TORAH Readings: Vayikra/Leviticus [KEDOSHIM]
19:1 And Hashem spoke unto Moshe, saying,
2 Speak unto kol Adat Bnei Yisroel, and say unto them, Ye shall be kedoshim (holy ones): for I Hashem Eloheichem am kadosh.
3 Ye shall fear every man his em, and his av, and be shomer over My Shabbatot: I am Hashem Eloheichem.
4 Turn ye not unto elilim, nor make to yourselves elohei massekhah (cast metal g-ds); I am Hashem Eloheichem.
5 And if ye offer a zevach shelamim unto Hashem, ye shall offer it for your acceptance.
6 It shall be eaten the same day ye offer it, and on the next day; and what remains until the yom hashelishi, it shall be burned in the eish.
7 And if it be eaten at all on the yom hashelishi, it is piggul (unclean sacrificial flesh); it shall not be accepted.
8 Therefore every one that eateth it shall bear his avon, because he hath desecrated as chillul the set-apart- as-kodesh thing of Hashem: and that nefesh shall be cut off from among his people.
9 And when ye reap the katzir of your land, thou shalt not wholly reap the corners of thy sadeh, neither shalt thou gather the gleanings of thy katzir.
10 And thou shalt not glean thy kerem (vineyard), neither shalt thou gather every grape of thy kerem; thou shalt leave them for the oni (poor) and ger (stranger); I am Hashem Eloheichem.
11 Ye shall not steal, neither deal falsely, neither speak sheker (falsehood, deception, lie) to another.
12 And ye shall not swear by My Shem lasheker (falsely), neither shalt thou commit Chillul ha-shem Eloheicha; I am Hashem.
13 Thou shalt not defraud thy re’a (neighbor), neither rob him; the wages of him that is a sakhir (hired man) shall not abide with thee ad boker (until morning).
14 Thou shalt not curse the cheresh (deaf), nor put a michshol (stumbling block) before the ivver (blind), but shalt fear Eloheicha: I am Hashem.
15 Ye shall do no avel bamishpat (perversion of justice); thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor favor the person of the gadol; but in tzedek shalt thou judge thy neighbor.
16 Thou shalt not go up and down as a rakhil (talebearer, slanderer) among thy people; neither shalt thou stand aside while thy neighbor’s dahm is shed; I am Hashem.
17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine lev; thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbor, and not bear chet because of him.
18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the bnei ammecha (children of thy people), v’ahavta l’re’acha kamocha (but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself): I am Hashem.
19 Ye shall be shomer over My chukkot. Thou shalt not mate different kinds of animals; thou shalt not sow thy sadeh with mingled zera; neither shall a garment with shaatnez (mixed fibers) come upon thee [see Devarim 22:11].
20 And whosoever lieth carnally with an isha, that is a shifcha betrothed to a husband, and not at all redeemed, nor chufshah (freedom) given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because she has not been chuppashah (freed).
21 And he shall bring his asham (trespass offering, guilt offering) unto Hashem, unto the entrance of the Ohel Mo’ed, even a ram of asham.
22 And the kohen shall make kapporah for him with the ram of the asham before Hashem for his chattat which he hath sinned; and the chattat which he hath sinned shall be forgiven him.
23 And when ye shall come into ha’aretz, and shall have planted all manner of food trees, then ye shall treat the fruit thereof as forbidden; shalosh shanim shall it be as forbidden unto you; it shall not be eaten of.
24 But in the shanah harev’i’it all the fruit thereof shall be kodesh to praise Hashem withal.
25 And in the shanah hachamishit shall ye eat of the fruit thereof, that it may yield unto you the increase thereof: I am Hashem Eloheichem.
26 Ye shall not eat any thing with the dahm; neither shall ye practice divination, nor practice sorcery.
27 Ye shall not cut the edge of your scalp, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.
28 Ye shall not make any cuttings in your basar for the dead, nor tattoo any marks upon you: I am Hashem.
29 Do not prostitute thy bat, to cause her to be a harlot; lest ha’aretz fall to whoredom, and ha’aretz become full of depravity.
30 Ye shall be shomer over My Shabbatot, and reverence My Mikdash; I am Hashem.
31 Regard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after Ovos (Mediums) and Yidonim (Spiritists), to be defiled by them: I am Hashem Eloheichem.
32 Thou shalt rise up before the old, and honor the face of the zaken, and fear Eloheicha: I am Hashem.
33 And if a ger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not mistreat him.
34 But the ger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were gerim in Eretz Mitzrayim: I am Hashem Eloheichem.
35 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in scales, in weights, and dry measures.
36 Tzedek scales, tzedek weights, a tzedek ephah, and a tzedek hin, shall ye have: I am Hashem Eloheichem, which brought you out of Eretz Mitzrayim.
37 Therefore shall ye be shomer (on guard to keep) over all My chukkot (statutes), and all My mishpatim (judgments), and do them: I am Hashem.
20:1 And Hashem spoke unto Moshe, saying,
2 Again, thou shalt say to the Bnei Yisroel, Whosoever he be of the Bnei Yisroel, or of the ger that sojourn in Yisroel, that giveth any of his zera unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death; the Am HaAretz shall stone him with stones.
3 And I will set My face against that ish, and will cut him off from among his people; because he hath given of his zera unto Molech, to make tamei My Mikdash, and to commit chillul Hashem against Shem Kodshi (My Holy Name).
4 And if the Am HaAretz close their eyes when that man giveth of his zera unto Molech, and kill him not,
5 Then I will set My face against that ish, and against his mishpochah, and will cut him off, and all that go awhoring after him, to commit whoredom with Molech, from among their people.
6 And the nefesh that turneth to Ovos (Mediums) and Yidonim (Spiritists), to go a-whoring after them, I will even set My face against that nefesh, and will cut him off from among his people.
7 Consecrate yourselves as kadosh, therefore, and be ye kedoshim: for I am Hashem Eloheichem.
8 And ye shall be shomer over My chukkot, and do them: I am Hashem who sets you apart as kodesh.
9 For every one that curseth his av or his em shall be surely put to death; he hath cursed his av or his em; his dahm shall be upon him.
10 And the ish that committeth adultery with the wife of another ish, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the no’ef (adulterer) and the no’efet (adulteress) shall surely be put to death.
11 And the ish that lieth with the wife of his av hath uncovered his father’s nakedness; both of them shall surely be put to death; their dahm shall be upon them.
12 And if an ish lie with his kallah (daughter-in-law), both of them shall surely be put to death; they have committed tevel (perversion); their dahm shall be upon them.
13 If an ish also lie with zachar, as he lieth with an isha, both of them have committed to’evah; they shall surely be put to death; their dahm shall be upon them.
14 And if an ish take a wife and her em, it is zimmah; they shall be burned with eish, both he and they; that there be no zimmah among you.
15 And if an ish give his shikhvat to a behemah, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the behemah.
16 And if an isha approach unto any behemah, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the isha, and the beast; they shall surely be put to death; their dahm shall be upon them.
17 And if an ish shall take his achot, the bat of his av (father), or the bat of his em (mother), and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a disgrace; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their Bnei Am; he hath uncovered the nakedness of his achot (sister); he shall bear his iniquity.
18 And if an ish shall lie with an isha during her davah (menstruous unwellness), and shall uncover her nakedness, he hath made bare her mekor (source), and she hath uncovered the source of her dahm; and both of them shall be cut off from among their people.
19 And thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother’s achot (sister), nor of thy father’s achot (sister); for he uncovereth (i.e., incestuously dishonored) his near kin; they shall bear their iniquity.
20 And if an ish shall lie with the wife of his dod, he hath uncovered his uncle’s nakedness; they shall bear their chet; they shall die childless.
21 And if an ish shall take his brother’s wife, it is niddah; he hath uncovered his brother’s nakedness; they shall be childless.
22 Ye shall therefore be shomer over all My chukkot, and all My mishpatim, and do them; that HaAretz, whither I bring you to dwell therein, vomit you not out.
23 And ye shall not walk in the chukkot of HaGoy, which I cast out before you; for they committed all these things; therefore I abhorred them.
24 But I have said unto you, Ye shall inherit their land, and I will give it unto you to inherit it, an Eretz zavat cholov udevash: I am Hashem Eloheichem, which have separated you from the peoples.
25 Ye shall therefore distinguish habehemah hatehorah from teme’ah, and between fowls tamei and tahor: and ye shall not make your nefashot sheketz (abomination) by beast, or by fowl, or by any manner of living thing that creepeth on the ground, which I have separated from you as tamei.
26 And ye shall be kadoshim unto Me: for I Hashem am kadosh, and have separated you from the nations, that ye should be Mine.
27 An ish also or isha who is an Ov (Medium) or a Yidoni (Spiritist), shall surely be put to death; they shall stone them with stones; their dahm shall be upon them.
TODAY'S LAWS & CUSTOMS:
• PASSOVER TORAH READINGS
Click here for a summary of the Passover Torah readings.
• CHOL HAMOED
Of the eight days of Passover, the first two and the last two are "yom tov" (festival days). The middle four days are called chol hamoed--"weekdays of the festival," also called "the intermediate days." (In Israel, where Passover is observed for seven days, the first and last days are yom tov, and the middle five days are chol hamoed).
The yom tov days are days of rest, during which all creative work is forbidden, as it is on the Shabbat, with the exception of certain types of work associated with food preparation (e.g., cooking and "carrying"). On chol hamoed the prohibition of work is less stringent--work whose avoidance would result in "significant loss" is permitted (except when chol hamoed is also Shabbat, when all work is forbidden).
The "Yaale V'yavo" prayer is included in all prayers and Grace After Meals. Hallel (partial) and Musaf are recited following the Shacharit (morning) prayers. It is the Chabad custom not to put on tefillin during the "intermediate days".
Click here for a more detailed treatment of the laws of Chol Hamoed.
• COUNT "FIVE DAYS TO THE OMER" TONIGHT
Tomorrow is the fifth day of the Omer Count. Since, on the Jewish calendar, the day begins at nightfall of the previous evening, we count the omer for tomorrow's date tonight, after nightfall: "Today is five days to the Omer." (If you miss the count tonight, you can count the omer all day tomorrow, but without the preceding blessing).
The 49-day "Counting of the Omer" retraces our ancestors' seven-week spiritual journey from the Exodus to Sinai. Each evening we recite a special blessing and count the days and weeks that have passed since the Omer; the 50th day is Shavuot, the festival celebrating the Giving of the Torah at Sinai.
Tonight's Sefirah: Hod sheb'Chessed -- "Humility in Kindness"
The teachings of Kabbalah explain that there are seven "Divine Attributes" -- Sefirot -- that G-d assumes through which to relate to our existence: Chessed, Gevurah, Tifferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod and Malchut ("Love", "Strength", "Beauty", "Victory", "Splendor", "Foundation" and "Sovereignty"). In the human being, created in the "image of G-d," the seven sefirot are mirrored in the seven "emotional attributes" of the human soul: Kindness, Restraint, Harmony, Ambition, Humility, Connection and Receptiveness. Each of the seven attributes contain elements of all seven--i.e., "Kindness in Kindness", "Restraint in Kindness", "Harmony in Kindness", etc.--making for a total of forty-nine traits. The 49-day Omer Count is thus a 49-step process of self-refinement, with each day devoted to the "rectification" and perfection of one the forty-nine "sefirot."
Links:
How to count the Omer
The deeper significance of the Omer Count
TODAY IN JEWISH HISTORY:
• PURIM FOSSANO (1796)
On this day in 1796, the Jewish community of Fossano, Italy was miraculously saved from the hands of a murderous mob by a French bomb which landed just in time to scare away the attackers. This day was established as "Purim Fossano" in commemoration of the miraculous salvation.
For the complete story, see Purim Fossano.
• RABBI ZEMBA MURDERED (1943)
Rabbi Menachem Zemba was born in a suburb of Warsaw, Poland in 1883. A follower of the Gerrer chassidic dynasty, he was a great genius and Torah scholar. He joined the Warsaw rabbinate in 1935, and was recognized as a leading rabbinic figure in pre-war Eastern Europe.
Rabbi Zemba was a moral force in the Warsaw Ghetto, always striving to infuse the community with optimism and hope. He arranged clandestine locations in cellars and bomb shelters where girls and boys would study Torah. Although afforded opportunities to escape the ghetto, he refused to do so, insisting that his presence was needed by the Jews in the ghetto.
Rabbi Zemba was a strong supporter of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, donating personal funds for ammunition and giving his whole-hearted blessing for the endeavor (see Jewish History for the 27th of Nissan). Five days after the fighting begun, on Shabbat the 19th of Nissan, the house were Rabbi Zemba was hiding was set afire by the SS. When attempting to escape, Rabbi Zemba was shot dead by the Nazis. May G-d avenge his blood.
The rabbi was buried in the Ghetto, and in 1958 his body was flown to Israel where he was buried in Jerusalem amid a great funeral procession.
Rabbi Zemba was a prolific writer. Unfortunately, most of his scholarly manuscripts were burnt in the Warsaw Ghetto. His few works which were authored before the war are still studied by Torah scholars world-wide.
DAILY STUDY:
CHITAS AND RAMBAM FOR TODAY:
Chumash: Kedoshim, 7th Portion Leviticus 20:23-20:27 with Rashi
• Chapter 20
23. You shall not follow the practices of the nation that I am sending away from before you, for they committed all these [sins], and I was disgusted with them. כג. וְלֹא תֵלְכוּ בְּחֻקֹּת הַגּוֹי אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מְשַׁלֵּחַ מִפְּנֵיכֶם כִּי אֶת כָּל אֵלֶּה עָשׂוּ וָאָקֻץ בָּם:
and so I was disgusted with them: Denotes “disgust,” just as [in the verse], “I am disgusted (קַצְתִּי) with my life” (Gen. 27:46), like a man who loathes (קָץ) his food [so God loathed those nations]. — [Torath Kohanim 20:125]
ואקץ: לשון מיאוס, כמו (בראשית כז מו) קצתי בחיי, כאדם שהוא קץ במזונו:
24. So I said to you, You shall possess their land, and I shall give it to you to possess it a land flowing with milk and honey. I am the Lord your God, Who has distinguished you from the peoples. כד. וָאֹמַר לָכֶם אַתֶּם תִּירְשׁוּ אֶת אַדְמָתָם וַאֲנִי אֶתְּנֶנָּה לָכֶם לָרֶשֶׁת אֹתָהּ אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבָשׁ אֲנִי יְהוָֹה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם אֲשֶׁר הִבְדַּלְתִּי אֶתְכֶם מִן הָעַמִּים:
25. And you shall distinguish between clean animals and unclean ones, and between unclean birds and clean ones; thus you shall not make yourselves disgusting through [unclean] animals and birds and any [creature] which crawls on the earth, that I have distinguished for you to render unclean. כה. וְהִבְדַּלְתֶּם בֵּין הַבְּהֵמָה הַטְּהֹרָה לַטְּמֵאָה וּבֵין הָעוֹף הַטָּמֵא לַטָּהֹר וְלֹא תְשַׁקְּצוּ אֶת נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם בַּבְּהֵמָה וּבָעוֹף וּבְכֹל אֲשֶׁר תִּרְמֹשׂ הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר הִבְדַּלְתִּי לָכֶם לְטַמֵּא:
And you shall distinguish between clean animals and unclean ones: It is not necessary for Scripture to say [that we must distinguish] between a cow and a donkey, since they are easily distinguishable and identifiable. Rather, [the Torah means that we must distinguish] between [an animal that] is clean because of you [i.e., permissible for you to eat because of your slaughtering], and [one that is] unclean because of you [i.e., forbidden for you to eat because of your slaughtering. [When an animal is slaughtered, both “signs,” i.e., organs, must be severed, namely, the esophagus, (gullet) and the trachea (windpipe), or at least, the majority of each. Thus, our verse here is referring to the following: The distinction] between an animal of which [one organ was severed completely and] the majority of the [other] organ was severed, [thus rendering the animal kosher], and [an animal of which one organ was completely severed] whereas only half the [other] organ was severed [thus rendering that animal nonkosher]. And what is the difference between its majority and half of it [that would mean the difference between kosher and nonkosher]? A hairbreadth [and consequently, Scripture commands us to make a careful distinction]. — [Torath Kohanim 20:116]
והבדלתם בין הבהמה הטהרה לטמאה: אין צריך לומר בין פרה לחמור, שהרי מובדלין ונכרין הם, אלא בין טהורה לך לטמאה לך, בין שנשחט רובו של סימן לנשחט חציו. וכמה בין רובו לחציו, מלא שערה:
that I have distinguished for you to render unclean: [I.e.,] to render] forbidden [to eat, as above]. — [Torath Kohanim 20:116]
אשר הבדלתי לכם לטמא: לאסור:
26. And you shall be holy to Me, for I, the Lord, am holy, and I have distinguished you from the peoples, to be Mine. כו. וִהְיִיתֶם לִי קְדשִׁים כִּי קָדוֹשׁ אֲנִי יְהוָֹה וָאַבְדִּל אֶתְכֶם מִן הָעַמִּים לִהְיוֹת לִי:
And I have distinguished you from the peoples, to be Mine: If you are separated from them [through your observance of Torah], you will be Mine, but if not, you will belong to Nebuchadnezzar and his ilk. Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah says: How do we know that a person should not say, “I find pork disgusting,” or “It is impossible for me to wear a mixture [of wool and linen],” but rather, one should say, “I indeed wish to, but what can I do-my Father in heaven has imposed these decrees upon me?” Because Scripture says here, “And I have distinguished you from the peoples, to be Mine”-your very distinction from the other peoples must be for My Name, separating yourself from transgression and accepting upon yourself the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven. — [Torath Kohanim 20:128]
ואבדל אתכם מן העמים להיות לי: אם אתם מובדלים מהם הרי אתם שלי, ואם לאו הרי אתם של נבוכדנצר וחביריו. רבי אלעזר בן עזריה אומר מנין שלא יאמר אדם נפשי קצה בבשר חזיר, אי אפשי ללבוש כלאים, אבל יאמר אפשי, ומה אעשה ואבי שבשמים גזר עלי, תלמוד לומר ואבדיל אתכם מן העמים להיות לי, שתהא הבדלתכם מהם לשמי, פורש מן העבירה ומקבל עליו עול מלכות שמים:
27. And a man or a woman who has [the sorcery of] Ov or Yid'oni, shall surely be put to death; they shall pelt them with stones; their blood is upon themselves. כז. וְאִישׁ אוֹ אִשָּׁה כִּי יִהְיֶה בָהֶם אוֹב אוֹ יִדְּעֹנִי מוֹת יוּמָתוּ בָּאֶבֶן יִרְגְּמוּ אֹתָם דְּמֵיהֶם בָּם:
[And a man or a woman] who has [the sorcery of] Ov or Yid’oni: Here, regarding those [who practice the sorcery of Ov or Yid’oni,] Scripture states death, while above (verse 6), Scripture states excision. [With] witnesses and warning [not to commit the sin], they incur [death by] stoning, but if [the perpetrators transgress] willfully but without warning, they incur excision; and if they transgress unintentionally, [they must bring] a sin-offering. And this [general principle regarding death, excision or sin-offering,] applies to all who are subject to the death penalty, about whom excision is also stated.
כי יהיה בהם אוב וגו': כאן נאמר בהם מיתה ולמעלה כרת. עדים והתראה בסקילה, מזיד בלא התראה בהכרת ושגגתם חטאת, וכן בכל חייבי מיתות שנאמר בהם כרת:
-------
Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 90 - 96
• Chapter 90
David found this prayer in its present form-receiving a tradition attributing it to MosesThe Midrash attributes the next eleven psalms to Moses (Rashi).-and incorporated it into the Tehillim. It speaks of the brevity of human life, and inspires man to repent and avoid pride in this world.
1. A prayer by Moses, the man of God. My Lord, You have been a shelter for us in every generation.
2. Before the mountains came into being, before You created the earth and the world-for ever and ever You are Almighty God.
3. You diminish man until he is crushed, and You say, "Return, you children of man.”
4. Indeed, a thousand years are in Your eyes like yesterday that has passed, like a watch of the night.
5. The stream of their life is as but a slumber; in the morning they are like grass that sprouts anew.
6. In the morning it thrives and sprouts anew; in the evening it withers and dries.
7. For we are consumed by Your anger, and destroyed by Your wrath.
8. You have set our wrongdoings before You, our hidden sins before the light of Your countenance.
9. For all our days have vanished in Your wrath; we cause our years to pass like a fleeting sound.
10. The days of our lives number seventy years, and if in great vigor, eighty years; most of them are but travail and futility, passing quickly and flying away.
11. Who can know the intensity of Your anger? Your wrath is commensurate with one's fear of You.
12. Teach us, then, to reckon our days, that we may acquire a wise heart.
13. Relent, O Lord; how long [will Your anger last]? Have compassion upon Your servants.
14. Satiate us in the morning with Your kindness, then we shall sing and rejoice throughout our days.
15. Give us joy corresponding to the days You afflicted us, the years we have seen adversity.
16. Let Your work be revealed to Your servants, and Your splendor be upon their children.
17. May the pleasantness of the Lord our God be upon us; establish for us the work of our hands; establish the work of our hands.
Chapter 91
This psalm inspires the hearts of the people to seek shelter under the wings of the Divine Presence. It also speaks of the four seasons of the year, and their respective ministering powers, instructing those who safeguard their souls to avoid them.
1. You who dwells in the shelter of the Most High, who abides in the shadow of the Omnipotent:
2. I say of the Lord who is my refuge and my stronghold, my God in whom I trust,
3. that He will save you from the ensnaring trap, from the destructive pestilence.
4. He will cover you with His pinions and you will find refuge under His wings; His truth is a shield and an armor.
5. You will not fear the terror of the night, nor the arrow that flies by day;
6. the pestilence that prowls in the darkness, nor the destruction that ravages at noon.
7. A thousand may fall at your [left] side, and ten thousand at your right, but it shall not reach you.
8. You need only look with your eyes, and you will see the retribution of the wicked.
9. Because you [have said,] "The Lord is my shelter," and you have made the Most High your haven,
10. no evil will befall you, no plague will come near your tent.
11. For He will instruct His angels in your behalf, to guard you in all your ways.
12. They will carry you in their hands, lest you injure your foot upon a rock.
13. You will tread upon the lion and the viper; you will trample upon the young lion and the serpent.
14. Because he desires Me, I will deliver him; I will fortify him, for he knows My Name.
15. When he calls on Me, I will answer him; I am with him in distress. I will deliver him and honor him.
16. I will satiate him with long life, and show him My deliverance.
Chapter 92
Sung every Shabbat by the Levites in the Holy Temple, this psalm speaks of the World to Come, and comforts the hearts of those crushed by suffering.
1. A psalm, a song for the Shabbat day.
2. It is good to praise the Lord, and to sing to Your Name, O Most High;
3. to proclaim Your kindness in the morning, and Your faithfulness in the nights,
4. with a ten-stringed instrument and lyre, to the melody of a harp.
5. For You, Lord, have gladdened me with Your deeds; I sing for joy at the works of Your hand.
6. How great are Your works, O Lord; how very profound Your thoughts!
7. A brutish man cannot know, a fool cannot comprehend this:
8. When the wicked thrive like grass, and all evildoers flourish-it is in order that they may be destroyed forever.
9. But You, Lord, are exalted forever.
10. Indeed, Your enemies, O Lord, indeed Your enemies shall perish; all evildoers shall be scattered.
11. But You have increased my might like that of a wild ox; I am anointed with fresh oil.
12. My eyes have seen [the downfall of] my watchful enemies; my ears have heard [the doom of] the wicked who rise against me.
13. The righteous will flourish like a palm tree, grow tall like a cedar in Lebanon.
14. Planted in the House of the Lord, they shall blossom in the courtyards of our God.
15. They shall be fruitful even in old age; they shall be full of sap and freshness-
16. to declare that the Lord is just; He is my Strength, and there is no injustice in Him.
Chapter 93
This psalm speaks of the Messianic era, when God will don grandeur-allowing no room for man to boast before Him as did Nebuchadnezzar, Pharaoh, and Sennacherib.
1. The Lord is King; He has garbed Himself with grandeur; the Lord has robed Himself, He has girded Himself with strength; He has also established the world firmly that it shall not falter.
2. Your throne stands firm from of old; You have existed forever.
3. The rivers have raised, O Lord, the rivers have raised their voice; the rivers raise their raging waves.
4. More than the sound of many waters, than the mighty breakers of the sea, is the Lord mighty on High.
5. Your testimonies are most trustworthy; Your House will be resplendent in holiness, O Lord, forever.
Chapter 94
An awe-inspiring and wondrous prayer with which every individual can pray for the redemption. It is also an important moral teaching.
1. The Lord is a God of retribution; O God of retribution, reveal Yourself!
2. Judge of the earth, arise; render to the arrogant their recompense.
3. How long shall the wicked, O Lord, how long shall the wicked exult?
4. They continuously speak insolently; all the evildoers act arrogantly.
5. They crush Your people, O Lord, and oppress Your heritage.
6. They kill the widow and the stranger, and murder the orphans.
7. And they say, "The Lord does not see, the God of Jacob does not perceive.”
8. Understand, you senseless among the people; you fools, when will you become wise?
9. Shall He who implants the ear not hear? Shall He who forms the eye not see?
10. Shall He who chastises nations not punish? Shall He who imparts knowledge to man [not know]?
11. The Lord knows the thoughts of man, that they are naught.
12. Fortunate is the man whom You chastise, O Lord, and instruct him in Your Torah,
13. bestowing upon him tranquillity in times of adversity, until the pit is dug for the wicked.
14. For the Lord will not abandon His people, nor forsake His heritage.
15. For judgment shall again be consonant with justice, and all the upright in heart will pursue it.
16. Who would rise up for me against the wicked ones; who would stand up for me against the evildoers?
17. Had the Lord not been a help to me, my soul would have soon dwelt in the silence [of the grave].
18. When I thought that my foot was slipping, Your kindness, O Lord, supported me.
19. When my [worrisome] thoughts multiply within me, Your consolation delights my soul.
20. Can one in the seat of evil, one who makes iniquity into law, consort with You?
21. They band together against the life of the righteous, and condemn innocent blood.
22. The Lord has been my stronghold; my God, the strength of my refuge.
23. He will turn their violence against them and destroy them through their own wickedness; the Lord, our God, will destroy them.
Chapter 95
This psalm speaks of the future, when man will say to his fellow, "Come, let us sing and offer praise to God for the miracles He has performed for us!"
1. Come, let us sing to the Lord; let us raise our voices in jubilation to the Rock of our deliverance.
2. Let us approach Him with thanksgiving; let us raise our voices to Him in song.
3. For the Lord is a great God, and a great King over all supernal beings;
4. in His hands are the depths of the earth, and the heights of the mountains are His.
5. Indeed, the sea is His, for He made it; His hands formed the dry land.
6. Come, let us prostrate ourselves and bow down; let us bend the knee before the Lord, our Maker.
7. For He is our God, and we are the people that He tends, the flock under His [guiding] hand-even this very day, if you would but hearken to His voice!
8. Do not harden your heart as at Merivah, as on the day at Massah in the wilderness,
9. where your fathers tested Me; they tried Me, though they had seen My deeds.
10. For forty years I quarreled with that generation; and I said, "They are a people of erring hearts, they do not know My ways.”
11. So I vowed in My anger that they would not enter My resting place.
Chapter 96
The time will yet come when man will say to his fellow: "Come, let us sing to God!"
1. Sing to the Lord a new song; sing to the Lord, all the earth.
2. Sing to the Lord, bless His Name; proclaim His deliverance from day to day.
3. Recount His glory among the nations, His wonders among all the peoples.
4. For the Lord is great and highly praised; He is awesome above all gods.
5. For all the gods of the nations are naught, but the Lord made the heavens.
6. Majesty and splendor are before Him, might and beauty in His Sanctuary.
7. Render to the Lord, O families of nations, render to the Lord honor and might.
8. Render to the Lord honor due to His Name; bring an offering and come to His courtyards.
9. Bow down to the Lord in resplendent holiness; tremble before Him, all the earth.
10. Proclaim among the nations, "The Lord reigns"; indeed, the world is firmly established that it shall not falter; He will judge the peoples with righteousness.
11. The heavens will rejoice, the earth will exult; the sea and its fullness will roar.
12. The fields and everything therein will jubilate; then all the trees of the forest will sing.
13. Before the Lord [they shall rejoice], for He has come, for He has come to judge the earth; He will judge the world with justice, and the nations with His truth.
-------
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 42
• Lessons in Tanya
• Today's Tanya Lesson
Shabbat, Nissan 19, 5774 • April 19, 2014
Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 42
In the previous chapter the Alter Rebbe explained that fear of G d is a prerequisite to divine service. Every Jew is capable of attaining this level, by contemplating how “G d stands over him” and “searches his reins and heart [to see] if he is serving Him as is fitting.” This thought will lead him to bring forth at least some measure of fear in his mind. This in turn will enable him to study Torah properly, as well as to perform both the positive and negative commandments.
The Alter Rebbe also noted that this level of fear is known as yirah tata‘ah, “lower-level fear,” which is a preparatory step to the proper performance of Torah and mitzvot. This degree of fear must be manifest, if one’s Torah study and performance of the mitzvot are to be deemed avodah, divine service.
והנה במה שכתוב לעיל בענין יראה תתאה
In the light of what has already been said on the subject of the lower level of fear, as summarized above,
יובן היטב מה שנאמר בגמרא על פסוק: ועתה ישראל מה ה׳ אלקיך שואל מעמך כי אם ליראה את ה׳ אלקיך, אטו יראה מילתא זוטרתי היא
one will clearly understand the Talmudic comment1 on the verse,2 “And now, Israel, what does the L rd your G d require of you? Only that you fear the L rd your G d.” The Gemara asks: “Is fear, then, such a small thing?”
אין: לגבי משה מילתא זוטרתי היא וכו׳
Answers the Gemara: “Yes, in the case of Moses it is a small thing,” and so forth.
Superficially, the answer seems to be that this was said by Moses to the Jewish people, and for him, fear of G d is indeed a simple thing.
דלכאורה אינו מובן התירו׳, דהא שואל מעמך כתיב
At first glance the answer of the Gemara is incomprehensible, for the verse asks, “What does [He] require of you?” — i.e., What does G d require of every Jew? For the majority of Jews, fear of G d is certainly no mean accomplishment. What, then, is the point of answering that for Moses it is a simple thing?
The Alter Rebbe now goes on to explain that the answer of the Gemara, that “in the case of Moses it is a simple thing,” does not refer to Moses alone, but to the “Moses” which is found in every Jew, for Moses imbues all Jews with the level of Daat (lit., “knowledge”), enabling them all to bind their own faculty of Daat to G dliness. It is concerning this level of Moses found within every Jew, that the statement is made, “...in the case of Moses it is a simple thing.” For when a Jew utilizes the power of Moses found within him, i.e., when he binds his Daat with G dliness, then fear of G d is indeed a simple thing and easy to attain, as shall presently be explained.
אלא הענין הוא כי כל נפש ונפש מבית ישראל יש בה מבחינת משה רבנו עליו השלום, כי הוא משבעה רועים
The explanation, however, is as follows: Each and every soul of the House of Israel comprises within it something of the quality of our teacher Moses, peace unto him, for he is one of the3 “seven shepherds”
הממשיכים חיות ואלקות לכללות נשמות ישראל, שלכן נקראים בשם רועים
who cause vitality and G dliness to flow to the community of the souls of Israel, for which reason they are called “shepherds”.
Just as a shepherd provides nourishment for his sheep, thereby supplying them with vitality, so too do the “seven shepherds” sustain Jewish souls with “vitality and G dliness,” each from his own spiritual level. Abraham provides the Jews with the spiritual faculty of Chesed and love, and so forth.
Chassidim relate that the Alter Rebbe pondered for a goodly number of weeks whether to write that the “seven shepherds” provide “G dly vitality” (חיות אלוקות), or whether he should write “vitality and G dliness” (חיות ואלוקות). He finally resolved to write the latter — “vitality and G dliness.” For “vitality” refers to love and fear of G d, since it is they that vitalize one’s performance of Torah and mitzvot; “G dliness” refers to self-nullification before G d. The “seven shepherds,” then, cause both “vitality and G dliness” to flow into Jewish souls.
ומשה רבנו, עליו השלום, הוא כללות כולם, ונקרא רעיא מהימנא, דהיינו שממשיך בחינת הדעת לכללות ישראל לידע את ה׳
Our teacher, Moses, peace unto him, comprises [aspects of] them all, and he is called “the faithful shepherd.” This means that he draws down the quality of Daat to the community of Israel, that they may know and be cognizant of the L rd, so that for them G dliness will be self-evident, and experienced by every Jew,
כל אחד כפי השגת נשמתו ושרשה למעלה
each according to the intellectual capacity of his soul and its root above, i.e., according to the height of the source of the soul as it exists above,
ויניקתה משרש נשמת משה רבנו, עליו השלום, המושרשת בדעת העליון שבי׳ ספירות דאצילות המיוחדות במאצילן, ברוך הוא
and according to [the degree of] its nurture from the root of the soul of our teacher Moses, peace unto him, which is rooted in the Daat Elyon (“Supernal Knowledge”) of the Ten Sefirot of Atzilut, which are united with their Emanator,
Just as G d is termed the Creator of created beings, so, too, is He called the Emanator of those entities found in the World of Atzilut, a World which, together with its beings, is an emanation of the Ein Sof.
שהוא ודעתו אחד, והוא המדע כו׳
for He and His Knowledge are one, and “He is the Knowledge....”
As explained in ch. 2 above, G d’s knowledge and man’s are utterly dissimilar. On the human plane, the knower and the faculty of knowledge and that which is known, are three distinct and separate entities. However, concerning G d: “He is the Knowledge, He is the Knower, and he is That which is Known.” Thus, Supernal Knowledge is one with Him. And it is within this level of Daat that Moses‘ soul is rooted.
When a Jew receives the capacity for Daat from the soul of Moses, he is able to perceive G dliness in a truly knowing and internalized manner, so that he actually experiences Him. Utilizing this capacity enables every Jew to know and feel how “G d stands over him... and sees his actions.” It is therefore easy for him to summon up within himself a fear of G d.
However, all the above refers to the luminary aspect of Moses which is received by every Jew. The Alter Rebbe now goes on to say that there is an even higher level of Moses — a “spark” of Moses‘ soul, that is bestowed upon the spiritual leaders and sages of each generation. (A spark is an actual part of the flame, unlike rays of illumination which are not truly part of the luminary. So, too, the sparks of the soul of Moses found within the leaders and scholars throughout the generations, are a part of Moses’ soul.) The task of these leaders is to teach G d’s greatness to the Jewish people, so that they will serve G d with all their heart.
ועוד זאת, יתר על כן, בכל דור ודור יורדין ניצוצין מנשמת משה רבנו, עליו השלום, ומתלבשין בגוף ונפש של חכמי הדור, עיני העדה
In addition and beyond this pervasive influence to the community as a whole, there descend, in every generation, sparks from the soul of our teacher Moses, peace unto him, and they clothe themselves in the body and soul of the sages of that generation, the “eyes” of the congregation,
Because of the “spark” of Moses found within a spiritual leader he is called “Moses”, as in the Talmudic expression,4 “Moses, do you speak aright?” This spark is clothed not only in a leader’s soul, but also in his body.5 This is why chassidim say that one never tires of gazing at a rebbe, for within him is a spark of Moses. These sparks which are clothed in sages and spiritual leaders enable them —
ללמד דעת את העם, ולידע גדולת ה׳ ולעבדו בלב ונפש
to impart knowledge to the people, that they may know the greatness of G d and [hence] serve Him with heart and soul.
כי העבודה שבלב היא לפי הדעת, כמו שכתוב: דע את אלקי אביך, ועבדהו בלב שלם ונפש חפצה
For the service of the heart, i.e., one’s love and fear of G d, is according to the Daat, according to one’s degree of knowledge and understanding of G d’s greatness, as it is written,6 “Know the G d of your father, and serve Him with all your heart and with a longing soul.”
Thus, in order to “serve Him with all your heart and with a longing soul,” it is necessary to “know the G d of your father” — to know and comprehend His greatness. This is taught to the Jewish people by the scholars of each generation, within whom sparks of Moses are enclothed.
ולעתיד הוא אומר: ולא ילמדו איש את רעהו לאמר, דעו את ה׳, כי כולם ידעו אותי וגו׳
Only concerning the future [Messianic era] is it written:7 “And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ‘Know the L rd,’ for they shall all know Me....”
Only at that time will a teacher be unnecessary. However, in our era, one needs to have a mentor impart knowledge of G d’s greatness if one is to know how to serve Him with heart and soul. And one’s dependence on Moses through the intermediary scholars of each generation (the “sparks” of Moses) is of the very essence of one’s divine service.
אך עיקר הדעת אינה הידיעה לבדה, שידעו גדולת ה׳ מפי סופרים ומפי ספרים
However, the essence of knowledge which leads one to serve G d with his whole soul and heart, is not mere knowing alone, that people should know the greatness of G d from authors (i.e., sages and spiritual guides) and books,
אלא העיקר הוא להעמיק דעתו בגדולת ה׳, ולתקוע מחשבתו בה׳ בחוזק ואומ׳ הלב והמוח
but the essential thing is to immerse one’s own mind deeply into those things which explain the greatness of G d, and fix one’s thought on G d with strength and vigor of the heart and mind,
עד שתהא מחשבתו מקושרת בה׳ בקשר אמי׳ וחזק, כמו שהיא מקושרת בדבר גשמי שרואה בעיני בשר ומעמיק בו מחשבתו
until his thought shall be bound to G d with a strong and mighty bond, as it is bound to a material thing which he sees with his physical eyes and upon which he concentrates his thought.
When one does so, he is mightily bound up with the object of his thoughts and is unable to free himself from them. Thinking about G d and His greatness should be done in the selfsame all-absorbing manner — and thereby the thinker will be truly bound up with Him.
כנודע שדעת הוא לשון התקשרות, כמו: והאדם ידע וגו׳
For it is known that Daat connotes union, as in the verse,8 “And Adam yada (lit., ‘knew’) Eve....” The word ידע in this verse connotes union. Thus, Daat entails knowing something to the point that one is completely united with it. The same is true regarding knowledge of G dliness. Although when one just knows G dliness, he is already fulfilling a mitzvah, still this does not suffice; it is necessary that one achieve the union of Daat by meditating deeply on G d’s greatness.
FOOTNOTES
1. Berachot 33b.
2. Devarim 10:12.
3. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Aaron, Joseph, David.
4. Shabbat 101b, and elsewhere.
5. Explaining why the Alter Rebbe says here that sparks from the soul of Moses are clothed in the body and soul of the sages of every generation, the Rebbe points out: It would seem that the order should be reversed — the sparks clothe themselves not only in the soul of the sage, but also in his body.
The Rebbe explains, however, that if the order would indeed be reversed one could erroneously be led to think that the spark of Moses clothed in the sage does not reach his body directly from Moses, except after first being clothed in his soul. By first stating “body” and then “soul” the Alter Rebbe underscores the fact that the spark of Moses clothed in the body arrives at its destination directly from Moses, without the interposition of the sage’s soul. Just as the distinctive quality of Moses himself related not only to his soul but also to his body, so, too, regarding the spark that emanates from him: it is clothed directly in the body of the sage.
This helps us understand more deeply why the sages are known as Moses, as mentioned earlier, for even within their bodies a spark of Moses is clothed.
6. I Divrei HaYamim 28:9.
7. Yirmeyahu 31:33.
8. See above, ch. 3.
-------
Rambam:
• Daily Mitzvah - Sefer Hamitzvos:
Shabbat, Nissan 19, 5774 • April 19, 2014
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 193
Vegetables or Grains Grown in a Vineyard
"Lest the seed that increase become forbidden"—Deuteronomy 22:9.
If vegetables or grains grew in a vineyard, it is forbidden to consume both the grapes as well as the vegetables or grain.
This biblical prohibition only applies in the land of Israel.
Vegetables or Grains Grown in a Vineyard
Negative Commandment 193
Translated by Berel Bell
The 193rd prohibition is that we are forbidden from eating a mixture of species only1 when planted in a vineyard.
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "[Do not plant mixed species in your vineyard] lest the additional growth [of the vine] and the seeds become prohibited [tikdosh]."
The Oral Tradition3 explains that the phrase pen tikdosh ["lest it become prohibited"] also implies, pen tukad aish ["lest you cause it to be burnt in fire"], i.e. that it is forbidden to derive any benefit from them.
You have already learned the principle,4 "Every case where the Torah writes hishomer (be careful), pen (lest) or al (do not) indicates a prohibition."5
In the second chapter of Pesachim,6our Sages discuss the law that, "one is not punished by lashes for any prohibition in the Torah unless one derives benefit in the normal way," i.e. that anything that one is prohibited from eating, one is not punished from eating it unless one derives benefit.7 The Talmud then says, "Abaye says, 'Everyone agrees that for [eating] mixed species that grew in a vineyard, one is punished by lashes even if one does not benefit in the normal way. What is the reason? Because the verse does not mention 'eating'; rather it is written, pen tikdosh, which also implies, pen tukad aish."8
The details of this mitzvah are explained in tractate Kilayim.
The Biblical prohibition of mixed species in a vineyard only applies in Israel.
FOOTNOTES
1.There are two prohibitions regarding planting a mixture of species: N215 prohibits planting any two species together; N216 prohibits planting either vegetables or grain in a vineyard. The prohibition regarding a vineyard is stricter in a number of ways; in this prohibition we see that the produce that grows in the vineyard may not be eaten. When not in a vineyard, however, only the act of planting is prohibited; the food that grows may be eaten.
The mitzvos are written separately because here, corresponding to the order in Mishneh Torah, we are dealing with prohibited foods. There, we deal with the agricultural laws.
2.Deut. 22:9.
3.Chullin 115a.
4.Makkos 13b. See N90. Eighth Introductory Principle.
5.From this expression we see that this verse prohibiting benefit counts as a separate prohibition from the verse prohibiting the planting (Lev. 19:19. N216).
6.24b.
7.For example, one who eats raw fat would not be punished (Pesachim ibid.).
8.Our versions of the Talmud omit this last phrase. The handwritten manuscripts quoted in Dikdukei Sofrim, however, do contain it. See Kapach, 5731, footnote 63.
________________________________________
Negative Commandment 153
Untithed Produce
"And they shall not profane the holy things of the children of Israel, that which they offer to G d"—Leviticus 22:15.
It is forbidden to partake of produce before all the requisite tithes – those that belong to the kohen, Levite, the poor, and the tithe that is separated and eaten in Jerusalem – are separated.
Untithed Produce
Negative Commandment 153
Translated by Berel Bell
The 153rd prohibition is that we are forbidden from eating tevel, i.e. produce from which the terumos1 and ma'asros have not yet been separated.
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "And they shall not desecrate the holy things of the children of Israel that they will separate to G‑d."
One who transgresses this prohibition by eating tevel is punished by a heavenly death penalty. This is alluded to from [the similarity between] this verse, "And they shall not desecrate the holy things," and the verse regarding terumos,3 "And the holy things of the children of Israel they shall not desecrate and [thereby] not die." From the identical expression, "they shall not desecrate," we can derive [the punishment for tevel] from terumah, which is a transgression punishable by death, as we have explained.4
The quote from tractate Sanhedrin5is, "What is the source that teaches us that the punishment for eating tevel is death? From the verse, 'And they shall not desecrate the holy things of the children of Israel that they will separate to G‑d.' This verse speaks about something that 'they will separate' in the future [i.e. tevel].6 And you derive [the punishment for violating] 'they will not desecrate' [regarding tevel] from 'they will not desecrate' written regarding terumah."
Their intention in saying, "in the future," is to say that it is as if the verse reads, "And they shall not desecrate the holy things that they will separate to G‑d in the future." This is the meaning of G‑d's statement (exalted be He), "that they will separate," in future tense, followed by7 the verse, "and they shall bear the guilt of their sin of eating their holy things."
Our Sages said in tractate Makkos,8 "You might think that the only time a person is punished for eating tevel is when nothing at all has been separated. How do we know [that the prohibition applies] when terumah gedolah has been separated, but not terumas ma'aser; when ma'aser rishon has been separated, but not ma'aser sheini, or even9 ma'aser oni? From the verse,10 'You are not allowed to eat in your gates [the ma'aser of your grain, wine or oil].' And later11 it says, '[When you finish taking all the ma'aser from your grain in the third year...] and they will eat in your gates and be satisfied.' Just as later on it refers [even12] to ma'aser oni,13 so too here it refers to ma'aser oni — and the verse says, 'you are not allowed.'"
However, these prohibitions only are punishable by lashes; the heavenly death penalty is only [when the tevel still contains] terumah gedolah or terumas ma'aser, since one who eats ma'aser rishon before the terumas ma'aser has been separated is punishable by death, in G‑d's statement14 (exalted be He) to the Levites, when He commanded them to separate a tithe from their tithe,15 "And the holy things of the children of Israel you shall not desecrate and [thereby] not die.," This is the prohibition not to eat ma'aser rishon when it is still tevel. Therefore, one is punishable by death [for eating it], as explained in tractate Demai.
The summary of all the above: one who eats tevel before the terumah gedolah and terumas ma'aser have been separated is punishable by death, based on the verse, "And they shall not desecrate the holy things of the children of Israel," as we have explained in this mitzvah. One who eats tevel after the terumos have been separated, but before [all] the ma'asros have been separated is punishable by lashes, based on the verse, "You are not allowed to eat in your gates the ma'aser of your grain." You should remember this and not err in it.
The details regarding tevel are explained in many passage of tractate Demai and Terumos, and tractate Ma'asros.
FOOTNOTES
1.Food that grows in Israel may not be eaten until the agricultural gifts have been separated. Terumah is given to the kohen; ma'aser is given to the Levite; the Levite himself must take part of the ma'aser as terumas ma'aser and give it to the kohen. Then, depending on which year of the seven year cycle it is, either ma'aser sheini or ma'aser oni is separated. Terumos refers to terumah and terumas ma'aser ; ma'asros refers to ma'aser , ma'aser sheini and ma'aser oni
2.Lev. 22:15.
3.Num. 18:32.
4.N133, which is written earlier in the order of the original Sefer HaMitzvos.
5.83a.
6.The Talmud first proves which type of "holy things" are referred to in the verse. Since the future tense is used ("they will separate"), it must refer to tevel, since the relevant portions have not yet been separated.
7.Lev. 22:16.
8.16b.
9.Ma'aser oni is the least strict of all the agricultural gifts mentioned, since there are no restrictions on who may eat it and where it may be eaten.
10.Deut. 12:17.
11.Ibid. 26:12.
12.We therefore can derive that if even ma'aser oni, which is the least strict, is prohibited, certainly the stricter ones are prohibited.
13.The verse refers to ma'aser oni, since it is the only agricultural gift unique to the third year.
14.Num. 18:32.
15.The Levites receive one-tenth of the produce. They must separate one-tenth of that and give it to the kohen as terumas ma'aser.
________________________________________
Negative Commandment 194
Idolatrous Libations
"Who eat the fat of their sacrifices, and drink the wine of their libations"—Deuteronomy 32:38.
It is forbidden to drink wine that was used as a libation for an idol.
Idolatrous Libations
Negative Commandment 194
Translated by Berel Bell
The 194th prohibition is that we are forbidden from drinking yayin nesech [wine used for idolatry].
There is no verse that states this prohibition explicitly. However, [the prohibition is derived from a verse by] the Sages in Avodah Zorah,1 "The verse2 says, 'They eat the fat of their sacrifices; they drink the wine of their libations' — just as the sacrifice is prohibited, so too the wine is prohibited."
You are aware that one is prohibited from deriving benefit from it, and the punishment [for drinking it] is lashes, as is well known throughout the Talmud.
The proof that yayin nesech is a Biblical prohibition and that it counts as one of the [365] prohibitions is the statement of the Sages in Gemara Avodah Zorah,3 "Rabbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish both say that all prohibitions of the Torah — regardless whether they were mixed into the same type or a different type — [are prohibited only] when the taste is perceptible; with the exception of tevel and yayin nesech, which, when mixed into the same type are prohibited even in the smallest amount, but when mixed into a different type, are prohibited only when the taste is perceptible."4 This is a clear proof that yayin nesech is one of the prohibitions of the Torah.5
The Sifri6 also, when mentioning the decline of the Jewish people in Shittim in acting immorally with the daughters of Moav,7 says, "He entered [her tent], and she had a bottle full of Ammonite wine with her, and non-Jewish wine had not yet been prohibited to the Jewish people. She said to him, 'Would you like to drink?' etc." This that they said, "and non-Jewish wine had not yet been prohibited to the Jewish people," undoubtedly implies that later on8 it was indeed prohibited.
