6

Where does the concept of Ben Adam Lemakom and Ben Adam Lechavero come from?

I know there is a concept of the first five of the ten commandments being between 'man and his friend' and the second five being between 'man and G-d' (lit. the place) but I am trying to find out who introduced this distinction. I understand the concept itself, at least superficially, but I am asking who introduced it.

There is a Rashi on the ten commandments that uses the phrase `ben adam lechavero', but not in contrast in ben adam lemakom. I remember learning about in primary school, but I can't find a source for it.

Various sources say things like

The Sages, for whom the world could be seen as a web of relationships, distinguished between mitzvot Bein Adam LaMakom (between a person and God, such as the commandments concerning Shabbat and prayer) and the mitzvot Bein Adam LeChavero (between people, such as the laws concerning business practices, marriage, divorce, and so on).

-- Schneierman.net

The mitzvot commanded to the Jewish people are usually described are falling into one of two categories: Bein Adam LaMakom (between man and G-d) and Bein Adam LeChavero (between man and his fellow man).

-- Naaleh

After some searching the internet all I can find is a generic 'rabbis', but no specific sources.`

Improve this question
8
  • 1
    Hi jhoyla and welcome to Mi Yodeya. Thanks for bringing your question here. It would help improve your question if you could include a little bit more about the topic you're trying to understand.
    – user2110
    Commented May 3, 2013 at 13:05
  • 1
    Hi @nikmasi, I know there is a concept of the first 5 commandments being between 'man and his friend' and the second 5 are between 'man and G-d' (lit. his place) but I am trying to find out who introduced this distinction. I understand the concept itself, at least superficially, but I am asking a more meta-concept of who introduced it.
    – jhoyla
    Commented May 3, 2013 at 13:21
  • 1
    jhoyla, this is indeed a very interesting question. I agree with @nikmasi that you could make this question stronger by editing more of what you already know and what you're looking for, precisely. You could start with the information in your comment along with some indication of where you've heard of this concept of splitting the Decalogue according to this distinction.
    – Isaac Moses ♦
    Commented May 3, 2013 at 14:13
  • 1
    Hi @IsaacMoses, I've added some more information, thanks for the advice.
    – jhoyla
    Commented May 3, 2013 at 16:15
  • It's used in the Mishna Yoma 8:9, and you can't get much older than that. Is that what you want, or do you want the first to use it in the context of the Decalogue?
    – Double AA ♦
    Commented May 3, 2013 at 16:46

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
9

The distinction is found in the Mishna (Yoma 8:9 (English)):

עברות ש​​​​​​​​​​​​​​בין אדם למקום, יום הכפורים מכפר.‏
עברות ש​​​​​​​​​​​​​​בין אדם לחברו כד, אין יום הכפורים מכפר, עד שירצה את חברו.‏
את זו דרש רבי אלעזר בן עזריה, (ויקרא טז) מכל חטאתיכם לפני יי תטהרו, עברות ש​​​​​​​​​​​​​​בין אדם למקום, יום הכפורים מכפר. עברות ש​​​​​​​​​​​​​​בין אדם לחברו, אין יום הכפורים מכפר, עד שירצה את חברו.‏

Sins between man and God: Yom Kippur atones for.
Sins between man and his friend: Yom Kippur does not atone for them until he has appeased his friend.
This was the exposition of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya: [The verse states (Leviticus 16:30):] "From all your sins before God shall you be cleansed." Those sins which are between you and God, Yom Kippur atones for. But those between you and your friend, Yom Kippur does not atone for.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .