0:00 / 0:00
Mishpatim - 3rd Portion
40 views
Comments(0)
Transcript
Auto-generated transcript. Not time-synced to the video.
Join me as we learn kumsh for Tuesday
paras mishbatim the third Torah reading
chapter 21 verse4 yesterday we began the
laws of damages pertaining if a person
hurts another individual if a person's
property hurts another person's property
today we continue with the laws of
damages and compensation for damages
Verse four.
If a man takes his animals in someone
else's field or vineyard
and therefore sends his animals there to
graze
and they graze in another person's
field.
The restitution that he has to make has
to be from the best of his field and
from the best of his vineyard.
Verse four, Rashi explains what this
means.
If you look at all of these
terminologies,
they're all terminologies of an animal,
us and our animals. So what does the
word yav mean?
He takes his animals and he allows them
to pasture in the field or vineyards of
his friend.
And he thereby damages his friends his
the another person's property in two in
two ways. Either
either by sending his animals there or
by actually burning it, consuming it
meaning by destroying it.
The rabbis explain what does it mean?
The actual terminology of sending the
animals, meaning that they are allowed
to walk there the way that they are
damaging the other person's property is
by stamping on all the food and thereby
bringing damage and to the other
person's property. When the word that
means there's two terminologies in this
Torah in this verse and he sends his
animals and then again gives another
terminology of what they've done.
This is talking about when a person
actually consumes it when the animal
consumes the food. So like we mentioned
before the word is beroy or bur either
the concept of them actually stepping
eating and consuming the actual food or
just destroying the food itself. When we
talk about a fire that's going to be the
next case when he burn when somebody put
sets fire to somebody else's property
somebody else's field another person's
field
says what does it mean from the best of
his property he has to pay
we evaluate the damage
now when the damager has to go and pay
for the amount of property that he
damaged
he has to pay him according to the best
of his properties For example,
if the damage was a sella,
he has to give him worth a
property that the damager owns.
Here the Torah is telling us
that anytime a person damages somebody
else's field, you have to go to the best
kind of field that this damager has. And
based on the best quality, you will then
give whatever was worth of whatever
damages you made to the individual.
Verse 5.
If a fire breaks out even accidentally
and therefore spreads through horns so
that it consumes a stacked pile or a
stacked pile of wheat, stacked or
standing grain
or the actual newly plowed field.
Whoever caused the the fire to happen
has to make restitution for what he has
done. Even though the fire may have
started on his own property, as we're
soon going to learn, still in all
because the fire continued into somebody
else's property. And you are now liable
the moment you uh ignite the fire as
we'll see the difference of opinion or
how it comes. As Rashi explains,
even if the person lit the fire on his
own in his own place and then spread to
his his friend's property,
the word translates in old French, which
is thorns,
and it ate the the wheat that was
standing that was already cut
that the fire went into the thorns, and
from there it continued to spread.
spread onto the wheat that was already
cut or wheat that was already that's
still connected to the ground
or to the actual field that may have
just been plowed.
It can it consumed all of the plowed
field.
Now he has to go and replplow his field
a second time
even though the person lit a fire in his
own property
and it continued to spread because of
the thorns that it caught on to
has to be he has to pay
because he did not protect and he did
not watch that that coal that he just
ignited should not the embers that he
made should not continue to go shouldn't
and damage somebody else's field.
Verse six.
And now we come to the Torah talks about
uh guards cosine. If a person you give
something to somebody else for
safekeeping, there are different levels
of safekeeping. As we're going to learn,
there are four different types of
guardsmen. One that gets paid for it,
one that doesn't get paid for it, a
renter and a borrower. And each one of
them have different laws as we're going
to see as the Torah continues to
explain. Verse six.
If a man gives a fellow man money or
objects money or objects to protect
was stolen from the person's home.
If the thief is found then he pays
double pays as we mentioned previously
you pay double to the owner.
That means the watchman says I had it in
my house and somebody stole it from my
home.
If the thief is found,
the thief has to pay double the bum to
the original owners that it was stolen
from. Verse seven,
what happens if the thief is not found?
Then the owner of the house has to
approach the judges the best
that if he did not lay hands on his
fellow's property that if he was not
negligent and he admits that he says I
did not touch this my property and was
[snorts] just stolen from my house then
he is exempt from any payment [snorts]
as we see over here continues and
explains
if the owner that comes The meaning that
the the owner of the item comes and
tells the watchman you owe me for the
item that was stolen from your house. So
therefore this guardsman comes now
he is the owner from where? The home
that it was stolen from who does he come
to the judges?
He has to come to court and swear and
take an oath that he did not touch the
item that wasn't his.
Verse eight, ales
in every case of dishonesty
al whether it's about an axe al whether
it's about a donkey als or a sheep al
sal or a garment I'll call or anything
that gets lost
and there are witnesses that testify
this is it these are the disputed goods
both of the parties should come to the
judges in front of judges
Whoever the judges should say that they
are guilty
will then be liable to pay double
restitution to his fellow men. Let's
understand what the verse is telling us.
A lot of rashies here to follow along
what the Torah is saying.
on every case [clears throat] of where a
person in every case of dishonesty
that you find a liar who in his oath
said false testimony
because we have witnesses that say he
himself stole it and the oath that he
took was false
and therefore the best has to find him
guilty according to the testimony of the
witnesses
of the Torah is telling us
that if somebody says the about an item
that was given for him to watch and he
says it was stolen from me and then we
find he himself stole it.
He has to pay double.
When does he pay double to the owner?
When does the watchman have to pay
double?
When he takes an oath and only
afterwards the witnesses come.
However, if before he took the oath that
he didn't subde it and then witnesses
come, he does not have to pay double
restitution. It's only because he took
the oath and he said something falsely
then witnesses come is he liable to pay.
This is how the rabbis explain it in
63b.
They explain what does this mean?
The reason why he comes to the judges is
to take an oath. Now you may say, "How
do I know this? When I say you have to
bring him to the judges,
am I bringing him for a court case or
just that he should take an oath
being that the watchman already comes to
court and he says that it was stolen
even if he didn't take an oath,
then he should be right away liable to
pay double restitution. If the witnesses
come and say, "We see it in his
backyard. How can he say that it was
stolen?
Therefore, the sages come along and
explain to us. It says in this case
about a person taking or touching the
item which is not his later on when it
talks about a watchman who is hired that
he also has to take an oath
that he has to take an oath to say that
he did not touch it. Just like later on
when a person denies that he didn't
touch it. Only time that he has to pay
double restitution is if he takes an
oath.
too. The only time that a watchman will
have to pay double the restitution is
only if he took an oath and afterwards
witnesses come along and say that oath
was false then he would have to pay
double
he will say this is it according to the
simple interpretation who is this
referring to
that the witnesses come along and say
that this actual item is that he swore
that he doesn't own that that he doesn't
that is not in his property
They tell them yes we saw it in your
property
or this also can mean that then the
judges the testimony between both of
them have to decide who is the guilty
and who's not
they'll have to thoroughly investigate
the witnesses
and if the witnesses say what their if
their testimony is correct
then they will find this watchman guilty
and what will he have to do he'll have
to pay double restitution to the owner
of the object who was given to him to
watch.
However, if the judges say that the
witnesses are guilty
and that they find that the witnesses
were saying false allegations and
libations against this individual,
they will have to pay
uh the watchmen double restitution.
That's the simple interpretation of this
verse that either if the witnesses say
it then the watchmen will have to pay
double restitution or if the witnesses
are guilty then they have to pay double
restitution to the watchmen.
The rabbis explain it as follows that
when it says Q that's referring to on
the watchman and what does it mean
this teaches us that we don't obligate
him an oath
only if he admits to partial of the
testimony he says
only if the watchman says yes you gave
me $100 but $50 was stolen and $50 I
still have Then we make him make an oath
on the leftovers. That's that the only
time he is obligated to take an oath is
where he acknowledges to partial of the
testimony.
Verse
n
when a person gives something to his
friend
a donkey or a sheep or any animal to
protect to watch and then it dies.
or it broke
or was carried off was captured by
somebody.
Nobody sees what happened.
Rashi explains that the first case when
we spoke about giving something to
somebody else to watch that's talking
about when the person was not getting
paid for it. However,
therefore, he was exempt from any theft.
If it was stolen from the person's home,
if it wasn't found, then you bring him
that he just has taken an oath. From
here, we learn
that he's exempt by taking the oath.
But now, this few verses that we're
going to be learning about is talking
about a hired watchman.
Therefore, he does not get off the hook
if it was stolen. as we're going to see
in the next verse, next two verses
that if it's stolen from him, he still
has to pay. But if something happens by
accident for example in this case where
it gets hurt by either it was captured
or somebody for stole it or it broke on
its own
died on its own or fell from a high
place and then broke one of its limbs
or was stolen by force by Roberts
but there was nobody there to testify
that it happened. So over here we're
talking about a case in this verse 9
where the thing that he was given to
watch was damaged but it was not on
purpose. It was by accident and or was
forced upon he had no choice. He had no
way to stop it. Verse 10.
So then he has to take an oath between
the two of them
that he did not lay a hand on his fellow
men's property. All of them the owners
take it the way it is. have to accept
the oath and he does not have to pay for
any uh any restitution for anything.
He has to swear that this is actually
what happened. And number two
and he also did not use it and that's
why it broke. That means if the fellow
went and touched the animal and because
of that the animal broke or hurt itself
or whatever it may be then
because if he actually touched it and
then it got into a damage and then he's
even obligated he's liable to pay
restitution because since he had no
right touching that item
what does the owners have to take as
they take the oath and then the watchman
doesn't have to pay anything for it. 11.
However, if it was stolen from him, then
he has to pay restitution to the owners
because he's liable for that's why it
was given to him to watch it not be
stolen. 12.
If however it was killed while and there
are witnesses.
He then has to produce witnesses and
that it that it happened. Then does not
have to pay restitution for this animal
that was killed
that it was killed by a wild animal.
He has to bring witnesses. The watchman
has to bring witnesses that there's
occurred and then he does not have to
pay.
Rashi says am I talking about only if it
was me? If this animal was m it was
mauled then it was therefore now
considered a carcass. There was nothing
left of it.
That's when he doesn't have to pay
only when it causes such a case.
The very fact that the Torah puts
the means that there could be a case
that he would have to pay and there
could be a case where he weren't have to
pay. Which one wouldn't he have to pay
for?
So therefore,
would you say that when it comes to a
cat or a um or a fox or a leopard that
that he does have to pay? Why? Because
he should have been able to save the
animal from them.
However, when it comes to a wolf and a
uh and a lion or a beer or a snake,
which those are more dangerous animals
that he wouldn't be able to stop it, he
shouldn't have to pay.
Who told you? Who spoken ear? This is
the terminology. Who whispered in your
ear that there's such a difference?
The Torah doesn't make a difference. You
may say just as if it died, captured or
wounded. And it compares all them
just like by death. You cannot stop
somebody from dying. So too if it was
broken or wounded
when you're not able to save it.
Therefore, when he talks about a trafa
that he is exempt from, that means when
he when an animal is mauled and
destroyed because of another wild animal
attacking it, that's only talking about
an animal that he was did not have the
ability to save it from because the
Torah compares it to death just like
death you don't have the ability to
stop. So to a damage that you did not
have the ability to stop. Now, the Torah
tells us about the next type of watchman
or the next type of people who use
somebody else's property.
If a man borrows something from his
fellow man
and a broke or died
and the owners were not with them at the
time, then he has to pay make a
restitution. Over here, we now move to
the to a more severe meaning that we are
the person has more liabilities because
he enjoys more of it. Meaning you're
borrowing something from somebody. You
don't have to pay the person for it. You
it's all the benefit is for you.
Therefore, you are most liable for it.
As we see in Rashi explains as follows.
If the owners are with him,
whether he's using it for that work or
not,
if he's using it at the time at the
borrowing it,
he has the owner of the ax has to be
with him at the time of borrowing it.
then he is not obligated to pay for any
damages that happen by accident and he
does not have to be with him at the time
of the actual wound as we seen in the
previous verse as well
as we're going to see in verse 14.
I'm sorry we learned the wrong rashies.
There we go again. Verse 13, the
rashies.
It's coming to tell me that a person who
borrows something is obligated in even
accidental damages.
If the owner of the ox is not with him
at the time of the work, then he is
obligated to pay for restitution. Now
verse 14, continuing on to the case of a
hirer.
If however the owner is with them is
employed together with the borrower
that's working with them does not have
to make any restitution.
If he's actually renting it if the thing
was hired were renting the item then
then this comes in exchange for its
rental price. Let's see what Rashi says.
So now what we just mentioned before the
rashi before whether he's there at the
time of work whether he's there at a
different work whether he's hired with
him at the time or not if he's employed
with him if he has it with him at the
time that he borrowed it he does not
have to be with him at the time that he
is employ that it actually was injured
if he was hired that means
this ox was not borrowed from the
individual but he's paying for it
this individual who's renting it
didn't borrow it. He does not have all
the benefits. Meaning in the case of
borrowing, the borrower gets all the
benefits for it. However, in the case of
renting it, the owner the owner is
getting money for it. Therefore,
and therefore, it does not have the same
judgment as a borrower who is obligated
in damages. And however, concerning the
other damages,
the Torah doesn't say clearly what the
law is pertaining to hire.
Is he considered like a watchman who
does not get paid for it or like a paid
watchman?
Therefore, there's a discussion and
debate between the scholars.
A renter, how does he pay
says that he's just like a unpaid
watchman and therefore he is exempt from
any time it is stolen or lost and he's
only obligated on negligence.
that he is like a paid watchman and he's
obligated for something that gets stolen
or lost and he's only exempt from
accidental damage.
Verse 15.
Now we're going to go into other laws
other different laws.
If a man seduces a virgin
who is not betrothed
or engaged and and therefore he is
intimate with her
he has to marry he has to marry her with
a marriage contract.
What does it mean? Means he seduces her.
He speaks to her heart. He convinces
her.
The word he continues to pester her. He
seduces her and finally convinces her.
What does the word mean?
He has to then give her whatever a
marriage contract is like a man and a
woman
which is that he has to write a marital
contract and he has to marry her because
you seduced her and now you have to stay
with her. Verse 16
have however the father refuses to give
her into marriage
to give him to this individual.
He then has to give a monetary set
settlement
whatever is customary to give to a woman
who has never been married and that is
as we're going to see is 50 shekels
as the Torah enumerates in other places
so of that this is 50 silver coins
of somebody who takes a woman who's not
married and he's with her by force as it
says
so Jew a person who seduces and the
woman and the father refuses to give him
this woman as his wife he has to pay the
50 kzf the 50 um shekel next case in 17
verse 17 talks about sorcery
you should not allow a sorcerer
sorceress to live
says sorcerer
this is giving who is this giving to
this is not an obligation on every
single individual that they should go
kill a individual who's a sorcerer. This
is given to
this applies to males and females.
The Torah is talking about factual
things and what usually happens and it
was that usually
it happened to be that women were more
usual to be sorcerers than men. We know
the story in the Talmet that talks about
a fellow by the name of Shiman Shatak
who went and he killed all the sorcerers
that he did at the time. The 80
sorcerers there were women sorcerers
that he killed as the Talmud enumerates
and talks about the story there.
Verse 18,
whoever engages in intimate
relationships with an animal must be put
to death.
He is then with
stoning to death. So too
the same idea would be if a person
whether it's a man or a woman who
engages in such kind of behavior
that it says their blood is liable to
them meaning to them whether it's a
which which is the death of stoning.
Verse 19.
Whoever sacrifices to idols is put to
death only to God alone should one be
bringing sacrifices.
Verse 19. What does this mean?
To their idolatry. How do I know that it
means that their idolatry?
Because if it would have had it
would have to explain
other gods when he says
therefore he's talking about to thee by
this way pointing out to the ones you're
not allowed to serve and therefore he
doesn't have to say the word other god
anytime you have that comes at the
beginning of a word
if it has a beginning like
then you have to explain and define to
which king which desert to which city
you're going to. So
or if it has
the very fact that he doesn't explain
that means he's including one so when he
says
even godly ones it means referring even
to God.
So when it has a
then you have to define afterwards who
you're referring to. But when it has a
then it's like a hey then it's like
saying to the
like to the desert to the city
you know which one you're but however
when we don't know which one we're
talking about
to the god the one that I told you about
in someplace else
because he doesn't say which one. So
therefore he puts a to the one that I
already explained previously that you're
not allowed to or allow to what he was
referring to. What does the word mean?
You should die. Why over here in this
case does he say should be should be put
to death and doesn't use the terminology
like he uses in other places you must
should be killed
and also already says another place that
it should be put to death as it says in
the book of deuteronomy
that you taketh that manner that woman
over there doesn't say clearly for which
thing he is liable of death penalty you
not say
that anytime a person gives any honor to
idolatry he's liable the death penalty
So therefore here the Torah tells us one
is liable of the death penalty
that if you bring sacrifices you're
liable death penalty to tell you that if
it's only bowing down or something else
just like when a person brings a
sacrifice to God it's done in the inner
sanctum of the holy temple
so and I conclude from here
somebody who brings incense or libations
which these are services which were done
in the holy temple inside holy temple
and you're therefore liable for them for
all idolatry as well
whether this was the way that they did
it for that idolatry
whether it was not the way they did it
for that idolatry
however any other type of service for
example which was sweeping the floor or
mopping the floor or hugging or kissing
those are not liable for capital
punishment. Those are only a warning.
Those are considered a negative
commandment which one would be liable
for uh lashes or whatever it may be but
not liable for capital punishment. The
only time somebody's liable for capital
punishment, it has to be something which
is compared to what was done in the holy
temple inside the holy temple like
sacrifices, incense or liations.
Verse 20,
you shall not taunt a foreigner.
nor oppress him
because you yourselves were foreigners
in the land of Egypt.
What does it mean? Taunt him with words
like when God uses the terminology the
time of the redemption that I've given
you to me to the field to the animals of
the field meaning by you I was giving
you the ability that people should be
able to make fun of you
do not hurt him in what way as well as
taking impressing them money with taking
money by stealing taking money from them
because of them using them to oppress
and get money because of it. Verse
continues
meaning why
that means if you embarrassed him
if you try to embarrass him and say oh
you're a foreigner he can still tell you
back you were also foreigners in the
land of Egypt and therefore he says as
the tal tells us a blemish that you have
don't put it on somebody
When we talk about over here foreigners,
what's this referring to?
Person was not born in that country
came from a different country to live
there. Like the Jewish people came from
the land of Kanan and they were living
in Egypt. Verse 21.
Do not cause pain to any widow or
orphan.
This applies to any person you shouldn't
cause pain to.
The Torah is talking about things that
usually happen.
These are people that are so to speak on
the lower level. So therefore, people
feel that they can take advantage of
them.
It was common that people sometimes take
advantage and hurt them and give them
pain.
If you do cause them pain
for it, they will urgently cry out to me
and I will certainly heed their cry.
This is a shortened verse
over here. The Torah is warning, but he
doesn't explain what the punishment
would be.
Like it says in the book of whoever
kills but the Torah warns but doesn't
say what's going to happen.
If you're going to hurt them,
meaning the Torah is warning us,
you're going to get back the same.
Why are you going to get why is the
punishment so bad? Because God says they
will cry out to me.
I will hear and I will take revenge and
pay measure for measure.
What's the display that what's going to
happen? I will display indignation
and I will kill you by this by the sword
and your wives will then remain widows
and your children will be orphans.
Don't I know from the fact that he's
going to kill them that automatically
the wives
the wives will be widows and children
orphans
over here the Torah is telling us two
verses number one
that the women are going to be not only
widows they're going to be they're not
going to be able to marry
they're going to be like living widows
meaning that they're not going to know
they could they don't have their husband
they're not going to be able to marry
anybody else
there won't be any testimony to say how
their husbands were killed.
They will forbidden to be married.
So too, the children will be orphan.
The best is not going to allow them to
inherit their father's property.
We don't know what happened to them. Did
they get killed or were they just
captive?
Verse 24.
When you lend money to my nation, to my
people,
To the poor person amongst you, do not
act like a creditor.
You should not charge him interest.
Tells us that over here the word
is a passive. That means you're not
obligated
besides three cases where there's an
obligation. And this is one of them.
It's not if you will loan somebody
money. It's when you will lend somebody
money that a person has an obligation to
give a loan to a poor person and not
charge interest my nation ami meaning
from the Jew
if you have a choice between a non-Jew
and a Jew the Jew [snorts] goes first
you can give a loan to a poor and a rich
person however you have a poor rich
person choice between which one you
should give first the poor person goes
first now
if you have somebody from your family
and somebody from your city.
The family comes first.
So if there's poor people from your city
and poor people from another city, the
poor people from your city come first.
This is what the refers to.
Who should you give money? Who should
you loan money to? My people and not the
nation of the world. Which people should
you give first? The poor people. Which
poor people? Those that are with you
from your family. Those that have first
preference. Another way of explaining it
is
do not treat them um in an embarrassing
way when you give them a loan because
they are my nation.
You have to look at yourself as if you
are a poor person and therefore don't
embarrass him. Don't be something which
you wouldn't want to be done to you.
Don't become like a creditor and coming
strong on him to be able to take back
the loan.
If you know that he doesn't have money
to pay back,
don't be somebody that's strict on him
like you just loaned it.
Make as if you never loaned him any
money. [snorts]
Don't embarrass him. In fact, Jewish law
tells us that if you know the person
doesn't have the money, you're not
allowed to ask them for the money. You
see them on black, you have to cross the
street that you shouldn't see that
you're coming to demand the money for
them. That's if you know that they don't
have the money. If he has the money,
that's already a different story.
What does the word mean? Is interest.
Why is interest considered like a snake?
Because it's like the the sting of a
snake.
because it gives you a little sting on
your leg. Feel it all of a sudden and it
blows up
and it hits you into the head and it
kills the person. So too is interest.
The interest is so bad because at the
beginning
okay what's a 5% 6% a little bit of
interest what's the big deal
until the interest becomes so big that
this causes him to lose a lot of money
as we see today whether all the
different interest that they balloon and
that's what most of the person is paying
up is spends a harder time paying up the
interest than the principle of the loan.
It is interesting to note that always
paras was traditionally by faban there
was a an appeal that was done for the
gach that rabbi and Gordon start and his
son Goldman used to make an appeal
parish for a gak because in this week's
Torah reading was the mitzvah of loaning
people money without interest the
concept of a
verse 25
if you repeatedly take your fellow man's
garmental
the fellow man's garment
you're taking it as a pledge still and
all you should return it to him in the
morning until sunset
[clears throat]
what does it mean over here when it
comes to usually means a wound when it
comes to it talking about collateral
we're talking about a collateral that
the person gives willingly at the time
of the loan that means he wants to get a
loan
that I'm giving you this item as a
collateral so that if I don't pay you're
able to keep it and this forces the
individual to give to make sure he pays
back. So the word the reason why the
Torah doubles it
many times says how much you owe me
because your soul comes up to me every
single night and and you have to give a
judgment
and you're obligated to me then even
though and I'm very nice and every
single morning God returns us our soul
so too even though yes the guy owes you
money and he gave you collateral
take it and give it back to take it and
give it back
every day. Give it to him until sunset
when it comes. You'll go and you'll take
it back
until it comes the next morning.
This is talking about a garment that the
person needs during the day.
Doesn't need it at night.
Verse 26.
For this alone is the person's garment.
This is what he has. He say this is what
he needs for a garment to cover his
skin.
He won't have what to have. He won't
have what to lie down with.
And then he's going to cry out to me and
I will listen [clears throat] because I
am compassionate.
This is the garment that he needs to
wear or the garment of shirt that he has
to wear during the day.
He won't have anything to put on his
bed. Meaning if it's something that he
needs by day, you have to give it to him
that he has it during the day. If it's
something that he will be able to have
it do that will have something to
that'll be able to wear during the day.
And therefore, God says you have to be
compassionate to a person that you are
loaning money to. This concludes the
Torah reading for Tuesday.