Our Gemara on Amud Aleph discusses a process of comparing perforations in the intestines to determine if the perforation happened prior to death or after, which makes a difference as to whether the animal is a tereifa or not. The Hebrew word used for “compare” is “makif”.

Usually the word makif means to encircle, such as in the prohibition to round the corners of the temple hairs, as in (Vayikra 19:27): “Do not round (sakifu) the corners of your head.” However, this usage in our Gemara means to draw two items near and compare; see Rashi (“Ein”, Chulin 47a).

There is a well-known use of the same word in Avos (3:16), in a metaphorical description of the course of life, reward, and punishment, which seems to be a third meaning:

“Everything is given against a pledge, and a net is spread out over all the living; the store is open and the storekeeper allows credit (mukaf), but the ledger is open and the hand writes, and whoever wishes to borrow may come and borrow; but the collectors go round regularly every day and exact dues from man, either with his consent or without his consent, and they have that on which they [can] rely [in their claims], seeing that the judgment is a righteous judgment, and everything is prepared for the banquet.”

Here the word mukaf means credit.

So now we have three meanings to words with the root H-K-F: Encircle, Draw Close to Compare, and Credit. Are all these words connected? If so, how? And if the words are connected, does it bring out nuance in this teaching?

To draw close to compare, and to encircle, are similar enough. Even though in our Gemara’s usage makif just means to compare via proximity, in many instances the best form of proximity is to encircle. In an agrarian society, one draws near to animals by encircling them, not by just becoming proximate. How that relates to credit is less clear to me, and perhaps there is no connection. L’shon kodesh, which has strong roots, rarely has homonyms that are not related. But once in a while there is an exception. Consider the word kos (Bereishis 40:11), which means cup, and also a bird of prey (Vayikra 11:17). There is no apparent relation. Additionally, the word makif as credit is rabbinic, and rabbinic Hebrew is not Biblical Hebrew and may have other linguistic roots (see Avodah Zara 58b: “The language of the Torah is different than the language of the sages.”)

Interestingly, the Latin word proximus, which means near, also can be used in the sense of estimate, as in ad-proximate, “toward near,” which is the source of the English approximate and, in Hebrew, le-hakif.

It occurs to me that the possible connection between makif in the form of credit and these other usages is the following verse regarding one of the creditor’s requirements to respect the debtor (Devarim 24:10-11):

“When you make a loan of any sort to your compatriot, you must not enter the house to seize the pledge.

You must remain outside, while the party to whom you made the loan brings the pledge out to you.”

If so, perhaps encoded within the word credit is the Torah ethic that the creditor must go roundabout, stay outside the house, and not seize assets invasively.

Returning to the metaphor in Avos, there is an allusion to this in Gemara Kiddushin (40a):

“Credit (makifin) is not given with regard to the desecration of God’s name, whether one sinned unintentionally or intentionally.”

The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the phrase: Credit is not given [makkifin]? Mar Zutra says: This means that God does not act like a storekeeper and provide credit. Rather, one is punished without delay. Mar, son of Rabbana, says: This means to say that if one’s merits and sins were equal, the sin of the desecration of God’s name tilts the balance of the scales toward the side of his sins. In other words, if his sins include the transgression of desecrating God’s name, God does not wait for this individual to perform a mitzvah to balance out the sin.

Most commentaries understand this as an interpretive addendum to the Mishnah Avos’s metaphor. Even though usually God allows “credit,” i.e., there is some delay or time allowed before one must “pay up” for sins, the punishment for Chillul Hashem is more immediate or more strict.

One final interesting linguistic idea regarding makif and this teaching: While most commentaries understand the idea to be that God does not extend credit in regard to Chillul Hashem, as we saw above, the Maharal takes a different approach. In Derech Chaim (Avos 4:4), he learns it comes from the meaning of approximate and comparison, such as the way makif is used in our Gemara. He explains that God does not compare desecration of His name to other sins—they are not equivalent. In every other case of sin, Maharal says they are physical, and eventually eventually subject to loss anyhow. If one steals or even murders, ultimately objects get lost or decay and people eventually die. So while it is obviously a sin, the object did not have permanence to begin with. On the other hand, when one desecrates, God forbid, God’s name, one is affecting the eternal, and therefore cannot be compared to any other type of sin.

Coming full circle, if I am correct regarding the etymology of creditor, makif, and the verse in Devarim regarding the creditor not invading the house of the debtor, we have an interesting tie-in. According to the Mishnah in Avos, God is the creditor who is patient, but eventually demands payment (punishment) from the transgressor. Yet, we also saw that when it came to Chillul Hashem, no credit is given, and according to the Maharal, it is because the sin cannot be compared to any other sin due to its depth and the way it affects the eternal versus impermanent objects. We could say that when it comes to other sins regarding material objects, God is the creditor who “stands outside,” because He is outside of the sin and outside of the physicality, and therefore He does not exact payment immediately. However, when there is Chillul Hashem, it is, so to speak, personal. In this case, God is not the creditor standing on the outside waiting to collect payment. Rather, the payment is in His hands and made immediately. Combining the Maharal and my linguistic twist, with Chillul Hashem there is no crediting, comparison, nor indirect retribution. It is personal and direct.

sponsored by https://empowermentaftertrauma.com/

Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation

Free resource for couples/families:

The Chosson and Kallah Shmooze You Wish You Had But Never Got

Over 80 lectures on heathy communication, marriage and sexuality from a Torah perspective  Click here

If you liked this, you might enjoy my Relationship Communications Guide. Click on the link above.

Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, LCSW-R, LMFT, DHL is a psychotherapist who works with high conflict couples and families. He can be reached via email at simchafeuerman@gmail.com