CHABAD - TODAY IN JUDAISM: Today is: Sunday, Adar 24, 5775 · March 15, 2015
Today in Jewish History:
• Blood Libel Declared False (1817)
On Adar 24, Czar Alexander I of Russia declared the Blood Libel -- the infamous accusation that Jews murdered Christian children to use their blood in the baking of matzah for Passover, for which thousands of Jews were massacred through the centuries -- to be false. Nevertheless, nearly a hundred years later the accusation was officially leveled against Mendel Beilis in Kiev.
Link: A detailed look at the Beilis case, including primary evidence, photographs, interviews and a documentary.
Daily Quote:
Why was the generation of the Flood utterly destroyed, but not the generation of the Tower? Because the former were consumed by robbery and violence, while amongst the latter love prevailed.[Midrash Rabbah]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Vayikra, 1st Portion Leviticus 1:1-1:13 with Rashi
• Chapter 1
1And He called to Moses, and the Lord spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting, saying, אוַיִּקְרָא אֶל משֶׁה וַיְדַבֵּר יְהֹוָה אֵלָיו מֵאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לֵאמֹר:
And He called to Moses: Every [time God communicated with Moses, whether it was represented by the expression] וַיְדַבֵּר, “And He spoke,” or וַיֹּאמֶר; “and He said,” or וַיְצַו, “and He commanded,” it was always preceded by [God] calling [to Moses by name] (Torath Kohanim 1:2-3). [קְרִיאָה] is an expression of affection, the [same] expression employed by the ministering angels [when addressing each other], as it says, “And one called (וְקָרָא) to the other…” (Isa. 6:3). To the prophets of the nations of the world, however, He revealed Himself through expressions denoting coincidence and impurity, as the verse says, “and God happened to [meet] (וַיִּקָּר) Balaam” (Num. 23:4). - [Bemidbar Rabbah 52:5] [The expression וַיִּקָּר has the meaning of a coincidental happening, and also alludes to impurity. [See Deut. 23:11, regarding the expression מִקְרֵה לַיְלָה.] ויקרא אל משה: לכל דברות ולכל אמירות ולכל צוויים קדמה קריאה, לשון חבה, לשון שמלאכי השרת משתמשים בו, שנאמר (ישעיה ו ג) וקרא זה אל זה, אבל לנביאי אומות העולם נגלה עליהן בלשון עראי וטומאה, שנאמר (במדבר כג ד) ויקר א-להים אל בלעם:
And He called to Moses: The [Divine] voice emanated and reached Moses’ ears, while all [the rest] of Israel did not hear it. One might think that for each new section [representing a new topic], there was also [such] a call. Scripture, therefore, states, “and [the Lord] spoke (וַיְדַבֵּר) [to him],” [denoting that] only for speech, [i.e., when God “spoke” to Moses, or “said” to him, or “commanded” him,] was there a call, but not at the subsections. [For when these expressions are employed, they demarcate the beginning of major sections, i.e., when God first called to Moses and then proceeded with the prophecy at hand, unlike the beginning of each separate subsection, when God simply continued His communication to Moses without “calling” him anew. Now, if each subsection in the Torah does not represent a new beckoning from God to Moses, ushering in a new prophecy, then] what is the purpose of these subsections? To give Moses a pause, to contemplate between one passage and the next, and between one subject and another. [And if this pause for contemplation was given to the great Moses when being taught by God, then] how much more [necessary is it] for an ordinary man learning [Torah] from another ordinary man [to be allowed pauses between sections and subjects, to carefully contemplate and understand the material being learned]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:3] ויקרא אל משה: הקול הולך ומגיע לאזניו, וכל ישראל לא שומעין. יכול אף להפסקות היתה קריאה, תלמוד לומר וידבר, לדבור היתה קריאה, ולא להפסקות. ומה היו הפסקות משמשות, ליתן ריוח למשה להתבונן בין פרשה לפרשה ובין ענין לענין, קל וחומר להדיוט הלומד מן ההדיוט:
to him: Heb. אֵלָיו [That is, God spoke only to Moses. This phrase comes] to exclude Aaron. Rabbi Judah [Ben Betheira] says: “Thirteen times in the Torah, God spoke (וַיְדַבֵּר) to both Moses and Aaron together, and, corresponding to them were thirteen [other] occasions [when God spoke only to Moses] precluding [Aaron], to teach you that they were not said [directly] to Aaron, but to Moses, that he should say them to Aaron. These are the thirteen cases where [Aaron was] precluded: (1) ”To speak with him…,“ (2) ”…speaking to him…,“ (3) ”…and He spoke to him“ (Num. 7:89); (4) ”I will meet with you [there at set times], etc. …“ (Exod. 25:22) All of them can be found [in the above dictum of Rabbi Judah] in Torath Kohanim (1:4). Now, [even though it was Moses who exclusively heard the prophecies,] one might think that they [i.e., the rest of Israel, nevertheless] heard the sound [of God] ”calling“ [to Moses preceding the prophecy]. Scripture therefore, says: [not ”He heard] the voice [speaking] to him (לוֹ),“ [but] ”[he heard] the voice [speaking right up] to him (אֵלָיו)“ (Num. 7:89). [This verse could have used the word לוֹ, ”to him,“ rather than such an exclusive expression as אֵלָיו, ”right up to him." However, it uses this expression in order to teach us that only] Moses heard [the Divine voice calling him], while all [the rest] of Israel did not hear [it]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:4] אליו: למעט את אהרן. ר' יהודה בן בתירא אומר שלשה עשר דברות נאמרו בתורה למשה ולאהרן, וכנגדן נאמרו שלשה עשר מיעוטין, ללמדך שלא לאהרן נאמרו אלא למשה שיאמר לאהרן. ואלו הן שלשה עשר מיעוטין לדבר אתו, מדבר אליו, וידבר אליו, ונועדתי לך, כולן בתורת כהנים. יכול שמעו את קול הקריאה, תלמוד לומר קול לו, קול אליו (במדבר ז פט), משה שמע, וכל ישראל לא שמעו:
from the Tent of Meeting: This teaches us that the [Divine] voice stopped and did not project itself beyond the Tent [of Meeting]. One might think that this was because the voice was low. Scripture therefore says, “[And when Moses came into the Tent of Meeting, he heard] the voice” (Num. 7:89). What is the meaning of “the voice” [with the definite article]? It is the voice referred to in Psalms (29:4-5): “The voice of the Lord is in strength; the voice of the Lord is in beauty. The voice of the Lord breaks cedars.” If so, why does it say, “[and the Lord spoke to him] from the Tent of Meeting” ? [To inform us] that the [Divine] voice stopped. A case similar to this [where a powerful sound uttered within the Holy Temple was not heard outside,] is: “And the sound of the cherubim’s wings was heard up to the outer courtyard…” (Ezek. 10:5). One might think that the sound was low. Scripture therefore states [further in that verse]: “…as the voice of the Almighty God when He speaks!” Why then does the verse say, “[the sound…was heard] up to the outer courtyard” [and not further, if this sound was indeed so mighty]? Because when it reached there, it stopped. — [Torath Kohanim 1:5] מאהל מועד: מלמד שהיה הקול נפסק ולא היה יוצא חוץ לאהל. יכול מפני שהקול נמוך, תלמוד לומר את הקול (שם), מהו הקול, הוא הקול המפורש בתהלים (כט ד - ה) קול ה' בכח קול ה' בהדר, קול ה' שובר ארזים, אם כן למה נאמר מאהל מועד, מלמד שהיה הקול נפסק. כיוצא בו (יחזקאל י ה) וקול כנפי הכרובים נשמע עד החצר החיצונה, יכול (מפני) שהקול נמוך, תלמוד לומר (שם) כקול אל שדי בדברו, אם כן למה נאמר עד החצר החיצונה, שכיון שמגיע שם היה נפסק:
[And the Lord spoke to him] from the Tent of Meeting, saying: One might think [that God spoke to Moses] from the entire house [that is, that the Divine voice emanated from the entire Tent of Meeting]. Scripture therefore states, “[and he heard the voice speaking to him] from above the ark cover” (Num. 7:89). [If so,] one might think [the voice emanated] from the entire ark cover. Scripture therefore states [further in that verse], “from between the two cherubim.” - [Torath Kohanim 1:5] מאהל מועד לאמר: יכול מכל הבית, תלמוד לומר מעל הכפורת. יכול מעל הכפורת כולה, תלמוד לומר מבין שני הכרובים:
saying: [God told Moses:] Go forth and say to them [the children of Israel] captivating words, [namely:] “For your sake God communicates with me. ” Indeed, we find this is so for all the thirty-eight years that the Israelites were in the desert, placed under a ban, [i.e.,] from the incident involving the spies and onwards, the [Divine] speech was not addressed especially to Moses, for it says, “So it was, when all the men of war had finished dying from among the people, that the Lord spoke to me saying …” (Deut. 2: 16-17). [Only then was] the Divine speech [again] addressed specifically to me. Another explanation [of לֵאמֹר is that God says to Moses]: “Go forth and tell them My commandments, and bring Me back word whether they will accept them,” as the verse says, “and Moses reported the words of the people back to the Lord” (Exod. 19:8). - [Torath Kohanim 1:6] לאמר: צא ואמור להם דברי כבושים, בשבילכם הוא נדבר עמי, שכן מצינו שכל שלשים ושמונה שנה שהיו ישראל במדבר כמנודים, מן המרגלים ואילך, לא נתייחד הדבור עם משה, שנאמר (דברים ב טז) ויהי כאשר תמו כל אנשי המלחמה למות וידבר ה' אלי לאמר, אלי היה הדיבור. דבר אחר צא ואמור להם דברי והשיבני אם יקבלום, כמו שנאמר (שמות יט ח) וישב משה את דברי העם וגו':
2Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: When a man from [among] you brings a sacrifice to the Lord; from animals, from cattle or from the flock you shall bring your sacrifice. בדַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם אָדָם כִּי יַקְרִיב מִכֶּם קָרְבָּן לַיהֹוָה מִן הַבְּהֵמָה מִן הַבָּקָר וּמִן הַצֹּאן תַּקְרִיבוּ אֶת קָרְבַּנְכֶם:
When a man from [among] you brings a sacrifice: Heb. יַקְרִיב כִּי, when he brings. [That is, Scripture is not dealing here with an obligatory sacrifice, in which case it would have said, “a man shall bring ….” Rather,] Scripture is speaking here of voluntary sacrifices [and thus says, “When a man …brings a sacrifice”]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:12] אדם כי יקריב מכם: כשיקריב, בקרבנות נדבה דבר הענין:
a man: Heb. אָדָם. Why is this term used here [as opposed to “ אָדָם ”]? [It alludes to Adam, the first man on earth, and teaches us:] Just as Adam, the first man, never offered sacrifices from stolen property, since everything was his, so too, you must not offer sacrifices from stolen property. — [Vayikra Rabbah 2:7] אדם: למה נאמר, מה אדם הראשון לא הקריב מן הגזל, שהכל היה שלו, אף אתם לא תקריבו מן הגזל:
animals: Heb. מִן הַבְּהֵמָה. One might think that wild beasts are also included [since sometimes wild beasts are included in this term, and therefore may be offered up as sacrifices]. Scripture therefore states [here], “from cattle or from the flock.” - [Torath Kohanim 1:16] הבהמה: יכול אף חיה בכלל, תלמוד לומר בקר וצאן:
from animals: but not all of them. [The phrase therefore comes] to exclude the case of animals that have cohabited with a human, as an active or a passive party. - [Torath Kohanim 1:17] מן הבהמה: ולא כולה, להוציא את הרובע ואת הנרבע:
from cattle: Heb. מִן הַבָּקָר [The phrase “from cattle” comes] to exclude an animal that has been worshipped [as a deity]. מן הבקר: להוציא את הנעבד:
or from the flock: Heb. וּמִן הַצֹּאן [This phrase comes] to exclude an animal set aside [i.e., designated for sacrifice to pagan deities]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:18] מן הצאן: להוציא את המוקצה:
or from the flock: [The extra “vav” at the beginning of this phrase comes] to exclude the case of a goring animal that has killed [a man]. Now, when [Scripture] states below (verse 3): מִן הַבָּקָר, “of cattle,” [the word מִן] need not have been used, since Scripture has already [taught us the exclusions here. Therefore, this extra word comes] to exclude a טְרֵפָה [an animal with a terminal disease or injury]. - [Torath Kohanim 1:17] ומן הצאן: להוציא את הנוגח שהמית. כשהוא אומר למטה מן הענין (פסוק ג) מן הבקר, שאין תלמוד לומר, להוציא את הטריפה:
you shall bring: Heb. תַּקְרִיבוּ [The plural form of the verb] teaches [us] that two people may donate a voluntary burnt offering in partnership. — [Torath Kohanim 1:19] תקריבו: מלמד ששנים מתנדבים עולה בשותפות:
your sacrifice: Heb. קָרְבַּנְכֶם [The plural form] teaches us that [a burnt offering] may also be offered as a voluntary gift from the community (Torath Kohanim 1:20). This sacrifice was called עוֹלַת קַיִץ הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, “the burnt-offering which was provision for the altar.” [Every year, each twenty-year old male was taxed to give a silver half-shekel for communal sacrifices. See Exod. 30:11-16. This voluntary sacrifice] was purchased with any money remaining [from the previous year’s collection of half-shekels, and was offered as a communal burnt offering when there were no individual offerings brought, in order to prevent the altar from being bereft of sacrifices. Thus, the name “provision for the altar”]. — [Shev. 12a] קרבנכם: מלמד שהיא באה נדבת צבור, היא עולת קיץ המזבח הבאה מן המותרות:
3If his sacrifice is a burnt offering from cattle, an unblemished male he shall bring it. He shall bring it willingly to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, before the Lord. גאִם עֹלָה קָרְבָּנוֹ מִן הַבָּקָר זָכָר תָּמִים יַקְרִיבֶנּוּ אֶל פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד יַקְרִיב אֹתוֹ לִרְצֹנוֹ לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה:
male: but not a female. When Scripture repeats later (verse 10) [that the burnt-offering must be] “a male [animal],” it appears unnecessary to state that [since Scripture has already taught us that it must be a male animal and not a female. Therefore, this repetition of the word “male,” comes to teach us that a sacrifice must consist of a completely] male [animal], not an animal of indeterminate gender or a hermaphrodite. — [Bech. 41b] זכר: ולא נקבה. כשהוא אומר זכר למטה, שאין תלמוד לומר, זכר ולא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס:
unblemished: Heb. תָּמִים, perfect, without a blemish. תמים: בלא מום:
[He shall bring it …] to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting: He [himself] must attend to bringing it up to the courtyard [of the Temple] (Torath Kohanim 1: 24). Why does the verse repeat the word “bring” here [when it says, “he shall bring…He shall bring it” ? This repetition teaches us that] even in the case of Reuben’s burnt offering [animal] being mixed up with Simeon’s burnt offering [animal, and the animals cannot be identified], nevertheless, each one of them must be offered up in the name of [its rightful owner] whoever that may be. Similarly, if [an animal designated for] a burnt offering has been mixed up with non-consecrated animals, the non-consecrated animals must be sold to those who need burnt offerings, and thus all of these animals are now [designated to become] burnt offerings. [Accordingly] each animal is now brought in the name of [its rightful owner] whoever that may be. Now, one might think that this must be done even if [an animal designated to become] a burnt offering became mixed up with animals unfit for sacrifice or with [animals designated to become] different kinds of sacrifices [e.g., a sin offering, a guilt offering, etc.]. Scripture therefore says here: יַקְרִיבֶנּוּ, [meaning, “he must bring it.” This teaches us that only an animal fit for and specifically designated as a burnt offering must be brought here]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:25] אל פתח אהל מועד: מטפל בהבאתו עד העזרה. מהו אומר יקריב יקריב, אפילו נתערבה עולת ראובן בעולת שמעון, יקריב כל אחת לשם מי שהוא. וכן עולה בחולין, ימכרו החולין לצרכי עולות, והרי הן כולן עולות ותקרב כל אחת לשם מי שהוא. יכול אפילו נתערבה בפסולין או בשאינו מינו, תלמוד לומר יקריבנו:
He shall bring it: [This clause] teaches us that the person is coerced [to bring the offering if he is remiss in bringing the sacrifice he had promised]. One might think that this means that they should force him against his will [to bring the offering]! Scripture therefore says: “[He shall bring it] willingly (לִרְצֹנוֹ).” How is this possible [that on one hand he should be forced, yet on the other, he must bring the offering willingly? The explanation is that] they must coerce him until he says “I am willing.” - [R.H. 6a, Torath Kohanim 3:15] 3-4. יקריב אתו: מלמד שכופין אותו. יכול בעל כרחו, תלמוד לומר לרצונו, הא כיצד כופין אותו עד שיאמר רוצה אני:
Before the Lord…And he shall lean: [The procedure of] leaning [the hands upon sacrifices] does not apply to a high place [a private altar. These high places were permitted to be used before the permanent Temple was built when the Mishkan was in Gilgal, Nob, and Gibeon. Certain sacrifices could be offered up on them. We learn this from the continuity of these two verses that only “before the Lord” -that is, in the sanctuary precincts-one “should lean his hand upon” the head of sacrifices, but not on a high place outside the sanctuary precincts.]- [Torath Kohanim 1:27] לפני ה' וסמך: אין סמיכה בבמה:
4And he shall lean his hand [forcefully] upon the head of the burnt offering, and it will be accepted for him to atone for him. דוְסָמַךְ יָדוֹ עַל רֹאשׁ הָעֹלָה וְנִרְצָה לוֹ לְכַפֵּר עָלָיו:
upon the head of the burnt offering: [The text could have simply said “upon its head.” However, it adds “burnt offering”] to include [any sacrifice that is called a “burnt offering,” namely,] (1) an obligatory burnt offering, that it too requires סְמִיכָה [leaning the hands on its head. Since this section deals with voluntary burnt offerings, this case requires an extra word to include it. See commentary on verse 2]; also included is (2) a burnt offering from the flock [that it too must have סְמִיכָה, for this is not specified in the verses dealing with the burnt offering from the flock. See verses 10-13]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:30] על ראש העולה: להביא עולת חובה לסמיכה ולהביא עולת הצאן:
the burnt offering: [The use of the definite article here teaches us that the verse is referring to “the” burnt offering, i.e., the one mentionebd earlier, where it says, “from cattle or from the flock” (verse 2). Thus] excluding the burnt offering from birds. — [Torath Kohanim 1:30] העולה: פרט לעולת העוף:
and it will be accepted for him: For which [sins] will [the sacrifice] be accepted for him [thereby atoning for them]? If you say that [the offering is accepted and thereby the person is atoned for] sins which incur the penalty of excision, the death penalty through the court, the death penalty through the heaven[ly court], or lashes, their punishments are [expressly] stated, [and thus, the person must undergo the respective punishment to receive atonement for those sins]. Thereby, we determine that it is accepted only for [failure to perform] a positive commandment [for which the punishment is not expressly stated in the Torah, or [violation of] a negative commandment that is attached to a positive commandment. [I.e., some negative commandments are attached to a positive commandment that relates to the same matter. An example of this is the law of the Passover lamb. The Torah states: “And you shall not leave over any of it until morning, and whatever is left over of it until morning, you shall burn in fire” (Exod. 12:10). Here, the negative commandment is “attached” to the positive commandment. How so? If someone has transgressed the negative commandment and left over some of the Passover lamb until the following morning, he may exonerate himself from the punishment he has just incurred by fulfilling the positive commandment attached, namely by burning the remainder in fire. That is an example of “a negative commandment that is attached to a positive commandment.” See Mak. 4b.]- [Torath Kohanim 1:31] ונרצה לו: על מה הוא מרצה לו, אם תאמר על כריתות ומיתות בית דין או מיתה בידי שמים או מלקות, הרי עונשן אמור, הא אינו מרצה אלא על עשה ועל לאו שנתק לעשה:
5And he shall slaughter the young bull before the Lord. And Aaron's descendants, the kohanim, shall bring the blood, and dash the blood upon the altar, around [the altar] which is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting. הוְשָׁחַט אֶת בֶּן הַבָּקָר לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה וְהִקְרִיבוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֲנִים אֶת הַדָּם וְזָרְקוּ אֶת הַדָּם עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ סָבִיב אֲשֶׁר פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד:
And he shall slaughter…And…the kohanim shall bring [the blood] :[Since the word kohanim is mentioned only in reference to receiving the blood, and not before, we learn that all procedures in a sacrifice] from receiving [the blood in a vessel] and onwards are the duty of the kehunah [as opposed to non- kohanim]. This teaches regarding the slaughtering [which precedes receiving the blood], that it is valid [even if performed] by a stranger [i.e., a non- kohen].-[Zev. 32a] ושחט, והקריבו, הכהנים: מקבלה ואילך מצות כהונה, למד על השחיטה שכשרה בזר:
before the Lord: in the courtyard [of the Holy Temple]. לפני ה': בעזרה:
and […the kohanim] shall bring [the blood]: [Although וְהִקְרִיבוּ literally means “bringing,” here,] it means “receiving” [the blood in a vessel], which is the first [procedure immediately following the slaughtering]. However, it literally means “bringing” [the blood to the altar]. [Consequently,] we learn that both these procedures are the duties of Aaron’s descendants [i.e., the kohanim]. — [Chag. 11a] והקריבו: זו קבלה שהיא הראשונה ומשמעה לשון הולכה, למדנו ששתיהן בבני אהרן:
Aaron’s descendants: One might think [that these duties may be performed as well by Aaron’s descendants who are] חִלָלִים, kohanim whose lineage invalidates them for kehunah [e.g., if the mother was divorced before marrying the kohen]. Scripture therefore adds: “the kohanim ” [indicating that these duties may be performed only by kohanim]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:38] בני אהרן: יכול חללים, תלמוד לומר הכהנים:
[The kohanim, shall bring] the blood, and dash the blood: Why does Scripture say, “blood, blood” here twice? To include [the cases of blood from a burnt offering,] that was mixed up with the same type [of blood, i.e., the blood of burnt offerings from two different people being mixed up, and [blood from a burnt offering] that was mixed up with a different type [of blood, i.e., from another type of sacrifice]. One might think that this would also include [the case that the blood was mixed up with blood of] an unfit sacrifice, or [blood from] inner sin offerings [the blood of which is to be sprinkled on the inner altar] or [blood from] outer sin offerings [the blood of which is to be sprinkled on the outer altar] even though [the latter, have their blood dashed] above [the chut hasikra , the red line, of the altar], while this [the burnt offering has its blood dashed] below [the chut hasikra of the altar]. Scripture [therefore] states [regarding a burnt offering] in another place: “its blood” (verses 11 and 15). [This expression teaches us that only cases in which the blood of a burnt offering is mixed up with the blood of another sacrifice which is also to be dashed below the chut hasikra on the altar, no problems arise, and these bloods can both be dashed at that level of the altar. This excludes the case of inner sin offerings whose blood is sprinkled inside and outer sin offerings whose blood must be dashed above the chut hasikra]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:39] את הדם וזרקו את הדם: מה תלמוד לומר דם דם שתי פעמים, להביא את שנתערב במינו או בשאינו מינו. יכול אף בפסולים או בחטאות הפנימיות או בחטאות החיצוניות, שאלו למעלה והיא למטה, תלמוד לומר במקום אחר את דמו:
And […the kohanim,shall…] dash [the blood…around]: [The kohen] must stand below [i.e., on the ground], and dash [the blood] from the vessel [in which it was received] onto the wall of the altar below the chut hasikra , towards the corners [of the altar. Meaning, from the ground he approaches the northeastern corner of the altar and dashes some of the blood from its receptacle onto the corner ridge where the northern wall and the eastern wall of the altar meet, below the red line. In this way, the blood dashes onto both the northern and eastern sides of the altar with one motion by the kohen. That motion is thus referred to as “one application (of blood) which is two,” i.e., one dashing motion, which applies the blood to two faces of the altar. The kohen then proceeds to the southwestern corner of the altar and again performs this procedure, thereby applying the blood to both the southern and western walls of the altar in one motion. Thus, in a total of two dashing motions, the blood has been applied to the four faces of the altar. These dashes are referred to as “two applications (of blood) which are four.”] Therefore, it says “around,” namely that [with these prescribed dashing motions] the blood is to be applied to the four sides of the altar. Now, one might think that [when the verse says that the kohen must dash the blood around the altar, this means that] he must encircle it [the altar with blood] like a thread. Scripture therefore says: “[the kohanim] shall…dash [the blood],” and it is impossible to apply it [as a continuous line] around the altar through a “dashing” motion. Alternatively, one might think that “shall…dash” refers to one dashing motion. Scripture therefore says: “around” [and it is impossible to apply the blood all around the altar with one dashing motion]. How then [should the blood be applied to the altar]? The kohen must make “two applications, which are four.” - [Torath Kohanim 1:40] וזרקו: עומד למטה וזורק מן הכלי לכותל המזבח למטה מחוט הסיקרא כנגד הזויות, לכך נאמר סביב, שיהא הדם ניתן בארבע רוחות המזבח. או יכול יקיפנו כחוט, תלמוד לומר וזרקו, ואי אפשר להקיף בזריקה. אי וזרקו יכול בזריקה אחת, תלמוד לומר סביב, הא כיצד נותן שתי מתנות שהן ארבע:
[the altar] which is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting: But not when [the Tent of Meeting] is disassembled [even though the altar itself may be standing, since at such a time the altar is not “at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting”]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:44] אשר פתח אהל מועד: ולא בזמן שהוא מפורק:
6And he shall skin the burnt offering, and cut it into its [prescribed] sections. ווְהִפְשִׁיט אֶת הָעֹלָה וְנִתַּח אֹתָהּ לִנְתָחֶיהָ:
And he shall skin [the burnt offering]: Why does the verse say “the burnt offering” ? To include every [kind of] burnt offering [not just this one in the procedure of] skinning and cutting up [in the prescribed manner]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:45] והפשיט את העלה: מה תלמוד לומר העולה, לרבות את כל העולות להפשט ונתוח:
its [prescribed] sections: [The verse does not state that the animal is cut into pieces, but rather “into its pieces,” implying that it must be cut into specific prescribed pieces] and not [to cut] its [prescribed] pieces into [smaller] pieces. — [Torath Kohanim 1:47; Chul. 11a] אתה לנתחיה: ולא נתחיה לנתחים:
7And the descendants of Aaron the kohen shall place fire on the altar, and arrange wood on the fire. זוְנָתְנוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן אֵשׁ עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְעָרְכוּ עֵצִים עַל הָאֵשׁ:
shall place fire [on the altar]: Even though the fire descended [miraculously] from heaven [onto the altar, to consume the sacrifices], it was [nevertheless] a mitzvah for a mortal to bring [his fire to the altar. — [Torath Kohanim 1: 49; Zev. 18a] ונתנו אש: אף על פי שהאש יורדת מן השמים, מצוה להביא מן ההדיוט:
the descendants of Aaron the Kohen: [But we know that Aaron was a Kohen Gadol ! So what does “the Kohen ” come to teach us? It teaches us that the Kohen Gadol may perform the sacrificial service only] when he is [invested] in his kehunah [i.e., wearing the proper eight garments of the Kohen Gadol]. If, however, he officiated wearing the raiment of an ordinary kohen, his service is rendered invalid. — [Torath Kohanim 1:49] בני אהרן הכהן: כשהוא בכיהונו, הא אם עבד בבגדי כהן הדיוט, עבודתו פסולה:
8And Aaron's descendants, the kohanim, shall then arrange the pieces, the head and the fat, on top of the wood which is on the fire that is on the altar. חוְעָרְכוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֲנִים אֵת הַנְּתָחִים אֶת הָרֹאשׁ וְאֶת הַפָּדֶר עַל הָעֵצִים אֲשֶׁר עַל הָאֵשׁ אֲשֶׁר עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ:
Aaron’s descendants, the kohanim: [But we know that Aaron’s descendants are kohanim! So what does “the kohanim” come to teach us?] The [ordinary] kohanim must be functioning in their kehunah [i.e., the proper four garments of the ordinary kohanim]. If an ordinary kohen officiated wearing the “eight garments” [of a Kohen Gadol], however, his service is rendered invalid. בני אהרן הכהנים: כשהם בכיהונם, הא כהן הדיוט שעבד בשמונה בגדים, עבודתו פסולה:
the pieces, the head: Since the head is not included in the skinning and cutting up [procedures], since it was detached by the slaughtering, the Torah had to count it individually [to inform us that it was to be placed on the altar as it is, even though it is not skinned.] - [Chul. 27a] את הנתחים את הראש: לפי שאין הראש בכלל הפשט, שכבר הותז בשחיטה, לפיכך הוצרך למנותו לעצמו:
and the fat: Why is [the fat] mentioned [separately]? To teach you that the kohen must bring it up [onto the altar together] with the head, and that with it he covers the area where [the animal] was slaughtered. This was done in deference to the honor of God on high [because the cut throat is soiled with the blood of the head] (Rashi, Yoma 26a). - [Chul. 27a] ואת הפדר: למה נאמר, ללמדך שמעלהו עם הראש ומכסה בו את בית השחיטה, וזהו דרך כבוד של מעלה:
[the wood] which is on the altar: The logs of wood must not project beyond the [area of the arranged] woodpile [constituting one square cubit. This is so that the kohanim would not be disturbed by protruding pieces of wood when they go around the altar]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:54] אשר על המזבח: שלא יהיו הגזירין יוצאין חוץ למערכה:
9And its innards and its legs, he shall wash with water. Then, the kohen shall cause to [go up in] smoke all [of the animal] on the altar, as a burnt offering, a fire offering, [with] a pleasing fragrance to the Lord. טוְקִרְבּוֹ וּכְרָעָיו יִרְחַץ בַּמָּיִם וְהִקְטִיר הַכֹּהֵן אֶת הַכֹּל הַמִּזְבֵּחָה עֹלָה אִשֵּׁה רֵיחַ נִיחוֹחַ לַיהֹוָה:
as a burnt offering: [I.e., the kohen] must burn the animal with the [specific] intention that it is a burnt offering. — [Torath Kohanim 1:58] עלה: לשם עולה יקטירנו:
a fire offering: Heb. אִשֵּׁה. When he slaughters [the animal], he must slaughter it with the [specific] intention [to burn it completely in] fire. Every [instance of the word] אִשֶּׁה in Scripture, is an expression related to [the word] אֵשׁ, “fire,” foyere in Old French. אשה: כשישחטנו יהא שוחטו לשם האש. וכל אשה לשון אש פויאד"א בלע"ז [אש]:
pleasing: Heb. נִיחוֹחַ [This word stems from the same root as the expression נַחַת רוּחַ, “contentment.” God says: “This sacrifice] gives Me contentment, for I said [My commandment], and My will was fulfilled!” ניחוח: נחת רוח לפני, שאמרתי ונעשה רצוני:
10And if his offering is [brought] from the flock from sheep or from goats as a burnt offering he shall sacrifice it an unblemished male. יוְאִם מִן הַצֹּאן קָרְבָּנוֹ מִן הַכְּשָׂבִים אוֹ מִן הָעִזִּים לְעֹלָה זָכָר תָּמִים יַקְרִיבֶנּוּ:
And if…from the flock: The “vav” [meaning “and” here demonstrates that this section concerning voluntary burnt offerings from the flock] is a continuation from the previous subject [those from cattle, and is thereby connected in that the laws of each are common to both]. But why was it separated [by a paragraph]? In order to give Moses a pause, so that he could contemplate between one passage and the next. — [Torath Kohanim 1:59] ואם מן הצאן: וי"ו מוסיף על ענין ראשון. ולמה הפסיק, ליתן ריוח למשה להתבונן בין פרשה לפרשה:
from the flock…from sheep…from goats: [The word “from” tells us that one cannot take all the animals of these classes, rather only “from” them, thereby disqualifying certain animals from being brought for a sacrifice.] These [three mentions of the word “from”] are three exclusions [from being offered as a sacrifice], excluding an aged [animal], a sick [animal] and a foul smelling [animal]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:60] מן הצאן מן הכשבים או מן העזים: הרי אלו שלשה מיעוטין פרט לזקן, לחולה ולמזוהם:
11And he shall slaughter it on the northern side of the altar, before the Lord. And Aaron's descendants, the kohanim, shall dash its blood upon the altar, around. יאוְשָׁחַט אֹתוֹ עַל יֶרֶךְ הַמִּזְבֵּחַ צָפֹנָה לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה וְזָרְקוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֲנִים אֶת דָּמוֹ עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ סָבִיב:
on the…side of the altar: Heb. יֶרֶ הַמִזְבֵּחַ, “on the…side of the altar.” על ירך המזבח: על צד המזבח:
[And he shall slaughter it] on the northern [side of the altar], before the Lord: [The law of] slaughtering on the northern side does not apply [when sacrificing an animal] on a high place [See above on verse 4]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:27] [We learn this from this verse that a burnt offering must be slaughtered “on the northern side of the altar” only if it is “before the Lord,” i.e., in the sanctuary precincts, but not outside them.] צפנה לפני ה': ואין צפון בבמה:
12And he shall cut it into its [prescribed] sections, with its head and its fat, and the kohen shall arrange them on top of the wood which is on the fire that is on the altar. יבוְנִתַּח אֹתוֹ לִנְתָחָיו וְאֶת רֹאשׁוֹ וְאֶת פִּדְרוֹ וְעָרַךְ הַכֹּהֵן אֹתָם עַל הָעֵצִים אֲשֶׁר עַל הָאֵשׁ אֲשֶׁר עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ:
13And the innards and the legs, he shall wash with water. Then, the kohen shall offer up all [of the animal], and cause it to [go up in] smoke on the altar. It is a burnt offering, a fire offering [with] a pleasing fragrance to the Lord. יגוְהַקֶּרֶב וְהַכְּרָעַיִם יִרְחַץ בַּמָּיִם וְהִקְרִיב הַכֹּהֵן אֶת הַכֹּל וְהִקְטִיר הַמִּזְבֵּחָה עֹלָה הוּא אִשֵּׁה רֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ לַיהֹוָה:
Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 113 - 118
• Chapter 113
This psalm recounts some of the wonders of the exodus from Egypt.
1. Praise the Lord! Offer praise, you servants of the Lord; praise the Name of the Lord.
2. May the Name of the Lord be blessed from now and to all eternity.
3. From the rising of the sun to its setting, the Name of the Lord is praised.
4. The Lord is high above all nations; His glory transcends the heavens.
5. Who is like the Lord our God, Who dwells on high
6. [yet] looks down so low upon heaven and earth!
7. He raises the poor from the dust, lifts the destitute from the dunghill,
8. to seat them with nobles, with the nobles of His people.
9. He transforms the barren woman into a household, into a joyful mother of children. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 114
This psalm explains why the tribe of Judah merited kingship.
1. When Israel went out of Egypt, the House of Jacob from a people of a foreign tongue,
2. Judah became His holy [nation], Israel, His domain.
3. The sea saw and fled, the Jordan turned backward.
4. The mountains skipped like rams, the hills like young sheep.
5. What is the matter with you, O sea, that you flee; Jordan, that you turn backward;
6. mountains, that you skip like rams; hills, like young sheep?
7. [We do so] before the Master, the Creator of the earth, before the God of Jacob,
8. Who turns the rock into a pool of water, the flintstone into a water fountain.
Chapter 115
A prayer that God bring this long exile to an end, for the sake of His Name-that it not be desecrated.
1. Not for our sake, Lord, not for our sake, but for the sake of Your Name bestow glory, because of Your kindness and Your truth.
2. Why should the nations say, "Where, now, is their God?”
3. Indeed, our God is in heaven; whatever He desires, He does.
4. Their idols are of silver and gold, the product of human hands.
5. They have a mouth, but cannot speak; they have eyes, but cannot see;
6. they have ears, but cannot hear; they have a nose, but cannot smell;
7. their hands cannot touch; their feet cannot walk; they can make no sound in their throat.
8. Those who make them will become like them-all who put their trust in them.
9. Israel, trust in the Lord; He is their help and their shield.
10. House of Aaron, trust in the Lord; He is their help and their shield.
11. You who fear the Lord, trust in the Lord; He is their help and their shield.
12. The Lord who is ever mindful of us, may He bless: May He bless the House of Israel; may He bless the House of Aaron;
13. may He bless those who fear the Lord, the small with the great.
14. May the Lord increase [blessing] upon you, upon you and upon your children.
15. You are blessed by the Lord, the Maker of heaven and earth.
16. The heavens are the Lord's heavens, but the earth He gave to the children of man.
17. The dead cannot praise the Lord, nor any who descend into the silence [of the grave].
18. But we will bless the Lord from now to eternity. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 116
This psalm contains magnificent praises to God. It also describes David's love for God, in light of all the miracles He performed for him. David does not know how to repay God, declaring it impossible to pay back for all God has done for him.
1. I would love if the Lord would listen to my voice, to my supplications;
2. if He would turn His ear to me on the days when I call.
3. The pangs of death encompassed me and the misery of the grave came upon me; I encounter trouble and sorrow.
4. I invoke the Name of the Lord, "Lord, I implore you, deliver my soul!”
5. The Lord is gracious and righteous; our God is compassionate.
6. The Lord watches over the simpletons; I was brought low, and He saved me.
7. Return, my soul, to your tranquility, for the Lord has bestowed goodness upon you.
8. For You have delivered my soul from death, my eyes from tears, my feet from stumbling.
9. I shall walk before the Lord in the lands of the living.
10. I had faith even when I declared, "I am greatly afflicted";
11. [even when] I said in my haste, "All men are deceitful.”
12. How can I repay the Lord for all His beneficences to me?
13. I will raise the cup of deliverance and proclaim the Name of the Lord.
14. I will pay my vows to the Lord in the presence of all His people.
15. Grievous in the eyes of the Lord is the death of His pious ones.
16. I thank you, Lord, that since I am Your servant, I am Your servant the son of Your maidservant, You have loosened my bonds.
17. To You I will bring an offering of thanksgiving, and proclaim the Name of the Lord.
18. I will pay my vows to the Lord in the presence of all His people,
19. in the courtyards of the House of the Lord, in the midst of Jerusalem. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 117
This psalm of two verses alludes to the Messianic era, when the Children of Israel will enjoy their former glory. All will praise God, in fulfillment of the verse, "All will then call in the Name of God."
1. Praise the Lord, all you nations; extol Him, all you peoples.
2. For His kindness was mighty over us, and the truth of the Lord is everlasting. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 118
This psalm describes David's immense trust in God. It also contains many praises to God, Who has fulfilled that which He has promised us.
1. Offer praise to the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is everlasting.
2. Let Israel declare that His kindness is everlasting.
3. Let the House of Aaron declare that His kindness is everlasting.
4. Let those who fear the Lord declare that His kindness is everlasting.
5. From out of distress I called to God; with abounding relief, God answered me.
6. The Lord is with me, I do not fear-what can man do to me?
7. The Lord is with me among my helpers, and I will see [the downfall of] my enemies.
8. It is better to rely on the Lord than to trust in man.
9. It is better to rely on the Lord than to trust in nobles.
10. All the nations surrounded me, but in the Name of the Lord I will cut them down.
11. They surrounded me, they encompassed me, but in the Name of the Lord I will cut them down.
12. They surrounded me like bees, yet they shall be extinguished like fiery thorns; in the Name of the Lord I will cut them down.
13. You [my foes] repeatedly pushed me to fall, but the Lord helped me.
14. God is my strength and song, and He has been a help to me.
15. The sound of rejoicing and deliverance reverberates in the tents of the righteous, "The right hand of the Lord performs deeds of valor.
16. The right hand of the Lord is exalted; the right hand of the Lord performs deeds of valor!”
17. I shall not die, but I shall live and recount the deeds of God.
18. God has indeed chastised me, but He did not give me up to death.
19. Open for me the gates of righteousness; I will enter them and praise God.
20. This is the gate of the Lord, the righteous will enter it.
21. I offer thanks to You, for You have answered me, and You have been my deliverance.
22. The stone which the builders scorned has become the chief cornerstone.
23. From the Lord has this come about; it is wondrous in our eyes.
24. This is the day which the Lord has made; let us be glad and rejoice on it.
25. We implore You, Lord, deliver us. We implore You, Lord, grant us success.
26. Blessed is he who comes in the Name of the Lord; we bless you from the House of the Lord.
27. The Lord is a benevolent God and He has given us light; bind the festival offering with cords until [you bring it to] the horns of the altar.
28. You are my God and I will praise You, my God-and I will exalt You.
29. Praise the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is everlasting.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 37
• Lessons in Tanya
• Daily Tanya
Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 37
Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 37
זאת ועוד אחרת
An additional [virtue] in mitzvot involving action (aside from their function in elevating one’s animal soul, mentioned above):
שכח נפש החיונית המתלבש באותיות הדבור בתלמוד תורה או תפלה וכיוצא בהן או מצות מעשיות
the vitalizing soul’s energy clothed in the utterance of letters of one’s speech in Torah study, prayer or the like, or the energy clothed in the performance of mitzvotinvolving action
הרי כל גידולו וחיותו מהדם, שמקליפת נוגה ממש
derives its entire growth and vitality from the blood, which is of kelipat nogahitself,
שהן כל אוכלין ומשקין שאכל ושתה, ונעשו דם
meaning all the food and drink that one has eaten and drunk, and which have become blood.
שהיו תחת ממשלתה, וינקו חיותם ממנה
These were under the dominion of kelipat nogah and drew their vitality from it.
ועתה היא מתהפכת מרע לטוב ונכללת בקדושה, על ידי כח נפש החיונית הגדל ממנה, שנתלבש באותיות אלה או בעשיה זו, אשר הן הן פנימיות רצונו יתברך בלי שום הסתר פנים
Now that the person performs a mitzvah with the energy derived from this food and drinkthis kelipah is transformed from evil to good and is absorbed into holiness, by means of the energy of the animal soul that grows from it (i.e., the energy nourished by those objects that derive their vitality from this kelipah), which has now clothed itself in these letters of Torah and prayer or in the performance of this mitzvah, which actually constitute the unveiled expression of the inner aspect of G‑d’s Will.
וחיותן נכלל גם כן באור אין סוף ברוך הוא, שהוא רצונו יתברך
For their vitality (the vitality expended in performing mitzvot) is also absorbed (like themitzvot themselves) into the blessed Ein Sof-light, which is His Will as expressed inmitzvot,
ובחיותן נכלל ועולה גם כן כח נפש החיונית
and with their vitality the energy of the animal soul is likewise elevated and absorbed into the Ein Sof-light; and since the energy necessary for performing mitzvot was supplied by food and drink, the vitality of the food and drink is likewise absorbed in the Ein Sof-light, together with the mitzvah whose performance it made possible.
ועל ידי זה תעלה גם כן כללות קליפת נוגה, שהיא כללות החיות של עולם הזה הגשמי והחומרי
Thereby, all of kelipat nogah, which constitutes the vitality of this physical and corporeal world as a whole, will ascend as well. When will this come about?
כאשר כל הנשמה ונפש האלקית שבכל ישראל, המתחלקת בפרטות לששים רבוא, תקיים כל נפש פרטית כל תרי׳׳ג מצות התורה
When the whole neshamah, the divine soul1 in all of Israel, which is divided into 600,000 particular offshoots (the standard figure for the members of the Jewish nation, all individual souls being further subdivisions of these 600,000 “general” souls, as will be explained further) will fulfill, each individual soul thereof, the 613 mitzvot of the Torah:
שס״ה לא תעשה, להפריד שס׳׳ה גידים של דם נפש החיונית שבגוף
when they will refrain from transgressing the 365 prohibitions, to restrain the 365 blood vessels of the animal soul in the body,
שלא יינקו ויקבלו חיות בעבירה זו מאת שלש קליפות הטמאות לגמרי, שמהן נשפעים שס׳׳ה לא תעשה דאורייתא, וענפיהן שהן מדרבנן
so that they do not draw nurture or receive vitality by means of such transgression, from any one of the three completely unclean kelipot from which are derived the 365 Biblical prohibitions, and the Rabbinical prohibitions — their offshoots.
Since all that derives its vitality from the three wholly unclean kelipot cannot rise to holiness, were a Jew to transgress any prohibition, and thereby cause the particular blood-vessel associated with that prohibition to receive vitality from these kelipot —
ושוב לא תוכל נפש החיונית לעלות אל ה׳, אם נטמאה בטומאת השלש קליפות הטמאות
the vitalizing soul could no longer ascend to G‑d, having been tainted by the impurity of the three impure kelipot.
שאין להן עליה לעולם, כי אם ביטול והעברה לגמרי
[For] these [kelipot] can never be elevated, but must be nullified and utterly destroyed,
כמו שכתוב: ואת רוח הטומאה אעביר מן הארץ
as it is written,2 “And I shall drive out the unclean spirit from the earth.”
Similarly, anything which derives its vitality from them can never ascend to holiness. Therefore, only the observance of all the 365 prohibitions allows theentire vital soul to ascend, without any part of it held back by the impurity of these kelipot.
ורמ״ח מצות עשה, להמשיך אור אין סוף ברוך הוא למטה
When, furthermore, every individual soul will fulfill also the 248 positive commandments, thereby drawing down the blessed Ein Sof-light below,
להעלות לו ולקשר ולייחד בו כללות הנפש החיונית שברמ״ח אברי הגוף ביחוד גמור, להיות לאחדים ממש
to elevate to Him and to bind and unite with Him the entire vital soul, which is in the 248 limbs of the body, in perfect unity, (such is the effect of a mitzvah in uniting the vital, animal soul with G‑d), so that they become actually one [with Him],
כמו שעלה ברצונו יתברך להיות לו דירה בתחתונים, והם לו למרכבה כמו האבות
in accordance with His Will that there be an abode for Him in the lower realms, and so great is this unity that they (the limbs of the body with the vitality of the animal soul invested in them) become a “chariot” for G‑d, as were the Patriarchs — whose every limb was in total submission to the Divine Will, wherefore they are designated as G‑d’s “chariots” — and so will every Jew become a chariot by performing the mitzvot.
FOOTNOTES
1. The Rebbe asks the following question: We are speaking here of the vital soul’s energy which is clothed in the letters of Torah study, prayer, and the performance of divine commandments. This energy comes from the person’s food and drink, which is under the dominion of kelipat nogah. And it is through the vitalizing soul that the life-force of kelipat nogah is transformed and absorbed into holiness. Moreover, the Alter Rebbe is now about to explain more specifically how the vitalizing soul (and through it the general vitality of this world) is united with G‑d’s Will and infinite light through the performance of both the positive and prohibitive commands of the Torah.
This being so, why does the Alter Rebbe interpolate the phrase, “When the whole neshamah, the divine soul in all of Israel,” when we are in reality speaking of the vitalizing soul?
The Rebbe says that the answer may possibly lie in the fact that a certain number of the 613 commandments are carried out through a person’s thought processes. The effect of the vitalizing soul, however, is felt mostly in those matters that relate to speech and action, inasmuch as the vitalizing soul is bound up with the corporeal limbs and organs. These are utilized for those commandments that are performed through action or speech. Conversely, the commandments performed through the person’s thought are for the most part carried out by the divine soul without the intermediacy of the vitalizing soul. The term “divine soul” is therefore used here, for the ultimate source of power that enables a person to perform all the commandments is the divine soul.
2. Zechariah 13:2.
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:
Daily Mitzvah
See previous note.
• 1 Chapter: Berachot Berachot - Chapter One
• Sunday, Adar 24, 5775 · 15 March 2015
"Today's Day"
Torah lessons: Chumash: Vayakheil, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 113-118.
Tanya: For whereas (p. 145)...on a (transitory) thing. (p. 145).
To R. Hillel Paritcher's question whether to review Chassidus even in towns where the people have no conception of Chassidus, the Mitteler Rebbe responded: "The soul hears words of Chassidus." It is written, "Flowing from Lebanon."1 Lebanon is spelled (in Hebrew) l'b nu'n.2 "Lebanon" thus represents chochma and bina of the soul. When the soul3 hears, from there4 issues a "flow", a "stream of droplets" into that "radiance" or ha'ara of the soul which vitalizes the body;5 this results in a strengthening of "do good" expressed in the 248 positive mitzvot, and of "turn from evil" expressed in the 365 prohibitions.
Torah lessons: Chumash: Sh'mini, Revi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 113-118.
Tanya: For in the (p. 183)...may He be blessed. (p. 183).
When saying Ana b'choach (p. 22), look at - or picture in thought - the sheimot(Divine Names) formed by the acronyms1 of the words, but do not pronounce them.
FOOTNOTES
1. Unvowelled words in the ana b'choach paragraph on p. 22. (This also applies toana b'choach on pages 121 and 341.)
Daily Thought:
Realistic Optimism
“I lift my eyes to the mountains, from whence will come my help?” (Psalms 121:1)Today in Jewish History:
• Blood Libel Declared False (1817)
On Adar 24, Czar Alexander I of Russia declared the Blood Libel -- the infamous accusation that Jews murdered Christian children to use their blood in the baking of matzah for Passover, for which thousands of Jews were massacred through the centuries -- to be false. Nevertheless, nearly a hundred years later the accusation was officially leveled against Mendel Beilis in Kiev.
Link: A detailed look at the Beilis case, including primary evidence, photographs, interviews and a documentary.
Daily Quote:
Why was the generation of the Flood utterly destroyed, but not the generation of the Tower? Because the former were consumed by robbery and violence, while amongst the latter love prevailed.[Midrash Rabbah]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Vayikra, 1st Portion Leviticus 1:1-1:13 with Rashi
• Chapter 1
1And He called to Moses, and the Lord spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting, saying, אוַיִּקְרָא אֶל משֶׁה וַיְדַבֵּר יְהֹוָה אֵלָיו מֵאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לֵאמֹר:
And He called to Moses: Every [time God communicated with Moses, whether it was represented by the expression] וַיְדַבֵּר, “And He spoke,” or וַיֹּאמֶר; “and He said,” or וַיְצַו, “and He commanded,” it was always preceded by [God] calling [to Moses by name] (Torath Kohanim 1:2-3). [קְרִיאָה] is an expression of affection, the [same] expression employed by the ministering angels [when addressing each other], as it says, “And one called (וְקָרָא) to the other…” (Isa. 6:3). To the prophets of the nations of the world, however, He revealed Himself through expressions denoting coincidence and impurity, as the verse says, “and God happened to [meet] (וַיִּקָּר) Balaam” (Num. 23:4). - [Bemidbar Rabbah 52:5] [The expression וַיִּקָּר has the meaning of a coincidental happening, and also alludes to impurity. [See Deut. 23:11, regarding the expression מִקְרֵה לַיְלָה.] ויקרא אל משה: לכל דברות ולכל אמירות ולכל צוויים קדמה קריאה, לשון חבה, לשון שמלאכי השרת משתמשים בו, שנאמר (ישעיה ו ג) וקרא זה אל זה, אבל לנביאי אומות העולם נגלה עליהן בלשון עראי וטומאה, שנאמר (במדבר כג ד) ויקר א-להים אל בלעם:
And He called to Moses: The [Divine] voice emanated and reached Moses’ ears, while all [the rest] of Israel did not hear it. One might think that for each new section [representing a new topic], there was also [such] a call. Scripture, therefore, states, “and [the Lord] spoke (וַיְדַבֵּר) [to him],” [denoting that] only for speech, [i.e., when God “spoke” to Moses, or “said” to him, or “commanded” him,] was there a call, but not at the subsections. [For when these expressions are employed, they demarcate the beginning of major sections, i.e., when God first called to Moses and then proceeded with the prophecy at hand, unlike the beginning of each separate subsection, when God simply continued His communication to Moses without “calling” him anew. Now, if each subsection in the Torah does not represent a new beckoning from God to Moses, ushering in a new prophecy, then] what is the purpose of these subsections? To give Moses a pause, to contemplate between one passage and the next, and between one subject and another. [And if this pause for contemplation was given to the great Moses when being taught by God, then] how much more [necessary is it] for an ordinary man learning [Torah] from another ordinary man [to be allowed pauses between sections and subjects, to carefully contemplate and understand the material being learned]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:3] ויקרא אל משה: הקול הולך ומגיע לאזניו, וכל ישראל לא שומעין. יכול אף להפסקות היתה קריאה, תלמוד לומר וידבר, לדבור היתה קריאה, ולא להפסקות. ומה היו הפסקות משמשות, ליתן ריוח למשה להתבונן בין פרשה לפרשה ובין ענין לענין, קל וחומר להדיוט הלומד מן ההדיוט:
to him: Heb. אֵלָיו [That is, God spoke only to Moses. This phrase comes] to exclude Aaron. Rabbi Judah [Ben Betheira] says: “Thirteen times in the Torah, God spoke (וַיְדַבֵּר) to both Moses and Aaron together, and, corresponding to them were thirteen [other] occasions [when God spoke only to Moses] precluding [Aaron], to teach you that they were not said [directly] to Aaron, but to Moses, that he should say them to Aaron. These are the thirteen cases where [Aaron was] precluded: (1) ”To speak with him…,“ (2) ”…speaking to him…,“ (3) ”…and He spoke to him“ (Num. 7:89); (4) ”I will meet with you [there at set times], etc. …“ (Exod. 25:22) All of them can be found [in the above dictum of Rabbi Judah] in Torath Kohanim (1:4). Now, [even though it was Moses who exclusively heard the prophecies,] one might think that they [i.e., the rest of Israel, nevertheless] heard the sound [of God] ”calling“ [to Moses preceding the prophecy]. Scripture therefore, says: [not ”He heard] the voice [speaking] to him (לוֹ),“ [but] ”[he heard] the voice [speaking right up] to him (אֵלָיו)“ (Num. 7:89). [This verse could have used the word לוֹ, ”to him,“ rather than such an exclusive expression as אֵלָיו, ”right up to him." However, it uses this expression in order to teach us that only] Moses heard [the Divine voice calling him], while all [the rest] of Israel did not hear [it]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:4] אליו: למעט את אהרן. ר' יהודה בן בתירא אומר שלשה עשר דברות נאמרו בתורה למשה ולאהרן, וכנגדן נאמרו שלשה עשר מיעוטין, ללמדך שלא לאהרן נאמרו אלא למשה שיאמר לאהרן. ואלו הן שלשה עשר מיעוטין לדבר אתו, מדבר אליו, וידבר אליו, ונועדתי לך, כולן בתורת כהנים. יכול שמעו את קול הקריאה, תלמוד לומר קול לו, קול אליו (במדבר ז פט), משה שמע, וכל ישראל לא שמעו:
from the Tent of Meeting: This teaches us that the [Divine] voice stopped and did not project itself beyond the Tent [of Meeting]. One might think that this was because the voice was low. Scripture therefore says, “[And when Moses came into the Tent of Meeting, he heard] the voice” (Num. 7:89). What is the meaning of “the voice” [with the definite article]? It is the voice referred to in Psalms (29:4-5): “The voice of the Lord is in strength; the voice of the Lord is in beauty. The voice of the Lord breaks cedars.” If so, why does it say, “[and the Lord spoke to him] from the Tent of Meeting” ? [To inform us] that the [Divine] voice stopped. A case similar to this [where a powerful sound uttered within the Holy Temple was not heard outside,] is: “And the sound of the cherubim’s wings was heard up to the outer courtyard…” (Ezek. 10:5). One might think that the sound was low. Scripture therefore states [further in that verse]: “…as the voice of the Almighty God when He speaks!” Why then does the verse say, “[the sound…was heard] up to the outer courtyard” [and not further, if this sound was indeed so mighty]? Because when it reached there, it stopped. — [Torath Kohanim 1:5] מאהל מועד: מלמד שהיה הקול נפסק ולא היה יוצא חוץ לאהל. יכול מפני שהקול נמוך, תלמוד לומר את הקול (שם), מהו הקול, הוא הקול המפורש בתהלים (כט ד - ה) קול ה' בכח קול ה' בהדר, קול ה' שובר ארזים, אם כן למה נאמר מאהל מועד, מלמד שהיה הקול נפסק. כיוצא בו (יחזקאל י ה) וקול כנפי הכרובים נשמע עד החצר החיצונה, יכול (מפני) שהקול נמוך, תלמוד לומר (שם) כקול אל שדי בדברו, אם כן למה נאמר עד החצר החיצונה, שכיון שמגיע שם היה נפסק:
[And the Lord spoke to him] from the Tent of Meeting, saying: One might think [that God spoke to Moses] from the entire house [that is, that the Divine voice emanated from the entire Tent of Meeting]. Scripture therefore states, “[and he heard the voice speaking to him] from above the ark cover” (Num. 7:89). [If so,] one might think [the voice emanated] from the entire ark cover. Scripture therefore states [further in that verse], “from between the two cherubim.” - [Torath Kohanim 1:5] מאהל מועד לאמר: יכול מכל הבית, תלמוד לומר מעל הכפורת. יכול מעל הכפורת כולה, תלמוד לומר מבין שני הכרובים:
saying: [God told Moses:] Go forth and say to them [the children of Israel] captivating words, [namely:] “For your sake God communicates with me. ” Indeed, we find this is so for all the thirty-eight years that the Israelites were in the desert, placed under a ban, [i.e.,] from the incident involving the spies and onwards, the [Divine] speech was not addressed especially to Moses, for it says, “So it was, when all the men of war had finished dying from among the people, that the Lord spoke to me saying …” (Deut. 2: 16-17). [Only then was] the Divine speech [again] addressed specifically to me. Another explanation [of לֵאמֹר is that God says to Moses]: “Go forth and tell them My commandments, and bring Me back word whether they will accept them,” as the verse says, “and Moses reported the words of the people back to the Lord” (Exod. 19:8). - [Torath Kohanim 1:6] לאמר: צא ואמור להם דברי כבושים, בשבילכם הוא נדבר עמי, שכן מצינו שכל שלשים ושמונה שנה שהיו ישראל במדבר כמנודים, מן המרגלים ואילך, לא נתייחד הדבור עם משה, שנאמר (דברים ב טז) ויהי כאשר תמו כל אנשי המלחמה למות וידבר ה' אלי לאמר, אלי היה הדיבור. דבר אחר צא ואמור להם דברי והשיבני אם יקבלום, כמו שנאמר (שמות יט ח) וישב משה את דברי העם וגו':
2Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: When a man from [among] you brings a sacrifice to the Lord; from animals, from cattle or from the flock you shall bring your sacrifice. בדַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם אָדָם כִּי יַקְרִיב מִכֶּם קָרְבָּן לַיהֹוָה מִן הַבְּהֵמָה מִן הַבָּקָר וּמִן הַצֹּאן תַּקְרִיבוּ אֶת קָרְבַּנְכֶם:
When a man from [among] you brings a sacrifice: Heb. יַקְרִיב כִּי, when he brings. [That is, Scripture is not dealing here with an obligatory sacrifice, in which case it would have said, “a man shall bring ….” Rather,] Scripture is speaking here of voluntary sacrifices [and thus says, “When a man …brings a sacrifice”]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:12] אדם כי יקריב מכם: כשיקריב, בקרבנות נדבה דבר הענין:
a man: Heb. אָדָם. Why is this term used here [as opposed to “ אָדָם ”]? [It alludes to Adam, the first man on earth, and teaches us:] Just as Adam, the first man, never offered sacrifices from stolen property, since everything was his, so too, you must not offer sacrifices from stolen property. — [Vayikra Rabbah 2:7] אדם: למה נאמר, מה אדם הראשון לא הקריב מן הגזל, שהכל היה שלו, אף אתם לא תקריבו מן הגזל:
animals: Heb. מִן הַבְּהֵמָה. One might think that wild beasts are also included [since sometimes wild beasts are included in this term, and therefore may be offered up as sacrifices]. Scripture therefore states [here], “from cattle or from the flock.” - [Torath Kohanim 1:16] הבהמה: יכול אף חיה בכלל, תלמוד לומר בקר וצאן:
from animals: but not all of them. [The phrase therefore comes] to exclude the case of animals that have cohabited with a human, as an active or a passive party. - [Torath Kohanim 1:17] מן הבהמה: ולא כולה, להוציא את הרובע ואת הנרבע:
from cattle: Heb. מִן הַבָּקָר [The phrase “from cattle” comes] to exclude an animal that has been worshipped [as a deity]. מן הבקר: להוציא את הנעבד:
or from the flock: Heb. וּמִן הַצֹּאן [This phrase comes] to exclude an animal set aside [i.e., designated for sacrifice to pagan deities]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:18] מן הצאן: להוציא את המוקצה:
or from the flock: [The extra “vav” at the beginning of this phrase comes] to exclude the case of a goring animal that has killed [a man]. Now, when [Scripture] states below (verse 3): מִן הַבָּקָר, “of cattle,” [the word מִן] need not have been used, since Scripture has already [taught us the exclusions here. Therefore, this extra word comes] to exclude a טְרֵפָה [an animal with a terminal disease or injury]. - [Torath Kohanim 1:17] ומן הצאן: להוציא את הנוגח שהמית. כשהוא אומר למטה מן הענין (פסוק ג) מן הבקר, שאין תלמוד לומר, להוציא את הטריפה:
you shall bring: Heb. תַּקְרִיבוּ [The plural form of the verb] teaches [us] that two people may donate a voluntary burnt offering in partnership. — [Torath Kohanim 1:19] תקריבו: מלמד ששנים מתנדבים עולה בשותפות:
your sacrifice: Heb. קָרְבַּנְכֶם [The plural form] teaches us that [a burnt offering] may also be offered as a voluntary gift from the community (Torath Kohanim 1:20). This sacrifice was called עוֹלַת קַיִץ הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, “the burnt-offering which was provision for the altar.” [Every year, each twenty-year old male was taxed to give a silver half-shekel for communal sacrifices. See Exod. 30:11-16. This voluntary sacrifice] was purchased with any money remaining [from the previous year’s collection of half-shekels, and was offered as a communal burnt offering when there were no individual offerings brought, in order to prevent the altar from being bereft of sacrifices. Thus, the name “provision for the altar”]. — [Shev. 12a] קרבנכם: מלמד שהיא באה נדבת צבור, היא עולת קיץ המזבח הבאה מן המותרות:
3If his sacrifice is a burnt offering from cattle, an unblemished male he shall bring it. He shall bring it willingly to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, before the Lord. גאִם עֹלָה קָרְבָּנוֹ מִן הַבָּקָר זָכָר תָּמִים יַקְרִיבֶנּוּ אֶל פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד יַקְרִיב אֹתוֹ לִרְצֹנוֹ לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה:
male: but not a female. When Scripture repeats later (verse 10) [that the burnt-offering must be] “a male [animal],” it appears unnecessary to state that [since Scripture has already taught us that it must be a male animal and not a female. Therefore, this repetition of the word “male,” comes to teach us that a sacrifice must consist of a completely] male [animal], not an animal of indeterminate gender or a hermaphrodite. — [Bech. 41b] זכר: ולא נקבה. כשהוא אומר זכר למטה, שאין תלמוד לומר, זכר ולא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס:
unblemished: Heb. תָּמִים, perfect, without a blemish. תמים: בלא מום:
[He shall bring it …] to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting: He [himself] must attend to bringing it up to the courtyard [of the Temple] (Torath Kohanim 1: 24). Why does the verse repeat the word “bring” here [when it says, “he shall bring…He shall bring it” ? This repetition teaches us that] even in the case of Reuben’s burnt offering [animal] being mixed up with Simeon’s burnt offering [animal, and the animals cannot be identified], nevertheless, each one of them must be offered up in the name of [its rightful owner] whoever that may be. Similarly, if [an animal designated for] a burnt offering has been mixed up with non-consecrated animals, the non-consecrated animals must be sold to those who need burnt offerings, and thus all of these animals are now [designated to become] burnt offerings. [Accordingly] each animal is now brought in the name of [its rightful owner] whoever that may be. Now, one might think that this must be done even if [an animal designated to become] a burnt offering became mixed up with animals unfit for sacrifice or with [animals designated to become] different kinds of sacrifices [e.g., a sin offering, a guilt offering, etc.]. Scripture therefore says here: יַקְרִיבֶנּוּ, [meaning, “he must bring it.” This teaches us that only an animal fit for and specifically designated as a burnt offering must be brought here]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:25] אל פתח אהל מועד: מטפל בהבאתו עד העזרה. מהו אומר יקריב יקריב, אפילו נתערבה עולת ראובן בעולת שמעון, יקריב כל אחת לשם מי שהוא. וכן עולה בחולין, ימכרו החולין לצרכי עולות, והרי הן כולן עולות ותקרב כל אחת לשם מי שהוא. יכול אפילו נתערבה בפסולין או בשאינו מינו, תלמוד לומר יקריבנו:
He shall bring it: [This clause] teaches us that the person is coerced [to bring the offering if he is remiss in bringing the sacrifice he had promised]. One might think that this means that they should force him against his will [to bring the offering]! Scripture therefore says: “[He shall bring it] willingly (לִרְצֹנוֹ).” How is this possible [that on one hand he should be forced, yet on the other, he must bring the offering willingly? The explanation is that] they must coerce him until he says “I am willing.” - [R.H. 6a, Torath Kohanim 3:15] 3-4. יקריב אתו: מלמד שכופין אותו. יכול בעל כרחו, תלמוד לומר לרצונו, הא כיצד כופין אותו עד שיאמר רוצה אני:
Before the Lord…And he shall lean: [The procedure of] leaning [the hands upon sacrifices] does not apply to a high place [a private altar. These high places were permitted to be used before the permanent Temple was built when the Mishkan was in Gilgal, Nob, and Gibeon. Certain sacrifices could be offered up on them. We learn this from the continuity of these two verses that only “before the Lord” -that is, in the sanctuary precincts-one “should lean his hand upon” the head of sacrifices, but not on a high place outside the sanctuary precincts.]- [Torath Kohanim 1:27] לפני ה' וסמך: אין סמיכה בבמה:
4And he shall lean his hand [forcefully] upon the head of the burnt offering, and it will be accepted for him to atone for him. דוְסָמַךְ יָדוֹ עַל רֹאשׁ הָעֹלָה וְנִרְצָה לוֹ לְכַפֵּר עָלָיו:
upon the head of the burnt offering: [The text could have simply said “upon its head.” However, it adds “burnt offering”] to include [any sacrifice that is called a “burnt offering,” namely,] (1) an obligatory burnt offering, that it too requires סְמִיכָה [leaning the hands on its head. Since this section deals with voluntary burnt offerings, this case requires an extra word to include it. See commentary on verse 2]; also included is (2) a burnt offering from the flock [that it too must have סְמִיכָה, for this is not specified in the verses dealing with the burnt offering from the flock. See verses 10-13]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:30] על ראש העולה: להביא עולת חובה לסמיכה ולהביא עולת הצאן:
the burnt offering: [The use of the definite article here teaches us that the verse is referring to “the” burnt offering, i.e., the one mentionebd earlier, where it says, “from cattle or from the flock” (verse 2). Thus] excluding the burnt offering from birds. — [Torath Kohanim 1:30] העולה: פרט לעולת העוף:
and it will be accepted for him: For which [sins] will [the sacrifice] be accepted for him [thereby atoning for them]? If you say that [the offering is accepted and thereby the person is atoned for] sins which incur the penalty of excision, the death penalty through the court, the death penalty through the heaven[ly court], or lashes, their punishments are [expressly] stated, [and thus, the person must undergo the respective punishment to receive atonement for those sins]. Thereby, we determine that it is accepted only for [failure to perform] a positive commandment [for which the punishment is not expressly stated in the Torah, or [violation of] a negative commandment that is attached to a positive commandment. [I.e., some negative commandments are attached to a positive commandment that relates to the same matter. An example of this is the law of the Passover lamb. The Torah states: “And you shall not leave over any of it until morning, and whatever is left over of it until morning, you shall burn in fire” (Exod. 12:10). Here, the negative commandment is “attached” to the positive commandment. How so? If someone has transgressed the negative commandment and left over some of the Passover lamb until the following morning, he may exonerate himself from the punishment he has just incurred by fulfilling the positive commandment attached, namely by burning the remainder in fire. That is an example of “a negative commandment that is attached to a positive commandment.” See Mak. 4b.]- [Torath Kohanim 1:31] ונרצה לו: על מה הוא מרצה לו, אם תאמר על כריתות ומיתות בית דין או מיתה בידי שמים או מלקות, הרי עונשן אמור, הא אינו מרצה אלא על עשה ועל לאו שנתק לעשה:
5And he shall slaughter the young bull before the Lord. And Aaron's descendants, the kohanim, shall bring the blood, and dash the blood upon the altar, around [the altar] which is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting. הוְשָׁחַט אֶת בֶּן הַבָּקָר לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה וְהִקְרִיבוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֲנִים אֶת הַדָּם וְזָרְקוּ אֶת הַדָּם עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ סָבִיב אֲשֶׁר פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד:
And he shall slaughter…And…the kohanim shall bring [the blood] :[Since the word kohanim is mentioned only in reference to receiving the blood, and not before, we learn that all procedures in a sacrifice] from receiving [the blood in a vessel] and onwards are the duty of the kehunah [as opposed to non- kohanim]. This teaches regarding the slaughtering [which precedes receiving the blood], that it is valid [even if performed] by a stranger [i.e., a non- kohen].-[Zev. 32a] ושחט, והקריבו, הכהנים: מקבלה ואילך מצות כהונה, למד על השחיטה שכשרה בזר:
before the Lord: in the courtyard [of the Holy Temple]. לפני ה': בעזרה:
and […the kohanim] shall bring [the blood]: [Although וְהִקְרִיבוּ literally means “bringing,” here,] it means “receiving” [the blood in a vessel], which is the first [procedure immediately following the slaughtering]. However, it literally means “bringing” [the blood to the altar]. [Consequently,] we learn that both these procedures are the duties of Aaron’s descendants [i.e., the kohanim]. — [Chag. 11a] והקריבו: זו קבלה שהיא הראשונה ומשמעה לשון הולכה, למדנו ששתיהן בבני אהרן:
Aaron’s descendants: One might think [that these duties may be performed as well by Aaron’s descendants who are] חִלָלִים, kohanim whose lineage invalidates them for kehunah [e.g., if the mother was divorced before marrying the kohen]. Scripture therefore adds: “the kohanim ” [indicating that these duties may be performed only by kohanim]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:38] בני אהרן: יכול חללים, תלמוד לומר הכהנים:
[The kohanim, shall bring] the blood, and dash the blood: Why does Scripture say, “blood, blood” here twice? To include [the cases of blood from a burnt offering,] that was mixed up with the same type [of blood, i.e., the blood of burnt offerings from two different people being mixed up, and [blood from a burnt offering] that was mixed up with a different type [of blood, i.e., from another type of sacrifice]. One might think that this would also include [the case that the blood was mixed up with blood of] an unfit sacrifice, or [blood from] inner sin offerings [the blood of which is to be sprinkled on the inner altar] or [blood from] outer sin offerings [the blood of which is to be sprinkled on the outer altar] even though [the latter, have their blood dashed] above [the chut hasikra , the red line, of the altar], while this [the burnt offering has its blood dashed] below [the chut hasikra of the altar]. Scripture [therefore] states [regarding a burnt offering] in another place: “its blood” (verses 11 and 15). [This expression teaches us that only cases in which the blood of a burnt offering is mixed up with the blood of another sacrifice which is also to be dashed below the chut hasikra on the altar, no problems arise, and these bloods can both be dashed at that level of the altar. This excludes the case of inner sin offerings whose blood is sprinkled inside and outer sin offerings whose blood must be dashed above the chut hasikra]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:39] את הדם וזרקו את הדם: מה תלמוד לומר דם דם שתי פעמים, להביא את שנתערב במינו או בשאינו מינו. יכול אף בפסולים או בחטאות הפנימיות או בחטאות החיצוניות, שאלו למעלה והיא למטה, תלמוד לומר במקום אחר את דמו:
And […the kohanim,shall…] dash [the blood…around]: [The kohen] must stand below [i.e., on the ground], and dash [the blood] from the vessel [in which it was received] onto the wall of the altar below the chut hasikra , towards the corners [of the altar. Meaning, from the ground he approaches the northeastern corner of the altar and dashes some of the blood from its receptacle onto the corner ridge where the northern wall and the eastern wall of the altar meet, below the red line. In this way, the blood dashes onto both the northern and eastern sides of the altar with one motion by the kohen. That motion is thus referred to as “one application (of blood) which is two,” i.e., one dashing motion, which applies the blood to two faces of the altar. The kohen then proceeds to the southwestern corner of the altar and again performs this procedure, thereby applying the blood to both the southern and western walls of the altar in one motion. Thus, in a total of two dashing motions, the blood has been applied to the four faces of the altar. These dashes are referred to as “two applications (of blood) which are four.”] Therefore, it says “around,” namely that [with these prescribed dashing motions] the blood is to be applied to the four sides of the altar. Now, one might think that [when the verse says that the kohen must dash the blood around the altar, this means that] he must encircle it [the altar with blood] like a thread. Scripture therefore says: “[the kohanim] shall…dash [the blood],” and it is impossible to apply it [as a continuous line] around the altar through a “dashing” motion. Alternatively, one might think that “shall…dash” refers to one dashing motion. Scripture therefore says: “around” [and it is impossible to apply the blood all around the altar with one dashing motion]. How then [should the blood be applied to the altar]? The kohen must make “two applications, which are four.” - [Torath Kohanim 1:40] וזרקו: עומד למטה וזורק מן הכלי לכותל המזבח למטה מחוט הסיקרא כנגד הזויות, לכך נאמר סביב, שיהא הדם ניתן בארבע רוחות המזבח. או יכול יקיפנו כחוט, תלמוד לומר וזרקו, ואי אפשר להקיף בזריקה. אי וזרקו יכול בזריקה אחת, תלמוד לומר סביב, הא כיצד נותן שתי מתנות שהן ארבע:
[the altar] which is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting: But not when [the Tent of Meeting] is disassembled [even though the altar itself may be standing, since at such a time the altar is not “at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting”]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:44] אשר פתח אהל מועד: ולא בזמן שהוא מפורק:
6And he shall skin the burnt offering, and cut it into its [prescribed] sections. ווְהִפְשִׁיט אֶת הָעֹלָה וְנִתַּח אֹתָהּ לִנְתָחֶיהָ:
And he shall skin [the burnt offering]: Why does the verse say “the burnt offering” ? To include every [kind of] burnt offering [not just this one in the procedure of] skinning and cutting up [in the prescribed manner]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:45] והפשיט את העלה: מה תלמוד לומר העולה, לרבות את כל העולות להפשט ונתוח:
its [prescribed] sections: [The verse does not state that the animal is cut into pieces, but rather “into its pieces,” implying that it must be cut into specific prescribed pieces] and not [to cut] its [prescribed] pieces into [smaller] pieces. — [Torath Kohanim 1:47; Chul. 11a] אתה לנתחיה: ולא נתחיה לנתחים:
7And the descendants of Aaron the kohen shall place fire on the altar, and arrange wood on the fire. זוְנָתְנוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן אֵשׁ עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְעָרְכוּ עֵצִים עַל הָאֵשׁ:
shall place fire [on the altar]: Even though the fire descended [miraculously] from heaven [onto the altar, to consume the sacrifices], it was [nevertheless] a mitzvah for a mortal to bring [his fire to the altar. — [Torath Kohanim 1: 49; Zev. 18a] ונתנו אש: אף על פי שהאש יורדת מן השמים, מצוה להביא מן ההדיוט:
the descendants of Aaron the Kohen: [But we know that Aaron was a Kohen Gadol ! So what does “the Kohen ” come to teach us? It teaches us that the Kohen Gadol may perform the sacrificial service only] when he is [invested] in his kehunah [i.e., wearing the proper eight garments of the Kohen Gadol]. If, however, he officiated wearing the raiment of an ordinary kohen, his service is rendered invalid. — [Torath Kohanim 1:49] בני אהרן הכהן: כשהוא בכיהונו, הא אם עבד בבגדי כהן הדיוט, עבודתו פסולה:
8And Aaron's descendants, the kohanim, shall then arrange the pieces, the head and the fat, on top of the wood which is on the fire that is on the altar. חוְעָרְכוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֲנִים אֵת הַנְּתָחִים אֶת הָרֹאשׁ וְאֶת הַפָּדֶר עַל הָעֵצִים אֲשֶׁר עַל הָאֵשׁ אֲשֶׁר עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ:
Aaron’s descendants, the kohanim: [But we know that Aaron’s descendants are kohanim! So what does “the kohanim” come to teach us?] The [ordinary] kohanim must be functioning in their kehunah [i.e., the proper four garments of the ordinary kohanim]. If an ordinary kohen officiated wearing the “eight garments” [of a Kohen Gadol], however, his service is rendered invalid. בני אהרן הכהנים: כשהם בכיהונם, הא כהן הדיוט שעבד בשמונה בגדים, עבודתו פסולה:
the pieces, the head: Since the head is not included in the skinning and cutting up [procedures], since it was detached by the slaughtering, the Torah had to count it individually [to inform us that it was to be placed on the altar as it is, even though it is not skinned.] - [Chul. 27a] את הנתחים את הראש: לפי שאין הראש בכלל הפשט, שכבר הותז בשחיטה, לפיכך הוצרך למנותו לעצמו:
and the fat: Why is [the fat] mentioned [separately]? To teach you that the kohen must bring it up [onto the altar together] with the head, and that with it he covers the area where [the animal] was slaughtered. This was done in deference to the honor of God on high [because the cut throat is soiled with the blood of the head] (Rashi, Yoma 26a). - [Chul. 27a] ואת הפדר: למה נאמר, ללמדך שמעלהו עם הראש ומכסה בו את בית השחיטה, וזהו דרך כבוד של מעלה:
[the wood] which is on the altar: The logs of wood must not project beyond the [area of the arranged] woodpile [constituting one square cubit. This is so that the kohanim would not be disturbed by protruding pieces of wood when they go around the altar]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:54] אשר על המזבח: שלא יהיו הגזירין יוצאין חוץ למערכה:
9And its innards and its legs, he shall wash with water. Then, the kohen shall cause to [go up in] smoke all [of the animal] on the altar, as a burnt offering, a fire offering, [with] a pleasing fragrance to the Lord. טוְקִרְבּוֹ וּכְרָעָיו יִרְחַץ בַּמָּיִם וְהִקְטִיר הַכֹּהֵן אֶת הַכֹּל הַמִּזְבֵּחָה עֹלָה אִשֵּׁה רֵיחַ נִיחוֹחַ לַיהֹוָה:
as a burnt offering: [I.e., the kohen] must burn the animal with the [specific] intention that it is a burnt offering. — [Torath Kohanim 1:58] עלה: לשם עולה יקטירנו:
a fire offering: Heb. אִשֵּׁה. When he slaughters [the animal], he must slaughter it with the [specific] intention [to burn it completely in] fire. Every [instance of the word] אִשֶּׁה in Scripture, is an expression related to [the word] אֵשׁ, “fire,” foyere in Old French. אשה: כשישחטנו יהא שוחטו לשם האש. וכל אשה לשון אש פויאד"א בלע"ז [אש]:
pleasing: Heb. נִיחוֹחַ [This word stems from the same root as the expression נַחַת רוּחַ, “contentment.” God says: “This sacrifice] gives Me contentment, for I said [My commandment], and My will was fulfilled!” ניחוח: נחת רוח לפני, שאמרתי ונעשה רצוני:
10And if his offering is [brought] from the flock from sheep or from goats as a burnt offering he shall sacrifice it an unblemished male. יוְאִם מִן הַצֹּאן קָרְבָּנוֹ מִן הַכְּשָׂבִים אוֹ מִן הָעִזִּים לְעֹלָה זָכָר תָּמִים יַקְרִיבֶנּוּ:
And if…from the flock: The “vav” [meaning “and” here demonstrates that this section concerning voluntary burnt offerings from the flock] is a continuation from the previous subject [those from cattle, and is thereby connected in that the laws of each are common to both]. But why was it separated [by a paragraph]? In order to give Moses a pause, so that he could contemplate between one passage and the next. — [Torath Kohanim 1:59] ואם מן הצאן: וי"ו מוסיף על ענין ראשון. ולמה הפסיק, ליתן ריוח למשה להתבונן בין פרשה לפרשה:
from the flock…from sheep…from goats: [The word “from” tells us that one cannot take all the animals of these classes, rather only “from” them, thereby disqualifying certain animals from being brought for a sacrifice.] These [three mentions of the word “from”] are three exclusions [from being offered as a sacrifice], excluding an aged [animal], a sick [animal] and a foul smelling [animal]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:60] מן הצאן מן הכשבים או מן העזים: הרי אלו שלשה מיעוטין פרט לזקן, לחולה ולמזוהם:
11And he shall slaughter it on the northern side of the altar, before the Lord. And Aaron's descendants, the kohanim, shall dash its blood upon the altar, around. יאוְשָׁחַט אֹתוֹ עַל יֶרֶךְ הַמִּזְבֵּחַ צָפֹנָה לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה וְזָרְקוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֲנִים אֶת דָּמוֹ עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ סָבִיב:
on the…side of the altar: Heb. יֶרֶ הַמִזְבֵּחַ, “on the…side of the altar.” על ירך המזבח: על צד המזבח:
[And he shall slaughter it] on the northern [side of the altar], before the Lord: [The law of] slaughtering on the northern side does not apply [when sacrificing an animal] on a high place [See above on verse 4]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:27] [We learn this from this verse that a burnt offering must be slaughtered “on the northern side of the altar” only if it is “before the Lord,” i.e., in the sanctuary precincts, but not outside them.] צפנה לפני ה': ואין צפון בבמה:
12And he shall cut it into its [prescribed] sections, with its head and its fat, and the kohen shall arrange them on top of the wood which is on the fire that is on the altar. יבוְנִתַּח אֹתוֹ לִנְתָחָיו וְאֶת רֹאשׁוֹ וְאֶת פִּדְרוֹ וְעָרַךְ הַכֹּהֵן אֹתָם עַל הָעֵצִים אֲשֶׁר עַל הָאֵשׁ אֲשֶׁר עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ:
13And the innards and the legs, he shall wash with water. Then, the kohen shall offer up all [of the animal], and cause it to [go up in] smoke on the altar. It is a burnt offering, a fire offering [with] a pleasing fragrance to the Lord. יגוְהַקֶּרֶב וְהַכְּרָעַיִם יִרְחַץ בַּמָּיִם וְהִקְרִיב הַכֹּהֵן אֶת הַכֹּל וְהִקְטִיר הַמִּזְבֵּחָה עֹלָה הוּא אִשֵּׁה רֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ לַיהֹוָה:
Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 113 - 118
• Chapter 113
This psalm recounts some of the wonders of the exodus from Egypt.
1. Praise the Lord! Offer praise, you servants of the Lord; praise the Name of the Lord.
2. May the Name of the Lord be blessed from now and to all eternity.
3. From the rising of the sun to its setting, the Name of the Lord is praised.
4. The Lord is high above all nations; His glory transcends the heavens.
5. Who is like the Lord our God, Who dwells on high
6. [yet] looks down so low upon heaven and earth!
7. He raises the poor from the dust, lifts the destitute from the dunghill,
8. to seat them with nobles, with the nobles of His people.
9. He transforms the barren woman into a household, into a joyful mother of children. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 114
This psalm explains why the tribe of Judah merited kingship.
1. When Israel went out of Egypt, the House of Jacob from a people of a foreign tongue,
2. Judah became His holy [nation], Israel, His domain.
3. The sea saw and fled, the Jordan turned backward.
4. The mountains skipped like rams, the hills like young sheep.
5. What is the matter with you, O sea, that you flee; Jordan, that you turn backward;
6. mountains, that you skip like rams; hills, like young sheep?
7. [We do so] before the Master, the Creator of the earth, before the God of Jacob,
8. Who turns the rock into a pool of water, the flintstone into a water fountain.
Chapter 115
A prayer that God bring this long exile to an end, for the sake of His Name-that it not be desecrated.
1. Not for our sake, Lord, not for our sake, but for the sake of Your Name bestow glory, because of Your kindness and Your truth.
2. Why should the nations say, "Where, now, is their God?”
3. Indeed, our God is in heaven; whatever He desires, He does.
4. Their idols are of silver and gold, the product of human hands.
5. They have a mouth, but cannot speak; they have eyes, but cannot see;
6. they have ears, but cannot hear; they have a nose, but cannot smell;
7. their hands cannot touch; their feet cannot walk; they can make no sound in their throat.
8. Those who make them will become like them-all who put their trust in them.
9. Israel, trust in the Lord; He is their help and their shield.
10. House of Aaron, trust in the Lord; He is their help and their shield.
11. You who fear the Lord, trust in the Lord; He is their help and their shield.
12. The Lord who is ever mindful of us, may He bless: May He bless the House of Israel; may He bless the House of Aaron;
13. may He bless those who fear the Lord, the small with the great.
14. May the Lord increase [blessing] upon you, upon you and upon your children.
15. You are blessed by the Lord, the Maker of heaven and earth.
16. The heavens are the Lord's heavens, but the earth He gave to the children of man.
17. The dead cannot praise the Lord, nor any who descend into the silence [of the grave].
18. But we will bless the Lord from now to eternity. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 116
This psalm contains magnificent praises to God. It also describes David's love for God, in light of all the miracles He performed for him. David does not know how to repay God, declaring it impossible to pay back for all God has done for him.
1. I would love if the Lord would listen to my voice, to my supplications;
2. if He would turn His ear to me on the days when I call.
3. The pangs of death encompassed me and the misery of the grave came upon me; I encounter trouble and sorrow.
4. I invoke the Name of the Lord, "Lord, I implore you, deliver my soul!”
5. The Lord is gracious and righteous; our God is compassionate.
6. The Lord watches over the simpletons; I was brought low, and He saved me.
7. Return, my soul, to your tranquility, for the Lord has bestowed goodness upon you.
8. For You have delivered my soul from death, my eyes from tears, my feet from stumbling.
9. I shall walk before the Lord in the lands of the living.
10. I had faith even when I declared, "I am greatly afflicted";
11. [even when] I said in my haste, "All men are deceitful.”
12. How can I repay the Lord for all His beneficences to me?
13. I will raise the cup of deliverance and proclaim the Name of the Lord.
14. I will pay my vows to the Lord in the presence of all His people.
15. Grievous in the eyes of the Lord is the death of His pious ones.
16. I thank you, Lord, that since I am Your servant, I am Your servant the son of Your maidservant, You have loosened my bonds.
17. To You I will bring an offering of thanksgiving, and proclaim the Name of the Lord.
18. I will pay my vows to the Lord in the presence of all His people,
19. in the courtyards of the House of the Lord, in the midst of Jerusalem. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 117
This psalm of two verses alludes to the Messianic era, when the Children of Israel will enjoy their former glory. All will praise God, in fulfillment of the verse, "All will then call in the Name of God."
1. Praise the Lord, all you nations; extol Him, all you peoples.
2. For His kindness was mighty over us, and the truth of the Lord is everlasting. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 118
This psalm describes David's immense trust in God. It also contains many praises to God, Who has fulfilled that which He has promised us.
1. Offer praise to the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is everlasting.
2. Let Israel declare that His kindness is everlasting.
3. Let the House of Aaron declare that His kindness is everlasting.
4. Let those who fear the Lord declare that His kindness is everlasting.
5. From out of distress I called to God; with abounding relief, God answered me.
6. The Lord is with me, I do not fear-what can man do to me?
7. The Lord is with me among my helpers, and I will see [the downfall of] my enemies.
8. It is better to rely on the Lord than to trust in man.
9. It is better to rely on the Lord than to trust in nobles.
10. All the nations surrounded me, but in the Name of the Lord I will cut them down.
11. They surrounded me, they encompassed me, but in the Name of the Lord I will cut them down.
12. They surrounded me like bees, yet they shall be extinguished like fiery thorns; in the Name of the Lord I will cut them down.
13. You [my foes] repeatedly pushed me to fall, but the Lord helped me.
14. God is my strength and song, and He has been a help to me.
15. The sound of rejoicing and deliverance reverberates in the tents of the righteous, "The right hand of the Lord performs deeds of valor.
16. The right hand of the Lord is exalted; the right hand of the Lord performs deeds of valor!”
17. I shall not die, but I shall live and recount the deeds of God.
18. God has indeed chastised me, but He did not give me up to death.
19. Open for me the gates of righteousness; I will enter them and praise God.
20. This is the gate of the Lord, the righteous will enter it.
21. I offer thanks to You, for You have answered me, and You have been my deliverance.
22. The stone which the builders scorned has become the chief cornerstone.
23. From the Lord has this come about; it is wondrous in our eyes.
24. This is the day which the Lord has made; let us be glad and rejoice on it.
25. We implore You, Lord, deliver us. We implore You, Lord, grant us success.
26. Blessed is he who comes in the Name of the Lord; we bless you from the House of the Lord.
27. The Lord is a benevolent God and He has given us light; bind the festival offering with cords until [you bring it to] the horns of the altar.
28. You are my God and I will praise You, my God-and I will exalt You.
29. Praise the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is everlasting.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 37
• Lessons in Tanya
• Daily Tanya
Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 37
Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 37
זאת ועוד אחרת
An additional [virtue] in mitzvot involving action (aside from their function in elevating one’s animal soul, mentioned above):
שכח נפש החיונית המתלבש באותיות הדבור בתלמוד תורה או תפלה וכיוצא בהן או מצות מעשיות
the vitalizing soul’s energy clothed in the utterance of letters of one’s speech in Torah study, prayer or the like, or the energy clothed in the performance of mitzvotinvolving action
הרי כל גידולו וחיותו מהדם, שמקליפת נוגה ממש
derives its entire growth and vitality from the blood, which is of kelipat nogahitself,
שהן כל אוכלין ומשקין שאכל ושתה, ונעשו דם
meaning all the food and drink that one has eaten and drunk, and which have become blood.
שהיו תחת ממשלתה, וינקו חיותם ממנה
These were under the dominion of kelipat nogah and drew their vitality from it.
ועתה היא מתהפכת מרע לטוב ונכללת בקדושה, על ידי כח נפש החיונית הגדל ממנה, שנתלבש באותיות אלה או בעשיה זו, אשר הן הן פנימיות רצונו יתברך בלי שום הסתר פנים
Now that the person performs a mitzvah with the energy derived from this food and drinkthis kelipah is transformed from evil to good and is absorbed into holiness, by means of the energy of the animal soul that grows from it (i.e., the energy nourished by those objects that derive their vitality from this kelipah), which has now clothed itself in these letters of Torah and prayer or in the performance of this mitzvah, which actually constitute the unveiled expression of the inner aspect of G‑d’s Will.
וחיותן נכלל גם כן באור אין סוף ברוך הוא, שהוא רצונו יתברך
For their vitality (the vitality expended in performing mitzvot) is also absorbed (like themitzvot themselves) into the blessed Ein Sof-light, which is His Will as expressed inmitzvot,
ובחיותן נכלל ועולה גם כן כח נפש החיונית
and with their vitality the energy of the animal soul is likewise elevated and absorbed into the Ein Sof-light; and since the energy necessary for performing mitzvot was supplied by food and drink, the vitality of the food and drink is likewise absorbed in the Ein Sof-light, together with the mitzvah whose performance it made possible.
ועל ידי זה תעלה גם כן כללות קליפת נוגה, שהיא כללות החיות של עולם הזה הגשמי והחומרי
Thereby, all of kelipat nogah, which constitutes the vitality of this physical and corporeal world as a whole, will ascend as well. When will this come about?
כאשר כל הנשמה ונפש האלקית שבכל ישראל, המתחלקת בפרטות לששים רבוא, תקיים כל נפש פרטית כל תרי׳׳ג מצות התורה
When the whole neshamah, the divine soul1 in all of Israel, which is divided into 600,000 particular offshoots (the standard figure for the members of the Jewish nation, all individual souls being further subdivisions of these 600,000 “general” souls, as will be explained further) will fulfill, each individual soul thereof, the 613 mitzvot of the Torah:
שס״ה לא תעשה, להפריד שס׳׳ה גידים של דם נפש החיונית שבגוף
when they will refrain from transgressing the 365 prohibitions, to restrain the 365 blood vessels of the animal soul in the body,
שלא יינקו ויקבלו חיות בעבירה זו מאת שלש קליפות הטמאות לגמרי, שמהן נשפעים שס׳׳ה לא תעשה דאורייתא, וענפיהן שהן מדרבנן
so that they do not draw nurture or receive vitality by means of such transgression, from any one of the three completely unclean kelipot from which are derived the 365 Biblical prohibitions, and the Rabbinical prohibitions — their offshoots.
Since all that derives its vitality from the three wholly unclean kelipot cannot rise to holiness, were a Jew to transgress any prohibition, and thereby cause the particular blood-vessel associated with that prohibition to receive vitality from these kelipot —
ושוב לא תוכל נפש החיונית לעלות אל ה׳, אם נטמאה בטומאת השלש קליפות הטמאות
the vitalizing soul could no longer ascend to G‑d, having been tainted by the impurity of the three impure kelipot.
שאין להן עליה לעולם, כי אם ביטול והעברה לגמרי
[For] these [kelipot] can never be elevated, but must be nullified and utterly destroyed,
כמו שכתוב: ואת רוח הטומאה אעביר מן הארץ
as it is written,2 “And I shall drive out the unclean spirit from the earth.”
Similarly, anything which derives its vitality from them can never ascend to holiness. Therefore, only the observance of all the 365 prohibitions allows theentire vital soul to ascend, without any part of it held back by the impurity of these kelipot.
ורמ״ח מצות עשה, להמשיך אור אין סוף ברוך הוא למטה
When, furthermore, every individual soul will fulfill also the 248 positive commandments, thereby drawing down the blessed Ein Sof-light below,
להעלות לו ולקשר ולייחד בו כללות הנפש החיונית שברמ״ח אברי הגוף ביחוד גמור, להיות לאחדים ממש
to elevate to Him and to bind and unite with Him the entire vital soul, which is in the 248 limbs of the body, in perfect unity, (such is the effect of a mitzvah in uniting the vital, animal soul with G‑d), so that they become actually one [with Him],
כמו שעלה ברצונו יתברך להיות לו דירה בתחתונים, והם לו למרכבה כמו האבות
in accordance with His Will that there be an abode for Him in the lower realms, and so great is this unity that they (the limbs of the body with the vitality of the animal soul invested in them) become a “chariot” for G‑d, as were the Patriarchs — whose every limb was in total submission to the Divine Will, wherefore they are designated as G‑d’s “chariots” — and so will every Jew become a chariot by performing the mitzvot.
FOOTNOTES
1. The Rebbe asks the following question: We are speaking here of the vital soul’s energy which is clothed in the letters of Torah study, prayer, and the performance of divine commandments. This energy comes from the person’s food and drink, which is under the dominion of kelipat nogah. And it is through the vitalizing soul that the life-force of kelipat nogah is transformed and absorbed into holiness. Moreover, the Alter Rebbe is now about to explain more specifically how the vitalizing soul (and through it the general vitality of this world) is united with G‑d’s Will and infinite light through the performance of both the positive and prohibitive commands of the Torah.
This being so, why does the Alter Rebbe interpolate the phrase, “When the whole neshamah, the divine soul in all of Israel,” when we are in reality speaking of the vitalizing soul?
The Rebbe says that the answer may possibly lie in the fact that a certain number of the 613 commandments are carried out through a person’s thought processes. The effect of the vitalizing soul, however, is felt mostly in those matters that relate to speech and action, inasmuch as the vitalizing soul is bound up with the corporeal limbs and organs. These are utilized for those commandments that are performed through action or speech. Conversely, the commandments performed through the person’s thought are for the most part carried out by the divine soul without the intermediacy of the vitalizing soul. The term “divine soul” is therefore used here, for the ultimate source of power that enables a person to perform all the commandments is the divine soul.
2. Zechariah 13:2.
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:
Daily Mitzvah
N352, N347, N346
Negative Commandment 352 (Digest)
Uncle-Nephew Incest
"You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's brother"—Leviticus 18:14.
It is forbidden for a man to engage in homosexual relations with his father's brother. One who does so transgresses two prohibitions: the general prohibition against homosexuality as well as this specific prohibition.
The 352nd prohibition is that one is forbidden from having [homosexual] relations with one's father's brother.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "do not commit a sexual offense against your father's brother."
One who unintentionally has relations with his father's brother must also bring two sin-offerings, as we explained regarding one's father.2 In tractate Sanhedrin they explain, "according to all opinions, one who has relations with his father's brother must bring two [sin-offerings], as the verse says, 'do not commit a sexual offense against your father's brother.' "
You should know3 that when I use the phrase, "acceptable testimony," I mean that there were two or more valid witnesses who gave the warning; that the testimony was given before a valid Beth Din of 23 members; and that it took place during a time when capital cases could be judged.4
It is clear that Scripture explicitly dictates kares for all the sexual prohibitions mentioned above. After listing all these prohibitions, the verse5says, "anyone who does any of these disgusting perversions — their souls shall be cut off (v'nich'r'su)." So too, any prohibition where we mentioned execution by Beth Din, it is also explicitly stated in Scripture. However, regarding the varying types of execution — stoning, strangulation, ors'reifah — some have come through the Oral Tradition and some are explicit in Scripture.
The details of all these prohibitions are explained in tractates Sanhedrin and Kerisus, and in a number of passages in Yevamos, Kesubos, and Kiddushin.
In the beginning of Kerisus it is explained that any transgression for which one receives kares if intentional and must bring a sin-offering if unintentional — if he is not sure [whether or not he did the transgression],6he must bring an asham talui.7 The sin-offering which is mentioned is an animal — either a female sheep or a female goat.
If you will examine the punishment mentioned regarding each prohibition, you will find that virtually every transgression where one receives kares if intentional and brings a sin-offering if unintentional — the sin-offering referred to is one of fixed value.8 There are two exceptions for which one receives kares if done intentionally, but if done unintentionally, one must bring a sin-offering of adjustable value, an oleh v'yored.9 These two transgressions are tumas mikdash10 and tumas kadashav;11 i.e. an impure person entering the Temple courtyard and an impure person eating meat from the sacrifices.
[If you examine all the punishments,] it will also be clear to you that for virtually every transgression where one receives kares if intentional, one must bring a sin-offering if unintentional. There is one exception — cursing G‑d's Name,12 for which one receives kares if done intentionally, but there is no sin-offering if done unintentionally.
[If you examine all the punishments,] it will also be clear to you that virtually every person who is subject to some form of execution by the Beth Din receives kares if he is not executed or they do not know about the transgression. There are ten exceptions, where the punishment is execution, but there is no kares — one who incites others to worship idols; one who incites a city to worship idols; a false prophet; one who prophesizes in the name of an idol; a rebellious elder; a rebellious son; a kidnapper; a murderer; one who strikes his father or mother; and one who curses his father or mother. In each of these cases, if the testimony is accepted, the person is put to death. If, however, they were unaware of the transgression or were unable to execute him, he has exposed himself to the death penalty, but does not receive kares. You should understand these principles and keep them in mind.
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. Lev. 18:14.
2. N351.
3. In the order of Sefer Hamitzvos, this mitzvah is the last of the sexual prohibitions punishable by kares (beginning with N330). The Rambam therefore summarizes a few points which apply equally to all these mitzvos (N330-352).
4. I.e. when the Holy Temple was in existence; when the Beth Din Hagadol was holding their sessions in the lishkas hagazis; and there was a Kohen who was bringing the sacrifices. See Hilchos Sanhedrin 4:11.
5. Lev. 18:29.
6. For example, there where two pieces of fat, one kosher and one not, and he is not sure which one he ate.
7. P70.
8. See P69.
9. See P72.
10.See N77.
11.See N129.
12.N60.
__________________________________________________
Negative Commandment 347 (Digest)
Adultery
"You shall not commit adultery"—Exodus 20:13.
It is forbidden to engage in adultery with a married woman.
The 347th prohibition is that one is forbidden to have relations with one's neighbor's wife.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "do not lie carnally with your neighbor's wife."
There are various forms of punishment for one who transgresses this prohibition. If she was a betrothed maiden [na'ara m'urasa],2 she is executed by stoning, as explained in Scripture.3 If she was the daughter of a kohen, she is executed by s'reifah. He, however, is executed by strangulation.4 If she is not the daughter of a kohen and is fully married,5both of them are executed by strangulation.
This all refers to where the testimony was accepted. If it was not, the penalty is kares.
All the above6 applies only if the transgression was done intentionally. If it was done unintentionally, a sin-offering must be brought.
This prohibition is repeated in the Ten Commandments in the verse,7 "do not commit adultery," which refers to relations with a married woman.
The Mechilta8 says, "Why does it say, 'do not commit adultery'? Because the verse,9 'both the adulterer and adulteress shall be put to death' teaches us only the punishment, not the actual prohibition.10 Therefore it says, 'do not commit adultery.' " And the Sifra says, "the verse,11 'if a man commits adultery with a married woman, and she is the wife of a fellow Jew [both the adulterer and adulteress shall be put to death]' teaches us only the punishment, not the actual prohibition. Therefore it says, 'do not commit adultery' — [to serve as the prohibition] both for the man and for the woman."
These sources do not use the verse, "do not lie carnally with your neighbor's wife" as the actual prohibition since it applies only to the man instead of both the man and woman. Similarly, our Sages had to extend the other sexual prohibitions to the woman as well [as to the man],12 as they said,13 "The verse,14 'they shall not approach to commit a sexual offense' addresses itself to two people [since it says 'they']. This comes to prohibit the man through the woman and the woman through the man."
Tractate Sanhedrin15 states, "all cases are included in the terms 'adulterer' and 'adulteress,' except that the daughter of a kohen was singled out for punishment by s'reifah, and the betrothed maiden for stoning." In our introduction16 we have already explained this statement.
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.Lev. 18:20.
2.I.e. she is after erusin but before n'suin (see P213), a virgin, and still in her father's house.
3.Deut. 22:21.
4.This refers to the latter case of the daughter of a kohen. In the case of a betrothed maiden, he too is executed by stoning. See Hilchos Issurei Biyah, 3:4.
5.Literally, "has had relations." This means that she is after n'suin — to exclude the case of ana'arah m'urasa.
6.I.e. that there is execution or kares.
7.Ex. 20:14; Deut. 5:17.
8.Parshas Yisro, ibid.
9.Lev. 20:10.
10.In general, every prohibition has one verse which gives the punishment for the transgression, and another verse which tells you that the act is prohibited.
11.Lev. 20:10.
12.Who is directly addressed in all these prohibitions.
13.Sifra, Acharei, Ch.13:1.
14.Lev. 18:6.
15.51b.
16.Principle 7. There, the Rambam disagrees with those who count adultery with a regular woman, with the kohen's daughter, and with a maiden all as separate mitzvos. He proves this from the passage in Sanhedrin, which explains that the verse which serves as the actual prohibition ("do not commit adultery") and the one which gives the punishment ("both the adulterer and adulteress shall be put to death") are general and include all cases. the fact that the Torah later gives more detail as to which type of execution applies in which case does not make them separate mitzvos.
_________________________________________________________
Negative Commandment 346 (Digest)
Relations with a Menstruating Woman
"And to a woman during the uncleanness of her separation you shall not come near"—Leviticus 18:19.
It is forbidden to have sexual relations with a menstruating woman during the seven-day period of her ritual impurity—and afterwards until she immerses in amikvah (ritual pool).
The 346th prohibition is that one is forbidden from having relations with a woman when she is still menstrualy impure, i.e. for seven days.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "do not approach a woman who is menstrually impure." She remains in this state even longer than seven days as long as she does not immerse [in a mikvah].3
One who transgresses this prohibition intentionally receives kares; and if it was unintentional, must bring a sin-offering.
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.In terms of practical halachah, this prohibition continues for a minimum of 12 days from the onset of menstruation and continues until she immerses in a kosher mikvah. There are many details regarding these laws which require careful study.
2.Lev. 18:19.
3.See previous note.
Negative Commandment 352 (Digest)
Uncle-Nephew Incest
"You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's brother"—Leviticus 18:14.
It is forbidden for a man to engage in homosexual relations with his father's brother. One who does so transgresses two prohibitions: the general prohibition against homosexuality as well as this specific prohibition.
The 352nd prohibition is that one is forbidden from having [homosexual] relations with one's father's brother.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "do not commit a sexual offense against your father's brother."
One who unintentionally has relations with his father's brother must also bring two sin-offerings, as we explained regarding one's father.2 In tractate Sanhedrin they explain, "according to all opinions, one who has relations with his father's brother must bring two [sin-offerings], as the verse says, 'do not commit a sexual offense against your father's brother.' "
You should know3 that when I use the phrase, "acceptable testimony," I mean that there were two or more valid witnesses who gave the warning; that the testimony was given before a valid Beth Din of 23 members; and that it took place during a time when capital cases could be judged.4
It is clear that Scripture explicitly dictates kares for all the sexual prohibitions mentioned above. After listing all these prohibitions, the verse5says, "anyone who does any of these disgusting perversions — their souls shall be cut off (v'nich'r'su)." So too, any prohibition where we mentioned execution by Beth Din, it is also explicitly stated in Scripture. However, regarding the varying types of execution — stoning, strangulation, ors'reifah — some have come through the Oral Tradition and some are explicit in Scripture.
The details of all these prohibitions are explained in tractates Sanhedrin and Kerisus, and in a number of passages in Yevamos, Kesubos, and Kiddushin.
In the beginning of Kerisus it is explained that any transgression for which one receives kares if intentional and must bring a sin-offering if unintentional — if he is not sure [whether or not he did the transgression],6he must bring an asham talui.7 The sin-offering which is mentioned is an animal — either a female sheep or a female goat.
If you will examine the punishment mentioned regarding each prohibition, you will find that virtually every transgression where one receives kares if intentional and brings a sin-offering if unintentional — the sin-offering referred to is one of fixed value.8 There are two exceptions for which one receives kares if done intentionally, but if done unintentionally, one must bring a sin-offering of adjustable value, an oleh v'yored.9 These two transgressions are tumas mikdash10 and tumas kadashav;11 i.e. an impure person entering the Temple courtyard and an impure person eating meat from the sacrifices.
[If you examine all the punishments,] it will also be clear to you that for virtually every transgression where one receives kares if intentional, one must bring a sin-offering if unintentional. There is one exception — cursing G‑d's Name,12 for which one receives kares if done intentionally, but there is no sin-offering if done unintentionally.
[If you examine all the punishments,] it will also be clear to you that virtually every person who is subject to some form of execution by the Beth Din receives kares if he is not executed or they do not know about the transgression. There are ten exceptions, where the punishment is execution, but there is no kares — one who incites others to worship idols; one who incites a city to worship idols; a false prophet; one who prophesizes in the name of an idol; a rebellious elder; a rebellious son; a kidnapper; a murderer; one who strikes his father or mother; and one who curses his father or mother. In each of these cases, if the testimony is accepted, the person is put to death. If, however, they were unaware of the transgression or were unable to execute him, he has exposed himself to the death penalty, but does not receive kares. You should understand these principles and keep them in mind.
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. Lev. 18:14.
2. N351.
3. In the order of Sefer Hamitzvos, this mitzvah is the last of the sexual prohibitions punishable by kares (beginning with N330). The Rambam therefore summarizes a few points which apply equally to all these mitzvos (N330-352).
4. I.e. when the Holy Temple was in existence; when the Beth Din Hagadol was holding their sessions in the lishkas hagazis; and there was a Kohen who was bringing the sacrifices. See Hilchos Sanhedrin 4:11.
5. Lev. 18:29.
6. For example, there where two pieces of fat, one kosher and one not, and he is not sure which one he ate.
7. P70.
8. See P69.
9. See P72.
10.See N77.
11.See N129.
12.N60.
__________________________________________________
Negative Commandment 347 (Digest)
Adultery
"You shall not commit adultery"—Exodus 20:13.
It is forbidden to engage in adultery with a married woman.
The 347th prohibition is that one is forbidden to have relations with one's neighbor's wife.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "do not lie carnally with your neighbor's wife."
There are various forms of punishment for one who transgresses this prohibition. If she was a betrothed maiden [na'ara m'urasa],2 she is executed by stoning, as explained in Scripture.3 If she was the daughter of a kohen, she is executed by s'reifah. He, however, is executed by strangulation.4 If she is not the daughter of a kohen and is fully married,5both of them are executed by strangulation.
This all refers to where the testimony was accepted. If it was not, the penalty is kares.
All the above6 applies only if the transgression was done intentionally. If it was done unintentionally, a sin-offering must be brought.
This prohibition is repeated in the Ten Commandments in the verse,7 "do not commit adultery," which refers to relations with a married woman.
The Mechilta8 says, "Why does it say, 'do not commit adultery'? Because the verse,9 'both the adulterer and adulteress shall be put to death' teaches us only the punishment, not the actual prohibition.10 Therefore it says, 'do not commit adultery.' " And the Sifra says, "the verse,11 'if a man commits adultery with a married woman, and she is the wife of a fellow Jew [both the adulterer and adulteress shall be put to death]' teaches us only the punishment, not the actual prohibition. Therefore it says, 'do not commit adultery' — [to serve as the prohibition] both for the man and for the woman."
These sources do not use the verse, "do not lie carnally with your neighbor's wife" as the actual prohibition since it applies only to the man instead of both the man and woman. Similarly, our Sages had to extend the other sexual prohibitions to the woman as well [as to the man],12 as they said,13 "The verse,14 'they shall not approach to commit a sexual offense' addresses itself to two people [since it says 'they']. This comes to prohibit the man through the woman and the woman through the man."
Tractate Sanhedrin15 states, "all cases are included in the terms 'adulterer' and 'adulteress,' except that the daughter of a kohen was singled out for punishment by s'reifah, and the betrothed maiden for stoning." In our introduction16 we have already explained this statement.
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.Lev. 18:20.
2.I.e. she is after erusin but before n'suin (see P213), a virgin, and still in her father's house.
3.Deut. 22:21.
4.This refers to the latter case of the daughter of a kohen. In the case of a betrothed maiden, he too is executed by stoning. See Hilchos Issurei Biyah, 3:4.
5.Literally, "has had relations." This means that she is after n'suin — to exclude the case of ana'arah m'urasa.
6.I.e. that there is execution or kares.
7.Ex. 20:14; Deut. 5:17.
8.Parshas Yisro, ibid.
9.Lev. 20:10.
10.In general, every prohibition has one verse which gives the punishment for the transgression, and another verse which tells you that the act is prohibited.
11.Lev. 20:10.
12.Who is directly addressed in all these prohibitions.
13.Sifra, Acharei, Ch.13:1.
14.Lev. 18:6.
15.51b.
16.Principle 7. There, the Rambam disagrees with those who count adultery with a regular woman, with the kohen's daughter, and with a maiden all as separate mitzvos. He proves this from the passage in Sanhedrin, which explains that the verse which serves as the actual prohibition ("do not commit adultery") and the one which gives the punishment ("both the adulterer and adulteress shall be put to death") are general and include all cases. the fact that the Torah later gives more detail as to which type of execution applies in which case does not make them separate mitzvos.
_________________________________________________________
Negative Commandment 346 (Digest)
Relations with a Menstruating Woman
"And to a woman during the uncleanness of her separation you shall not come near"—Leviticus 18:19.
It is forbidden to have sexual relations with a menstruating woman during the seven-day period of her ritual impurity—and afterwards until she immerses in amikvah (ritual pool).
The 346th prohibition is that one is forbidden from having relations with a woman when she is still menstrualy impure, i.e. for seven days.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "do not approach a woman who is menstrually impure." She remains in this state even longer than seven days as long as she does not immerse [in a mikvah].3
One who transgresses this prohibition intentionally receives kares; and if it was unintentional, must bring a sin-offering.
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.In terms of practical halachah, this prohibition continues for a minimum of 12 days from the onset of menstruation and continues until she immerses in a kosher mikvah. There are many details regarding these laws which require careful study.
2.Lev. 18:19.
3.See previous note.
See previous note.
Berachot - Chapter One
HILCHOT BERACHOT
THE LAWS OF BLESSINGS
THE LAWS OF BLESSINGS
It contains one positive mitzvah: To bless [God's] great and holy name after eating [a meal].
This mitzvah is explained in the following chapters.
This mitzvah is explained in the following chapters.
Halacha 1
It is a positive mitzvah from the Torah to bless [God] after eating satisfying food, as [Deuteronomy 8:10] states: "When you have eaten and are satiated, you shall bless God, your Lord."
The Torah itself requires a person to recite grace only when he eats to the point of satiation, as implied by the above verse, "When you have eaten and are satiated, you shall bless...." The Sages, however, ordained that one should recite grace after eating [an amount of bread equal] to the size of an olive.
Halacha 2
Similarly, the Rabbis ordained that we recite blessings before partaking of any food. Even when one wants to eat the slightest amount of food or drink, one should recite a blessing, and then derive benefit from it.
Similarly, when smelling a pleasant fragrance, one should recite a blessing and then smell. Anyone who derives benefit [from this world] without reciting a blessing is considered as if he misappropriated a sacred article.
The Rabbis also ordained that one should recite a blessing after eating or drinking, provided one drinks a revi'it and eats a k'zayit. A person who [merely] tastes food is not required to recite a blessing before partaking of it or afterwards unless he partakes of a revi'it.
Halacha 3
Just as we recite blessings for benefit which we derive from the world, we should also recite blessings for each mitzvah before we fulfill it.
Similarly, the Sages instituted many blessings as expressions of praise and thanks to God and as a means of petition, so that we will always remember the Creator, even though we have not received any benefit or performed a mitzvah.
Halacha 4
Thus, all the blessings can be divided into three categories:
a) blessings over benefit;
b) blessings over mitzvot;
c) blessings recited as expressions of praise and thanks to God and as a means of petition, so that we will always remember the Creator and fear Him.
a) blessings over benefit;
b) blessings over mitzvot;
c) blessings recited as expressions of praise and thanks to God and as a means of petition, so that we will always remember the Creator and fear Him.
Halacha 5
The text of all the blessings was ordained by Ezra and his court. It is not fit to alter it, to add to it, or to detract from it. Whoever alters the text of a blessing from that ordained by the Sages is making an error.
A blessing that does not include the mention of God's name and His sovereignty [over the world] is not considered a blessing unless it is recited in proximity to a blessing [which meets these criteria].
Halacha 6
All the blessings may be recited in any language, provided one recites [a translation of] the text ordained by the Sages. [A person who] changes that text fulfills his obligation nonetheless - since he mentioned God's name, His sovereignty, and the subject of the blessing - although he did so in a ordinary language.
Halacha 7
A person should recite all the blessings loud enough for him to hear what he is saying. Nevertheless, a person who does not recite a blessing out loud fulfills his obligation, whether he verbalizes the blessing or merely recites it in his heart.
Halacha 8
Whenever one recites a blessing, one should not make an interruption between the blessing and the subject for which the blessing is recited. If one makes an interruption with other matters, one must recite the blessing again.
If, however, one makes an interruption which relates to the subject of the blessing, one does not have to repeat the blessing. What is implied? When a person recites a blessing over bread and before eating says, "Bring salt," "Bring food," "Give so-and-so to eat," "Bring food for the animal," or the like, he need not repeat the blessing.
Halacha 9
A person who is ritually impure is permitted to recite all the blessings. This applies regardless of whether the impurity is of a type from which one can purify oneself on the same day or not.
A person who is naked should not recite a blessing until he covers his genitals. To whom does this apply? To men. Women may recite blessings [while naked], provided they sit with their genitals facing the ground.
Halacha 10
[The following principle applies to] all blessings: Although a person has already recited them and fulfilled his own obligation, he may recite them again for others who have not fulfilled their obligation, so that they can fulfill their obligation.
There is, however, one exception: blessings over benefit which is not associated with a mitzvah. In this instance, one may not recite a blessing for others unless one enjoys benefit together with them. Nevertheless, one may recite blessings for benefit which is associated with a mitzvah - e.g., eating matzah on Pesach and reciting kiddush [on Sabbaths and festivals] - for others. They may then eat or drink, even though the one [who recites the blessing] does not eat or drink with them.
Halacha 11
Whenever a person listens to the entire recitation of a blessing with the intention of fulfilling his obligation, he is considered to have fulfilled his obligation although he does not answer Amen. Whoever answers Amen to a blessing recited by another person is considered as if he recited the blessing himself, provided the person who recites the blessing is obligated to recite that blessing.
If the person who recites the blessing is obligated only because of a Rabbinic ordinance, while the person responding is obligated by Torah law, the listener cannot fulfill his obligation until he repeats in response [to the one reciting the blessings] or until he hears [the blessing recited] by someone who, like him, is obligated by Torah law.
Halacha 12
When many people gather together to eat [a meal with] bread or to drink wine, and one recites the blessing while the others respond Amen, they are [all] permitted to eat and drink. If, however, they did not intend to eat together, but rather they each came on their own initiative, although they all eat from a single loaf of bread, each one should recite the blessings [before eating] by himself.
When does the above apply? With regard to bread and wine. With regard to other foods, however, which do not require [premeditated intent] to be eaten together as a group, if one person recited a blessing and everyone answeredAmen, they may eat and drink although they did not intend to gather together as a group.
Halacha 13
Whenever a person hears a Jew recite a blessing, he is obligated to respondAmen, although
a) he did not hear the blessing in its entirety,
b) he was not obligated to recite that blessing himself.
a) he did not hear the blessing in its entirety,
b) he was not obligated to recite that blessing himself.
One should not respond Amen if the person reciting the blessing is a gentile, an apostate, a Samaritan, a child in the midst of study, or an adult who altered the text of the blessing.
Halacha 14
Whenever responding Amen, one should not recite a rushed Amen, a cut offAmen, nor a short or a prolonged Amen, but rather an Amen of intermediate length.
One should not raise one's voice above that of the person reciting the blessing. Whoever did not hear a blessing that he is obligated to recite should not answerAmen together with the others.
Halacha 15
Whoever recites a blessing for which he is not obligated is considered as if he took God's name in vain. He is considered as one who took a false oath, and it is forbidden to answer Amen after his blessing.
We may teach children the blessings using the full text. Even though in this manner, they recite blessings in vain in the midst of their study, it is permissible. One should not recite Amen after their blessings. A person who answers Amenafter their blessings does not fulfill his obligation.
Halacha 16
It is demeaning for a person to recite Amen after his own blessings. When, however, one concludes the last of a series of blessings, it is praiseworthy to answer Amen - e.g., after the blessing, Boneh Yerushalayim in grace, and after the final blessing [following] the recitation of the Shema in the evening service. Similarly, always, at the conclusion of the last of a series of blessings, one should recite Amen after one's own blessing.
Halacha 17
Why is Amen recited after the blessing Boneh Yerushalayim, although it is followed by the blessing Hatov v'hametiv? Because the latter blessing was ordained in the era of the Mishnah and is considered to be an addition. The conclusion of the essential blessings of grace is Boneh Yerushalayim.
Why is Amen not recited after the blessing Ahavat olam? Because it is the conclusion of the blessings recited before the Shema. Similarly, in other instances when [a series of] blessings are recited before a practice - e.g., the blessings recited before the reading of the Megillah or the kindling of the Chanukah lights - Amen [is not recited] lest it constitute an interruption between the blessings and [the fulfillment of] the performance over which they are being recited.
Halacha 18
Why is Amen not recited after the blessing over fruits and the like? Because it is only a single blessing, and Amen is recited only after a concluding blessing that follows another blessing or blessings - e.g., the blessings of the king or the blessings of the High Priest - to signify the conclusion of the blessings. Therefore, reciting Amen is appropriate.
Halacha 19
When a person eats a forbidden food - whether consciously or inadvertently - he should not recite a blessing beforehand or afterward.
What is implied? If one eats tevel - even food that is classified as tevel by Rabbinical decree, the first tithe from which terumah was not separated, or the second tithe or sanctified foods that were not redeemed in the proper manner, one should not recite a blessing. Needless to say, this applies if one ate meat from an animal that was not ritually slaughtered or was trefah or if one drank wine used as a libation for idol worship.
What is implied? If one eats tevel - even food that is classified as tevel by Rabbinical decree, the first tithe from which terumah was not separated, or the second tithe or sanctified foods that were not redeemed in the proper manner, one should not recite a blessing. Needless to say, this applies if one ate meat from an animal that was not ritually slaughtered or was trefah or if one drank wine used as a libation for idol worship.
Halacha 20
If, however, a person ate d'mai, although it is fit only for the poor, the first tithe from which terumat ma'aser was separated, even though the proper amount forterumah was not separated because the tithe was taken while the grain was still in sheaves, or the second tithe or sanctified food that was redeemed, but an additional fifth was not added upon it, one should recite a blessing beforehand and afterwards. The same applies in other similar situations.
Commentary Halacha 1
It is a positive mitzvah - Sefer HaMitzvot (Positive Commandment 19) andSefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 430) include this as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
from the Torah - as opposed to the other blessings, which were ordained by the Rabbis.
to bless [God] after eating satisfying food - The Kiryat Sefer and others interpret "satisfying food" as referring to bread made from the five species of grain mentioned in Chapter 3, Halachah 1. Significantly, the Rishon LeTzionand the Noda BiYhudah maintain that with this expression, the Rambam is implying that the blessing al hamichyah, which is recited over other foods made from these species, also has its source in the Torah itself (See also Beit Yosef, Orach Chayim 209).
as [Deuteronomy 8:10] states: "When you have eaten and are satiated, you shall bless God, your Lord."
The Torah itself requires a person to recite grace only when he eats to the point of satiation - The Rabbis do not specify a standard quantity or measure of food that a person must eat to have reached this state. Rather, they leave the matter up to the person's own feelings.
as implied by the above verse, "When you have eaten and are satiated, you shall bless...." - The proof-text clearly indicates that the obligation to "bless" applies only when one is "satiated."
The Sages, however, ordained - Berachot 20b relates:
The angels complained to the Holy One, blessed be He: "...In Your Torah, it is written [that You] 'will not show favor, nor take bribes,' and yet You show favor to the Jews...."
God replied: "Are the Jews not worthy that I show them favor? In My Torah, I have written, ‘When you have eaten and are satiated, you shall bless,’ and they have nevertheless adopted the stringency of reciting grace after eating an amount equivalent to an olive."
God replied: "Are the Jews not worthy that I show them favor? In My Torah, I have written, ‘When you have eaten and are satiated, you shall bless,’ and they have nevertheless adopted the stringency of reciting grace after eating an amount equivalent to an olive."
that one should recite grace after eating [an amount of bread equal] to the size of an olive. - a k'zayit. This is the measurement generally intended by the Torah for the mitzvot and prohibitions concerned with eating. In contemporary measure, it is equivalent to 28.8 cc according to Shiurei Torah, and 33 cc according to the Chazon Ish.
Note the commentary on Chapter 5, Halachah 16, which discusses the Ra'avad's opinion that anyone who eats a k'zayit of bread is required by the Torah to recite grace.
Commentary Halacha 2
Similarly, the Rabbis ordained - The definition of this obligation as Rabbinical in nature has aroused questions. Berachot 35a states that this concept can be derived through one of the thirteen principles of Biblical interpretation. Thus, it has all the authority of a Torah law. Though the Rambam (see the Introduction to Sefer HaMitzvot, General Principle 2) refers to laws derived in this manner as מדברי סופרים - literally, "from the words of our Sages," the same term used here - his intent is not to imply that the law did not originate in the Torah itself.
Tosafot (Berachot, loc. cit.), however, explain that the Talmud ultimately does not accept the interpretation that the obligation is derived from the Torah, and maintain that the obligation to recite blessings is Rabbinic in origin. Even according to these opinions, it appears that the Sages ordained the recitation of blessings rather early in our national history. Midrashim referring to the age of King David explicitly mention the recitation of blessings, and there are intimations of this obligation in references to earlier periods. See also the commentary on Halachah 5.
that we recite blessings before partaking of any food. -Berachot, loc. cit., states: "It is forbidden to benefit from this world without reciting a blessing." Therefore,
Even when one wants to eat the slightest amount of food or drink - i.e., less than a k'zayit or a revi'it
one should recite a blessing, and then derive benefit from it. - In this instance, however, a blessing need not be recited after eating or drinking.
Similarly, when smelling a pleasant fragrance, one should recite a blessing - See Chapter 9 with regard to the particular blessings required.
and then smell. - Berachot 43b quotes Psalms 150:6: "All souls shall praise God," and asks: "From what does a soul benefit? Fragrance."
Anyone who derives benefit [from this world] without reciting a blessing is considered as if he misappropriated a sacred article. - Berachot 35a explains that the entire world belongs to God, as Psalms 24:1 declares: "The earth and its fullness are God's." Although God allows man to benefit from this world, that license is granted only when man acknowledges God's control by reciting a blessing.
The Rabbis also ordained that one should recite a blessing after eating or drinking, provided one drinks a revi'it - The word revi'it means "a fourth." It is one fourth of a larger measure, known as a log. In contemporary measure, a revi'it is equivalent to 86.6 cc according to Shiurei Torah, and 150 cc according to the Chazon Ish.
and eats a k'zayit. - Anything less is not considered significant enough to require a blessing afterwards. A blessing beforehand must nevertheless be recited, because "it is forbidden to benefit from this world without a blessing."
There is, however, a law which appears to be an exception to this principle:
A person who [merely] tastes food is not required to recite a blessing before partaking of it or afterwards unless he partakes of a revi'it. - Rav David Arameah explains that this law applies only when one spits out the food one tastes. If one swallows it, a blessing is required. The Kessef Mishnehdiffers, and maintains that even when a person swallows the food, since his intent is not to benefit from it - but merely to taste it - and he partakes of only a very small amount, a blessing is not required.
Commentary Halacha 3
Just as we recite blessings for benefit which we derive from the world -as explained above,
we should also recite blessings for each mitzvah before we fulfill it. - The laws governing the blessings recited over the performance of mitzvot are discussed in Chapter 11.
Similarly, the Sages instituted many blessings as expressions of praise and thanks to God and as a means of petition - See Chapter 10.
so that we will always remember the Creator, even though we have not received any benefit or performed a mitzvah. - By reciting blessings over the special events which occur to us, we become conscious of God's control of all aspects of our daily existence. We learn to appreciate Him, not only as the Creator who brought the world into being, but as the One who directs the functioning of our lives and the world around us.
Commentary Halacha 5
The text of all the blessings was ordained by Ezra and his court. -Berachot 33a explains that when the Men of the Great Assembly established the text of the prayer service (see Hilchot Tefillah 1:4), they also established the text for the various blessings and for kiddush and havdalah.
This, however, does not mean that the blessings were not recited beforehand. Rather, just as explained with regard to prayer, before Ezra's time each person would recite the blessings according to his own inspiration and ability to express himself. In Ezra's time, many people had difficulty expressing themselves eloquently and, therefore, Ezra and his court established a standard text.
It is not fit to alter it - to substitute different words
to add to it, or to detract from it. Whoever alters the text of a blessing from that ordained by the Sages is making an error. - The Radbaz (Vol. 5, Responsum 1424) states that as long as the person mentions God's name, His sovereignty over the world, and the subject of the blessing, he fulfills his obligation even if he does not use the text ordained by the Sages. (This interpretation is borne out by the next halachah.)
The Kessef Mishneh explains that the Rambam's phraseology alludes to two types of changes:
a) Changes which do not substantially alter the blessing from the text ordained by the Sages. With regard to such changes, the Rambam uses the expression "it is not fit," which implies that although the person's deed is not desirable, he fulfills his obligation.
b) A change of an innovative nature which alters the text of the blessing entirely. These changes the Rambam considers as "errors" which prevent a person from fulfilling his obligation. See also Halachah 13, Berachot 40b, andHilchot Kri'at Shema 1:7.
a) Changes which do not substantially alter the blessing from the text ordained by the Sages. With regard to such changes, the Rambam uses the expression "it is not fit," which implies that although the person's deed is not desirable, he fulfills his obligation.
b) A change of an innovative nature which alters the text of the blessing entirely. These changes the Rambam considers as "errors" which prevent a person from fulfilling his obligation. See also Halachah 13, Berachot 40b, andHilchot Kri'at Shema 1:7.
A blessing that does not include the mention of God's name - i.e., the phrase י-ה-ו-ה א-להנו (God, our Lord),
and His sovereignty [over the world]- i.e., the phrase מלך העולם (King of the universe),
is not considered a blessing - and the person reciting it does not fulfill his obligation. See Berachot 40b.
unless it is recited in proximity to a blessing [which meets these criteria]. - For example, the second and third blessings in grace, which do not mention God's sovereignty because they follow directly after the first blessing, which does. Since the blessings are recited in one continuum, one's original statement is applied to the subsequent blessings as well.
Commentary Halacha 6
All the blessings may be recited in any language - Although the text ordained by Ezra and his court was in Hebrew, there is no absolute requirement to use that language
provided one recites [a translation of] the text ordained by the Sages. -Note Shulchan Aruch HaRav 185:1-2, which quotes an opinion that maintains that a person who recites a blessing does not fulfill his obligation unless he understands what he is saying, even when he recites the blessing in Hebrew. Although there are other opinions that maintain that as long as the blessing is recited in Hebrew, one fulfills his obligation, Shulchan Aruch HaRav concludes that it is preferable for a person who does not understand Hebrew to recite the blessings - in particular, the grace - in a language he understands.
[A person who] changes that text - reciting a different blessing from that ordained by the Sages
fulfills his obligation nonetheless - since he mentioned God's name, His sovereignty, and the subject of the blessing - although he did so in a ordinary language. –I.e., a language other than “the Holy Tongue,” Hebrew. See Berachot 40b, which states that a person who recites the phrase "Blessed be God, Master of this bread" in Aramaic fulfills his obligation for the first blessing of grace. Note the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 167:10) which requires that God's sovereignty over the world also be mentioned.
Commentary Halacha 7
A person should recite all the blessings loud enough for him to hear what he is saying. Nevertheless, a person who does not recite a blessing out loud fulfills his obligation, whether he verbalizes the blessing -pronouncing the words with his lips
or merely recites it in his heart. - The Rambam's statements are based onBerachot 15a-b, which states:
A person who reads the Shema in a tone too low to hear fulfills his obligation. Rabbi Yosse states: "He does not fulfill his obligation."...
The difference of opinion applies with regard to the recitation of the Shemabecause it states, "Hear, Israel." With regard to other mitzvot (blessings, Rashi), everyone agrees that one fulfills one's obligation.
The difference of opinion applies with regard to the recitation of the Shemabecause it states, "Hear, Israel." With regard to other mitzvot (blessings, Rashi), everyone agrees that one fulfills one's obligation.
The Rambam's decision that, after the fact, one fulfills his obligation by reciting grace or other blessings in thought alone is not accepted by other authorities. Rashi, Rabbenu Asher, the Tur, and the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 185:2 maintain that though one need not recite the blessings out loud, it is necessary to subvocalize them, pronouncing them with one's lips.
Commentary Halacha 8
Whenever one recites a blessing, one should not make an interruption between the blessing and the subject for which the blessing is recited. -This applies with regard to both blessings recited before food and blessings recited before performing a mitzvah.
If one makes an interruption with other matters, one must recite the blessing again. - This is a literal translation of the Rambam's words. NoteShulchan Aruch HaRav 206:3 which states that even remaining silent for the time it takes to say, Shalom alecha, Rebbe constitutes an interruption.
If, however, one makes an interruption which relates to the subject of the blessing, one does not have to repeat the blessing. - The Rambam's phraseology appears to indicate that, at the outset, one should not make any interruption. If, however, the situation demands that an interruption be made or if one inadvertently does so, the blessing need not be repeated when it is of the following nature.
What is implied? When a person recites a blessing over bread and before eating says, "Bring salt," "Bring food," "Give --- to eat," "Bring food for the animal," or the like - See Berachot 40a and commentaries, which explain why each of these statements is connected with the meal.
he need not repeat the blessing.
Commentary Halacha 9
A person who is ritually impure is permitted to recite all the blessings. - InHilchot Kri'at Shema 4:8, the Rambam states:
The words of Torah never contract impurity. Rather, they remain pure forever, as [Jeremiah 23:29] states: "Are not My words as fire...." Just as fire can never contract impurity, the words of Torah never contract impurity.
In Hilchot Tefillah 4:4, the Rambam applies these same principles to the words of prayer.
This applies regardless of whether the impurity is of a type from which one can purify oneself on the same day - e.g., the impurity which comes as a result of contact with the carcass of an animal. In this case, to regain ritual purity, one must immerse oneself in a mikveh and wait until nightfall.
or not. - There are some impurities - e.g., the impurity of a זב or the impurity resulting from contact with a human corpse - which require an extended period of time and other rituals besides immersion to regain ritual purity. (See alsoBerachot 3:4-6 and the Rambam's commentary on those Mishnayot.)
A person who is naked should not recite a blessing until he covers his genitals. - As explained in Hilchot Kri'at Shema 3:16-17, a person is not allowed to recite the Shema in a place where he can see naked people or when he, himself, is naked. The same principles apply with regard to the recitation of blessings.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 206:3) adds that a person may not recite any blessings unless there is a separation between his heart and his genitals and his head is covered.
To whom does this apply? To men - whose genitals protrude. In contrast,
Women may recite blessings [while naked], provided they sit with their genitals facing the ground. - Note the Rambam's Commentary on theMishnah, Challah 2:3, and the Magen Avraham's interpretation of his words (206:5).
Commentary Halacha 10
[The following principle applies to] all blessings: Although a person has already recited them and fulfilled his own obligation - In one of his responsa, the Rambam explains that the same principle applies when the person reciting the blessing has not fulfilled his obligation, but does not desire to do so at the present time.
he may recite them again for others who have not fulfilled their obligation - Rashi, Rosh HaShanah 29a, explains this principle on the basis of the concept of ערבות (mutual responsibility) that exists among the Jewish people. Each Jew shares a responsibility for his colleague's observance. Therefore, although he personally has already recited the blessing, he has not discharged his obligation entirely until each of his fellow Jews fulfills the requirements incumbent upon him.
so that they can fulfill their obligation. - The Rambam describes the manner in which the listener fulfills his obligation in the next halachah.
For the above principle to apply, however, the listener must be obligated to fulfill the mitzvah. When the listener is not obligated - e.g., a woman for shofar blowing - a person should not recite a blessing unless he is obligated himself (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 589:6).
There is, however, one exception: blessings over benefit which is not associated with a mitzvah - e.g., the blessings recited over food in an ordinary meal.
In this instance, one may not recite a blessing for others unless one enjoys benefit together with them. - In this instance, there is no obligation for a person to partake of this food. Hence, the principle of ערבות does not apply (Rashi, loc. cit.) unless the person reciting the blessing also desires to partake of the food. Should he desire to do so, the blessing he recites may include others as well. (Note an alternate explanation in the commentary on Chapter 5, Halachah 16.)
Nevertheless, one may recite blessings for benefit which is associated with a mitzvah - e.g., eating matzah on Pesach and reciting kiddush [on Sabbaths and festivals] - i.e., not only the blessing al achilat matzah, which mentions the mitzvah of eating matzah, but also the blessing hamotzi, which is recited for eating bread; not only the blessing of kiddush, but also the blessingborey pri hagafen, on the wine.
for others - since, in this instance, the only way the mitzvah can be fulfilled is by eating the food.
Note the Tur, Orach Chayim 273, which states that, at the outset, a person who has already recited kiddush should not recite kiddush for others, unless they are incapable of doing so themselves.
They may then eat or drink, even though the one [who recites the blessing] does not eat or drink with them. - Note Sefer HaKovetz, which states that a person is not allowed to recitehamotzi to enable a colleague to partake of the Sabbath meal when he does not join them. There is reason to assume that, since partaking of such a meal is a mitzvah, one would be allowed to recite a blessing, and thus enable a colleague to do so. Nevertheless, following the reasoning mentioned in Sefer HaKovetz, the Shulchan Aruch(Orach Chayim 167:20) and commentaries mention only the examples cited by the Rambam.
Commentary Halacha 11
Whenever a person listens to the entire recitation of a blessing with the intention of fulfilling his obligation - The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim213:3) rules that the person reciting the blessing also must intend that the listener fulfill his obligation by hearing the blessing.
The Beit Yosef and the Bayit Chadash 213 explain that this ruling points to a question of a larger scope: Do mitzvot of the Rabbis require intention, or is it possible to fulfill one's obligation by performing the required act without any intent.
According to the latter view, although the person reciting the blessing does not have the intention of fulfilling the obligation of the listener, since "one who listens is considered as though he responded," the listener is considered to have recited the blessing, and thus to have fulfilled his obligation.
In contrast, the former view requires that one have a conscious desire to fulfill one's obligation when fulfilling a Rabbinic obligation. Since the person reciting the blessing did not have such an intention on behalf of the listener, the listener cannot fulfill his obligation.
he is considered to have fulfilled his obligation although he does not answer Amen. - According to the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 167:13, 213:1), this applies to all blessings. The Ramah (Orach Chayim 213:1) differs, however, and explains that with regard to blessings for mitzvot, the principle stated by the Rambam is acceptable. With regard to blessings for deriving benefit, however, different rules apply, and a person can fulfill his obligation to recite a blessing by listening to someone else's blessing only when they intentionally sit down to break bread or drink wine together. See the commentary on the following halachah.
Sukkah 38b states:
What is the source which teaches that a person who listens is considered as if he responded?
[II Kings 22:16] mentions: "all the words of the scroll read by the king." Did Josaiah [the king] read them? Shafan read them.... Thus, this teaches that a person who listens is considered as if he responded.
[II Kings 22:16] mentions: "all the words of the scroll read by the king." Did Josaiah [the king] read them? Shafan read them.... Thus, this teaches that a person who listens is considered as if he responded.
Whoever answers Amen to a blessing recited by another person is considered as if he recited the blessing himself - Berachot 53b mentions two opinions, one which equates the person answeringAmen with the person actually reciting the blessing (the opinion cited by the Rambam), and one which considers the person answering to be on an even higher level.
Thus, with this statement, the Rambam is explaining that, although a person can fulfill his obligation by listening without answering Amen, when he answers he is considered as if he actually recited the blessing himself (Kessef Mishneh).
provided the person who recites the blessing is obligated to recite that blessing. - This excludes a blessing recited by a mentally incapable individual, a deaf-mute, or a child, who are not obligated to fulfill mitzvot (Berachot 20a,Rosh HaShanah 29a).
In Chapter 5, Halachot 15-16, the Rambam mentions that an adult who did not eat a full meal and is obligated to recite grace only by Rabbinic decree can fulfill his obligation by listening to the blessings recited by a child. This, however, is a unique instance and does not apply to blessings recited in the prayer service or over the fulfillment of other mitzvot. With regard to grace, the child's recitation of the blessings comes as a result of a single Rabbinic obligation. Hence, he can fulfill the mitzvah on behalf of an individual whose obligation is also Rabbinic in origin.
In contrast, with regard to other blessings, the blessings themselves are Rabbinic in origin, and the child's obligation to recite them constitutes a second Rabbinic obligation. Accordingly, he cannot fulfill the mitzvah for someone whose obligation stems from a single Rabbinic decree (Tosafot, Megillah 19b).
If the person who recites the blessing is obligated only because of a Rabbinic ordinance - e.g., an adult male who has not eaten to the point of satiation
while the person responding is obligated by Torah law - an adult who ate to the point of satiation
the listener cannot fulfill his obligation until he repeats - word for word
in response [to the one reciting the blessings] - Our translation (based onSefer HaKovetz and the Bnei Binyamin) does conform to Biblical and Mishnaic interpretations of the word יענה. It does, however, appear slightly forced. Nevertheless, it is the most appropriate way to interpret the Rambam's words according to the halachah which states that, only with regard to grace, may an adult fulfill his obligation to recite a blessing by answering Amen to a child's blessing.
Rav Kapach presents a unique thesis, maintaining that in this halachah the Rambam is teaching us that an adult can fulfill his obligation to recite any blessing by responding Amen to a blessing recited by a child. His interpretation, though contrary to the accepted halachah, allows for a more direct translation of the Rambam's words.
or until he hears [the blessing recited] by someone who, like him, is obligated by Torah law. - In the latter case, the listener is not obligated to recite Amen.
Commentary Halacha 12
When many people gather together to eat [a meal with] bread or to drink wine, and one recites the blessing - Our translation follows the standard text of the Mishneh Torah. According to the source for this law, Berachot 6:6, and the manner it is quoted in the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 167:11), it should read, "one person should recite the blessing." This is the preferred manner for the group to bless their food, because "within the multitude of people is the glory of the king" (Proverbs 14:28).
Shulchan Aruch HaRav 167:18 relates that today, even when eating a meal as a group, it is customary for each person to recite the blessing over bread himself, so that an interruption is not made between the recitation of the blessing and partaking of the food.
while the others respond Amen, they are [all] permitted to eat and drink -without reciting blessings themselves. They fulfill their obligation by listening to the blessing recited previously.
If, however, they did not intend to eat together, but rather they each came on their own initiative, although they all eat from a single loaf of bread, each one should recite the blessings [before eating] by himself. -Although this is the desired practice, if one answers Amen to another person's blessing, he fulfills his obligation, as stated in the previous halachah.
This reflects the position of the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 167:13). TheMagen Avraham, however, differs, and maintains that one cannot fulfill his obligation to recite blessings that involve benefit unless one had the intention of eating together with the other person and responding to his blessings. This view takes a more lenient position regarding blessings over mitzvot, which we are obligated to fulfill, than regarding the blessings over food, which we are not obligated to eat.
When does the above apply? With regard to bread and wine. With regard to other foods, however, which do not require [premeditated intent] to be eaten together as a group - Our interpretation of הסבה is based on the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Berachot 6:6.
if one person recited a blessing and everyone answered Amen, they may eat and drink although they did not intend to gather together as a group. - The Ra'avad differs and maintains that when eating foods other than bread or wine, each person should recite the blessings for himself. (Significantly, on this issue there is a responsum which is attributed to the Rambam. However, it has raised difficulties among the commentaries and its authenticity has been challenged.)
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 213:1) accepts the Rambam's opinion, but states that this applies only when people sit around a single table as a group. Eating in a single room is not sufficient. The Ramah, however, quotes the Ra'avad's view.
Commentary Halacha 13
Until now, the Rambam has dealt with the recitation of Amen within the context of fulfilling one's own obligation by responding to another person's blessing. In this and the following halachot, the Rambam deals with the recitation of Amenas an obligation in its own right.
Whenever a person hears a Jew recite a blessing, he is obligated - This represents a difference of opinion between the Rambam and the Tur (Orach Chayim 215), who considers respondingAmen a matter left to our own volition. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 215:2) quotes the Rambam's opinion. Furthermore, the Magen Avrahamh 6:9 mentions an obligation to reciteAmenninety times each day.
to respond Amen - Shabbat 119b states that Amen is an acronym for the words, א-ל מלך נאמן (God, faithful King). In that passage, our Sages declare that, "the Gates of Gan Eden will be opened for a person who answers Amen with all his strength."
The Tur (Orach Chayim 124) explains that Amen implies an acknowledgement of the truth of a statement. The Magen Avraham 124:9 adds that when answered in response to a request, it also has the implication that one prays that the request be fulfilled speedily.
although a) he did not hear the blessing in its entirety - but merely its conclusion. See also the commentary on the last clause of the following halachah.
b) he was not obligated to recite that blessing himself. One should not respond Amen if the person reciting the blessing is a gentile - Although the latter word is surrounded by parentheses in the standard published text of the Mishneh Torah (indicating a question with regard to its inclusion), it is found in all the authoritative manuscripts and reflects the Rambam's statements in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Berachot 8:8, the source for this law).
The reason we do not respond to a gentile's blessing is that we assume that although he mentions God's name, his blessing is directed toward the alien deity in which he believes.
Rabbenu Asher maintains that a person should respond Amen to a gentile's blessing when he hear the blessing recited in its entirety and he supports his statements with a quote from the Jerusalem Talmud, Berachot 8:8. The Ramah (Orach Chayim 215:2) quotes this opinion. There is not necessarily a contradiction between the latter ruling and the Rambam's. The Rambam's statements can be interpreted as applying to gentiles in general, while those of the Jerusalem Talmud, as applying to those gentiles - e.g., Moslems - who are known not to worship any idols or alien gods.
an apostate - Since, "It can be assumed that an apostate has false gods in mind (Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 2:5)," we are forbidden to respond to his blessings.
a Samaritan - In his Commentary on the Mishnah (loc. cit.), the Rambam elaborates in the description of the Samaritans. He explains that after Sancheriv exiled the ten tribes, he settled several gentile tribes in their land. These tribes adopted certain aspects of Jewish practice. Hence, with regard to certain laws, the Sages considered them as converts. Afterward, however, the Sages discovered that they were idolaters. From that time onward, they were considered as other gentiles.
a child in the midst of study - and recites blessings for practice. When a child recites a blessing with the intent of fulfilling his obligation, however, it is appropriate to respond Amen (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 215:3).
or an adult who altered the text of the blessing - Since (as stated in the commentary on Halachah 5) a person who alters the text of the blessing does not fulfill his obligation, Amen should not be recited. [This applies only when the change in the text of the blessings is significant enough to prevent one from fulfilling his obligation with such a blessing (Mishnah Berurah 215:11).]
Commentary Halacha 14
Whenever responding Amen, one should not recite a rushed Amen - Our translation is based on the interpretation of the Aruch, which explains that this means that a person should not answer Amen before the one reciting the blessing has concluded its recitation.
Rashi (Berachot 47a) interprets this to mean that one substitutes a chataf patach (:-) for a kamatz in the vocalization of the Alef. The Shulchan Aruch(Orach Chayim 124:8) accepts both interpretations as halachah.
a cut off Amen - The Aruch explains that this refers to pronouncing Amen as if the word were cut in two. Rashi (loc. cit.) explains that this refers to swallowing the pronunciation ("cutting off") of the final nun. Again, the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) and the Ramah quote both interpretations as halachah.
nor a short or a prolonged Amen - Berachot (loc. cit.) states, "Whoever prolongs the recitation of Amen errs," since by doing so one distorts the pronunciation of the word (Tosafot).
but rather an Amen of intermediate length.
One should not raise one's voice above that of the person reciting the blessing. - Berachot 45a states that this law is derived from Psalms 34:4: "Exalt God with me and let us extol His name together."
Whoever did not hear a blessing that he is obligated to recite should not answer Amen together with the others. - Berachot 47a describes this as "an orphaned Amen" - i.e., an Amen that is separated from the blessing that gave rise to it.
The Rambam specifies that this applies only regarding "a blessing that he is required to recite," because of a passage from Sukkah 51b. There, the Talmud relates that the synagogue in Alexandria was so large that flags would be waved as a signal that the chazan had finished a blessing, and then everyone would recite Amen, even though they had not heard the blessing themselves.
[Rashi (loc. cit.) interprets "an orphaned Amen" as reciting Amen although one does not know which blessing was recited. Shulchan Aruch HaRav (loc. cit.) accepts the stringencies that result from both opinions.
Commentary Halacha 15
Whoever recites a blessing for which he is not obligated is considered as if he took God's name in vain. - See Hilchot Sh'vuot 12:9-10, where the Rambam states that a person who intentionally recites a blessing in vain should be placed under a ban of ostracism.
Note Chapter 4, Halachah 10, which states that after reciting an unnecessary blessing, one should praise God, saying, "Blessed be the Name of Him whose glorious kingdom is forever and ever" so that his mention of God's name will not be in vain.
He is considered as one who took a false oath - The Minchat Chinuch(Mitzvah 30) states that, with this statement, the Rambam intended to imply that the person should be lashed in punishment. Other Rabbis rule less severely, stating that although this punishment is not administered, the person is considered to have violated the commandment, "Do not take God's name in vain." Shulchan Aruch HaRav 215:3, however, maintains that since he intended to recite a blessing, his mention of God's name is not entirely frivolous, and he is hence considered to have violated a Rabbinic prohibition and not the commandment of the Torah itself.
and it is forbidden to answer Amen after his blessing. - For this reason, it is forbidden to recite a blessing unnecessarily - e.g., to recite two blessings when a single blessing is sufficient. Similarly, for this reason, a person who is unsure of whether or not he is obligated to recite a blessing should not recite it, lest he recite a blessing in vain.
Despite the severity of the prohibition against taking God's name in vain
We may teach children the blessings using the full text. Even though in this manner, they recite blessings in vain in the midst of their study, it is permissible - so that the child will learn how to recite blessings properly.
One should not recite Amen after their blessings. - The source of this halachah, Berachot 53b, indicates that this law applies only when the children are reciting the blessings for practice. When they are reciting the blessings to fulfill their obligation, we should respond Amen.
A person who answers Amen after their blessings does not fulfill his obligation. - Note our commentary on Halachah 11, which explains that only with regard to grace (see Chapter 3, Halachot 15- 16) may an adult fulfill his obligation by reciting Amen to a blessing recited by a child.
Commentary Halacha 16
It is demeaning for a person to recite Amen after his own blessings. - This does not refer to the recitation of a single blessing (which is discussed in Halachah 18), but the recitation ofAmen after each blessing recited in a series of blessings. Reciting Amen is considered demeaning because it implies a conclusion of one's prayers. It is not proper to conclude and begin, conclude and begin, several times in one series (Kessef Mishneh).
When, however, one concludes the last of a series of blessings, it is praiseworthy to answer Amen - This serves as a statement that one has concluded one's prayers with praise of God.
e.g., after the blessing Boneh Yerushalayim in grace - The third blessing in grace. Note also the following halachah. This example is explicitly mentioned byBerachot 45b, the source for this halachah.
and after the final blessing [following] the recitation of the Shema in the evening service. - This example was chosen by the Rambam himself. The Rambam specifies the evening service because he considers the recitation ofAmen at this point in the morning service as an interruption between the blessing גאל ישראל and the beginning of Shemoneh Esreh.
Similarly, always, at the conclusion of the last of a series of blessings, one should recite Amen after one's own blessing. -Tosafot, Berachot, loc. cit., and the Ramah (Orach Chayim 215:1) state that Amen is recited only afterBoneh Yerushalayim and not after other series of blessings. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 54:1 explains this ruling, stating that there is another advantage to reciting Amen after Boneh Yerushalayim: It differentiates between blessings required by the Torah and those ordained by Rabbinic decree.
Commentary Halacha 17
Why is Amen recited after the blessing Boneh Yerushalayim although it is followed by the blessing Hatov v'hametiv? - On the surface, the latter blessing, and not the blessing Boneh Yerushalayim, marks the conclusion of the blessings of grace.
Because the latter blessing was ordained in the era of the Mishnah - See Chapter 2, Halachah 1, and commentary.
and is considered to be an addition. The conclusion of the essential blessings of grace is Boneh Yerushalayim. - Hence Amen is recited at this point. As mentioned in the commentary on the previous halachah, its recitation differentiates between the blessings required by the Torah and those instituted by the Rabbis.
Why is Amen not recited after the blessing Ahavat olam? - Its recitation would be appropriate because Ahavat olam concludes the two blessings recited before the Shema.
Because it is the conclusion of the blessings recited before the Shema -and an interruption should not be made between these blessings and the recitation of the Shema.
Similarly, in other instances when [a series of] blessings are recited before a practice - e.g., the blessings recited before the reading of theMegillah or the kindling of the Chanukah lights - when two or three blessings are recited in succession,
Amen [is not recited] lest it constitute an interruption between the blessings and [the fulfillment of] the performance over which they are being recited. - See Halachah 8.
Commentary Halacha 18
Why is Amen not recited after the blessing over fruits and the like? - The Ra'avad and the Kessef Mishneh explain that the Rambam is not referring to the blessing recited before partaking of fruit. All agree that one should not reciteAmen after such a blessing, because Amen would constitute an interruption between the blessing and partaking of the fruit. Rather, the Rambam is speaking about the blessing al hapairot or other similar blessings.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam on this matter and suggests that a person should recite Amen after concluding any of these blessings. The later authorities, however, accept the Rambam's decision.
Because it is only a single blessing, and Amen is recited only after a concluding blessing that follows another blessing or blessings - e.g., the blessings of the king - The series of seven blessings recited by the king after reading from the Torah at the Hakhel gathering held in the Temple once every seven years (Hilchot Chaggigah 3:4)
or the blessings of the High Priest - The series of eight blessings recited by the High Priest after reading from the Torah during the Temple service on Yom Kippur (Hilchot Avodat Yom HaKippurim 3:11).
to signify the conclusion of the blessings. Therefore, reciting Amen is appropriate. - The Jerusalem Talmud (Berachot 5:4) also cites the blessings recited after the haftarah as an example of a sequence at whose conclusion it is appropriate to recite Amen.
Commentary Halacha 19
When a person eats a forbidden food - whether consciously or inadvertently - he should not recite a blessing beforehand or afterward. -It is improper to bless God after transgressing His commandments. On the contrary, concerning a similar incident, the Jerusalem Talmud (Challah 1:5) cites Psalms 10:3, "A thief who recites a blessing disgusts God." Even an inadvertent violation of the law is an act against His will for which it is not appropriate to bless Him.
The Ra'avad and Rabbenu Asher differ with the Rambam's decision and maintain that the fact that a person violates a commandment against eating forbidden food should not cause him to violate another commandment and benefit from the world without praising God. TheTurei Zahav 196:1 attempts to resolve the two views and offers a compromise: A person who intentionally violates a prohibition should not recite a blessing. If, however, a person eats a forbidden food inadvertently, he should recite a blessing afterwards.
Significantly, the Beit Yosef (Orach Chayim 196) explains that even the Rambam would agree that a sick person who is required to eat a forbidden food for medicinal purposes should recite a blessing. There are, however, authorities who differ with this ruling as well.
What is implied? If one eats tevel - grain, oil, or wine from which terumahwas not separated
even food that is classified as tevel by Rabbinical decree - e.g., produce that grows in containers. According to Torah law, the agricultural gifts are required to be given only from produce that grows in the earth itself (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Berachot 7:1).
the first tithe from which terumah was not separated - Even when the first tithe was separated before terumah, terumah should be separated from the tithe as well (loc. cit.).
or the second tithe - which must be eaten in Jerusalem. If this is not possible, the food can be redeemed and the money brought to Jerusalem to purchase food there. It is forbidden to eat this food outside Jerusalem until it is redeemed (Deuteronomy 14:22-27). In this instance, we are speaking about a situation where the redemption was improperly performed - e.g., one used uncoined metal (the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Berachot 7:1).
or sanctified foods - foods consecrated to the Temple
that were not redeemed in the proper manner,- They were redeemed using landed property, which is unacceptable (loc. cit.).
one should not recite a blessing. Needless to say, this applies if one ate meat from an animal that was not ritually slaughtered - but rather, died naturally or was slaughtered without using the proper procedure
or was trefah - An animal attacked by a wild beast or diseased and therefore suffering from an affliction that will cause it to die within twelve months (Hilchot Shechitah, Chapter 5).
or if one drank wine used as a libation for idol worship. - It is forbidden to drink such wine. See Hilchot Ma'achalot Asurot, Chapter 11.
ssurei Biah - Chapter Twelve
Halacha 1
When a Jew engages in relations with a woman from other nations, [taking her] as his wife or a Jewess engages in relations with a non-Jew as his wife, they are punished by lashes, according to Scriptural Law.1 As [Deuteronomy 7:3] states: "You shall not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughter to his son, and do not take his daughter for your son."
Halacha 2
The Scriptural prohibition applies only to marital relations.4 When, by contrast, one engages in relations with a gentile woman with a licentious intent, he is given "stripes for rebellious conduct" according to Rabbinic Law. [This is a] decree, lest this lead to marriage.
If [a Jew] designates [a gentile woman] for licentious relations, he is liable for relations with a niddah, a maid-servant, a gentile woman, and a licentious woman.5 If he did not designate her for himself, but instead, [engage in relations with her] spontaneously, he is only liable for relations with a gentile woman. All of these liabilities are Rabbinic in origin.6
Halacha 3
When does the above apply? When the man who engaged in relations was an Israelite. If, however, a priest engages in relations with a gentile woman, he is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law, because of the prohibition against relations with a zonah.7 [This prohibition applies] both to a non-Jewish zonahand a Jewish one. He receives lashes for relations alone, for he cannot consecrate her.8
Halacha 4
Whenever a man has relations with a gentile woman in public, i.e., the relations are carried out in the presence of ten or more Jews, if a zealous person strikes him and kills him, he is considered praiseworthy and ardent.9 [This applies whether the relations were] in the context of marriage or licentious in nature. This matter is a halachah conveyed to Moshe at Sinai.10 Support for this can be derived from Pinchas' slaying of Zimri.11
Halacha 5
The zealous person can strike [the fornicators] only at the time of relations, as was the case with regard to Zimri, as [Numbers 25:8] states: "[He pierced]ו the woman into her stomach."12 If, however, [the transgressor] withdraws,13he should not be slain. Indeed, if [the zealous person] slays him, he may be executed [as a murderer].14
If the zealous person comes to ask permission from the court to slay him, they do not instruct him [to],15 even if this takes place at the time [of relations]. Not only that, if the zealous person comes to kill the transgressor and he withdraws and kills the zealous person in order to save himself, the transgressor is not executed for killing him.16
When a Jew has relations with the daughter of a resident alien,17 the zealous may not strike him. [The transgressor] should, however, be given stripes for rebellious conduct.
Halacha 6
If the zealous did not strike him, nor did he receive stripes from the court,18 his punishment is explicitly stated in the words of the prophetic tradition. He is liable for kerat,19 as [Malachi 2:11-12] states: "Judah desecrated that which is sacred to God, [by] loving and engaging in relations with the daughter of a foreign god. May God cut off from a man who does this any progeny and descendant." [Implied is]20 that if he is an Israelite, he will not have progeny among the wise who will raise issues, nor a descendant among the scholars who will respond. If he is a priest, he will not have [a descendant] who "presents an offering to the Lord of Hosts." Thus you have learned that a person who shares intimacy with a gentile woman is considered as if he married a false deity, as the verse states: "engaging in relations with the daughter of a foreign god." And he is called one who "desecrated that which is sacred to God."
Halacha 7
Although this transgression is not punishable by execution by the court, it should not be regarded lightly, for it leads to a detriment that has no parallel among all the other forbidden sexual relations. For a child conceived from any other forbidden sexual union, is [the father's] son with regard to all matters and is considered a member of the Jewish people, even if he is a mamzer.21A son conceived by a gentile woman, by contrast, is not considered his son. [This is derived from Deuteronomy 7:4:] "For he shall sway your son away from following Me." She turns him away from being one of those who follow God.
Halacha 8
This matter causes one to cling to the gentile nations from whom the Holy One, blessed be He, has separated us, and to turn away from following God and to betray Him.
Halacha 9
When a gentile engages in relations with a Jewish woman, if she is married, he should be executed.22 If she is single, he is not executed.
Halacha 10
If, by contrast, a Jewish male enters into relations with a gentile woman, when he does so intentionally, she should be executed.23 She is executed because she caused a Jew to be involved in an unseemly transgression, as [is the law with regard to] an animal.24 [This applies regardless of] whether the gentile women was a minor of three years of age,25 or an adult, whether she was single or married. And it applies even if [the Jew] was a minor of nine years old, [she is executed].26
This [punishment] is explicitly mentioned in the Torah, as [Numbers 31:16-17] states: "Behold they were [involved] with the children of Israel according to the advice of Balaamו.27 Execute any woman fit to know a man through lying with a male."
Halacha 11
Servants that have been immersed for the sake of servitude and accepted the mitzvot in which servants are obligated,28 have departed from the category of gentiles, but have yet to enter the category of Jews. For this reason, a maidservant is forbidden29 to a free Jew. [This applies to] both one's own maid-servant and a maid-servant belonging to a colleague.
When a person enters into relations with a maid-servant, he should be given stripes for rebellious conduct as prescribed by the Rabbis.30 [It is obvious that a Scriptural prohibition is not involved,] for it is explicitly stated in the Torah that a master may give a Hebrew servant a Canaanite maid-servant31 [for the sake of relations]32 and that she is permitted to him, as [Exodus 21:4] states: "If his master will give him a wife."
Halacha 12
Halacha 13
This transgression should not be light in one's eyes, because it does not involve lashes according to Scriptural Law. For this [act] also causes the son to be turned away from following God. For a son born of a maid-servant is a servant and is not a [full] member of Israel. Thus he causes [Israel's] holy seed to be profaned and produce servants. Behold Onkelos the translator35 included relations with a servant and a maid-servant in [the prohibitions, Deuteronomy 23:18]: "There shall not be a promiscuous manו and there shall not be a promiscuous woman."36
Halacha 14
When a person engages in relations with a maid-servant, even in public, a zealous person may not strike him, not even at the time of the transgression.37Similarly, if one marries a maid-servant,38 he does not receive lashes according to Scriptural Law. For from the time she immersed and accepted the mitzvot, she departed from the category of gentiles.
Halacha 15
If [the identity of] a Jewish child becomes confused with that of the child of a maid-servant, the status of both [children] is doubtful.39 Each of them is considered as possibly a servant. [Hence] we compel the owner of the maid-servant to free them both.40 If [the owner died and] the son [whose identity was confused] is the [only] son of the servant's master, when they come of age, they should free each other.41 Then they will be permitted to marry within the Jewish people.
Halacha 16
If the children whose identities were confused were female, they are both considered as possibly a maid-servant. If a person enters into relations with either of them, the offspring is considered as a servant because of the doubt.42
Similarly, if the identity of a gentile child becomes confused with that of a Jewish child, we immerse both of them as converts and they are both considered as possibly a convert.43
Halacha 17
Whenever any of the gentiles convert and accept all of the mitzvot in the Torah44 or a servant is freed,45 they are considered as Jews with regard to all matters,46 as [Numbers 15:15] states: "For the community: there will be one law [for you and the convert]." A convert may marry within the Jewish community immediately, i.e., a male convert or freed servant may marry a native-born Jewess and an Israelite47 may marry a female convert or a freed maid-servant.
There are four nations from which [converts] are exceptions: Ammon, Moab, Egypt, and Edom. When a person from one of these nations converts, he is like an Israelite with regard to all matters with the exception of marriage within the Jewish community.
Halacha 18
What are the laws that apply to them [in that context]? It is forbidden to marry an Ammonite and a Moabite forever. This applies to the males and not the females,48 as [Deuteronomy 23:4] states: "An Ammonite and a Moabite shall not enter the congregation of God." It is a halachah transmitted to Moses at Sinai that it is a male Ammonite and a male Moabite who are forbidden to marry a native-born Israelite forever,49 [including] even their son's grandson forever. An Ammonite woman and a Moabite woman are, by contrast, permitted immediately50 as are [converts] from other nations.
Halacha 19
An Egyptian and an Edomite convert - both a male and a female - are forbidden to marry among the Jewish people for the first and second generations. The third generation, however, is permitted, as [ibid.:9] states: "Children who are born to them [may enter the congregation of God in the third generation]."
Halacha 20
When a female Egyptian converts while she is pregnant, her son is considered a second [generation Egyptian convert]. When a second [generation] Egyptian male [convert] marries a first [generation] Egyptian female [convert] or a first [generation] Egyptian male [convert] marries a second [generation] Egyptian female [convert], the child is considered a second generation [convert].51 [This is derived from the phrase]: "Children who are born to them."52 The verse made the matter dependent on birth.
Halacha 21
When a male Ammonite convert marries a female Egyptian,53 the offspring are considered as Ammonites.54 When a male Egyptian convert marries a female Ammonite, the offspring are considered as Egyptians.55 This is the general principle: Among gentiles, the identity [of the offspring] is determined by the male. Once they convert, [the offspring] is given the identity that is of the lowest status.
Halacha 22
A person from the seven [Canaanite] nations who converts is not forbidden to marry among the Jewish people according to Scriptural Law.56 It is known that of them, only the Gibeonites converted.57 Joshua decreed that they be forbidden to marry among the Jewish people,58 both males and females.
He instituted this prohibition only during the time a Sanctuary is standing, as [Joshua 9:23] states: "[You shall be] wood-choppers and water-drawers for the house of my God." He made their ban dependent on the Sanctuary.
Halacha 23
They are called Netinim, "the designated ones," for they were designated for the service in the Sanctuary. David came and decreed that they should never be allowed to marry among the Jewish people, even at a time when the Sanctuary is no longer standing. This is explicitly stated in Ezra [8:20]: "From the Netinim whom David and the officers designated for the service of the Levites." From this, we see that he did not make the matter dependent on the Sanctuary.59
Halacha 24
Why did David and his court pass this decree against them? Because he saw that they were characterized by brazenness and cruelty. For they asked to kill and hang the seven sons of Saul, God's chosen one,60 and they did not have mercy upon them.
Halacha 25
When Sannecherib, King of Assyria, arose, he confused the identity of all the nations, mixing them together, and exiling them from their place.61 The Egyptians that live in the land of Egypt at present are of other nationalities. This also applies with regard to the Edomites in the field of Edom.
Since these four forbidden nations became intermingled with all the nations of the world [with] whom it is permitted [to marry once they convert], all [converts] are permitted. For when anyone of them separates himself [from them by] converting, we operate under the presumption that he became separate from the majority.62 Therefore in the present age, in all places, whenever a convert converts, whether he be an Edomite, an Egyptian, an Ammonite, a Moabite, a Kushite, or from any of the other nations, whether male or female, he or she is permitted to marry among the Jewish people immediately.63
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
Licentious relations with a gentile man or woman are not included in the scope of this Scriptural prohibition, as stated in the following halachah.
|
| 2. |
Although the verse the Rambam cites as a prooftext refers to the seven Canaanite nations, all other gentiles are also included as reflected by the verse from Nechemiah.
The Tur (Even HaEzer 16) differs with the Rambam, explaining that the verse should be understood within its limited context, referring only to the seven nations. (The Rambam's opinion has a source in the Sheiltot D'Rabbenu Achai Gaon, while that of the Tur is found in the Sefer Mitzvot Gadol) The crux of the difference is the exegesis of the continuation of the verse cited by the Rambam: "For he shall sway your son away." Kiddushin 68b quotes Rabbi Shimon as focusing on the motivating rationale for the verse and thus including all those who might sway a person's heart. Thus it refers to all gentiles. The Sages, however, do not accept this perspective.
|
| 3. |
Although the verse is contained in the Book of Nechemiah, the Rambam considers Ezra and Nechemiah as one book. See Hilchot Sefer Torah 7:15. Similarly, Sanhedrin 93b states that none of the books of the Tanach are named after Nechemiah.
The verse cited by the Rambam is part of the oath taken by the people to remain true to their faith upon their return to Zion. At that time, the gentiles living in the land were not Canaanites.
|
| 4. |
The Tur, loc. cit., differs with the Rambam concerning this point as well, stating that there is no concept of marriage between a Jew and non-Jew.
|
| 5. |
This was a decree passed by the court of the Hasmoneans when they saw that the Jews were sharing intimacy with Greek women (Avodah Zarah 36b). The transgressor is given stripes several times, once for each of the Rabbinic prohibitions he ignored.
|
| 6. |
According to Scriptural Law, if a Jew engages in relations with a gentile woman in public "the zealous may strike him," as stated in Halachah 4. The Hasmoneon's decree, however, applies even when relations were carried out in private.
|
| 7. |
The term zonah is generally translated as "prostitute." It has, however, a precise halachic definition, as stated in Chapter 18, Halachah 1.
|
| 8. |
Note the contrast to the laws applying to a Jewish zonah, as mentioned in Chapter 17, Halachah 2.
|
| 9. |
The Ra'avad rules that the zealous person must warn the transgressor before striking him. TheMaggid Mishneh states that the concept of a warning is relevant only with regard to execution by the court and not to the independent actions taken by a zealous person. The Rama (Choshen Mishpat 425:4) quotes the Ra'avad's view.
|
| 10. |
I.e., a law which is not commanded by the Written Torah, yet communicated by the Oral Tradition.
|
| 11. |
As Numbers, ch. 25 relates, the Jews began worshiping idols, because they were lured to by Midianite women. Enraged Moses commanded that the worshipers be executed. Zimri, the prince of the tribe of Shimon, took a Midianite woman and confronted Moses, engaging in relations before him. When Pinchas saw this, he slew Zimri, giving expression to the law mentioned by the Rambam.
|
| 12. |
Our Sages relate that Pinchas' javelin went through Zimri's back and into her gut, killing them both in the midst of relations.
|
| 13. |
Even if he transgressed already.
|
| 14. |
Needless to say, a warning must be given and two acceptable witnesses must observe the slaying.
|
| 15. |
The initiative to slay the transgressor must be totally that of the zealous person. For the court has no obligation - and there no license - to exact such punishment.
|
| 16. |
For the zealous person is considered as a rodef, pursuer, whom the intended victim has the right to slay, as stated in Hilchot Rotzeach, ch. 1.
|
| 17. |
As explained in Chapter 14, Halachah 7, this refers to a non-Jew who accepted the seven universal laws commanded to Noah and his descendants. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 9:6), the Rambam states that the woman herself - not only her father - must not be an idolater.
|
| 18. |
The Maggid Mishneh writes that if he was given "stripes for rebellious conduct" by the court, he is no longer liable for kereit. Our Sages (Makkot 23b) state a similar concept with regard to a person who receives lashes for the violation of a Scriptural prohibition. The Rambam extends the idea to include a person who is punished on the basis of Rabbinic decree.
|
| 19. |
This applies even if relations are conducted in private.
|
| 20. |
As interpreted by Yevamot 22b, 23a.
|
| 21. |
Indeed, Horiot 13a states that a mamzer who is a scholar receives precedence over a High Priest who is unlearned.
|
| 22. |
For the gentiles are prohibited against adultery.
|
| 23. |
Note the gloss of the Maggid Mishneh who questions the source for the Rambam's ruling, arguing that the passage from Numbers cannot be interpreted as definitive proof.
|
| 24. |
See Chapter 1, Halachot 16-18.
|
| 25. |
If, however, she is younger than three, the relations are not considered significant.
|
| 26. |
From that age onward, sexual relations in which he engages are significant, as stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 13.
|
| 27. |
Who advised the Midianites and the Moabites to have their women seduce Jewish men to provoke God's wrath.
|
| 28. |
See Chapter 14, Halachah 9.
|
| 29. |
I.e., the prohibition is Rabbinic in origin, as indicated by the conclusion of this halachah and the following halachot.
|
| 30. |
And not lashes, as is the punishment for the violation of a Scriptural commandment.
|
| 31. |
Were there to be a Scriptural prohibition involved, it would not be relaxed in the case of a servant.
|
| 32. |
So that the offspring will be the master's.
|
| 33. |
Forbidding such relations to a Hebrew servant (Ma'aseh Rokeach).
|
| 34. |
Chapter 3, Halachah 13.
|
| 35. |
Who composed the standard Aramaic translation of the Torah.
|
| 36. |
The Rambam does not fully accept the view of Onkelos. For Onkelos defines the scope of the Biblical prohibition as including these relations and the Rambam does not, as evident from the fact that the Rambam does not considered these relations as punishable by lashes. (The Rambam also has a different conception of the prohibition of relations with "a promiscuous woman"; seeHilchot Ishut 1:4.) Nevertheless, the Rambam uses the view of Onkelos as support for his condemnation of this act (Mayim Chayim; see also Beit Shmuel 16:6).
|
| 37. |
In contrast to relations with a gentile woman (Halachah 4).
|
| 38. |
In contrast to marriage to a gentile woman (Halachah 1).
|
| 39. |
When explaining this possibility the Talmud gives the example of women who gave birth together in a cave. Today, unfortunately, such confusion has happened in hospitals.
|
| 40. |
Otherwise, because of the doubt, neither of the children would be able to marry. They could not marry a Jewess, for perhaps they were servants, nor a maid-servant, for perhaps they were Jews (compare to Hilchot Avadim 7:7).
|
| 41. |
Since we do not know which is the servant and which is the master, they must both free each other. And thus the servant will certainly have been freed by the master.
Before they reach adulthood, however, it is impossible for one to free the other, because a minor may not free a servant.
|
| 42. |
In this instance, the Rambam does not say that the owner must free the offspring, because there is no obligation for a woman to marry and bear children. Compare to Hilchot Avadim, loc. cit.; seeMaggid Mishneh, Beit Shmuel 16:7. The master may not, however, compel either of them to work. For they both can require him to prove his claims.
|
| 43. |
Thus they are forbidden to marry a priest, as stated in Chapter 18, Halachah 3 (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 44. |
As described in Chapter 13.
|
| 45. |
At which time his conversion process is completed.
|
| 46. |
I.e., there is no difference between a convert and a native Israelite with regard to any matter of Jewish observance.
|
| 47. |
But not a priest (Maaseh Rokeach).
|
| 48. |
The rationale for this leniency is explained as follows. The Torah explains the reason for this prohibition: "Because of the fact that they did not greet you with bread and water on the way." Now it is not appropriate for women to greet travelers with food. Hence, since the sin does not apply with regard to women - the consequence of it - the prohibition against marrying into the Jewish people also does not apply with regard to them.
|
| 49. |
They may, however, marry women who converted to Judaism or freed maid-servants. Shaar HaMelech also states that these individuals may even marry maid-servants who were not yet freed.
|
| 50. |
Indeed, Ruth the maternal ancestor of King David - and ultimately of Mashiach - was a female Moabite convert. Initially, and indeed for several generations, there were questions whether she and her descendants were allowed to marry within the Jewish. Ultimately, however, the ruling stated by the Rambam was accepted throughout the Jewish community. See Yevamot 76b.
|
| 51. |
Rashi differs and maintains that the child's status depends on that of its mother. Thus if the mother is a second generation Egyptian convert, the child is a third generation convert and is permitted. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 4:4) quotes both views.
|
| 52. |
The Maggid Mishneh explains that the intent is that everyone knows that birth involves both a man and a woman. Hence the child must be the third generation from both of the male and the female.
|
| 53. |
Who has converted.
|
| 54. |
The Maggid Mishneh refers to Yevamot 78b and maintains that this ruling applies only when the offspring are male. If they are female, they are not considered as Ammonites (and hence, permitted). Instead, they are considered as Egyptian and forbidden for three generations, i.e., we follow the greater blemish. This view is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 4:7).
|
| 55. |
This also can be considered as applying only when the offspring are male. If they are female, some opinions considered them as permitted (as a female Ammonite) and others as Egyptian [Rama (Even HaEzer, loc. cit.)].
|
| 56. |
This ruling depends on the Rambam's interpretation of the prohibition: "You shall not intermarry with them" mentioned at the beginning of the chapter. As explained, according to the Rambam, the verse applies to all gentiles, not only Canaanites, and only before they convert. Once they convert, all gentiles - except the four nations mentioned in the previous halachot - may marry freely among the Jewish people.
The other authorities, by contrast, maintain that the prohibition applies to the Canaanite nations alone and after conversion. Otherwise, they maintain, it is unnecessary, for there is no concept of marriage between a Jew and a non-Jew.
|
| 57. |
Note Joshua, ch. 9, which relates how the Gibeonites deceived the Jewish people and established a covenant with them.
|
| 58. |
Because of the deception they perpetrated.
|
| 59. |
For the narrative in Ezra speaks of a time when the Temple had already been destroyed.
|
| 60. |
As related in II Samuel, ch. 21, there was a famine for three years in Eretz Yisrael. Through prophetic vision, David learned that the reason for the famine was Saul's oppression of the Gibeonites (exactly what Saul did to oppress them is a matter of discussion among the Rabbis). David asked the Gibeonites what they desired to be appeased for this oppression. They answered that they wanted to slay seven of his descendants. David handed over seven of Saul's descendants to them and they hung them and left their corpses on the gallows. For this act of cruelty, David decreed that they should never marry among the Jewish people. For Israel should be characterized by kindness and mercy. See Chapter 19, Halachah 17, which further develops this theme.
|
| 61. |
I.e., in order to thwart the possibility of local peoples organizing rebellions against him, Sannecherib destroyed the national identity of people by exiling them from their native lands and forcing them to intermingle with other peoples.
|
| 62. |
This principle applies in many instances when forbidden and permitted substances or individuals become mixed together. See for example, Yoma 84b, Zevachim 73a,b.
|
| 63. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 4:10) quotes this ruling, but states that according to the opinion of Rabbenu Asher, Sannecherib did not succeed in erasing the identity of the Egyptians and the prohibition against marrying their converts still applies.
|
Issurei Biah - Chapter Thirteen
Halacha 1
Israel entered the covenant [with God]1 with three acts: circumcision, immersion, and offering a sacrifice.
Halacha 2
Circumcision took place in Egypt, [before the Paschal sacrifice, of which Exodus 12:48] says: "No uncircumcised person shall partake of it." Moses our teacher circumcised [the people]. For with the exception of the tribe of Levi, the entire [people] neglected the covenant of circumcision in Egypt.2 Regarding this, [Deuteronomy 33:9 praises the Levites,] saying: "They upheld Your covenant."
Halacha 3
Immersion was performed in the desert before the Giving of the Torah, as [Exodus 19:10] states: "Sanctify them today and tomorrow, and have them wash their garments." Sacrifices [were also offered then], as [ibid. 24:5] states: "And he sent out the youth of the children of Israel and they brought burnt offerings." They offered them as agents of the entire Jewish people.
Halacha 4
Similarly, for [all] future generations, when a gentile desires to enter into the covenant, take shelter under the wings of the Divine presence, and accept the yoke of the Torah,3 he must undergo circumcision,4 immersion, and the offering of a sacrifice. A woman [who converts] must undergo immersion and bring a sacrifice, as [Numbers 15:15] states: "As it is for you, so shall it be for the convert." Just as you [entered the covenant] with circumcision, immersion, and the offering of a sacrifice; so, too, for future generations, a convert must undergo circumcision, immersion, and must bring a sacrifice.
Halacha 5
What is the sacrifice that a convert [is required to bring]? A burnt offering of an animal or two turtle-doves or two fledging doves. Both of [the doves] must be brought as burnt offerings.5 In the present age, when there are no sacrifices,6[a convert] must undergo circumcision and immersion.7 When the Temple is rebuilt, he must bring a sacrifice.8
Halacha 6
When a convert is circumcised, but does not immerse himself, or immerses himself, but was not circumcised, he is not considered a convert until he perform both of these activities. He must immerse himself in the presence of three men.9 Since a court is required, he may not immerse on the Sabbath or on festivals, or during the night.10 If, however, they had him immerse [at night], he is a convert.11
Halacha 7
We immerse a minor who seeks to convert based upon the guidance of the court.12 For it is an advantage for a person [to convert].13 When a pregnant woman converts and immerses herself, her child does not require immersion.14
When [a convert] immerses himself alone and converts alone - or even if he does this in the presence of two persons15 - his conversion is not valid.16 If he comes and says: "I converted in the court of so-and-so and they had me immerse," his word is not accepted with regard to license to marry among the Jewish people17 unless he brings witnesses [who testify to the truth of his statements].
Halacha 8
[The following rules apply if] he was married to a native-born Jewess or a convert and he already fathered children. If he says: "I converted alone," his word is accepted with regard to the disqualification of his self,18 but not with regard to the disqualification of his children.19 He must immerse himself again in the presence of a court.20
Halacha 9
[The following laws apply with regard to] a female convert who we see conduct herself according to the ways of Israel at all times, for example, she immerses herself after being a niddah,21 she separates terumah from dough, or the like, and to a male convert who follows the paths of Israel, for example, he immerses himself after a seminal emission, and performs all the mitzvot. These are considered as righteous converts even though there are no witnesses to testify before whom they converted. Nevertheless, if they come to marry among the Jewish people, we do not allow them unless they bring witnesses or they immerse themselves in our presence. The rationale is that their identity was originally established as gentiles.
Halacha 10
If, however, a person comes and says that he was a gentile, but that he was converted by a court, his word is accepted. [The rationale is that] the mouth that forbade him was the same that permitted him.22
When does the above apply? In Eretz Yisrael in the Talmudic era. For [at that time,] all the people there could be assumed to be Jewish. In the Diaspora, however, he must bring proof of his conversion.23 [Only] afterwards may he marry a Jewess. I say that this is an additional stringency adopted to protect the purity of our lineage.
Halacha 11
Just as we circumcise and immerse converts; so, too, we circumcise and immerse servants which are acquired from the gentiles for the sake of servitude.24
When a person acquires a servant from the gentiles and the gentile takes the initiative and immerses with the intent of becoming a free man, he acquires his own person,25 provided he says while immersing: "Behold I am immersing before you for the sake of conversion." If he immerses himself in the presence of his master, he does not have to make an explicit statement.26 Instead, since he immersed himself, he attains his freedom.27
For this reason, [when having the servant immerse,] the master must push him into the water28 until he arises at which time he is in his servitude. He must tell him that he is having him immerse for the sake of servitude in the presence of the judges. A servant must also immerse only in the presence of three judges and during the day as a convert, for it is a partial conversion.
Halacha 12
When a servant is freed, he must immerse himself a second time29in the presence of three men during the day,30 for through this act, his conversion is completed and [his status] becomes that of a Jew. It is not necessary for him to accept the mitzvot and [for the judges] to inform him of the fundamentals of the faith, for they already informed him when he immersed himself for the sake of servitude.31
Halacha 13
Converts, servants, and freed servants must be immersed in a mikveh that is acceptable for a niddah to immerse in. All of the substances that [disqualify her immersion because] they intervene [between the water and her flesh] disqualify the immersions, of converts, servants, and freed servants.32
Halacha 14
One should not think that Samson who saved the Jewish people, and Solomon King of Israel, who is called "the friend of God,"33 married gentile woman who did not convert. Instead, the matter can be explained as follows: The proper way of performing the mitzvah is when a male or a female prospective convert comes, we inspect his motives for conversion. Perhaps he is coming for the sake of financial gain, in order to receive a position of authority,34 or he desires to enter our faith because of fear. For a man, we check whether he focused his attention on a Jewish woman. For a woman, we check whether she focused her attention on a Jewish youth.
If we find no ulterior motive, we inform them of the heaviness of the yoke of the Torah and the difficulty the common people have in observing it so that they will abandon [their desire].35 If they accept [this introduction] and do not abandon their resolve and thus we see that they are motivated by love, we accept them, as [indicated by Ruth 1:18]: "And she saw that she was exerting herself to continue with her and she ceased speaking with her."36
Halacha 15
For this reason,37 the court did not accept converts throughout the reign of David and Solomon. In David's time, [they feared] that they sought to convert because of fear and in Solomon's time, [they feared] that they were motivated by the sovereignty, prosperity, and eminence which Israel enjoyed. [They refrained from accepting such converts, because] a gentile who seeks to convert because of the vanities of this [material] world is not a righteous convert.
Nevertheless, there were many people who converted in the presence of ordinary people38 during the era of David and Solomon. The SupremeSanhedrin would view them with skepticism. Since they immersed themselves, they would not reject them, but they would not draw them close until they saw what the outcome would be.39
Halacha 16
Solomon converted women and married them and similarly, Samson converted [women] and married [them]. It is well known that they converted only because of an ulterior motive and that their conversion was not under the guidance of the court. Hence the Tanach40 considered it as if they were gentiles and remained forbidden. Moreover, their conduct ultimately revealed their initial intent. For they would worship their false deities and build platforms for them. Therefore the Scriptures considered it as if [Solomon] built them, as [I Kings 11:7] states: "And then, Solomon built a platform."
Halacha 17
When a court did not check a [potential] converts background and did not inform him of the mitzvot41 and the punishment for [the failure to observe] the mitzvot and he circumcised himself and immersed in the presence of three ordinary people, he is a convert. Even if it is discovered that he converted for an ulterior motive, since he circumcised himself and converted, he has departed from the category of gentiles and we view him with skepticism until his righteousness is revealed.
Even if afterwards, [the convert] worships false deities, he is like an apostate Jew. [If he] consecrates [a woman,] the consecration is valid,42 and it is a mitzvah to return his lost object.43 For since he immersed himself he became a Jew. For this reason,44Samson and Solomon maintained their wives even though their inner feelings45 were revealed.
Halacha 18
For this reason, our Sages said:46 "Converts are as difficult for the Jewish people to bear as a leprous blemish." For most converts revert for some reason or other and cause Jews to stray. It is difficult to separate from them once they have converted. Look at what happened in the desert at the worship of the Golden Calf and Kivrot HaTa'avah.47 Similarly, most of [the complaints in the instances when] our people tried God were instigated by the mixed multitude.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
Tosafot, Keritot 9a, refer to this as the covenant which separated the Jews from the other nations. The Rambam is emphasizing that all of these acts where performed in preparation for the Giving of the Torah when the covenant took effect.
|
| 2. |
See Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 1:3 which describes the extent of the Jews' assimilation in Egypt.
|
| 3. |
Implied is that together with these ritual acts, the gentile must also accept the yoke of Jewish observance. As Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 268:3) emphasizes this is a fundamental element of the conversion process.
|
| 4. |
If he had been circumcised as a gentile, a small amount of blood must be drawn from him for the sake of conversion [Chapter 14, Halachah 5; Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 268:1)].
|
| 5. |
In contrast to other situations when a pair of such doves are offered and one is brought as a burnt offering and one as a sin offering.
|
| 6. |
For the Temple is destroyed.
|
| 7. |
The Rambam mentions the two acts in the desired order: circumcision and then, immersion. Nevertheless, if a convert immerses before circumcision, there is a difference of opinion among the later Rabbis if the immersion is acceptable or not [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 268:1)]. Hence he should immerse again because of the doubt (Siftei Cohen 268:2).
|
| 8. |
Yevamot 46a quotes an opinion which requires the convert to actually set aside the money. The Talmud's conclusion, however, is that it would be undesirable to do so, lest the funds be used for other purposes which is a transgression.
It must be emphasized that even before the convert brings a sacrifice, he is considered as a full-fledged member of the Jewish people.
|
| 9. |
Numbers 15:16 states: "There will be one judgment for you and the convert." Since the verse uses the term judgment, Yevamot 46b states that like in a judgment, three judges are necessary.
There are opinions that emphasize that this is merely an asmachta, a Rabbinic ruling that uses a Biblical verse as a support. Kin'at Eliyahuexplains the rationale for this view. Were the concept to have its source in Scriptural Law, judges possessing semichah, the unique ordination that ceased in the Talmudic era, would be required and thus it would be impossible to accept converts in the present age.
|
| 10. |
For a court does not hold sessions at these times. Another reason why the immersion should not be performed at this time is that it amends the person's state, and that is not permitted on the Sabbath. Nevertheless, the Rambam considers the first rationale of primary importance (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 11. |
The Rashba explains that a legal case that is begun during the day may be completed at night. Hence, the convert's immersion may also be accepted at night.
|
| 12. |
Conversion, a change in status, must be brought about through a conscious decision by the convert. A minor is not considered as able to make mature decisions and is not held responsible for his conduct. Therefore he cannot make the decision to convert. Nevertheless, the Jewish court makes this decision on his behalf.
The converted child, however, has the option of refuting the conversion when he comes of age. If he protests his conversion at that time, he is considered a gentile and need not observe the mitzvot. If, however, he accepts his conversion when he comes of age, but regrets afterwards, he is bound by his original decision.
|
| 13. |
A person cannot act on another person's behalf unless it is considered to his benefit, but our Sages consider becoming part of the Jewish people a benefit sufficient enough to justify their actions. The Maggid Mishneh explains that although the Torah and its mitzvot compel a person to restrain his conduct, as long as he is young and has not become habituated to forbidden conduct, he will be able to accommodate himself to the Torah's guidelines.
|
| 14. |
For the fetus is considered as part of her body and her immersion is sufficient for the fetus as well.
|
| 15. |
For two people do not constitute a court (Hilchot Sanhedrin 2:10).
|
| 16. |
For as mentioned in the previous halachah, three judges must be present.
The Rambam's perspective is not accepted by all authorities. Rabbenu Asher maintains that the requirement applies only at the outset. After the fact, even if a gentile circumcised himself and immersed on his own, the immersion is acceptable, provided he accepted the mitzvot in the presence of three Jews. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 268:3) mentions both opinions, but appears to favor that of Rabbenu Asher.
|
| 17. |
As indicated by Halachah 10, this refers to a situation where previously, we know that the person was a gentile. If not, different laws apply. In all instances, the person must observe the mitzvot because of his statements. We, however, do not rely on his word alone with regard to marriage.
|
| 18. |
And he is not allowed to continue living with his wife until he performs the conversion rites again.
The Siftei Cohen 268:22 quotes Rabbenu Asher who rules that his statements are of no consequence whatsoever. For example, if he enters into relations with a married Jewish women. If he was a gentile, the woman would be able to continue living with her husband, but if he was Jewish (i.e., his conversion was acceptable), the relations are considered as adulterous and she is forbidden. According to Rabbenu Asher, his word is not accepted and she is not forbidden.
|
| 19. |
The Maggid Mishneh questions how is it possible to disqualify his children. Even if he was indeed a gentile, the children would be Jewish. He explains that there is a halachic difference in a situation where both the parents converted privately. In that instance, were we to disqualify the children because of their statements, there would be a change in status.
|
| 20. |
Rabbi Akiva Eiger adds that according to the Rambam, he must also have blood drawn from his male organ as is the case of a convert who was circumcised while a gentile.
|
| 21. |
According to the authorities that, after the fact. do not require a convert's immersion to be performed in the presence of a court, this immersion also could serve as the immersion for the sake of conversion.
|
| 22. |
I.e., we knew nothing of the person's identity before he came before us. He was the one who raised the doubt whether he was Jewish - by saying that he was a convert - and he resolved it - by saying that he converted in a proper court. This follows the principle of miggo, if he desired to lie, he could have told a more effective lie, saying that he was a native-born Israelite.
|
| 23. |
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam, explaining that there are two Talmudic opinions: one that accepts the convert's word both in Eretz Yisrael and in the Diaspora and one that requires him to bring proof in both places. Similarly, the Ramban and the Rashba differ and maintain that the convert's word is accepted in all places. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 268:10) mentions the Rambam's view, but appears to follow that of the Ramban and the Rashba. Today the custom is for a court to be careful and investigate a convert's conversion before allowing him to marry among the Jewish people.
|
| 24. |
For becoming a servant is also a change of status, causing the servant to depart from the status of a gentile, as stated in Chapter 12, Halachah 11.
|
| 25. |
Yevamot 45b-46a explains the rationale for this law: The gentile owner who sold the servant does not own his physical person in the same manner as a Jew does. That ownership is a new factor established through immersion. Hence, if the servant takes the initiative, he can avoid being acquired.
|
| 26. |
For taking this independent act in the presence of his master is considered as if he made an explicit statement.
|
| 27. |
He must, however, reimburse the master for his value [Maggid Mishneh; Rama (Yoreh De'ah267:9)].
|
| 28. |
By manifesting his control over him in this manner, he emphasizes that he is acquiring him as a servant.
|
| 29. |
The Maggid Mishneh cites views that maintain that this immersion is Rabbinic in origin. Rabbi Akiva Eiger cites Tosafot who emphasize that it is a Scriptural requirement.
|
| 30. |
As required of a convert (Halachah 6).
|
| 31. |
See the initial halachot of the following chapter which describe the manner in which a gentile and a servant are informed about the mitzvot.
|
| 32. |
See Hilchot Mikveot which elaborates at length concerning both concepts mentioned in this halachah: what makes a mikveh acceptable and which substances disqualify an immersion when they intervene between a person's flesh and the water. For this reason, a servant or a convert should trim his nails and hair [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 268:2); see also Siftei Cohen 268:7].
|
| 33. |
See II Shmuel 12:25, as interpreted by Menachot 53a, et al.
|
| 34. |
Tosafot cites the narrative (Shabbat 31a) which relates that a gentile came to Hillel and asked him to convert him on the condition that he become the High Priest. Hillel agreed. Later the convert discovered the error of his ways and accepted Jewish practice genuinely. Tosafot explains that from the outset, Hillel recognized his potential sincerity and therefore accepted him even though originally, his motives were self-oriented. The Bayit Chadash and the Siftei Cohen 268:23 state that Hillel's example may be emulated and the Jewish courts have the prerogative of making a decision to accept a convert even though at the outset, he seeks to convert for ulterior motives.
|
| 35. |
For as the Rambam continues to explain, a convert's lack of observance could have a negative effect on the entire people. There is no obligation to convert. A gentile who observes the seven universal laws commanded to Noah and his descendants is on a very high rung. Hence unless a gentile is motivated by a very sincere commitment, it is preferable for him not to change his status and serve God in his present state.
|
| 36. |
At first, Naomi tried to dissuade Ruth from converting. When, however, she saw her sincerity, she allowed her to join her. See Chapter 14, Halachah 1, which describes how this concept is applied.
|
| 37. |
I.e., because their motives were not genuine, as the Rambam continues to explain.
|
| 38. |
I.e., these individuals did not know that the converts should not be accepted.
|
| 39. |
I.e., would they accept Jewish practice genuinely.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 268:12) interprets this to mean that the conversion was effective. They are Jews and have all the privileges and responsibilities of the Jewish people. Nevertheless, as an initial and preferred option, our Sages would not allow them to marry within the Jewish people and the like until they had established their sincere commitment to the Torah and its mitzvot.
It must be emphasized that, according to the Shulchan Aruch, we are speaking about people who convert for ulterior motives, but still accept the yoke of the Torah and its mitzvot. When a person "converts" without accepting the Torah and its mitzvot at all, the conversion is invalid, even if he becomes circumcised and immerses in a mikveh. For that reason, non-halachic "conversions" are unacceptable. See the notes to Halachah 18.
|
| 40. |
See Judges 14:3, I Kings 11:4.
|
| 41. |
The Maggid Mishneh states that even if the court does not notify the potential convert of the mitzvot, the conversion is effective. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 268:12) when quoting this law, changes the text to "the reward for the mitzvot," implying that the gentile must accept the mitzvot before immersion. As the commentaries to the Shulchan Aruch explain, according to theShulchan Aruch, if a convert does not accept the observance of mitzvot, the conversion is not acceptable even if he becomes circumcised and immerses. This concept is particularly relevant in the presence age when there are many non-halachic "conversions."
|
| 42. |
Hence a get (formal bill of divorce) is required before the woman can marry another Jew.
|
| 43. |
The basic concept is that a convert who sins is considered as a Jew who sins. Even if he or she commits serious transgressions, the conversion is not revoked. The Kessef Mishneh maintains that if the convert intentionally worships false deities, a lost object that belonged to him is not returned, as indicated by Hilchot Gezeilah ViAvedah 11:2.
|
| 44. |
I.e., because despite their sins, they remained Jewesses.
|
| 45. |
I.e., their connection to idolatry.
|
| 46. |
Yevamot 47a. It must be emphasized that sincere converts are given the highest praise. In a renowned letter to a convert named Ovadiah, the Rambam states: "We [i.e., native-born Jews] share a connection with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Your connection is with the One who spoke and created the world."
|
| 47. |
Our Sages explain that in both instances, it was the erev rav, the mixed multitude of converts who accompanied the Jews out of Egypt, who enticed the people to perform these sins. Kivrot HaTa'avah refers to the incident, Numbers, ch. 11, where the people complained because they desired other food in addition to the manna.
|
Issurei Biah - Chapter Fourteen
Halacha 1
What is the procedure when accepting a righteous convert? When one of the gentiles comes to convert, we inspect his background.1 If an ulterior motive for conversion is not found,2 we ask him:3 "Why did you choose to convert? Don't you know that in the present era, the Jews are afflicted, crushed, subjugated, strained, and suffering comes upon them?" If he answers: "I know. Would it be that I be able to be part of them,"4 we accept him immediately.
Halacha 2
We inform him of the fundamentals of the faith, i.e., the unity of God and the prohibition against the worship of false deities. We elaborate on this matter.5We inform him about some of the easy mitzvot and some of the more severe ones. We do not elaborate on this matter.6 We inform him of the transgression of [not leaving] leket, shichachah, pe'ah,7 and the second tithe.8 And we inform him of the punishment given for [violating] the mitzvot.
What is implied? We tell him: "Before you came to our faith, if you partook of fat, you were not liable for your soul to be cut off. If you desecrated the Sabbath, you were not liable to be stoned to death. Now, after you convert, if you partake of fat, you are liable for your soul to be cut off. If you desecrate the Sabbath, you are liable to be stoned to death."
We do not teach him all the particulars lest this cause him concern and turn him away from a good path to a bad path. For at the outset, we draw a person forth with soft and appealing words, as [Hoshea 11:4] states: "With cords of man, I drew them forth,"9 and then continues: "with bonds of love."10
Halacha 3
Just as he is informed of the punishment [for disobeying] the commandments; so, too, he is informed about the reward for [their observance]. We tell him that by observing these mitzvot, he will merit the life of the World to Come. For there is no completely righteous man other than a master of wisdom who observes these mitzvot and knows them.
Halacha 4
We tell him: "Know that the World to Come is hidden away only for the righteous; they are the Jews.11 The fact that you see Israel suffering difficulty in this world [reflects] the good that is hidden away for them. For they cannot receive an abundance of good in this world as the gentiles do. For they hearts may become uplifted and they will err and lose the reward of the World to Come, as [Deuteronomy 32:15] states: "Jeshuron became fat and rebelled."12
Halacha 5
The Holy One, blessed be He, brings upon them an abundance of retribution solely so that they will not perish. For all the other nations will perish and they will prevail. We elaborate on this concept to make them feel cherished. If [the prospective convert] retracts and does not want to accept [the mitzvot], he goes on his way. If he accepts [their observance], we do not have him wait, but instead circumcise him immediately.13 If he was circumcised, we draw the blood of circumcision from him.14 We wait until he heals entirely15 and then immerse him.
Halacha 6
Three [judges] stand over him and inform him about some of the easy mitzvot and some of the more severe ones a second time while he stands in the water.16 If the convert was female,17 women position her in the water until her neck while the judges are outside. They inform her about some of the easy mitzvot and some of the more severe ones while she is sitting in the water. Then she immerses herself in their presence. Afterwards, they turn their faces away and depart so that they will not see her when she ascends from the water.
Halacha 7
What is meant by a resident alien? A gentile who makes a commitment not to worship false deities and to observe the other [six] universal laws commanded to Noah's descendants. He does not circumcise himself or immerse. We accept this commitment and he is considered one of the pious gentiles.
Why is he called a resident? Because we are permitted to allow him to dwell among us in Eretz Yisrael, as explained in Hilchot Avodah Zarah.18
Halacha 8
Halacha 9
When a servant is purchased from the gentiles, we do not say: "Why did you choose to convert?"22 Instead, we say to him: "Do you desire to enter the category of Jewish servants and become one of the observant of them?" If he agrees, he is informed about the fundamentals of the faith, about some of the easy mitzvot and some of the more severe ones, and the punishments and rewards [associated with them] as we notify a convert. [Then] we immerse him23 as we immerse a convert and inform him [of the mitzvot] while he is in the water.
If he does not desire to accept [the status of a servant], we are patient with him for twelve months. Afterwards, we sell him to a gentile. It is forbidden to maintain him for a longer period.24 If at the outset, he established a condition that he would not be circumcised or immersed, but instead would be a resident alien, it is permissible to maintain him in that status.25 A servant may be maintained in this status only during the era when the Jubilee is observed.
Halacha 10
The only sexual relations forbidden to a gentile are: his mother, his father's wife, his maternal sister, a married woman, a male, and an animal, as will be explained in Hilchot Melachim UMilchomoteihem.26 Other relations forbidden the Jews are permitted to them.
Halacha 11
When a gentile converts or a servant is freed,27 he is like a newborn baby. Any relatives whom he had as a gentile or a servant are no longer considered his relatives. If both he and they convert, he is not obligated for relations with any of them.
Halacha 12
According to Scriptural Law, a convert may marry his mother or his maternal sister after they convert. Nevertheless, our Sages forbade this so that [the converts] will not say: "We came from a more severe level of holiness to a less severe one. Yesterday, this [relationship] was forbidden and today, it is permitted."28
Similarly, when a convert engages in relations with his mother or his sister when they have not converted, it is considered as if he had relations with a woman with whom he was not related.
Halacha 13
What is the law that applies to converts with regard to relations with their relatives. As we explained, if one was married while a gentile to his mother or his sister and they converted, we separate them as explained [above]. If he was married to any one of the other forbidden relations and he and his wife converted, they are not forced to separate.29
A convert is forbidden to marry his maternal relatives after they convert according to Rabbinic Law. He may, however, marry his paternal relatives. [This applies] even when he certainly knows that these persons are his paternal relatives,30 for example, twins, in which instance it is clear that the father of one is the father of the other. Nevertheless, our Sages did not enforce a decree with regard to one's paternal relatives.
Accordingly, a convert may marry the wife of his paternal brother, the wife of his father's brother, his father's wife,31 and his son's wife. [This applies] even if they married his brother, his father, his father's brother, or his son after they converted.32 Similarly, his mother's paternal sister, his paternal sister, and his daughter who converted are permitted to him. He may not, however, marry his maternal sister, his mother's maternal sister, nor a woman who married his maternal brother after he converted. If, however, a woman married his brother while he was a gentile,33 she is permitted to him.
Halacha 14
Halacha 15
When a man marries a female convert and her daughter who converted or two maternal sisters [who converted], he should remain married to one of them and divorce the other.36 If he married a female convert and she died, he is permitted to marry her mother or her daughter.37 For our Sages ordained their decree only during [the woman's] lifetime.
It is permissible for a man to marry two paternal sisters who converted, for our Sages did not ordain any decrees with regard to paternal relations, as explained.38
Halacha 16
[Our Sages] did not ordain any decrees with regard to shniot39 who convert. Therefore a convert may marry his maternal grandmother. Similarly, a person may marry a convert and the mother of her maternal grandmother40 or her and the daughter of her daughter's daughter. Similar laws apply with regard to the remainder of the shniot.
Halacha 17
A servant is permitted to marry his mother while he is a servant.41Needless to say, this applies with regard to his daughter, his sister, or the like. [Since] he has already departed from the category of gentiles,42 the intimate relations forbidden to the gentiles are not forbidden to him. And [since] he has not entered the category of the Jewish people, the intimate relations that are forbidden to the converts are not yet forbidden to him.
Halacha 18
Halacha 19
Servants who are freed are like converts. All of the relationships forbidden to converts are forbidden to them and all those permitted to converts are permitted to them.
A person may give his maid-servant to his own servant or to a servant belonging to his colleague. At the outset, he may give one maid-servant to two servants.45Nor must they follow any restrictions. Instead, they are like animals. There is no difference whether a maid-servant is set aside for a servant or not, for there is no concept of marriage except within the Jewish people or among gentiles themselves,46 but not among servants themselves or between servants and the Jewish people.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
See Chapter 13, Halachah 14.
|
| 2. |
See Chapter 13, Halachah 14.
|
| 3. |
The halachah is quoted from Yevamot 47a. As early as the Talmudic era, potential converts were dissuaded in this manner.
|
| 4. |
Our translation is based on Rashi's commentary to Yevamot, loc. cit.
|
| 5. |
Because they are the fundamentals of our faith (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 6. |
This law, quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 268:2) indicates that even the opinions which require a convert to accept the observance of the mitzvot do not require him to accept all of the mitzvot individually. Instead, he must make a general commitment to confirm to Jewish practice.
|
| 7. |
These refer to different obligations from the crops that must be left for the poor. See Hilchot Matanot Aniyim, ch. 1.
|
| 8. |
Although this is the version in the standard published text of the Mishneh Torah, many manuscripts and early printings state "the tithe for the poor." This fits both the context and the Rambam's source, Yevamot 47a.
These mitzvot are mentioned because the giver has no control over them. When a prospective convert sees that Judaism places such financial obligations upon him, he may regret his choice (Rashi, Yevamot, loc. cit.).
|
| 9. |
This can be interpreted as referring to the warnings concerning the transgressions.
|
| 10. |
And this to the encouragement based on the knowledge of the reward for mitzvot.
|
| 11. |
The commentaries have questioned the Rambam's statements here noting that in Hilchot Teshuvah 3:5 and other sources, he states that the pious among the gentiles have a share in the World to Come. Among the resolutions offered is that "All of Israel have a share in the World to Come" (Sanhedrin 10:1). By virtue of the essential Godliness of the Jewish soul, they are granted a portion in this eternal good. A gentile must, however, earn his portion through his deeds. It is not "hidden away" for him.
|
| 12. |
I.e., the outcome of prosperity was not increased observance, but the opposite: rebellion against God's will.
|
| 13. |
For we do not postpone the performance of a mitzvah.
|
| 14. |
I.e., a small wound is made on his male organ to draw blood for the sake of the covenant. The expression "the blood of the covenant" is derived from Exodus 24:8. See also Zechariah 9:11.
|
| 15. |
For we fear that, otherwise, the immersion might cause the wound to become infected (Rashi,Yevamot 47b).
The commentaries ask: Why don't we have him immerse first and then circumcise himself? In this way, he will not have to delay his conversion any longer. The Ramban (cited by Turei Zahav268:4) states that we fear that he might refuse to become circumcised. This will be problematic for the immersion will have completed the conversion process. Hence, we have him become circumcised before the conversion is irreversible.
|
| 16. |
Rashi (loc. cit.) explains that since the immersion completes his conversion, the convert must accept the yoke of mitzvot at that time.
|
| 17. |
And thus it would be immodest for her to enter the mikveh in the presence of the judges.
|
| 18. |
See Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 10:6 which states that in an era when the Jews have undisputed authority over Eretz Yisrael, they may not allow an idolater to dwell in the holy land. Only when a gentile accepts these seven universal laws is he granted this privilege. The rationale for the Rambam's ruling is derived from the prooftext he cites (Exodus 23:33): "They shall not dwell in your land, lest they cause you to sin against Me." Since gentiles may turn into a negative spiritual influence, they should be prevented from dwelling in the land. If, however, a gentile has made a commitment to the observance of these seven laws, he will not lower the moral climate of the land.
As explained by the commentaries to Hilchot Avodat Kochavim, the Rambam's opinion is not universally accepted. The Ra'avad interprets the prooftext as referring to the seven Canaanite nations alone. Never, he claims, were other gentiles prohibited from living among us.
|
| 19. |
The Jubilee must be observed only when the entire Jewish people are dwelling in Eretz Yisrael. Therefore when the tribes of Reuven and Gad, and half the tribe of Menasheh were exiled by the kingdom of Assyria (this took place approximately 150 years before the destruction of the First Temple), the laws of the Jubilee ceased to be observed according to Scriptural Law (Hilchot Shemitah ViYoval 10:8).
|
| 20. |
The Rambam's source ( Bechorot 30b) states: "one minor point of Rabbinic Law." The commentaries question why the Rambam omits this point.
|
| 21. |
As the Rambam states in Hilchot Avodat Kochavim, loc. cit., in the present era, we accept only full converts. Implied is that in the present era, were we to have the authority, we should prevent gentiles from living in Eretz Yisrael.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam concerning this point, explaining that with regard to certain matters the status of a gentile who accepts the observance of the seven mitzvot in the present age is more severe than that before the revocation of the Jubilee laws and in other matters, it is more lenient. According to his opinion, however, there is no reason why a gentile should be prohibited against living in Eretz Yisrael. In his gloss to Hilchot Avodat Kochavim, the Kessef Mishneh states that even the Rambam would agree. For since the gentile is living a moral lifestyle, there is no reason to fear that he will lead a Jew to sin. The Rambam's directive here is directed at the courts. They cannot formalize a resident alien's status in the present age.
In that vein, it must be emphasized that although the concept of a resident alien does not apply in the present age, we are obligated to teach the gentiles the seven universal laws commanded to Noah's descendants, as the Rambam states in Hilchot Melachim 8:10.
|
| 22. |
As we tell a prospective convert. We do not make this statement to a servant, for he is not coming to convert on his own volition.
|
| 23. |
A male servant is also circumcised before conversion. It is questionable why the Rambam does not mention this point.
|
| 24. |
He must be sold to the Diaspora or to a gentile (Hilchot Avadim 8:12).
|
| 25. |
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 267:4) writes that in the lands where he lived (Central Europe), it was forbidden to convert a gentile to Judaism. Therefore it is taken for granted that the servant was purchased on the condition that his status not be altered. Hence, he may be maintained indefinitely as a gentile.
|
| 26. |
Hilchot Melachim 9:5.
|
| 27. |
See Halachah 17 which emphasizes that even while a servant, a servant need not show concern for these prohibitions.
|
| 28. |
I.e., it would appear that he was bound by more severe prohibitions before conversion.
|
| 29. |
This applies even to maternal relatives. Since they were married before, we do not force them to separate (Siftei Cohen 269:2). We do not fear that these converts will say that they entered a lower level of holiness, because there are relations - a mother and a sister - which they are forbidden. This makes it obvious that the distinction in the laws results from their change in status (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 30. |
I.e, one might say that the reason for the prohibition is that one is certain that he is related to his maternal relatives. Those reputed to be his paternal relatives, however, might in fact not be related to him at all, because the man reputed to be his father may not be his parent. For the gentiles are known to be promiscuous. This is not the reason for the leniency. Instead, the Torah does not have any conceptual of paternal lineage with regard to a gentile (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 31. |
There are opinions which forbid the wife of the convert's father [Tur, Rama (Yoreh De'ah 269:3)]. The Siftei Cohen 269:4 adds that the convert should also refrain from relations with the sister of his father.
|
| 32. |
For their conversion is of no consequence in this context. They are considered as having no family ties.
|
| 33. |
But was never married to the brother according to Jewish Law.
|
| 34. |
I.e., they were conceived before their mother converted and born after she converted.
|
| 35. |
For it is considered as if the two brothers are ordinary Jews and bound by the laws that apply to members of our people. Nevertheless, they may not fulfill the mitzvah of yibbum, for they are not brothers in the complete sense [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 269:4)].
|
| 36. |
This is a Rabbinic decree. According to Scriptural Law, the marriages are valid. Nevertheless, our Rabbis were stringent and forbade this union, for were the women to be native-born Jewesses, this would be forbidden. Hence, formal divorce proceedings are necessary.
|
| 37. |
In this instance, as well, were the women to be native-born Jewesses, this would be forbidden. See Siftei Cohen 269:10 which cites opinions that maintain that the Rabbinic prohibition applies after the woman's death as well.
|
| 38. |
In Halachah 13. Note the contrast to the previous clause which speaks about relations with maternal sisters.
|
| 39. |
This term refers to relatives more distantly removed than those forbidden by Scriptural Law. Relations with them are forbidden by Rabbinic decree, as explained in Chapter 1, Halachah 8;Hilchot Ishut 1:6. Since the prohibition is a Rabbinic safeguard, our Sage's did not add a further safeguard with regard to a convert. For we do not ordain a safeguard for a safeguard.
|
| 40. |
Our translation follows the text of the authoritative manuscripts of the Mishneh Torah. The Siftei Cohen 269:12 justifies this reading, explaining that relations with a woman's maternal grandmother (the version in the standard published text of the Mishneh Torah) is a Scriptural prohibition, not a Rabbinic safeguard.
|
| 41. |
I.e., before he is freed.
|
| 42. |
See Chapter 12, Halachah 11.
|
| 43. |
This phrase points to a conclusion deduced by the Rambam for which he has no explicit source in previous Rabbinic literature. The Ra'avad, however, considers the concept as blatantly obvious.
The Maggid Mishneh adds that he is also executed for relations with a married Jewish woman and questions why the Rambam does not mention this transgression.
|
| 44. |
The word "executed" is plural. Both men or the man and the animal are executed (Or Sameach).
|
| 45. |
I.e., we do not enforce monogamy.
|
| 46. |
See Hilchot Melachim 9:5.
|
• Sunday, Adar 24, 5775 · 15 March 2015
"Today's Day"
Torah lessons: Chumash: Vayakheil, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 113-118.
Tanya: For whereas (p. 145)...on a (transitory) thing. (p. 145).
To R. Hillel Paritcher's question whether to review Chassidus even in towns where the people have no conception of Chassidus, the Mitteler Rebbe responded: "The soul hears words of Chassidus." It is written, "Flowing from Lebanon."1 Lebanon is spelled (in Hebrew) l'b nu'n.2 "Lebanon" thus represents chochma and bina of the soul. When the soul3 hears, from there4 issues a "flow", a "stream of droplets" into that "radiance" or ha'ara of the soul which vitalizes the body;5 this results in a strengthening of "do good" expressed in the 248 positive mitzvot, and of "turn from evil" expressed in the 365 prohibitions.
Torah lessons: Chumash: Sh'mini, Revi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 113-118.
Tanya: For in the (p. 183)...may He be blessed. (p. 183).
When saying Ana b'choach (p. 22), look at - or picture in thought - the sheimot(Divine Names) formed by the acronyms1 of the words, but do not pronounce them.
FOOTNOTES
1. Unvowelled words in the ana b'choach paragraph on p. 22. (This also applies toana b'choach on pages 121 and 341.)
Daily Thought:
Realistic Optimism
People believe that only fools are optimists. But the opposite is true.
Precisely because we understand how desperate the situation really is, how helpless we are and how impossible the challenge, that itself tells us how great a G‑d we have—a G‑d who can lift us high beyond the natural order and transform the most ominous darkness to brilliant good.
The greater a realist you are, the greater your joy.[20 Cheshvan 5741.]
___________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment