Chabad - TODAY IS: Shabbat, SIVAN 2, 5774 • MAY 31, 2014 - Omer: Day 46 - Netzach sheb'Malchut - Tonight Count 47

Chabad - TODAY IS: Shabbat, SIVAN 2, 5774 • MAY 31, 2014 - Omer: Day 46 - Netzach sheb'Malchut - Tonight Count 47
Torah Reading
Naso (Numbers/Bamidbar 4:21 And Hashem spoke unto Moshe, saying,
22 Take also the census of the Bnei Gershon, throughout the bais avot of them, by their mishpekhot;
23 From shloshim shanah (thirty years old) and upward until chamishim shanah (fifty years old) shalt thou number them; all that enter to serve the tz’va (holy militia service of Hashem), to labor in the Avodah in the Ohel Mo’ed.
24 This is the Avodat Mishpekhot Gershoni, as relates to service and massa (burden):
25 And they shall bear the curtains of the Mishkan, and the Ohel Mo’ed, its covering, and the tachash hide covering that is over the top of it, and the screen for the entrance of the Ohel Mo’ed,
26 And the hangings of the khatzer (court), and the hanging for the entrance of the sha’ar (gate) of the khatzer (court), which is around the Mishkan and around the Mizbe’ach, and their cords, and all the Klei Avodah (Utensils of Service, Ministry) of them, and all that is done for them; so shall they serve.
27 At the appointment of Aharon and his banim shall be all the Avodat Bnei Gershoni, in all their massa (burdens), and in all their avodah (service); and ye shall appoint unto them in mishmeret (guard duty responsibility) for all their massa (burdens).
28 This is the Avodat Mishpekhot Bnei Gershoni in the Ohel Mo’ed; and misheret (guard duty responsibility) shall be under the direction of Itamar ben Aharon HaKohen.
29 As for the Bnei Merari, thou shalt number them after their mishpekhot, by the bais of their avot;
30 From shloshim shanah (thirty years old) and upward even until chamishim shanah (fifty years old) shalt thou number them, every one that entereth into the tz’va (holy militia service of Hashem), to do the work of the Avodat Ohel Mo’ed.
31 And this is their mishmeret (guard) massa (burden), according to all their Avodah (Service, Ministry) in the Ohel Mo’ed; the frames of the Mishkan, and the crossbars thereof, and the posts thereof, and bases thereof,
32 And the posts surrounding the khatzer, and their bases, and their tent pegs, and their cords, with all their implements, and with all their service; and by shmot (names) ye shall assign the klei mishmeret (vessels of duty) massa (burdens).
33 This is the Avodat Mishpekhot Bnei Merari, according to all their service, in the Ohel Mo’ed under the direction of Itamar ben Aharon HaKohen.
34 And Moshe and Aharon and the Nasi’ei HaEdah (Leaders of the Congregation) counted the Bnei HaKehati after their mishpekhot, and after the bais of their avot,
35 From shloshim shanah (thirty years old) and upward even until chamishim shanah (fifty years old) shalt thou number them, every one that entereth into the tz’va (holy militia service of Hashem), to do the work of the Avodah in the Ohel Mo’ed;
36 And those that were numbered of them by their mishpekhot were two thousand seven hundred and fifty.
37 These were they that were numbered of the mishpekhot HaKehati, all that might do service in the Ohel Mo’ed which Moshe and Aharon did number according to the command of Hashem by the hand of Moshe.
38 And those that were numbered of the Bnei Gershon, throughout their mishpekhot, and by the bais of their avot,
39 From shloshim shanah and upward even until chamishim shanah shalt thou number them, every one that entereth into the tz’va (holy militia service of Hashem), to do the work of the Avodah in the Ohel Mo’ed,
40 Even those that were numbered of them, throughout their mishpekhot, by the bais of their avot, were two thousand and six hundred and thirty.
41 These are they that were numbered of the Mishpekhot Bnei Gershon, of all that might do service in the Ohel Mo’ed whom Moshe and Aharon did number according to the command of Hashem.
42 And those that were numbered of the Mishpekhot Bnei Merari, throughout their mishpekhot, by the bais of their avot,
43 From shloshim shanah and upward even until chamishim shanah shalt thou number them, every one that entereth into the tz’va, to do the work of the Avodah in the Ohel Mo’ed,
44 Even those that were numbered of them by their mishpekhot, were three thousand and two hundred.
45 These be those that were numbered of the Mishpekhot Bnei Merari, whom Moshe and Aharon numbered according to the command of Hashem by the hand of Moshe.
46 All those that were numbered of the Levi’im, whom Moshe and Aharon and the Nasi’ei Yisroel numbered, by their mishpekhot, and by the bais of their avot,
47 From shloshim shanah and upward even until chamishim shanah shalt thou number them, every one that entereth to do the Avodat Avodah (the Work of the Service, Ministry) and the Avodat Massa (Service, Ministry of the Burden) in the Ohel Mo’ed.
48 Even those that were numbered of them, were shmonat alafim vachamesh me’ot ushmonim (eight thousand and five hundred and fourscore),
49 According to the command of Hashem they were numbered by the hand of Moshe, every one according to his Avodah (Service), and according to his Massa (Burden); thus were they counted of him, as Hashem commanded Moshe.
5:1 And Hashem spoke unto Moshe, saying,
2 Command the Bnei Yisroel, that they put out of the machaneh every tzaru’a, and every one that hath a discharge, and whosoever is tameh lanefesh (unclean, defiled by reason of contact with a corpse),
3 Both zakhar and nekevah shall ye put out, without the machaneh shall ye put them; that they defile not their machanot, in the midst whereof I dwell.
4 And the Bnei Yisroel did so, and put them outside the machaneh; just as Hashem spoke unto Moshe, so did the Bnei Yisroel.
5 And Hashem spoke unto Moshe, saying,
6 Speak unto the Bnei Yisroel, When a man or woman shall commit any chattot that men commit, l’me’ol ma’al baHashem (thereby trespassing against Hashem), and feels guilty;
7 Then they shall make vidduy (confession of sin) of their chattot which they have committed; and shall make reparation in full, and add unto it the fifth part thereof, and give it unto him against whom they hath incurred liability.
8 But if the man have no go’el unto whom reparation for the asham can be made, let the asham be recompensed unto Hashem, even to the kohen, besides the ram of the kippurim, whereby a kapparah shall be made on his behalf.
9 And every terumah of all the holy things of the Bnei Yisroel, which they bring unto the kohen, shall be his.
10 And every man’s things set apart as kodesh shall be his; whatsoever any man giveth the kohen, it shall be his.
11 And Hashem spoke unto Moshe, saying,
12 Speak unto the Bnei Yisroel, and say unto them, If any man’s isha go aside, and commit a trespass [i.e., is unfaithful] against him,
13 And a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her ish, and she become tameh secretly, and there be no ed (witness) against her, neither she be caught;
14 And a ruach kina (spirit of jealousy) come upon him, and he be jealous of his isha, and she be tameh; or if a ruach kina come upon him, and he be jealous of his isha, and she be not tameh;
15 Then shall the ish bring his isha unto the kohen, and he shall bring her korban for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no shemen upon it, nor put incense thereon; for it is a minchat kinot (grain offering of jealousies), a minchat zekaron (grain offering of memorial), bringing avon to remembrance.
16 And the kohen shall bring her near, and set her before Hashem;
17 And the kohen shall take mayim kedoshim in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is in the floor of the Mishkan the kohen shall take, and put it into the mayim;
18 And the kohen shall set the isha before Hashem, and unbind the hair of the isha, and put the minchat zekaron in her hands, which is the minchat kena’ot; and the kohen shall have in his hand the mei hamarim hame’ararim (waters of bitterness that causeth the curse);
19 And the kohen shall put her under oath, and say unto the isha, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not turned astray to tum’a (uncleanness, impurity) with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from these mei hamarim hame’ararim;
20 But if thou hast turned astray to another instead of thy ish, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee other than thine ish;
21 Then the kohen shall put the isha under oath with the oath of the curse, and the kohen shall say unto the isha, Hashem make thee an alah (curse) and a shevu’ah (oath) among thy people, when Hashem doth make thy thigh to waste away, and thy belly to swell;
22 And this mayim that causeth the curse shall go into thy inner parts, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to waste away; And the isha shall say, Omen, Omen.
23 And the kohen shall write these alot (curses) on a sefer, and he shall wash them into the mei hamarim;
24 And he shall cause the isha to drink the mei hamarim hame’ararim; and the mayim hame’ararim shall enter into her, and become bitter.
25 Then the kohen shall take the minchat hakena’ot out of the yad haisha, and shall wave the minchah before Hashem, and offer it upon the Mizbe’ach:
26 And the kohen shall take a handful of the minchah, even the memorial thereof, and burn it upon the Mizbe’ach, and afterward shall cause the isha to drink the mayim.
27 And when he hath made her to drink the mayim, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass [i.e., been unfaithful] against her ish, that the mayim hame’ararim shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall waste away; and the isha shall become a curse among her people.
28 And if the isha be not defiled, but be tehorah (clean); then she shall be free, and shall conceive zera.
29 This is the torat hakena’ot (law of jealousy), when an isha goeth astray to another instead of her ish, and is defiled;
30 Or when the ruach kinah cometh upon him, and he be jealous over his isha, and shall set the isha before Hashem, and the kohen shall execute upon her all this torah.
31 Then shall the ish be free from guilt from avon, and this isha shall bear her avon.
6:1 And Hashem spoke unto Moshe, saying,
2 Speak unto the Bnei Yisroel, and say unto them, When either ish or isha shall separate themselves to vow a neder of a Nazir, to separate themselves unto Hashem;
3 He shall separate himself from yayin and shekhar (fermented drink), and shall drink no chometz (vinegar) of yayin, or chometz of shekhar, neither shall he drink any grape juice, nor eat moist grapes, or dried (i.e., raisins).
4 Kol hayamim of his nazir (vow as a nazir) shall he eat nothing that is made of the gefen hayayin, from the seeds even to the grape-skins.
5 Kol hayamim of the neder of his nazir there shall no razor come upon his head; until hayamim be fulfilled, in the which he separateth himself unto Hashem, he shall be kadosh, and shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow.
6 Kol hayamei of his separation unto Hashem he shall go not near nefesh met (dead body).
7 He shall not make himself tameh for his av, or for his em, for his ach, or for his achot, when they die; because the Nezer Elohav (Consecration of his G-d) is upon his head.
8 Kol yemei of his nazir (separation) he is kadosh unto Hashem.
9 And if any man die very suddenly by him, and he hath made tameh the head of his nezer (consecration); then he shall shave his head in the yom of his tohorat, on the yom hashevi’i shall he shave it.
10 And on the yom hashemi’ni he shall bring two doves, or two young pigeons, to the kohen, to the entrance of the Ohel Mo’ed;
11 And the kohen shall offer the one for a chattat (sin offering), and the other for an olah (burnt offering), and make kapporah for him, because he sinned by the nefesh (dead body), and shall make kadosh his head that same day.
12 And he shall consecrate unto Hashem the yemei of his nazir, and shall bring a lamb of the first year for an asham (trespass offering); but the yamim harishonim shall not be counted, because his nazir was tameh.
13 And this is the Torat HaNazir, when the yamim of his nazir are fulfilled: he shall be brought unto the entrance of the Ohel Mo’ed;
14 And he shall offer his korban unto Hashem, one helamb of the first year tamim (without blemish) for an olah (burnt offering), and one ewe lamb of the first year temimah (without blemish) for a chattat, and one ram tamim (without blemish) for shlamim (peace offerings),
15 And a basket of matzot, cakes of fine flour mingled with shemen, and wafers of matzot meshuchim (anointed) with oil, and their minchot (grain offerings), and their nesakim (drink offerings).
16 And the kohen shall bring them before Hashem, and shall offer his chattat, and his olah (burnt offering);
17 And he shall offer the ram for a zevach shelamim (sacrifice of peace offerings) unto Hashem, with the basket of matzot; the kohen shall offer also his minchah (grain offering), and his nesekh (drink offering).
18 And the Nazir shall shave the head of his nazir [see Ac 21:24] at the entrance of the Ohel Mo’ed, and shall take the hair of the head of his nazir, and put it in the eish (fire) which is under the zevach hashelamim (sacrifce of peace offerings).
19 And the kohen shall take the boiled shoulder of the ram, and one challat matzah (loaf of matzah) out of the basket, and one unleavened wafer, and shall put them upon the hands of the Nazir, after the hair of his nazir (consecration) is shaven;
20 And the kohen shall wave them for a wave offering before Hashem; this is kodesh for the kohen, with the breast of the wave offering and thigh of the terumah (raisedup presentation); and after that the Nazir may drink yayin.
21 This is the Torat HaNazir who hath vowed, and of his korban unto Hashem for his nazir (separation), in addition to whatever else his hand shall afford, according to the neder (vow) which he vowed, so he must do after the torah of his Nazir.
22 And Hashem spoke unto Moshe, saying,
23 Speak unto Aharon and unto his Banim, saying, On this wise ye shall bless the Bnei Yisroel, saying unto them,
24 Y’varekhekha Adonai v’yishmerekha (Hashem bless thee, and keep thee);
25 Ya’er Adonai panav eleikha vichunekha (Hashem make His face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee);
26 Yissa Adonai panav eleikha v’yasem l’kha shalom (Hashem lift up His countenance upon thee, and give thee shalom).
27 And they shall put My Shem upon the Bnei Yisroel, and I will bless them.
7:1 And it came to pass on the day that Moshe had fully set up the Mishkan, and had anointed it, and set it apart as kodesh, and all the instruments thereof, both the Mizbe’ach and all the vessels thereof, and had anointed them, and set them apart as kodesh,
2 That the Nasiim (Rulers) of Yisroel, heads of the Bais of their Avot, who were the Nasiim of the tribes, and were over them that were numbered, offered;
3 And they brought their korban before Hashem, six covered carts, and twelve oxen; a cart for two of the Nasiim, and for each one an ox; and they brought them before the Mishkan.
4 And Hashem spoke unto Moshe, saying,
5 Take it of them, that they may be for the service of the Ohel Mo’ed; and thou shalt give them unto the Levi’im, to every man according to his service.
6 And Moshe took the carts and the oxen, and gave them unto the Levi’im.
7 Two carts and four oxen he gave unto the Bnei Gershon, according to their service;
8 And four carts and eight oxen he gave unto the Bnei Merari, according unto their service, under the hand of Itamar ben Aharon HaKohen.
9 But unto the Bnei Kehat he gave none, because the service of HaKodesh belonging unto them was that they should bear upon their shoulders.
10 And the Nasiim offered for dedicating of the Mizbe’ach in the day that it was anointed, even the Nasiim (Rulers) offered their korban before the Mizbe’ach.
11 And Hashem said unto Moshe, They shall offer their korban, each Nasi on his day, for the dedicating of the Mizbe’ach.
12 And he that offered his korban the first day was Nachshon Ben Amminadav, of the tribe of Yehudah;
13 And his korban was one silver bowl, the weight thereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver basin of seventy shekels, according to the shekel HaKodesh; both of them were full of fine flour mixed with oil for a minchah;
14 One ladle of ten shekels of zahav, full of ketoret;
15 One young bull, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for an olah (burnt offering);
16 One kid of the goats for a chattat;
17 And for a zevach of shelamim, two oxen, five rams, five he-goats, five lambs of the first year; this was the korban of Nachshon ben Amminadav.
18 On the second day Netanel ben Tzuar, prince of Yissakhar, did offer:
19 He offered for his korban one silver bowl, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver basin of seventy shekels, according to shekel HaKodesh; both of them full of fine flour mixed with oil for a minchah;
20 One ladle of zahav of ten shekels, full of ketoret;
21 One young bull, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for an olah (burnt offering);
22 One kid of the goats for a chattat;
23 And for a zevach of shelamim, two oxen, five rams, five he-goats, five lambs of the first year; this was the korban of Netanel ben Tzuar.
24 On the third day Eliav ben Chelon, Nasi of the Bnei Zevulun, did offer:
25 His korban was one silver bowl, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver basin of seventy shekels, according to shekel HaKodesh; both of them full of fine flour mixed with oil for a minchah;
26 One golden ladle of ten shekels, full of ketoret;
27 One young bull, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for an olah (burnt offering);
28 One kid of the goats for a chattat;
29 And for a zevach of shelamim, two oxen, five rams, five he-goats, five lambs of the first year; this was the korban of Eliav ben Chelon.
30 On the fourth day Elitzur ben Shedeur, Nasi of the Bnei Reuven, did offer:
31 His korban was one silver bowl of the weight of an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver basin of seventy shekels, according to shekel HaKodesh; both of them full of fine flour mixed with oil for a minchah;
32 One golden ladle of ten shekels, full of ketoret;
33 One young bull, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for an olah;
34 One kid of the goats for a chattat;
35 And for a zevach of shelamim, two oxen, five rams, five he-goats, five lambs of the first year; this was the korban of Elitzur ben Shedeur.
36 On the fifth day Shelumiel ben Tzurishaddai, Nasi of the Bnei Shim’on, did offer:
37 His korban was one silver bowl, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver basin of seventy shekels, according to shekel HaKodesh; both of them full of fine flour mixed with oil for a minchah;
38 One golden ladle of ten shekels, full of ketoret;
39 One young bull, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for an olah;
40 One kid of the goats for a chattat;
41 And for a zevach of shelamim, two oxen, five rams, five he-goats, five lambs of the first year; this was the korban of Shelumiel ben Tzurishaddai.
42 On the sixth day Elyasaph ben Deuel, Nasi of the Bnei Gad, offered:
43 His korban was one silver bowl of the weight of an hundred and thirty shekels, a silver basin of seventy shekels, according to shekel HaKodesh; both of them full of fine flour mixed with oil for a minchah;
44 One golden ladle of ten shekels, full of ketoret;
45 One young bull, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for an olah (burnt offering);
46 One kid of the goats for a chattat;
47 And for a zevach of shelamim, two oxen, five rams, five he-goats, five lambs of the first year; this was the korban of Elyasaph ben Deuel.
48 On the seventh day Elishama ben Ammihud, Nasi of the Bnei Ephrayim, offered:
49 His korban was one silver bowl, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver basin of seventy shekels, according to shekel HaKodesh; both of them full of fine flour mixed with oil for a minchah;
50 One golden ladle of ten shekels, full of ketoret;
51 One young bull, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for an olah (burnt offering);
52 One kid of the goats for a chattat;
53 And for a zevach of shelamim, two oxen, five rams, five he-goats, five lambs of the first year; this was the korban of Elishama ben Ammihud.
54 On the eighth day Gamaliel ben Pedahtzur, Nasi of the Bnei Menasheh offered:
55 His korban was one silver bowl of the weight of an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver basin of seventy shekels, according to shekel HaKodesh; both of them full of fine flour mixed with oil for a minchah;
56 One golden ladle of ten shekels, full of ketoret;
57 One young bull, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for an olah (burnt offering);
58 One kid of the goats for a chattat;
59 And for a zevach of shelamim, two oxen, five rams, five he-goats, five lambs of the first year; this was the korban of Gamaliel ben Pedahtzur.
60 On the ninth day Avidan ben Gideoni, Nasi of the Bnei Binyamin, offered:
61 His korban was one silver bowl, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver basin of seventy shekels, according to shekel HaKodesh; both of them full of fine flour mixed with oil for a minchah;
62 One golden ladle of ten shekels, full of ketoret;
63 One young bull, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for an olah;
64 One kid of the goats for a chattat;
65 And for a zevach of shelamim, two oxen, five rams, five he-goats, five lambs of the first year; this was the korban of Avidan ben Gideoni.
66 On the tenth day Achiezer ben Ammishaddai, Nasi of the Bnei Dan, offered:
67 His korban was one silver bowl, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver basin of seventy shekels, according to shekel HaKodesh; both of them full of fine flour mixed with oil for a minchah;
68 One golden ladle of ten shekels, full of ketoret;
69 One young bull, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for an olah;
70 One kid of the goats for a chattat;
71 And for a zevach of shelamim, two oxen, five rams, five he-goats, five lambs of the first year; this was the korban of Achiezer ben Ammishaddai.
72 On the eleventh day Pagiel ben Ochran, Nasi of the Bnei Asher, offered:
73 His korban was one silver bowl, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver basin of seventy shekels, according to shekel HaKodesh; both of them full of fine flour mixed with oil for a minchah;
74 One golden ladle of ten shekels, full of ketoret;
75 One young bull, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for an olah;
76 One kid of the goats for a chattat;
77 And for a zevach of shelamim, two oxen, five rams, five he-goats, five lambs of the first year; this was the korban of Pagiel ben Ochran.
78 On the twelfth day Achira ben Enan, Nasi of the Bnei Naphtali, offered:
79 His korban was one silver bowl, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver basin of seventy shekels, according to shekel HaKodesh; both of them full of fine flour mixed with oil for a minchah;
80 One golden ladle of ten shekels, full of ketoret;
81 One young bull, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for an olah;
82 One kid of the goats for a chattat;
83 And for a zevach of shelamim, two oxen, five rams, five he-goats, five lambs of the first year; this was the korban of Achira ben Enan.
84 This was the dedication of the Mizbe’ach, in the day when it was anointed, by the Nasiim of Yisroel: twelve bowls of kesef, twelve silver basins, twelve spoons of zahav:
85 Each bowl of silver weighing an hundred and thirty shekels, each basin seventy; all the silver vessels weighed two thousand and four hundred shekels, according to the shekel HaKodesh;
86 The golden spoons were twelve, full of ketoret, weighing ten shekels apiece, according to the shekel HaKodesh; all the zahav of the spoons was an hundred and twenty shekels.
87 All the oxen for the olah (burnt offering) were twelve bulls, the rams twelve, the lambs of the first year twelve, with their minchah; and the kids of the goats for chattat twelve.
88 And all the oxen for the zevach of the shelamim were twenty and four bulls, the rams sixty, the he-goats sixty, the lambs of the first year sixty. This was the dedication of the Mizbe’ach, after that it was anointed.
89 And when Moshe was gone into the Ohel Mo’ed to speak with Him, then he heard the voice of One speaking unto him from over the kapporet that was upon the Aron HaEdut, from between the two keruvim; so He spoke unto him.)
TODAY'S LAWS & CUSTOMS:
Ethics: Chapter 6
In preparation for the festival of Shavuot, we study one of the six chapters of the Talmud's Ethics of the Fathers ("Avot") on the afternoon of each of the six Shabbatot between Passover and Shavuot; this Shabbat being the Shabbat before Shhavuot, we study Chapter Six. (In many communities -- and such is the Chabad custom -- the study cycle is repeated through the summer, until the Shabbat before Rosh Hashanah.)
Link: Ethics of the Fathers, Chapter 6
Count "Forty-Seven Days to the Omer" Tonight
Tomorrow is the forty-seventh 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 forty-seven days, which are six weeks and 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'Malchut -- "Humility in Receptiveness"
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:
Chosen People (1313 BCE)
Sivan 2 is marked on the Jewish calendar as Yom HaMeyuchas ("Day of Distinction"); it was on this day that G-d told Moses -- when Moses ascended Mount Sinai for the first time -- to tell the people of Israel: "You shall be My chosen treasure from among all the nations, for all the earth is Mine. You shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Exodus 19:4-6).
Links:
Who Are the Jews?
On the Essence of Choice 
More on the "choseness" of the Jewish people
Israel Captures Golan Heights (1967)
Until the Six-Day War (see “Today in Jewish History” for Iyar 26), the Syrian army was deployed in strong fortifications on the Golan Heights, from which they repeatedly shelled the Israeli settlements below. On the fifth day of the war, the Israeli Army broke through the Syrian front. Facing very difficult topographical conditions, they scaled the steep and rugged heights. The Engineering Corps cleared the way of mines, followed by bulldozers which leveled a route for the tanks on the rocky face. After more than 24 hours of heavy fighting, the Syrian deployment collapsed and the Syrian forces fled in retreat.
Links: More on the Six-Day War
DAILY STUDY:
CHITAS AND RAMBAM FOR TODAY:
Chumash: Parshat Naso, 7th Portion (Numbers 7:84-7:89) with Rashi
• Chapter 7
84. This was the dedication offering of the altar presented by the chieftains on the day it was anointed; there were twelve silver bowls, twelve silver basins and twelve gold spoons. פד. זֹאת | חֲנֻכַּת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ בְּיוֹם הִמָּשַׁח אֹתוֹ מֵאֵת נְשִׂיאֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל קַעֲרֹת כֶּסֶף שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה מִזְרְקֵי כֶסֶף שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר כַּפּוֹת זָהָב שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה:
on the day it was anointed: On the day it was anointed, he brought the offering. So what is the meaning of “after it was anointed” (verse 88)? That it was first anointed and then he brought an offering, or [perhaps] “after it was anointed” means: after some time later [i.e., a while after it was anointed], and “on the day it was anointed” [does not mean that it was offered on the day it was anointed, but it] comes only to tell us that it was anointed by day? [However,] when Scripture says, “on the day they were anointed” (Lev. 7:36), we have already learned that it was anointed by day. So what does “on the day it was anointed” [here] teach us? That on the day it was anointed, he brought the offering. — [Sifrei Naso 1:159].
ביום המשח אותו: בו ביום שנמשח הקריב, ומה אני מקיים אחרי המשח, שנמשח תחלה ואחר כך הקריב. או אחרי המשח לאחר זמן, ולא בא ללמד ביום המשח אלא לומר שנמשח ביום, כשהוא אומר (ויקרא ז, לו) ביום משחו אותם, למדנו שנמשח ביום, ומה תלמוד לומר ביום המשח אותו, ביום שנמשח הקריב:
twelve silver bowls: [The total is recorded here to show that] these were the very same ones that were donated, and no disqualifying factor happened to them. - [Sifrei Naso 1:160].
קערת כסף שתים עשרה: הם הם שהתנדבו ולא אירע בהם פסול:
85. The weight of each silver bowl was one hundred and thirty [shekels], and that of each basin was seventy [shekels]; all the silver of the vessels weighed in total two thousand four hundred [shekels] according to the holy shekel. פה. שְׁלשִׁים וּמֵאָה הַקְּעָרָה הָאַחַת כֶּסֶף וְשִׁבְעִים הַמִּזְרָק הָאֶחָד כֹּל כֶּסֶף הַכֵּלִים אַלְפַּיִם וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת בְּשֶׁקֶל הַקֹּדֶשׁ:
[The weight of] each silver bowl was one hundred and thirty [shekels]: What does this teach us? Since Scripture says [in the account of the donation of each chieftain]: “weighing one hundred and thirty shekels,” but it does not specify which type of shekel, therefore, [Scripture] repeats it here, and includes them all: “all the silver of the vessels… according to the holy shekel.” - [Sifrei Naso 1:160].
שלשים ומאה הקערה האחת וגו': מה תלמוד לומר, לפי שנאמר שלשים ומאה משקלה, ולא פירש באיזו שקל, לכך חזר ושנאה כאן, וכלל בכולן כל כסף הכלים בשקל הקדש:
all the silver of the vessels: This teaches you that all the vessels of the sanctuary were of precise weight; whether weighed individually or collectively, there was neither more nor less [than the specified amount]. — [Sifrei Naso 1:160]
כל כסף הכלים וגו': למדך שהיו כלי המקדש מכוונים במשקלן, שוקלן אחד אחד ושוקלן כולן כאחד, לא ריבה ולא מיעט:
86. Twelve gold spoons filled with incense; each spoon weighing ten [shekels] according to the holy shekel; all the gold spoons totaled one hundred and twenty shekels. פו. כַּפּוֹת זָהָב שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה מְלֵאֹת קְטֹרֶת עֲשָׂרָה עֲשָׂרָה הַכַּף בְּשֶׁקֶל הַקֹּדֶשׁ כָּל זְהַב הַכַּפּוֹת עֶשְׂרִים וּמֵאָה:
Twelve gold spoons: Why is this said? For it says [in the account of the donation of each chieftain]: “One spoon [weighing] ten gold [shekels].” [Does this mean that] it was made of gold and it weighed ten silver shekels? Or [does it mean] that it was a silver spoon weighing ten gold shekels-for the weight of the gold shekels is not the same as the weight of silver ones? Therefore, Scripture tells us: “Gold spoons”-they were [made] of gold. — [Sifrei Naso 1:161]
כפות זהב שתים עשרה: למה נאמר, לפי שנאמר כף אחת עשרה זהב, היא של זהב, ומשקלה עשרה שקלים של כסף, או אינו אלא כף אחת של כסף ומשקלה עשרה שקלי זהב, ושקלי זהב אין משקלם שוה לשל כסף, תלמוד לומר כפות זהב, של זהב היו:
87. The total of the cattle for the burnt offerings was twelve bulls, twelve rams, and twelve lambs in their first year with their meal offerings. And [there were] twelve young he goats for sin offerings. פז. כָּל הַבָּקָר לָעֹלָה שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר פָּרִים אֵילִם שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר כְּבָשִׂים בְּנֵי שָׁנָה שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר וּמִנְחָתָם וּשְׂעִירֵי עִזִּים שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר לְחַטָּאת:
88. The total of cattle for the peace offerings was twenty four oxen, sixty rams, sixty he goats, and sixty lambs in their first year. This was the dedication offering for the altar, after it was anointed. פח. וְכֹל בְּקַר | זֶבַח הַשְּׁלָמִים עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבָּעָה פָּרִים אֵילִם שִׁשִּׁים עַתֻּדִים שִׁשִּׁים כְּבָשִׂים בְּנֵי שָׁנָה שִׁשִּׁים זֹאת חֲנֻכַּת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ אַחֲרֵי הִמָּשַׁח אֹתוֹ:
89. When Moses would come into the Tent of Meeting to speak with Him, he would hear the voice speaking to him from the two cherubim above the covering which was over the Ark of Testimony, and He spoke to him. פט. וּבְבֹא משֶׁה אֶל אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לְדַבֵּר אִתּוֹ וַיִּשְׁמַע אֶת הַקּוֹל מִדַּבֵּר אֵלָיו מֵעַל הַכַּפֹּרֶת אֲשֶׁר עַל אֲרֹן הָעֵדֻת מִבֵּין שְׁנֵי הַכְּרֻבִים וַיְדַבֵּר אֵלָיו:
When Moses would enter: [When there are] two contradictory verses, the third one comes and reconciles them. One verse says, “the Lord spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting” (Lev. 1:1), and that implies outside the curtain, whereas another verse says,“and speak to you from above the ark cover” (Exod. 25:22) [which is beyond the curtain]. This [verse] comes and reconciles them: Moses came into the Tent of Meeting, and there he would hear the voice [of God] coming from [between the cherubim,] above the ark cover. - [Sifrei Naso 1:162]
ובבא משה: שני כתובים המכחישים זה את זה, בא שלישי והכריע ביניהם. כתוב אחד אומר (ויקרא א, א) וידבר ה' אליו מאהל מועד, והוא חוץ לפרכת, וכתוב אחד אומר (שמות כה, כב) ודברתי אתך מעל הכפרת, בא זה והכריע ביניהם, משה בא אל אהל מועד ושם שומע את הקול הבא מעל הכפרת:
from between the two cherubim: The voice emanated from heaven to [the area] between the two cherubim, and from there it went out to the Tent of Meeting. — [Sifrei Naso 1:162]
מבין שני הכרובים: הקול יוצא מן השמים לבין שני הכרובים ומשם יצא לאהל מועד:
speaking to him: Heb. מִדַּבֵּר. [The word מִדַּבֵּר] is similar to מִתְדַּבֵּר [the reflexive form, literally,] “speaking to itself.” It is out of reverence for the Most High to express it in this way. [The voice] would speak to itself, and Moses would listen to it.
מדבר: כמו מתדבר, כבודו של מעלה לומר כן מדבר בינו לבין עצמו, ומשה שומע מאליו:
and He spoke to Him: [Thus] excluding Aaron from the [Divine] statements.
וידבר אליו: למעט את אהרן מן הדברות:
He would hear the voice: I might think it was in an undertone. Therefore, Scripture teaches us:“the voice”-the very voice which spoke with him at [Mount] Sinai, [which was loud and clear]. But when it [the voice] reached the entrance, it stopped and did not proceed outside the tent.
וישמע את הקול: יכול קול נמוך, תלמוד לומר את הקול, הוא הקול שנדבר עמו בסיני, וכשמגיע לפתח היה נפסק, ולא היה יוצא חוץ לאהל:
-------
Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 10-17
• Chapter 10
This psalm tells of the wicked one’s prosperity and his boasting of it, until he says: “There is neither law nor judge. God pays no attention to the actions of mere mortals.”
1. Why, O Lord, do You stand afar, do You hide Yourself in times of distress?
2. The wicked man in his arrogance pursues the poor; they are caught by the schemes they have contrived.
3. For the wicked man glories in the desire of his heart, and the robber boasts that he has scorned the Lord.
4. The wicked one in his insolence [thinks], “He does not avenge”; all his thoughts are, “There is no God.”
5. His ways always succeed; Your retribution is far removed from before him; he puffs at all his foes.
6. He says in his heart, “I shall not falter; for all generations no evil will befall me.”
7. His mouth is full of oaths, deceit and malice; mischief and iniquity are under his tongue.
8. He sits in ambush near open cities; in hidden places he murders the innocent; his eyes stealthily watch for the helpless.
9. He lurks in hiding like a lion in his lair; he lurks to seize the poor, then seizes the poor when he draws his net.
10. He crouches and stoops, then the helpless fall prey to his might.
11. He says in his heart, “God has forgotten, He conceals His countenance, He will never see.”
12. Arise, O Lord! O God, lift Your hand! Do not forget the lowly.
13. Why does the wicked man scorn God? Because he says in his heart, “You do not avenge.”
14. Indeed, You do see! For You behold the mischief and vexation. To recompense is in Your power; the helpless place their trust in You; You have [always] helped the orphan.
15. Break the strength of the wicked; then search for the wickedness of the evil one and You will not find it.
16. The Lord reigns for all eternity; the nations have vanished from His land.
17. Lord, You have heard the desire of the humble; direct their hearts, let Your ear listen,
18. to bring justice to the orphan and the downtrodden, so that [the wicked] shall no longer crush the frail of the earth.
Chapter 11
This psalm declares that the suffering of the righteous one is for his own benefit, to cleanse him of his sins; whereas the wicked one is granted prosperity in this world-similar to the verse, "Wealth remains with its owner, to his detriment."
1. For the Conductor, by David. I have placed my trust in the Lord; [thus] how can you say of my soul, your mountain,1 that it flees like a bird?2
2. For behold, the wicked bend the bow, they have readied their arrow upon the bowstring, to shoot in darkness at the upright of heart.
3. They destroyed the foundations; 3 what [wrong] has the righteous man done?
4. The Lord is in His holy Sanctuary, the Lord's throne is in heaven, [yet] His eyes behold, His pupils probe [the deeds of] mankind.
5. The Lord tests the righteous, but He hates the wicked and the lover of violence.
6. He will rain down upon the wicked fiery coals and brimstone; a scorching wind will be their allotted portion.
7. For the Lord is righteous, He loves [the man of] righteous deeds; the upright will behold His countenance.
Chapter 12
This psalm admonishes informers, slanderers, and flatterers.
1. For the Conductor, upon the eight-stringed instrument, a psalm by David.
2. Help us, Lord, for the pious are no more; for the faithful have vanished from among men.
3. Men speak falsehood to one another; with flattering lips, with a duplicitous heart do they speak.
4. May the Lord cut off all flattering lips, the tongue that speaks boastfully-
5. those who have said, "With our tongues we shall prevail, our lips are with us, who is master over us!”
6. Because of the plundering of the poor, because of the moaning of the needy, the Lord says, "Now I will arise!" "I will grant deliverance," He says to him.
7. The words of the Lord are pure words, like silver refined in the finest earthen crucible, purified seven times.
8. May You, O Lord, watch over them; may You forever guard them from this generation,
9. [in which] the wicked walk on every side; when they are exalted it is a disgrace to mankind.
Chapter 13
A prayer for an end to the long exile. One in distress should offer this prayer for his troubles and for the length of the exile.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. How long, O Lord, will You forget me, forever? How long will You hide Your countenance from me?
3. How long must I seek counsel within my soul, [to escape] the grief in my heart all day? How long will my enemy be exalted over me?
4. Look! Answer me, O Lord, my God; give light to my eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death.
5. Lest my enemy say, "I have overcome him," [and] my oppressors rejoice when I falter.
6. I have placed my trust in Your kindness, my heart will rejoice in Your deliverance. I will sing to the Lord, for He has dealt kindly with me.
Chapter 14
This psalm speaks of the destruction of the two Holy Temples-the first by Nebuchadnezzar, and the second by Titus.
1. For the Conductor, by David. The fool says in his heart, "There is no God!" [Man's] deeds have become corrupt and abominable, no one does good.
2. The Lord looked down from heaven upon mankind, to see if there was any wise man who searches for God.
3. They have all gone astray together, they have become corrupt; there is none who does good, not even one.
4. Indeed, all the evildoers, who devour My people as they devour bread, who do not call upon the Lord, will [ultimately] come to know [the consequences of their actions].
5. There they will be seized with fright, for God is with the righteous generation.
6. You scorn the counsel of the lowly, that he puts his trust in the Lord.
7. O that out of Zion would come Israel's deliverance! When the Lord returns the captivity of His people, Jacob will exult, Israel will rejoice.
Chapter 15
This psalm speaks of several virtues and attributes with which one should conduct oneself. He is then assured that his soul will rest in Gan Eden.
1. A psalm by David. Who may abide in Your tent, O Lord? Who may dwell on Your holy Mountain?
2. He who walks blamelessly, acts justly, and speaks truth in his heart;
3. who has no slander on his tongue, who has done his fellowman no evil, and who has brought no disgrace upon his relative;
4. in whose eyes a despicable person is abhorrent, but who honors those who are God-fearing; who does not change his oath even if it is to his own detriment;
5. who does not lend his money at interest, nor accept a bribe against the innocent. He who does these things shall never falter.
Chapter 16
When one is in need, he should not implore God in his own merit, for he must leave his merits for his children.
1. A michtam,1 by David. Watch over me, O God, for I have put my trust in You.
2. You, [my soul,] have said to God, "You are my Master; You are not obligated to benefit me.”
3. For the sake of the holy ones who lie in the earth, and for the mighty-all my desires are fulfilled in their merit.
4. Those who hasten after other [gods], their sorrows shall increase; I will not offer their libations of blood, nor take their names upon my lips.
5. The Lord is my allotted portion and my share; You guide my destiny.
6. Portions have fallen to me in pleasant places; indeed, a beautiful inheritance is mine.
7. I bless the Lord Who has advised me; even in the nights my intellect admonishes me.2
8. I have set the Lord before me at all times; because He is at my right hand, I shall not falter.
9. Therefore my heart rejoices and my soul exults; my flesh, too, rests secure.
10. For You will not abandon my soul to the grave, You will not allow Your pious one to see purgatory.
11. Make known to me the path of life, that I may be satiated with the joy of Your presence, with the bliss of Your right hand forever.
Chapter 17
A loftily person should not ask God to test him with some sinful matter, or other things. If one has sinned, he should see to reform himself, and to save many others from sin.
1. A prayer by David. Hear my sincere [plea], O Lord; listen to my cry; give ear to my prayer, expressed by guileless lips.
2. Let my verdict come forth from before You; let Your eyes behold uprightness.
3. You have probed my heart, examined it in the night, tested me and found nothing; no evil thought crossed my mind; as are my words so are my thoughts.
4. So that [my] human deeds conform with the words of Your lips, I guard myself from the paths of the lawbreakers.
5. Support my steps in Your paths, so that my feet shall not falter.
6. I have called upon You, for You, O Lord, will answer me; incline Your ear to me, hear what I say.
7. Withhold Your kindness-O You who delivers with Your right hand those who put their trust in You-from those who rise up against [You].
8. Guard me like the apple of the eye; hide me in the shadow of Your wings
9. from the wicked who despoil me, [from] my mortal enemies who surround me.
10. Their fat has closed [their hearts]; their mouths speak arrogantly.
11. They encircle our footsteps; they set their eyes to make us stray from the earth.
12. His appearance is like a lion longing to devour, like a young lion lurking in hiding.
13. Arise, O Lord! Confront him, bring him to his knees; rescue my soul from the wicked [who serves as] Your sword.
14. Let me be among those whose death is by Your hand, O Lord, among those who die of old age, whose portion is eternal life and whose innards are filled with Your concealed goodness; who are sated with sons and leave their abundance to their offspring.
15. Because of my righteousness, I shall behold Your countenance; in the time of resurrection, I will be sated by Your image.
-------
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 52
• Lessons in Tanya
• Shabbat, 2 Sivan 5774 - May 31, 2014
• Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 52
ובירידתה בהשתלשלות מעולם לעולם, גם השכינה ירדה ונתלבשה בה בכל עולם ועולם
As [this wisdom] came down by progressive descents from World to World, the Shechinah, too, came down and clothed itself in it in each World.
Thus, within the Supernal Wisdom which descends into each World is to be found the Shechinah of that World.
וזהו היכל קדשי קדשים שבכל עולם ועולם
This is the shrine of the “Holy of Holies,” which is contained in each World.
I.e., the Shechinah resides with the “Holy of Holies” of each World, this being the Divine “intelligence” enclothed in the Torah of each particular World.
וכמו שכתוב בזהר ועץ חיים, שהשכינה, שהיא מלכות דאצילות [שהיא בחינת גילוי אור אין סוף ברוך הוא וחיות שמאיר לעולמות, ולכן היא נקראת דבר ה׳ ורוח פיו כביכול
So also has it been stated in the Zohar and Etz Chayim, that the Shechinah, which is Malchut of Atzilut (1 being the manifestation of the light and vitality of the blessed Ein Sof, which illumine the worlds, wherefore i.e., since it is a revelation it is called “G‑d’s speech” and the “breath of His mouth,” as it were, for the purpose of speech is to reveal that which was concealed in thought,
על דרך משל, כמו שבאדם הדבור מגלה מחשבתו הסתומה ונעלמה להשומעים]
as in the case of a person, by way of example, speech reveals to the hearers the speaker’s concealed and hidden thought),
The same applies Above: Malchut of Atzilut, the level at which the light of Ein Sof and the previously concealed vitality becomes manifest, is called “G‑d’s speech,” for it reveals G‑dliness to the Worlds. This level of Shechinah, which is Malchut of Atzilut:
היא מתלבשת בהיכל קדשי קדשים דבריאה, שהוא חב״ד דבריאה, ובהתלבשותן במלכות דבריאה נבראו הנשמות והמלאכים שבבריאה
clothes itself in the shrine of the Holy of Holies of Beriah, namely, the Chochmah, Binah and Daat of Beriah. Through the fact that [the latter Sefirot] clothe themselves in the Malchut of Beriah, the souls and angels which exist in the World of Beriah have been created.
At this point the Rebbe notes: “[The ChaBaD of Beriah clothe themselves in the Malchut of Beriah] together with the Malchut of Atzilut which is within them, for, as stated earlier [in this chapter], ‘from this source... have been created....’*”
The souls and angels of the World of Beriah are created beings. Unlike the Sefirot of any particular World, they are not the G‑dliness of their World, but are created from the level of Malchut therein. Thus, the souls and angels of the World of Beriah are created from Malchut of that World.2
וגם משם נמשך התלמוד שלפנינו
And from there also — from Malchut of Beriah, in which is enclothed the Shechinah, i.e., Malchut of Atzilut, which previously had clothed itself in the Chochmah, Binah and Daat of the World of Beriah, after which the latter are clothed in Malchut of the World of Beriah — derives the Talmud that we possess.3
וכמו שנתבאר לעיל בשם התיקונים, שבעולם הבריאה מאירות ומשפיעות שם חכמתו ובינתו ודעתו של אין סוף ברוך הוא בבחינת צמצום עצום, בכדי שיוכלו הנשמות והמלאכים, שהם בעלי גבול ותכלית, לקבל השפעה מבחינת חב״ד אלו
And as has previously been explained in the name of the Tikkunim, that in the World of Beriah there shine and flow forth the Chochmah, Binah and Daat of the Ein Sof, in a powerfully contracted manner, in order that the souls and the angels, which are finite beings, shall be able to receive influence from these categories of ChaBaD.
Souls and angels in the World of Beriah are unable to receive influence from ChaBaD as it exists in its essential state, in Atzilut. Only after ChaBaD descends in a powerfully contracted manner into Beriah are they able to receive its influence.
ולכן נמשך משם התלמוד, שהוא גם כן בחינת חב״ד, שהתלמוד הוא טעמי ההלכות על בוריין, והטעמים הם בחינת חב״ד
Therefore the Talmud (not the Mishnah, but the Gemara) also originates from there — from the World of Beriah, for it (the Talmud) is also of the category of ChaBaD, for the Talmud is i.e., it consists of the clearly defined reasons of the Halachot, and the reasons being rational are from the category of ChaBaD (“intelligence”).
וההלכות עצמן הן ממדותיו של אין סוף ברוך הוא, שהן חסד דין רחמים כו׳ שמהן נמשך ההיתר והאיסור, והכשר והפסול, והחיוב והפטור
And the laws themselves found in the Mishnah derive from the middot (the emotive attributes) of the Ein Sof, namely, kindness, severity, mercy, and so on, from which originate permission and prohibition, permission deriving from kindness and prohibition from severity, ritual validity and invalidity, liability and blamelessness, ritual validity and blamelessness originating from the attribute of kindness, and ritual invalidity and liability originating from the attribute of severity,
כמו שכתוב בתיקונים
as is explained in the Tikkunim.
ובהתלבשות מלכות דאצילות במלכות דבריאה, מתלבשת בהיכל קדשי קדשים דיצירה, שהוא חב״ד דיצירה
By virtue of the clothing of Malchut of Atzilut in Malchut of Beriah4 it then clothes itself in the shrine of the Holy of Holies of Yetzirah, this being the ChaBaD of Yetzirah — the Chochmah, Binah and Daat of Yetzirah. It is in this manner that the Shechinah of Malchut of Atzilut ultimately comes to reside in the World of Yetzirah.
ובהתלבשותן במלכות דיצירה, נוצרו הרוחות
When later on the latter (Malchut of Atzilut, together with the Sefirot in which it is enclothed — in Malchut of Beriah and in ChaBaD of Yetzirah) are clothed in Malchut of Yetzirah, the souls which are called Ruchot are created,
For the three levels of souls, Nefesh, Ruach (singular of Ruchot) and Neshamah, correspond to the three lower Worlds: Nefesh originates in Asiyah, Ruach in Yetzirah and Neshamah in Beriah. With regard to Neshamot, the Alter Rebbe has said previously that they are created from Malchut of Beriah. In now discussing the level of Malchut of Yetzirah, he writes that souls of the level of Ruach are created,
והמלאכים שביצירה
and the angels which are of the World of Yetzirah.
וגם משם היא המשנה שלפנינו, שהיא הלכות פסוקות הנמשכות גם כן מחב״ד של אין סוף ברוך הוא
From there too, from Malchut of Yetzirah, comes the Mishnah that we possess, which comprises the legal decisions that are likewise derived from ChaBaD of the blessed Ein Sof.5
Not only the Gemara within the Talmud, but the Mishnah too, derives from the “intelligence” of the Ein Sof. Even though it was stated earlier that the Mishnah derives from middot, yet since within the Mishnah there is concealed the rationale of the laws, they, too, emanate from the ChaBaD of Ein Sof.
רק שבחינת חב״ד, שהם טעמי ההלכות, הם מלובשים וגנוזים בגופי ההלכות, ולא בבחינת גילוי
Only that the categories of ChaBaD, that is, the reasons and interpretations of the halachot, are clothed and hidden within the laws themselves and are not in a revealed form,
In the Gemara the reasons for the laws are revealed, whereas in the Mishnah all that is revealed is the actual law itself, not the reasons underlying it.
וגופי ההלכות, שהן בבחינת גילוי, הן הן הארת מדותיו של אין סוף ברוך הוא בבחינת גילוי
while the elements of the halachot, which are in a revealed form in the Mishnah, are the very reflection of the middot of the blessed Ein Sof in their revealed form.
As mentioned earlier, the actual halachic decision that something is permissible derives from the divine attribute of kindness, and that something is prohibited derives from the attribute of severity.
כמו שכתוב לעיל בשם התיקונים, דשית ספירן מקננין ביצירה, שהן דרך כלל שני קוין, ימין ושמאל
Thus, it has been explained above in the name of the Tikkunim, that six Sefirot nest in Yetzirah. They the six Sefirot or middot comprise, in general, two extensions — right and left, right representing kindness, and left, severity,
להקל מסטרא דחסד, דהיינו: להתיר, שיוכל לעלות אל ה׳
acting with forbearance deriving from the aspect of kindness, which results in adjudicating leniently, that is to say, to permit [a thing] to ascend to G‑d,
For only that which is permitted to a Jew can ascend to G‑d. Thus, when a ruling is lenient and the object in question is permitted for use, it enables the individual, through utilizing it in the performance of a mitzvah, to cause it to ascend to G‑d. This, of course, is an act of kindness.
או להחמיר כו׳
or acting in a stringent manner, and so on, declaring the object to be forbidden for use, and thereby precluding its elevation to holiness. This is an act of severity. These two traits, kindness and severity, represent the two general directions of the emotive attributes as they exist Above, and from which the halachot of the Mishnah derive.
והכל על פי חכמה עילאה דאצילות, ובינה ודעת כלולות בה
And all this, both the Mishnah and Talmud, is according to the Supernal Chochmah of Atzilut, and Binah and Daat are comprised in it (i.e., in Chochmah),
ומיוחדות באין סוף ברוך הוא, כי בתוך כולן מלובשות חב״ד דאצילות, שאור אין סוף ברוך הוא מיוחד בהן בתכלית היחוד
and they (the Mishnah and Talmud, and the illumination of ChaBaD and middot found in them) are united with the blessed Ein Sof, for in all of them are clothed ChaBaD of Atzilut, with which the light of the blessed Ein Sof is united in a perfect union.
Thus, when the Shechinah enclothes itself in the shrine of the Holy of Holies of the World of Yetzirah, and thereafter in Malchut of Yetzirah, that part of Torah which is called the Mishnah is drawn down, this being the receptacle for the light of the Shechinah as it is revealed in the World of Yetzirah.
וכן בדרך זה ירדה השכינה, ונתלבשה בהיכל קדשי קדשים דעשיה
In like manner, i.e., in the same manner that the Shechinah first clothed itself in the level of Malchut of Yetzirah, the Shechinah then descended and clothed itself in the shrine of the Holy of Holies of Asiyah.
וכל עולם מג׳ עולמות אלו מתחלק לרבבות מדריגות, הנקראות גם כן עולמות פרטים
And each of these three Worlds, Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah, is subdivided into myriads of gradations, which are also called particular worlds,
ומלכות דאצילות מלובשת במלכות של כל עולם פרטי, יורדת, ומתלבשת בהיכל קדשי קדשים, שהוא חב״ד, שבעולם שלמטה ממנו במדרגה
and Malchut of Atzilut (the level of Shechinah) is clothed in (a) the level of Malchut* of each particular World; (b) moreover, through the above-mentioned enclothing, it descends, and (c) enclothes itself in the shrine of the Holy of Holies, namely, the ChaBaD, which is in the World below it in rank.
We thus have Malchut of Atzilut as it is enclothed in Malchut of a World of higher rank, descending into the ChaBad of a World of lesser rank.6
הגהה
ובזה יובן לשון הכתוב: מלכותך מלכות כל עולמים
*NOTE
This will enable us to understand the wording of the verse: “Your kingdom is the kingdom of all Worlds.”
The text seems to imply that there is one level of kingship called “Your kingdom,” and another level of kingship known as “the kingdom of all Worlds.” The Alter Rebbe therefore explains that the verse is telling us that “Your kingdom” is the innermost aspect of “the kingdom of all the Worlds.” Within them all is enclothed “Your kingdom” — Malchut of Atzilut.
END OF NOTE
והנה מהשכינה המלובשת בהיכל קדשי קדשים של כל עולם ועולם כללי או פרטי, נמשך ומתפשט ממנה אור וחיות לכל העולם והברואים שבו: נשמות ומלאכים וכו׳
It is from the Shechinah which is clothed in the shrine of the Holy of Holies of each and every general or particular World that light and vitality are extended and diffused to that whole World and the creatures contained therein — the souls, angels, and so forth,
The last phrase refers to the other beings of each World, such as the heichalot; they all receive light and vitality from the Shechinah as it is enclothed in the shrine of the Holy of Holies of that particular World.
כי כולם נבראו בעשרה מאמרות שבמעשה בראשית, שהם דבר ה׳ הנקרא בשם שכינה
for they were all created by the ten Divine utterances of creation,7 these being G‑d’s speech, which is termed the Shechinah.
Divine speech revealed that which was previously concealed. This is also the purpose of the Shechinah — revealing to the world a light which is essentially higher than the world. Therefore, Malchut of Atzilut (which is termed the Shechinah, and which is G‑d’s speech as revealed in the ten Divine utterances of creation) is the level from which life and vitality are drawn down and revealed to all Worlds and created beings.
And all this is accomplished through Torah, for Torah is the shrine of the Holy of Holies (in which the Shechinah first resides) in every World. Thus, as mentioned earlier, it serves as a “garment” to the Shechinah.
FOOTNOTES
1.Parentheses are in the original text.
2.Iggeret HaKodesh, on the third page of Epistle 25.
3.The Rebbe explains why the Alter Rebbe has added, “that we possess,” i.e., the Talmud that we possess here, in this world. Possibly, he says, this was added in order to anticipate a question that might arise from ch. 23 above. There the Alter Rebbe says that Torah is the illumination of the blessed Ein Sof, for “He is the Knower....” This indicates that Torah is wholly one with G‑d Himself. How, then, can it be said that the Talmud emanates from a level and Sefirah no higher than the World of Beriah?
The Alter Rebbe therefore explains that this refers only to the Talmud “that we possess,” as man studies it in this world. This concept sits well with the statement in ch. 23, that the laws are “particular streams flowing from the inner Supreme Will itself” — but an emanation from the Supreme Will. The Rebbe also cites the Alter Rebbe’s second note to ch. 40, which says that the core and the essence of the Supreme Will is in Atzilut, and only a glow therefrom radiates to each World according to its rank.
4.The Rebbe addresses the question of why the Alter Rebbe repeats, “By virtue of the clothing of Malchut of Atzilut in Malchut of Beriah,” when it had already been stated: “Through the fact that [the latter Sefirot] clothe themselves in the Malchut of Beriah....”
He answers: The vestment spoken of earlier is much milder and conceals little. From it, therefore, there only come about entities of the World of Beriah such as the souls and angels of that World, or the part of Torah connected with that World — the World of Beriah being on the level of a “world of concealment.”
The vestment which the Alter Rebbe speaks of here is so much stronger and conceals so much more, that through this concealment creatures of the World of Yetzirah come into being — the World of Yetzirah being on the much lower level of a “world of manifestation.”
The Rebbe provides an additional answer, which because of its complexity will be presented in capsule form.
There are two manners in which the Shechinah (Malchut of Atzilut) may clothe itself in the Malchut of every World. The actual manner in which it vests itself depends on its goal. When the vestment takes place in order to create creatures of that World itself (for example, when the Shechinah vests itself in Malchut of Beriah in order to create angels and souls of the World of Beriah), then the Shechinah first clothes itself in the ChaBaD of that World. Only after vesting itself there will it clothe itself in Malchut.
In such a situation, the prior vestment in ChaBaD is indispensable, just as in the analogy of body and soul, the vitality of all parts of the body derives from the brain — ChaBaD.
However, when the Shechinah vests itself in the Malchut of a lower World not for the sake of the World itself, but only in order to be able to descend into an even lower World (for example, when Malchut of Atzilut vests itself in Malchut of Beriah, in order to be later able to vest itself in Malchut of Yetzirah), then the vestment is direct: the Shechinah descends directly into the Malchut of the lower World.
Even if it were argued that in this instance too there must be some manner of prior vestment in ChaBaD of that World, still, in the subsequent vestment of the Shechinah in Malchut, no real effect of the prior vestment in ChaBaD is felt. At any rate, this lesser effect is present only to the degree necessary to enable the Shechinah to clothe itself in Malchut of the lower World.
This is why, when the Alter Rebbe begins discussing the World of Yetzirah, he first says, “By virtue of the clothing of Malchut of Atzilut in Malchut of Beriah.” This he does in order to emphasize that the vestment of the Shechinah in Malchut of Beriah is a direct (or at least a more direct) vestment, since it is not for the sake of Beriah itself, but rather for the sake of Yetzirah.
5.Note of the Rebbe: “For all of Torah is wisdom of the blessed Ein Sof, for which reason ‘Torah and G‑d are truly one.’ This is why the distinctive quality of Torah surpasses even that of the mitzvot, as explained in many places in the Tanya.”
6.The division of stages into (a), (b) and (c) is by the Rebbe; so too the repetition of “Malchut of Atzilut” in each and every one. It seems that the Rebbe is thereby indicating that the vestment in the Holy of Holies of each World relates to Malchut of Atzilut, and not to the Malchut of the lower Worlds in which Malchut of Atzilut vests itself. This corresponds with what the Alter Rebbe says further: “...and from the Shechinah which is clothed in the shrine of the Holy of Holies....”
7.Note of the Rebbe: “For before this there were no Worlds (this being the meaning of ‘In the beginning’ — at the beginning point of creation — from non-being to being).”
-------
Rambam:
• Daily Mitzvah P80, P81 - Sefer Hamitzvos:
Shabbat, 2 Sivan 5774 / May 31, 2014
Positive Commandment 80 (Digest)
Redeeming Firstborn Sons
"Give to Me the firstborn of your sons"—Numbers 22:28.
We are commanded to "redeem" male firstborn and to give the redemption money – five sela'im – to the priest.
The obligation to redeem the firstborn son lies with the boy's father; the mother is not obligated in this mitzvah.
The 80th mitzvah is that we are commanded to redeem a first-born male and to give the redemption value to a kohen.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "Give Me the first-born of your sons." The explanation of this "giving" is that we must redeem him as if the kohen already owns him. We acquire the child from the kohen by giving him five selah.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "You must redeem a first-born male child."
This mitzvah is called pidyon haben. Women are not obligated in this mitzvah; it is the child's mitzvah which the father must fulfill, as explained in Kiddushin.3
The details of this mitzvah are explained in tractate B'choros.
Levites are exempt from this mitzvah.
Rabbi Berel Bell is a well-known educator, author and lecturer. He and his family reside in Montreal, Canada.
From "Sefer Hamitzvot in English," published by Sichos in English.
FOOTNOTES
1.Ex. 22:28.
2.Num. 18:15.
3.29a.
Positive Commandment 81 (Digest)
Redeeming Firstborn Donkeys
"The firstborn of a donkey you shall redeem with a lamb"—Exodus 34:20.
We are commanded to redeem a firstborn male donkey with a lamb—which is given to the priest. (Unless the owner wishes to give the priest the monetary value of the donkey.)
Levites are exempt from this mitzvah.
The 81st mitzvah is that we are commanded to redeem a first-born donkey with a sheep, and to give the sheep to a kohen — unless we give the monetary value.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "The first-born of a donkey you shall redeem with a sheep."
The details of this mitzvah are also explained in tractate B'choros.
Levites are also exempt from this mitzvah.
Rabbi Berel Bell is a well-known educator, author and lecturer. He and his family reside in Montreal, Canada.
From "Sefer Hamitzvot in English," published by Sichos in English.
FOOTNOTES
1.If one desire, money may be given, since the Torah gives him the option of giving a sheep for the owner's convenience. See Hilchos B'chorim, Ch. 12, Hal. 11.
2.Ibid. 34:20.
Translation of (the unabridged text of) Sefer Hamitzvot by Rabbi Berel Bell, member of the Rabbinical Court of Montreal and director of Teacher Training for the Jewish Learning Institute.
-------
Rambam:
• 1 Chapter: Zechiyah uMattanah - Chapter Four
Zechiyah uMattanah - Chapter Four
Halacha 1
Once a person acquires a gift, he cannot nullify his acquisition. To cite an example: A person received a gift and acquired it. After it entered his domain while he remained silent, he retracted and said: "I do not desire it," "It is nullified," or "I see this blemish in it," his statements are of no consequence. Just as the giver cannot retract, so too, the recipient cannot retract once he has acquired it.
The gift that the recipient stated that he did not desire after it entered his possession becomes ownerless. The first person to take possession of it acquires it. For the recipient declared it ownerless after he acquired it. If, however, the recipient protested from the very outset, he does not acquire it , and it should be returned to its original owners.
Halacha 2
The following rules apply when a person transfers ownership over an article to a colleague through the agency of a third party. Once the third party takes possession of it - e.g., he performs meshichah on movable property, a deed of transfer of landed property reaches his hand, or he manifests ownership over the land - his colleague acquires the gift, even though it does not reach his hand. The giver can no longer retract.
The recipient by contrast has the option in his hand. If he desires, he may accept it. If he does not desire, he need not accept it. For a positive acquisition may be made for his person without his consent, and an obligation cannot be undertaken on his behalf without his consent. If a person desires that a gift be given to him, it is considered to be a positive acquisition. If, however, he does not desire it, a person cannot be forced to accept a gift that is given to him.
Halacha 3
There is an unresolved question among our Sages when another person accepts a gift on behalf of the recipient, when the recipient hears about the gift and remains silent, and afterwards he protests and states that he does not desire to receive it. We do not know whether the reason he remained silent at first is that he desired to accept it, and the reason he protested was that he retracted. Or perhaps he remained silent at the outset because nothing had reached his hand at that time. When the article did reach his hand, he protested, and his ultimate statements reveal his original intent.
Therefore," if another person comes first and acquires the article himself, it should not be expropriated from his possession. For perhaps the recipient originally acquired the article, and when he said: "I do not desire it," he declared it ownerless, as explained above. Thus, the person who came and took possession of it while it was ownerless acquires it.
If, however, the original owner comes and takes the article out of the possession of the person who took it, it should not be expropriated from his possession. The rationale is that perhaps the recipient did not acquire it, for when he said: "I do not desire it," his ultimate statements reveal his original intent. Thus, the person who took possession of it did not acquire it, and it remained in the possession of its original owner.
Halacha 4
The above principles can be applied in the following situation: Reuven desired to give 100 dinarim to Shimon. He sent him the 100 dinarim with Levi. If Reuven told Levi: "Acquire these 100 zwz on behalf of Shimon," or "Give these 100 zuz to Shimon," Reuven cannot retract his gift.
If, however, he tells him: "Bring these 100 zuz to Shimon," he has the option of retracting until the 100 zuz reach Shimon.
Halacha 5
In the above instance, if Levi took the 100 zuz that he was sent to bring to Shimon and looked for Shimon, but could not find him, he should return the money to Reuven.
If Shimon died during Reuven's lifetime, Levi should return the money to Reuven or to his heirs. But if Reuven died in Shimon's lifetime, the 100 zuz should be given to Shimon or his heirs.
The rationale is that it is a mitzvah to carry out the instructions of a deceased person, even though he gave those instructions while he was healthy. And in this instance, the 100 zuz are still in the possession of the agent.
Halacha 6
A person cannot acquire a gift on behalf of a colleague unless the person acquiring the gift is past majority and mentally competent. Both a man and a woman - indeed, even a married woman or a servant or maidservant can acquire property on behalf of another person.
A gentile, by contrast, cannot acquire property for a Jew. Since he is not fit to serve as an agent, he can never acquire property on behalf of a Jew. Similarly, just as a Jew cannot serve as an agent for a gentile, he cannot acquire property for a gentile.
Halacha 7
When a child reaches the state of understanding that when he is given a stone he throws it away, but when he is given a nut he keeps it, he can acquire property on his own behalf, but he cannot acquire on behalf of others. If he is less mature than this, he cannot even acquire property on his own behalf.
Similarly, a mentally or emotionally incompetent person cannot acquire property, neither on his own behalf nor on behalf of others. When a person gives property to a mentally or emotionally incompetent person through the agency of a mentally competent person, the incompetent acquires it.
A deaf mute can acquire property on his own behalf, as explained in Hilchot Gezelah.
8. One may acquire property for a minor - even a newborn child - or an adult, in his presence or outside his presence.
A person's courtyard can acquire property on his behalf even though he is not standing there. The rationale is that since the gift reached the person's courtyard, it is as if another person acquired it on his behalf.
Halacha 9
When does the above apply? With regard to a courtyard that is safeguarded. Different rules apply with regard to a courtyard that is not safeguarded - e.g., a field or a ruin. In such an instance, a person does not acquire an article unless he is standing next to the courtyard and says: "Let my field acquire the article for me."
Similarly, the area within a radius of the four cubits next to where a person is standing can acquire property on his behalf, if he is standing in an alleyway, at the sides of the public domain, which are not crowded with many people or in a field that is ownerless. However, when a person stands in the public domain or in a field belonging to a colleague, he does not acquire the article until it reaches his hand.
A female minor may acquire an article by virtue of its presence in her courtyard or within the area within a radius of four cubits of her. A male minor, by contrast, cannot acquire a gift unless it reaches his hand or is acquired on his behalf by another person.
Halacha 10
A gift is like a bill of divorce, in that a person cannot transfer words alone to an agent.
What is implied? If a person tells three people: "Tell so and so and so and so to compose and sign a deed recording a gift and give it to so and so," his statement is of no consequence. If these people convey these instructions to those witnesses and the witnesses write the deed and give it to the intended recipient, the recipient does not acquire anything.
Similarly, if a person tells two people, "Compose and sign a deed recording a gift and give it to so and so," they cannot tell a scribe to compose such a deed. Instead, they must compose it themselves, as applies with regard to a bill of divorce.
Halacha 11
When a person writes a deed saying: "I gave such and such a field to so and so," "I gave it to him," or "Behold, it is his," the person named acquires the field when the deed reaches his hand.
When, by contrast, the prospective donor writes in a deed: "I will give it to him," the intended recipient does not acquire the property even if witnesses testify with regard to the document.
The intended recipient does not acquire the property until the giver tells the witnesses: "Compose a deed recording a gift, and give it to him." Then they should compose the deed and give it. The rationale is that a recipient does not acquire the property given to him until a deed recording the gift reaches his hand or until the giver transfers ownership of the property to him via a third party, as explained.
Halacha 12
When a person says: "I gave this and this field to so and so," but the recipient says: "He did not give it to me," we suspect that perhaps the giver had another person acquire it for him.
Different rules apply if the giver states: "I composed a deed and gave it to him," and the recipient states: "He did not compose such a deed, nor did he give it to me." If the recipient of the gift himself makes such a statement, the admission of the principal himself is equivalent to the testimony of 100 witnesses. Therefore the giver is entitled to receive the produce of the field.
If the son of the recipient is the one who states: "You did not give this field to my father," while the giver maintains: "I wrote a deed and gave it to him," the produce should be entrusted to a third party until the status of the field becomes known.
Halacha 13
When a person thought to have received a gift claims: "The object in my possession was not given to me as a gift; instead, I am a watchman for it," or the like, or he says: "The gift was nullified from the outset, because I did not accept it," "I was forced to accept it against my will," "I accepted it by mistake," or the like, his claim is accepted. He is required to take a sh'vuat hesset, and the gift is returned to its original owners.
Halacha 14
If the alleged giver of a gift denies giving it, and instead, claims: "You are a watchman over it," "I gave it to you unwillingly," or "It is stolen property that you have," and the person in possession of the disputed article states: "You gave it to me as a gift," the alleged recipient must support his claim with a Rabbinic oath. Afterwards, he is under no obligation.
-------
Rambam:
• 3 Chapters: Bikkurim - Chapter 9, Bikkurim - Chapter 10, Bikkurim - Chapter 11
Bikkurim - Chapter 9
Halacha 1
It is a positive commandment for anyone1 who slaughters a kosher domesticated animal to give a priest the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw,2 as [Deuteronomy 18:50] states: "This is the judgment [due] the priests...." These are universally known as "presents."
This mitzvah is practiced at all times, whether at the time the Temple is standing or not, whether in Eretz Yisrael or in the Diaspora,3 with regard to ordinary animals and not consecrated ones.
Halacha 2
There is an obligation to separate the above-mentioned presents from all consecrated animals that had a permanent blemish4 before they were consecrated and were redeemed.5 If, by contrast, they had a temporary blemish6 before their consecration or they were consecrated when they were unblemished, but afterwards, they became blemished,7 and they were redeemed, they are exempt from these presents.8
Halacha 3
If there is an unresolved doubt whether an animal is a firstborn,9 there is certainly an obligation to give the presents [from it to the priest].10 [The rationale is:] If it is a firstborn, it must be given to a priest in its entirety. If it is not a firstborn, the presents must be given to a priest.
If a question arises with regard to the status of two animals11 and a priest took one because of the doubt, the second one is exempt from the presents. [The rationale is that] it is considered as an animal which a priest acquired and then gave to its owners, because of its blemish.12
If, however, there is an unresolved doubt whether an animal is the tithes of the herd,13 it is exempt in all situations. [The rationale is that] when one desires to expropriate property from a colleague,14 the burden of proof is on him.15
Halacha 4
When an animal that was consecrated and then disqualified because of a blemish16 became mixed with other animals - even one with 100 - if one person owns all of them,17 they are all exempt [from the obligation of the presents]. [The rationale is that the status of] each one is doubtful and when one desires to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is on him.18 If one person was slaughtering all the animals, only one [set of] presents is exempt.19
Halacha 5
We are required to separate presents only from a kosher domesticated animal,20 [as indicated by Deuteronomy, loc. cit., which] states: "If it be an ox or a sheep."21 If a hybrid is born from a sheep and a goat, there is an obligation for presents to be given.22 We separate all23 the presents from a ko'i24even though its status is undetermined.
When a male deer mates with a goat and it gives birth, there is an obligation [to give] half the presents [to a priest]. [This is derived from the above prooftext]: "If it be... a sheep," i.e., even if it is only part sheep.25 [When, by contrast,] a male goat mates with a deer, the offspring is exempt from the presents.26
Halacha 6
Whether a person slaughters an animal for consumption by Jews, by animals, by dogs, or for medical purposes, there is an obligation [to give] the presents.27
Halacha 7
There is an obligation [to separate the presents from] an animal belonging to partners, as [the above prooftext] states: "those who slaughter28 the animal."
Halacha 8
When a person purchases an animal with the produce of the Sabbatical year, he is obligated to [give] presents [to a priest].29
Priests and Levites are exempt from the presents, as [the above prooftext] states: "from the people." It is questionable whether the Levites are considered as part of "the people" or not. Therefore [the presents] are not taken from them.30 If, however, a priest took them, he need not return them.31
Halacha 9
When does the above32 apply? When one slaughters for his own sake. [Different laws apply to] a priest who is butcher, who slaughters [animals] and sells them in the marketplace. We grant him two or three weeks.33 Afterwards, we expropriate the presents from him and grant them to other priests.34
If he established a butcher shop to sell meat, we do not wait at all. Instead, we expropriate the presents from him immediately. If he refrains from giving them, we place him under a ban of ostracism35 until he gives them.
Halacha 10
A person who slaughters an animal for the sake of a priest or a gentile is exempt from [the obligation to give presents].36
A person who enters into a partnership with a priest [in the ownership of an animal] must mark his portion, so that he will leave the presents in the portion of the priest. If he does not mark his portion, he is obligated [to give] these presents, because the fact that the priest is his partner is not a matter of public knowledge.37Accordingly, if the priest was standing with him in the butcher store and dealing and negotiating with him,38 he is not required to mark [his portion].39
When a person enters a partnership with a gentile [in the ownership of an animal], he need not mark his portion.40 [The rationale is that] as a rule, a gentile will speak excessively and inform everyone that he is [the Jew's] partner, even if [the Jew] is not present at the time of the sale.
Halacha 11
[If, when negotiating a partnership agreement41 regarding the ownership of an animal,] a priest stipulates to [his partner, an Israelite,] that they are partners with the exception of the presents, the presents belong to the priest. Since the priest stipulated "with the exception of...," he left himself the portion of [the animal containing] the presents. Hence, they are his.42
If, however, the priest told the Israelite: "...on the condition that the presents are mine," the presents belong to the Israelite and he may give them to any priest he desires. Even though [the priest] stipulated that they were his, [the animal] is not exempt from [the obligation to give] the presents.43 For by saying "on the condition that...," he did not leave himself [the ownership of] the presents. Since he did not leave himself a share in their ownership, he did not acquire them through this stipulation.44
Halacha 12
If a priest was a partner in [the ownership of] the head, he is exempt from [giving] the jaw. If he is a partner in the front leg, he is exempt from the fore leg. If he is a partner in the digestive organs, he is exempt from the maw.45
If the priest told [the Israelite]: "The entire animal is mine, but the head is yours," he is obligated to give the jaw, for the portion that must be given belongs to the Israelite.
Halacha 13
[The following laws apply when] a gentile converts and he is in the process of having an animal slaughtered. If it was slaughtered before he converted, he is exempt.46 If [it was slaughtered] after he converted, he is obligated. If there is a doubt concerning the matter, [we follow the principle]: When one desires to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is on him.47
Halacha 14
It is permitted to partake [of the meat] of an animal from which the presents were not separated. [The situation] is not analogous to tevel48 [The rationale is that] the presents due to be given the priests are separate and distinct.49It is forbidden for an Israelite to partake of the presents themselves without the permission of a priest. If he transgresses and partakes of them, damages them, or sells them, he is not liable to make financial restitution.50 [The rationale is that] this is money that has no known plaintiff.51 A person who purchases them - even though he is forbidden to do so - is permitted to partake of them, because when the presents to the priests are stolen, the theft effect a change in ownership.
Halacha 15
If one tells a butcher: "Sell me the digestive organs of a cow," and there were presents52 among them, [the purchaser] should give them to a priest,53but [the seller] need not decrease the price [accordingly].54 If [the purchaser] bought [the organs] by weight, he should give them to the priest and deduct their value from the butcher's [due].55
Halacha 16
When a person sends meat to a friend and there were presents56 in [the parcel], the recipient need not be concerned that [the sender] transgressed and stole them.57
In a place where there are no priests,58 one should determine their financial value and partake of them, [so as not to cause] a priest a loss.59 He should then give the money to any priest he desires.
Halacha 17
If a person wants to give the presents to only one priest, he may do so. If he wants to divide them [and give them to several], he should not give half the maw or half the foreleg to one [priest]. Instead, he should give the foreleg to one, the maw to another, and the jaw to two others. [This is inferred from Deuteronomy 18:4]: "And you shall give it to him," i.e., give him a portion that is a significant present.60 If [he is giving presents] from an ox, he may divide them into portions,61 provided each portion is a significant present.
Halacha 18
What is meant by the foreleg? The right foreleg,62 The portion from the upper-joint until the ankle joint; two limbs, one connected with the other. The jaw refers to the jaw bones until the large ring of the protrusion of the gullet with the tongue between the bones.63 All of this is given to the priest.
Halacha 19
[When giving the jaw and the foreleg to the priest,] we do not pour boiling water on the hide [to remove the hair], nor do we skin it. Instead, we give it to [the priest] with its skin and wool. [We give a priest] the maw with the fat upon it64 and the fat within it. The priests have already accepted the custom of leaving the fat of the maw for the owner.65
Halacha 20
A women of the priestly family may partake of the presents even if she is married to an Israelite, because they are not consecrated. Moreover, her husband may partake of the presents for her sake.
A challalah,66 by contrast, may not partake of the presents, because challalim67 are not in the category of priests.68 If a priest desires to sell the presents, to give them as gifts, even to a gentile, or to feed them to the dogs, he may, for they are not consecrated at all.69
Halacha 21
[The following rules apply when there is] a priest whose friends [continually] give him presents. If he desires to transfer ownership of them to a friend who is an Israelite,70 he may, even though they did not enter [the priest's] domain. Thus [the priest's] friends may slaughter [their animals] and give the presents to the Israelite who acquired them. [This applies] provided the Israelite is in difficult straits and does not have the means to buy meat and the priest who transfers the meat to him is his friend. If, however, the priest is the Israelite's attendant or his hired worker or employee, he may not transfer ownership [of the presents] until they enter his domain.71 [This is a safeguard,] lest he compel him to do so.
Halacha 22
A priest should not grab the presents, nor should he even request them verbally. Instead, if he is given them72 in a respectful manner, he may take them.73 When there are many priests at the slaughter house, the modest ones withdraw and the gluttons take them. [Even though] a priest is modest, [if] it is not known that he is a priest, he should take [the presents] to let it be known to everyone that he is a priest.
The priests should only eat the presents as they are roasted, with mustard on them,74 for [Numbers 18:8] states [that the gifts to the priests75 were given them]: "for distinction." Hence, [they should] be eaten in a manner befitting a king.
FOOTNOTES
1.I.e., other than a priest or Levite (see Halachah 8).
2.Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 143) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 506) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. Chulin 134b states that the priests merited these gifts in recognition of the heroism of Pinchas in stopping the Jews' lewd behavior with the Midianite women.
3.This is a matter of debate among the commentaries. The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 61:21) quote the Rambam's view, but also mention the opinion of Rashi and Rabbenu Meir of Rutenberg who maintain that this mitzvah is not practiced in the Diaspora. They conclude that this latter view is observed. The Sefer HaChinuch, loc. cit., writes that in the abstract, he agrees that the law should be observed in the present era as well, but "we do not have the power to compel the butchers to observe it." See also the Responsa of the Chatam Sofer, sec. 301, where he writes that he would observe this mitzvah.
4.These blemishes are listed in Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash, ch. 7, Hilchot Issurei Mizbeach, ch. 2.
5.Since they are permanently blemished at the time of their consecration, it is obvious that they will ultimately be redeemed and used for ordinary purposes, not as a sacrifice. Hence it is never considered that their actual bodies became consecrated. Once they are redeemed, they are like any ordinary property. Hence the obligation to separate the presents falls upon them (Radbaz).
6.Such blemishes are listed in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeach 2:7.
7.Even permanently.
8.In such a situation, the consecration of the animal encompasses its actual body. The rationale is that in the first instance mentioned in this clause, the blemish is not permanent. Hence, it does not block the consecration. And in the second instance, the blemish comes after the consecration already took effect. And since the consecration affected the actual bodies of the animals, it continues to have an effect even after the animals have been redeemed. They are considered as pesulei hamukdashim and are exempt from this obligation (Radbaz, based on Bechorot 15a).
9.A sheep that had not given birth before gave birth to two offspring, a male - which would be separated as a firstborn - and a female which would not - and it is not known which of them was born first. See Hilchot Bechorot 5:1. Alternatively, a firstborn animal became mixed together with other animals [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 61:20).
10.A priest to whom a firstborn animal is given is not obligated to separate the presents and give them to another priest. In the instance described above, the Israelite who is the owner of the animal may retain possession of it, for we follow the principle: "When one desires to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is on him." Thus since a priest cannot prove that the animal was a firstborn, it remains the property of the owner. Nevertheless, he must give the presents to a priest based on the rationale presented by the Rambam.
11.E.g., a sheep that had not given birth before gave birth to two males. Thus one of them is certainly the firstborn and must be given to a priest. The question is which one. Hence the weaker one is given to the priest and the other one remains the property of its owner, but may not be slaughtered until it receives a disqualifying blemish (Hilchot Bechorot, loc. cit.).
12.I.e., in exchange for giving the priest the weaker animal, the priest forfeits his claim on the other animal. Hence, although there is a possibility that it is an ordinary animal and the presents must be given to the priest, to obtain those presents, the priest is required to prove that claim and he cannot. Hence, the owner may retain possession.
13.Which the owner must offer as a sacrifice (Hilchot Bechorot 6:4). Were this to be the case, he would not be required to give the presents to a priest.
14.In this instance, the priest desires to expropriate the presents.
15.I.e., we cannot obligate him to give the presents to a priest, because unlike the firstborn, the priest has no claim to the animal as a whole.
16.It is exempt from the obligation to separate the presents as stated in Halachah 2.
17.Our translation is based on authoritative manuscripts and early printings of the Mishneh Torah. The standard printed text differs slightly.
18.In this instance, the priest desires to expropriate the presents.
19.Because he knows that only one animal was consecrated and then disqualified.
20.If, however, he slaughters a kosher wild animal (e.g., a deer) or a kosher fowl, he is not required to give the presents to the priest.
21.More particularly, the Hebrew term seh can refer either to a sheep or a goat.
22.For even though it is a hybrid, it is definitely a domesticated animal and hence, there is an obligation for presents to be given.
23.Not only half.
24.Generally - and indeed, this interpretation is indicated by the standard published text of Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 1:13 - a ko'i is defined as: "a mixed species that comes from the mating of a kosher domesticated animal and a kosher wild beast." Accordingly, the Tur (Yoreh De'ah 61) questions the Rambam's ruling for it appears to contradict his own statements in the continuation of this halachah. Rav Yosef Caro (in his Kessef Mishneh to the Mishneh Torah and his Beit Yosef to the Tur) explains that the Rambam understands the term ko'i as referring to an independent species that we do not know whether to classify as a domesticated animal or as a wild beast. He maintains that the proper version of Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot is "any animal whose classification as a domesticated animal or as a beast is doubtful is a ko'i" and he maintains that Hilchot Shechitah 14:4 serves as proof of this interpretation.
25.Chulin 132a explains that since it is only part sheep, only part of the presents are granted. We do not take the species of the father of the animal into consideration.
26.For, as in the previous law, we do not take the species of the father of the animal into consideration. Although this matter is not determined definitively, since "when one desires to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is on him," the priest cannot claim the presents definitively either (Siftei Cohen61:10).
27.Presents need not be separated when an animal is killed without ritual slaughter - or when the ritual slaughter is performed improperly and the animal is forbidden to be eaten (Tosefta, Chulin 9:1). Nevertheless, if the slaughter is performed properly, the presents must be given to a priest, regardless of the reason for which the animal was slaughtered. This is derived from a comparison to the covering of the blood after the slaughter of an animal (Ra'avad).
28.The use of the plural term implies that the law applies even if there are many for whom the animal is being slaughtered (seeChulin 136a).
29.For even though that produce must be destroyed at the appropriate time, while it is in a person's possession, it is his personal property. See Bechorot 12b.
30.As above, when one desires to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is on him. And it is impossible for a priest to prove that the Levite is obligated.
From Chulin 131a, it is obvious that a Levite does not have the right to receive presents (Siftei Cohen 61:12).
31.For now they are in the possession of the priest. He may therefore retain them, for the Levite cannot prove that he is exempt.
The Rambam's view is cited by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 61:23). The Rama maintains that since the law is that a priest is not entitled to take it, if he takes it by force, he is required to return it. This difference of opinion reflects a divergence on an issue of a greater scope. See Hilchot Bechorot 5:3, where the Rambam rules that when there is a question concerning whether an animal is a firstborn or not, a priest is not permitted to take possession of it. If he takes possession of it, however, it is not expropriated from him. In that instance as well, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 315:1) follows the Rambam's approach and the Rama differs.
32.That the priests are exempt from giving presents.
33.During which he is allowed to keep the presents for himself.
34.Since he sells the meat, he is acting on behalf of others and they are not absolved from the obligation of giving the presents. See the gloss of Rav Yosef Korcus who debates whether this is a Scriptural Law or a Rabbinic decree.
35.See Hilchot Talmud Torah, ch. 6.
36.We are speaking about a situation where the animal belongs entirely to the priest or the gentile. It is the ownership of the animal, not the identity of the slaughterer which is significant. Since neither the priest nor the gentile would be required to give these presents, a slaughterer who acts on their behalf is also exempt.
37.Hence, if he does not give a priest the presents, people will suspect him of withholding them.
38.And thus it is evident that they are partners.
39.The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 61) differs with the Rambam, explaining Chulin 133a,b (the Rambam's source) differently. In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro elaborates in support of the Rambam's interpretation (even though at the outset, he states that the interpretation of the Tur appears more appropriate to the simple meaning of the passage. In his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 61:25), he follows the Tur's interpretation.
40.And we nevertheless assume that the presents were in the gentile's portion.
41.Rashi (in his commentary to Chulin 132a, the source for the Rambam's ruling) and similarly, the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 61:29) interpret this as referring to a sale and not a partnership agreement.
42.Even if they were not marked [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Chulin 10:3)].
43.The Radbaz explains that the rationale is that his stipulation runs contrary to the Torah - for the Torah requires that the presents be given - and whenever a person makes a stipulation that runs contrary to Torah law, the stipulation is nullified. Hence, it is as if the stipulation was never made and the priest's partner must separate the presents as stated in the previous halachah.
44.The commentaries note an apparent contradiction between the Rambam's ruling here and his ruling in Hilchot Ma'aser 6:19 where he states:
When a priest sells a field to an Israelite and tells him: "[I am selling it] on the condition that the tithes from it belong to me forever," they belong to him. [The rationale is that] saying "on the condition that" is tantamount to setting aside for himself [the portion of the field] where the tithes [grow].
Although there are explicit Talmudic sources for both rulings, their logic appears contradictory. Among the resolutions offered is that here, the Rambam is speaking about the ownership of an animal, while in Hilchot Ma'aser, he is speaking about landed property and the principles of ownership are different in these two instances.
45.The new concept taught by this halachah is that one can be exempt from part, but not all, of the presents.
46.Because at that time, he was not obligated, as stated in Halachah 10.
47.Hence, the convert may retain possession of the presents. As mentioned in the notes to Chapter 8, Halachah 9, when a similar situation arises concerning challah, the Rambam rules that the convert is liable to separate the dough. Nevertheless, a distinction between the two can be made because of the severity of that prohibition.
48.In which instance, it is forbidden to partake of the produce until the terumah and the tithes are separated.
49.In contrast to the produce where the terumah and tithes must be separated from the produce as a whole.
50.I.e., he has no legal obligation to make financial restitution. In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro questions whether the person has a moral and spiritual obligation to make restitution and in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 61:15), he rules that he does.
51.There is no one priest who can claim that the presents are his and they must be returned to him, for until they are given, the owner has the right to give them to any priest he desires.
52.I.e., the maw.
53.For they belong to him.
54.Since it was obvious that the maw was among the organs he purchased, the purchaser should have realized that it was not included in the price. Instead, he was paying him for the remainder of the meat (Kessef Mishneh).
55.Since the maw did not belong to the butcher - for it must be given to the priest - he had no right to sell it (ibid.). See also the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Chulin 10:4) which states that it is forbidden to buy the presents, because by doing so, one would be aiding theft.
56.I.e., some of the organs that have to be given the priest.
57.For we do not suspect that a person sinned. Instead, the recipient assumes that the sender purchased the presents from a priest; alternatively, there were no priests in the area and he followed the advice given in the following clause.
58.And thus there is no one to give the presents to.
59.For if he sets them aside, they will spoil. There is no difficulty in doing so, for the presents are not consecrated at all.
60.See the notes of Rav Kapach to the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Chulin 10:4). There he writes that the original version of the Rambam's Commentary did not contain this law, but the later version did.
61.For even a portion of the organs of an ox are of a significant size.
62.The Turei Zahav 61:1 states that this is derived from the fact that the prooftext speaks of "the foreleg," i.e., the important one. An animal's foreleg is comprised of three bones. According to the Rambam, the lower two are given to the priest. See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Chulin 10:4).
63.Chulin 134b states that one should take the jaw until the place where the animal is slaughtered. See the accompanying diagrams.
64.This fat is forbidden to be eaten (Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 7:6).
65.Chulin 134b explains that this is an act of generosity on the part of the priests. Since the presents are their personal property without any sanctity at all, they can do with them as they see fit. From the wording of the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 61:4), however, it appears that this custom is not universally accepted.
66.In Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 19:1 describes a challalah as a woman born from relations forbidden to the priesthood or a woman who is forbidden to the priesthood who engaged in relations with a priest.
67.The term challal refers to the offspring of relations forbidden to a priest.
68.Hence, just as the presents may not be given to a challal, they may not be given to a challalah.
The concept that challalim are not priests applies in many contexts. See Hilchot Nesiat Kapayim 15:5, Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 19:5, Hilchot Terumah 6:7, et al.
69.The Siftei Cohen 61:5 states that a priest should not give or sell them to gentiles or feed them to dogs unless they are no longer fit for human consumption.
70.The Rambam's source (Chulin 133a) mentions that the recipient of these presents must be a Torah scholar. The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 61:14) also mention that point. Apparently, the Rambam thinks that it is not an absolute necessity.
71.Once they are given to him, however, there are no restrictions on what he may do with them.
72.Turei Zahav 61:12 states that this is derived from the word "and you shall give" in the prooftext. Implied is that the presents should be given. They should not be taken by the priests on their own initiative.
73.See parallels in Hilchot Terumah 12:18.
74.If, however, a priest prefers to eat them in another manner, he may. It is not an obligation to partake of them in the manner described (Tosafot, Chulin 132b).
75.This verse does not speak about the presents of meat explicitly, but rather the portions of the sacrifices given to the priests. Nevertheless, the concepts can be derived one from the other. See Rashi, Chulin, loc. cit..
Bikkurim - Chapter 10
Halacha 1
It is a positive commandment to give a priest the first shearings [of an animal],1 as [Deuteronomy 18:4] states: 'Give him the first shearings of your flock.' Levites are considered like Israelites with regard to this mitzvah.2 There is no minimum measure for these shearings according to Scriptural law. According to Rabbinical Law, one should not give less than a sixtieth. It applies only in Eretz [Yisrael],3 whether the Temple is standing or not like the first of the grain.4 It applies to ordinary animals, but not to consecrated ones.
Halacha 2
What is implied? A person consecrated animals for the Temple treasury5and then sheared them. Is he obligated to redeem them and give [the first shearings] to the priests? Or if one consecrated an animal with the exception of its shearings, is he obligated in the first shearings? It is written [ibid.]: "your sheep,' [i.e., the obligation applies only to "your sheep.'
Halacha 3
There is an obligation [to give a priest] the first shearing of any consecrated animals6 that possessed a permanent blemish before they were consecrated and were [then] redeemed.7 If, however, they were consecrated before they were blemished or it had a temporary blemish before it was consecrated,8 and afterwards, it received a permanent blemish and it was redeemed, it is exempt from the first shearing.9
Halacha 4
The only animals whose first shearings we are obligated [to give a priest] are sheep, both male and female, for their wool is fit [to make] garments. If their wool was stiff and not fit for [making] garments, they are exempt from the first shearings, for this present is given to the priest for the sole purpose of providing him with garments.10
Halacha 5
Since the Holy One, blessed be He, granted [a priest] the terumot which provide him with bread and wine11 and He granted him the presents of meat12and the sacrificial meat of the Temple for meat,13 He provided them with the first shearings for their garments and [restitution for property] stolen from a [childless] convert,14 devotion offerings,15 ancestral fields [that were consecrated and not redeemed],16 and the redemption of the firstborn,17for their expenses and for their other needs. [These are granted to the priests,] because they are not granted an ancestral portion of the land, nor a share in the spoils of war.18
Halacha 6
If [a sheep's] wool was [naturally] red, black, or brown, there is an obligation [to give the priest] the first shearings. If, however, the wool was shorn and dyed, before it was given [to a priest], he is exempt from the first shearings.19 If one bleached it before he gave it [to the priests], he is obligated to set [the wool] aside after he bleaches it.20 When a person pulls out the wool of ewes by hand instead of shearing it, he is obligated in the first shearings.
Halacha 7
There is an obligation [to separate] the first shearings from hybrids [of sheep],21 a ko'i,22 and a sheep that is mortally il1.23 If, however, one shears a dead sheep, he is exempt.24
Halacha 8
When a person sets aside the first shearings and they are lost, he is responsible to make restitution until he gives them to the priest.25
When a person says: 'Let all of my shearings be considered as the first shearings,' his words are of consequence.26
Halacha 9
A person who purchases the shearings of a gentile's sheep after the gentile has shorn them is exempt from the first shearings.27 When he purchases [the gentile's] sheep for their shearing,28 he is obligated even though the wool grew in the gentile's domain and the sheep are returned to the gentile after the shearing. Since the shearer is Jewish and the shearings belong to him, he is obligated. For the obligation takes effect only at the time of shearing.
Halacha 10
[The following laws apply when] a person purchases the shearings of a fellow Jew. If the seller left a portion of his sheep to shear,29 the seller is obligated to separate from [the shearing of] the remainder [the appropriate amount] for the entire [flock. This applies] even if the seller has not begun to shear [his sheep.30 The rationale is that we operate under] the assumption that a person will not sell the presents to be given the priests.31 If [the seller] did not leave any [sheep to shear], the purchaser is obligated to separate [the first shearings].32
Halacha 11
[A different rule applies it] there are two types of shearings, e.g., white wool and brown wool, or wool from males and wool from females, and one sold one and retained possession of the other. Both [the purchaser and the seller] should give the first shearings, [the purchaser] on what he purchased and the seller on what he retained.33
Halacha 12
When a convert converts and he possesses sheep that are being shorn and it is not known whether they were shorn before he converted or after he converted, he is exempt. [The rationale is when] one desires to expropriate property from a colleague,34 the burden of proof is upon him.
Halacha 13
How many sheep must there be for [a flock] to be obligated for the first shearings? No less than five,35 provided their shearings is not less than the weight of 60 sela36 and the shearings of each one will not be less than the weight of 12 sela. If the shearings of one of them is less than the weight of twelve sela, [the flock] is exempt from the first shearing, even if [the wool of] the five of them weighs 60 selaim or more.
Halacha 14
Partners are obligated in [the mitzvah of] the first shearings, provided each one's share is equal to the minimum measure [mentioned above]. It: however, there are only five sheep belonging to two partners, they are exempt.37
Halacha 15
The mitzvah is to set aside the first shearing at the outset.38 If, however, one set it aside in the middle or at the end, he fulfilled his obligation.
When a person owns five sheep, but [did not shear them together, i.e.,] he had one shorn alone and sold its wool, and then had another shorn alone and sold its wool, and then a third, etc., all of these are combined [to obligate him in the mitzvah of] the first shearing,39 even if this takes place over the course of several years. He may separate from the new shearings for the old shearings and from [the shearings of] one type of sheep for another.40 If, however, he had one sheep, he sheared it and set aside its shearings, purchased a second sheep and set aside its shearings, [and continued doing so until he sheared five sheep], their shearings are not combined.41
Halacha 16
When a person has several shearings from the first shearings that he desired to divide among the priests, he should not give any priest less than the weight of five selaim of white wool, enough to make a small garment.
The intent is not that he should whiten it and give it to them. Instead, he should give each of them [at least enough] unrefined wool to produce five selaim42 or more of wool after it has been whitened. [This is derived from Deuteronomy 18:14:] 'Give it to him,' i.e., give him a significant present.
Halacha 17
The first shearings are ordinary property in every regard. Therefore, I maintain that they may be given to a woman of the priestly family even if she is married to an Israelite like the presents of meat.43 It appears to me that they are governed by the same laws.
FOOTNOTES
1.Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 144) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 508) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
2.I.e., as opposed to the presents described in the previous chapter, the Levites are required to separate these shearings.
3.But not in the Diaspora. Thus it resembles terumah - for both are called "first" and hence share similarilities in many laws - and not the presents of meat. Although the Mishnah (Chulin 11:1) states that this mitzvah also applies in the Diaspora, according to the Rambam, the halachah does not follow that view.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 333:1) follows the Rambam's view. The Tur and the Rama state that theoretically, this mitzvah should also be observed in the Diaspora, but in practice, that view is not followed.
4.I.e., terumah. See Hilchot Terumah 1:1.
5.I.e., needless to say this law would apply if the animal was consecrated for the sake of sacrifice on the Altar, for in that instance, the animal is forbidden to be shorn and it is forbidden to work with it. Moreover, even if the animal is consecrated only for the sake of the Temple treasury, in which instance, it will ultimately be redeemed for personal use, since while it is consecrated, it is not "your sheep,' as the Rambam continues to explain, there is no obligation to give its first shearings.
6.I.e., even if the animal was consecrated only for the sake of the Temple treasury, as above, these laws apply. The rationale is that a blemished kosher animal that is consecrated to the Temple treasury is redeemed with the intent to be used as a sacrifice.
7.Since it was blemished at the time it was consecrated, the animal was never fit to be offered on the altar. Hence, the consecration never affected the actual physical substance of the animal. Accordingly, once it is redeemed, it is considered as an ordinary animal and its first shearings must be given to a priest
8.Since the temporary blemish will be healed, it is considered as if did not exist.
9.Since when consecrated, the animal was fit for sacrifice, the consecration affected its physical substance. Hence, even after it was redeemed, it is not considered as an ordinary animal and it is exempt from the first shearings. See the parallel in Chapter 9, Halachah2.
10.Rav Yosef Corcus explains that the Rambam (based on one of the opinions in Chulin 137a) is referring to the priestly garments which are made from wool and linen. For, otherwise, goats' wool is also fit to make ordinary garments. This explanation is also quoted by Siftei Cohen 333:2. The intent is not, however, that the first shearings should be used only for priestly garments, for as the Rambam states in the following halachah, the first shearings were given to the priests for their personal garments.
11.According to the Rambam, the terumot also include oil and other fruits.
12.Described in Chapter 9.
13.I.e., the portions of the sin offerings, guilt offerings, and peace offerings which are granted to the priests.
14.See Hilchot Gezeilah, Chapter 8.
15.See Hilchot Arachin VaCharamim, Chapter 6.
16.Which becomes the property of the priests; see Hilchot Arachin VaCharamim4:19.
17.See Chapters 11 and 12.
18.See Hilchot Shemitah VeYovel, Chapter 13, with regard to both these points.
19.He is considered to have acquired the wool because he made a significant change in its nature. This ruling applies after the fact. As an initial preference, it is forbidden to make such a change [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Chulin 11:3; Rav Kappach's edition)].
20.For this is not considered as a significant change.
21.The Radbaz explains that this law depends on the concept stated in Halachah 4: If the wool of a hybrid (the offspring of a sheep or a goat) is soft, the first shearings must be separated. If not, it is exempt.
22.As mentioned in the notes to Chapter 9, Halachah 5, the Rambam understands the term ko'i as referring to an animal which our Sages were unable to classify as a domesticated animal or a wild beast.
23.For the animal is alive at present and the removal of its wool is considered as shearing.
24.The Kessef Mishneh explains that this is derived from the very definition of the mitzvah, 'the shearing of the sheep.' A dead sheep is not considered a sheep and cutting its wool is not considered as shearing.
25.The Radbaz questions why the first shearings are different than all the other presents given to the priests where such a law is not found. He explains that the other presents involve grain and meat and a granary or a slaughter house are not located at a great distance from the residential area of a city. Hence, it is not very difficult for a priest to go and collect them. Sheep, by contrast, may not be allowed to pasture near residential areas. Hence, since it is far more difficult for a priest to collect them, the Torah made the owners responsible for the shearings.
26.Chulin 136b notes that in this respect, although they are also called "the first," the first shearings are different from terumah and challah. With regard to these separations, if one designates his entire crop as terumah 0r his entire dough as challah, his statements are of no consequence. The Radbaz explains that the term terumah - and challah is also called terumah - implies elevating one portion of a group from another portion. Hence, there must always be something left behind. The term 'the first shearings' does not have such a connotation.
Rav Yosef Corcus notes that Chulin 136b associates this ruling with the Rabbi Ila'ai's opinion that the first shearing applies in the Diaspora as well as in Eretz Yisrael. Thus there is an apparent contradiction between the Rambam's ruling here and his ruling in Halachah 1 that the mitzvah of the first shearing applies only in Eretz Yisrael. Rav Yosef explains that the Rambam's ruling in Halachah 1 is based on custom and not on the acceptance of the opinions that differ with Rabbi Ila'ai.
27.This point is obvious. The Rambam (and his source, Chulin 138a) mention it only because of the contrast to the following laws. Rashi, however, interprets that passage differently. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 333:7) follows the Rambam's understanding, while the Tur and the Rama follow Rashi's view.
28.I.e., he never becomes the real owner of the sheep; he acquires them only for the right to shear their wool.
29.And that portion contains the minimum measure mentioned in Halachah 13.
30.Since the seller has not begun shearing the sheep at all, it would seem reasonable to say that each person should give the first shearings from his portion. Nevertheless, the ruling is not so.
31.And thus they remain in his portion. Selling these presents is prohibited and we assume that the person would not desire to transgress.
32.Chulin 138a explains that the seller tells the purchaser: 'I did not sell you the first shearings. The money I took from you is for the remainder of the wool that is not the priest's portion. I merely gave you the opportunity to give the presents to the priest of your choice."
33.Even though one may separate the first shearings from one type of wool for another type as evident from Halachah 15, in this instance, since the two types are owned by two separate people, each should separate the first shearings from his own wool.
34.I.e., the priest desires to expropriate the first shearings from the owner. See the parallel in Chapter 9, Halachah 13. The Radbaz explains that this ruling follows the principle: When there is a doubt concerning a prohibition, we rule stringently. When there is a doubt concerning financial matters, we rule leniently.
35.Chulin 11:1 derives this from a non-literal interpretation of II Samuel 25:18.
36.A sela is approximately 20 grams in contemporary measure.
Chulin 11:2 states that this measure is required, for only then will the gift to the priest be significant, for it will be possible to make a small garment from it.
37.I.e., the Rambam follows the opinion (Chulin 135a) that the partnership is not recognized as a single entity. Hence, it is necessary for the share of each of the partners to comprise at least the minimum amount. The Kessef Mishneh notes the parallel to Chapter 6, Halachah 20.
38.The Radbaz states that this is implied by the very term 'the first of.'
39.Because at the time he sheared the first sheep, he possessed a flock of the minimum size. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 333: 12) states that this applies even if he sold some of his sheep after shearing them.
40.One should not, however, separate the shearings of inferior sheep for those of superior sheep [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 333:12)].
41.Because at the time he sheared the first sheep, he did not have a flock of the minimum size.
42.Five selaim is 100 grams in contemporary measure. This measure of wool was sufficient to fashion a sash (avneit) for a priest (Chulin 138a).
43.See Chapter 9, Halachah 20.
Bikkurim - Chapter 11
Halacha 1
It is a positive commandment1 for every Jewish man2 to redeem his son who is the firstborn of his Jewish mother, as [Exodus 34:19] states: "All first issues of the womb are mine" and [Numbers 18:15] states: "And you shall surely redeem a firstborn man."
Halacha 2
A woman is not obligated to redeem her son,3 for one who is obligated to redeem himself is obligated to redeem his son.4 If the father transgressed and did not redeem his son, when he comes of age,5 he is obligated to redeem himself.6
Halacha 3
If it is necessary to redeem both the person himself and his son, he should redeem himself first and then his son.7 If he only has enough [money] for one redemption, he should redeem himself.
Halacha 4
If [a father] had to redeem his son and the time arrived for him to make a festive pilgrimage [to Jerusalem] and he does not have the resources for both, he should redeem his son and then make the pilgrimage. [This is alluded to in Exodus 34:20:] which states: "You shall redeem all your firstborn sons" and afterwards [continues]: "Do not behold My countenance8 emptyhanded."9
Halacha 5
A person who redeems his son should recite the blessing: "[Blessed are You...] who sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us concerning the redemption of a son."10 Afterwards, he recites the blessing Shehechiyanu11 and then gives12 [the money for] the redemption to the priest. If [a son] redeems himself, he should recite the blessing: "[Blessed... who commanded us] to redeem the firstborn"13 and he should recite the blessing Shehechiyanu.
Halacha 6
This mitzvah is practiced in every place and at all times.14 For how much should the son be redeemed? Five selaim,15 as [Numbers 18:16] states: "And those to be redeemed: from one month you shall redeem [according to the valuation of five silver shekalim]." [The redemption may be paid] in silver16 or in articles worth silver, i.e., movable property that is of financial worth like the shekalim are. Therefore one may not redeem [a firstborn] with landed property or with servants. Nor may promissory notes [be used], because they are not of inherent worth.17 If one redeemed a firstborn with these, he is not redeemed.18
Halacha 7
When a father writes to a priest that he is obligated to give him five selaim, the obligation takes effect,19 but the son is not redeemed.20If he gives him a utensil that is not worth five selaim in the market, but the priest accepts it as if he was given five selaim, the son is redeemed.21 If he divides the five selaim among ten priests,22 whether at once or one after the other, he fulfils his obligation.23
Halacha 8
If the priest desires to return [what was given for] the redemption to [the father], he may. He should not, however, give it to him with the intent that he return it. If he did so, and [the priest] returned it, his son is not redeemed.24 [Instead,] he must give it to him with the resolution that he is giving him a present without any reservations. Afterwards, if the priest desires to return it, he may return it.25 Similarly, if he gives it to him as a present with the stipulation that it be returned, his son is redeemed.26
Halacha 9
The priests and the Levites are exempt from the redemption of their firstborn, as evident from a logical deduction: If they served as the redemption of the Israelites firstborn in the desert,27 certainly, they themselves are exempt.
Halacha 10
An Israelite who is born to a woman of the priestly or Levite family28is exempt, for this matter is not dependent on the father, but rather on the mother, 7as [indicated by the phrase]:29 "the first issue of the womb in Israel."
Halacha 11
When a woman of the Levite family was impregnated by a gentile, her son is exempt.30 If, however, a woman of the priestly family was impregnated by a gentile, her son is obligated,31 for his mother was disqualified from the priestly family because of relations with the gentile.32
Halacha 12
When a priest fathers a son who is a challal33 and the father dies within 30 days [of the son's birth], the son is obligated to redeem himself,34because the father did not acquire the redemption.35 If [the father] dies after 30 days [have passed], the son is not obligated to redeem himself, because the father acquired the redemption.36
Halacha 13
If a maidservant was freed - or a gentile woman converted - while she was pregnant and then she gave birth,37 since he was born in holiness,38 [the child] is obligated [to redeem himself] even though he was not conceived in holiness, as [indicated by] the phrase:39 "the first issue of the womb in Israel." For this child is the first issue of a womb in Israel. If it is not known whether the woman gave birth before she converted or afterwards,40 [we follow the principle:] When one desires to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is on him.41
Halacha 14
When a gentile woman or a maidservant gave birth and then converted or was freed and then gave birth again, [the second child] is exempt,42 as [indicated by] the phrase "the first issue of the womb," and this is not [the woman's] first issue of the womb.43
Similar concepts apply when a son is born after a nefal.44 Whenever the mother is ritually impure due to birth because of a nefal,45a son born afterwards is not considered the first issue of the womb. Whenever a nefal does not cause the mother to be ritually impure due to birth,46 e.g., a woman who miscarries and the issue resembles a fish or a grasshopper,47 a woman who miscarries on the fortieth day [after conception],48 or the like, a son born afterwards is [under obligation] to the priesthood and must be redeemed.
Halacha 15
When a fetus in a woman's womb was cut up and removed limb by limb, a son born afterwards is not considered to be "the first issue of her womb."49 When the head of a fetus that was carried for eight months emerged alive50 and then was withdrawn back to the womb where it died - or the head of a stillborn fetus that was carried for nine moths emerged and then was withdrawn - and afterwards the [twin] brother [of the fetus] emerged as [a viable] birth, the viable birth is not considered the first issue of the womb, for [all subsequent births] became exempt with the [emergence of] the head of the first [fetus]. As soon as its forehead emerged, it exempted those born afterwards.51
Halacha 16
When a baby is born by Caesarian section, both it and the next birth are exempt: the first because it did not emerge from the womb,52 and the second, because it was preceded by another birth.53
Halacha 17
When does the obligation for redemption take effect? When the baby completes 30 days of life,54 as [Numbers 18:16] states: "And those to be redeemed should be redeemed from the age of a month." If the son died within the thirty days - even on the thirtieth day - or it became mortally ill,55 there is no obligation [to pay the priest] five selaim.56 If he gave the priest [the money for] the redemption beforehand, he should return it.57 If the baby died after its thirtieth day, the father is obligated to redeem him.58 If he did not give [the money to the priest], he should.
Halacha 18
[The following rules apply when] one redeems his son within 30 days of his birth: If he tells [the priest]: "I am redeeming him at this time," his son is not redeemed.59 If he tells him that [the gift should take effect] after 30 days, his son is redeemed even if the coins no longer exist after 30 days.60
Halacha 19
If there is a doubt whether a son is obligated to be redeemed or not, he is exempt. [The rationale is that when] one desires to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is on him.61 If a father dies within 30 days [of his son's birth], we operate under the assumption that the son was not redeemed unless he brings proof from his father that he redeemed him62 before he died. If the father died after 30 days [following the son's birth], we operate under the assumption that he was redeemed63 unless he informed us that he was not redeemed.64
Halacha 20
When a person's wife has never given birth and she gives birth to a male and a female, but it is not known which emerged first,65 there is no obligation to give the priest anything.66
If she gave birth to two males, even if it is not known which is the firstborn, [the father] must give five selaim to the priest.67 If one of them dies within 30 days, [the father] is exempt, [based on the principle, when] one desires to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is on him].68 If the father died - whether he died within 30 days of the birth of his sons or afterwards, whether the sons divided his estate69 or not - five selaim should be given from the estate to the priest, because an obligation was already established upon the estate.
Halacha 21
[The following rules apply when a man has] two wives who have not yet given birth and they give birth to two sons and [the father] gives ten selaim to the priest [within 30 days of their birth].70 If one dies within 30 days and he had given [the ten selaim] to one priest, he should return five selaim to him.71 If he gave the money to two priests,72 he cannot expropriate the money from them, since he did not specify which son he is redeeming and each can tell him: "Have my colleague refund you."73
Halacha 22
When a man has two wives who have not given birth yet and they give birth to a male and a female or two males and a female [and it is not known which mother gave birth to which child and which is the order of the children's births], he should give five selaim to a priest. [The rationale is that] it is impossible that among them there will not be one male who is the first issue of the womb.74
Halacha 23
[In the above situation, if the women] give birth to two females and a male or two males and two females and it is not known which was born first, the priest is not entitled to anything. For [with regard to each mother], it is possible to say a female was born first and then a male.75
Halacha 24
[When a man has] two wives, one who has already given birth and one who has not yet given birth, and they give birth to two sons who become mixed together, he must give five selaim to a priest.76 If one of the sons dies within thirty days, the father is exempt.77 If the father died,78 five selaim should be paid from his estate.79
Halacha 25
[In the above situation, if the two wives] gave birth to a male and a female or two males and a female, the priest is not entitled to anything. For it is possible to say that the woman who did not give birth yet gave birth to a female first and then a male and the one who had given birth already gave birth to a male.80
Halacha 26
When there are two men who have wives who had not yet given birth and they both gave birth to males and they became mixed together,81 each father must give five selaim.
[The following rules apply if] they both gave [that amount] within thirty days and then one of the sons died within that time. If they gave the money to two priests, they cannot expropriate it from them.82 If they both gave it to the same priest, one should write a document giving power of attorney to the other and then the one with power of attorney should expropriate five selaim from the priest.83
Halacha 27
[In the above situation, if the women] gave birth to a male and a female and they became mixed together, the fathers are exempt84 and the son is obligated to redeem himself.85 Similar [laws apply when] a woman who has not given birth previously does not wait after [being divorced from] her [first] husband three months [before marrying] and gives birth [to a child, whose lineage is doubtful]. It is not known whether he is the first [husband's] son having been born after nine months or the last husband's son, having been born after seven. Both fathers are exempt86 and the son is obligated to redeem himself.87
Halacha 28
[In the above situation, if the women] gave birth to two females and a male or two females and two males, the priest is not entitled to anything.88
Halacha 29
[The following laws apply when] there are two wives of two men and one gave birth previously and one did not [and they gave birth and the infants became mixed together]. If they gave birth to two males, the father whose wife had not given birth previously must give five selaim to a priest.89 If they gave birth to a male and a female, the priest does not receive anything.90
Halacha 30
[In the above situation, if the women] gave birth to two males and a female, the man whose wife had not given birth previously should give five selaim. The rationale is that his exemption implies a compounded doubt. For if his wife gave birth to a male only, he is obligated. And if she gave birth to a male and a female, he is obligated unless she gave birth to the female first. Since the probability of this is distant, he should give the money for the redemption.91
FOOTNOTES
1.Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 80) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 392) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. This obligation was established in commemoration of the slaying of the Egyptian firstborn before the Exodus.
2.I.e., the obligation is incumbent on the baby's father, not his mother, as stated in the following halachah.
3.The P'nei Meivin, Yoreh De'ah, Responsum 226, infers from the wording "a woman is not obligated," that she may do so if she desires. Eidut LiYisrael states that this is the common custom if the child does not have a father.
4.The Rambam's wording implies that the obligation is incumbent on the son. Nevertheless, as a newborn, the son cannot fulfill it and so, the obligation becomes his father's. See the Minchat Chinuch (mitzvah 392), the Siftei Cohen 305:11, Likkutei Sichot, Vol. XI, p. 44ff., and others who debate whether the mitzvah is primarily the father's or the son's. This difference is not merely theoretical. Among the practical question that result is: If the father did not redeem the son until the son was thirteen, who has the fundamental responsibility to observe the mitzvah, the father or the son?
5.13, at which age he is obligated to observe the mitzvot. See Minchat Chinuch, loc. cit., who discusses a situation where the son redeemed himself beforehand.
6.The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 305:15) states that a silver plaque should be placed around the child's neck as a reminder that he has not been redeemed. See also Halachah 11. The Sifei Cohen 305:20 states that this is not practical. In many instances, the silver plaque will become lost before the child comes of age and he will not be aware of the responsibility incumbent upon him. Instead, it is preferable that the redemption be performed by the Jewish court. Eidut LiYisrael also mentions that if the child's grandfather is alive, there are opinions that he should perform the redemption.
7.For the mitzvah incumbent on his own person takes precedence (Kiddushin 29a,b).
8.I.e., make a pilgrimage to the Temple to behold the Divine presence.
9.Even though he could possibly redeem his son afterwards, and he will not be able to make this pilgrimage again, the redemption of his son takes precedence.
10.This follows the Rambam's rulings in Hilchot Berachot 11:11 where he writes that a person who performs a mitzvah involving his own person should praise God who "commanded us to...." If the mitzvah involves others, by contrast, the blessing should conclude "commanded us concerning...." The commentaries, however, note that in ibid.:12 and in Hilchot Milah 3:1, the Rambam writes that one who circumcises his own son should recite the blessing concluding "to circumcise...," for the mitzvah is incumbent on his own person. Seemingly, this should also apply with regard to the redemption of a son.
It is possible to resolve the question as follows: The mitzvah of redeeming the son is primarily the child's/ Hence, the father uses the form "concerning...." The mitzvah of circumcision, by contrast, is primarily the father's. Hence he uses the form "to...."
11.This blessing is recited as an expression of thanks whenever one performs a mitzvah infrequently (Hilchot Berachot 12:9). Even though one recited this blessing at the child's circumcision, it should be recited again at his redemption, for the two are separate mitzvot to be performed at separate times (Radbaz). Similarly, as an expression of thanks, it is customary to mark the redemption with a celebratory feast. This feast is considered a seudat mitzvah, a feast associated with a mitzvah.
12.For the blessing should precede the observance of the mitzvah.
13.For he is certainly performing a mitzvah involving himself. The Rambam's ruling is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 305:10). The Tur and the Rama rule that even in such a situation, the conclusion of the blessing should be "...concerning the redemption of the firstborn."
14.I.e., its observance is not limited to Eretz Yisrael, nor to the time when the Temple is standing.
15.Shiurei Torah defines this as 101 or 96 grams of pure silver.
16.We have translated kessef as "silver" and not "money" to allude to the concepts stated below.
17.This includes not only promissory notes given by a particular individual, but also the fiat currencies of the present day, for such currency does not have any inherent value. In practice, silver coins are almost always used for the redemption of the firstborn.
18.And he must be redeemed again.
19.As stated in Hilchot Mechirah 11:15, when a person undertakes a financial obligation, even though according to law he was not liable, he is bound by his commitment.
20.This applies even if he actually pays him the five selaim, for that money is being paid to satisfy the obligation he voluntarily undertook and not to discharge the obligation the Torah placed upon him (Bechorot 49b).
The Turei Zahav 305:2 and the Siftei Cohen 305:3 explain that according to Scriptural Law, the commitment is effective in redeeming the son. Nevertheless, our Sages ruled that it is unacceptable lest a person attempt to redeem his son with promissory notes from other people.
21.In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro debates this ruling at length and in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 305:5), he rules that the utensil must be worth five selaim to a person in a given situation. If, however, there is no way that it would be considered as worth five selaim, the son is not redeemed. The Turei Zahav 305:5 and the Siftei Cohen 305:5, however, maintain that the Rambam's words should be understood simply.
22.Giving each a half-sela.
23.The Pitchei Teshuvah 305:10 states that it is not desirable to redeem one's son in this manner. As an initial preference, one should give all five selaim to one priest, at one time.
24.Since the father expected the present to be returned, it is as if he never really intended to give it to the priest (Bechorot, loc. cit., Radbaz). This applies only when the priest actually returns what he was given, for if he does not return it, we assume that after the fact, the father consents that the priest retain possession and as a result, the son is redeemed.
25.When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 305:8) states that the priest should not frequently return what is given to him for the redemption. It should only be done occasionally, when the father is poor.
26.A present given with the intent that it be returned is considered as a valid present (Kiddushin 6b). Thus the father's gift was within the limits of law. Hence, it is acceptable. In the first instance, by contrast, since the present was not given wholeheartedly, it is as if it was never given. Nevertheless, receiving the redemption as a present with the stipulation that it be returned is frowned upon by our Rabbis. The Shulchan Aruch describes a priest who does so as having "transgressed."
27.See Numbers 3:45 which commands "Take the Levites in place of all the firstborn of the children of Israel."
28.I.e., the father is an Israelite and thus the son is an Israelite.
29.The commentaries have noted that there is no exact verse in the Torah that corresponds to the Rambam's wording. Similar phrases are found in Exodus 13:2 and Numbers 3:12.
30.The identity of the father does not change the status of the mother or the child and it is just as if the child was from a Jewish father. See Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 15:3.
31.I.e., he is obligated to redeem himself when he comes of age, for as stated in Halachah 2, there is no obligation for a woman to redeem her son. There are authorities who maintain that, in the present age, the Jewish court should redeem such children, for it is possible that when the child comes of age, he will not be aware of the mitzvah and will fail to observe it.
32.Such relations - even if she is raped - caused her to be deemed a zonah and she is disqualified from the priestly family. Her children do not bear its holiness, nor does she have any of the rights granted to its members (Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 18:1).
33.The children born from relations between a priest and a woman forbidden because of the unique prohibitions incumbent upon the priests, as explained in Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 19:3-6.
34.I.e., if the son is the first issue of his mother's womb.
35.I.e., were the father to have lived until the son was 30 days old, there would have been an obligation to redeem the child. Nevertheless, since the father was a priest - and the fact that he entered into a forbidden relationship does not disqualify him from the priesthood - it is considered as if he paid himself and the child was redeemed (Turei Zahav 305:17).
36.Because he died after the obligation took effect, as indicated by Halachah 17.
37.For the first time, as obvious from the following halachah.
38.I.e., as a Jew.
39.I.e., the father is an Israelite and thus the son is an Israelite.
40.Implied is that we do not rely on her word alone.
41.The priest is considered as if he desires to expropriate property - the five selaim of the redemption - from the child. Since the priest cannot prove that the child was born as an Israelite, the child is not obligated. See parallels in Chapter 9, Halachah 13, and Chapter 10, Halachah 12.
42.As the Radbaz mentions, this child may be considered as the father's firstborn and receive a double share of his inheritance. Nevertheless, in this context, he is not considered as a firstborn.
43.Even though it is her first Jewish child.
44.A stillborn, aborted, or miscarried fetus.
45.See Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 10:1 which states: "Every woman who gives birth is impure like a niddah, even if she did not suffer uterine bleeding. [This applies whether] a woman gives birth to a living child or one which is stillborn, and even if she miscarries [and discharges a fetus]." The remainder of that chapter mentions different questionable circumstances involving such miscarriages.
46.In the instances mentioned, the embryo that was miscarried is not given the halachic status of a fetus and none of the laws applying to childbirth apply.
47.See ibid. 5:15.
48.ibid. 10:2.
49.Even though it was removed from the womb piece by piece, the mother is considered impure as if she gave birth (Ibid.:6) and the subsequent child is not considered as a firstborn.
50.From the Rambam's wording, the commentaries have inferred that if the baby emerges dead, a boy born next is considered as the mother's firstborn. The rationale is that a baby born in the eighth month is considered as if it would never be a viable birth. This ruling is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 305:23).
51.For the emergence of the forehead is considered as birth in several halachic contexts (e.g., Hilchot Nachalot 2:2).
52.And the Torah obligated only the first issue of a woman's womb.
53.These concepts also apply with regard to the definition of a firstborn with regard to the inheritance (ibid.:11).
54.I.e., as soon as the thirty-first day begins. These days are counted from sunset to sunset and not from hour to hour. It is customary to redeem the son on his thirty-first day of life, because one should not delay the observance of a mitzvah. If, however, the thirty-first day is the Sabbath or a festival, the redemption is performed at the earliest possible opportunity afterwards.
55.Treifah, the Hebrew term used by the Rambam, is interpreted as referring to an ailment that will cause the person to die within a year.
56.For the obligation to redeem the child never took effect.
57.For that gift is not effective in redeeming the child, as stated in the following halachah.
58.When quoting this law, the Rama (Yoreh De'ah 305:12) states that the father must also recite the blessing for the redemption. He does not, however, recite the blessing Shehechiyanu.
59.Because the obligation to redeem him has not taken effect. This ruling applies even if the coins remain in the priest's possession until after the thirtieth day. For the redemption to take effect, the priest must return the money to the father and then he must give it to him again. See Siftei Cohen 305:18.
60.There is a difference of opinion concerning this issue in the Talmud (Bechorot 49a,b). The Rambam's ruling follows the position of Shmuel, even though Rav differs and rules that the son is not redeemed. Although ordinarily, in such differences of opinion, the halachah follows Rav with regard to questions involving Torah prohibitions, in this instance, the Talmud explicitly states that the halachah follows Shmuel. There is, however, a question regarding the proper version of the Talmudic text and the Rambam's ruling does not follow the standard published version (Radbaz). The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 305:13) quotes the Rambam's ruling, while the Rama rules that if the money no longer exists, the redemption is not effective.
61.As explained above, the priest is considered as if he desires to expropriate property - the five selaim of the redemption - from the father. The rationale is based on the fact that the money is presently in possession of the father. There are commentaries who maintain that if the priest would seize the five selaim, he would be entitled to retain possession of them, because the father would now have to prove that he is not obligated and that is likewise impossible. They support this conclusion with the Rambam's ruling in Hilchot Bechorot 5:3 that if there is an animal whose status is unclear and there is a doubt whether it is a firstborn, should a priest seize possession of it, we do not expropriate it from his property. Others, however, differentiate between the two instances, explaining that in Hilchot Bechorot, the priest has seized a specific entity concerning which an unresolved doubt exists. In this halachah, by contrast, although there is a question whether the father is under obligation to the priest, the money that the priest seizes definitely belongs to the father. Hence, it must be returned (Machaneh Ephrayim, Hilchot Zechiyah, sec. 8; see also Radbaz to Halachah 21).
62.In the manner described at the conclusion of the previous halachah. This is an uncommon occurrence. Hence, unless there is specific knowledge that the father redeemed him in this manner, we assume he did not.
63.For we assume that the person fulfilled the mitzvah incumbent upon him at the earliest possible opportunity.
64.I.e., he made such statements on his deathbed [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 305:14)].
65.Thus there is a question whether the son must be redeemed or not, for if the female emerged first, the son need not be redeemed.
66.Since there is a doubt concerning the obligation, the burden of proof is on the priest, as stated in Halachah 19. Not only does this apply with regard to the father, the son is under no obligation to redeem himself when he comes of age. This is the underlying principle governing many of the situations described in the following halachot.
67.For one of his sons is certainly a firstborn and hence, he is required to redeem him. Although the father does not know which of his sons he is redeeming, he is obligated to perform the redemption (Radbaz).
68.For the father can claim that the son who died was the firstborn and since he died within 30 days of his birth, there is no obligation to redeem him, as stated in Halachah 17.
69.In which case, each of the sons could argue that perhaps the other was in fact the firstborn and hence, he is not required to give toward the redemption. This ruling represents a reversal of the Rambam's opinion from his ruling in his final version of his Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 8:3). [Apparently, the issue was one that the Rambam debated back and forth, because his earlier version of that text does not mention an exemption.] The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 305:265) quotes the Rambam's ruling here. The Tur and the Siftei Cohen 305:30 rule that the sons are exempt if the father died before the passage of the 30 days. The rationale they give is that each of the sons can claim that the obligation is on the other.
70.For their redemption in the maaner stated in Halachah 18.
71.For there is no obligation to redeem a son who died before he reaches the age of 30 days.
72.Giving each five selaim for one of the sons, without specifying which one.
73.I.e., each priest can maintain that he received the redemption for the son that is alive and it is the other priest who is required to return the funds.
74.In the second instance, however, he need not redeem both sons, because it is possible that his daughter's birth preceded the birth of one of them. Thus with regard to that child, we follow the principle stated in Halachah 19.
75.Although two mothers and two pairs of children are involved, the situation is abstractly the same as that described in Halachah 20.
76.For the woman who had not given birth previously obviously gave birth to a firstborn son. The fact that his identity is unknown is not significant.
77.Because it is possible that the firstborn died and therefore, there is no obligation if he dies within thirty days of his birth.
78.Whether within 30 days of the sons' birth or afterwards, as in Halachah 20. See, however, note 68.
79.Although the entire sum could not be expropriated from either of the sons - for each one could claim that it is the other who is liable - it can be expropriated from the estate. For the father was certainly obligated and that obligation is transferred to his estate.
80.The commentaries question the Rambam's ruling, maintaining that seemingly the instance here is analogous to the case described in Halachah 30. What difference does it make if the two women mentioned are the wives of one man or two? The Radbaz explains that since we are speaking about one man with two wives and one is exempt, we assume that the exemption will continue unless it is indicated otherwise.
81.So that it was not known which woman was the mother of which child.
82.For, as in Halachah 21, each priest can claim that he received the redemption for the son who is presently alive.
83.The priest owes one of the two five selaim, but there is no way of determining which one. Thus if each approached him and demanded money individually, he could avoid paying, claiming that the father must prove that it was his son that died. When, however, he is approached by the two fathers in a single claim, he has no recourse other than to pay [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 8:5)].
84.Because there is no way it can be proven who is the father of the male and thus responsible for his redemption.
85.I.e., when he attains majority. For there is no question that he is a firstborn (Turei Zahav 305:23).
86.The priest owes one of the two five selaim, but there is no way of determining which one. Thus if each approached him and demanded money individually, he could avoid paying, claiming that the father must prove that it was his son that died. When, however, he is approached by the two fathers in a single claim, he has no recourse other than to pay [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 8:5)].
87.Because there is no way it can be proven who is the father of the male and thus responsible for his redemption.
88.Because it is impossible to prove that a male was born first. See Halachah 23. From the Rambam's wording, it could be inferred that different rules apply when the women gave birth to two males and one female. It would appear that according to the Rambam, each of the males would have to redeem himself when he comes of age. The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 305) rules that in such a situation, the sons are exempt. See Turei Zahav 305:24.
89.Even though the identity of his son is not firmly established, his wife definitely gave birth to a firstborn son and he is obligated to redeem him.
90.For there is no way of proving that the woman who had not given birth previously was the mother of the male. Hence, the exemption is granted not only to the father, but also to the son when he comes of age.
91.More specifically, there are five possibilities regarding this situation:
a) the woman who had not given birth before gave birth to one male (and the other woman gave birth to a male and a female);
b) she gave birth to two males (and the other woman gave birth to a female);
c) she gave birth to a male and then a female (and the other woman gave birth to a male);
d) she gave birth to a female and then a male (and the other woman gave birth to a male);
e) she gave birth to a female (and the other woman gave birth to two males).
Since her husband would be obligated in the first three of this situations, he is considered as obligated, because of the higher probability.
As mentioned in the notes to Halachah 25, there is a difference of opinion among the commentaries with regard to the rulings in the two halachot. The Ra'avad reverses the Rambam's ruling in both instances, maintaining that here, the father is exempt and there, he is obligated. And the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 305:31) rule that he is exempt in both instances. These differences of opinion depend on textual differences in the versions of Bechorot 49a and differences in the interpretation of that passage.
-------
Today's Hayom Yom
Hayom Yom:
• Shabbat, 2 Sivan 5774 - May 31, 2014
• Shabbat, Sivan 2, 46th day of the omer, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Bamidbar, Shevi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 10-17.
Tanya: As (this wisdom) (p. 273)...is termed "Shechinah" (p. 277).
Ana B'choach at Kabalat Shabbat (p. 131) is said in an undertone.
Ufros aleinu... at Kabalat Shabbat (p. 138) is said standing.
In the year 5589 (1829) the Shabbat of Parshat Bamidbar was on 5 Sivan. Before the kindling of the Shabbat candles, the Tzemach Tzedek delivered the maamar, S'u et rosh...avotam.1 Following the commentary of Ibn Ezra, he interpreted the word S'u in the sense of elevation, as in "Ki tisa et rosh,"2 (lit. "When you take up the head.") The implication is that through avoda of the radiance of the soul within the body, an elevation is effected in the head (rosh) and essence of the soul as it is Above.3 In this vein he then explained a number of Torah-verses and statements in Zohar and Midrash.
At noon on Shabbat the Rebbe delivered the maamar V'eirastich and its elaboration as printed in Likutei Torah. The next day, the first day of Shavuot, he delivered the maamar Us'fartem and its elaboration as printed in Likutei Torah. During the festival meal of the second day of Shavuot, the Rebbe delivered the maamar V'hachachma mei'ayin timatzei which is the second elaboration on the subject of tisp'ru chamishim yom printed in Likutei Torah.
Compiled and arranged by the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, of righteous memory, in 5703 (1943) from the talks and letters of the sixth Chabad Rebbe, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn, of righteous memory.
FOOTNOTES
1.Bamidbar 1:2.
2.Sh'mot 30:12.
3."Above" refers to the soul before its descent into the material world and the body, and to that element of the soul that always remains "Above," not descending into the body. In general "Above" refers to the planes "higher" than the physical universe.
-------
Daily Thought:
Jewish Nucleus
Every society has that which bonds it: A common ancestry and a system of lineage. Or a common language or common borders or governing body. Usually, it is a combination of several factors that mold a mass of people into a single whole.
The Jewish people are unique in that they have only a single nucleus—and it is none of the above.
All that bonds us is Torah. Nothing else has proven capable of holding us together for more than a generation or two. Nothing else, other than the same Torah that first forged us as a nation.
-------