Talmidav Shel Aharon
30-5768: Mitzvah N-33
August 5, 2008

Negative Mitzvah 33 – This is a negative commandment: do not kidnap a living Jew.

Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “You shall not steal.” (Ex. 20:13). The Sages of blessed memory learned (Talmud Sanhedrin 86a) that this is an admonition to one who would kidnap a living Jew. If he sells him into slavery he likewise violates a negative commandment, since that is covered by the injunction, “They shall not be sold as slaves” (Lev. 25:42) a kidnapper is not punishable by death until he steals away an Israelite, takes him into his domain and makes use of him, and sells him to others. If he sold the man to the father or brother of the one who was kidnapped, he would be free of punishment. It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.

Once again, the Ten Commandments doesn’t say what we think it says. On the surface, when it says, “You shall not steal” we would think that it refers to the theft of someone’s “stuff” (chattels as it is called in the legal literature). But stealing property is covered by the law in Leviticus 19:11. The Rabbis also noted that the prohibition against stealing is found between the laws of murder and adultery, both capital crimes. Stealing property did not seem to fit, so they interpreted this law to be a ban on kidnapping.

There are two other places where this law is mentioned. Exodus 21:16 and Deut. 24:7 and there are some discrepancies between them. Exodus refers to the kidnapping of all people but Deut. seems to limit the law to kidnapping Jews. It reconcile the many differences between these two verses, the sages limited the charge of Kidnapping to those who abduct, detain, enslave and sell a human being. Without all four parts, a kidnapper could not be put to death. The crime may be reprehensible, but not a capital offence. This is the reason that the sale of the man to his father or brother would not make him guilty of any offence. The brother or father would be buying the man, not for slavery, but to redeem him from captivity. (Redeeming from captivity would be a positive mitzvahfor the family.)

Without all four elements, there could be no punishment for the kidnapper at all since any one element missing, would make the act incomplete and not a “real kidnapping.”

The Hafetz Hayim seems to limit this law to Jews but my sources informed me that it applies to all human beings. Kidnapping and the sale of those people into slavery is forbidden for all people.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
29-5768: Mitzvah N-32
July 30, 2008

Negative Mitzvah 32 – This is a negative commandment: do not kill a living human being
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “You shall not murder.” (Ex. 20:13). If someone kills a human being deliberately, his execution should be by the sword (decapitation). If he did not kill him with his own hand but only caused his death, he is not subject to execution by court verdict, but is punishable by death at heaven’s hands. If someone destroys even one living person in Jewry, it is as though he made a whole world perish. If someone closes a person’s eyes at the departure of his life (instead of afterward) he thus sheds blood (by shortening the other’s life, however briefly. It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.

The Ten Commandments do not say, “You shall not kill” it says instead, “You shall not murder”. Murder here is the taking of another human life. It does not matter if that life is Jewish or not. Taking a human life is a capital crime in all cases. The Torah is clear, if you murder, you are executed. Of the four types of capital punishment, the one used for murder is decapitation. The later rabbis ruled that if you injure someone, even though the Torah requires “eye for an eye” we set a value on the injury and the one who injures pays that amount to the one injured. The Torah, however, forbids ransoming someone accused of murder. There can be no valuation placed on the taking of a life. The murderer must die. Maybe!
The Sages of the Talmud did not want to execute murderers. They declared that a court that sentences on person to death in seven years was a “hanging court”. Other Rabbis declared that if they were on that court, it would not happen once in seventy years. The Sages understood that such a position might encourage murder but then again, they could turn their condemned over to the Romans for punishment.
How could they reverse a plain, clear law from the Torah? They really didn’t. The law is still on the books, The Sages just made it very difficult to get a clear conviction. There had to be two witnesses to the murder, that is, they had to see the actual killing. (Seeing a man holding a bloody sword over a dead body was not proof enough for the court). That alone is rare. The witnesses could not be relatives of the victim or the killer making getting a witness very difficult. The witnesses had to be warned that if they were plotting to testify falsely, the execution they plotted for the defendant would be carried out on them instead. There were no jury trials but the court would have seventy one judges and to execute the defendant, they needed not a simple majority but 50% plus two. To acquit, however, they only needed 50% plus one. In all other cases the elder judges spoke before the younger colleagues. In capital cases, the younger colleagues voted first so as not to be swayed by their more experienced colleagues. A man was presumed innocent until proven guilty and once acquitted; the defendant could not be tried again for the same crime. We see that it was very hard to convict in a capital case. Why then did they just take capital punishment off the books? Because they felt that from time to time there may be a need to execute a criminal in unusual circumstances. In the Middle Ages, for example, the community might execute a person convicted of informing against the community to the non-Jewish authorities in order to bring down a pogrom or riot in which many could be killed. Even with all the terrorists in Israeli prisons, only one person has ever been executed in Israel, for a crime so great it warranted this one exception: Adof Eichmann.
Accidental killing is not the same as murder and the one who kills without premeditation is not put to death. It is in the hands of Heaven if he will die a premature death. Soldiers and those who were defending themselves or others from deadly force could use deadly force themselves to prevent killing. This too is allowed. This law, interestingly enough, is also used to allow an abortion to protect the health of the mother. The fetus endangering his mother is called “one who pursues with murderous intent” and can be killed before he kills his victim (in this case, his mother).
The Rabbis noted that G-d created only one person, Adam, in the divine image in order to teach that whoever takes one life, it is as if he has killed an entire world. The killer has not killed just one person but he has also killed all the descendants of that person. If a human being is created in the image of G-d, then the one who kills a person is guilty of desecrating the image of G-d as well as killing a human being. It is a very grave crime.
The final note has to do with euthanasia. We are not allowed to end a life even one moment before they are destined to die. Even when a person is breathing their last breaths, we don’t touch them or interfere with their passing. To close the eyes of someone who is dying but not yet dead, is a final insult to the dying and is declared to be as if one has hastened the death and therefore a murderer, even though the person was dying anyway. We can remove things that prevent a person from dying but we can not hasten the natural progression of death without being called a murderer.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
28-5768: Mitzvah N-31
July 15, 2008

Negative Mitzvah 31 – This is a negative commandment: do not swear an oath of expression over a falsehood.

Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “and you shall not swear by my name falsely.” (Lev. 19:12). This is called an oath of expression. A person is punishable for this if he takes a [false] oath over things that are possible to do, whether in the future or the past. For example, “That I ate” or “I threw a stone into the sea.”or that so and so spoke to so and so” “that I did not eat” or “I did not throw a stone into the sea” or “so and so did not talk to so and so”. And in the future: for example, “ That I shall eat,” or “I shall not eat” or “I will throw a pebble or stone into the sea” or “I will not throw.” If a person swore to one of these statements, he would violate this prohibition. It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.

In keeping with the theme of the importance of words, we have the rules about more standard oaths. When one would offer an oath, it would include the Name of G-d and would be spoken in the presence of the court or witnesses. The value of this oath was to testify about something when another witness was not present or about an intention that no one else can know. The examples here are the mundane activities of life. We don’t go around looking for witnesses every time we want to do something. We go to lunch, talk to those around us and take little notice of it until it becomes important. When someone else gets into trouble, we want to help if we can.
The reminder here is that we are forbidden to speak a falsehood even about the most mundane activity. G-d’s name is involved and we have to be meticulous about how we use that name. If we know that we are being asked to swear to something, even in the future, we have to make sure that we only speak what is true. Maybe you meant to eat but for some reason you didn’t eat that meal that day. Maybe you always see two people together for lunch but you are not sure that on the particular day in question, they were in their usual seat. Just because you always go on a picnic in the park during the summer, does not mean that you can swear that you will be in the park this coming weekend since weather and a host of family issues could prevent this from happening.
Do we really remember what we had for lunch last Tuesday? Even if we always eat at the same sandwich shop, are we sure that last Tuesday was the exception, or perhaps this coming Tuesday will be different. You could get sick, the office could close early, the diner could burn down. This mitzvah teaches us to watch our words and make sure that we don’t swear to something that, later, could prove to be wrong or false. This would damage our reputation and would damage G-d’s reputation as well. We need to keep our daily dairy current and refer back to it before we invoke it before we take any oaths.
The later Rabbis did not like oaths for this reason. It is too easy to make a false oath like these and they would undermine the entire legal system. Better to avoid as many oaths as possible.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
27-5768: Mitzvah N-30
June 23, 2008

Negative Mitzvah 30 – This is a negative commandment: do not swear falsely over the denial of a monetary matter.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “nor shall you lie one to another.” (Lev. 19:11). If someone sues his fellow human being for something of value (excluding land or deeds) worth from a peruta (the smallest coin) and up, where if the other admitted it he would be obligated to pay (excluding cases of fines) but he denied it and took an oath, or the claimant (plaintiff) pronounced an oath on him and he denied it (falsely) – the defendant is punishable, even if he did not answer “amen”. This is known as an oath over a Pikadon (an object entrusted for safekeeping) and he is obligated to pay the principal (original amount) and a fifth. Whoever violates this prohibition violates also violates the injunction, “and you shall not swear by my name falsely,” (Lev. 19:12) which applies to an oath of expression. (See next week’s lesson). If a person denies his fellow human being’s claim to landed property or deeds and he swears falsely, although hi is free of penalty over an oath of pikadon, he is nevertheless liable on account of an oath of expression, since he swore to a lie. It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.

In the ancient world, words were very important and an oath to G-d was a very serious legal matter. When there was something brought to court that could came down to a dispute between two parties and there was no other proof except for the claims that each was making. The court could demand an oath from one or the other or from both parties as to their side of the story. Many times someone would rather pay the damages than take an oath that perhaps could turn out to be false. In our case here a person has been given an object of value to safeguard for someone else. For example, you give a friend your antique vase to keep in their home while your house is under repair. For some reason the vase disappears or is damaged. Your friend is only liable for the disappearance or damage if it can be shown that he did not take due care with the vase. One can be pretty careful with something that belongs to someone else and still there could be damage. Clearly your friend is not responsible for an earthquake or a violent home invasion. It is still hard to prove if the friend did take good care of the object or not. Since the friend was not paid to guard the vase, rather he was just a volunteer, the court allows him to swear an oath that he was indeed careful with the vase and the friend cannot force him to page damages.
But if it can be proven in another way that the friend did not take all normal precautions, but carried it around all day and to show it off to friends and left it by an open window all day and night where the weather and thieves could easily damage it, then the friend has sworn a false oath and he must pay for the vase, pay a fine of 1/5th the value of the vase. He is also in violation of the law of swearing a false oath which we will deal with in our next lesson.
If land or property deeds were given over for safe keeping, the law different and one does not take an oath like the unpaid watchman of a movable object, rather the issue is usually who is the owner of the land. He can swear that he is the rightful owner. If it is found later that he lied about his ownership, then the only punishment is because he took a false oath, he does not pay damages or the fine.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
27-5768: Mitzvah N-29
May 26, 2008

Negative Mitzvah 29 – This is a negative commandment: Do not swear in vain.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “You shall not take the name of the Lord your G-d in vain.” (Ex. 20:7). A vain oath is divided into four categories: 1. If one swears to a change in something known: for example, if he swears about a man that he is a woman or about a stone that it is gold. 2. if he swears to no purpose; for example, he takes an oath about a stone that it is a stone. 3. If he takes an oath to fail to observe a mitzvah. 4. If he swears to do something which is impossible to fulfill; for example, that he will not sleep for three days in a row, or that he will taste no food for seven days in a row. Over every one of these oaths, if he swore it willfully, he should receive whiplashes; and if it was unwittingly, he is free of penalty. If someone says a benediction in vain [needlessly] or he utters the name of G-d to no purpose, he violates the injunction, “You shall not take the name f the Lord your G-d in vain.” It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.

When it comes to using G-d’s name, there are two possible uses. One is to invoke holiness and the other is using it improperly for shock value. The purpose of a vain oath is either for its shock value or else we have to assume that this person is a fool. Let’s take a look at the four examples. In the first case, he does not have to swear at all. Anyone can see for themselves what the correct answer is. Why should he have to use G-d’s name to prove that a man is a woman or a stone is really gold? It is easy to prove him right or wrong without his taking an oath. An oath would only be necessary if there was no other way to know the status; For example, if the person in question was missing at sea or if the stone in question were lost.
In the second case he is taking an oath about something that is already known to everyone. A proper oath would be to testify about something that nobody else would know. The testimony is the only proof of that can be obtained. If everyone knows the information and it is accepted by the court as true, then what reason would he have to swear in G-d’s name? In the third case, he is taking an oath to disobey the law. He thus gets stuck in a dilemma, should he keep the law, he breaks his oath (and the law), if he keeps his oath he has broken the law. The mitzvah is more important and the oath is in vain. Finally, in the last case, the oath is in vain because it can never be fulfilled. It is one thing to promise to give ten percent to charity if one wins a million dollars. This is a legitimate oath. But if he promises to give a million dollars to charity and does not have that kind of money to give, then the oath is in vain. All of these oaths are vain oaths. They are not only a waste of time, breath and court resources, but there is no holiness that comes from them. It is only the shock value of making such an oath and this is the sin involved.
We see the same issues arise at the end of the teaching, when it is extended to blessings or curses. There are some who interpret this prohibition against blessings broadly, explaining that you can only say a blessing one time. Such people get themselves in trouble if they forget if they said the blessing or not or discover that they may or may not have said it correctly. I prefer to keep this interpretation narrow. It is not an issue to me if one forgets if the blessing was said to say it over. The intention of the blessing remains the same; to bring holiness into the moment of prayer. If one is teaching a blessing than it is also permitted to say the blessing over and over again to learn it properly. If one has said the blessing and then leads others in the same blessing, I still believe that holiness is still being brought into the world. If one is making fun of the blessings or is mindlessly repeating it over and over this would be a violation of this mitzvah. (This is why we don’t make popular music out of the words of a blessing).
Cursing through the use of G-d’s name, with its ability to shock and without any aspect of holiness, is always a sin.
I should also mention that these laws do not apply to every name of G-d. There are actually dozens of names for G-d that appear in sacred literature. There are only seven names whose use is regulated by this mitzvah, and only the Hebrew words make one liable. This includes the four letter name of G-d that is never pronounced as well as Elohim and Shaddai. These names, in Hebrew, must be not be destroyed but placed in a Geniza (a special place for sacred texts) and may not be used in vain.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
26-5768: Mitzvah N-28
May 12, 2008

Negative Mitzvah 28 – This is a negative commandment: Do not make gashes or incisions in one’s flesh in idol-worship or [in grief] over one’s dead.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “you shall not gash yourselves” (Deut. 14:1). Whoever cuts his flesh in grief over his dead violates this prohibition, whether he makes the gash by hand or with an instrument. In idol-worship, however, if he uses an instrument his is punished by whiplashes, but if he uses his hand, he is free of penalty. Included in this law is the warning not to separate into agudot, (groups). This teaches us that there should not be two religious courts in town, one following one practice and one following another practice. It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.

The first part of this commandment is pretty easy to explain. First of all, in Judaism, we do not own our bodies. Our bodies are a gift from G-d and we use them as long as G-d is willing to let us. In this sense, we only rent our bodies for the duration of our life and we have, therefore an obligation to take care of our bodies. When we get sick, we must seek healing. We need to eat healthy foods, exercise and make sure our body is as healthy as can be. Drugs and excessive alcohol are forbidden as is tobacco. We are not permitted to over pierce our body or decorate it with tattoos. It only follows that we cannot scar or maim our bodies, especially in the name of an idol or on behalf of the dead. Cutting for idols is clearly forbidden and the punishment is set. Ritual gashing is done with a ritual knife, so if one gashes by hand, then this law does not apply. Gashing for the dead is a sign of grief so it does not matter how you do the slashing, it is all forbidden. Just as one should not spend too much to bury the dead, I can see here a similar problem. Just how much pain should I endure to show how much I loved the one who died? The more gashes, the more blood, the more love? We can see where this is going. Jewish law would have us rip our clothing to mourn the dead, one rip, over the heart. That is all that is allowed. Our grief is enough pain without the added pain of gashing our bodies.

The second part seems to be honored in the breach more than in reality. I can think of few times in Jewish History where the Jewish People were not divided into camps. Orthodox, Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist are only the most modern divisions. In Israel there are Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities, Hasidic and Mitnagdic, and the Hasidim are divided into even smaller camps. The sages were divided into the schools of Hillel and Shammai, into political camps of Pharisees and Sadducees. The priests who worked in the Temple were divided into “families” who were rivals of each other. You get the picture. We are not a very unified people. The trick is not to divide into sects that don’t talk to each other and who do not intermarry with each other. We may divide ourselves into groups that don’t agree with each other, but there are only rare moments in Jewish History where we were so divided that we stopped talking and intermarrying with each other. Underneath it all, we are still Jews.

The most famous schism was the one that opened up between Rabbinic Judaism and the Jews who were followers of Jesus of Nazareth. Eventually, there was no reconciliation possible and the two groups moved off in separate ways and began to see each other as new religions. Other than this one historical event, we may not agree on much but we agree that we are all Jews. The rest is just details. In Israel today, there is a movement against the official “Rabbanut” because they are becoming so particular in how one proves one is Jewish, that the rest of the country is almost in rebellion against them. We will see how it plays out. In any event, our communities, both here and in Israel have many different rabbinical courts. The Hafetz Hayim is making his pitch for Jewish unity, but that is an ideal, not the reality of Judaism, neither in history nor today.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
25-5768: Mitzvah N-27
May 5, 2008

Negative Mitzvah 27 – This is a negative commandment: Do not prophesize in the name of an idol. Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “and make no mention of the name of other gods” (Ex. 23:13). His death (if one does prophesy so) is by strangulation, even if he spoke in the name of an idol and was in accord with Halacha (definitive law), to declare the defiled unclean and the pure clean. It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.
We can understand the prohibition against idolatry when it is commanding us to do something that is forbidden by Jewish law. But here, the real issue is when an idol commands us to do exactly what G-d would have us do. This sounds like a rather innocuous idol. What could be the harm in it? Does it really matter if we say we worship G-d or an idol as long as, in the end, we have the same moral laws and the same religious activities? If the result is the same, who cares how we get there?
I almost sounds like someone in a cult declaring that there is no difference between what they promote and what we already have. It is only slowly, over time that differences become apparent and we are encouraged to slowly “evolve” our understanding of Judaism to fit with the “new” or “ancient” “improvements” that the new religion entails. After all, this is how Christianity separated itself from Judaism, by slowly, over time, changing the rules for those who professed to be followers of Jesus. It is a time-honored way of enticing people away from the faith of their ancestors.
It is all the more effective if there is a “Jew” who is doing the enticing (and we can see why an group like Jews for Jesus uses “rabbis” in their churches) it makes it all the more comfortable when one begins and the changes can be slow and small until a whole new religion is being practiced.
Again, I want to state that Judaism does not see Christianity and Islam as pagan religions and they would not fall under this ban if someone were to teach a class, for example in Islamic theology. Those who don’t like what other Jews are teaching as differences in Jewish law have also abused it. One does not incur the death penalty for not holding a “glatt” standard when it comes to Kashrut.
Jews have been enticed for thousands of years to come and join other faiths that were “almost” the same as what we already practice. Our response has always been the same, “You can worship how and whom you please but for me and my family, we will follow the Lord our G-d and the G-d of our ancestors”.

Talmidav Shel Aharon

24-5768: Mitzvah N-23-24-25-26

April 28, 2008

Negative Mitzvah 23 – This is a negative commandment: Do not entice a Jew to worship an idol.

Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “If your brother… entices you secretly, saying, “Let us go and serve other gods” … Then all Israel shall hear and shall fear, and shall never again do any such wickedness as this.” (Deut. 13:7,12). If anyone entices a Jew to worship idols , whether he entices him speaking in the plural or in the singular, he is to be stoned to death, even if neither the entices nor the enticed person worshipped any idols. – but [he deserves death] only because he instructed him to worship An enticer needs no prior warning to warrant the death penalty. It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.

Negative Mitzvah 24 – This is a negative commandment: Pay no attention to one who entices you to worship idols.

Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “You shall not befriend him.” (Deut. 13:9).



Negative Mitzvah 25 – This is a negative commandment: You shall not quit hating the enticer

Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “neither shall you listen to him.” (Deut. 13:9).

Negative Mitzvah 26 – This is a negative commandment: Do not rescue the enticer from danger.

Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “nor shall your eye pity him.” (Deut. 13:9).



The Torah starts in a difficult position. Israelites are about to enter a new land that has been promised to their ancestors. The problem is that it is filled with idolaters. Many of these will be killed in the conquest. Some will flee the invading Israelite army. Some will join with the invaders and become a part of the religion of Israel. But there will be some who will stay and in their own personal way, continue to worship the traditional idols of the area. Remember, idols were particular to a neighborhood. One worshiped the local gods who knew the specific needs of those who lived there. These secret idolaters are good people; they work hard and try to earn a living for themselves and their families. Maybe they do better than others and the local Israelites ask what is the secret to his success. Maybe there is a drought, or a flood, or a fire or blight and the Israelites wonder why things have turned bad. What is a secret idolater to do? He calls aside a trusted friend and confides that the local gods are angry with the Israelites and if they just go up that mountain over there and put a small offering on the large rock under the tree, things will get better. Nobody has to know.

In many ways it is like sharing gardening tips with your neighbors except that these tips involve corrupting your religion. It means having to make a choice between being faithful or being successful. Judaism knows that this kind of a choice will undermine all that our faith stands for. It takes our reason and laws and begins the slow slide into superstition and magic.

Now we can understand why there can be no compromise with pagans. Their faith needs to be removed from the land and we must not show them any pity. For they sit in waiting for our faith to falter and then they begin to creep in and cause us to question what we believe. This is not the same as living in an open society and letting each one practice what they believe, this is about an insidious undermining of what Judaism stands for.

The list of negative commandments appears to be strong and the punishments are strict. Even if we agree that the death penalty is no longer in use in Judaism, it still creates a strong wall of separation that can not be crossed even if want to treat the pagan as a human being.

I prefer to see this entire series as a reminder that we can not let even the slightest trace of other gods into the realm of true religion. It is not so much about how we treat one who would entice us away from our faith, but about how strong we must be in the face of religions that have as their only good point the fact that they are part of a majority culture. Is paganism a majority culture today? Well, let’s just say that “American Idol” would not be the same show if it was about a competition to find the greatest educator or the finest poet. Perhaps these laws remind us that just because someone declares “This is your god!” doesn’t make them anything other than a call to suspend our logic and our power of reason. These are hard lessons for the human psyche. We must not give even a toehold to those who preach magic and superstition. Don’t have pity on them, just walk away.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
23-5768: Mitzvah N-21-22
April 14, 2008

Negative Mitzvah 21 – This is a negative commandment: Do not follow the customs of the heathen.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “And in their statutes you shall not walk” (Lev. 18:3). One is not to emulate them in any way of dress that is distinctive for them, nor let the locks of the hair grow. Neither is one to shave the hair at the sides, leaving the hair in the middle of the head, which is called a crest. Neither is one to shave the hair in apposition to the face, from ear to ear, leaving a long growth behind him. Whoever does any one of these, or anything similar, is to receive whiplashes. If someone is close to the ruling circles of government and he needs to dress in their kind of clothes and emulate them, he is permitted. It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.

Negative Mitzvah 22 – This is a negative commandment: Pay no heed a person prophesying in the name of an idol.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “You shall not listen to the words of that prophet.” (Deut. 13:4). One should not get into any long discussion with him or ask for a sign or a wonder. If he performed a sign or a wonder, no attention is to be paid him. Whoever thinks of a sign of his that perhaps it is true, violates this prohibition. It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.

In Mitzvah 21, the Hafetz Hayim is concerned that by mimicking the practices of pagans, we will come to follow their lure. Judaism was a minority religion and if we do not maintain or special practices, than it is so easy to slip away into the majority religion. Even last weeks lesson, which spoke of intermarriage, it was always assumed in pre-modern times, that the majority religion would eventually pull the Jew away from the Jewish faith. Many Jewish rituals are designed to keep Jews separate and apart from the rest of the world and to uphold the unique elements of our faith.
The thrust of this mitzvah is not to go around looking like a pagan. It is not about refraining from a “Mohawk haircut” but trying to look like something that you are not. We have evidence, in Greco-Roman times of Jews, wanting to participate in gymnastic games that were always performed nude. Such Jews were embarrassed by their circumcision and actually had “surgery” (a very crude plastic surgery) to make it look like they were not circumcised. That is how far they were prepared to go to look like everyone else. Many cults insist on certain types of clothing and haircuts to this day to help identify followers. Jewish history is filled with people who dressed like pagans because they had jobs that put them in contact with pagans everyday and they needed to look like those they served (the Talmud often mentions Barbers as wearing their hair in pagan styles). It was not forbidden, but the Sages always tried to get Jews to look like Jews.
This is not about fashion necessarily. Much of what is fashionable today may be a violation of modesty rules in Judaism, but would not constitute looking like a pagan. But note that many signs of royalty and government also use religious symbols and if that is part of the “job” of working for government, this could be of help to the Jewish people in a time of trouble (think Queen Esther) and it is permitted to dress like a pagan.
In Mitzvah 22, the issue that it raises for us today relates directly to cults. Signs and wonders are very interesting things to see. There is no prohibition of attending a magic show or a “wonders of Science” show. The trouble begins in the interpretation of the “wonder”. If the result is given a “religious” interpretation, it is a sign that Jews need to get away quick. Cults depend on such interpretations to gather in members, using these wonders to convince others of the importance of the cult and its leader. For a long time Jews seemed to be the primary targets of such cults, unable to see that the connection between wonder and explanation was at fault. It does no good at all to enter into the discussions over the merit of the wonder or not. And here it does not matter if we are talking about cults, missionaries, or anyone else trying to convince a Jew that this religion is better because of this wonder or sign. We are not to argue with them, or show them the error of their ways, we are to pay no attention and walk away. We are not even allowed to consider if the wonder may be true or not.
So does this leave us in the dark about modern discoveries in science and the natural world? Again, the issue is not the wonder, but the explanation of the wonder. As long as it does not demand that we give up our faith, we can study and learn. As soon as it is used to “prove” that they are right and we are wrong, it is prohibited.

Talmidav Shel Aharon
22-5768: Mitzvah N-19-20
April 7, 2008

Negative Mitzvah 19 – This is a negative commandment: Do not intermarry with a non-Jewish person.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “Neither shall you make marriages with them.” (Deut. 7:3). It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.

Negative Mitzvah 20 – This is a negative commandment: Have no mercy on idol-worshippers.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “nor shall you show mercy to them.” (Deut. 7:2). If someone sees an idol-worshipper drowning, he is not to save him. In his illness, he is not to cure him. If he is afraid of him or there is the consideration of consequent enmity, let him cure him for a fee, but not for free. It is, however, forbidden to end the man’s life with one’s own hands or toe push him into a pit and so on, if the other makes no hostile attack against him. One is not to give him any free gift, nor is one to speak his praise, and all the more certainly not in praise of his actions. It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.

The Hafetz Hayyim lets Mitzvah 19 go without comment because, for him, it is evident and plain to see that intermarriage leads to idolatry. It happened in the Torah, in Parshat Balak, and it happens in the rest of the Bible over and over again. A non-Jewish spouse leads one away from the faith of one’s ancestors. This is one of the main reasons that paganism was to be kept far away from Israel and from Jews. One can even claim that the laws of Shabbat and Kashrut were designed to keep Jews and non-Jews from mixing in social situations, whether they are of a religious nature or not. Judaism does not recognize marriages between Jews and non-Jews. This is why there is no reason to have a Rabbi perform an intermarriage. The entire wedding ceremony presumes a marriage between Jews. The wedding would have no meaning if one of the parties does not claim to be a part of the Jewish people.
For the Hafetz Hayim, a Jew who married a non-Jew was lost to the Jewish people. Whatever Jewish customs they might maintain would almost certainly be lost in the next generation.
Today, there are families that intermarry and choose to maintain ties to Judaism. It is often a very difficult road and statistically, the next generation has a much less connection to Judaism. This, of course, does not apply if one person converts to Judaism. In this case, it is a marriage between two Jews and does not fall under the prohibition above. We live in a world where people do what they feel they need to do but living in a home where there are two religions is hard for the couple and hard on their children. We find that homes should have one faith to raise the children and the time to address this is before the marriage. As I said, it is not impossible for intermarriage to work, it is just very hard and one faith or the other will fade into the background, as the other becomes a larger part of family life. The vast majority of the literature on dual faith families is that children raised with two faiths, will, in the end, practice none.
Mitzvah 20 is complex for the Hafetz Hayim but far less for us. Jewish History is filled with Jews who worked on behalf of ancient and modern empires and faiths and did not follow the strict, almost bigoted, rules above. The Talmud states that one is to treat every non-Jew as one would treat a Jew if, for no other reason than “for the sake of peace” a topic the Hafetz Hayim touches on briefly in the explanation of the Mitzvah. If they are drowning, let me make this clear, we rescue them (as long as we do not endanger our own lives in the process; we are not allowed to save any other person, Jew or non-Jew if we endanger our own life). We treat the non-Jew and the Jew the same way when it comes to medicine and healing (The State of Israel heals Palestinian sick every day, ignoring borders and family connections). We treat the property of the non-Jew as if it was our own property and we return lost animals to non-Jews as we would return the lost animal of a Jew.
Also, it is forbidden to kill any human being for any reason or to endanger their lives in any way. All human beings are created in G-d’s image and all life must be treated as holy. We cannot be best friends with an idolater nor can we join them socially, but we do have to act to them as human beings who deserve basic human rights and privileges. This is not Conservative Judaism but all found in basic Jewish texts. There has always bee this trend in Judaism to favor Jews and reject all contact with non-Jews. It is always a minority opinion and the majority of Jewish sources insist that we treat all people fairly and with justice. Also, I remind everyone again, that Christianity and Islam are not considered pagan in Jewish legal circles.
In our interfaith world, we can learn about the faiths of others as long as they do not try to convert us to their faith by enticement or by force. Short of proselytizing, a non-Jew must be treated as we would a Jew in every other basic civic situation.