OU Torah Insights

By Rabbi Avraham Fischer. A publication of the Orthodox Union in cooperation with the Seymour J. Abrams Orthodox Union Jerusalem World Center

Parshat Beshalach - Shabbat Shirah
13 Shevat 5766 - February 10-11, 2006

The Israelites have been warned that no manna will fall on Shabbat, but some go out to collect nonetheless.

And Hashem said to Moshe, “How long will you refuse (MEIANTEM) to keep My commandments and My teachings? See that Hashem has given you the Shabbat, and therefore He gives you food for two days on Friday. Let each one remain at his position (SHVU TACHTAV); let no one leave his place (AL YEITZEI ISH MI’MEKOMO) on Saturday.” And the people rested on Saturday (Shemot 16:28-30).

If some acted distrustfully, why blame everyone? What is the meaning of this prohibition?

Rashi says

let no one leave his place (AL YEITZEI ISH MI’MEKOMO) means “don’t gather manna.” It explicitly prohibits carrying, one of the 39 forms of creative activity (melacha), as stated in Eiruvin 17b.

However, Rambam cites these verses (Laws of Shabbat 27:1) to prohibit leaving the Shabbat “boundary” (techum): One who goes outside the limits of the jurisdiction on Shabbat receives lashes, as it says, let no one leave his place (AL YEITZEI ISH MI’MEKOMO) on Saturday. The aforementioned place is the limit of the city, but the Torah did not provide a measurement for this limit. However, the Sages transmitted the tradition that this limit is beyond 12 mil [24,000 amot, or cubits], corresponding to the dimensions of the Israelite camp [see Yoma 75b]. In effect, Moshe our teacher was saying to them: “You shall not go outside the camp.” But by the decree of the Scribes, a person may go outside the city only up to 2000 amot, but beyond 2000 amot is forbidden, since 2000 amot is the suburb of the city (Bamidbar 35:5).

Ralbag (R. Levi ben Gershom, 1288-1344) suggests that for every amah a person occupies bodily, he requires an additional amah for use as fields and vineyards. Thus, the Torah’s prohibition allows for an additional camp’s- worth of space, 12 mils, beyond the boundaries of the camp.

Since techum Shabbat is not included in the 39 categories of melacha, there is no capital punishment. As a separate prohibition, it obligates corporal punishment. Rambam continues (¶ 2):

Consequently, a person may walk throughout the entire city on Shabbat, even if it is as large as Ninveh, whether or not it is surrounded by a wall. And also it is permitted for him to walk outside the city a distance of 2000 amot in every direction, such that the boundary is in the shape of a square, which allows him the corners. If he leaves beyond 2000 amot, he is given “lashes of rebellion” [for violating a Rabbinic law], up to 12 mils; however, if he leaves and distances himself from the city more than 12 mils, even one amah, he is lashed by Torah law.

Rambam’s source is Yer. Eiruvin 3:4, quoted by Rif (R. Yitzchak Alfasi, 1013-1103). Sefer HaChinuch (ascribed to either R. Aharon HaLevi or R. Pinchas HaLevi of Barcelona, mid-13th Century) concurs.

Ramban, however, argues that in the view of the Babylonian Talmud, there is no prohibition of techum Shabbat whatsoever in the Torah. As Rashi also says, the verses cited as the basis for techum Shabbat are for support only (asmachta), but all techum-related prohibitions are Rabbinic in origin.

The Karaites, who rejected the Talmud and interpreted the Torah as they saw fit, claimed that

let no one leave his place (AL YEITZEI ISH MI’MEKOMO)

was intended to confine the Jew to his home on Shabbat! R. Meshullam ben-Kalonymus (10th- 11th century), cited in Sefer Mitzvot Gadol (R. Moshe ben Yaakov of Coucy, 13th Century), proved that this would be inconsistent with the words of the prophets:

And it shall be that … every Shabbat all flesh shall come to prostrate before Me, says Hashem (Yesha’ya 66:23; see also Yechezkel 46:3).

While techum Shabbat does create restrictions, our verse reminds us See that Hashem has given you the Shabbat; Shabbat is not a prison confining a person to his house.

