Today's Laws & Customs:
Today in Jewish History:
End of the “Elders Era” (1228 BCE)
The last of the Elders (z'keinim) who were contemporaries of Joshua and outlived him, passed away in the year 2533 after creation. They were part of the chain of Torah transmission as listed at the beginning of Ethics of the Fathers: "Moses received the Torah from Sinai and gave it over to Joshua. Joshua gave it over to the Elders, the Elders to the Prophets..."
In ancient times, this day was marked as a fast day.
[Some are of the opinion that this occurred on the 5th of Shevat].
DAILY QUOTE:
Blessed are you G-d... who re-enacts the work of creation[blessing recited on the sun once in 28 years when it returns to its original place and time at the time of its creationj]
DAILY STUDY:
CHITAS AND RAMBAM FOR TODAY:End of the “Elders Era” (1228 BCE)
The last of the Elders (z'keinim) who were contemporaries of Joshua and outlived him, passed away in the year 2533 after creation. They were part of the chain of Torah transmission as listed at the beginning of Ethics of the Fathers: "Moses received the Torah from Sinai and gave it over to Joshua. Joshua gave it over to the Elders, the Elders to the Prophets..."
In ancient times, this day was marked as a fast day.
[Some are of the opinion that this occurred on the 5th of Shevat].
DAILY QUOTE:
Blessed are you G-d... who re-enacts the work of creation[blessing recited on the sun once in 28 years when it returns to its original place and time at the time of its creationj]
DAILY STUDY:
Chumash Parshat Beshalach, 4th Portion (Exodus 14:26-15:26) with Rashi
• Chapter 14
Chapter 15
| 1. Then Moses and the children of Israel sang this song to the Lord, and they spoke, saying, I will sing to the Lord, for very exalted is He; a horse and its rider He cast into the sea. | א. אָז יָשִׁיר משֶׁה וּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת הַשִּׁירָה הַזֹּאת לַיהֹוָה וַיֹּאמְרוּ לֵאמֹר אָשִׁירָה לַּיהֹוָה כִּי גָאֹה גָּאָה סוּס וְרֹכְבוֹ רָמָה בַיָּם: | |
| Then…sang: Heb. אָז יָשִׁיר. [The future tense presents a problem. Therefore, Rashi explains:] Then, when he [Moses] saw the miracle, it occurred to him to recite a song, and similarly, “Then Joshua spoke (אָז יְדַבֵּר יְהוֹשֻׁעַ)” (Josh. 10:12); and similarly, “and the house [which] he would make (יַעֲשֶׂה) for Pharaoh’s daughter” (I Kings 7: 8), [which means] he decided to make it for her. Here too, יָשִׁיר [in the future tense means that] his heart dictated to him that he should sing, and so he did, “and they spoke, saying, I will sing to the Lord.’ ” Likewise, with [the above reference to] Joshua, when he saw the miracle [of the defeat of the Amorite kings (Josh. 10:11)], his heart dictated to him that he speak [praises to God], and so he did, “and he said in the sight of Israel” (Josh. 10:12). Likewise, the song of the well, with which [Scripture] commences: “Then Israel sang (אָז יָשִׁיר)” (Num. 21:17), it explains after it, “Ascend, O well!, sing to it.” [I.e., in these three instances, the “yud” of the future tense denotes the thought, and after each one, Scripture continues that the thought was brought to fruition.] “Then did Solomon build (אָז יִבְנֶה) a high place” (I Kings 11:7); the Sages of Israel explain that he sought to build [it] but did not build [it] (Sanh. 91b). We [thus] learn that the “yud” may serve to indicate a thought. This is to explain its simple meaning, but the midrashic interpretation is [as follows]: Our Rabbis of blessed memory stated: From here is an allusion from the Torah to the resurrection of the dead (Sanh. 91b, Mechilta), and so it is [i.e., the future tense is used] with them all, except that of Solomon, which they explained as [implying] “he sought to build but did not build.” One cannot say and explain this form like other words written in the future, but which mean [that they occurred] immediately, such as “So would Job do (וָעִשֶׂה)” (Job 1:5); “by the command of the Lord would they encamp (יַחֲנוּ)” (Num. 9:23); “And sometimes the cloud would be (יִהְיֶה)” (Num. 9:21), because that is [an example of] something that occurs continually, and either the future or the past is appropriate for it, but that which occurred only once [i.e., the song that was sung], cannot be explained in this manner. — | אז ישיר משה: אז כשראה הנס עלה בלבו שישיר שירה, וכן (יהושע י יב) אז ידבר יהושע, וכן (מלכים א' ז ח) ובית יעשה לבת פרעה, חשב בלבו שיעשה לה, אף כאן ישיר, אמר לו לבו שישיר, וכן עשה, ויאמרו לאמר אשירה לה'. וכן ביהושע, כשראה הנס אמר לו לבו שידבר וכן עשה (יהושע י יב) ויאמר לעיני ישראל, וכן שירת הבאר שפתח בה (במדבר כא יז) אז ישיר ישראל, פירש אחריו עלי באר ענו לה. (מלכים יא ז) אז יבנה שלמה במה, פירשו בו חכמי ישראל שבקש לבנות ולא בנה. למדנו שהיו"ד על שם המחשבה נאמרה, זהו ליישב פשוטו. אבל מדרשו אמרו רבותינו זכרונם לברכה, מכאן רמז לתחיית המתים מן התורה, וכן בכולן חוץ משל שלמה, שפירשוהו, בקש לבנות ולא בנה. ואין לומר וליישב הלשון הזה כשאר דברים הנכתבים בלשון עתיד והן מיד, כגון (איוב א ה) ככה יעשה איוב, (במדבר ט כג) על פי ה' יחנו, (שם כ) ויש אשר יהיה הענן, לפי שהן דבר ההוה תמיד, ונופל בו בין לשון עתיד בין לשון עבר, אבל זה שלא היה אלא לשעה אינו יכול ליישבו בלשון הזה: | |
| for very exalted is He: Heb. גָאֹה גָאָה, [to be interpreted] according to the Targum [He was exalted over the exalted, and the exaltation is His]. Another explanation: [The] doubling [of the verb] comes to say that He did something impossible for a flesh and blood [person] to do. When he fights with his fellow and overwhelms him, he throws him off the horse, but here, “a horse and its rider He cast into the sea,” [i.e., with the rider still on the horse]. Anything that cannot be done by anyone else is described as exaltation (גֵּאוּת), like “for He has performed an exalted act (גֵּאוּת)” (Isa. 12:5). Similarly, [throughout] the entire song you will find the repetitive pattern, such as: “My strength and my praise are the Eternal, and He was my salvation” (verse 2); “The Lord is a Master of war; the Lord is His Name,” (verse 3); and so on, all of them (in an old Rashi). Another explanation: גָאֹה גָאָה means for He is exalted beyond all songs, [i.e.,] for however I will praise Him, He still has more [praise]. [This is] unlike the manner of a human king, who is praised for something he does not possess. — [from Mechilta] | כי גאה גאה: שנתגאה על כל גאה כתרגומו. דבר אחר בא הכפל לומר שעשה דבר שאי אפשר לבשר ודם לעשות, כשהוא נלחם בחבירו ומתגבר עליו מפילו מן הסוס וכאן סוס ורוכבו רמה בים וכל שאי אפשר לעשות על ידי זולתו נופל בו לשון גאות, כמו (ישעיהו יב ה) כי גאות עשה, וכן כל השירה תמצא כפולה (פסוק ב) עזי וזמרת יה ויהי לי לישועה (פסוק ג) ה' איש מלחמה ה' שמו, וכן כולם. דבר אחר כי גאה גאה על כל השירות, וכל מה שאקלס בו עוד יש בו תוספת, ולא כמדת מלך בשר ודם שמקלסין אותו ואין בו: | |
| a horse and its rider: Both bound to one another, and the water lifted them up high and brought them down into the depths, and [still] they did not separate. — [from Mechilta] | סוס ורכבו: שניהם קשורין זה בזה והמים מעלין אותם לרום ומורידין אותם לעומק ואינן נפרדין: | |
| He cast: Heb. רָמָה, [meaning] He cast, and similarly, “and they were cast (וּרְמִיו) into the burning, fiery furnace” (Dan. 3:21). The aggadic midrash, however, [states as follows]: One verse (verse 1) says: רָמָה בַיָם, [derived from רוּם, meaning “to cast up,”] and one verse (verse 4) says: יָרָה בַיָם [meaning “to cast down”]. [This] teaches us that they [the horse and rider] went up and [then] descended into the deep, [i.e., they were thrown up and down]. [The meaning of יָרָה is here] similar to: “who laid (יָרָה) its cornerstone” (Job 38:6), [which signifies laying the stone] from above, downward. — [from Mechilta, Tanchuma, Beshallach 13] | רמה: השליך וכן (דניאל ג ו) יתרמא לגוא אתון נורא. ומדרש אגדה כתוב אחד אומר רמה, וכתוב אחד אומר (פסוק ד) ירה, מלמד שהיו עולין לרום ויורדין לתהום, כמו (איוב לח ו) מי ירה אבן פנתה, מלמעלה למטה: | |
| 2. The Eternal's strength and His vengeance were my salvation; this is my God, and I will make Him a habitation, the God of my father, and I will ascribe to Him exaltation. | ב. עָזִּי וְזִמְרָת יָהּ וַיְהִי לִי לִישׁוּעָה זֶה אֵלִי וְאַנְוֵהוּ אֱלֹהֵי אָבִי וַאֲרֹמְמֶנְהוּ: | |
| The Eternal’s strength and His vengeance were my salvation: Heb. וְזִמְרָתיָ-ה עָזִי. Onkelos renders: My strength and my praise, [thus interpreting] עָזִי like עֻזִי [my strength] with a “shuruk,” and וְזִמְרָת like וְזִמְרָתִי [my song]. But I wonder about the language of the text, for there is nothing like it [the word עָזִי] in Scripture with its vowelization except in three places [i.e., here and in Isa. 12:2 and Ps. 118:14], where it is next to וְזִמְרָת, but [in] all other places,it is vowelized with a “shuruk" [now called a "kubutz"], [e.g., in the phrase] "O Lord, Who are my power (עֻזִי) and my strength” (Jer. 16:19); “[Because of] his strength (עֻזוֹ), I hope for You” (Ps. 59:10). Likewise, any word [noun] consisting of two letters, vowelized with a “melupum,” [i.e., a "cholam,"] when it is lengthened by [the addition of] a third letter, and the second letter is not punctuated with a “sheva” the first [letter] is vowelized with a “shuruk,” e.g., עֹז strength, becomes עֻזִי, my strength, spittle (Job 30:10), רֹק becomes רֹקִי, my spittle (Job 7:19). allotment (Gen. 47:22), חֹק becomes חֹקִי, my allotment (Prov. 30:8). עֹל, yoke (Deut. 28:48), becomes עֻלוֹ, his yoke, “shall be removed…his yoke עֻלוֹ” (Isa. 10:27). כֹּל, all (Gen. 21:12), becomes כֻּלוֹ, all of it, “with officers over them all כֻּלוֹ” (Exod. 14:7). But these three [examples of the phrase], עָזִי וְזִמְרָת, [namely] the one [written] here, the one [written in] Isaiah (12: 2), and the one [written in] Psalms (118:14) [all examples of the word עָזִי are vowelized with a short “kamatz.” Moreover, not one of them [i.e., of these examples] is written וְזִמְרָתִי but וְזִמְרָת, and next to each of them it says וַיְהִי-לִי לִיֹשוּעָה, were my salvation. Therefore, in order to reconcile the language of the text, I say that עָזִי is not like עֻזִי, nor is וְזִמְרָת like וְזִמְרָתִי, but עָזִי is a noun [and the final “yud” is only stylistic], like [the final “yud” in these examples:] “You Who dwell (הַישְׁבִי) in heaven” (Ps. 123:1); “who dwell (שֹׁכְנִי) in the clefts of the rock” (Obad. 1:3); “Who dwells (שֹׁכְנִי) in the thorn bush” (Deut. 33:16). And this is the praise [that Moses and the Israelites sing to God]: The strength and the vengeance of the Eternal--that was my salvation. [In brief, the “yud” at the end of the word is a stylistic suffix, which has no bearing on the meaning.] And the word וְזִמְרָת is connected to the word denoting the Divine Name, like “to the aid of (לְעֶזְרַת) the Lord” (Jud. 5:23); [and like the word בְּעֶבְרַת in] “By the wrath of (בְּעֶבְרַת) the Lord” (Isa. 9:18); [and the word דִבְרַת in:] “concerning the matter of (דִבְרַת)” (Eccl. 3:18). [In brief, the ַת or, ָת denotes the construct state of a feminine noun.] The expression וְזִמְרָת is an expression related to “and your vineyard you shall not prune (לֹא תִזְמֹר)” (Lev. 25:4); “the downfall of (זְמִיר) the tyrants” (Isa. 25:5), an expression denoting mowing down and cutting off. [Thus the phrase means:] The strength and the vengeance of our God was our salvation. Now [since this is the meaning of the phrase,] do not be puzzled about the expression וַיְהִי, [i.e.,] that it does not say הָיָה [without a “vav” since this is the verb following עָזִי וְזִמְרָת and does not begin a clause as the conversive “vav” usually does], for there are verses worded this way, and this is an example: “[against] the walls of the house around [both] the temple and the sanctuary, he made (וַיַּעַשׂ) chambers around [it]” (I Kings 6:5). It should have said עָשָׂה, “chambers around [it]” [instead of וַיַּעַשׂ]. Similarly, in (II) Chron. (10:17): “But the children of Israel who dwelt in the cities of Judah-Rehoboam reigned (וַיִמְלֹ) over them.” It should have said: “Rehoboam (מָלַ) over them.” [Similarly,] “Because the Lord was unable…He slaughtered them (וַיִשְׁחָטֵם) in the desert” (Num. 14:16). It should have said: שְׁחָטָם. [Similarly,] “But the men whom Moses sent…died (וַיָמוּתוּ)” (Num 14:36, 37). It should have said: מֵתוּ. [Similarly,] “But he who did not pay attention to the word of the Lord left (וַיַעִזֹב)” (Exod. 9:21). It should have said: עָזַב. | עזי וזמרת יה: אונקלום תרגם תוקפי ותושבחתי. עזי כמו עזי בשור"ק, וזמרת כמו וזמרתי. ואני תמה על לשון המקרא שאין לך כמוהו בנקודתו במקרא אלא בשלושה מקומות שהוא סמוך אצל וזמרת, וכל שאר מקומות נקוד שור"ק, (ירמיה טז יט) ה' עזי ומעזי, (תהלים נט י) עזו אליך אשמורה. וכן כל תיבה בת שתי אותיות הנקודה מלאפו"ם כשהיא מארכת באות שלישית ואין השניה בשו"א בחטף, הראשונה נקודה בשור"ק כגון עז עזי, רוק רוקי, חק חקי, עול עולו, יסור עולו (ישעיהו י כז), כל כלו ושלישים על כלו (לעיל יד ז). ואלו שלושה עזי וזמרת של כאן, ושל ישעיה (ישעיהו יב ב) ושל תהלים (תהלים קיח יד) נקודים בחטף קמ"ץ, ועוד אין באחד מהם כתוב וזמרתי אלא וזמרת, וכולם סמוך להם ויהי לי לישועה, לכך אני אומר ליישב לשון המקרא, שאין עזי כמו עזי, ולא וזמרת כמו וזמרתי, אלא עזי שם דבר הוא, כמו (שם קכג א) היושבי בשמים, (עובדיה א ג) שוכני בחגוי סלע, (דברים לג טז) שוכני סנה. וזהו השבח עזי וזמרת יה הוא היה לי לישועה, וזמרת דבוק הוא לתיבת ה', כמו (שופטים ה כג) לעזרת ה', (ישעיה ט יח) בעברת ה', (קהלת ג יח) על דברת בני האדם. ולשון וזמרת לשון (ויקרא כה ד) לא תזמור, (ישעיה כה ה) זמיר עריצים, לשון כסוח וכריתה. עוזו ונקמתו של אלהינו היה לנו לישועה. ואל תתמה על לשון ויהי שלא נאמר היה, שיש לנו כמה מקראות מדברים בלשון זה, וזה דוגמתו (מלכים א ו ה) את קירות הבית סביב להיכל ולדביר ויעש צלעות סביב, היה לו לומר עשה צלעות סביב, וכן בדברי הימים (דברי הימים ב' י יז) ובני ישראל היושבים בערי יהודה וימלוך עליהם רחבעם, היה לו לומר מלך עליהם רחבעם, (במדבר יד טז) מבלתי יכולת ה' וגו' וישחטם, היה לו לומר שחטם, (שם לו - לז) והאנשים אשר שלח משה וגו' וימותו, מתו היה לו לומר, (שמות ט כא) ואשר לא שם לבו אל דבר ה' ויעזוב, היה לו לומר עזב: | |
| this is my God: He revealed Himself in His glory to them [the Israelites], and they pointed at Him with their finger [as denoted by זֶה, this]. By the sea, [even] a maidservant perceived what prophets did not perceive. — [from Mechilta] | זה אלי: בכבודו נגלה עליהם והיו מראין אותו באצבע, ראתה שפחה על הים מה שלא ראו נביאים: | |
| and I will make Him a habitation: Heb. וְאַנְוֵה. Onkelos rendered it as an expression of habitation (נָוֶה) [as in the following phrases]: “a tranquil dwelling (נָוֶה)” (Isa. 33:20); “a sheepfold (נְוֵה)” (Isa. 65:10). Another explanation: וְאַנְוֵהוּ is an expression of beauty (נוּ). [Thus the phrase means] I will tell of His beauty and His praise to those who enter the world, such as: [When Israel is asked:] "How is your beloved more than another beloved…? [Israel will say] My beloved is white and ruddy…" and the entire section [of Song of Songs] (Song of Songs 5:9, 10). — [from Mechilta] | ואנוהו: אונקלוס תרגם לשון נוה, (ישעיה לג כ) נוה שאנן, (שם סה י) לנוה צאן. דבר אחר ואנוהו לשון נוי, אספר נויו ושבחו לבאי עולם, כגון (שיר השירים ה ט - י) מה דודך מדוד דודי צח ואדום, וכל הענין: | |
| the God of my father: is this One, and I will exalt Him. | אלהי אבי: הוא זה וארוממנהו. אלהי אבי, לא אני תחלת הקדושה, אלא מוחזקת ועומדת לי הקדושה ואלהותו עלי מימי אבותי: | |
| the God of my father: I am not the beginning of the sanctity [i.e., I am not the first to recognize His sanctity], but the sanctity has been established and has remained with me, and His Divinity has been upon me since the days of my forefathers. — [from Mechilta] | : | |
| 3. The Lord is a Master of war; the Lord is His Name. | ג. יְהֹוָה אִישׁ מִלְחָמָה יְהֹוָה שְׁמוֹ: | |
| The Lord is a Master of war: Heb. אִישׁ מִלְחָמָה, lit., a man of war, [which is inappropriate in reference to the Deity. Therefore,] Rashi renders: Master of war, like “Naomi’s husband (אִישׁ נָעֳמִי)” (Ruth 1:3) and so, every [instance in the Torah of] אִישׁ, husband, and אִישֵׁ, your husband, is rendered: בַּעַל, master. Similarly, “You shall be strong and become a man (לְאִישׁ)” (I Kings 2:2), [meaning] a strong man. — | ה' איש מלחמה: בעל מלחמות, כמו (רות א ג) איש נעמי, וכל איש ואישך מתורגמין בעל, וכן (מלכים א' ב ב) וחזקת והיית לאיש - לגבור: | |
| the Lord is His Name: His wars are not [waged] with weapons, but He wages battle with His Name, as David said [to Goliath before fighting him], “[You come to me with spear and javelin] and I come to you with the Name of the Lord of Hosts” (I Sam. 17:45). Another explanation: The Lord י-ה-ו-ה, denoting the Divine Standard of Clemency,] is His Name--Even when He wages war and takes vengeance upon His enemies, He sticks to His behavior of having mercy on His creatures and nourishing all those who enter the world, unlike the behavior of earthly kings. When he [an earthly king] is engaged in war, he turns away from all his [other] affairs and does not have the ability to do both this [i.e., wage war] and that [other things]. — [from Mechilta] | ה' שמו: מלחמותיו לא בכלי זיין, אלא בשמו הוא נלחם, כמו שאמר דוד (שמואל א' יז מה) ואנכי בא אליך בשם ה' צבאות. דבר אחר ה' שמו אף בשעה שהוא נלחם ונוקם מאויביו, אוחז הוא במדתו לרחם על ברואיו ולזון את כל באי עולם, ולא כמדת מלכי אדמה כשהוא עוסק במלחמה פונה עצמו מכל עסקים, ואין בו כח לעשות זו וזו: | |
| 4. Pharaoh's chariots and his army He cast into the sea, and the elite of his officers sank in the Red Sea. | ד. מַרְכְּבֹת פַּרְעֹה וְחֵילוֹ יָרָה בַיָּם וּמִבְחַר שָׁלִשָׁיו טֻבְּעוּ בְיַם סוּף: | |
| He cast into the sea: Heb. יָרָה בַיָם. [Onkelos renders:] שְׁדִי שְׁדִי בְיַמָּא is an expression of casting down (יָרָה), as [Scripture] says: “or shall surely be cast down (יָרֹה יִיָָּרֶה)” (Exod. 19:13), which Onkelos renders: יִשְׁךְתְּדִי אִשְׁךְתְּדָאָה. The “tav” serves in these [forms] in the hithpa’el form. | ירה בים: שדי בימא. שדי לשון ירייה, וכן הוא אומר (שמות יט יג) או ירה יירה או אשתדאה אישתדי, והתי"ו משמשת באלו במקום התפעל: | |
| and the elite of: Heb. וּמִבְחַר, a noun, like מֶרְכָּב, riding gear (Lev. 15:9); מִשְׁכָּב, bed (Lev. 15:23); מִקְרָא קֹדֶשׁ, holy convocation (Exod. 12:16, Lev. 23:3). | ומבחר: שם דבר, כמו (ויקרא טו ט) מרכב, (שם ד) משכב, (שמות יב טז) מקרא קדש: | |
| sank: Heb. טֻבְּעוּ. The term טְבִיעָה [for sinking] is used [in the Tanach] only [when referring] to a place where there is mud, like “I have sunk (טָבַעְךְתִּי) in muddy depths” (Ps. 69:3); “and Jeremiah sank (וַיִּטְבַּע) into the mud” (Jer. 38: 6). This informs [us] that the sea became mud, to recompense them [the Egyptians] according to their behavior, [namely] that they enslaved the Israelites with [work that entailed] clay and bricks. — [from Mechilta] | טבעו: אין טביעה אלא במקום טיט, כמו (תהלים סט ג) טבעתי ביון מצולה, (ירמיה לח ו) ויטבע ירמיהו בטיט, מלמד שנעשה הים טיט לגמול להם כמדתם, ששיעבדו את ישראל בחומר ובלבנים: | |
| 5. The depths covered them; they descended into the depths like a stone. | ה. תְּהֹמֹת יְכַסְיֻמוּ יָרְדוּ בִמְצוֹלֹת כְּמוֹ אָבֶן: | |
| covered them: Heb. יְכַסְיֻמוּ, like יְכַסוּם. The “yud” in the middle of it is superfluous. This is, however, a common biblical style [to add an additional “yud”], like “and your cattle and your flocks will increase (יִרְבְּיֻן)” (Deut. 8:13); “They will be sated (יִרְוְיֻן) from the fat of Your house” (Ps. 36:9). The first “yud,” which denotes the future tense, is to be explained as follows: They sank in the Red Sea, so that the water would return and cover them up. There is no word in Scripture similar to יְכַסְיֻמוּ in its vowelization. It would usually be vowelized יְכַסְיֻמוּ with a “melupum.” [Here too it is obvious that Rashi means a “cholam,” as I explained above (Exod. 14:12).] | יכסימו: כמו יכסום, והיו"ד האמצעית יתירה בו, ודרך המקראות בכך, כמו (דברים ח יג) ובקרך וצאנך ירביון, (תהלים לו ט) ירוין מדשן ביתך, והיו"ד ראשונה שמשמעה לשון עתיד כך פרשהו, טבעו בים סוף כדי שיחזרו המים ויכסו אותן. יכסימו אין דומה לו במקרא בנקודתו, ודרכו להיות נקוד יכסימו במלאפו"ם: | |
| like a stone: Elsewhere (verse 10), it says, “they sank like lead.” Still elsewhere (verse 7), it says, “it devoured them like straw.” [The solution is that] the [most] wicked were [treated] like straw, constantly tossed, rising and falling; the average ones like stone; and the best like lead-[i.e.,] they sank immediately [and thus were spared suffering]. — [from Mechilta] | כמו אבן: ובמקום אחר (פסוק י) צללו כעופרת, ובמקום אחר (פסוק ז) יאכלמו כקש, הרשעים כקש הולכים ומטרפין עולין ויורדין, בינונים כאבן, והכשרים כעופרת, שנחו מיד: | |
| 6. Your right hand, O Lord, is most powerful; Your right hand, O Lord, crushes the foe. | ו. יְמִינְךָ יְהֹוָה נֶאְדָּרִי בַּכֹּחַ יְמִינְךָ יְהֹוָה תִּרְעַץ אוֹיֵב: | |
| Your right hand…Your right hand: twice. When the Israelites perform the will of the Omnipresent, [even] the left hand becomes a right hand. — [Rashi from Mechilta] | ימינך ימינך: שתי פעמים, כשישראל עושין את רצונו של מקום השמאל נעשית ימין: | |
| Your right hand, O Lord, is most powerful: to save Israel, and Your second right hand crushes the foe. It seems to me, however, that that very right hand [also] crushes the foe, unlike a human being, who cannot perform two kinds of work with the same hand. The simple meaning of the verse is: Your right hand, which is strengthened with might--what is its work? Your right hand, O Lord, crushes the foe. There are many verses resembling it [i.e., where parts of the verse are repeated]: “For behold Your enemies, O Lord, for behold Your enemies will perish” (Ps. 92:10); “How long will the wicked, O Lord, how long will the wicked rejoice?” (Ps. 94:3); “The rivers have raised, O Lord, the rivers have raised their voice” (Ps. 93:3); “Not for us, O Lord, not for us” (Ps. 115:1); “I will answer, says the Lord; I will answer the heavens” (Hos. 2:23); “I to the Lord, I shall sing” (Jud. 5:3); “Had it not been for the Lord, etc. Had it not been for the Lord Who was with us when men rose up against us” (Ps. 124:1, 2); “Praise! Praise! Deborah. Praise! Praise! Utter a song” (Jud. 5:12); “A foot shall trample it, the feet of a poor man” (Isa. 26:6); “And He gave their land as an inheritance, an inheritance to Israel His people” (Ps. 135:12). | ימינך ה' נאדרי בכח: להציל את ישראל וימינך השנית תרעץ אויב. ולי נראה אותה ימין עצמה תרעץ אויב, מה שאי אפשר לאדם לעשות שתי מלאכות ביד אחת. ופשוטו של מקרא ימינך הנאדרת בכח מה מלאכתה, ימינך היא תרעץ אויב, וכמה מקראות דוגמתו (תהלים צב י) כי הנה אויביך ה' כי הנה אויביך יאבדו, (תהלים צד ג) עד מתי רשעים ה' עד מתי רשעים יעלוזו, (תהלים צג ג) נשאו נהרות ה' נשאו נהרות קולם, (תהלים קטו א) לא לנו ה' לא לנו, (הושע ב כג) אענה נאום ה' אענה את השמים, (שופטים ה ג) אנכי לה' אנכי אשירה, (תהלים קכד א - ב) לולי ה' וכו' לולי ה' שהיה לנו בקום עלינו אדם, (שופטים ה יב) עורי עורי דבורה עורי עורי דברי שיר, (ישעי' כו ו) תרמסנה רגל רגלי עני, (תהלים קלו כא - כב) ונתן ארצם לנחלה וכו' נחלה לישראל: | |
| is most powerful: Heb. נֶאְדָּרִי The “yud” is superfluous, like “populous (רַבָּתִי עָם) …princess (שָׂרָתִי) among the provinces” (Lam. 1:1); “what was stolen by day” (גְּנֻבְתִי) (Gen. 31:39). | נאדרי: היו"ד יתירה, כמו (איכה א א) רבתי עם שרתי במדינות, (בראשית לא לט) גנובתי יום: | |
| crushes the foe: Heb. ךְתִּרְעַץ, [which means] it constantly crushes and breaks the foe. Similar to this, “And they crushed (וַיִרְעִצוּ) and broke the children of Israel,” in Jud. (10:8). (Another explanation: Your right hand, which is strengthened with might-it breaks and strikes the foe.) | תרעץ אויב: תמיד היא רועצת ומשברת האויב, ודומה לו וירעצו וירוצצו את בני ישראל בשופטים (שופטים י ח). דבר אחר ימינך הנאדרת בכח היא משברת ומלקה אויב: | |
| 7. And with Your great pride You tear down those who rise up against You; You send forth Your burning wrath; it devours them like straw. | ז. וּבְרֹב גְּאוֹנְךָ תַּהֲרֹס קָמֶיךָ תְּשַׁלַּח חֲרֹנְךָ יֹאכְלֵמוֹ כַּקַּשׁ: | |
| And with Your great pride: (If the hand alone crushes the foe, then when it is raised with its great pride, it will [definitely] tear down those who rise up against Him. And if with His great pride alone His foes are torn down, how much more so, when He sends upon them His burning wrath, will it consume them.) | וברב גאונך: אם היד בלבד רועצת האויב, כשהוא מרומם ברוב גאונו, אז יהרס קמיו, ואם ברוב גאונו לבד אויביו נהרסים, קל וחומר כששלח בם חרון אף יאכלמו: | |
| You tear down: You always tear down those who rise up against You. And who are those who rise up against Him? These are the ones who rise up against Israel, and so does he [the Psalmist] say, “For behold, Your enemies stir.” And what is that stirring? “Against Your people they plot cunningly” (Ps. 83:3, 4). For this reason, he calls them the enemies of the Omnipresent. — [from Mechilta] | תהרס: תמיד אתה הורס קמיך הקמים נגדך, ומי הם הקמים כנגדו, אלו הקמים על ישראל, וכן הוא אומר (תהלים פג ג) כי הנה אויביך יהמיון, ומה היא ההמיה, (שם ב) על עמך יערימו סוד, ועל זה קורא אותם אויביו של מקום: | |
| 8. And with the breath of Your nostrils the waters were heaped up; the running water stood erect like a wall; the depths congealed in the heart of the sea. | ח. וּבְרוּחַ אַפֶּיךָ נֶעֶרְמוּ מַיִם נִצְּבוּ כְמוֹ נֵד נֹזְלִים קָפְאוּ תְהֹמֹת בְּלֶב יָם: | |
| And with the breath of Your nostrils: Breath which comes out of the two nostrils of the nose. Scripture speaks anthropomorphically about the Shechinah, on the model of a mortal king, in order to enable the ears of the people to hear it [to understand God’s anger] as it usually occurs [in humans], so that they should be able to understand the matter. [Namely that] when a person becomes angry, wind comes out of his nostrils. Likewise, “Smoke went up from His nostrils” (Ps. 18:9), and similarly, “and from the wind of His nostrils they will be destroyed” (Job 4:9). And this is what it [Scripture] says: “For the sake of My Name, I defer My anger” (Isa. 48:9) [lit., I lengthen the breath of My nose]. [This means that] when his [a person’s] anger subsides, his breath becomes longer, and when he becomes angry, his breath becomes shorter; [the verse continues:] “and for My praise I restrain My wrath (אֶחֱטָם) for you” (Isa. 48: 9). [I.e.,] I put a ring (חִטָם) into My nostrils in front of the anger and the wind, [so] that they should not come out. “For you” means “for your sake.” [The word] אֶחֱטָם is like [the expression in the Mishnah:] “a dromedary with a nose ring” (בַּחִטָם) in tractate Shabbath (51b). This is how it appears to me. And concerning every [expression of] אַף and חָרוֹן in the Bible [which are expressions of anger] I say this: [The expression] חָרָה אַף, anger was kindled, is like [the word חָרָה in:] “and my bones dried out (חָרָה) from the heat” (Job 30:30); חָרָה is an expression of fire and burning, for the nostrils heat up and burn at the time of anger. חָרוֹן (burning) is from the root חרה (to burn) just as רָצוֹן (will) is from the root רצה (to desire). And likewise, חֵמָה is an expression of heat (חֲמִימוּת). Therefore, it [Scripture] says: “and his anger (וַחִמָתוֹ) burnt within him” (Esther 1:12), and when the anger subsides, we say, “His mind has cooled off (נִתְקָרְרָה דַעְךְתּוֹ).” | וברוח אפיך: היוצא משני נחירים של אף. דבר הכתוב כביכול בשכינה דוגמת מלך בשר ודם, כדי להשמיע אוזן הבריות כפי ההוה שיוכלו להבין דבר. כשאדם כועס יוצא רוח מנחיריו, וכן (תהלים יח ט) עלה עשן באפו, וכן (איוב ד ט) ומרוח אפו יכלו, וזהו שאמר (ישעיהו מח ט) למען שמי אאריך אפי, כשזעפו נח נשימתו ארוכה, וכשהוא כועס, נשימתו קצרה, (שם) ותהלתי אחטם לך, ולמען תהלתי אשים חטם באפי לסתום נחירי בפני האף והרוח שלא יצאו, לך בשבילך. אחטם כמו נאקה בחטם במסכת שבת (דף נא ב) כך נראה בעיני. וכל אף וחרון שבמקרא אני אומר כן, (דברים ז ד) חרה אף, כמו (איוב ל ל) ועצמי חרה מני חורב, לשון שריפה ומוקד, שהנחירים מתחממים ונחרים בעת הקצף, וחרון מגזרת חרה, כמו רצון מגזרת רצה, וכן חמה לשון חמימות, על כן הוא אומר (אסתר א יב) וחמתו בערה בו, ובנוח החמה אומר נתקררה דעתו: | |
| the waters were heaped up: Heb. נֶעֶרְמוּ. Onkelos rendered [this word] as an expression of cunning (עַרְמִימוּת). According to the clarity of Scripture, however, it is an expression related to “a stack (עִרֵמַת) of wheat” (Song of Songs 7:3), and [the phrase that follows:] “the running water stood erect like a wall” proves this. | נערמו מים: אונקלוס תרגם לשון ערמימות ולשון צחות המקרא, כמו (שיר השירים ז ג) ערמת חטים, ונצבו כמו נד יוכיח. ממוקד רוח שיצא מאפיך יבשו המים והם נעשו כמין גלים וכריות של ערימה שהם גבוהים: | |
| the waters were heaped up: From the heat of the wind that came out of Your nose, the water dried up, and it became like piles and heaps of grain stacks, which are tall. | נערמו מים: ממוקד רוח שיצא מאפיך יבשו המים והם נעשו כמין גלים וכריות של ערימה שהם גבוהים | |
| like a wall: Heb. כְמוֹ-נֵד, as the Targum [Onkelos] renders: כְּשׁוּר, like a wall. — | כמו נד: כתרגומו כשור, כחומה: | |
| wall: Heb. נֵד, an expression of heaping and gathering, like “a heap (נֵד) of harvest on a day of sickness” (Isa. 17:11); “He gathers (כֹּנֵס) as a mound כַּנֵד” (Ps. 33:7). It does not say, “He brings in as a flask כַּנֹּאד,” but כַּנַּד. Now if כַּנַּד were the same as כַּנֹּאד, and כֹּנֵס were an expression of bringing in, it should have said, “He brings in as into a flask כִּבְנֹאד) (מַכְנִיס the waters of the sea.” Rather, כֹּנֵס is an expression of gathering and heaping, and so, “shall stand in one heap (נֵד)” ; “stood in one heap (נֵד).” (Josh. 3:13, 16); and the expression of rising and standing does not apply to flasks, but to walls and heaps. Moreover, we do not find נֹּאד, meaning a flask, vowelized [with any vowel] but with a “melupum,” (meaning a “cholam,” ) like [in the phrases:] “place my tears into Your flask (בְּנֹּאדֶ)” (Ps. 56:9); “the flask of נֹּאד milk” (Jud. 4:19). | נד: לשון צבור וכנוס, כמו (ישעיהו יז יא) נד קציר ביום נחלה, (תהלים לג ז) כונס כנד, לא כתיב כנאד אלא כנד, ואלו היה כנד כמו כנאד. וכונס לשון הכנסה, היה לו לכתוב מכניס כבנאד מי הים, אלא כונס לשון אוסף וצובר הוא, וכן (יהושע ג טז) קמו נד אחד, (שם יג) ויעמדו נד אחד, ואין לשון קימה ועמידה בנאדות אלא בחומות וצבורים, ולא מצינו נאד נקוד אלא במלאפו"ם, כמו (תהלים נו ט) שימה דמעתי בנאדך, (שופטים ד יט) את נאד החלב: | |
| congealed: Heb. קָפְאוּ, like “and curdle me (ךְתַּקְפִּיאֵנִי) like cheese” (Job 10:10). [I.e.,] that they [the depths] hardened and became like stones, and the water hurled the Egyptians against the stone with [all its] might and fought with them [the Egyptians] with all kinds of harshness. | קפאו: כמו (איוב י י) וכגבינה תקפיאני, שהוקשו ונעשו כאבנים והמים זורקים את המצרים על האבן בכח ונלחמים בם בכל מיני קושי: | |
| in the heart of the sea: Heb. בְּלֶב יָם, in the strongest part of the sea. It is customary for the Scriptures to speak in this manner, [for instance:] “until the heart of (לֵב) the heavens” (Deut. 4:11); in the heart of (בְּלֵב) the terebinth" (II Sam. 18:14). [The heart in these examples is] an expression denoting the root and the strength of anything. — | בלב ים: בחוזק הים, ודרך המקראות לדבר כן (דברים ד יא) עד לב השמים, (שמואל ב' יח יד) בלב האלה, לשון עקרו ותקפו של דבר: | |
| 9. [Because] the enemy said, I will pursue, I will overtake, I will share the booty; my desire will be filled from them; I will draw my sword, my hand will impoverish them. | ט. אָמַר אוֹיֵב אֶרְדֹּף אַשִּׂיג אֲחַלֵּק שָׁלָל תִּמְלָאֵמוֹ נַפְשִׁי אָרִיק חַרְבִּי תּוֹרִישֵׁמוֹ יָדִי: | |
| [Because] the enemy said: to his people, when he enticed them with [his] words, "I will pursue, and I will overtake them, and I will share the plunder with my officers and my servants." | אמר אויב: לעמו כשפיתם בדברים, ארדוף ואשיגם ואחלק שלל עם שרי ועבדי: | |
| will be filled from them: Heb. ךְתִּמְלָאֵמוֹ, equivalent to ךְתִּמְלָא מֵהֶם, will be filled from them. | תמלאמו: תתמלא מהם: | |
| my desire: Heb. נַפְשִׁי, lit., my soul, my spirit, and my will. Do not be surprised at [one] word speaking for two [words]; i.e., ךְתִּמְלָאֵמוֹ, instead of ךְתִּמְלָא מֵהֶם, because there are many such words [in Tanach like this], e.g., “you have given me (נְתַךְתָּנִי) dry land” (Jud. 1:15), [which is] like נָתַךְתָּ לִי “and they could not speak with him (דַּבְּרוּ) peacefully” (Gen. 37:4), [which is] like דַּבֵּר עִמוֹ“my children have left me (יְצָאוּנִי) ” (Jer. 10:20), [which is] like יָצְאוּ מִמֶנִי “I will tell him (אַגִּידֶנּוּ) ” (Job 31:37), [which is] like אַגִיד לוֹ. Here too, ךְתִּמְלָאֵמוֹ is equivalent to ךְתִִִּמְלָאֵמוֹ נַפְשִׁי מֵהֶם. | נפשי: רוחי ורצוני. ואל תתמה על תיבה המדברת בשתים - תמלאמו תמלא מהם, יש הרבה כלשון הזה (שופטים א טו) כי ארץ הנגב נתתני, כמו נתת לי. (בראשית לז ד) ולא יכלו דברו לשלום, כמו דבר עמו. (ירמיה י כ) בני יצאוני, כמו יצאו ממני. (איוב לא לז) מספר צעדי אגידנו, כמו אגיד לו, אף כאן תמלאמו - תמלא נפשי מהם: | |
| I will draw my sword: Heb. חַרְבִּי אָרִיק, lit., I will empty my sword. I will draw, and because one empties the sheath by drawing it [the sword], and it remains empty, an expression of emptying is appropriate, like “And it came to pass that they were emptying (מְרִיקִים) their sacks” (Gen. 42:35); “and they shall empty (יָרִיקוּ) his vessels” (Jer. 48:12). Do not say that the expression of emptiness [in these examples] does not apply to what comes out [of its container] but [instead applies] to the sheath, the sack, or the vessel from which it came out, but not to the sword or the wine, and [thus] to force an interpretation of אָרִיק חַרְבִּי like the language of “and he armed (וַיָרֶק) his trained men” (Gen. 14:14), [claiming that its] meaning [is] "I will arm myself with my sword.” [To this I answer that] we find the expression [of emptying] also applied to that which comes out, e.g., “oil poured forth (ךְתּוּרַק) ” (Song of Songs 1:3); “and he has not been poured (הוּרַק) from one vessel to another vessel” (Jer. 48:11). It is not written: “the vessel was not emptied (הוּרַק)” but “the wine was not poured (הוּרַק) from one vessel to another vessel.” Similarly, “and they will draw (וְהֵרִיקוּ) their swords on the beauty of your wisdom” (Ezek. 28:7), referring to Hiram [the king of Tyre]-[following Onkelos, Jonathan]. | אריק חרבי: אשלוף, ועל שם שהוא מריק את התער בשליפתו ונשאר ריק נופל בו לשון הרקה, כמו (בראשית מב לה) מריקים שקיהם, (ירמיה מח יב) וכליו יריקו. ואם תאמר אין לשון ריקות נופל על היוצא, אלא על התיק ועל השק ועל הכלי שיצא ממנה, אבל לא על החרב ועל היין, ולדחוק ולפרש אריק חרבי, כלשון (בראשית יד יד) וירק את חניכיו - אזדיין בחרבי, מצינו הלשון מוסב אף על היוצא (שיר השירים א ג) שמן תורק, (ירמיהו מח יא) ולא הורק מכלי אל כלי, לא הורק הכלי אין כתיב כאן אלא לא הורק היין מכלי אל כלי, מצינו הלשון מוסב על היין. וכן (יחזקאל כח ז) והריקו חרבותם על יפי חכמתך, דחירם: | |
| my hand will impoverish them: Heb. ךְתּוֹרִישֵׁמוֹ, an expression of poverty (רֵישׁוּת) and destitution, like “The Lord impoverishes (מוֹרִישׁ) and makes rich” (I Sam. 2:7). | תורישמו: לשון רישות ודלות, כמו (שמואל א' ב ז) מוריש ומעשיר: | |
| 10. You blew with Your wind, the sea covered them; they sank like lead in the powerful waters. | י. נָשַׁפְתָּ בְרוּחֲךָ כִּסָּמוֹ יָם צָלֲלוּ כַּעוֹפֶרֶת בְּמַיִם אַדִּירִים: | |
| You blew: Heb. נָשַׁפְךְתָּ, an expression of blowing, and likewise: “and also He blew (נָשַׁף) on them” (Isa. 40:24). | נשפת: לשון הפחה, וכן (ישעיהו מ כד) וגם נשף בהם: | |
| they sank: Heb. צָלִלוּ, [which means] they sank; they went down to the depths, an expression of מְצוּלָה, deep. | צללו: שקעו, עמקו, לשון (תהלים סט ג) מצולה: | |
| like lead: Heb. כַּעוֹפֶרֶת, plomb in French, lead. | כעופרת: אבר פלו"ם [עופרת] בלעז: | |
| 11. Who is like You among the powerful, O Lord? Who is like You, powerful in the holy place? Too awesome for praises, performing wonders! | יא. מִי כָמֹכָה בָּאֵלִם יְהֹוָה מִי כָּמֹכָה נֶאְדָּר בַּקֹּדֶשׁ נוֹרָא תְהִלֹּת עֹשֵׂה פֶלֶא: | |
| among the powerful: Heb. בָּאֵלִם, among the strong, like “and the powerful (אֵילֵי) of the land he took away” (Ezek. 17:13); “my strength איָלוּתִי, hasten to my assistance” (Ps. 22:20). | באלם: בחזקים, כמו (יחזקאל יז יג) ואת אילי הארץ לקח, (תהלים כב כ) אילותי לעזרתי חושה: | |
| Too awesome for praises: [You are] too awesome for [one] to recite Your praises, lest they fall short, as it is written: “Silence is praise to You” (Ps. 65:2). | נורא תהלות: יראוי מלהגיד תהלותיו פן ימעטו, כמו שכתוב (שם סה ב) לך דומיה תהלה: | |
| 12. You inclined Your right hand; the earth swallowed them up. | יב. נָטִיתָ יְמִינְךָ תִּבְלָעֵמוֹ אָרֶץ: | |
| You inclined Your right hand: When the Holy One, blessed be He, inclines His hand, the wicked perish and fall, because all are placed in His hand, and they fall when He inclines it. Similarly, it [Scripture] says: “and the Lord shall turn His hand, and the helper shall stumble, and the helped one shall fall” (Isa. 31:3). This can be compared to glass vessels placed in a person’s hand. If he inclines his hand a little, they fall and break. — [based on Mechilta] | נטית ימינך: כשהקב"ה נוטה ידו הרשעים כלים ונופלים, לפי שהכל נתון בידו ונופלים בהטייתה וכן הוא אומר (ישעיה לא ג) וה' יטה ידו וכשל עוזר ונפל עזור. משל לכלי זכוכית הנתונים בידי אדם, מטה ידו מעט והן נופלין ומשתברין: | |
| the earth swallowed them up: From here [we deduce] that they merited to be buried as a reward for saying, “The Lord is the righteous One” (Exod. 9:27). — [from Mechilta] | תבלעמו ארץ: מכאן שזכו לקבורה בשכר שאמרו (לעיל ט כז) ה' הצדיק: | |
| 13. With Your loving kindness You led the people You redeemed; You led [them] with Your might to Your holy abode. | יג. נָחִיתָ בְחַסְדְּךָ עַם זוּ גּאָלְתָּ נֵהַלְתָּ בְעָזְּךָ אֶל נְוֵה קָדְשֶׁךָ: | |
| You led: Heb. נֵהַלְךְתָּ, an expression of leading. Onkelos, however, rendered [it as] an expression of carrying and bearing, but he was not exact in explaining it in accordance with the Hebrew. [I.e., he explained the sense of the verse, but he did not translate the word literally.] | נהלת: לשון מנהל, ואונקלוס תרגם לשון נושא וסובל, ולא דקדק לפרש אחר לשון העברית: | |
| 14. People heard, they trembled; a shudder seized the inhabitants of Philistia. | יד. שָׁמְעוּ עַמִּים יִרְגָּזוּן חִיל אָחַז ישְׁבֵי פְּלָשֶׁת: | |
| they trembled: Heb. יִרְגָזוּן, [which means] they tremble. | ירגזון: מתרגזין: | |
| the inhabitants of Philistia: [They trembled] since they slew the children of Ephraim, who hastened the end [of their exile] and went out [of Egypt] forcibly, as is delineated in (I) Chronicles (7:21). And the people of [the town of] Gath slew them [the children of Ephraim]. — [from Mechilta] | ישבי פלשת: מפני שהרגו את בני אפרים שמיהרו את הקץ ויצאו בחזקה, כמפורש בדברי הימים (דברי הימים א' ז כא) והרגום אנשי גת: | |
| 15. Then the chieftains of Edom were startled; [as for] the powerful men of Moab, trembling seized them; all the inhabitants of Canaan melted. | טו. אָז נִבְהֲלוּ אַלּוּפֵי אֱדוֹם אֵילֵי מוֹאָב יֹאחֲזֵמוֹ רָעַד נָמֹגוּ כֹּל ישְׁבֵי כְנָעַן: | |
| the chieftains of Edom…the powerful men of Moab: Now they had nothing to fear at all, because they [the Israelites] were not advancing upon them. Rather, [they trembled] because of grief, that they were grieving and suffering because of the glory of Israel. | אלופי אדום אילי מואב: והלא לא היה להם לירא כלום, שהרי לא עליהם הולכים, אלא מפני אנינות שהיו מתאוננים ומצטערים על כבודם של ישראל: | |
| melted: Heb. נָמֹגוּ, [as in the phrase] “with raindrops You dissolve it (ךְתְּמֹגְגֶנָּה)” (Ps. 65:11). They [the inhabitants of Canaan] said, “They are coming upon us to annihilate us and possess our land.” -[from Mechilta] | נמגו: נמסו, כמו (תהלים סה יא) ברביבים תמוגגנה. אמרו עלינו הם באים לכלותינו ולירש את ארצנו: | |
| 16. May dread and fright fall upon them; with the arm of Your greatness may they become as still as a stone, until Your people cross over, O Lord, until this nation that You have acquired crosses over. | טז. תִּפֹּל עֲלֵיהֶם אֵימָתָה וָפַחַד בִּגְדֹל זְרוֹעֲךָ יִדְּמוּ כָּאָבֶן עַד יַעֲבֹר עַמְּךָ יְהֹוָה עַד יַעֲבֹר עַם זוּ קָנִיתָ: | |
| May dread…fall upon them: Heb. אֵימָתָה, upon the distant ones. — [from Mechilta] | תפל עליהם אימתה: על הרחוקים: | |
| and fright: Heb. וָפַחַד. Upon the nearby ones, as the matter that is stated: “For we have heard how the Lord dried up [the water of the Red Sea for you, etc.]” (Josh. 2:10).[from Mechilta] | ופחד: על הקרובים, כענין שנאמר (יהושע ב י) כי שמענו את אשר הוביש וגו': | |
| until…cross over, until…crosses over: As the Targum [Onkelos] renders. | עד יעבר עד יעבר: כתרגומו: | |
| You have acquired: Heb. קָנִיתָ. [I.e., whom] You loved more than other nations, similar to an article purchased for a high price, which is dear to the person [who purchased it]. | קנית: חבבת משאר אומות, כחפץ הקנוי בדמים יקרים, שחביב על האדם: | |
| 17. You shall bring them and plant them on the mount of Your heritage, directed toward Your habitation, which You made, O Lord; the sanctuary, O Lord, [which] Your hands founded. | יז. תְּבִאֵמוֹ וְתִטָּעֵמוֹ בְּהַר נַחֲלָתְךָ מָכוֹן לְשִׁבְתְּךָ פָּעַלְתָּ יְהֹוָה מִקְּדָשׁ אֲדֹנָי כּוֹנְנוּ יָדֶיךָ: | |
| You shall bring them: Moses prophesied that he would not enter the land [of Israel]. Therefore, it does not say: “You shall bring us.” (It appears that it should read “that they would not enter the land, etc.” Indeed, this is the way it is stated in Baba Bathra 119b and in Mechilta: The sons will enter but not the fathers. Although the decree of the spies had not yet been pronounced, he [Moses] prophesied, not knowing what he was prophesying. — [Maharshal]) | תבאמו: נתנבא משה שלא יכנס לארץ לכך לא נאמר תביאנו: | |
| directed toward Your habitation: The Temple below is directly opposite the Temple above, which You made. — [from Mechilta] | מכון לשבתך: מקדש של מטה מכוון כנגד כסא של מעלה אשר פעלת: | |
| the sanctuary: Heb. מִקְּדָשׁ. The cantillation sign over it is a “zakef gadol,” to separate it from the word ה following it. [The verse thus means:] the sanctuary which Your hands founded, O Lord. The Temple is beloved, since, whereas the world was created with “one hand,” as it is said: “Even My hand laid the foundation of the earth” (Isa. 48:13), the sanctuary [will be built] with “two hands.” When will it be built with "two hands"? At the time when “the Lord will reign to all eternity” [verse 18]. In the future, when the entire ruling power is His. — [from Mechilta and Keth. 5a] | מקדש: הטעם עליו זקף גדול להפרידו מתיבת השם שלאחריו המקדש אשר כוננו ידיך ה'. חביב בית המקדש שהעולם נברא ביד אחת, שנאמר (ישעיהו מח יג) אף ידי יסדה ארץ, ומקדש בשתי ידים. ואימתי יבנה בשתי ידים, בזמן שה' ימלוך לעולם ועד, לעתיד לבא שכל המלוכה שלו: | |
| 18. The Lord will reign to all eternity | יח. יְהֹוָה | יִמְלֹךְ לְעֹלָם וָעֶד: | |
| to all eternity: Heb. לְעֹלָם וָעֶד. [This is] an expression of eternity, and the “vav” in it is part of the root. Therefore, it is punctuated with a “pattach.” But in “and I am He Who knows, and [I am] a witness וָעֵד” (Jer. 29:23), in which the “vav” is a prefix, it is punctuated with a “kamatz.” | לעלם ועד: לשון עולמות הוא והוי"ו בו יסוד לפיכך היא פתוחה, אבל (ירמיהו כט כג) ואנכי היודע ועד, שהוי"ו בו שימוש, קמוצה היא: | |
| 19. When Pharaoh's horses came with his chariots and his horsemen into the sea, and the Lord brought the waters of the sea back upon them, and the children of Israel walked on dry land in the midst of the sea, | יט. כִּי בָא סוּס פַּרְעֹה בְּרִכְבּוֹ וּבְפָרָשָׁיו בַּיָּם וַיָּשֶׁב יְהֹוָה עֲלֵהֶם אֶת מֵי הַיָּם וּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל הָלְכוּ בַיַּבָּשָׁה בְּתוֹךְ הַיָּם: | |
| When Pharaoh’s horses came: Heb. כִּי בָא When they came. | כי בא סוס פרעה: כאשר בא: | |
| 20. Miriam, the prophetess, Aaron's sister, took a timbrel in her hand, and all the women came out after her with timbrels and with dances. | כ. וַתִּקַּח מִרְיָם הַנְּבִיאָה אֲחוֹת אַהֲרֹן אֶת הַתֹּף בְּיָדָהּ וַתֵּצֶאןָ כָל הַנָּשִׁים אַחֲרֶיהָ בְּתֻפִּים וּבִמְחֹלֹת: | |
| Miriam, the prophetess, Aaron’s sister, took: When did she prophesy? When she was [known only as] “Aaron’s sister,” before Moses was born, she said, “My mother is destined to bear a son” [who will save Israel], as is found in Sotah 12b, 13a). Another explanation: [It is written] Aaron’s sister since he [Aaron] risked his life for her when she was afflicted with zara’ath; [thus] she is called by his name (Mechilta). | ותקח מרים הנביאה: היכן נתנבאה כשהיתה אחות אהרן, קודם שנולד משה, אמרה עתידה אמי שתלד בן וכו', כדאיתא בסוטה (דף יג א). דבר אחר אחות אהרן לפי שמסר נפשו עליה כשנצטרעה, נקראת על שמו: | |
| a timbrel: Heb. הַךְתֹּף, a type of musical instrument. | את התף: כלי של מיני זמר: | |
| with timbrels and with dances: The righteous women of that generation were [so] certain that the Holy One, blessed be He, would perform miracles for them, they took timbrels out of Egypt. — [from Mechilta] | בתפים ובמחלת: מובטחות היו צדקניות שבדור שהקדוש ברוך הוא עושה להם נסים והוציאו תופים ממצרים: | |
| 21. And Miriam called out to them, Sing to the Lord, for very exalted is He; a horse and its rider He cast into the sea | כא. וַתַּעַן לָהֶם מִרְיָם שִׁירוּ לַיהֹוָה כִּי גָאֹה גָּאָה סוּס וְרֹכְבוֹ רָמָה בַיָּם: | |
| And Miriam called out to them: Moses said the Song to the men, and they answered after him, and Miriam said the song to the women [and they too repeated it]. — [from Mechilta] | ותען להם מרים: משה אמר שירה לאנשים, הוא אומר והם עונין אחריו, ומרים אמרה שירה לנשים: | |
| 22. Moses led Israel away from the Red Sea, and they went out into the desert of Shur; they walked for three days in the desert but did not find water. | כב. וַיַּסַּע משֶׁה אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל מִיַּם סוּף וַיֵּצְאוּ אֶל מִדְבַּר שׁוּר וַיֵּלְכוּ שְׁלשֶׁת יָמִים בַּמִּדְבָּר וְלֹא מָצְאוּ מָיִם: | |
| Moses led Israel away: lit., made Israel journey. He led them away against their will, for the Egyptians had adorned their steeds with ornaments of gold, silver, and precious stones, and the Israelites were finding them in the sea. The plunder at the sea was greater than the plunder in Egypt, as it is said: “We will make you rows of gold with studs of silver” (Song of Songs 1:11). Therefore, he had to lead them against their will. — [from Tanchuma Buber, Beshallach 16, Mechilta, Exod. 12:35, Song Rabbah 1:11] | ויסע משה: הסיען בעל כרחם שעטרו מצרים סוסיהם בתכשיטי זהב וכסף ואבנים טובות, והיו ישראל מוצאין אותם בים, וגדולה היתה ביזת הים מביזת מצרים, שנאמר (שיר השירים א יא) תורי זהב נעשה לך עם נקודות הכסף, לפיכך הוצרך להסיען בעל כרחם: | |
| 23. They came to Marah, but they could not drink water from Marah because it was bitter; therefore, it was named Marah. | כג. וַיָּבֹאוּ מָרָתָה וְלֹא יָכְלוּ לִשְׁתֹּת מַיִם מִמָּרָה כִּי מָרִים הֵם עַל כֵּן קָרָא שְׁמָהּ מָרָה: | |
| They came to Marah: Heb. מָרָתָה, like לְמָרָָה. The “hey” at the end מָרָתָה is instead of a “lammed” [prefix] at the beginning [of the word], and the “thav” is instead of the “hey” [that is part] of the root in the word מָרָָה. But when a suffix is added, when it is attached to a “hey” that replaces a “lammed,” the “hey” of the root is transformed into a “thav.” Similarly, every “hey” that is part of the root of the word is transformed into a “thav” when a suffix is added, like “I have no wrath (חֵמָה) ” (Isa. 27:4), [becomes] “and his wrath (וַחִמָתוֹ) burnt within him” (Esther 1:12). Note that the “hey” of the root is transformed into a “thav” when it is placed next to the added “vav.” Likewise,"bond servants and handmaids (וְאָמָה) “ (Lev. 25:44), [becomes] and "Here is my handmaid (אִמָתִי) Bilhah” (Gen. 30:3); “a living (חַיָה) soul” (Gen. 2:7), [becomes] “and his living spirit (חַיָתוֹ) causes him to abhor food” (Job 33:20); “between Ramah (הָרָמָה)” (Jud. 4:5), [becomes] “And his return was to Ramah (הָרָמָתָה)” (I Sam. 7:17). | ויבאו מרתה: כמו למרה, ה"א בסוף תיבה במקום למ"ד בתחילתה, והתי"ו היא במקום ה"א הנשרשת בתיבת מרה, ובסמיכתה כשהיא נדבקת לה"א, שהוא מוסיף במקום הלמ"ד, תהפך הה"א של שרש לתי"ו, וכן כל ה"א שהיא שרש בתיבה, תתהפך לתי"ו בסמיכתה, כמו (ישעיהו כז ד) חמה אין לי, (אסתר א יב) וחמתו בערה בו, הרי ה"א של שורש נהפכת לתי"ו, מפני שנסמכת אל הו"ו הנוספת, וכן (ויקרא כה מד) עבד ואמה, (בראשית ל ג) הנה אמתי בלהה, (שם ב ז) לנפש חיה, (איוב לג כ) וזהמתו חיתו לחם, (שופטים ד ה) בין הרמה, (שמואל א' ז יז) ותשובתו הרמתה: | |
| 24. The people complained against Moses, saying, What shall we drink? | כד. וַיִּלֹּנוּ הָעָם עַל משֶׁה לֵּאמֹר מַה נִּשְׁתֶּה: | |
| complained: Heb. וַיִלֹנוּ. This is in the niph’al conjugation. [In this case, the niph’al denotes the reflexive, as we see further in Rashi.] Likewise, in the Targum [Onkelos], it is also a niph’al expression: וְאִתְרַעִמוּ. The nature of the term denoting complaint ךְתְּלוּנָה [is that it] reverts to the person [complaining], מִתְלוֹנֵן [complains] or מִתְרוֹעֵם [storms], but one does not say לוֹנֵן or רוֹעֵם [Hebrew]. The Frenchman also says, “Decomplenst sey.” He reverts the statement to himself when he says, “Sey.” | וילנו: לשון נפעל הוא וכן התרגום לשון נפעל הוא ואתרעמו. כן דרך לשון תלונה להסב הדבור אל האדם מתלונן מתרועם, ולא אמר, לונן, רועם, וכן יאמר הלועז דיקומפליינש"ט שי"י [התלונן], מוסב הדבור אליו באמרו שי"י [עצמו]: | |
| 25. So he cried out to the Lord, and the Lord instructed him concerning a piece of wood, which he cast into the water, and the water became sweet. There He gave them a statute and an ordinance, and there He tested them. | כה. וַיִּצְעַק אֶל יְהֹוָה וַיּוֹרֵהוּ יְהֹוָה עֵץ וַיַּשְׁלֵךְ אֶל הַמַּיִם וַיִּמְתְּקוּ הַמָּיִם שָׁם שָׂם לוֹ חֹק וּמִשְׁפָּט וְשָׁם נִסָּהוּ: | |
| There He gave them: In Marah, He gave them some sections of the Torah so that they would busy themselves with them, namely [they were given the laws governing] the Sabbath, the red cow, and laws of jurisprudence. — [from Mechilta and Sanh. 56b] | שם שם לו: במרה נתן להם מקצת פרשיות של תורה שיתעסקו בהם, שבת ופרה אדומה ודינין: | |
| and there He tested them: [He tested] the people and saw how stiff-necked they were, that they did not consult Moses with respectful language, “Entreat [God to have] mercy upon us that we should have water to drink,” but they complained. — [from Mechilta] | ושם נסהו: לעם, וראה קשי ערפן שלא נמלכו במשה בלשון יפה, בקש עלינו רחמים שיהיה לנו מים לשתות, אלא נתלוננו: | |
| 26. And He said, If you hearken to the voice of the Lord, your God, and you do what is proper in His eyes, and you listen closely to His commandments and observe all His statutes, all the sicknesses that I have visited upon Egypt I will not visit upon you, for I, the Lord, heal you | כו. וַיֹּאמֶר אִם שָׁמוֹעַ תִּשְׁמַע לְקוֹל | יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ וְהַיָּשָׁר בְּעֵינָיו תַּעֲשֶׂה וְהַאֲזַנְתָּ לְמִצְוֹתָיו וְשָׁמַרְתָּ כָּל חֻקָּיו כָּל הַמַּחֲלָה אֲשֶׁר שַׂמְתִּי בְמִצְרַיִם לֹא אָשִׂים עָלֶיךָ כִּי אֲנִי יְהֹוָה רֹפְאֶךָ: | |
| If you hearken: This is the acceptance [of the law] that they should accept upon themselves. | אם שמוע תשמע: זו קבלה שיקבלו עליהם: | |
| and you do: This means the performance [of the commandments]. | תעשה: היא עשייה: | |
| and you listen closely: [This means that] you [should] incline your ears to be meticulous in [fulfilling] them. | והאזנת: תטה אזנים לדקדק בהם: | |
| all His statutes: Things that are only the decree of the King, without any [apparent] rationale, and with which the evil inclination finds fault, [saying,] “What is [the sense of] the prohibition of these [things]? Why were they prohibited?” For example, [the prohibitions of] wearing shatnes [a mixture of wool and linen] and eating pork, and [the ritual of] the red cow and their like. — [based on Yoma 67b] | כל חקיו: דברים שאינן אלא גזירת מלך בלא שום טעם, ויצר הרע מקנטר עליהם מה איסור באלו, למה נאסרו, כגון לבישת כלאים ואכילת חזיר ופרה אדומה וכיוצא בהם: | |
| I will not visit upon you: And if I do bring [sickness upon you], it is as if it has not been brought, “for I, the Lord, heal you.” This is its midrashic interpretation (see Sanh. 101a, Mechilta). According to its simple meaning, [we explain:] “for I, the Lord, am your Physician” and [I] teach you the Torah and the mitzvoth in order that you be saved from them [illnesses], like this physician who says to a person, “Do not eat things that will cause you to relapse into the grip of illness.” This [warning] refers to listening closely to the commandments, and so [Scripture] says: “It shall be healing for your navel” (Prov. 3:8). — [from Mechilta] | לא אשים עליך: ואם אשים הרי היא כלא הושמה, כי אני ה' רופאך, זהו מדרשו. ולפי פשוטו כי אני ה' רופאך ומלמדך תורה ומצות למען תנצל מהם, כרופא הזה האומר לאדם אל תאכל [דבר זה פן יביאך לידי חולי זה] וכן הוא אומר (משלי ג ח) רפאות תהי לשרך: |
___________________________
Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 44-48
• Chapter 44
The psalmist cries and laments painfully over this bitter exile, where we and our Torah are shamed daily, when the nations say that God has exchanged us for another nation, and where we are considered as sheep for the slaughter, as a byword and taunt. It is therefore fitting that God redeem us, for the sake of His great Name that abides with us in exile.
1. For the Conductor, by the sons of Korach, a maskil.1
2. God, with our ears we have heard, our fathers have told us, of the deeds You wrought in their days, in the days of old.
3. You drove out nations with Your hand, and planted [Israel in their place]; You afflicted peoples and banished them.
4. For not by their sword did they inherit the land, and their own arm did not save them, but by Your right hand, Your arm and the light of Your countenance-for You favored them.
5. You are my king, O God; decree the salvation of Jacob.
6. Through You will we gore our adversaries; with Your Name we will trample our opponents.
7. For I do not trust in my bow, and my sword cannot save me.
8. For You have delivered us from our foes, and You shamed those who hate us.
9. In God we glory all day, and forever thank Your Name, Selah.
10. Though You abandon and disgrace us, and do not go forth with our armies;
11. You cause us to retreat from the oppressor, and those who hate us plunder for themselves;
12. You deliver us like sheep to be devoured, and scatter us among the nations;
13. You sell Your nation without gain, and do not set a high price upon them;
14. You make us a disgrace to our neighbors, the scorn and derision of those around us;
15. You make us a byword among the nations, [a cause for] nodding the head among the peoples;
16. all day long my humiliation is before me, and the shame of my face covers me
17. at the voice of the reviler and blasphemer, because of the foe and avenger-
18. all this has come upon us, yet we have not forgotten You, nor have we been false to Your covenant.
19. Our hearts have not retracted, nor have our steps strayed from Your path.
20. Even when You crushed us in the place of serpents, and shrouded us in the shadow of death-
21. did we forget the Name of our God, and extend our hands to a foreign god?
22. Is it not so that God can examine this, for He knows the secrets of the heart.
23. For it is for Your sake that we are killed all the time; we are regarded as sheep for the slaughter.
24. Arise! Why do You sleep, my Lord? Wake up! Do not abandon [us] forever!
25. Why do You conceal Your countenance and forget our affliction and distress?
26. For our souls are bowed to the dust, our bellies cleave to the earth.
27. Arise! Be our help, and redeem us for the sake of Your kindness.
Chapter 45
The psalmist composed this psalm referring to Moshiach. He describes his greatness, his attributes, his glory, his wealth, and his reign; and states that Israel anticipates him, remembering and saying in every generation, "When will King Moshiach come?"
1. For the Conductor, upon the shoshanim,1 By the sons of Korach; a maskil,2 a song of love.
2. My heart is astir with a noble theme; I say, "My composition is for the king;3 my tongue is the pen of a skillful scribe.”
3. You are the most handsome of men, charm is poured upon your lips; therefore has God blessed you forever.
4. Gird your sword upon your thigh, O mighty one-it is your majesty and splendor.
5. And with your splendor, succeed and ride on for the sake of truth and righteous humility; and your right hand will guide you to awesome deeds.
6. Your arrows are sharpened-nations fall beneath you-[the arrows fall] into the hearts of the king's enemies.
7. Your throne, O ruler, is forever and ever, [for] the scepter of justice is the scepter of your kingdom.
8. You love righteousness and hate wickedness; therefore has God, your God, anointed you with oil of joy above your peers.
9. Myrrh, aloes and cassia are [the fragrance] of all your garments, which are from ivory palaces that bring you joy.
10. Daughters of kings visit you, and the queen stands erect at your right hand, adorned in the fine gold of Ophir.
11. Hear, O daughter, and observe, incline your ear; forget your people and your father's house.
12. Then the king will desire your beauty. He is your master-bow to him.
13. The daughter of Tyre, the wealthiest of nations, will seek your favor with a gift.
14. All the glory of the princess is within; her clothing surpasses settings of gold.
15. In embroidered garments she will be brought to the king; the maidens in her train, her companions, will be led to you.
16. They will be brought with gladness and joy, they will enter the palace of the king.
17. Your sons will succeed your fathers; you will appoint them ministers throughout the land.
18. I will cause Your Name to be remembered throughout the generations; therefore will the nations praise You forever and ever.
Chapter 46
This psalm tells of the Gog and Magog era (the Messianic age), when man will cast aside his weapons, and warfare will be no more.
1. For the Conductor, by the sons of Korach, on the alamot,1 a song.
2. God is our refuge and strength, a help in distress, He is most accessible.
3. Therefore, we will not be afraid when the earth is transformed, when mountains collapse in the heart of the seas;
4. when its waters roar and are muddied, and mountains quake before His grandeur, Selah.
5. The river2-its streams will bring joy to the city of God, the sacred dwelling of the Most High.
6. God is in her midst, she will not falter; God will help her at the approach of morning.
7. Nations clamor, kingdoms stumble; He raises His voice and the earth dissolves.
8. The Lord of Hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our stronghold forever.
9. Go and see the works of the Lord, Who has wrought devastation in the land.
10. To the end of the earth He causes wars to cease; He breaks the bow, snaps the spear, and burns the wagons in fire.
11. Stop [waging war]! And know that I am God; I will be exalted among the nations, exalted upon the earth.
12. The Lord of Hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our stronghold forever.
Chapter 47
Following the battle of Gog and Magog (in the Messianic era), war will be no more. God will grant us salvation, and we will merit to go up to the Holy Temple for the festivals, Amen.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by the sons of Korach.
2. All you nations, clap hands; sound [the shofar] to God with a sound of jubilation.
3. For the Lord is most high, awesome; a great King over all the earth.
4. He subdues peoples under us, nations beneath our feet.
5. He chooses our heritage for us, the glory of Jacob whom He loves eternally.
6. God ascends through teruah, the Lord-through the sound of the shofar.
7. Sing, O sing to God; sing, O sing to our King.
8. For God is King over all the earth; sing, O man of understanding.
9. God reigns over the nations; God is seated on His holy throne.
10. The most noble of the nations are gathered, the nation of the God of Abraham; for the protectors of the earth belong to God; He is greatly exalted.
Chapter 48
The psalmist prophesies about the Messianic era, singing the praises of a rebuilt Jerusalem and the sacrifices brought there. At that time Israel will say, "As we heard from the mouths of the prophets, so have we merited to see!"
1. A song, a psalm by the sons of Korach.
2. The Lord is great and exceedingly acclaimed in the city of God, His holy mountain.
3. Beautiful in landscape, the joy of the whole earth is Mount Zion, on the northern slopes, the city of the great King.
4. In her citadels, God became known as a tower of strength.
5. For behold, the kings assembled, they advanced in concert [to invade her].
6. They saw [the wonders of the Almighty] and were astounded; they were terror-stricken, they hastened to flee.
7. Trembling seized them there, pangs as of a woman in the throes of labor;
8. [they were crushed as] by an east wind that shatters the ships of Tarshish.
9. As we have heard, so have we seen, in the city of the Lord of Hosts, in the city of our God; may God establish it for all eternity.
10. God, we have been hoping for Your kindness [to be revealed] within Your Sanctuary.
11. As Your Name, O God, [is great,] so is Your praise to the ends of the earth; Your right hand is filled with righteousness.
12. Let Mount Zion rejoice, let the towns of Judah exult, because of Your judgments.
13. Walk around Zion, encircle her, count her towers.
14. Consider well her ramparts, behold her lofty citadels, that you may recount it to a later generation.
15. For this God is our God forever and ever; He will lead us eternally.
____________________________
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 21
• Lessons in Tanya
• Today's Tanya Lesson
Wednesday, 8 Shevat, 5775 • 28 January 2015
Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 21
וככה ממש, דרך משל, מיוחדות דבורו ומחשבתו של הקב״ה בתכלית היחוד במהותו ועצמותו יתברך גם אחר שיצא דבורו יתברך אל הפועל בבריאות העולמות, כמו שהיה מיוחד עמו קודם בריאת העולמות
Precisely so, by way of analogy, are G‑d’s “speech” and “thought” absolutely united with His essence and being even after His “speech” has already become materialized in the creation of the worlds, just as it was united with Him before the worlds were created.
ואין שום שינוי כלל לפניו יתברך אלא אל הברואים המקבלים חיותם מבחינת דבורו יתברך בבחינת יציאתו כבר אל הפועל בבריאת העולמות
Thus, for G‑d, nothing whatever was changed by the revelation of His creative power in Creation. The change wrought by Creation exists only with regard to the created beings, who receive their life-force from G‑d’s Word when it proceeds (from concealment) to actualization, with the creation of the worlds.
For the created beings, the revelation of the creative power contained in G‑d’s Word represents the greatest possible change — the passage from nonexistence to existence, since they come into being only when the Divine Word begins to actually create worlds.
שמתלבש בהם להחיותם
at which time it clothes itself in these worlds, to give them life.
על ידי השתלשלות מעלה לעלול, וירידת המדרגות בצמצומים רבים ושונים
This process takes place through a gradual descent from level to level (with the higher level referred to as the עילה, the “cause”, and the lower level — the עלול, the “effect”), and a downward gradation by means of numerous and various contractions (tzimtzumim, i.e., a progressive decrease in the intensity of the revealed Divine powers).
עד שיוכלו הברואים לקבל חיותם והתהוותם ממנו ולא יתבטלו במציאות
G‑d’s Word descends and is contracted to the point where the created beings can derive their life-force and existence from it, without losing their identity.
An undimmed revelation of the G‑dly life-force would create beings whose identity would be utterly nullified within their life-force. It was G‑d’s intention that His creations perceive themselves to be separate from Him, and that through their own efforts they achieve a spirit of self-nullification vis-à-vis their Creator. To this end, G‑d revealed His creative power only through a series of contractions, whose effect the Alter Rebbe now goes on to explain:
וכל הצמצומים הם בחינת הסתר פנים, להסתיר ולהעלים האור והחיות הנמשך מדבורו יתברך, שלא יתגלה בבחינת גילוי רב שלא יוכלו התחתונים לקבל
All the contractions constitute a “veiling of the [Divine] Countenance”; that is, they veil and conceal the “face,” i.e., the essential aspects of the light and life-force that are derived from G‑d’s Word, so that it should not reveal itself with an intense radiance which the lower worlds would be incapable of receiving.
ולכן גם כן נדמה להם אור וחיות הדבור של מקום ברוך הוא המלובש בהם, כאלו הוא דבר מובדל ממהותו ועצמותו יתברך
Therefore too, because it is thus obscured through tzimtzum, the light and life-force of G‑d’s Word that is clothed in them appears to them as if it is something separate from G‑d Himself,
רק שנמשך ממנו יתברך כמו דבור של אדם מנפשו
and as though it only issues from Him, just as the speech of a human being issues from him but then becomes separated from him.
This false perception of the G‑dly life-force as something separate from G‑d is possible only because the life-force is hidden from creation by means of the tzimtzumim.
אך לגבי הקב״ה אין שום צמצום והסתר והעלם מסתיר ומעלים לפניו, וכחשכה כאורה
Yet, in regard to G‑d, no concealment or veil hides or obscures anything from Him; to Him,1 “‘darkness’ (concealment) and ‘light’ (revelation) are alike,”
כדכתיב: גם חשך לא יחשיך ממך וגו׳
as it is written:2 “Even the darkness does not obscure [anything] from You.”
This may also be interpreted: “Even the darkness does not obscure because it derives from You”; i.e., the veil of tzimtzum is itself of divine origin, and therefore it cannot obscure G‑dliness. For as the Alter Rebbe goes on to say, only a foreign body can constitute an obstruction; one cannot hide from his own self.
משום שאין הצמצומים והלבושים דבר נפרד ממנו יתברך, חס ושלום, אלא כהדין קמצא, דלבושיה מיניה וביה
For the tzimtzumim and the “veils” are not things distinct from Him, heaven forfend, since nothing is separate from G‑d, but are3 “like the turtle (or: ’snail‘), whose garment i.e., its shell is part of its body”; so too, the very “shell” — the process of tzimtzum — that hides G‑dliness is itself G‑dly.
כמו שכתוב: כי ה׳ הוא האלקים, וכמו שכתוב במקום אחר
Thus it is written:4 “G‑d — He is the Lord,” as is explained elsewhere.5
In Hebrew: “Yud-hei-vav-hei — He is Elokim.” The Four-Letter Name of G‑d denotes Divine revelation and transcendence, while the Name Elokim refers to G‑d’s power of self-concealment by which he vests Himself in creation. The equation points out that they are one; Elokim is G‑dly just as is the level of G‑dliness signified by the other Name. Thus, Elokim does not act as a veil obscuring G‑d, since it is essentially one with Yud-hei-vav-hei, the power of revelation.
ולכן קמיה כולא כלא חשיב ממש
Therefore, in His presence, all else is of absolutely no account.
Since G‑d is not affected by the tzimtzumim which make it possible for a created being to feel separate from Him, He perceives all the creations brought into being by His Word as being still within their source — Himself. There they are in a state of absolute nullification. From His perspective they are still nonentities, and the fact of their creation in no way detracts from His absolute unity — He is One alone after Creation just as He was before Creation.
——— ● ———
FOOTNOTES
1. Tehillim 139:12.
2. Tehillim 139:12.
3. Bereishit Rabbah 21:5.
4. Devarim 4:35.
5. Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah, ch. 6.
____________________________
Rambam:
Daily Mitzvah P155 Sefer Hamitzvot
Today's Mitzvah
Wednesday 8 Shevat, 5775 • 28 January 2015
Daily Mitzvah P155 Sefer Hamitzvot
Today's Mitzvah
Wednesday 8 Shevat, 5775 • 28 January 2015
Positive Commandment 155 (Digest)
Sanctifying the Shabbat
"Remember the Shabbat to keep it holy"—Exodus 20:8.
We are commanded to honor the Shabbat when it enters and when it leaves by pronouncing words that proclaim the greatness and holiness of the day, and its distinctness from the weekdays that precede and follow it. This mitzvah – commonly known as kiddush and havdalah – is performed over a cup of wine.
The 155th mitzvah is that we are commanded to make a verbal declaration when Shabbos enters and when it leaves. We must mention the greatness and exalted character of this day, and how it is distinct from the other days of the week which precede it and follow it.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statementex1 (exalted be He), "Remember the Shabbos day to sanctify it." This means that one should commemorate it through mentioning its holiness and greatness. This is the mitzvah of Kiddush.
The Mechilta says the following: " 'Remember the Shabbos day to sanctify it,' — this means one should sanctify it through reciting a blessing." The Sages said explicitly,2 "Remember [Kiddush] over wine."
The Sages also said,3 "Sanctify it when it enters and when it leaves," [the phrase, "when it leaves"] referring to Havdalah, which is also part of our commandment to remember Shabbos.
The details of this commandment are explained in the end of tractate Pesachim4, and in many places in Berachos5 and Shabbos6.
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.Shmos 20:8.
2.Pesachim 106a.
3.See Kapach, 5731, note 71, that the apparent source is Sh'iltos D'Rav Achai, parshas Zos HaBerachah.
4.. 106a.
5.. 51b.
6.. 150b.
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.
________________________________________
Sanctifying the Shabbat
"Remember the Shabbat to keep it holy"—Exodus 20:8.
We are commanded to honor the Shabbat when it enters and when it leaves by pronouncing words that proclaim the greatness and holiness of the day, and its distinctness from the weekdays that precede and follow it. This mitzvah – commonly known as kiddush and havdalah – is performed over a cup of wine.
The 155th mitzvah is that we are commanded to make a verbal declaration when Shabbos enters and when it leaves. We must mention the greatness and exalted character of this day, and how it is distinct from the other days of the week which precede it and follow it.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statementex1 (exalted be He), "Remember the Shabbos day to sanctify it." This means that one should commemorate it through mentioning its holiness and greatness. This is the mitzvah of Kiddush.
The Mechilta says the following: " 'Remember the Shabbos day to sanctify it,' — this means one should sanctify it through reciting a blessing." The Sages said explicitly,2 "Remember [Kiddush] over wine."
The Sages also said,3 "Sanctify it when it enters and when it leaves," [the phrase, "when it leaves"] referring to Havdalah, which is also part of our commandment to remember Shabbos.
The details of this commandment are explained in the end of tractate Pesachim4, and in many places in Berachos5 and Shabbos6.
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.Shmos 20:8.
2.Pesachim 106a.
3.See Kapach, 5731, note 71, that the apparent source is Sh'iltos D'Rav Achai, parshas Zos HaBerachah.
4.. 106a.
5.. 51b.
6.. 150b.
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 a Day: Avodah Kochavim - Chapter NineAvodah Kochavim - Chapter Nine
Halacha 1
It is forbidden to purchase or sell any durable entity to an idolater within three days of one of their holidays. [Similarly, within this period, it is forbidden] to borrow from them, to lend to them, to accept payment from them or to repay them for a loan that is supported by a promissory note or collateral. It is, however, permitted to collect a loan which is supported by a verbal commitment alone, because one is saving one's property from being lost to them.
It is permitted to sell them an entity which will not endure - e.g., vegetables, or a cooked dish - until the day of their festival.
When does the above apply? In Eretz Yisrael. In other lands, however, it is forbidden [to engage in such activities] only on the day of their festival itself.
If one transgressed and did business with them during these three days, one may derive benefit from the results of these transactions. When, however, one does business with them on the day of their festival itself, it is forbidden to benefit from the results of these transactions.
Halacha 2
It is forbidden to send a present to a gentile on one of his holidays, unless one knows that he does not acknowledge or worship idols. Similarly, if a gentile sends a present to a Jew on one of [the gentile's] holidays, the Jew should not accept it. If, however, there is the possibility of ill-feeling arising, he should take it from him. Nevertheless, he should not derive any benefit from it until he finds out that the gentile does not acknowledge or worship idols.
Halacha 3
If the idolaters' festival lasts several days - whether three, four, or ten - all the days [of the festival] are considered as a single day. [Carrying out transactions] on any of these days, or on the three days preceding them, is forbidden.
Halacha 4
The Canaanites are idol worshipers, and Sunday is their festival. Accordingly, inEretz Yisrael, it is forbidden to conduct transactions with them on Thursday and Friday each and every week, and, needless to say, on Sunday itself, when transactions with them are forbidden everywhere.
Halacha 5
The day on which the idolaters gather together to crown a king and offer sacrifice and praise to their false deities is considered to be one of their holidays, since it is comparable to their other holidays. In contrast, on a day which is celebrated by an individual idolater as a festival on which he gives thanks and praise to the star he [worships] - for example, his birthday, the day on which he shaves his beard or hair, the day on which he returns from a sea-voyage, the day on which he leaves prison, the day on which he makes a [wedding] feast for his son, and the like - it is forbidden [to do business] on that particular day only with that individual man.
Similarly, when [it is customary] that the day on which one of them dies is marked with festivities, it is forbidden [to do business] with those individuals on that day. Whenever [a person's] death is marked by the burning of his utensils and the offering of incense, we can assume that idol worship is [involved in the ritual].
The [above] prohibition applies only to those who worship [the false deity]. In contrast, it is permitted to do business with those who join in the celebrations by eating, drinking, and observing it as a matter of custom or in deference to the king.
Halacha 6
Articles which are distinguished by their use [in the worship] of one of the false deities in a particular locale may never be sold to the worshipers of that deity in that locale. Articles which are not characterized by such uniqueness may be sold to them without enquiring [about the purpose for which they will be used].
If, however, an idolater specifically states that he is purchasing the article for the sake of idol worship, it is forbidden to sell it to him unless one blemishes it in a manner which disqualifies it for use as an offering to the idol. An animal lacking a limb is not offered as a sacrifice to an idol.
Halacha 7
It is permitted to sell articles which are distinguished [by their use in the worship of a false deity] that are mixed together with articles that are not used for such purposes - e.g., pure frankincense with black frankincense - without enquiring [about the purpose for which they will be used]. We do not suspect that [the purchaser] will separate the pure frankincense to use for idol worship. The same applies in other similar situations.
Halacha 8
Just as it is forbidden to sell idolaters articles that assist them in idol worship, it is forbidden to sell them articles that can cause harm to many people - for example, bears, lions, weapons, fetters, and chains. [Similarly,] it is forbidden to sharpen their weapons.
Everything that is forbidden to be sold to idolaters is also forbidden to be sold to a Jew who is suspect that he will sell to idolaters. Similarly, it is forbidden to sell dangerous objects to a Jewish thief.
Halacha 9
When the Jews dwell among the idolaters and have established a covenant with them, it is permissible to sell weapons to the servants of the king and his to his soldiers, because they use them to wage war against the enemies of the country and to protect it. Thus, they also protect us, for we dwell among them.
It is permitted to walk around a city in which an idol is located. It is, however, forbidden to enter [the city]. If the idol is located outside the city, it is permitted to walk within it.
Halacha 10
A person who is journeying from one place to another may not pass through a city in which a false deity is located.
When does this apply? When this is the only way to his destination. If, however, there is an alternate route to his destination and, by chance, he took [the route which passed through this city], it is permissible.
Halacha 11
It is forbidden to build - [even] together with an idolater - a dome under which an idol is placed. If one transgressed and built such a structure, however, one's wage is permitted. A priori, one may construct the palace or the courtyard where that dome is located.
Halacha 12
[The following laws apply] when an idol is located within a city and there some shops which are adorned and some which are not: It is forbidden to benefit from those which are adorned or [to use] anything they contain, since we can assume that they were adorned for the sake of idol worship. It is permitted to benefit from those which are not adorned.
It is forbidden to do business with a store owned by a false deity, because one offers benefit to the false deity.
Halacha 13
When a person sells his house to an idol, it is forbidden to benefit from the proceeds of the sale. Rather, they must be taken to the Dead Sea. If, however, an idolater steals a Jew's house against his will and places an idol within, it is permitted [to accept whatever] money [he offers]. [The Jew] may compose [a bill of sale] and formalize it in accordance with the civil law procedures.
Halacha 14
Flutes belonging to idolaters should not be used in a funeral dirge.
One may attend a pagan commercial fair and purchase livestock, gentile servants and maidservants before they convert, houses, fields, and vineyards. One may compose a bill of sale and formalize it in accordance with the civil law procedures, since by doing so one saves [one's property] from them.
When does the above apply? When one buys from a private individual who does not have to pay a tax [to the false deity]. If, however, one buys from a merchant, it is forbidden, for a merchant must pay a tax which must be given to the false deity. Hence, [by making such a purchase], one is giving benefit to a false deity.
[The following laws apply] if one transgressed and purchased [merchandise] from a merchant: If one purchased livestock, one should cut off the animal's hooves from below the anklebone. If one purchased garments or other objects, one should let them rot. If one purchased money or metal utensils, one should bring them to the Dead Sea. If one purchased a servant, one may not help him up [from a pit], nor should one push him into one.
Halacha 15
When an idolater makes a [wedding] party for his son or daughter, it is forbidden to benefit from the feast. It is even forbidden for a Jew to eat and drink his own food there, since it is being consumed at a celebration of idolaters.
When is it forbidden to eat such an idolater's food? From when he began to prepare for the wedding feast, the entire duration of the wedding feast, and for thirty days afterwards. [Furthermore,] if he makes another celebration because of the wedding even after thirty days have passed, it is forbidden [to participate] until twelve months [have passed].
This stringency was imposed because of idol worship, as [implied by Exodus 34:15-16]: "And he shall call to you and you shall eat from his slaughter, and you shall choose from his daughters for your sons. His daughters will stray after their gods, and they will lead your sons astray after these gods."
Halacha 16
A Jewish woman should not nurse the child of an idolater, since, by doing so, she raises a son who will be an idolater. She should not serve as a midwife for an idolatrous woman [without charge]. She may, however, do so for a fee, lest strife arise.
An idolatrous woman may serve as a midwife for a Jewess and nurse her child. [This must be done] in premises belonging to a Jew, lest the idolatrous woman kill the child.
Halacha 17
It is forbidden to trade with [gentiles] on their way to reproachful places of idol worship, but it is permitted to trade with them when they return. This applies when they do not journey in a caravan. If, however, they are traveling in a caravan, they may change their mind and return.
If a Jew journeys to a reproachful place of idol worship, one may trade with him on his way, since he may change his mind. On his way back, it is forbidden. [It is forbidden to trade with] an apostate Jew on his way there and on his way back.
Halacha 18
When a Jew attends a fair of idol worshipers it is forbidden to trade with him when he returns. Perhaps he sold an idol to them, and it is forbidden to benefit from the proceeds of the sale of idol worship possessed by a Jew.
It is, however, permitted to benefit from [the proceeds of the sale of an idol] possessed by an idolater. Therefore, it is permitted to trade with an idolater coming from such a fair, but not with a Jew. It is forbidden to trade with an apostate Jew on his way to and on his way from such a fair.
Rambam:
• 3 Chapters a Day: Shabbos - Chapter Twenty Four, Shabbos - Chapter Twenty Five, Shabbos - Chapter Twenty Six
Shabbos - Chapter Twenty Four
Halacha 1
There are activities that are forbidden on the Sabbath despite the fact that they do not resemble the [forbidden] labors, nor will they lead to [the performance of] the [forbidden] labors.1
Why then are [these activities] forbidden? Because it is written [Isaiah 58:13], "If you restrain your feet, because of the Sabbath, and [refrain] from pursuing your desires on My holy day..." and it is written [ibid.], " And you shall honor it [by refraining] from following your [ordinary] ways, attending to your wants, and speaking about [mundane] matters."
Therefore, it is forbidden for a person to go2 and tend to his [mundane] concerns on the Sabbath, or even to speak about them3 - e.g., to discuss with a partner which merchandise should be sold on the morrow or which should be bought, how this building should be constructed, or which merchandise should be taken to a particular place. Speaking about all matters of this like is included in the prohibition [against] "...speaking about [mundane] matters."
It is speaking that is forbidden. Thinking [about such matters] is permitted.4
Halacha 2
It is forbidden for a person to check his gardens and fields on the Sabbath to see what they require or to see how their fruit is growing, for this involves going to "pursue your desires."5
Halacha 3
When does the above apply? When one goes to the end of the Sabbath boundary to wait until nightfall to perform an activity that is forbidden on the Sabbath itself. It is, however, permitted to [go to the boundary and] wait until nightfall in order to perform a task that is permitted on the Sabbath.
What is implied? We may not go to the boundary and wait until nightfall in order to bring produce that is still attached to the ground or to hire workers. One may, however, go and wait until nightfall in order to guard one's produce, since it is permitted to guard [produce] on the Sabbath.8
Similarly, one may go and wait until nightfall in order to bring an animal or fruit that has already been detached. For one calls to an animal and it will come even if it is outside the [Sabbath] boundary,9 and had there been enclosures, one would have been able to bring the detached produce on the Sabbath.
Halacha 4
It is permitted for a person to tell a worker whom he sees [on the Sabbath], "Stand near me in the evening."12 One may not, however, tell him, "Be prepared for me in the evening," since by doing so," the person is attending to his wants on the Sabbath.
It is forbidden to run and jump on the Sabbath, as [Isaiah, loc. cit.] states, "[Refraining] from following your [ordinary] ways" - i.e., the manner in which you walk on the Sabbath should not resemble the manner in which you walk during the week. A person may, however, descend to a cistern, pit, or cave, even if they are 100 cubits deep, climb down to drink and then climb up.
It is forbidden to speak extensively about idle matters, as it is written [ibid.], "...speaking about [mundane] matters" - i.e., the manner in which you speak on the Sabbath should not resemble the manner in which you speak during the week.13
Halacha 5
It is permitted to run on the Sabbath for matters involved with a mitzvah14 - e.g., to run to the synagogue or the house of study.
We are permitted to calculate accounts associated with a mitzvah,15 to make measurements concerning a mitzvah - e.g., to measure a mikveh to see if it contains [the required] quantity,16 or a cloth to see if it is [large enough to] contract ritual impurity.17
Charity may be pledged to the poor.18 We may go to synagogues and houses of study - and even to theaters and halls of gentiles - to take care19 of matters of public interest on the Sabbath.
One may speak about arranging a marriage for a girl, or arranging study - whether the study of Torah or the study of a profession20 - for a boy.21 We may visit the sick and comfort mourners.22 A person who goes to visit a sick person should say, "It is the Sabbath [when it is forbidden] to plead;23 healing will come soon."24
One may go to the end of the Sabbath boundary to wait until nightfall to take care of the needs of a bride or to take care of the needs of a deceased person [- e.g.], to bring a coffin or shrouds.
[When involved in these matters,] one may tell [a colleague,] "Go to.... If you don't find [the required object] there, bring it from...." "If you can't find it at one hundred, bring it [even] at two hundred." [This is permitted] as long as one does not mention the [maximum] sum he is willing to pay.25
[The rationale for] all these and similar [leniencies] is that [they concern] a mitzvah. And the [verse from which the prohibitions against mundane activity is derived] states, "pursuing your desires." "Your desires" are forbidden; God's desires are permitted.
Halacha 6
One may set out on a ship on the Mediterranean Sea on Friday for the sake of the fulfillment of a mitzvah.26 One [must] make an agreement with [the captain] to halt [the journey] on the Sabbath. If, [however,] he does not halt [the journey, it is of no consequence].27
We may nullify28 vows on the Sabbath, both vows that must be nullified for the sake of the Sabbath and vows whose nullification is not related to the Sabbath.29 One may ask a wise man to absolve [a person] of a vow if this is necessary for the sake of the Sabbath.30This is possible despite the fact that the person had the opportunity to have [himself] absolved [of the vow] before the Sabbath. [This license is granted] because all of the above matters concern a mitzvah.
Halacha 7
Punishments may not be administered [by the court] on the Sabbath. Although [administering] punishment fulfills a positive command [of the Torah], the observance of a positive commandment does not supersede [the observance of] the Sabbath [laws].
What is implied? A person who was sentenced to be lashed or executed by [the court] should not be lashed or executed on the Sabbath, as [Exodus 35:3] states: "Do not kindle a fire in all of your dwellings on the Sabbath."31 This [verse serves as] a warning to the court not to [execute a person by] burning on the Sabbath. The same principle applies regarding other punishments [administered by the court].32
Halacha 8
A person is permitted to guard his produce on the Sabbath regardless of whether it is detached from the earth or not. If another person comes to take it, or an animal or a wild beast comes to eat it, he may shout at them and beat them to drive them away.
[One might ask:] This involves tending to one's own concerns. Why is it permitted? Because33 one is prohibited only against acquiring new property that one does not possess, earning a wage, making a profit, or seeking to accrue [new] benefits. It is, however, permitted for a person to protect the interests that he already possesses. To what can this be compared? To locking one's house [to prevent] thieves [from entering].
Halacha 9
A person who protects his grains from birds or who protects his cucumbers and squash from beasts should not clap his hands and dance as he does during the week. [This is] a decree, [instituted] lest one pick up a pebble and throw it four cubits in the public domain.34
Halacha 10
All the actions that are forbidden as [part of the category of] sh'vut are not forbidden beyn hash'mashot,35[between sunset and the appearance of the stars].36 They are forbidden only on the Sabbath itself, and they are permitted during beyn hash'mashot,37 provided that [the activity] is necessary because of a mitzvah or a pressing matter.38
What is implied? During beyn hash'mashot it is permitted to climb a tree39 or to swim across water40 to bring a lulav or a shofar. Similarly, one may take aneruv that one has made down from a tree or out from a carmelit.41
Similarly, if one is concerned, anxious, and pressed concerning a matter, [an activity forbidden as] a sh'vut is permitted during beyn hash'mashot. If, however, the matter is not pressing, nor does it concern a mitzvah, it is forbidden. Therefore, one may not tithe produce that definitely has not been tithed,42 although the prohibition against tithing produce on the Sabbath was instituted as a sh'vut.43 One may, however, tithe produce of which one is unsure whether or not it has been tithed.44
Halacha 11
When a minor performs an activity on the Sabbath that is forbidden as a sh'vut - e.g., he plucks from [a plant growing in] a flower pot that does not have a hole, or he carries in a carmelit - the court is not obligated to prevent him from doing so. Similarly, if his father allows him to act in this manner, [the father] need not be rebuked.45
Halacha 12
The Sages forbade the carrying of certain objects on the Sabbath in the same manner as [one carries] during the week. Why was this prohibition instituted?46[Our Sages] said: If the prophets warned that the manner in which a person walks on the Sabbath should not resemble the manner in which he walks during the week, and similarly, one's conversation on the Sabbath should not resemble one's conversation during the week, as it is written, "[refraining from]... speaking about [mundane] matters," surely the manner in which one carries on the Sabbath should not resemble the manner in which one carries during the week.
In this manner, no one will regard [the Sabbath] as an ordinary weekday and lift up and repair articles, [carrying them] from room to room, or from house to house, or set aside stones and the like. [These restrictions are necessary] for since the person is idle and sitting at home, [it is likely that] he will seek something with which to occupy himself. Thus, he will not have ceased activity and will have negated the motivating principle for the Torah's commandment [Deuteronomy 5:14], "Thus... will rest."47
Halacha 13
Furthermore, when one searches for and carries articles that are used for a forbidden activity, it is possible that one will use them and thus be motivated to perform a [forbidden] labor.
[Another reason for this prohibition is] that there are some people who are not craftsmen and are always idle - e.g., tourists and those that stand on the street corners. These individuals never perform labor. Were they to be allowed to walk, talk, and carry as they do during the week, the result would be that their cessation of activity on [the Sabbath] would not be discernible. For this reason, [our Sages instituted] refraining from such activities,48 for the cessation of such activities is universally applicable.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
As stated in Chapter 21, Halachah 1, these two reasons are the source for the prohibitions placed in the category of sh'vut.
|
| 2. |
This restriction stems from the fact that the verse mentions, "Restraining your feet."
|
| 3. |
Rabbenu Asher, in his gloss on Shabbat 150a, associates this prohibition with discussing matters that are forbidden to be performed on the Sabbath itself. This thrust is reflected in the decisions ofShulchan Aruch HaRav 307:1 and the Mishnah Berurah 307:1.
The Rambam mentions these principles in Halachah 3. In this context, it can be noted that all the examples the Rambam gives in this halachah reflect activities forbidden on the Sabbath.
|
| 4. |
For the verse specifically mentions speech, thus excluding thought from the prohibition. Nevertheless, as the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 306:8) emphasizes, "It is a mitzvah not to think of these matters at all. Instead, one's attitude should be that all of one's work has been completed."
|
| 5. |
According to the later authorities, this prohibition applies only when it is obvious that one's intent is to take care of one's own needs. If, however, it appears that one is merely taking a pleasure stroll, there is no prohibition (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 306:2; Mishnah Berurah 306:1). See, however, the notes on the following halachah.
|
| 6. |
2000 cubits from one's place at the commencement of the Sabbath. (See Chapter 27, where this concept is discussed at length.)
The Maggid Mishneh states that by mentioning "the end of the Sabbath boundary," the Rambam alludes to a concept stated by Tosafot (Shabbat 150a) - i.e., that if one's field is within the Sabbath boundary, there is no difficulty and one may walk to it on the Sabbath so that one can begin work on Saturday night. If the field is at the end of the Sabbath boundary, it is obvious that one is walking to proceed to one's field. When the field is within the Sabbath limits, by contrast, it is not obvious that one's intent is to perform forbidden labor.
Although the Shulchan Aruch 307:9 quotes this law, the Magen Avraham 307:13 questions the rationale, for the verse from Isaiah quoted above appears to prohibit walking to facilitate the performance of any activity forbidden on the Sabbath, regardless of the appearance created.
|
| 7. |
As explained in the following halachah, this refers to a task that is prohibited on the Sabbath itself.
|
| 8. |
See Halachah 8.
|
| 9. |
Note the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 306:1), which states that this refers only to an animal that is able to walk on its own. If the animal is too young to walk on its own, it is forbidden to go and wait for it, since even if there were houses, one would be forbidden to carry the animal, because of the prohibition of muktzeh.
|
| 10. |
One may not, however, say, "I am riding," for riding is forbidden on the Sabbath (Mishnah Berurah307:30).
|
| 11. |
Similarly, he may ask the colleague to accompany him (Maggid Mishneh, Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 307:8).
|
| 12. |
Although both the employer and the employee understand the implication, since the employer is not making a direct statement - but merely an allusion - this is permitted. The Maggid Mishnehassociates this with the concept mentioned at the conclusion of the first halachah: speaking about forbidden matters is prohibited, but not thought. Since no forbidden matters are discussed, the fact that they are implied is of no consequence.
|
| 13. |
The Ramah (Orach Chayim 307:1) mentions that a person who enjoys talking about news and matters of this nature may engage in such discussions on the Sabbath, since this brings him pleasure. Needless to say, Torah scholars are encouraged to direct their attention to loftier matters (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 307:2).
|
| 14. |
The Maggid Mishneh equates activities which involve a mitzvah with matters of communal interest. He emphasizes that it is only the prohibitions against involvement with mundane matters that are relaxed because of the performance of a mitzvah. Other prohibitions - e.g., telling a gentile to perform a forbidden activity, or performing an act that resembles or that may lead to the performance of a forbidden labor (i.e., shvut) - are never relaxed, even for the sake of a mitzvah .
As the Rambam mentions (Chapter 6, Halachot 9-10), the prohibition against instructing a gentile to perform an act that is forbidden as a sh'vut is relaxed when a mitzvah is involved, but only when the prohibition is Rabbinic in origin.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 307:5) mentions an opinion permitting us to instruct a gentile to perform a forbidden act for matters of serious communal need, and also a more stringent opinion, that even forbids giving a gentile such instructions. The Ramah also notes a more lenient approach that allows one to tell a gentile to perform a task forbidden by the Torah. In practice, the Rambam's view, as interpreted by the Maggid Mishneh, is accepted by most authorities except in cases where a great loss is involved. In those instances, the leniency mentioned by the Shulchan Aruch is accepted.
|
| 15. |
The Magen Avraham 306:10 gives as an example, calculating the cost of a feast associated with a mitzvah.
|
| 16. |
A mikveh must contain 40 seah to be halachically acceptable.
|
| 17. |
As mentioned in Hilchot Keilim, Chapter 22, a piece of cloth is susceptible to contracting ritual impurity only if it is of a specific size. There are different sizes, depending on the type of cloth.
|
| 18. |
Or for the benefit of a synagogue or other charitable cause.
|
| 19. |
From the discussion of this matter by the later Rabbis, it appears that this phrase has two meanings: a) to examine and inspect a situation where the communal interest is involved; b) to plan out a course of action to deal with questions of this nature, and even to execute that plan, provided the only prohibition being violated is involvement in mundane affairs - for example, to speak to the gentile communal authorities.
|
| 20. |
For earning one's livelihood is a mitzvah of great esteem. (See also Hilchot Matnot Ani'im 10:18 and the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Avot 4:5.)
|
| 21. |
The details of financial arrangements involved in the marriage or the instructions should not, however, be discussed on the Sabbath (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 306:6).
|
| 22. |
See Shabbat 12b, which states that permission to visit the sick and comfort mourners on the Sabbath was granted "with difficulty," because it runs contrary to the mood of pleasure that should characterize the Sabbath (Rashi). Significantly, the treatment of this subject in Shulchan Aruch HaRav 287:1-3 appears to reflect a different emphasis from that of the Rambam.
|
| 23. |
In this context, note one of the Rambam's responsa (208), which emphasizes the importance of refraining from reciting any prayers containing requests whether of a communal or an individual nature on the Sabbath or on festivals.
|
| 24. |
As the Rambam writes in Hilchot Eivel 14:6, one of the fundamental aspects of the mitzvah of visiting the sick is to arouse divine mercy on their behalf. Nevertheless, since it is forbidden to plead on the Sabbath, one makes a statement that acknowledges God's kindness. The phrase cited by the Rambam is also used as the basis of the Mi Sheberach prayers recited for a sick person in the synagogue on the Sabbath.
|
| 25. |
Our translation is based on the commentary of the Maggid Mishneh, which is quoted by theShulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 306:3).
|
| 26. |
As the Rambam mentions in Chapter 30, Halachah 13, generally one is not allowed to set out on a sea journey less than three days before the Sabbath so that one will have already acclimated oneself to the travails of sea travel by the Sabbath. Nevertheless, because of the person's involvement in the performance of a mitzvah, this restriction is waived.
|
| 27. |
The later authorities maintain that particularly because a mitzvah is involved, if the gentile does not agree to halt the journey at the outset, one need not refrain from traveling with him (Mishnah Berurah 248:2).
|
| 28. |
The Torah gives a husband and a father the right to nullify vows made by his wife and daughter. (See Numbers, Chapter 30.)
|
| 29. |
The reason that all vows may be nullified on the Sabbath is that a vow can be nullified by a husband or father only on the day that he hears it. Therefore, if he were not able to nullify it on the Sabbath, he would never be able to nullify it in the future. To preserve this right, our Sages did not forbid nullifying vows on the Sabbath (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 30. |
In this instance, only the vows that are necessary to be absolved for the sake of the Sabbath may be absolved on the Sabbath, since there is nothing preventing one from absolving the other vows on the following day (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 31. |
Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 322) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 114) count this commandment as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
Note the Magen Avraham 339:3, which questions the Rambam's statements, asking why lashes that do not involve the violation of the Sabbath laws ares included in this prohibition. He explains that it is inevitable that the administration of lashes will result in bleeding.
Alternatively, the commandment teaches us that no cases of this nature may be judged on the Sabbath. The Minchat Chinuch (Mitzvah 114) favors this answer, for it also resolves another problem: Why is this restriction given the status of a separate mitzvah? Since the principle that the observance of a positive commandment does not supersede the observance of the Sabbath laws is already known, why is it necessary for the Torah to give us this commandment?
|
| 32. |
In his gloss on the Mishneh Torah, Rabbi Akiva Eiger notes that there is a principle that a person who refrains from performing a positive commandment should be beaten until he agrees to perform it. Since these blows are not given as punishment, but rather as a prod to motivate the person to observe the commandments, they may be administered on the Sabbath.
|
| 33. |
The Maggid Mishneh states that this explanation is an original thought developed by the Rambam.
|
| 34. |
The Tzafenat Paneach notes that when considering the minimum size of a pebble one is liable for carrying, Shabbat 81a mentions two opinions: a pebble large enough to throw at an animal and a pebble large enough to throw at a bird. He questions why in Chapter 18, Halachah 11, the Rambam follows the opinion that requires a pebble large enough to throw at an animal, when in this halachah the Rambam mentions a purpose to be served by a pebble large enough to scare away a bird.
In resolution, the Tzafenat Paneach explains that a pebble large enough to scare away a bird can serve a purpose as mentioned in this halachah. Nevertheless, as stated in Shabbat 79a, a person will not take the trouble of carrying an article that is tiny. Hence, the minimum measure for which one is liable for carrying must be more substantial.
|
| 35. |
Note the Mishnah Berurah 342:1, which states that this applies only when a person has not accepted the Sabbath. If, however, the person or the community in which he is living has accepted the Sabbath, these activities are forbidden even if a mitzvah is involved.
|
| 36. |
See Chapter 5, Halachah 4, which states that, "There is a doubt whether beyn hash'mashot is considered as part of the day or as part of the night." Although, as mentioned there, we act stringently regarding the observance of Torah prohibitions during this time, certain leniencies are granted regarding Rabbinic prohibitions, as the Rambam explains.
|
| 37. |
See S'deh Chemed (K'lalim, Pe'at HaSadeh 2:2) and others, who question whether or not the leniencies mentioned by the Rambam apply both beyn hash'mashot on Friday and beyn hash'mashot on Saturday. There is room to differentiate between them, because during beyn hash'mashot on Friday, the prohibition against these activities has not yet taken effect. On Saturday evening, by contrast, since the prohibitions have been in effect throughout the Sabbath, one might think that they need not be relaxed until the Sabbath has definitely concluded. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 342:1 rules that one may follow the more lenient view. See also the Be'ur Halachah342 who mentions this issue.
|
| 38. |
Significantly, most manuscript copies of the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Eruvin 3:3) state that the prohibitions in the category of sh'vut do not apply during beyn hash'mashot, without mentioning the qualification that the matter must be pressing or involve a mitzvah. In one of his responsa (Birkat Avraham, Responsum 14), Rabbenu Avraham, the Rambam's son, explains that the Rambam changed his perspective when composing the Mishneh Torah and adopted a more stringent view than he had originally held.
|
| 39. |
This is forbidden as a sh'vut, as stated in Chapter 21, Halachah 6.
|
| 40. |
This is forbidden as a sh'vut, as stated in Chapter 23, Halachah 5.
|
| 41. |
This refers to an eruv t'chumim (which allows a person to extend his Sabbath boundary), as stated in Hilchot Eruvin 6:9-10. Hilchot Eruvin 6:13, the Rambam states that during beyn hash'mashot, only an eruv chatzerot (which allows a person to carry in an enclosed area) may be made, but not an eruv t'chumim). The present ruling does not, however, represent a change of opinion. It is referring to an instance where the eruv was made before the commencement of the Sabbath, and the person merely desired to move it on the Sabbth.
|
| 42. |
Note the Birkat Avraham, loc. cit.,, which states that, even though tithing is itself a mitzvah, there is no obligation to tithe at a particular time. Here, the intent is that carrying out the activity beyn hash'mashot will allow the performance of a mitzvah that could not otherwise be performed. If that is true regarding tithing produce that definitely has not been tithed - e.g., to provide one with food for the Sabbath - one may separate tithes beyn hash'mashot.
|
| 43. |
As mentioned in Chapter 23, Halachot 9 and 14.
|
| 44. |
See Chapter 23, Halachah 15. Although tithing this produce involves a shvut and there is no mitzvah involved, this tithing is permitted, because the prohibition against using the produce is not that severe.
|
| 45. |
The Rambam's rulings here have aroused the attention of the commentaries. To understand his perspective, it is worthy to quote Chapter 12, Halachah 7:
Relevant concepts are also reflected in the Rambam's rulings, Hilchot Ma'achalot Asurot 17:27- 28:
According to the Rambam, the court is never obligated to restrain a child from performing a prohibited act, regardless of whether it originates from the Torah itself, or from Rabbinic decree. The child's father, however, is obligated to educate him. If the father fails to do so, the court should rebuke the father if he allows his child to violate prohibitions that stem from the Torah. If, however, the prohibitions stem from Rabbinic law, the court is not obligated to rebuke the father.
This explanation of the Rambam's approach is based on the statements of Rav Yosef Karo in theKessef Mishneh and on his rulings in the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 343:1). The Ramah (based on Tosafot, Shabbat 121a) introduces a different perspective: that when a child has reached an age when it is fit to educate him in the performance of the mitzvot, the obligation to educate him falls on the court as well. Therefore, they are obligated to restrain him from transgressing Jewish law.
|
| 46. |
In this and in the following halachah, the Rambam sets the conceptual basis for the prohibitions described as muktzeh. The particular laws that result from these principles are described in the following two chapters.
|
| 47. |
See the notes on the beginning of Chapter 21, which use this halachah as a support for the principle that the positive commandment to rest on the Sabbath is more than just a restatement of the negative commandment not to perform forbidden labor.
|
| 48. |
Walking, talking, and carrying.
|
| 49. |
The three reasons mentioned by the Rambam are the product of his own original thought. The Ra'avad notes that the Talmud (Shabbat 124b) mentions a further reason: lest one come to carry articles from one domain to another.
The Maggid Mishneh explains that the Rambam did not intend to negate the reason mentioned by the Talmud. Nevertheless, as Shabbat 123b mentions, the prohibition originally instituted was partially relaxed. The reasons why it was not relaxed entirely are stated by the Rambam.
|
| 50. |
The Rambam's wording implies that it is forbidden for a person to carry an article unless his act is purposeful. (See Chapter 25, Halachah 3 regarding which purposes are acceptable.) One may not carry a utensil, even one that is used for a permitted activity, without a purpose. (See also the gloss of the Maggid Mishneh on that halachah.)
|
Shabbos - Chapter Twenty Five
Halacha 1
There are utensils that are used for permitted purposes - i.e., a utensil that may be used on the Sabbath for the same purpose for which it is used during the week - e.g., a cup to drink from, a bowl to eat from, a knife to cut meat or bread, a hatchet to crack open nuts,1 and the like.
Halacha 2
There are utensils that are used for forbidden purposes - i.e., a utensil that is forbidden to be used on the Sabbath for the same purpose that it is [ordinarily] used - e.g., a grinder, a mill, and the like - for it is forbidden to crush or grind on the Sabbath.
Halacha 3
All utensils used for purposes that are permitted may be carried on the Sabbath, whether they are made of wood, earthenware, stone, or metal. [They may be moved] for the sake of the utensil, for the use of the place [it occupies], or to use it [for a purpose that is permitted].2
All utensils used for purposes that are forbidden, whether they are made of wood, earthenware, stone, or metal may be moved [with certain restrictions]. [Such a utensil may be moved] for the use of the place [it occupies], or to use it [for a purpose that is permitted]. It is, however, forbidden [to move it] for its own sake.3
Halacha 4
What is implied? One may move a wooden bowl to eat from it, to sit in the place [where it is located], or so that it will not be stolen. The latter is [what is meant by the expression] "for the sake of [the utensil] itself."
Similarly, [a utensil] may be taken out of the sun so that it will not become parched and break. It may also be removed from the rain so that it will not become saturated with water and deteriorate. These are considered "for the sake of [the utensil] itself" and are permitted, since the tasks performed with this utensil are permitted.
Halacha 5
Similarly, one may move a mill or a grinder4 in order to crack nuts open on it5 or to climb up to a couch on it. This is [what is meant by the expression] "to use it [for a purpose that is permitted]."
[Similarly, one may move it] to sit in the place where it is located. One may not, however, move it so that it will not break, so that it will not be stolen, or the like.
Halacha 6
Any entity that is not a utensil - e.g., stones, money, rods, beams, and the like - is forbidden to be carried.6 [Nevertheless,] even a large stone or a large beam that requires ten people to carry it, if it is deemed a utensil7 it may be carried.8
Halacha 7
It is permitted to carry a utensil to perform tasks other than those for which it is intended to be used. What is implied? One may take a hammer to crack nuts, a hatchet to cut a dried fig, a saw to cut cheese, a rake to collect dried figs, a winnowing shovel or a pitchfork to feed a child, a spindle or a weaver's shuttle to pierce with, a sack-maker's needle to pick a lock,13 or a mill-stone to sit on.14The same principle applies in other similar situations.
Halacha 8
Halacha 9
Whenever a person is careful [not to use] a utensil lest its value depreciate - e.g., utensils that are set aside as merchandise,18 or very expensive utensils of which one is extremely careful lest they spoil - carrying it is forbidden on the Sabbath.19 This [category] is referred to as muktzeh [lest] financial loss [be caused].
[Included in this category are] a large saw, the knife-like point of a plow, a butcher's knife, a leather-worker's knife, a carpenter's plane, a perfume-maker's mortar,20 and the like.
Halacha 10
All utensils that were set aside because of [an association with] a prohibited [activity] are forbidden to be carried. For example, it is forbidden [to move] a lamp that was kindled for the Sabbath,21 a candelabra upon which a lamp was placed, or a table on which money was lying.22
[Moreover,] even if the candle is extinguished or if the money falls, [the prohibition remains intact]. Whenever an article is forbidden to be carried beyn hash'mashot [on Friday], it remains forbidden to be carried throughout the entire Sabbath23, even though the factor that caused it to become forbidden is no longer present.
Halacha 11
Halacha 12
The doors of any utensil28 that may be carried on the Sabbath - e.g., the doors of a box, a chest, or a cabinet - may themselves be carried [on the Sabbath], regardless of whether they were removed on the Sabbath or before the Sabbath.29
Similarly, whenever a utensil that can be carried on the Sabbath breaks, whether before the Sabbath or on the Sabbath,30 its broken pieces may be carried on the Sabbath, provided these pieces can be used for a purpose that resembles the purpose for which they could be used [originally].31
What is implied? The broken pieces of a kneading trough can be used to cover the opening of a jug. Broken pieces of glass can be used to cover the opening of a flask. The same rules apply in other similar situations. If, by contrast, the broken pieces are unfit for any purposeful use, it is forbidden to carry them.32
Halacha 13
All the covers of utensils may be carried on the Sabbath, provided they, themselves, are considered to be utensils.33
[The following rules apply regarding] utensils that are attached to the ground - e.g., a barrel imbedded in the earth:34If its cover has a handle, it may be carried. If not, it may not be carried. Similarly, the coverings of cisterns and ditches should not be carried35 unless they have a handle.36 The covering of an oven [by contrast] may be carried, even though it does not have a handle.37
Halacha 14
[The following rules apply when] there are two entities, one permitted to be carried and one forbidden to be carried - one adjacent to the other, one on top of the other, or one within the other - and when one is moved the other will also be moved:38 If a person requires the article that is permitted [to be carried], he may move it, even though the forbidden article is drawn after it. If he requires to move the forbidden article, he should not move it by moving the permitted article.
Halacha 15
What is implied? When a fig39 is buried in straw40 or a cake is lying upon coals, one may pierce them with a spindle or a weaver's shuttle and remove them, even though the straw or the coals41 will be moved on the Sabbath when one removes them.
Similarly, if a turnip or a radish42 is buried in [loose] earth and a portion of its leaves is protruding,43 one may pull out [the vegetables] on the Sabbath, even though the earth is dislodged. Conversely, however, if a loaf of bread or a child is [located] on a stone or beam, one may not carry the stone or beam because of the child or the loaf of bread.44 Similar rules apply in other analogous situations.
Halacha 16
A person may pick up his son if [the son] yearns for [his father],45 despite the fact that the son is holding a stone.46This, however, is not [permitted] if [the son] is holding a dinar,47 lest it fall and the father [pick it up and] carry it.48
When a basket has a hole and a stone has been used to plug the hole,49 [the basket] may be carried, because the stone is considered as its wall.
[The following rules apply when] a basket is filled with fruit and a stone [is discovered] among the fruit:50 If the fruit is soft - e.g., grapes or berries - the basket may be carried as it is.51 If one spills out the fruit, it would be spoiled by the earth, and [our Sages] did not [apply] their decree in an instance where a loss would be caused.52
Halacha 17
When a person forgets a stone on the opening of a jug, he may tilt the jug to the side [so that the stone] falls.53 If the jug with the stone upon it is standing among other jugs,54 it should be lifted to another place, and then tilted to the side [so that the stone] falls. Similarly, if one forgets money on a pillow that one needs, one may shake the pillow [so that the money] falls.55 If one needs [to use] the place where the pillow [is located], one may remove the pillow [although] the money is upon it.
Halacha 18
[The following rule applies to] a stone that is placed in an earthenware59 bucket [as a weight]:60 If it does not fall out when one draws water [with the bucket], it is considered part of the bucket and one is permitted to draw water with it. If not, one may not draw water with it.61 A garment that is [hanging] on a reed62may be slipped off the reed.63
Halacha 19
It is forbidden to carry produce that is forbidden to eat - e.g., produce that has not been tithed, even if the obligation to tithe is only Rabbinic,64 produce separated as the first tithe, from which terumat [ma'aser] has not been separated,65terumah that has contracted ritual impurity,66 produce separated as the second tithe67 or produce that has been consecrated68 and has not been redeemed.
Halacha 20
An Israelite is allowed to carry terumah, even though it is not appropriate for him. One may carry terumah that has contracted ritual impurity together withterumah that is pure, or together with ordinary produce, if both of them are contained in a single receptacle.71
When does the above apply? When the pure terumah is below [the impure],72and the [terumah consists of] produce that would be soiled by the ground. Thus, if the container were overturned, it would be spoiled. If, by contrast, the produce is nuts, almonds, or the like, one must overturn the container, take theterumah and the ordinary produce, and leave the impure [terumah].
If one requires the place where the container is located, one may take all the produce at once, regardless of whether the pure [terumah] is located at the top or at the bottom.
Halacha 21
[The following rules apply when] a person has in mind [to sit on] a row of stones73 before the commencement of the Sabbath: If he prepares them,74 he is permitted to sit on them on the morrow; if not, that is forbidden.75
When a person gathers the branches of a date palm [to use as kindling] wood, but changes his mind on Friday and decides to use them to sit on [in place of mats], he is allowed to carry them.76 Similarly, if he actually sat upon them77before the commencement of the Sabbath, it is permitted to carry them.
Halacha 22
One may not move straw that is on a bed with one's hands;78one may, however, move it with one's body.79 [Moreover,] if it is [useful as] animal fodder, one is permitted to carry it [by hand]. Similarly, if a pillow or a sheet is placed upon it, it is considered as if one had sat on it before the commencement of the Sabbath,80 and one may move it by hand.
Halacha 23
It is forbidden to negate the possibility of using a utensil, since this is comparable to destroying [it]. What is implied? A person should not place a receptacle below a lamp on the Sabbath to receive any oil that drips. For the oil in the lamp is forbidden to be carried, and when it falls into the receptacle it will cause the receptacle that had been permitted to become forbidden.84 The same applies in all analogous situations.
For this reason, a receptacle may not be placed below a chicken to receive the eggs it lays.85 One may, however, cover [the eggs] with an [overturned] utensil.86 Similarly, one may use an overturned utensil to cover any article that is forbidden to be carried, for by doing so one has not negated its use.87 Should one desire to take [the overturned article], one may.
Halacha 24
One may place a receptacle under dripping water88 to collect it.89 If the receptacle becomes full, one may pour out the water and return [the receptacle to its place] without hesitation.90
[The above applies] only when the dripping water is fit to use for bathing.91 If the water is not fit [for washing], one should not place a receptacle there.92[Nevertheless, after the fact,] should one have placed a receptacle there, one may carry it together with the repulsive water it contains.93 [The reason for the restriction against placing the receptacle there is] that we do not create a repulsive situation94 at the outset.95
Halacha 25
Should a barrel containing [wine or oil] that is tevel,96 be broken [on the Sabbath], one may bring a receptacle and place it under [the barrel]. [By doing so, one is not considered to have nullified the possibility of using the receptacle,] since were one to transgress and separate [the terumah and tithes as required], the produce would be permitted for use.97.
A receptacle may be placed below a candle to collect the sparks that fall, for [the sparks] have no substance. In such an instance, it is permissible to move the receptacle.98
When a beam breaks, we should not support it with a bench or a bed post99unless there is ample space [between the beams] and one can remove [the bench or the bed post] whenever one desires,100 so that one will not nullify a utensil from the possibility of being used.
One may spread a mat over stones or over a beehive on the Sabbath in the summer, [as protection] from the sun, and in the rainy season, [as protection] from the rain, provided that one has no intention of snaring [the bees].101 [By doing so, one is not considered to have nullified the possibility of using the receptacle] because one may remove [the mat] whenever one desires.
Halacha 26
[The following rules apply when] an animal falls into a cistern or into a water conduit [from which it cannot ascend on its own]: If one can supply it with its needs while it is there, one should do so until Saturday night. If not, one may bring cushions and blankets and place them beneath it. If this [enables the animal] to ascend, there is no difficulty. Although one is nullifying the possibility of using a utensil - for one is throwing it into a cistern [filled with] water105 - [our Sages did] not institute a decree [in this instance], because of the suffering [the] animal endures.
[Regardless of the circumstances,] it is forbidden to lift the animal up by hand.106 Similarly, one may not lift up an animal, beast, or fowl in a courtyard.107 One may, however, push them until they enter.
One may support108 calves and ponies as they walk. One may not, however, hold a chicken that fled [as one directs] it [to return to its coop]. [This prohibition was instituted] because [the chicken tries] to free itself from [the person's] hand, and [in the process, causes] its wings to be torn off.109 One may, however, push it until it enters [its coop].
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
In many manuscript copies of the Mishneh Torah, the text reads "a hammer to crack open nuts." A blacksmith's hammer is considered as a utensil that is used for purposes that are forbidden (see Halachah 7). Nevertheless, a hammer specifically used to crack nuts is placed in a different category. The need to make this distinction is avoided by our version of the text which refers to a hatchet.
|
| 2. |
As mentioned in the conclusion of the previous chapter, the Maggid Mishneh interprets the Rambam's statements as meaning that we are not allowed to carry a utensil for no purpose at all, even one that is generally used for a permitted purpose. This law is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 308:4).
|
| 3. |
There are, however, several leniencies suggested by the later authorities - e.g., using such a utensil for a permitted purpose and then placing it down where one desires (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 308:12; Mishnah Berurah 308:16). Alternatively, one may move it with one's feet or in a manner that is considered irregular (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 308:15).
|
| 4. |
I.e., utensils that are used for a forbidden purpose, as mentioned in Halachah 2.
|
| 5. |
After one picks up such a utensil and uses it for a permitted purpose, one may continue carrying it and place it wherever one desires (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 6. |
They may not be moved at all, even if one desires to use them for a purpose that is permitted, or one requires the place that they are occupying (Ramah, Orach Chayim 308:7).
|
| 7. |
I.e., as indicated in the subsequent halachot, if a person set aside or prepared a stone or board for a specific purpose, it is considered a utensil and may be moved on the Sabbath.
|
| 8. |
No matter how large a utensil is, it is permitted to be carried it on the Sabbath if one would ordinarily carry such a utensil during the week (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 308:2). (See, however, Chapter 26, Halachah 11, and notes.)
|
| 9. |
Shabbat 122b differentiates between the doors of a chest - which are permitted to be carried if removed on the Sabbath (see Halachah 12) - and the doors of a house, which are not. The Rambam explains that the reason for this distinction is that, even though the doors of a house are considered utensils, it is unlikely that before the Sabbath commenced, one considered using them on the Sabbath. Therefore, they are considered muktzeh, as is explained in Halachah 9 and notes.
Rashi, by contrast, maintains that these doors are not utensils, and that is the reason it is forbidden to carry them.
|
| 10. |
The Rambam uses the word "even" both here and in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat17:1). It would appear that his intent is that it is taken for granted that doors that were removed before the Sabbath and were not prepared to be used for another purpose may not be used on the Sabbath. Even doors that were removed on the Sabbath and had been used as doors on this Sabbath may not be carried if they are removed.
|
| 11. |
See the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 311), which mentions certain leniencies regarding moving a corpse if one fears that it will begin to decompose.
|
| 12. |
Yevamot 80b states that a child born after only eight months will surely die. Therefore, even while he is still living, it is forbidden to carry him on the Sabbath.
Tosafot, Shabbat 135a, states that this ruling is no longer followed, since at present it is impossible to determine exactly when a child was conceived. Therefore, we cannot be certain of the length of time the mother was pregnant. Furthermore, the advances in medical technology have enabled us to save the lives of many babies who would surely not have survived in previous generations. At present, it is a mitzvah to attempt to save the lives of all premature babies, even if doing so involves performing a forbidden labor on the Sabbath.
|
| 13. |
Our translation of the above terms is based on the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat 17:2).
|
| 14. |
Significantly, this is the only one of the examples given by the Rambam that is not mentioned in the Mishnah (op. cit.). The Rabbis cite Eruvin 102b or Shabbat 124b as possible sources.
|
| 15. |
In his Commentary on the Mishnah (loc. cit.), the Rambam uses this statement as proof that there is no prohibition against removing a splinter on the Sabbath.
|
| 16. |
Because it is no longer useful as a utensil (Shabbat 123a). Thus it resembles a stone which cannot be carried on the Sabbath. See Halachah 12.
|
| 17. |
Since there are times when it is preserved in this state for the purpose of removing thorns and the like (Rashi, Shabbat, loc. cit.).
|
| 18. |
Note Shulchan Aruch HaRav 308:3, which states that not all utensils that are set aside as merchandise are intended solely for that purpose. Many storekeepers consider making personal use of the wares in their shops. In such an instance, one would be allowed to move the article on the Sabbath.
|
| 19. |
The word muktzeh means "set aside." Since a person would ordinarily have no thought of using such a utensil on the Sabbath, it is placed in this category. Even if he changes his mind afterwards and decides to use it on the Sabbath, this is forbidden. Since at the commencement of the Sabbath it was not his intent to use it, it may not be moved for the entire day.
The commentaries compare this law regarding merchandise to Chapter 26, Halachah 14, which states that food, even when set aside to be sold, is never considered muktzeh.
|
| 20. |
All these utensils are used for professional purposes that are forbidden on the Sabbath. Since they are delicate instruments, their owners will not use them for other purposes, lest they become damaged.
|
| 21. |
For these same reasons, it is forbidden to use the oil in the lamp, as stated in Chapter 5, Halachah 12.
It must be emphasized that, because the articles mentioned in this halachah were involved with the performance of a forbidden activity on the Sabbath itself, the prohibitions governing it are more severe than those applying to an article used for a forbidden labor. It is forbidden to move the articles mentioned in this halachah, even when it is necessary to use the place where they are located or one desires to use them for a permitted purpose.
|
| 22. |
As evident from Halachah 17, the present halachah refers to an instance when money was intentionally placed on the table. If it was forgotten there, more lenient rules apply.
|
| 23. |
Rashi, Beitzah 26b, derives this concept from Exodus 16:5, "On Friday, they will prepare what they have brought," which implies that the Sabbath preparations are completed on Friday, before the Sabbath's commencement. An article that is not prepared for use at that time may not be used throughout the Sabbath.
|
| 24. |
Kerosene produces an unpleasant odor. Therefore, even a metal lamp that uses it for fuel is considered repulsive.
|
| 25. |
This halachah grants permission to carry the repulsive article for other purposes. One is allowed to remove an article that contains filth from a room regardless, as stated in the Shulchan Aruch(Orach Chayim 279:6, 308:34-35).
|
| 26. |
Although one would generally not think of using such a utensil because it is repulsive, since its use is not totally out of the question, it is not forbidden as muktzeh. According to the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 308:35), however, this leniency does not apply to a chamber pot. It is considered as too repulsive to use for other purposes.
|
| 27. |
Note the gloss of Rabbi Akiva Eiger, which states that it appears that such entities may be moved only when one desires to use them for a purpose and not when one merely desires to use the place in which they are being kept. The Mishnah Beruah 279:19, however, differs and also permits moving the article when one desires to use its place.
|
| 28. |
Compare to Halachah 6.
|
| 29. |
The Merkevet HaMishneh notes that in this clause the Rambam mentions "before the Sabbath" after "on the Sabbath," because it is the greater inclusion. Since the doors were not fixed before the Sabbath, one might think that they are no longer considered part of a utensil, and hence it would be forbidden to carry them on the Sabbath. Nevertheless, since they are fit to be attached to their original utensil, they may be moved.
In the following clause, the Rambam mentions "on the Sabbath" after "before the Sabbath," because it is the greater inclusion, as explained in the following note.
|
| 30. |
When an article breaks on the Sabbath and it is no longer fit to be used for its original purpose, there is a difficulty. There is a difference of opinion among the Sages whether an object that isnolad - i.e., "comes into existence initially" on the Sabbath - is permitted or not. Since it was on the Sabbath that it first became possible to use the broken pieces of the utensils for this new purpose, it is possible to consider them as nolad (Magen Avraham 308:14).
The prevailing view is that objects that are nolad are permitted to be moved on the Sabbath. They are, however, forbidden to be moved on a festival. Accordingly, if an article breaks on a festival, it would be forbidden to move its broken pieces even if they were fit to be used for a constructive (other than one resembling the article's original) purpose Shulchan Aruch HaRav308:24].
It must, however, be noted that the Magen Avraham's conception is not accepted by all authorities. Many maintain that since these pieces were always fit for use - either as part of the larger utensil or in their own right - they should not be considered nolad (Be'ur Halachah 308).
|
| 31. |
Our translation follows the standard printed text of the Mishneh Torah, even though there appears to be a printing error. To explain: In the Mishnah (Shabbat 17:5), there is a difference of opinion between the Sages. The first opinion of the Mishnah states that the broken pieces of a utensil may be carried provided they can be used for any constructive purpose. Rabbi Yehudah differs and maintains that the broken pieces may be carried only when they can be used for a purpose that resembles the intent for which they had originally been used.
Although the wording of the standard printed text follows Rabbi Yehudah's opinion, the examples he gives and the continuation of the halachah follow the other view. Significantly, many manuscripts and early printings of the Mishneh Torah state "provided the pieces can be used for a constructive purpose."
Although the Baal Halachot Gedolot and other sages of the early generations follow Rabbi Yehudah's opinion, in the later generations almost all the authorities accept the other view.
|
| 32. |
For they are no longer a utensil, and hence may not be carried, as stated in Halachah 6. Note the Ramah (Orach Chayim 308:6), who mentions that if the broken pieces of the utensil present a danger, they may be moved.
|
| 33. |
With the latter clause, the Rambam excludes objects that were never used as the coverings of utensils before the Sabbath, nor were they prepared for to be used for this purpose. Furthermore, if it is not common practice to use an object for this purpose - e.g., a stone - it may not be moved on the Sabbath despite the fact that it was used as a covering several times during the week (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 308:36).
(See also Rashi (Shabbat 126b), who states that we may carry a cover only when it is fit to be used as a utensil in its own right. His opinion is not shared by other authorities.)
|
| 34. |
According to the Maggid Mishneh, this refers to a utensil that is buried entirely within the ground and does not protrude at all. Since it is built in this manner, the Sages apply the laws governing pits and vats to it, lest people be unable to distinguish between them. If, however, a utensil that is attached to the ground projects from the ground, its cover does not require a handle, as will be explained (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 308:10).
|
| 35. |
This refers to covers that are not attached with a hinge, as is obvious from Chapter 10, Halachah 14.
|
| 36. |
By mentioning this law in this context, it would appear that the Rambam considers the rationale for the prohibition to be that without handles, the cover is not considered a utensil (Rav David Arameah).
Other authorities explain that when a cover lacks handles, its removal or placement resembles building. If, however, the cover has a handle, it is clearly distinguished as a separate entity that is intended to be handled (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 308:37; Mishnah Berurah 308:42). The Rambam touches on the latter prohibition, albeit in a slightly different manner, in Chapter 22, Halachah 25.
|
| 37. |
In Talmudic times, an oven was a separate utensil whose base was attached to the ground, but which protruded from the ground entirely. Therefore, it could not be confused with a pit or a vat (Maggid Mishneh). As the structure of ovens has changed throughout the ages, there has also been a variation in the laws governing their covers.
|
| 38. |
Based on Tosafot, Shabbat 43b, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 311:8) describes these laws with the term טלטול מן הצד, "carrying in an indirect manner."
|
| 39. |
An article that is permitted to be carried.
|
| 40. |
An article that is forbidden to be carried, because it is used for construction. More precisely, the term פגה refers to an unripe fig that is placed in the straw to ripen.
|
| 41. |
The commentaries question whether or not this refers to an instance where the coals are burning. Were the coals to be burning, there is the possibility that by removing the cake, one will extinguish the upper coals and cause the lower coals to burn. The Maggid Mishneh quotes Rashi (Eruvin 77a) as explaining that the coals have already been extinguished.
The Kessef Mishneh notes that the wording chosen by the Rambam differs slightly from that of the Talmud. The Talmud states "a cake buried in coals," while the Rambam speaks of a cake "lying on coals." Therefore, he maintains that the law stated by the Rambam applies even when the coals are burning.
Rabbenu Avraham, the Rambam's son (Birkat Avraham, Responsum 9), also shares that opinion, explaining that it is not absolutely necessary that the person will cause the coals to move, and this is not his intention. Therefore, there is no prohibition involved, as stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 5. (See also Hilchot Shegagot, Chapter 7.) Significantly, however, when Rav Yosef Karo mentions these laws in the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 311:9), he cites the example of the fig and the straw, but omits mention of the cake and the coals entirely.
|
| 42. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 311:8) emphasizes that this refers to an instance where the vegetables were placed in the earth for storage purposes and they had not yet become rooted there. Were they to have taken root in the earth, it would be forbidden to remove them.
|
| 43. |
If, however, a portion of its leaves is not protruding, it is not permitted to pierce them with a spindle and remove them. By doing so, one would appear to be creating a pit in the earth.
This is the opinion of the Maggid Mishneh. The Magen Avraham 311:21, however, mentions the opinion of the Tosafot, Shabbat 50b, from which it appears that this leniency would be allowed.
|
| 44. |
This is an example of the second principle mentioned in the previous halachah, that one may not carry a forbidden object because of a permitted object lying upon it. Note Chapter 26, Halachah 21, which mentions that exceptions to this principle are made to save a corpse from the heat or from a fire.
|
| 45. |
The bracketed additions were made on the basis of Shabbat 141b.
|
| 46. |
Shabbat 141b explains that this refers to a situation where the son might become sick if his father does not pick him up. If there is no danger of the child's becoming sick, the father is forbidden to pick him up (Magen Avraham 309:1).
|
| 47. |
A coin of the Talmudic period.
|
| 48. |
Shulchan Aruch HaRav 309:2 mentions that it is even forbidden to hold the child by the hand that is not holding the coin.
|
| 49. |
The Magen Avraham 309:3 states that this refers to an instance where one firmly attached the stone in the hole, making it a permanent part of the basket. Otherwise, carrying the stone in the basket is forbidden.
Note the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat 21:1), where the Rambam interprets this law and the one that follows as a single concept (as the Ra'avad does in his notes). According to that understanding, the leniency of using the stone as part of a container is permitted only when the basket contains fruit that will spoil if the container is overturned. Thus, the Rambam's decision here reflects a change of mind in favor of a more lenient ruling.
|
| 50. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 309:3) mentions the converse of this principle. When the fruits are firm and will not be spoiled if the basket is overturned and they are spilled to the earth, the basket should be overturned before it is carried.
|
| 51. |
As mentioned above, the Ra'avad objects to this decision, based on his interpretation of Shabbat142a. The Maggid Mishneh states that according to the text of the Talmud we have, the Ra'avad's interpretation must be accepted. It is, however, possible that the Rambam's text of the Talmud had a different version of this passage. Both the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 309:3) follow the Rambam's approach.
|
| 52. |
The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) also mentions that if one needs to use the place where the basket with the stone is placed, one may move it without overturning it, even though it contains fruit that will not be spoiled. (See Halachot 17 and 20).
|
| 53. |
Shabbat 142b emphasizes that we are required to tilt the jug only when it is moved for the sake of its wine. If one moves it to use the place where it is located, there is no need to dislodge the stones. This ruling is quoted in the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 309:5).
|
| 54. |
Were he to tilt the jug there, the falling stone might break other jugs.
|
| 55. |
Shulchan Aruch HaRav 309:6 and the Mishnah Berurah 309:14 emphasize that if one's intent is only that the money should not be stolen, it is forbidden to shake it from the pillow.
|
| 56. |
The Ramah (Orach Chayim 309:4) states that the following restrictions apply only when one places a forbidden article on an article of one's own, and not when one places a forbidden article on an article belonging to a colleague. For a person cannot cause an article belonging to a colleague to become forbidden.
|
| 57. |
Note the Magen Avraham 309:6, which states that the word "intentionally" must be interpreted to mean "for a useful purpose." If, however, a person put down an article on another object intentionally, but with no particular purpose in mind, it is considered as if he forgot it there.
|
| 58. |
Since the article is forbidden beyn hash'mashot, the time of the commencement of the Sabbath, it remains forbidden for the entire Sabbath.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 309:4) also mentions the opinion of Tosafot, who maintain that a base for a forbidden object is created only when one's intent was that the forbidden object remain on the base for the entire Sabbath. If one intended to shake it off the base, or have it transferred by a gentile over the course of the Sabbath, it is not considered a base.
Although the Rambam's opinion is accepted by the later authorities, the more lenient view may be followed if there is a possibility that a loss will be caused - e.g., a lamp falls on a table (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 309:7).
|
| 59. |
Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat 17:6) andHilchot Keilim 20:1. Rashi and others render the Hebrew קרויה as a "gourd."
|
| 60. |
I.e., since the bucket is made of earthenware, it is not necessarily heavy enough to sink. Therefore, the stone is used as a weight.
|
| 61. |
In such an instance, the bucket itself becomes forbidden, because it serves as a base for a forbidden object (Mishnah Berurah 309:8).
|
| 62. |
This refers to a reed that was not altered to serve as a hanger. It is not considered a utensil and is therefore deemed muktzeh.
|
| 63. |
The intent is that one must hold the garment that is not muktzeh, and not the reed that is (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 308:16). The Mishnah Berurah 308:64 mentions that one must remove the garment without moving the reed. It is questionable, however, whether the Rambam would agree to that stringency, for this appears to resemble the other instances of טלטול מן הצד, "carrying in an indirect manner," described above.
|
| 64. |
I.e., produce other than grain, wine, or olive oil.
|
| 65. |
After the tithes have been given to the Levites, they are required to separate a tenth of the produce that they have been given. This produce is given to the priests and is governed by same laws as terumah. (See Numbers 18:25-32.)
|
| 66. |
Once terumah has contracted ritual impurity, the priests are forbidden to partake of it and it must be burnt.
|
| 67. |
The produce separated as the second tithe must be eaten in Jerusalem. When a person lives far from Jerusalem, produce that has been separated as the second tithe can be redeemed by exchanging it for money (Deuteronomy 14:24-27).
|
| 68. |
With the exception of the first fruits (bikkurim), produce is not offered in the Temple. If a person consecrates produce, his intent is that it be sold, and the proceeds given to the Temple.
|
| 69. |
Produce purchased from an individual on whom we cannot depend to have separated tithes.
|
| 70. |
When one redeems the second tithe or consecrated property, it is necessary to add a fifth of its value to the sum. (One pays 125%.) Nevertheless, as long as one has given the value of the produce, it is considered to have been redeemed, and the additional fifth is considered a debt. Note a parallel in Hilchot Eruvin 1:15.
It must, however, be noted that in Hilchot Ma'aser Sheni 5:12, the Rambam writes that the sacred dimension of the second tithe is considered to have departed from the produce after it has been redeemed, even though one has not paid the additional fifth. Nevertheless, one should not partake of this produce, even on the Sabbath, unless one pays that fifth.
In contrast, in Hilchot Arachin 7:3, the Rambam writes that one is permitted to partake of consecrated produce after it has been redeemed, despite the fact that one has not paid the additional fifth.
|
| 71. |
The presence of an article that is forbidden to be carried does not cause the entire container to become forbidden.
|
| 72. |
Our translation follows the standard published text of the Mishneh Torah. The Kessef Mishnehmentions that the version of this halachah in the texts of the Mishneh Torah commonly available in his time read: "When does the above apply? When the impure [terumah] was below...." He, however, prefers the version found in our standard texts, because it parallels the text of Shabbat141b. Significantly, Rav Kapach notes that both versions appear in ancient manuscripts.
The Maggid Mishneh explains that if the pure terumah is above, one should remove the pureterumah by hand, and then leave the remainder.
|
| 73. |
That were not cemented in place. Hence, there is a possibility that one will move them when one sits down.
The Magen Avraham 308:41 emphasizes that if one will not move the stones when sitting, there is no prohibition. Moreover, the Magen Avraham emphasizes that the prohibition against muktzehpertains only to carrying objects with one's hands, and not to moving it with one's body. (See the following halachah.) Therefore, the intent in both clauses of this halachah is to carry the stones or the branches in order to sit on them.
|
| 74. |
I.e., performed a deed preparing them.
|
| 75. |
Although the Ramah (Orach Chayim 308:21) desires to equate the row of stones with the date branches, the Magen Avraham (loc. cit.) justifies the Rambam's ruling.
|
| 76. |
In contrast to the previous law, thought is sufficient to change the status of the date branches. This leniency is granted because date branches are often used to sit on. It was the person's thought to use the branches for kindling that caused them to be forbidden. Hence, his thought itself is sufficient to remove that prohibition.
By contrast, a row of stones is generally used for construction and not as a seat. Therefore, one must perform a deed that indicates one's desire to use the row to sit upon. Consequently, in the present era, when it is no longer customary to sit on date branches, in this instance as well one must perform a deed to indicate one's intent (Magen Avraham 306:40).
|
| 77. |
The person did not intend to use them as a mat in the future when he sat upon them. Nevertheless, since date branches are commonly used for that purpose, that is sufficient to cause them to be considered as a useful object (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 308:51).
|
| 78. |
In the Talmudic era, straw was generally used for the purpose of kindling. Therefore, it is classified as muktzeh. The Magen Avraham 308:53 notes that in his era, straw was used most commonly for animal fodder. Therefore it should not be classified as muktzeh.
|
| 79. |
For the prohibition against moving muktzeh applies only when one moves it with one's hands.
|
| 80. |
I.e., placing the pillow or sheet on it is a clear indication that one intends to use it as a mattress. Note Shulchan Aruch HaRav 311:15 and the Mishneh Berurah 311:31, which state that if one puts straw on a bed with the intention of sleeping on it, one may spread it out by hand.
|
| 81. |
The bracketed addition is made on the basis of the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 308:35), which states that unless the person sets aside a corner of the house for the earth, it is considered part of the floor of the house. This implies that the person emptied out the container, for otherwise the earth would remain a distinct entity.
|
| 82. |
This act indicates that the person plans to use the earth on the Sabbath. Therefore it is considered a designated article (מוכן). (See Hilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov 2:18.)
|
| 83. |
In the ages prior to household plumbing, earth was necessary to cover urine, feces, and other wastes.
|
| 84. |
This law has already been explained in Chapter 5, Halachah 13. Were one to place the receptacle there before the commencement of the Sabbath, it would be permitted.
|
| 85. |
According to most authorities, nolad, an article that first comes into existence on the Sabbath, is not forbidden. Nevertheless, an egg laid on the Sabbath is forbidden to be moved. This is a decree enacted as a safeguard, lest one move an egg laid on a festival, as explained in the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Beitzah 1:1).
|
| 86. |
One must, however, be careful not to move the forbidden article when covering it (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 310:6; note the gloss of the Ra'avad to this halachah).
|
| 87. |
Although there is an opinion in Shabbat 43a that states that one may carry an article only for the sake of an object that may itself be carried, this opinion is not accepted as halachah (Maggid Mishneh). (Note, however, the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh on Chapter 26, Halachah 22.)
|
| 88. |
I.e., water dripping from a leaking roof or the like.
|
| 89. |
There is no prohibition against carrying rainwater. Thus, in placing the receptacle there one does not nullify the possibility of using the receptacle later (Mishnah Berurah 338:30).
|
| 90. |
This pattern may be repeated any number of times.
|
| 91. |
Water with which one bathes need not be as clean as water that one drinks. Nevertheless, one will not bathe with water that is soiled. Although the Tur (Orach Chayim 338) differs with the Rambam and does not require the water to be clear, the Rambam's view is accepted by theShulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 338:8) and the later authorities.
|
| 92. |
The reason for the prohibition against placing a receptacle to collect the water is that one is invalidating the utensil for future use. The commentaries question this decision, noting that ultimately, when the receptacle becomes full, one is permitted to move it because it is repulsive. They explain that this restriction was instituted because, at the outset, it is forbidden to cause an article to become repulsive (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 339:9, Be'ur Halachah 339).
|
| 93. |
These leniencies are granted only within a person's permanent dwelling, as reflected in theShulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 308:34.
|
| 94. |
Literally, "a chamber pot."
|
| 95. |
Leniency is granted if there is a possibility of loss involved (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit. 308:37).
|
| 96. |
Produce from Eretz Yisrael from which the agricultural requirements (terumah and the tithes) have not been separated. Until these requirements are separated, the produce is not fit to eat and it is considered as muktzeh as explained in Halachah 19.
|
| 97. |
See Chapter 23, Halachah 15.
|
| 98. |
See Chapter 5, Halachah 13.
|
| 99. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 313:7) emphasizes that one may use these utensils only to prevent the beam from falling further. It is forbidden to raise the beam to its original position, because that would be considered as if one were building.
|
| 100. |
Unless there is ample space, we fear that the pressure will be so great that it will be impossible to remove them later. Therefore, one will have nullified all future possibilities of using them (Shabbat43a).
|
| 101. |
Based on Chapter 1, Halachah 6, one must add that the person must place down the mat in a manner that will not inevitably cause the bees to be snared (פסיק רישא). Were that to be the case, the person who places down the mat would be liable for snaring.
|
| 102. |
Which are muktzeh like all animals and fowl.
|
| 103. |
Although one is forbidden to carry the basket while the chicks are in it, one is not considered to have invalidated the possibility of using the receptacle, because one may move it after the chicks descend.
|
| 104. |
If, however, the chicks are in the basket throughout beyn hash'mashot on Friday, the basket becomes muktzeh (Mishnah Berurah 308:148).
|
| 105. |
Rashi and the Rashba (Shabbat 128b) explain the problem differently from the Rambam: that while the animal is standing on the cushions, it is impossible to move them. This interpretation is difficult, because one may move them after the animal departs,. According to the Rambam's interpretation, by contrast, there is no difficulty, because once the cushions are wet, they cannot be used. The Rambam's interpretation is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 305:19).
|
| 106. |
Although the prohibition against carrying an animal by hand is also Rabbinic in origin, it is more severe. Therefore, our Sages did not nullify it despite the suffering caused to the animal.
There are authorities who are more lenient and maintain that even the latter prohibition is waived because of the animal's suffering. The later authorities rule that one may rely on this decision in a situation where a great loss will be incurred. Moreover, they add that all agree that one may instruct a gentile to lift the animal from the cistern. This is preferable to placing the cushions and blankets there (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 305:26; Mishnah Berurah 305:70).
|
| 107. |
Needless to say, this is forbidden in the public domain, because it is forbidden to carry an animal there (Shabbat, loc. cit).
|
| 108. |
I.e., hold them by the necks or shoulders and direct them (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit. 308:40).
|
| 109. |
This is the Rambam's interpretation of Shabbat (loc. cit.). Rashi and the Ra'avad offer a different rationale for the prohibition against lifting a chicken: that the chicken will lift up its legs from the ground, causing one to carry it. This interpretation is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.).
|
Shabbos - Chapter Twenty Six
Halacha 1
All the utensils used for weaving, including the cords and the reeds, may be carried [according to the rules governing] other utensils that are used for forbidden tasks.1 An exception is made regarding the upper weaver's beam and the lower weaver's beam. They may not be carried, because they are [usually] fixed [within the loam].2
Similarly, the pillars [of the loam] may not be moved, lest one fill the hole [in the earth created when they are removed]. It is permitted to move the other utensils of a weaver.3
Halacha 2
Brooms made of date branches and the like, which are used to sweep the ground, are considered utensils that are used for a permitted purpose, since sweeping is permitted on the Sabbath.4
Bricks that remain after a building [was completed] are considered utensils that are used for a permitted purpose, for they are fit to recline upon,5, as is obvious from the fact that they are filed and adjusted for this purpose.6 If, however, one collects them, [it is evident] that they have been set aside [for building], and it is forbidden to carry them.7
Halacha 3
A small shard may be carried, even in the public domain.8[This leniency is granted] because it is fit to be used in a courtyard to cover the opening of a small utensil.9 [When] the stopper of a barrel has been cut off, both it and its broken pieces are permitted to be carried. If one threw it into a garbage dump10before the commencement of the Sabbath,11 carrying it is forbidden.
When a utensil has been broken [but not shattered into pieces], one should not remove a shard from it to use to cover [another utensil] or to use as a support.
Halacha 4
It is permitted to bring three rounded12 stones into a lavatory to clean oneself.13Of what size may they be? A fistful.14A clod of earth, by contrast, which is likely to crumble, is forbidden to be taken to clean oneself.15
It is permitted to take these stones up to a roof [so that one will be able] to clean oneself with them.16 When rain descends upon them and they sink in the mud, they may be taken if there is a distinct mark [showing their location].17
[When] a stone has filth on it, one can be certain that it is used to clean oneself. Therefore, carrying it is permitted it even though it is large.18
Halacha 5
Halacha 6
The remnants of mats that have become tattered are considered utensils that may be used for a permitted purpose, for they are fit to be used to cover filth.23In contrast, the remnants of clothes24 that are less than three [thumbbreadths] by three [thumbbreadths],25 and have become tattered may not be carried, for they are not fit - neither for the poor nor for the rich.26
Halacha 7
A ladder leading to a loft is forbidden to be carried [on the Sabbath], since it is not considered to be a utensil.29 [A ladder leading] to a dovecote [by contrast, is not considered muktzeh30 and] is permitted to be tilted. One should not, however, carry it from one dovecote to another, lest one follow one's ordinary course of conduct and come to snare [the doves].
[The following rule governs the use of] a rod that is used to harvest olives:31When it is categorized as a utensil,32 it is considered to be a utensil that is used for a forbidden purpose. [The following rule governs the use of] a reed that is adjusted by a homeowner to open and lock [his door]:33 When it is categorized as a utensil,34 it is considered to be a utensil that is used for a permitted purpose.
Halacha 8
[The following rules apply to] a door35 that once had a hinge - though at present it does not have a hinge36 - which is prepared to close a yard,37 but which drags on the ground when it is opened and closed: If the door is attached to and hanging on the wall, it may be used to close the space and may be locked.38 If not, it may not be used to close the space. If the door is [suspended] above the ground, it may be used to close the space.39 The same rules apply to a [partition made from] brambles or a mat that drags on the floor.
Halacha 9
[The following rules apply to] a door that is made from a single piece of wood and which is placed in [a doorway] to close it and removed [to open it]. If [the doorway] does not have a base at the bottom that resembles a doorstep that would indicate that [the door] is a utensil that is used for [opening and] closing, [the door] may not be used to close [the doorway].40 If [the doorway] has a doorstep, one may use [the door].41
Similarly, a bolt that has a bulb at its end that indicates that it is a utensil used to bolt a door, and is not merely an ordinary beam, may be used to bolt a door on the Sabbath.42
Halacha 10
[The following rules apply to] a bolt that does not have a bulb at its end: If it is tied to the door and suspended from it, we may use it to bolt the door on the Sabbath.43 [This ruling] also applies when it is carried together with the rope attaching it to the door.44
If, by contrast, the rope attaching it is fixed permanently to the door and the bolt is removed like a beam, placed in a corner, and then reattached when one desires, its use as a bolt is forbidden [on the Sabbath].45 This is forbidden because [the bolt] is not considered to be a utensil, nor is there any indication [that it is being used as a utensil], for it is not attached to the door, nor is it connected to a rope.46
Halacha 11
Halacha 12
We may remove a shoe from a shoemaker's block on the Sabbath.51 We may release a clothes press belonging to an ordinary person on the Sabbath. We may not, however, set the press in place.52 A press belonging to a launderer should not be touched at all; it is set aside not to be used, because of the financial loss [that might be incurred through its improper use].53
Similarly, unprocessed rolls of wool may not be carried,54 because [their owner] objects [to their use for purposes other than spinning fabric].55 Therefore, if they have been set aside for a particular purpose,56 it is permitted to use them. Unprocessed hides - regardless of whether they belong to a private person or to a [leather] craftsman - may be carried,57 because [their owner] does not object to their [use].58
Halacha 13
All filth - e.g., feces, vomit, excrement, and the like - that is located in a courtyard where [people] are dwelling may be removed to a dung heap or to a latrine.59 Such entities are referred to as a chamber pot.60 If it is located in another courtyard, it should be covered by a utensil so that a child will not become soiled by it.
One may step on spittle that is lying on the ground without taking any notice of it.61 One may carry a warming-pan because of its ash. [This leniency is granted] despite the fact that it contains chips of wood,62 because it is equivalent to a chamber pot.
At the outset, we may not bring about the creation of a repulsive entity63 on the Sabbath. If, however, [such an entity] comes about as a natural process, or one transgresses and creates it, it may be removed.
Halacha 14
It is permitted to partake of oil that flows from beneath the beam of an olive press on the Sabbath64 and from dates and almonds that are prepared to be sold.65 One may even begin to take grain from a storehouse66 or from a grain pile on the Sabbath, for food never becomes muktzeh on the Sabbath at all. On the contrary, all [types of food] are [always] prepared for use.67
[There is, however, one] exception: figs and raisins that have been set aside to dry. Since they pass through an intermediate stage when they become repulsive and are unfit to eat,68 they are considered muktzeh and are forbidden [to be carried] on the Sabbath.69
A barrel [of wine] or a watermelon that was opened may be carried and stored away, even though it is no longer fit to eat.70 Similarly, an amulet that has not proven its efficacy may be moved, although one is forbidden to go out [into the public domain] wearing it.71
The oil that remains in a lamp or in a bowl that was kindled on a particular Sabbath may not be used on that Sabbath. It is muktzeh because of the forbidden [labor with which it was associated beyn hash'mashot].72
Halacha 15
Although taking [produce] from a storehouse of grain or of barrels of wine is permitted, it is forbidden to begin73 to empty [the storehouse]74 unless this is being done for a purpose associated with a mitzvah - e.g., emptying it to host guests or to establish a hall of study.
[In the latter situations,] how should the storehouse be emptied? Every person should take [out] four or five75 containers until it has been completely [cleared].76 We may not sweep the floor of the storehouse, as has been explained.77
[Even when one is forbidden to empty the storehouse,] one may enter and leave and create a path with one's feet by entering and leaving.
Halacha 16
Any substance that is fit to be used as food for an animal, beast, or fowl that is commonly found may be carried on the Sabbath. What is implied? One may carry dry turmos beans78 because they are food for goats. Fresh [turmosbeans,] by contrast, may not [be carried].79 [One may carry] chatzav80 because it is food for deer, mustard seed because it is food for doves,81and bones because they are food for dogs.
Similarly, we may carry all the shells and seeds [of produce] that are fit to serve as animal fodder. Concerning those that are not fit to be eaten: One should eat the food and throw [the shells or seeds] behind one's back;82 carrying them is forbidden.
Halacha 17
We may not carry broken pieces of glass even though they are edible by ostriches,86 nor bundles of twigs from a vine even though they are edible by elephants, nor luf,87 even though it is edible by ravens. [These restrictions were instituted] because these and similar [species] are not commonly found among most people.88
Halacha 18
[The following rules apply to] bundles of straw, bundles of wood, and bundles of twigs: If they were prepared89 to be used as animal fodder, one may carry them. If not, one may not carry them.
Halacha 19
We may not rake food that was placed before an ox that is being fattened for slaughter. [This applies regardless of whether the food has been placed] in a feeding trough that is a [separate] utensil92 or in an earthen feeding trough. [Similarly,] one may not shift [the food] to the side so that [it does not become mixed with] feces. [These restrictions are] decrees, [instituted] lest one level grooves [in the floor].93
One may take food that had been placed before a donkey and place it before an ox.94 One may not, by contrast, take food that had been placed before an ox and place it before a donkey. [This restriction was instituted] because the food that is before an ox becomes soiled by its spittle95 and is not fit to be eaten by another animal.96
Leaves that produce a foul and repulsive odor and are not eaten by animals may not be carried. For similar reasons, carrying the hook on which fish are hung is forbidden.97 By contrast, the hook on which meat is hung is permitted to be carried. The same applies in all similar situations.
Halacha 20
Although carrying a corpse on the Sabbath is forbidden, one may anoint it and wash it, provided one does not move any of its limbs.98 We may slip out a pillow from underneath it99 so that it will be lying on the ground100 to enable it to remain without decomposing.
We may bring a utensil that will cool [a corpse] or a metal utensil and place it on the belly [of the corpse] so that [the corpse] will not swell. We may stop up [the corpse's] orifices so that air will not enter them. We may tie its jaw - not so that it will close101 - but so that it will not [open] further. We may not close [a corpse's] eyes on the Sabbath.102
Halacha 21
When a corpse is lying in the sun, we may place a loaf of bread103 or a baby on it and carry it [into the shade]. Similarly, if a fire breaks out in a courtyard where a corpse is lying, we may place a loaf of bread or a baby on it104 and carry it [out from the fire].105
Indeed, even if a loaf of bread or a baby are not available, one may save a corpse from a fire. [This leniency is granted] lest one extinguish the fire out of apprehension that the corpse not be consumed [by the flames].
[The leniency of carrying an entity with] a loaf of bread or a baby upon it is granted only in the case of a corpse, because a person is distraught over the corpse [of his loved ones].106
Halacha 22
[The following procedure should be adhered to when] a corpse is lying in the sun and there is no place to carry it, or [the people] do not desire to move it from its place: Two people should come and sit, one on either side [of the corpse]. If it is [too] warm for them [to sit on the ground], they may both bring couches and sit on them. If it is [too] warm for them [to sit in the sun], they may both bring mats and spread them over the couches.107
[Afterwards,] they both may [depart], overturn their couches, and remove them [leaving the mats suspended over the corpse]. In this manner, the covering is created on its own accord, [as it were], for the two mats are next to each other and their two ends are located on the ground on either side of the corpse.
Halacha 23
When a corpse has decomposed108 in a house [to the extent that it produces a foul odor] and thus is being disgraced in the eyes of the living, and their honor is being compromised because of it, carrying it109 into a carmelit is permitted.110
[This leniency was granted because] the honor of the creatures is great enough to supersede [the observance of] a negative commandment of the Torah, namely: "Do not swerve right or left from the words they tell you" [Deuteronomy 17:11].111
If [the people in the home] have an alternative place to go, they may not remove the corpse. Instead, the corpse should be left in its place and they should depart.112
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
I.e., the object may be carried to perform a permitted task or because the place in which it is lying is needed (Chapter 25, Halachah 3).
|
| 2. |
The Maggid Mishneh writes that, for this reason, it is as though they are not considered to be utensils.
|
| 3. |
See Chapter 10, Halachah 3, and the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat 15:2, which mention the use of a weaver's rope.
|
| 4. |
See Chapter 21, Halachah 3, which states that one may sweep a floor on the Sabbath only if it is paved. Since sweeping is permitted in that instance, however, it is considered a permitted activity.
Nevertheless, according to the Ramah (Orach Chayim 337:2), who forbids sweeping with these brooms even on a paved floor, a broom would be considered a utensil used for a forbidden purpose. The notes on that halachah mention the views of the later authorities.
|
| 5. |
Rashi, Shabbat 124b, states "to sit upon."
|
| 6. |
For this reason, a more lenient ruling is given than with regard to the row of stones mentioned in Chapter 25, Halachah 21, where one must indicate one's desire to use them on the Sabbath. (See Mishnah Berurah 306:73.)
|
| 7. |
Since they are not considered to be utensils. (See Chapter 25, Halachah 6.)
|
| 8. |
Although there is no utensil to cover there, since it is fit to cover a utensil one may take it to use for another purpose (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 306:7). Needless to say, one may carry it only less than four cubits.
|
| 9. |
As the Maggid Mishneh and the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) emphasize, this leniency applies only to the broken pieces of a utensil. Since it was originally considered a utensil, it remains in this category as long as it can serve a useful purpose. In contrast, a stone is not considered a utensil, even though it is fit to cover another utensil, unless it is designated for this purpose.
|
| 10. |
Although it is useful, since its owner discarded it before the commencement of the Sabbath, there was no intent of using it at the time the Sabbath commenced. Therefore, it becomes forbidden. (See Ramah, Orach Chayim 308:7.)
|
| 11. |
If, however, it is discarded on the Sabbath itself, its use is permitted, since at the time of the commencement of the Sabbath it was still deemed to be a useful article (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 12. |
Our translation is taken from the dictionary of Rabbi Tanchum of Jerusalem. The Maggid Mishneh renders the term מקורזלות as "sharp."
|
| 13. |
Although stones are not considered to be utensils and therefore may not ordinarily be carried, an exception is made in order to allow a person to take care of his basic hygienic needs.
Because of the advances in civilization, the situations described in this and the following halachah are no longer common practice. Nevertheless, the motivating principle behind these laws - that our Sages allowed certain leniencies for the sake of human dignity and hygiene - is pertinent at all times.
In this context, it is worthy to note the difference of opinion mentioned by the Ramah (Orach Chayim 312:1): According to one opinion, it is permitted to carry these stones only in one's own courtyard; i.e., only the prohibition against carrying stones is lifted. A second opinion, however, maintains that the prohibition against bringing an article from a carmelit into the private domain is also lifted in this instance. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 312:4 and the Mishnah Berurah 312:8 favor the latter view.
|
| 14. |
I.e., the size of all three together may not exceed a fistful (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 15. |
Rashi (Shabbat 81a) relates that since the earth is likely to crumble - and then it will no longer be useful for this purpose - the prohibition against carrying it was never lifted.
|
| 16. |
Rashi (loc. cit.) and the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 312:1) explain that carrying the stones might entail extraordinary difficulty, which is normally forbidden on the Sabbath. An exception is made in this instance, however, for the reasons mentioned above.
|
| 17. |
There is no concern that one might be performing a derivative of the forbidden labor of grinding, nor of the forbidden labor of demolishing.
|
| 18. |
As a corollary to this principle, the Mishnah Berurah 312:6 mentions that it is permitted to carry toilet paper. Although paper is generally considered to be muktzeh, since the purpose for which this paper is used is clearly designated, it is not placed in this category. The Mishnah Berurah, however, emphasizes that tearing the paper on the Sabbath is forbidden.
|
| 19. |
Since a shard is sharp and might tear one's membranes (Rashi, Shabbat 82a).
|
| 20. |
Because in this instance the shard is smooth and will not tear one's membranes. Since the shard comes from a useful article, it is not muktzeh, as the stones are.
|
| 21. |
Since the grass is useful as animal fodder, it is not considered muktzeh. Therefore, using it is preferable to using the stone. Note the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 312:6), which states that one may use grasses that are still attached to the ground, provided one does not uproot them.
|
| 22. |
If the grasses are firm, there is a possibility that their sharp edges will perforate one's membranes (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit.:5).
|
| 23. |
The Ramban states that if they were discarded before the commencement of the Sabbath, they are considered to be muktzeh. This ruling is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim308:12).
|
| 24. |
The Maggid Mishneh cites the Ra'avad who states that this refers to the remnants of a tallit used for prayer, which are inappropriate to be used to clean filth. The Rambam, however, interprets this as referring to the remnants of all garments. Although the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.:13) quotes both views, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 308:41 favors the Rambam's opinion, explaining that even though smaller pieces of cloth are fit to be used to clean filth, this does not cause them to be considered to be a כלי, "useful article," unless they are explicitly designated for this purpose. Therefore, they are placed in the category of muktzeh like stones.
|
| 25. |
The minimum size of a piece of cloth that is susceptible to ritual impurity (Hilchot Keilim 22:20).
|
| 26. |
Hilchot Keilim (op. cit.) mentions that a cloth three thumbbreadths by three thumbbreadths is fit only for the poor. A rich person, by contrast, will not consider a cloth valuable until it is a minimum of three handbreadths by three handbreadths. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 308:41 and the Mishnah Berurah 308:52 also apply these concepts with regard to our present halachah.
|
| 27. |
See Chapter 25, Halachah 12.
|
| 28. |
And thus perform a forbidden labor. The Ramah (Orach Chayim 308:16) applies this concept to other articles - e.g., a bench that has one leg broken off.
|
| 29. |
Hence, moving it at all is forbidden. (See Hilchot Eruvin 3:7, from which one can derive the following: A ladder leading to a loft is usually left there permanently. Therefore, it is a heavy structure that is not considered to be a כלי, a utensil, but rather a permanent part of the building's structure.)
|
| 30. |
Since it is usually moved from dovecote to dovecote, it is light and is therefore considered to be a כלי. Accordingly, if there were no room for suspicion that one would snare doves, one would be allowed to move it.
The Maggid Mishneh draws attention to Hilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov 5:4, which states that the only reason the Sages permitted moving such a ladder on a holiday was to allow for festive joy (i.e., to permit one to bring doves to slaughter). Therefore, on the Sabbath, when slaughtering is forbidden, there is no reason to allow one to move such a ladder. A household ladder, by contrast, may be moved (Mishnah Berurah 308:78).
|
| 31. |
The Rambam describes the construction and use of such a rod in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat 17:3).
|
| 32. |
Note the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 313:1), which states that for a reed to be "categorized as a utensil," it is not sufficient merely to think about using it for that purpose; one must actually adapt the article to fit the purpose for which it is intended to be used.
|
| 33. |
I.e., it is used as a door stop. Thus, it resembles slightly the bolt mentioned in the following halachah.
|
| 34. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 313:1) mentions two perspectives on this matter. Rashi states that one must prepare the reed for use as a utensil that can be employed for other purposes. Otherwise, using it as a door stop will be considered to be building. Rabbenu Tam explains that as long as the reed is prepared for use as a door stop, it is sufficient.
Although in this halachah, the Rambam's perspective appears to follow that of Rashi, in his gloss to Chapter 23, Halachah 13, the Maggid Mishneh states that the Rambam follows the position of Rabbenu Tam. The later authorities agree that one may rely on Rabbenu Tam's view (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 313:2; Mishnah Berurah 313:7).
|
| 35. |
Rashi and others explain that the difficulty with the doors mentioned in this halachah is that since they do not meet all the criteria of ordinary doors, closing an opening with them resembles building. The Rambam, by contrast, appears to maintain that the difficulty is whether doors of this nature are considered to be כלים, useful articles, or not. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim313:3) follows Rashi's view.
|
| 36. |
If the board used as a door lacks any sign of a hinge, it is not considered a כלי, a useful article, and carrying it is forbidden. In this instance, since it has the mark of a hinge, it was obviously used as a door in the past. Therefore, if it meets either of the other conditions mentioned by the Rambam, it may be moved on the Sabbath.
|
| 37. |
Our translation is based on Rashi (Eruvin 101a) and the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.). More precisely, in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Eruvin 10:8), the Rambam defines the Hebrew term מוקצה as "a distinct place that is not used for any purpose, nor is it required by its owner - e.g., a barn or stable."
The Shulchan Aruch emphasizes that the ruling concerning moving the partition used as a door is dependent on the fact that this enclosure is used infrequently. If an entrance that is frequently used were closed with such a partition, it would be considered as having been set aside for this purpose. However, since this is not the case, there is reason for the restrictions mentioned.
|
| 38. |
According to the Rambam, the fact that they were attached to the wall before the Sabbath indicates that they were intended to be used as a door. According to Rashi, it is sufficient to indicate that one is not building on the Sabbath.
|
| 39. |
The Maggid Mishneh states that the Rambam's wording appears to indicate that two criteria must be met: The partition used as a door must have at least the remnant of a hinge, and it must either be attached to the wall or be suspended above the ground. He objects to this conception, explaining that based on Eruvin 101a, it would appear that if a partition is suspended above the ground, it is considered to be a door even if it never had a hinge.
The Maggid Mishneh states, however, that it is possible that the Rambam also shares this conception. (Merkevet HaMishneh postulates that he surely does. Otherwise, the Rambam's words would be redundant, since it is impossible for a door to be suspended above the ground unless it hangs from the wall or is attached by a hinge.) The Maggid Mishneh's view is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 313:3).
|
| 40. |
As in the previous halachah, Rashi and others explain that the reason the prohibition was instituted is that this door does not resemble an ordinary door. Hence, one appears to be building when closing it. The Rambam, by contrast, explains that the prohibition stems from the fact that the door is not prepared to serve as a כלי, a useful article. Therefore, moving it is forbidden, as explained in the previous chapter.
|
| 41. |
Note the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 313:4), which states that even if the entrance has a doorstep, since it is uncommon to use a door made of a single piece of wood, such a door may not be used on the Sabbath. Moreover, the Shulchan Aruch continues, this prohibition applies even when the door has a hinge.
The Magen Avraham 313:8 and other later authorities, however, maintain that one may rely on the Rambam's opinion if a door is used frequently as an entrance and an exit. This is surely true in the present age, when it is very common for doors to be made from a single piece of wood.
|
| 42. |
Eruvin 10:10 relates that there was a synagogue in Tiberias that had such a bolt. Its congregants refrained from using it on the Sabbath until Rabban Gamliel and the elders ruled that using it was permitted.
In this instance as well, the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit:1) is more stringent and requires the bolt to be tied to the door even when it has a bulb at the end. (See the following halachah and notes.)
|
| 43. |
For the fact that it is tied to the door clearly indicates that it has been set aside for a purpose.
|
| 44. |
This refers to an instance where the bolt is attached to a rope that is, in turn, attached to the door. If the bolt is removed by detaching the rope from the door and carrying the bolt and the rope together, the presence of the rope serves as an indication that the bolt has been set aside to be used for a significant purpose. Therefore, there is no prohibition involved. If, as in the following clause, the bolt is detached from the rope, there is nothing to indicate that it is a useful article. Hence, it is forbidden (Kessef Mishneh).
The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's interpretation of the Hebrew ניטל באגדו. Instead, he offers a different explanation: that the rope with which the beam is attached to the door with a knot that is strong enough to hold the beam when it is removed. This is the interpretation that Rav Yosef Karo follows in the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 313:1).
|
| 45. |
It was permitted to use such a bolt in the Temple, because none of the Rabbinic prohibitions in the category of sh'vut were in effect there. Outside of the Temple, using such a bolt was prohibited for the reasons mentioned by the Rambam (or according to others, because this resembles building, Eruvin 102a).
|
| 46. |
Rav Moshe Cohen of Lunil and others question the distinction between this halachah and Chapter 22, Halachah 30, which mentions a piece of wood that is used to close a window. TheMaggid Mishneh explains that in that instance, leniency was granted only when the piece of wood is prepared for that purpose. In the present halachah, by contrast, nothing has been done to indicate that the bolt is set aside for purposeful use.
It must be emphasized that the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) takes a different perspective and maintains that the restrictions were instituted lest it appear that one is building when using such a door. According to this perspective, unless the conditions mentioned above are met, it is forbidden to use this bolt, even if it was prepared for this purpose before the Sabbath.
|
| 47. |
This applies even when one has not lit this candelabrum at the commencement of the particular Sabbath in question. Had the candelabrum been lit at that time, carrying it would have been forbidden, as reflected by Chapter 25, Halachah 23.
|
| 48. |
See Chapter 22, Halachah 26.
|
| 49. |
The Kessef Mishneh questions the phrase "because of its weight," for seemingly Shabbat 46a considers that as another rationale for stringency, not at all dependent on the fact that the candelabrum has grooves. Indeed, these rationales offered by two separate sages seem to be mutually exclusive. He and other commentators attempt to resolve this difficulty. Rav Kapach notes that many authoritative manuscripts of the Mishneh Torah omit this problematic phrase.
|
| 50. |
In the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 279:7), Rav Yosef Karo follows the reasoning he mentions in his Kessef Mishneh and forbids the use of all candelabra with grooves, whether large or small.
|
| 51. |
A new shoe will most likely be firmly fixed on the shoemaker's block, and removing it would necessitate moving the block. This is, nevertheless, permitted, because the shoemaker's block is considered to be a utensil that is used for a forbidden intent. Accordingly, it may be moved when one desires to use the space it takes up - in this instance, the space within the shoe where one puts one's foot [Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 308:14)].
|
| 52. |
Rashi (Shabbat 141a) explains that putting clothes in a press is forbidden, because it appears to be an activity performed for the sake of the weekdays that follow, and not for sake of the Sabbath itself.
|
| 53. |
Rashi (loc. cit.) offers a different rationale for this prohibition: that setting up a professional press resembles building and opening it resembles the labor of demolishing. The Shulchan Aruch(Orach Chayim 302:4) quotes Rashi's view.
|
| 54. |
Shabbat 49a,b mentions the use of such wool for the purpose of insulating food to keep it warm.
|
| 55. |
Note the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 259:1), which follows the ruling of Rabbenu Asher (in his gloss on Shabbat 49a), who permits picking up such rolls if they are used as insulation, unless they are explicitly set aside for sale. Although these rolls are generally used for spinning wool, since they are not very valuable, the fact that they are employed for the purpose of insulation is sufficient for them to be considered to have been set aside for that purpose (Mishnah Berurah 259:6).
|
| 56. |
Note the Magen Avraham 259:2, which states that they must be set aside to be used for this purpose - e.g., insulation - forever. It is not sufficient that one decide to use them for this purpose on merely one Sabbath.
|
| 57. |
These are likely to be used as mats to sit on (Shabbat, loc. cit.).
|
| 58. |
The Ramah (Orach Chayim 308:25) mentions an opinion that states that this leniency applies only to cow hides, but not to sheep hides. The later authorities, however, do not accept this view (Mishnah Berurah 308:107).
|
| 59. |
It would appear that the Rambam's intent is that although these repulsive entities should be forbidden to be removed since they are not כלים, it is permitted to remove them because of the discomfort their presence causes.
|
| 60. |
I.e., this term is used as an idiom to describe all repulsive entities.
|
| 61. |
Note Chapter 11, Halachah 4, for a more specific definition of the Hebrew wording used.
|
| 62. |
The Ra'avad accepts the Rambam's ruling only when the warming-pan has coals that had turned to ash before the commencement of the Sabbath. The Ra'avad offers a different explanation of the leniency, stating that it is granted because the warming-pan is the base for a permitted article (the ash that existed before the commencement of the Sabbath) and a forbidden article (the remainder of the ash and the chips of wood). The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 310:8) quotes the Ra'avad's interpretation.
|
| 63. |
Our translation is based on the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 308:36).
|
| 64. |
Although the oil had not been separated before the commencement of the Sabbath, one is allowed to partake of it on the Sabbath. As mentioned previously, the Rambam follows the view of Rabbi Shimon (Shabbat 19b) who permits the use of nolad (objects that come into existence on the Sabbath).
|
| 65. |
In contrast to utensils that are forbidden in this instance, as mentioned in Chapter 25, Halachah 9.
|
| 66. |
See, however, the following halachah.
|
| 67. |
As examples of this principle, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 310:2) states that one may pick up seeds from the ground which fell before the Sabbath that have not become rooted or eggs that were laid before the Sabbath from beneath a chicken. (See also Hilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov 1:18.)
|
| 68. |
I.e., fresh grapes and figs and dried grapes and figs are desirable foods. In the process by which these fruits dry out, they pass through a stage when they become repulsive.
|
| 69. |
The Shulchan Aruch (ibid.) states that there are two drawbacks to such fruit: a) it is unfit to be eaten; b) the owners intentionally set it aside, not to be used until it became dried. Therefore, the restriction is placed upon it.
|
| 70. |
See Hilchot Rotzeach 11:9, which explains that partaking of such foods is forbidden, because it is possible that a poisonous snake deposited venom there.
|
| 71. |
See Chapter 19, Halachah 14.
|
| 72. |
See Chapter 5, Halachah 12 and Chapter 25, Halachah 10.
|
| 73. |
From the use of the word "begin," the Beis Yosef (Orach Chayim 331) derives the following ruling: If one begins emptying the storehouse before the commencement of the Sabbath, one may complete the removal of its contents on the Sabbath, even if one's purpose is not directly associated with a mitzvah.
The Turei Zahav 331:1 objects to this leniency, however, for this appears to be unnecessary work that should not be permitted on the Sabbath.
|
| 74. |
In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat 18:1, based on Shabbat 127a), the Rambam explains the reason that this restriction was instituted. It is very likely that there are grooves or cavities in the floor of a storeroom, and a person would be tempted to level the floor if he were allowed to empty the entire room. The Turei Zahav 333:1 explains that the prohibition was instituted to prevent a person from exerting himself excessively.
Significantly, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 331:1 quotes both rationales, indicating that they are not mutually exclusive.
|
| 75. |
In his Commentary on the Mishnah (loc. cit.), the Rambam explains that this number is not intended as a limitation. Indeed, every person may take out as many containers as he needs at one time.
It must be emphasized that this interpretation is dependent on a version of Shabbat 126b-127a that is not accepted by many other authorities, including the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim333:1).
|
| 76. |
I.e., a single individual is not allowed to clear out the entire storehouse. Instead, each individual - or a substitute for him - must clear out the area he needs. Although one person may remove as many containers as he can carry at one time, he may not, however, return to take more (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, loc. cit.). See also the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim333:3).
|
| 77. |
See Chapter 21, Halachah 2.
|
| 78. |
See the notes on Chapter 3, Halachah 12, for a more specific definition of the type of bean referred to.
|
| 79. |
Because they are very bitter, they are not eaten at all (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 80. |
A shrub whose roots penetrate deeply into the ground.
|
| 81. |
The Maggid Mishneh objects to the mention of mustard seed. Although it is used as food for doves, it is also commonly used to prepare food for humans. There is a general principle that whenever a substance is considered to be food both for animals and for humans, it is considered to be set aside for use for humans and not for animals. The Kessef Mishneh, however, justifies the Rambam's ruling.
|
| 82. |
A person should throw the shells - and similarly, any other waste left after eating - over his shoulder so that he will not create a repulsive situation on the table before him. For, as mentioned above (Halachah 13), at the outset creating a repulsive situation is forbidden (Maggid Mishneh). Significantly, this point is not emphasized by the later authorities.
|
| 83. |
Or dogs (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 308:31).
|
| 84. |
According to most authorities, although meat must be salted to remove the blood before cooking, there is no prohibition against eating uncooked unsalted meat. (See Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 67:2.) Nevertheless, according to the Rambam (Hilchot Ma'achalot Asurot 6:12), it is necessary to salt raw meat before one eats it. From the juxtaposition of these two rulings, Rav Kapach derives that, according to the Rambam, it is permitted to salt meat on the Sabbath to remove its blood.
|
| 85. |
For it is unfit for both human and animal consumption.
|
| 86. |
Rav Kapach explains that the intent is not that the broken glass is actually considered to be food by the ostriches. Instead, the intent is that ostriches have strong digestive organs, which will not be torn by the glass. As such, the glass will assist them in the process of digestion, because it will help shred the other food that they have consumed.
|
| 87. |
A wild vegetable of the onion family (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Shabbat 18:1).
|
| 88. |
Nevertheless, a person who owns a species of animal that is rarely found may carry whatever food is necessary for it, even though it is not usually consumed by other animals (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 308:29).
|
| 89. |
Preparation is necessary, because we assume that these substances would ordinarily be used for kindling (Maggid Mishneh). Note the Magen Avraham 308:53, which states that straw is usually employed at present as a mattress or for animal fodder. Hence, it is permitted to be carried even though it was not prepared before the Sabbath.
|
| 90. |
At times these substances are used for kindling, at times for animal fodder, and at times for other purposes that serve humans.
|
| 91. |
Since these substances are less likely to be used for kindling, everything depends on the person's intent when he brought them home. Note the Magen Avraham 321:1, which states that if one brings them home without any specific intent, they are considered to be animal fodder. (See also Chapter 21, Halachah 19.)
|
| 92. |
This is forbidden, lest one follow the same practice in an earthen feeding trough.
|
| 93. |
Note the Mishneh Berurah 324:41, which gives another reason for the prohibition against shifting food to the side: Some of the straw has surely become repulsive and is no longer fit to be carried.
|
| 94. |
For an ox will not hesitate to eat food from before a donkey.
|
| 95. |
Because oxen chew their cud.
|
| 96. |
The Mishnah Berurah 324:37 emphasizes that the intent is that an animal of another species will not eat food that is soiled with the spittle of an ox. One ox will, however, eat food that is soiled with the spittle of another ox.
|
| 97. |
The Maggid Mishneh explains that, in contrast to a meat hook, a fish hook is not a proper utensil and will be discarded after use. Hence, it may not be carried on the Sabbath. Rav Kapach objects to this interpretation, noting that if this explanation were correct, it would have been more appropriate to state this halachah in Chapter 25, which differentiates between entities that are considered utensils and those that are not.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 310:1) states that it is permitted to carry a fish hook, because it is not considered too repulsive to move.
|
| 98. |
All the leniencies mentioned in this halachah are intended to inhibit the process of the corpse's decomposition.
|
| 99. |
Moving the pillow, and not the corpse, by hand. Although the corpse will also be moved, this is of no consequence.
|
| 100. |
If a corpse is covered by blankets or sheets, it is possible that they will serve as insulator and keep heat from diffusing, thus causing the corpse to decompose more quickly.
|
| 101. |
For this would involve moving a limb (Rashi, Shabbat 151b).
|
| 102. |
Shulchan Aruch HaRav 311:13 and the Mishnah Berurah 311:22 relate that, based on the Zohar, it has become customary to close a corpse's eyes and straighten its limbs on the Sabbath, for the failure to do so will lead to danger.
|
| 103. |
Note the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 311:4), which mentions an opinion that allows a corpse to be carried if it is dressed in the clothes it wore while it was alive. Shulchan Aruch HaRav311:10 accepts this ruling; the Mishnah Berurah 311:16, by contrast, does not.
|
| 104. |
Thus, it is as if the corpse were merely a medium to enable one to carry the bread or the baby.
|
| 105. |
This refers to carrying a corpse within a private domain. (See also Halachah 23 and notes.)
|
| 106. |
If a baby or a loaf of bread is not available, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 311:1) allows one to move a corpse by shifting it from one bed to another. The Ramah (loc. cit.:2) offers another alternative - to have a gentile carry the corpse.
|
| 107. |
Spreading the mats constitutes the construction of a temporary tent. This is permitted only because of the discomfort suffered by a living person, and not for the sake of preserving the corpse. Therefore, it is necessary to undertake all the stages in this process, so that it will not be obvious that this is being done for the sake of the corpse (Kessef Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch HaRav 311:11; Mishnah Berurah 311:19).
|
| 108. |
Or will shortly reach that state (Ramah, Orach Chayim 311:2).
|
| 109. |
The Maggid Mishneh notes that the Rambam does not mention carrying the corpse with a baby or a loaf of bread on it, as in Halachah 21. The commentaries differ on whether this is necessary. The Rashba maintains that it is desirable to place another article on the corpse, so that one will be carrying the corpse for the sake of a permitted article.
The Ramban, by contrast, explains that since one is carrying the corpse into a carmelit and violating a Rabbinic prohibition associated with a forbidden labor, it is preferable to minimize the violation of that prohibition by not carrying another article. Although the prohibition against carrying an entity (the corpse) that is muktzeh will be violated in a more serious way, it is preferable to violate that prohibition (which is associated with a sh'vut) than the prohibition against carrying into a carmelit, which has its source in the forbidden labor of transferring articles.
Although the Rashba's view is accepted by the later authorities (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 311:2;Mishnah Berurah 311:9), one may rely on the Ramban's view if there is not another useful article available, and carry the corpse out without anything else.
|
| 110. |
The corpse may be carried into a carmelit, but not into a public domain (Shulchan Aruch HaRav311:5; Mishnah Berurah 311:10).
The Tur allows carrying a corpse even into the public domain; since one does not intend to use the corpse, carrying it is a מלאכה שאינה צריכה לגופה, and the prohibition against performing such an activity is waived in this instance. The Rambam would surely not accept this premise, for he maintains that one is liable according to the Torah for performing a מלאכה שאינה צריכה לגופה. Even the later Ashkenazic authorities who accept the basic principle of the Tur do not accept this leniency.
|
| 111. |
See Hilchot Mamrim 1:2, which interprets this as a commandment prohibiting us from transgressing a directive instituted by the Rabbis. All the Rabbinic commandments have their source in this mitzvah from the Torah. See also Hilchot Kilayim 10:29.
|
| 112. |
The commentaries emphasize that this ruling indicates that according to the Rambam, the main source for leniency is the regard for the honor of the living, that they are forced to remain in a house permeated by the odor of a decaying corpse.
[It is possible to explain that according to the view of the Ramah cited in Note 106, the honor of the corpse is also considered, and removing it is allowed even if the people in the home have an alternative place to spend the Sabbath (Mishnah Berurah 311:7)].
|
Hayom Yom:
Wednesday, 8 Shevat, 5775 • 28 January 2015
"Today's Day"
orah lessons: Chumash: Bo, Chamishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 44-48.
Tanya: The explanation (p. 75)...Sefer Ha-Gilgulim. (p. 77).
In these days especially, when by G-d's kindness we stand at the threshold of redemption, we must make every conceivable effort to strengthen every facet of our religion. Mitzvot must be observed b'hidur, with "beauty," beyond minimal requirements. Customs must be kept scrupulously, nothing compromised. It is a Mitzva and duty of every Rabbi in Israel to inform his congregation that the current tribulations and agonies are the "birth-pangs of Mashiach." G-d is demanding that we return to Torah and mitzvot, that we not hinder the imminent coming of our righteous Mashiach.
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.
____________________________
Daily Thought:
Be Quiet
There are questions to which G-d says to be quiet, to be still, to cease to ask.
The quietness, the stillness, the abandonment of being, that itself is an answer.[Tetzeh 5725:4.]
____________________________
orah lessons: Chumash: Bo, Chamishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 44-48.
Tanya: The explanation (p. 75)...Sefer Ha-Gilgulim. (p. 77).
In these days especially, when by G-d's kindness we stand at the threshold of redemption, we must make every conceivable effort to strengthen every facet of our religion. Mitzvot must be observed b'hidur, with "beauty," beyond minimal requirements. Customs must be kept scrupulously, nothing compromised. It is a Mitzva and duty of every Rabbi in Israel to inform his congregation that the current tribulations and agonies are the "birth-pangs of Mashiach." G-d is demanding that we return to Torah and mitzvot, that we not hinder the imminent coming of our righteous Mashiach.
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.
____________________________
Daily Thought:
Be Quiet
There are questions to which G-d says to be quiet, to be still, to cease to ask.
The quietness, the stillness, the abandonment of being, that itself is an answer.[Tetzeh 5725:4.]
____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment