That we should not give from our seed to Molekh: That we should not give some of our sons, to pass them in front of an idol that people would make during the time of the giving of the Torah, the name of which was Molekh; as it is stated (Leviticus 18:21), “And from your seed, you shall not give to pass to Molekh” — meaning some of your seed. And the warning is repeated in a different place, as it is written (Deuteronomy 18:10), “There shall not be found in you, one who passes his son or his daughter in the fire.” And so would they do — the father would hand him over to the priests for the sake of the abominations (idols), similar to that which is written about fit offerings (Leviticus 15:14), “and he shall give them to the priest.” And it is possible that the priests would do a waving or a presentation in front of the Molekh, and they would give him back to the father afterwards. And they would burn a big fire in front of the Molekh and the father would take his son and pass him through the flame of the fire. And so did they say in Talmud Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 7:10, “He is not liable until he gives [him] over to the priests and he takes him and passes him through. But the opinion of the rabbi, Rashi, may his memory be blessed (Rashi on Sanhedrin 64b, s.v. shraga) and Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Foreign Worship and Customs of the Nations 6:3), may his memory be blessed, is that he would not burn him, but rather the worship was to pass him through alone. And once he passed him as it was their way of passing, he is liable. And the opinion of Ramban, may his memory be blessed, (Ramban on Leviticus 18:21) is that he would pass him through the flame until his soul departs — and his proofs are in the commentary to the Pentateuch that he made.
I wrote what I have known above about a hint from the roots of the distancing of idolatry more generally in the Order of Vayishma Yitro (Sefer HaChinukh 26). And the matter of this idolatry of Molekh [is that] since it was an extremely bad worship and [its followers] were very fervent at that time, a warning (negative commandment) was specified about it, besides all of the many warnings about idolatry in the Torah. And this is said according to the opinion of Rambam, may his memory be blessed. But according to what appears is the opinion of Ramban, may his memory be blessed (Ramban on Leviticus 20:5), we do not require this; since he reasons that there is a novel matter in this worship of Molekh [compared to] all of the other idolatries. As with any [other] idolatry, he is only liable if it is not its way [of worship] except for the four well-known [ways] of worship. But in this style of Molekh, one is liable who does this act of Molekh with any idolatry. And therefore, a warning was specified for it. And because the matter was extremely ugly, the Torah was so strict with it, to make one liable for it with any idolatry, even if it is not its way with this. This is what appears from the sum of his words. And [regarding] this matter (see Sefer Mitzvot Gadol, Negative Commandments 40) that the liability only comes with some of the seed and not with all of it, it is possible that it was because the lying priests would promise the father of the child that through the sacrifice of this child, the rest of his seed would succeed in everything to which they would turn, and blessing and good would be found in his home. And from their great trickery, they did not want to fix the law at first except for one who would have seed remain besides the one that he gives to them, lest they refuse to listen to them — whether to completely burn him or whether to pass him through the flame, according to the opinion of some of the commentators; and in order that they could also promise blessing and good to those remaining; and from this, the fools could be deceived. And therefore the Torah only made liable in the matter, just when it was similar to their worship, and not in any other way.
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sanhedrin 64a), “[If] he gave over but did not pass, passed but did not give over, he is exempt”; that he is not liable until he passes part of his seed and leaves some of it, as we said; that he is liable whether with his fit seed, or whether with his disqualified seed; and that he is liable for all of those that “come out of his thigh” — sons or daughters, whether children or grandchildren, forever. But if he passes his brothers or sisters or fathers or passed himself, he is exempt. And the rest of its details are in the seventh chapter of Sanhedrin. (See Tur, Even HaEzer 86.)
And it is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females (Sifra, Kedoshim, Section 4:1). And one who transgresses this negative commandment volitionally and there are witnesses and a warning is stoned at the time that we judge capital cases. And if there are no witnesses and warning, he is liable for excision. And when inadvertent, he is obligated to bring a fixed sin-offering. And I have already written above in the Order of Vayishma Yitro (Sefer HaChinukh 26) that the prohibition of idolatry is upon all people of the world, more generally.
שֶׁלֹּא נִתֵּן מִזַּרְעֵנוּ לַמֹּלֶךְ – שֶׁלֹּא נִתֵּן קְצָת מִבָּנֵינוּ לְהַעֲבִירָם לִפְנֵי עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, שֶׁהָיוּ עוֹשִׂין בְּנֵי אָדָם בִּזְמַן מַתַּן תּוֹרָה, שֶׁהָיָה שְׁמוֹ מֹלֶךְ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יח כא) וּמִזַּרְעֲךָ לֹא תִתֵּן לְהַעֲבִיר לַמֹּלֶךְ כְּלוֹמַר מִקְצָת זַרְעֲךָ. וְנִכְפְּלָה הָאַזְהָרָה בְּמָקוֹם אַחֵר, דִּכְתִיב (דברים יח י) לֹא יִמָּצֵא בְךָ מַעֲבִיר בְּנוֹ וּבִתּוֹ בָּאֵשׁ. וְכָךְ הָיוּ עוֹשִׂין, הָאָב מוֹסְרוֹ לַכּוּמָרִים לְשֵׁם שִׁקּוּצָם כְּעֵין מָה שֶׁכָּתוּב בְּקָרְבָּנוֹת כְּשֵׁרִים, (ויקרא טו יד) וּנְתָנָם אֶל הַכֹּהֵן. וְאֶפְשָׁר שֶׁהַכּוּמָרִים עוֹשִׂין בּוֹ תְּנוּפָה אוֹ הַגָּשָׁה לִפְנֵי הַמֹּלֶךְ, וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַחְזִירִין אוֹתוֹ לָאָב, וּמַבְעִירִין אֵשׁ גְּדוֹלָה לִפְנֵי הַמֹּלֶךְ, וְהָאָב הָיָה לוֹקֵחַ בְּנוֹ וּמַעֲבִירוֹ בְּלַהַב הָאֵשׁ. וְכָךְ אָמְרוּ בַּיְּרוּשַׁלְמִי (סנהדרין ז, י) אֵינוֹ חַיָּב עַד שֶׁיִּמְסֹר לַכּוּמָרִים וְיִטְּלֶנּוּ וְיַעֲבִירֶנּוּ. וְדַעַת הָרַב רַשִׁ"י זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה (סנהדרין סד, ב ד"ה שרגא) וְהָרַמְבַּ"ם זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה (עכו"ם ו, ג) שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה שׂוֹרְפוֹ אֶלָּא הָעֲבוֹדָה הָיְתָה לְהַעֲבִירוֹ לְבַד, וּמִכֵּיוָן שֶׁהֶעֱבִירוֹ כְּמוֹ שֶׁהָיָה דַּרְכָּם לְהַעֲבִירוֹ חַיָּב. וְדַעַת הָרַמְבַּ"ן זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה (בפי' לתורה ויקרא יח כא) שֶׁהָיָה מַעֲבִירוֹ בְּלַהַב עַד שֶׁנִּשְׁמָתוֹ יוֹצֵאת, וּרְאָיוֹתָיו בְּפֵרוּשׁ הַחֻמָּשׁ שֶׁעָשָׂה.
That we should not give from our seed to Molekh: That we should not give some of our sons, to pass them in front of an idol that people would make during the time of the giving of the Torah, the name of which was Molekh; as it is stated (Leviticus 18:21), “And from your seed, you shall not give to pass to Molekh” — meaning some of your seed. And the warning is repeated in a different place, as it is written (Deuteronomy 18:10), “There shall not be found in you, one who passes his son or his daughter in the fire.” And so would they do — the father would hand him over to the priests for the sake of the abominations (idols), similar to that which is written about fit offerings (Leviticus 15:14), “and he shall give them to the priest.” And it is possible that the priests would do a waving or a presentation in front of the Molekh, and they would give him back to the father afterwards. And they would burn a big fire in front of the Molekh and the father would take his son and pass him through the flame of the fire. And so did they say in Talmud Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 7:10, “He is not liable until he gives [him] over to the priests and he takes him and passes him through. But the opinion of the rabbi, Rashi, may his memory be blessed (Rashi on Sanhedrin 64b, s.v. shraga) and Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Foreign Worship and Customs of the Nations 6:3), may his memory be blessed, is that he would not burn him, but rather the worship was to pass him through alone. And once he passed him as it was their way of passing, he is liable. And the opinion of Ramban, may his memory be blessed, (Ramban on Leviticus 18:21) is that he would pass him through the flame until his soul departs — and his proofs are in the commentary to the Pentateuch that he made.
רֶמֶז מִשָּׁרְשֵׁי רִחוּק עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה דֶּרֶךְ כְּלָל כָּתַבְתִּי לְמַעְלָה בּוֹ מָה שֶׁיָּדַעְתִּי בְּסֵדֶר וַיִּשְׁמַע יִתְרוֹ (מצוה כו). וְהָעִנְיָן הַזֶּה שֶׁל עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה זוֹ שֶׁל מֹלֶךְ, לְפִי שֶׁהָיְתָה עֲבוֹדָה רָעָה בְּיוֹתֵר וְהָיוּ אֲדוּקִין בָּהּ הַרְבֵּה בְּאוֹתוֹ זְמַן, נִתְיַחֲדָה בָּהּ אַזְהָרָה מִלְּבַד כָּל אַזְהָרוֹת עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה הַרְבֵּה בַּתּוֹרָה, וְזֶה נֹאמַר לְדַעַת הָרַמְבַּ"ם זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה. אֲבָל לְפִי הַנִּרְאֶה לְדַעַת הָרַמְבַּ"ן זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה (ויקרא כ ה) לֹא נִצְטָרֵךְ לָזֶה, כִּי הוּא סוֹבֵר שֶׁעִנְיָן מְחֻדָּשׁ יֵשׁ בַּעֲבוֹדָה זוֹ שֶׁל מֹלֶךְ מִכָּל שְׁאָר עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, שֶׁבְּכָל עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה לֹא יִתְחַיֵּב הָעוֹבְדָהּ בְּשֶׁלֹּא כְּדַרְכָּהּ אֶלָּא בְּאַרְבַּע הָעֲבוֹדוֹת הַיְּדוּעוֹת, אֲבָל בְּעִנְיָן זֶה שֶׁל מֹלֶךְ יִתְחַיֵּב הָעוֹשֶׂה מַעֲשֶׂה זֶה שֶׁל מֹלֶךְ בְּכָל עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, וּלְפִיכָךְ נִתְיַחֲדָה הָאַזְהָרָה בּוֹ. וּלְפִי שֶׁהָעִנְיָן מְכֹעָר בְּיוֹתֵר, הֶחְמִירָה הַתּוֹרָה בּוֹ כָּל כָּךְ לְחַיֵּב הָעוֹשֶׂה כֵּן בְּכָל עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ דַּרְכָּהּ בְּכָךְ. זֶהוּ הַנִּרְאֶה לִי מִכְּלַל דְּבָרָיו. וְזֶה הָעִנְיָן (עי' סמ"ג ל"ת מ) שֶׁאֵין הַחִיּוּב בָּא אֶלָּא בְּמִקְצָת הַזֶּרַע וְלֹא בְּכֻלּוֹ (סנהדרין סד ב), אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁהָיָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַכּוּמָרִים הַשַּׁקְרָנִים הָיוּ מַבְטִיחִין אֲבִי הַבֵּן כִּי עַל יְדֵי תִּקְרֹבֶת בֵּן זֶה, יַצְלִיחַ שְׁאָר זַרְעוֹ בְּכָל אֲשֶׁר יִפְנֶה, וְתִהְיֶה הַבְּרָכָה וְהַטּוֹבָה מְצוּיָה בְּבֵיתוֹ, וּלְרֹב תַּרְמִיתָם, לֹא רָצוּ מִתְּחִלָּה לִקְבֹּעַ הַחֹק רַק בְּמִי שֶׁיִּשָּׁאֵר לוֹ זֶרַע מִלְּבַד אוֹתוֹ שֶׁהוּא נוֹתֵן לָהֶם, פֶּן יְמָאֲנוּ מִלִּשְׁמֹעַ אֲלֵיהֶם, הֵן לְשָׂרְפוֹ לְגַמְרֵי, הֵן לְהַעֲבִירוֹ בְּתוֹךְ הַלַּהַב, כְּדַעַת קְצָת הַמְּפָרְשִׁים, וּלְמַעַן יַבְטִיחוּ גַּם כֵּן עַל הַבְּרָכָה וְהַטּוֹבָה בַּנִּשְׁאָרִים וְיִתְפַּתּוּ אֲלֵיהֶם מִתּוֹךְ כָּךְ הַפְּתָאִים, וְלָכֵן לֹא חִיְּבָה הַתּוֹרָה בָּעִנְיָן, רַק כְּשֶׁהוּא כְּעֵין עֲבוֹדָתָן וְלֹא בְּצַד אַחֵר.
I wrote what I have known above about a hint from the roots of the distancing of idolatry more generally in the Order of Vayishma Yitro (Sefer HaChinukh 26). And the matter of this idolatry of Molekh [is that] since it was an extremely bad worship and [its followers] were very fervent at that time, a warning (negative commandment) was specified about it, besides all of the many warnings about idolatry in the Torah. And this is said according to the opinion of Rambam, may his memory be blessed. But according to what appears is the opinion of Ramban, may his memory be blessed (Ramban on Leviticus 20:5), we do not require this; since he reasons that there is a novel matter in this worship of Molekh [compared to] all of the other idolatries. As with any [other] idolatry, he is only liable if it is not its way [of worship] except for the four well-known [ways] of worship. But in this style of Molekh, one is liable who does this act of Molekh with any idolatry. And therefore, a warning was specified for it. And because the matter was extremely ugly, the Torah was so strict with it, to make one liable for it with any idolatry, even if it is not its way with this. This is what appears from the sum of his words. And [regarding] this matter (see Sefer Mitzvot Gadol, Negative Commandments 40) that the liability only comes with some of the seed and not with all of it, it is possible that it was because the lying priests would promise the father of the child that through the sacrifice of this child, the rest of his seed would succeed in everything to which they would turn, and blessing and good would be found in his home. And from their great trickery, they did not want to fix the law at first except for one who would have seed remain besides the one that he gives to them, lest they refuse to listen to them — whether to completely burn him or whether to pass him through the flame, according to the opinion of some of the commentators; and in order that they could also promise blessing and good to those remaining; and from this, the fools could be deceived. And therefore the Torah only made liable in the matter, just when it was similar to their worship, and not in any other way.
מִדִּינֵי הַמִּצְוָה. מָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (סנהדרין סד א) מָסַר וְלֹא הֶעֱבִיר, הֶעֱבִיר וְלֹא מָסַר פָּטוּר וְשֶׁאֵינוֹ חַיָּב עַד שֶׁיַּעֲבִיר מִקְצָת זַרְעוֹ וְיַנִּיחַ מִקְצָתוֹ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁאָמַרְנוּ. וְשֶׁחַיָּב בֵּין עַל זַרְעוֹ כָּשֵׁר, בֵּין עַל זַרְעוֹ פָּסוּל, וְשֶׁחַיָּב עַל כָּל יוֹצְאֵי יְרֵכוֹ, בָּנִים אוֹ בָּנוֹת, בֵּין בָּנִים אוֹ בְּנֵי בָּנִים, עַד לְעוֹלָם, אֲבָל אִם הֶעֱבִיר אֶחָיו אוֹ אַחְיוֹתָיו אוֹ אֲבוֹתָיו אוֹ שֶׁהֶעֱבִיר עַצְמוֹ פָּטוּר. וְיֶתֶר פְּרָטֶיהָ בְּפֶרֶק שְׁבִיעִי מִסַּנְהֶדְרִין. (ה' ע"א פ"ו).
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sanhedrin 64a), “[If] he gave over but did not pass, passed but did not give over, he is exempt”; that he is not liable until he passes part of his seed and leaves some of it, as we said; that he is liable whether with his fit seed, or whether with his disqualified seed; and that he is liable for all of those that “come out of his thigh” — sons or daughters, whether children or grandchildren, forever. But if he passes his brothers or sisters or fathers or passed himself, he is exempt. And the rest of its details are in the seventh chapter of Sanhedrin. (See Tur, Even HaEzer 86.)
וְנוֹהֶגֶת בְּכָל מָקוֹם וּבְכָל זְמַן בִּזְכָרִים וּנְקֵבוֹת (ספרא קדושים ד א). וְהָעוֹבֵר עַל לָאו זֶה בְּמֵזִיד וְיֵשׁ עֵדִים וְהַתְרָאָה, נִסְקָל בִּזְמַן שֶׁדָּנִין דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת, וְאִם אֵין עֵדִים וְהַתְרָאָה חַיָּב כָּרֵת, וּבְשׁוֹגֵג חַיָּב לְהָבִיא חַטָּאת קְבוּעָה. וּכְבָר כָּתַבְתִּי לְמַעְלָה בְּסֵדֶר וַיִּשְׁמַע יִתְרוֹ (מצוה כו), שֶׁאִסּוּר עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה הוּא עַל כָּל בְּנֵי הָעוֹלָם כֻּלּוֹ בִּכְלָל.
And it is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females (Sifra, Kedoshim, Section 4:1). And one who transgresses this negative commandment volitionally and there are witnesses and a warning is stoned at the time that we judge capital cases. And if there are no witnesses and warning, he is liable for excision. And when inadvertent, he is obligated to bring a fixed sin-offering. And I have already written above in the Order of Vayishma Yitro (Sefer HaChinukh 26) that the prohibition of idolatry is upon all people of the world, more generally.