Negative Commandments 245 – 365 (Auto Translated) – תמלול מתורגם

Okay, now we’re holding at the third section of the negative commandments. We’re still in the middle of a section about not stealing. We brought a whole list of ways one can steal from another person, which one is not permitted to do. First, we already learned yesterday about not kidnapping a person, and also not stealing money.

248 – Not to Rob

This commandment is not to rob, as it says “You shall not rob.” Unlike theft (geneiva), which means taking something when the other person doesn’t see, robbery (gezeilah) means “armed banditry” – one comes and takes from another person to their face.

249 – Not to Encroach on Boundaries

Another way one can steal land is by moving the boundary marker, not to encroach on boundaries, one should not push into another’s [property]. From this comes the concept called “hasagas gevul” (encroachment) in other contexts, where one can enter into another’s territory. It has become a common expression about encroaching on someone’s boundary – I believe it’s a phrase from Chazal, “This one comes into my domain,” that he comes into my “portion from the Holy One, Blessed be He.” A person has a territory, for example he published a sefer, and now that sefer is his territory, and someone goes and reprints it.

250 – Not to Oppress

This commandment is not to oppress. What is the difference between robbery and oppression? One will see it when learning the laws of robbery and lost objects, but it means taking money from another person.

251 – Not to Deny Another’s Money

If a person borrowed money from someone, and he denies it, he says he never received any money from you, this is another type of stealing. Or a deposit and the like. As it says “You shall not deny.”

252 – Not to Swear Falsely About Denying Another’s Money

When someone denies that he received money from another, besides transgressing “You shall not deny,” if he also goes and swears, he transgresses an additional negative commandment, and he receives additional lashes for the swearing, as it says “You shall not lie,” meaning do not swear falsely about money that your fellow has in your possession.

253 – Not to Cheat in Commerce

One should not deceive people in buying and selling. Exactly what the laws of fraud are, we will learn in the Rambam, but one may not deceive, as it says “Do not wrong one another.” It means selling something for more than it’s worth. As long as one knows how much it’s worth, it’s not fraud.

254 – Not to Wrong with Words

Besides this, there is wrongdoing that is called causing pain with words, as it says “Do not wrong one another.” One should not cause pain to another person with words, saying things that cause them distress. It simply appears that causing pain to someone in commerce is not the robbery itself, rather it’s that you let him be deceived, that causes him pain. One wonders what the connection is that “yonah” means something related to causing pain. It’s a double expression, it appears twice, so one was made for this (money) and one for that (words).

255-256 – Wronging a Convert

Besides causing pain to another Jew, there is an additional prohibition not to wrong a convert with words, as it says “You shall not wrong a stranger.” It’s an additional negative commandment. If one causes pain to a convert, one transgresses two negative commandments. And additionally also in commerce, not to wrong a convert in commerce (as it says “nor oppress him”). Apparently a convert needs more protection, he is more vulnerable, he doesn’t have relatives, he doesn’t have kings in the gentile culture, so the Torah specifically said about him that one should not cause him pain.

257-258 – A Slave Who Fled

Not to return a slave who fled to the Land of Israel, a slave who ran away from outside the Land to the Land of Israel, one should not bring him back to his master who is outside the Land, as it says “You shall not deliver a slave to his master,” one should not hand him over.

And regarding this same slave there is a negative commandment not to wrong this slave, one should not cause him pain. As it says “He shall dwell with you in your midst… in the place that is good for him, you shall not wrong him,” one should not hurt him.

There are levels of who is vulnerable: a convert is very vulnerable, a slave who fled is even more vulnerable, even more likely to be mistreated. “You shall not wrong him” means either wrongdoing with words or wrongdoing with money.

259 – Afflicting Orphans and Widows

Not to afflict orphans and widows, not to torment and cause pain, as it says “You shall not afflict any widow or orphan.” The Rambam says in other places that it’s not specifically orphans and widows, but anyone who is weak, who doesn’t have someone to stand up for them. But the Rambam says that an orphan and widow, even if they have money, even if they have everything, and they don’t feel weak, one must be very careful.

260 – Working a Hebrew Slave

Not to work a Hebrew slave with slave labor. A Hebrew slave should not be made to work with hard or degrading labor, as it says “You shall not work him with slave labor.”

261 – Selling a Hebrew Slave

Not to sell him as a slave is sold. One should not sell him in the marketplace, where there is a market where one puts [slaves] up on a stage and everyone can feel the slave and make sure he’s a good slave. Not so should one deal with a Jew, one should sell him in a dignified manner.

262 – Backbreaking Labor

Not to work a Hebrew slave with backbreaking labor. This is besides the prohibition of degrading work, here the issue is making him do hard labor, as it says “You shall not rule over him with rigor.” He notes that it means telling him to do something you don’t really need. Just like that, you’re taking advantage, it’s a waste for the slave not to work, and you give him something to do that you don’t need. Backbreaking labor is what was done in Egypt.

I think this prohibition also applies to non-slaves. It’s perhaps a kal vachomer (a fortiori argument), if someone has a worker and gives him work he doesn’t need, or gives a son work. I think that when a teacher tells a boy to copy the same thing fifty times, is that backbreaking labor or not? Is he transgressing “You shall not work him with rigor”? It could be. Everyone should ask their local principal… But one needs to know, if the teacher thinks that “educational necessity” is a permit for all the commandments in the Torah… A Hebrew slave already sold himself because of his theft, that’s already a piece of education, and about him we say it’s slave labor. A boy in cheder is certainly not worse than him.

It could be that when one makes a child do a punishment that is a form of backbreaking labor, that is the pain of it – that an unsuccessful teacher has now pinched my ears or thrown me in the garbage… It’s a terrible pain. There is an aspect of education, but there is where one may give punishment, but it’s real work.

263 – A Hebrew Slave Sold to a Gentile

Not to allow a gentile to work a Hebrew slave… with rigor. Not only may one not make a Hebrew slave work with rigor oneself, but if a Hebrew slave was sold to a gentile, one should not allow it, as it says “He shall not rule over him with rigor before your eyes,” you should not allow him to be worked hard.

I think that the mitzvah of redeeming captives as we know it, just as Rabbi Moshe Leib of Sassov ran around and saved Jews from the landowners, was more similar to this mitzvah. The fact that a landowner has a Jew and can do with him whatever he wants, he can be so cruel to him, don’t allow it.

264 – Selling a Hebrew Maidservant

Not to sell a Hebrew maidservant to another. A Hebrew maidservant, after you have taken her, you may not sell her further, as it says “He shall not have power to sell her… since he has dealt deceitfully with her.” He was deceitful with her by not fulfilling the mitzvah of “yi’ud” (designation), of taking her as a match.

265 – Food, Clothing, and Conjugal Rights

Not to withhold from a designated Hebrew maidservant her food, clothing, and conjugal rights. A Hebrew maidservant who is designated, who has become a bride, one should not withhold from her these three things. As it says “Her food, her clothing, and her conjugal rights he shall not diminish.”

I was learning yesterday with a groom, and he told me that “she’er” (food) can mean all physical needs (sustenance), “kesut” (clothing) is a matter of honor, because one needs to buy nice garments, that means giving her honor, and “onatah” (conjugal rights) means giving her everything she needs emotionally.

And the same applies to other women, it’s a kal vachomer: if for a type of wife who is a Hebrew maidservant one must do so, certainly for a proper wife this is the mitzvah. It could be just as we had here not to wrong those who are more vulnerable (convert, slave), it could be she is also the woman who is most vulnerable, because she doesn’t have a distinguished father who fights for her, so the Torah says “her food, her clothing, and her conjugal rights he shall not diminish,” and so too all other women.

266-267 – A Woman of Beautiful Form

Not to sell a woman of beautiful form. A person went to war and saw a woman of beautiful form, he converted her, he took her with him. After she has done the “and she shall weep for her father and mother for a month,” he may not sell her further. It’s very similar to not selling a Hebrew maidservant. As it says “You shall not sell her for money.”

Not to subjugate a woman of beautiful form to be a maidservant. When he takes her home, he can take her as a wife, but he cannot take her to become a maidservant. As it says “You shall not deal with her as a slave.”

268-269 – Do Not Covet and Do Not Desire

Not to covet, as it says “Do not covet your neighbor’s wife.”

The next one is not to desire, as it says “Do not desire your neighbor’s house.”

The Rambam learns in the Laws of Robbery that “do not covet” means when one takes actions based on the desire, one puts great pressure on another to sell to you. But “do not desire” is in the heart, one transgresses “do not desire” even if one doesn’t take action afterward. This is the main desiring that then brings actions.

Regarding the question of Ibn Ezra and others, how can one indeed be commanded not to have such a feeling? The answer is as we learned yesterday regarding “not to think” – it’s said to mean making a decision, here too it can mean not to give in to a feeling (not to entertain the thought).

Okay, okay. One needs to ask the rabbis when one transgresses “do not desire,” I don’t know the answer. I asked someone regarding matters of matchmaking to know when one transgresses. And apparently the Jews who go around offering people money for their houses, that’s properly the “do not covet” journey. It’s literally speaking about this. But it could be according to the Rambam [that it’s a prohibition], but according to others, simply offering normally is not [prohibited], rather sending intermediaries, making and putting pressure. That’s the first approach.

The second approach, because this is the way of commerce in the world. But I’m thinking of something else. It says, when may one have jealousy? “Jealousy of scholars increases wisdom.” But what kind of jealousy of scholars increases wisdom? Not where he goes and thinks “Ah, I would have wanted to be a Torah scholar,” with that nothing happens. It means when one begins to seriously work on it. It’s the same measure regarding do not desire and do not covet, the same measure where the jealousy that is permitted also means when one begins to do something seriously, not the thought alone and one does nothing.

Commandment 270 – A Worker Should Not Eat When Not at the Time of Completing Work from What is Attached

270, A worker should not eat when not at the time of completing work from what is attached. And we learned earlier that one allows eating from the fruits in the field. But when he’s not in the middle, not at the time of completing work, then he may eat from the fruits that are cut, but he may not go cut from the tree. As it says “You shall not wield a sickle” [on your neighbor’s standing grain], that he should not go tear off from the fruits that are still attached.

Commandment 271 – A Worker Should Not Take More Than His Eating

271, A worker should not take more than his eating. A worker who eats, during the work he may taste some of the food, but he may not take too much. As it says “You may eat grapes as your soul desires, to your fill, but you shall not put any in your vessel.”

I once thought that in our reality this means like when a person goes to a shalom zachor, he can taste a little, maybe he can even take home a few chocolates for the children or a package. But if he takes out a big bag from his pocket and starts packing, that’s already… The Torah tells us that one needs to know the measure and weight. On one hand one needs to have compassion on the workers in another’s field, and you see he has a desire, yes, it’s a pity with desire, you desire the grain, the work stuff, but it doesn’t mean you can now take out a knife and cut and take home more than the measure. But this is regarding a worker, but at a shalom zachor there is another halacha about this. Anyway, it’s not yours, it’s only yours in order to be able to eat. Yes, I’m saying that this mitzvah is so that one should know where it’s on and where it’s off. One has compassion on you and you may eat, but it doesn’t mean it has no limit.

Commandment 272 – Not to Ignore a Lost Object

Further. Commandment 272, not to ignore a lost object. One may not turn a blind eye when seeing a lost object, and if there is one, one should take it and fulfill the mitzvah of returning a lost object. As it says “You cannot ignore it.”

Commandment 273 – Not to Leave an Animal Crouching Under Its Load on the Road

273, if a person sees an animal, we learned this also in the previous shiurim, that there is a mitzvah of “you shall surely help.” There is a negative commandment that one should not leave it as it is. Not to leave an animal crouching, when the animal is breaking down under a heavy load. As it says “When you see the donkey of your enemy” etc. “you shall not abandon him,” rather what? One should help out. This is the mitzvah of unloading.

These two mitzvos are for example a good example of what I told you between the shiurim, that it’s a bit funny when one takes the positive commandments and negative commandments, because the negation doesn’t mean anything. It’s a deficiency, but you shouldn’t misunderstand the shiur. As a general rule for the investigator I’ll explain, there’s a reason, it could be technical, analytical, halachic, but it’s established that one makes a list. A negative commandment without an action, can that also be a reason? It could be. I’m saying it’s a bit funny when one tells the story like this… We don’t know, this could already be from the secrets of the Torah, why certain things Hashem said, both in a positive way and negative, it’s not clear. The secrets of the Torah means we don’t yet know. I’ll try to find an answer. I know one for nothing, it’s a secret. I don’t know. One needs to make the list together, that’s indeed how it’s done inside the sefarim. But it never says that one must make the list this way.

Commandment 274 – Not to Do Wrong in Measurement

274, here begins certain matters of honoring other people properly, not stealing from other people, not just money, one will see “do not do wrong in judgment” and so on.

274, not to do wrong in measurement. We learned earlier about fraud in commerce. It’s very interesting, because it’s very similar to fraud in commerce, but it’s a different manner. As it says “Do not do wrong in judgment” [in measurement]. What does this mean? For example, having an incorrect… your scale should say it’s a pound when it’s less than a pound, you’ll be able to take more money. The Torah comes and says “Do not do wrong in the judgment of measurement.” What does “in judgment in measurement” mean? The correctness of the measure should not be off. The other way to explain would mean that the verse says two things: wrong in judgment, besides that in measurement, in weight and in volume. But the plain works of the Sages received from Moshe Rabbeinu and they said no, “the judgment of the measurement.” That means, when a Jew goes to a store and asks for a piece, then how much you get… The scale is like the judge who rules what is the correct pound. You have a way of bribing and corrupting the judge and making the measure not be good.

Commandment 275 – Not to Have in Our Possession Two Kinds of Weights

He says, “You shall not have in your house two kinds of measures.” This is the verse, that not only should one not use it, but one should not have at all these kinds of tools of false measures, two kinds of measures, two kinds of weights, “You shall not have in your house” [etc.]. Does it mean actually not having it at all, or not having it to use? Not having it. What does it mean to use? A museum? A museum needs to have its own halachos. “You shall not have,” one should not have it at all. It could be that having it is so that one should not enter into a test, a person should not come close to a test. There are many mitzvos that are closer to other mitzvos, not necessarily that each thing is the problem.

Do not covet also, the Rebbe once said in the Rambam shiur that the Rambam says that do not covet is halachically the end of stealing. It’s not the explanation that coveting itself is a prohibition, rather when one covets, it usually leads to stealing. So, do not desire leads to do not covet. It could be so. In Sefer HaMitzvos it also says “he will end up robbing.” The Rambam also said that the prohibition is the pressing itself. But it could also be that, it could be this is the prohibition because one wants to press, and it’s worthwhile that one should not become a thief.

Commandment 276 – Not to Pervert Justice

276, not to pervert justice. Not to do any wrong in judgment. This is a mitzvah on the judges, as Rashi says in Parshas Yisro, “Do not accept a false report.”

Mitzvah 274 – Not to Take a Bribe

And also not to take a bribe, that the judge should not take any bribe, to take a bribe for the sake of justice. As it says “And you shall not take a bribe.”

One needs to know if the prohibition perhaps also applies to ordinary Jews. For example, a director of an institution who admits whoever gives him money, it could be that he violates “you shall not take a bribe.” Just as we learned that the measure is a type of judgment, it could also be that the person who must make a judgment whether to admit that child or not, he is a judge now, and when he does it, he violates “you shall not pervert justice.” I remember that it exists, because today for example in the law, for example if someone is a member of Knesset and such, and he says he doesn’t take bribes, which law? According to halacha it’s not clear, he doesn’t make any judgment. There are indeed poskim who say there is a prohibition. One can say that a judge exists in various ways of being a judge. Every person who has some certain power and he abuses his power, is similar to the judge who perverts justice. If he does it for a bribe, if whoever gives him money, instead of for merit. He has some benefit, he should seek the public good, just like a director who should seek the benefit of the institution, for the benefit of all Israel, but he seeks his own benefit. I hear, I hear. And if it’s an entire institution that is for his own benefit, which is a private institution, then it’s like an institution needs to change from the gate of the Talmud, and one needs to call it a purchase of bribery. An institution is a purchase of bribery. Okay.

Mitzvah 275 – Not to Honor a Great Person in Judgment

275, there is also an important halacha. A great person in Torah comes? One must look only at the matter itself, and not honor a great person in judgment. As they learned, a beautiful teaching in this week’s parsha, Parshat Yitro, and in the previous week’s parsha, Yitro said that to Moshe one should bring “every great matter.” It doesn’t say the cases that deal with a million dollars, or that two important people have at the din Torah. But actually it says “every difficult matter.” It’s hard to figure out, not those that are a great matter, it can be a small amount of money, or simple people, but because it’s a difficult matter one should bring it to Moshe.

Anyway, it’s a very difficult halacha to fulfill this not to honor a great person in judgment, as it says “and you shall not favor the face of a great person.” I know because I haven’t seen anyone succeed in doing this. There’s no such thing that a distinguished Jew who is from the Torah comes together with… it’s a challenge. Because the judge won’t be able to withstand it, it’s very hard. One is very friendly with that one, with their in-law. I’m not talking just about a friend, it’s a void. If a distinguished Jew comes, a wealthy person, someone comes over and takes him into the Torah. It’s not possible to… I don’t know how one fulfills this. Unless one makes oneself like a blind person. One can perhaps only not think about whether there are faces somewhere, it doesn’t have a formal law. Because law means there’s a beit din that belongs to the city, and it’s only that two people accepted that it’s a beit din of laymen which doesn’t have this law. One may, one needs to know. It helps, this is a technical solution that leaves the actual problem, right? Yes.

Mitzvah 276 – That the Judge Should Not Fear an Evil Person in Judgment

The other thing is also difficult, that the judge should not fear an evil person in judgment. As it says “Do not fear any man.” It’s also difficult, because many people before the poor person demand to extract money from him – it’s also not an easy thing. Would they be people with the “rage”? There are good people like you, I won’t bother you, I have the bother. I not to be poor—I already also a good Jew R’ Yosef. Mitzvah 276. A person should also not be afraid. “Do not fear”, not be afraid that he will take revenge. Shalom, “do not fear.” It’s interesting, all types of people are a problem for the judges. A good person, a wealthy person, a poor person, a bad person. One fears the respected person, one fears the violent strongman, one fears the poor person.

Mitzvah 277 – Not to Have Mercy on a Poor Person in Judgment

It already says such, not to have mercy on a poor person in judgment [as it says “and you shall not favor a poor person in his dispute”], one should rule a judgment with truth. You can already take here according to the Heider letter, you need to let know the facts whether after finishing the Torah one may say to the wealthy person, but have mercy on whom it belongs to you.

He should not be afraid.

It’s interesting, all types of people are a problem for the beit din. Whether he’s a good person, whether he’s a wealthy person, whether he’s a poor person, whether he’s a good person, whether he’s a bad person. One judge fears the man of war, one judge fears the violent strongman, and one judge fears the poor person. Therefore it says (277) not to have mercy on a poor person in judgment, one should rule a judgment with truth.

The Kishinever Rav has a letter where he discusses the ruling, whether after finishing the Torah one may say to the wealthy person: “But have mercy on whom you are going to judge.” It could perhaps be, once you said with the Torah, as your judgment, din Torah, with the Torah we will live, so it is. But now I ask you as… you are also the Rav who cares for the community, besides the judgment, he should make an appeal outside of the beit din.

But one must remember that judgment is judgment. Not only that, but even Rashi in Parshat Kedoshim on “You shall not do injustice in judgment,” Rashi says: “That you should not say, this person is wealthy or is from great people, how can I embarrass him and see his shame? Therefore it says ‘and you shall not favor the face of a great person.’ And that you should not say, this person is poor and the householder is wealthy and it’s a mitzvah to support him, I’ll find him meritorious in judgment and he’ll be supported cleanly. Therefore it says ‘and you shall not favor a poor person in his dispute.'” Even if that one deserves punishment, but you do it so he should be sustained, it’s not according to the Torah.

This is also a very difficult thing for certain people. Yes, Rashi in Parshat Mishpatim, (279) not to have mercy on the damager in laws of fines. When laws of fines come before a beit din, someone comes saying, “That one stole from me and he must pay me a fine, a double fine,” you should not have mercy and say, “I won’t take the double amount.”

Rashi in Parshat Devarim, (280) not to pervert the judgment of converts and orphans, is very similar to not to have mercy on a poor person in judgment. But here it means the opposite, that you should not, because he’s an orphan, you should not be afraid to take from him a bribe and rule against the orphan.

It’s also very difficult. The truth is, even metaphysically, philosophically, these halachot are very difficult. Perhaps you’ll understand this better, because it’s not truly the case that there’s such a thing as judgment that has nothing to do with what is humane, what is right. You can say, mercy means a bit more, but the entire judgment is built on mercy. That one stole from me, and you have no mercy on him?

But again, if you focus on what the story was, exactly how it lay, how he took it, you don’t focus on the people. There was a Jew, whom I mean R’ Asher Freund, he very much liked to know only the first names of the people who came to him. He said: “I should know the last name? Him I’ll honor as a Friedman, him I’ll honor as a friend? No. Asher, Yankel, Moshe, Shlomo. Don’t look at the people, you look at the story. What happened? What was the damage? Who made the damage?”

That was the young men sitting with their tallitot, and I looked, they said about the Mordechai: Don’t look at the people, look at the history, the story as it was. You go further into the same question, he can be a teacher in cheder, or something like that, he also has some law of a judge in the same way. Also “to pervert judgment” is there a very important thing. Because sometimes, here the boy, he always makes problems, perhaps he didn’t do this thing, he did other things? No, hello. If he hadn’t come to the point, he would have laid the fear before him. He would have usually done so. But he doesn’t think with the principle.

Mitzvah 281

(281) Not to hear from one of the litigants when his fellow is not with him.

It’s easier many times, okay, let’s hear one person at a time with the claims. One may not do this, because as it says “Do not accept a false report.” Interesting, it’s called “false” because when that one doesn’t hear, it becomes false. Does one perhaps mean lashon hara? Because lashon hara, that is indeed the law must be, that one must have the right. No, that one must have the right to respond.

It’s also a very difficult halacha, a halacha from Sanhedrin. It’s a difficult halacha, because when you deal with two people, the person always takes a view on what he wants to do. You always know, because one of the two will hold back their things to say. The truth will come out more when they can speak and that one isn’t there. But in din Torah it’s the opposite, you want that one should indeed accept the clarification. Because here the truth from one creditor, you don’t know that a person can say it falsely, therefore it’s a false report.

Mitzvah 282

(282) Not to follow the majority in capital cases if those who convict exceed those who acquit by one.

That means, in beit din one always follows what the majority says. But this is only if the majority is more than one. If the majority is there’s a beit din of 23, and it’s twelve against eleven, you cannot make that one person should be the… in capital cases. “And incline after the majority to decide.”

Mitzvah 283

(283) That one who argued for acquittal initially should not argue for conviction in capital cases.

There was a discussion of capital cases, and a person argued for acquittal, he should not retract and afterward argue for conviction. As it says “Do not speak up in a dispute to incline.” So, interesting, what happens if the one who argued for acquittal later realized he wasn’t right? He cannot. That’s the halacha. One seeks ways not to punish in capital cases.

Mitzvah 284

(284) Not to appoint as judges a person who is not wise in matters of Torah even though he is wise in other wisdoms.

It’s actually quite a common thing. Many times in beit din, one wants to have a judge who knows well about financials, he should understand the laws, he should understand. One brings in a judge who is somewhat of a social worker in Torah laws… but one must make sure he also knows the halachot. As it says “Do not show favoritism in judgment.”

Interesting, I remember “do not show favoritism in judgment” the other interpretation is also a way of not honoring an important person. But what the Rambam learns, is indeed what the Midrash learns, that Chazal derive that this means “do not show favoritism in judgment” to those who appoint the judgment. That means, there is a judgment of making the judgment. One speaks of the judgment, that they should only take those who are worthy because they can learn. When the “do not show favoritism,” the Rambam makes, says wisdom of other wisdoms, but I remember there it also says that if he has a big beard, he’s a distinguished Jew, don’t look at his face, rather look at what he can learn, the halachot.

Mitzvah 285

(285) Not to testify falsely, to swear falsely, as it says “Do not bear false witness against your neighbor.”

Mitzvah 286

(286) That a transgressor should not testify. One who is not kosher for testimony, one should not accept his testimony, as it says “Do not join your hand with a wicked person to be a corrupt witness.”

Mitzvah 287

(287) That a relative should not testify. A relative cannot testify about his relative, as it says “Fathers shall not be put to death because of children.” And the interpretation of the tradition learned from here that fathers shall not be put to death through the testimony of children, and similarly other relatives.

Mitzvah 288

(288) Not to decide a case based on one witness. A case can only be decided according to two witnesses, as it says “One witness shall not rise up against a person.”

Mitzvah 289

The next mitzvah is (289) not to kill an innocent person, one should not kill a person who is not liable to death, as it says “Do not murder.” You see that the Rambam also holds that murder means murder, not just killing. People say, one may not kill people, as it says “do not murder.” It’s not just anything. “Do not murder” is a word for a specific thing, for killing an innocent person. One who is not innocent, what does it say? All people are innocent. I mean to say, that when it was ruled that one deserves death, he is not killing an innocent person, that’s simply so. Or, he means to say the killing in war, for example. He says that the killing is not “be killed rather than transgress,” which I mean murder. Killing and murder are not the same thing.

Mitzvah 290

(290) Not to decide a case based on circumstantial evidence. That a judge should not rule a case just because it occurred to him. One speaks here of capital cases, I think. That two witnesses to the actual matter. One only examines for clear testimony, as it says “And the innocent and righteous you shall not kill.” This is the story of the witnesses who saw the knife, yes, that he ran in with a knife. Yes. But there is such a Rambam that doesn’t say clearly that he means here in capital cases, but one understands it only from the verse, yes.

Mitzvah 291

(291) That the witness should not rule in a case in which he testified in capital cases. If one witness saw capital cases, he should not at all come to testify if he doesn’t have two witnesses. You see so? I mean that it says that one witness… “should not rule,” he should not be one of the judges. “A witness cannot become a judge,” that’s the halacha of “a witness cannot become a judge.” Excuse me, I didn’t learn well. “Should not rule,” the witness should not be the one who rules, should not be the judge, in a case in which he testified in capital cases. After he testified in capital cases, he himself doesn’t become the judge.

Mitzvah 292

(292) Not to kill one liable to death before he stands in judgment. Even when one knows he is liable to death, one should not kill him before he was made to stand in judgment, as it says “And the murderer shall not die until he stands before the congregation for judgment.”

Mitzvah 293

(293) Not to have pity on the pursuer. One who is a pursuer, it’s connected. Just as when someone killed in the past, then one must make a whole din Torah. But one who is now pursuing his fellow to kill him, one should not have mercy, to kill him before he reaches the pursued one and kills him, even if the pursuer is a minor or a woman, as it says “And you shall cut off her hand, your eye shall not pity.” Such a case where there is no having mercy. Mercy one must have when one anyway cannot save anymore, and now it’s only a question about punishment. Then one must have mercy. But when that one is in the middle of his murder, one must stop him at all costs.

Mitzvah 294

(294) Not to punish one who was forced. A woman who was violated, she doesn’t deserve any punishment, as it says “And to the maiden you shall do nothing.” One cannot blame her. This is the prohibition, a well-known prohibition today, one cannot blame the victims. He says, it truly means all cases of coercion.

Mitzvah 295

(295) Not to take ransom from a murderer. One should not take, one should not allow a murderer to pay money instead of his punishment.

Mitzvah 297

(297) Not to stand idly by the blood. “Do not stand” means to delay, to hold oneself back, there must not be any lack in alacrity. On the contrary, if you see someone in danger, you should be diligent, and not remain standing calmly.

Mitzvah 298

(298) Not to leave an obstacle, as it says “And you shall not place blood in your house.” We leave an obstacle, it means “do not place blood in your house.” Does obstacle mean, in one’s own home or in general? When you see an obstacle by other people, it’s not a branch of “do not place blood” in the home. It’s a branch, true, but each one is responsible for oneself at home.

What is the question here? There are things that “do not place blood in your house,” one doesn’t say about a railing that no normal person goes down from the roof. No, sometimes there is an obligation that “things that are likely to bring about an obstacle” one must make a railing etc.

Mitzvah 299

(299) Not to cause a simple person to stumble on the way. An innocent person who doesn’t know… this goes for… “not to cause a simple person to stumble” means presumably if that one knows the dangers, and that one is crazy, and you don’t say the mitzvah to that one simply. But one who doesn’t know, you leave the obstacle. The “do not place blood in your house” perhaps has levels here, one needs to understand, perhaps one needs to learn it and see little.

Mitzvah 299: Before a blind person do not place a stumbling block

But that one doesn’t know, you must be the… well, an obstacle is perhaps for everyone. The “and before a blind person do not place a stumbling block” perhaps has a level, one needs to understand. There are things that “before a blind person do not place a stumbling block” one doesn’t say about a knowledgeable person; a normal person, no one is expected. No, one says there is an obligation that a thing that has a concern of damage one must make a knowledgeable person and such.

But things that are a transgression – does one need any transgression? Okay. Or when one says a reason, it’s innocent in the matter, it’s blind in the matter. And from this one also learns spiritually, that you should not cause a Jew to stumble spiritually. Just as you say, you should not cause a Jew to stumble in transgression.

Mitzvah 300: Not to Add to Lashes

Mitzvah 300, not to add to the lashes for one who is obligated to receive lashes. When one gives lashes to a person who is obligated to receive lashes, one may not add more. “Well, let’s just add one more” – one may not. As it says, “he shall not add, lest he add.” And from here we learn that simply striking a Jew – ah, a blow – all the more so if he is not obligated to receive lashes, one may not give more than the prescribed lashes. Yes, you might say he has already exceeded the thirty-nine, but what about just one slap? Well, that is also forbidden on its own.

Mitzvah 301: Not to Gossip

Mitzvah 301, not to gossip. This is another one of the mitzvot that is not… one might have thought to give a slap, he wouldn’t have known the mitzvah. Mitzvah 301, not to gossip, one should not spy. And from this we learn anything related to rechilut, to carry tales, “I found out an interesting thing about someone,” a matter of rechilut. As it says, “You shall not go as a talebearer among your people.”

From here we see that what a matchmaker does is not called rechilut, because if so, we wouldn’t be here, since there were always matchmakers before everything. One needs to know what is considered rechilut and what is not considered rechilut. Heaven forbid, not everything one does is permitted.

Mitzvah 302: Not to Hate in One’s Heart

Mitzvah 302, not to hate in one’s heart, one should not hate another Jew in one’s heart. As it says, “You shall not hate your brother in your heart.” It seems that the Rambam says about this that if one has a grievance, one should tell him, one should discuss it.

Mitzvah 303: Not to Embarrass a Person

Mitzvah 303, not to embarrass a person from Israel, one should not shame a Jew. When one shames someone, he turns white, as the Gemara says, “the redness goes away,” the red color leaves a person’s face and it becomes white. As it says, “You shall surely rebuke your fellow and not bear sin because of him.” Very fitting. The “and not bear sin because of him” means that “rebuke” – when one needs to give him mussar, one should give him mussar, but one may not embarrass him when giving him mussar.

Mitzvah 304: Not to Take Revenge

Mitzvah 304, not to take revenge. The prohibition of not taking revenge according to the Torah, the mitzvah of not taking revenge, as it says, “You shall not take revenge.” Not to take revenge means, even when one doesn’t retaliate, but one holds the hatred in one’s heart. It is similar to the prohibition of not hating in one’s heart, that even if one doesn’t hate him, but one holds a grievance against him, one holds it in one’s heart. Taking revenge means that one says, “I’m not taking revenge on you, but I do have a grievance.”

Mitzvah 306: Sending Away the Mother Bird

Mitzvah 306, the mitzvah of sending away the mother bird (shiluach haken), not to take the mother with the young. The prohibition, the negative commandment of not taking the mother with the young, that one should not take the eggs or the chicks from the mother. As it says, “You shall not take the mother with the young.”

And it’s interesting that shiluach haken came in here. One sees that the Rambam understood that shiluach haken is a simple matter of preventing cruelty to animals, although it says in the Mishnah that it is not. Anyway, do you see what I want to say here? It’s also about exploiting another’s vulnerability. That now is a good opportunity to take the mother too, because she is watching over her children. It’s a matter of fairness, it’s a further matter of justice. A kind of justice like fairness.

Mitzvot 307-308: Impurity of Tzara’at

Now we will see in the impurity of tzara’at, two mitzvot that have to do with tzara’at.

Mitzvah 307: Not to shave the hair of the scall. If a person has a lesion on his beard or on his hair, he may not cut the hair. As it says, “And the scall he shall not shave.”

Mitzvah 308: Not to remove signs of tzara’at. If he has tzara’at on his flesh, on his skin, he should not remove it, as it says, “Take heed regarding the plague of tzara’at.” This cannot be ruled on directly, one needs to think. A matter where you sit with a beit din, let’s see. But this he doesn’t have.

Mitzvah 309: The Eitan Stream

This is 309, not to work or sow in the eitan stream. There is a place called an eitan stream, a certain river where the eglah arufah (beheaded calf) was performed. In that place one performs an eglah arufah, and in that place – he means after performing an eglah arufah – one may not there “work or sow,” as it says, “which shall not be worked nor sown.”

Mitzvah 310: A Groom Shall Not Be Obligated

Mitzvah 310, that a groom shall not be obligated in matters of public needs during the entire first year. That the first year of a groom, one should not place upon him any public obligations, such as army service and guarding the wall and similar things, things that one usually obligates people, that they must go to the army, they must guard the wall. A groom is not required to do this, as it says, “He shall not go out to the army, nor shall anything pass upon him for any matter.”

This is not that… whoever is appointed over public needs should not give public duties to the groom. This is also a mitzvah of “he shall be free for his house,” which is a mitzvah on the groom, and this is a mitzvah that the one who distributes the work for public needs should not place work on the groom.

Mitzvah 311: A Sorcerer

Mitzvah 311, not to have pity on a sorcerer. That the beit din should take revenge, should give punishment to a sorcerer, and one should not let a sorceress live, as it says, “You shall not allow a sorceress to live.” A male sorcerer is the same.

Mitzvot 312-319: Awe of Royalty and the Court

Now it begins from 312… The fellow who sent the question about the order, so he should keep track, Rabbi So-and-so son of So-and-so, it’s interesting how it comes in. One can understand that these are also matters of rabbis, because the lesion is something that the kohen must take care of, it’s something related to semicha, also the public needs, the sorcerer is for the beit din.

And now from 312 are the matters of semicha, of honor for the beit din, and honor for authority for the Nasi.

* Mitzvah 312: Not to rebel against the beit din, not to rule in beit din, this means not to follow the beit din, as it says, “You shall not deviate from all the matter that they tell you.”

* Mitzvah 313: Not to add to the mitzvot of the Torah, not to add to the mitzvot of the Torah, whether the Written Torah or its interpretation that was received orally, as it says, “The entire matter that I command you, that you shall observe to do, you shall not add to it.” But as the Rambam explains, this means saying about something that is not a mitzvah that it is a mitzvah.

* Mitzvah 314: Not to diminish from the mitzvot of the Torah, not to say about a certain mitzvah that it is no longer a mitzvah, as it says, “and you shall not diminish from it.”

* Mitzvah 315: Not to curse the judge, one should not curse the judge, as it says, “You shall not curse a judge.”

* Mitzvah 316: Not to curse the Nasi, which is the head of the yeshiva in the Land of Israel, as it says, “And a prince among your people you shall not curse.” The head of the yeshiva was the Nasi and the head of the beit din.

* Mitzvah 317: Not to curse any other Jew, one should not curse any Jew (as it says, “You shall not curse the deaf”). So regarding the Nasi, one transgresses two things, one transgresses the prohibition regarding a Jew, and then the extra prohibition of not cursing the Nasi.

* Mitzvah 318: Not to curse father and mother, as it says, “And one who curses his father or mother shall surely die.”

* Mitzvah 319: Not to strike father and mother, as it says, “And one who strikes his father or mother shall surely die.”

Mitzvot 320-329: Shabbat and Holidays

And now we will see various negative commandments regarding times. The next nine mitzvot are mitzvot regarding times.

* Mitzvah 320: Not to do work on Shabbat, as it says, “You shall not do any work,” one may not do any labors.

* Mitzvah 321: Besides the labors, there is the prohibition which is only a negative commandment, not to walk beyond the boundary of the city, one should not go out beyond the Shabbat boundary. The Sages said that this is the Shabbat boundary, two thousand mil. Like those who walk far on Shabbat, like people who walk far, far away. As it says, “Let no man go out from his place” on Shabbat, one should be local and one should not walk too far.

* Mitzvah 322: A mitzvah and apparently a painful one, not to punish on Shabbat, on Shabbat one may not give any punishments. As it says, “You shall not kindle fire in all your dwellings,” meaning one should not perform the punishment of burning, and all other punishments. The reason why “you shall not kindle fire” is extra, because fire is one of the thirty-nine labors, so “you shall not kindle fire” as a negative commandment applies to the death penalty on Shabbat. It also doesn’t mean the person who does the transgression with his hands, because he is anyway transgressing one of the thirty-nine labors, it means the judge who rules that one should give the death penalty. I think it doesn’t mean only fire, I think it means lashes and any punishment. We learn it from “you shall not kindle fire,” but it’s only a drash. The Rambam says this interpretation somewhere in Shabbat or in Sefer HaMitzvot, that there is the simple meaning “labor went out for a negative commandment, it went out to divide,” but besides this we learn from this a punishment. Here there is also a dispute among the poskim about what this is, whether this is only an obligation for the beit din. A father may not hit his children on Shabbat, that is also not allowed. It’s good to be strict. Tell your son that on Motzaei Shabbat you will hit him.

Okay.

* Mitzvah 323: Not to do work on the first day of Pesach, the first day of Pesach, as it says, “No work shall be done on them.”

* Mitzvah 324: The next mitzvah is the seventh day of Pesach, not to do work, as it says, “No work shall be done on them.”

* Mitzvah 325: The three hundred and twenty-fifth is not to do any labors on Shavuot, as it says in the verse, “You shall do no laborious work.”

* Mitzvah 326: The next mitzvah is not to do any labors on Rosh Hashanah, the first of the seventh month. The same thing, the same verse.

* Mitzvah 327: The same thing, not to do any labors on Yom Kippur. The same thing. Yom Kippur is more forbidden regarding labor, no difference for food preparation. As it says, “And you shall do no work.”

* Mitzvah 328: Not to do any labors on the first day of Sukkot.

* Mitzvah 329: And the last is not to do any labors on the eighth day, the last day of Sukkot.

Mitzvot 330: Forbidden Relations

Now one can learn various laws of forbidden relations.

Mitzvah 330, not to uncover the nakedness of a mother. To uncover means not to have relations with the mother, enough said. Here let’s go quickly, here one can go a bit quickly. The nakedness of a mother, the first forbidden relation is a mother. The wife of a father, a sister, and only with a sister.

Now one can learn various laws of forbidden relations.

(330) Not to uncover the nakedness of a mother, to uncover means not to have relations with the mother. The nakedness of a mother, the first forbidden relation is a mother. (331) Not to uncover the nakedness of a sister, a sister. And here there is an extra negative commandment that the sister means not only a sister from father and mother, but also a sister from father or from mother [(332)].

The next forbidden relation is (333) not to uncover the nakedness of a son’s daughter, a grandchild, a daughter of a son. And the next negative commandment is (334) not to uncover the nakedness of a daughter’s daughter, a grandchild from the daughter’s daughter.

Regarding (335) not to uncover the nakedness of a daughter, the daughter herself, he says: Where does it already stand in the Torah? A kal vachomer. The Sages derived from a kal vachomer that if one may not have relations with a son’s daughter, one certainly may not with a daughter herself. But still, from the oral tradition we learned that the prohibition of a daughter is from the body of the Torah like other forbidden relations.

Further there is (336) not to uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter. Or (340) not to uncover the nakedness of a father’s sister, an aunt from the father’s sister, and the same thing the mother’s sister [(339)]. And then there is (341) not to uncover the nakedness of the wife of the father’s brother, the wife of the uncle. And one also may not (342) not to uncover the nakedness of a son’s wife, the daughter-in-law, as it says, “The nakedness of your daughter-in-law you shall not uncover.”

(343) Not to uncover the nakedness of a brother’s wife, except the wife of his brother is only permitted in the case of yibum. (344) Not to uncover the nakedness of a wife’s sister, the sister-in-law, the sister of the wife.

Then there is (345) not to uncover the nakedness of a niddah, one’s own wife when she is a niddah, or any woman who is a niddah, as it says, “And to a woman in her menstrual impurity you shall not approach.”

And there is a prohibition (346) not to uncover the nakedness of a married woman.

Then there is the prohibition regarding an animal: (347) not to lie with an animal, that a man should not live with an animal, or (348) that a woman should not bring an animal upon her.

(349) Not to lie with a male, homosexual relations.

(350) Not to uncover the nakedness of the father himself.

(351) Not to uncover the nakedness of the father’s brother himself.

(352) Not to approach forbidden relations through things that lead to uncovering nakedness, such as hugging and kissing and hinting and jumping.

This is an addition to all the forbidden relations that were listed, that it’s not only the prohibition to have relations, but there is also as it says, “To any close relative you shall not approach to uncover nakedness.” There is no difference what level. People think that there is such a prohibition called “touching.” There is no such prohibition of touching; there is a prohibition of “approaching.” It is equally forbidden to hint, to jump, as hugging and kissing – anything that leads to uncovering nakedness.

From the oral tradition we learned that this is a warning against approaching that leads to uncovering nakedness. You cannot go laughing with someone and then say “I didn’t touch you,” there is no such permission, it’s a mistake. And also to say that a touch that doesn’t lead to improper thoughts is permitted, there is also no such thing. There is no prohibition of touching in itself, but there is a prohibition called approaching forbidden relations.

(353) A mamzer may not marry a daughter of Israel, a mamzer may not take a daughter of Israel, as it says, “A mamzer shall not enter the congregation of God.”

(354) There shall not be a harlot, that a Jewish daughter should not be a harlot. What does a harlot mean? And she is one who has relations without a ketubah and kiddushin. There is a prohibition on marrying a woman without a ketubah and kiddushin.

(355) One who divorces his wife may not remarry her after she married another. If one divorced his wife, he may take her back immediately afterward, but if she married another, afterward he may not. As it says, “Her first husband who sent her away may not return to take her.”

(356) A yevamah may not marry a stranger other than her yavam. A yevamah must wait for her yavam, as it says, “The wife of the deceased shall not be” to an outsider.

(357) One who violated a woman may not divorce his victim. If one violated a woman, he may not divorce his victim, but he must marry her and stay with her, as it says, “He may not send her away all his days.”

(358) One who defames his wife may not divorce her, also the same thing, if one defamed her, as it says regarding him, “He may not send her away all his days.”

(359) A eunuch may not marry a daughter of Israel. One who is a eunuch, whose reproductive organs have been damaged, cannot marry a daughter of Israel, as it says, “One with crushed organs shall not enter.”

(360) Not to castrate any male of any species, not a person nor an animal, beast, or bird. One may not castrate, damage the reproductive organs, as it says, “And in your land you shall not do.”

And the last group of mitzvot are the mitzvot of kingship:

(361) Not to appoint over Israel a man from the congregation of converts as a king. One should take from Jews. And the mitzvah is that one should not take any appointment, not only a king, but any important appointment one should not give to a convert from any converts, as it says, “You may not place upon yourself a foreign man.”

There is a question, because the Rambam in the transmitters of the Torah listed several converts. Listed are Shemaya and Avtalyon, they themselves were converts. Also listed is Rabbi Meir, who was from converts. Perhaps the Rambam wants to tell us with this that they were not transmitters of the Torah because they were “appointed” (given a position), because if so, it would not have been permitted. Rather, it appears that being among the transmitters of the Torah is not an appointment, but it is a teacher. Something whose authority comes because he was appointed, one may not. But something whose authority comes because he is a Jew, because he sits and learns, because he is among the greatest Torah scholars of the generations – that is permitted.

(362) The king shall not have too many horses, not too many horses.

(363) The king shall not have too many wives, not too many wives.

(364) The king shall not have too much silver and gold.

The Rambam says, these are, these are the 613, the six hundred and thirteen mitzvot, that were told to Moshe at Sinai. And to Moshe Rabbeinu were also told their general principles and their details and their fine points. “And all those general principles and details and fine points of each and every mitzvah, that is the Oral Torah that the beit din received from beit din.” The Rambam says here clearly the words that it was beit din from beit din, that there was never an individual who received from an individual. Where there were many, they received from many. It cannot be that someone made something up from his heart, because there was always an entire beit din.

And there are other mitzvot that were innovated after the giving of the Torah, which prophets and sages established and spread throughout all of Israel. Such as reading the Megillah, Chanukah candles (which the sages of the generation instituted), and the fast of Tisha B’Av. And hands – the mitzvah of washing hands, about which it says King Solomon instituted. And eruv also King Solomon.

And each and every one of these mitzvot also has interpretations and fine points. Just as there are interpretations and fine points on the mitzvot of the Torah, there are also interpretations and fine points on the mitzvot that the Sages instituted.

We already spoke about this once, that what people say that there are “seven rabbinic mitzvot” – the Rambam holds much more than seven. The Rambam holds several.

Ah, one minute, the Rambam listed one, two, three… no, he doesn’t count a number, he just takes a point. It’s a mitzvah. They already spoke about this once in some other shiur, that what people say that there are seven rabbinic mitzvot, it’s a complete mistake. The Rambam holds that there are more. Yichud, and other things.

“All these mitzvot that were newly instituted, we are obligated to accept them and observe them, as it says ‘you shall not deviate from all the matter.’” What does it say there? “That they will tell you” (Deuteronomy 17:11), the beit din. And he explains this to mean that the beit din of every generation, prophets and sages, each of whom had the status of a beit din, instituted [these things], and it is a mitzvah upon us to listen to them. There is an extra mitzvah that states “you shall not deviate from the matter.”

He says: “And they are not an addition to the mitzvot of the Torah.” These things are not an addition, and when they made them, they did not violate bal tosif (the prohibition against adding).

But if so, there is a question: “Didn’t the Torah warn ‘you shall not add to it’ and ‘you shall not diminish from it’” (Deuteronomy 13:1)? The Torah said you may not add!

He answers that “bal tosif” means “that a prophet should not come and instruct to innovate something and say that the Holy One, Blessed be He, commanded him with this mitzvah.” A prophet may not say, besides the 613, that the Almighty added more mitzvot to him. That would be violating bal tosif, “that the Holy One, Blessed be He, commanded to add to the mitzvot of the Torah or to diminish one of all these six hundred and thirteen mitzvot. But if a beit din or prophet who was in that time added a mitzvah by way of an enactment…”

But if a beit din with a prophet added… Why does he mention the prophet? It could be because the Gemara derives various things from the words of the prophets and the received tradition. That’s true, but it doesn’t come in the capacity of prophecy. “But if a beit din or prophet who was in that time added a mitzvah…” They instituted it by way of an enactment.

I think there are two or three approaches: by way of an enactment, or by way of instruction, or by way of a decree.

* By way of an enactment: is a new enactment, because a change occurred, it needs to be fixed, a repair of the world.

* By way of instruction: perhaps he means a temporary ruling? A hora’at sha’ah (emergency ruling)? Perhaps he means to say that at that time it was only an instruction, like during a war and the like.

* By way of a decree: I also understand, a decree means that they decreed as a safeguard.

When you see in Tosafot, this means that they didn’t add a new mitzvah. That is, they didn’t say that the Holy One, Blessed be He, commanded us to make an eruv, or to read the Megillah in its proper time. That’s not what they said, because if so, that would be said regarding tefillin, “they would be adding to the Torah.”

So what did they say? The Rambam brings: “Rather, this is what we say, that the prophets and beit din instituted and commanded us to read the Megillah in its proper time.” What is “in its proper time”? To read the Megillah, he means to say from the 11th until the 14th.

Why? “In order to mention the praise of the Holy One, Blessed be He, and the salvation He performed for us, and that He is close to those who call upon Him, in order to bless Him and praise Him, and in order to inform future generations that what He promised us in the Torah is true, ‘For what great nation is there that has God so close to it as the Lord our God whenever we call upon Him.'”

Again, what the beit din said, they didn’t say that there is another mitzvah besides the 613 mitzvot. Rather, they only said a new enactment. They didn’t say that the Almighty said it, rather they said that a new event occurred here, that Jews were helped, we will make a new halacha – not that the Almighty commanded us, but that we want to.

And it’s interesting, the Rambam says here that with this they strengthened the Torah itself. They didn’t say it’s an addition to the Torah, rather they strengthened the Torah. He means to say that reading the Megillah also has some similarity to a decree, because it strengthens the mitzvah of “and from the abundance of praises of the Holy One, Blessed be He.”

He includes here a lengthy explanation that seemingly isn’t necessary for his reason, but it’s very beautiful. He says, when we read the Megillah, we’re not just reading something old – a voice calling in the Megillah and in the Parah, the righteous say – we’re not reading an old story, rather we’re reminding ourselves that the Almighty loves us, and that the Almighty answers Jews, and that when Jews ask, the Almighty helps them.

It’s true that this is a beautiful piece of Rambam, in general what he brings from Purim and the like throughout the year. But here in this context, seemingly the way it fits in is only because the Rambam wants to explain the reason. He wants to bring you a little into the mind of the sage who institutes the new mitzvah. Not such a mindset of “I’m making new mitzvot that the Almighty didn’t give,” no. I can explain to you that there’s still a matter here, that the Almighty loves when Jews stand up for the Torah, it’s a mitzvah to publicize, it’s a great good thing, therefore I institute it.

It could be that he means to say that their enactments should also be within the Torah’s tools. They should look at what the Torah instituted. The Torah made it that when one has a salvation, one gives thanks. The Rambam says it’s an extra new mitzvah, he only explained to you the reasoning why they did it.

He wants to say that it’s not a new value, he didn’t create a new idea, it’s an idea that’s written in the Chumash. But even so, it’s not really necessary. They didn’t just make you bless and praise, they made it a form of reading the Megillah. If they had said that during davening one should have in mind the miracle, they wouldn’t have really added anything to you. They did add something to you, a form of a mitzvah, to read a certain book. Why isn’t it bal tosif? Because what makes bal tosif is not that it’s a new thing, but that they say [it’s from the Holy One, Blessed be He].

I’m thinking perhaps another thing. I think the Rambam simply wants to explain the reason here, he wants to bring into the mind of the one who makes it. Granted, if he says it’s a prophecy, I understand. But if the Almighty didn’t command it, what are you doing? So I’ve explained to you an example of an easy mitzvah to explain why he does it. It could also be that the Rambam holds that truly there is praise to God here, one must thank the Almighty, the Almighty wrote that one must thank Him. The thought is there, one understands that the Almighty gave a hint of what is important.

It could indeed be that what lies here is that a regular bal tosif takes away from the completeness of the Torah, this strengthens the Torah, because this is new testimony that the Almighty gave a Torah. Yes, it’s actually problematic. I asked then, may one say that the Almighty commanded? One may not hold so. It would actually help if yes, but through the fact that it’s a mitzvah from the words of the Sages, there is no concern of bal tosif.

Okay, did I give you the right part of the introduction? Now you know that all the mitzvot, we can already, thank God, make a summary of the entire Torah. The entire Torah in brief we have already learned. It’s very good, one needs to make a new thing to maintain the entire Torah. Now we have already acquired in summary, the entire Torah.