However, this that the Sages included wine among the 18 Rabbinic decrees9; and so too their statement,10 "Yayin nesech is different, because the Sages were especially strict in its regard" [implying that the prohibition is only Rabbinic in nature] — they are referring to stam yaynom11, not to actual yayin nesech. But actual yayin nesech is a Biblical prohibition, as you already know their saying,12 "There are three categories of [prohibited] wine."13
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the final chapters of tractate Avodah Zorah.
FOOTNOTES
1.29b.
2.Deut. 32:38.
3.73b.
4.Taste is normally perceptible at the point of one-sixtieth of the mixture. Therefore, according to this passage, if yayin nesech fell into a bowl of orange juice, the mixture will be permitted if there is less than one-sixtieth yayin nesech. If it fell into a bowl of kosher wine, however, the mixture would be forbidden.
5.Since the phrase, "all prohibitions of the Torah," is used.
6.Num. 21:1.
7.Num. 25.
8.I.e. in Deut. 32.
9.Shabbos 17b.
10.Avodah Zorah 62b.
11.The Sages decreed that all wine of non-Jews is prohibited by Rabbinic law, even if it was not used for idolatry.
12.Avodah Zorah 30b.
13.I.e. yayin nesech, stam yaynom and wine deposited in the house of a non-Jew.
________________________________________
Positive Commandment 146
Slaughtering
"And you shall slaughter of your cattle and of your sheep...as I have commanded you"—Deuteronomy 12:21.
We are commanded to ritually slaughter [animals and fowl] if wishing to eat from their flesh. Only through slaughter is flesh rendered fit for consumption.
Slaughtering
Positive Commandment 146
Translated by Berel Bell
The 146th mitzvah is that we are commanded to slaughter an animal [we wish to eat] and only after that to eat it; and the only acceptable preparation is through shechitah.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "And you shall slaughter your cattle and sheep ... as I have commanded you."
In the words of the Sifri, "'And you shall slaughter' teaches that just as sacrifices need shechitah, so too non-sanctified animals need shechitah. 'As I have commanded you' teaches that Moshe was commanded regarding the trachea, and the esophagus, and cutting the majority of one for a bird, and cutting the majority of both for an animal."
The details of this mitzvah and all its laws are explained in the tractate devoted to this subject, i.e. tractate Chullin.
FOOTNOTES
1.Deut. 12:21.
________________________________________
Rambam:
• 1 Chapter: Rotseah uShmirat Nefesh Rotseah uShmirat Nefesh - Chapter Five Rotseah uShmirat Nefesh - Chapter Five
Halacha 1
Whenever a person kills unintentionally, he should be exiled from the city in which he killed, to a city of refuge. It is a positive mitzvah to exile him, as implied by Numbers 35:25: "He shall dwell there until the death of the High Priest."
The court is admonished not to accept a ransom from the killer to enable him to remain in his city, as Ibid.:32 states: "You shall not accept a ransom so that he will not have to flee to his city of refuge."
Halacha 2
A person who kills unintentionally is not exiled unless the person whom he kills dies immediately. If, however, he wounds a person unintentionally - even though the court assesses that the victim will die - and the victim indeed falls sick and dies, the killer is not exiled. The rationale is that the death may not have been entirely the killer's fault; perhaps the victim in some way hastened his own death or wind entered his wound and caused him to die.
Even if the killer severed the victim's windpipe and esophagus, if the victim remained alive for a short while, the killer is not exiled on his accord. Therefore, it is only when the victim died without entering any death spasms at all, or was killed in a place that was not open to the wind - e.g., a closed marble building, or the like - that the killer is exiled.
Halacha 3
When a Jew unintentionally kills a servant or a resident alien, he must be exiled. Similarly, if a servant unintentionally kills a Jew or a resident alien, he should be exiled.
Similarly, a resident alien who kills another resident alien or a servant unintentionally should be exiled, for the passage concerning the cities of refuge, Numbers 35:15, describes them as being for "the children of Israel, an alien and the residents among you."
Halacha 4
When a resident alien kills a Jew unintentionally, he should be executed, even though he acted unintentionally. The rationale is that a person must always take responsibility for his conduct.
Similarly, if a resident alien kills another resident alien because he thought that it was permitted to kill, he is considered to be close to acting intentionally, and he should be executed, for he intended to kill.
When one gentile kills another gentile unintentionally, the cities of refuge do not serve as a haven for him, for the above verse states: "For the children of Israel."
Halacha 5
When a son unintentionally kills his father, he should be exiled. Similarly, when a father unintentionally kills his son, he should be exiled.
When does the above apply? When the father kills the son while not in the midst of Torah study, or when he was teaching his son a profession that is not necessary for him. If, however, he imposes punishment on his son while teaching him Torah, secular knowledge or a profession, and the son dies, the father is not liable for exile.
Halacha 6
Similarly, when a teacher strikes a student or an emissary of the court strikes a litigant who refuses to appear in courtand accidentally kills him, he is not liable for exile.
This concept is derived from Deuteronomy 19:5, which mentions the punishment of exile for a person who unintentionally kills a colleague while "chopping wood" - i.e., a permitted act. Thus, this punishment is not imposed when a father strikes a son, a teacher strikes a student, or an emissary of the court strikes a litigant, for they unintentionally killed while performing a mitzvah.
Halacha 7
At the outset, both a person who killed unintentionally and one who killed intentionally should flee to a city of refuge. The court in the city in which the killing took place sends for the killer and brings him back to that city, as ibid.:12 states: "And the elders of his city shall send and take him from there."
If the killer is condemned to execution, he should be executed, as ibid. continues: "And they shall give him to the hand of the blood redeemer." If a person is absolved, he should be released, as Numbers 35:25 states: "And the congregation shall save the killer from the hand of the blood redeemer." And if the killer is sentenced to exile, he should be returned to his previous place, as ibid. continues: "And the congregation shall return him to his city of refuge."
Halacha 8
When he is returned to his city of refuge, he is given two Torah sages to accompany him, lest the blood redeemer attempt to kill him on the way. They should tell him: "Do not deal with him in the manner of those who shed blood. It was unintentional that this happened."
Halacha 9
When a blood redeemer slays a person who killed unintentionally outside the Sabbath limits of his city of refuge, he is not held liable, as Deuteronomy 19:6 states: "He is not judged as liable to be executed."
Halacha 10
The above applies whether he kills him on the road before he enters his city of refuge or if he kills him when returning together with the two who are guarding him. If he enters his city of refuge and intentionally departs beyond its Sabbath boundaries,he has granted license for his life to be taken. The blood redeemer is permitted to kill him. And if another person kills him, that other person is not liable, as Numbers 35:27 states: "There is no liability for his blood."
Halacha 11
If the killer leaves his city of refuge unintentionally, whoever slays him - whether the blood redeemer or another person - should be exiled. If the killer is slain within the Sabbath limits of the city of refuge, the one who slayed him should be executed.
Halacha 12
The altar in the Temple serves as a haven for killers. This is derived from Exodus 21:14, which states with regard to a person who kills intentionally: "You shall take him from My altar to die." One can derive from this, that one who kills unintentionally should not be killed at the altar.
Thus, if a person kills unintentionally and takes refuge at the altar, and the blood redeemer kills him there, he should be executed as if he killed him in a city of refuge.
Halacha 13
What serves as a haven is only the top of the altar in the Temple. Moreover, it serves as a haven only for a priest who is in the midst of sacrificial worship. For a person other than a priest, a priest who is not involved in the sacrificial worship, or a priest who was involved in the sacrificial worship but was near the altar or holding on to its horns, the altar does not serve as a haven.
Halacha 14
If someone takes refuge on the altar, he is not left there. Instead, he is given guards and taken to a city of refuge.
When does the above apply? When one is obligated to be exiled. If, however, a person feared that a king will have him executed as is the king's authority, or that the court will execute him as an immediate directive, and fled to the altar and held on to it, he should be saved.
This applies even if he is a commoner. He should not be taken from the altar to die unless he was sentenced to death because of the testimony of witnesses who delivered a warning, as is always required with regard to those executed by the court.
-------
Rambam:
• 3 Chapters: Ma'achalot Assurot Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 17, Shechitah Shechitah - Chapter 1, Shechitah Shechitah - Chapter 2
Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 17
Halacha 1
When the meat of a nevelah or a crawling animal or teeming animal was cooked in an earthenware pot,1 one should not cook the meat of a ritually slaughtered animal in that pot on that same day. If he cooked a type of meat [in the pot that day], the dish is forbidden.2 If he cooked another substance in it, [it is forbidden if] its flavor can be detected.3
Halacha 2
The Torah forbade only [the use of] a pot that was [cooked with the forbidden substance] on that day.4 For [in that time,] the flavor of the fat absorbed in the pot had not been impaired.5
According to Rabbinic Law, one should never cook in it again.6 For this reason, one should never purchase used earthenware utensils from gentiles to use them for hot foods, e.g., pots and plates. This applies even when they are coated with leaded. If one purchased such a utensil and cooked in it from the second day onward, the food is permitted.7
Halacha 3
[The following rules apply when] a person purchases metal or glass dinnerware from a gentile. Utensils that [the gentile] did not use at all should be immersed in the waters of a mikveh. Afterwards, it is permitted to eat and drink with them.8
Utensils that he used for cold [food and drink], e.g., cups, flasks, and pitchers, he should wash them thoroughly9 and immerse them. [Afterwards,] they are permitted. Utensils that he used for hot food: large pots, kettles, and pots used to heat foot, should be purged through hagaalah,10 and immersed in the mikveh.11 Afterwards, they are permitted. Utensils that he used by exposing them to fire, e.g., spits and grills, should be exposed to fire12 until they become white-hot and their outer surface falls off.13 They may then be immersed and become permitted for use.
Halacha 4
How is [the purging process of] hagaalah achieved? A small pot is placed into a large pot and they are filled with water until the smaller one is submerged.14 Then one must boil it very thoroughly.15
If a large pot was [forbidden],16 one should place dough or mud along its edge [so that] he could fill it with water so that it will flow over its edge.17He [then] boils it.
In all instances, if he used them before boiling [water in them for hagaalah], washing them thoroughly, making them white hot, or immersing them, [the food] is kosher. For any fat [absorbed] in them imparts an unpleasant flavor, as explained.18
Halacha 5
The immersion of the dinnerware that is purchased from gentiles to allow it to be used for eating and drinking is not associated with ritual purity and impurity. Instead, it is a Rabbinic decree.19
There is an allusion20 to this [in Numbers 31:23 that describes Moses' instructions with regard to the spoils taken from Midian:] "Everything that can be passed through fire, you shall pass through fire and it will become pure." According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that the verse is speaking only about purifying [the utensils] from gentile cooking, not from ritual impurity. For there is no ritually impurity that is dispelled by fire. All those who are impure ascend from their impurity through immersion and the impurity stemming from [contact with] a human corpse is [dispelled] through the sprinkling [of water and the ashes of the red heifer]. There is no concept of fire [employed in this context], rather [it is employed] with regard to purification from gentile cooking. Since the verse states "and it will become pure," our Sages said: "Add to it another dimension of purity after passing it through fire to cause it to be permitted because [of its contact] with gentile cooking."21
Halacha 6
[Our Sages] obligate this immersion only for metal22 dinnerware utensils23 that were purchased from a gentile. When, however, a person borrows [such utensils] from a gentile or a gentile left him such utensils as security, it is only necessary to wash them thoroughly, boil them, or expose them to fire. He does not have to immerse [them].24 Similarly, if one purchased wooden or stone utensils, it is only necessary to wash them thoroughly, boil them, or expose them to fire. Similarly, earthenware utensils need not be immersed.25 If, however, they are coated with lead, they are considered as metal utensils and require immersion.26
Halacha 7
When a person purchases a knife from a gentile, he must expose it to fire until it become white hot or have it honed in its sharpener.27 If it was a perfectly [smooth] knife without any blemishes, it is sufficient to insert it in hard earth ten times.28 [Afterwards,] one may eat cold food with it.29 If it had blemishes or it was perfectly [smooth], but one desired to use it to eat hot food or to slaughter with it, he should expose it to fire until it becomes white hot or hone it in its entirety.30 If he slaughtered [an animal] with such a knife before purifying it, he should wash thoroughly the place of slaughter.31 If he removes the surface [of the meat around the place of slaughter], it is praiseworthy.32
Halacha 8
When a knife was used to slaughter an animal that was trefe, one should not slaughter with it [again] until it is washed thoroughly, even with cold water or wiped clean with worn-out clothes.33
Halacha 9
There are other substances which are forbidden by the Sages. Even though there is not a basis for their prohibition in Scriptural Law, they decreed against their use34 to separate from the gentiles so that Jews will not intermingle with them and intermarry. They are: It is forbidden to drink [alcoholic beverages] with them35even in a place where there was no suspicion that the wine was poured as a libation. And they forbade eating from their bread or cooked dishes36even in a place where there is no suspicion that the food was forbidden.37
Halacha 10
A person should not drink at a party of gentiles even though boiled wine which is not forbidden38 [is being served] or he is drinking from his own utensils. If the majority of the attendants of the party are Jewish, it is permitted.39We may not drink the beer that they make from dates, figs, or the like. [This is forbidden] only in the place where they are sold.40 If, however, one brought the beer home and drank it there, it is permitted. For the fundamental point of the decree is that one should not feast with [a gentile].
Halacha 11
It is permitted to drink wine from apples, pomegranates, and the like in every place. [Our Sages] did not institute a decree in an uncommon situation. Raisen wine is like ordinary wine and is used for libations.41
Halacha 12
Although [our Sages] forbade bread [baked] by gentiles, there are places were leniency is shown regarding this matter and bread baked by a gentile baker is purchased in a place where there is no Jewish baker and it is in a field, because this is a pressing situation.42 There is, by contrast, no one who will rule that leniency may be shown with regard to bread baked by a homeowner.43 For the primary reason for [our Sages'] decree was [to prevent] intermarriage. If one will eat the bread of a [gentile] homeowner, [it is likely that] he will feast with him.
Halacha 13
[The bread] is permitted [in the following situations]: A gentile lit the oven and a Jew baked within it, a Jew lit the oven and the gentile baked within it, the gentile both lit the oven and baked, but the Jew stirred the fire or reduced it, since he was involved in the baking tasks, [we rule leniently]. Even though he did not do more than throw one piece of wood into the oven, he caused all the bread in it to be permitted. [The rationale is that this requirement] is only to make a distinction that [a gentile's] bread is forbidden.44
Halacha 14
When a gentile cooks wine, milk, honey, quince,45 or the like, i.e., any entity that is usually eaten raw, it is permitted. [Our Sages] issued their decree only with regard to entities that are not eaten at all raw, e.g., meat, unsalted fish, an egg, and vegetables. If a gentile were to cook them from the beginning to the end without the Jew participated in the cooking at all, they are forbidden because they were cooked by gentiles.
Halacha 15
When does the above apply? To [food] that would be served on the table of kings46 to be eaten together with bread,47 e.g., meat, eggs, fish, and the like. When, by contrast, [food] would not be served on the table of kings to be eaten together with bread, e.g., vetch48 cooked by gentiles, it is permitted despite the fact that it is not eaten uncooked. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations. For the fundamental purpose of the decree was to prevent intermarriage, by [hindering] a gentile from inviting [the Jew] to a feast. And when [food] would not be served on the table of kings to be eaten together with bread, a person would not invite a friend [to share a meal] of it.
Halacha 16
When small fish were salted by a Jew or a gentile,49 it is as if they have undergone part of their cooking process. [Therefore] if a gentile roasted them afterwards, they are permitted.50 [Similarly,] whenever a Jew performs a small part of the cooking process, whether at the beginning or at the end, [the food] is permitted. Accordingly, if a gentile placed meat or a pot on the fire and the Jew turned over the meat or stirred the pot or, conversely, the Jew placed [the food on the fire] and the gentile completed [the cooking process], [the food] is permitted.51
Halacha 17
When a gentile salts fish or smokes fruit and in this way prepares them to be eaten, they are permitted. With regard to this decree,52 salted food is not considered as if it were boiling hot, nor is smoking considered as cooking. Similarly, kernels of grain roasted by a gentile are permitted. They were not included in the decree, for a person will not invite a colleague53 to [come and eat] roasted kernels of grain.
Halacha 18
Beans, peas, lentils, and the like that have been cooked by gentiles and are sold are forbidden because of [the decree against] gentile cooking in places where they are served on the tables of kings54 as a relish. [They are also forbidden,] because of prohibited foods in all places for perhaps they were cooked together with meat55 or in a pot in which meat had been cooked.56 Similarly, doughnuts that are fried by gentiles in oil are forbidden because of prohibited foods.57
Halacha 19
When a gentile cooked without intending to cook, [the product] is permitted.58 What is implied? A gentile lit a fire in a swamp to clean away the overgrowth and grasshoppers were roasted, it is permitted to eat them. [This applies] even in places where they are served on the tables of kings as a relish. Similarly, if he scorches a [kosher animal's] head to remove its hair, it is permitted to partake of the strings of meat and the tips of the ears that were roasted at the time of the scorching.
Halacha 20
[The following rules apply to] dates that were cooked by gentiles. If, initially, they were sweet, they are permitted.59 If they were bitter and the cooking sweetened them, they are forbidden. If they were of intermediate sweetness, they are forbidden.
Halacha 21
Roasted lentils that were kneaded with water or with vinegar are forbidden.60 When, however, roasted kernels of wheat or barley are kneaded with water, they are permitted.
Halacha 22
The oil of gentiles is permitted. One who forbids it commits a great sin, for he rebels61 against [the teachings] of the [High] Court who permitted it.62 Even if the oil was cooked, it is permitted. It is not forbidden because of gentile cooking, because we partake of oil uncooked. Nor is it forbidden, because of prohibited foods,63 because meat impairs [the flavor of] oil and spoils it.
Halacha 23
Similarly, when gentile honey was cooked and sweets were made from it, it is permitted for the same reason.64
Halacha 24
Date dregs65 of gentiles that were heated in hot water, whether in a large pot or a small pot, are permitted.66 For the [flavor of forbidden meat absorbed in the pot] impairs its flavor. Similarly, pickled foods to which it is not customary to add vinegar or wine or pickled olives or pickled grasshoppers that are brought from the storehouse are permitted.67 Nevertheless, grasshoppers and pickled foods over which wine is sprinkled are forbidden.68 Similarly, they are forbidden if vinegar - even vinegar made from beer - is sprinkled over them.69
Halacha 25
Why is gentile vinegar made from beer forbidden? Because they cast the dregs of wine into it. Therefore [vinegar] taken from a storage room is permitted.70
Halacha 26
[Gentile] fish brine, in places where it is customary to mix wine into it, is forbidden. If the wine is more expensive than the fish brine, it is permitted. We rule this way in all instances where we suspect that the gentiles mixed a forbidden substance [into a permitted substance]. For a person will not mix something expensive into something that is low-priced, for he will lose. He will, however, mix the low-priced into the expensive, for then he profits.
Halacha 27
When a child eats forbidden foods or performs a forbidden labor on the Sabbath,71 the Jewish court is not commanded to make him cease, because he is not intellectually capable.72
When does the above apply? When he acts on his own initiative.73 It is, however, forbidden [for an adult] to give him [non-kosher food] by hand. [This applies even] to foods forbidden by Rabbinic decree. Similarly, it is forbidden to make him accustomed to desecrating the Sabbath and the festivals.74 [This applies even] to even [performing] activities forbidden as a shvut.75
Halacha 28
Although the Jewish court is not commanded to separate a child from transgressions, his father is commanded to rebuke him so that he withdraws in order to train him in holy conduct, as [Proverbs 22:6] states: "Educate a child according to his way."76
Halacha 29
Our Sages77 forbade [a person from partaking of] food and drink from which the souls of most people are revolted, e.g., food and drink that were mixed with vomit, feces, foul discharges, or the like.78 Similarly, our Sages forbade eating and drinking from filthy utensils from which a person's soul languishes, e.g., the utensils of a lavatory, the glass79 utensils of medical attendants that are used to let blood, and the like.
Halacha 30
Similarly, they forbade eating with unclean and soiled hands and with dirty utensils. All of these matters are included in the general [prohibition]: "Do not make your souls detestable." A person who partakes of these foods is given stripes for rebellious conduct.80
Halacha 31
Similarly, it is forbidden for a person to delay relieving himself at all, whether through defecation or urination.81 Anyone who delays relieving himself is considered among those who make their souls detestable in addition to the severe illnesses he brings upon himself and becoming liable for his life. Instead, it is appropriate for a person to train himself [to eliminate] at specific times so that he will not have to separate himself in the presence of others and not have to make his soul detestable.
Halacha 32
Whoever is careful concerning these matters82 brings an additional measure of holiness and purity to his soul and purges his soul for the sake of the Holy One, blessed be He, as [Leviticus 11:44] states: "And you shall sanctify yourselves and you will be holy, for I am holy."
Blessed be God who grants assistance.
FOOTNOTES
1.If the pot was made out of metal, it is possible to purge the flavor of the non-kosher food the pot absorbed through hagaalah. This process is not effective with regard to an earthenware pot.
2.Since the dish contains meat and the flavor of the forbidden meat was absorbed in the pot, the laws applying to a forbidden substance mixed with its own type apply. Since we do not know how much of the forbidden substance is absorbed in the pot, we assume that the entire pot is forbidden. For this reason, the Rambam does not mention that if there is 60 times the amount of the forbidden food in the kosher food, the kosher food is permitted. For it is very rare that a pot be able to contain sixty times its own volume (Radbaz).
3.According to the Rambam, it should be tasted by a gentile to determine whether the forbidden flavor is detectable or not, as stated in Chapter 15, Halachah 30. As mentioned, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 98:1) accepts the Rambam's premise, but the Rama states that in the present age, we do not rely on the statements of a non-Jew who tasted food to determine whether it is kosher or not.
4.The meaning of the Rambam's words is not clear. Rashi (Avodah Zarah 75b) interprets the term as meaning "which has not been left overnight." Tosafot, by contrast, states that it means "that has not been left for 24 hours." The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 103:5) follows the latter view.
5.After that time, however, the flavor is impaired and thus will not cause a substance cooked in the pot to become forbidden.
6.This is a safeguard less cooking in a pot that had not been used for non-kosher food for a day lead to cooking in one that had been used for non-kosher food that day (Avodah Zarah, loc. cit.).
7.Our Sages did not enforce their decree after the fact. Nevertheless, at the outset, an earthenware pot that was used for non-kosher food may never be used.
8.See Halachah 5 regarding the obligation for this immersion.
9.Lest any forbidden food be stuck to them.
10.This will purge any forbidden food that was absorbed in them. There should be at least one day between the last time a pot was used for non-kosher food and the time when hagaalah is performed.
11.See Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 121:2 which discusses what must be done if they were immersed in the mikveh before hagaalah was performed.
12.That the forbidden article and the utensil were in direct contact with fire without a medium of water or any other liquid.
13.Only then will the forbidden flavor that was absorbed be purged.
14.In that way, there will not be any portion of it that is not exposed to the water.
15.I.e., we follow the principle: "As it absorbed a forbidden flavor, so it purges it." Hence boiling it thoroughly will cause any forbidden taste that is absorbed to be purged.
16.And thus it would be difficult to submerge it a larger pot.
17.And thus the boiling water will also cover the edge.
18.In Halachah 2.
19.As the Jerusalem Talmud (Avodah Zarah 5:15) states, this immersion was instituted to mark the article's transition from the impurity of the gentiles.
20.Most commentaries understand the Rambam as explaining that the requirement for immersion is an asmachta, i.e., an obligation that is essentially Rabbinic in origin. Although our Sages cited a verse that can be seen to allude to it, the intent is not that the obligation is derived from the verse. Instead, the verse is merely a hint which the Rabbis found to allude to their teaching (Rabbenu Nissim).
There are, however, others who note that the Rambam occasionally employs the term he employs here - midvrei sofrim - to refer to obligations and laws that are of Scriptural origin. They are not explicitly stated in the verse, but instead derived through the principles of Biblical exegesis. According to this view, the obligation is of Scriptural origin (the Rashba, Vol. III, Responsum 255, 259).
21.I.e., after you have purged it from the taste absorbed because of gentile cooking, add another dimension of purity through immersion.
22.This requirement also applies to glass dinnerware, as stated in Halachah 3.
Avodah Zarah 75b explains the association with metal utensils as follows. Our Sages associated this obligation with the purification of the spoil taken in the war against Midian and the verse which mentions those spoils (Numbers 31:22) refers to metal utensils. Glass utensils are also included, because, halachically, they share similarities to metal utensils.
23.I.e., utensils used to prepare, serve, or partake of food. Even utensils that are used in the preliminary phases of preparation of food, e.g., a knife used to slaughter or skin an animal, are required to be immersed according to certain authorities [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 120:5)].
24.For even though he has permission to use them, he has not become their owner. The Kessef Mishneh quotes certain opinions that maintain that utensils taken as security must be immersed, because if the debt is not repaid, they are considered as payment [see Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 120:5).
In this context, there are many authorities who question why the utensils that are "purchased" by a gentile before Pesach are not required to be immersed.
25.Needless to say, plastic utensils need not be immersed.
26.The Rama ((Yoreh De'ah 120:1) states that they should be immersed without a blessing.
27.By exposing the knife to fire, the person will burn away any non-kosher substances. By honing it, he will grind away its surface and together with it, the taste of the forbidden substance it absorbed.
28.One must insert it in ten different places in the earth. It is not sufficient to insert it in the same place ten times [Tur and Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 121:7)].
29.For sticking it into the earth will remove any traces of forbidden fat on its surface and the taste of forbidden food that is absorbed will not be released when it is used for cold food.
30.These activities may cause any forbidden taste absorbed by the knife to be released. Hence before the knife is used, the traces of the forbidden flavor must be removed as above.
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 121:7) quotes opinions that maintain that honing the knife is not sufficient to allow it to be used for hot foods. He states that this is accustomed practice. Even so, after the fact, if a person slaughtered an animal with a knife that was honed in a grinder, thre is no prohibition involved (Siftei Cohen 121:20).
31.To remove any traces of forbidden fat that might be present.
This is permitted only after the fact. At the outset, it is forbidden to slaughter with such a knife unless measures are taken to remove the absorbed fat (Siftei Cohen 10:8).
32.For according to some opinions, through the slaughter of the animal, the forbidden fat on the knife can become absorbed in the surface of the meat where the animal was slaughtered. Hence it is necessary that it be removed. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 10:1) rules that it is necessary to take this measure and remove the surface of the meat.
33.To remove any trace of forbidden blood or fat. Nothing more is necessary, we do not say that the blood or fat became absorbed in the knife.
The Turei Zahav 10:15 states that unlike a knife used by gentiles mentioned in the previous halachah, it was not used frequently with a non-kosher substance. Hence washing it thoroughly is sufficient.
34.These decrees were about the eighteen decrees passed when the students of the School of Shammai outnumbered the students of the School of Hillel, as related in Shabbat 1:3 (the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, Avodah Zarah 2:6).
35.See the following halachah.
36.See Halachot 12-24.
37.E.g., the food was cooked by gentiles on Jewish premises (the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, loc. cit.).
38.See Chapter 11, Halachah 9.
39.The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch do not mention this restriction or the accompanying leniency. The Beit Yosef (Yoreh De'ah 112) explains the Rambam's logic as follows: Avodah Zarah 30a relates that one of the Sages, Shmuel was sitting with Abalat, a gentile. They were served boiled wine. Abalat withdrew, lest he touch the wine and cause it to become forbidden. Shmuel called him back, telling him there was no prohibition against boiled wine.
Rabbenu Asher asks: Since the prohibition against gentile wine was instituted as a protection against intermarriage, what difference does it make whether the wine is boiled or not? He answers that boiled wine is not common. Hence our Sages did not include it in their decree.
Rambam maintains that boiled wine is common and hence included in our Sages' decree. For this reason, it is forbidden to drink it together with gentiles. How then could Shmuel drink with Abalat? Because there were a majority of Jews at the gathering and such a situation is not included in our Sages' decree.
40.Thus according to the Rambam [and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 114:1) who quotes his ruling, it is forbidden to drink at a bar frequented primarily by gentiles. The Rama mentions that it is customary in the Ashkenazic community to rule leniently with regard to alcoholic beverages made from honey and grain.
41.Hence a gentile's touch renders it forbidden.
42.Because bread is a staple of life and there is no Jewish bread available, our Sages allowed for leniency when purchasing bread from a commercial baker. For buying from him will not lead to close personal relationships. Nevertheless, according to the Rambam, this leniency is granted only: where there is no Jewish bakers and in the fields, not in the cities. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 112:2) rules more leniently and does not forbid this in a city. The Rama rules even more leniently and allows the purchase of bread from a gentile baker even in places where bread from a Jewish baker is available.
43.There are opinions which maintain when there is no bread from a commercial baker available, one may even use bread baked by a gentile homeowner [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 112)]. The Rama states that one may accept this leniency.
44.The Radbaz states that this leniency applies only with regard to baking bread. With regard to cooking, a Jew must take a more active role in the cooking process. This ruling is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 113:7). The Rama, however, differs and maintains that kindling the oven is sufficient for cooking as well.
45.There is a slight difficulty with the Rambam's statements, because quince are only edible when cooked.
46.Today, when monarchy is a point of history, the phrase "fit to be served on the table of kings" refers to food served at a dinner for the President or dignitaries of similar status.
47.Avodah Zarah 38a gives this and the leniency mentioned in the previous halachah as alternate explanations when food cooked by gentiles is permitted. Since the matter is left unresolved by the Talmud, the Rambam and the subsequent authorities rule leniently in both situations.
48.A legume used as cattle fodder, but also served to humans on occasion.
49.The Radbaz that this is speaking about fish that are frequently served salted even without being cooked (e.g., sardines or herring served in brine). It is permitted to eat such fish for, as the Rambam states in the following halachah, in this context, salting is not considered as cooking. This leniency does not apply to large fish, for they are unfit to be eaten unless they are cooked or roasted. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 103:12) mentions this ruling, but also a dissenting view that allows leniency even with regard to large fish.
50.Since they were fit to be eaten before they were roasted, the fact that they were roasted by a gentile afterwards does not cause them to be forbidden. This applies even when a gentile performed the salting. For that salting did not cause the fish to become forbidden and yet, it made it fit to be eaten (ibid.).
51.In his Kessef Mishneh, R. Yosef Caro rules that this applies only when the cooking process would have been completed without the gentile's activity; the gentile merely hastened it. He does not, however, quote this ruling in his Shulchan Aruch. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 113:6) rules that even if the food would not have cooked without the gentile's activity, it is permitted. The Turei Zahav 113:6 and the Siftei Cohen 113:8, however, raise questions concerning that leniency.
52.In contrast to certain other halachic contexts.
53.See the conclusion of Halachah 15.
54.Implied is that the designation of a food as important enough to be served on the tables of kings is a relative matter, determined by each locale in accordance with its own practice (Makor Mayim Chayim).
55.For this is frequently done in order to flavor beans.
56.I.e., cooked that day. The Kessef Mishneh states that, according to the Rambam, we assume that a pot owned by a gentile had been used to cook non-kosher food that day. This is not the view of the majority of Halachic authorities.
57.For we fear that the gentile used non-kosher fat or that the fryer in which they are prepared was used that day for non-kosher meat.
58.When quoting this law, Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 113:5) emphasizes that if the gentile intends to cook, even if he did not intend to cook a particular substance, that substance is forbidden. For example, when a gentile lit an oven with the intent of cooking food without realizing that there was meat in the oven, the meat is forbidden.
59.Since they can be eaten fresh, they are not forbidden when cooked (Halachah 14).
60.Avodah Zarah 38b relates that it was customary to eat a dish made from roasted lentils mixed with vinegar. This was considered like cooking. As a safeguard against partaking of such a mixture, they also forbade roasted lentils mixed with water. It was not, however, customary to partake of grain mixed with vinegar. Hence, there was no reason to forbid grain mixed with water.
61.The wording the Rambam uses alludes to the Biblical prohibition of the rebellious elder (see Deuteronomy, ch. 17, and Hilchot Mamrim, ch. 3). The Jerusalem Talmud (Avodah Zarah 2:8) relates that Rav once refused to partake of gentile oil. Shmuel ordered him to do so. "If not," he threatened, "I will have you labeled a rebellious elder."
62.Avodah Zarah 35b states that Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi and his court permitted gentile oil to be used.
63.I.e., the flavor of forbidden meat absorbed in the pot.
64.I.e., because it is ordinarily eaten raw and because meat spoils its flavor.
65.Which would be boiled to make beer.
66.Avodah Zarah 38b originally postulates that only date dregs cooked in small pots with openings to narrow to put in non-kosher meat are forbidden. The conclusion of the passage, however, permits even date dregs cooked in large pots for the reason mentioned by the Rambam.
67.In some halachic contexts, pickling is considered as cooking. Nevertheless, with regard to this prohibition, our Sages ruled leniently. We do not forbid them because of the suspicion that wine or vinegar will be sprinkled over them, because wine or vinegar would not be sprinkled over them in the storeroom, only in a retail outlet [Rashi (Avodah Zarah 39b)].
68.Because of the gentile wine.
69.As stated in Chapter 11, Halachah 13, vinegar made from gentile wine is forbidden. And as indicated in the next halachah, other types of vinegar are also forbidden.
70.For if wine dregs were cast into the vinegar in the storage room, it would spoil (Avodah Zarah 32b). In a store, however, we assume that it will be sold quickly and in that brief time, it will not spoil (Turei Zahav 114:5).
71.Although the Rambam's wording in Hilchot Shabbat 24:11 might lead one to think that one must rebuke a child for performing a task forbidden by Scriptural Law, both the Maggid Mishneh and the Kessef Mishneh explain that his statements there should be interpreted within the context of his statements here.
72.Hence, he is not responsible for his actions.
73.Note, however, the Rama (Orach Chayim 243:1) which quotes opinions that maintain that once a child has reached the age where he is fit to be educated in the observance of the mitzvot, the court - and every individual person - is obligated to rebuke for transgressing.
74.To give a contemporary example, a parent cannot have a child turn lights on and off on the Sabbath.
75.As the Rambam explains in Hilchot Shabbat 21:1, the term shvut refers to activities forbidden by Rabbinic Law, because they resemble forbidden labors or because they might lead one to commit a forbidden labor.
Note, however, the Shulchan Aruch HaRav 243:1 which rules that when there is a necessity, not even a severe necessity, Rabbinic prohibitions can be overstepped with regard to a child.
76.This is a general charge, applying to the Torah and its mitzvot in their totality.
77.See the notes to the following halachah with regard to whether these restrictions are of Scriptural or Rabbinic origin.
78.The Radbaz states that one partake of such foods for curative purposes if necessary.
79.The Bayit Chadash (Yoreh De'ah 116) states that this also applies to metal utensils. The Rambam mentions glass only because that was the ordinary practice at that time.
80.See the Beit Yosef (Yoreh De'ah 116) who debates whether the prohibition mentioned in this and the previous halachah are of Rabbinic or Scriptural origin. It is possible to explain that the restrictions were instituted by the Rabbis and they employed the Biblical verse merely as an asmachta, an allusion and a hint, but not a source per se.
The wording of the Rambam here and his statements in Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 179) imply that the prohibition itself is Scriptural in origin. The only reason a person is not given lashes is because the simple meaning of the verse refers to the prohibition against teeming animals.
81.See Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Mahadura Basra 3:11 which mentions several points concerning this restriction:
a) Our Sages did not, however, require their ordinance to override considerations of public embarrassment. For example, [a person is allowed to wait] until he finds a private place to relieve himself or until he will not be causing an interruption in prayer.
b) The Rashba maintains that the prohibition "not [to] make your souls detestable" does not apply to deferring urination. c) Whenever one can contain himself, whether from urinating or from eliminating, for the length of time it takes to walk a parsah (a Persian measure equal to approximately four kilometers), all opinions agree that the prohibition "not [to] make yourselves loathsome" does not apply.
82.It would appear that the Rambam's intent is not only the subjects spoken about in the last halachot, but also the totality of the laws of kashrut.
Shechitah - Chapter 1
Halacha 1
It is a positive commandment1 for one who desires to partake of the meat of a domesticated animal, wild beast, or fowl to slaughter [it] and then partake of it,2 as [Deuteronomy 12:21] states: "And you shall slaughter from your cattle and from your sheep." And with regard to a firstborn animal with a blemish,3 [ibid.:22] states: "As one would partake of a deer and a gazelle." From this, we learn that a wild beast is [governed by] the same [laws] as a domesticated animal with regard to ritual slaughter.
And with regard to a fowl, [Leviticus 17:13] states: "that will snare a beast or a fowl as prey... and shed its blood." This teaches that shedding the blood of a fowl is analogous to shedding the blood of a wild beast.4
Halacha 2
The laws governing ritual slaughter are the same in all instances.5Therefore one who slaughters a domesticated animal, beast, or fowl should first6 recite the blessing: "[Blessed...] who sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us concerning7 ritual slaughter." If he did not recite a blessing, either consciously or inadvertently, the meat is permitted.8
It is forbidden to partake of a slaughtered animal throughout the time it is in its death throes.9 When a person partakes of it before it dies, he transgresses a negative commandment. [This act] is included in the prohibition [Leviticus 19:26]: "Do not eat upon the blood." He does not, however, receive lashes.10
It is permitted to cut meat from it after it has been ritually slaughtered, but before it dies. That meat should be salted thoroughly, washed thoroughly,11 and left until the animal dies. Afterwards, it may be eaten.
Halacha 3
Fish and locusts need not be slaughtered. Instead, gathering them causes them to be permitted to be eaten. [This is indicated by Numbers 11:22]: "Can sheep and cattle be slaughtered for them that will suffice them? If all the fish of the sea would be gathered for them...." This indicates that gathering fish is like slaughtering cattle and sheep. And with regard to locusts, [Isaiah 33:4] states: "the gathering of the locusts," i.e., gathering alone [is sufficient]. Therefore if fish die naturally in the water, they are permitted.12 And it is permitted to eat them while they are alive.13
Halacha 4
The slaughter which the Torah mentions without elaboration must be explained so that we know: a) which place in the animal is [appropriate] for ritual slaughter?, b) what is the measure of the slaughtering process?, c) with what do we slaughter?, d) when do we slaughter?, e) in which place [on the animal's neck] do we slaughter? f) how do we slaughter, g) what factors disqualify the slaughter? h) who can slaughter?14
We were commanded concerning all of these factors in the Torah with the verse [Deuteronomy 12:21]: "And you shall slaughter from your cattle... as I commanded you." All of these factors were commanded to us orally as is true with regard to the remainder of the Oral Law which is called "the mitzvah," as we explained in the beginning of this text.15
Halacha 5
The place where an animal should be slaughtered is the neck. The entire neck is acceptable for slaughtering.
What is implied? With regard to the gullet,16 from the beginning of the place where when it is cut, it contracts until the place where hair grows17 and it begins appearing fissured like the stomach, this is the place of slaughter with regard to the gullet.
Halacha 6
If one slaughters above this place - in the area called the entrance to the gullet18 - or below this place - i.e., the beginning of the digestive system, the slaughter is unacceptable.19
The measure of the entrance to the gullet above which is unfit for slaughter in an animal or a beast is so one can grab it with two fingers.20 With regard to a fowl, it depends on its size. The lower limit extends until the crop.21
Halacha 7
Where is the place of slaughter with regard to the windpipe? From the slant of its cap22 downward until the beginning of the flank of the lung when the animal extends its neck to pasture,23 this is the place of slaughter with regard to the windpipe. The area opposite this place on the outside is called the neck.
Halacha 8
When the animal strained itself and extended its neck exceedingly or the slaughterer applied exertion to the signs and extended them upward, but slaughtered in the neck at the place of slaughter, there is an unresolved doubt24 whether [the animal] is a nevelah. For the place where the gullet and windpipe were cut is not the place where [the animal] is [usually] slaughtered.25
Halacha 9
The slaughterer must slaughter in the center of the neck. If he slaughters to the side, it is acceptable.26
What is the measure of slaughter? That one [cut] the two identifying marks, the windpipe and the gullet.27 Superior slaughter involves cutting both of them, whether for an animal or a fowl and a slaughterer should have this intent. [After the fact,] if one cut the majority of one of them for a fowl and the majority of both of them for an animal or a beast, the slaughter is acceptable.
Halacha 10
When one cut one sign entirely and half28 of the other sign when slaughtering an animal, his slaughter is unacceptable. If he cut the majority of both signs, even though in each instance he cuts only a hair's breadth more than half, it is acceptable. Since he cut even the slightest amount more than half,29 he has cut the majority.
Halacha 11
If he cut half30 of one and half of the other - even in a fowl - the slaughter is unacceptable. When a windpipe is half slit31 and one cut a little more on the place of the slit, making the cut a majority, the slaughter is acceptable. [This applies] whether one begins [on a portion of the windpipe] that is intact and reaches the slit or one inserts the knife into the slit and [increases its size until it] reaches the majority.
Halacha 12
Every slaughterer must check the signs after he slaughters.32 If he did not check and the animal's head was cut off before he could check,33 [the animal] is [considered] a nevelah.34 [This applies even] if the slaughterer was adroit and expert.
Halacha 13
During its lifetime, every animal is considered to be forbidden until it is definitely known that it was slaughtered in an acceptable manner.35
Halacha 14
With what can we slaughter? With any entity, with a metal knife, a flint, glass, the edge of a bulrush,36 or the like among the entities that cut. [This applies] provided its edge is sharp and does not have a barb. If, however, there was a spike at the edge of the entity with which one slaughters, even if the spike is very small,37 the slaughter is unacceptable.38
Halacha 15
If the spike was on only one side of the knife, one should not slaughter with it [at the outset]. [After the fact,] if one slaughtered with it using the side on which the blemish was not detectable, the slaughter is acceptable.
Halacha 16
What is implied? There was a knife that was checked by passing it [over one's finger] and no blemish was felt on it, but when one drew it back, one felt that it had a blemish. If one slaughtered with it by passing it forwards and did not draw it back, the slaughter is acceptable. If one drew it back, the slaughter is unacceptable.39
Halacha 17
When a knife ascends and descends [in a curve] like a snake40 but does not have a blemish, one may slaughter with it as an initial and preferred option. When the edge of a knife is smooth, but is not sharp, one may slaughter with it, since it does not have a blemish.41 Even though one passes it back and forth the entire day until the slaughter [is completed], the slaughter is acceptable.42
Halacha 18
When a sharp knife has been whetted, but its [blade] is not smooth, instead, touching it is like touching the tip of an ear of grain which becomes snarled on one's finger, [nevertheless,] since it does not have a blemish, one may slaughter with it.43
Halacha 19
When a person uproots a reed or a tooth or cuts off a flint or a nail, if they are sharp and do not have a blemish, one may slaughter with them.44 If one stuck them into the ground, one should not slaughter with them while they are stuck into the ground. [After the fact,] if one slaughtered [in such a situation],45 one's slaughter is acceptable.46
Halacha 20
When one slaughtered with these entities when they were connected from the beginning of their existence, before they were uprooted, the slaughter is unacceptable47 even if they do not have a blemish.
Halacha 21
If one took the jawbone of an animal that had sharp teeth and slaughtered with it, it is unacceptable, for they are like a sickle.48 When, however, only one tooth is fixed in a jaw, one may slaughter with it as an initial and preferred option, even though it is set in the jaw.49
Halacha 22
When one made a knife white-hot in fire and slaughtered with it, the slaughter is acceptable.50 If one side of a knife is [jagged-edge like] a sickle and the other side is desirable, [i.e., smooth,] one should not slaughter with the desirable side as an initial and preferred measure. [This is] a decree lest one slaughter with the other side. If one slaughtered [with it], since one slaughtered with the desirable side, the slaughter is acceptable.
Halacha 23
A slaughterer must check the knife at its tip and at both of its sides [before slaughtering]. How must he check it? He must pass it over and draw it back over the flesh of his finger and pass it over and draw it back51 over his fingernail on three edges, i.e., its tip and both of its sides so that it will not have a blemish at all. [Only] afterwards, should he slaughter with it.
Halacha 24
It must [also] be inspected in this manner after slaughter.52 For if a blemish is discovered on it afterwards, there is an unresolved doubt whether the animal is a nevelah.53 For perhaps [the knife] became blemished [when cutting] the skin and when he cut the signs, he cut them with a blemished knife.54
For this reason, when a person slaughters many animals or many fowl,55 he must inspect [the knife] between each [slaughter]. For if he did not check, and then checked [after slaughtering] the last one and discovered [the knife] to be blemished, there is an unresolved doubt whether all of them - even the first - are nevelot56 or not.57
Halacha 25
When one inspected a knife, slaughtered with it, but did not inspect it after slaughtering, and then used it to break a bone, a piece of wood, or the like, and afterwards, inspected it and discovered it to be unacceptable, his slaughter is acceptable. [The rationale is that] the prevailing assumption is that the knife became blemished on the hard entity which it was used to break.58 Similarly, if one was negligent and did not check his knife [after slaughtering] or the knife was lost before it could be checked, the slaughter is acceptable.59
Halacha 26
Whenever a slaughterer60 does not have the knife with which he slaughters inspected by a wise man61 and uses it to slaughter for himself, we inspect it. If it is discovered to be desirable [and passes] the examination, we, nevertheless, place him under a ban of ostracism [lest] he rely on himself on another occasion and then the knife will be blemished, but he will still slaughter with it. If [upon examination] the knife is discovered to be blemished, he is removed from his position and placed under a ban of ostracism. We pronounce all the meat that he slaughtered to be unacceptable.62
Halacha 27
How long must the knife with which one slaughters be? Even the slightest length, provided it is not [overly] thin to the extent that it pierces and does not slit63 like the head of a blade or the like.64
Halacha 28
When can one slaughter? Any time, whether during the day or during the night, provided that [at night] he has a torch65 with him so that he sees what he is doing.66 If a person slaughters in darkness, his slaughter is acceptable.67
Halacha 29
When a person inadvertently slaughters on Yom Kippur or the Sabbath,68 his slaughter is acceptable,69 even though were he to have been acting willfully he would be liable for his life70 or for lashes [for slaughtering] on Yom Kippur.71
FOOTNOTES
1.Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 146) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 451) include this among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. As mentioned at the beginning of the Mishneh Torah, the Ra'avad differs and does not consider this a mitzvah.
2.The Rambam's wording echo his statements in Hilchot Berachot 11:2: "There are other mitzvot that are not obligations, but resemble voluntary activities, for example, the mitzvah of mezuzah.... A person is not obligated to dwell in a house that requires a mezuzah in order to fulfill this mitzvah." Similarly, in the instance at hand, a person is not obligated to slaughter. If, however, he desires to eat meat, he must fulfill this mitzvah.
3.Note the Kessef Mishneh who elaborates, explaining that although Rashi does not interpret the verse in the same manner the Rambam does, there is support for the Rambam's interpretation.
4.I.e., in both instances, ritual slaughter is required. The Kessef Mishneh notes that Chulin 27b derives this equivalence from another source and explains why the Rambam cites this verse instead.
5.See the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh who explains that there are some differences between the laws governing the slaughter of each of these types of animals.
6.For the blessings for all mitzvot must be recited before their observance (Pesachim 7b).
7.We do not, however, say "to slaughter," for, as above, the mitzvah to slaughter is not obligatory. It is dependent on the person's desire (Hilchot Berachot 11:15).
8.For after the fact, the recitation of the blessings is not essential (Kessef Mishneh).
9.Partaking of the meat at this time does not, however, represent a transgression of the prohibitions against eating a limb or flesh from a living animal (see Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot, ch. 5). For once the animal has been slaughtered, these prohibitions no longer apply.
10.This prohibition is considered as a prohibition of a general nature (Hilchot Sanhedrin 18:2-3), i.e., prohibitions that include several diverse and unrelated acts, and lashes are not given for the violation of such prohibitions.
11.The Rambam's words provoke a question: Of course, this meat must be salted thoroughly as must all meat so that its blood will be removed (Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 6:10). Why would one think that this meat is different?
It would appear that the explanation is that other meat may be eaten if it is roasted or its blood sealed by being cast into vinegar (ibid.:12) and these options do not apply with regard to the meat in question.
12.One might think that man would have to gather them alive for them to be permitted. Hence the Rambam emphasizes that this is not so (Kessef Mishneh). The general principle is: Whenever the mitzvah of ritual slaughter does not apply, the prohibitions against eating flesh from a living animal and eating a dead animal do not apply.
13.The commentaries note that Shabbat 90b states that one who eats a live locust violates the prohibition: "Do not make your souls detestable." [See also Rama (Yoreh De'ah 13:1) who issues a similar warning with regard to partaking of live fish.) How the can the Rambam say that it is permitted?
Among the resolutions of this question are:
a) The passage in Shabbat refers only to a non-kosher locust, not a kosher one.
b) The Rambam, here, is saying that one may cut off part of a living locust and eat it, but not that one may eat an entire locust alive.
c) Here the Rambam is speaking with regard to the laws regarding ritual slaughter. He is not focusing on those involving other prohibitions.
14.In the following chapters, the Rambam proceeds to answer all of these questions.
15.I.e., in the Introduction that precedes Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah. There the Rambam explains that the Oral Law is called "the mitzvah," because it gives us instruction concerning the observance of the mitzvot. Without it, we would not know how to fulfill them.
16.As will be explained in Halachah 9, ritual slaughter involves cutting the gullet and the windpipe. In this halachah, the Rambam defines where the gullet may be cut.
17.In contrast to the surface of the gullet which is smooth.
18.I.e., the end of the throat, where it is attached to the jaw..
19.The animal is considered a nevelah and it is forbidden to partake of it. See Chapter 3, Halachah 18 (Kessef Mishneh, note Siftei Cohen 20:5).
20.This is the Rambam's interpretation of Chulin 44a. Rashi interprets that passage as referring to a space the size of four fingers. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 20:2) follows the Rambam's understanding, while the Rama cites that of Rashi.
21.The first of the fowl's stomachs. The crop is not considered part of the gller and it is forbidden to slaughter there.
22.The windpipe is made up of a series of rings. Above the top ring, there is a slanted covering that is called the cap.
23.When the animal extends its neck, the flanks of its lungs rise upward.
24.See Chulin 45a which discusses these questions but leaves them unresolved.
25.I.e., the place of slaughter on the neck should be aligned with the place of slaughter on the windpipe and the gullet in their natural position. In this instance, the external place of slaughter - the position on the neck - was correct, but the signs were not cut in the usual place.
26.This applies only after the fact. At the outset, one must slaughter in the center of the neck.
27.Since the acceptability of the slaughter is dependent on them, they are referred to as the simanim, "signs," i.e., indications that the slaughter is acceptable.
28.But not the majority.
29.See the Turei Zahav 21:2 who emphasizes that the difference in size need not be significant. As long as more than half is cut, the slaughter is acceptable.
30.But no more than half.
31.This is speaking about a situation where the animal is alive. The fact that an animal's windpipe is slit slightly does not cause it to be considered as a trefe. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 21:5) adds that we must be careful that the gullet has not been punctured, for that would render the animal trefe. See the Turei Zahav 21:4 and the Siftei Cohen 21:5 who debate whether it is possible to rely on this leniency at present. See also Chapter 3, Halchot 6-7.
32.To make sure that the minimal measure for slaughter was slit.
33.Obviously, once the head is cut off, it is no longer possible to check.
34.Because of the doubt involved. See the following halachah.
35.This is the rationale for the stringency stated in the previous halachah (Kessef Mishneh).
36.The Kessef Mishneh notes that many marsh plants splinter easily and they are unacceptable for they will perforate the gullet.
37.Generally, it is accepted that a spike that can be detected by a fingernail disqualifies an animal. Nevertheless, the Rambam appears to be referring to an even smaller measure. His approach is followed by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 18:2) which speaks of a spike that is even the size of a hairsbreadth being sufficient to disqualify a knife.
Alternatively, it can be understood that the two are synanomous. This understanding is reflected by Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 1:14 which speaks about "a stone being blemished so that a fingernail would become caught in it like a knife used for ritual slaughter."
38.For the spike will perforate the gullet, rendering the animal trefe before the slaughter was completed (Maggid Mishneh).
39.The commentaries offer two explanations for this ruling. The Rambam's position is that when the spike is felt only on one side of the knife, one may slaughter with that side. Others add that the blemish must be positioned to the very far end of the knife, either near its point or near its handle. In such an instance, it is possible that the blemish never actually touched the signs and thus did not disqualify the ritual slaughter. See Shulchan Aruch [Yoreh De'ah and Rama (18:4)].
40.Who raises his head and tail, creating a curve for its body (Kessef Mishneh).
41.Since it does not have a blemish, it will not disqualify the signs.
42.Provided one does not interrupt the slaughter in the middle as stated in Chapter 3, Halachah 2.
43.The Rama (Yoreh De'ah18:6) writes that since it is difficult to understand what exactly is meant by such a knife, we do not permit this leniency.
44.As apparent from Halachah 14.
45.For example, by passing the animal's neck back and forth below the knife [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 6:4)].
46.As indicated by the following halachah, an entity may not be used for ritual slaughter if it is connected to its source. When an entity is stuck into the ground, it is not connected to its source and hence, after the fact, the slaughter is acceptable. Nevertheless, because of the similarity to the forbidden situation, initially, one should not use such an entity for slaughter.
47.Chulin 16a states that it is a Scriptural decree that the cutting edge used for slaughter must be a separate entity, something that one could take in his hand.
48.I.e., a blade with a jagged edge which is unacceptable as stated above.
49.Since the jaw as a whole is moveable, we are not concerned with the fact that the tooth is in a fixed position (Kessef Mishneh).
50.We do not say that rather than cut the signs, the knife burnt them. The latter would disqualify the slaughter.
It must be noted that the Tur (see also the gloss of the Radbaz) quotes the Rambam as ruling that the slaughter is unacceptable for the above reason. This approach is also followed by many other Rishonim. In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro states that the Rambam rules that the slaughter is acceptable. In his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 9:1), however, he quotes both views without stating which should be followed. All authorities agree that such a knife should not be used as an initial and preferred option.
51.Using the same motions as he would use to slaughter an animal.
52.The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam, maintaining that after ritual slaughter, no inspection is necessary unless the person desires to use the knife to slaughter another animal immeidately. In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro justifies the Rambam's ruling and he cites it in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 18:3).
53.This ruling also depends on the principle stated in Halachah 13, that during its lifetime, an animal is forbidden. Hence it is not permitted unless we are certain that it was slaughtered in a proper manner (Radbaz; Siftei Cohen 18:2).
54.And this would cause the slaughter to be unacceptable as mentioned above.
55.The Kessef Mishneh notes that since the skin of a fowl is soft, it is not very probable that this caused the blemish on the knife. Nevertheless, our Sages adopted this stringency.
56.See Chapter 3, Halachah 18, for the ramifications of this ruling.
57.I.e., it is possible that the knife could have become blemished when cutting the skin of the first animal. Hence, that animal - and all the subsequent ones - were slaughtered with an unacceptable knife.
58.Since he checked the knife at the outset and it was acceptable, we rely on probability. As long as we have a way of explaining how the knife was blemished, we do not say it was blemished on the animal's skin, for the likelihood of that happening is very low.
59.Here also, since the knife was inspected initially, there is no reason to suspect that the slaughter was unacceptable, we do not disqualify it [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 18:12)] .
60.This is referring to a slaughterer who slaughters on behalf of people at large, not only for his own private purposes.
61.The Radbaz notes that the Rambam's words appear to differ slightly from the simple meaning of Chullin 18a, his source. From Chullin, it appears that the necessity to show the knife to the wise man is a mere token of respect, while from the Rambam it appears that it is a necessary safeguard to check that the slaughter is kosher.
The difference between these approaches can lead to a variance in practice. If we say that this inspection is merely for the sake of respect, then the sages may forgo the respect due them and allow an expert to slaughter even though he does not present his knife. If, however, it is a necessary precaution to insure that the slaughter is performed correctly, an inspection is always necessary.
Both of these perspectives have continued to be given emphasis throughout the Rabbinic literature, although the halachah as prescribed by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 18:17) is that a sage may forgo the honor due him. The present custom in many slaughtering houses today is for the slaughterers to work in pairs and for one to check the knife of the other. At times, a visiting Rabbinic authority comes and he inspects the knives of all of the slaughterers.
62.I.e., we assume that not only on this occasion, but on others, he slaughtered using an unacceptable knife, thus disqualifying the meat.
63.As will be explained, ritual slaughter is accomplished by drawing the knife back and forth across the neck. If a knife is two small to enable this, it should not be used [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 8:1)].
64.See the Ramah (Yoreh De'ah 24:2) who quotes opinions that require a knife used to slaughter a animal to be twice the length of the animal's neck. The custom is also to use a knife of such measure for a fowl.
65.Two candles are considered a torch [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 11:1)].
66.Otherwise, it is possible that the animal will be slaughtered incorrectly without him realizing.
67.Nevertheless, it is forbidden to do so as an initial and preferred option [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 11:1)].
68.I.e., he was not aware that the day was either the Sabbath or Yom Kippur; alternatively, he did not know that it was forbidden to slaughter on these holy days.
69.The Turei Zahav 11:2 states that one must, nevertheless, wait until the conclusion of the Sabbath or Yom Kippur before partaking of the meat, as is the law when one cooks on the Sabbath.
70.For slaughtering on the Sabbath.
71.If he does so intentionally, he is considered as an apostate who desecrates the Sabbath and his slaughter is disqualified (the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, Chullin 1:1; see Chapter 4, Halachah 14). The Siftei Cohen 11:23 states that in certain instances the leniency would also apply if he slaughters intentionally.
Shechitah - Chapter 2
Halacha 1
It is permitted to slaughter an animal in any place except the Temple courtyard. For only animals consecrated for [sacrifice on the altar] may be sacrificed in the Temple courtyard. Ordinary animals, by contrast, whether domesticated animals, beasts, or fowl, are forbidden to be sacrificed in the Temple courtyard. Similarly, [Deuteronomy 12:21] states with regard to meat [which man] desires [to eat]:1 "When the place that God will choose will be distant from you... and you shall slaughter from your cattle and your sheep... and you shall eat in your gates." One may infer that meat [which man] desires [to eat] may be slaughtered only outside "the place that God will choose."
Halacha 2
[Meat from animals] slaughtered outside this [holy] place is permitted to be eaten everywhere. If, however, one slaughters an ordinary animal in the Temple courtyard, that meat is ritually pure,2 but it is forbidden to benefit from it like meat mixed with milk and the like. It must be buried; [if it is burnt,] its ashes are forbidden [to be used].3
[The above applies] even if one slaughters for healing purposes,4 to feed a gentile, or to feed dogs. If, however, one cuts off an animal's head in the Temple courtyard, one rips the signs from their place, a gentile slaughters, [a Jew] slaughters, but the animal was discovered to be trefe, or one slaughters a non-kosher domesticated animal, beast, or fowl in the Temple courtyard, it is permitted to benefit from all of the above.5
Halacha 3
This does not apply only to domesticated animals or beasts. Instead, it is forbidden to bring all ordinary food into the Temple courtyard. [This includes] even meat from a slaughtered [animal], fruit, or bread.6 If one transgresses and brings in such food, it is permitted to partake of this food as it was beforehand.
All of the above concepts are part of the Oral Tradition. Whenever anyone slaughters in the Temple courtyard or eats an olive-sized portion of the meat of ordinary [animals that were] slaughtered in the Temple courtyard, he is liable for stripes for rebellious conduct.7
Halacha 4
[The following rule applies when] a person says: "This animal is [consecrated as] a peace offering, but [the fetus it is carrying] remains of ordinary status." If it is slaughtered in the Temple courtyard, it is permitted to partake of its offspring, because it is forbidden to slaughter [the mother] outside [the Temple courtyard].8
Halacha 5
One should not slaughter into9 seas or rivers, lest [an onlooker] say: "He is worshipping the water,"10 and it would appear as if he is offering a sacrifice to the water. Nor should one slaughter into a utensil filled with water, lest one say: "He is slaughtering into the form that appears in the water."11 Nor should he slaughter into utensils12 or into a pit for this is the way of idolaters. If one slaughters in the above manner, his slaughter is acceptable.
Halacha 6
One may slaughter into murky water in which an image may not be seen. Similarly, one may slaughter outside a pit and allow the blood to flow and descend into a pit. One should not do this in the marketplace so as not to mimic the gentiles. [Indeed,] if one slaughters into a pit in the marketplace, it is forbidden to eat from his slaughter until his [character] is examined, lest he be a heretic.13
It is permitted to slaughter on the wall of a ship, [although] the blood will flow down the wall and descend into the water.14 [Similarly,] it is permitted to slaughter above [the outer surface of] utensils.
Halacha 7
How does one slaughter? One extends the neck and passes the knife back and forth until [the animal] is slaughtered. Whether the animal was lying down15or it was standing and one held the back of its neck, held the knife in his hand below, and slaughtered, the slaughter is acceptable.
Halacha 8
If one implanted a knife in the wall and brought the neck [of an animal back and forth] over it until it was slaughtered, the slaughter is acceptable, provided the neck of the animal is below and the knife is above.16 For if the neck of the animal will be above the knife, it is possible that the animal will descend with the weight of its body [on the knife] and cut [its throat] without [it being brought back and forth].17 This is not ritual slaughter, as will be explained.18 Therefore, if we are speaking about a fowl, whether its neck is above the knife that is implanted or below it, the slaughter is acceptable.19
Halacha 9
When a person slaughters and draws the knife forward, but does not draw it back, draws it back, but does not draw it forward, his slaughter is acceptable.20
If he drew the knife back and forth until he cut off the head entirely, his slaughter is acceptable. [The following rules apply if] he drew the knife forward, but did not draw it back, drew it back, but did not draw it forward, and cut off the head while drawing it forward alone or drawing it back alone. If the knife is twice as long21 as the width of the neck of the animal being slaughtered, his slaughter is acceptable. If not, his slaughter is not acceptable.22
If one slaughters the heads [of two animals] together, his slaughter is acceptable.
Halacha 10
When two people hold unto a knife together - even when one is holding from one side and the other from the other side - and they slaughter together, the slaughter is acceptable. Similarly, if two people hold two knives and both slaughter simultaneously in two places in the neck, their slaughter is acceptable. This applies even if one slit the gullet alone or its majority and the other cut the windpipe or its majority in another place, this slaughter is acceptable even though the slaughter was not entirely in the same place.
Similarly, slaughter in the form of a reed23 and slaughter in the form of a comb24 are acceptable.
Halacha 11
The slaughter of ordinary animals25 does not require focused attention.26 Even if one slaughtered when [wielding a knife] aimlessly, in jest, or [even] if he threw a knife to implant it in the wall and it slaughtered an animal as it was passing, since it slaughtered properly in the appropriate place and with the appropriate measure, it is acceptable.
Halacha 12
Accordingly,27 when a deafmute, an emotional or an intellectual unstable individual, a minor, a drunk whose mind is befuddled,28 a person who became overtaken by an evil spirit slaughters and others observe that he slaughters in the correct manner,29 [the slaughter] is acceptable.30
If, by contrast, a knife falls31 and slaughters [an animal] on its way, it is not acceptable even if it slaughtered it in [the appropriate] manner. For [Deuteronomy, loc. cit.] states: "You shall slaughter," implying that a man must slaughter. [His actions are acceptable,] even if he does not intend to slaughter.
Halacha 13
[The following laws apply if there is] a stone or wooden wheel with a knife affixed to it. If a person turned the wheel and placed the neck of a fowl or an animal opposite it and slaughtered by turning the wheel, [the slaughter] is acceptable. If water is turning the wheel and he placed the neck of [the animal] opposite it while it was turning causing it to be slaughtered, it is unacceptable.32 If a person caused the water to flow until they turned the wheel and caused it to slaughter by turning it, [the slaughter] is acceptable.33 For [the activity] came as a result of man's actions.
When does the above apply? With regard to the first turn, for that comes from man's power. The second and subsequent turns, however, do not come from man's power, but from the power of the flowing water.
Halacha 14
When a person slaughters for the sake of mountains, hills, seas, rivers, or deserts, his slaughter is unacceptable even when he does not intend to worship these entities, but merely for curative purposes or the like according to the empty words related by the gentiles, the slaughter is unacceptable.34 If, however, one slaughtered for the sake of the spiritual source35 of the sea, the mountain, the stars, the constellations, or the like, it is forbidden to benefit from the animal36 like all offerings brought to false deities.37
Halacha 15
When a person slaughters an animal [with the intent of] sprinkling its blood for the sake of false deities or burning its fats for the sake of false deities,38 it is forbidden. For we derive [the laws governing] one's intent outside [the Temple] with regard to [slaughtering] ordinary animals from those pertaining to the intent with regard to [slaughtering] consecrated animals within [the Temple]. For such an intent disqualifies them, as will be explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim.39
Halacha 16
When a person slaughtered [an animal] and afterwards, thought to sprinkle its blood for the sake of false deities or to burn its fats for the sake of false deities, it is forbidden because of the doubt involved.40 Perhaps the ultimate result showed what his initial intent was and it was with this intent that he slaughtered.
Halacha 17
When a person slaughters [an animal] for the sake of [a type of] sacrifice for which one could consecrate an animal through a vow or through a pledge,41the slaughter is unacceptable.42 For this is comparable to slaughtering consecrated animals outside [the Temple courtyard]. If he slaughters [an animal] for the sake of [a type of] sacrifice for which one could not designate an animal through a vow or through a pledge,43 the slaughter is acceptable.44
Halacha 18
What is implied? When one slaughters [an animal] for the sake of a burnt offering, for the sake of a peace offering, for the sake of a thanksgiving offering, or for the sake of a Paschal offering, the slaughter is unacceptable.45 Since a Paschal offering may be designated every year at any time one desires, it resembles a sacrifice that can be consecrated through a vow or through a pledge.46
If one slaughters [an animal] for the sake of a sin offering, for the sake of a certain guilt offering, for the sake of a doubtful guilt offering,47 for the sake of a firstborn offering,48 for the sake of a tithe offering,49 or for the sake of a substitute [for any offering],50 the slaughter is acceptable.51
Halacha 19
When a person is liable for a sin offering and he slaughters, saying: "For the sake of my sin offering," his slaughter is unacceptable.52 If he had a sacrificial animal in his home and he slaughters, saying: "For the sake of a substitution for my sacrifice," his slaughter is unacceptable, for he substituted the animal [for the consecrated one].53
Halacha 20
When a woman slaughters54 for the sake of the burnt offering brought by a woman who gave birth, saying: "This is for the sake of my burnt offering," her slaughter is acceptable.55 [The rationale is that the obligation to bring] the burnt offering of a woman who gave birth cannot be initiated through a vow or through a pledge and this woman has not given birth and thus is not obligated to bring a burnt offering. We do not suspect that she had a miscarriage.56 For it will become public knowledge if a woman miscarries.57
When, by contrast, a person slaughters for the sake of a burnt offering brought by a Nazarite, his slaughter is unacceptable even if he is not a Nazarite. [The rationale is that] the fundamental dimension of being a Nazarite is a vow like other vows.58
Halacha 21
When two people hold a knife and slaughter, one has in mind an intent that would disqualify the slaughter and the other has nothing at all in mind - or even if he had in mind an intent that is permitted - the slaughter is unacceptable.59Similarly, if they slaughtered one after the other60 and one had an intent that disqualifies the slaughter, it is disqualified.
When does the above apply? When [the person with the undesirable intent] has a share in the animal. If, however, he does not have a share in the animal, it does not become forbidden. For a Jewish person does not cause something that does not belong to him to become forbidden. He is acting only to cause his colleague anguish.61
Halacha 22
When a Jew slaughters for a gentile, the slaughter is acceptable regardless of the thoughts the gentile has in mind.62 For we are concerned only with the thoughts of the person slaughtering and not the thoughts of the owner of the animal.63 Therefore when a gentile - even a minor64 - slaughters for the sake of a Jew, the animal he slaughters is a nevelah, as will be explained.65
FOOTNOTES
1.This is the term the Sifri to the above verse and other Rabbinic texts use to describe ordinary meat in contrast to animals offered as sacrifices.
2.Since the slaughter was acceptable, the animal is not considered as a nevelah. Hence it does not impart ritual impurity.
3.See Hilchot Pesulei HaMekudashim 19:13-14.
4.Without intending to partake of the meat. I.e., using the meat for this or the following purposes is forbidden.
5.For the prohibition is only against slaughtering ordinary animals in the Temple courtyard, for this resembles the slaughter of the sacrifices (Kessef Mishneh). Since none of the above actions are considered as ritual slaughter, they do not cause the animal to become forbidden.
6.The Rashba (as quoted by the Kessef Mishneh) questions the Rambam's ruling, stating that the prohibition applies only to fruit that resemble the first fruits and bread that resembles the loaves of the Thanksgiving offering.
7.Since the prohibition is not explicitly mentioned in the Torah, he is not liable for lashes - as appropriate for the violation of an explicit Scriptural prohibition (Kessef Mishneh). Nevertheless, since the source for the prohibition is a Scriptural verse, it has the weight of a Scriptural commandment. Others, however, interpret the Rambam as implying that the prohibition is entirely Rabbinic. The verse cited previously is merely an asmachta.
The above applies to the prohibition against slaughetring in the Temple Courtyard. With regard to partaking of the meat, all authorities agree that the prohibition is Rabbinic in origin. See Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 16:6.
8.As stated in Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 5:13-14, when a pregnant animal is slaughtered, the fetus it is carrying is considered as one of its limbs. Even if it lives, it does not have to be slaughtered again; the slaughter of its mother causes it to be permitted.
In this instance, the mother may not be slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard. Since there is no other way for the fetus to be permitted, the slaughter of the mother inside the Temple courtyard does not cause it to be forbidden.
9.I.e., pour the blood directly into.
10.In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Chullin 2:9), the Rambam writes that we suspect that the person worships "the element of water," water in its pure elemental state and not the water before us.
11.In this context also, the Rambam (ibid.) explains that we fear he is worshipping the power that controls the image seen in the water.
12.Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 11:3) writes that we fear that onlookers will say that he is collecting blood to offer it to false deities.
13.Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 12:2) mentions this ruling, but also the ruling of the Rashba that, after the fact, the slaughter is permitted. The Rama rules that, in the present age, when pagan rites are uncommonly practiced, one may rely on the more lenient view.
14.As long as he is not slaughtering directly into the water, it does not appear that he is worshipping it.
15.And thus the knife was above its neck.
16.See Chapter 1, Halachah 19.
17.The Turand the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 6:4) rule that slaughtering an animal in such a manner is unacceptable even if the slaughterer states that he is certain the animal's throat was not pierced in this manner. The rationale is that an animal's head is heavy and its weight will most likely cause its throat to be pierced.
18.Chapter 3, Halachah 11. Even though the throat of the animal is cut, it is not considered ritual slaughter. Ritual slaughter involves bringing the knife back and forth across the neck or bringing the neck back and forth across the knife. Any other act that cuts its throat is not acceptable.
19.Since a fowl is light, the slaughterer can hold it securely and maneuver it back and forth over the knife without difficulty. See Chullin 16b.
20.Provided the slaughter of the animal is accomplished in that one action. If the slaughterer lifts the knife, that disqualifies the slaughter.
21.The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 24:2) requires that a knife be of this length even if one does not cut off the animal's head.
22.For it is not feasible that passing a knife the length of the animal's neck alone will be sufficient to slice off its head in one motion [Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.)]. Hence, we must assume that the animal's head was severed by pressing the knife against the neck. This disqualifies the slaughter as stated in Chapter 3, Halachah 11.
23.He cut in a slant, cutting the windpipe at an angle and continuing to descend at that angle and cutting the gullet.
24.The Kessef Mishneh interprets this as meaning that the person cut in several places on the signs. Others interpret it as meaning a cut that slants back and forth (Turei Zahav 21:3).
25.In contrast to the slaughter of sacrificial animals (see Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 1:3).
26.Here, we are not speaking about refined spiritual intentions; the Rambam is stating that even if the person slaughters the animal without paying attention to what he is doing or even if he had no intent to slaughter it, the slaughter is acceptable.
27.Since the deed is significant and not the intent.
28.While he is intoxicated, he may reach the point where he is no longer able to control his conduct. See Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 1:8).
29.The others must watch. Otherwise, there is no way that we can insure that the slaughter is acceptable. Indeed, if such a person slaughters in private, the slaughter is disqualified [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 1:5)].
30.This applies only after the fact [Radbaz; see Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 1:5)]. At the outset, only a person fully in control of his intellect and emotions should be entrusted with ritual slaughter.
31.On its own accord or because of the wind. If, however, a person pushed the knife, since it was set in motion by human action, the slaughter is acceptable (Chullin 31a).
32.For the animal was slaughtered by the power of the water and not by human power.
33.Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 7:1) rules that the slaughter is acceptable only after the fact. At the outset, one should not slaughter in this manner. The Siftei Cohen 7:1 states that this is the Rambam's opinion with regard to the first clause of the halachah as well.
34.It is forbidden to partake of the animal, because this resembles bringing a sacrifice to a false deity. Nevertheless, since one is bringing the offering for a particular purpose and not in actual worship of the false deity, it is not forbidden to benefit from the animal (Kessef Mishneh).
35.This is the translation of the Hebrew term mazal; i.e., the person is not worshipping the material entity but the spiritual source from which its existence emanates.
36.For this is considered as worshipping a false deity.
37.See Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 11:1; Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 7:2.
38.He is not slaughtering the animal itself for the sake of the false deity - in which instance, there would be no question that it is forbidden - but, nevertheless, at the time of slaughter, he does intend to offer its blood or fats to the false deity.
39.In Chapter 15, Halachah 10, of those halachot, the Rambam writes that one who slaughters a sacrificial animal with the proper intent for the sake of sprinkling its blood or burning its fats for an improper intent, the slaughter is unacceptable.
40.The Turei Zahav 4:2 writes that according to the Rambam, because of the doubt, it is forbidden to benefit from the animal. Others (see also Siftei Cohen 4:2) rule that it is forbidden to partake of the animal's meat, but one may benefit from it.
41.As indicated in the following halachah, there are certain sacrifices that a person may offer on his own initiative. Since he has not actually consecrated the animal, the prohibition against sacrificing consecrated animals outside the Temple does not apply according to Scriptural Law. Nevertheless, because of the impression created, our Sages forbade the slaughter of an animal for that intent (Maggid Mishneh). The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 5), however, states that we fear that he might have consecrated it, implying that there is a question of a Scriptural prohibition involved.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 5:1) rules that this law applies even when the slaughtered animal has a blemish which would disqualify it as a sacrifice, for there are times when a person will conceal the blemish.
42.From the fact that the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah, sec. 7) quotes this and the following halachot, we see that these laws also apply in the present age although the Temple is destroyed. See the conclusion of the gloss of the Maggid Mishneh to Halachah 20 which mentions a difference of opinion concerning this matter.
43.As indicated in the following halachah, there are other sacrifices for which a person may consecrate an animal only when he is required to bring that offering. He may not pledge such a sacrifice on his own initiative.
44.Since he cannot consecrate animals for such offerings, we do not worry about the impression that may be created. On the contrary, an onlooker will consider the person's statements facetious (Siftei Cohen 5:4)
45.For these are sacrifices that a person can consecrate on his own initiative. Hence slaughtering an animal for this purpose is forbidden as stated in the previous halachah.
46.Seemingly, the Paschal offering does not resemble the others for it is an obligation incumbent on a person and can be brought only on the fourteenth of Nisan (Chullin 41b). Nevertheless, it is placed in this category for the reason explained by the Rambam.
47.The instance of a doubtful guilt offering is debated in Chullin, loc. cit., without the Talmud reaching a definite conclusion concerning the matter. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah, loc. cit.) quotes the Rambam's view. The Tur and the Rama, however, follow the view that a person can consecrate a doubtful guilt offering on his own initiative and hence, forbid ritual slaughter for this intent.
48.For a firstborn animal is consecrated by birth; a person cannot consecrate it through his statements.
49.For the tithe offerings are consecrated through the tithing rite; a person cannot consecrate it through his statements.
50.For unless a person has a consecrated animal at home, there is no reason that an onlooker might think that the substitution is of consequence (Chullin, loc. cit.).
51.For these are sacrifices that a person cannot consecrate unless he is required to.
52.Rashi (Chullin, loc. cit.) explains that when a person is liable to bring a sin offering, he makes the matter known so that he will be embarrassed and thus further his atonement. Therefore the onlookers will know of his obligation and will not regard his statements as facetious.
53.From the Rambam's words, it would appear that this is not merely a Rabbinical safeguard, but that his statements bring about a substitution (temurah) of the animal and he is liable for slaughtering it outside the Temple courtyard.
54.As stated in Chapter 4, Halachah 4, a woman may slaughter animals. And since she may slaughter ordinary animals, her slaughter of sacrificial animals would be acceptable. Note, however, the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Chullin 2:10) which speaks about a man slaughtering an animal on behalf of a woman.
55.Since this offering cannot be brought on a person's own initiative, her statements are considered facetious.
56.A woman who miscarries is also obligated to bring such a burnt offering.
57.The word here matches the Rambam's statements in the revised text of his Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.) as published by Rav Kappach. The Rambam's original text - and the version of his Commentary to the Mishnah commonly circulated - present an entirely different conception of this halachah.
58.Hence we suspect that perhaps he took a Nazarite vow in private and the matter has not become known (Kessef Mishneh, Lechem Mishneh).
59.Since his activity in slaughtering the animal was significant, his intent is also of consequence.
60.I.e., without waiting; thus the slaughter is not disqualified.
61.He makes such statements to make it appear that the slaughter is unacceptable so that his colleague will suffer anguish. Nevertheless, his statements have no effect. The Rambam's view is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 5:3). The Tur and the Rama states that there are opinions which forbid the slaughter regardless of whether the other person has a share in the animal or not because of the impression that is created.
62.I.e., even if the gentile considers it as a sacrifice to a false deity.
63.See Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 14:1.
64.Who is to young to be involved in the worship of false deities.
65.As stated in Chapter 4, Halachot 11-12, the gentile's slaughter is not considered halachicly significant and it is as if the animal died without being slaughtered.
-------
Hayom Yom:
• Shabbat, Nissan 19, 5774 • 19 April 2014
"Today's Day"
Shabbat, Nissan 19, 4th day of the omer, 5703
In L'cha dodi substitute besimcha, and say gam besimcha uv'tzahala (p. 132).
The following prayers are to be said in an undertone this Shabbat: Shalom aleichem, Eishet chayil, Mizmor l'David, Da hi s'udata (pages 144-146). Also V'yitein l'cha (p. 235).
Torah lessons: Chumash: Acharei Mot, Shevi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 90-96.
Tanya: Ch. 42. In the light (p. 217)...(yada) knew Eve." (p. 219).
My father once expanded on Ma nishtana (the "four questions" at the Seder):
How is this night, i.e. this present, final exile of Israel (exile being analogous to night) different from all other nights, i.e. all earlier exiles?
1) On all other nights we do not dip (the Hebrew word matbilin is used for immersion in a mikva for purification), expressing scouring, cleansing, purifying...
...even once; i.e. the cleansing was not completed in the earlier exiles, for they were followed by yet another exile;
but tonight we dip twice, this final exile will bring about the scouring of the body and the revelation of the soul.1
2) On all other nights we eat chametz or matza. Following each of the earlier exiles our avoda involved our G-dly soul (indicated by matza, a metaphor for nullification of self) and also our animal soul (indicated by chametz, a metaphor for ego, self-awareness);
But this night, following this final exile...
...we eat only matza, for the spirit of impurity will be abolished.2
3) On all other nights we eat various greens. The face of a jealous person turns green, that color symbolizing envy. During the earlier exiles there were various forms of envy; for example, the competitive envy among Torah-scholars;
But on this night, after the final exile...
...only maror, bitter greens, the most intense sort of envy, similar to a statement in the Talmud that in the Hereafter "each tzadik will be scorched by the 'canopy' of his fellow."3
4) On all other nights we eat either sitting or reclining... "Eating" indicates the spiritual delight, ta'anug, in the revelations that ensue from exile.4 There is the extension or manifest ta'anug, and there is (higher yet) the essence of ta'anug. Some through their avoda attain the extension of ta'anug, while others attain the essence of ta'anug.
...but tonight we all recline. After this final exile, all Israel will attain the quintessential ta'anug.
FOOTNOTES
1. I.e. following this final exile we will be doubly purified ("...dip twice"), and in need of no further cleansing.
2. And our avoda will therefore involve only the G-dly soul.
3. Bava Batra 75a. Viz. Aggadot Maharsha ibid. Each tzadik will have his "canopy", an indication of his achievements in this mortal life. Just as achievements vary, the canopies will vary. Seeing his fellow's unique canopy he is "scorched," unable to absorb the other's light.
4. For example, overcoming or enduring economic deprivation while staunchly observing Shabbat. Remaining devoted to our faith, to Torah and mitzvot, despite the spiritual darkness and physical hardships of exile, generates in the spiritual cosmos a "delight," ta'anug, unique to exile.
-------
Daily Thought:
From Beyond, With Love A miracle is what occurs when a force from beyond the finite cosmos enters within. That is why to see a miracle, you need an open heart and mind. Open enough to receive the Infinite.
-------
No comments:
Post a Comment