CHABAD: Today in Judaism - TODAY IS: SHABBAT, ADAR II 20, 5774 • MARCH 22, 2014 - PARAH
Torah Reading
Shemini (Leviticus Vayikra 9:1 And it come to pass on yom hashemini, that Moshe called to Aharon and his Banim, and the Ziknei Yisroel;
2 And he said unto Aharon, Take thee a young calf for a chattat (sin offering), and a ram for an olah (burnt offering), temimim (without blemish), and offer them before Hashem.
3 And unto the Bnei Yisroel thou shalt speak, saying, Take ye a sa’ir izzim (male goat) for a chattat (sin offering); and a calf and a keves (lamb), both of the first year, temimim (without blemish), for an olah;
4 Also a bull and a ram for shelamim (peace offerings), to sacrifice before Hashem; and a minchah mixed with shemen; for today Hashem will appear unto you.
5 And they brought that which Moshe commanded before the Ohel Mo’ed; and kol HaEdah drew near and stood before Hashem.
6 And Moshe said, This is the thing which Hashem commanded that ye should do; and the kavod Hashem shall appear unto you.
7 And Moshe said unto Aharon, Go unto the Mizbe’ach, and offer thy chattat (sin offering), and thy olah (burnt offering), and make kapporah for thyself, and for the people; and offer the korban of the people, and make kapporah for them; just as Hashem commanded.
8 Aharon therefore went unto the Mizbe’ach, and slaughtered (shachat) the calf of the chattat (sin offering), which was for himself.
9 And the Bnei Aharon brought the dahm unto him; and he dipped his forefinger in the dahm, and put it upon the horns of the Mizbe’ach, and poured out the dahm at the foundation of the Mizbe’ach;
10 But the chelev (fat), and the kidneys, and the diaphragm with the liver of the chattat (sin offering), he burned upon the Mizbe’ach; just as Hashem commanded Moshe.
11 And the basar and the hide he burned with eish outside the machaneh.
12 And he slaughtered (shachat) the olah (burnt offering); and the Bnei Aharon presented unto him the dahm, which he sprinkled around upon the Mizbe’ach.
13 And they presented the olah (burnt offering) unto him, with the pieces thereof, and the head; and he burned them upon the Mizbe’ach.
14 And he did wash the innards and the legs, and burned them upon the olah (burnt offering) on the Mizbe’ach.
15 And he brought the korban HaAm (the offering of the people), and took the goat of the chattat (sin offering) for the people, and slaughtered (shachat) it, and offered it for sin, as before.
16 And he brought the olah (burnt offering), and offered it in the prescribed way.
17 And he brought the minchah, and took a handful thereof, and burned it upon the Mizbe’ach, in addition to the olah of the boker.
18 He slaughtered (shachat) also the bull and the ram for a zevach which was for the people; and the Bnei Aharon presented unto him the dahm, which he sprinkled upon the Mizbe’ach around,
19 And the chalavim (fat portions) of the bull and of the ram, the tail, and that which covereth the innards, and the kidneys, and the diaphragm above the liver;
20 And they put the chelev (fat) upon the breasts, and he burned the chelev (fat) upon the Mizbe’ach;
21 And the breasts and the right thigh Aharon waved for a tenufah (wave offering) before Hashem; just as Moshe commanded.
22 And Aharon lifted up his hand toward the people, and pronounced a barucha upon them, and came down from offering of the chattat (sin offering), and the olah (burnt offering), and shelamim (peace offerings).
23 And Moshe and Aharon went into the Ohel Mo’ed, and came out, and pronounced a barucha over the people; and the kavod Hashem appeared unto kol HaAm.
24 And there came an eish out from before Hashem, and consumed upon the Mizbe’ach the olah (burnt offering) and the chalavim (fat portions); which when all the people saw, they shouted, and fell on their faces.
10:1 And Nadav and Avihu, the bnei Aharon, each took his censer, and put eish therein, and put ketoret (incense) thereon, and offered eish zarah (strange, unauthorized fire) before Hashem, which He commanded them not.
2 And there went out eish (fire) from the presence of Hashem, and devoured them, and they died before Hashem.
3 Then Moshe said unto Aharon, This is it that Hashem spoke, saying, I will show Myself kadosh among them that come near Me, and before kol HaAm (all the People) I will be honored. And Aharon was silent.
4 And Moshe called Mishael and Eltzaphan, the bnei Uzziel the dod (uncle) of Aharon, and said unto them, Come near, carry your brethren from before the Kodesh to the outside of the machaneh.
5 So they went near, and carried them in the kuttanot of them out of the machaneh; as Moshe had said.
6 And Moshe said unto Aharon, and unto Eleazar and unto Itamar, his banim, Don’t uncover your head, neither rend your clothes; lest ye die, and lest wrath come upon kol HaEdah; but let your brethren, the kol Bais Yisroel, bewail the burning which Hashem hath kindled.
7 And ye shall not go out from the entrance of the Ohel Mo’ed, lest ye die; for the shemen mishchat (anointing oil) of Hashem is upon you. And they did according to the word of Moshe.
8 And Hashem spoke unto Aharon, saying,
9 Do not drink yayin nor strong drink, thou, nor thy banim with thee, when ye go into the Ohel Mo’ed, lest ye die; it shall be chukkat olam throughout your generations;
10 And that ye may put difference between kodesh and chol (common, profane), and between tameh (unclean) and tahor (clean);
11 And that ye may teach the Bnei Yisroel all the chukkim which Hashem hath spoken unto them by the hand of Moshe.
12 And Moshe spoke unto Aharon, and unto Eleazar and unto Itamar, his banim that were left, Take the minchah that remaineth of the offerings of Hashem made by eish, and eat it without leaven (i.e., matzot) beside the Mizbe’ach; for it is kodesh kodashim;
13 And ye shall eat it in the makom kadosh, because it is the chok (share, portion) of thee and thy banim, of the sacrifices of Hashem made by eish; for so I am commanded.
14 And the breast of the waving and raised up thigh shall ye eat in a makom tahor; thou, and thy banim, and thy banot with thee; for they are thy chok, and the chok of thy banim, which are given out of the zevakhim of shelamim (peace offerings) of the Bnei Yisroel.
15 The raised-up thigh and the breast of the waving shall they bring with the offerings made by eish of the chelavim (fat portions), to wave it for a wave offering before Hashem; and it shall be thine, and unto thy banim with thee, by a chok olam (portion forever); as Hashem hath commanded.
16 And Moshe diligently inquired about the sa’ir of the chattat, and, hinei, it was burned up; and he was angry with Eleazar and Itamar, the bnei Aharon which were left alive, saying,
17 Why have ye not eaten the chattat in the makom hakodesh, seeing it is kodesh kodashim, and G-d hath given it you to bear away the avon HaEdah, to make kapporah for them before Hashem?
18 Since the dahm of it was not brought in within HaKodesh, ye should indeed have eaten it in the Kodesh, as I commanded.
19 And Aharon said unto Moshe, See, today have they offered their chattat (sin offering) and their olah (burnt offering) before Hashem; and such things have befallen me; and if I had eaten the chattat today, should it have been accepted in the sight of Hashem?
20 And when Moshe heard that, he was satisfied.
11:1 And Hashem spoke unto Moshe and to Aharon, saying unto them,
2 Speak unto the Bnei Yisroel, saying, These are the beasts which ye shall eat among all the beasts that are on ha’aretz.
3 Whatsoever spliteth the hoof, and separateth into double hooves, and cheweth the cud, among the behemah (animals), that shall ye eat.
4 Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that separateth the hoof; as the gamal (camel), because he cheweth the cud, but separateth not the hoof; he is tamei unto you.
5 And the hyrax, because he cheweth the cud, but separateth not the hoof; he is tamei unto you.
6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but separateth not the hoof; he is temeiah (unclean) unto you.
7 And the chazir (swine), though he separate the hoof, and be separated into double hooves, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is tamei to you.
8 Of their basar shall ye not eat, and their nevelah shall ye not touch; they are temei’im (unclean ones) to you.
9 These shall ye eat of all that are in the mayim; whatsoever hath fins and scales in the mayim, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.
10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that swarm in the mayim, and of any nefesh hachayyah which is in the mayim, they shall be sheketz (abomination, detestable) unto you;
11 They shall be even sheketz unto you; ye shall not eat of their basar, but ye shall have their nevelah in sheketz.
12 Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the mayim, that shall be sheketz unto you.
13 And these are they which ye shall have in sheketz among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are sheketz: the nesher (eagle), and the vulture, and the whitetailed eagle,
14 And the da’ah (kite), and the black kite after its kind;
15 Every orev (raven) after its kind;
16 And the ostrich, and the screech owl, and the seagull, and the hawk after its kind,
17 And the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl,
18 And the white owl, and the pelican, and the osprey,
19 And the stork, the heron after its kind, and the hoopoe, and the bat.
20 All fowls that creep, going upon all fours, shall be sheketz unto you.
21 Yet these may ye eat of every winged insect that goeth upon all fours, which have jumping legs above their feet, to hop withal upon ha’aretz;
22 Even these of them ye may eat: the arbeh (locust) after its kind, and the katydid after its kind, and the cricket after its kind, and the grasshopper after its kind.
23 But all other winged insects, which have four feet, shall be sheketz unto you.
24 And for these ye shall be temei’im; whosoever toucheth the nevelah of them shall be tamei until erev.
25 And whosoever pick up any of the nevelah of them shall wash his clothes, and be tamei until erev.
26 Every beast which spliteth the hooves, and is not completely split, nor cheweth the cud, are temei’im unto you; every one that toucheth them shall be tamei.
27 And whatsoever goeth upon its paws, among all manner of beasts that go on all fours, those are temei’im unto you; whosoever toucheth their nevelah shall be tamei until erev.
28 And he that beareth the nevelah of them shall wash his clothes, and be tamei until erev; they are temei’im unto you.
29 These also shall be tamei unto you among the creeping things that creep upon ha’aretz: the weasel, and the rat, and the great lizard after its kind,
30 And the gecko, and the land crocodile, and the skink, and the lizard, and the chameleon.
31 These are temei’im to you among all that creep; whosoever doth touch them, when they be dead, shall be tamei until erev.
32 And whatsoever of them, when they are dead, doth fall on something, it shall be tamei; whether it be any vessel of wood, or cloth, or hide, or sackcloth, whatsoever vessel it be, wherein any melachah (work) is done, it must be put into mayim, and it shall be tamei until erev; then it shall be tahor (clean).
33 And every clay vessel, whereinto any of them falleth, whatsoever is in it shall be tamei; and ye shall break it.
34 Of all okhel which may be eaten, that on which such mayim cometh shall be tamei; and all mashkeh that may be drunk in every such vessel shall be tamei.
35 And everything whereupon any part of their nevelah falleth shall be tamei; whether it be oven, or stove, they shall be broken; for they are temei’im and shall be temei’im unto you.
36 Nevertheless a spring or cistern, wherein there is a mikveh mayim (collection of water) shall be tahor; but that which toucheth their nevelah shall be tamei.
37 And if any part of their nevelah fall upon any zera for sowing which is to be sown, it shall be tahor.
38 But if any mayim be put upon the zera, and any part of their nevelah fall thereon, it shall be tamei unto you.
39 And if any behemah, of which ye may eat, die, he that toucheth the nevelah thereof shall be tamei until erev.
40 And he that eateth of the nevelah of it shall wash his clothes, and be tamei until erev; he also that picketh up the nevelah of it shall wash his clothes, and be tamei until erev.
41 And every creeping thing that creepeth upon ha’aretz shall be sheketz; it shall not be eaten.
42 Whatsoever goeth upon the belly, and whatsoever goeth upon all fours, or whatsoever hath marbeh raglayim (many feet) among all creeping things that creep upon ha’aretz, them ye shall not eat; for they are sheketz.
43 Ye shall not make your nefashot sheketz with any creeping thing that creepeth, neither shall ye make yourselves tamei with them, that ye should be made tamei thereby.
44 For I am Hashem Eloheichem; ye shall therefore set yourselves apart as kodesh, and ye shall be kadoshim; for I am kadosh; neither shall ye make your nefashot tamei with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon ha’aretz.
45 For I am Hashem that bringeth you up out of Eretz Mitzrayim, to be for you as Elohim: ye shall therefore be kadoshim, for I am kadosh.
46 This is the torah concerning the beasts, and of the fowl, and of every living creature that moveth in the mayim, and of every creature that creepeth upon ha’aretz;
47 To make a divide [lehavdil; to make a distinction, separation] between the tamei and the tahor, and between the beast that may be and the beast that may not be eaten.)
TODAY'S LAWS & CUSTOMS:
• PARSHAT PARAH
The Torah reading of Parah (Numbers 19) is added to the weekly reading. Parah details the laws of the "Red Heifer" and the process by which a person rendered ritually impure by contact with a dead body was purified.
(When the Holy Temple stood in Jerusalem, every Jew had to be in a state of ritual purity in time for the bringing of the Passover offering in the Temple. Today, though we're unable to fulfill the Temple-related rituals in practice, we fulfill them spiritually by studying their laws in the Torah. Thus, we study and read the section of Parah in preparation for the upcoming festival of Passover.)
Links: The Parah reading w commentary
The Calf's Mother
TODAY IN JEWISH HISTORY:
• CHONI THE CIRCLE MAKER PRAYS FOR RAIN (1st Century BCE)
"One year, most of Adar went by and it didn't rain. They sent for Choni the Circle Maker. He prayed and the rains didn't come. He drew a circle, stood in it and said: 'Master of The World! Your children have turned to me; I swear in Your great name that I won't move from here until You have pity on Your children.' The rains came down." (Talmud, Taanit 23a)
• PASSING OF "BACH" (1640)
Adar 20 is the yahrtzeit (anniversary of the passing) of Rabbi Yoel Sirkes (1560?-1640), Rabbi of Krakow and author of the Bayit Chadash ("Bach") commentary on the great Halachic work, the Arba'ah Turim.
DAILY STUDY:
CHITAS AND RAMBAM FOR TODAY:
Chumash: Shemini, 7th Portion Leviticus 11:33-11:47 with Rashi
• Chapter 11
33. But any earthenware vessel, into whose interior any of them falls, whatever is inside it shall become unclean, and you shall break [the vessel] itself. לג. וְכָל כְּלִי חֶרֶשׂ אֲשֶׁר יִפֹּל מֵהֶם אֶל תּוֹכוֹ כֹּל אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹכוֹ יִטְמָא וְאֹתוֹ תִשְׁבֹּרוּ:
into whose interior: An earthenware vessel becomes unclean only through [the defiling item entering] its inner space [even if it does not touch the vessel wall. If it touches the outer wall, however, the vessel does not become unclean]. — [Chul. 24b]
אל תוכו: אין כלי חרס מיטמא אלא מאוירו:
whatever is inside it becomes unclean: The vessel in turn defiles whatever is in its inner space (other editions: in its interior).
כל אשר בתוכו יטמא: הכלי חוזר ומטמא מה שבאוירו:
and you shall break [the vessel] itself: This teaches us that it [an earthenware vessel] cannot be purified in a mikvah. [Consequently, if you wish to use it, you must break it so that it cannot be used for its original use.]- [Torath Kohanim 11:132]
ואתו תשבורו: למד שאין לו טהרה במקוה:
34. Of any food that is [usually] eaten, upon which water comes will become unclean, and any beverage that is [usually] drunk, which is in any vessel, shall become unclean. לד. מִכָּל הָאֹכֶל אֲשֶׁר יֵאָכֵל אֲשֶׁר יָבוֹא עָלָיו מַיִם יִטְמָא וְכָל מַשְׁקֶה אֲשֶׁר יִשָּׁתֶה בְּכָל כְּלִי יִטְמָא:
Of any food that is [usually] eaten: This refers back to the preceding verse, [as if to say]: whatever is inside it shall become unclean… of any food that is [usually] eaten, upon which water comes-if it is inside an unclean earthenware vessel-will become unclean. Likewise, any liquid that is [usually] drunk, in any vessel, meaning that it is in the inner space of an unclean earthenware vessel, will become unclean. From here we learn many things. We learn that food becomes predisposed and prepared to contract uncleanness only if water had, at one time, come upon it. And once water has come upon it, the food can contract uncleanness forever, even if it is dry. Wine, oil, and whatever is called a beverage (מַשְׁקֶה) predisposes seeds to receive uncleanness, just as water [does] (Torath Kohanim 11:135). [The liquids that fall under the category of מַשְׁקֶה are: water, dew, oil, wine, milk, blood, and bee-honey.] For our verse [here] is to be expounded as follows: “upon which water comes will become unclean, or any beverage that is [usually] drunk, which is in any vessel, it shall become unclean.” [I.e.] the food [will become unclean]. Our rabbis also learned from this verse that an item with a secondary degree of uncleanness does not defile vessels, for we learned (Shab. 138b): One might think that all vessels would become defiled [when they enter] the inner space of an [unclean] earthenware vessel; Scripture, therefore, says (verses 3334): כֹּל אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹכוֹ יִטְמָא [lit., “anything inside it becomes unclean]… מִכָּל הָאֹכֶל [lit., of any food]”; i.e., food and liquid are defiled by the inner space of an [unclean] earthenware vessel, but [other] vessels do not become defiled by the inner space of an [unclean] earthenware vessel. Because a שֶׁרֶץ is a primary source of uncleanness (אָב הַטֻּמְאָה), and the vessel that becomes defiled by it is a secondary source of uncleanness (וְלָד הַטֻּמְאָה). Consequently, it does not in turn defile [other] vessels contained within it. We also learned [from this verse] that if a שֶׁרֶץ fell into the inner space of an [earthenware] oven that contained bread, and the שֶׁרֶץ did not touch the bread, the oven becomes [defiled with] first degree [uncleanness], while the bread is [defiled with] second degree [uncleanness. In this case,] we do not say that the oven is perceived as though it were “filled with uncleanness,” so that the bread contained within becomes [defiled as well with] first degree [uncleanness], for if we were to say so, no vessel would be excluded from becoming defiled by the inner space of an earthenware vessel since uncleanness itself has directly touched the surface of this second vessel (Shab. 138b). We also learned [from this verse] about the contact of water [with food]-that this predisposes seeds [to receive uncleanness] only if the water wetted the seeds after they had been detached from the earth. For, if one were to say that they become predisposed [to contract uncleanness] while still attached [to the ground], there is [no food produce] upon which no water has come [at one time or another]. In that case, why would [Scripture] tell us: “upon which water comes”? [It must therefore mean: after it has been detached from the earth] (Torath Kohanim 11:150). We also learned [from this verse] that [unclean] food will defile other items only if the food has a [minimum] volume equal to a [hen’s] egg, as it is said, “[Any food] that is [usually] eaten,” meaning: [the amount of] food that can be eaten at one time. And our Sages estimated that the pharynx cannot hold more than [the volume of] a hen’s egg" (Yoma 80a).
כל האכל אשר יאכל: מוסב על מקרא העליון, כל אשר בתוכו יטמא, מכל האוכל אשר יאכל אשר יבא עליו מים והוא בתוך כלי חרס הטמא, יטמא. וכן כל משקה אשר ישתה בכל כלי, והוא בתוך כלי חרס הטמא, יטמא. למדנו מכאן דברים הרבה למדנו שאין אוכל מוכשר ומתוקן לקבל טומאה עד שיבאו עליו מים פעם אחת, ומשבאו עליו מים פעם אחת מקבל טומאה לעולם ואפילו נגוב. והיין והשמן וכל הנקרא משקה מכשיר זרעים לטומאה כמים. שכך יש לדרוש המקרא אשר יבא עליו מים או כל משקה אשר ישתה בכל כלי יטמא האוכל. ועוד למדו רבותינו מכאן, שאין ולד הטומאה מטמא כלים, שכך שנינו יכול יהיו כל הכלים מיטמאין מאויר כלי חרס, תלמוד לומר כל אשר בתוכו יטמא מכל האוכל, אוכל מיטמא מאויר כלי חרס, ואין כל הכלים מיטמאין מאויר כלי חרס, לפי שהשרץ אב הטומאה והכלי, שנטמא ממנו, ולד הטומאה, לפיכך אינו חוזר ומטמא כלים שבתוכו. ולמדנו עוד, שהשרץ שנפל לאויר תנור והפת בתוכו, ולא נגע השרץ בפת, התנור ראשון והפת שנייה. ולא נאמר רואין את התנור כאלו מלא טומאה ותהא הפת תחלה, שאם אתה אומר כן לא נתמעטו כל הכלים מלהטמא מאויר כלי חרס, שהרי טומאה עצמה נגעה בהן מגבן. ולמדנו עוד על ביאת מים, שאינה מכשרת זרעים אלא אם כן נפלו עליהן משנתלשו, שאם אתה אומר מקבלין הכשר במחובר, אין לך שלא באו עליו מים, ומהו אומר אשר יבוא עליו מים, משנתלשו. ולמדנו עוד שאין אוכל מטמא אחרים אלא אם כן יש בו כביצה, שנאמר אשר יאכל, אוכל הנאכל בבת אחת, ושיערו חכמים אין בית הבליעה מחזיק יותר מביצת תרנגולת:
35. And anything upon which any of their carcasses of these [animals] fall, will become unclean. [Thus,] an oven or stove shall be demolished; they are unclean, and, they shall be unclean for you. לה. וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר יִפֹּל מִנִּבְלָתָם | עָלָיו יִטְמָא תַּנּוּר וְכִירַיִם יֻתָּץ טְמֵאִים הֵם וּטְמֵאִים יִהְיוּ לָכֶם:
oven or stove: They are movable objects, made of earthenware, and they have a hollow inside [i.e., an inner space]; and one places the pot over the opening of the cavity. Both have their openings on the top [rather than on the side. See Shab. 38b.]
תנור וכירים: כלים המטלטלין הם, והם של חרס ויש להן תוך, ושופת את הקדרה על נקב החלל ושניהם פיהם למעלה:
shall be demolished: Because an earthenware vessel cannot be purified by immersion [in a mikvah].
יתץ: שאין לכלי חרס טהרה בטבילה:
and they shall be unclean for you: Lest you say, “I am commanded to demolish them,” Scripture says, “they shall be unclean for you” [meaning that] if you wish to keep them in their unclean state, you are permitted [to do so]. — [Torath Kohanim 11:142]
וטמאים יהיו לכם: שלא תאמר מצווה אני לנותצם, תלמוד לומר וטמאים יהיו לכם, אם רצה לקיימן בטומאתן רשאי:
36. But a spring or a cistern, a gathering of water remains clean. However, one who touches their carcass shall become unclean. לו. אַךְ מַעְיָן וּבוֹר מִקְוֵה מַיִם יִהְיֶה טָהוֹר וְנֹגֵעַ בְּנִבְלָתָם יִטְמָא:
But a spring or a cistern, a gathering of water: which are attached to the ground, do not contract uncleanness. We also learn from the phrase יִהְיֶה טָהוֹר [lit., “he will be clean”] that anyone who immerses in these [collections of water] “will become clean” from his uncleanness. — [see Pes. 16a]
אך מעין ובור מקוה מים: המחוברים לקרקע, אין מקבלין טומאה. ועוד יש לך ללמוד יהיה טהור הטובל בהם מטומאתו:
However, one who touches their carcass shall become unclean: If someone touches the uncleanness [of their carcasses] even while he is inside a spring or a cistern, he becomes unclean. Lest you say, [It can be derived from a] kal vachomer : “If [these collections of water] purify defiled [people] from their uncleanness, how much more so should they prevent a clean [person standing inside them] from becoming defiled!” Therefore, [Scripture] says, “ one who touches their carcass shall become unclean.” - [Torath Kohanim 11:146]
ונוגע בנבלתם יטמא: אפילו הוא בתוך מעין ובור ונוגע בנבלתם יטמא, שלא תאמר קל וחומר אם מטהר את הטמאים מטומאתם, קל וחומר שיציל את הטהור מליטמא, לכך נאמר ונוגע בנבלתם יטמא:
37. And if of their carcass falls upon any sowing seed which is to be sown, it remains clean. לז. וְכִי יִפֹּל מִנִּבְלָתָם עַל כָּל זֶרַע זֵרוּעַ אֲשֶׁר יִזָּרֵעַ טָהוֹר הוּא:
a sowing seed which is to be sown: [This refers to] the sowing of [various] kinds of seeds (זֵרוּעַ). [The word] זֵרוּעַ [lit., “something which is planted,”] is a noun, as in the verse, “and let them give us some pulse (הַזֵּרֹעִים) ” (Dan. 1:12).
זרע זרוע: זריעה של מיני זרעונין. זרוע שם דבר הוא, כמו (דניאל א יב) ויתנו לנו מן הזרועים:
it remains clean: Scripture teaches you that it is not predisposed and prepared to be regarded as “food [fit] to receive uncleanness” until water has come upon it.
טהור הוא: למדך הכתוב שלא הוכשר ונתקן לקרות אוכל לקבל טומאה, עד שיבואו עליו מים:
38. But if water is put upon seeds, and any of their carcass falls on them, they are unclean for you. לח. וְכִי יֻתַּן מַיִם עַל זֶרַע וְנָפַל מִנִּבְלָתָם עָלָיו טָמֵא הוּא לָכֶם:
But if water is put upon seeds: after they have been detached [from the ground]. For if you say that [produce] attached [to the ground] can become predisposed [to receive uncleanness], then there would be no seed that would remain unprepared [to receive uncleanness, since all plants are watered]. — [Chul. 118b]
וכי יתן מים על זרע: לאחר שנתלש, שאם תאמר יש הכשר במחובר, אין לך זרע שלא הוכשר:
water…upon seeds: [The law applies] both to water and to other beverages, whether they fell on the seed or the seed fell into them. All this is expounded on in Torath Kohanim (11:151, 152).
מים על זרע: בין מים בין שאר משקין, בין נפלו הם על הזרע, בין הזרע נפל לתוכן, הכל נדרש בתורת כהנים:
and any of their carcass falls on them: even if they have dried, for the Torah was particular only it should be regarded as “food,” then as soon as it has become predisposed to contract uncleanness once [by becoming wet], this predisposition can never be removed from it.
ונפל מנבלתם עליו: אף משנגב מן המים, שלא הקפידה תורה אלא להיות עליו שם אוכל, ומשירד עליו הכשר קבלת טומאה פעם אחת, שוב אינו נעקר הימנו:
39. If an animal that you [normally] eat, dies, one who touches its carcass shall be unclean until evening. לט. וְכִי יָמוּת מִן הַבְּהֵמָה אֲשֶׁר הִיא לָכֶם לְאָכְלָה הַנֹּגֵעַ בְּנִבְלָתָהּ יִטְמָא עַד הָעָרֶב:
[one who touches] its carcass: [but] not its bones or its sinews, nor its horns, hooves or hide [unless they are attached to the carcass]. — [Torath Kohanim 11:159]
בנבלתה: ולא בעצמות וגידים ולא בקרנים וטלפים ולא בעור:
40. And one who eats of its carcass shall immerse his garments, and he shall be unclean until evening. And one who carries its carcass shall immerse his garments, and he shall be unclean until evening. מ. וְהָאֹכֵל מִנִּבְלָתָהּ יְכַבֵּס בְּגָדָיו וְטָמֵא עַד הָעָרֶב וְהַנֹּשֵׂא אֶת נִבְלָתָהּ יְכַבֵּס בְּגָדָיו וְטָמֵא עַד הָעָרֶב:
And one who carries its carcass: טֻמְאַת מַשָּׂא [uncleanness resulting from lifting up an unclean item, even without touching it, e.g., by lifting it up with a stick,] is more stringent than טֻמְאַת מַגָּע [uncleanness resulting from touching an unclean item], for one who lifts [a carcass, in addition to becoming unclean himself, also] defiles his garments, but one who [merely] touches it does not defile his garments, for regarding him it does not say, “he shall immerse his garments.”
והנשא את נבלתה: חמורה טומאת משא מטומאת מגע, שהנושא מטמא בגדים, והנוגע אין בגדיו טמאין, שלא נאמר בו יכבס בגדיו:
And one who eats of its carcass: One might think that his eating renders him unclean. However, when [Scripture] says, regarding the carcass of a clean bird, “He shall not eat carrion or one stricken by a fatal disease or injury, to be defiled through it” (Lev. 22:8), [the seemingly superfluous word] בָהּ [“through it,” is explained as follows]: One defiles his garments “through it,” [i.e.,] through eating it, but the carcass of an animal does not defile if one eats it without lifting it up. For example, if someone else forced it down his pharynx. If so, why does it say, “And one who eats [of its carcass]”? To specify the [minimum] volume [needed to render someone unclean] through his touching or lifting up [an unclean carcass], namely, the volume that one [normally] eats [at a time], namely, the size of an olive," [half the volume of a hen’s egg] (Torath Kohanim 11:16). [One should note that, for food to defile other items, it must have a minimum volume possibly edible at one time, namely, equal to that of a hen’s egg. See Rashi on Lev. 11:34].
והאכל מנבלתה: יכול תטמאנו אכילתו, כשהוא אומר בנבלת עוף טהור (ויקרא כב ח) נבלה וטרפה לא יאכל לטמאה בה, אותה מטמאה בגדים באכילתה, ואין נבלת בהמה מטמאה בגדים באכילתה בלא משא, כגון אם תחבה לו חבירו בבית הבליעה, אם כן מה תלמוד לומר האוכל, ליתן שיעור לנושא ולנוגע כדי אכילה והוא כזית:
and he shall be unclean until evening: Even though he has already immersed himself, he requires sunset [in order to be completely clean].
וטמא עד הערב: אף על פי שטבל צריך הערב שמש:
41. And any creeping creature that creeps on the ground is an abomination; it shall not be eaten. מא. וְכָל הַשֶּׁרֶץ הַשֹּׁרֵץ עַל הָאָרֶץ שֶׁקֶץ הוּא לֹא יֵאָכֵל:
that creeps on the ground: This comes to exclude mites founds in chickpeas and in beans, and the pea-beetles found in lentils, since they did not creep on the ground but within the food [which was already detached from the ground]. However, when they exit into the air and creep, they become prohibited [because they fall into the category of שֶׁרֶץ, those that “creep on the ground”]. — [Torath Kohanim 11:161]
השרץ על הארץ: להוציא את היתושין שבכליסין ושבפולין ואת הזיזין שבעדשים, שהרי לא שרצו על הארץ אלא בתוך האוכל, אבל משיצאו לאויר ושרצו הרי נאסרו:
it shall not be eaten: [This phrase comes] to render guilty someone who feeds a person [with the flesh of a creeping animal] just as if he would have eaten it [himself] (Torath Kohanim 11:162). A שֶׁרֶץ means a low, short-legged creature, which appears [in its motion] only as if slithering and moving.
לא יאכל: לחייב על המאכיל כאוכל. ואין קרוי שרץ אלא דבר נמוך קצר רגלים, שאינו נראה אלא כרוחש ונד:
42. Any [creature] that goes on its belly, and any [creature] that walks on four [legs] to any [creature] that has many legs, among all creeping creatures that creep on the ground, you shall not eat, for they are an abomination. מב. כֹּל הוֹלֵךְ עַל גָּחוֹן וְכֹל | הוֹלֵךְ עַל אַרְבַּע עַד כָּל מַרְבֵּה רַגְלַיִם לְכָל הַשֶּׁרֶץ הַשֹּׁרֵץ עַל הָאָרֶץ לֹא תֹאכְלוּם כִּי שֶׁקֶץ הֵם:
that goes on its belly: This is the snake (Torath Kohanim 11:163). The word גָּחוֹן denotes “bending low” [and it is used to describe the snake] because it moves while bent a prostrated posture, prostrated on its belly.
הולך על גחון: זה נחש, ולשון גחון שחייה, שהולך שח ונופל על מעיו:
Any [creature] that goes: [This comes] to include earthworms and what resembles those that resemble them [i.e., that have tiny legs, but nevertheless slither like a worm on their bellies]. — [Torath Kohanim 11:163]
כל הולך: להביא השלשולין ואת הדומה לדומה:
that walks on four [legs]: This [refers to] a scorpion. — [Torath Kohanim 11:163]
הולך על ארבע: זה עקרב:
any [creature]: [This word comes] to include the beetle, called escarbot in French, and what resembles those that resemble them. — [Torath Kohanim 11:163]
כל: להביא את החפושית אישקרבו"ט בלע"ז [חיפושית] ואת הדומה לדומה:
any [creature] that has many legs: This is the centipede, a creature with legs from its head to its tail, on either side, called centipede [in French]. — [Torath Kohanim 11:163]
מרבה רגלים: זה נדל שרץ שיש לו רגלים מראשו ועד זנבו לכאן ולכאן, וקורין ציינפיי"ש [נדל]:
43. You shall not make yourselves abominable with any creeping creature that creeps, and you shall not defile yourselves with them, that you should become unclean through them. מג. אַל תְּשַׁקְּצוּ אֶת נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם בְּכָל הַשֶּׁרֶץ הַשֹּׁרֵץ וְלֹא תִטַּמְּאוּ בָּהֶם וְנִטְמֵתֶם בָּם:
You shall not make [yourselves] abominable: By eating them, for it says: נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם, “your souls” [lit., “Do not make your souls abominable”], and merely touching [an unclean item] does not cause “abomination of the soul” [whereas eating it does. See Me’ilah 16b, Rashi there]; similarly, “and you shall not defile yourselves” [means] by eating them.
אל תשקצו: באכילתן, שהרי כתיב נפשותיכם, ואין שיקוץ נפש במגע, וכן ולא תטמאו באכילתן:
that you should become unclean through them: [God says:] “If you defile yourselves through these [creatures] on earth, I too will defile you in the world to come and in the heavenly academy.” - [Yoma 39a]
ונטמתם בם: אם אתם מטמאין בהם בארץ אף אני מטמא אתכם בעולם הבא ובישיבת מעלה:
44. For I am the Lord your God, and you shall sanctify yourselves and be holy, because I am holy, and you shall not defile yourselves through any creeping creature that crawls on the ground. מד. כִּי אֲנִי יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם וְהִתְקַדִּשְׁתֶּם וִהְיִיתֶם קְדשִׁים כִּי קָדוֹשׁ אָנִי וְלֹא תְטַמְּאוּ אֶת נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם בְּכָל הַשֶּׁרֶץ הָרֹמֵשׂ עַל הָאָרֶץ:
For I am the Lord your God: Just as I am holy, for I am the Lord your God, so too, you shall make yourselves holy, [i.e.,] sanctify yourselves below [on earth]. — [Torath Kohanim 11:168]
כי אני ה' אלהיכם: כשם שאני קדוש שאני ה' אלהיכם, כך והתקדשתם קדשו עצמכם למטה:
and be holy: before Me, for I will make you holy above and in the world to come. — [Yoma 39a]
והייתם קדשים: לפי שאני אקדש אתכם למעלה ובעולם הבא:
and you shall not defile yourselves: [This prohibition is written to make a transgressor guilty of] transgressing many negative commandments. And for [the transgression of] each negative commandment, [the perpetrator receives] lashes. This is what [the Sages said in the Talmud (Mak. 16): “If one eats a פּוּטִיתָא [a small unclean aquatic creature], one receives four series of lashes [i.e., four separate series of lashes for the four negative commandments transgressed by eating that one creature]; if one eats an ant, one receives five series of lashes; if one eats a hornet, [he receives] six series of lashes” (Mak. 16b).
ולא תטמאו וגו': לעבור עליהם בלאוין הרבה. וכל לאו מלקות, וזהו שאמרו בתלמוד [מכות טז] אכל פוטיתא לוקה ארבע, נמלה לוקה חמש, צרעה לוקה שש:
45. For I am the Lord Who has brought you up from the land of Egypt to be your God. Thus, you shall be holy, because I am holy. מה. כִּי | אֲנִי יְהֹוָה הַמַּעֲלֶה אֶתְכֶם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם לִהְיֹת לָכֶם לֵאלֹהִים וִהְיִיתֶם קְדשִׁים כִּי קָדוֹשׁ אָנִי:
For I am the Lord Who has brought you up: On the condition that you accept My commandments, I have brought you up [out of Egypt] (Torath Kohanim 11:170). Another explanation of “For I am the Lord Who has brought you up” : Everywhere [Scripture] says, “Who has brought [you] out(הוֹצֵאתִי) [of the land of Egypt],” while here it says, “Who has brought [you] up (הַמַּעֲלֶה).” [What is the meaning of the unusual expression here of bringing up?] the school of Rabbi Ishmael taught: [God says,] “If I had brought up Israel from Egypt only so that they would not defile themselves with creeping creatures like the other nations, it would have been sufficient for them, and this is an exaltation for them.” This, then, explains [the use of] the expression הַמַּעֲלֶה - [B.M. 61b]
כי אני ה' המעלה אתכם: על מנת שתקבלו מצותי העליתי אתכם. דבר אחר כי אני ה' המעלה אתכם, בכולן כתיב והוצאתי, וכאן כתיב המעלה, תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל אלמלי לא העליתי את ישראל ממצרים אלא בשביל שאין מטמאין בשרצים כשאר אומות, דיים, ומעליותא היא גבייהו, זהו לשון מעלה:
46. This is the law regarding animals, birds, all living creatures that move in water and all creatures that creep on the ground, מו. זֹאת תּוֹרַת הַבְּהֵמָה וְהָעוֹף וְכֹל נֶפֶשׁ הַחַיָּה הָרֹמֶשֶׂת בַּמָּיִם וּלְכָל נֶפֶשׁ הַשֹּׁרֶצֶת עַל הָאָרֶץ:
47. to distinguish between the unclean and the clean, and between the animal that may be eaten and the animal that may not be eaten. מז. לְהַבְדִּיל בֵּין הַטָּמֵא וּבֵין הַטָּהֹר וּבֵין הַחַיָּה הַנֶּאֱכֶלֶת וּבֵין הַחַיָּה אֲשֶׁר לֹא תֵאָכֵל:
to distinguish: Not only must you learn [these laws concerning prohibited creatures in order to know the laws for the sake of knowing Torah], but also you shall know and recognize [these creatures], and be proficient [in identifying] them.
להבדיל: לא בלבד השונה, אלא שתהא יודע ומכיר ובקי בהן:
between the unclean and the clean: But is it necessary [for Scripture] to state [that we should know] the difference between [kosher and non-kosher animals such as] a donkey and a cow, when these [differences] have already been explained? Rather, [what is meant here, is to distinguish] between what is unclean because of you and what is clean because of you, namely between [an animal] whose trachea was slaughtered halfway through [which is considered “unclean” and may not be eaten], and [an animal] who had most of its trachea slaughtered, [rendering the animal “clean” and it may be eaten]. — [Torath Kohanim 11:173:7]
בין הטמא ובין הטהר: צריך לומר בין חמור לפרה והלא כבר מפורשים הם, אלא בין טמאה לך לטהורה לך, בין נשחט חציו של קנה לנשחט רובו:
and between the animal that may be eaten: Does [Scripture] have to tell us [that one must be able to distinguish] between a deer and a wild donkey? Are they not already delineated? Rather, [to distinguish] between [an animal] in which signs of a treifah have developed, and it is nevertheless kosher [such as an animal whose injury does not render it treifah], and an animal in which signs of a treifah have developed, and it is not kosher. - [Torath Kohanim 11:173:8]
ובין החיה הנאכלת: צריך לומר בין צבי לערוד, והלא כבר מפורשים הם, אלא בין שנולדו בה סימני טרפה כשרה, לנולדו בה סימני טרפה פסולה:
-------
Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 97 - 103
• Chapter 97
1. When the Lord will reveal His kingship, the earth will exult; the multitudes of islands will rejoice.
2. Clouds and dense darkness will surround Him; justice and mercy will be the foundation of His throne.
3. Fire will go before Him and consume His foes all around.
4. His lightnings will illuminate the world; the earth will see and tremble.
5. The mountains will melt like wax before the Lord, before the Master of all the earth.
6. The heavens will declare His justice, and all the nations will behold His glory.
7. All who worship graven images, who take pride in idols, will be ashamed; all idol worshippers will prostrate themselves before Him.
8. Zion will hear and rejoice, the towns of Judah will exult, because of Your judgments, O Lord.
9. For You, Lord, transcend all the earth; You are exceedingly exalted above all the supernal beings.
10. You who love the Lord, hate evil; He watches over the souls of His pious ones, He saves them from the hand of the wicked.
11. Light is sown for the righteous, and joy for the upright in heart.
12. Rejoice in the Lord, you righteous, and extol His holy Name.
Chapter 98
This psalm describes how Israel will praise God for the Redemption.
1. A psalm. Sing to the Lord a new song, for He has performed wonders; His right hand and holy arm have wrought deliverance for Him.
2. The Lord has made known His salvation; He has revealed His justice before the eyes of the nations.
3. He has remembered His kindness and faithfulness to the House of Israel; all, from the farthest corners of the earth, witnessed the deliverance by our God.
4. Raise your voices in jubilation to the Lord, all the earth; burst into joyous song and chanting.
5. Sing to the Lord with a harp, with a harp and the sound of song.
6. With trumpets and the sound of the shofar, jubilate before the King, the Lord.
7. The sea and its fullness will roar in joy, the earth and its inhabitants.
8. The rivers will clap their hands, the mountains will sing together.
9. [They will rejoice] before the Lord, for He has come to judge the earth; He will judge the world with justice, and the nations with righteousness.
Chapter 99
This psalm refers to the wars of Gog and Magog, which will precede the Redemption.
1. When the Lord will reveal His kingship, the nations will tremble; the earth will quake before Him Who is enthroned upon the cherubim,
2. [before] the Lord Who is in Zion, Who is great and exalted above all the peoples.
3. They will extol Your Name which is great, awesome and holy.
4. And [they will praise] the might of the King Who loves justice. You have established uprightness; You have made [the laws of] justice and righteousness in Jacob.
5. Exalt the Lord our God, and bow down at His footstool; He is holy.
6. Moses and Aaron among His priests, and Samuel among those who invoke His Name, would call upon the Lord and He would answer them.
7. He would speak to them from a pillar of cloud; they observed His testimonies and the decrees which He gave them.
8. Lord our God, You have answered them; You were a forgiving God for their sake, yet bringing retribution for their own misdeeds.
9. Exalt the Lord our God, and bow down at His holy mountain, for the Lord our God is holy.
Chapter 100
This psalm inspires the hearts of those who suffer in this world. Let them, nevertheless, serve God with joy, for all is for their good, as in the verse: "He whom God loves does He chastise." The psalm also refers to the thanksgiving sacrifice-the only sacrifice to be offered in the Messianic era.
1. A psalm of thanksgiving. Let all the earth sing in jubilation to the Lord.
2. Serve the Lord with joy; come before Him with exultation.
3. Know that the Lord is God; He has made us and we are His, His people and the sheep of His pasture.
4. Enter His gates with gratitude, His courtyards with praise; give thanks to Him, bless His Name.
5. For the Lord is good; His kindness is everlasting, and His faithfulness is for all generations.
Chapter 101
This psalm speaks of David's secluding himself from others, and of his virtuous conduct even in his own home.
1. By David, a psalm. I will sing of [Your] kindness and justice; to You, O Lord, will I chant praise!
2. I will pay heed to the path of integrity-O when will it come to me? I shall walk with the innocence of my heart [even] within my house.
3. I shall not place an evil thing before my eyes; I despise the doing of wayward deeds, it does not cling to me.
4. A perverse heart shall depart from me; I shall not know evil.
5. He who slanders his fellow in secret, him will I cut down; one with haughty eyes and a lustful heart, him I cannot suffer.
6. My eyes are upon the faithful of the land, that they may dwell with me; he who walks in the path of integrity, he shall minister to me.
7. He that practices deceit shall not dwell within my house; the speaker of lies shall have no place before my eyes.
8. Every morning I will cut down all the wicked of the land, to excise all evildoers from the city of the Lord.
Chapter 102
An awe-inspiring prayer for the exiled, and an appropriate prayer for anyone in distress.
1. A prayer of the poor man when he is faint [with affliction], and pours out his tale of woe before the Lord.
2. O Lord, hear my prayer, let my cry reach You!
3. Hide not Your face from me on the day of my distress; turn Your ear to me; on the day that I call, answer me quickly.
4. For my days have vanished with the smoke; my bones are dried up as a hearth.
5. Smitten like grass and withered is my heart, for I have forgotten to eat my bread.
6. From the voice of my sigh, my bone cleaves to my flesh.
7. I am like the bird of the wilderness; like the owl of the wasteland have I become.
8. In haste I fled; I was like a bird, alone on a roof.
9. All day my enemies disgrace me; those who ridicule me curse using my name.1
10. For I have eaten ashes like bread, and mixed my drink with tears,
11. because of Your anger and Your wrath-for You have raised me up, then cast me down.
12. My days are like the fleeting shadow; I wither away like the grass.
13. But You, Lord, will be enthroned forever, and Your remembrance is for all generations.
14. You will arise and have mercy on Zion, for it is time to be gracious to her; the appointed time has come.
15. For Your servants cherish her stones, and love her dust.
16. Then the nations will fear the Name of the Lord, and all the kings of the earth Your glory,
17. when [they see that] the Lord has built Zion, He has appeared in His glory.
18. He turned to the entreaty of the prayerful, and did not despise their prayer.
19. Let this be written for the last generation, so that the newborn nation will praise the Lord.
20. For He looked down from His holy heights; from heaven, the Lord gazed upon the earth,
21. to hear the cry of the bound, to untie those who are doomed to die,
22. so that the Name of the Lord be declared in Zion, and His praise in Jerusalem,
23. when nations and kingdoms will gather together to serve the Lord.
24. He weakened my strength on the way; He shortened my days.
25. I would say: "My God, do not remove me in the midst of my days! You Whose years endure through all generations.”
26. In the beginning You laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands.
27. They will perish, but You will endure; all of them will wear out like a garment; You will exchange them like a robe, and they will vanish.
28. But You remain the same; Your years will not end.
29. The children of Your servants will abide; their seed shall be established before You.
Chapter 103
David's prayer when he was ill, this psalm is an appropriate prayer on behalf of the sick, especially when offered by the sick person himself while his soul is yet in his body. He can then bless God from his depths, body and soul. Read, and find repose for your soul.
1. By David. Bless the Lord, O my soul; and all my being, His holy Name.
2. My soul, bless the Lord; forget not all His favors:
3. Who forgives all your sins, Who heals all your illnesses;
4. Who redeems your life from the grave, Who crowns you with kindness and mercy;
5. Who satisfies your mouth with goodness; like the eagle, your youth is renewed.
6. The Lord executes righteousness and justice for all the oppressed.
7. He made His ways known to Moses, His deeds to the Children of Israel.
8. The Lord is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger and of great kindness.
9. He will not contend for eternity, nor harbor ill will forever.
10. He has not dealt with us according to our transgressions, nor requited us according to our sins.
11. For as high as heaven is above the earth, so has His kindness been mighty over those who fear Him.
12. As far as the east is from the west, so has He distanced our transgressions from us.
13. As a father has compassion on his children, so has the Lord had compassion on those who fear Him.
14. For He knows our nature; He is mindful that we are but dust.
15. As for man, his days are like grass; like a flower of the field, so he sprouts.
16. When a wind passes over him, he is gone; his place recognizes him no more.
17. But the kindness of the Lord is forever and ever upon those who fear Him, and His righteousness is [secured] for children's children,
18. to those who keep His covenant, and to those who remember His commands to do them.
19. The Lord has established His throne in the heavens, and His kingship has dominion over all.
20. Bless the Lord, you His angels who are mighty in strength, who do His bidding to obey the voice of His speech.
21. Bless the Lord, all His hosts, His servants who do His will.
22. Bless the Lord, all His works, in all the places of His dominion. My soul, bless the Lord!
-------
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 37
• Lessons in Tanya
• Today's Tanya Lesson
Shabbat, Adar II 20, 5774 • March 22, 2014
Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 37
ובזה יובן מה שהפליגו רז״ל במאד מאד במעלת הצדקה, ואמרו ששקולה כנגד כל המצות
In light of the above, where it was explained that the advantage of the “active” mitzvot lies in their elevating effect on the body and vital soul, we can understand why our Sages so greatly extolled the virtue of charity,1 declaring it equal to all the other mitzvot together.
ובכל תלמוד ירושלמי היא נקראת בשם מצוה סתם, כי כך היה הרגל הלשון לקרוא צדקה בשם מצוה סתם
In all of the Talmud Yerushalmi charity is called simply “The Commandment,” for such was the idiomatic expression commonly used to refer to charity: “The Commandment,”
מפני שהיא עיקר המצות מעשיות, ועולה על כולנה
because charity is the core of all the mitzvot of action and surpasses them all.
שכולן הן רק להעלות נפש החיונית לה׳, שהיא היא המקיימת אותן ומתלבשת בהן
For the purpose of all these mitzvot is only to elevate one’s animal soul to G d, since it is this vital soul that performs them and clothes itself in them,
ליכלל באור אין סוף ברוך הוא המלובש בהם
so as to be absorbed into the blessed Ein Sof-light clothed in them.
ואין לך מצוה שנפש החיונית מתלבשת בה כל כך כבמצות הצדקה
Now, you will find no other mitzvah in which the vital soul is clothed to the same extent as in the mitzvah of charity.
שבכל המצות אין מתלבש בהן רק כח אחד מנפש החיונית, בשעת מעשה המצוה לבד
For in all other mitzvot only one faculty of the vital soul is clothed (e.g., the faculty of action in the hand donning Tefillin or holding an etrog); and even this one faculty is clothed in the mitzvah only while the mitzvah is being performed.
אבל בצדקה, שאדם נותן מיגיע כפיו
In the case of charity, however, which one gives from the proceeds of the toil of his hands,
הרי כל כח נפשו החיונית מלובש בעשיית מלאכתו, או עסק אחר שנשתכר בה מעות אלו
surely all the strength of his vital soul is clothed in (i.e., applied to) the effort of his labor, or in any other occupation by which he earned this money which he now distributes for charity.
וכשנותנן לצדקה, הרי כל נפשו החיונית עולה לה׳
Thus when he gives to charity this money to which he applied all the strength of his vital soul, his entire vital soul ascends to G d. Hence the superiority of charity over other mitzvot.
But this seems to imply that if one does not invest all his strength into earning his livelihood, his charity lacks this quality; to which the Alter Rebbe rejoins:
וגם מי שאינו נהנה מיגיעו, מכל מקום הואיל ובמעות אלו היה יכול לקנות חיי נפשו החיונית, הרי נותן חיי נפשו לה׳
Even he who does not earn his livelihood from his labors, nevertheless, since he could have purchased with this money that he gave for charity, sustenance for the life of his vital soul, he is actually giving his soul’s life to G d in the form of charity. Thus, charity comprises and therefore elevates more energy of the vital soul than any other mitzvah.
ולכן אמרו רז״ל שמקרבת את הגאולה
This is why our Sages have said2 that charity hastens the Messianic redemption:
לפי שבצדקה אחת מעלה הרבה מנפש החיונית, מה שלא היה יכול להעלות ממנה כל כך כחות ובחינות בכמה מצות מעשיות אחרות
For with one act of charity one elevates a great deal of the vital soul; more of its faculties and powers, in fact, than he might elevate through many other active mitzvot [combined]. As mentioned earlier in this chapter, the Messianic Era is a result of our efforts in purifying and elevating the vital soul; charity, which effects this elevation in such great measure, thus hastens the redemption.
We see, at any rate, that charity is superior to all other mitzvot, including Torah study. But here one may object:
ומה שאמרו רז״ל שתלמוד תורה כנגד כולם
As for the statement of our Rabbis3 that Torah study outweighs all other mitzvot — including charity; how can this be reconciled with what was said above?
היינו מפני שתלמוד תורה היא בדבור ומחשבה, שהם לבושים הפנימיים של נפש החיונית
This is because the study of Torah employs speech and thought, which are the inner garments of the vital soul — unlike action, which is external. Thus, only Torah study, and not other mitzvot, can suffuse the inner garments of the soul with the light of Torah.
וגם מהותן ועצמותן של בחינות חב״ד מקליפת נוגה שבנפש החיונית נכללות בקדושה ממש, כשעוסק בתורה בעיון ושכל
Furthermore, the very substance and essence of the intellectual faculties of ChaBaD (Chochmah, Binah, Daat) of the kelipat nogah in the vital soul are actually absorbed into holiness when one studies Torah with concentration and intelligence.
The intellectual faculties applied to Torah study are absorbed in the holiness of the mitzvah of Torah study, and thereby ascend from the realm of kelipat nogah (to which they previously belonged, being a part of the vital soul) to the realm of holiness.
Although it was explained in ch. 12 that the Beinoni is capable of transforming to holiness only the garments of the animal soul, not the soul faculties themselves, there is no contradiction here: the latter statement applies only to the middot (the emotional attributes) of the animal soul. The Beinoni is indeed incapable of transforming the middot to holiness; ChaBaD, however, can be transformed even by the Beinoni. The Alter Rebbe now explains the difference between them.
ואף שמהותן ועצמותן של המדות חג״ת כו׳ לא יכלו להם הבינונים להפכם לקדושה
Although Beinonim are incapable of mastering the substance and essence of the middot — Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet, and so on — so as to transform them into holiness,
היינו משום שהרע חזק יותר במדות מבחב״ד, מפני יניקתן שם מהקדושה יותר, כידוע ליודעי ח״ן
this is because the evil of kelipah is stronger in the middot than in [ChaBaD:] the intellectual faculties, since on that level (of middot) they [the kelipot] draw more vitality than they do on the level of ChaBaD, as is known to students of the Kabbalah.
The “shattering of the vessels,” which gave rise to the existence of kelipah, occurred primarily in the middot, and it is therefore more difficult to elevate the evil of middot. The evil of ChaBaD, however, can be transformed to good through intensive Torah study.
Thus we have two reasons for the superiority of the mitzvah of Torah study: (a) it is practiced with the innermost soul garment — thought; (b) it transforms the actual soul faculties of ChaBaD themselves to holiness.
זאת ועוד אחרת, והיא העולה על כולנה, במעלת עסק תלמוד תורה על כל המצות
Aside from this, there is another, far more important, aspect to the superiority of Torah study over all other mitzvot,
על פי מה שכתוב לעיל בשם התיקונים, דרמ״ח פיקודין הן רמ״ח אברים דמלכא
based on the statement quoted above (ch. 23) from Tikkunei Zohar that “the 248 positive commandments are the 248 ‘limbs’ of the King (G d).”
Just as a limb of the human body is a receptacle for a corresponding soul faculty, so is each mitzvah a receptacle for a corresponding expression of the Divine Will.
Concerning Torah, however, it is written in Tikkunei Zohar: “Torah and the Holy One, blessed be He, are entirely one” (unlike mitzvot which are merely “limbs”). The Alter Rebbe now elucidates the difference:
וכמו באדם התחתון, דרך משל, אין ערוך ודמיון כלל בין החיות שברמ״ח אבריו לגבי החיות שבמוחין, שהוא השכל, המתחלק לג׳ בחינות חב״ד
Just as, for example in the case of a human being, the vitality in his 248 organs bears no comparison or similarity to the vitality in his brain — i.e., the intellect, which is divided into the three faculties of Chochmah, Binah and Daat, —
Every limb of the body is of course bound to the soul which provides it with life — yet they are two separate entities which have been joined together. It is otherwise, however, in the relationship between one’s intellect and his soul. The intellect is an extension and a part of the soul itself: thus its unity with the soul is not that of two separate entities which have been joined, but of two components of a whole.
This difference between the limbs and the intellect illustrates the difference between the other mitzvot and Torah study, as the Alter Rebbe continues:
ככה ממש, דרך משל, להבדיל ברבבות הבדלות לאין ק׳, בהארת אור אין סוף ברוך הוא המתלבשות במצות מעשיות, לגבי הארת אור אין סוף שבבחינת חב״ד שבחכמת התורה, איש איש כפי שכלו והשגתו
Just as it is in the case of a human being, so, too, by way of analogy — allowing for the qualification that any comparison between human and divine traits must be distant, however, by myriads of degrees — is it with regard to the illumination of Ein Sof-light clothed in mitzvot of action, compared to the illumination of Ein Sof-light [clothed] in the ChaBaD faculties [of one immersed] in the wisdom of Torah, an illumination commensurate with the level of each man’s intellect and his grasp of Torah. To the extent that his intellect grasps the Torah which he studies, it is united with G dliness with a unity comparable to that of one’s intellect with his soul.
Herein, then, lies the superiority of Torah study over other mitzvot, even over charity: Torah study effects a much higher level of unity with G dliness than do the mitzvot of action.
ואף שאינו משיג אלא בגשמיות
Although one grasps [Torah] only as it is clothed in physical terms (e.g., the law concerning “Two men who clutch a garment...,” or “One who trades a cow for an ass...”); how, then, can it be said that through study of such laws one attains this lofty level of unity with G dliness? —
הרי התורה נמשלה למים שיורדים ממקום גבוה כו׳, כמו שכתוב לעיל
yet the Torah has been compared to “water descending from a high place....” The water on the lower level is exactly the same as it was on the higher level. Similarly, the laws of Torah, although they have “descended” to deal with ordinary physical situations, still consist of G d’s Will and Wisdom. Thus, in studying Torah, one is united with G d’s Will and Wisdom, and thereby with G d Himself, as discussed above (ch. 4).
ואף על פי כן אמרו רז״ל: לא המדרש עיקר אלא המעשה
Nevertheless, notwithstanding the superior level of unity with G dliness attained only by Torah, our Sages have said:4 “The essential thing is not study, but deed.”
והיום לעשותם כתיב, ומבטלין תלמוד תורה לקיום מצוה מעשיית, כשאי אפשר לעשותה על ידי אחרים
It is also written:5 “This day, i.e., during our life in this world, the all-important thing is to do them” (the mitzvot). And the Halachah rules that one must interrupt Torah study to perform a mitzvah of action when it cannot be fulfilled by others.
משום כי זה כל האדם, ותכלית בריאתו וירידתו לעולם הזה
For “this (the active performance of mitzvot) is man’s entire purpose,” the purpose for which he was created and for which [his soul] descended to this world,
להיות לו יתברך דירה בתחתונים דוקא, לאהפכא חשוכא לנהורא
so that G d may have an abode precisely in the lowest realms, to turn the darkness of this world into light of holiness,
וימלא כבוד ה׳ את כל האר׳ הגשמית דייקא, וראו כל בשר יחדיו, כנ״ל
so that G d’s glory fill specifically the entire physical world, and “all flesh will behold [G dliness] together,” as was discussed above (ch. 36).
Thus, the goal of making this world an abode for G d is achieved primarily through mitzvot of action. Therefore, when presented with the opportunity of performing a mitzvah that others cannot fulfill, one must fulfill this mitzvah even at the cost of interrrupting his Torah studies, so that G d’s desire for “an abode in the lower realms” be realized.
If, however, the mitzvah that clashes with one’s Torah study can be fulfilled by others, the choice is no longer between respecting or ignoring G d’s desire for “an abode...” — whether he suspends his Torah study to perform the mitzvah, or continues his studies and leaves the mitzvah to others, this objective will be realized regardless. The choice is now between studying Torah and actively performing a mitzvah; and here Torah study prevails because of the superior level of unity that it effects between the Torah student’s soul and G d.
In the Alter Rebbe’s words:
מה שאין כן כשאפשר לעשותה על ידי אחרים, אין מבטלין תלמוד תורה, אף שכל התורה אינה אלא פירוש המצות מעשיות
On the other hand, if [the mitzvah] can be performed by others, one does not interrupt Torah study to perform it, even though the whole Torah is, after all, only an explanation of the mitzvot of action.
והיינו משום שהיא בחינת חב״ד של אין סוף ברוך הוא, ובעסקו בה ממשיך עליו אור אין סוף ברוך הוא ביתר שאת והארה גדולה לאין ק׳ מהארה והמשכה על ידי פקודין, שהן אברים דמלכא
This is because the Torah is the level of ChaBaD of the blessed Ein Sof, and hence, when one is engaged in [studying] it he draws upon himself an infinitely greater illumination of the blessed Ein Sof-light — greater both in its illuminative power and in its higher quality — than the illumination and influence that one draws upon his soul through mitzvot, which are [merely] “organs” of the King.
What emerges from this discussion is that the effect of mitzvot consists primarily of the elevation of one’s body and the physical world in general; the effect of Torah study on the other hand is to unite the soul with G d. Accordingly, the Alter Rebbe explains the following Talmudic statement:
וזה שאמר רב ששת: חדאי נפשאי, לך קראי, לך תנאי
This is what Rav Sheshet meant when he said,6 “Rejoice, my soul! For you do I study Scripture; for you do I study Mishnah,”
For the soul, the unity with G d attained through Torah (Scripture and Mishnah) is greater than that attained through mitzvot; he therefore addressed these words to it: “For your sake I learn....”
כמו שכתוב במקום אחר באריכות
as the superiority of the soul’s unity with G d through Torah is explained elsewhere at length.7
Until here the Alter Rebbe has discussed the superiority of Torah study over other mitzvot in terms of its greater influence on the soul. He now begins to describe a far greater quality found in Torah study. Of all the mitzvot, only Torah study is described as “calling to G d, as one calls to his friend, and as a son calls his father,” as the Alter Rebbe will state shortly. Whereas mitzvot have the effect of drawing the light of G d (i.e., of His Will) upon the soul, Torah study “calls” G d’s essence to man, as is implied in the analogy of one who calls to his friend: the friend will turn with his entire “essence” to face his caller.
Furthermore: As a means of “calling” G d, Torah study is superior even to prayer. For this reason, in the verse, “G d is near to all who call Him, to all who call Him in truth,” the first part of the verse refers to prayer and the latter to Torah.
The difference between the two forms of “calling G d” is that prayer effects a change in material matters: healing, prosperity, etc., whereas the effect of Torah is in the soul, on the spiritual plane.
In the Alter Rebbe’s words:
והנה המשכה והארה זו שאדם ממשיך ומאיר מהארת אור אין סוף ברוך הוא על נפשו ועל נפשות כל ישראל
This influence and illumination generated by one’s Torah study, which man draws from the radiance of the Ein Sof-light upon his soul and upon the souls of all Israel,
היא השכינה, כנסת ישראל, מקור כל נשמות ישראל, כמו שכתוב לקמן
(meaning, as will be explained later, that the light is drawn into the spiritual level known as “the Shechinah, Knesset Yisrael” — the source of all the souls of Israel — and thereby the Ein Sof- light reaches not only the soul of the person studying Torah, but also that of every Jew), —
על ידי עסק התורה, נקראת בלשון קריאה
This illumination which one draws through his Torah study is referred to as “calling” [as in the Talmudic expression] (concerning a Torah student)קורא בתורה (usually translated as “One who reads (studies) the Torah,” but reinterpreted here as “One who calls [G d] through the Torah”).
Just as calling in its usual sense means that the caller causes the person being called to come to him, to turn to him with his entire being, similarly in the context of “calling through Torah”:
קורא בתורה, פירוש: שעל ידי עסק התורה קורא להקב״ה לבוא אליו, כביכול
This [phrase] means that in Torah study one calls G d to come to him, so to speak,
כאדם הקורא לחבירו שיבא אליו, וכבן קטן הקורא לאביו לבא אליו להיות עמו בצוותא חדא ולא ליפרד ממנו ולישאר יחידי, חס ושלום
as a man calls to his friend to come to him, or as a child will call his father to come and join him and not to part from him, leaving him alone, G d forbid.
The former analogy pertains to those Jews designated as “brethren and friends” of G d; when they study Torah they call their “friend”. The latter analogy pertains to those designed “children of G d”; when they study Torah they are calling their “father”.
וזה שכתוב: קרוב ה׳ לכל קוראיו, לכל אשר יקראוהו באמת, ואין אמת אלא תורה, דהיינו שקורא להקב״ה על ידי התורה דוקא
This is the meaning of the verse:8 “G d is near (a) to all who call Him, (b) to all who call Him in truth,”9 and10 “There is no truth but Torah,” indicating that [one “calls G d with truth”] as opposed to simply “calling G d,” only by calling G d through Torah study,
לאפוקי מי שקורא אותו שלא על ידי עסק התורה, אלא צועק אבא אבא
in contrast to one who does not call Him through Torah study, but merely cries: “Father, Father!”
This refers to the service of prayer, in which one calls G d, out of love for Him, saying “Father...!” Such a call is not considered “calling with truth,” and thus the illumination of G dly light generated by this call cannot compare with that generated by Torah, as explained above.
וכמו שקובל עליו הנביא: ואין קורא בשמך כו׳, כמו שכתוב במקום אחר
Over him who thus calls G d the prophet laments:11 “There is none who calls by Your Name,” as is written elsewhere.
Since he does not say simply: “There is none who calls You,” his intention must be that although there are indeed those who “call” G d, yet they do not do so “by His Name,” meaning through Torah, “whose words throughout are the Names of G d” (Ramban, Introduction to his commentary on the Torah, based on the Zohar).
ומזה יתבונן המשכיל להמשיך עליו יראה גדולה בשעת עסק התורה, כמו שכתוב לעיל פרק כ״ג
By dwelling on this matter, the intelligent person will derive means of drawing upon himself a great awe [of G d] when he engages in Torah study, as explained above (in ch. 23).12
There it is stated that one’s Torah study must be permeated with awe of G d (despite the apparent incompatibility between the intellectual boldness that characterizes study, and the constraint engendered by awe); this awe, moreover, is the goal of Torah study, while study is merely the “gateway”.
The thought that in Torah study one “calls” G d to himself, just as, for example, one calls his friend to come to him, will surely arouse in the student a feeling of intense awe of G d.
FOOTNOTES
1. Bava Batra 9a.
2. Ibid. 10a.
3. Peah 1:1.
4. Avot 1:17.
5. Devarim 7:11.
6. Pesachim 68b.
7. The Rebbe notes: “Possibly this alludes to the discourse in Torah Or, beginning of Parshat Mishpatim.”
8. Tehillim 145:18.
9. The division into (a) and (b) is by the Rebbe, who notes that this accords with the explanation given in Sanhedrin 39b, and in the Siddur [with chassidic commentary] on this verse.
10. Tanna devei Eliyahu Zuta, ch. 21.
11. Yeshayahu 64:6.
12. The Rebbe asks the following question. What reason is there for the Alter Rebbe to refer the reader back to ch. 23, when arousal of great reverence is achieved only by meditating on that which is stated in this chapter, and not in ch. 23? For in this chapter the Alter Rebbe stresses that through his Torah study a person is able to draw down G d Himself, as it were, like a person calling his friend to come to him. In ch. 23, however, we find only that Torah study enables the person to draw down the Supernal Will and Light; it mentions nothing of drawing down G d Himself. Why, then, does the Alter Rebbe connect ch. 23 to that which is being discussed here?
We must say, writes the Rebbe, that the Alter Rebbe does so in order to stress that great reverence is indispensable during Torah study. Since fear is an emotion that leads to withdrawal and contraction it would seem to be inimical to Torah study, which requires openness and expansiveness. The Alter Rebbe therefore cites ch. 23, wherein he explained that great reverence must be felt during one’s study of Torah. Furthermore, by citing the above-mentioned chapter the Alter Rebbe indicates that one should ponder the statement there — that Torah study is “secondary” to reverence, and serves to arouse it.
This is the meaning of the verse, “And G d commanded us [to obey] all these statutes, in order to fear G d...” This, explains the Alter Rebbe at the end of ch. 23, implies that (a) the ultimate purpose of the Torah — “commanded us” — is “in order to fear G d”; (b) that Torah is called “a gateway to the dwelling” of fear. Thus Torah in relation to fear is a matter of secondary importance, a mere gateway to the house itself.
All the above is discussed in ch. 23, and it is this that the Alter Rebbe intended to convey when he cited that chapter.
-------
Rambam:
• Daily Mitzvah - Sefer Hamitzvos:
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Important Message Regarding This Lesson
The Daily Mitzvah schedule runs parallel to the daily study of 3 chapters of Maimonides' 14-volume code. There are instances when the Mitzvah is repeated a few days consecutively while the exploration of the same Mitzvah continues in the in-depth track.
Negative Commandment 355
Out of Wedlock Intimacy
"There shall be no indecent women among the daughters of Israel"—Deuteronomy 23:18.
It is forbidden for a man and woman to be intimate unless married to each other.
Out of Wedlock Intimacy
Negative Commandment 355
Translated by Berel Bell
The 355th prohibition is that we are forbidden from having relations with a woman without [giving her] a Kesubah and acquiring her (kiddushin).
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "There may not be any prostitutes among Jewish girls."
This same commandment is repeated, but using a different expression, in G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "Do not defile your daughter with premarital relations." The Sifra says, " 'Do not defile your daughter' — this command is directed towards a man who hands over his unmarried daughter for sexual relations without marriage, as well as a girl who herself has sexual relations without marriage."
Now listen as I explain why the prohibition is repeated with this wording,3 and what the repetition adds. G‑d (exalted be He) has already instructed us in the Torah that a man who has relations with a virgin incurs none of the punishments4, regardless of whether he seduced or raped her. Rather, he must pay a monetary fine and marry the girl that he harmed, as explained in the Torah.5
Accordingly, a person might think that since the offender is only required to pay a fine, therefore this is looked upon as a purely financial case. Therefore, just as a person, if he wishes, is allowed to give away his money to another person, or to forgive a debt, so too, [he might think,] he may take his unmarried daughter and give her to a man to have relations with her. This would be like forgiving a debt due to him, since the 50 silver [shekels which the seducer or rapist must pay] go to the father. Alternatively, a person might think that [since this is purely a financial matter,] he may give his daughter on condition that the man pays a certain amount of money.
Therefore, the Torah prohibited this and said, "Do not defile your daughter with premarital relations." The monetary fine only refers to a case where the seduction or rape actually occurred. But it is still completely forbidden for them to engage in sexual relations, even when they both agree.
The Torah also reveals the reason for this prohibition: ["Do not defile your daughter with premarital relations,] and you will then not make the land sexually immoral, and the land [will not] be filled with perversion." The explanation of this: seduction and rape occur very rarely, but if the Torah allowed premarital relations when both parties agree, it would occur often and become widespread throughout the world.
This is a fine and wondrous explanation of this verse, and fits all the sayings of our Sages and laws of the Torah.
This prohibition, i.e. the prohibition of [having relations with] an unmarried woman, is punishable by lashes.
The details of this mitzvah are explained in Kesubos and Kiddushin.
FOOTNOTES
1.Deut. 23:18.
2.Lev. 19:29.
3.Directed to the father, unlike the other verse, which is phrased as a general prohibition.
4.. Such as lashes or execution.
5.Ex. 22:15. Deut. 22:28. See P220, P218.
________________________________________
Rambam:
• 1 Chapter: Gezelah va'Avedah Gezelah va'Avedah - Chapter Three
Gezelah va'Avedah - Chapter Three
Halacha 1
The following rules apply when a person robs a jug of wine from a colleague that was worth a dinar at the time of the robbery and increased in value while in the robber's possession until it was worth four dinarim. If he broke the jug, drank its contents, sold it or gave it away as a present after it increased in value, he must pay four dinarim - its worth when it left his possession. The rationale is that if he had left it, he would have had to return it intact.
If it broke because of other causes or it was lost, the robber must pay only a dinar, its value at the time of the robbery.
Halacha 2
If it was worth four dinarim at the time of the robbery, but only one dinar when it left his possession, he must pay the four dinarim it was worth at the time of the robbery. This applies whether he broke it or drank it, or whether it was broken or lost due to other causes. The same principles apply in other analogous situations.
Halacha 3
The following rules apply when a person obtains by robbery a basket of five dates. If the entire basket were sold together it would cost nine coins, but if the dates were sold one by one they would be sold for ten. The robber is required to pay only nine. We do not heed the claim of the owner, who argues: "I would have sold them one by one."
Similar laws apply if a person damages a colleague's property or is required to reimburse him for a loss in a similar instance. This principle does not apply, however, with regard to property that is consecrated. In that instance, the robber must pay ten coins.
Halacha 4
When a person obtains an animal by robbery and it becomes old, or it becomes weak and will never regain its strength - e.g., because of an illness for which there is no cure - a coin and it cracked or was disqualified by the ruling authorities, produce and the entire amount rotted, or wine and it became vinegar, he is considered to be a person who obtained a utensil by robbery and destroyed it, and he must pay the worth of the article obtained by robbery at the time of the robbery.
If, however, a person obtained animals by robbery and they became weaker, but their strength could be restored; servants and they became old; a coin and it was disqualified as currency by one country, but still accepted by another; produce of which a portion became rotten; terumah that became impure;leaven, and the festival of Passover was celebrated; or an animal that was used for the purposes of sin, became disqualified for sacrifice on the altar, or was condemned to be stoned to death; the robber may tell the original owner: "Here is your article," and return to him the article obtained by robbery.
Halacha 5
When does the above apply? When the article obtained by robbery is itself returned. If, however, the article obtained by robbery was burned or lost after benefiting from it became forbidden, the robber must pay its value at the time of the robbery.
Based on this rationale, if the robber denied possession of the article after deriving benefit from it became forbidden, and affirmed his denial with an oath, he is liable to pay the principal and an additional fifth of its value, and bring a guilt offering.
Halacha 6
When a person obtains an animal by robbery and uses it to transport a burden, rides on it, plows or threshes with it or the like, and then returns it to its owner, he violates the commandment against robbery. Nevertheless, he is not liable for any payment, for he did not cause the animal any injury or weakness.
If, however, this person becomes habituated to robbing, withholding property or performing such acts time after time, he should be penalized. This applies even in the diaspora. The court should evaluate the wage or the increase in value that he earned with the animal, and that amount should be paid to the person whose property was taken.
Halacha 7
When a person seizes a servant belonging to a colleague and causes him to perform labor, but does not prevent him from performing work for his master, he is not liable. The rationale is that a person is happy that his servants do not go idle. If, however, this prevents him from performing work for his master, the person who seized the servant must pay the master the wages of the servant, as if he were a hired worker.
Halacha 8
The following laws apply when a person seizes a boat belonging to a colleague and performs work with it. If the boat is not generally hired out, the damage to the boat should be evaluated and must be paid.
If the boat is generally hired out there are two guidelines that apply. If the person took the boat with the intent of renting it, since the owner did not grant his permission, the owner has the option. He may collect the wage usually paid or he may collect payment for the damage to the boat.
If the person took the boat as robbery, he must pay for the damages. Similar principles apply in all like situations.
Halacha 9
The following rules apply when a person dwells in a courtyard belonging to a colleague without notifying him. If the courtyard is not usually rented out, he is not required to pay him rent. This applies even if the person who dwells within generally rents a dwelling, for one person is benefiting and the other is not suffering a loss.
If the courtyard is generally rented out, the person who dwells within must pay rent even though he does not usually rent a dwelling, because he is causing the owner a loss of income.
Halacha 10
When a person owned wool that he was dyeing in a vat, and another person came and added other dyes without the consent of the owner, the latter must pay the owner of the wool for the decline in the value of the wool he caused. This payment does not include the value of the dye the owner used for the wool.If the person whose property was damaged seizes the value of dye that he lost, that money should not be expropriated from him.
Halacha 11
A person who without the owner's consent takes an object entrusted to him for safekeeping to use for his private purposes in a way that will diminish it, or to take as his own is judged as a robber. This applies whether he takes the article himself, or it is taken for him by his son, his servant or his agent.
The person who takes the article is liable for it if it is destroyed by forces beyond his control, and the object that he took is considered to be within his domain according to the laws that govern all robbers.
A watchman who decides to take an entrusted article for his private purposes is not held responsible for it until he actually takes it. When, however, he takes the article from one place to another in his domain in order to take it for his private purposes, he is liable although he did not take any portion of the entrusted article. For the watchman becomes responsible in such an instance even when the entrusted article remains intact.
Halacha 12
As soon as the watchman lifts up the jug to take a revi'it of wine, he is liable for it in the event of its destruction by forces beyond his control, even though he has not taken it.
If, however, he lifts up a wallet containing many coins to take one dinar, there is a doubt whether he is liable for the entire wallet if it is destroyed by forces beyond his control, or he is liable only for the one dinar. Similar laws apply with regard to other instances where a container holds several discrete entities.
Halacha 13
When produce was entrusted to a person for safekeeping and he took a portion of it as his own, he is responsible only for the produce that he actually took. The produce remaining in its place remains the property of the original owner. If, however, the entire produce becomes spoiled because of the amount that he took, he is liable for the entire amount.
What is implied? If the watchman tilted a jug while it remained in its place and removed a revi'it or more, and then the jug was broken afterwards, the watchman is liable only for the amount that he took, for he did not lift up the jug. If the wine turned into vinegar, he must pay the value of the entire jug at the time he took it. Similar principles apply in all like situations.
Halacha 14
When a person denies in court having been given an object entrusted to him for safekeeping, he is considered to be a robber if the object was in his possession at the time of his denial. He is liable for the article if it is destroyed by factors beyond his control.
Halacha 15
A person who borrows an object without the consent of its owner is considered to be a robber.
If a utensil was in the hands of a person's son or servant and another person took it from him and used it, he is considered to have borrowed the object without the consent of its owner. The article is considered to have entered his domain, and he is responsible for it in the event of its destruction by forces beyond his control until he returns it to the owner.
Therefore, if he returns it to the minor or to the servant who was holding it beforehand, and then it is lost or stolen, the borrower is liable. Similar principles apply in all like situations.
Halacha 16
When a person seizes collateral from a debtor without receiving license from the court, he is considered to be a robber, despite the debt that he is owed. Needless to say, if he enters the debtor's home and seizes collateral, he is considered to be a robber, for Deuteronomy 24:11 explicitly states: "Stand outside and the man who owes the debt to you will bring the security out to you."
-------
Rambam:
• 3 Chapters: Ishut Ishut - Chapter Eight, Ishut Ishut - Chapter Nine, Ishut Ishut - Chapter Ten
Ishut - Chapter Eight
Halacha 1
When [a man] tells a woman: "Behold, you are consecrated to me with this cup of wine," and the cup is discovered to contain honey [she is not consecrated]. [Similarly, if he tells her: "...Behold, you are consecrated to me with this cup] of honey," and the cup is discovered to contain wine;1 "...with this dinar of silver," and it is discovered to be gold; "...[with this dinar] of gold," and it is discovered to be silver; "...on condition that I am a priest," and he was discovered to be a Levite; "[on condition that I am] a Levite," and he was discovered to be a priest; "...[on condition that I am] a Givonite,"2 and he was discovered to be a bastard; "...[on condition that I am] a bastard," and he was discovered to be a Givonite; "...[on condition that I am] an inhabitant of a town," and he was discovered to be an inhabitant of a metropolis; "...[on condition that I am] an inhabitant of a metropolis," and he was discovered to be an inhabitant of a town; "...on condition that I am poor," and he was discovered to be rich; "...[on condition that I am] rich," and he was discovered to be poor; "...on condition that my house is close to the bathhouse," and it is discovered to be distant from it; "...[on condition that my house is] distant from the bathhouse," and it is discovered to be close to it; "...on condition that I have a maid," "...a daughter who knows how to braid hair," or "...who bakes," and [it is discovered that] he does not have one; "...on condition that he does not have [one of the above,] and [it is discovered that] he does; "...on condition that he has a wife and children," and [it is discovered that] he does not; "...on condition that he does not have [the above,] and [it is discovered that] he does - in all these and in any similar instance, the woman is not consecrated. The same rule applies if she [makes a condition based on] false information.
Halacha 2
In all the above instances, she is not consecrated even though she says: "In my heart, I was willing to be consecrated to him even though he deceived me and gave me wrong information." Similarly, [if she gave him false information,] she is not consecrated even though he says: "In my heart, I was willing to consecrate her even though she deceived me." [The rationale is that] feelings in one's heart are not [the same as explicit] statements.
Halacha 3
[When a man tells a woman:] "Behold, you are consecrated to me on condition that I am a perfumer," and it is discovered that he is both a perfumer and a leather craftsman;3 "...on condition that I am an inhabitant of a town," and he was discovered to be an inhabitant of both a town and a metropolis;4 or "...on condition that my name is Yosef," and it was discovered that his name was Yosef and Shimon; she is consecrated.
If, however, he told her: "[Behold, you are consecrated to me] on condition that my name is only Yosef," and it was discovered that his name was Yosef and Shimon; "...on condition that I am solely a perfumer," and it is discovered that he is both a perfumer and a leather craftsman; or "...on condition that I am solely an inhabitant of a town," and he was discovered to be an inhabitant of both a town and a metropolis; she is not consecrated.
Halacha 4
When [a man] tells a woman: "Behold, you are consecrated to me on condition that I know how to read," [for the stipulation to be fulfilled] it is necessary that he know how to read from the Torah and translate what he reads according to the translation of Onkelos the convert.
If he tells her: "...on condition that I am a reader," he must know how to read the Torah, the works of the Prophets and the Holy Writings with proper grammatical precision. [If he tells her:] "...on condition that I know how to study the Mishnah," he must know how to read the Mishnah. "...On condition that I am a sage of the Mishnah," he must know how to read the Mishnah, the Sifra,5 the Sifre,6 and the Tosefta of Rabbi Chiyya.7
Halacha 5
[When a man tells a woman: "Behold, you are consecrated to me] on condition that I am a student [of the Torah]," we do not say that [he must be a student] of the caliber of ben Azzai and ben Zoma.8 Instead, it is sufficient that when one asks him a question regarding his studies, he is able to answer. [This includes] even the laws of the festivals that are studied in public; these are easy matters that are studied close to the festival, so that people at large will be familiar with them.
[When a man tells a woman: "Behold, you are consecrated to me] on condition that I am a wise man," we do not say that [he must be] like Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues. Instead, it is sufficient that when one asks him a point of logic with regard to any subject, he is able to answer. "...On condition that I am mighty," we do not say that [he must be] like Avner ben Ner9 or Yoav.10 Rather, it is sufficient that his colleagues fear him because of his might. "...On condition that I am rich," we do not say that [he must be as wealthy] as Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah.11 Rather, it is sufficient that the inhabitants of his city honor him because of his wealth.
[When a man tells a woman: "Behold, you are consecrated to me] on condition that I am righteous," even if the person is known to be thoroughly wicked, there is doubt [regarding the status of the kiddushin, and] the woman is considered as consecrated. For it is possible that he had thoughts of repentance in his heart at that time.12
"...On condition that I am wicked," even if the person is known to be thoroughly righteous, there is doubt [regarding the status of the kiddushin, and] the woman is considered as consecrated, since it is possible that he had thoughts of idol worship in his heart at that time. For the sin of idol worship is so great that even when a person thinks of serving [idols] in his heart,13 he is considered wicked, as [implied by Deuteronomy 11:16, which] states: "lest your hearts be tempted [and you go astray and serve other gods]," and [Ezekiel 14:5, which] states: "that I may detect the House of Israel in their hearts [for they are all estranged from Me because of their idols]."
Halacha 6
[When a man] consecrates a woman and says, "I thought she was from a priestly family, and instead she is from a family of Levites," "...from a family of Levites, and instead she is from a priestly family," "...poor, and instead she is rich," or "...rich, and instead she is poor," she is consecrated, for she did not cause him to err.14
Similarly, if she says, "I thought he was a priest, and instead he is a Levite," "...a Levite, and instead he is a priest," "...poor, and instead he is rich," or "...rich, and instead he is poor," she is consecrated, for he did not cause her to err.
FOOTNOTES
1.Even though honey is more valuable than wine, the kiddushin are not binding, because the stipulation was not fulfilled, and it is possible that the woman indeed desired wine rather than honey. Similarly, with regard to the sets that follow, Kiddushin (48b ff) explains reasons why it is possible to say that the woman favored either of the alternatives, and she is therefore not consecrated unless the stipulation that is made is met.
2.Who, like bastards, are forbidden to marry into the Jewish people. (See the notes on Chapter 1, Halachah 7.)
3.Animal feces were used in the processing of leather, and thus leather craftsmen were known for their unpleasant odor.
4.I.e., he maintains two homes.
5.A compendium of halachic exegesis of the Book of Leviticus, composed by Rav, a student of Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi, who compiled the Mishnah. Rav was the leader of the first generation of Amoraim in Babylonia.
6.A compendium of the halachic exegesis of the Books of Numbers and Deuteronomy, composed by Rav.
7.A collection of teachings intended to "explain the Mishnah and expound upon concepts that would require much effort to be derived from the Mishnah." Rabbi Chiyya was one of Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi's primary disciples.
8.Students of Rabbi Akiva, renowned for their scholarship in their youth. Their promising futures were effaced after they entered a mystical experience together with their master. (See Chaggigah 14b.)
9.The commander of King Saul's armies.
10.Yoav ben Tz'ruyah, the commander of King David's armies.
11.Who was renowned for his wealth. Each year he would give 12,000 calves as the tithes of his herd (Shabbat 54b). Another version of the text also mentions Elazar ben Chersom whose wealth is described in Yoma 35b.
12.The doubt exists only because we cannot be aware of what is happening within the person's heart or mind. If we could be sure that he had repented within his heart, he is considered a righteous man, regardless of his previous conduct. This demonstrates the power of teshuvah, how one thought of repentance can transform one's spiritual level from one extreme to the other.
13.In general, a person is not punished for a sin unless he commits a deed. The worship of false gods is different. (See Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 2:6, which states: "Whoever accepts a false god as true, even when he does not actually worship it, disgraces and blasphemes [God's] glorious and awesome name." See also Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 2:1,3.)
14.Since he did not explicitly state the matter as a stipulation, his misconception does not cause the kiddushin to be nullified.
Ishut - Chapter Nine
Halacha 1
[When a man] consecrates two women whom he is forbidden to marry at the same time, because it creates a prohibited relationship, neither is consecrated. What is implied? When a man consecrates a woman and her daughter or two sisters at the same time, neither of them is consecrated.
Halacha 2
[The following rule applies when a man] consecrates many women at the same time and says: "Behold, all of you are consecrated to me." If among [these women] were two sisters, a woman and her daughter or the like, none of the women is consecrated.1
If [the man] told [the women]: "Those of you who are fit to engage in marital relations with me are consecrated to me," they are all consecrated to him, except the sisters, the mother and her daughter or the like.
Similarly, if [a man] told [a group of women], "Behold, all of you are consecrated to me," and among [these women] was a Canaanite maidservant, a non-Jewish woman or a woman who is forbidden to this man as an ervah - e.g., a married woman, his daughter, his sister or the like - none of them is consecrated to him. If he says: "Those of you who are fit to engage in marital relations with me are consecrated to me," they are all consecrated to him, except the women with whom he cannot establish kiddushin.
Halacha 3
[The following rule applies when] a man tells two sisters: "Behold, one of you is consecrated to me with this [article]," and gives them both a p'rutah, or one accepts it on behalf [of herself and] her sister. They both require a divorce from him, and it is forbidden for him to engage in marital relations with either of them, for the kiddushin are viable even though he is forbidden to engage in relations with either of them.2 The same [rule applies] when [a man] tells a father: "One of your daughters is consecrated to me," and the father accepts the kiddushin.3
Halacha 4
[The following rule applies when a man] appoints an agent to consecrate a particular woman, the agent went and consecrated her, the principal himself consecrated the woman's mother, daughter or sister, and it is not known which of them was consecrated first: They both require a divorce, and they both are forbidden [to have relations] with him.
A similar [rule applies] if a woman appointed an agent to consecrate her, he [fulfilled her charge], she herself consecrated herself to another man, and it is not known which consecration took place first. Both men are required to divorce her. If they so desire, one may divorce her and one may marry her.4
Halacha 5
When does the above apply? When [the two men who consecrated her] were not related. If, however, they were related, the agent consecrated the woman to a father, and she consecrated herself to his son, to his brother or the like: they both must divorce her, and they both are forbidden [to have relations] with her.
Halacha 6
[The following rules apply when a man] tells an agent: "Go out and consecrate a woman for me," the agent dies, and it is not known whether or not he consecrated a woman on behalf of the principal. We accept the presumption that he consecrated [on his behalf], for it is an accepted presumption that the agent will carry out the mission with which he was charged.
[Accordingly,] since it is not known which woman he consecrated, the principal is forbidden to marry any woman who has a relative who might be forbidden because of the laws of ervah - i.e., a woman who has an [unmarried] daughter, mother, sister or the like.
[The rationale is] that if you say: "Let him marry this one," perhaps the agent had consecrated the woman's mother, sister or daughter. He is permitted [to marry] a woman who does not have relatives like these.5
If [the woman the man desires to marry] has a relative like this - e.g., a sister - and that relative was married at the time the agent was appointed, [the man] is permitted to marry her. [This applies] even if this relative was divorced before the agent died. We do not say that perhaps the agent consecrated her relative after she was divorced. For she was not fit to [marry him] at the time the agent was appointed, and a person does not appoint an agent to consecrate a wife for him if [the intended] is not fit to be consecrated at the time the agent is appointed.
Halacha 7
[The following rules apply when] a person has five sons, they each appoint their father as an agent to consecrate a wife for them, and the father tells a colleague who has five daughters: "[Each] one of your daughters is consecrated to one of my sons." Should the father [of the girls] accept the kiddushin,6 each of the girls must be divorced by each of the five brothers. For they all gave their father the prerogative of consecrating a wife for them [and he did not specify which woman would be the wife for which of his sons].
If one of [the sons] dies, each of the women must be divorced by the four [remaining brothers] and must perform the rite of chalitzah with one of them.7
Halacha 8
[There is, by contrast, no doubt in the following situation:] A father had [two daughters]: one a minor or a na'arah8 whom he has the privilege [of consecrating], and one a bogeret.9 Even if the bogeret gives her father the privilege of consecrating her, when he consecrates one of his daughters without specifying which one, it is assumed that the bogeret is not the one intended unless he specifically states [that the kiddushin are for] "my older daughter, who is a bogeret, who appointed me as [her] agent."10 Therefore, [in such a situation,] the bogeret is not consecrated,11 and her sister is consecrated.
Halacha 9
[The following rules apply with regard to a father] who has two pairs of daughters from two different wives, and he has the prerogative [of consecrating all of them].12 If he consecrated one daughter, and at the time of the kiddushin told the husband: "I consecrated my oldest daughter" [there is no confusion with regard to his intent]. Although it is possible to say that perhaps he consecrated the older daughter in the older pair to him, or the older daughter in the younger pair or the younger daughter in the older pair - for she is older than the older daughter in the younger pair [- we do not entertain such doubts.] All [the daughters] are permitted [to marry other men] except the older daughter in the older pair; she alone is considered to be consecrated.
Similarly, if [the father says that] he consecrated his youngest daughter: Although it is possible to say that perhaps [he consecrated] the younger daughter in the younger pair to him, or the younger daughter in the older pair or the older daughter in the younger pair - for she is younger than the younger daughter in the older pair [- we do not entertain such doubts]. All [the daughters] are permitted [to marry other men] except the younger daughter in the younger pair; she alone is considered to be consecrated. For the phrase "my oldest daughter" implies the daughter whom none is elder than, and the phrase "my youngest daughter" implies the daughter whom none is younger than.13
Halacha 10
A father's word is accepted with regard to [the status of] his daughter below the age of bagrut. [If] he states that she has been consecrated, she is forbidden to marry at all.14
Halacha 11
When a father says, "I consecrated my daughter, but I do not know to whom I consecrated her," she is forbidden [to marry] any man forever unless the father says, "I became aware of the fact that I consecrated her to so and so." He alone must divorce her [before she can marry another person]. [Her father's word is accepted with regard to the identity of the person who consecrated her] even if he becomes aware after she reaches the age of bagrut.15
Halacha 12
If a father says, "I don't know to whom I consecrated [my daughter]," and a person comes and says, "I am the one who consecrated her," his word is accepted. [Moreover, he is granted the prerogative of] consummating the marriage.16 He need not consecrate her a second time.
Halacha 13
[In the above situation,] if two people come and both claim that they were the ones who consecrated her, they are both required to divorce her. If they desire, one may divorce her, and one may consummate the marriage.17
[If the latter option was taken, and] one consummated the marriage,18 and afterwards a third person came and claimed that he was the one who had consecrated her [originally], his word is not accepted and he does not cause her to be forbidden to her husband.
Halacha 14
[The following rules apply when] a woman states: "I was consecrated, but I do not know to whom I was consecrated," and a man comes and claims: "I was the one who consecrated her." His word is accepted and he may divorce her [so that] she is permitted to marry others, but not him. He is forbidden to consummate the marriage.19
[This restriction was instituted out of suspicion that] perhaps the man's natural inclination overcame him [and he made his statement out of desire for her]. [And we fear that the woman] will encourage [his false statements] so that she will be permitted [to marry].
Halacha 15
[The following rules apply when a man] tells a woman: "I consecrated you," and the woman denies the matter. He is forbidden [to marry] her close relatives,20 but she is permitted [to marry] his close relatives.21 If she says, "You consecrated me," and he denies the matter, he is permitted [to marry] her close relatives, but she is forbidden [to marry] his close relatives.
If he says: "I consecrated you," and the woman says: "It was my daughter, not me, whom you consecrated," he is forbidden [to marry] the close relatives of the mother; the mother is permitted [to marry] his close relatives; he is permitted [to marry] the close relatives of the daughter;22 and the daughter is permitted [to marry] the man's close relatives.23
[The following rules apply when the man says:] "I consecrated your daughter," and the woman says: "It was myself [not my daughter] whom you consecrated." He is forbidden [to marry] the daughter's close relatives; the daughter is permitted [to marry] his close relatives; he is permitted [to marry] the mother's close relatives; and the mother is forbidden [to marry] the man's close relatives.
Halacha 16
All the claims of kiddushin [mentioned in the previous halachah] refer to a situation in which the person making the claim states that the kiddushin were given in the presence of witnesses, and the witnesses either journeyed overseas or died. If, however, they acknowledge that the kiddushin were given without witnesses observing, the kiddushin are of no consequence, as we have explained.24
Whenever a woman tells a man, "You consecrated me," and he denies the matter, we ask him to compose a bill of divorce so that she will be permitted to marry others, for [doing this] does not involve any loss to him.25 If he gives her a divorce on his own volition,26 we compel him to give her [the monetary settlement, as stated in] the ketubah.27
Halacha 17
When a man appoints an agent to consecrate a woman for him, and the agent goes and consecrates her for himself, the woman is consecrated to the agent. It is, however, forbidden to do such a thing. Whoever does this or performs a similar act with regard to business matters is considered to be wicked.28
Halacha 18
[The following rules apply when a man] appoints an agent to consecrate a woman for him, the agent consecrates her [but a doubt arises whether the agent consecrated her for himself or for the principal]. When the agent says, "I consecrated [the woman] for myself," and the woman says, "I was consecrated to the principal," [the ruling depends on whether or not the appointment of the agent was made in the presence of witnesses].29
If the agent was not appointed in the presence of witnesses, the agent is forbidden to marry the woman's close relatives, and she is permitted to marry [the agent's] close relatives.30 The woman is forbidden to marry the principal's close relatives, but the principal is permitted to marry her close relatives.31 If the agent was appointed in the presence of witnesses, she is consecrated to the principal.32
Halacha 19
[The following rules apply when] the woman says, "I do not know to whom I was consecrated, whether to the agent or to the principal." If the agent was not appointed in the presence of witnesses, she is consecrated to the agent. If he was appointed as his agent [in the presence of witnesses], they both are required to divorce her. If they desire, one may divorce her and one may consummate the marriage.
Halacha 20
[The following rule applies when] a woman appoints an agent to consecrate her, he went and fulfilled his mission, but while he was in the process of doing so, she nullified his agency and rescinded his appointment, and it is not known whether she nullified his agency before he received the kiddushin or afterwards. The status of the kiddushin is doubtful. [She cannot marry another man without receiving a divorce, nor may the marriage be consummated unless she receives kiddushin again.] Similar rules apply when a man appoints an agent and retracts his appointment.
Halacha 21
[The following rules apply when a man] consecrates one of five women but does not know which of them he has consecrated, and each of them says, "He consecrated me." He is forbidden to marry the [close] relatives of all these women and must divorce each of them. [With regard to the payment of the money due because of the marriage contract,] he should leave [the sum due because of] one marriage contract among all the women and depart.33
If, however, [the man] had consecrated [his intended] through sexual relations, our Sages penalized him34 [and required him] to give [the sum due because of] the marriage contract to each of the women.35
[When could such a situation apply?]36 When it is known that he wrote a marriage contract for one of the women,37 and the marriage contract was lost, and each of the women claims: "I was the one who was consecrated. He wrote the marriage contract for me and it was lost."
Halacha 22
When a report is circulated that a woman has been consecrated to a particular man, we operate under the presumption that [the woman] is consecrated although there is no binding evidence to that effect.38 Whenever a report is not substantiated by a court, no attention is paid to it.39
What type of report when substantiated will cause a woman to be considered to be consecrated? Two [men] came [to court] and testified that they saw candles lit, couches spread, people coming in and out of the house, and women celebrating with her, saying "So and so was consecrated today."40 If the women are heard saying: "So and so will be consecrated today," no attention is paid [to the report]; perhaps they assembled for the purpose of kiddushin, but the kiddushin were not given. It is only when [the report says that the woman] was [actually] consecrated [that the court considers her as such].
Similarly, if two [men] come and say, "We saw what looked like an erusin celebration and we heard sounds [of joy], and we heard from so and so41 who heard from so and so that this woman was consecrated in the presence of [two witnesses] and the witnesses went to another country or died" - this is a report that could cause a woman to be considered consecrated.
Halacha 23
When does the above apply? When there is no rationale that offsets the report. If, however, there is a rationale that offsets the report, and that rationale is heard when [the report that] she was consecrated is heard, [the woman] is not considered to be consecrated.
What is [an example] of a rationale that offsets a report? "So and so was consecrated with a stipulation attached," or "[So and so was given] kiddushin whose status is in doubt."42 [In such instances,] the woman is not considered [consecrated]. Instead, we ask her [for an account of the circumstances] and rely on her word, since there is no clear evidence nor firm report.
Halacha 24
[The following rules apply when at first] a report spreads that [a woman] was consecrated to a particular man, and after a few days a rationale that offsets the report is stated. If it appears to the court that the rationale is true, they rely on it, and [the woman] is not considered to be consecrated. If not, since the rationale was not heard at the time the report of the kiddushin was heard, we do not take it into consideration.
Halacha 25
An incident once occurred involving a report that a particular woman was consecrated to the son of so and so. After time passed, they asked [the husband's] father, who said, "There was a stipulation attached when she was consecrated to him, and the stipulation was not fulfilled." The Sages did not rely on his words. Instead, they ruled that the status of the kiddushin was in doubt, as if there were no rationale that offsets [the original report].
Halacha 26
[The following rules apply when] a report is spread that [a woman] was consecrated to a particular man, and a second man came and consecrated her in our presence. We attempt to verify the report of the kiddushin of the first man. If witnesses come and give clear testimony that [the woman] was consecrated to the first man, the kiddushin given by the second are of no consequence.
If not, the first man, for whom there is merely a report of his kiddushin, must divorce the woman, and the second man, who definitely consecrated her, is allowed to consummate the marriage.43 If the second man divorces her, the first should not consummate the marriage, lest people at large say, "He remarried the woman he divorced after consecrating her, after she had been consecrated by another man."44
Halacha 27
When a report is spread that a woman was consecrated to one man, and a second report is later spread that she was consecrated to another, one of the men should write her a bill of divorce, and the other - either the first or the last - may consummate the marriage.
Halacha 28
In a place where it is customary for [a prospective groom] to send gifts to his [prospective] bride after consecrating her, and witnesses who had seen presents being brought to [a woman] come [and testify to that effect], we suspect that she has been consecrated.45 [Because of this] suspicion, she must be divorced. [This ruling applies] even when the majority of the men in the city send presents before consecrating [their prospective brides].46
In a place where it is customary for all the men [of the locale] to send presents first and then consecrate, [the fact that witnesses] saw presents [being sent] is not a cause for suspicion.
Halacha 29
[The following rules apply when] it was established that a marriage contract had been composed [for a specific woman]: If it is common for some of the people in that place to consecrate and then have [a marriage contract] composed, we suspect [that the woman was consecrated].47 [This law applies] even when there is no scribe in the locale. We do not say that because a scribe happened to be found [in the locale], [the man had the marriage contract] written before [he consecrated the woman].
If all the men in a locale have marriage contracts composed before consecrating [their wives], [the existence of a marriage contract] is not a cause for suspicion [that a woman has been consecrated].
Halacha 30
[The following rule applies when there is a dispute between two pairs of witnesses:] two [witnesses] say: "We saw [a woman] consecrated on this particular day," and two [witnesses] say: "We did not see [this happen]." Although they are all neighbors, living in the same courtyard, [the woman] is considered to be consecrated; the claim "We did not see [this happen]" is of no consequence, for it is common for [a man] to consecrate [a woman] in private.
Halacha 31
When one witness says, "This [woman] has been consecrated," and [the woman] herself says, "I have not been consecrated," she is permitted [to marry without restriction].48
When one [witness] says, "[This woman] has been consecrated," and another [witness] says, "she has not been consecrated," she should not marry49 [anyone other than the person to whom the witness says she has been consecrated]. If she, nevertheless, marries another person, [there is no necessity to] terminate [the marriage], for she says, "I was not consecrated."
[The following rules apply when a woman herself] says, "I have been consecrated," and afterwards she accepts kiddushin [a second time]. If she can offer a rationale that explains her previous statements, explaining why she said she was consecrated, and the reason appears substantial [to the court],50 she is permitted to [marry] the second man.51 If she cannot offer an explanation, or she offers one but it does not appear substantial, she is forbidden [to marry]. [Nevertheless, we also give certain consideration to] the kiddushin given by the second man, and [require] him to divorce her. She is forbidden to [marry] him or anyone else until the person who first consecrated her comes.
Similar [rules apply with regard to] a woman who comes [to a new community] and says that she is a married woman, and afterwards says that she is unmarried. If she gives a rationale that explains her statements, and it [appears] substantial, her word is accepted.
FOOTNOTES
1.Since all the women were included in the same statement without differentiating between any of them, none is consecrated.
The Maggid Mishneh notes that Kiddushin 51a equates this law with the following ruling: When one person tells another, "You and this animal will acquire this object," the person acquires half. The correspondence is explained as follows. Although the animal is not fit to acquire the property, the person still acquires the half. Similarly, although some of the women are not fit to be consecrated, the others are, and they should be consecrated.
On this basis, the Maggid Mishneh asks: Since in Hilchot Mechirah 22:12, the Rambam rules that the person acquires the property although the animal does not, seemingly he should agree that the women who are fit to be married should be consecrated. In resolution, he explains that monetary laws are governed by different principles from marital laws, and therefore there is no contradiction between the two rulings.
Because of this contradiction, although the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 41:4) mentions the Rambam's opinion, it also mentions a view that states that the women who are not related are consecrated. It concludes that because of the conflicting opinions, the status of the kiddushin is doubtful. The same applies with regard to the law mentioned in the second portion of this halachah.
2.Since the man was not specific as to which of the sisters he was consecrating, there is no way to determine which of them was intended. [Even if the man specifies his intent afterwards, his word is not accepted (Ramah, Even HaEzer 37:16).] Therefore, there is doubt as to the status of both of the women.
3.The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 37:16) states that this rule applies even when the man consecrating the daughters was engaged to one of them. Since he did not specify his intent at the time of the kiddushin, all the daughters require a divorce.
4.In the previous instance, the man was not able to marry either of the women he consecrated, because they were related and it is forbidden to marry one's divorcee's mother, sister or daughter.
5.The Ramah (Even HaEzer 35:11) quotes the opinion of Rabbenu Nissim, who maintains that if the relatives state that they were never consecrated and the man marries the woman, they are permitted to remain married.
6.If the girls are below the age of bagrut, their father has the privilege of consecrating them. If they are above the age of bagrut, it is possible that they appointed him as an agent to receive their kiddushin. Note, however, the following halachah.
7.For perhaps the brother who died was her betrothed.
8.A girl between the ages of twelve and twelve and a half, who has manifested signs of physical maturity.
9.A girl past the age of twelve and a half, who has manifested signs of physical maturity.
In the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Kiddushin 3:8), he states that if the man has several daughters below the age of bagrut, they all require a divorce, because of the doubt mentioned in the previous halachot, but the daughter above the age of bagrut does not require a divorce.
10.Kiddushin 51b explains the rationale for this ruling. A person will not abandon a mitzvah for which he is responsible (the consecration of his younger daughter) to fulfill a mitzvah for which he is not responsible (the consecration of his elder daughter).
11.The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 37:15) states that this law applies only when the daughter who is above bagrut does not specify the identity of a man she desires to marry. If, however, she makes such a specification, and the above situation occurs with regard to this individual, she also requires a divorce.
12.I.e., none of them has reached the age of bagrut (Beit Yosef, Even HaEzer 37). (See Beit Shmuel 37:42.)
13.Although the Hebrew words גדולה and קטנה can mean both "older" and "oldest" and "younger" and "youngest" respectively, in this context the man's intent is clear, and the intent is the oldest and the youngest.
14.Kiddushin 64a derives this concept from Deuteronomy 22:16, "I gave my daughter to this man," the verse that teaches that the father has the prerogative of consecrating his daughter until she becomes a bogeret. From "I gave my daughter," we learn that because of her father's words, the woman is forbidden to marry anyone but her intended. From "this man," we learn that he can clarify the identity of the intended.
15.The rationale is that since the prohibition comes on the basis of her father's statements, the license to marry is also granted on that basis.
16.I.e., not only may he free the girl of the prohibition by divorcing her, he may consummate the marriage if he desires. We do not suspect that he is making this statement merely because he is attracted to the woman (Kiddushin 63b). The man is given this prerogative because we assume that he would not lie, lest the father protest and deny his claim.
17.He must, however, consecrate the woman again (Rashba, Ramah, Even HaEzer 37:22).
18.The Rashba states that this ruling applies even if the marriage was not yet consummated. As long as the license for the marriage was granted, the third person's claims do not cause it to be rescinded. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 37:23) quotes both views, but appears to favor that of the Rambam.
19.If, however, he consummates the marriage and the couple live together as man and wife, we do not force them to separate because of the suspicions mentioned (Rashba, Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 37:24).
20.I.e., the relatives he would be forbidden to marry if she were his wife. Since according to his statements they are man and wife, he must uphold any prohibitions that such a relationship would bring about.
21.For she denies the matter.
22.I.e., those who are not forbidden to him because of his statements regarding her mother. Since he does not acknowledge the consecration of the daughter, he is not bound by the mother's statements.
23.For the mother's statements are not binding for the daughter. Although Scriptural law gives a father the prerogative to make binding statements regarding his daughter's status, a mother's statements do not have this power even according to Rabbinic law (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Kiddushin 3:11).
24.Chapter 4, Halachah 6.
25.Once the man divorces the woman, he is forbidden to marry her close relatives. Nevertheless, this is not considered a significant loss, since there are many other women he could marry. And yet, because of this factor, he cannot be compelled to divorce the woman (Maggid Mishneh; Ramah, Even HaEzer 48:6). Others [Rabbenu Eliyahu Mizrachi and the Maharshal (Responsum 25)] differ and maintain that since he divorced the woman only as a favor to her, he is not forbidden to marry her relatives.
26.I.e., without being asked to by others.
27.The Maggid Mishneh notes that there are several points that require clarification with regard to the Rambam's statements. As stated in Chapter 10, Halachah 11, a man is not ordinarily obligated to pay a marriage contract until the second stage of the marriage (nisu'in). If merely kiddushin were given, he is not under such an obligation. It is only when he wrote the woman a ketubah and gave it together with the kiddushin, that he is obligated.
This, however, raises a question: If he wrote the woman a ketubah, how can he deny the kiddushin? The Maggid Mishneh explains that this law applies only in a place where it is customary to write the ketubah before the kiddushin are given. Because in most instances there is no obligation to give a ketubah after kiddushin, the Shulchan Aruch does not mention this law at all (Chelkat Mechokek 48:2).
28.See Hilchot Mechirah 7:10.
29.The Ra'avad maintains that the man must always appoint an agent in the presence of witnesses. He therefore interprets the phrase huchzak hashaliach to mean that the appointment of the agent was public knowledge.
30.As in Halachah 15.
31.For his agent states that he did not consecrate the woman on behalf of the principal.
32.The Maggid Mishneh states that even though the woman is considered to be consecrated to the principal, the agent is still forbidden to marry the woman's relatives. The Ramah (Even HaEzer 35:15) quotes this ruling.
Rabbenu Asher does not accept the Rambam's ruling, stating that if the agent explicitly states that he did not consecrate the woman on behalf of the principal, there is no way that the kiddushin can be binding.
33.Because of the doubt, he is not required to pay each of them the sum required by the marriage contract.
34.Because he violated our Sages' instructions not to consecrate with sexual relations.
35.The Beit Shmuel 49:2 questions why this ruling differs from the ruling delivered (Hilchot Gezelot 4:9) when a man says that he stole from one of five people, and does not know from whom he stole. In such an instance, although the thief is required to reimburse each of the five, this is only when each of the recipients takes an oath that the money was stolen from him. The Beit Shmuel leaves the question unresolved.
36.For, as stated in Chapter 10, Halachah 11, a man is not ordinarily required to pay the money due because of a marriage contract until nisu'in, the second stage of the marriage relationship. If the woman has merely been consecrated, this obligation is not incumbent upon him unless he wrote a marriage contract for her.
37.The Ra'avad states that there is no need for the marriage contract to have been written. If the man made a verbal agreement to that effect when consecrating the woman, he is obligated. The Maggid Mishneh explains that the Rambam would also accept the Ra'avad's law, and was merely giving one of several possible settings in which the law stated could be applied.
38.As the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 46:1) states, the woman is bound by the same rules as all those whose status of their kiddushin is in doubt. She may not marry any one other than the man to whom the report says she is consecrated, but before she may consummate the marriage with him, she must be consecrated again.
39.I.e., it is possible for many rumors to be spread. When is credence given to a rumor? When it can be substantiated in court with testimony, as mentioned below. (See Rashi, Gittin 99b.)
40.In this part of the halachah (in contrast to its beginning), the Rambam does not mention that the witnesses state to whom the woman was consecrated. The later authorities (Chelkat Mechokek 46:1; Beit Shmuel 46:1) maintain that this information must also be stated; otherwise the woman is not considered to be consecrated.
41.I.e., according to the Rambam, it is sufficient for two witnesses to hear from one person who originally heard the report from another person. The Rashba and Rabbenu Asher maintain that unless a report is spread by at least two individuals, it cannot be substantiated in court. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 46:2) quotes the Rambam's view and the Ramah quotes the other opinions.
42.I.e., there is a question whether the kiddushin were worth a p'rutah, or the youth consecrating her had reached the age of majority (Gittin 9:9; Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 46:3).
43.If the first man does not divorce her, the second is not allowed to consummate the marriage. If he does not heed this ruling and marries her before she receives a divorce, the Rabbis ruled that the woman is forbidden to him, and he is required to divorce her (Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 46:5).
44.This is forbidden, as explained in Hilchot Gerushin 11:12. If the first man does not heed this ruling and marries her, the Rabbis are unresolved whether or not the marriage is allowed to stand (Chelkat Mechokek 46:13).
45.I.e., although the presents are worth more than a p'rutah, they themselves do not establish a bond of kiddushin, because they are not given with that intent. Nevertheless, the fact that the presents were given indicates that there is a possibility that kiddushin had been given previously.
46.Since there are a number of men who send presents after consecrating, we suspect that perhaps this person also followed that practice. Although rulings of Torah law are ordinarily determined by the practice of the majority, an exception is made in this case, because of the severity of the laws of marriage and divorce (Tosafot, Kiddushin 50b), or because this majority practice is not fixed and may change at the whim of the people (Rabbenu Nissim).
47.I.e., the marriage contract, like the gifts mentioned in the previous halachah, are a sign that perhaps the woman was consecrated (Maggid Mishneh).
48.In this instance, the testimony of one witness is not accepted when the woman denies his statements. If her words were not true, she would not dare to contradict the witness's testimony (Maggid Mishneh).
49.The Rambam's ruling appears to be based on the rationale that since the woman has a witness who supports her, we suspect that she might contradict the other witness even when she is not telling the truth (Maggid Mishneh).
This rationale is not accepted by the Ra'avad and other authorities, who object to the Rambam's ruling. They maintain that since the woman's statements are accepted when she has no support, surely they should be accepted when they are supported by another witness. They explain that Ketubot 23a, the source for this halachah, is referring to an instance when a man threw kiddushin to a woman, one witness claims that the kiddushin were closer to the woman (and hence, she was consecrated), the other claims that they were closer to the man (and thus she was not consecrated), and the woman herself does not know. This is the view accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 47:3).
50.Ketubot 22a gives an example of a rationale that the Sages accepted. A very attractive woman at first said that she was consecrated, and afterwards accepted kiddushin. When asked to account for her behavior, she explained that her suitors were originally not worthy people, and she therefore wanted nothing to do with them. When a worthy suitor came, she was happy to accept his offer.
51.Note the ruling of the Ramah (Even HaEzer 47:4), who states that this law applies only when the woman says "I was consecrated," but does not state to whom. If she mentions the name of a person who she claims to have consecrated her, her retraction is not accepted even when the rationale she offers appears to have substance.
Ishut - Chapter Ten
Halacha 1
According to Rabbinic law, a woman who has been consecrated (i.e., an arusah) is forbidden to engage in sexual relations1with her husband as long as she is living in her father's home.2 A man who has relations with his arusah in his father-in-law's home is punished with "stripes for rebelliousness."
Even when [the husband] consecrated [his arusah] by having sexual relations with her, he is forbidden to engage in sexual relations with her again until he brings her to his home, enters into privacy with her, and thus singles her out as his [wife].
[Their entry into] privacy is referred to as entry into the chuppah,3 and it is universally referred to as nisu'in.4
When a man has relations with his arusah for the sake of [establishing] nisu'in after he has consecrated her, the relationship is established at the beginning of sexual relations. This causes her to be considered his wife with regard to all matters.5
Halacha 2
Once an arusah has entered the chuppah, her husband is allowed to have relations with her at any time he desires, and she is considered to be his wife with regard to all matters. Once she enters the chuppah, she is called a nesu'ah, although [the couple] has not engaged in sexual relations.
[The above applies when] it is fitting to engage in relations with the woman. If, however, the woman is in the niddah state [when relations are forbidden], the marriage bond is not completed and she is still considered to be an arusah although she entered the chuppah and remained in privacy [with her husband].6
Halacha 3
The marriage blessings must be recited in the groom's home7before the marriage takes place. There are six blessings; they are:
Blessed are You, God, our Lord, King of the universe, who has created all things for His glory.
Blessed are You, God, our Lord, King of the universe, Creator of man.8
Blessed are You, God, our Lord, King of the universe,9 who created man in His image, in an image reflecting His likeness; [He brought forth] his form and prepared for him from His own Self a structure that will last for all time.10 Blessed are You, God, Creator of man.
May the barren one rejoice and exult as her children are gathered to her with joy. Blessed are You, God, who makes Zion rejoice in her children.11
Grant joy to these loving companions, as You granted joy to Your creation in the Garden of Eden long ago. Blessed are You, God, who grants joy to the groom and the bride.12
Blessed are You, God, our Lord, King of the universe, who created joy and happiness, bride and groom, gladness, song, cheer and delight, love and harmony, peace and friendship. Soon, God, our Lord, may there be heard in the cities of Judah and the outskirts of Jerusalem, a voice of joy and a voice of happiness, a voice of a groom and a voice of a bride, a voice of grooms rejoicing from their wedding canopies and youths from their songfests.13 Blessed are You, God, who grants joy to the groom together with the bride.14
Halacha 4
If wine is available, a cup of wine should be brought, and the blessing over wine recited first. Afterwards, all the above blessings should be recited over the cup of wine; thus, one recites seven blessings.15
In certain places, it is customary to bring a myrtle [branch] together with the wine. The blessing over the myrtle is recited after [the blessing over] the wine, and then the six blessings [mentioned above] are recited.
Halacha 5
The wedding blessings are recited only in the presence of a quorum of ten adult free men.16 The groom is counted as part of the quorum.
Halacha 6
When a man consecrates a woman, recites the wedding blessings, but does not enter into privacy with her in his home, she is still considered to be [merely] an arusah. For nisu'in are not established by the recitation of the wedding blessings, but rather by [the couple's] entry into the chuppah.
When [a man] consecrates [a woman] and [the two] enter a chuppah, but do not have the wedding blessings recited, the woman is considered to be married with regard to all matters. The wedding blessings may be recited even after several days have passed.
A woman in the niddah state should not marry until she is purified. The marriage blessings are not recited for her until she is purified.17 If a person transgresses, marries [a woman in this state] and has the blessings recited, they should not be recited again afterwards.
Halacha 7
[A man] must write a marriage contract (a ketubah) [for his wife] before their entry into the chuppah; only afterwards is he permitted to live with his wife. The groom pays the scribe's fee.
How much does [the marriage contract require him to promise to have paid to her in the event of his death or his divorcing her]? If the bride is a virgin, no less than 200 dinarim. If she is not a virgin, no less than 100 dinarim.18 This amount is called the fundamental requirement of the ketubah.
If the groom desires to add to this amount he may, [promising any sum,] even a talent of gold. The laws pertaining to this addition and to the fundamental requirement of the ketubah are the same with regard to most matters. Therefore, every time the term ketubah is used without any additional explanation, it should be understood to include the fundamental requirement of the ketubah together with the additional amount [promised by the groom].
It was our Sages19 who ordained the requirement of [writing] a ketubah for a woman. [They instituted this obligation] so that it would not be a casual matter for [her husband] to divorce her.20
Halacha 8
[Our Sages] did not require that these dinarim be of pure silver. Instead, [their intent was] the coin [commonly used] in the [Talmudic] period, which was seven parts copper and one part silver. Thus, a sela (a coin worth four dinarim) contained half a zuz of [pure] silver.21 And the 200 dinarim to be paid a virgin were equivalent to 25 zuz of pure silver, while the 100 zuz to be paid to a woman who had previously engaged in sexual relations was 12 and a half zuz [of pure silver].
The weight of each zuz is 96 barley corns, as explained at the beginning of [Hilchot] Eruvin.22 A dinar is universally referred to as a zuz, regardless of whether it was of pure silver or of the coins used in the [Talmudic] period.
Halacha 9
[A marriage contract] for a virgin may not be less than 200 [zuz], nor less than 100 [zuz] for a woman who is not a virgin. Whenever anyone [composes a marriage contract for] a lesser sum, the sexual relations [he conducts with his wife] are considered promiscuous.
[Marital relations] are permitted whether the husband composes a legal document [recording] the ketubah, or whether he has witnesses observe him making a commitment for either 100 or 200 [zuz] and [reaffirms that] commitment with a contractual act.23 Similarly, if [a man] gives his wife possessions equivalent to the value of her ketubah [as security], he is permitted to engage in relations with her until he has the opportunity to [have the document] composed.24
Halacha 10
When a man brings a woman [into a chuppah] without writing a ketubah for her, or he has written her a ketubah but it was lost, or the woman waived the ketubah in favor of her husband, or she sold her ketubah to him, he must compose a document [obligating himself] for [at least] the fundamental requirement of the ketubah25 if he desires to continue living with his wife. For it is forbidden for a man to continue living with his wife for even a single moment without [her having] a ketubah.
When, however, a woman sells her ketubah to others for the possible benefit,26 [her husband] does not have to write another ketubah for her. For the ketubah was instituted solely so that it would not be a casual matter for [a man] to divorce [his wife]. In this instance, if [the woman's husband] divorces her, he must pay her ketubah to the purchaser in the same way that he would pay her if she had not sold it.
Halacha 11
When [a man] consecrates a woman and writes her a ketubah, but does not enter into a chuppah with her, her status is that of an arusah and not that of a nesu'ah. For a ketubah does not bring about nisu'in. If [the husband] dies or divorces her, she may collect the fundamental requirement of the ketubah from property possessed by the man or his estate.27 She does not collect the additional sum [that he attached to the ketubah] at all, for they did not enter [a chuppah].28
If, by contrast, a man consecrates a woman and does not write a ketubah for her, and he dies or divorces her while she is still an arusah, she has no claim against him, not even for the fundamental [requirement of the ketubah]. For our Sages did not grant [a woman] the fundamental requirement of the ketubah until the marriage is consummated or until the husband writes a document for her.29
When a man consecrates his daughter, and [her intended husband] writes her a ketubah and dies or divorces her while she is a na'arah, her father receives [payment for] her ketubah, as explained in Chapter Three30 above.
Halacha 12
Similarly, our Sages ordained that whoever weds a virgin should celebrate with her for seven days.31 He should not pursue his occupation, nor should he involve himself in commercial dealings; he should eat, drink and celebrate.32 [This ruling applies] regardless of whether the groom had been married before or not.
If the bride is not a virgin, [he should celebrate with her] for no less than three days. For it is an ordinance of our Sages that a husband - regardless of whether he was married before or not - should celebrate with a non-virgin bride for three days.33
Halacha 13
A man may wed several women at one time on one day and recite the marriage blessings for all of them at the same time. With regard to the celebrations, however, he must rejoice with each bride the time allotted to her: seven days for a virgin, three days for a non-virgin. One celebration should not be allowed to overlap with another.34
Halacha 14
It is permitted to consecrate a woman on any weekday,35 even on Tish'ah B'Av,36 whether during the day or during the night. With regard to weddings, by contrast, a wedding is not conducted on a Friday37 or a Sunday. [This is] a decree, [ordained] lest conducting the wedding feast lead to the desecration of the Sabbath, for a groom is preoccupied with the wedding feast. Needless to say, a wedding is not conducted on the Sabbath.38
Even on Chol HaMo'ed weddings are not held, as we have explained,39 for one celebration should not be mixed with another, as [implied by Genesis 29:27]: "Complete the week [of celebration] of this one and then I will give you this other one."
On other days, it is permitted to wed a woman on any day one desires, provided one spends three days preparing for the wedding feast.
Halacha 15
In a locale where the court holds session only on Monday and Thursday, a virgin bride should be wed on Wednesday. Thus, if her husband has a claim with regard to her virginity,40 he can take it to the court early the next morning.41
It is the custom of the Sages that a man who weds a non-virgin bride should wed her on Thursday, so that he will celebrate with her on Thursday, Friday and the Sabbath.42 On Sunday, he will go back to work.
Halacha 16
When a man consecrates his daughter while she is below the age of majority, both she and her father may object and delay the wedding until she comes of age and becomes a na'arah. If [the husband] desires to wed her, he may.43 It is not proper, however, to do so.44
Halacha 17
If a man consecrated [a girl], delayed several years, and seeks to wed her while she is a na'arah, the girl is given twelve months from the day he makes his request, to outfit herself45and prepare what she needs for him. Only afterwards, must she wed.
If he makes his request after she becomes a bogeret, she is given twelve months from the day she becomes a bogeret. Similarly, if he consecrates her on the day on which she becomes a bogeret, she is given twelve months from the day of the kiddushin - i.e., the day on which she became a bogeret.
When he consecrates her after she has become a bogeret, if more than twelve months have passed from the time she became a bogeret until he consecrates her, she is given only 30 days from the day he requests to wed her [to prepare]. Similarly, when a man consecrates a non-virgin bride,46 she is given 30 days [to prepare] from the day he requests to wed her.
Halacha 18
Just as a woman is given time to outfit herself after her groom requests to wed her and then the wedding is held, so too, time is granted to the man to prepare himself47 if the woman requests the wedding to be held.
How much time is granted him? The same as is granted her. If [she would be granted] twelve months, [he is granted] twelve months. If [she would be granted] thirty days, [he is granted] thirty days.48
Halacha 19
When the time allotted to the man passes and he still has not wed his arusah, he is obligated to provide her livelihood, although they have not wed. [Nevertheless,] if [the final day in] the time allotted him falls on Sunday or Friday, he is not liable for her livelihood on that day, for the wedding cannot be held then.49 Similarly, if he or she falls ill or she enters the niddah state at the conclusion of the time allotted him, he is not obligated to provide her with her livelihood. For she is not fit to wed until she purifies herself,50 or until she becomes healthy. Similarly, he is not able to wed a woman until he regains his health.
FOOTNOTES
1.Indeed, the two are forbidden to remain in privacy together. For the prohibition against yichud, being alone with a woman other than one's wife, applies until the marriage is consummated (Ramah, Even HaEzer 55:1).
2.This is alluded to by the wording of the blessing recited before consecrating a woman (Chapter 3, Halachah 24), which praises God "who has forbidden the arusot to us, and permitted to us those who are married by [the rites of] chuppah and kiddushin" (Kessef Mishneh).
3.Popularly, the term chuppah is understood to refer to the wedding canopy. There are also sources for this definition (see Sotah 49b and Rashi's commentary; for other definitions, see the notes of the Ramah, Even HaEzer 55:1). Nevertheless, the common practice is to follow the Rambam's view as well. For this reason, after the ceremony under the wedding canopy, the bride and groom go to a private room, the cheder yichud. This constitutes the halachic definition of chuppah.
4.As mentioned previously, in Jewish law, marriage is a two-stage process involving erusin and nisu'in. Erusin (also referred to as kiddushin) is the stage described in the previous chapters, that causes a woman to be designated as a man's wife and causes her to be forbidden to other men. It is not until nisu'in, however, that the couple begins living together as man and wife. At present, nisu'in follows directly after erusin; under the wedding canopy the groom consecrates the bride, and afterwards they go to a private room.
5.I.e., all the privileges and obligations of the ketubah (marriage contract) apply. He alone nullifies her vows, and if he is a priest, should his wife die, he must become impure when burying her.
6.This ruling is not accepted by Rabbenu Asher and other authorities. They maintain that a chuppah conducted with a niddah is binding, despite the fact that the couple are forbidden to engage in sexual relations. (See Tur and Shulchan Aruch 61:1.) At present, every effort is made to schedule a wedding so that the woman will not be in the niddah state at that time. If, however, that is not possible, the wedding is held and is considered binding, despite the woman's condition.
7.This applied when the wedding celebrations were held in the groom's home. The intent is that the blessings be recited before the complete establishment of the marriage bond. Therefore, at present, these blessings are recited under the marriage canopy, before the couple goes to their private room.
8.Rashi (Ketubot 7b) explains that this blessing is in praise of the creation of Adam, the first man.
In Hilchot Berachot 10:11, where the text of the wedding blessings is mentioned, this blessing precedes the blessing "who has created all things for His glory." The order mentioned in these halachot is the sequence in which these blessings are recited today. It appears more appropriate, particularly according to Rashi's commentary (ibid.), which explains that the blessing "who has created all things..." is not directly connected to the wedding itself, but rather is recited in appreciation of the guests who have come to celebrate together with the new couple.
9.Despite the fact that this blessing follows two (or three) blessings that begin with "Blessed..." it also begins with "Blessed...." Among the explanations offered is that the first blessings are short, and if the phrase "Blessed..." were not mentioned, they would appear to be a single blessing (Tosafot, Ketubot, ibid.).
10.Rashi (ibid.) interprets this as a reference to the creation of woman, who was created from man ("his own self"), and gives him the potential for reproduction ("a structure that will last for all time").
11."The barren one" refers to Jerusalem. Psalms 137:6 states: "Let my tongue cleave to my palate if I do not place Jerusalem above my highest joy." Thus, at the height of the wedding celebration, we recall the holy city and pray that it be rebuilt.
12.This is a prayer that the bride and groom enjoy the happiness experienced by Adam and Eve before the first sin.
13.Cf. Jeremiah 33:11. This blessing joins our wishes for the happiness of the particular couple with our hope for the Messianic redemption and the rebuilding of Jerusalem. The ultimate marriage relationship is the bond between God and the Jewish people, which will be realized in the Messianic age. Thus, the two themes, marriage and redemption, share an intrinsic link.
14.Rashi, Ketubot 8a, explains the difference between the last two blessings. The fifth of the blessings concludes with a request that the bride and groom enjoy a lifetime of happiness and success together. The sixth and final blessing concludes with a request that they find happiness in each other, that their wedding joy be extended throughout their lives. Alternatively, the final blessing is a blessing for the Jewish people as a whole, who find fulfillment in married life.
15.These seven blessings are also recited after grace at the festive meals held during the seven days of celebration after a couple's marriage. (See Hilchot Berachot 2:9-11.)
16.Ketubot 7b derives this from Ruth 4:2, "And he took ten men from the elders of the city," which is interpreted to refer to the marriage between Boaz and Ruth.
In the Guide for the Perplexed, Vol. III, Chapter 49, the Rambam explains that our Sages required ten men to be present to publicize all weddings, so that a man will live together with a woman only after their marriage has become public knowledge. Their intent was to make it socially unacceptable for couples to live together without marriage.
17.As mentioned in the notes on Halachah 2, although all efforts are made not to schedule a marriage when the woman is in the niddah state, if this is unavoidable the wedding may be held and the blessings recited. Nevertheless, the consummation of the marriage is possible only when the woman is purified.
18.Rav Ovadiah of Bertinoro (Pe'ah 8:8) states that this is the sum of money required for a person to support himself for one year.
19.This point is a matter of debate, for there are certain opinions (among them that of Rabbenu Tam) that maintain that the obligation to pay the fundamental requirement of the ketubah stems from the Torah. Support for the latter opinion may be drawn from the wording commonly used in most Ashkenazic ketubot "200 silver zuz that are rightfully yours [as required by] the Torah." [Significantly, even the text of the ketubah in the standard printed texts of the Mishneh Torah (Hilchot Yibbum VaChalitzah 4:34) includes this phrase. Nevertheless, many authorities maintain that this is a printer's addition and not the Rambam's own words.]
Most authorities (including Rabbenu Asher) agree that the obligation to pay the fundamental requirement of the Ketubah is Rabbinic in origin. Nevertheless, the abovementioned phrase is traditionally included in the ketubah to teach us the value of the silver to which we are referring, as is explained in the notes on the following halachah.
20.I.e., when the man understands that divorcing his wife will cost him a significant sum of money, he will think twice before doing so.
21.The Ashkenazic authorities (even those who agree with the Rambam with regard to the Rabbinic origin of the fundamental requirement of the ketubah) differ with him regarding the value the man is required to pay [Tur, Ramah (Even HaEzer 66:6)]. According to these authorities, our Sages ordained that a man pay his virgin bride 200 zuz of pure silver. With regard to a bride who is not a virgin, however, they differ and maintain that the obligation is 100 zuz of the Talmudic period. In practice, however, the custom is to give such a bride half the sum given to a virgin (Beit Shmuel 66:14).
22.Chapter 1, Halachah 12. According to most authorities, the equivalent of a dinar in contemporary measure is 4.8 grams. According to Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi (Piskei Siddur), it is 5.1 grams.
23.I.e., a kinyan chalifin, in which the recipient gives the seller a handkerchief and thus reaffirms his commitment. After this act, the transaction is binding. (See Hilchot Mechirah 5:5.)
Once a person reaffirms his commitment by performing a contractual act in the presence of witnesses, the witnesses have the right to draw up a document attesting to the obligation he accepted upon himself. They need not consult him before doing so (Ketubot 55a).
24.Implied by the Rambam's wording is that this is only a temporary measure, and that a ketubah must be composed at the earliest possible opportunity. (See Ramah, Even HaEzer 66:2.)
25.I.e., he does not have to give her the full value of her original ketubah. He must, however, give her a ketubah in which he obligates himself for the minimal amount required by our Sages. Note the Beit Shmuel 66:10, who questions whether he must write the ketubah for 100 or 200 zuz.
The Beit Shmuel (op. cit.) and the Chelkat Mechokek 66:14 state that the man is obligated for the minimal amount only in the latter two instances mentioned by the Rambam. When the woman loses her ketubah, her husband must write her a new ketubah for the initial amount.
26.I.e., she sells the rights to her ketubah to a purchaser for a price below its face value. Should her husband die or divorce her, the purchaser receives the full value of the ketubah. If the woman dies before her husband, the purchaser does not receive anything.
27.I.e., after a marriage has been consummated, a woman may collect her due even from property that has been sold, for all her husband's property is on lien to her ketubah. Before the marriage bond is consummated, however, she does not have this right (Ketubot 43b).
Rabbenu Asher and Rabbenu Nissim differ with the Rambam in this regard and maintain that the woman should be able to collect her ketubah from property that has been sold as well. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 55:6) follows the Rambam's view.
28.Ketubot 54b explains that the additional amount was granted the woman in consideration of the couple's sexual relationship.
29.In this matter as well, Rabbenu Asher differs with the Rambam and maintains that a woman is entitled to a ketubah from erusin onward. The Shulchan Aruch (ibid.) quotes the Rambam's view. Although the Ramah mentions Rabbenu Asher's opinion, he states that it is customary to follow the Rambam's ruling.
30.Halachah 11.
31.Hilchot Eivel 1:1 states that Moses ordained the seven days of mourning and the seven days of wedding celebrations for the Jewish people.
32.During these days, it is customary for the friends and family of the bride and groom to host them at celebrations referred to as sheva berachot ("seven blessings") for the seven wedding blessings recited after the meal at these celebrations, as explained in Hilchot Berachot, Chapter 2.
33.The Maggid Mishneh states that if the groom was not married previously, he should celebrate with his bride for seven days even when she had been married before. He draws support from Hilchot Berachot 2:9, which states that in such an instance the seven wedding blessings are recited for the week following the wedding.
34.See Halachah 14, which explains the source for this ruling.
35.Even during Chol Hamo'ed (Hilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov 7:16).
36.The mourning customs of that day do not prevent one from consecrating a wife. The rationale: another man may consecrate the woman instead of him (Jerusalem Talmud, Ketubot 1:1).
37.Although many of the early Sephardi authorities object, the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 64:3, based on the ruling of the Tur) states that in the present age, it is customary to hold weddings on Friday, provided the groom spends three days preparing for the wedding feast.
(A wedding may be held on Sunday or Monday. The fact that the Sabbath is interposed in between does not mean that three days were not spent in preparation for the wedding.)
38.With regard to weddings on the Sabbath, there is an additional reason for the prohibition. A wedding involves a kinyan, the acquisition of the rights of the marriage contract, and it is forbidden to make a kinyan on the Sabbath (Hilchot Shabbat 23:14).
39.Hilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov, loc. cit.
40.This subject is discussed in detail in the following chapter.
41.Our Sages desired that he take the matter to court so the matter be investigated, lest the bride had in fact committed adultery (for in the Talmudic age, erusin preceded nisu'in). If the wedding were held on another day, our Sages feared that in the time the husband was waiting for the court to hold sessions, his wife would soothe his anger (Rashi, Ketubot 2a).
42.Since the wedding blessings are recited for only one day when both the bride and the groom have been married before, our Sages feared that the man would ignore his wife on the day following their wedding and immediately return to work. To prevent this, they suggested that the wedding be held on Thursday. For the husband will not consider going to work on Friday and the Sabbath (Ibid.).
43.I.e., if the husband forces the bride to agree, the wedding is binding. The Drishah (Even HaEzer 56) interprets the Rambam's wording to mean that the father desires to have his daughter wed before she comes of age. Some maintain that there is a slight printing error in the standard text of the Mishneh Torah, and the proper version is "if they desire" - i.e., the bride and her father. (See Chelkat Mechokek 56:6.)
44.Instead, the father should wait until his daughter comes of age and willingly agrees to marry her spouse. (See Chapter 3, Halachah 19.)
45.I.e., to buy garments and jewelry (Ketubot 57b).
46.I.e., even if she is not yet a bogeret. The Maggid Mishneh and others explain that the Rambam is referring to a widow who is consecrated. (Therefore, she is given only 30 days, for she had already prepared herself for her first marriage.) He uses the term "non-virgin" to exclude a bride who had previously been widowed after consecration, but had never wed.
47.I.e., to prepare for the wedding celebrations and to prepare a home and furnishings.
48.The Maggid Mishneh states that the Rambam's wording implies that everything depends on the woman's status. If she would be given twelve months to prepare herself, her husband is given that amount of time. The Jerusalem Talmud (Ketubot 5:3) states that it is his status that is the determining factor: if he has never been married, he is given twelve months. If he is a widower, he is given thirty days. The Tur (Even HaEzer 56) follows that position.
49.See Halachah 14. With regard to this and the other examples that follow, the rationale is that since he is prevented by forces beyond his control from wedding her, he is not liable. Note the Ramah (Even HaEzer 56:3), who states that if the man voluntarily delays the wedding and thus, becomes obligated to support his arusah, he must continue to support her even if she falls ill, and the wedding must be postponed because of her illness.
50.See Halachah 2.
-------
Hayom Yom:
• "Today's Day"
Shabbat, Adar II 20, 5774 • 22 March 2014
Shabbat, Adar Sheini 20, Parshat Para 5703
Haftora: Va'y'hi dvar Hashem...dibarti v'assissi.
Say Av harachamim.
Torah lessons: Chumash: Tzav, Shevi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 97-103.
Tanya: In the light (p. 175)...explained (Ch. 23). (p. 179).
The Alter Rebbe related: Among the teachings my Rebbe (the Maggid) told me at yechidus, there was one on the verse, "A constant fire shall be kept burning on the altar; it shall not be extinguished."1
The Maggid taught: Though fire descends from Above, spontaneously, it is a mitzva to bring from the 'ordinary,' by man.2 (Man's action is) an awakening from below which engenders an awakening Above. (For the nature of spirit is that) 'spirit elicits (another, responding) spirit and in turn calls forth another, yet higher spirit.' The spirit from below elicits the spirit from Above, calling forth spirit from higher and still higher.3
It is a positive mitzva to kindle fire on the altar. 'Altar' refers to the 'man who offers of you.'4 The offering itself is insufficient. Man must kindle a fire on the offering that is 'of you.' This fire, lo tichbeh (literally, 'it shall not be extinguished'), shall extinguish (tichbeh) the lo (the 'no,' the negative).
My Master told me this teaching ten times to engrave it in the ten powers of my soul. "You, my pupil," he said to me, "are in need of this constant fire, for yours is the duty of extinguishing the great lo (of the opponents of Chassidus). You shall extinguish the lo, and G-d will transform the lo to hein ('yes'; assent, the positive).
FOOTNOTES
1. Vayikra 6:6.
2. Also in the literal sense: Both in the mishkan desert sanctuary and the Jerusalem Beit Hamikdash a miraculous heavenly fire descended which was subsequently kept burning for all sacrifices; yet it was a mitzva to bring ordinary physical fire too.
3. If Man's action (the "Awakening From Below") elicits only the Divine response ("Awakening From Above") on the same plane from which the fire from Above had descended spontaneously, what is the gain in Man's initiative? Hence the explanation that spirit from Below elicits spirit from Above, calling...etc. from higher and still higher. See Supplementary Footnotes, p. 125; see also Zohar III, p. 162b, and Or HaTorah for Chanuka, p. 286a.
4. See 12 Adar II.
-------
Daily Thought:
What Lies Inside
Within each thing we behold, the moshiach dwells, like the embryo waiting to break out of its egg. In the rhythm of a dandelion shivering in the breeze, in the eyes of the children we raise, in the goals we make in life, in the machines we use and the art we create, in the air we breathe and the blood rushing through our veins.
When the world was made, the sages say, the moshiach was the wind hovering over all that would be.
Within each thing, infinite beauty awaits us to tap upon its shell.
-------
No comments:
Post a Comment