๐พ Archived View for scholasticdiversity.us.to โบ scriptures โบ jewish โบ t โบ Or%20HaChaim%20on%20Levitiโฆ captured on 2024-05-10 at 12:31:39. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
10 โ[1] ** ืืืฆื ืื ืืฉื ืืฉืจืืืืช, The son of a Jewish woman went out, etc.** We must understand the meaning of the expression ืืืฆื as analogous to the way *Tanchuma* understood the same word when the Torah described the emergence of the golden calf in Exodus 32,24. *Tanchuma* defined the word as describing an unplanned occurrence, i.e. the emergence of the golden calf from that crucible was totally unexpected. We may therefore relate to the portion of the ืืงืื, the blasphemer, as the ultimate result of an act by the mother which was totally outside her consciousness. *Shemot Rabbah* 1,28 describes that the Egyptian overseer killed by Moses once entered the house of his victim pretending to be her husband and slept with her. The child born from that union developed into the blasphemer who is the subject of our verse. This is the reason the Torah describes the mother as ืืฉื ืืฉืจืืืืช, comparing her to ืืืฉ ืืืฉืจืืื, to tell us that her guilt in this matter was no greater than the guilt of the ืืืฉ ืืืฉืจืืื, i.e. she was free from guilt. The Torah goes on to write ืืชืื ืื ื ืืฉืจืื, to inform us that there were no ืืืืจืื, bastards, amongst the Jewish people, i.e. children from unions who may not marry Israelites.
โ[2] We may also deduce from the word ืืืฆื that the Israelites were not prepared to allocate space to that individual in their respective parts of the encampment, each one claiming that he did not belong there. *Torat Kohanim* write that the manner in which the Torah introduces the blasphemer indicates that he had converted to Judaism. [seeing he was born before the Torah was given, he was not automatically Jewish due to his having a Jewish mother. Ed.] Both commentaries are perfectly true and compatible with Torah principles.
โ[3] **ืืืืฉ ืืืฉืจืืื. and the Jewish man.** It is possible that the reason the Torah does not disclose the name of this man is that it was he who caused the name of G'd to be blasphemed by the son of the Jewish woman, Shlomit bat Divri. G'd is not anxious to condemn a person, especially not in a book such as the Torah which will be read for all future generations so that a dishonourable mention is especially painful to the party concerned.
โ[4] Furthermore, the Torah wanted to reveal that the substance of the quarrel between these two men concerned the difference between being known as merely "the son of a Jewish woman," and being known as "the son of a Jew." The wording of the Torah comprises all that our sages have said about the substance of this quarrel in *Vayikra Rabbah* 32,3, some saying the quarrel was about the showbread legislation, the blasphemer ridiculing it. Others say that the quarrel centred about whether the blasphemer was a member of the Jewish people, and if so if he could claim membership of a particular tribe. The Torah did not bother to be specific and mention his name as it did not make any difference in the end.
Version: Or Hachayim, trans. Eliyahu Munk
Source: http://www.urimpublications.com/or-hachayim-commentary-on-the-torah-5-vols.html
License: CC-BY