The Torah presents a fascinating triplet regarding those who must bring a "sin-offering" beginning in VaYikra 5:1. Briefly, and without the benefit of the commentaries which elucidate the verses somewhat, my understanding is that the following must bring a sin-offering: (1) one who takes an oath to testify because he or she has knowledge of an event but refuses to testify; (2) one who touches an unclean object without knowing he or she was doing so; and (3) one who makes an oath - either positive or negative - but then fails to abide by that oath.
What a facially odd trio! We've got sins regarding oaths of some kind on the ends and touching an unclean object, like an unclean animal carcass or "human contamination," in the middle. Why are these three together?
I think the Torah is teaching us an obvious secret - that physical wrongdoing, through action, is just as severe as non-physical wrongdoing, especially wrongdoing associated with human speech (and, perhaps, especially human speech).
How is our society's criminal justice generally structured? Physical crimes - murder, theft, battery, and many others - are all punished extremely harshly. But perjury? Falsifying documents? General fraud? Courts do not sentence these defendants nearly as harshly. And nearly anything can be said about anyone under the false guise of "free speech," to say nothing of the massive entertainment industry focused solely on lashon hara.
This, perhaps, has to do with our obsession with the physical - that the physical is treasured so much that any harm to the physical should be punished much more harshly than crimes involving, for example, lying in a court of law.
The Torah here comes to disagree. Sure, intentionally taking a life could potentially be punishable by death (but I would note that according to the Talmud, such penalty may only be imposed when the defendant was warned by two proper witnesses not to do so and then did so anyway; and that a court is a murderous court if it sentences someone to death more than once [or is it twice? no, I think it is once] every 70 years), but otherwise, acts involving physical wrongdoing are on the exact same plane as those involving verbal wrongdoing.
Just imagine what our society would look like if false testimony was taken just as seriously as battery was. If the latter is extremely frowned upon, we need to break down the idolization of the physical so that the former is frowned down upon as well.
Comments
Post a Comment