Image from www.zazzle.ca
[First posted November 11, 2013.
A national God who regulates every aspect of His chosen people’s life—that is the God of Israel.
Imagine including in the No-No’s such practices as transgender dressing, interweaving two different thread sources, sowing different seed species, and the like.
In the case of ‘transgender dressing’, most likely it is not the ‘dress’ that is being regulated but transgender preference that is the issue. What we see today in sexuality is not new, it is as old as biblical times; human nature has not changed much since; what has changed is tolerance or acceptability of individual ‘differences’.
‘Second nature’ which is a choice more than an inherited nature, has replaced ‘First Nature’ which is God’s original design. Just look at what works naturally vis-a-vis this artificial and unnatural world that humankind has recreated, thinking it could improve further on the Creator’s original, how presumptuous indeed! Surely the all-wise Creator knows what of He speaks but unfortunately, man thinks he knows better and continues to ignore or violate all these rules; after all, the thinking is — ‘it’s so antiquated, it’s passé and obsolete, for Israelites only and not for us.’ And so we reap the consequences of ignorance or violation of the Law-Giver’s Torah. Just look at the world today—-is there true joy, contentment, peace, justice in the world despite the giant leaps in terms of advances in almost every area of learning, particularly science and technology?
Commentary here is from the best of Jewish minds as collected in one resource book by Dr. J.H. Hertz, Pentateuch and Haftorahs; our translation of choice is EF/Everett Fox, The Five Books of Moses..—Admin1.]
——————————————–
Deuteronomy/Davarim 22
1-3. RESTORING LOST PROPERTY
We have in these three verses a repetition of the law in Exod. XXIII,4,5, regarding our duty of restoring the strayed ox or ass, and of the lifting up of the fallen beast of burden. The law is here widened to include other lost articles that require restoration to their owners. Exodus speaks of the things belonging to ‘thine enemy’; here the wider term,’ thy brother,’ is used. Whether thy neighbour be thy brother or enemy, his property must be protected and restored.
1 You are not to see the ox of your brother or his sheep wandering-away
and hide yourself from them;
you are to return, yes, return them to your brother.
ox . . . sheep. These names are typical, and the law applies to all domestic animals alike.
hide thyself from them. Fail to notice them or trouble about them, saying, ‘It is no concern of mine.’
2 Now if your brother not be near to you
or you do not know him,
you are to bring it into the midst of your house,
it is to be-there with you until your brother makes-inquiry about it,
then you are to return it to him.
restore it. Failure to do is accounted theft, and punished with a fine one-fifth over and above the value, if denied on oath; Lev. V,20-24 (Chap. VI,1-5 in English Bible).
3 Thus you are to do with his donkey,
thus you are to do with his garment,
thus you are to do with anything lost of your brother, that is lost by him, and you find it:
you are not allowed to hide yourself.
4. ASSISTING TO LIFT FALLEN BEASTS
4 You are not to see the donkey of your brother, or his ox, fallen by the wayside,
and hide yourself from them;
you are to raise, yes, raise it up (together) with him.
help him. lit. ‘help with him’; i.e. in company with the owner. The owner must not stand by idle and leave the work to others. A Chassidic Rabbi lamented that this law was little observed, and he devoted himself to its fulfillment. He was continually to be seen in the streets, helping one man to load his wagon, another to drag his cart out of the mire.
(c) MISCELLANEOUS LAWS
FIRST GROUP
5. DISTINCTION OF SEX IN APPAREL
5 There is not to be a man’s item on a woman,
a man is not to clothe himself in the garment of a woman,
for an abomination to YHVH your God is anyone doing these!
An interchange of attire between man and woman would promote immodesty and, in consequence, immorality. This law is probably directed against rites in Syrian heathenism, which included exchange of garments by sexes and led to gross impurities.
6-7. SPARING THE MOTHER BIRD
The ground sympathy here is the sacredness of the parental relationship. The mother-bird is sacred as a mother; and length of days is promised to those who regard the sanctity of motherhood in this sphere, as it is promised to those who observe the Fifth Commandment. ‘When the mother is sent away, she does not see the taking of her young ones, and does not feel any pain. The eggs over which the bird sits, and the brood that are in need of the mother, are generally unfit for food. Consequently, this commandment will cause man to leave the whole nest untouched. The Torah provides that such grief should not be caused to cattle (Lev. XXII,28) or birds; how much more careful must we be that we should not cause grief to our fellowmen’ (Maimonides); see XXV,4.
[EF] Mixed Clothing (22:5): This prohibition touches on a frequent theme in Leviticus: the improper mixing of categories.
Image from www.bible-archaeology.info
6 When you encounter the nest of a bird before you in the way,
in any tree or on the ground,
(whether) fledglings or eggs,
with the mother crouching upon the fledglings or upon the eggs,
you are not to take away the mother along with the children.
7 Send-free, send-free the mother,
but the children you may take for yourself,
in order that it may go-well with you and you may prolong (your) days.
prolong thy days. Rabbi Akiba, referring to this promise of long life, supposes the case of a man who climbs a tower and takes the young from the nest, sparing the mother bird in accordance with this commandment. But on his way down, he falls and dies. To the question, ‘Where is the well-being and prolonging of days in this case?’ Akiba answers, ‘In the Life to Come, where all goes well and all is abiding.’
8. PARAPETS TO HOUSE ROOFS
As the houses in all Eastern countries possessed flat roofs, which were used for walking, sleeping, and other domestic purposes, it was necessary to erect a parapet to prevent accidental falling off. According to the Rabbis, the parapet was to be at least two cubits high.
[EF] Mother Bird and Child Bird (22:6-7): Another indicator of the humane concerns of Deuteronomy. There is an obvious parallel between the language here and that of the Fifth Commandment (honoring parents): “prolonging days” and “going-well” as a result of following these laws.
8 When you build a new house,
you are to make a parapet for your roof,
that you not put blood-guilt on your house
if someone-falling falls from it.
blood. Blood-guiltiness; failure to protect human life exposes the builder, owner, or resident of the house to blood-guiltiness in the eyes of God. The Rabbis extended this prohibition to cover all cases where danger to life exists through our negligence; such as keeping a dangerous dog, or placing a broken ladder against a wall.
9. AGAINST MIXING SEEDS
This law–as well as the two laws following it against ploughing with an ox and an ass together, and the wearing of a garment composed of a mixture of wool and linen—is based on the idea that God has made distinctions in the natural world which it is wrong for man to obliterate by processes of intermixing; see on Lev. XIX,19.
[EF] The Safe Roof (22:8): Deuteronomy, with its concern human life, prevents the shedding of innocent blood once again.
9 You are not to sow your vineyard with two-kinds,
lest you forfeit-as-holy the full-yield from the seed that you sow, and the produce of the vineyard.
two kinds. Heb. kilayim, mutually exclusive kinds.
forfeited. let. ‘to become consecrated’; the resultant crop would have to be consigned to the flames. The man would lose both his grapes and his other crop, as a penalty for his irreligious act.
10. YOKING AN OX AND AN ASS
10 You are not to plow with an ox and a donkey together.
ox and an ass. They differ greatly in their nature, in size, and strength; it is, therefore, cruel to the weaker animal to yoke them together.
11. SHAATNES
11 You are not to clothe yourself (in) shaatnez,
wool and flax together.
mingled stuff. The etymology and meaning of this word are both uncertain. Some derive it from the Egyptian. The reason underlying the prohibition may possibly be the same as that against mixing seeds, v. 9. The Rabbis class it with the prohibition of swine’s flesh and other chukkim, which provoke the ridicule of scoffers, Jewish and non-Jewish, but which the loyal Israelite nevertheless willingly obeys, because they are the commands of his Father Who is in Heaven.
12. TZITZIS
[EF] More Forbidden Mixtures (22:9-11): AS Greenstein (1984a) explains, hybrids in various areas were understood as appropriate only for God (or, in the case of clothing, the priests).
12 Twisted-cords you are to make yourself
on the four corners of your tunic-covering with which you cover yourself.
twisted cords. Heb. gedilim; lit. ‘twisted threads’ identified by the Rabbis with the tzitzis in Num. XV,37-41. Among all peoples, knots have been used as reminders and symbols. The tzitzis are a constant reminder of the special relationship in which the Israelite stands to God and the consequent duty of withstanding temptation to sin. There is a well-known Talmudic story of a reprobate and riotous liver who was recalled to his better self by the tzitzis he wore, so as to break completely with his wicked past.
(9) HOLINESS OF MARRIAGE
13-21. CHARGES AGAINST A BRIDE
He who falsely accuses his wife of unchastity during betrothal shall be rebuked, fined, and he loses the right ever to divorce her. However, if such charge be true, it is a case of capital punishment. Betrothal in Bible times united the bridal couple as husband and wife for all purposes, save living together; and any infidelity on the part of the wife was considered adultery; see v. 22. ‘In considering these plain-spoken laws (v. 13-21), it is just to remember that they represent an upward stage in the struggle against the animal passions of men. That we do not need some of them today is due to the fact that their enforcement under religious sanction was needed at the time of their origin. It is only ignorance or ingratitude which can cavil at their spirit or their form’ (G.A. Smith).
[EF] Fringes (22:12): Paralleling Num. 15:37-41- but this time with no rationale. In Numbers, the “tassels” were to serve as a constant reminder of the divine commandments.
13 When a man takes a woman (in marriage)
and comes in to her, and (then) hates her,
and hate her. The man had entered on marriage merely for the satisfaction of his passions, and then turned against his wife by a revulsion of feeling frequent in such characters (Bertholet); see on XXI,14 and II Sam. XIII,15.
[EF] The “Damaged” Wife (22:13-21): A law that alternately upholds a woman’s dignity (making her husband pay f he has baselessly accused her) and may lead to taking her life (if the accusation is true). In the former case, they must remain married, and the husband has no possibility of divorcing her.
Virginity for women at marriage was an important value in ancient Israel as elsewhere. Frymer-Kensky (1992a) notes that this case parallels the one of the rebellious son above: the prints’ stars and welfare is jeopardized; the parents can bring about the child’s death; and the elders have the authority to make a ruling, while the public has the power to put the offender to death.
14 and puts on her capricious charges,
giving out against her an evil name,
and says:
This woman I took-in-marriage
and came near her,
but I did not find in her signs-of-virginity:
- Image from www.womeninthebible.net
15 the father of the girl and her mother are to take her
and bring out the signs-of-virginity of the girl to the elders of the town, to the gate.
the tokens. Such evidence was regarded as essential by many ancient races, though the absence of those tokens is by no means conclusive of guilt. Some of the Rabbis, therefore, took the phrase concerning the tokens as a metaphorical expression for clearly establishing the falsity of his charge by witnesses and expert evidence.
16 Then the father of the girl is to say to the elders:
I gave my daughter to this man as a wife, and he came-to-hate-her.
17 Now here: he has put out capricious charges,
saying:
I did not find in your daughter signs-of-virginity;
but these are the signs-of-virginity of my daughter!
He is to spread out the garment before the presence of the elders of the town;
18 then the elders of that town are to take the man and discipline him.
chastise him. Inflict the corporal punishment, ‘thirty-nine stripes’ upon him (Talmud).
19 They are to fine him a hundred units-of-silver,
and are to give (it) to the father of the girl-
for he gave out an evil name
upon a virgin of Israel.
His she is to remain as a wife, he is not allowed to send her away all his days.
a hundred shekels. Nominally £13 15s ; then the equivalent of a far greater sum.
unto the father. Whose family name had been defamed. ‘If the damsel is an orphan, the fine goes to her’ (Talmud).
put her away. Divorce her.
20 But if this matter was true
-there were not found signs-of-virginity on the girl-
this thing. The charge, see on v. 15.
be true. And—add the Rabbis—if at the time she had been warned by witnesses of the serious consequences of her conduct.
21 they are to bring out the girl to the entrance of her father’s house
and are to stone her, the men of her town, with stones
so that she dies,
for she has done a disgrace in Israel
by playing-the-whore in her father’s house.
So you shall burn out the evil from your midst!
to the door of her father’s house. Not at the city gate, because it was her father’s house, which he had dishonoured.
wanton deed. Or, ‘folly’ (AV). Heb. nevalah. The Heb. word does not indicate weakness of reason, but a rooted incapacity to discern moral and religious relations, leading to an intolerant repudiation in practice of the claims which they impose’ (Driver).
wanton deed in Israel. Or, ‘folly against Israel’. Her action is an offence against the national standard, a crime against the national conscience. ‘She did not merely degrade herself, but every virgin in Israel’ (Sifri).
22. ADULTERY
[EF] Adultery (22:22): The definition used here is the classic biblical one: a married woman and a man, married or not. In Mesopotamia it was possible to pay off the aggrieved husband, but not in ancient Israel, where adultery was seen as attacking the moral foundations of society and perhaps also the symbolism of the close relationship between God and Israel.
22 When there is found a man lying with a woman espoused to a spouse,
they are to die, the two-of-them,
the man who lies with the woman and the woman.
So you shall burn out the evil from Israel!
both of them die. The man as well as the woman; Lev. XX,10. There is to be no double standard of conjugal morality in Israel.
As in the case of all capital offences, the Rabbis required that the guilty parties be warned of the seriousness of their proposed action. Without such warning (hathraah), the death penalty could not be carried out. Furthermore, the law of evidence in capital offences and the proof of premeditation were made so severe that a death verdict was almost impossible. R. Tarphon and R. Akiba said, ‘If we had been in the Sanhedrin, a man would never have been executed by it.’ A few lines before it is stated, ‘A Sanhedrin that executes a person once in seven years is called destructive.’ R. Eleazar ben Azaryah says, ‘One in seventy years.’
23 When there is a girl, a virgin, spoken-for to a man,
and a(nother) man finds her in the town, and lies with her,
23-27. A BETROTHED VIRGIN
[EF] Raper-or Not (22:23-27): In this case a woman is all but married, yet a distinction is made between an urban and a rural setting in terms of her fate. Note that her consent is not an issue here; as a betrothed woman, she had no right to give it (Frymer-Kensky 1992a).
Rape of an Unattached Woman (22:28-29): The difference here, of course, is that the woman does not “belong” to a man. The rape must result in marriage, but since no husband’s privilege has been violated, the crime is neither a capital one nor even a criminal one. It is, however, seen as a “disgrace” (see Gen. 34:7).
24 you are to take-out both of them to the gate of that town
and are to stone them with stones
so that they die
-the girl because she did not cry out in the town
and the man because he humbled the wife of his neighbor.
So you shall burn out the evil from your midst!
25 But if (it is) in the field the man finds the spoken-for girl
and the man strongly-seizes her and lay with her,
then he is to die, the man who lay with her, he alone.
26 But to the girl you are not to do anything,
the girl did not (incur) sin (deserving) of death,
for just as (the case of) the man who rises up against his neighbor and murders his life,
so is this matter:
no sin. Where there is compulsion, force majeure, there is no sin, or any of the legal consequences of sin.
27 for in the open-field he found her;
when the spoken-for girl cried out,
there was no deliverer for her.
cried. The woman is given the benefit of the doubt (Rashbam, Sforno). A similar provision, with similar phrasing, is found in the newly-discovered Hittite Law, going back to the year 1350 B.C.E. It seems, therefore, that in the laws concerning rape we have the Common Law of the more advanced Semitic nations, just as we have seen in the Code of Hammurabi parallels to the Civil Legislation in Exodus.
28 When a man finds a girl, a virgin who has never been spoken-for,
and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found:
28-29. A VIRGIN NOT BETROTHED
The man must pay the ‘bride-price’ and marry her, without right of divorce.
29 the man who lies with her is to give to the father of the girl fifty units-of-silver;
his shall she be, as a wife,
because he has humbled her;
he is not allowed to send her away, all his days.