Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld's
Weekly
Parasha-Page

This week's issue has been dedicated to the memory of Chaim Yissacher (ben Yaakov) Smulewitz by his two daughters, Jeri Turkel and Marsha Weinblatt, and by his son, Moshe Smulewitz.

Parashat Ki-Tetze 5756

FINGER IN EAR

When you encamp against your enemies, be careful to refrain from any wrong-doings.... You should set aside a place outside of the encampment and you should go there [to relieve yourselves]. You should have a shovel ("Yated") in addition to the rest of your equipment ("Azenecha"). When you go out [to "relieve yourselves,] you should dig with it and cover up your excrement. [Do all this,] because Hashem goes in the midst of your encampment to save you and to place your enemies in your power. Your camp must remain holy, lest He see in you a repugnant doing and He will cease helping you.
(Devarim 23:10, 13-14)

Bar Kapara said: What does it mean "You shall have a "Yated" (shovel or peg) in addition to "Azenecha" (your equipment)? Don't read the word, "Azenecha" but rather "Aznecha" (your ear). If a person hears something improper being discussed (e.g., Lashon Hara -- slander or gossip), he should place his fingers in his ears. [That is, the verse is hinting that one should use the handy "pegs" Hashem gave him to stop his "ears" from hearing what they shouldn't hear.] (Ketubot 5a)

Bar Kapara's interpretation of the verse at hand certainly seems bizarre. The end of the verse clearly states that the Yated of the verse is to be used to dig and cover excrement. How can Bar Kapara interpret this verse as referring to fingers, ears and Lashon Hara? Secondly, why did Bar Kapara read the word as "Aznecha" against the Massoretic "Azenecha?" True, the Torah scroll itself is not punctuated, which allows for such a misreading of the verse. Nevertheless, if we may punctuate the Torah at will ignoring the Mesorah, every person would create a new Torah with a different set of Mitzvot. This would clearly defeat the perpetuation of the Torah and its religion!

II

Rambam (Maimonides) in "Moreh Nevuchim" (3:43) contends, based on Bar Kapara's teaching, that wherever Chazal (our Rabbis) say "Don't read the word such, but rather such," they are simply expressing their teachings in prosaic manner. The verse itself does not hint at the thought they are discussing in the least. (See also Sh'lah -- section on Torah Shebe'al Peh, end of letter "Aleph" -- and Torah Temimah -- Bamidbar 19:21 -- who follow the Rambam's approach to a limited extent. In his "Introduction to the Mishnah," the Ramban uses a similar approach to explain the significance of the rabbinic "Asmachta.")

However, numerous Rishonim and Acharonim reject the Rambam's approach as an oversimplification. Although it is obvious that Chazal are not trying to change the Massoretic pronunciation of the verse, it is still possible that the ideas they express with their prosaic "Don't read the word such..." are indeed based on a lesson learned from the verse in its literal sense. (Ritva to Rosh Hashana 16b differs with the Rambam's understanding of "Asmachta" based on a similar argument.)

A number of works have been published in defense of this more textual understanding of the "Don't read it such ..." phraseology (c.f. Shivrei Luchot, Rav Yechiel of Nemerov, d. 1648; Korei B'emet, Rav Yitzchak Bamberger of Wurtzberg, 1871 -- see also Parasha Page Chukat 5754, part II). I would like to suggest a new understanding of Bar Kapara's words that conforms to this latter approach. (See also Koreh B'emet p. 39, Kli Yakar ad. loc., for other explanations.)

III

The Vilna Gaon (Mishlei 24:31, Imrei Noam to Berachot 8a) shows that when Chazal offer advice regarding relieving one's self, their words carry an added dimension. Aside from the simple meaning of their words, they are also alluding to relieving one's self of the mental spoilage and rot that brings one to adopt unacceptable behavior. If relieving one's self of excrement means abandoning unacceptable motivations, then the excrement one is commanded to cover in the verse from our Parasha may allude to hiding one's sacrilegious acts. Such a concept is in fact discussed in a number of sources:

Rebbi Avahu said in the name of Rebbi Chanina: It is better for a person to do a wrongdoing in secret, that he should not desecrate the Holy Name publicly. The elder Rebbi Ela'i said: If a person feels an uncontrollable urge to sin, let him go to a place where he is not known, wear black clothing and do there what he desires, rather than desecrate the Holy Name publicly.
(Kiddushin 40a)

Chazal certainly do not sanction sinning in secret. Rather, they are addressing an extreme case, where someone feels compelled uncontrollably to sin. Under such circumstances, he is advised to at least "cover up" his unworthy act. The best course of action, though, is to control his impulses and refrain from the act. No matter how compelling it seems to him at the time, in the final analysis, it is *he* who retains control over his desires and not vice versa. (See esp. Rif Moed Kattan 17a.)

There is, however, an instance where even the Torah itself takes into account an uncontrollable desire and relaxes its rules accordingly --the case of a warring army camp. The Torah permits the warriors caught up in the fervor of war to take women from the defeated nation as they see fit ("Eshet Yefat To'ar").

Because the beauty of the enemy women is liable to invoke so strongly the desires of the Jewish warriors (-the enemy women used to dress up and apply their finest perfumes in order to seduce their captors, Rashi to Devarim 21:13), the Torah reluctantly permitted them to the warriors. Better to permit the warriors to do something morally improper, than to prohibit the act and cause them to desecrate the Torah outright.
(Rashi, Kiddushin end of 21b).

Similarly, the Torah permits warriors, when hungry, to eat all the prohibited foods during a war (Rambam Hilchot Melachim 8:1 -- see however Ramban to Devarim 6:10 who differs with the Rambam on this point).

Our verse, although ostensibly discussing the treatment of excrement in the army camp, may now be said to allude to the unpleasant situation that arises during war time. It may be warning us that when warriors "leave" the normally accepted Jewish behavior, they should at least not do so publicly. They should "cover up" their actions so that they will not be seen by their fellow Jews.

Rabbenu Bachye does, in fact, tells us that the Talmud warns to take the Yefat Toar in as covert a manner as possible. He then quotes the end of our verse to support this teaching! (Rabbenu Bachye, Devarim 21:10, "Ve'heveita")

IV

The concealment of sin serves a dual purpose. First, if others would hear of the transgression, it would weaken their own resolve ("If so-and-so did this act, why shouldn't I...?"). Second, those who witnessed the transgression would find it hard to resist the temptation to say Lashon Hara and pass on the information ("Do you know what so-and-so did...?"). This would cause resentment, denial and internal quarreling among the troops. This was, in fact, a major issue during wartime, as pointed out by the Ramban (Devarim 23:10, see also Vayikra Rabba 26:2).

We can now understand the lesson learned from our verse. The Torah warns the warriors to conceal the occasional sin that they sin under duress because it may have a detrimental effect on the moral standards of others who hear of their plight. Similarly, it is incumbent that we avoid *listening* when someone is telling of the moral decline of a fellow Jew, that we may not learn from his bad example or provoke his animosity.

We can now understand why Bar Kapara said that our verse may be read as, "You shall use a finger to stop up your ear" from hearing of another Jew's misdeeds. Although this isn't the literal meaning of the verse, it *is* a lesson that is *learned* from the literal meaning of the verse!

Visit the
Dafyomi Advancement Forum