R. Zalman Sorotzkin (1881-1966), in Oznayim LaTorah, identifies two aspects of Shabbat: “the Shabbat of rest,” a notion which all peoples can comprehend, a “day off” for relaxation and recreation; and the uniquely Jewish dimension, “the Shabbat of holiness.”

Accordingly, R. Sorotzkin explains our verses: And Hashem said to Moshe, “How long will you refuse (MEIANTEM) This is written in the plural, because it is incumbent upon the community of Israel to motivate every member to keep Shabbat. All Israel is considered as one person, “wedded” as one to the Shabbat bride.

… to keep My commandments and My teachings Hashem extends His rebuke from Shabbat to the entire Torah, because only with a commitment to the “Shabbat of holiness” can the people be ready to accept the Torah.

See that Hashem has given you the Shabbat This is the “Shabbat of holiness.” When you contemplate what Hashem has done with the manna all week, and especially on Shabbat, you will understand that this heavenly aspect of Shabbat is a great gift bestowed on Israel alone.

Let each one remain at his position (SHVU TACHTAV) “The Israelite Shabbat demands of us introspection, thought, prayer and study of Hashem’s Torah. The Jew who observes his Shabbat properly is like one who has been walking in a marketplace, teeming with men and beasts, buyers and sellers, all running and shouting, day after day. Suddenly, he stops and asks himself: Where am I running? What am I doing in this market? What is the point of my shouting and agitation? How long will it continue? … He finds his answer in Hashem’s Torah: Only the Shabbat slows his race and straightens his path, even during the six days of activity.” let no one leave his place (AL YEITZEI ISH MI’MEKOMO) on Saturday.

Neither techum Shabbat nor the prohibition of carrying (the least of the melachot) can be comprehended in a “Shabbat of rest.” These special restrictions lay the basis for the “Shabbat of holiness.”

"Ain Torah K'Torat Eretz Yisrael!"- Torah from Aloh Na'aleh*
Parshat Beshalach

Jewish history exists of many epoch-making events. However, these events have not all made an inroad into the consciousness of the Jewish people. For this to happen, the event must become, as the Jewish philosopher Emile Fackenheim calls it, a root- xperience, a moment in which the hand of God becomes most apparent through His active participation in Jewish history. Still this alone is not yet sufficient. It is also necessary that the experience take place in front of the multitude, as in the case of the splitting of the Red Sea, when “even the maidservants saw what the prophet Yechezkel ben Buzi could not see.” However, above and beyond all, a third element is necessary. It must be possible for later generations to have access to this vision. Only then can one speak of an actual root experience. If a vision cannot be shared with later generations, it will turn into a claim of the past and lose much of its religious value within Judaism. The most important quality of a miracle is not that it is supernatural, or super-historical, but that it is a moment which, even when it can be argued away in terms of science and brought into the nexus of nature and normal history, remains miraculous in the eyes of the person to whom it occurred. This is what happened at the splitting of the Red Sea.

The event of the establishment of the State of Israel was no doubt an epoch-making event. The most important religious dimension of this event is the abiding astonishment which it caused after the events of the Holocaust. Only when the establishment of the State of Israel is seen in the light of the miracle at the Red Sea, will its fascination continue. And this is exactly where the greatest danger towards Israel’s continued existence lies. Just as we are informed that the miracle at the Red Sea lost its religious impact on the Israelites and normalcy became the call of the day, so we see a mentality of psychological denial and existential dullness in the State of Israel in which many people, but most of all its leadership, no longer understand the wonder of the State’s very existence. And just as the Israelites in the desert paid a heavy price, so will Israeli society, if it does not force itself once again to look through the clouds, see the miracle and rejuvenate itself through it.

Nathan Lopes Cardoza
Jerusalem


*D’var Torah from Aloh Na'aleh: an initiative of former North American Rabbis and laymen who successfully made Aliyah, aimed at highlighting the centrality of Israel and promoting Aliyah. They send emissaries – Rabbis, academicians, and others – on speaking-tours throughout the U.S. and Canada.

Contact information:

Rabbi Yerachmiel Roness , Exec. Dir., Aloh Naaleh,
At the OU Center, 22 Keren HaYesod
Alohnaaleh@israelcenter.co.il
Tel.(02) 566-7787 ex. 254