Torah Reading
Tazria-Metzora (Leviticus 12:1 Adonai said to Moshe, 2 “Tell the people of Isra’el: ‘If a woman conceives and gives birth to a boy, she will be unclean for seven days with the same uncleanness as in niddah, when she is having her menstrual period. 3 On the eighth day, the baby’s foreskin is to be circumcised. 4 She is to wait an additional thirty-three days to be purified from her blood; she is not to touch any holy thing or come into the sanctuary until the time of her purification is over. 5 But if she gives birth to a girl, she will be unclean for two weeks, as in her niddah; and she is to wait another sixty-six days to be purified from her blood.
Today's Laws & Customs:
6 “‘When the days of her purification are over, whether for a son or for a daughter, she is to bring a lamb in its first year for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or dove for a sin offering to the entrance of the tent of meeting, to the cohen. 7 He will offer it before Adonai and make atonement for her; thus she will be purified from her discharge of blood. Such is the law for a woman who gives birth, whether to a boy or to a girl. 8 If she can’t afford a lamb, she is to take two doves or two young pigeons, the one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering; the cohen will make atonement for her, and she will be clean.’”
13:1 Adonai said to Moshe and Aharon, 2 “If someone develops on his skin a swelling, scab or bright spot which could develop into the disease tzara‘at, he is to be brought to Aharon the cohen or to one of his sons who are cohanim. 3 The cohen is to examine the sore on his skin; if the hair in the sore has turned white, and the sore appears to go deep into the skin, it is tzara‘at, and after examining him the cohen is to declare him unclean. 4 If the bright spot on his skin is white, but it does not appear to go deep into the skin, and its hair has not turned white, then the cohen is to isolate him for seven days. 5 On the seventh day the cohen is to examine him again, and if the sore appears the same as before and has not spread on the skin, then the cohen is to isolate him for seven more days. (LY: ii) 6 On the seventh day the cohen is to examine him again, and if the sore has faded and hasn’t spread on the skin, then the cohen is to declare him clean — it is only a scab, so he is to wash his clothes and be clean. 7 But if the scab spreads further on the skin after he has been examined by the cohen and declared clean, he is to let himself be examined yet again by the cohen. 8 The cohen will examine him, and if he sees that the scab has spread on his skin, then the cohen will declare him unclean; it is tzara‘at.
9 “If a person has tzara‘at, he is to be brought to the cohen. 10 The cohen is to examine him, and if he sees that there is a white swelling in the skin which has turned the hair white and inflamed flesh in the swelling, 11 then it is chronic tzara‘at on his skin, and the cohen is to declare him unclean; he is not to isolate him, because it is already clear that he is unclean. 12 If the tzara‘at breaks out all over the skin, so that, as far as the cohen can see, the person with tzara‘at has sores everywhere on his body, from his head to his feet; 13 then the cohen is to examine him, and if he sees that the tzara‘at has covered his entire body, he is to pronounce the person with the sores clean — it has all turned white, and he is clean. 14 But if one day inflamed flesh appears on him, he will be unclean. 15 The cohen will examine the inflamed flesh and declare him unclean; the inflamed flesh is unclean; it is tzara‘at. 16 However, if the inflamed flesh again turns white, he is to come to the cohen. 17 The cohen will examine him, and if he sees that the sores have turned white, then the cohen is to declare clean the person with the sores; he is clean.
(LY: iii) 18 “If a person has on his skin a boil that heals 19 in such a way that in place of the boil there is a white swelling or a reddish-white bright spot, it is to be shown to the cohen. 20 The cohen is to examine it; if he sees that it appears to be more than skin-deep, and its hair has turned white, then the cohen is to pronounce him unclean — the disease of tzara‘at has broken out in the boil. 21 But if the cohen looks at it and doesn’t see any white hairs in it, and it isn’t more than skin-deep but appears faded, the cohen is to isolate him for seven days. 22 If it spreads on the skin, the cohen is to declare him unclean; it is the disease. 23 But if the bright spot stays where it was and has not spread, it is the scar of the boil; and the cohen is to declare him clean.
(RY: ii, LY: iv) 24 “Or if someone has on his skin a burn caused by fire; and the inflamed flesh where it was burned has become a bright spot, reddish-white or white, 25 then the cohen is to examine it; and if he sees that the hair in the bright spot has turned white and that it appears to be deeper than the skin around it, it is tzara‘at; it has broken out in the burn, and the cohen is to declare him unclean; it is a sore from tzara‘at. 26 But if the cohen examines it and sees no white hair in the bright spot, and it is no lower than the skin around it but looks faded, then the cohen is to isolate him for seven days. 27 On the seventh day the cohen is to examine him; if it has spread on the skin, then the cohen is to declare him unclean; it is a sore from tzara‘at. 28 But if the bright spot stays where it was and has not spread on the skin but appears faded, it is a swelling due to the burn; and the cohen is to declare him clean; because it is only a scar from the burn.
(LY: v) 29 “If a man or woman has a sore on the head or a man in his beard, 30 then the cohen is to examine the sore; if he sees that it appears to be deeper than the skin around it, with yellow, thin hair in it, then the cohen is to declare him unclean; it is a crusted area, a tzara‘at of the head or beard. 31 If the cohen examines the diseased crusted area and sees that it appears not to be deeper than the skin around it, and without any black hair in it, then the cohen is to isolate for seven days the person with the diseased crusted area. 32 On the seventh day the cohen is to examine the sore, and if he sees that the crusted area hasn’t spread, that it has no yellow hair in it, and that the crusted area is not deeper than the skin around it; 33 then the person is to be shaved, except for the crusted area itself, and the cohen is to isolate him for seven more days. 34 On the seventh day the cohen is to examine the crusted area; and if he sees that the crusted area has not spread on the skin and does not appear to be deeper than the skin around it, then the cohen is to declare him clean; he is to wash his clothes and be clean. 35 But if the crusted area spreads after his purification, 36 then the cohen is to examine him; and if he sees that the crusted area has spread on the skin, the cohen is not to look for yellow hair; he is unclean. 37 But if the crusted area’s appearance doesn’t change, and black hair grows up in it, then the crusted area is healed; he is clean; and the cohen is to declare him clean.
(RY: iii, LY: vi) 38 “If a man or woman has bright spots on his skin, bright white spots; 39 then the cohen is to examine them. If he sees that the bright spots on the skin are dull white, it is only a rash that has broken out on the skin; he is clean.
40 “If a man’s hair has fallen from his scalp, he is bald; but he is clean. 41 If his hair has fallen off the front part of his head, he is forehead-bald; but he is clean. 42 But if on the bald scalp or forehead there is a reddish-white sore, it is tzara‘at breaking out on his bald scalp or forehead. 43 Then the cohen is to examine him; if he sees that there is a reddish-white swelling on his bald scalp or forehead, appearing like tzara‘at on the rest of the body, 44 he is a person with tzara‘at; he is unclean; the cohen must declare him unclean; the sore is on his head.
45 “Everyone who has tzara‘at sores is to wear torn clothes and unbound hair, cover his upper lip and cry, ‘Unclean! Unclean!’ 46 As long as he has sores, he will be unclean; since he is unclean, he must live in isolation; he must live outside the camp.
47 “When tzara‘at infects an article of clothing, whether it be a woolen or a linen garment, 48 on the threads or the woven-in parts of either linen or wool, or on a hide or item made of leather; 49 then if the stain on the garment, hide, threads, woven-in parts or leather item is greenish or reddish, it is an infection of tzara‘at and is to be shown to the cohen. 50 The cohen is to examine the stain and isolate the article that has the infection for seven days. 51 On the seventh day he is to examine the stain; if the stain has spread on the garment, threads, woven-in parts or leather, whatever its use, the infection is a contagious tzara‘at; the garment is unclean. 52 He is to burn the garment, threads, woven-in parts of either wool or linen, or item of leather having the infection; for it is a contagious tzara‘at; it must be burned up completely. 53 But if, when the cohen examines it, he sees that the infection has not spread on the garment or in the threads, woven-in parts or leather item, 54 then the cohen is to order that the article having the infection be washed and isolated for seven more days. (RY: iv, LY: vii) 55 The cohen is to examine it after the stain has been washed, and if he sees that the stain has not changed color, then, even though the stain has not spread, it is unclean; you are to burn it up completely — it is rotten, no matter whether the spot is on the outside or on the inside. 56 If the cohen examines it and sees that the stain has faded after being washed, then he is to tear the stain out of the garment, leather, threads or woven-in parts. (LY: Maftir) 57 If it appears again in the garment, threads, woven-in parts or leather item, it is contagious, and you are to burn up completely the article that had the stain. 58 But if the infection is gone from the garment, threads, woven-in parts or leather item that you washed, then it is to be washed a second time, and it will be clean. 59 This is the law concerning infections of tzara‘at in a garment of wool or linen, or in the threads or the woven-in parts, or in any leather item — when to declare it clean and when to declare it unclean.
Haftarah Tazria: M’lakhim Bet (2 Kings) 4:42–5:19
B’rit Hadashah suggested readings for Parashah Tazria: Mattityahu (Matthew) 8:1–4, 11:2–6; Mark 1:40–45; Luke 2:22–24; 5:12–16; 7:18–23
Parashah 28: M’tzora (Person afflicted with tzara‘at) 14:1–15:33
[In regular years read with Parashah 27, in leap years read separately]
14:1 Adonai said to Moshe, 2 “This is to be the law concerning the person afflicted with tzara‘at on the day of his purification. He is to be brought to the cohen, 3 and the cohen is to go outside the camp and examine him there. If he sees that the tzara‘at sores have been healed in the afflicted person, 4 then the cohen will order that two living clean birds be taken for the one to be purified, along with cedar-wood, scarlet yarn and hyssop leaves. 5 The cohen is to order one of the birds slaughtered in a clay pot over running water. 6 As for the live bird, he is to take it with the cedar-wood, scarlet yarn and hyssop and dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird slaughtered over running water, 7 and sprinkle the person to be purified from the tzara‘at seven times. Next he is to set the live bird free in an open field. 8 He who is to be purified must wash his clothes, shave off all his hair and bathe himself in water. Then he will be clean; and after that, he may enter the camp; but he must live outside his tent for seven days. 9 On the seventh day he is to shave all the hair off his head, also his beard and eyebrows — he must shave off all his hair; and he is to wash his clothes and bathe his body in water; and he will be clean.
10 “On the eighth day he is to take two male lambs without defect, one female lamb in its first year without defect and six-and-a-half quarts of fine flour for a grain offering, mixed with olive oil, and two-thirds of a pint of olive oil. 11 The cohen purifying him is to place the person being purified with these items before Adonai at the entrance to the tent of meeting. 12 The cohen is to take one of the male lambs and offer it as a guilt offering with the two-thirds-pint of olive oil, then wave them as a wave offering before Adonai. (LY: ii) 13 He is to slaughter the male lamb at the place in the sanctuary for slaughtering sin offerings and burnt offerings, because the guilt offering belongs to the cohen, just like the sin offering; it is especially holy. 14 The cohen is to take some of the blood of the guilt offering and put it on the tip of the right ear of the person being purified, on the thumb of his right hand and on the big toe of his right foot. 15 Next, the cohen is to take some of the two-thirds-pint of olive oil and pour it into the palm of his own left hand, 16 dip his right finger in the oil that is in his left hand and sprinkle from the oil with his finger seven times before Adonai. 17 Then the cohen is to put some of the remaining oil in his hand on the tip of the right ear of the person being purified, on the thumb of his right hand, on the big toe of his right foot and on the blood of the guilt offering. 18 Finally, the cohen is to put the rest of the oil in his hand on the head of the person being purified; and the cohen will make atonement for him before Adonai. 19 The cohen is to offer the sin offering and make atonement for the person being purified because of his uncleanness; afterwards, he is to slaughter the burnt offering. 20 The cohen is to offer the burnt offering and the grain offering on the altar; thus the cohen will make atonement for him; and he will be clean.
(RY: v, LY: iii) 21 “If he is poor, so that he can’t afford to do otherwise, he is to take one male lamb as a guilt offering to be waved, to make atonement for him; two quarts of fine flour mixed with olive oil for a grain offering; two-thirds of a pint of olive oil; 22 and two doves or two young pigeons, such as he can afford, the one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. 23 On the eighth day, he will bring them to the cohen for his purification, to the entrance of the tent of meeting before Adonai. 24 The cohen is to take the lamb of the guilt offering and the two-thirds of a pint of olive oil and wave them as a wave offering before Adonai. 25 He is to slaughter the lamb of the guilt offering; and the cohen is to take some of the blood of the guilt offering and put it on the tip of the right ear of the person being purified, on the thumb of his right hand and on the big toe of his right foot. 26 The cohen is to take some of the olive oil and pour it into the palm of his own left hand, 27 and sprinkle with his right hand some of the oil that is in his left hand seven times before Adonai. 28 The cohen is to put some of the oil in his hand on the tip of the right ear of the person being purified, on the thumb of his right hand, on the big toe of his right foot — in the same place as the blood of the guilt offering. 29 Finally, the cohen is to put the rest of the oil in his hand on the head of the person being purified, to make atonement for him before Adonai. 30 He is to offer one of the doves or young pigeons, such as the person can afford, 31 whatever his means suffice for — the one as a sin offering and the other as a burnt offering — with the grain offering; thus the cohen will make atonement before Adonai for the person being purified. 32 Such is the law for the person who has tzara‘at sores if he cannot afford the usual elements used for his purification.”
(RY: vi, LY: iv) 33 Adonai said to Moshe and Aharon, 34 “When you have entered the land of Kena‘an which I am giving you as a possession, and I put an infection of tzara‘at in a house in the land that you possess, 35 then the owner of the house is to come and tell the cohen, ‘It seems to me that there may be an infection in the house.’ 36 The cohen is to order the house emptied before he goes in to inspect the infection, so that everything in the house won’t be made unclean; afterwards, the cohen is to enter and inspect the house. 37 He will examine the infection; and if he sees that the infection is in the walls of the house, with greenish or reddish depressions that seem to go in deeper than the surface of the wall, 38 he is to go out of the house to its door and seal up the house for seven days. 39 The cohen will come again on the seventh day and examine the house; if he sees that the infection has spread over its walls, 40 he is to order them to remove the infected stones and throw them into some unclean place outside the city. 41 Next, he is to have the inside of the house thoroughly scraped, and the scraped-off plaster is to be discarded outside the city in an unclean place. 42 Finally, other stones must be set in the place of the first stones and other plaster used to replaster the house. 43 If the infection returns and breaks out in the house after the stones have been removed and the house scraped and plastered; 44 then the cohen is to enter and examine it. If he sees that the infection has spread in the house, it is a contagious tzara‘at in the house; it is unclean. 45 He must break down the house and take its stones, timber and plaster out of the city to an unclean place. 46 Moreover, whoever enters the house at any time while it is sealed up will be unclean until evening. 47 Whoever lies down or eats in the house must wash his clothes. 48 If the cohen enters, examines and sees that the infection has not spread in the house since it was plastered; then he is to declare the house clean; because the infection is cured.
49 “To purify the house, he is to take two birds, cedar-wood, scarlet yarn and hyssop leaves. 50 He is to slaughter one of the birds in a clay pot over running water. 51 He is to take the cedar-wood, the hyssop, the scarlet yarn and the live bird and dip them in the blood of the slaughtered bird and in the running water, and sprinkle the house seven times. 52 He will purify the house with the blood of the bird, the running water, the live bird, the cedar-wood, the hyssop and the scarlet yarn. 53 But he is to set the live bird free outside the city in an open field; thus will he make atonement for the house; and it will be clean.
(LY: v) 54 “Such is the law for all kinds of tzara‘at sores, for a crusted area, 55 for tzara‘at in a garment, for a house, 56 for a swelling, for a scab and for a bright spot, 57 to determine when it is clean and when it is unclean. This is the law concerning tzara‘at.”
15:1 Adonai said to Moshe and Aharon, 2 “Tell the people of Isra’el, ‘When any man has a discharge from his body, the discharge is unclean. 3 The discharge is unclean no matter whether it continues flowing or has stopped; it is still his uncleanness. 4 Every bed which the person with the discharge lies on is unclean, and everything he sits on is unclean. 5 Whoever touches his bed is to wash his clothes and bathe himself in water; he will be unclean until evening. 6 Whoever sits on anything the person with the discharge sat on is to wash his clothes and bathe himself in water; he will be unclean until evening. 7 Anyone who touches the body of the person with the discharge is to wash his clothes and bathe himself in water; he will be unclean until evening. 8 If the person with the discharge spits on someone who is clean, the latter is to wash his clothes and bathe himself in water; he will be unclean until evening. 9 Any saddle that the person with the discharge rides on will be unclean. 10 Whoever touches anything that was under him will be unclean until evening; he who carries those things is to wash his clothes and bathe himself in water; he will be unclean until evening. 11 If the person with the discharge fails to rinse his hands in water before touching someone, that person is to wash his clothes and bathe himself in water; he will be unclean until evening. 12 If the person with the discharge touches a clay pot, it must be broken; if he touches a wooden utensil, it must be rinsed in water.
13 “‘When a person with a discharge has become free of it, he is to count seven days for his purification. Then he is to wash his clothes and bathe his body in running water; after that, he will be clean. 14 On the eighth day, he is to take for himself two doves or two young pigeons, come before Adonai to the entrance of the tent of meeting and give them to the cohen. 15 The cohen is to offer them, the one as a sin offering and the other as a burnt offering; thus the cohen will make atonement for him on account of his discharge before Adonai.
(RY: vii, LY: vi) 16 “‘If a man has a seminal emission, he is to bathe his entire body in water; he will be unclean until evening. 17 Any clothing or leather on which there is any semen is to be washed with water; it will be unclean until evening. 18 If a man goes to bed with a woman and has sexual relations, both are to bathe themselves in water; they will be unclean until evening.
19 “‘If a woman has a discharge, and the discharge from her body is blood, she will be in her state of niddah for seven days. Whoever touches her will be unclean until evening. 20 Everything she lies on or sits on in her state of niddah will be unclean. 21 Whoever touches her bed is to wash his clothes and bathe himself in water; he will be unclean until evening. 22 Whoever touches anything she sits on is to wash his clothes and bathe himself in water; he will be unclean until evening. 23 Whether he is on the bed or on something she sits on, when he touches it, he will be unclean until evening. 24 If a man goes to bed with her, and her menstrual flow touches him, he will be unclean seven days; and every bed he lies on will be unclean.
25 “‘If a woman has a discharge of blood for many days not during her period, or if her discharge lasts beyond the normal end of her period, then throughout the time she is having an unclean discharge she will be as when she is in niddah — she is unclean. 26 Every bed she lies on at any time while she is having her discharge will be for her like the bed she uses during her time of niddah; and everything she sits on will be unclean with uncleanness like that of her time of niddah. 27 Whoever touches those things will be unclean; he is to wash his clothes and bathe himself in water; he will be unclean until evening.
28 “‘If she has become free of her discharge, she is to count seven days; after that, she will be clean. (LY: vii) 29 On the eighth day, she is to take for herself two doves or two young pigeons and bring them to the cohen at the entrance to the tent of meeting. 30 The cohen is to offer the one as a sin offering and the other as a burnt offering; thus the cohen will make atonement for her before Adonai on account of her unclean discharge.
(Maftir) 31 “‘In this way you will separate the people of Isra’el from their uncleanness, so that they will not die in a state of uncleanness for defiling my tabernacle which is there with them.
32 “‘Such is the law for the person who has a discharge; for the man who has a seminal emission that makes him unclean; 33 for the woman in niddah during her menstrual period; for the person, man or woman, with a discharge; and for the man who has sexual relations with a woman who is unclean.)
• Ethics of the Fathers: Chapter 2
In preparation for the festival of Shavuot, we study one of the six chapters of the Talmud's Ethics of the Fathers ("Avot") on the afternoon of each of the six Shabbatot between Passover and Shavuot; this week we study Chapter Two. (In many communities -- and such is the Chabad custom -- the study cycle is repeated through the summer, until the Shabbat before Rosh Hashanah.)
Link: Ethics of the Fathers, Chapter 2
• Count "Twenty-Two Days to the Omer" Tonight
Tomorrow is the twenty-second day of the Omer Count. Since, on the Jewish calendar, the day begins at nightfall of the previous evening, we count the omer fortomorrow's date tonight, after nightfall: "Today is twenty-two days, which are three weeks and one day, to the Omer." (If you miss the count tonight, you can count the omer all day tomorrow, but without the preceding blessing).
The 49-day "Counting of the Omer" retraces our ancestors' seven-week spiritual journey from the Exodus to Sinai. Each evening we recite a special blessing and count the days and weeks that have passed since the Omer; the 50th day isShavuot, the festival celebrating the Giving of the Torah at Sinai.
Tonight's Sefirah: Chessed sheb'Netzach -- "Kindness in Ambition"
The teachings of Kabbalah explain that there are seven "Divine Attributes" --Sefirot -- that G-d assumes through which to relate to our existence: Chessed,Gevurah, Tifferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod and Malchut ("Love", "Strength", "Beauty", "Victory", "Splendor", "Foundation" and "Sovereignty"). In the human being, created in the "image of G-d," the seven sefirot are mirrored in the seven "emotional attributes" of the human soul: Kindness, Restraint, Harmony, Ambition, Humility, Connection and Receptiveness. Each of the seven attributes contain elements of all seven--i.e., "Kindness in Kindness", "Restraint in Kindness", "Harmony in Kindness", etc.--making for a total of forty-nine traits. The 49-day Omer Count is thus a 49-step process of self-refinement, with each day devoted to the "rectification" and perfection of one the forty-nine "sefirot."
Links:
How to count the Omer
The deeper significance of the Omer Count
Today in Jewish History:
• Anti-Jewish Riots in Russia (1881)
Following the assassination a month earlier of Tzar Alexander II of Russia, and the subsequent rumors that the Jews were behind the assassination, anti-Jewish riots broke out on the 6th of Iyar. The riots and pogroms lasted for four years, during which time thousands of Jewish homes and synagogues were destroyed, and countless Jews were injured and impoverished. The unrest started out in Southern Russia, and quickly spread throughout the entire country.
Tzar Alexander III actually blamed the riots on the Jews(!) and punished them by enacting new laws which further restricted their freedoms. Among these devastating laws were legislation which restricted Jews from residing in towns with fewer than 10,000 citizens, and limiting their professional employment and education opportunities.
These oppressive laws, known as the "May Laws," compelled many Jews to emigrate. They are said to have caused more than two million Jews to leave Russia, many of them opting to move to the United States of America, and the freedoms it offered.
Link: The Pogroms of 1881-1884
• Arab Countries Declare War on Israel (1948)
One day after the State of Israel was proclaimed (see Jewish History for the 5th of Iyar), the surrounding Arab nations -- Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq --declared war on the fledgling state, with the objective of "driving the Jews into the sea." Tel Aviv was bombed on that very first day of the War of Independence.
Link: War of Independence
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Tazria-Metzora, 7th Portion Leviticus 15:16-15:33 with Rashi
• Chapter 15
16A man from whom there is a discharge of semen, shall immerse all his flesh in water, and he shall remain unclean until evening. טזוְאִישׁ כִּי תֵצֵא מִמֶּנּוּ שִׁכְבַת זָרַע וְרָחַץ בַּמַּיִם אֶת כָּל בְּשָׂרוֹ וְטָמֵא עַד הָעָרֶב:
17And any garment or any leather [object] which has semen on it, shall be immersed in water, and shall remain unclean until evening. יזוְכָל בֶּגֶד וְכָל עוֹר אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה עָלָיו שִׁכְבַת זָרַע וְכֻבַּס בַּמַּיִם וְטָמֵא עַד הָעָרֶב:
18A woman with whom a man cohabits, whereby there was [a discharge of] semen, they shall immerse in water, and they shall remain unclean until evening. יחוְאִשָּׁה אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁכַּב אִישׁ אֹתָהּ שִׁכְבַת זָרַע וְרָחֲצוּ בַמַּיִם וְטָמְאוּ עַד הָעָרֶב:
[Both of] these must immerse in water: It is the Divine King’s decree that the woman becomes defiled through cohabitation, and the reason is not that she came into contact with semen, for this constitutes contact with hidden parts of the body [which does not defile]. — [Niddah 41b] ורחצו במים: גזירת מלך היא שתטמא האשה בביאה. ואין הטעם משום נוגע בשכבת זרע, שהרי מגע בית הסתרים הוא:
19If a woman has a discharge, her flesh discharging blood, she shall remain in her state of menstrual separation for seven days, and whoever touches her shall become unclean until evening. יטוְאִשָּׁה כִּי תִהְיֶה זָבָה דָּם יִהְיֶה זֹבָהּ בִּבְשָׂרָהּ שִׁבְעַת יָמִים תִּהְיֶה בְנִדָּתָהּ וְכָל הַנֹּגֵעַ בָּהּ יִטְמָא עַד הָעָרֶב:
[If a woman] has a discharge: One might think that this means from any of her organs. Scripture, therefore, says “and she revealed the fountain of her blood” (Lev. 20:18). [Scripture here teaches us that] the only blood that defiles is what comes from her “fountain” [i.e., her womb]. — [Torath Kohanim 15:169] כי תהיה זבה: יכול מאחד מכל איבריה, תלמוד לומר (ויקרא כ יח) והיא גלתה את מקור דמיה, אין דם מטמא אלא הבא מן המקור:
her flesh discharging blood: A woman’s discharge is not called a defiling discharge unless it is red. — [Niddah 19a] דם יהיה זבה בבשרה: אין זובה קרוי זוב לטמא אלא אם כן הוא אדום:
in her state of menstrual separation: Heb. נִדָּתָהּ, like, “and chase him (יְנִדֻּהוּ) from the world” (Job 18:18), for she is separated (מְנֻדָּה) from contact with any man. בנדתה: כמו (איוב יח יח) ומתבל ינידוהו, שהיא מנודה ממגע כל אדם:
she shall remain in her state of menstrual separation: Even if she saw only the first sighting. — [Torath Kohanim 15:171] תהיה בנדתה: אפילו לא ראתה אלא ראיה ראשונה:
20And whatever she lies on during her menstrual separation, shall become unclean, and whatever she sits on, shall become unclean. כוְכֹל אֲשֶׁר תִּשְׁכַּב עָלָיו בְּנִדָּתָהּ יִטְמָא וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר תֵּשֵׁב עָלָיו יִטְמָא:
21And anyone who touches her bedding, shall immerse his garments and immerse [himself] in water, and he shall remain unclean until evening. כאוְכָל הַנֹּגֵעַ בְּמִשְׁכָּבָהּ יְכַבֵּס בְּגָדָיו וְרָחַץ בַּמַּיִם וְטָמֵא עַד הָעָרֶב:
22And anyone who touches any object upon which she will sit, shall immerse his garments and immerse himself in water, and he shall remain unclean until evening. כבוְכָל הַנֹּגֵעַ בְּכָל כְּלִי אֲשֶׁר תֵּשֵׁב עָלָיו יְכַבֵּס בְּגָדָיו וְרָחַץ בַּמַּיִם וְטָמֵא עַד הָעָרֶב:
23And if he is on the bedding or on the object, upon which she is sitting, when he touches it, he becomes unclean until evening. כגוְאִם עַל הַמִּשְׁכָּב הוּא אוֹ עַל הַכְּלִי אֲשֶׁר הִוא ישֶׁבֶת עָלָיו בְּנָגְעוֹ בוֹ יִטְמָא עַד הָעָרֶב:
And if he is on the bedding: [I.e.,] someone who lies or sits upon her bedding or upon her seat, even if he does not touch it [if he sits on a seat that is on that seat - see Rashi on verse 6], this person is nevertheless also included in the law of uncleanness stated in the previous verse, and he requires immersion of his garments [in a mikvah]. — [Torath Kohanim 15:134] ואם על המשכב הוא: השוכב או היושב על משכבה או על מושבה, אפילו לא נגע בה, אף הוא בדת טומאה האמורה במקרא העליון שטעון כבוס בגדים:
or on the object: [This comes] to include riding gear. — [Torath Kohanim 15:176] על הכלי: לרבות את המרכב:
when he touches it, he becomes unclean: [This clause] refers exclusively to riding gear, which is included by [the words] “or object.” בנגעו בו יטמא: אינו מדבר אלא על המרכב שנתרבה מעל הכלי:
when he touches it, he becomes unclean: But he does not require immersion of garments, for touching unclean riding gear does not defile people to defile their garments. — [Keilim 23:3] בנגעו בו יטמא: ואינו טעון כבוס בגדים שהמרכב אין מגעו מטמא אדם לטמא בגדים:
24If a man cohabits with her, [the uncleanness of] her menstruation shall be upon him, and he shall be unclean for seven days, and any bedding he lies upon, shall become unclean. כדוְאִם שָׁכֹב יִשְׁכַּב אִישׁ אֹתָהּ וּתְהִי נִדָּתָהּ עָלָיו וְטָמֵא שִׁבְעַת יָמִים וְכָל הַמִּשְׁכָּב אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁכַּב עָלָיו יִטְמָא:
[the uncleanness of] her menstruation shall be upon him: One might think that he follows in her footsteps, [i.e.,] if he had relations with her on the fifth day of her menstruation, he, too, will be unclean only for three days, like her. Scripture, therefore, continues, “and he shall be unclean for seven days.” So what does this clause here, “then [the uncleanness of] her menstruation shall be upon him,” come to teach us? [It means that the same laws of her uncleanness apply, insofar as] just as she defiles people and earthenware vessels, so does he defile people and earthenware vessels. — [Torath Kohanim 15:180; Niddah 33a] ותהי נדתה עליו: יכול יעלה לרגלה, שאם בא עליה בחמישי לנדתה לא יטמא אלא שלשה ימים כמותה, תלמוד לומר וטמא שבעת ימים. ומה תלמוד לומר ותהי נדתה עליו, מה היא מטמאה אדם וכלי חרס, אף הוא מטמא אדם וכלי חרס:
25And a woman whose flow of blood flows for many days, outside of the time of her menstrual separation, or she has a discharge after her menstrual separation, then all the days she has her unclean discharge, she shall be unclean just like the days of her menstrual separation. כהוְאִשָּׁה כִּי יָזוּב זוֹב דָּמָהּ יָמִים רַבִּים בְּלֹא עֶת נִדָּתָהּ אוֹ כִי תָזוּב עַל נִדָּתָהּ כָּל יְמֵי זוֹב טֻמְאָתָהּ כִּימֵי נִדָּתָהּ תִּהְיֶה טְמֵאָה הִוא:
many days: Three days. — [Torath Kohanim 15:186] ימים רבים: שלשה ימים:
outside of the time of her menstrual separation: [I.e., after the seven days of her menstrual uncleanness had passed [not within the period of her menstrual uncleanness]. — [Torath Kohanim 8:187, Niddah 73a] בלא עת נדתה: אחר שיצאו שבעת ימי נדתה:
or she has a discharge: [of] these three days. או כי תזוב: את שלשת הימים הללו:
after her menstrual separation: i.e., separated from [the period of] her menstruation by one day, this is a zavah, whose law is decreed in this passage, unlike the laws of the menstruant, insofar as this one [the zavah gedolah A woman who discharges for three consecutive days,] requires a counting of seven [days] clean [of blood] and a sacrifice [for her purification], whereas the menstruant is not required [by Torah law] to count clean days. Rather, [the menstruant] need only remain in her state of menstrual separation for seven days (verse 19), whether she sees [an issue of blood] or not. And our Rabbis expounded this passage (Torath Kohanim 15:187; Niddah 73) as follows: Between the end of one period of menstruation to the beginning of the next, there is an eleven-day interval, so that if during these eleven days, she sees an issue of blood for three consecutive [days], she becomes a zavah [gedolah]. על נדתה: מופלג מנדתה יום אחד, זו היא זבה ומשפטה חרוץ בפרשה זו, ולא כדת הנדה, שזו טעונה ספירת שבעה נקיים וקרבן, והנדה אינה טעונה ספירת שבעה נקיים, אלא שבעת ימים תהיה בנדתה בין רואה בין שאינה רואה. ודרשו רבותינו בפרשה זו, אחד עשר יום יש בין סוף נדה לתחלת נדה, שכל שלשה רצופין שתראה באחד עשר יום הללו, תהא זבה:
26Any bedding upon which she lies during all the time of her discharge, will have the same [uncleanness] for her, as the bedding of her menstruation. And any object upon which she will sit, shall become unclean. like her menstrual uncleanness. כוכָּל הַמִּשְׁכָּב אֲשֶׁר תִּשְׁכַּב עָלָיו כָּל יְמֵי זוֹבָהּ כְּמִשְׁכַּב נִדָּתָהּ יִהְיֶה לָּהּ וְכָל הַכְּלִי אֲשֶׁר תֵּשֵׁב עָלָיו טָמֵא יִהְיֶה כְּטֻמְאַת נִדָּתָהּ:
27And anyone who touches them shall become unclean; he shall immerse his garments and immerse [himself] in water, and he shall remain unclean until evening. כזוְכָל הַנּוֹגֵעַ בָּם יִטְמָא וְכִבֶּס בְּגָדָיו וְרָחַץ בַּמַּיִם וְטָמֵא עַד הָעָרֶב:
28And if she becomes clean of her discharge, she shall count for herself seven days, and after this, she may be cleansed. כחוְאִם טָהֲרָה מִזּוֹבָהּ וְסָפְרָה לָּהּ שִׁבְעַת יָמִים וְאַחַר תִּטְהָר:
29And on the eighth day, she shall take for herself two turtle doves or two young doves, and bring them to the kohen, to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting. כט וּבַיּוֹם הַשְּׁמִינִי תִּקַּח לָהּ שְׁתֵּי תֹרִים אוֹ שְׁנֵי בְּנֵי יוֹנָה וְהֵבִיאָה אוֹתָם אֶל הַכֹּהֵן אֶל פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד:
30And the kohen shall make one into a sin offering and one into a burnt offering, and the kohen shall effect atonement for her, before the Lord, from the uncleanness of her discharge. לוְעָשָׂה הַכֹּהֵן אֶת הָאֶחָד חַטָּאת וְאֶת הָאֶחָד עֹלָה וְכִפֶּר עָלֶיהָ הַכֹּהֵן לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה מִזּוֹב טֻמְאָתָהּ:
31And you shall separate the children of Israel from their uncleanness, so that they will not die on account of their uncleanness, if they defile My Sanctuary which is in their midst. לאוְהִזַּרְתֶּם אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִטֻּמְאָתָם וְלֹא יָמֻתוּ בְּטֻמְאָתָם בְּטַמְּאָם אֶת מִשְׁכָּנִי אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹכָם:
And you shall separate: Heb. וְהִזַּרְתֶּם. The term נְזִירָה always denotes separation (Torath Kohanim 15:196); similarly, “they drew (נָזרוּ) backwards” (Isa. 1:4); and similarly, “the one separated (נְזִיר) from his brothers” (Gen. 49:26). והזרתם: אין נזירה אלא פרישה, וכן (ישעיה א ד) נזורו אחור, וכן (בראשית מט כו) נזיר אחיו:
so that they will not die on account of their uncleanness: [The punishment כָּרֵת the death of the perpetrator and his offspring-is attached to an unclean person who enters the sanctuary, thus defiling it. See Num. 19:13.] We see [from here] that this כָּרֵת incurred by someone [unclean] who defiles the sanctuary is also referred to as מִיתָה [meaning “the death penalty from Heaven,” although in other contexts, מִיתָה refers to the death of the perpetrator but not his offspring.]. — [Sifrei Bamidbar 19:45] ולא ימתו בטמאתם: הרי הכרת של מטמא מקדש קרוי מיתה:
32This is the law for one who has a discharge, and one from whom semen issues, through which he becomes unclean, לבזֹאת תּוֹרַת הַזָּב וַאֲשֶׁר תֵּצֵא מִמֶּנּוּ שִׁכְבַת זֶרַע לְטָמְאָה בָהּ:
This is the law for one who has a discharge: [I.e.,] a person who sees one discharge. And what is the law governing him? [As the Torah continues:] זאת תורת הזב: בעל ראיה אחת, ומהו תורתו ואשר תצא ממנו שכבת זרע - הרי הוא כבעל קרי טמא טומאת ערב:
and one from whom semen issues: He is like one who has experienced a seminal emission, that he becomes unclean until evening. — [Torath Kohanim 15:194] :
33And for a woman who has her menstrual flow, and for one who has a discharge, whether male or female, and a man who cohabits with an unclean woman. לגוְהַדָּוָה בְּנִדָּתָהּ וְהַזָּב אֶת זוֹבוֹ לַזָּכָר וְלַנְּקֵבָה וּלְאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁכַּב עִם טְמֵאָה:
and for one who has a discharge: [This expression refers to] someone who has seen two discharges and someone who has seen three discharges, whose law is specified above [in this whole passage, beginning with verse 3]. — [Torath Kohanim 15:194] והזב את זובו: בעל שתי ראיות ובעל שלש ראיות, שתורתן מפורשת למעלה:Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 35 - 38
• Chapter 35
This psalm is an awe-inspiring and wondrous prayer about David's enemies-that they be as chaff before the wind, chased by the angel of God. It also declares that everything comes about through God's help.
1. By David. Fight my antagonists, O Lord, battle those who battle against me.
2. Take hold of shield and armor and arise to help me.
3. Draw a spear, and bar the way before my pursuers; say to my soul, "I am your deliverance.”
4. Let those who seek my life be shamed and disgraced; let those who devise my harm retreat and be humiliated.
5. Let them be as chaff before the wind; let the angel of the Lord thrust them away.
6. Let their path be dark and slippery; let them be chased by the angel of the Lord.
7. For without cause have they laid their nets in the pit for me; without cause have they dug [pits] for my soul.
8. Let darkness come upon him unawares; let the very snare that he hid trap him, in darkness he will fall in it.
9. And my soul shall exult in the Lord, rejoice in His deliverance.
10. My entire being shall declare: Lord, who is like You? Who saves the poor from one stronger than he, the poor and the destitute from one who would rob him.
11. Corrupt witnesses rise up [against me], they demand of me things of which I do not know.
12. They repay me evil for good, death for my soul.
13. But I wore sackcloth when they were ill; I afflicted my soul with fasting. Let my prayer return upon my own bosom.
14. As if it were my friend, my brother, I went about; like a mother in mourning, I was bent over in gloom.
15. But when I limped, they rejoiced and gathered; the lowly gathered against me-even those whom I do not know; they laugh and cannot be quiet.
16. With flattery and scorn, for the sake of a meal,1 they gnash their teeth at me.
17. My Lord, how long will You look on? Restore my life from their darkness; from young lions, my soul.
18. I will thank You in a great congregation, amidst a mighty nation I will praise You.
19. Let not those who hate me without cause rejoice over me; [let not] those who despise me without reason wink their eye.
20. For they speak not of peace, rather they scheme deceitful matters against the broken of the land.
21. They opened their mouths wide against me, they said, "Aha! Aha! Our eyes have seen [his misfortune].”
22. You saw, Lord, be not silent; my Lord, be not distant from me.
23. Rouse and awaken Yourself to my judgement, to my cause, my God and my Lord.
24. Judge me according to your righteousness, Lord my God; let them not rejoice over me.
25. Let them not say in their hearts, "Aha! We have our desire!" Let them not say, "We have swallowed him!”
26. Let them be shamed and disgraced together, those who rejoice at my trouble; let them be clothed in shame and humiliation, those who raise themselves arrogantly over me.
27. Let those who desire my vindication sing joyously and be glad; let them say always, "Let the Lord be exalted, Who desires the peace of His servant.”
28. My tongue will speak of Your righteousness, Your praise, all day long.
Chapter 36
This psalm is a message to those who follow their evil inclination, that tells them, "Do not place the fear of God before you," and brings them to sin by beautifying evil deeds in their eyes. For so is his way: "He descends (to earth) and corrupts, then goes up (to the Heavenly Court) and prosecutes."
1. For the Conductor, by the servant of the Lord, by David.
2. [I think] in my heart: Sin says to the wicked, "There is none [who need place] the fear of God before his eyes.”
3. For Sin makes itself appealing to him, until his iniquity be found and he is hated.
4. The speech of his mouth is evil and deceit; he fails to reason, to improve.
5. On his bed he contemplates evil, he stands in a path that is not good; he does not despise evil.
6. O Lord, Your kindness is in the heavens; Your faithfulness is till the skies.
7. Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains, Your judgements extend to the great deep; man and beast You deliver, O Lord.
8. How precious is Your kindness, O God; man takes shelter in the shadow of Your wings.
9. They will be filled by the abundance of Your house; from the stream of Your Eden, You will give them to drink.
10. For the source of life is with You; in Your Light do we see light.
11. Extend Your kindness to those who know You, and Your righteousness to the upright of heart.
12. Let not the foot of the arrogant overtake me; let not the hand of the wicked drive me away.
13. There1 the doers of evil fell, thrust down, unable to rise.
Chapter 37
King David exhorts his generation not to be jealous of the prosperity of the wicked, for it may lead to falling into their ways. Rather, put your trust in God, conduct yourselves with integrity, and God will take care of everything.
1. By David. Do not compete with the wicked; do not envy doers of injustice.
2. For like grass they will be swiftly cut down; like green vegetation they will wither.
3. Trust in the Lord and do good; then will you abide in the land and be nourished by faith.
4. Delight in the Lord, and He will grant you the desires of your heart.
5. Cast your needs upon the Lord; rely on Him, and He will take care.
6. He will reveal your righteousness like the light, your justness like the high noon.
7. Depend on the Lord and hope in Him. Compete not with the prosperous, with the man who invents evil schemes.
8. Let go of anger, abandon rage; do not compete with [one who intends] only to harm.
9. For the evildoers will be cut down; but those who hope in the Lord, they will inherit the earth.
10. For soon the wicked one will not be; you will gaze at his place and he will be gone.
11. But the humble shall inherit the earth, and delight in abundant peace.
12. The wicked one plots against the righteous, and gnashes his teeth at him.
13. My Lord laughs at him, for He sees that his day will come.
14. The wicked have drawn a sword and bent their bow to fell the poor and destitute, to slaughter those of upright ways.
15. But their sword shall enter their own hearts, and their bows shall break.
16. Better the little of the righteous, than the abundant wealth of the wicked.
17. For the strength of the wicked will be broken, but the Lord supports the righteous.
18. The Lord appreciates the days of the innocent; their inheritance will last forever.
19. They will not be shamed in times of calamity, and in days of famine they will be satisfied.
20. For the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the Lord are as fattened sheep: consumed, consumed in smoke.
21. The wicked man borrows and does not repay; but the righteous man is gracious and gives.
22. For those blessed by Him will inherit the earth, and those cursed by Him will be cut off.
23. The steps of man are directed by God; He desires his way.
24. When he totters he shall not be thrown down, for the Lord supports his hand.
25. I have been a youth, I have also aged; yet I have not seen the righteous forsaken, nor his offspring begging bread.
26. All day he is kind and lends; his offspring are a blessing.
27. Turn away from evil and do good, and you will dwell [in peace] forever.
28. For the Lord loves justice, he will not abandon his pious ones-they are protected forever; but the offspring of the wicked are cut off.
29. The righteous shall inherit the earth and dwell upon it forever.
30. The mouth of the righteous one utters wisdom, and his tongue speaks justice.
31. The Torah of his God is in his heart; his steps shall not falter.
32. The wicked one watches for the righteous man, and seeks to kill him.
33. But the Lord will not abandon him in his hand, nor condemn him when he is judged.
34. Hope in the Lord and keep His way; then He will raise you high to inherit the earth. When the wicked are cut off, you shall see it.
35. I saw a powerful wicked man, well-rooted like a vibrant, native tree.
36. Yet he vanished, behold he was gone; I searched for him, but he could not be found.
37. Watch the innocent, and observe the upright, for the future of such a man is peace.
38. But sinners shall be destroyed together; the future of the wicked is cut off.
39. The deliverance of the righteous is from the Lord; He is their strength in time of distress.
40. The Lord helps them and delivers them; He delivers them from the wicked and saves them, because they have put their trust in Him.
Chapter 38
A prayer for every individual, bewailing the length of the exile. One who is in distress should recite this psalm, hence its introduction, "A psalm... to remind" (to remind us to recite it in times of distress). One can also derive many lessons from it.
1. A psalm by David, to remind.
2. O Lord, do not rebuke me in Your anger, nor chastise me in Your wrath.
3. For Your arrows have landed in me, Your hand descended upon me.
4. There is no soundness in my flesh because of Your rage, no peace in my bones because of my sin.
5. For my iniquities have flooded over my head; like a heavy load, they are too heavy for me.
6. My wounds are rotted; they reek because of my foolishness.
7. I am bent and extremely bowed; all day I go about in gloom.
8. My sides are inflamed; there is no soundness in my flesh.
9. I am weakened and extremely depressed; I howl from the moaning of my heart.
10. My Lord, all that I desire is before You; my sighing is not hidden from You.
11. My heart is engulfed, my strength has left me; the light of my eyes they, too, are not with me.
12. My friends and companions stand aloof from my affliction; my intimates stand afar.
13. The seekers of my life have laid traps; those who seek my harm speak destructiveness; they utter deceits all day long.
14. But I am like a deaf man, I do not hear; like a mute that does not open his mouth.
15. I was like a man that does not perceive, and in whose mouth there are no rebuttals.
16. Because for You, O Lord, I wait; You will answer, my Lord, my God.
17. For I said, "Lest they rejoice over me; when my foot falters they will gloat over me.”
18. For I am accustomed to limping, and my pain is constantly before me.
19. For I admit my iniquity; I worry because of my sin.
20. But my enemies abound with life; those who hate me without cause flourish.
21. Those who repay evil for good resent me for my pursuit of good.
22. Do not forsake me, O Lord; do not be distant from me, my God.
23. Hurry to my aid, O my Lord, my Salvation.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 44• Lessons in Tanya
• Shabbat, Iyar 6, 5775 · April 25, 2015
Today's Tanya Lesson
Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 44
רק שאף על פי כן צריך לטרוח בשכלו להשיג ולהגיע גם לבחינת אהבת עולם הנזכרת למעלה, הבאה מהתבונה ודעת בגדולת ה׳
Nonetheless a person must strain his intellect to apprehend and attain also the above-mentioned1 level of ahavat olam, which stems from an understanding and knowledge of the greatness of G‑d,
As such it differs from the loves of “My soul...” and “Like a son...” which essentially are inherited, and are only revealed through contemplation.
כדי להגדיל מדורת אש האהבה ברשפי אש ושלהבת עזה ולהב העולה השמימה, עד שמים רבים לא יוכלו לכבות וגו׳ ונהרות לא ישטפוה וגו׳
in order to fan the blaze of the fiery love, with glowing coals and an intense fire and a flame that rises heavenwards, so that2 “not even many waters which are enemies of the love can extinguish it..., nor rivers quench it....”
Love created purely as a result of contemplation is more passionate and fiery than love which is essentially inherited, even when the inherited love is revealed through contemplation.
כי יש יתרון ומעלה לבחינת אהבה כרשפי אש ושלהבת עזה וכו׳ הבאה מהתבונה ודעת בגדולת אין סוף ברוך הוא, על שתי בחינות אהבה הנזכרות למעלה כאשר אינן כרשפי אש ושלהבת כו׳
For there is a superiority and excellence in the quality of love burning like fiery coals and an intense flame,... which comes from an understanding and knowledge of the greatness and transcendence of the blessed Ein Sof, over the two categories of love referred to above, when they are not like fiery coals3 and a blaze,... but merely result from feeling (or contemplating) G‑d’s closeness to a Jew, inasmuch as He is “the Source of our life” and “our true Father.” The superiority of this love is:
כיתרון ומעלת הזהב על הכסף וכו׳ כמו שכתוב לקמן
similar to the superiority and excellence of gold over silver, and so forth, as will be explained later.4
Not only is gold worth more than silver ounce for ounce, in which case a preponderance of silver would be more valuable, but gold is intrinsically of greater value in that it possesses a distinctive gleam which people find highly attractive.
So, too, with regard to love that results wholly from contemplation: it is not a higher levelof love; on the contrary, the level of love that comes from above and is termed ahavah rabbah, “great love,” is the higher form of love. The superiority of love that results entirely from contemplation lies in its fiery passion and yearning of the soul. This is one reason why the two previously-mentioned kinds of love that Jews inherit do not suffice; they lack passion when compared to love emanating entirely from one’s intellect.
The Alter Rebbe now provides yet another reason why wholly contemplative love is necessary: It is important to attain contemplative love not only because of the superiority of the resulting passion, but because the contemplation is an end unto itself. By contemplating G‑d’s greatness, one fulfills the whole purpose of creation — that created beings should come to know and understand G‑d’s greatness.
וגם כי זה כל האדם ותכליתו
Besides, this is the whole man and his raison d‘etre:
למען דעת את כבוד ה׳ ויקר תפארת גדולתו, איש איש כפי אשר יוכל שאת, כמו שכתוב ברעיא מהימנא, פרשת בא: בגין דישתמודען ליה וכו׳ וכנודע
that one may know the glory of G‑d and the majestic splendor of His greatness, each according to the limit of his capacity, as is written in Ra‘aya Mehemna, Parshat Bo: “In order that they may know Him,” and so forth, as is known.
Thus, there is a special quality and purpose in contemplation (that leads to love) itself. Contemplation of G‑d’s greatness is exercised to a much greater degree in the love that iscreated from contemplation, than it is found in a love which is merely revealed through contemplation, as is the case in the two aforementioned kinds of love.
In order to merely reveal the love of “My soul...” by contemplating how G‑d is the “true Source of life,” or to reveal the love of “Like a son..,” by contemplating how G‑d is “our true Father,” one’s meditation need not be exceedingly profound. A much deeper understanding and more profound mode of meditation is necessary in order to create a love of G‑d based solely on intellectual comprehension.
As a result, the divine intention “that they may know Him” — that created beings come to know G‑dliness — is realized to a much greater extent through wholly contemplative love. This is the additional reason as to why the kinds of love inherited from the Patriarchs do not suffice, and it is necessary to exert oneself to attain a love of G‑d that stems entirely from contemplating His greatness.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Ch. 43. |
| 2. | Shir HaShirim 8:7. |
| 3. | Commenting on the words “when they are not like fiery coals,” the Rebbe notes that it is indeed possible for the loves of “My soul...” and “Like a son...” to possess the quality and passion of “fiery coals.” This comes about when the contemplation which leads to the revelation of these two loves focuses [not on His nearness, but] on the transcendence of “our true Father” and the “Source of our life”; the majestic exaltedness of the Father arouses a thirsting and longing love in the son. Briefly, the matter is as follows: There are two general modes of contemplating G‑dliness — contemplating His transcendence and exaltedness (or conversely, the distance of the worlds from G‑d), and contemplating G‑d’s close relationship with us. The former will result in the thirsting and longing love of “fiery coals,” while the latter will result in a Jew’s feeling close to G‑d. This love is known as “love similar to water.” Each of these two modes of contemplation has two possible results: (1) it leads to therevelation of a love (or fear) that already exists in the soul (as an inheritance from the Patriarchs), or (2) it creates love (or fear). The Rebbe concludes: “It is noteworthy that [love resulting from contemplating G‑d’s] transcendence must refer to a form of transcendence that has some relationship to the person; otherwise the result will be self-abnegation. The same is true with regard to [contemplating the world’s] distance [from G‑d]. Cf. references cited in note to Kuntres Etz HaChayim, ch. 2.” |
| 4. | In ch. 50. |
• Sefer Hamitzvos:Shabbat Iyar 6, 5775 · April 25, 2015
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Important Message Regarding This Lesson
The Daily Mitzvah schedule runs parallel to the daily study of 3 chapters of Maimonides' 14-volume code. There are instances when the Mitzvah is repeated a few days consecutively while the exploration of the same Mitzvah continues in the in-depth track.
