּשְׁמוּעוֹ! תִּלְמֹד לוֹמַר "כִּי תִרְאֶה". כֵּיצַד יִתְקַיְּמוּ שְׁנֵי כְתוּבִין? שִׁעֲרוּ חֲכָמִים, אֶחָד מִשִּׁבְעָה וּמַחְצָה בְמִיל, הֱוֵי אוֹמֵר, רֵיס.
"וְחָדַלְתָּ מֵעֲזֹב לוֹ, עָזֹב תַּעֲזֹב עִמּוֹ." נִמְצֵינוּ לְמֵדִין, שֶׁעוֹבֵר עַל 'עֲשֵׂה' וְעַל 'לֹא תַּעֲשֶׂה'.
"רֹבֵץ", לֹא שֶׁיְּהֵי רַבְצָן. "תַּחַת מַשָּׂאוֹ", וְלֹא יָתֵר עַל מַשָּׂאוֹ. "תַּחַת מַשָּׂאוֹ", וְלֹא שֶׁיְּהֵי מַשָּׂאוֹ בְצִדּוֹ. "וְחָדַלְתָּ מֵעֲזֹב לוֹ", פְּעָמִין שֶׁאַתְּ חָדֵל, פְּעָמִים שֶׁאַתְּ עוֹזֵב.
(Exodus 23:5) "lying (under its burden"): and not a (habitual) "lier." "under its burden": and not (under) more than its (customary) burden. Variantly: "under its burden": and (he is) not (required to help gratis) if its burden is at its side. "and you forbear to help him": There are times that you forbear and times that you help.
חֲמוֹר שֶׁלְּיִשְׂרָאֵל וּמַשּׂוֹי שֶׁלְּיִשְׂרָאֵל*וּמַשּׂוֹי שֶׁלְּיִשְׂרָאֵל. בכ"י אוקספורד: שֶׁלַּגּוֹי. "עָזֹב תַּעֲזֹב עִמּוֹ." חֲמוֹר שֶׁלַּגּוֹי וּמַשּׂוֹי שֶׁלְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, "וְחָדַלְתָּ מֵעֲזֹב לוֹ". פְּעָמִין שֶׁאַתְּ חָדֵל, פְּעָמִים שֶׁאַתְּ עוֹזֵב.
How so? The ass of a Jew and the burden of a gentile — "help shall you help with him." The ass of a gentile and the burden of a Jew — "and you forbear to help him."
הָיָה בֵּין קְבָרוֹת, לֹא יִטַּמֵּא לוֹ. אִם אָמַר לוֹ אָבִיו 'הִטַּמָּא!' יִטַּמֵּא, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמִּצְוַת 'עֲשֵׂה' קוֹדֶמֶת לְ'לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה'? לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר "וְחָדַלְתָּ מֵעֲזֹב". פְּעָמִים שֶׁאַתָּה חָדֵל, וּפְעָמִים שֶׁאֵין אַתָּה חָדֵל:
If he (who saw the animal) were a Cohein and it (the animal) were in the cemetery, he does not become unclean for it. ( might think that if his father said to him "Make yourself unclean" (in the cemetery), he should do so because a positive commandment overrides a negative commandment; it is, therefore, written "and you forbear to help him."
אָמַר לוֹ אָבִיו: אַל תִּפְרֹק עִמּוֹ! אַל תִּטְעֹן עִמּוֹ! אַל תַּחְזִיר לוֹ אֲבֵדָתוֹ! הֲרֵי זֶה לֹא יִשְׁמַע לוֹ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא וְאָבִיו חַיָּבִין בַּמִּצְווֹת.
If his father said to him: Do not load with him; do not unload with him; do not return his lost object, he should not heed him, because his father and mother are obligated to perform the mitzvoth.
"עָזֹב תַּעֲזֹב עִמּוֹ", לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר? לְפִי שֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר (דברים כב,ד) "הָקֵם תָּקִים עִמּוֹ." אֵין לִי אֶלָּא טְעִינָה, פְּרִיקָה מְנַיִן? תִּלְמֹד לוֹמַר "עָזֹב תַּעֲזֹב עִמּוֹ." רַבִּי יֹאשִׁיָּה אוֹמֵר: אֶחָד זֶה וְאֶחָד זֶה, בִּפְרִיקָה הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר. אֵין לִי אֶלָּא פְרִיקָה, טְעִינָה מְנַיִן? דִּין הוּא: מָה, אִם פְּרִיקָה, שֶׁהוּא יָכֹל לְפְרֹק בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ, הֲרֵי הוּא מֻזְהָר עָלֶיהָ, וּטְעִינָה, שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכֹל לִטְעוֹן בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיְּהֵי מֻזְהָר עָלֶיהָ? מִפְּנֵי מָה? דִּבֵּר הַכָּתוּב בַּקַּל, לְלַמֵּד מִמֶּנּוּ עַל הֶחָמוּר.
"help shall you help with him": What is the intent of this? From (Devarim 22:4) "Lift up shall you lift up with him" I might think that only loading (is commanded). Whence do I derive (the same for) unloading? From "help shall you help with him." R. Yoshiyah says: In both instances Scripture speaks of unloading. This tells me only of unloading. Whence do I derive (the same for) loading. It follows a fortiori, viz.: If unloading, which he (the owner of the animal) can do by himself, the other is commanded to assist him with, how much more so loading, which he cannot do by himself! Scripture speaks of the less obvious instance to derive therefrom the more obvious (by a fortiori reasoning)
רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בְּתֵירָה אוֹמֵר: "עָזֹב תַּעֲזֹב עִמּוֹ", פְּרִיקָה. "הָקֵם תָּקִים עִמּוֹ", טְעִינָה. מִכָּן הָיָה רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי אוֹמֵר: כַּשֵּׁם שֶׁהַפְּרִיקָה מִן הַתּוֹרָה, כָּךְ טְעִינָה מִן הַתּוֹרָה.
— whence R. Yishmael says: Just as unloading is (commanded) by the Torah, so, loading.
"עָזֹב תַּעֲזֹב עִמּוֹ", לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר? לְפִי שֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר "הָקֵם תָּקִים עִמּוֹ", אֵין לִי אֶלָּא פְּרִיקָה וּטְעִינָה, בְּהֵמָה עַצְמָהּ מְנַיִן? תִּלְמֹד לוֹמַר "הָקֵם תָּקִים עִמּוֹ." "הָקֵם תָּקִים עִמּוֹ", בִּזְמַן שֶׁאַתְּ שָׁוֶה לוֹ.
"Help shall you help with him": What is the intent of this? From (Devarim 24:4) "Lift up shall you lift up with him," I would know only of unloading and loading (the load itself). Whence do I derive (the same for lifting) the animal itself? From "lift up shall you lift up with him." — when you are like him (i.e., when he also does his part).