Shabbat Parashat Naso - 5785

Shabbat Parashat Naso - 5785

Rabbi Hal Miller

  Speak to the children of Israel: a man or woman who commits any of man's sins by

  committing a trespass against God, and that person shall become guilty and they

  shall confess their sin that they committed, he shall make restitution for his guilt in its

  principal amount and add its fifth to it and give it to the one to whom he is guilty. [Bamidbar 5:6-7]

It is hard to track here who sinned, against whom, what kind of sin, and to whom the restitution (if any) goes. We can understand initially from the wording that it applies to both men and women, but it switches to the male gender when speaking of restitution. Does that mean women are not liable to restitution should it come up? The commentators seem to ignore this or assume it isn't an issue, thus we must assume that the "he shall make restitution" is in the generic sense.

At first glance it seems that what is at issue is a sin against God, but how does restitution fit that? The only case that would seem to make sense would be in the situation of me'ilah, inappropriate use of Temple property. But what is the "any of man's sins" doing here? What is the sin or trespass involved in this commandment?

Nechama Leibowitz finds the answer in the next verse [8], which explains that if one robs from a convert, who then dies without an heir, the repayment is to the Kohen. Rashi finds the same answer from Vayikra [5:21] which is about one who robs and swears falsely about it, and says that this law is repeated in our verse to add more details. Rav Hirsch expands slightly, that if one owes a debt, whether from robbery or otherwise, and swears falsely, then our verse kicks in. He adds that this is "a treachery against God" and that it only applies where the sinner confesses that he needs to pay the penalty, otherwise there are different rules to deal with the sinner. Or HaChayim expands even more and says this applies to any of the sins of man-against-man. Most commentators agree that it specifically applies to robbery and theft.

We have already seen prohibitions against robbery and theft. Why are we back at it here? Rav Soloveitchik and Rav Moshe Feinstein explain. According to Rav Moshe, the Torah is teaching in our verse that the sin is not because we are hurting the victim of the theft but that we are taking something that God did not give us. One should "only desire what God bestows upon him, that which he has earned in a permissible manner." Rav Soloveitchik notes that everything belongs to God and we are only given temporary domain over certain items, provided we use them for God's intended purposes. If we misuse or misappropriate, our rights over that object expire. This would explain the phrase "committing a trespass against God" in our verse, even though the victim of the theft is another human. Restitution covers the man-against-man, and the guilt-offering covers the man-against-God trespass.