Positive Commandment 127
The First Tithe
"But the tithes of the Children of Israel which they offer to G‑d as a gift..."—Numbers 18:24.
We are commanded to separate a tenth of our crops and give it to a Levite.
This biblical precept only applies in the Land of Israel.
The First Tithe
Positive Commandment 127
Translated by Berel Bell
The 127th mitzvah is that we are commanded to separate ma'aser from produce which grows from the ground.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "[The inheritance I am giving the Levites shall consist of] the ma'aser of the Jewish people which they shall separate."
The verse itself explains that ma'aser is given to the Levites.
The details of this mitzvah are explained in tractate Ma'aseros.
This is called ma'aser rishon, and is a Biblical requirement only in Eretz Yisroel.2
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 27:30.
2.By Rabbinic law, ma'aser must be given from some lands which surround Eretz Yisroel. See Hilchos Terumos, 1:1.
Shabbos - Chapter Twenty Four
Halacha 1
There are activities that are forbidden on the Sabbath despite the fact that they do not resemble the [forbidden] labors, nor will they lead to [the performance of] the [forbidden] labors.1
Why then are [these activities] forbidden? Because it is written [Isaiah 58:13], "If you restrain your feet, because of the Sabbath, and [refrain] from pursuing your desires on My holy day..." and it is written [ibid.], " And you shall honor it [by refraining] from following your [ordinary] ways, attending to your wants, and speaking about [mundane] matters."
Therefore, it is forbidden for a person to go2 and tend to his [mundane] concerns on the Sabbath, or even to speak about them3 - e.g., to discuss with a partner which merchandise should be sold on the morrow or which should be bought, how this building should be constructed, or which merchandise should be taken to a particular place. Speaking about all matters of this like is included in the prohibition [against] "...speaking about [mundane] matters."
It is speaking that is forbidden. Thinking [about such matters] is permitted.4
Halacha 2
It is forbidden for a person to check his gardens and fields on the Sabbath to see what they require or to see how their fruit is growing, for this involves going to "pursue your desires."5
Halacha 3
When does the above apply? When one goes to the end of the Sabbath boundary to wait until nightfall to perform an activity that is forbidden on the Sabbath itself. It is, however, permitted to [go to the boundary and] wait until nightfall in order to perform a task that is permitted on the Sabbath.
What is implied? We may not go to the boundary and wait until nightfall in order to bring produce that is still attached to the ground or to hire workers. One may, however, go and wait until nightfall in order to guard one's produce, since it is permitted to guard [produce] on the Sabbath.8
Similarly, one may go and wait until nightfall in order to bring an animal or fruit that has already been detached. For one calls to an animal and it will come even if it is outside the [Sabbath] boundary,9 and had there been enclosures, one would have been able to bring the detached produce on the Sabbath.
Halacha 4
It is permitted for a person to tell a worker whom he sees [on the Sabbath], "Stand near me in the evening."12 One may not, however, tell him, "Be prepared for me in the evening," since by doing so," the person is attending to his wants on the Sabbath.
It is forbidden to run and jump on the Sabbath, as [Isaiah, loc. cit.] states, "[Refraining] from following your [ordinary] ways" - i.e., the manner in which you walk on the Sabbath should not resemble the manner in which you walk during the week. A person may, however, descend to a cistern, pit, or cave, even if they are 100 cubits deep, climb down to drink and then climb up.
It is forbidden to speak extensively about idle matters, as it is written [ibid.], "...speaking about [mundane] matters" - i.e., the manner in which you speak on the Sabbath should not resemble the manner in which you speak during the week.13
Halacha 5
It is permitted to run on the Sabbath for matters involved with a mitzvah14 - e.g., to run to the synagogue or the house of study.
We are permitted to calculate accounts associated with a mitzvah,15 to make measurements concerning a mitzvah - e.g., to measure a mikveh to see if it contains [the required] quantity,16 or a cloth to see if it is [large enough to] contract ritual impurity.17
Charity may be pledged to the poor.18 We may go to synagogues and houses of study - and even to theaters and halls of gentiles - to take care19 of matters of public interest on the Sabbath.
One may speak about arranging a marriage for a girl, or arranging study - whether the study of Torah or the study of a profession20 - for a boy.21 We may visit the sick and comfort mourners.22 A person who goes to visit a sick person should say, "It is the Sabbath [when it is forbidden] to plead;23 healing will come soon."24
One may go to the end of the Sabbath boundary to wait until nightfall to take care of the needs of a bride or to take care of the needs of a deceased person [- e.g.], to bring a coffin or shrouds.
[When involved in these matters,] one may tell [a colleague,] "Go to.... If you don't find [the required object] there, bring it from...." "If you can't find it at one hundred, bring it [even] at two hundred." [This is permitted] as long as one does not mention the [maximum] sum he is willing to pay.25
[The rationale for] all these and similar [leniencies] is that [they concern] a mitzvah. And the [verse from which the prohibitions against mundane activity is derived] states, "pursuing your desires." "Your desires" are forbidden; God's desires are permitted.
Halacha 6
One may set out on a ship on the Mediterranean Sea on Friday for the sake of the fulfillment of a mitzvah.26 One [must] make an agreement with [the captain] to halt [the journey] on the Sabbath. If, [however,] he does not halt [the journey, it is of no consequence].27
We may nullify28 vows on the Sabbath, both vows that must be nullified for the sake of the Sabbath and vows whose nullification is not related to the Sabbath.29 One may ask a wise man to absolve [a person] of a vow if this is necessary for the sake of the Sabbath.30This is possible despite the fact that the person had the opportunity to have [himself] absolved [of the vow] before the Sabbath. [This license is granted] because all of the above matters concern a mitzvah.
Halacha 7
Punishments may not be administered [by the court] on the Sabbath. Although [administering] punishment fulfills a positive command [of the Torah], the observance of a positive commandment does not supersede [the observance of] the Sabbath [laws].
What is implied? A person who was sentenced to be lashed or executed by [the court] should not be lashed or executed on the Sabbath, as [Exodus 35:3] states: "Do not kindle a fire in all of your dwellings on the Sabbath."31 This [verse serves as] a warning to the court not to [execute a person by] burning on the Sabbath. The same principle applies regarding other punishments [administered by the court].32
Halacha 8
A person is permitted to guard his produce on the Sabbath regardless of whether it is detached from the earth or not. If another person comes to take it, or an animal or a wild beast comes to eat it, he may shout at them and beat them to drive them away.
[One might ask:] This involves tending to one's own concerns. Why is it permitted? Because33 one is prohibited only against acquiring new property that one does not possess, earning a wage, making a profit, or seeking to accrue [new] benefits. It is, however, permitted for a person to protect the interests that he already possesses. To what can this be compared? To locking one's house [to prevent] thieves [from entering].
Halacha 9
A person who protects his grains from birds or who protects his cucumbers and squash from beasts should not clap his hands and dance as he does during the week. [This is] a decree, [instituted] lest one pick up a pebble and throw it four cubits in the public domain.34
Halacha 10
All the actions that are forbidden as [part of the category of] sh'vut are not forbidden beyn hash'mashot,35[between sunset and the appearance of the stars].36 They are forbidden only on the Sabbath itself, and they are permitted during beyn hash'mashot,37 provided that [the activity] is necessary because of a mitzvah or a pressing matter.38
What is implied? During beyn hash'mashot it is permitted to climb a tree39 or to swim across water40 to bring a lulav or a shofar. Similarly, one may take aneruv that one has made down from a tree or out from a carmelit.41
Similarly, if one is concerned, anxious, and pressed concerning a matter, [an activity forbidden as] a sh'vut is permitted during beyn hash'mashot. If, however, the matter is not pressing, nor does it concern a mitzvah, it is forbidden. Therefore, one may not tithe produce that definitely has not been tithed,42 although the prohibition against tithing produce on the Sabbath was instituted as a sh'vut.43 One may, however, tithe produce of which one is unsure whether or not it has been tithed.44
Halacha 11
When a minor performs an activity on the Sabbath that is forbidden as a sh'vut - e.g., he plucks from [a plant growing in] a flower pot that does not have a hole, or he carries in a carmelit - the court is not obligated to prevent him from doing so. Similarly, if his father allows him to act in this manner, [the father] need not be rebuked.45
Halacha 12
The Sages forbade the carrying of certain objects on the Sabbath in the same manner as [one carries] during the week. Why was this prohibition instituted?46[Our Sages] said: If the prophets warned that the manner in which a person walks on the Sabbath should not resemble the manner in which he walks during the week, and similarly, one's conversation on the Sabbath should not resemble one's conversation during the week, as it is written, "[refraining from]... speaking about [mundane] matters," surely the manner in which one carries on the Sabbath should not resemble the manner in which one carries during the week.
In this manner, no one will regard [the Sabbath] as an ordinary weekday and lift up and repair articles, [carrying them] from room to room, or from house to house, or set aside stones and the like. [These restrictions are necessary] for since the person is idle and sitting at home, [it is likely that] he will seek something with which to occupy himself. Thus, he will not have ceased activity and will have negated the motivating principle for the Torah's commandment [Deuteronomy 5:14], "Thus... will rest."47
Halacha 13
Furthermore, when one searches for and carries articles that are used for a forbidden activity, it is possible that one will use them and thus be motivated to perform a [forbidden] labor.
[Another reason for this prohibition is] that there are some people who are not craftsmen and are always idle - e.g., tourists and those that stand on the street corners. These individuals never perform labor. Were they to be allowed to walk, talk, and carry as they do during the week, the result would be that their cessation of activity on [the Sabbath] would not be discernible. For this reason, [our Sages instituted] refraining from such activities,48 for the cessation of such activities is universally applicable.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
As stated in Chapter 21, Halachah 1, these two reasons are the source for the prohibitions placed in the category of sh'vut.
|
| 2. |
This restriction stems from the fact that the verse mentions, "Restraining your feet."
|
| 3. |
Rabbenu Asher, in his gloss on Shabbat 150a, associates this prohibition with discussing matters that are forbidden to be performed on the Sabbath itself. This thrust is reflected in the decisions ofShulchan Aruch HaRav 307:1 and the Mishnah Berurah 307:1.
The Rambam mentions these principles in Halachah 3. In this context, it can be noted that all the examples the Rambam gives in this halachah reflect activities forbidden on the Sabbath.
|
| 4. |
For the verse specifically mentions speech, thus excluding thought from the prohibition. Nevertheless, as the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 306:8) emphasizes, "It is a mitzvah not to think of these matters at all. Instead, one's attitude should be that all of one's work has been completed."
|
| 5. |
According to the later authorities, this prohibition applies only when it is obvious that one's intent is to take care of one's own needs. If, however, it appears that one is merely taking a pleasure stroll, there is no prohibition (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 306:2; Mishnah Berurah 306:1). See, however, the notes on the following halachah.
|
| 6. |
2000 cubits from one's place at the commencement of the Sabbath. (See Chapter 27, where this concept is discussed at length.)
The Maggid Mishneh states that by mentioning "the end of the Sabbath boundary," the Rambam alludes to a concept stated by Tosafot (Shabbat 150a) - i.e., that if one's field is within the Sabbath boundary, there is no difficulty and one may walk to it on the Sabbath so that one can begin work on Saturday night. If the field is at the end of the Sabbath boundary, it is obvious that one is walking to proceed to one's field. When the field is within the Sabbath limits, by contrast, it is not obvious that one's intent is to perform forbidden labor.
Although the Shulchan Aruch 307:9 quotes this law, the Magen Avraham 307:13 questions the rationale, for the verse from Isaiah quoted above appears to prohibit walking to facilitate the performance of any activity forbidden on the Sabbath, regardless of the appearance created.
|
| 7. |
As explained in the following halachah, this refers to a task that is prohibited on the Sabbath itself.
|
| 8. |
See Halachah 8.
|
| 9. |
Note the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 306:1), which states that this refers only to an animal that is able to walk on its own. If the animal is too young to walk on its own, it is forbidden to go and wait for it, since even if there were houses, one would be forbidden to carry the animal, because of the prohibition of muktzeh.
|
| 10. |
One may not, however, say, "I am riding," for riding is forbidden on the Sabbath (Mishnah Berurah307:30).
|
| 11. |
Similarly, he may ask the colleague to accompany him (Maggid Mishneh, Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 307:8).
|
| 12. |
Although both the employer and the employee understand the implication, since the employer is not making a direct statement - but merely an allusion - this is permitted. The Maggid Mishnehassociates this with the concept mentioned at the conclusion of the first halachah: speaking about forbidden matters is prohibited, but not thought. Since no forbidden matters are discussed, the fact that they are implied is of no consequence.
|
| 13. |
The Ramah (Orach Chayim 307:1) mentions that a person who enjoys talking about news and matters of this nature may engage in such discussions on the Sabbath, since this brings him pleasure. Needless to say, Torah scholars are encouraged to direct their attention to loftier matters (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 307:2).
|
| 14. |
The Maggid Mishneh equates activities which involve a mitzvah with matters of communal interest. He emphasizes that it is only the prohibitions against involvement with mundane matters that are relaxed because of the performance of a mitzvah. Other prohibitions - e.g., telling a gentile to perform a forbidden activity, or performing an act that resembles or that may lead to the performance of a forbidden labor (i.e., shvut) - are never relaxed, even for the sake of a mitzvah .
As the Rambam mentions (Chapter 6, Halachot 9-10), the prohibition against instructing a gentile to perform an act that is forbidden as a sh'vut is relaxed when a mitzvah is involved, but only when the prohibition is Rabbinic in origin.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 307:5) mentions an opinion permitting us to instruct a gentile to perform a forbidden act for matters of serious communal need, and also a more stringent opinion, that even forbids giving a gentile such instructions. The Ramah also notes a more lenient approach that allows one to tell a gentile to perform a task forbidden by the Torah. In practice, the Rambam's view, as interpreted by the Maggid Mishneh, is accepted by most authorities except in cases where a great loss is involved. In those instances, the leniency mentioned by the Shulchan Aruch is accepted.
|
| 15. |
The Magen Avraham 306:10 gives as an example, calculating the cost of a feast associated with a mitzvah.
|
| 16. |
A mikveh must contain 40 seah to be halachically acceptable.
|
| 17. |
As mentioned in Hilchot Keilim, Chapter 22, a piece of cloth is susceptible to contracting ritual impurity only if it is of a specific size. There are different sizes, depending on the type of cloth.
|
| 18. |
Or for the benefit of a synagogue or other charitable cause.
|
| 19. |
From the discussion of this matter by the later Rabbis, it appears that this phrase has two meanings: a) to examine and inspect a situation where the communal interest is involved; b) to plan out a course of action to deal with questions of this nature, and even to execute that plan, provided the only prohibition being violated is involvement in mundane affairs - for example, to speak to the gentile communal authorities.
|
| 20. |
For earning one's livelihood is a mitzvah of great esteem. (See also Hilchot Matnot Ani'im 10:18 and the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Avot 4:5.)
|
| 21. |
The details of financial arrangements involved in the marriage or the instructions should not, however, be discussed on the Sabbath (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 306:6).
|
| 22. |
See Shabbat 12b, which states that permission to visit the sick and comfort mourners on the Sabbath was granted "with difficulty," because it runs contrary to the mood of pleasure that should characterize the Sabbath (Rashi). Significantly, the treatment of this subject in Shulchan Aruch HaRav 287:1-3 appears to reflect a different emphasis from that of the Rambam.
|
| 23. |
In this context, note one of the Rambam's responsa (208), which emphasizes the importance of refraining from reciting any prayers containing requests whether of a communal or an individual nature on the Sabbath or on festivals.
|
| 24. |
As the Rambam writes in Hilchot Eivel 14:6, one of the fundamental aspects of the mitzvah of visiting the sick is to arouse divine mercy on their behalf. Nevertheless, since it is forbidden to plead on the Sabbath, one makes a statement that acknowledges God's kindness. The phrase cited by the Rambam is also used as the basis of the Mi Sheberach prayers recited for a sick person in the synagogue on the Sabbath.
|
| 25. |
Our translation is based on the commentary of the Maggid Mishneh, which is quoted by theShulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 306:3).
|
| 26. |
As the Rambam mentions in Chapter 30, Halachah 13, generally one is not allowed to set out on a sea journey less than three days before the Sabbath so that one will have already acclimated oneself to the travails of sea travel by the Sabbath. Nevertheless, because of the person's involvement in the performance of a mitzvah, this restriction is waived.
|
| 27. |
The later authorities maintain that particularly because a mitzvah is involved, if the gentile does not agree to halt the journey at the outset, one need not refrain from traveling with him (Mishnah Berurah 248:2).
|
| 28. |
The Torah gives a husband and a father the right to nullify vows made by his wife and daughter. (See Numbers, Chapter 30.)
|
| 29. |
The reason that all vows may be nullified on the Sabbath is that a vow can be nullified by a husband or father only on the day that he hears it. Therefore, if he were not able to nullify it on the Sabbath, he would never be able to nullify it in the future. To preserve this right, our Sages did not forbid nullifying vows on the Sabbath (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 30. |
In this instance, only the vows that are necessary to be absolved for the sake of the Sabbath may be absolved on the Sabbath, since there is nothing preventing one from absolving the other vows on the following day (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 31. |
Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 322) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 114) count this commandment as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
Note the Magen Avraham 339:3, which questions the Rambam's statements, asking why lashes that do not involve the violation of the Sabbath laws ares included in this prohibition. He explains that it is inevitable that the administration of lashes will result in bleeding.
Alternatively, the commandment teaches us that no cases of this nature may be judged on the Sabbath. The Minchat Chinuch (Mitzvah 114) favors this answer, for it also resolves another problem: Why is this restriction given the status of a separate mitzvah? Since the principle that the observance of a positive commandment does not supersede the observance of the Sabbath laws is already known, why is it necessary for the Torah to give us this commandment?
|
| 32. |
In his gloss on the Mishneh Torah, Rabbi Akiva Eiger notes that there is a principle that a person who refrains from performing a positive commandment should be beaten until he agrees to perform it. Since these blows are not given as punishment, but rather as a prod to motivate the person to observe the commandments, they may be administered on the Sabbath.
|
| 33. |
The Maggid Mishneh states that this explanation is an original thought developed by the Rambam.
|
| 34. |
The Tzafenat Paneach notes that when considering the minimum size of a pebble one is liable for carrying, Shabbat 81a mentions two opinions: a pebble large enough to throw at an animal and a pebble large enough to throw at a bird. He questions why in Chapter 18, Halachah 11, the Rambam follows the opinion that requires a pebble large enough to throw at an animal, when in this halachah the Rambam mentions a purpose to be served by a pebble large enough to scare away a bird.
In resolution, the Tzafenat Paneach explains that a pebble large enough to scare away a bird can serve a purpose as mentioned in this halachah. Nevertheless, as stated in Shabbat 79a, a person will not take the trouble of carrying an article that is tiny. Hence, the minimum measure for which one is liable for carrying must be more substantial.
|
| 35. |
Note the Mishnah Berurah 342:1, which states that this applies only when a person has not accepted the Sabbath. If, however, the person or the community in which he is living has accepted the Sabbath, these activities are forbidden even if a mitzvah is involved.
|
| 36. |
See Chapter 5, Halachah 4, which states that, "There is a doubt whether beyn hash'mashot is considered as part of the day or as part of the night." Although, as mentioned there, we act stringently regarding the observance of Torah prohibitions during this time, certain leniencies are granted regarding Rabbinic prohibitions, as the Rambam explains.
|
| 37. |
See S'deh Chemed (K'lalim, Pe'at HaSadeh 2:2) and others, who question whether or not the leniencies mentioned by the Rambam apply both beyn hash'mashot on Friday and beyn hash'mashot on Saturday. There is room to differentiate between them, because during beyn hash'mashot on Friday, the prohibition against these activities has not yet taken effect. On Saturday evening, by contrast, since the prohibitions have been in effect throughout the Sabbath, one might think that they need not be relaxed until the Sabbath has definitely concluded. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 342:1 rules that one may follow the more lenient view. See also the Be'ur Halachah342 who mentions this issue.
|
| 38. |
Significantly, most manuscript copies of the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Eruvin 3:3) state that the prohibitions in the category of sh'vut do not apply during beyn hash'mashot, without mentioning the qualification that the matter must be pressing or involve a mitzvah. In one of his responsa (Birkat Avraham, Responsum 14), Rabbenu Avraham, the Rambam's son, explains that the Rambam changed his perspective when composing the Mishneh Torah and adopted a more stringent view than he had originally held.
|
| 39. |
This is forbidden as a sh'vut, as stated in Chapter 21, Halachah 6.
|
| 40. |
This is forbidden as a sh'vut, as stated in Chapter 23, Halachah 5.
|
| 41. |
This refers to an eruv t'chumim (which allows a person to extend his Sabbath boundary), as stated in Hilchot Eruvin 6:9-10. Hilchot Eruvin 6:13, the Rambam states that during beyn hash'mashot, only an eruv chatzerot (which allows a person to carry in an enclosed area) may be made, but not an eruv t'chumim). The present ruling does not, however, represent a change of opinion. It is referring to an instance where the eruv was made before the commencement of the Sabbath, and the person merely desired to move it on the Sabbth.
|
| 42. |
Note the Birkat Avraham, loc. cit.,, which states that, even though tithing is itself a mitzvah, there is no obligation to tithe at a particular time. Here, the intent is that carrying out the activity beyn hash'mashot will allow the performance of a mitzvah that could not otherwise be performed. If that is true regarding tithing produce that definitely has not been tithed - e.g., to provide one with food for the Sabbath - one may separate tithes beyn hash'mashot.
|
| 43. |
As mentioned in Chapter 23, Halachot 9 and 14.
|
| 44. |
See Chapter 23, Halachah 15. Although tithing this produce involves a shvut and there is no mitzvah involved, this tithing is permitted, because the prohibition against using the produce is not that severe.
|
| 45. |
The Rambam's rulings here have aroused the attention of the commentaries. To understand his perspective, it is worthy to quote Chapter 12, Halachah 7:
Relevant concepts are also reflected in the Rambam's rulings, Hilchot Ma'achalot Asurot 17:27- 28:
According to the Rambam, the court is never obligated to restrain a child from performing a prohibited act, regardless of whether it originates from the Torah itself, or from Rabbinic decree. The child's father, however, is obligated to educate him. If the father fails to do so, the court should rebuke the father if he allows his child to violate prohibitions that stem from the Torah. If, however, the prohibitions stem from Rabbinic law, the court is not obligated to rebuke the father.
This explanation of the Rambam's approach is based on the statements of Rav Yosef Karo in theKessef Mishneh and on his rulings in the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 343:1). The Ramah (based on Tosafot, Shabbat 121a) introduces a different perspective: that when a child has reached an age when it is fit to educate him in the performance of the mitzvot, the obligation to educate him falls on the court as well. Therefore, they are obligated to restrain him from transgressing Jewish law.
|
| 46. |
In this and in the following halachah, the Rambam sets the conceptual basis for the prohibitions described as muktzeh. The particular laws that result from these principles are described in the following two chapters.
|
| 47. |
See the notes on the beginning of Chapter 21, which use this halachah as a support for the principle that the positive commandment to rest on the Sabbath is more than just a restatement of the negative commandment not to perform forbidden labor.
|
| 48. |
Walking, talking, and carrying.
|
| 49. |
The three reasons mentioned by the Rambam are the product of his own original thought. The Ra'avad notes that the Talmud (Shabbat 124b) mentions a further reason: lest one come to carry articles from one domain to another.
The Maggid Mishneh explains that the Rambam did not intend to negate the reason mentioned by the Talmud. Nevertheless, as Shabbat 123b mentions, the prohibition originally instituted was partially relaxed. The reasons why it was not relaxed entirely are stated by the Rambam.
|
| 50. |
The Rambam's wording implies that it is forbidden for a person to carry an article unless his act is purposeful. (See Chapter 25, Halachah 3 regarding which purposes are acceptable.) One may not carry a utensil, even one that is used for a permitted activity, without a purpose. (See also the gloss of the Maggid Mishneh on that halachah.)
|
Maaser - Chapter 4
Halacha 1
The obligation to tithe is not established for tevel1 according to Scriptural Law until one2 brings it3 into his home,4 as [implied by Deuteronomy 26:13]: "I removed the sacred produce from the home." [This applies] provided he brings the produce in through the gate, as [ibid.:12] states: "And you shall eat in your gates." If, however, he brought produce in from the roof or from the yard,5 he is exempt [from the obligation] to separate terumah and tithes.6
Halacha 2
It appears to me7 that lashes are not administered as required by Scriptural Law for eating tevel unless [the obligation to tithe] was established by bringing it into one's home as we explained according to the Oral Tradition.8 If, however, the obligation was established through one of the six ways that we mentioned,9he is given only stripes for rebellious conduct as mandated by Rabbinic Law.
Similarly, a person who partakes of produce which he desires to bring to the market place after the tasks necessary to prepare it have been completed receives only stripes for rebellious conduct, as we explained.10 For a person who completes [the tasks necessary to prepare his produce] for sale is obligated to tithe only according to Rabbinic Law.
Halacha 3
When a house is less than four cubits by four cubits in area, [bringing produce into it] does not establish an obligation.11 Similarly, [bringing produce onto] a roof does not establish an obligation12 even though [bringing it into] the house below would. If, however, the roof was not four cubits by four cubits in area, e.g., the house ascended on a slant, bringing [the produce] there does not absolve it from the obligation to tithe it.13 Instead, [the roof] is considered as part of the domain of the home.
Halacha 4
Leantos,14 guardhouses,15 summer shelters - i.e., four pillars with a roof on top of them without walls,16 and sukkot17 built by workers who dwell in the vineyard and the gardens in the summer,18 even though they dwell in them throughout the summer and [the sukkot] contain mills and chickens do not establish an obligation to tithe. Similarly, the outer sukkot built by potters19 and the sukkotfor the holiday [of Sukkot] during that festival do not establish an obligation.20For none of these are permanent dwellings.
Halacha 5
Leantos and guardhouses establish an obligation to tithe for their owners,21even though they do not create such an obligation for all people.22Similar, [bringing produce into] a school or a house of study23 creates an obligation to tithe for a person who abides there and teaches, because they are comparable to his home.24 They do not create an obligation for others.
Halacha 6
Halacha 7
Halacha 8
[Into] which type of courtyard must [produce be brought] for an obligation [to tithe] to be established? Any one in which utensils are protected within, one in which a person will not be embarrassed to eat there, or one in which were a person to enter, he would be asked: "What are you looking for?"33 The above also applies to a courtyard which has two inhabitants or is owned by two partners when one opens it and enters and then the other comes and enters or leaves and locks it. Since they open it and lock it, [bringing produce into] it establishes an obligation to tithe.34
Halacha 9
A gatehouse to a courtyard, an excedra,35 and a porch are governed by the same laws as a courtyard.36 If [bringing produce into] a courtyard would establish an obligation to tithe, [bringing produce into these] establishes an obligation. If not, an obligation is not established in these instances as well.37
Halacha 10
When there are two courtyards, one inside the other, [bringing produce into] either of them establishes an obligation to tithe.38 When a potter has [two]sukkot one leading to the other, [bringing produce into] the inner sukkahestablishes an obligation to tithe. [Bringing it into] the outer one does not.39[Bringing produce into] a store establishes an obligation like a home does.40
Halacha 11
Halacha 12
Halacha 13
When a person brings figs from a field to partake of them in a courtyard which is exempt from the obligation to tithe,46 but then he forgot and brought them into his home, he is permitted to take them out from the home and snack from them.47 Similarly, if he forget [and after taking them into his home], took them up to the roof,48 he may snack from them on the roof.
Halacha 14
When a courtyard has been plowed, it is considered like a garden51 and one may snack in it. [This applies] provided he plowed the majority [of the courtyard].52 If he sowed the majority of it,53 he may not snack in it.54The same law applies if he planted trees in it.55 If he planted trees in the courtyard to make it attractive,56 since the field has been plowed, he may snack from those trees [without tithing].
Halacha 15
When a fig tree is growing in a courtyard, one may eat57 figs from it one by one while exempt [from tithing]. If he gathers them together, he is obligated to tithe.58
When does the above apply? When he is standing on the ground. If, however, he climbs to the top59 of the fig tree, he may fill his bosom with them and eat them there. For the open space of a courtyard does not create an obligation to tithe.
Halacha 16
[If a fruit tree] was standing in a courtyard and leaning into a garden, one may partake of the tree while standing in the garden in his ordinary manner,60 as if the tree was planted in the garden.61 If [the tree] was planted in a garden and leaning into a courtyard, it is considered as if it was planted in the courtyard and one may only partake of them one at a time.
Halacha 17
When a vine is planted in a courtyard, one should not pick an entire cluster and partake of it. Instead, one should pick the grapes one by one.62 Similarly, with regard to pomegranates, one should not take the entire pomegranate, but instead should divide the pomegranate while it is on the tree and partake of the seeds from it. Similarly, with regard to a watermelon, one should bend it over to the ground and partake of it there.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
Produce from which the tithes (and/or terumah) have not been separated. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Berachot 7:1), the Rambam interprets this as a composite of the words tav lo, meaning "it is not good."
|
| 2. |
From Chapter 3, Halachah 7, and Halachah 5, of this chapter, one might surmise that this applies whether the owner of the produce or another person brought it into the owner's home.
|
| 3. |
From Chapter 3, Halachah 4, it appears that this refers to produce for which all the tasks necessary to prepare it were completed.
|
| 4. |
Although according to Rabbinic Law, it is sufficient to bring the produce into one's courtyard as stated in Chapter 3, Halachah 3, according to Scriptural Law, it must be brought into one's home.
|
| 5. |
More particularly, the term karfef used by the Rambam, refers to an unprotected yard.
|
| 6. |
He is, however, liable according to Rabbinic Law, in these instances. In his notes to Berachot 35b, the Meiri writes that even according to Scriptural Law, it is forbidden to do this as an initial preference; the leniency is granted only after the fact.
|
| 7. |
This expression introduces a deduction for which the Rambam has no definite prior source in the Rabbinic literature. The Kessef Mishneh questions why the Rambam uses this expression when the Jerusalem Talmud (Ma'aserot 3:1) explicitly states that the obligation established by three of the six situations is Rabbinic in origin. He explains that there is no explicit source for the other three. Hence, this expression is appropriate.
|
| 8. |
In the previous halachah.
|
| 9. |
In Chapter 3, Halachah 3.
|
| 10. |
See Chapter 2, Halachah 1.
|
| 11. |
Since it is so small, it is not fit to serve as a dwelling. Based on Hilchot Mezuzah 6:2, one might assume that tithes are required if the home comprises this area even though it is not square in shape.
|
| 12. |
For roofs are not considered as dwellings.
|
| 13. |
I.e., since the roof is small, it is not considered as an independent entity, but instead, is considered as part of the home (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 14. |
Shelters made of branches and wood [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aserot3:7].
|
| 15. |
Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid.).
|
| 16. |
Structures constructed to provide shade from the summer sun.
|
| 17. |
Booths that do not have permanent roofs.
|
| 18. |
This is the meaning of the term sukkot Ginosar in the mishnah (loc. cit.). Ginosar (the area around Lake Kinneret) was known for the quality and abundance of its produce. Workers would be hired to pick this produce during the harvest and they would construct semi-permanent structures in which they would dwell over the summer.
|
| 19. |
Potters would construct sukkot with two rooms. The inner room would be their dwelling, while the outer room would serve as a workshop and storefront. If produce was brought into the innersukkah, the obligation to tithe is established. See the notes to Halachah 9 with regard to this ruling.
|
| 20. |
Note the clarification in the following halachah.
|
| 21. |
I.e., if the owners of these structures bring produce into them, they are obligated to tithe it before partaking of it.
|
| 22. |
I.e., if a person brings produce into a house belonging to a colleague, he is not obligated to tithe it. On the surface, the question may be raised: Even if a person brings produce into a colleague's home, he is not obligated to tithe it, as stated in Halachah 1. Why then are a leanto and a guardhouse singled out here?
It is possible to explain, however, that if a person makes it a practice of bringing produce into a colleague's home, he becomes obligated to tithe it when he does so. In contrast, even if he makes a practice of bringing produce into his colleague's leanto, an obligation to tithe is not established, because a leanto is not a permanent dwelling.
|
| 23. |
From the Jerusalem Talmud (Ma'aserot 3:7), it appears that the term "school" refers to a school where young children are taught Scripture, while the term "house of study" refers to a study center where older students are taught the Oral Law.
|
| 24. |
Even if he does not have an apartment there, since he is continually there, it is considered as his established abode (Radbaz, gloss to Halachah 6).
|
| 25. |
In contrast to the house of study mentioned in the previous halachah, this is a house of study for adults where they meet and share ideas (Radbaz).
|
| 26. |
For the sexton, as was common in certain situations.
|
| 27. |
Since it contains a dwelling for the sexton, even the portion of the structure that serves as a synagogue or a house of study is considered as part of a dwelling (Radbaz). See also parallel rulings in Hilchot Mezuzah 6:6 and Hilchot Shabbat 28:4.
|
| 28. |
Our translation is based on the gloss of Rabbi Yosef Korcus who cites II Chronicles 9:25.
|
| 29. |
For until the produce has been brought to a dwelling or the marketplace, it is still considered as being in an intermediate phase of preparation.
|
| 30. |
In this instance as well, if the structure contains an apartment, e.g., for a guard or the like, bringing produce into any part of the structure establishes an obligation to tithe.
|
| 31. |
A distinction must, however, be made. The obligation to tithe produce brought into a home is Scriptural in origin and the obligation to tithe produce brought into a courtyard is of Rabbinic origin.
|
| 32. |
In Halachah 1, the Rambam makes such statements with regard to bringing produce into a home. He deduces that similar concepts apply with regard to bringing it into a courtyard.
|
| 33. |
All of these signs are indications that the courtyard is regarded as private property and not the public domain.
|
| 34. |
I.e., although two people share it, and one may carelessly leave it open, since the other locks it, it is regarded as private property. Hence bringing produce into it establishes the obligation to tithe.
|
| 35. |
A structure common in Greek and Roman times with two or three walls and a roof. (Occasionally, there would be an opening in the roof.)
|
| 36. |
In and of themselves, these structures are not considered dwellings and bringing produce into them would not create an obligation. Nevertheless, since they lead to and/or are auxiliaries to an area that is considered part of a permanent dwelling, they are considered as part of that dwelling.
The Radbaz notes that in Halachah 4 and in the following halachah, the Rambam states that bringing produce into a potter's outer sukkah does not create an obligation, while bringing it into the inner sukkah does. Why don't we, he asks, apply the same principle? Let us say that the outersukkah is an entrance and/or auxiliary to the inner one. He explains that for the inner sukkah to create an obligation is itself a new development and the obligation is not strong enough to be extended to the outer sukkah.
|
| 37. |
For as above, in and of themselves, these structures are not considered significant dwellings.
|
| 38. |
For they are both considered as permanent structures, leading to and auxiliary to the home.
|
| 39. |
See the notes to Halachah 4 and those to the previous halachah. The commentaries question why the Rambam repeats the same law in such close proximity.
|
| 40. |
Since a person spends much time in his store, it is considered as equivalent to a home for him.
|
| 41. |
The Radbaz emphasizes that if the person spends a Sabbath on his journey, the commencement of the Sabbath establishes an obligation to tithe as stated in Chapter 3, Halachah 3.
|
| 42. |
I.e., if he does not transport the produce to his intended destination, but instead, changes his mind in the middle, and returns with it (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 43. |
Who sell perfumes to women [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aserot 2:3)].
|
| 44. |
This is speaking about their own produce or produce which was given to them to partake of (ibid.). If they were intending to sell the produce, there is an immediate obligation to tithe it. It is like bringing it to the marketplace (see Chapter 3, Halachah 2).
|
| 45. |
Rav Yosef Korcus explains that in this instance - in contrast to the previous halachah - the obligation falls before they reach their ultimate destination. The rationale for the distinction is that since these traveling salesmen do not have an ultimate goal, wherever they spend the night is significant for them.
|
| 46. |
I.e., one which is not guarded (Halachah 8).
|
| 47. |
For bringing produce into his home does not establish an obligation to tithe unless the person brings them there intentionally (see Chapter 3, Halachah 5). The person must, however, remove them from the home. He may not partake of them in the home without tithing them.
|
| 48. |
For bringing produce to a roof does not establish an obligation to tithe (Halachah 3).
|
| 49. |
This is the version in the standard printed texts of the Mishneh Torah and is also found in authoritative manuscripts and early printings. The version of the Mishneh Torah which the Radbaz and Rav Yosef Korcus followed states: "brought them to dry them on the roof."
|
| 50. |
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's ruling, explaining that bringing produce into a friend's courtyard does not establish an obligation to tithe unless one does so intentionally, but not when one does so out of forgetfulness. He also cites a version of the Tosefta (Ma'aserot 2:10) which supports his understanding.
Rav Yosef Korcus offers two justifications for the Rambam's ruling. First of all, he states that the phrase "he should not partake of them" could be interpreted as referring to the owner of the courtyard and not to the owner of the produce. Alternatively, he explains that even if it refers to the owner of the produce, since the courtyard he brings it into is part of a permanent dwelling, he should not partake of it until he tithes it. Leniency was given to traveling salesmen (Halachah 13), because they brought the produce into the courtyard with the intent of removing it immediately. In this instance, however, the owner does not necessarily intend to remove it immediately. Why then should he not be obligated to tithe?
In his gloss to Chapter 5, Halachah 8, the Ra'avad notes a seeming contradiction to the Rambam's ruling here. In his gloss to that halachah, the Radbaz explains that the stringency here is to correct a misimpression that might result in the eyes of an observer. The Kessef Mishneh, however, finds the Rambam's rulings difficult to reconcile and suggests that there is a printing error here.
Nevertheless, Rav Yosef Korcus continues, the Rambam's statements appear to be self-contradictory, because in the previous clause it appears that if one brings produce into a home after forgetting, he is not obligated to tithe it, but this clause states that if he brings it into his colleague's courtyard, he is. Seemingly, bringing it into one's own home would be a stronger factor than bringing it into a colleague's courtyard. Among the resolutions he offers is that when a person forgets and brings the produce into his own home, he is certainly acting inadvertently, without intent. If, however, he brings it into his colleague's courtyard, that could be considered as a conscious change of mind.
|
| 51. |
I.e., it is no longer considered as an extension of the home, but as a separate entity like a field.
|
| 52. |
For once he has plowed the majority, he will certainly plow the remainder.
|
| 53. |
But not the entirety of the courtyard.
|
| 54. |
The rationale is that since he did not sow the entire courtyard, we assume that his sowing is only temporary and soon, he will revert to considering the courtyard as that and not as a field.
|
| 55. |
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam on this point, maintaining that planting trees does not remove land from the category of a courtyard. He explains that the Rambam used an incorrect version of the Jerusalem Talmud (Ma'aserot 3:10). For the Rambam's version of that passage conflicts with the rulings of Eruvin 23a regarding eruvin. The Kessef Mishneh explains that the obligations of eruvin and tithes are governed by different principles and deductions cannot necessarily be made from one situation to the other.
|
| 56. |
This indicates that he is not intending to uproot them and return the area to the function of an ordinary courtyard. Hence, it is considered as an orchard and he may snack from the produce before tithing.
|
| 57. |
In this and in the following halachot, the intent is to snack, not to eat a significant meal.
|
| 58. |
For he is then considered to have completed the work associated with harvesting figs and they are in a courtyard. Compare to Chapter 5, Halachah 3.
|
| 59. |
I.e., any place above three handbreadts off the ground (Radbaz).
|
| 60. |
I.e., he can collect them instead of eating from them one by one.
|
| 61. |
In other instances (see Ma'aserot 3:10), the foliage of the tree is considered as being in the same domain as its trunk. In this instance, however, the ruling depends on the domain in which the produce is collected.
|
| 62. |
Following the same logic stated in Halachah 15.
|
| 63. |
This applies to an instance where one intentionally brought the produce into the courtyard. If one did so unintentionally, there is no obligation to tithe as stated in Halachah 13.
|
| 64. |
I.e., once the produce has entered the courtyard, the obligation to tithe is irrevocably established.
|
| 65. |
Our translation is taken from Rav Kappach's translation of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aserot 3:10).
|
| 66. |
One in which the majority was sown as stated in Halachah 14.
|
Maaser - Chapter 5
Halacha 1
When a person purchases detached produce to partake of it, he is obligated to tithe it according to Rabbinic decree as we explained.1
When is the obligation [to tithe] established? When [the purchaser] pays [for the produce], even if he has not drawn it [into his domain].2 If [a potential purchaser] was selecting and setting aside, selecting and setting aside, even if he did so the entire day and even if he made up his mind to purchase the produce,3 he is not obligated to tithe it. If he is a God-fearing person, from the time he made up his mind, he should tithe it.4 Afterwards, if he desires to return it to the seller, he may return it.5
Halacha 2
Halacha 3
When a person tells a colleague: "Here is an isar8 and give me five figs for it," he may eat them one by one and he is exempt [from the obligation to tithe]. If [the seller] gathers them together, he is obligated to tithe them.
[If he says:] "Here is an isar for 20 figs that I will select,"9 he may select them one by one and eat them.10 "...For a cluster of grapes that I will select," he may pick them individually from the tree and partake of them. "...For a pomegranate that I will select," he may remove the seeds while on the tree and partake of them. "...For a watermelon that I will select," he may bend it over to the ground and partake of it.
If he cut off the figs and gathered them together or cut off the cluster of grapes or the watermelon, he is obligated to tithe, because he purchased the produce in its detached state.11 If, however, he told him: "Here is an isar for these 20 figs," "...for these two12 clusters of grapes," "...for these two pomegranates," or "...for these two watermelons," he may harvest the produce in an ordinary manner and snack on it," for the obligation to tithe was not established, for he purchased the produce while it was attached.13
Halacha 4
When a person exchanges [produce]14 with a colleague and each have the intent of eating, an obligation has been established to tithe both lots of produce, for they have been purchased while detached.15 [If they are exchanged while attached, with] each one having to reap the others crops, an obligation has not been established for either of them, for a sale does not establish an obligation [to tithe] unless the work associated with its preparation is completed as we explained.16
If one purchased produce to eat17 in an exchange and the other purchased produce to reap in the same exchange, the one who purchased produce to eat is obligated to tithe, while the obligation to tithe has not been established for the one who purchased produce to reap.
Halacha 5
When a person tells a colleague: "Go out and gather 20 figs of mine for yourself18 and I will fill my gut with your produce," both are exempt.19 This is not considered as an exchange that is comparable to a sale.20 If he gathers [the produce] together and partakes of it, he is liable.21 [Giving produce as] a present does not establish an obligation to tithe as a sale does.22
Halacha 6
When a common person23 is passing through the marketplace and saying: "Take figs,"24 one may partake of them25 and one is exempt [from the obligation to tithe], for a present does not establish such an obligation.26
[Different rules apply when the recipients] brings the produce home. If the majority of the people [who harvest] bring their produce home [before taking it to the marketplace], one must certainly separate the tithes.27 If most of the people take the produce directly to the market place, he should only make the separations28 as one does for demai,29 for perhaps he tithed it and then brought it to the marketplace.
If [the common person] said: "Take them and bring them to your homes,"30when one takes them home, he must tithe them as one tithes demai.31 If [the common person] gave him a large amount of produce - even if he told him: "Take it and eat it,"32 - it is as if he told him, "Take it and bring it home."33 He may not partake of it until he makes the separations as one does for demai.34Similarly, if he gave him produce that is not usually eaten uncooked or the recipient was a person of stature who would not ordinarily eat in the marketplace, he should make the separations as one does for demai.
Halacha 7
If there were two [prospective recipients] and [the common person] said to one: "Take it and partake of it [here in the marketplace]," and he told the other: "Take it and bring it home," the first may partake of it and be exempt [from the obligation to tithe],35 while the second is obligated if he eats.36
Halacha 8
Similarly,37 if there were people sitting at the gate [of a courtyard] or in a store and [the common person] told them: "Take [this produce] and partake of it," they may partake of it38 and are exempt [from the obligation to tithe].39 The owner of the gate or the owner of the store may not partake of it until he makes the separations as one does for demai. For it is as if [the common person] told these people: "Take it and bring it home," for [these places] are considered like their homes.40 As we already explained,41 having produce pass through a house that is not one's own does not establish [an obligation to tithe].42
Halacha 9
[The following rules apply when one] hires workers to perform work with him concerning produce, whether produce that has been detached or that which is attached. Since [the workers] have the right to partake of the produce with which they are working according to Scriptural Law,43 they may partake of it and are exempt from tithing.44
[Different rules apply if the employer] agreed to a condition that allowed them to partake of produce to which the Torah did not entitle them, e.g., the worker stipulated that his son could partake of the produce with him, his son could partake of the produce as payment of his wages, or that he would be able to [continue] partaking of the produce which was harvested after the work [involved in its preparation] was completed, he is forbidden to partake of the produce until he tithes it. [The rationale is that] since he is partaking of the produce because of the condition, he is like a purchaser.45
Halacha 10
Halacha 11
If one hired [a worker] to hoe around onions49 and he stipulated that he could partake of the green onions,50 he can cut off leaf by leaf and partake of them [without tithing], if he gathered them together, he is obligated.51
If a worker52 stipulated that he could eat a litra53 of olives, he may eat them one by one [without having to tithe them]. If he gathered them together, he is obligated to tithe. [The rationale is that] since he is eating a fixed measure, he is considered as a purchaser and [in such an instance,] if the produce is gathered together, his obligation to tithe is established. If he did not make a stipulation and instead, was eating as authorized by Torah Law, he may gather together and eat as much as he desires,54 provided he does not dip them in salt. If he dips them in salt,55 he is permitted [to eat them] one by one [without tithing].56[To eat them] two by two is forbidden, for the obligation to tithe is established by dipping them in salt.57
Halacha 12
When a worker was performing work with lower quality figs,58 he should not partake59 of higher quality figs.60 If he was performing work with higher quality figs, he should not partake of lower quality figs unless he tithes them. He is permitted, however, to refrain from eating until he reaches the higher quality figs.
Halacha 13
When a person takes workers out to his field to perform work for him there,61 if he is not required to provide them with food, they may partake of the produce of the field62 [when granted permission by the owner],63 and they are exempt from the tithes,64provided the tasks associated with [the preparation of the produce] are not completed.65If, however, he is required to provide them with food, they should not eat [of the produce of the field] even though they have not completed their tasks.66 [The rationale is that] we do not pay a debt fromtevel.67 [Even in such a situation, the workers] should partake of the figs one by one. They may not, however, [partake of those] in a basket or in a container or those set aside.68
Halacha 14
Halacha 15
Halacha 16
When a person places wine into a cooked dish that is hot75 or he places oil in a pot or a baking dish when they are boiling, he establishes an obligation to tithe. If he mixes wine with hot water, he establishes an obligation to tithe. Needless to say, that if he cooks wine, even in the wine press, it is forbidden to drink from it unless he tithes it.
Halacha 17
Halacha 18
When a person salts produce in the field, an obligation to tithe is established.81If, however, he dips olives into salt one by one and eats them, he is exempt. A person who opens olives so their fluid82 will flow out, is exempt. A person who removes olives from the storage vat,83 may dip them in salt one by one and eat them. If, however, he salted [several] and served them, he is obligated [to tithe]. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
Halacha 19
Halacha 20
Halacha 21
When children hid figs for the Sabbath and forgot to tithe them, one should not partake of them Saturday night until they are tithed.89
Halacha 22
If there was a fig tree that was designated for one to partake of its produce on the Sabbath90 and one gathered a basket [of these figs], one may not partake of them91until he tithes them. [This stringency was established,] because these figs are designated for the Sabbath and the Sabbath establishes an obligation to tithe.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
See Chapter 2, Halachot 1-2 which explain that according to Scriptural Law, one is obligated to tithe produce only when he harvests it for his own personal use. Similarly, one who purchases produce is not liable to tithe it according to Scriptural Law.
As indicated by the following halachah, this applies when the purchaser bought the produce to partake of it. If he purchased it as merchandise, the obligation to tithe does not take effect until one purchases it with the intent of partaking of it.
|
| 2. |
With regard to the laws of acquisition, according to Scriptural Law, the payment of money brings about a kinyan, the transfer of an object from one person's domain to another. Nevertheless, our Sages decreed that such a transfer should be brought about by drawing the object to be acquired out of the seller's domain (meshichah; see Hilchot Mechirah 3:5). Nevertheless, with regard to the obligation to tithe, they did not alter the Scriptural Law.
|
| 3. |
For making up his mind does not establish a binding obligation.
|
| 4. |
For a Torah sage should go beyond the letter of the law and accept financial responsibilities that are not mandated by Torah Law. See Hilchot De'ot, the conclusion of ch. 5.
|
| 5. |
The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh emphasize that he should not return the produce unless the seller agrees. Nevertheless, even if the seller agrees to accept the produce, the purchaser must make restitution from his own produce or funds for the produce that he tithed.
|
| 6. |
This applies even if the work necessary to prepare it has been completed.
|
| 7. |
Although our Sages required one who purchases produce to tithe it, they instituted this obligation only when one intended to partake of it himself, just as the Scriptural obligation to tithe applies only for a person who harvests produce to partake of it himself (Siftei Cohen 331:119).
|
| 8. |
A coin used in the Talmudic era of moderate value.
|
| 9. |
His wording implies that he acquires them after he selects them and picks them from the tree, for the terms of purchase state that he would "select it," i.e., detach it.
|
| 10. |
Without tithing.
|
| 11. |
I.e., though it was attached when he negotiated the deal, the purchase takes effect after he detaches it. Hence, he is obligated to tithe the produce, because a sale is one of the factors that establish such an obligation [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aserot 2:6)].
|
| 12. |
The Radbaz questions why the Rambam mentions two clusters of figs. The same laws would apply if only one cluster was involved. He explains that since it is not common for people to purchase a large amount of produce while it is still attached to the ground, it is important to emphasize that this law applies even when he purchases a large amount.
|
| 13. |
And a sale of attached produce does not convey an obligation to tithe.
|
| 14. |
As stated in Hilchot Mechirah 5:1, an exchange is considered as equivalent to a sale.
|
| 15. |
Hence it is forbidden even to snack from them.
|
| 16. |
Chapter 3, Halachah 3.
|
| 17. |
I.e., detached produce.
|
| 18. |
I.e., the produce is on the trees and it does not become the other person's until he picks it.
|
| 19. |
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and maintains that the person who partakes of a particular number of figs is obligated to tithe them. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh justify the Rambam's ruling.
|
| 20. |
Instead, it is considered as if each person gave the other a present.
|
| 21. |
For partaking of untithed produce.
|
| 22. |
There are certain dimensions of Jewish business law in which a present is considered as a sale and others in which it is not (see Hilchot Gezeilah 9:13; Hilchot Mechirah 29:14). The Jerusalem Talmud (Ma'aserot 2:1) states that even those authorities who maintain that giving a present should be considered as a sale (see Hilchot Shemitah VeYoval 11:19) agree that this stringency should not be enforced in the present age, because in the present age, the obligation to tithe is of Rabbinic origin. The Rambam mentions this leniency without differentiating between the era when the obligation to tithe was Scriptural and the present age, because he maintains that the entire obligation to tithe produce obtained through purchase is of Rabbinic origin.
|
| 23. |
Who is not necessarily relied upon with regard to tithes.
|
| 24. |
As presents [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aserot 2:1)].
|
| 25. |
As a snack.
|
| 26. |
For we assume that the produce has not been taken home and thus has not incurred the obligation to be tithed. Hence, one is permitted to snack from it without tithing (ibid.).
|
| 27. |
Since the common person passed through the marketplace and did not stand there to sell his produce, we assume that he is one of those who brings his produce home. Furthermore, we proceed on the assumption that he has not taken the produce home yet and thus it never incurred the obligation to be tithed. Therefore when the recipients take it home, it incurs that obligation for the first time. Indeed, they must separate not only the tithes, but also terumah.
|
| 28. |
These separations must be made, for in such a situation, the produce incurs the obligation to be tithed after the work associated with its preparation was completed (see Chapter 3, Halachah 1).
|
| 29. |
As will be explained in Chapter 9, in the Second Temple period, the common people became somewhat lax with regard to the mitzvah of separating tithes. When they became aware of this situation, the Sages ordained that one should not partake of produce from a common person without tithing it, for perhaps he did not do so. One should not, however, recite a blessing, for it is possible that it was tithed. Similarly in this instance, it is possible that the common person tithed his produce, but it is possible that he did not.
|
| 30. |
I.e., he is assuring the recipients that they may take the produce home without qualms because it has already been tithed [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.)].
|
| 31. |
For we do not accept the common person's word (ibid.).
|
| 32. |
Which could be interpreted as assurance that the produce had not been taken home by the common person and thus it has not yet been tithed.
|
| 33. |
Because a large amount of produce will certainly not be eaten in the marketplace. We do not rely on the common person's assurance that he tithed it or that he will tithe it in the future.
|
| 34. |
For we are unsure of whether or not it was tithed or not. The same concepts apply with regard to the instances mentioned in the later clauses.
|
| 35. |
As in the first clause of the previous halachah.
|
| 36. |
As in the later clause. The fact that his statements are self-contradictory is not a matter of concern, for the obligation to tithe is Rabbinic in origin and our Sages established their rules as general guidelines to be applied even if some ramifications are difficult to understand (Aruch HaShulchan).
|
| 37. |
I.e., here to, the above principles produce seemingly contradictory rulings.
|
| 38. |
As a snack. They may not eat a significant meal.
|
| 39. |
Even if it is brought within the gate or the store.
|
| 40. |
For they are located there on a consistent basis [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aserot 2:2)].
|
| 41. |
Chapter 4, Halachah 11. As the Ra'avad notes, the Rambam's decision here appears somewhat contradictory to his ruling there. See the notes to that halachah.
|
| 42. |
And thus, the other people in the store or gate are not obligated to tithe.
|
| 43. |
See Hilchot Sechirut, ch. 12, based on Deuteronomy 23:25-26, which describes a worker's right to partake of the produce with which he is working.
|
| 44. |
Because the worker does not acquire the produce that he eats. Instead, he is eating because of the Torah's license. Hence, he is not required to separate tithes (Siftei Cohen 331:123).
|
| 45. |
Who must tithe his produce as stated above.
|
| 46. |
To remove weeds so that the tree will grow better. In such an instance, he is not entitled to partake of the olives according to Scriptural Law, because his work does not involve the produce itself. See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aserot 3:3).
|
| 47. |
As In Chapter 4, Halachah 15, et al. For in this manner, the work associated with the olives is not completed.
|
| 48. |
Because collecting even a small number of them would be considered as the completion of a task. He is obligated to tithe, because since he is eating due to the stipulation, it is considered as a purchase.
|
| 49. |
I.e., to remove small onions and/or weeds from an onion patch so that the large onions would have the opportunity to grow.
|
| 50. |
I.e., the leaves of the onions. According to Scriptural Law, the worker is not allowed to partake of the onions, because his efforts to do not complete the preparation of this produce (Hilchot Sechirut 12:4). Nevertheless, this owner agreed to allow the worker to partake of the onion leaves.
|
| 51. |
As explained in the previous halachah.
|
| 52. |
Who was performing work with the olives that would entitle him to partake of them according to Scriptural Law, e.g., he was harvesting them.
|
| 53. |
A Talmudic measure equivalent to half a log, 171 cc according to Shiurei Torah, 300 cc according to Chazon Ish.
|
| 54. |
As stated in Halachah 9.
|
| 55. |
It must be emphasized that we are speaking about an instance where the employer gives the worker special license to dip the olives in salt. Otherwise, he is forbidden to do so, as apparent from Hilchot Sechirut 12:10 (Rambam LeAm).
|
| 56. |
See Halachah 18.
|
| 57. |
As stated in Chapter 3, Halachah 3.
|
| 58. |
Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aserot 2:8).
|
| 59. |
Without separating tithes.
|
| 60. |
Because that is not the species of produce with which he is working.
|
| 61. |
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aserot 3:2), the Rambam states that we are not speaking about workers employed to harvest the produce of the field, for they would have a right to partake of this produce according to Scriptural Law. Instead, we are speaking of workers who are plowing or performing other similar tasks.
|
| 62. |
They may partake of the produce freely, not merely one at a time.
|
| 63. |
This addition is made on the basis of the gloss of the Radbaz.
|
| 64. |
For a present is not considered like a sale and does not obligate the separation of tithes, as stated in Halachah 5.
|
| 65. |
As stated at the beginning of Chapter 3. If the tasks were completed, it would be forbidden to partake of a significant meal from this produce.
|
| 66. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 9. The Radbaz mentions that the produce must have matured to the extent that it could be obligated to tithed. Otherwise, there would be no prohibition in paying one's debt with it.
|
| 67. |
And since the owner is required to provide them with food, allowing them to partake of this produce would be equivalent to paying a debt.
|
| 68. |
For the work associated with this produce is completed and it is forbidden to partake of it unless it is tithed.
|
| 69. |
I.e., cook without spices.
|
| 70. |
In brine, the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aserot 4:1).
|
| 71. |
This obligation is, however, merely Rabbinic in origin.
|
| 72. |
Our Sages [the Jerusalem Talmud (Nedarim 6:1)] raise this question and leave it unresolved. See the Radbaz who mentions instances where smoking is considered as cooking and others when it is not.
|
| 73. |
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.), the Rambam explains that when produce was picked before it was ripened, it would be buried in this manner to hasten its ripening and softening process.
|
| 74. |
Although this activity helps prepare them to be eaten, it is not considered as cooking or pickling (Radbaz; see also the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, loc. cit.).
|
| 75. |
Apparently, this ruling applies even if the cooked food has been removed from the fire and placed in another utensil (a kli sheni). See Radbaz and Chapter 3, Halachah 15.
|
| 76. |
The Radbaz states that this applies whether the spices were untithed and the oil had been tithed previously or the oil was untithed and the spices had been tithed previously.
|
| 77. |
If they were not brought home. Crushing these pungent herbs and mixing them with oil is equivalent to cooking them.
|
| 78. |
Creating a liquid (wine) from the grapes is equivalent to cooking.
|
| 79. |
Containing other food.
|
| 80. |
Because the wine was absorbed immediately by the food in the pot and never became a distinct entity. We are speaking about food that is cold. Otherwise, exposing the wine to heat would establish the obligation as stated in the previous halachah (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 81. |
As stated in Chapter 3, Halachah 3.
|
| 82. |
A white fluid that resembles milk in its appearance [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aserot 4:1)].
|
| 83. |
Where the olives are kept until they become soft and fit to be squeezed for their oil (14ibid.|ERROR:@|13 4:3).
|
| 84. |
See Hilchot Terumah 5:14,15 which give examples of instances where a person made an improper separation of terumah and hence, was required to separate terumah a second time.
|
| 85. |
Chapter 3, Halachah 3, states that separating terumah creates an obligation to tithe the remaining produce. In this halachah, the Rambam emphasizes that even if the separation of terumah was defective and terumah had to be separated a second time, the obligation to tithe has still taken effect (Radbaz).
|
| 86. |
As stated in Chapter 3, Halachah 3, the onset of the Sabbath establishes an obligation to tithe. Nevertheless, this applies only when the tasks associated with the preparation of the produce was completed beforehand (Beitzah 35a).
|
| 87. |
The rationale is that since the work associated with them has been completed, it is possible to partake of them on the Sabbath. Now eating any food on the Sabbath is significant for it is a dimension of the mitzvah of oneg Shabbat, taking pleasure in the Sabbath. Hence, the obligation to tithe is established (Siftei Cohen 331:127).
|
| 88. |
Even a snack.
|
| 89. |
For the onset of the Sabbath establishes an obligation to tithe as above.
The Rambam is quoting the Mishnah (Ma'aserot 4:2). The Jerusalem Talmud raises the question: Why is it necessary to state that the children were intending to partake of them on the Sabbath? Even if that was not their intent, the commencement of the Sabbath would have established the obligation to tithe. The Jerusalem Talmud answers that the new insight is that since it was children who hid the produce, it would be permitted to be eaten as a snack on Friday. If, however, adults set aside the produce for use on the Sabbath, it is not permitted to snack from it on Friday. See also Siftei Cohen 331:129.
|
| 90. |
Its figs were of a high quality and hence, set aside to be used on the Sabbath when one must use produce of the highest quality.
|
| 91. |
Even during the week (Radbaz).
|
| 92. |
I.e., snacking. Eating a significant amount establishes an obligation to tithe.
|
| 93. |
The tithing should be done before the Sabbath, because it is forbidden to tithe on the Sabbath itself (Hilchot Shabbat 23:9).
|
| 94. |
Since he began partaking of them before the commencement of the Sabbath and places them aside so that he would not partake of them on the Sabbath, their status does not change. He need not tithe them if he partakes of them after the Sabbath (Siftei Cohen 331:130).
|
Maaser - Chapter 6
Halacha 1
One may rub the surface of figs and grapes [of tevel];1 this does not cause a [significant] loss.2 Whatever is forbidden for non-priests to partake of with regard to terumah, e.g., the seeds or the like,3 may not be eaten from tevel, from the tithes from which terumat ma'aser has not been separated, or from the second tithe and consecrated property that were not redeemed. Whatever non-priests may partake of with regard to terumah is also permitted to be eaten from tevel, from the tithes from which terumat ma'aser has not been separated, and from the second tithe and consecrated property that were not redeemed.
Halacha 2
We4 may not kindle impure tevel ,5 even during the week. Needless to say, this applies on Sabbath.6 [This is implied by Numbers 18:5]: "the watch of Myterumah."7 Just as pure terumah may not be used until after it has been separated, so too, we may not benefit from impure terumah until after it was separated.
Halacha 3
We may not cover tevel with earth,8 nor may we sow it. It is forbidden to sow even produce for which the work associated with their preparation has not been completed9 until it has been tithed.10
When does the above apply? With regard to grains, legumes, and the like.11If, however, one uproots saplings that contain fruit and replants them in another place in his field,12 it is permitted. It is not considered as sowing tevel, for he did not gather the fruit.13
Similarly, when one uproots turnips and radishes and replants them elsewhere, if he intends to add to their bulk, it is permitted.14 If one plants them so that they will produce stalks so that he can take their seed, it is forbidden [to plant them without tithing],15because it is like sowing wheat or barley that is tevel.
Halacha 4
[The following laws apply when a person] sows a litra of produce16that was separated as tithes, but terumat ma'aser had not been separated from it. If it increased and it is now 10 litra, [the entire new crop] is required to be tithed.17 A tenth18 should be separated for the [original] litra from other produce19according to the appropriate reckoning.20
If one separated [terumah and tithes] from a litra of onions and sowed them, one should not separate the tithes according to the reckoning of the increase, but according to the entire sum of the crop.21
Halacha 5
There is an unresolved doubt regarding the ruling when stalks of produce whose seed does not decompose that reached a third of their growth,22 were [gathered,] their stack was straightened,23 he sowed them, and they increased in size. [One might say that] there is a Rabbinic obligation to tithe them, because they increased in size.24 [But one might say] that there is no obligation25 since the seed which continues to exist and did not decompose was tithed. [The laws governing these species] do not resemble [those that apply to] onions, because it is not common practice to sow onions.26
Halacha 6
[The following laws apply when one] sows tevel, whether a crop whose seed decomposes27 or a crop whose seed does not decompose.28 If it is possible for him to gather it [before it takes root in the ground], we penalize him29 and [require him to] gather it. [If the seed decomposes], should it grow, we do not require him to uproot [the plants].30 [The growths] are considered as ordinary produce.31
If the produce is of a type whose seed does not decompose, even the produce that grows from the growths - indeed, even until the third generation - is forbidden. The fourth generation is permitted. Why are the growths foribidden? Because of the terumat ma'aser and the terumah within them.32 These same laws apply when one sows produce separated as the tithes from which terumat ma'aser was not separated.
Halacha 7
[The following rules apply when a person] sells produce35to a colleague, but then remembers that it is tevel and although he afterwards runs to pursue him to make the appropriate separations,36 he cannot find him. If he knows that the produce no longer exists - it was already lost or consumed - he does not have to separate tithes for it.37 If there is a doubt whether it exists or do not exists, he should separate tithes for it from other produce.38
Halacha 8
[The following rule applies when there is a dispute when] a person sells produce to a purchaser.] The seller says: "I sold them with the stipulation that they were tevel."39 The purchaser said: "I purchased tithed produce from you."40 We compel the seller to make the appropriate separations.41 [This is a] penalty imposed upon him for selling tevel.42
Halacha 9
One may not pay a debt from tevel, for this resembles a sale.43
Halacha 10
Halacha 11
When a person purchases tevel from two sources,46 he may separate the tithes from one for the other.47 When a person receives a field from a Jew or from a gentile as part of a sharecropping agreement,48 he should make the division [of the produce] in the presence of the owner of the field and give him his share then, so that he knows that he received tevel.49
[Different rules apply, however, when a person] rents a field from a Jew on the condition that he pay the owner a specific amount of produce. If he pays him with produce from the field he rented, [the renter] must separateterumah.50Afterwards, he gives him the measure he stipulated he would give him and the owner of the field must separate the tithe himself.51 If, however, [the renter] pays the owner from the produce of another field or with another type of produce, [the renter] must first separate the tithes and then pay [the owner].52
Halacha 12
When a person rents a field from a gentile on the condition that he pay him a specific amount of produce, he must tithe the produce before giving it to him. This is a penalty imposed upon him so that he will not rent the field from the gentile.53 In this way, the field will lie fallow [before the gentile]54 and, of necessity, he will sell it to a Jew.55
Similarly, when a person accepts his ancestral field from a gentile as a sharecropper,56 he was penalized and required to tithe the produce before giving the gentile his share of produce after it was tithed. [This measure was instituted] so that a person should not jump at the opportunity to receive it because it was his ancestral field. In this manner, it will remain fallow before the gentile so that he will sell it to a Jew.
Halacha 13
What is meant by a chokar and what is meant by a mekabel?57 A chokar hires the field for a specific amount of produce - these-and-these many se'ah - whether the field produced a lot or a little. A mekabel hires the field for a percentage of its yield, half, a third, or whichever amount they agree on. Asochar is one who rents the land for [a sum of] money.58
Halacha 14
When two people receive a field as sharecroppers together, they inherit the field, or join as partners with regard to it, one may tell the other: "Take the wheat in this-and-this place and I will take the wheat from that-and-that place. You [take] the wine in this-and-this place and I will take the wine from that-and-that place."59 He should not say: "You take the wheat and I will take the barley. You take the wine and I will take the oil," for that constitutes selling tevel.
Halacha 15
When a priest or a Levite purchased produce from an Israelite after the tasks [associated with their preparation] were completed,60 we expropriate theterumah and tithes from their possession and give them to other priests and Levites. This is a penalty imposed on them so that they will not hurry to the grainheaps and winepresses and purchase tevel to grab the presents of their priestly brethren.61 If, however, they purchase [the produce] before [these] tasks are completed, we do not expropriate [the presents] from their possession.62
Halacha 16
When a priest or Levite sold produce that was detached to an Israelite63 before the tasks [associated with their preparation] were completed - and certainly, if they sold the produce while it was attached - the terumah or the tithes belong to [the priest or Levite].64 If they sold it after these tasks were completed, theterumah and the tithes belong to the purchaser.65 He must separate them and may give them to the priest or Levite of his choice.
Halacha 17
When a priest or Levite receive a field from an Israelite under a sharecropping agreement, they should divide the terumah and the tithes, as they divide up the ordinary produce. The Israelite should take his portion and give it to the priest or Levite of his choice. When, however, an Israelite receives a field from a priest or a Levite under a sharecropping agreement, the terumah and/or the tithes belong to the owner of the field.66 The remainder of the presents67 should be divided.
Halacha 18
Halacha 19
When a priest sells a field to an Israelite and tells him: "[I am selling it] on the condition that the tithes from it belong to me forever," they belong to him.70[The rationale is that] saying "on the condition that" is tantamount to setting aside for himself [the portion of the field] where the tithes [grow].71
If the priest [who sold the land] dies, his son is like all other priests.72 If [the priest] told [the purchaser]: "[I am selling it] on the condition that the tithes from it belong to me and my son," [when] he dies, his son73 should take [the tithes]. If he sold it "...on the condition throughout the time it is in your possession," should the purchaser sell it to another person - even if he later buys it back, the priest is no longer entitled to those tithes.
Halacha 20
When an Israelite received a field under a sharecropping agreement from a priest or Levite and stipulated that [the agreement is being made] "on the condition that the tithes are mine74 for four or five years," this is permitted.75"...On the condition that they are mine forever," this is forbidden. [The rationale is that] one priest cannot make another priest.76
Halacha 21
When an Israelite inherits tevel that was found in a grainheap whose edges had been straightened79 from his maternal grandfather who was a priest who in turn inherited it from his maternal grandfather who was an Israelite, [the Israelite who was the heir] may separate the tithes and keep them as his own. [The rationale is that] presents which are fit to be separated are considered as if they have already been separated although in actual fact they were not separated.80
Halacha 22
When a person gives his field81 to a gentile or to someone upon whom we cannot rely with regard to the tithes82 in a sharecropping arrangement, he must separate the tithes in lieu of them even though [the produce] had not reached the "phase of tithing" [when the arrangement was made].83
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
Produce from which terumah and tithes were not separated. It was common to rub the surface of grapes and figs to smooth them (Kessef Mishneh). The Radbaz states that oil was applied to their surface.
|
| 2. |
Although this activity causes the produce to spoil slightly faster, this is not significant over the long run. See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aserot 1:8).
|
| 3. |
The Rambam is speaking about aspects of produce, e.g., leaves, peels, seeds, some of which are considered waste products (and hence, permitted to be eaten by non-priests) and some of which are considered as food (and forbidden to them). See Hilchot Terumah 11:10-13 where the Rambam gives many different examples of these categories. Any substance that is considered as food with regard to terumah is also considered as food with regard to the other prohibitions mentioned by the Rambam. Conversely, any substance that is not considered as food with regard to terumah is also not considered as food in the other contexts.
|
| 4. |
Even priests who are permitted to use impure terumah (Radbaz).
|
| 5. |
Impure terumah, e.g., oil, may be used as fuel for kindling. The priest might think: "Since I want to use all of this oil as fuel, why should I separate the terumah? Let me kindle it all as tevel." This is not permitted as the Rambam proceeds to explain.
Our translation follows the interpretation of the Radbaz. Others interpret the term mechapin as "cover."
|
| 6. |
I.e., kindling the Sabbath lights with oil that is tevel. This is certainly forbidden, because terumahand the tithes may not be separated on the Sabbath.
|
| 7. |
In the verse, the noun terumah uses a plural form alluding to two types of terumah: pure terumahand impure terumah. See also Hilchot Terumah 2:14.
|
| 8. |
To cover seeds that were strewn over the field with earth (Radbaz). It was forbidden to do this until after terumah and the tithes were separated because this resembles sowing tevel.
|
| 9. |
The obligation to separate terumah and the tithes does not take effect until the work associated with the preparation of the produce has been completed (see Chapter 3, Halachot 8-13). Since the produce has not reached this stage, one might think that there is no prohibition against sowing it.
|
| 10. |
According to Scriptural Law, there is no prohibition against sowing tevel. The obligation to tithe applies only when one eats. Nevertheless, our Sages (Pe'ah 1:16) imposed this stringency.
|
| 11. |
For gathering them together to sow them completes the work associated with their preparation [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aserot 1:8)].
|
| 12. |
The Radbaz states that if he gives the trees to a colleague for the colleague to plant in his field, the fruit must be tithed.
|
| 13. |
Thus the fruit was never considered as an independent entity from the tree so that the obligation to tithe it could be considered.
|
| 14. |
For they were not gathered with the intent of reaping produce and thus the obligation to tithe ddid not fall upon them.
|
| 15. |
For the obligation to tithe was incurred when the produce was harvested originally.
|
| 16. |
The Ra'avad states that this applies only to crops like onions or the like where a bulb is planted and it increases as it grows. If, however, seeds which do not grow until they decompose are planted, this law does not apply. The Radbaz states that the Rambam would not necessarily accept this limitation.
|
| 17. |
I.e., not only the new crop but also the old crop which was tithed and then sown, as explained in the subsequent notes.
|
| 18. |
The percentage to be separated as terumat ma'aser.
|
| 19. |
Which was reaped in the same year as that produce was reaped, for it is forbidden to separate the terumah [or terumat ma'aser] for produce from one year from produce from a different year (Hilchot Terumot 5:11).
|
| 20. |
For although it is now considered as part of the new crop, since it still physically exists, there is an obligation to separate terumat ma'aser for it.
|
| 21. |
Since one sowed the onions themselves and tithes had already been separated from them, there is reason to think that there would be no need to tithe them again. Indeed, it would be undesirable to do so, for it is improper to tithe produce that has already been tithed. Nevertheless, in this instance, there is an obligation to tithe. The rationale is that the new growth of the onions outweighs their initial mass and that initial mass is considered as betal, insignificant and subsumed in the greater whole. This concept is illustrated in other contexts; see Hilchot Terumot 11:22;Hilchot Shemitah 4:21, et al.
|
| 22. |
At which point the obligation to tithe applies.
|
| 23. |
I.e., this completes the tasks associated with the preparation of the produce and causes the obligation to tithe to be incurred.
|
| 24. |
And the produce which existed previously is considered as betal to the new produce, as above.
|
| 25. |
To tithe the original produce. Even this opinion agrees that the new produce which grows must be tithed.
|
| 26. |
Hence, the laws governing onions cannot provide guidance in this instance (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 27. |
E.g., wheat or barley.
|
| 28. |
Like onions or garlic.
|
| 29. |
For violating our Sages' decree not to sow tevel.
|
| 30. |
For the prohibited entity no longer exists.
|
| 31. |
I.e., it is permitted to partake of them and the required separations must be made.
|
| 32. |
Compare to Hilchot Terumah 11:21 and notes.
|
| 33. |
We are translating the term chaver according to the Rambam's wording in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Demai 5:8). More specifically, it refers to a person who adheres to the laws of tithing. Torah scholars are mentioned, because we assume that they adhere to those laws (Chapter 9, Halachah 1, Chapter 10, Halachot 1-2).
|
| 34. |
I.e., since both are known to tithe their produce, it is possible that both will think that the other one tithed, when in fact neither of them did so.
|
| 35. |
Which both the seller and the purchaser thought had been tithed.
|
| 36. |
I.e., this is the first step such a person should take.
|
| 37. |
Once the produce has ceased to exist, there is no way a person can correct his past lapses.
|
| 38. |
The Ra'avad states that the produce separated must itself be tithed, for it is possible that in fact the original produce had been lost. The Radbaz states that the Rambam would also accept this point.
|
| 39. |
He says this after the sale, so that the purchaser knows that the produce must be tithed. He must bring witnesses who testify that he is telling the truth, i.e., that the produce is tevel. Otherwise, the seller's word would not be accepted. See also Chapter 12, Halachah 18, and notes.
|
| 40. |
And thus the seller is required to reimburse him for the tithed produce.
|
| 41. |
I.e., separating the tithes for the produce that was sold from other produce.
|
| 42. |
I.e., ordinarily, the ruling would favor the seller, based on the principle: "When a person seeks to expropriate property from a coleague, the burden of proof is upon him." In this instance, however, the seller is penalized, because he violated a Rabbinic prohibition by selling tevel (Radbaz).
|
| 43. |
For one is receiving a monetary advantage for the tevel.
|
| 44. |
I.e., the king had levied a tax on all his countrymen equally. Such a tax must be paid, because "the law of the land is your law" (Hilchot Gezeilah 5:12).
|
| 45. |
Otherwise, he would be paying a debt with tevel.
|
| 46. |
I.e., both sellers inform the purchaser that they are selling him tevel (Radbaz).
|
| 47. |
We do not suspect that the two batches of produce are from different years and thus the tithes for one should not be separated from the other (ibid.).
|
| 48. |
See Halachah 13 for a definition of the Hebrew terms used in this halachah.
|
| 49. |
The sharecropper does not have to tithe the crop before he gives the owner his share. This is not considered as selling tevel, for the owner's share of the produce never belonged to the sharecropper. Nevertheless, if the division is not made in the presence of the owner, the sharecropper should separate the tithes, lest the owner think the produce he receives has been tithed and transgress by partaking of it without tithing (ibid.). Even if the owner is a gentile, this applies for another Jew may see the Jewish sharecropper bringing produce to the gentile and purchase it from him under the impression that it was tithed (ibid.).
|
| 50. |
For it is forbidden to take produce from the grainheap in which it is gathered without separatingterumah (ibid.).
|
| 51. |
The renter does not have to separate the tithes, because - as above - this portion of the crop never belonged to him. From the outset, it was designated for the owner.
|
| 52. |
For in that instance, he is paying the owner with the untithed produce and that is forbidden.
|
| 53. |
The Radbaz notes that - as indicated by the previous halachah - a penalty was not imposed on a person who enters into a sharecropping agreement with a gentile unless it was his ancestral field. The Radbaz explains the difference between the two situations: When a person rents a field for a specific amount of produce, he usually does so as a last resort and receives only a minimal amount. Therefore, if there are restrictions made against him doing so, he may sell the land. When, by contrast, a person seeks a sharecropper, he is reserving the option to sow it himself. Hence, he is less likely to sell it.
|
| 54. |
For no one will seek to hire it from him.
|
| 55. |
This and the measure mentioned in the following clause were part of the safeguards the Sages employed to uphold the Jews' possession of our Holy Land. For in the Roman era, gentiles would frequently seize Jewish property without cause. Rather than have it remain in the gentile's possession, our Sages desired that he be compelled to sell it back to a Jew.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Demai 6:2), the Rambam states that this ruling applies only inEretz Yisrael, for it is only there that we are careful about land not being sold to a gentile. TheShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 331:121), however, quotes this law without making that restriction. It is possible to explain that even in the Diaspora, there is a concept of maintaining the stability of the Jewish community by not giving up Jewish land to gentiles.
|
| 56. |
I.e., the gentile seized a field which a Jew had inherited from his ancestors. Because of his connection to the field, the Jew desired to till it and promised to give the gentile a share under a sharecropping agreement.
|
| 57. |
These terms refer to sharecroppers operating under different types of agreements.
|
| 58. |
See Hilchot Sechirut 8:1-2 which also discusses these distinctions.
|
| 59. |
I.e., making a division for the sake of convenience [see the standard printed text of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Demai 6:8); Rav Kappach's version differs)].
|
| 60. |
But before terumah and the tithes were separated. Since the priests or Levites are entitled to the tithes and/or the terumah, they wished to purchase the produce and separate them for themselves. See Chapter 1, Halachah 3.
|
| 61. |
The Ra'avad accepts the Rambam's ruling, but differs with regard to its motivating rationale. He explains that since the Israelite completed the tasks associated with the preparation of the grain, he has the right to give away the terumah and the tithes and the priest or Levite is not entitled to take that from him. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh note that the rationale given by the Rambam is mentioned in the Jerusalem Talmud (Pe'ah 1:6) and thus question the Ra'avad's position.
|
| 62. |
Since there is a certain amount of difficulty involved in the completion of these tasks, we do not penalize them.
|
| 63. |
But not to a fellow priest or Levite.
|
| 64. |
The rationale is that we operate under the presumption that when the priest or Levite sold the produce, he included a stipulation that the terumah and/or the tithes were his. Even though this stipulation was not explicitly made, we assume that it was understood (Rav Yosef Korcus).
Although they sold tevel - and thus it would be appropriate to penalize them - since they made it known that the produce was tevel, no penalty is imposed.
|
| 65. |
Since the tasks associated with the produce were completed, the obligation to tithe is immediate. Hence, if the priest or Levite desired to retain possession of the terumah and tithes, they would have to make an explicit stipulation.
|
| 66. |
In this instance as well, since the field belongs to the priest or Levite, it is as if he made a stipulation that the terumah and/or tithes should be given to him.
|
| 67. |
The second tithe or the tithe given to the poor.
|
| 68. |
I.e., olives that have already been harvested from the tree (Radbaz).
|
| 69. |
Hence if the priest or Levite desired that the terumah and/or tithes be left for him, he would have to make an explicit stipulation to that effect. Thus if the olives - or any other produce - have not been harvested, if the land is owned by a priest or Levite, he retains the right to the terumah and/or tithes as above.
|
| 70. |
Even if the purchaser later sells that field to another person, he cannot override the stipulation that was part of the original sale.
|
| 71. |
Were his stipulation not to be powerful enough to retain a portion of the land itself, it would not be effective, because it would be tantamount to purchasing an entity that has not come into existence. Such a purchase is not effective (Bava Batra 63a).
The commentaries note an apparent contradiction between the Rambam's ruling here and his ruling in Hilchot Bikkurim 9:11. Although there are explicit Talmudic sources for both rulings, their logic appears contradictory. Among the resolutions offered is that here, the Rambam is speaking about landed property, while in Hilchot Bikkurim, he is speaking about an animal and the principles of ownership are different in these two instances.
|
| 72. |
I.e., he no longer has any special rights to the terumah or tithes.
|
| 73. |
His grandson, however, does not have a right to them (Aruch HaShulchan).
|
| 74. |
I.e., the Israelite's.
|
| 75. |
The Israelite is stipulating that he retains the right to separate the terumah and the tithes for all of the produce and give them to any priest or Levite he desires. Although as stated above, when the owner of the field is a priest, he can retain the rights to the terumah and the tithes. Nevertheless, as part of his contractual arrangement with the renter, he may give him the right to distribute them (Radbaz).
|
| 76. |
I.e., a priest cannot give his right to collect terumah to a person who is not a priest. Similarly, a Levite may not make another Levite. Since the renter desires to make the arrangement permanent, it is forbidden, for a person who does not have a right to take the terumah and tithes is taking them.
|
| 77. |
I.e., the creditor will continue to deduct the value of the tithes from the debt until the debt is paid.
|
| 78. |
Even though the creditor is taking them for the Levite, since he does not have an inherent right to them, he may not collect them.
|
| 79. |
I.e., at this stage, the tasks associated with the preparation of the produce were completed and tithes are required to be separated from it.
|
| 80. |
To summarize the situation: The first testator, the Israelite, had completed the tasks involved with the preparation of his produce, but died before he had the opportunity to separate the terumah and the tithes. The first heir and second testator, the priest, also died before he had the opportunity to make these separations. Nevertheless, since had he in fact separated them, he would have been allowed to keep them as his own, we consider it as if he actually did so. Therefore when the final heir, the Israelite, takes possession of the produce, he must separate the terumah and the tithes to fulfill the mitzvah. He may then, however, keep them as his own property. (He may not, however, partake of the terumah, he must sell it to a priest.)
|
| 81. |
This halachah is speaking about an instance where the person worded the arrangement with the gentile in such a manner that the gentile does not receive possession of the produce until after it reaches the "phase of tithing." Otherwise, there would be no obligation to separate tithes. SeeHilchot Terumah 1:13.
|
| 82. |
In contrast to the following clause, this phrase does not refer to an ordinary common person, but one who has a reputation for being lax in the observance of this mitzvah (see Ra'avad). For with regard to a common person, we apply certain safeguards lest he not have tithed, but nevertheless, we are not certain that he has not tithed. On the contrary, our presumption is that he did tithe.
|
| 83. |
This is a penalty, imposed so that a person will not give his field to a person who does not observe the mitzvah of tithing.
|
| 84. |
Since the majority of the common people tithe (Shabbat 23a), since he has not incurred the responsibility to tithe at all, he was not penalized.
|
| 85. |
Since the produce reached the "phase of tithing," and there are some common people who do not tithe, our Sages required that this measure be taken.
|
| 86. |
Before a division of produce is made.
|
| 87. |
I.e., if they partook of some of the produce while it was forbidden for them to do so.
|
• Shabbat, Iyar 6, 5775 · 25 April 2015
"Today's Day"
Torah lessons: Chumash: Emor, Shlishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 35-38.
Tanya: In a manner (p. 241)...above at length. (p. 243).
Our sages said: "One should not take leave of his friend other than with a parting word of Torah-law, a d'var halacha."1 Our forefathers, the saintly Rebbes, explained: The parting word should be the kind of Torah-teaching that transforms the listener into amehaleich. "Progress," hiluch, means to rise from level to level, with one ascent after another. Such progression embodies the superiority of the human soul over the angels, for this ascent is greatest through an act of goodness - extending a favor to another, a material favor in general, a spiritual favor in particular.
FOOTNOTES
1. Halacha is related to mehaleich,"one who progresses."
Daily Thought:
Tolerance & Love
There is tolerance that doesn’t care. That just looks the other way and goes about its own business. Indifferent tolerance.
Then there is the opposite; the kind of caring that doesn’t allow others to step outside the path you believe to be good for them. Suffocating tolerance.
And then there is compassionate tolerance. The kind that recognizes the other person’s right to grow, his need to travel along a path and get there on his own—and yet to be there for him nevertheless when he gets lost.
True compassion has room for a thousand private journeys.
____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment