Torah Reading
Vayak'hel-Pekudei (Exodus 35:1 Moshe assembled the whole community of the people of Isra’el and said to them, “These are the things which Adonai has ordered you to do. 2 On six days work is to be done, but the seventh day is to be a holy day for you, a Shabbat of complete rest in honor of Adonai. Whoever does any work on it is to be put to death. 3 You are not to kindle a fire in any of your homes on Shabbat.”
Today's Laws & Customs:
4 Moshe said to the whole community of the people of Isra’el, “Here is what Adonai has ordered: 5 ‘Take up a collection for Adonai from among yourselves — anyone whose heart makes him willing is to bring the offering for Adonai: gold, silver and bronze; 6 blue, purple and scarlet yarn; fine linen, goat’s hair, 7 tanned ram skins and fine leather; acacia-wood; 8 oil for the light, spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense; 9 onyx stones and stones to be set, for the ritual vest and the breastplate.
10 “‘Then let all the craftsmen among you come and make everything Adonai has ordered: 11 the tabernacle with its tent, covering, fasteners, planks, crossbars, posts and sockets; 12 the ark with its poles, ark-cover and the curtain to screen it; 13 the table with its poles, all its utensils and the showbread; 14 the menorah for the light, with its utensils and lamps, and the oil for the light; 15 the incense altar with its poles; the anointing oil; the fragrant incense; the screen for the entranceway at the entrance to the tabernacle; 16 the altar for burnt offerings, with its poles and all its utensils; the basin with its base; 17 the tapestries for the courtyard, with their posts and sockets; the screen for the gateway of the courtyard; 18 the tent pegs for the tabernacle; the tent pegs for the courtyard, with their ropes; 19 the garments for officiating, for serving in the Holy Place; and the holy garments for Aharon the cohen and the garments for his sons, so that they can serve in the office of cohen.’”
20 Then the whole community of the people of Isra’el withdrew from Moshe’s presence; (LY: ii) 21 and they came, everyone whose heart stirred him and everyone whose spirit made him willing, and brought Adonai’s offering for the work on the tent of meeting, for the service in it and for the holy garments. 22 Both men and women came, as many as had willing hearts; they brought nose-rings, earrings, signet-rings, belts, all kinds of gold jewelry — everyone bringing an offering of gold to Adonai. 23 Everyone who had blue, purple or scarlet yarn; fine linen; tanned ram skins or fine leather brought them. 24 Everyone contributing silver or bronze brought his offering for Adonai, and everyone who had acacia-wood suitable for any of the work brought it. 25 All the women who were skilled at spinning got to work and brought what they had spun, the blue, purple and scarlet yarn and the fine linen. 26 Likewise the women whose heart stirred them to use their skill spun the goat’s hair. 27 The leaders brought the onyx stones and the stones to be set, for the ritual vest and the breasplate; 28 the spices; and the oil for the light, for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense. 29 Thus every man and woman of the people of Isra’el whose heart impelled him to contribute to any of the work Adonai had ordered through Moshe brought it to Adonai as a voluntary offering.
(RY: ii, LY: iii) 30 Moshe said to the people of Isra’el, “See, Adonai has singled out B’tzal’el the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Y’hudah. 31 He has filled him with the Spirit of God — with wisdom, understanding and knowledge concerning every kind of artisanry. 32 He is a master of design in gold, silver, bronze, 33 cutting precious stones to be set, woodcarving and every other craft. 34 [Adonai] has also given him and Oholi’av the son of Achisamakh, of the tribe of Dan, the ability to teach others. 35 He has filled them with the skill needed for every kind of work, whether done by an artisan, a designer, an embroiderer using blue, purple and scarlet yarn, and fine linen, or a weaver — they have the skill for every kind of work and design.
36:1 “B’tzal’el and Oholi’av, along with all the craftsmen whom Adonai has endowed with the wisdom and skill necessary to carry out the work needed for the sanctuary, are to do exactly according to everything Adonai has ordered.”
2 Moshe summoned B’tzal’el, Oholi’av and every craftsman to whom Adonai had given wisdom, everyone whose heart stirred him, to come and take part in the work. 3 They received from Moshe all the offering which the people of Isra’el had brought for the work of building the sanctuary. But they still kept bringing voluntary offerings every morning, 4 until all the craftsmen doing the work for the sanctuary left the work they were involved with 5 to tell Moshe, “The people are bringing far more than is needed to do the work Adonai has ordered done.” 6 So Moshe gave an order which was proclaimed throughout the camp: “Neither men nor women are to make any further efforts for the sanctuary offering.” In this way, the people were restrained from making additional contributions. 7 For what they had already was not only sufficient for doing all the work, but too much!
(LY: iv) 8 All the skilled men among them who did the work made the tabernacle, using ten sheets of finely woven linen and of blue, purple and scarlet yarn. He made them with k’ruvim worked in that had been crafted by a skilled artisan. 9 Each sheet was forty-two feet long and six feet wide; all the sheets were the same size. 10 He joined five sheets one to another, and the other five sheets he joined one to another. 11 He made loops of blue on the edge of the outermost sheet in the first set and did the same on the edge of the outermost sheet in the second set. 12 He made fifty loops on the one sheet, and he made fifty loops on the edge of the sheet in the second set; the loops were opposite one another. 13 He made fifty fasteners of gold and coupled the sheets to each other with the fasteners, so that the tabernacle formed a single unit.
14 He made sheets of goat’s hair to be used as a tent covering the tabernacle; he made eleven sheets. 15 Each sheet was forty-five feet long and six feet wide; all eleven sheets were the same size. 16 He joined five sheets together and six sheets together. 17 He made fifty loops on the edge of the outermost sheet in the first set and fifty loops on the outermost sheet in the second set. 18 He made fifty fasteners of bronze to join the tent together, so that it would be a single unit.
19 He made a covering for the tent of tanned ram skins and an outer covering of fine leather.
(LY: v) 20 He made the upright planks of acacia-wood for the tabernacle. 21 Each plank was fifteen feet long and two-and-a-quarter feet wide. 22 There were two projections on each plank, and the planks were joined one to another. This is how he made all the planks for the tabernacle.
23 He made the planks for the tabernacle as follows: twenty planks for the south side, facing southward. 24 He made forty silver sockets under the twenty planks, two sockets under one plank for its two projections and two sockets under another plank for its two projections. 25 For the second side of the tabernacle, to the north, he made twenty planks 26 and their forty silver sockets, two sockets under one plank and two under another. 27 For the rear part of the tabernacle, toward the west, he made six planks. 28 For the corners of the tabernacle in the rear he made two planks, 29 double from the bottom all the way to the top but joined at a single ring. He did the same with both of them at the two corners. 30 Thus there were eight planks with their silver sockets, sixteen sockets, two sockets under each plank.
31 He made crossbars of acacia-wood, five for the planks of the one side of the tabernacle, 32 five crossbars for the planks of the other side of the tabernacle, and five crossbars for the planks at the side of the tabernacle at the rear toward the west. 33 He made the middle crossbar so that it extended from one end of the planks to the other, halfway up. 34 He overlaid the planks with gold, made gold rings for them through which the crossbars could pass and overlaid the crossbars with gold.
35 He made the curtain of blue, purple and scarlet yarn and finely woven linen. He made them with k’ruvim worked in that had been crafted by a skilled artisan. 36 He made for it four posts of acacia-wood and overlaid them with gold, and gold hooks; and cast for them four silver sockets.
37 For the entrance to the tent he made a screen of blue, purple and scarlet yarn and finely woven linen, in colors, the work of a weaver; 38 with its five posts and their hooks. He overlaid their capitals and their attached rings for hanging with gold, while their five sockets were of bronze.
37:1 B’tzal’el made the ark of acacia-wood three-and-three-quarters feet long, two-and-a-quarter feet wide and two-and-a-quarter feet high. 2 He overlaid it with pure gold inside and outside and put a molding of gold for it around the top. 3 He cast four gold rings for it at its four feet, two rings on each side. 4 He made poles of acacia-wood and overlaid them with gold. 5 He put the carrying-poles for the ark in the rings on the sides of the ark.
6 He made a cover for the ark of pure gold, three-and-three-quarters feet long and two-and-a-quarter feet wide. 7 He made two k’ruvim of gold; he made them of hammered work for the two ends of the ark-cover — 8 one keruv for one end and one keruv for the other end; he made the k’ruvim of one piece with the ark-cover at its two ends. 9 The k’ruvim had their wings spread out above, so that their wings covered the ark; their faces were toward each other and toward the ark-cover.
10 He made the table of acacia-wood, three feet long, eighteen inches wide and eighteen inches high. 11 He overlaid it with pure gold and put a molding of gold around the top of it. 12 He made around it a rim a handbreadth wide and put a molding of gold around the rim. 13 He cast for it four gold rings and attached the rings to the four corners, near its four legs. 14 The rings to hold the carrying-poles for the table were placed close to the rim. 15 He made the carrying-poles for the table of acacia-wood and overlaid them with gold. 16 He made the utensils to be put on the table — its dishes, pans, bowls and pitchers — of pure gold.
(RY: iii, LY: vi) 17 He made the menorah of pure gold. He made it of hammered work; its base, shaft, cups, rings of outer leaves and flowers were a single unit. 18 There were six branches extending from its sides, three branches of the menorah on one side of it and three on the other. 19 On one branch were three cups shaped like almond blossoms, a ring of outer leaves and petals; likewise on the opposite branch three cups shaped like almond blossoms, a ring of outer leaves and petals; and similarly for all six branches extending from the menorah. 20 On the central shaft of the menorah were four cups shaped like almond blossoms, each with its ring of outer leaves and petals. 21 Where each pair of branches joined the central shaft was a ring of outer leaves of one piece with the pair of branches — thus for all six branches. 22 Their rings of outer leaves and their branches were of one piece with the shaft. Thus the whole menorah was one piece of hammered work made of pure gold. 23 He made its seven lamps, its tongs and its trays of pure gold. 24 The menorah and its utensils were made of sixty-six pounds of pure gold.
25 He made the altar on which to burn incense of acacia-wood, eighteen inches square and three feet high; its horns were a single unit. 26 He overlaid it with pure gold — its top, all around its sides and its horns; and he put around it a molding of gold. 27 He made two gold rings for it under its molding at the two corners on both sides, to hold the carrying-poles. 28 He made the poles of acacia-wood and overlaid them with gold.
29 He made the holy anointing oil and the pure incense of aromatic plant substances as would an expert perfume-maker.
38:1 (RY: iv, LY: vii) He made the altar for burnt offerings of acacia-wood, seven-and-a-half feet long and seven-and-a-half feet wide — it was square — and four-and-a-half feet high. 2 He made horns for it on its four corners, the horns were of one piece with it, and he overlaid it with bronze.
3 He made all the utensils for the altar — its pots, shovels, basins, meat-hooks and fire pans; all its utensils he made of bronze. 4 He made for the altar a grate of bronze netting, under its rim, reaching halfway up the altar. 5 He cast four rings for the four ends of the bronze grate to hold the poles. 6 He made the poles of acacia-wood and overlaid them with bronze. 7 He put the carrying-poles into the rings on the sides of the altar; he made it of planks and hollow inside.
8 He made the basin of bronze with its base of bronze from the mirrors of the women serving at the entrance to the tent of meeting.
9 He made the courtyard. On the south side, facing southward, the tapestries for the courtyard were made of finely woven linen, 150 feet long, 10 supported on twenty posts in twenty bronze sockets; the hooks on the posts and the attached rings for hanging were of silver. 11 On the north side they were 150 feet long, hung on twenty posts in twenty bronze sockets, with the hooks on the posts and their rings of silver. 12 On the west side were tapestries seventy-five feet long, hung on ten posts in ten sockets, with the hooks on the posts and their rings of silver. 13 On the east side were tapestries seventy-five feet long. 14 The tapestries for the one side [of the gateway] were twenty-two-and-a-half feet long, hung on three posts in three sockets; 15 likewise for the other side — on either side [of the gate] were tapestries twenty-two-and-a-half feet long on three posts in three sockets. 16 All the tapestries for the courtyard, all the way around, were of finely woven linen; 17 the sockets for the posts were of bronze; the hooks on the posts and their rings were of silver; the capitals of the posts were overlaid with silver; and all the posts of the courtyard were banded with silver.
(LY: Maftir) 18 The screen for the gateway to the courtyard was the work of a weaver in colors, of blue, purple and scarlet yarn and finely woven linen. Its length was thirty feet and its height seven-and-a-half feet all the way along, like the tapestries of the courtyard. 19 It had four posts in four bronze sockets, with silver hooks, capitals overlaid with silver and silver fasteners.
20 The tent pegs for the tabernacle and for the courtyard around it were of bronze.
21 These are the accounts of the tabernacle, the tabernacle of the testimony, recorded, as Moshe ordered, by the L’vi’im under the direction of Itamar the son of Aharon, the cohen.
22 B’tzal’el the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Y’hudah, made everything that Adonai ordered Moshe to make. 23 Assisting him was Oholi’av the son of Achisamakh, of the tribe of Dan, who was an engraver, a designer and a weaver in colors — in blue, purple and scarlet yarn and in fine linen.
24 All the gold used for the work in everything needed for the sanctuary, the gold of the offering, weighed 29 talents 730 shekels [1,930 pounds], using the sanctuary shekel.
25 The silver given by the community weighed 100 talents 1,775 shekels [6,650 pounds], using the sanctuary shekel. 26 This was a beka per person, that is, half a shekel [one-fifth of an ounce], using the sanctuary shekel, for everyone twenty years old or older counted in the census, 603,550 men. 27 The hundred talents of silver were used to cast the sockets for the sanctuary and the sockets for the curtain — one hundred sockets made from the hundred talents, one talent [sixty-six pounds] per socket. 28 The 1,775 shekels [fifty pounds] he used to make hooks for the posts, to overlay their capitals and to make fasteners for them.
29 The bronze in the offering came to 4,680 pounds. 30 He used it to make the sockets for the entrance to the tent of meeting, the bronze altar, its bronze grate, all the utensils for the altar, 31 the sockets for the courtyard around it, the sockets for the gateway to the courtyard, all the tent pegs for the tabernacle and all the tent pegs for the courtyard around it.
39:1 From the blue, purple and scarlet yarn they made the garments for officiating, for serving in the Holy Place; and they made the holy garments for Aharon, as Adonai had ordered Moshe. (RY: v, LY: ii) 2 He made the ritual vest of gold, of blue, purple and scarlet yarn, and of finely woven linen. 3 They hammered the gold into thin plates and cut them into threads in order to work it into the blue, purple and scarlet yarn and the fine linen crafted by the skilled artisan. 4 They made shoulder-pieces for it, joined together; they were joined together at the two ends. 5 The decorated belt on the vest, used to fasten it, was of the same workmanship and materials — gold; blue, purple and scarlet yarn; and finely twined linen — as Adonai had ordered Moshe. 6 They worked the onyx stones, mounted in gold settings, engraving them with the names of the sons of Isra’el as they would be engraved on a seal. 7 Then he put them on the shoulder-pieces of the vest to be stones calling to mind the sons of Isra’el, as Adonai had ordered Moshe.
8 He made the breastplate; it was crafted by a skilled artisan and made like the work of the ritual vest — of gold; blue, purple and scarlet yarn; and finely woven linen. 9 When folded double, the breastplate was square — doubled, it was a hand-span by a hand-span. 10 They set in it four rows of stones: the first row was a carnelian, a topaz and an emerald; 11 the second row a green feldspar, a sapphire and a diamond; 12 the third row an orange zircon, an agate and an amethyst; 13 and the fourth row a beryl, an onyx and a jasper. They were mounted in settings of gold. 14 The stones corresponded to the names of the twelve sons of Isra’el; they were engraved with their names as a seal would be engraved, each name representing one of the twelve tribes.
15 On the breastplate they made two pure gold chains, twisted like cords. 16 Also for the breastplate they made two settings of gold and two gold rings, and they put the two rings at the two ends of the breastplate. 17 They put the two twisted gold chains in the two rings at the ends of the breastplate 18 and attached the other two ends of the twisted chains to the front of the shoulder-pieces of the ritual vest. 19 They also made two gold rings and put them on the two ends of the breastplate, at its edge, on the side facing in toward the vest. 20 Also they made two gold rings and attached them low on the front part of the vest’s shoulder-pieces, near the join, above the vest’s decorated belt. 21 Then they bound the breastplate by its rings to the rings of the vest with a blue cord, so that it could be on the vest’s decorated belt, and so that the breastplate would not swing loose from the vest — as Adonai had ordered Moshe.
(RY: vi, LY: iii) 22 He made the robe for the ritual vest; it was woven entirely of blue, 23 with its opening in the middle, like that of a coat of mail, and with a border around the opening, so that it wouldn’t tear. 24 On the bottom hem they made pomegranates of blue, purple and scarlet, and woven linen; 25 and they made bells of pure gold, and put the bells between the pomegranates all the way around the hem of the robe — between the pomegranates, 26 that is, bell, pomegranate, bell, pomegranate, all the way around the hem of the robe for service — as Adonai had ordered Moshe.
27 They made the tunics of finely woven linen for Aharon and his sons, 28 the turban of fine linen, the splendid headgear of fine linen, the linen shorts, 29 and the sash of finely woven linen and blue, purple and scarlet yarn, the work of a weaver in colors — as Adonai had ordered Moshe.
30 They made the ornament for the holy turban of pure gold; wrote on it the words, “Set apart for Adonai,” like the engraving on a seal; 31 and tied a blue cord on it to fasten it to the front of the turban — as Adonai had ordered Moshe.
32 Thus all the work for the tabernacle, the tent of meeting, was finished, with the people of Isra’el doing everything exactly as Adonai had ordered Moshe.
(LY: iv) 33 Then they brought the tabernacle to Moshe — the tent and all its furnishings, clasps, planks, crossbars, posts and sockets; 34 the covering of tanned ram skins, the covering of fine leather and the curtain for the screen; 35 the ark for the testimony, its poles and the ark-cover; 36 the table, all its utensils and the showbread; 37 the pure menorah, its lamps and their arrangement for display, its accessories and the oil for the light; 38 the gold altar; the anointing oil; the fragrant incense; the screen for the entrance to the tent; 39 the bronze altar with its bronze grate, poles and all its utensils; the basin with its base; 40 the tapestries for the courtyard, with their posts and sockets; the screen for the entrance to the courtyard, with its ropes and tent pegs; all the utensils for the service in the tabernacle, the tent of meeting; 41 the garments for officiating, for serving in the Holy Place; the holy garments for Aharon the cohen; and the garments for his sons to serve in the office of cohen.
42 The people of Isra’el did all the work just as Adonai had ordered Moshe. 43 Moshe saw all the work, and — there it was! — they had done it! Exactly as Adonai had ordered, they had done it. And Moshe blessed them.
40:1 (RY: vii, LY: v) Adonai said to Moshe, 2 “On the first day of the first month, you are to set up the tabernacle, the tent of meeting. 3 Put in it the ark for the testimony, and conceal the ark with the curtain. 4 Bring in the table, and arrange its display. Bring in the menorah, and light its lamps. 5 Set the gold altar for incense in front of the ark for the testimony, and set up the screen at the entrance to the tabernacle. 6 Place the altar for burnt offerings in front of the entrance to the tabernacle, the tent of meeting. 7 Set the basin between the tent of meeting and the altar, and put water in it. 8 Set up the courtyard all the way around, and hang up the screen for the entrance to the courtyard.
9 “Take the anointing oil, and anoint the tabernacle and everything in it — consecrate it with all its furnishings; then it will be holy. 10 Anoint the altar for burnt offerings with all its utensils — consecrate the altar; then the altar will be especially holy. 11 Anoint the basin and its base, and consecrate it.
12 “Then bring Aharon and his sons to the entrance of the tent of meeting and wash them with water. 13 Put the holy garments on Aharon, anoint him, and consecrate him, so that he can serve me in the office of cohen. 14 Bring his sons, put tunics on them, 15 and anoint them as you anointed their father, so that they can serve me in the office of cohen. Their anointing will signify that the office of cohen is theirs through all their generations.”
16 Moshe did this — he acted in accordance with everything Adonai had ordered him to do.
(LY: vi) 17 On the first day of the first month of the second year, the tabernacle was set up. 18 Moshe erected the tabernacle, put its sockets in place, put up its planks, put in its crossbars and set up its posts. 19 He spread the tent over the tabernacle and put the covering of the tent above it, as Adonai had ordered Moshe. 20 He took and put the testimony inside the ark, put the poles on the ark, and set the ark-cover above, on the ark. 21 Then he brought the ark into the tabernacle, set up the curtain as a screen and concealed the ark for the testimony, as Adonai had ordered Moshe.
22 He put the table in the tent of meeting on the side of the tabernacle facing north, outside the curtain. 23 He arranged a row of bread on it before Adonai, as Adonai had ordered Moshe.
24 He put the menorah in the tent of meeting across from the table, on the side of the tabernacle facing south. 25 Then he lit the lamps before Adonai, as Adonai had ordered Moshe.
26 He set the gold altar in the tent of meeting in front of the curtain 27 and burned on it incense made from aromatic spices, as Adonai had ordered Moshe.
(LY: vii) 28 He set up the screen at the entrance to the tabernacle. 29 The altar for burnt offerings he placed at the entrance to the tabernacle, the tent of meeting, and offered on it the burnt offering and the grain offering, as Adonai had ordered Moshe.
30 He set the basin between the tent of meeting and the altar and put water in it for washing, 31 so that Moshe and Aharon and his sons could wash their hands and feet there — 32 so that they could wash when entering the tent of meeting and when approaching the altar, as Adonai had ordered Moshe.
33 Finally, he erected the courtyard around the tabernacle and the altar and set up the screen for the entrance to the courtyard.
(Maftir) 34 Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of Adonai filled the tabernacle. 35 Moshe was unable to enter the tent of meeting, because the cloud remained on it, and the glory of Adonai filled the tabernacle.
36 Whenever the cloud was taken up from over the tabernacle, the people of Isra’el continued with all their travels. 37 But if the cloud was not taken up, then they did not travel onward until the day when it was taken up. 38 For the cloud of Adonai was above the tabernacle during the day, and fire was in [the cloud] at night, so that all the house of Isra’el could see it throughout all their travels.)
• Parshat Parah
The Torah reading of Parah (Numbers 19) is added to the weekly reading. Parah details the laws of the "Red Heifer" and the process by which a person rendered ritually impure by contact with a dead body was purified.
(When the Holy Temple stood in Jerusalem, every Jew had to be in a state of ritual purity in time for the bringing of the Passover offering in the Temple. Today, though we're unable to fulfill the Temple-related rituals in practice, we fulfill them spiritually by studying their laws in the Torah. Thus, we study and read the section of Parah in preparation for the upcoming festival of Passover.)
Links: The Parah reading w commentary
The Calf's Mother
• Blessing the New Month
This Shabbat is Shabbat Mevarchim ("the Shabbat that blesses" the new month): a special prayer is recited blessing the Rosh Chodesh ("Head of the Month") of upcoming month of Nissan, which occurs next Shabbat.
Prior to the blessing, we announce the precise time of the molad, the "birth" of the new moon. Click here for molad times.
It is a Chabad custom to recite the entire book of Psalms before morning prayers, and to conduct farbrengens (chassidic gatherings) in the course of the Shabbat.
Links: On the Significance of Shabbat Mevarchim; Tehillim (the Book of Psalms);The Farbrengen
Today in Jewish History:
• Mishkan assembled for the 1st time; "Seven Days of Training" begin (1312 BCE)
The Children of Israel began building the "Mishkan" (also called the "Tabernacle"--a portable sanctuary to house the Divine presence in their midst as they journeyed through the desert) on the 11th of Tishrei of the year 2449 from creation (1312 BCE) -- six months after their Exodus from Egypt, four months after the revelation at Sinai, and 80 days after their worship of the Golden Calf. The construction of the Mishkan, which followed a detailed set of instructions issued to Moses on Mount Sinai, lasted 74 days, and was completed on the 25th of Kislev; but the Divine command to erect the edifice came only three months later, on the 23rd of Adar, when Moses was instructed to begin a 7-day "training period."
During the week of Adar 23-29, the Mishkan was erected each morning and dismantled each evening; Moses served as the High Priest and initiated Aaron and his four sons into the priesthood. Then, on the "eighth day" -- the 1st of Nissan -- the Mishkan was "permanently" assembled (that is, put up to stand until the Divine command would come to journey on), Aaron and his sons assumed the priesthood, and the divine presence came to dwell in the Mishkan.
Links:
Parshah Terumah (detailed description of Mishkan with commentary)
Why It's Frustrating Having a Brain
More on the Mishkan
• Passing of 1st Rebbe of Ger (1866)
Chassidic Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Altar (1799-1866), author of Chiddushei Harim (a commentary on the Talmud and Shulchan Aruch), was a disciple of the Maggid of Koshnitz and Rabbi Simcha Bunim of Peshischa, and the founder of the "Ger" (Gerer) Chassidic dynasty. All his 13 sons had died in his lifetime, and he was succeeded (in 1870) by his young grandson, Rabbi Yehudah Leib Alter (the "Sefat Emmet").
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Vayak'hel-Pekudei, 7th Portion Exodus 40:1-40:38 with Rashi
• Chapter 40
1The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: אוַיְדַבֵּר יְהֹוָה אֶל משֶׁה לֵּאמֹר:
2"On the day of the first month, on the first of the month, you shall set up the Mishkan of the Tent of Meeting. בבְּיוֹם הַחֹדֶשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן בְּאֶחָד לַחֹדֶשׁ תָּקִים אֶת מִשְׁכַּן אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד:
3There you shall place the Ark of the Testimony, and you shall spread the dividing curtain toward the ark. גוְשַׂמְתָּ שָׁם אֵת אֲרוֹן הָעֵדוּת וְסַכֹּתָ עַל הָאָרֹן אֶת הַפָּרֹכֶת:
and you shall spread… toward the ark: Heb. וְסַכֹּתָ, an expression denoting protection, for this [dividing curtain] was a partition [not a covering]. וסכת על הארן: לשון הגנה, שהרי מחיצה היתה:
4You shall bring in the table and set its arrangement; you shall bring in the menorah and kindle its lamps. דוְהֵבֵאתָ אֶת הַשֻּׁלְחָן וְעָרַכְתָּ אֶת עֶרְכּוֹ וְהֵבֵאתָ אֶת הַמְּנֹרָה וְהַעֲלֵיתָ אֶת נֵרֹתֶיהָ:
and set its arrangement: [I.e., arrange] the two stacks of the [loaves of] showbread (Lev. 24:6). וערכת את ערכו: שתי מערכות של לחם הפנים:
5You shall place the golden altar for incense before the Ark of the Testimony, and you shall place the screen of the entrance to the Mishkan. הוְנָתַתָּה אֶת מִזְבַּח הַזָּהָב לִקְטֹרֶת לִפְנֵי אֲרוֹן הָעֵדֻת וְשַׂמְתָּ אֶת מָסַךְ הַפֶּתַח לַמִּשְׁכָּן:
6You shall place the altar of the burnt offering in front of the entrance of the Mishkan of the Tent of Meeting. ווְנָתַתָּה אֵת מִזְבַּח הָעֹלָה לִפְנֵי פֶּתַח מִשְׁכַּן אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד:
7You shall place the washstand between the Tent of Meeting and the altar, and there you shall put water. זוְנָתַתָּ אֶת הַכִּיֹּר בֵּין אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וּבֵין הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְנָתַתָּ שָׁם מָיִם:
8And you shall set up the courtyard all around, and you shall put up the screen for the gate to the courtyard. חוְשַׂמְתָּ אֶת הֶחָצֵר סָבִיב וְנָתַתָּ אֶת מָסַךְ שַׁעַר הֶחָצֵר:
9You shall take the anointing oil and anoint the Mishkan and everything within it, and you shall sanctify it and all its furnishings; thus it will become a holy thing. טוְלָקַחְתָּ אֶת שֶׁמֶן הַמִּשְׁחָה וּמָשַׁחְתָּ אֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן וְאֶת כָּל אֲשֶׁר בּוֹ וְקִדַּשְׁתָּ אֹתוֹ וְאֶת כָּל כֵּלָיו וְהָיָה קֹדֶשׁ:
10You shall anoint the altar for the burnt offering and all its implements; you shall sanctify the altar; thus the altar will become a holy of holies. יוּמָשַׁחְתָּ אֶת מִזְבַּח הָעֹלָה וְאֶת כָּל כֵּלָיו וְקִדַּשְׁתָּ אֶת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְהָיָה הַמִּזְבֵּחַ קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים:
11You shall anoint the washstand and its base and sanctify it. יאוּמָשַׁחְתָּ אֶת הַכִּיֹּר וְאֶת כַּנּוֹ וְקִדַּשְׁתָּ אֹתוֹ:
12And you shall bring Aaron and his sons near the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, and you shall bathe them in water. יבוְהִקְרַבְתָּ אֶת אַהֲרֹן וְאֶת בָּנָיו אֶל פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וְרָחַצְתָּ אֹתָם בַּמָּיִם:
13And you shall clothe Aaron with the holy garments, and you shall anoint him and sanctify him so that he may serve Me [as a kohen]. יגוְהִלְבַּשְׁתָּ אֶת אַהֲרֹן אֵת בִּגְדֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ וּמָשַׁחְתָּ אֹתוֹ וְקִדַּשְׁתָּ אֹתוֹ וְכִהֵן לִי:
14And you shall bring his sons near and clothe them with tunics. ידוְאֶת בָּנָיו תַּקְרִיב וְהִלְבַּשְׁתָּ אֹתָם כֻּתֳּנֹת:
15And you shall anoint them, as you have anointed their father, so that they may serve Me [as kohanim]. And this shall be so that their anointment shall remain for them an everlasting kehunah throughout their generations." טווּמָשַׁחְתָּ אֹתָם כַּאֲשֶׁר מָשַׁחְתָּ אֶת אֲבִיהֶם וְכִהֲנוּ לִי וְהָיְתָה לִהְיֹת לָהֶם מָשְׁחָתָם לִכְהֻנַּת עוֹלָם לְדֹרֹתָם:
16Thus Moses did; according to all that the Lord had commanded him, so he did. טזוַיַּעַשׂ משֶׁה כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֹתוֹ כֵּן עָשָׂה:
17It came to pass in the first month, in the second year, on the first day of the month, that the Mishkan was set up. יזוַיְהִי בַּחֹדֶשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן בַּשָּׁנָה הַשֵּׁנִית בְּאֶחָד לַחֹדֶשׁ הוּקַם הַמִּשְׁכָּן:
18Moses set up the Mishkan, placed its sockets, put up its planks, put in its bars, and set up its pillars. יחוַיָּקֶם משֶׁה אֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן וַיִּתֵּן אֶת אֲדָנָיו וַיָּשֶׂם אֶת קְרָשָׁיו וַיִּתֵּן אֶת בְּרִיחָיו וַיָּקֶם אֶת עַמּוּדָיו:
19He spread the tent over the Mishkan, and he placed the cover of the tent over it from above, as the Lord had commanded Moses. יטוַיִּפְרֹשׂ אֶת הָאֹהֶל עַל הַמִּשְׁכָּן וַיָּשֶׂם אֶת מִכְסֵה הָאֹהֶל עָלָיו מִלְמָעְלָה כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֶת משֶׁה:
He spread the tent: They are the curtains of goat hair (Exod. 26:7, 36:14). ויפרש את האהל: הן יריעות העזים:
20He took and placed the testimony into the ark, put the poles upon the ark, and placed the ark cover on the ark from above. כוַיִּקַּח וַיִּתֵּן אֶת הָעֵדֻת אֶל הָאָרֹן וַיָּשֶׂם אֶת הַבַּדִּים עַל הָאָרֹן וַיִּתֵּן אֶת הַכַּפֹּרֶת עַל הָאָרֹן מִלְמָעְלָה:
the testimony: [I.e.,] the tablets [of the testimony]. את העדות: הלוחות:
21He brought the ark into the Mishkan and placed the screening dividing curtain so that it formed a protective covering before the Ark of the Testimony as the Lord had commanded Moses. כאוַיָּבֵא אֶת הָאָרֹן אֶל הַמִּשְׁכָּן וַיָּשֶׂם אֵת פָּרֹכֶת הַמָּסָךְ וַיָּסֶךְ עַל אֲרוֹן הָעֵדוּת כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֶת משֶׁה:
22He placed the table in the Tent of Meeting on the northern side of the Mishkan, outside the dividing curtain. כבוַיִּתֵּן אֶת הַשֻּׁלְחָן בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד עַל יֶרֶךְ הַמִּשְׁכָּן צָפֹנָה מִחוּץ לַפָּרֹכֶת:
on the northern side of the Mishkan: In the northern half of the width of the Temple [i.e., the Mishkan]. -[from Yoma 33b] על ירך המשכן צפונה: בחצי הצפוני של רוחב הבית:
side: Heb. יֶרֶ, lit., thigh, as the Targum [Onkelos renders it]: צִדָּא, the side, like the thigh that is on a person’s side. ירך: כתרגומו צדא, כירך הזה שהוא בצדו של אדם:
23He set upon it an arrangement of bread before the Lord as the Lord had commanded Moses. כגוַיַּעֲרֹךְ עָלָיו עֵרֶךְ לֶחֶם לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֶת משֶׁה:
24He placed the menorah in the Tent of Meeting, opposite the table, on the southern side of the Mishkan. כדוַיָּשֶׂם אֶת הַמְּנֹרָה בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד נֹכַח הַשֻּׁלְחָן עַל יֶרֶךְ הַמִּשְׁכָּן נֶגְבָּה:
25He kindled the lamps before the Lord as the Lord had commanded Moses. כהוַיַּעַל הַנֵּרֹת לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֶת משֶׁה:
26He placed the golden altar in the Tent of Meeting in front of the dividing curtain. כווַיָּשֶׂם אֶת מִזְבַּח הַזָּהָב בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לִפְנֵי הַפָּרֹכֶת:
27He made the incense go up in smoke upon it as the Lord had commanded Moses. כזוַיַּקְטֵר עָלָיו קְטֹרֶת סַמִּים כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֶת משֶׁה:
He made the incense go up in smoke upon it: in the morning and in the evening, as it is said: “every morning when he sets the lamps in order [he shall make it go up in smoke]” (Exod. 30:7). ויקטר עליו אהרון קטרת: שחרית וערבית, כמו שנאמר (שמות ל ז) בבקר בבקר בהיטיבו את הנרות וגו':
28He placed the screen for the entrance of the Mishkan. כחוַיָּשֶׂם אֶת מָסַךְ הַפֶּתַח לַמִּשְׁכָּן:
29The altar of the burnt offering he placed in front of the entrance of the Mishkan of the Tent of Meeting, and he offered up the burnt offering and the meal offering upon it as the Lord had commanded Moses. כטוְאֵת מִזְבַּח הָעֹלָה שָׂם פֶּתַח מִשְׁכַּן אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וַיַּעַל עָלָיו אֶת הָעֹלָה וְאֶת הַמִּנְחָה כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֶת משֶׁה:
and he offered up the burnt offering and the meal offering upon it:Even on the eighth day of the investitures-which was the day of the setting up of the Mishkan-Moses officiated and offered up the communal sacrifices, with the exception of those that Aaron was commanded [to offer up] on that day, as it is said: “Approach the altar” (Lev. 9:7). ויעל עליו וגו': אף ביום השמיני למלואים, שהוא יום הקמת המשכן, שמש משה והקריב קרבנות צבור, חוץ מאותן שנצטוו בו ביום, שנאמר (ויקרא ט ז) קרב אל המזבח וגו':
the burnt offering: The daily burnt offering. את העלה: עולת התמיד:
and the meal offering: [This refers to] the meal offering of the libations of the daily burnt offering, as it is said: “And one-tenth of fine flour, thoroughly mixed with… oil” (Exod. 29:40). ואת המנחה: מנחת נסכים של תמיד, כמו שנאמר (שמות כט מ) ועשרן סלת בלול בשמן וגו':
30He placed the washstand between the Tent of Meeting and the altar, and there he put water for washing, לוַיָּשֶׂם אֶת הַכִּיֹּר בֵּין אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וּבֵין הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וַיִּתֵּן שָׁמָּה מַיִם לְרָחְצָה:
31and Moses, Aaron, and his sons would wash their hands and their feet from it. לאוְרָחֲצוּ מִמֶּנּוּ משֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן וּבָנָיו אֶת יְדֵיהֶם וְאֶת רַגְלֵיהֶם:
and Moses, Aaron, and his sons would wash: On the eighth day, they were all equal in respect to the kehunah. Its [Aramaic] translation is וִיקַדְּשׁוּן מִנֵּיהּ, and shall wash from it, for on that day Moses washed with them. ורחצו ממנו משה ואהרן ובניו: יום שמיני למלואים הושוו כולם לכהונה, ותרגומו ומקדשין מניה, בו ביום קדש משה עמהם:
32When they entered the Tent of Meeting and when they approached the altar they would wash as the Lord had commanded Moses. לבבְּבֹאָם אֶל אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וּבְקָרְבָתָם אֶל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ יִרְחָצוּ כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֶת משֶׁה:
and when they approached: Heb. וּבְקָרְבָתָם, like וּבְקָרְבָם, when they will approach (sic). ובקרבתם: כמו ובקרבם כשיקרבו:
33He set up the courtyard all around the Mishkan and the altar, and he put up the screen at the entrance to the courtyard; and Moses completed the work. לגוַיָּקֶם אֶת הֶחָצֵר סָבִיב לַמִּשְׁכָּן וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ וַיִּתֵּן אֶת מָסַךְ שַׁעַר הֶחָצֵר וַיְכַל משֶׁה אֶת הַמְּלָאכָה:
34And the cloud covered the Tent of Meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the Mishkan. לדוַיְכַס הֶעָנָן אֶת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וּכְבוֹד יְהֹוָה מָלֵא אֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן:
35Moses could not enter the Tent of Meeting because the cloud rested upon it and the glory of the Lord filled the Mishkan. להוְלֹא יָכֹל משֶׁה לָבוֹא אֶל אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד כִּי שָׁכַן עָלָיו הֶעָנָן וּכְבוֹד יְהֹוָה מָלֵא אֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן:
Moses could not enter the Tent of Meeting: But one [other] passage says: “And when Moses would enter the Tent of Meeting” (Num. 7:89), [which is an apparent contradiction]. The third passage [verse 35] came and reconciled them: “because the cloud rested upon it.” You may henceforth say that as long as the cloud was upon it, he could not enter, [but when] the cloud withdrew, he would enter and [God] would speak with him. -[from Torath Kohanim, Shalosh Esrei Middoth, Thirteen methods, Section 8] ולא יכול משה לבוא אל אהל מועד: וכתוב אחד אומר (במדבר ז פט) ובבא משה אל אהל מועד, בא הכתוב השלישי והכריע ביניהם, כי שכן עליו הענן, אמור מעתה כל זמן שהיה עליו הענן לא היה יכול לבוא, נסתלק הענן נכנס ומדבר עמו:
36When the cloud rose up from over the Mishkan, the children of Israel set out in all their journeys. לווּבְהֵעָלוֹת הֶעָנָן מֵעַל הַמִּשְׁכָּן יִסְעוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּכֹל מַסְעֵיהֶם:
37But if the cloud did not rise up, they did not set out until the day that it rose. לזוְאִם לֹא יֵעָלֶה הֶעָנָן וְלֹא יִסְעוּ עַד יוֹם הֵעָלֹתוֹ:
38For the cloud of the Lord was upon the Mishkan by day, and there was fire within it at night, before the eyes of the entire house of Israel in all their journeys. לחכִּי עֲנַן יְהֹוָה עַל הַמִּשְׁכָּן יוֹמָם וְאֵשׁ תִּהְיֶה לַיְלָה בּוֹ לְעֵינֵי כָל בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּכָל מַסְעֵיהֶם:
before the eyes of the entire house of Israel in all their journeys: On every journey (מַסָּע) that they were traveling, the cloud would rest in that place where they encamped. The place of their encampment is also called a journey (מַסָּע). Likewise, “And he went to his stations (לְמַסָּעָיו) ” (Gen. 13:3) [i.e., to the stops along his journey], and likewise, “These are the journeys (מַסְעֵי) ” (Num. 33:1). Since from the place of their encampment they resumed their journeys, they are all called “journeys” (מַסָעוֹת). לעיני כל בית ישראל בכל מסעיהם: בכל מסע שכן במקום אשר יחנו שם. מקום חנייתן אף הוא קרוי מסע, וכן (בראשית יג ג) וילך למסעיו, וכן (במדבר לג א) אלה מסעי לפי שממקום החנייה חזרו ונסעו, לכך נקראו כולן מסעות: היו נוסעים היה הענן שו
Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 108 - 112
• Chapter 108
1. A song, a psalm by David.
2. My heart is steadfast, O God; I will sing and chant praises even with my soul.
3. Awake, O lyre and harp; I shall awaken the dawn.
4. I will thank You among the nations, Lord; I will sing praises to You among the peoples.
5. Indeed, Your kindness reaches above the heavens; Your truth reaches to the skies.
6. Be exalted upon the heavens, O God, [show] Your glory upon all the earth.
7. That Your beloved ones may be delivered, help with Your right hand and answer me.
8. God spoke in His holiness that I would exult, I would divide portions [of the enemies' land], I would measure the Valley of Succot.
9. Mine is Gilead, mine is Manasseh, and Ephraim is the stronghold of my head, Judah is my prince.
10. Moab is my washbasin, I will cast my shoe upon Edom, I will shout over Philistia.
11. Who brings me to the fortified city? Who led me unto Edom?
12. Is it not God, Who has [until now] forsaken us, and did not go forth, O God, with our armies?
13. Give us help against the adversary; futile is the help of man.
14. Through God we will do valiantly, and He will trample our oppressors.
Chapter 109
David composed this psalm while fleeing from Saul. At that time he faced many enemies who, despite acting friendly in his presence, spoke only evil of him; he therefore curses them bitterly.
1. For the Conductor, by David, a psalm. O God of my praise, be not silent.
2. For the mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful have opened against me; they spoke to me with a false tongue.
3. They have surrounded me with words of hate, and attacked me without cause.
4. In return for my love they hate me; still, I am [a man of] prayer.
5. They placed harm upon me in return for my favor, and hatred in return for my love.
6. Appoint a wicked man over him; let an adversary stand at his right.
7. When he is judged may he go out condemned; may his prayer be considered a sin.
8. May his days be few; may another take his position.
9. May his children be orphans and his wife a widow.
10. May his children wander about and beg; may they seek charity from amid their ruins.
11. May the creditor seize all that he has, and may strangers plunder [the fruits of] his labor.
12. May he have none who extends him kindness, and may none be gracious to his orphans.
13. May his posterity be cut off; may their name be erased in a later generation.
14. May the iniquity of his fathers be remembered by the Lord, and the sin of his mother not be erased.
15. May they be before the Lord always, and may He cut off their memory from the earth.
16. Because he did not remember to do kindness, and he pursued the poor and destitute man and the broken-hearted, to kill [him].
17. He loved the curse and it has come upon him; he did not desire blessing, and it has remained far from him.
18. He donned the curse like his garment, and it came like water into his innards, like oil into his bones.
19. May it be to him like a cloak in which he wraps himself, as a belt with which he girds himself always.
20. This is from the Lord for the deeds of my enemies, and [for] those who speak evil against my soul.
21. And You, God, my Lord, do [kindness] with me for the sake of Your Name; for Your kindness is good, rescue me!
22. For I am poor and destitute, and my heart has died within me.
23. Like the fleeting shadow I am banished, I am tossed about like the locust.
24. My knees totter from fasting, and my flesh is lean without fat.
25. And I became a disgrace to them; they see me and shake their heads.
26. Help me, Lord, my God, deliver me according to Your kindness.
27. Let them know that this is Your hand, that You, Lord, have done it.
28. Let them curse, but You will bless; they arose, but they will be shamed, and Your servant will rejoice.
29. May my adversaries be clothed in humiliation; may they wrap themselves in their shame as in a cloak.
30. I will thank the Lord profusely with my mouth, and amid the multitude I will praise Him,
31. when He stands at the right of the destitute one to deliver him from the condemners of his soul.
Chapter 110
This psalm records the response of Eliezer, servant of Abraham (to those who asked how Abraham managed to defeat the four kings). He tells of Abraham killing the mighty kings and their armies. Read, and you will discover that the entire psalm refers to Abraham, who merited prominence for recognizing God in his youth.
1. By David, a psalm. The Lord said to my master, "Sit at My right, until I make your enemies a stool for your feet.”
2. The staff of your strength the Lord will send from Zion, to rule amid your enemies.
3. Your people [will come] willingly on the day of your campaign; because of your splendid sanctity from when you emerged from the womb, you still possess the dew of your youth.
4. The Lord has sworn and will not regret: "You shall be a priest forever, just as Melchizedek!”
5. My Lord is at your right; He has crushed kings on the day of His fury.
6. He will render judgement upon the nations, and they will be filled with corpses; He will crush heads over a vast land.
7. He will drink from the stream on the way, and so will hold his head high.
Chapter 111
This psalm is written in alphabetical sequence, each verse containing two letters, save the last two verses which contain three letters each. The psalm is short yet prominent, speaking of the works of God and their greatness.
1. Praise the Lord! I will give thanks to the Lord with all my heart, in the counsel of the upright and the congregation.
2. Great are the works of the Lord, [yet] available to all who desire them.
3. Majesty and splendor are His work, and His righteousness endures forever.
4. He established a memorial for His wonders, for the Lord is gracious and compassionate.
5. He gave food to those who fear Him; He remembered His covenant always.
6. He has declared the power of His deeds to His people, to give them the inheritance of nations.
7. The works of His hands are true and just; all His mandates are faithful.
8. They are steadfast for ever and ever, for they are made with truth and uprightness.
9. He sent redemption to His people, [by] commanding His covenant forever; holy and awesome is His Name.
10. The beginning of wisdom is fear of the Lord; sound wisdom for all who practice it-His praise endures forever.
Chapter 112
This psalm, too, follows alphabetical sequence, each verse containing two letters, save the last two which contain three letters each. It speaks of the good traits man should choose, and of how to give charity-the reward for which is never having to rely on others.
1. Praise the Lord! Fortunate is the man who fears the Lord, and desires His commandments intensely.
2. His descendants will be mighty on the earth; he will be blessed with an upright generation.
3. Wealth and riches are in his house, and his righteousness endures forever.
4. Even in darkness light shines for the upright, for [He is] Compassionate, Merciful, and Just.
5. Good is the man who is compassionate and lends, [but] provides for his own needs with discretion.
6. For he will never falter; the righteous man will be an eternal remembrance.
7. He will not be afraid of a bad tiding; his heart is steadfast, secure in the Lord.
8. His heart is steadfast, he does not fear, until he sees his oppressors [destroyed].
9. He has distributed [his wealth], giving to the needy. His righteousness will endure forever; his might will be uplifted in honor.
10. The wicked man will see and be angry; he will gnash his teeth and melt away; the wish of the wicked will be ruined.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 37• Lessons in Tanya
• Shabbat, Adar 23, 5775 · March 14, 2015
Today's Tanya Lesson
Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 37
In the previous chapter, the Alter Rebbe explained that the statement of the Sages that “G-d desired an abode in the lower realms” refers to our physical world. This is the lowest of worlds in terms of the degree of revelation of the divine creative power: it is hidden in this world as it is in no other world. G-d desired precisely this world, pervaded as it is with “doubled and redoubled darkness,” as His “abode”, where His presence would ultimately be revealed to a greater degree than it is revealed in the higher worlds, without any concealing “garments” whatever.
This will come to pass in the Messianic era, the period for which the world was originally created, when G-dliness will be manifest throughout the world, so that all the nations on earth will experience divine revelation.
והנה תכלית השלימות הזה של ימות המשיח ותחיית המתים, שהוא גילוי אור אין סוף ברוך הוא בעולם הזה הגשמי
Now this ultimate perfection of the Messianic era and [the time of] the resurrection of the dead, meaning the revelation of Ein Sof-light in this physical world,
תלוי במעשינו ועבודתנו כל זמן משך הגלות
is dependent on our actions and [divine] service throughout the period of exile(unlike the aforementioned revelation at Sinai, which was initiated by G-d).
כי הגורם שכר המצוה היא המצוה בעצמה
For it is the mitzvah itself that causes i.e., creates its reward.
The Rebbe notes: Unlike, for example, the wages paid by the owner of a field to the laborer who plows and plants in it, where the laborer does not create the money he is paid, a mitzvahactually creates its own reward.
כי בעשייתה ממשיך האדם גילוי אור אין סוף ברוך הוא מלמעלה למטה
For by performing [the mitzvah] man draws the revelation of the blessed Ein Sof-light from above downwards,
להתלבש בגשמיות עולם הזה, בדבר שהיה תחלה תחת ממשלת קליפת נוגה, ומקבל חיותה ממנה
to be clothed in the physicality of this world, i.e., in an object which had heretofore been under the dominion of kelipat nogah and had received its vitality from this kelipah;
שהם כל הדברים הטהורים ומותרים שנעשית בהם המצוה מעשיית
namely, all pure, permissible objects with which the act of the mitzvah is performed. By performing the mitzvah, man draws the Ein Sof-light upon the object with which it is performed.
The Alter Rebbe now illustrates his phrase — “pure, permissible objects with which the act of the mitzvah is performed,” citing as examples one object from each of the three categories: animal life, vegetative, and inanimate life.
כגון קלף התפילין ומזוזה וספר תורה
For example, the parchment of the tefillin, mezuzah and Sefer Torah which must be made of the skins of permissible, kosher animals.
וכמאמר רז״ל: לא הוכשר למלאכת שמים אלא טהורים ומותרים בפיך
As our Sages state:1 “For the ‘work of heaven’ i.e., mitzvah objects only that which is pure and permissible to eat may be used.”
The parchment derived from such animals is, however, under the dominion of kelipat nogah until one uses it for tefillin, etc., when the mitzvah draws upon the parchment a revelation of Ein Sof-light.
וכן אתרג שאינו ערלה, ומעות הצדקה שאינן גזל, וכיוצא בהם
Similarly, an etrog which is not orlah* (the forbidden fruit of a tree’s first three harvests), or money given to charity that has not been acquired through theft, and their like i.e., other physical objects used in performing a mitzvah, all of which were previously in the realm of kelipat nogah, and (as the Alter Rebbe will conclude presently) are now merged into the Divine Will by serving the purpose of a mitzvah.
*NOTE
In reference to his earlier stipulation that an etrog not be orlah, and that charity be honestly acquired, the Alter Rebbe notes:
הגהה
שהערלה היא משלש קליפות הטמאות לגמרי שאין להם עליה לעולם, כמו שכתוב בע׳ חיים
For orlah is of the three completely unclean kelipot that can never ascend into holiness, as is written in Etz Chayim; thus fruit which is orlah, deriving its vitality from these kelipot, cannot be elevated by having a mitzvah performed with it.
וכן כל מצוה הבאה בעבירה, חס ושלום
Similarly any mitzvah whose performance involved a transgression (G-d forbid). Since the sinful act receives its vitality from the three completely unclean kelipot, the resulting mitzvah cannot elevate it.
END OF NOTE
When performed, however, with pure and permissible objects, the mitzvah elevates those objects from kelipat nogah to holiness, to be united with the Ein Sof-light, as the Alter Rebbe continues:
ועכשיו שמקיים בהם מצות ה׳ ורצונו
Now that one fulfills G‑d’s commandment and Will with these objects,
הרי החיות שבהם עולה ומתבטל ונכלל באור אין סוף ברוך הוא, שהוא רצונו יתברך המלובש בהם
the vitality within them ascends and is dissolved and absorbed into the blessedEin Sof-light, which is His Will that is clothed in the mitzvot, the Divine Will that each mitzvah represents.
מאחר שאין שם בחינת הסתר פנים כלל, להסתיר אורו יתברך
For [in a mitzvah] there is no “concealment of the Countenance” whatever to hide His light, preventing the object from being absorbed in this light. As stated earlier, wherever the Ein Sof-light stands revealed, there is no separation from G‑d; everything is united with His light — in this case, the object with which the mitzvah (representing revelation of the Will and light of the Ein Sof) is performed.
* * *
Thus far, the Alter Rebbe has discussed the effect of a mitzvah on the objects used in its performance (e.g., the etrog, the parchment used for tefillin, etc.). He now discusses its effect on the power of a Jew’s animal soul that is applied to the mitzvah. This soul, like the aforementioned objects, derives its vitality from kelipat nogah; and like them it experiences a similar elevation to the realm of holiness whenever it is used in service of a mitzvah, being absorbed into the Divine Will represented by the mitzvah.
In the Alter Rebbe’s words:
וכן כח נפש החיונית הבהמית שבאברי גוף האדם המקיים המצוה, הוא מתלבש גם כן בעשיה זו
Similarly the power of the vitalizing animal soul clothed in the bodily limbs of a person who performs a mitzvah, likewise clothes itself in the deed of themitzvah.
ועולה מהקליפה, ונכלל בקדושת המצוה שהיא רצונו יתברך, ובטל באור אין סוף ברוך הוא
Thereby it ascends from the kelipah to be absorbed into the holiness of themitzvah which is His Will, and is nullified within the blessed Ein Sof-light.
The Alter Rebbe now goes on to say that those mitzvot involving speech alone likewise effect this elevation of the animal soul, even though here the animal soul’s power is not brought to bear in the performance of any mitzvah.
וגם במצות תלמוד תורה וקריאת שמע ותפלה וכיוצא בהן
Even in the case of such mitzvot as Torah study, reciting the Shema, prayer and the like, the animal soul’s power is elevated to holiness,
אף שאינן בעשיה גשמית ממש שתחת ממשלת קליפת נוגה
although they do not involve actual physical action which is under the dominion of kelipat nogah,
מכל מקום הא קיימא לן דהרהור לאו כדבור דמי, ואינו יוצא ידי חובתו עד שיוציא בשפתיו
yet it is an accepted principle that “thought is not a substitute for speech”; and one does not fulfill his duty of Torah study, prayer, etc. unless he actually utters [the words] with his lips.
וקיימא לן דעקימת שפתיו הוי מעשה
It is also accepted that “moving one’s lips constitutes action,” and such “action”, as the Rebbe notes, likewise stems from the vitality of the kelipat nogah that is nourished by the animal soul, as does the actual bodily action spoken of earlier.
כי אי אפשר לנפש האלקית לבטא בשפתיים ופה ולשון ושיניים הגשמיים, כי אם על ידי נפש החיונית הבהמית, המלובשת באברי הגוף ממש
For the divine soul cannot express itself with the physical lips, mouth, tongue or teeth, the instruments of speech, except by way of the vitalizing animal soul actually clothed in the organs of the body.
The divine soul is entirely spiritual, the body, physical. Therefore (as explained in ch. 35), the divine soul cannot activate the body to perform a mitzvah except through an intermediary. This intermediary is the animal soul, which, on the one hand, is a soul, a spiritual life-force, yet on the other hand is actually clothed in the blood and the bodily organs.
This intermediary is necessary in mitzvot performed through speech, just as in the mitzvotperformed through action. For articulating the words required for the mitzvah also constitutes physical “action”; so that this too cannot be accomplished by the divine soul except by way of the animal soul’s power.
וכל מה שמדבר בכח גדול יותר, הוא מכניס ומלביש יותר כחות מנפש החיונית בדבורים אלו
Hence, the more forcefully one speaks words of Torah or prayer, the more of the animal soul’s energy he introduces and clothes in these words. Thereby, he converts more of the energy of the kelipah to holiness.
וזה שאמר הכתוב: כל עצמותי תאמרנה וגו׳
This is also the meaning of the verse,2 “All my bones shall declare.... [:‘G‑d,who is like You?’],” which means that the words of Torah and prayer must be said “ with all of one’s bones,” so that as much as possible of the body’s energy be utilized in performing the mitzvot.
וזה שאמרו רז״ל: אם ערוכה בכל רמ״ח אברים שלך משתמרת, ואם לאו אינה משתמרת
This is why our Sages have said:3 “If the Torah abides in all of your 248 limbs it is preserved in your memory; otherwise it is not preserved.”
כי השכחה היא מקליפת הגוף ונפש החיונית הבהמית, שהן מקליפת נוגה הנכללת לפעמים בקדושה
For forgetfulness in matters of Torah stems from the kelipah of the body and vitalizing animal soul, derived from kelipat nogah which is sometimes absorbed into holiness; when it is absorbed into holiness, there is no longer any cause for forgetfulness.
והיינו כשמתיש כחן, ומכניס כל כחן בקדושת התורה או התפלה
This is accomplished when one weakens their power (the power of body and animal soul), applying all their strength to the holiness of Torah and prayer.
This, then, is the meaning of the aforementioned quotation: When one involves (the energy of) all his 248 limbs in Torah study, it is preserved in his memory, for the kelipah that causes one to forget has been weakened.
* * *
Up till here, the Alter Rebbe has spoken of the effect of a mitzvah on the power of one’s animal soul used in performing it. He now states that not only does one’s animal soul ascend from kelipat nogah to holiness when he performs a mitzvah, but also all the food and drink that sustained one and gave him the strength to perform the mitzvah, are likewise elevated from the dominion of kelipat nogah.
Based on this idea, the Alter Rebbe explains how the vitality of all physical objects of this world — which currently draw their vitality from kelipat nogah — will be elevated to the realm of holiness.
Every Jewish soul is given the ability and responsibility to elevate a portion of this physical world which “belongs” to it. This elevation is accomplished by means of the 613mitzvot, as mentioned. There are, however, two categories in mitzvot: the 248 positive commandments and the 365 prohibitive commandments. Similarly, the elevating effect ofmitzvot on physical matter takes two forms: one positive and the other negative (i.e., restrictive).
To explain these two aspects of elevation accomplished by the two categories of mitzvot,the Alter Rebbe uses for each category an analogy drawn from the human body. The 248 positive commandments correspond to the body’s 248 limbs; and, indeed, the function of thesemitzvot resembles that of the limbs. Every organ of the body is a vehicle for a particular faculty of the soul, and brings that faculty into active expression. Similarly, every (positive) mitzvah is a vehicle for the expression of a particular aspect of Divine Will, and brings about a G‑dly revelation.
The prohibitive commandments, numbering 365, correspond to the 365 blood vessels of the body; their function, too, is like that of the blood vessels. The blood vessel acts as a conduit, channeling blood in the right direction so that it will not be randomly, wastefully dispersed through the body. Similarly, the prohibitive commandments prevent the life-force of holiness from being funneled off into the kelipot, thereby increasing their power; they channel the life-force toward deserving recipients.
When all the souls of Israel, representing the vitality of all physical matter, fulfill all the commandments — drawing down G‑d’s light by performing the positive mitzvot, and confining it to the realm of holiness by observing the prohibitive mitzvot — they elevate the vitality of the entire world from kelipat nogah to holiness.
This, in summary, is the subject of the following discussion.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | See Shabbat 108a. |
| 2. | Tehillim 35:10. |
| 3. | Eruvin 54a. |
• Sefer Hamitzvos:
Shabbat, Adar 23, 5775 · March 14, 2015
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 348
Bestiality (for a man)
"And with no animal shall you cohabit"—Leviticus 18:23.
It is forbidden for a man to engage in sexual relations with an animal.
Bestiality (for a man)
Bestiality (for a man)
Negative Commandment 348
Translated by Berel Bell
The 348th prohibition is that we are forbidden from having sexual relations with an animal, whether it be male or female.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "do not perform any sexual act with an animal."
One who transgresses this prohibition intentionally is punished by s'kila; if he does not receive stoning,2 he is punished by kares; and if it was done unintentionally, he must bring a sin-offering.
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 18:23.
2.E.g. there were no witnesses.
Bestiality (for a woman)
"And a woman shall not stand in front of an animal to cohabit with it"—Leviticus 18:23.
It is forbidden for a woman to engage in sexual relations with an animal.
Bestiality (for a woman)
Negative Commandment 349
Translated by Berel Bell
The 349th prohibition is that women are forbidden from allowing animals to have sexual relations with them.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "A woman shall not give herself to an animal and allow it to mate with her."
This counts as a separate commandment distinct from the previous one. [The proof of this is that] the prohibition on males from having relations with animals does not itself prohibit women from allowing animals to have relations with them, would it not be for a separate prohibition.
In the first chapter of Kerisus,2 our Sages say, "there are 36 mitzvos in the Torah which are punishable by kares." They enumerate them, and include both a man and a woman committing bestiality. [These are counted separately,] even though the Sages only enumerate general categories, as we explained in our commentary.3 We have therefore proven that this mitzvah counts as a separate prohibition.
One who transgresses this prohibition intentionally is punished by stoning; if it was done intentionally but there was no acceptable testimony, she receives kares; and if it was done unintentionally, she must bring a sin-offering.
FOOTNOTES
1.Ibid.
2.Ch.1, Mishneh 1.
3.In his Commentary to the Mishneh, the Rambam comments on the prohibition of having relations with a woman and her daughter, which is listed as one of the 36. Although relations with a woman and her granddaughter, etc. are also prohibited, the Mishneh just lists the one general idea of "parents" and "offspring" — counting it as just one of the 36 categories. Nevertheless, the two mitzvos mentioned here are listed separately, and count as two of the 36.
Male Homosexuality
"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; this is an abomination"—Leviticus 18:22.
It is forbidden for a man to engage in homosexual relations.
Male Homosexuality
Negative Commandment 350
Translated by Berel Bell
The 350th prohibition is that [a male] is forbidden from having relations with another male.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "Do not lie with a man as you would with a woman, since this is a disgusting perversion." The same prohibition is repeated a second time,2 "there shall not be a prostitute among Jewish men."
This is the proper explanation of the repetition — that it was added to give additional stress, not to give a separate prohibition for the passive partner. From the statement, "do not lie," one derives the prohibition for both parties.
In3 tractate Sanhedrin,4 it is explained that Rabbi Yishmael is the one who interprets the verse, "there shall not be a prostitute" as a prohibition to the passive partner. Therefore, according to Rabbi Yishmael, one who both has relations with a male and allows a male to have relations with him in the same helam5 must bring two sin-offerings. But Rabbi Akiva says, "[a separate verse] is not necessary [to make a prohibition on the passive partner]. The Torah says, 'do not lie (lo sishkav) with a man' — it can also be read, 'do not allow another to lie with you (lo sishacheiv).' " Therefore, according to him, one who both has relations with a male and allows a male to have relations with him in the same helam must only bring one sin-offering. The reasoning given is "lo sishkav and lo sishacheiv are one prohibition," and according to him, "there shall not be a prostitute" comes only to add stress. This is similar to the prohibition,6 "do not commit adultery," which is the same prohibition of a married woman,7 "do not lie carnally with your neighbor's wife." We explained many similar cases in the Ninth Introductory Principle.
One who transgresses this prohibition [intentionally] is punished by stoning; if it was done intentionally but he did not receive stoning, he receives kares; and if it was done unintentionally, he must bring a sin-offering.
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 18:22.
2.Deut. 23:18.
3.The Rambam now proceeds to prove that this counts as only one prohibition, and not two.
4.54b.
5.Literally, a "concealment." One brings a sin-offering only if the transgression was done unintentionally. If one does the same prohibited act many times without realizing that the act was forbidden, only one sin-offering is brought.
This is known as helam echad, one concealment. However, if two different prohibitions are done, even in the same helam, two offerings must be brought.
6.N347.
7.Lev. 18:20.
Father-Son Incest
"You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father"—Leviticus 18:7.
It is forbidden for a man to engage in homosexual relations with his father. One who does so transgresses two prohibitions: the general prohibition against homosexuality as well as this specific prohibition.
Father-Son Incest
Negative Commandment 351
Translated by Berel Bell
The 351st prohibition is that one is forbidden from having [homosexual] relations with one's father.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "do not commit a sexual offense against your father."
One who transgresses this prohibition also is punished by stoning. One who has relations with his father is therefore guilty of homosexual relations2 and of relations with one's father.
In tractate Sanhedrin,3 the verse "do not commit a sexual offense against your father" is explained as meaning, "literally, your father."4 On this they ask, "but this is already prohibited from the verse, 'do not lie with a man'! They answer, "[this verse comes] to make him guilty of two offenses, like Rav Yehudah said, 'a non-Jew who has relations with his father is guilty of two offenses.' " There they explain, "it is sensible to say that Rav Yehudah was really referring to the law of a Jew who has done the act unintentionally, and who must bring a sacrifice. He used the expression, "non-Jew" as a euphemism."5 Therefore, if he had relations with his father unintentionally, he would bring two sin-offerings just as one who unintentionally committed two types of sexual prohibitions. This is not the case with [homosexual relations with] another male, where only one sin-offering would be brought.
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 18:7.
2.N350 above.
3.54a.
4.Rather than translating "a sexual offense against your father" as incest with one's mother, which would automatically be an offense against one's father.
5.Rav Yehudah didn't even want to mention a Jew in reference to such an act.
• 1 Chapter: Tzitzit Tzitzit - Chapter Three
Tzitzit - Chapter Three
Halacha 1
A garment to which the Torah obligates a person to attach tzitzit [must meet the following requirements]:
a) it must have four - or more than four - corners;
b) it must be large enough to cover both the head and the majority of the body of a child who is able to walk on his own in the marketplace without having someone else accompany him and watch him;
c) it must be made of either wool or linen alone.
a) it must have four - or more than four - corners;
b) it must be large enough to cover both the head and the majority of the body of a child who is able to walk on his own in the marketplace without having someone else accompany him and watch him;
c) it must be made of either wool or linen alone.
Halacha 2
In contrast, a garment made of other fabrics - for example, clothes of silk, cotton, camels' wool, hares' wool, goats' wool, and the like - are required to have tzitzit only because of Rabbinic decree, in order to show regard for the mitzvah of tzitzit.
[These garments require tzitzit only] when they are four-cornered - or have more than four corners - and are of the measure mentioned above.
[The motivating principle for this law] is that all the garments mentioned in the Torah without any further explanation refer to those made of either wool or linen alone.
Halacha 3
"On the four corners of your garments" (Deuteronomy 22:12): This applies to a garment which possesses four corners, but not to one which possesses only three. Perhaps, [it comes to include] a four-cornered garment and [to exclude] a five-cornered garment? The Torah continues: "with which you cover yourself." This includes even a five- (or more) cornered garment.
Why do I obligate a garment of five corners and exempt a garment of three corners? Neither has four corners [as required by the above verse]. Because a five-cornered garment has four corners.
Accordingly, when one attaches tzitzit to a garment with five or six corners, one should attach the tzitzit only to the four corners which are farthest apart from each other from among these five or six corners, as [implied by the phrase,] "On the four corners of your garments."
Halacha 4
If a garment is made of cloth and its corners of leather, it requires tzitzit. If the garment is of leather and its corners are of cloth, it does not require tzitzit. The determining factor is the makeup of the garment itself.
A garment belonging to two partners requires [tzitzit], as [implied by Numbers 15:38]: "On the corners of their garments." The term "your garments" [(Deuteronomy 22:12), which is interpreted as an exclusion,] excludes only a borrowed garment, since a borrowed garment does not require tzitzit for thirty days. Afterwards, it does require them.
Halacha 5
For a garment of wool, the white strands should be made of wool. For a garment of linen, the white strands should be made of linen. For garments of other [fabrics], the white strands should be made from the same fabric as the garment itself. For example, silk strands should be used for a silk garment, strands of goats' wool should be used for garments of goats' wool.
If one desired to make white strands of wool or linen for [garments of] any type [of fabric], one may, because [strands of] wool and linen can fulfill the obligation [of tzitzit] for garments made of their own fabric or for garments made of other fabrics. In contrast, [strands made] from other fabrics can fulfill the obligation [of tzitzit] only for garments made of their own fabric.
Halacha 6
What is the ruling regarding making woolen strands for a garment of linen or linen strands for a garment of wool - even though we are speaking only of the white strands without techelet?
One might think that it should be permitted, because sha'atnez is permitted to be used for tzitzit, as evident from the fact that techelet is made using woolen strands, and yet it should be placed on a linen garment. Nevertheless, this is not done.
Why? Because it is possible to make the white strands from the same fabric as [the garment]. Whenever [a conflict exists] between the observance of a positive commandment and the adherence to a negative commandment, [the following rules apply]: If it is possible to observe both of them, one should. If not, the observance of the positive commandment supersedes the negative commandment. In the present instance, however, it is possible to observe both of them.
Halacha 7
Techelet should not be attached to a linen garment. Rather, one should [make the tzitzit] from white threads of linen alone. This is not because [the prohibition against] sha'atnez supersedes [the mitzvah of] tzitzit, but rather it is a Rabbinical decree [imposed] lest one wear the garment at night, when one is not required to wear tzitzit, and thus violate a negative commandment when the performance of a positive commandment is not involved.
[This is because] the obligation to wear tzitzit applies during the day, but not at night [as can be inferred from Numbers 15:39]: "And you shall see them." [The mitzvah applies only] during a time when one can see. [Nevertheless,] a blind man is obligated to wear tzitzit. Even though he does not see them, others see him [wearing them].
Halacha 8
A person is permitted to wear tzitzit at night, both during the weekdays and on the Sabbath, even though this is not the time when the mitzvah should be fulfilled, provided he does not recite a blessing.
When should the blessing over tzitzit be recited in the morning? When [the sun has risen so] that one can differentiate between the strands of techelet and those which are white.
Which blessing should be recited upon it? "Blessed are you, God, our Lord, King of the universe, who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to wrap ourselves with tzitzit." Whenever a person wraps himself in tzitzit during the day, he should recite the blessing before doing so.
No blessing should be recited on the tzitzit when making them, because the ultimate purpose of the mitzvah is that one should wrap oneself in [a tallit].
Halacha 9
It is permissible to enter a lavatory or a bathhouse [wearing] tzitzit. If one of the strands of white or techelet becomes torn, it may be discarded in a garbage dump, because tzitzit is a mitzvah which does not confer sanctity on the article itself.
It is forbidden to sell a garment with tzitzit to a gentile until he removes the tzitzit, not because the garment possesses a measure of holiness, but because we are concerned that he will dress in it, and [unknowingly,] a Jew will accompany him, thinking that he is a fellow Jew, and the gentile may kill him.
Women, servants, and minors are not required by the Torah to wear tzitzit. It is, however, a Rabbinical obligation for every child who knows how to dress himself to wear tzitzit in order to educate him to fulfill mitzvot.
Women and servants who wish to wrap themselves in tzitzit may do so without reciting a blessing. Similarly, regarding the other positive commandments which women are not required to fulfill, if they desire to fulfill them without reciting a blessing, they should not be prevented from doing so.
A tumtum and an androgynous are obligated in all positive commandments because of the doubt [about their status]. Therefore, they fulfill [all these positive commandments] without reciting a blessing.
Halacha 10
What is the nature of the obligation of the commandment of tzitzit? Every person who is obligated to fulfill this mitzvah, if he wears a garment requiring tzitzit, should attach tzitzit to it and then wear it. If he wears it without attaching tzitzit to it, he has negated [this] positive commandment.
There is, however, no obligation to attach tzitzit to a garment which requires tzitzit, as long as it remains folded in its place, without a person wearing it. It is not that a garment requires [tzitzit]. Rather, the requirement is incumbent on the person [wearing] the garment.
Halacha 11
Even though a person is not obligated to purchase a tallit and wrap himself in it so that he must attach tzitzit to it, it is not proper for a person to release himself from this commandment. Instead, he should always try to be wrapped in a garment which requires tzitzit so that he will fulfill this mitzvah.
In particular, care should be taken regarding this matter during prayer. It is very shameful for a Torah scholar to pray without being wrapped [in a tallit].
Halacha 12
A person should always be careful regarding the mitzvah of tzitzit, because the Torah considered it equal to all the mitzvot and considered them all as dependent on it, as [implied by Numbers 15:39]: "And you shall see them and remember all the mitzvot of God."
Commentary Halacha 1
A garment to which the Torah obligates a person to attach tzitzit - With this expression, the Rambam could be alluding to the concept that a person is not obligated to wear tzitzit. Should a person desire to wear a garment of the type that requires tzitzit, then he has the opportunity to fulfill the mitzvah. See Halachot 10-11.
[must meet the following requirements]: a) it must have four -Deuteronomy 22:12 states: "Make braids on the four corners of your garments." As explained in Halachah 3, this excludes a garment with fewer than four corners.
or more than four - corners; - See Halachah 3.
b) it must be large enough to cover both the head and the majority of the body of a child - Menachot 41a adds that the garment must be large enough for an adult to use it occasionally.
This requirement is particularly significant regarding a tallit katan. Note theMishnah Berurah 16:4, which requires that a tallit katan be at least 0.75 of a cubit long and 0.75 of a cubit wide on each side, without including the area of the hole where one's head is inserted. Preferably, the tallit katan should be a cubit by a cubit on each side.
who is able to walk on his own in the marketplace without having someone else accompany him and watch him; - The Tur (Orach Chayim 16) defines this as referring to a child who is at least nine years old.
c) it must be made of either wool or linen alone. - as explained in the following halachah.
Commentary Halacha 2
In contrast, a garment made of other fabrics - for example, clothes of silk, cotton, camels' wool, hares' wool, goats' wool, - The term "wool" when used without any modifier refers to wool from sheep or rams alone.
and the like - are required to have tzitzit only because of Rabbinic decree - The Rambam's opinion is quoted as halachah by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 9:1). The Ashkenazic authorities, however (see the Ramah), disagree and maintain that all four-cornered garments require tzitzit regardless of the fabric they are made of. This difference of opinion results from the interpretation of a debate between Amoraim (Menachot 39b).
Because of this difference of opinion, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 9:6) suggests that everyone wear a tallit of wool, so that he will fulfill the mitzvah as required by the Torah according to all opinions. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 9:4 and the Mishnah Berurah 9:5 suggest that a God-fearing person should have both his tallit gadol and his tallit katan made of wool. See also the commentary on Halachah 5.
in order to show regard for the mitzvah of tzitzit. - Were tzitzit not required to be attached to these garments, people might not attach them to the garments which do require them.
[These garments require tzitzit only] when they are four-cornered - or have more than four corners - and are of the measure mentioned above. -Even when extending the scope of the mitzvah, the Rabbis maintained these criteria, which are explained in the previous halachah.
[The motivating principle for this law] - as explained in Menachot, ibid.
is that all the garments mentioned in the Torah without any further explanation - This includes the garments to which tzitzit are attached, asNumbers 15:38 states: "On the corners of their garments."
refer to those made of either wool or linen alone. - Since, regarding the prohibition against mixing fabrics (sha'atnez, Hilchot Kilayim 10:1) and the laws of tzara'at (leprosy, Hilchot Tumat Tzara'at 13:1), the Torah mentions garments of wool and linen, we can assume that any place in the Torah which mentions the word "garment" is referring to one made from wool or linen unless another fabric is explicitly mentioned.
Commentary Halacha 3
"On the four corners of your garments" (Deuteronomy 22:12): - In this halachah, the Rambam departs from his usual pattern of stating a law tersely without explanation, and quotes the entire passage (Menachot 43b), from which these laws are derived.
This - The Torah's command to attach tzitzit
applies to a garment which possesses four corners, but not to one which possesses only three - since the mention of a specific number of corners obviously is intended to exclude garments which do not meet this requirement.
Perhaps, [it - this phrase
comes to include] a four-cornered garment and [to exclude] a five-cornered garment? - i.e., why restrict the scope of the exclusion?
The Torah continues: "with which you cover yourself." This - extra phrase, which has no apparent purpose was added to
includes even a five- (or more) cornered garment. - One also "covers himself" with such garments.
The Talmud continues, asking
Why do I obligate a garment of five corners and exempt a garment of three corners? - Why is the inclusion applied to a five-cornered garment and the exclusion to a three-cornered garment? Perhaps they should be reversed, after all,
Neither - a three- or five-cornered garment
has four corners [as required by the above verse]. - The Talmud answers:
Because a five-cornered garment has four corners. - Therefore, it is logical to assume that the inclusion applies to it. This concludes the quotation from the Talmud.
Accordingly, - Since the reason tzitzit are placed on a five-cornered garment is that it possesses four corners
when one attaches tzitzit to a garment with five or six corners, one should attach the tzitzit only to the four corners - Indeed, if one attaches tzitzit to more than four corners of the garment, one transgresses the prohibition against adding to a Torah commandment (Magen Avraham 10:2).
which are farthest apart from each other - for, in this way, the tzitzit will be more noticeable (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 10:3).
from among these five or six corners, as [implied by the phrase,] "On the four corners of your garments." - There are other opinions, which maintain that a garment with more than four corners does not require tzitzit. In consideration of these opinions, it is preferable not to wear such garments at all (Magen Avraham 10:1).
Commentary Halacha 4
13A garment made of leather does not require tzitzit. Deuteronomy 15:38states that tzitzit must be attached to בגדיהם, "their garments." The word בגד implies a woven garment and not one of leather (Levush, Orach Chayim 10:4). Thus, a leather garment does not require tzitzit.
If a garment is made of cloth - any cloth, not only wool or linen
and its corners of leather, it requires tzitzit. - The same law applies when not only the corners, but also a portion of the garment itself, is leather. As long as the majority of the garment is cloth, it requires tzitzit (Shulchan Aruch HaRav10:8; Mishnah Berurah 10:10).
If the garment is of leather and its corners are of cloth - In this case as well, as long as the majority of the garment is leather
it does not require tzitzit. The determining factor is the makeup of the garment itself. - This is derived from the conclusion of the verse from Deuteronomy, "with which you cover yourself." A person covers himself with the major portion of the garment (Rabbenu Manoach).
A garment belonging to two partners requires [tzitzit], as [implied byNumbers 15:38]: "On the corners of their garments." - Here, the usage of a plural term implies an inclusion of garments which belong to many owners.
In contrast,
The term "your garments" - In this verse, the singular form of the word "your" is used.
[(Deuteronomy 22:12), which is interpreted as an exclusion], excludes only a borrowed garment, since a borrowed garment does not require tzitzit for thirty days. - Nevertheless, one is allowed to attach tzitzit to the garment if one chooses. Furthermore, one is allowed to borrow a colleague's tallit and recite a blessing over it - even without his knowledge (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 14:3-4).
Afterwards, it does require them. - Note the Hagahot Maimoniot, which explain that, even after thirty days, the Torah does not require a person to attach tzitzit to a garment which is not his own. The Sages, however, imposed this obligation because the garment appears to be his.
Commentary Halacha 5
For a garment of wool, the white strands should be made of wool - alone.
For a garment of linen, the white strands should be made of linen - alone. Note the explanation in the following halachah.
For garments of other [fabrics] - As mentioned in the commentary on Halachah 2, there is a difference of opinion among the Rabbis whether garments made from fabrics other than wool or linen require tzitzit or not. According to the opinions which maintain that they do, the concepts that follow are derived from the exegesis of a Biblical verse. (See Menachot 39b.) According to the Rambam, who maintains that the requirement of tzitzit on these garments is Rabbinic in origin, we must assume that these concepts were part of the Rabbinic ordinance requiring tzitzit for these garments (Kessef Mishneh).
the white strands should be made from the same fabric as the garment itself. - The authorities who consider the obligation to attach tzitzit to such garments as stemming from the Torah explain that, in the commandment to attach tzitzit, the Torah mentions the word "corner" an extra time, to teach that the tzitzit should be made of the same fabric as the corners.
For example, silk strands should be used for a silk garment, strands of goats' wool should be used for garments of goats' wool. - If one chooses to make tzitzit from these fabrics, one should use them for all four tzitzit. It is questionable whether it is acceptable to make some of the tzitzit of a specific garment from wool and others from the fabric of which the garment is made (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 9:4).
If one desired to make white strands of wool or of linen - The Ramah (Orach Chayim 9:2) states that at present it is customary not to make linen tzitzit at all.
for [garments of] any type [of fabric], one may - Menachot, ibid., derives this concept from the fact that Deuteronomy 22:12 mentions the mitzvah to attach tzitzit to our garments directly after the mention of the prohibition of making garments of wool and linen. Our Sages explain, that although mixtures of wool and linen are forbidden in general, such a mixture is required in tzitzit. (See the following two halachot.) Therefore, whenever tzitzit are made, either of these two fabrics may be used.
because [strands of] wool and linen can fulfill the obligation [of tzitzit] for garments made of their own fabric or for garments made of other fabrics. - Rabbi Meir of Rothenberg maintains, however, that wool and linen strands alone are not sufficient, and only a combination of wool and linen including strands of techelet can be used to fulfill the obligation of tzitzit for garments made from other fabrics. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 9:4 suggests considering this opinion.
In contrast, [strands made] from other fabrics can fulfill the obligation [of tzitzit] only for garments made of their own fabric. - Note Shulchan Aruch HaRav 9:5 and the Mishnah Berurah 9:10,13 which discuss a situation where the garment is woven from both wool and another fabric.
Commentary Halacha 6
What is the ruling regarding making woolen strands for a garment of linen or linen strands for a garment of wool - even though we are speaking only of the white strands without techelet? - It appears that the Rambam is asking about attaching tzitzit that have only white strands, without attaching techelet. Thus, one can conclude that when attaching tzitzit to a linen garment, it is forbidden to make the white strands of wool even though one includes a woolen strand oftechelet. Though the prohibition against sha'atnez is lifted for this garment, it is lifted only when there is no alternative but to do so (Kessef Mishneh).
One might think that it should be permitted, because sha'atnez - a mixture of wool and linen which is forbidden. (See Deuteronomy 22:11 and Hilchot Kilayim, Chapter 10.)
is permitted to be used for tzitzit, as evident from the fact that techelet is made using woolen strands - Chapter 2, Halachot 1- 2.
and yet it should be placed on a linen garment - according to Torah law. See, however, the following halachah.
Neverthless, this - Using linen strands for a woolen garment or vice versa
is not done.Why? Because it is possible to make the white strands from the same fabric as [the garment]. - Woolen strands for a woolen garment, linen strands for a linen garment, and thus skirt the prohibition entirely.
Whenever [a conflict exists] between the observance of a positive commandment and the adherence to a negative commandment, [the following rules apply:] - The following are general rules which apply, not only regarding tzitzit, but in other circumstances as well: for example, Hilchot Milah1:9.
If it is possible to observe both of them - by fulfilling the positive commandment without breaking the prohibition
one should. If not, the observance of the positive commandment supersedes the negative commandment. - Rav Nissim Gaon explains that although the violation of a negative commandment receives a more severe punishment than the failure to observe a positive commandment, when God originally gave the negative commandments, He prescribed that they do not apply when adherence to them causes the performance of a positive commandment to be nullified.
The Tanya (Iggeret HaTeshuvah, Chapter 1) explains the rationale for this principle. Man's purpose in this world is to spread Godly light through the observance of mitzvot. Accordingly, the observance of these mitzvot is always given preference when there is such a conflict.
It must be emphasized that one must fulfill the mitzvah at the time one is violating the transgression. It is forbidden, however, in order to break a commandment to later perform a mitzvah.
In the present instance, however, it is possible to observe both of them -as explained above.
144
Commentary Halacha 7
Techelet should not be attached to a linen garment. - This decree was imposed even when techelet was available.
Rather, one should [make the tzitzit] from white threads of linen alone -even though by doing so, one does not fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzit to the fullest degree.
This is not because [the prohibition against] sha'atnez supersedes [the mitzvah of] tzitzit, but rather it is a Rabbinical decree - The Rabbis have the power to ordain that a person bypass the performance of a Torah commandment. Surely this applies in the present instance, when the mitzvah of tzitzit is not nullified entirely.
[imposed] lest one wear the garment at night - Significantly, the Rambam does not quote his apparent source (Menachot 40b) exactly. The Talmud states "lest one wear a garment of the night." The Rambam's change of phraseology teaches two concepts. First, that not only a garment which is generally worn at night, but even one which is worn primarily during the day, should not havetechelet attached to it, lest one wear it during the night.
This also sheds light on a more involved issue. There is a difference of opinion among the Rabbis if the exclusion of wearing tzitzit at night applies to all tzitzit, or if it applies only to garments which are worn primarily at night. According to the latter opinion, garments worn primarily at night do not require tzitzit, even when worn during the day. In contrast, a garment which is worn primarily during the day requires tzitzit, even during the night and one does not transgress the prohibition against sha'atnez when wearing it at that time.
By altering the terminology used by the Talmud, the Rambam indicates his acceptance of the first perspective. Rabbenu Asher is the primary exponent of the second position. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 18:1) mentions both views without reaching a conclusion.
when one is not required to wear tzitzit, and thus violate a negative commandment when the performance of a positive commandment is not involved. - See Hilchot Kilayim 10:32, which mentions a similar concept regarding the priestly garments. The sash worn by the priests was made fromsha'atnez. Therefore, the priests were allowed to wear it only when they were actually involved in the Temple service. Wearing it at other times constitutes a transgression, and not a mitzvah.
Significantly, Rabbenu Tam differs with the Rambam and allows the sash and tzitzit to be worn even during the times when doing so does not fulfill a mitzvah.
[This is because] the obligation to wear tzitzit applies during the day, but not at night [as can be inferred from Numbers 15:39]: "And you shall see them." - Note the Magen Avraham 8:13, which states that this verse also implies that one should wear tzitzit in a manner in which the strands can be seen.
[The mitzvah applies only] during a time when one can see. - i.e., the daytime hours. Note the Chatam Sofer and Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Orach Chayim18), who mention opinions that maintain that the mitzvah is not limited by the times of day and night, but rather by situations when one can see the tzitzit. During a daytime eclipse, one would not be obligated.
[Nevertheless,] a blind man is obligated to wear tzitzit. Even though he does not see them, others see him [wearing them]. - There is no question concerning a blind man's obligation. He is required to wear tzitzit and may recite a blessing beforehand (Mishnah Berurah 17:1).
Commentary Halacha 8
A person is permitted to wear tzitzit at night - i.e., doing so is not a transgression of the prohibition against adding to the performance of a mitzvah.
The Mishnah Berurah 21:15 quotes the Ari zal, as advising one to sleep in atallit katan at night.
both during the weekdays - Rabbi Yitzchak Abuhav maintains that this law applies even to tzitzit containing techelet. Based on the previous halachah, however, most authorities do not accept this opinion.
and on the Sabbath - On the Sabbath, it is forbidden to carry in the public domain. Therefore, one might think that it is forbidden to wear a garment with tzitzit at night, for it would be considered as if one is carrying them. The Rambam is teaching us that the tzitzit are not considered to be a burden, but rather an adornment of the garment to which they are attached (Hilchot Shabbat 19:20).
even though this is not the time when the mitzvah should be fulfilled, provided he does not recite a blessing. - Therefore, when a tallit is put on during the night - e.g., before the Selichot prayers - a blessing should not be recited (Ramah, Orach Chayim 18:3).
When should the blessing over tzitzit be recited in the morning? -According to the Rambam, this question applies whether one wears his tallit at night or not. Nevertheless, because of Rabbenu Asher's opinion mentioned in the previous halachah, if someone slept in his tallit katan, he should not recite a blessing upon it in the morning. Instead, it is preferable that he recite the blessing over his tallit gadol with the intention of including the tallit katan(Mishneh Berurah 8:24).
When [the sun has risen so] that one can differentiate between the strands of techelet and those which are white. - This time is slightly more than midway between dawn (עלות השחר) and sunrise (הנץ החמה).
Note the Ramah (Orach Chayim 18:3), who allows the blessing to be recited from dawn onwards.
Which blessing should be recited upon it? "Blessed are you, God, our Lord, King of the universe, who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to wrap ourselves with tzitzit." - This is the blessing recited over the tallit gadol. For a tallit katan, most authorities suggest concluding al mitzvat tzitzit, "concerning the mitzvah of tzitzit."
Whenever a person wraps himself in tzitzit during the day, he should recite the blessing before doing so. - Note the difference of opinion between the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 8:14) and the Ramah, whether a person who removes his tallit with the intention of putting it on again in the near future is obligated to recite a blessing or not.
No blessing should be recited on the tzitzit when making them - NoteHilchot Berachot 11:9, which states that one should recite the blessing,shehecheyanu, when one acquires or makes tzitzit. (See Shulchan Aruch,Orach Chayim 22:1.)
because - making the tzitzit or even attaching them to the garment is only a preparatory act
the ultimate purpose of the mitzvah is that one should wrap oneself in [a tallit]. - See Hilchot Mezuzah 5:7; Hilchot Berachot 11:8.
Commentary Halacha 9
In contrast to tefillin (see Hilchot Tefillin 4:17-20) and a Torah scroll (see Hilchot Sefer Torah 10:6), which are themselves sacred articles,
It is permissible to enter a lavatory or a bathhouse [wearing] tzitzit - since the tzitzit themselves are not considered sacred articles. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 21:3 and the Mishnah Berurah 21:14 state that it is improper to enter a lavatory wearing a tallit gadol. Since this garment is worn exclusively at the times of prayer, it is not fitting to wear it in a lavatory.
If one of the strands of white or techelet becomes torn, it may be discarded in a garbage dump - in contrast to sacred articles that have become worn, which must be entombed. (See Hilchot Sefer Torah 10:3-4.)
The Ramah (Orach Chayim 21:1) differs and maintains that even after tzitzit have been removed from a garment, they should not be treated with disrespect.
because tzitzit is a mitzvah which does not confer sanctity on the article itself. - Though the tzitzit are used to perform a mitzvah, they, themselves, do not become sacred.
It is forbidden to sell a garment with tzitzit to a gentile until he removes the tzitzit, not because the garment possesses a measure of holiness -and we are afraid that he will deface it. (See Hilchot Mezuzah 5:11.)
but because we are concerned that he will dress in it, and [unknowingly,] a Jew will accompany him, thinking that he is a fellow Jew, and the gentile may kill him. - Note Hilchot Rotzeach UShemirat HaNefesh 12:7, which forbids traveling together with a gentile.
Women - Women are not required to fulfill any mitzvot whose observance is linked to a specific time. (See Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 12:3.) Since tzitzit are worn only during the day, women are not obligated to wear them.
servants - i.e., gentile servants, who are required to fulfill only the mitzvot for which women are obligated. (See Hilchot Tefilah 1:2 and Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah12:11, 14:9.) A Jew sold as a slave is required to fulfill all the mitzvot.
and minors are not required by the Torah to wear tzitzit. - The Torah does not place any obligations on minors.
It is, however, a Rabbinical obligation for every child -Likkutei Sichot (Vol. 17) notes that the Rambam's choice of phraseology appears to indicate that the requirement to become trained in the performance of mitzvot obligates the child himself. Generally, it is understood that the obligation is on the child's parents, who are required to train him in Torah observance.
The contention that the obligation is on the child himself is supported by Hilchot Berachot 5:15-16, which states that an adult who has eaten only a small meal can fulfill his obligation to recite the grace by answering "Amen" to the blessings recited by a child who has reached the age of education. This ruling is based on the rationale that both the child and the adult share the same degree of obligation, a Rabbinical decree. This appears to indicate that the Sages placed the obligation to recite grace on the child himself.
who knows how to dress himself - The Ramah (Orach Chayim 17:3) interprets this to mean, "knows how to wrap himself in tzitzit in the ritual manner."
to wear tzitzit in order to educate him to fulfill mitzvot. - In many communities, it is customary to begin training a child to wear a tallit katan from the time he is toilet trained. In other communities, a child begins to wear tzitzit from the age of 6.
Women and servants who wish to wrap themselves in tzitzit may do so -The Ramah (Orach Chayim 17:1), however, advises against women wearing tzitzit, explaining that doing so would be a sign of conceit.
without reciting a blessing. Similarly, regarding the other positive commandments which women are not required to fulfill, if they desire to fulfill them without reciting a blessing, they should not be prevented from doing so. - Since they are not obligated to fulfill these commandments, it is improper for them to say the blessing which praises God "who has commanded us" to perform the mitzvot.
This perspective is not accepted by Ashkenazic authorities. TheMagen Avraham 17:1 explains that the fact that, as our Sages relate, women are given some measure of reward for the fulfillment of these commandments indicates that the commandment applies - albeit not completely - to them as well.
A tumtum - The word tumtum has its roots in the word atum, which means "a solid block." It refers to a person whose genitalia are covered by skin, so that it is impossible to determine whether he is male or female. (See also Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 12:4, Hilchot Ishut 2:25.)
Should a tumtum undergo an operation and it be revealed that he is either male or female, he is bound by the laws which apply to that gender.
and an androgynous - Androgynous is a combination of the Greek words meaning "man" and "woman." It refers to a person who possesses the sexual organs of both genders. (See also Hilchot Ishut 2:24.)
are obligated in all positive commandments because of the doubt [about their status]. - i.e., it is doubtful whether they are governed by the laws applying to a man or those applying to a woman. The doubts are, however, different in nature. With regard to a tumtum, we are uncertain what is his true gender. With regard to an androgynous, however, the question revolves around the Sages' failure to define his status.
Therefore, they fulfill [all these positive commandments] - lest they be considered men.
without reciting a blessing. - lest they be considered women. Needless to say, according to Ashkenazic practice, they would be required to recite blessings as well.
Commentary Halacha 10
What is the nature of the obligation of the commandment of tzitzit? Every person who is obligated to fulfill this mitzvah - i.e., adult males, as explained in the previous halachah
if he wears a garment requiring tzitzit - See Halachot 1-4.
should attach tzitzit to it and then wear it - if he desires to do so.
If he wears it without attaching tzitzit to it, he has negated [this] positive commandment.
There is, however, no obligation to attach tzitzit to a garment which requires tzitzit, as long as it remains folded in its place, without a person wearing it. - 13The Rambam wants to emphasize that
It is not that a garment requires [tzitzit]. - The Rambam's statements in this halachah revolve around a difference of opinion of our Sages, Menachot 42b. There are Sages who maintain that tzitzit is an obligation that depends on the garment - i.e., the mitzvah is completed by placing tzitzit on every garment which requires them. The other opinion states that tzitzit are an obligation incumbent on a person, that a person is required to attach tzitzit to his garments. The Rambam rephrases the latter opinion as follows:
Rather, the requirement is incumbent on the person [wearing] the garment. - With this choice of phraseology, he desires to indicate that - in contrast to other mitzvot (e.g., tefillin) - there is no obligation from the Torah to wear tzitzit every day. Only when a person desires to wear a garment that requires tzitzit is he obligated to fulfill the mitzvah.
This conception represents a change of position for the Rambam. Rav Yitzchak Alfasi, whose decisions the Rambam frequently followed, maintains that each person is obligated to wear tzitzit, apparently indicating that tzitzit, like tefillin, are an obligation which a person is required to fulfill.
The Rambam apparently held this view himself at one time. Therefore, in Sefer HaMitzvot, at the conclusion of the listing of the positive commandments, he lists tzitzit (together with tefillin) as one of the positive commandments whose observance we must pursue. Here, his choice of phraseology indicates that, although the mitzvah is incumbent on the person, it does relate to the garment. Only when a person wears a garment which requires tzitzit is he obligated to fulfill the mitzvah.
Commentary Halacha 11
Even though a person is not obligated to purchase a tallit and wrap himself in it so that he must attach tzitzit to it - as explained in the previous halachah.
it is not proper for a person to release himself from this commandment. Instead, he should always try to be wrapped in a garment which requires tzitzit so that he will fulfill this mitzvah - because of the importance of this mitzvah, as mentioned in the following halachah.
The Rambam mentions being "wrapped in a garment requiring tzitzit," an expression which appears to refer to a tallit gadol, a garment of the size and cut appropriate for "wrapping oneself." Significantly, throughout these halachot, he has used that term and never makes any reference to a tallit katan, the smaller garment which is colloquially called "tzitzit" today.
In Talmudic times, draping oneself with a garment that resembled our tallitot gedolot was common, but in different lands and different eras, the style of dress changed and, except for sages who would spend their day involved in study, it was rare that a person would wear a tallit gadol throughout the day. Accordingly, the people took to wearing the smaller tallit katan, which could be accommodated to other styles of dress more easily.
There is no explicit mention of a tallit katan in the Talmud, although a story related in Menachot 44a appears to indicate that such garments were worn in that era as well. The writings of the early Ashkenazic and later Sephardic rabbis of the Middle Ages mention the wearing of a tallit katan as an accepted practice.
In particular, care should be taken regarding this matter during prayer. -The Rambam does not specify the morning service. Perhaps he refers to the afternoon service as well.
It is very shameful for a Torah scholar to pray without being wrapped [in a tallit]. - See Rosh HaShanah 17b, which relates that when God revealed the thirteen qualities of mercy to Moses, "He wrapped Himself [in a tallit] like a leader of prayer and taught him the order of prayer."
Issurei Biah - Chapter Nine
Halacha 1
Halacha 2
According to Rabbinic Law, whenever a woman discovers a bloodstain on her flesh7 or on her clothes,8 she is impure, as if she discovered bleeding within [the vaginal channel] on her flesh. [This applies] even if she did not experience a physical sensation [and] even if she conducted an internal examination and did not discover bleeding.9 This impurity is [because of our] doubt;10 perhaps the stain came from uterine bleeding.
Halacha 3
Similarly, according to Rabbinic Law: Whenever a woman discovers bleeding at a time other than her veset11 and whenever she discovers a bloodstain, she is impure retroactively for 24 hours.12 If she conducted an internal examination within this time and discovered that she was pure, she is impure retroactively until the time of the inspection.13
Although she is impure retroactively, she does not cause a man who engages in relations with her to become impure, as we explained.14 Nor may she begin counting her "days of niddah" or counting because of the stain except from the time she discovered the bleeding or the stain.
Whenever a woman discovers a stain, her reckoning [of her veset] is confused. For it is possible that the bleeding came from the uterus and her veset must be recalculated.15
Halacha 4
When a woman discovers bleeding at the time of her veset, she does not become impure retroactively. Instead, [the impurity begins] at the time [of discovery]. Similarly, a woman who is pregnant, nursing, a virgin,16 or elderly do not become impure retroactively.
Halacha 5
[The term] "virgin" refers to a girl who has never menstruated even through she experienced uterine bleeding because of marriage19 or because of birth.20
The term "elderly woman" refers to a woman who did not menstruate for 90 days near her old age.21 When is she considered elderly? When she is called an old woman [by others] and she does not protest.
[The laws that apply when] a pregnant, nursing, or elderly woman [discovers] a stain are the same as when she discovers bleeding. She does not become impure retroactively. With regard to a virgin who has never menstruated and who is still a minor, a stain that is discovered is pure until she menstruates on three successive months.
Halacha 6
What is the difference between a stain which is found on a woman's flesh and one found on her clothing? There is no minimum measure for a stain found on a woman's flesh.22 A stain on a garment, by contrast, does not render a woman impure unless it is the size of half a Cilikean bean (a gris)23 which is equivalent to a square large enough to contain nine lentils, i.e., three rows of three. If it is smaller than this, she is pure.24
Halacha 7
[When] a stain is discovered on an article that is not susceptible to ritual impurity, the woman is pure and she need not be concerned about it.
What is implied? If a woman sat on a utensil made of stone,27 earth, animal dung, on fish skin, on the outside of an earthenware utensil,28 or on a cloth that is smaller than three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths29 and blood was discovered on the above, she is pure. Even if she inspected earth,30 then sat on it, and when she arose, a stain was discovered, she is pure. For our Sages did not decree that a woman would be impure when a stain was discovered on an article that is not susceptible to ritual impurity.31 Nor did they decree [that a stain discovered on an article susceptible to ritual impurity renders a woman] impure unless that article is white.32 If, however an article is colored, we are not concerned with a stain. For this reason, our Sages ordained that a woman should wear colored garments33 so that she be protected from problems arising due to stains.
Halacha 8
[A woman] does not become impure because of a bloodstain found on every place on her body, only due to those found opposite her genital area.
What is implied? If a stain is found on her heel, she is impure. For perhaps she touched her genital area when she sat.34 Similarly, she is impure if a stain was found on her calves or on the inner side of her ankles, [the portions of her legs] that will touch each other when she stands with her feet and calves together. If it is found on the tip of her toe, she is impure. Perhaps [blood] dripped from the uterus to her foot when she walked.
Similarly, if blood is found in any place where her menstrual blood could have spattered when she walked, she is impure. Similarly, if blood is found on her hands, even on the backs of her fingers, she is impure. For the hands are active.35 If, however, blood is found on the outer or side portions of her calves and, needless to say, if it is found from her thighs upward,36 she is pure. For this is certainly blood that was spattered on her from another place.37
Halacha 9
When a bloodstain that is found on a woman's body is long like a strand or round, or made up of small drops, the length of the stain was across the width of her thigh, it looks like it came from below upward,38 since it is opposite her genital area, she is impure. We do not say: Had it dripped from her body, it would not be found in such a form.39 Instead, we are stringent with regard to all blood that is found in these places, even though there is a doubt concerning it.
Halacha 10
Halacha 11
If she would remove her garment and cover herself with it at night, she is impure wherever blood is found.43 Similarly, if blood is found anywhere on her girdle, she is impure.
Halacha 12
If a woman wears one tunic for three days or more during a time that is not part of her "days of niddah" and inspected it and discovered three stains or one stain that contains the measure of three stains,44 there is a doubt whether she is a [major] zavah.45 For it is possible that each day, she stained the garment.46
Halacha 13
[The following rules apply if] she found one stain that did not contain the measure of three stains.50 If she inspected herself throughout bein hashamashot51 of the first day and found that she was pure, but did not inspect her clothes and on the third day, discovered this stain which is not the measure of three stains, she need not worry about being a zavah.52
If she did not inspect herself throughout bein hashamashot, she must suspect that she is a zavah. [The rationale is that] she did not inspect her garment and continued wearing it for three days during her "days of zivah."53
Halacha 14
If she discovered a stain on her garment on one day and then experienced bleeding for two successive days or experienced bleeding for two [successive] days and discovered a stain on the third day, there is a doubt whether she is a [major] zavah.54
Halacha 15
When a woman discovers a stain and then discovers bleeding, she associates the stain with the bleeding for a 24-hour period.55 [This applies] whether she inspected herself at the time she discovered the stain and found herself to be pure or whether she did not inspect herself. If, however, she discovers one stain after another stain within 24 hours, she does not associate one stain with the other unless she carried out an inspection in the interim. If, however, she carried out an inspection and found herself to be pure between [the discovery of the first] stain and the second, they should not be associated with regard to the counting of zivut.56
Halacha 16
What is implied? She discovered a stain on Friday during the first hour of the day and then she discovered menstrual bleeding at any time until the first hour of the day on the Sabbath, she does not count [her impurity] from [the time she discovered] the stain. Instead, she associates the stain with the bleeding. [This applies] even if she did not inspect herself [after discovering the stain] and did not know whether she was impure or not. Thus if she discovers bleeding on Sunday and on Monday, she is a [major] zavah.57
If, however, she discovered bleeding during the second hour on the Sabbath, she is considered as if she was impure for two days: Friday because of the stain she discovered and the Sabbath because of the bleeding, because there are more than 24 hours between them. Hence, if she discovers bleeding on Sunday, she must suspect that she is a zavah.58
Halacha 17
[The following rules apply if] she did not experience bleeding on the Sabbath, but instead discovered a stain during the first hour on the Sabbath. If she inspected herself on Friday and discovered that she was pure, she only counts from [the time of] the later stain [that was discovered] on the Sabbath, because they both were discovered within the same 24 hour period. If she did not inspect herself and did not know whether or not she was in fact pure between the two, she begins counting from Friday. Thus if she discovers bleeding on Sunday, she must suspect that she is a zavah.59
Halacha 18
If she discovered the second stain during the second hour of the Sabbath day, she is considered as impure for two days, for the two are not within the same 24 hour period. [This applies] whether she inspected herself or did not inspect herself. [In such a situation,] if she discovers bleeding on Sunday after 24 hours have passed, she must suspect that she is a zavah.60
[The following laws apply if] she discovered a third stain during the first hour on Sunday. If she inspected herself and discovered that she was pure, they are not considered as coming in succession61 and she need not suspect that she is azavah. If she does not carry out such an inspection, she must suspect that she is a zavah.62
Halacha 19
[The following rules apply] whenever there is a stain that causes a woman to be considered impure and there is a factor to which she could attribute the stain, saying: "The stain came because of this factor."63 If [the stain] is found on a garment, she is pure. For our Sages did not say that one should rule stringently regarding these matters, only leniently.64 If the stain is found on her flesh, she is impure because of the doubt and she may not attribute the stain to the external factor.65 If she has a greater reason to attribute a stain on her flesh [t an outside factor] than one on her clothes,66 she may attribute even a stain on her flesh [to the factor] and she is pure despite the doubt.
Halacha 20
What is implied? If she slaughtered an animal, a beast, or a fowl, became occupied with stains, sat next to people who were, or passed through a marketplace of butchers and blood was found on her outer garment, she is pure. She may attribute the stain to these factors for it is [likely] to have come from them.
Halacha 21
[The following rules apply if] the stain was found on her flesh alone. If the stain is at her belt or lower, she is impure.67 If she turned upside down and flipped,68even [a stain] from her belt and above renders her impure.69 For if the blood had come from slaughtering or from the market, it would also have been found on her garments. Since it was found on her flesh and not on her garments, she is impure.
Halacha 22
Halacha 23
When a stain is found on both her garments and her flesh, she may attribute it with all [the external factors] possible.72 And she may explain that [the stain was caused by] a louse, for perhaps when she sat down, a louse was killed and this blood came from the louse.73
Until when [does the above apply]? [When the stain is no larger than] a gris. If, however, the stain is larger than a gris, she may not attribute it to a louse. [This applies] even if there is a crushed louse on the stain. Since the stain is larger than a gris, she may not attribute it to a louse.74
Halacha 24
Halacha 25
We do not consider the possibility that blood was [transferred] from one place to another to attribute a stain to it. What is implied? If a woman had a wound on her shoulder and a stain was discovered on her calf,77 we do not say: Maybe she touched the wound with her hand and then touched this other portion of her body.78 Similar laws apply in all analogous situations. We attribute neither stains on her body, nor those on her garment [to such wounds].79
Halacha 26
[The following laws apply when] two women were occupied with [slaughtering] one fowl and it contained only an amount of blood equal in size to a sela. If a stain the size of a sela is found on both of them, they are both impure.80
If a woman was occupied with blood that could produce a stain no larger than agris and a stain the size of two grisim was found on her, she may attribute a gristo the blood with which she was occupied with and a gris to a louse.81 If, however, the stain was larger than two grisim, she is impure.
Halacha 27
If she was occupied with red [blood], she may not attribute a black [stain] to it. If she was occupied with a fowl that had many different colors of blood and one of them was found on her, she may attribute [the stain] to [the fowl].
If she was wearing three outer garments, if there is an external factor to which she could attribute [a stain], she may attribute even [a stain] on the bottom garment to it.82 If she [knows of] no external factor to attribute it to, she may not attribute it to any factor, even if it is found only on the upper one.83
What is implied? If she passed through a butcher's market place, even if the stain is found only on the bottom garment, she may attribute it to the blood of the butcher's. If she did not pass through a butcher's market or the like, even if the stain is only on the upper garment, she is impure. If she is in doubt whether or not she passed through [such a place] or whether or not she was occupied [with an object that could produce a stain], she may not attribute it [to an external factor].84
Halacha 28
When a city has pigs [that roam freely] or [such animals] enter it at all times, [a woman] need not be concerned with stains that are found on her outer garment.85
Halacha 29
When a woman lent her garment to a niddah, whether a Jewess or a gentile woman,86 and then put it on before checking it,87 she can attribute a stain she finds upon it to the niddah who wore it.88
[Similarly,] if she lent [a garment] to a minor zavah on a day that she is impure,89 one who is experiencing [the post-birth] blood of purity,90 or to [a woman who was] a virgin and is experiencing [hymeneal] bleeding [which is] pure, she may attribute the stain to them.91
[A different ruling applies,] however, if she lent [a garment] to a minor zavah on the day she is watching or a major zavah during her seven "spotless" days, put it on before checking it and then discovered a stain. [In such an instance,] the halachic status of both is impaired., the lender and the borrower. For perhaps this one caused the stain or perhaps the other did.92
If she lent [the garment] to a woman who is watching herself because of the discovery of a stain, she may not attribute the stain to her. [The rationale is that] we do not attribute one stain to another.93
Halacha 30
[The following law applies when a woman] inspected her outer garment and then inspected herself94 and discovered that she was pure and afterwards, lent that garment to a colleague. If the borrower wore the garment and then a stain was discovered upon it when she returned it, the borrower is impure. She cannot attribute the stain to the owner, because the owner inspected it before she lent it to her.
Halacha 31
[The following laws apply when] a tall woman wears an outer garment belonging to a short woman and a stain is discovered upon it. If [the place where the stain is located] reaches her genital area, she is impure.95 If it does not, she is pure, because [it is probable] that the stain came from the short woman.
Halacha 32
Halacha 33
[The following principle applies when, in the above situation, the women] all inspected themselves and discovered that they were pure. A woman who is not likely to discover bleeding may attribute the stain to one who is likely to discover bleeding. Thus the one who is unlikely [to discover bleeding] will be pure and the one who is likely will be impure.
What is implied? If one of the woman is pregnant and another is not pregnant, the pregnant101 woman is pure102 and the one who is not pregnant is impure. If one was nursing103 and one was not nursing, the one who is nursing is pure.104If one is an elderly woman,105 and one is not elderly, the elder woman is pure.106 If one has not experienced menstrual bleeding107 and one has, the one who has no experience is pure.108 If they are all pregnant, all elderly, all nursing, or all have not experienced menstrual bleeding, they are all impure.109
Halacha 34
[The following laws apply when] three women ascended from the foot of a bed,110 and went to sleep. If a blood[stain] was discovered under the middle one, all three are impure.111 If [a stain] was discovered under112 the innermost one, she and the woman to her side are impure and the outermost one is pure.113 If [the stain] was under the outermost, she and the woman to her side are impure and the innermost is pure. If, however, they did not ascend from the foot of the bed, and thus they have no order, if a blood[stain] is discovered under any one of them, they are all impure.
Halacha 35
When does the above apply? When the woman all inspected themselves and found themselves to be pure. Thus none of them could attribute [the stain] to the other as we explained. If, however, one of them inspected herself and discovered that she was pure, the woman who is pure can attribute the stain to the one who did not check, and that woman is impure.
Halacha 36
Whenever a stain is found on a garment and there is no external source to attribute it to, it, [nevertheless,] does not cause a woman to be considered impure until it is proven to be blood.114 If a doubt arises for [the experts]115whether [a stain] was blood or [simply] red dye, they [wash the stain] with [the following] seven cleaning agents in order. If it is washed away or its color becomes weaker,116 it is a bloodstain and [the woman] is considered impure. If the stain remains the same color, it is a dye and [she] is pure.117
Halacha 37
These are the seven cleaning agents in the order [in which they should be used]: the saliva of a person who has not eaten, beans that have been chewed, urine that has become sour, lye,118 natron,119 cumin powder,120 and bleach.121[The garment] must be rubbed three times with each cleansing agent and it must be passed back and forth while being rubbed.
If a person did not use these cleansing agents in the above order or used them all at once, his deeds are of no consequence.122 If he used the last substances before the first ones, the fact that he used the last ones - i.e., the first ones in the proper order - is significant. He may then use [merely] the last ones - which he used first - so that he will have used all seven in order.
Halacha 38
What is meant by "the saliva of a person who has not eaten"? [Saliva taken from a person who did not eat from the beginning of the night and slept the second half of the night and gave this saliva before he ate the next morning. [Moreover,] he must not have spoken excessively for the first three hours of the day. If, however, a person arose and repeated his studies before three hours of the day passed, his saliva is not placed in this category. For speaking nullifies the power of the saliva and causes it to be like water.
What is meant by beans that have been chewed? Beans that have been chewed thoroughly until a large quantity of saliva has been mixed with them. What is meant by urine that has soured? Urine that is three days old or more.
Halacha 39
[The following laws apply to] any woman who becomes impure because of a stain. If she discovers the stain during her "days of niddah," she must consider herself a niddah because of the doubt. She must remain [impure] for seven days and immerses herself on the eighth night. Afterwards, she is permitted to her husband.
If she discovered [the stain] during her "days of zivah," because of the doubt, she must consider herself as a minor zavah or a major zavah as clarified in this chapter.123 She must remain [impure] for one day if she is a minor zavah or count seven "spotless" days if there is a doubt whether she is a major zavah.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
In contrast to Rabbinic Law as defined by the following halachah.
The Turei Zahav 190:1 interprets the gloss of the Maggid Mishneh as stating that even if we are certain that a woman experienced uterine bleeding, if she did not experience the physical sensations that accompany menstruation, she is not impure according to Scriptural Law.
|
| 2. |
The physical sensation described here is not the heaviness, nausea, or stomach contractions which sometimes precipitate a woman's menstrual bleeding. [These sensations are also halachicly significant, but are related to another aspect of the niddah laws - the determination ofvesetos, the time when her menstruation could be expected to begin (see Chapter 8, Halachah 2).] Instead, here the intent is either: a) an awareness of the opening of the uterus, or b) shivers or shudders as in a state of shock. Certain authorities also speak of a third sensation: that of a flow of moisture in the uterine channel. See the commentaries to Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah183:1). It must be emphasized that today, many authorities rule that a woman is unable to identify these sensations.
|
| 3. |
Chapter 5, Halachah 2.
|
| 4. |
I.e., according to Scriptural Law, she does not become impure retroactively.
|
| 5. |
Carrying out the internal examination, however, prevented her from feeling that sensation.
|
| 6. |
Chapter 5, Halachah 5, which states that the discovery of bleeding in the vaginal channel renders her impure.
|
| 7. |
As clarified in Halachah 8.
|
| 8. |
As clarified in Halachot 9-11.
|
| 9. |
We do not say that the fact that she did not discover any internal signs of bleeding indicates that the bleeding originated elsewhere.
|
| 10. |
Since we are speaking about a Rabbinic institution and there is doubt involved, there is some room for leniency as will be explained.
The Kessef Mishneh questions why we do not consider this a question of multiple doubt (s'fek s'feika) in which case we rule leniently. In this instance, it is possible that the blood came from her flesh and it is possible that it came from an outside source. And even if it came from her flesh, it is possible it came from the uterus and it is possible it came from the ovaries.
The Kessef Mishneh offers two resolutions: a) because of the serious nature of the prohibition involved, our Sages were stringent despite the multiple doubt;
b) when the woman has no outside factors to which the blood can be attributed, our Sages ruled stringently and maintained that it is considered as if the bleeding is definitely from her flesh. Thus there is only one doubt: whether the bleeding comes from the uterus or the ovaries.
Kin'at Eliyahu offers a third resolution: Essentially, there is one question involved? Did the bleeding originate in the uterus or elsewhere? Where elsewhere - the ovaries or an outside source - does not multiply the doubt involved.
|
| 11. |
If she discovers bleeding at the time of her veset, we assume that she began menstruating then, since that is when she ordinarily menstruates, as stated in the following halachah. Otherwise, we assume she began menstruating beforehand.
|
| 12. |
I.e., any articles that she touched within that time are considered as if they are ritually impure. We assume that she began menstruating before she discovered the bleeding and therefore consider her impure retroactively.
|
| 13. |
I.e., we reduce the time of impurity from 24 hours, because she conducted an internal examination in the interim. Nevertheless, we still follow the basic premise that she is considered impure retroactively.
|
| 14. |
Chapter 8, Halachah 13. Note Hilchot Mitamei Mishkav UMoshav 3:8 which states that although the man who engages in relations with her is not governed by the severe rules that apply to one who had relations with a niddah, he is still considered ritually impure for touching the woman.
|
| 15. |
As stated in Chapter 8, a woman must calculate the day on which she is expected to begin menstruated. In this instance, she cannot do so, for she does not know whether to begin counting anew from the time she discovered the stain or perhaps her original cycle has not changed.
|
| 16. |
These terms are defined in this and the following halachah. The rationale is that these women are not expected to menstruate. Hence, we do not show concern for the possibility that they menstruated at an earlier time.
|
| 17. |
Even if she discovers her pregnancy earlier, she must take the bleeding into consideration until three months.
|
| 18. |
Conversely, although a woman continues nursing beyond this times, she is not granted this leniency (Hilchot Mitamei Mishkav UMoshav 4:1).
|
| 19. |
I.e., hymeneal bleeding.
|
| 20. |
As stated in Hilchot Mitamei Mishkav UMoshav 4:3, this principle applies the first two times she menstruates.
|
| 21. |
I.e., once three months pass without her menstruating, we assume that she will no longer menstruate according to a set pattern.
|
| 22. |
She becomes impure no matter how small it is.
|
| 23. |
A gris is half a bean. Cilik is a place where beans grow very large [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 17:112)]. Most contemporary experts consider this to be the size of an American dime.
|
| 24. |
It is possible that the blood came from a louse that was inadvertently killed (see Halachah 23). Since the question is one of Rabbinic Law, we rule leniently and consider the woman pure. When, however, the stain is on her flesh, we rule stringently, because lice are not usually found on one's flesh (Kessef Mishneh).
The distinction between a stain on one's body and on one's clothes is not accepted by all authorities. Ra'avad, Ramban, and Rashba differ and maintain that there is no difference between the two. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:6) quotes both opinions without stating which one is favored.
|
| 25. |
I.e. unless one of the spots is the size of a gris, the woman is considered pure. We are not concerned with the combined area of the spots.
|
| 26. |
In this instance, if the combined area of the stain is the size of a gris, the woman is considered as impure.
|
| 27. |
All of the following are examples of articles that are not susceptible to ritual impurity. The Rambam discusses all of these types of utensils in Hilchot Keilim. Commenting on the citation of this law in the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:10), the Rama (and Pitchei Teshuvah 190:19) also give the example of a toilet seat as an article that is not susceptible to ritual impurity.
|
| 28. |
For an earthenware utensil only contracts ritual impurity from its inside.
|
| 29. |
A cloth of this size is considered too small to serve any purpose and hence, is not considered as a garment or utensil.
|
| 30. |
And found there were no bloodstains on it.
|
| 31. |
As mentioned above, the designation of a woman as impure because of a stain that is discovered is a Rabbinic decree. When our Sages instituted the decree, they allowed for leniency in certain instances.
|
| 32. |
Niddah 61b relates that originally our Sages thought to prohibit women from wearing colored garments as part of the mourning customs introduced because of the destruction of the Temple. Afterwards, they reconsidered and recommended that they wear such garments as the Rambam explains.
|
| 33. |
On days other than her seven "spotless" days.
|
| 34. |
In the Talmudic era, people would sit on rugs on cushions on the ground and when sitting in this manner, it is possible that a woman's foot will touch her genital area.
|
| 35. |
And it is possible that unknowingly, she touched a place on her body where there was menstrual blood (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 36. |
When restating this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:11) uses the wording "if it is found above her genital area." It also states that if a woman lifted her legs above her waist, she is impure even if a stain is found on the upper portion of her body.
|
| 37. |
I.e., we assume that the blood came from an external source. For it is not ordinary that her menstrual blood would spatter to these portions of her body.
|
| 38. |
I.e., the shape of the stain appeared to indicate that the blood was spattered upward, rather than dripped downward.
|
| 39. |
I.e., even when the shape of the stain appears to indicate that it came from an external source, as long as its position leaves open the possibility that it came from uterine bleeding, we rule stringently.
|
| 40. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:12) rules that this law applies even when the stain is found on only the external part of her garment.
|
| 41. |
For the possibility exists that it came as a result of uterine bleeding. See Halachot 19-20 which explain that when there is justified reason to suspect that the stain came from an external source, she is pure, even though the stain is found on the lower portion of her garment.
|
| 42. |
Even when she bends (Maggid Mishneh in the name of the Rashba).
|
| 43. |
Because it is possible that she and the blanket both shifted position while she was sleeping.
|
| 44. |
I.e., it is three times the size of a gris.
|
| 45. |
She must wait seven "spotless" days before engaging in relations. She brings the sacrifice required of a zavah, but because of the doubt concerning her status, it is not eaten.
|
| 46. |
Three stains are sufficient to render her a major zavah. She is not, however, definitely given this status, for it is possible that the three stains came on one day.
|
| 47. |
I.e., she wore the three garments at the same time, one on top of the other.
|
| 48. |
For it is possible that she experienced bleeding on three successive days.
|
| 49. |
And thus it is likely that the three stains came from the same bleeding. Nevertheless, since we are not certain of this, she is considered a zavah because of the doubt.
|
| 50. |
I.e., it is smaller than three times the size of a gris.
|
| 51. |
Bein hashamashot refers to the time between sunset and the appearance of the stars. The intent is not that a woman should continue to inspect herself throughout this entire time. Instead, what is meant is that she should insert a small cloth into her vagina and leave it there for this entire time.
|
| 52. |
For she will have verified that she had not experienced bleeding on the first day.
|
| 53. |
Since she was wearing the garment for three days, the possibility exists that she experienced bleeding for three days, but all the stains were in the same place.
|
| 54. |
Since on one of the days, she became impure because of a stain without feeling the physical sensations associated with menstruation, her impurity is not of Scriptural status. For to be considered as a zavah according to Scriptural Law, she must experience these physical sensations.
|
| 55. |
If the bleeding was discovered within 24 hours of the stain, we assume that the stain came about because of the subsequent bleeding and therefore she is governed by the same laws that would apply had she experienced only the bleeding as stated in Halachah 16.
|
| 56. |
The Rambam's ruling is dependent on his understanding of Niddah 53b. The Ra'avad does not accept the Rambam's interpretation of this passage and harshly dismisses the Rambam's conclusions. The Maggid Mishneh both supports and explains the Rambam's position.
|
| 57. |
But if she does not discover blood on Monday, she is not a major zavah, i.e., we pay no attention to the stain that she discovered on Friday.
(Any time the term zavah is mentioned subsequently in this chapter, she is considered as azavah.)
|
| 58. |
She is not definitely placed in that category, because one of the days is associated with a stain, as stated in Halachah 14.
|
| 59. |
Because she experienced either a stain or bleeding on three consecutive days..
|
| 60. |
Because she experienced either a stain or bleeding on three consecutive days..
|
| 61. |
I.e., instead of being concerned that she discovered stains on three consecutive days, she associates the stain of the Sabbath and that of Sunday and counts them only as one.
|
| 62. |
For each of the stains is considered individually.
|
| 63. |
The principles mentioned in this halachah are illustrated in the halachot that follow.
|
| 64. |
Since the impurity associated with a stain is a matter of Rabbinic Law, we follow the principle: Whenever there is a doubt involved a matter of Rabbinic Law, we rule leniently [Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 190:18)].
|
| 65. |
Since the stain is found on her flesh and not on her clothes, we assume that it is more likely to come from the uterus than from an external factor.
|
| 66. |
E.g., she has a wound on her flesh.
|
| 67. |
Provided the stain is found on a portion of her body from which the blood could have dripped from the uterus as stated in Halachah 8.
|
| 68. |
This phrase was not found in the texts of the Mishneh Torah possessed by the Ra'avad and theMaggid Mishneh. Therefore they raised objections to the Rambam's ruling.
|
| 69. |
Ordinarily, however, such a stain does not alter her status even though it is found on her flesh alone.
|
| 70. |
E.g., if it was scratched [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:18)].
|
| 71. |
And thus her status does not change. Note, however, Halachah 25.
|
| 72. |
For we can assume that it came from the outside first to her garments and then to her flesh. Hence she may attribute the blood to any of the factors mentioned in Halachah 20, as if the blood was found on her garments alone.
|
| 73. |
This applies even if she did not see that she killed a louse. If she knows that she killed an insect and it is possible that it produced a stain larger than a gris, she may attribute the stain to that [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Niddah 8:2)].
|
| 74. |
For it is an accepted principle that a louse contains no more than a gris of blood. Hence if the stain is larger, that is an indication that the blood came from another source. Note Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:28) which rules leniently and explains that it is possible that there were two lice here, one which she killed previously and the one which is found crushed on her garment.
|
| 75. |
As indicated by the Rambam's explanation, even if she did not know that they touched her with soiled hands, if their hands were soiled, she may assume that this is the fact. For it is likely for a husband to touch his wife and a child to touch his mother.
|
| 76. |
If, however, their hands are not soiled, we do not attribute a stain to them unless the blood could have spattered upon her [Maggid Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:19)].
|
| 77. |
It is highly improbable that blood dripped from her shoulder to her calf.
|
| 78. |
There are instances where we postulate that a person's hands are active and the possibility exists that one transferred impurity from one place to another. Nevertheless, this concept is used only to lead to a stringency, not as a source for leniency.
|
| 79. |
The Maggid Mishneh states that if it is possible that the garment passed over the wound when it was removed, we can attribute a stain on a garment to such a wound. The Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 190:16) quotes this conclusion.
|
| 80. |
Since the fowl did not contain enough blood to produce two stains of this size, we assume that one came from another source and attribute it to menstrual bleeding. Since we don't know which of the women was soiled by the fowl and which was not, we rule that they are both impure.
The Bayit Chadash (Yoreh De'ah 190) rules that this law applies only when the two women come to inquire about their status together. If they come one after the other, he rules that they are both considered pure. The Turei Zahav 190:17 differs, maintaining that although the ruling of the Bayit Chadash has parallels in other contexts, the logic should not be applied in this instance. TheNekudot HaKessef, however, accepts the ruling of the Bayit Chadash.
|
| 81. |
As stated in Halachah 23. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 190:26) states that although there are opinions which rule that a woman is impure in such an instance, we follow the more lenient view, for the entire issue is one of Rabbinic Law.
|
| 82. |
Although there is reason to say that if the stain came from the outside, it would certainly be found on the outer garment as well, we still rule leniently, because there is the possibility that the outer garment was raised up at the time the blood was spattered.
|
| 83. |
Thus had the stain come from the woman's body, it would be far more likely to be found on the lower garment.
|
| 84. |
Although we rule leniently in questions involving stains, that is when we know that there is definitely a factor that could cause a stain involved. In this instance, we are not certain that there is indeed such a factor involved.
When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:22) adds that this ruling applies only in a city where there is a set place for butchering and the like. In places where these activities are carried out in many different places, a woman can attribute a stain to such a factor even if she is not certain that she passed such a place.
|
| 85. |
For the pigs eat small crawling animals and spatter their blood on passersby. Needless to say in most modern cities, this law does not apply.
|
| 86. |
According to Scriptural Law, the laws of niddah do not apply to gentile woman, but according to Rabbinic Law, every gentile women is considered as if she is a niddah. The Maggid Mishnehquotes opinions which maintain that even if the gentile woman is not known to be a niddah, the stain can still be attributed to her, because her halachic status is that of a niddah. This opinion is also reflected in the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:41). Even according to this conception, the gentile woman must be of the age that it is possible that she will experience menstrual bleeding. See Halachah 33 for further clarification regarding the fundamental principle on which this halachah is based.
|
| 87. |
The Rambam's wording teaches us another concept: We are not concerned about stains on clothing unless the clothes were checked first (Maggid Mishne).
|
| 88. |
Since the niddah and the gentile woman are already impure and will not suffer any difficulty if the stain is attributed to them, we indeed consider them as the source of the bleeding.
|
| 89. |
The day on which she experienced uterine bleeding.
|
| 90. |
This was the law in the era of the Talmud when the laws of "the blood of purity" were observed after childbirth. As will be explained in Chapter 11 and notes, at present, this leniency is no longer observed.
|
| 91. |
In all these instances, attributing the stain to the borrower does not change her halachic status. The minor zavah is impure and the woman after childbirth and the virgin are pure regardless of the stain.
As stated in Chapter 11, the concept of a minor zavah does not apply in the present age and instead, she is considered as equivalent to a major zavah. Hence a stain can certainly be attributed to her. The laws concerning a woman with hymeneal bleeding or a woman after childbirth are different, for in the present age, we do not consider such woman as ritually pure. Instead, uterine bleeding - and even a stain - renders them ritually impure. Accordingly, since the status of these woman will be impaired because of the discovery of the stain, there is reason to assume that it should not be attributed to them alone, but instead, both the borrower and the lender should be considered impure as in the following clause. {See the Tur (Yoreh De'ah 190) which cites such views.} The commentaries explain, however, that according to the Rambam, this law applies even in the present era. Indeed, it is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah190:42) and the Shulchan Aruch only quotes laws that apply in the present era.
The Siftei Cohen 190:54 explains that even though the halachic status of these women changed in the present era, their physical tendency did not change. They frequently experience uterine bleeding and hence, we attribute the stain to them.
|
| 92. |
Both the lender and the borrower are not likely to experience uterine bleeding and for both, it will impair their halachic status. Since we do not know which one is responsible for the stain, both share the resulting halachic liability.
The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah, loc. cit.) differ with the Rambam's ruling and maintain that the owner of the garment is pure. Since the status of the woman who is seeking to attain ritual purity is already impaired when compared to that of the owner, the stain is attributed to her alone despite the fact that her status will become further impaired by this ruling.
|
| 93. |
Although a woman is considered impure because of a stain, we do not consider it a certain enough sign of uterine bleeding to attribute another stain to it.
|
| 94. |
When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:40) omits mention of the fact that the woman inspected herself as well as her garment.
|
| 95. |
I.e., the owner is definitely impure; in this instance, the borrower is also impure, because it is possible that the stain comes from her.
|
| 96. |
Since there is no reason to attribute the stain to one more than the other and they all share the same halachic status, they are all considered as impure.
|
| 97. |
With their bodies intertwined [see Maggid Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:50) based on Niddah 61a].
|
| 98. |
Based on Niddah, loc. cit., the Maggid Mishneh and the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) interpret this as referring to an instance when the woman all climbed into the bed from the same side. See Halachah 34.
|
| 99. |
The Maggid Mishneh and the Kessef Mishneh interpret this as meaning that she inspected herself within the same day or night as the stain was discovered. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:51) states that the inspection must be made immediately thereafter.
|
| 100. |
For we assume that the woman who found herself impure is the source of the stain.
The commentaries question if this clause applies only with regard to the bed or also with regard to the garment. The Maggid Mishneh asserts that it applies to the garment as well. The Kessef Mishneh, however, argues against his position.
|
| 101. |
See Halachah 4 for the definition of this term in the present context.
|
| 102. |
For she is unlikely to experience uterine bleeding.
|
| 103. |
For we assume that the woman who found herself impure is the source of the stain.
The commentaries question if this clause applies only with regard to the bed or also with regard to the garment. The Maggid Mishneh asserts that it applies to the garment as well. The Kessef Mishneh, however, argues against his position.
|
| 104. |
See Halachah 4 for the definition of this term in the present context.
|
| 105. |
See Halachah 5 for the definition of this term in the present context.
|
| 106. |
See Halachah 4 for the definition of this term in the present context.
|
| 107. |
This is the meaning of the term betulah in this context. See Halachah 5.
|
| 108. |
See Halachah 4 for the definition of this term in the present context.
|
| 109. |
Since there is no reason to favor one over the other, we rule stringently with regard to all of them.
|
| 110. |
And thus each one did not pass over the place where the other slept. See the notes to Halachah 32.
|
| 111. |
Because either of the woman on the sides could have shifted position slightly and the blood have come from her.
|
| 112. |
If, however, the stain was discovered on the top sheet, they are all impure, because the top sheet is likely to shift position during their sleep.
|
| 113. |
For it is unlikely that one twisted and turned to that degree.
|
| 114. |
The Maggid Mishneh interprets the Rambam's words as follows: If a stain that appears to be blood is discovered, a woman must consider herself impure. If, however, there is a question in the minds of the experts whether or not she is truly impure, they could verify the woman's status through the test the Rambam mentions. It is not, as the Ra'avad appeared to understand that the Rambam maintained, that a woman should not consider herself impure unless she verified that the stain was blood through the process described. This interpretation is quoted by Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:31). See also Hilchot Mitamei Mishkav UMoshav, ch. 4.
|
| 115. |
I.e., the sages to whom women would turn to determine whether a stain was blood or not.
|
| 116. |
See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Niddah 9:6).
|
| 117. |
The Ra'avad also differs with the Rambam concerning this point, maintaining that the seven cleansing agents are used to help purify a garment, not to determine whether a woman is pure. As explained in Hilchot Mitamei Mishkav UMoshav, loc. cit., the Rambam also appreciates the role of these cleansing agents in restoring the ritual impurity of a garment. If, however, the cleansing agents are not effective, it becomes obvious that the stain is not blood. Hence, not only the garment, but also the woman is considered as pure.
|
| 118. |
We have given the popular translation. In his edition of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Niddah 9:6), Rav Kappach identifies the Arabic term used by the Rambam as a cleaning agent made from the plant "althaea officinalis."
|
| 119. |
Again, we have used the common translation. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 2:1), the Rambam defines the term is referring to a blue stone that becomes dissolved in water easily and which is used to clean hair and garments.
|
| 120. |
Again, we have used the common term. Rav Kappach (loc. cit.) defines the Arabic term used by the Rambam as referring to a plant known as anabis setifera.
|
| 121. |
Rav Kappach (loc. cit.) defines the Arabic term used by the Rambam as referring to a plant known as saponaria officinalis.
|
| 122. |
I.e., the fact that the stain remains is not considered evidence that it is not blood.
Note Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:31) which states that because we are unsure of the identity of some of these seven cleansing agents, we do not employ this examination process in the present age.
|
| 123. |
Halachot 12-18.
|
| 124. |
Halachah 2.
|
| 125. |
The punishment given for violating a Rabbinic commandment.
|
| 126. |
If he engaged in relations with her inadvertantly.
|
Issurei Biah - Chapter Ten
Halacha 1
Every woman who gives birth is impure like a niddah, even if she did not suffer uterine bleeding.1 [This applies whether] a woman gives birth to a living child or one which is still born, and even is she miscarries [and discharges a fetus]. If [the fetus is] male, she remains impure [for seven days as is required after giving birth to] a male.2 If it is female, she remains impure [for fourteen days as is required after giving birth to] a female.
[The above applies,] provided the form [of the fetus] is complete. And the form of a fetus will never become complete in less than forty days. [This applies] to both a male and a female.
Halacha 2
If a woman miscarries within forty days, she is not impure because of birth.3[This applies] even on the fortieth day.
If a woman miscarried on the forty-first day after relations,4 there is a doubt whether she is considered as having miscarried.5 [Hence,] she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female and those applying to aniddah.6 If the human form could be barely detected in the fetus without it being clear and obvious, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female.7 This is called a developed8 embryo.
Halacha 3
What is meant by a developed embryo? At the beginning of the formation of the human body, it is the size of a lentil. His two eyes are like the two eyes9of a fly, [slightly] separate from each other. His two nostrils are like two eyes of a fly that are close to each other. Its mouth is a hairsbreadth open and its hands and feet are not distinct.
If its form becomes more defined than this, but it still cannot be distinguished as either male or female, we do not check it in water, but in oil. For the oil will burnish it. One should bring a wood chip with a smooth edge and use it to probe the genital area [of the fetus] from above downward. If there is an obstruction, it can be determined as male.10 If the genital area appears like a split barley corn, it is a female and need not be checked. A woman is not granted the leniency of "the blood of purity" for such underdeveloped embryos; the fetus must have hair on its head.
Halacha 4
Halacha 5
When a child is born through Cesarean section, the mother is not impure because of birth. She [need] not [observe] the days of impurity, [nor is she granted] days of purity. [This is derived from Leviticus 12:2]: "When a woman will conceive and give birth to a male...." [The laws of that passage apply] only when she gives birth from the place she conceives.
When a woman has difficulties in giving birth and [ultimately,] gives birth through Cesarean section, the blood from the birth throes which emerges from the womb is considered as the blood of zivah or the blood of niddah.15 The blood that emerges from the operation is itself impure.16 If no blood emerged from the womb, the woman is pure. Although the blood that emerges from the operation is impure, the woman does not become impure unless she suffers bleeding from her vagina.17
Halacha 6
When a fetus is cut up inside a woman's womb,18 whether it emerged according to the order of the limbs, e.g., first a foot emerged, then a calf, and then a thigh, or it emerged in an abnormal order, the woman is not considered impure until the majority of the body emerges.19 If its entire head comes out intact, it is as if the majority [of the body] emerged.20 If it was not cut up and it emerged in the ordinary manner, it is considered as having been born when its forehead emerges, even though it was cut up afterwards.21
Halacha 7
Halacha 8
[The following laws apply when] a woman miscarries and discharges something resembling an animal, beast, or fowl.25 If its face resembles that of a human,26it is considered as a birth even though the remainder of the body resembles an animal, beast, or fowl. If it is male, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male. If it is female, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a female. If it cannot be determined whether it is male or female, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female.
If its face does not resemble that of a human, it is not considered as a fetus and its mother is not impure due to birth.27 [This applies] even though the remainder of the body resembles that of a human, its hands and feet resemble those of a human, and it is male or female.
Halacha 9
What is meant by the human form of a face? That the forehead, eyebrows, eyes, cheeks, and the contour of the jaw share the human form. Even if the mouth, the ears, and the nose resemble that of an animal or a beast, [the fetus] is considered as a birth.
Halacha 10
When a woman miscarries and discharges something resembling a snake, the mother is impure due to birth.28 [The rationale is that] the form of its eye is round like that of a human. When a woman miscarries and discharges a human form that has wings of flesh, the mother is impure due to birth.
[The following rules apply when a fetus] is created with one eye and one thigh. If they are on the side, it is considered as half a human and the mother is impure due to birth. If they are in the center, the mother is pure, because this is another creature.
Halacha 11
[The following laws apply when a fetus] is created with its windpipe closed, its body lacking [form] from the navel downward, but instead is a mass of flesh, its skull being merely a mass of flesh, its face was amorphous and its features could not be distinguished, it has two backs and two backbones, the contours of the head of the fetus she discharged could not be distinguished, or the contours of its hand could not be distinguished, the mother is not impure due to birth.29
If, however, she miscarried and discharged a hand or a foot that was cut off, we operate under the assumption that it came from a complete fetus and it is included in the sum of the majority of its limbs.30
Halacha 12
There are times when from the remainder of the blood from which a fetus is formed will coagulate and form a mass that resembles the tongue of an ox. It is wound around a portion of the fetus and is called a sandal. A sandal will never be formed without a fetus. If a similar mass is formed without a fetus, it is not called a sandal.Most fetuses will not have a sandal with them.
There are times when a pregnant woman will receive a blow on her stomach and the fetus will be damaged and will become like this sandal. There are time when the [resulting sandal] will retain its facial features and there are times when the fetus will dry up and change its appearance and blood from elsewhere will coagulate upon it to the extent that its facial features cannot be recognized.
Accordingly, when a woman miscarries and discharges a male fetus together with a sandal, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female. For perhaps this sandal was a female fetus. [The Sages] ruled stringency and considered her impure due to a [female] fetus even though it did not possess any facial features. [The rationale is that] she is impure due to birth regardless because of the fetus [discharged] with it.
Halacha 13
The thick membrane that is like a goatskin in which the fetus is formed and which surrounds the fetus and the sandal - if there is a sandal with it - is called the placenta. When the time comes for the fetus to emerge, it tears it and emerges. At the beginning of its creation, it resembles a thread of the woof that is hollow like a trumpet and thick like the craw of a chicken. A placenta must be at least a handbreadth in size.31
Halacha 14
When [a woman] miscarries and discharges a placenta, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female. [The intent is] not that a placenta is a fetus, but there will not be a placenta without a fetus.
If she discharged a fetus and then discharged a placenta, we show concern about the placenta and it is considered as a fetus. We do not say: "This is the placenta of the fetus that miscarried." For we associate the discharge of the placenta only with a viable birth.
Accordingly, if the woman gave birth to a viable child and then discharged a placenta - even after 23 days32 - we assume that [the placenta] came as a result of the child. We do not suspect that there was a second fetus. [Instead, we assume] that the child tore through the placenta and emerged.
Halacha 15
[When a woman] discharges a placenta and afterwards bears a viable child, we suspect that the placenta came as the result of another fetus.33 We do not associate it with the child that was born afterwards, for it is not usual for the placenta to emerge before the fetus.34
If a portion of the placenta emerges on Sunday and a portion emerges on Monday, we count [her days of impurity] from the first day and we count her days of purity only from the second day as a stringency.35
Halacha 16
If [a woman] miscarries and discharges something resembling an animal, beast, or fowl and a placenta is connected to it, we do not suspect that there is [another] fetus.36 If they are not connected to [the placenta], we treat it with severity as if there were two fetuses. For we say that maybe the fetus that was carried in this placenta became effaced, and maybe the placenta of this fetus that appears like an animal or beast became effaced.37
Halacha 17
In all instances when we are concerned that [the emergence of] a placenta [indicates that a fetus emerged previously], a woman is not given days of purity.38
[The following laws apply to] every [woman] who miscarries and discharges something that does not resemble a human fetus39 or a fetus that is within 40 days of conception whose form has thus not been completed.40 If [the emergence of] the fetus was accompanied by bleeding, the woman is either aniddah or a zavah.41 If it emerged dry, without any bleeding, she is pure.42
Halacha 18
When a woman gives birth to twins - a boy and a girl - she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a female.43 If she gives birth to a tumtum44 or anandrogynus,45 she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female.46 If she gives birth to twins, one that is male and one that is a tumtumor an androgynus, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female.47 If one [of the twins] is female and one is a tumtum or anandrogynus, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a female.48For the gender of a tumtum and an androgynus is a matter of doubt: Maybe they are male or maybe female.49
Halacha 19
When a woman is known to be pregnant miscarries and it is not known what she miscarried, e.g., she passed a river and miscarried there, miscarried into a pit, or miscarried and a beast dragged away the fetus, we assume that she discharged a human fetus.50 Hence, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female.51 If, however, she was not known to be pregnant, miscarried, and did not know what she miscarried, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female and those applying to a niddah.52
Halacha 20
What are the laws that apply wherever we said: "She is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female"? She is forbidden to her husband for fourteen days like a woman who gives birth to a female. The status of the first seven is definite;53 that of the latter seven is doubtful.54
We do not grant her any "days of purity" beyond the fortieth day [from the birth] as is the law with regard to one who gives birth to a male.55 If she discovers menstrual bleeding between the fortieth and eightieth days from birth, it is not "pure blood."56 Instead, because of the doubt, we consider it as niddahbleeding, or zivah bleeding if it comes in the "days of zivah," as we explained.57
Similarly, if she discovers [uterine bleeding] on the eighty-first day alone, she is considered as a niddah because of the doubt.58 She must observe the seven days of niddah. [The rationale is that] perhaps she gave birth to a female and her "days of niddah" do not begin until after the conclusion [of the days of purity], as we explained.59
Halacha 21
What are the laws that apply wherever we said: "She is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female and those applying to a niddah"? She is forbidden to her husband for fourteen days like a woman who gives birth to a female. If she discovers blood on the eighty-first day, there is a doubt whether she is a niddah.60
Similarly, if she discovered uterine bleeding on the seventy-fourth day and the eighty-first day, there is a doubt whether she is a niddah.61 Similarly, if she discovered [uterine bleeding] on the forty-first day, there is a doubt whether she is a niddah even though she discovered bleeding on the thirty-fourth day. She is forbidden to her husband until the forty-eighth day, as is the law for a woman who gives birth to a male.62
We do not grant her any "pure days" at all, like a niddah. [The following rules apply with regard to] any bleeding that she discovers from the day on which she miscarried until the eightieth day beginning from seven days after she miscarried. If it is discovered in her "days of niddah, she is a niddah, because of the doubt. And if it is discovered in her "days of zivah," she is a zavah, because of the doubt. For throughout the days after birth, [the previous patterns concerning] the expected times of menstruation do not apply.63
Similarly, if she discovers uterine bleeding on the eighty-first day, her situation is still problematic and she must consider herself a niddah because of the doubt as explained [above]. [This applies] even if she discovers bleeding for only one day. When she establishes a pattern of menstruation after eighty days, her difficulties will cease and she will be either definitely a niddah or definitely azavah.64 Similarly, from the time she miscarried for seven days, she will be definitely impure [like] a niddah65 if she miscarried in the midst of her days ofniddah, as we explained.66
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
The Kessef Mishneh notes that in Chapter 5, Halachah 13, the Rambam rules that when a woman discharges a piece of flesh from the vagina, it must be accompanied by bleeding. For discharging that piece of flesh is not considered as giving birth. With regard to giving birth (or miscarrying), however, the Torah deems a woman is impure, whether or not the birth is accompanied by bleeding.
|
| 2. |
See Chapter 4, Halachah 2.
|
| 3. |
A miscarriage is usually accompanied by uterine bleeding. Thus the woman will become impure (as a niddah or as a zavah). However, the unique laws that apply to childbirth do not apply to her.
Even if she had conceived previously, until she reaches the fortieth day, the embryo is not given the halachic status of a fetus and none of the laws applying to childbirth apply.
|
| 4. |
I.e., the forty-first day after she immersed herself in the mikveh and engaged in relations that night.
|
| 5. |
I.e., it is possible that she conceived after engaging in relations that night, but we are not certain. Hence, her status is doubtful.
|
| 6. |
Since it is possible that the fetus was male, it is possible that it was female, and it is possible that it was not considered a fetus in the halachic sense at all, the woman must take all these possibilities into consideration. See Halachah 21 which defines the laws incumbent on a woman in this situation.
|
| 7. |
In this instance, it is clear that the embryo had developed into a fetus. Hence the laws that apply to ordinary uterine bleeding need not be considered. Nevertheless, since we are uncertain whether the fetus is male or female, the woman must take both of these factors into consideration. See Halachah 20 which describes the laws that a woman must follow in such a situation.
|
| 8. |
Rekem, the root of the term merukam, means "embroidered." Implied is that the form of the embryo is beginning to take shape.
|
| 9. |
Alternatively, as two drops of a fly's discharge.
|
| 10. |
For ultimately, the male organ will grow there.
|
| 11. |
For we assume that the mass was a dead fetus. The fact that it contains a bone indicates that it had developed sufficiently to acquire the features mentioned in the previous halachah. Obviously, certain factors had caused the fetus to be crushed and the features obliterated.
|
| 12. |
Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Niddah 3:3) which interprets the Hebrew as referring to "flesh that appears to be cut in the form of worms."
|
| 13. |
I.e., developed to the point it possesses the features mentioned in the previous halachah.
|
| 14. |
Moreover, if there is no apparent blood on the discharge, she is not impure as a niddah (the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, loc. cit.; see also Chapter 5, Halachah 13).
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 194:3) states that in the present age, we follow the approach of the Rashba who rules that we are not knowledgeable enough to make the fine distinctions necessary to define when an embryo is developed or not. Hence, a woman should always consider herself impure because of birth.
|
| 15. |
Depending on the day of her cycle on which the blood emerged.
Although the Torah considered the blood that emerges during birth pure (Chapter 6, Halachah 1), that apples when the woman gives birth in an ordinary manner, and not when she gives birth by Cesarean section (Rashi, Niddah 41a).
|
| 16. |
The blood itself is impure, because the uterus itself is impure and it conveys impurity on the blood. Therefore anyone who touches the blood is impure until the evening. The blood does not, however, convey impurity on the woman unless it comes into contact with her after it emerges from her body.
|
| 17. |
Niddah, loc. cit., derives this concept from the exegesis of Leviticus 20:18.
|
| 18. |
I.e., the woman was unable to birth the baby and the doctors saw that to save the woman's life, the fetus would have to be killed and taken out limb by limb.
|
| 19. |
I.e., the point brought out by this halachah is not whether the woman becomes impure, but when the impurity takes effect. The Siftei Cohen 194:9 states that the law stated by the Rambam applies according to Scriptural Law. According to Rabbinic decree, she is impure as soon as one limb emerges.
|
| 20. |
Although the Mishnah (Niddah 3:5) uses the phrase "the majority of the head," the Rambam maintains that the entire head must emerge for this law to apply. See the Maggid Mishneh andKessef Mishneh.
|
| 21. |
I.e., complications arouse and it was necessary to cut up the fetus to remove it from the womb entirely.
|
| 22. |
The Maggid Mishneh questions whether the same laws apply with regard to a foot. The Tur states that they do, while the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 194:11) quotes the Rambam's ruling verbatim.
|
| 23. |
Although Genesis 38:28 states: "And when she was giving birth, he stuck out a hand," Niddah 28a rules that this should not be interpreted as an implication that sticking out a hand is considered as giving birth. Instead, according to Scriptural Law, the woman does not become impure until the majority of the body of the fetus emerges.
|
| 24. |
I.e., as implied by the previous halachah.
|
| 25. |
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Niddah 3:2), the Rambam explains that although it is abnormal for a woman to discharge a fetus with such an appearance, there are exceptional situations from time to time. These and the forms mentioned in the following halachot are definite possibilities.
|
| 26. |
As defined in the following halachah.
|
| 27. |
The Maggid Mishneh states that this law also applies in the present era, as indicated by Chapter 11, Halachah 12. In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro differs, citing the Ra'avad and the Ramban and explaining that the Rabbis of the present era did not feel that they were expert enough to determine if the face of a fetus resembled that of a man or not. Hence they ruled that woman is impure. In his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 194:3), he follows this approach.
Note also Halachah 17 which states that if the discharge of such a fetus is accompanied by bleeding, the woman is impure even if the fetus does not resemble a human.
|
| 28. |
The Ra'avad questions the Rambam's ruling, noting that in the previous two halachot, he stated that for a fetus to be considered as having a human form, it must have the majority of a human facial form intact, not merely the eyes. The Kessef Mishneh supports the Rambam's ruling, explaining that the eye of a snake resembles that of a human much more closely than that of other animals. Hence, there is room for the Rambam's ruling.
|
| 29. |
This ruling is based on Niddah23b which states that any fetus that is created in a manner that is not fit for its soul to be created (i.e., it is not viable) does not cause the mother to be impure due to birth. Since a fetus with these defects would not live, the mother is not impure. See the Kessef Mishneh which questions the details of certain of the examples cited by the Rambam.
|
| 30. |
As stated in Halachah 6, when the majority of the limbs of a fetus emerge, the mother is considered as impure due to birth. The present halachah is stating that if previously many of the limbs of a fetus emerged and then the mother discharged this cut off hand or foot, it is not considered as part of a separate fetus, but instead, part of the fetus that already emerged. Hence, if together with the limbs that previously emerged, it equals the majority of the fetus, the woman is impure (Maggid Mishneh).
From Rabbi Akiva Eiger's interpretation of Niddah 28a, the source for this halachah, the following explanation can be given. When a woman discharges a cut off hand or foot, even if we have not seen the remainder of the fetus, we assume that she discharged them already. Hence, she is considered impure. We do not suspect that maybe the fetus she discharged was not viable.
|
| 31. |
Implied is a leniency. If a woman discharges something resembling a placenta, but which is smaller than a handbreadth, she is not impure due to birth. The Maggid Mishneh quotes Ramban and Rashba who rule that in the present age, we are stringent and rule her impure even if it is smaller than a handbreadth lest an error be made.
|
| 32. |
Based on Niddah 27a, it appears that this is the maximum number of days granted between a birth and the emergence of the placenta.
In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro notes that there are authorities who maintain that the 23 days include the day of the birth, while the Rambam maintains that the day of the birth is not included. In his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 194:3), he quotes the Rambam's ruling.
|
| 33. |
I.e., the woman had been carrying two fetuses. The emergence of the fetus indicates that she had miscarried and discharged one previously.
|
| 34. |
Since the fetus is carried within the placenta, in a viable birth, the placenta will never emerge before the fetus carried within it.
|
| 35. |
I.e., as soon as the first portion of the placenta emerges, the woman becomes impure. Nevertheless, her days of purity do not begin until the appropriate time (7 or 14 days) passes after the second day. And they end after 40 or 80 days from the first day, not from the second day.
|
| 36. |
As stated in Halachah 8, the discharge of these type of creatures does not render the woman impure. When she discharges a placenta that is connected to them, we assume that they were carried within the placenta. Hence, just as they do not render the woman impure, the placenta also does not.
Although the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 194:7) cites this law without qualification, the Siftei Cohen 194:7 states that just as we are stringent in the present era with regard to the law stated in Halachah 8, we are stringent with regard to this law and rule that the woman is impure.
|
| 37. |
I.e., we are concerned with the possibility that the woman was carrying two fetuses. Although only one fetus - the animal-formed one - and one placenta emerged, we suppose that originally there was another fetus and another placenta and they were effaced. We assume that the fetus that was effaced was ordinary and hence, the woman is considered as impure.
|
| 38. |
I.e., the forty or eighty day period when uterine bleeding does not render a woman impure is not granted in this situation, for we suspect that perhaps the woman never in fact gave birth.
|
| 39. |
As mentioned in Halachah 8.
|
| 40. |
As mentioned in Halachah 2.
|
| 41. |
The ruling depends on the day of her personal cycle on which the woman miscarries: Is it one of the days of niddah or one of the days of zivah?
|
| 42. |
This ruling depends on our Sages' statement (Niddah 21a) that it is possible for the uterus to open without the woman experiencing any bleeding.
This statement is the subject of a difference of opinion in the Talmud and there are some Rishonimwho follow the other position and therefore rule that the woman is impure. The Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 194:2) follows this view and rules that even if the woman does not notice any bleeding, she must assume that bleeding did in fact take place.
|
| 43. |
I.e., she must observe 14 days of impurity and then is given 66 days of purity. We do not restrict her to 26 days because of the birth of the boy.
|
| 44. |
A person whose genital area is covered by a mass of flesh and thus it is impossible to determine his or her gender.
|
| 45. |
A person who has both male and female sexual organs. There is an unresolved halachic question with regard to the classification of such a person's gender.
|
| 46. |
Since there is a doubt concerning the issue, the woman must observe the stringencies resulting from either option.
|
| 47. |
Since it is possible that the tumtum or the androgynus is - or is considered as - a female, the woman must also take the laws governing the birth of a female into consideration.
|
| 48. |
For even if the tumtum or androgynus was considered as a male, there would be no need for any further severity as stated at the beginning of the halachah.
|
| 49. |
In particular, there is a difference between the two. With regard to a tumtum, the child has a specific gender, we simply are not able to identify it. With regard to an androgynus, by contrast, the doubt involves the child's halachic status.
|
| 50. |
And not one of the forms mentioned in Halachah 8.
|
| 51. |
Because we do not know the gender of the fetus, she must take both possibilities into consideration.
|
| 52. |
For it is possible that she was less than 40 days pregnant, in which instance the fetus is not considered as being born, and she is governed by the laws applying to a niddah, as stated in Halachah 2.
|
| 53. |
For even if the fetus was male, she would be impure for this time.
|
| 54. |
For we do not know that the fetus was female.
|
| 55. |
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Niddah 3:3), the Rambam explains the rationale for this ruling. There is a question of Scriptural Law involved. Whenever doubt arises in such a situation, we follow the more stringent approach.
|
| 56. |
As would be the ruling was she to have given birth to a female. As explained in Chapter 11, Halachah 6, today
|
| 57. |
In Chapter 7, Halachah 12, the Rambam writes that "that any bleeding that a woman discovers after the completion of the days associated with childbirth marks the beginning of her days ofniddah." Accordingly, the first time a woman in such a situation discovers uterine bleeding between the fortieth and eightieth day after birth, there is a doubt whether she is a niddah. If she discovers bleeding a second time, the question of whether the doubt involves the niddah or zivahstate depends on the day when the bleeding is discovered.
|
| 58. |
I.e., she is not merely a minor zavah.
Apparently, the Rambam's intent is speaking about a woman who discovered uterine bleeding between the fortieth and eightieth day after birth and then a second time on the eighty-first day and according to the niddah-zivah cycle, the eighty-first day is a day of zivah. (For example, she discovered uterine bleeding previous on the seventieth day.). In that instance, there is a doubt whether she is considered a niddah, for if the fetus was female, this would be considered the beginning of the niddah cycle, or a zavah, for if the fetus was male, her cycle would have begun earlier. See the following halachah and notes.
According to this interpretation, however, the word "alone" which the Rambam adds appears to be in error.
|
| 59. |
Chapter 7, Halachah 12.
|
| 60. |
The Rambam is speaking about a situation when a woman discovers uterine bleeding for the first time after a miscarriage. Ordinarily, her niddah cycle would start at that time. Nevertheless, since the possibility exists that her miscarriage did not involve a fetus, she must continue her previous reckoning of the "days of niddah" and the "days of zivah."
|
| 61. |
If the fetus was male, the bleeding on the seventy-fourth day would have been considered the beginning of her "days of niddah" and the eighty-first day, the beginning of her "days of zivah." Thus she would be only a minor zavah. Nevertheless, there is also a possibility that the fetus was female. In such an instance, any bleeding before the eighty-first day is insignificant and the eighty-first day begins the niddah cycle. Hence we rule more stringently and consider her a niddah, because of the doubt.
|
| 62. |
This would be the law were we certain that she had miscarried a male fetus. Her status is doubtful, for it is possible that her miscarriage is not considered a birth at all. In that instance, the bleeding would be either niddah or zivah bleeding, depending on her cycle.
|
| 63. |
I.e., were we to know for certain that she had given birth, there would be no concept of days ofniddah and days of zivah. Hence, in the present situation, although the woman must observe the stringencies of niddah and zivah, it is only because of the doubt.
|
| 64. |
Depending on the day of her cycle on which the bleeding is discovered.
|
| 65. |
Either because of the miscarriage or because the bleeding is considered as blood of niddah. Either way, she is definitely impure for seven days.
|
| 66. |
In Halachah 20.
|
Issurei Biah - Chapter Eleven
Halacha 1
All of what was said with regard to [the laws of] niddah, zivah, and childbirth applies with regard to Scriptural Law. [The Jews] would follow these laws when the Supreme Sanhedrin held sessions and it included great sages who were familiar with [the types of] blood. If a doubt arose [for the lesser judges] with regard to the discovery of blood or the days of niddah and zivah, they could ascend to the Supreme Sanhedrin and ask them. As the Torah promised concerning them [Deuteronomy 17:8]: "If a matter of judgment is unknown to you concerning one type of blood or another, or one judgment and anotherו [you shallו ascend to the place that Godו shall choose]."1
["Concerning one type of blood or another"] means "between the blood ofniddah and the blood of zivah. In that era, Jewish women would be careful concerning this matter and would pay attention to their monthly patterns and would always count the "days of niddah" and the "days of zivah."
Halacha 2
It is very difficult to keep track of the counting of the dates. Many times doubts will arise. For even if a woman discovered bleeding on the day she was born, she must begin counting the "days of niddah" and the "days of zivah," as we explained.2 Therefore a girl cannot become impure as a zavah until she is ten days old. For if she discovered bleeding on the day that she was born, she would be a niddah for seven days. [Then to be a zavah, she would have to discover bleeding] on the three days directly following the "days of niddah." Thus [she would be] ten days [old].
Thus we learned that she begins counting the "days of niddah" and the "days ofzivah" from the first time she discovers uterine bleeding throughout her entire life. [This applies] even if [the first time] she discovers bleeding is when she is a minor.
Halacha 3
During the era of the Sages of the Gemara, many doubts arose with regard to the appearance of blood3 and the reckoning of the pattern of menstruation. For it was not within the potential of all women to calculate the "days of niddah" and the "days of zivah." Therefore our Sages ruled stringently concerning this matter and decreed that a woman should consider all her days as "days ofzivah" and consider any bleeding that she discovers as zivah bleeding because of the doubt.4
Halacha 4
In addition, Jewish women accepted a further stringency upon themselves. They accepted the custom that wherever Jews live, whenever a Jewish woman discovers [uterine] bleeding, even if she does not discover more than a drop the size of a mustard seed and the bleeding ceases immediately, she must count seven "spotless" days.5 [This stringency applies] even if she discovered the bleeding during her "days of niddah."6
Whether the bleeding continued for one day, two days, an entire seven days, or longer, when the bleeding ceases, she counts seven "spotless" days as is required of a major zavah and immerses on the night of the eighth day despite the fact that there is a doubt whether she is a zavah.7 Or she may immerse during the day on the eighth day in a pressing situation, as explained.8Afterwards, she is permitted to her husband.
Halacha 5
Similarly, every women who gives birth in the present age is considered as one who gives birth while a zavah and she must count seven "spotless" days, as we explained.9
It is the commonly accepted custom in Babylon, in "the cherished land,"10Spain, and the West,11 that if a woman discovers bleeding in the days after childbirth,12 she must count seven "spotless" days after the bleeding stopped. [This applies] even if she first counted seven "spotless" days and immersed [after giving birth].
We do not grant her any pure days at all. Instead, whenever a woman discovers bleeding whether it is bleeding associated with childbirth or "pure blood," it is all impure. She must count seven "spotless" days after the bleeding ceases.
Halacha 6
This law was instituted in the era of the Geonim. They decreed that there be no concept of "pure" blood. For the stringency that women accepted upon themselves in the era of the Sages of the Talmud applies only to a woman who discovers bleeding that would render them impure. [In this instance, they accepted the custom of] waiting seven days. Blood which she discovers during her "days of purity" after counting [seven "spotless" days], by contrast, is not a matter of concern [according to Scriptural Law]. For the days of purity are not subject [to concern] with regard to niddah or zivah as we explained.13
Halacha 7
We have heard that in France,14 even today, relations are allowed [despite] "pure" bleeding as was the law in the Talmudic era after [the woman] counts [seven "spotless" days] and immerses herself because of the impurity resulting from giving birth in the zivah state. This matter is dependent on local custom.15
Halacha 8
Similarly, [stringencies were adopted] with regard to the laws of hymeneal bleeding in the present age. Even if a minor is below the age when she could be expected to menstruate and never discovered uterine bleeding, [her husband] must separate after engaging in the relations which are a mitzvah.16
Whenever she discovers hymeneal bleeding,17 she is impure. When the bleeding ceases, she must count seven "spotless" days [before immersing herself].
Halacha 9
Moreover, whenever a girl is asked to marry and consents, she must count seven "spotless" days after she consents to marry.18 Afterwards, [she immerses and] becomes permitted to her husband.19 [The rationale is that] she might have desired a man and released a drop [of blood] without being aware of it. Whether she is a mature woman or a minor, she must wait seven "spotless" days after she consents to marry. Afterwards, she immerses and may engage in relations.
Halacha 10
All of these matters are additional stringencies that have been practiced by Jewish women from the era of the Sages of the Talmud [onward]. One should never deviate from it. Therefore every women who consents when asked to marry should not marry until she counts [these days] and immerses herself. If she marries a Torah scholar, she may marry immediately and then count after marriage and immerse. [The rationale is that] a Torah scholar will know that she is forbidden and observe [the restriction]. He will not approach her until she immerses.20
Halacha 11
The laws applying to [the discovery of] stains in the present era [follow the principles] we explained.21 There is no innovation in this regard, not are there any [new] customs. Instead, any stain which we ruled was pure, is considered pure. And when [a woman discovers] any of the stains which we ruled were impure - [even] of the stain was not of the size that would generate concern forzivut - she must count seven ["spotless"] days, after the day of the discovery of the stain. For the discovery of a stain is not identical with the discovery of bleeding.22
Halacha 12
All the statements we made concerning a woman who miscarried [and discharged a creature that does not resemble a human fetus]23 and [hence] is pure also apply in the present age.24
Similarly, when a woman discovers a white or green blood-like secretion25or if she discharges a red mass of flesh that is not accompanied by bleeding,26she is pure even in the present age. For the stringency involves only one who discovers impure bleeding and the above are not considered as impure bleeding.
Halacha 13
Halacha 14
In certain places, the practice is that a woman must consider herself a niddahfor seven days even though her bleeding lasted only one day. [Then] after these seven, she must count seven "spotless" days. This is not a [proper] custom.30 Instead, it is an error on the part of the one who ruled in this manner and is not worthy of being given any consideration.31 Instead, [the law is that if a woman experiences] one day of menstrual bleeding, she should count seven "spotless" days afterwards and immerse on the night [following] the eighth day,32 which is the second day after her ["days of] niddah." She is [then] permitted to her husband.
Halacha 15
Similarly, in certain places, the practice is - and support for this is found in the responsa of some of the Geonim - for a woman who gives birth to a male not to engage in relations until the conclusion of forty days and for one who gives birth to a female [to refrain] until after eighty days33 even though they discovered bleeding only during the [first] seven days. This is not a [proper] custom. Instead, these responsa are in error and indeed [the observance of this practice] in these places is of a heretical nature.34 They learned this interpretation from the Sadducees.35 It is a mitzvah to compel [these people] to remove [this improper custom] from their hearts and to return them to [the observance of] the words of the Sages who require only the counting of seven "spotless" days as explained.
Halacha 16
A woman does not ascend from her state of ritual impurity and cease being considered as an ervah until she immerses herself in a mikveh that is halachicly acceptable while there are no substances intervening between her flesh and the water.36 In Hilchot Mikveot, we will explain what defines a mikveh as acceptable and what disqualifies it, the manner in which one should immerse, and the laws concerning intervening substances.
If, by contrast, she washes in a bath - even if all the water in the world passes over her - her state is the same after washing as before washing [and a man who engages in relations with her is liable] for kereit. For there is no way of ascending from a state of ritual impurity to one of purity except through immersing in the waters of a mikveh, a spring, or a sea which is like a spring, as will be explained in Hilchot Mikveot.
Halacha 17
In the present age, although the seven "spotless" days [are observed only because of] doubt,37 if a woman immerses herself during them, it is as if she did not immerse herself.38 If she immerses herself on the seventh day,39the immersion is valid even though it is forbidden to do so at the outset, lest one engage in relations on the seventh day after the immersion.40 [The rationale is that] she immersed in the appropriate time even were she to have definitely been a zavah.41
Halacha 18
It is forbidden to a person to embrace his wife during these seven "spotless" days. [This applies] even if she is clothed and he is clothed.42 He should not draw close to her, nor touch her, not even with his pinky. He may not eat together with her from the same plate.43 The general principle is he must conduct himself with her during the days she is counting as he does in her "days of niddah." For [relations with her] are still punishable by kereit until she immerses herself, as we explained.44
Halacha 19
A niddah may perform any task which a wife would perform for her husband except washing his face, hands, and feet, pouring him a drink, and spreading out his bed in his presence.45 [These were forbidden as] decrees, lest they come to sin.46
For this reason, she should not eat with him from the same plate, nor should he touch her flesh, lest this lead to sin. Similarly, she should not perform these three tasks for him during her seven "spotless" days. It is permitted for a woman to adorn herself during her "days of niddah," so that she does not become unattractive to her husband.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
I.e., to the Temple in Jerusalem. See Hilchot Mamrim, chs. 1 and 4, which discuss the authority of the Supreme Sanhedrin and how it served as the final governing body for Jewish Law.
|
| 2. |
Chapter 4, Halachah 4.
|
| 3. |
As stated in Chapter 5, Halachah 7-12, in the Talmudic era, our Sages felt capable of distinguishing between different shades of red and were able to identify some shades as pure and others as impure. In the Rambam's era and certainly in later ages, the Rabbis felt incapable of making such distinctions.
|
| 4. |
The Maggid Mishneh relates that the Rambam did not clarify his statements concerning this Rabbinic ordinance because it was only a temporary measure. It does not reflect Scriptural Law, nor does it reflect Rabbinic Law as practice, because it was later supplanted by the stringency Jewish women accepted upon themselves as stated in the following halachah.
To explain: Niddah 66a relates that Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi ordained that any woman who discovers uterine bleeding should wait six "spotless" days before immersing herself . If, however, she discovers bleeding for three consecutive days, she must wait seven "spotless" days. Thus if the bleeding had come in her days of niddah, she would have waited the seven days required by Scriptural Law (the day she discovered the bleeding and the six "spotless" days). And if the bleeding had come in her days of zivah, all that is required by Scriptural Law is for her to wait one spotless day. This is the ordinance to which the Rambam referred.
|
| 5. |
The stringency implied by this practice is that even if bleeding is sighted for only one day, the woman counts seven "spotless" days.
|
| 6. |
According to Scriptural Law, there is no need for her to count seven "spotless" days in such a situation. Instead, she may immerse after the seventh day regardless. Nevertheless, women accepted this stringency upon themselves.
|
| 7. |
I.e., according to Scriptural Law, a zavah may immerse herself during the day on the seventh day. She need not wait until evening. Nevertheless, since a niddah is required to wait until the evening to immerse herself, women standardized their conduct and ordained that all immersion be performed at night unless there are extenuating circumstances. Note, however, Halachah 17.
|
| 8. |
Chapter 4, Halachah 8.
|
| 9. |
Chapter 7, Halachah 5.
According to Scriptural Law, if a women is not a zavah when she gives birth, she may immerse herself after seven or fourteen days, even if she was bleeding the entire time. In the Talmudic era, however, it became customary to observe the stringency described by the Rambam. The rationale is that since every discovery of bleeding renders her a zavah, she is always considered as having given birth in that state (Maggid Mishneh).
When quoting this law, Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 194:1) emphasizes that this practice does not supplant Scriptural Law. Thus if a woman counts seven "spotless" days directly after giving birth to a girl, she must still wait the fourteen days required by the Torah before immersing.
|
| 10. |
Eretz Yisrael.
|
| 11. |
Morocco and North Africa.
|
| 12. |
The Hebrew term used by the Rambam has a specific meaning, the days between the seventh and fortieth days after a woman gives birth to a male or the days between the fourteenth and eightieth days after she gives birth to a female.
|
| 13. |
Chapter 7, Halachah 7.
|
| 14. |
Whose halachic tradition differed from that of the Sephardic community in many particulars.
|
| 15. |
The Rambam is referring to one of the principles mentioned in his introduction to the Mishneh Torah: Laws ordained by the Sages of the Talmud must be accepted universally throughout the Jewish community. Laws ordained by later authorities are subject to the halachic review of the local authorities.
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 194:1) writes that it has already become universal Jewish practice to forbid relations when a woman discovers bleeding during her days of purity.
|
| 16. |
I.e., the first time the couple engage in relations. As explained in Chapter 5, Halachot 18-25, according to Scriptural Law, hymeneal bleeding does not represent any difficulty for it is not at all related to niddah or zivah. Hence, according to Talmudic Law, when the wife is a minor, the couple may engage in relations until the hymeneal bleeding ceases. Even a girl who gets married at the age of twelve is granted certain leniency. The later Rabbis, however, required all couples to separate because of hymeneal bleeding.
The Maggid Mishneh emphasizes that the groom may complete relations and withdraw while erect even if he knows that bleeding has commenced. Although our Rabbis ordained this stringency, they did not apply it to the first time the couple engaged in relations.
He also states that even if no bleeding is discovered, if the bride was a virgin, we assume that there was a slight amount of blood that was not noticed and rule that she is impure. These laws are quoted by Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 193:1).
|
| 17. |
I.e., if all the hymeneal blood was not released during the first time the couple engaged in relations and bleeding was discovered after subsequent relations.
|
| 18. |
The day after she consents is the first of these seven days. If she becomes engaged and there is a considerable time between the engagement and the marriage, the days are counted from the time wedding preparations are made in earnest (Maggid Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah192:1-2).
|
| 19. |
This stringency applies to a young girl who never menstruated or an older girl who already experienced seven "spotless" days after her last menstruation.
|
| 20. |
The Kessef Mishneh and the Maggid Mishneh maintain that the Rambam would agree that not only relations, but also remaining alone with one's wife is forbidden in this situation. The Ra'avad and the Tur (Yoreh De'ah 192) infer that the Rambam is not paying heed to this prohibition. Hence, they differ with his ruling.
|
| 21. |
In Chapter 9.
|
| 22. |
The Rambam is saying that for a stain a woman is not required to make a hefsek taharah or count seven days. Instead, it is sufficient for her to count six "spotless" days as described in Halachah 3 and notes. For as he explains, the discovery of a stain is not the same as the discovery of bleeding.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and maintains that the laws applying to the discovery of bleeding also apply with regard to the discovery of a stain. The Maggid Mishneh offers theoretical support for the Rambam's approach, but states that since other Rishonim follow the Ra'avad's view, we should be stringent and accept it. This opinion is followed by Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 188:3, 190:1).
|
| 23. |
See Chapter 5, Halachah 15; Chapter 10, Halachah 8.
|
| 24. |
The Rambam maintains that the Rabbis did not issue a decree concerning such a situation, nor was this included in the stringency which Jewish women accepted upon themselves. The Ra'avad differs, explaining that in the present era, we are not knowledgeable concerning the distinctions between the forms which our Sages made. Hence, because of the doubt, we rule that a woman is impure after any miscarriage.
In this instance as well, the Ra'avad's view is accepted by the Ramban and the Rashba and is cited as halachah by Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 194:3).
|
| 25. |
See Chapter 5, Halachah 6. This ruling is accepted by all authorities.
|
| 26. |
See Chapter 5, Halachah 13. This ruling is also disputed by the Ra'avad and other Rishonim. For they maintain that it is impossible for the uterus to open without there being any bleeding. This view is accepted by Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 194:2).
|
| 27. |
See Chapter 4, Halachah 20.
|
| 28. |
See Chapter 5, Halachah 17. Other Rabbis also do not require stringency with regard to these matters in the present age.
|
| 29. |
As stated in Halachah 3, the later Rabbis felt incapable of distinguishing between different shades of red as the Sages of the Talmud were capable of doing.
|
| 30. |
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 196:11) also mentions the practice cited by the Rambam. He also negates it saying: "There is not reason for the practiceו. A person who is lenient earns a reward and hastens his [involvement in] the mitzvah."
|
| 31. |
Although the halachic authorities are unanimous in their support of the Rambam's ruling. The custom he quotes has a Rabbinic source in Midrash Tanchuma, Parshat Metzora, sec. 7.
|
| 32. |
The Rama (loc. cit.) mentions that the Ashkenazic custom is not to begin counting seven until thje fifth day after the woman discovered menstrual bleeding.
|
| 33. |
By this practice, they distort the meaning of Leviticus, ch. 12, as interpreted in Chapter 4, Halachah 5.
|
| 34. |
For as indicated by the association with the Sadducees, they undermine the authority of the Oral Law.
|
| 35. |
A deviant sect which tried to sway our people from Jewish practice by denying the authority of the Oral Law.
|
| 36. |
For an immersion can be disqualified when there are substances intervening between one's flesh and the waters of a mikveh. See Hilchot Mikveot 1:7 and the laws that follow.
|
| 37. |
As explained in Halachot 3 and 4 and notes.
|
| 38. |
Since a niddah or a zavah does not change her state if she immerses herself before the required time, we apply this same ruling to a woman in the present age.
|
| 39. |
I.e., after sunrise.
|
| 40. |
We fear that she may discover uterine bleeding after engaging in relations, but before nightfall, and thus nullify the entire seven "spotless" days. In that instance, her immersion is of no consequence.
|
| 41. |
For according to Scriptural Law, a zavah may immerse at this time, as stated in Chapter 6, Halachah 11. And if the woman is a niddah, she may certainly immerse according to Scriptural Law, for the time of her impurity has passed.
|
| 42. |
This and the following restrictions were imposed lest they lead to relations, as the Rambam states in the following halachah.
|
| 43. |
The Ra'avad states: "Our custom is that [they may not eat] even on the same table." TheShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 195:3) quotes the Ra'avad's ruling, but offers the following leniency. One may place an object between the two to make a distinction.
|
| 44. |
In Halachah 16.
|
| 45. |
Implied is that if he is not present, she may make his bed. Outside his presence, making his bed is a household task. In his presence, it could suggest an invitation for intimacy. See Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah, ch. 195) and commentaries for a further delineation of stringencies that must be observed until a woman purifies herself.
|
| 46. |
I.e., relations.
|
• Shabbat,Adar 23, 5775 · 03/14/2015
"Today's Day"
Sunday 23 Adar I 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Vayakheil, first parsha with Rashi.
Tehillim: 108-112.
Tanya: Ch. 32. Acting upon (p. 145)...great and small. (p. 145).
Rabbis and scholars are called the "eyes of the community" and "heads of the thousands of Israel," and when the head is healthy, the body is then also healthy.
Torah lessons: Chumash: Sh'mini, Shlishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 108-112.
Tanya: To be sure (p. 181)...and expansion. (p. 183).
My father once said to a Rav,1 who labored in avoda and was an especially diligent scholar: A Rav must remember at all times and at every moment that he always stands on the threshold between being one of those who bring merit to the public and, G-d forbid, one of those who cause the public to sin - the threshold between the loftiest of heights and the most abysmal depth. All issues must touch him at the innermost core of his soul, literally, because his very soul is at stake.
FOOTNOTES
1. "Senior Rabbi"; a practising Halachic (Torah-law) authority in a congregation, city. etc.
Daily Thought:
Real Rich
The truly rich person is one whose very being is to give.
You only truly own that which you are capable of giving away.[Maamar Tefillah L’Mosheh 5769.]
____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment