Igrot Kodesh · Letter 8889 — Faith & Bitachon

(5724)

Regarding the notes (note 1: This letter is addressed to Rav Yisrael Yitzchak Piekarzki, rector of the central Yeshivah* Tomchei Temimim* Lubavitch*, in New York. See, regarding him, letters no. 7242 and 7572.) on the Sifri*, at the beginning of Parshas* Berachah*: Responding to the sons of Eisav* who asked Him what is contained in the Torah* (note 2: When Hashem proposed it to all the nations before giving it to the children of Yisrael*.), the Holy One, blessed be He, said: "You shall not murder." Similarly, He said to the sons of Ammon* and Moav*: "You shall not commit adultery," and to the sons of Yishmael*: "You shall not steal." However, this was not the novelty introduced by the giving of the Torah*, for these Precepts also belong to the seven Mitzvos* of the descendants of Noach*. And, one should consult, on this subject, Tractate* Yevamos* 47b, which says: "He forbade us idolatry." One should also see what the commentators say at that reference.

However, one can explain that it was necessary to present these Mitzvos* to them, precisely, because they considered them the most severe, inasmuch as they went against their deep personality. This is, moreover, why each of these peoples responded: "We exist only for this" (note 3: To do what Hashem wished to forbid them.). Subsequently, this was forbidden to them through the seven Mitzvos* of the descendants of Noach*, but the distinction that must be made in this matter is quite clear. At the giving of the Torah*, the Holy One, blessed be He, was asking them to accept it of their own free will (note 4: The Rebbe* underlines the expression: "of their own free will.") and it is to this that they responded: "We exist only for this," thus justifying why they could not receive it.

What has just been said allows one to understand simply the commentary of the Mechilta* on the verse Yisro* 20:2, which takes up the explanation of the Sifri* and concludes: "Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar teaches: The descendants of Noach* do not manage to observe their seven Mitzvos*, even though they committed themselves to them. All the more so is this the case for the Mitzvos* of the Torah*!" And the Sifri* adopts the same position, saying: "One might think that they knew of the Torah* and accepted it. Regarding this it is said: 'They will not observe them.' In fact, the descendants of Noach* did not even manage to put into practice their own Mitzvos*, to which they had committed. Subsequently, they went back on this commitment and it was transmitted to the children of Yisrael*." This is self-evident.

The Sifri* explains that the verse: "You shall not murder" is an addition, concerning the children of Yisrael*, to the prohibition that had been made to the descendants of Noach* against shedding blood, but this is somewhat difficult to accept. If this were the case, the essential part of the explanation would be missing from the book. One can, however, support this assertion by the response given to the descendants of Ammon* and Moav*, who reject adultery, as it is said: "The daughters of Lot conceived from their father." At the giving of the Torah*, the prohibition of forbidden relations was added to this. Similarly, the response given to the sons of Eisav* can be compared to the verse: "You shall live by your sword." It is quite clear that the blessing of Yitzchak* was not intended to lead him to transgress the Commandments of the descendants of Noach*.

As for the assertion of Midrash* Shemos Rabbah*, chapter 30, paragraph 9, according to which the non-Jews received the outlines of the Mitzvos*, one should consult the commentary of the Ramban* on the verse Vayishlach* 34:13, which says: "In my opinion, the judgments that have been enumerated..." You should also see Tractate* Chullin* 92a, which specifies: "The Mitzvos* to which the children of Yisrael* are obligated."

ח'תתפט

[תשכ"ד]

... לההערות בספרי ר"פ ברכה: מה שאמר הקב"ה לבני עשיו (על השאלה מה כתיב בתורה) - לא תרצח ועד"ז לבני עמון ומואב - לא תנאף ולבני ישמעאל - לא תגנוב, והרי לא זהו החידוש במתן תורה, כי כהנ"ל הם מז' מצות ב"נ.

- ולהעיר מיבמות (מז, ב) אסיר לן ע"ז וראה שם במפרשים.

י"ל כי הוכרח לומר להם דוקא ע"ד מצות אלו. כי הם דוקא החמורות בשבילם היפך ענינם (כדמוכח מהמענה דכאו"א מהנ"ל "כל עצמו").

ואף שבלאה"כ נצטוו ע"ז (בז' מצות ב"נ) - י"ל בפשטות שהרי בשעת מ"ת שאלם הקב"ה היקבלו תורה ברצון וע"ז ענו כל עצמו כו' ולכן אי"א לקבל כו'.

ועפ"ז מובנת בפשטות המכילתא (יתרו כ, ב) דגם שם איתא כהנ"ל בספרי ומסיים: ארשב"א אם בז' מצות שנצטוו ב"נ שקבלו עליהן אינן יכולין לעמוד בהן ק"ו למצות שבתורה. ועד"ז משמע גם בספרי שמסיים יכול שמעו וקבלו (התורה) ת"ל ואותם לא יעשו ואומר כו' אלא אפילו ז"מ שקיבלו עליהם ב"נ לא יכלו לעמוד בהם עד שפרקום ונתנום לישראל. וק"ל.

לתרץ הספרי שכוונת הכתוב בהלא תרצח כו' היינו מה שמוסיף בציווי זה לבנ"י - על האיסור דשפ"ד דב"נ - דוחק קצת, דא"כ העיקר חסר מן הספר. אלא שקצת ראי' לזה ממענה בני עמון ומואב בשלילת לא תנאף ממש"נ ותהרינה שתי בנות לוט מאביהן, דניתוסף איסור זה בג"ע במ"ת, אבל מותר לב"נ. כן ממענה בני עשיו ממש"נ על חרבך תחי', דפשיטא דלא תהי' ברכת יצחק לעבור על מצות ב"נ.

למרז"ל בשמו"ר (פ"ל, ט) דלעכו"ם ניתנו מצות גולמיות - יש להעיר מפי' הרמב"ן (וישלח לד, יג): ועל דעתי הדינין שמנו כו'. וראה ג"כ חולין (צב, סע"א) ל' מצות שקיבלו עליהם ב"נ כו'.

ח'תתפט
האגרת היא להג"ר ישראל יצחק פיקרסקי. אגרות נוספות אליו - לעיל ח"כ ז'תקעב. חי"ט ז'רמב.