I have not eaten of it in my mourning, neither have I removed any of it while I was unclean, nor given of it for the dead. I have listened to Yahweh my God’s voice. I have done according to all that you have commanded me.
Not to spend second tithe money on anything other than food and drink
The cited verse
The Hebrew (Masoretic Text)
וְלֹא־נָתַתִּי מִמֶּנּוּ לְמֵת
In Maimonides’ words
How Maimonides defines this commandment in his Sefer HaMitzvot — his own words, shown as a primary source.
הזהירנו מהוציא דמי מעשר שני אלא באכילה ושתיה. והוא אמרו ולא נתתי ממנו למת. ולשון ספרי ולא נתתי ממנו למת שלא לקחתי ממנו ארון ותכריכין, וכל זמן שיוציא ממנו דבר יאכל כנגדו, כמו שהתבאר במקומו. ואמנם זכר המת לחזוק, כאלו יאמר ואע"פ שהוא מצוה לא הוציא בה מעות מעשר שני אלא במזון לבד, כמו שאמר ונתתה הכסף וגו' שאם הוציאהו בזולת המזון כאילו הוציאהו למת שאין תועלת לו בזה. (שם, שם):
He prohibited us from spending the [redemption] money of second tithe except for food and drink. And that is His saying, "nor did I make use of it for the dead" (Deuteronomy 26:14). And the language of the Sifrei (Sifrei Devarim 303:17) is, "I did not take of it for a casket and shrouds." And any time he used it for something [else], he should [purchase food and] eat it corresponding to [the amount he used] - as it is explained in its place (Maaser Sheni 3:10). However He mentioned, "the dead," to strengthen [it] - as if He said, "And even though [burial] is a commandment, he may only spend second tithe monies on food alone"; as He said, "And give the money, etc." (Deuteronomy 14:26). For if he spent it on something besides food, it is as if he spent it for the dead, who have no purpose for it. (See Parashat Ki Tavo; Mishneh Torah, Second Tithes and Fourth Year's Fruit 3.)
Hebrew: Sefer HaMitzvot, Warsaw 1883 (public domain). English: Sefaria Edition, trans. Rabbi Francis Nataf, 2021 (CC0). Via Sefaria; translator’s footnotes omitted.
Literary form: a command embedded in narrative
Applicability
How the catalog describes where and when this commandment applies. These are independent descriptions, not a verdict on which laws still count.
- Binding in the land of Israel
Classical halakhic consequences
The consequences the classical halakhah attaches to this commandment, grouped by who imposes them. Where a category has none recorded, that absence is itself meaningful.
Imposed by a court
- Lashes (malkot)
At the hands of Heaven
No divinely-imposed consequence is recorded.
Ritual remedy
No ritual remedy is recorded.
How the streams of Judaism treat this commandment
The streams of Judaism read the same commandment differently — an ongoing plurality, not a ranking. Each position below is reported as the catalog records it; none is presented as the correct one.
- Orthodox Binding, with modification
- Conservative Not binding
- Reform Not binding
- Reconstructionist Not binding
- Karaite Not binding
24 of 613 commandments have been examined in depth so far — this one is queued.
Where this commandment meets modern human-rights frameworks
One modern normative lens, attributed to it — not GEBible’s assessment. Each row names the framework it measures against and the catalog’s own classification of the relation.
This framework catalogues tensions; it records agreement in only one of its entries. The near-total tension rate is the shape of the instrument, not a finding.
-
general principle
This framework classifies the relation as a direct contradiction.
The commandment prescribes corporal punishment for spending one's own redeemed funds on non-food items — an economic choice with no victim in the modern legal sense. Corporal punishment for a financial consumption decision is categorically disproportionate under modern penal theory.
-
Article 7
This framework classifies the relation as a direct contradiction.
ICCPR Article 7 prohibits cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment; lashing for a private spending decision contravenes the standards of humane treatment that international human-rights law requires.
-
general principle
This framework classifies the relation as abrogated in practice.
Rabbinic tradition holds that Sanhedrin corporal jurisdiction lapsed with the destruction of the Second Temple and the loss of ordained judicial authority; the malkot sanction for this offense is de jure but has been inoperative for nearly two millennia.