Parshas Mishpatim 5785

"Anyone who says Onkelos is just a translation, is mistaken."

(excerpt from an approbation of Sefer Nefesh HaGer, a supercommentary on Targum Onkelos)

The passuk says in this week’s Parsha, Parshas Mishpatim:

Onkelos renders the passuk as follows:

We see that Onkelos renders the last clause significantly different from the simple reading of the passuk; the simple reading makes no mention of a doctor being the care provider specifically, nor is there any mention of monetary compensation, yet Onkelos incorporates both of those into the passuk.

Although Onkelos does sometimes elaborate in his rendering of a passuk when the simple reading is particularly terse and not readily understood by the simple reading, however in this instance it seems like Onkelos is straying unusually far from the simple reading of the passuk?

And perhaps a more educated and pointed question which relates specifically to pointedly this passuk can be asked: In explaining the double verbiage of the clause “v’rapo yerapei”, the Gemara in Bava Kamma 85a expounds this very clause:

In short, Onkelos on this clause is veering from the simple reading of the passuk and shying away from plugging in the Talmudical exegesis too.

What then is Onkelos getting at here?

After the aforementioned Gemara where the double-verbiage v’rapo yerapei is expounded, the Gemara continues on the topic of the assailant's responsibility to heal the victim. The Gemara says:

The Or HaTargum, a supercommentary on Onkelos, says that Onkelos’ addition of “the doctor’s fee” is alluding to the first teaching of the Gemara, that the victim may deny the assailant’s cannot request to do the treatment, and may request a third-party doctor to be brought in.

The Nesina LaGer, another supercommentary on Onkelos, zeroes in on another part of Onkelos’ rendering, “the doctor's fee” as alluding to the Gemara’s subsequent teaching that the victim may deny deny the assailant’s request to have the job done for free, and may demand a doctor to be hired to do the job.

It comes out that in just two words Onkloes is alluding to a flowing Gemara in Bava Kamma, one line after the other!

However, the question can still be asked, why is Onkelos explaining the passuk from the angle of this Gemara in Bava Kamma, and not according to the simple explanation or the drasha which is more on the nose?

First we need to understand the entire M.O. of Onkelos. The Meforshei Onkelos say that Onkelos’ agenda in his translation-commentary is not to necessarily explain the exact words of the passuk, but instead to bring out the overarching idea (inyan) of the passuk. Sometimes word for word literal translation into Aramaic is sufficient, sometimes the drasha of Chazal comes in to clarify it, and other times, like here, neither one captures the overarching idea, and Onkelos finds another way to get to that destination.

In this case in particular, it is the subsequent Gemara (which ironically comes directly after where the Gemara expounds the words of the passuk), which he chooses to represent the idea of the passuk.

How does Onkelos see idea of hiring a doctor the overarching theme of the passuk “and he shall surely heal him?”

Perhaps the explanation is that, through the double-verbiage, the passuk is emphasizing that the intended end result is for the victim’s healing to be seen to full fruition.

When either of these two conditions are in play, that is if the assailant himself is administering the treatment or it is being done for free, the result of full recovery is at risk.

According to this explanation, the aforementioned Gemara is a great pick for representing the intention behind the words “he shall surely be healed”, right in line with Onkelos’ agenda.

[To further this idea, the Poskim discuss whether a doctor is even allowed to reduce a fee* or waive a fee for their services. Like we mentioned, when a doctor isn’t getting his “monetary motivation” it can result in him doing a sub-par job and endanger the patient. See Yam Shel Shlomo Siman 10 and Shevus Yaakov 86.]

In a similar vein the Gemara in Kiddushin says:

Although the Gemara seems to take aim at this group of doctors, in light of what we are saying, it is a “backhanded compliment” since these doctors hold themselves to providing a consistently high standard of care which they know can only be achieved if they are paid commensurate for the services they are offering.

While not all of us are doctors, we can all take an important lesson from here. Part of how Hashem made us was to need to be rewarded in order for us to produce quality work. It isn’t something to be ashamed of to demand that your value is recognized and compensated accordingly.

"If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth!"

(Rocky)

Good Shabbos!

Further Reading and Sources

However, this klal doesn't seem to be agreed upon by all meforshim, see Ohr HaChama to Rashi in the previous passuk: