Ramban on Ki Seitzei

AI-Generated Summary (AI can be inaccurate. Check important information):

This shiur explores various insights from the Ramban on Parshat Ki Teitzei, focusing on the rationales behind specific biblical commandments and their impact on human character. The discussion highlights that many punishments, such as those for the wayward son or the false witness, serve as deterrents to protect society rather than being purely punitive for the act itself. Ultimately, the Ramban concludes that the mitzvos were given for the benefit and refinement of man’s soul, rather than for the sake of the Almighty, teaching us to avoid cruelty and maintain the presence of the Divine within the Jewish people.

1. Psychological adjustment in war — The aveilus of the yefas toar is not just for her own sake or to make her unattractive, but to allow her to psychologically come to terms with her new reality.
2. Hedonism as a violation — A ben sorer u-moreh is punished partly for violating kedoshim tihyu, showing that excessive indulgence in kosher pleasures like meat and wine is a serious spiritual failure.
3. Punishment as a deterrent — Certain individuals like the ben sorer u-moreh, zakein mamre, edim zomemim, and meisis are executed not solely for their past actions but as a necessary deterrent for the nation.
4. Mitzvos benefit man — A fundamental principle in the Ramban is that God does not "need" our mitzvos; rather, they are given entirely for the refinement and benefit of the human soul.
5. Warfare and the Shekhinah — The requirement for holiness in a military camp (v'nishmarta mikol davar ra) is essential to ensure the Shekhinah remains with the army, which is the true source of victory.
6. Ribbis as a chessed — Taking interest (ribbis) is not inherently theft, but rather a prohibition against charging a brother; therefore, it is permitted to charge a goy interest as the duty of chessed does not apply.
7. Lashon Hara as a Mitzvat Aseh — Remembering the story of Miriam is a positive commandment (mitzvat aseh) to internalize the severity of lashon hara and to teach this gravity to one's children.

What is Ramban on the Parsha | Rabbi Shlomo Friedman (Yeshivat Kerem B'Yavneh)?

Shiurim by Rabbi Shlomo Friedman in KBY.

Enjoyed? Your feedback means a lot to us. Click here to email us: https://tinyurl.com/thanksEN

Donations: https://www.kby.org/english/support-us/?id=46

I'm more basic than that,

I don't have any scientific definition of what it means in more basic רמב"ן,

I will point out that the רמב"ן himself tells us in his introduction that

those discussions which are mystical,

which are kabbalistic,

so those that are not מקובלים should switch.

There were a number of years ago that I could say I'm not old

enough to do the קבלה and now I can't say that anymore,

but I can certainly still say with great confidence not wise enough to be

able to do those.

So we're certainly skipping those רמב"ן,

we are skipping the רמב"ן that get very much involved in דקדוק,

but there are many רמב"ן that relate to פשט in פסוקים,

he has very beautiful important insights in פסוקים.

Furthermore,

no less important,

there are also all sorts of השקפה ideas which emerge from the רמב"ן.

When would this חוג generally speaking take place?

Well,

it might end up taking place on Friday mornings in light of the new

schedule that involves שיעורים on Friday,

which I guess means that the שנה ב׳

guys who could attend,

the שנה א׳

guys if interested will hear some recording,

the guys at least that are not in משיב.

On days when there is some event taking place on יום שישי then perhaps

on Thursdays,

perhaps some other time during the week,

whenever it works we'll try to do the רמב"ן.

Okay,

now it's time for the DC to go on,

let's hope,

somebody say the magic words,

so hopefully we'll go on soon,

let's start then.

Okay רבותי,

פרשת כי תצא.

We'll be trying to do some reading inside,

it's not critical to have a רמב"ן in front of you,

but if you do then that's great.

Okay,

so with respect to the מצוה of יפת תואר,

the דין of אשת יפת תואר.

So says the רמב"ן on page ת״מ א׳

in the what we'll refer to as the standard printing,

he discusses the following.

What is the idea,

what's the purpose of אבילות which is practiced by this אשת יפת תואר?

So רמב"ן has a number of opinions.

וטעם האבילות והבכי על דעת רבותינו,

three lines to the end of page ת״מ א׳.

So חז"ל understand the purpose of אבילות is אבילות generally speaking a process in

which a person is not taking care of himself and thus חז"ל understood that

the תורה is interested in this יפת תואר not making herself beautiful because after

all ideally speaking one will eventually decide that he's not going to marry this

woman.

So says the רמב"ן,

על דעת רבותינו כדי שתתנבל,

ניבול is ugly,

אולי יעבור חשקו ממנה.

That way maybe he'll lose his desire.

רבי אברהם,

the אבן עזרא,

אמר כנתנה לה התורה,

it's not for your sake she should become ugly,

but rather it's for her that she can mourn and give respect for her

parents that were presumably killed in war.

רבי אברהם אמר כנתנה לה התורה זמן כמשפט הבוכים על מת לכבוד אביה ואמה

שמתו במלחמה.

And then he cites the רמבם in מורה נבוכים,

that's לחמלה עליה,

to have mercy on her,

because after all a person that mourns will feel somewhat better as a result

of being מתאבל on that relative.

Okay,

however the רמב"ן himself,

on the second line of the next page,

ועל דעתי,

אין הפנאי לחמול עליה.

Rather he says,

if I understood correctly,

the idea of the אבילות according to the רמב"ן is so that the woman

can come to terms with that new situation.

If in fact she's מתאבל during that period she will realize that what was

no longer is,

she'll realize that this situation is now her new situation and she's not going

to go back to what was before the war.

And if she comes to terms with those situations,

then the chances of there being great complications down the road are that much.

Along those I think along those lines.

Okay.

Skipping to תמ״ה פסוק ט״ז,

כ״א ט״ז,

לא יוכל לבכר את בן האהובה.

So תורה says one is not meant to give the בכורה to the בן

האהובה rather than to the בן השנואה,

and the רמב״ן points out that if a person declares in his will that

he wants the true בכור to not get פי שנים and he wants somebody

else to get the פי שנים,

that is a violation of the לאו,

and he says one violates the לאו despite the fact that it is ineffected,

despite the fact that it doesn't work.

Okay,

בן סורר ומורה,

a famous important רמב״ן.

So the רמב״ן points out that there are two עבירות involved in this בן

סורר ומורה.

In the second line where כ״א י״ח,

שני עונשים.

האחד,

what are the two עבירות that he's doing?

שהוא מקלה אביו ואמו,

making light of his parents,

וממרה בהם,

and is a rebellion against the parents.

That's considered to be negative.

That's number one.

והשני שהוא זולל וסובא,

that he's a glutton.

And what's so terrible about that?

So says the רמב״ן,

he's violating that which we're commanded קדושים תהיו.

Now,

this I find somewhat fascinating because after all,

we're all familiar with the רמב״ן that says that קדושים תהיו is telling us

that a person shouldn't think that as long as something is כשר,

as long as it has the right הכשר,

then there's no problem with it.

And there's no problem,

one might think,

with drinking a lot of wine as long as it's בד״ץ or whatever הכשרים

הרב דוידסון spoke about,

no long,

no problem with having lots of meat and partying the whole day all the

time.

It might not be so good,

but so comes along the תורה and says קדושים תהיו.

Aside from the fact that we're meant to stay away from עבירות,

we're not meant to be overly involved in the pleasures of this world.

It doesn't mean that one is meant to be an ascetic,

but one is not meant to act live in a hedonistic fashion.

Now,

sometimes a person thinks,

okay,

that's for holy people.

For holy people,

they're meant to,

the רמב״ן says no,

this בן סורר ומורה,

one of the terrible things which he's doing is the fact that he's violating

קדושים תהיו.

Okay.

And continues the רמב״ן and he says the following.

He says that this fellow,

we know that חז״ל tell us that he's נהרג על שם סופו,

ימות זכאי ואל ימות חייב.

So he points out about four lines from the bottom,

this is about six lines into the piece:

כי לא הומת בגודל חטאו אלא לייסר בו את הרבים ושלא תהיה תקלה לאחרים.

That the בן סורר ומורה is not punished mainly based on what he did,

but rather he's punished as a deterrent.

If this fellow is not punished and will continue on his terrible path,

then he will lead to his doing all sorts of even more evil things.

To keep his habit,

he's going to מלסטם את הבריות,

he's going to kill.

And points out the רמב״ן,

there are other individuals also that are killed or seriously punished as a deterrent,

not so much because of what they did,

but because of the harm that could eventually come about from such an action.

And before we see those examples,

the רמב״ן points out that those four individuals,

the תורה says by all of them,

כל ישראל ישמעו וייראו,

or something along those lines.

In light of the fact that these people,

they're punished as a deterrent,

so we need to make a federal case out of,

need to point out.

Okay,

what other individuals are there aside from בן סורר ומורה that are נהרג in

a certain sense על שם סופו?

So you have also a זקן ממרא.

A זקן ממרא that we read about,

where did we read about זקן ממרא?

Which פרשה was that?

Can anybody remember?

Last week,

of course.

So last week we read about זקן ממרא and what's a זקן ממרא?

He פוסקנ׳ס against the בית דין הגדול and he fought it out,

he had it out with the בית דין הגדול.

A person who's הגיע להוראה,

he's meant to express his opinion,

but if he discussed it with the בית דין הגדול and the בית דין

הגדול voted against him,

then for him to go back to his city and to continue.

continued to פסקן,

that is a violation of the לא תסור and such an individual is a

זקן ממרא.

So hey,

even if nobody listened to his פסק,

nevertheless he is punished.

Why?

Because if such a person would be able,

if a person continues,

a person does such a thing,

then that could cause a great מחלוקת in the Jewish people.

Therefore he's killed as a deterrent.

So we have בן סורר ומורה,

we have זקן ממרא,

and we have עדים זוממים.

עדים זוממים as we know,

הלכה is כאשר זמם לעשות לו,

כאשר עשה.

Ah,

so hey,

the עדים זוממים they didn't bring about that much harm yet,

and therefore you might have said eh,

let them off the hook,

no,

we need to punish them as a deterrent so that people don't testify falsely.

And the fourth in this dubious club is מסית.

A מסית,

a person tries to convince me to worship עבודה זרה.

So such a person,

even though he's unsuccessful,

we punish him.

Hey,

what did he do wrong?

No,

nothing came about as a result,

I didn't listen to him.

Answer:

you want to try again?

No haven't tried.

Oh yeah,

okay.

One guy probably also the same,

but so also מסית didn't do anything so terrible,

but nevertheless he's punished as a deterrent.

Okay,

we could try to open the windows,

I don't know if that will help,

but whatever,

whatever you guys want.

Okay,

if I don't mean to what's it called,

but if you come to terms with the fact that okay it's hot and

we're not going to go by the way until seven o'clock,

because our Rav Sarf is giving at seven o'clock and we need to give

a little bit of break in between the two.

Okay,

skipping to let's see פסוק כב,

not skipping,

פסוק כב,

the Torah says that a person that is hung on the tree as a

punishment,

so he's meant to be taken down that same day.

And the Torah uses the expression כי קללת אלקים תלוי.

קללת means a זלזול.

It's a זלזול in God when somebody's hung.

Why's that a זלזול in God?

So רש"י has some משל which is mind-boggling,

difficult to understand.

רש"י gives a משל of two brothers that look similar,

and one of them violated a crime and he's hung,

and people would confuse one with the other and they thought that the other

brother...

so along similar lines,

the man is created in the image of God,

so when a person is hung,

that's a זלזול in God.

Difficult to understand.

הרמב"ן says that he thinks פשט is totally different.

He says that the two people להלכה we פסקן that those people that are

hung are דוקא a מגדף,

a person that blasphemes,

or a person who worships עבודה זרה.

Oh,

if that's the case,

so הרמב"ן,

when there is a case of someone that is blasphemous,

someone who worships עבודה זרה,

then obviously that is a case in which somebody was מזלזל in God.

So although the person needs to be punished,

but we don't want there to be too much of a discussion on that

because that discussion of the fact someone was עובד עבודה זרה,

the fact that somebody blasphemed is something which in a certain sense is a

זלזול.

Okay,

הרמב"ן points out that we have a over here this דין that there's an

obligation to bury and not to leave the individual unburied is something which applies

to every Jew,

לאו דוקא to a person that's killed,

that there's a מצוה of a burial of the מת and not to delay

the מת unless it's לכבודו.

He says it's an additional מצוה in ארץ ישראל.

Okay,

skipping to כי יקרא קן ציפור לפניך,

פסוק ו in פרק כב.

So a very lengthy and important הרמב"ן which we will read now or go

through only short snippets.

This is something which in the Sunday חוג,

not this week,

but eventually in חורף זמן בלי נדר hopefully to discuss at greater length.

Okay,

we know this מצוה of קן ציפור,

sending away the mother bird before taking...

what's this מצוה based on?

So הרמב"ם understands it's based on the concept of צער בעלי חיים.

Okay,

but הרמב"ן asks on himself a קשיא from a משנה in ברכות.

What's it say in ברכות?

האומר קן ציפור יגיעו רחמיך,

a person says just like God You had mercy on the birds,

also have mercy on us,

so משתקין אותו,

you silence him.

So הרמב"ם asks on himself,

hey,

how can I say the מצוה is based on צער בעלי חיים?

But if a person says קן ציפור just like You had mercy on the

birds,

also have mercy on us,

so משתקין אותו,

since it's improper.

And the גמרא says,

why is it improper?

Because Because after all these the מצוות they're גזירות and not רחמים.

So it doesn't seem to indicate that this is not based on צער בעלי

חיים.

So the רמב״ם says whatever he says,

the רמב״ן is not happy.

The רמב״ן himself thinks that פשט is differently.

Why is it that you're meant to be merciful to animals?

Someone could have understood it's מצד the fact that הקדוש ברוך הוא says that

we're meant to feel bad,

so to speak,

for the animals per se.

But says רמב״ן,

that's not פשט because after all if you need to do something with animals

for your own benefit the תורה allows us.

תורה allows שחיטה,

allows—you're meant to do it in a humane fashion.

But he says rather פשט is the following:

I'm meant to be humane—I don't know if humane to animals is the right

word—I'm meant to be kind to animals because if I act in a cruel

fashion to animals I eventually will be cruel to people,

be cruel to people.

So therefore if a person says just like you had mercy on קן ציפור

have mercy on us,

so that's not so accurate because it's not really out of mercy on the

birds per se.

It's rather that הקדוש ברוך הוא wanted a person not to develop bad מדות.

We know that חז״ל say טוב שברופאים...

can anybody finish the sentence?

טוב שברופאים לגיהנום.

Thank you.

טוב שבטבחים,

חז״ל tell us the best of the שוחטים לגיהנום.

Why טוב שבטבחים?

What's the sentence?

I forgot the sentence of—I'm sorry not לגיהנום,

טוב שבטבחים שותפו של עמלק.

Why שותפו של עמלק?

Because after all a טבח at times—again there are exceptions to the rule and

he does it לשם שמים whatever—but if a person is all the time involved

in killing that could cause him to develop a cruel מדות.

Okay.

In any case,

but what's so important about this רמב״ן is the following:

how he comes onto this topic we won't go into now.

And this is to state briefly the רמב״ן has the following idea,

an idea which to be understood properly requires a lot more discussion.

But the רמב״ן has the following very important יסוד.

That which הקדוש ברוך הוא was מצווה us in the מצוות,

both the מצוות בין אדם למקום and the מצוות בין אדם לחברו,

is not because of God needing those מצוות.

God will get along just fine without our doing the מצוות,

without our doing the מצוות בין אדם לחברו,

and even without our doing the מצוות בין אדם למקום.

Open parenthesis:

there is some concept of עבודה לצורך גבוה,

there's some concept of שכל מה שברא לכבודו,

and what that is all about—so that's something we'd have to discuss some other

opportunity,

that's something which does come up in the חוג sometime in the beginning of

חורף זמן.

But basically God doesn't need our מצוות,

rather the מצוות are for us,

for our benefit.

And the פסוקים say—we mentioned this in יום כיפור דאווענינג—ויצונו השם את כל החוקים

האלה לטוב לנו כל הימים לחיותנו כהיום הזה.

For man to have this relationship with the infinite God,

the God who is the source of everything noble,

everything good in this world,

that is for the benefit of man.

That is what the מצוות are largely about rather than for the benefit of

God.

And says רמב״ן,

he quotes a פסוק in איוב:

אם חטאת מה תפעל בו?

If you sin you haven't harmed God.

And he says זה דבר מוסכם בכל דברי רבותינו.

And he says in continuation,

הנה ביארו אפילו לולב וסוכה ותפילין שהקדוש ברוך הוא צונו עליהם לזכור שמה שהוציאנו

ממצרים אינם לכבוד השם יתברך אבל לרחם על נפשותינו.

Okay,

very important יסוד,

which due to the fact that there are other important רמב״נ'ס we're moving on.

Okay,

עונש של מאה כסף.

Who's punished מאה כסף?

A מוציא שם רע.

Is that correct?

A מוציא שם רע.

In any case,

so why מאה כסף?

Says רמב״ן,

well we know that a גנב needs to pay כפל.

So along similar lines a fellow's מוציא שם רע—why is he מוציא שם רע?

Because he decided to divorce her and wants to avoid having to pay the

כתובה.

So the כתובה is חמישים כסף and this guy that tried to avoid paying

the כתובה by being מוציא שם רע he needs to pay מאה כסף.

Okay skipping to:

the תורה says לא יבא עמוני ומואבי בקהל השם.

This is כ״ג ה׳,

כ״ג ה׳.

They are allowed to marry a גיורת,

a ממזרת.

Okay,

in any case,

so why is this so?

So says the תורה:

על דבר אשר לא קדמו אתכם בלחם ובמים ואשר שכר עליך את בלעם בן

בעור מפתור ארם נהרים לקללך.

So two reasons why עמוני ומואבי can't marry into the Jewish people.

A,

they didn't,

weren't willing to sell to us לחם ומים.

And B,

they hired בלעם to curse us.

So a slight major question.

When משה רבינו sends a message to סיחון,

then he says:

well sell me food just like בני עשיו and מואב.

So did מואב sell us food or did מואב not sell us food?

The פסוק over here indicates,

please help me out,

that מואב was מואב willing to sell us food?

No.

But משה רבינו tells סיחון,

well hey,

sell us food,

he tells סיחון,

sell us food just like מואב.

So what we call in לומדות'שר terms a סתירה.

In קיצור,

we have over here a סתירה.

רמב"ן has different approaches.

רמב"ן quotes אבן עזרא and others.

But the רמב"ן's own approach is the following.

מואב in fact did not,

did yes give us food.

מואב gave us food,

they sold us food as is indicated in that פסוק by סיחון.

איי,

how do we understand the פסוק over here?

Well hey,

the תורה gives us two reasons why we can't let עמוני ומואבי marry into

the Jewish people.

And he says each reason applies to a different nation.

עמוני can't marry into the Jewish people because they didn't provide,

weren't willing to sell us food.

מואבי,

they were willing to sell us food,

but they can't marry into the Jewish people due to the fact that,

due to the fact that they hired בלעם.

Okay,

skipping to פסוק י',

כ"ג י'.

The תורה says that at a time of war ונשמרת מכל דבר רע.

In an army camp needs to be very careful and avoid negative things.

If somebody's טמא,

he needs to become טהור.

There needs to be some sort of shovel so that one's wastes are covered

up.

So why is it the special אזהרה on ונשמרת מכל דבר רע at a

time of war?

In general,

you need to avoid terrible things.

So רש"י says השטן מקטרג בשעת הסכנה.

At a time of סכנה,

there's special danger.

רמב"ן says there's an additional factor.

And that is when a person is,

we don't have many חיילים here,

maybe potential חיילים.

But when a person is in a situation of pressure,

in a situation of danger,

not in a normal setting,

then a person could violate all sorts of terrible things.

And therefore there's a need for a special אזהרה at a time when we're

going to war.

And,

and as the רמב"ן,

one important factor in the Jewish people being victorious is סייעתא דשמיא,

having the שכינה go with us when we go to war.

And if we do all sorts of terrible things,

that's something that חס ושלום could remove the שכינה from the Jewish people.

That's why it's so terrible that you have such progressive elements that are trying

to force a situation where soldiers need to serve in mixed units.

After all,

the תורה speaks of the great importance of having the שכינה in the Jewish

people and certainly being involved in situations which could lead to sin is something

which potentially חס ושלום could remove the שכינה.

Okay,

פסוק ט"ז,

לא תסגיר עבד אל אדוניו.

What is not meant to return a runaway slave?

This is a famous verse that was known by the black slaves way back

when in America in the 1800s.

In any case,

לא תסגיר עבד אל אדוניו.

So חז"ל different interpretation of what this means.

According to one interpretation,

this refers even to an עבד כנעני of a Jew.

This עבד כנעני of a Jew,

let's say a Jew in Boro Park or Golders Green,

has an עבד כנעני and the עבד כנעני runs away,

runs away to ארץ ישראל.

So one is not meant to return him to his master.

as you guys learnt in or will learn in תוספות גיטין דף י"ז עמוד

א,

whatever,

ראשונים there that let's not focus directly on תוספות more in the רמב"ן.

So חז"ל say that you're meant to let that עבד stay in ארץ ישראל

rather than return him to חוץ לארץ.

Okay.

Skipping to פסוק י"ט.

לא תביא אתנן זונה.

If a person had relations with a זונה and he gives some payment,

gives some sheep as a payment,

that payment can't be brought as a קרבן.

Why?

So many מפרשים say it's דרך זלזול.

It's דרך זלזול to bring such a disgusting thing as a payment,

that זונה can't bring as a payment.

The רמב"ן though has a very beautiful insight.

He says the following.

Sometimes there are people that violate עבירות but they feel guilty.

A person robs a bank and he feels guilty.

So what does he do to clear his guilt?

Gives some charity,

gives some charity.

Oh,

it's a מצוה,

right?

I'm doing it לשם שמים.

I'm robbing the bank לשם שמים so I can give more צדקה.

So God says I'm not interested in such מצוות.

After all,

if the זונה has a guilty conscience,

a conscience on that which she did and she decides to clear her conscience

by giving that as a קרבן,

then that's something that God's not interested in.

Okay.

Skipping to לא תשיך or next רמב"ן,

לא תשיך לאחיך.

There's an איסור of taking ריבית.

Is there somebody in this world you're allowed to take ריבית from?

Billions and billions of people,

for a non-Jew.

So why is that so?

You're allowed to steal from a non-Jew?

Certainly not.

Says the רמב"ן,

פשט is the following.

The איסור of taking ריבית is not really something which should have been considered

stealing.

After all,

my money could have been earning money in the bank.

I'm not sure which bank at this point and no good banks for investments,

I'll be happy to hear but whatever.

So it's not really stealing,

it's something which should have been permissible.

אלא מה,

the תורה says out of love for your fellow Jew you're meant to,

you're not meant to take a ריבית,

meant to do him a favor.

But by a גוי,

so you don't have to do that favor.

Besides,

a גוי is allowed to take ריבית from you,

so you're allowed to take ריבית from a גוי.

Okay.

Also שמיטה,

that which שמיטה cancels debts of Jews but doesn't cancel debts of גוים,

that's for the same idea.

Okay.

There's רמב"ן about אחרי אשר הוטמאה but you guys presumably learnt it.

Whatever,

I'll just mention very briefly.

Why is it an איסור to remarry a woman that one divorced if she

married somebody else?

Says the רמב"ן,

the תורה doesn't want a situation where a person will so to speak lend

out his wife by telling his wife,

okay,

I'm divorcing you now,

I'll be happy to marry you again in another month,

but for the next month,

so you'll can be married to somebody else,

and then he'll divorce you or he'll die,

whatever it is,

and then I'll be happy to take you back.

So the תורה doesn't want such a disgusting situation and hence the איסור of

מחזיר גרושתו.

Okay.

זכור,

פסוק כ"ד ט'.

זכור את אשר עשה ה' אלהיך למרים.

So רש"י sounds like it's good advice.

You want to avoid צרעת?

So don't speak לשון הרע.

The רמב"ן says it's a מצות עשה to avoid לשון הרע.

And there's also a לאו,

השמר לך.

The תורה says be careful with the צרעת,

which רמב"ן understands isn't only to be careful with דיני צרעת but to avoid

speaking a לשון הרע.

I was listening last night to some podcast of רב דוד כהן from חברון

and he was asked the following question.

Says there's a fellow that has two individuals,

one of which is a basically a פרום guy,

a very שטארק guy,

but he speaks לשון הרע,

which רב דוד כהן points out that's an oxymoron,

שטארק guy but speaks לשון הרע.

Whatever.

Some and you could also be friendly with some guy that,

you know,

ain't so religiously committed and but he doesn't talk לשון הרע.

So which friend should he hang out with?

Probably neither,

but whatever.

Says in between the two,

so obviously the second one rather than the first.

The guy speaks לשון הרע,

that's a לאו דאורייתא.

You can't listen to לשון הרע.

So in any case,

so says the רמב"ן that you have over here a מצות עשה to avoid

לשון הרע and also a לאו.

And he points out that remembering the story with מרים could help us realize

the significance of the seriousness of the עבירה.

After all,

מרים loved משה רבינו very much.

She had saved him.

Some person thinks,

"Well it's my brother,

so of course I can talk לשון הרע about him,

and hey,

I did him a favor so he owes me one so I can speak

לשון הרע." No no no,

it doesn't work that way.

So מרים,

despite the fact that she didn't publicize,

she just spoke to אהרן about it,

nevertheless she was punished and קל וחומר for a person who is מזלזל in

this איסור.

Okay.

You understand the מצווה of זכור is to speak about the seriousness of לשון

הרע.

Okay,

skipping to פסוק י"ז,

the end of the פרשה,

to remember מעשה עמלק is also in this week's פרשה.

So the רמב"ן has a ספק whether this means that there's a מצווה of

קריאת התורה,

maybe this is a רמז to what we do in פרשת זכור or he

feels that it's more correct to say that this means you're meant to teach

your children about the terrible thing which עמלק did,

that prepares you for the מצווה of מחיית עמלק.

If a person thinks,

"Well עמלק,

yeah,

they were nice guys," so it'll be hard to go to war against עמלק.

If you think that yeah all our enemies they're really like nice people,

they're friendly,

they want to make peace,

as long as we're all dead,

you know,

so we should be friendly with them.

No no no,

that's not the proper approach.

And the רמב"ן adds,

similarly in respect to the מצווה of זכירת מעשה מרים,

we're meant to teach our children,

it's a מצוות עשה to teach your children the seriousness of לשון הרע.

Of course,

it goes without saying that if you yourself are not נזהר in לשון הרע,

so your kids are obviously not going to listen to you.

Okay,

and what's so serious about לשון הרע,

says רמב"ן at the very end of the פרשה,

he says number one it's a חטא גדול,

and number two it causes lots of harm,

and number three it's something that people are נכשל on a regular basis.

Okay רבותי,

to review very quickly some things we've seen,

the רמב"ן,

a number of different approaches with respect to what's the idea behind the אבילות

of a יפת תואר,

he himself said that's so the woman will come to terms with her new

situation.

Okay,

רמב"ן explained that a בן סורר ומורה is killed as a deterrent,

something which you also find with a מסית and עדים זוממים and זקן ממרא.

And therefore the תורה uses the expression of וכל ישראל ישמעו וייראו.

The רמב"ן said the מצווה of קן ציפור that the מצוות,

all the מצוות,

are for man's benefit rather than for God's benefit.

רמב"ן told us that מאה כסף מוציא שם רע is like the דין of

כפל.

רמב"ן resolved the סתירה with respect to whether מואב did or did not supply

food and water.

The רמב"ן says that the need for ונשמרת מכל דבר רע is not only

מצד that the שטן מקטרג בשעת הסכנה but also potentially when a person is

in such a situation,

they might do all sorts of terrible things,

something which in and of itself is a negative and also could be מסלק

the שכינה.

Okay,

the איסור of taking ריבית doesn't exist by a גוי,

because after all,

ריבית is not actually stealing,

it's just a special favor which you're meant to do to another Jew.

Why does the תורה prohibit to bring an אתנן זונה as a קרבן?

Due to the fact a person,

the זונה might think that "Okay,

as long as I bring this קרבן,

then what I did is not so terrible." רמב"ן told us that there's a

מצוות עשה and לא תעשה concerning speaking לשון הרע,

and רמב"ן taught us that the מצוות עשה involves teaching your children the seriousness

of this איסור and similarly זכירת מעשה עמלק to teach your children the seriousness

of what עמלק did.

Have a wonderful שבת.