English translation — קדושים ב

A.

Regarding the commandment of "measures and weights"

(in our parshah¹)

— about which the Torah says "

(You shall not commit injustice in judgment, in measure, etc., just balances, etc.)

I am the L-rd your G-d who brought you out of the land of Egypt" —

Brings the Rambam²

(from Toras Kohanim³)

: And anyone who denies the commandment of measures

Like one who denies the Exodus from Egypt which is the beginning of the commandment.

And whoever accepts upon himself the commandment of character traits, behold he acknowledges the Exodus from Egypt which caused all the commandments.

What is the connection of "commandment of character traits" specifically to the Exodus from Egypt?

explains the Magid Mishneh⁴

that "one who weighs with a deficient measure is like one who transgresses

a transgression in secret ..

and the Exodus from Egypt had in it novel miracles and they indicate creation ex nihilo and Providence."

One must however understand: also theft is "like one who commits a transgression in secret ..

for he denies <b>Providence</b>⁵

<b> </b><b>And as explained in Chazal</b>⁶

that the severity of theft relative to robbery is because of that which "as it were, made the eye below as if it does not see and the ear etc. does not hear" — and nevertheless it is not stated regarding the general prohibition of theft that "he who denies

(the commandments)

theft is like one who denies the Exodus from Egypt";

And likewise the general prohibition of fraud

in the general prohibition of "Do not⁸

wrong one another, a man his fellow"]

its content is that one <b>cheats</b> the other,

and consequently it is

(exactly like "the commandment of measures")

"like one who commits a transgression in secret ..

that he denies providence",

that he denies providence"⁹.

And likewise regarding many other commandments which are transgressions in secret¹⁰

And the question returns to its place: What is the unique aspect of the mitzvah of measures,

that specifically by it¹¹

is said "one who denies the mitzvah of measures is like one who denies the Exodus from Egypt"?

2.

Also one must understand the language of the Rambam — "And anyone who denies the mitzvah of measures is like one who denies the Exodus from Egypt <b>which is the beginning</b>¹²

<b>of the commandment</b> and anyone who accepts etc. admits to the Exodus from Egypt <b>which caused</b>¹²

<b>all the commandments</b>":

These words

("that it is the beginning of the commandment",

"that it caused all the commandments")

do not stand in the Toras Kohanim

(source of the Rambam),

they are an addition of the Rambam.

It is perplexing at first glance: Does the Rambam need to innovate that the greatness of the Exodus consists of "that it is the beginning of the commandment..

it caused all the commandments"?

! The Rambam could have said only

(as in Toras Kohanim)

"one who denies the Exodus from Egypt"; "one who acknowledges the Exodus from Egypt"?

And on the other hand,

Yetzias Mitzrayim has brought about so many general matters,

and here it picks out

Specifically the Rambam has this matter — that Yetzias Mitzrayim is "the beginning of the commandment",

"caused all the commandments".

Commentators¹³

say,

that that which "one who denies the attributes ..

we consider him as one who denies the Exodus from Egypt" is "because it is the beginning of all the commands and all the commandments that G-d commanded us branch out from the Exodus from Egypt, and thus this one who denies the attributes, which is a branch of the Exodus from Egypt, is like one who denies it."

But prima facie this is forced,

because the same matter

(that "attributes" is a "branch of the Exodus from Egypt")

exists regarding <b>every</b> command of the Torah¹⁴.

3.

And one must say the explanation in this:

The Gemara¹⁵

says that the "prohibition that the Merciful One wrote regarding weights"

(although that "theft¹⁶

is a major [offense]")

opens — "to transgress upon it from the time of <b>making</b>".

And as the Rambam¹⁷

rules: "Anyone who <b>keeps in his house</b>..

a deficient measure ..

transgresses a negative commandment",

And likewise regarding the positive commandment, the Rambam says¹⁸

"It is a positive commandment to give charity

The scales etc. very very precisely and to be precise in their calculation <b>at the time of their making</b> — the prohibition of [using] deficient measures and weights,

does not begin from <b>the monetary loss of one's fellow</b>,

but immediately at the making

(and that it was in his house)

of a deficient measure.

and in the language of the Rambam¹⁹

— "The Torah was stringent regarding measures <b>to any degree</b>"

("even though regarding other thefts the Torah was stringent only [starting from] a perutah"²⁰)

— because the prohibition of measures and weights is not

(merely)

the monetary loss of one's fellow,

but the very existence of the deficient measure].

And one must say,

that the reason of the matter is not only because from the existence of a deficient measure in the house can come a stumbling block²¹

(it can bring to a monetary loss of one's fellow),

but also because the very

existence of the deficient measure <b>in itself</b>²²

is a severe prohibition²³.

The explanation in this:

The difference between measures and weights and other ways of theft and overreaching is:

In other forms of theft and overcharging, the thief has only one desire,

he performs an action through which he takes his fellow's money;

But regarding measures and weights, there are two movements

(opposite)

: the very thing that he is measuring and weighing for his fellow is an expression of a conduct of reckoning with his fellow,

he performs an action that shows a desire not to wrong his fellow²⁴

; and together with this,

he makes a "measure of deficiency" — that the same act of measuring should bring about the theft of his fellow's money!

and therefore the Torah prohibits the very doing

(and it was)

of a measure of deficiency

(even if in practice another will not be harmed by it,

as above)

— because the content of "commandments of measures" is — to negate this cunning²⁵

in the person towards himself*²⁵.

According to this explanation in the material of "mitzvas middos", will also become clear the phrase "all &lt;b&gt;who denies the mitzvos&lt;/b&gt; of middos" — at first glance:

According to the aforementioned explanation of Maggid Mishneh

(that "one who weighs with a deficient measure ..

denies providence")

would at first glance fit more the phrase "all &lt;b&gt;who is not careful&lt;/b&gt; with the mitzvos of middos",

or "does not accept upon himself"

(as the continuation of the language of the Rambam&lt;sup&gt;26&lt;/sup&gt;

"and all who accepts upon himself etc. admits etc.")

and the like&lt;sup&gt;27&lt;/sup&gt;

; how does the phrase "&lt;b&gt;who denies the mitzvos&lt;/b&gt; of middos" fit,

which means

(simply)

that he denies the &lt;b&gt;mitzvah&lt;/b&gt;,

4.

i.e.

that is

he denies that the Almighty commanded regarding middos?

Based on the above, we can explain the phrase "the one who denies the commandments of character traits" — that he denies

In the unique content

(the above)

of "commandments of character traits".

Certainly he believes that the Supreme One prohibited stealing another's money; he denies, however, that the Supreme One commanded regarding the very action

(and that it was)

of a deficient character trait²⁸

(even <b>were it not</b> for the lack of another's money)

due to the cunning in his heart.

And about this the Rambam says²⁹

"And whoever denies the commandments of [ethical] qualities is like one who denies the Exodus from Egypt" — because the concept of the Exodus from Egypt is — according to the view of the Rambam — connected with the fact that the Most High punishes for matters between a person and his fellow not only because of the damage to his fellow,

but because of the very evil heart of the injurer in itself.

As follows.

5.

In the Laws of Repentance³⁰

the Rambam speaks at length about the "great principle ...

the pillar of the Torah"³¹

— "that the Creator does not coerce human beings nor decree upon them to do good or evil"³¹,

and he explains that the Most High's knowledge does not compel man's choice.

Afterwards,

In the continuation of the words³²,

the Rambam asks: "But is it not written in the Torah³³

'And they will enslave them and oppress them' — behold, He decreed upon the Egyptians to do evil,

and it is written³⁴

'And this people will rise up and stray after the gods of the foreigners of the land' — behold, He decreed upon Israel to worship idolatry",

and he answers: "That He did not decree upon a specific known person that he will be the one who strays, but each and every one of those who stray...

If he did not want to worship, he would not have worshipped...

And likewise the Egyptians — each and every one of those Egyptians who distressed and harmed Israel, if he did not want to harm them, the authority was in his hand; He did not decree upon a known person, but informed that the end of his seed is destined to be enslaved in a land not theirs"

: "And we have already said³⁶

that there is no power in man to know how the Holy One, blessed be He, knows future things"].

The Ra'avad³⁷

objects to this and says,

that if "the Creator says to the strayers, 'Why

Zoned and I did not mention you by name so that you would say that I decreed upon you, they will say to the zoners, and upon whom does your decree apply? Upon those who did not zone? Behold, your decree was not fulfilled.

And regarding Egypt he answers³⁷

(in the second answer)

"For the Creator said: 'And they will afflict them' and they worked them <b>with rigor</b> and killed some of them and drowned some of them, as it is said³⁸

I was angry a little and they³⁹

helped for evil, therefore they were punished."

From the fact that the Rambam does <b>not</b> accept the answer of the Ra'avad, the opinion of the Rambam is understood,

that everything that the Egyptians did was included in the decree of the Holy One, blessed be He, "And they will serve them and afflict them."

And regarding the question of the Ra'avad⁴⁰

(that the "zoners" can argue to the Almighty that through them "Your decree was fulfilled")

— one can say according to how the Alter Rebbe explains in Iggeret HaKodesh⁴¹

regarding every injurer and injured,

that "upon the injured <b>it was already decreed from heaven</b>",

and that which the injurer is "liable in human law and in heavenly law" it is "<b>for the evil of his choice</b>",

because "there are many agents to the Omnipresent."

D.

E.

Even though that in practice,

is after the way the injurer had chosen to injure the other,

it is carried out through a decree of Heaven <b>through him</b>,

this is nevertheless not a reason to exempt him from a punishment,

because <b>he</b> did not have to be the agent to do the act of damage

(and many agents are available to the Omnipresent),

and therefore he is punished — "for the evil of his choice".

And likewise in our matter: since the decree of the Holy One, blessed be He, "and they will enslave them and oppress them" could have been carried out through others,

so "each and every one of those who distressed and harmed Israel" was punished "for the evil of his choice".

It follows automatically,

that the punishment

(Plagues)

upon the Egyptians is not from the aspect of the "damage" that the Jews suffered from this

— upon Jews it was already decreed anyway that they should go through the affliction of "and they will enslave them and afflict them" —

Only on "the evil of their choice",

on the wickedness of the heart⁴²

of the Egyptians,

that they chose to be oppressors to Israel

(and consequently through them the decree was carried out)⁴³.

6.

And seemingly one should add to this,

and with the preface:

The above explanation of the Rambam regarding the decree of "And they will enslave them and afflict them" is seemingly a sufficient answer only regarding the &lt;b&gt;Egyptians&lt;/b&gt;,

because each individual Egyptian had the choice not to afflict the Jews and the decree would have been carried out through others;

But regarding &lt;b&gt;Pharaoh&lt;/b&gt; king of Egypt

that "he sinned of himself first and did evil to Israel who dwelt in his land" and afterwards his punishment was "to prevent repentance from him until He took vengeance upon him"]

— it is not possible to answer thus,

because the decree of the Holy One, blessed be He, "And they will enslave them and afflict them" had to be carried out through the &lt;b&gt;king&lt;/b&gt; of the land who would decree upon his people to enslave the Jews&lt;sup&gt;45&lt;/sup&gt;.

It follows,

that from the side of the decree of "And they will enslave them and afflict them" &lt;b&gt;Pharaoh&lt;/b&gt;

(at least)

was compelled to enslave the Jews&lt;sup&gt;46&lt;/sup&gt;.

One must say,

that although the decree had to be carried out through Pharaoh — nevertheless,

since Pharaoh did it <b>not</b> in order to fulfill the decree of the Holy One, blessed be He, "And they will serve them and afflict them,"

but from <b>his</b> wickedness of heart,

he was punished "for the evil of his choice"⁴⁷.

although "the Holy One, blessed be He, knows all that will be"⁴⁸,

because that which the person chooses evil is not from the knowledge of the Holy One, blessed be He, but from <b> </b><b>his choice</b>⁴⁹].

It turns out,

that regarding <b>Pharaoh</b>,

that the decree of ,

"And they will serve them and they will afflict them" was initially set up that it should be carried out through him,

is his punishment entirely⁵⁰

connected with his wickedness of the heart⁵¹.

Z.

According to the above regarding the content of the prohibition of "measurements of commandments",

it is to be explained why the Rambam chooses specifically <b>this</b> matter in the Exodus from Egypt "which is the beginning of the commandment" — because thereby he indicates the special severity of "measurements of commandments" regarding other prohibitions of theft etc.:

The reason of the matter that the Torah prohibits specifically the actual doing

(and the tarrying)

of a deficient quality — is because the cunning in the heart of a person is the root and beginning of all other matters of theft.

The beginning of theft and fraud is in this,

that before he fell until

So much so to want to steal from the other,

he only wants to measure and weigh for his fellow with a calculation — only

(without precision)

he mixes in dishonesty,

to measure with a deficient measure.

And afterwards he descends from one level to another until to overcharging and theft,

regarding which from the outset there is only one desire — to take the money of his fellow unlawfully.

And therefore,

comparing "commandments of measures" with "the Exodus from Egypt"

(from the aspect of the common point in them,

as above section d-e),

the Rambam emphasizes the matter in the Exodus from Egypt "which is the &lt;b&gt;beginning&lt;/b&gt; of the commandment",

to bring out how here it is about matters which are "beginning"; the commandment of measures which is the "beginning" of the commandments of theft and overcharging,

has in itself the same "characteristic" of "the beginning of the commandment" &lt;b&gt;of the entire Torah&lt;/b&gt; — the Exodus from Egypt.

8.

In greater depth

(And in the manner of mussar)

One should add,

then “the beginning of the commandment” — the foundation of the entire Torah — is connected with the caution in “commandments of character traits.”

And as it is also hinted in the words of the midrash⁵²

that “for this sin

(because of weights)

came Amalek”

(in Parshat Teitzei)

the portion of Amalek to the portion of weights

("Not⁵³

shall you have etc. stone and stone etc. ephah and ephah etc.)]

— that Amalek came "&lt;b&gt;on the way when you went out of Egypt&lt;/b&gt;"⁵⁴,

In the preparation days for receiving the Torah,

Because Amalek is "the <b>first</b> of nations"⁵⁵,

The root and beginning of all matters of opposition to Torah.

And seemingly: What is so the "outcry" of the sin of weights,

That because of this there should be "And Amalek came"⁵⁶?

Is from this itself proven,

that the sin of weights pertains to the fulfillment of the entire Torah as a whole.

9.

The explanation in this:

Jews are indeed "children to the L-rd your G-d"⁵⁷,

"the portion of the L-rd is His people"⁵⁸.

How is it possible that the evil inclination can persuade a Jew to commit a sin?

The answer to this is — sin of weights: the evil inclination does not come <b>ab initio</b> to a Jew that he should rebel against the Holy One, blessed be He,

rather today it says to him⁵⁹

etc. — it tries to make a deficiency in his "measure".

It agrees that one must conduct oneself

(in general)

with a "measure",

according to the measures and limits of the Shulchan Aruch; it argues, however, that it does not matter if the measure should be "deficient"

(and in particular if it is merely some deficiency).

Furthermore: it even agrees that the Jew should have a "stone

(weight)

complete and just"⁶⁰

: He argues, however, that in <b>addition</b> to the "complete stone",

he should have yet a stone that is not complete — "a stone and a stone etc. an ephah and an ephah, great and small"⁶¹.

He argues that among Jews there are two "measures" — regarding matters of the soul,

the spiritual matters of man,

there it is indeed relevant that the "measure" should be exactly according to the measures and limits of the Shulchan Aruch: But when it comes to matters of the body,

the physical needs of man — there one may adjust the "measure",

so that it should be in accordance with the "measures" of the ways of the world,

until as above,

(Today He says to him: do thus etc. until)

He says to him: worship idolatry."

And therefore the sin of weights is connected with "And Amalek came"62 — because the beginning of "his coming" of

(the husk)

Amalek into a Jew is not a movement of <b>open</b> rebellion against G‑d,

but that he casts in <b>doubts</b> — Amalek in gematria is doubt⁶³

a matter of <b>doubt</b>].

And the doubt — the absence of <b>intensity</b> of faith

(which permeates all parts of a person equally)

— is "the beginning

Gentiles",

the root and beginning of all evil matters.

And therefore,

through that which one is careful in measures and weights — one has only <b>one</b> and only "a complete and just ephah" for <b>all</b> matters of man — it brings to

Fulfillment of the entire Torah,

And in the language of the Rambam: And whoever accepts upon himself the commandments of the attributes, behold he admits to the Exodus from Egypt, which caused all the commandments.

(From the talks of Shabbos Parshas Vayeishev 5746,

Purim 5722)