שמות כ:ז - לא תשא את שם ה' אלקיך לשוא כי לא ינקה ה' את אשר ישא את שמו לושא.
While most of the laws of the Decalogue are basic laws of religion and humanity, one law is particularly surprising. 20:7 records, "You are not to take up the name of G-d in vain, for G-d will not clear him that takes up His name in vain," (adaptation of Fox, 1995, translation). The law appears to be very important since the end of verse records that G-d will punish those who violate the law and it is included in the Decalogue, but what is the prohibition? What does it man "to take up G-d's name in vain?"
N. Leibowitz (1976a, pp. 324-333) review three different approaches to understanding 20:7. The first approach is that the verse prohibits a person from swearing in vain while using G-d's name. The Rambam (Laws of swearing 1:4-7) lists the four types of swearing that come under this prohibition, but all four cases are pretty rare. For example, one case is where a person swears that a man is a woman, and a second case is where one swears that a man is a man. Could it be that the Torah included in the Decalogue these rare cases? Ibn Ezra (on 20:7) attempts to defend the importance of this law by arguing that it is very common for people to profane G-d’s name by swearing falsely using G-d's name, and that this is the most serious prohibition in the Decalogue. Yet, if the Torah meant to forbid swearing, why did the Torah not refer to swearing explicitly as for example it does in Vayikra 19:12?
The second approach to understanding 20:7 is from the Talmud (Berakhot 33a, in the name of Rav or Resh Lakish or Resh Lakish and Rav Yochanon) that the verse refers to making a berakha le-vatalah, an unnecessary blessing. With this approach the person is saying G-d's name in a blessing, and it is in vain since the blessing is unnecessary. Yet, could this really be the intent of the verse? There is only one blessing recorded in the Torah, birkat ha-mazon, and it is recorded in Devarim 8:10. Did the people even know about birkat ha-mazon by the Decalogue?
The third approach to understanding 20:7 is from Ramban (on 20:7) and Cassuto (1967, p. 243) that the verse prohibits invoking the name of G-d in conjunction with "worthless practices," and he relates this idea to various pagan practices. (The Rambam, Laws of oaths, 12:11, seems to derive this prohibition from Devarim 28:58.) N. Leibowitz extends this approach to include invoking G-d to deify various causes or "isms" (socialism?), when a person claims he is acting out of a desire to worship G-d but really he is acting based on his own interest or desires. N. Leibowitz likes this third approach since it can be connected with the previous verses that record the prohibition of idolatry.
Yet, the third approach does not specifically relate to the recitation of G-d's name but to people who ascribe their actions to G-d when they are not. The person is insincere, possibly a liar, but usually he is not invoking G-d's name, unless one argues that as part of his "worthless practices" he mentions G-d's name, which would seem to be quite rare.
My guess is that 20:7 is an example of a fundamental principle in the Torah that a person cannot become too close to G-d. A person cannot be "buddy, buddy" with G-d, see our discussion on 20:19-23, "Establishing boundaries after the Decalogue." If a person freely says G-d's name for no reason then this shows he is being too close to G-d, as he is treating G-d as a friend and not as G-d. This prohibition is independent of whether the person says G-d's name in conjunction with some particular action or he just states G-d's name. In addition, the principle that one cannot get too close to G-d is not just when one is flippant in using G-d's name, but the phrase in vain also refers to when one worships G-d when one is not commanded to do so. Thus, the prohibition of 20:7 would include reciting G-d's name even when one is worshipping G-d, but one is worshipping G-d in a way not commanded by G-d, which could be the case of a bracha le-vatalah.
The prohibition of 20:7 is to show the barriers that exist between G-d and mankind even when man wants to worship G-d. This is a fundamental idea in the Torah and this could be why this prohibition was included in the Decalogue.
Maybe this approach can even explain the flow of the Decalogue. After the prohibition of idolatry, the Torah tells people that even when they want to worship G-d, they must only do so as commanded, and the following law is an example of being commanded, to rest on Shabbat.
Bibliography:
Cassuto, Umberto (1883-1951), 1967, A commentary on the book of Exodus, Jerusalem: The Magnes Press.
Fox, Everett, 1995, The Five Books of Moses: A new translation, New York: Schocken Books.
Leibowitz, Nehama (1905-1997), 1976a, Studies in Shemot, translated by Aryeh Newman, Jerusalem: The World Zionist Organization.
No comments:
Post a Comment