Today's Laws & Customs:
• Rosh Chodesh Observances
Today is Rosh Chodesh ("Head of the Month") for the month of Sivan.
Special portions are added to the daily prayers: Hallel (Psalms 113-118) is recited -- in its "partial" form -- following the Shacharit morning prayer, and the Yaaleh V'yavo prayer is added to the Amidah and to Grace After Meals; the additional Musaf prayer is said (when Rosh Chodesh is Shabbat, special additions are made to the Shabbat Musaf). Tachnun (confession of sins) and similar prayers are omitted.
Many have the custom to mark Rosh Chodesh with a festive meal and reduced work activity. The latter custom is prevalent amongst women, who have a special affinity with Rosh Chodesh -- the month being the feminine aspect of the Jewish Calendar.
Links:
The 29th Day
The Lunar Files
• Count "Forty-Six Days to the Omer" Tonight
Tomorrow is the forty-sixth 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 forty-six days, which are six weeks and four days, to the Omer." (If you miss the count tonight, you can count the omer all day tomorrow, but without the preceding blessing).
The 49-day "Counting of the Omer" retraces our ancestors' seven-week spiritual journey from the Exodus to Sinai. Each evening we recite a special blessing and count the days and weeks that have passed since the Omer; the 50th day isShavuot, the festival celebrating the Giving of the Torah at Sinai.
Tonight's Sefirah: Netzach sheb'Malchut -- "Ambition in Receptiveness"
The teachings of Kabbalah explain that there are seven "Divine Attributes" --Sefirot -- that G-d assumes through which to relate to our existence: Chessed,Gevurah, Tifferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod and Malchut ("Love", "Strength", "Beauty", "Victory", "Splendor", "Foundation" and "Sovereignty"). In the human being, created in the "image of G-d," the seven sefirot are mirrored in the seven "emotional attributes" of the human soul: Kindness, Restraint, Harmony, Ambition, Humility, Connection and Receptiveness. Each of the seven attributes contain elements of all seven--i.e., "Kindness in Kindness", "Restraint in Kindness", "Harmony in Kindness", etc.--making for a total of forty-nine traits. The 49-day Omer Count is thus a 49-step process of self-refinement, with each day devoted to the "rectification" and perfection of one the forty-nine "sefirot."
Links:
How to count the Omer
The deeper significance of the Omer Count
Today in Jewish History:
• Flood Waters Recede (2105 BCE)
150 days after the rains stopped falling in the Great Flood, the raging waters which covered the face of the earth calmed and began to subside at the rate of one cubit every four days (Genesis 8:3; Rashi, ibid. See "Today in Jewish History" for Cheshvan 17.)
Links:
Noah and the Flood
The Flood
• Encampment at Sinai (1313 BCE)
On the 1st of Sivan of the year 2448 from creation (1313 BCE), six weeks after their exodus from Egypt, the Children of Israel arrived at Mount Sinai in the SinaiDesert and camped at the foot of the mountain "as one man, with one heart" in preparation for the receiving of the Torah from G-d. On this day, however "Moses did not say anything to them, because of their exhaustion from the journey."
Link: The Day That Nothing Happened
• Korach Swallowed Up by the Earth (1312 BCE)
Korach, who led a rebellion against the leadership of Moses and Aaron, met his end when, miraculously, "the ground split beneath them... And the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed them up, and their houses, and all the men that appertained to Korach, and all their possessions" (Numbers 16:31-32).
Links:
Korach's Rebellion
More on Korach
• Worms Jews Massacred (1096)
At the end of a week in which a group Jews took refuge in a local castle in Worms, Germany, the crusaders massacred them during their morning prayers. (see "Today in Jewish History" for Iyar 8.)
Daily Quote:
The duration of our galut (exile) is comparable to the fetus' nine months of incubation in its mother's womb. The messianic redemption represents the moment of birth.[Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi (Torah Or, p. 109)]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Bamidbar, 3rd Portion Numbers 2:1-2:34 with Rashi
• Chapter 2
1God spoke to Moses and Aaron saying: אוַיְדַבֵּר יְהוָֹה אֶל משֶׁה וְאֶל אַהֲרֹן לֵאמֹר:
2The children of Israel shall encamp each man by his division with the flag staffs of their fathers' house; some distance from the Tent of Meeting they shall encamp. באִישׁ עַל דִּגְלוֹ בְאֹתֹת לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם יַחֲנוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִנֶּגֶד סָבִיב לְאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד יַחֲנוּ:
with the flag staffs: Heb. בְאֹתֹת. Every division shall have its own flag staff, with a colored flag hanging on it; the color of one being different from the color of any other. The color of each one was like the hue of its stone, set in the choshen [worn by the Kohen Gadol], and in this way, everyone could recognize his division. Another explanation: “with the signs [the literal translation of בְאֹתֹת] of his fathers’ house”—according to the sign their father Jacob gave them when they carried him out of Egypt, as it says, “His sons did for him just as he had commanded them” (Gen. 50:12), [which was that] Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun should bear him [his body] from the east, Reuben, Simeon, and Gad from the south etc. as it states in the [Midrash] Tanchuma on this section. — [Rashi] באתת: כל דגל יהיה לו אות מפה צבועה תלויה בו. צבעו של זה לא כצבעו של זה, צבע כל אחד כגוון אבנו הקבועה בחשן, ומתוך כך יכיר כל אחד את דגלו. דבר אחר באותות לבית אבותם באות שמסר להם יעקב אביהם כשנשאוהו ממצרים, שנאמר (בראשית נ, יב) ויעשו בניו לו כן כאשר צום, יהודה ויששכר וזבולן ישאוהו מן המזרח, וראובן ושמעון וגד מן הדרום וכו', כדאיתא בתנחומא [במדבר יב] בפרשה זו:
some distance: At a distance of a mil, as it is stated in Joshua (3:4),“However, there shall be some distance between you and it; about two thousand cubits.” [The reason for this distance, which is the distance permitted to travel on a Sabbath day, was] so that they would be able to come [to the Mishkan] on the Sabbath, [for] Moses, Aaron and his sons, and the Levites were encamped close to it. מנגד: מרחוק מיל, כמו שנאמר ביהושע (יהושע ג, ד) אך רחוק יהיה ביניכם וביניו כאלפים אמה, שיוכלו לבא בשבת, משה ואהרן ובניו והלוים חונים בסמוך לו:
3Those camping in front, to the east, were the legions under the division of the camp of Judah. The prince of the children of Judah was Nahshon the son of Amminadab. גוְהַחֹנִים קֵדְמָה מִזְרָחָה דֶּגֶל מַחֲנֵה יְהוּדָה לְצִבְאֹתָם וְנָשִׂיא לִבְנֵי יְהוּדָה נַחְשׁוֹן בֶּן עַמִּינָדָב:
in front: The front side, which is called קֶדֶם, and which is this? The east side. The west is called the rear side [of the world]. — [Rashi] קדמה: לפנים הקרויה קדם, ואיזו זו, רוח מזרחית. והמערב קרוי אחור:
4His legion numbered seventy four thousand, six hundred. דוּצְבָאוֹ וּפְקֻדֵיהֶם אַרְבָּעָה וְשִׁבְעִים אֶלֶף וְשֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת:
5Camping next to him, the tribe of Issachar; the prince of the children of Issachar was Nethanel the son of Zu'ar. הוְהַחֹנִים עָלָיו מַטֵּה יִשָּׂשכָר וְנָשִׂיא לִבְנֵי יִשָּׂשכָר נְתַנְאֵל בֶּן צוּעָר:
6His legion numbered fifty four thousand, four hundred. ווּצְבָאוֹ וּפְקֻדָיו אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים אֶלֶף וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת:
7[Then] the tribe of Zebulun, and the prince of the children of Zebulun was Eliab the son of Helon. זמַטֵּה זְבוּלֻן וְנָשִׂיא לִבְנֵי זְבוּלֻן אֱלִיאָב בֶּן חֵלֹן:
8His legion numbered fifty seven thousand, four hundred. חוּצְבָאוֹ וּפְקֻדָיו שִׁבְעָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים אֶלֶף וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת:
9The total sum for the legions of Judah's camp was one hundred and eighty six thousand, four hundred; these shall journey first. טכָּל הַפְּקֻדִים לְמַחֲנֵה יְהוּדָה מְאַת אֶלֶף וּשְׁמֹנִים אֶלֶף וְשֵׁשֶׁת אֲלָפִים וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת לְצִבְאֹתָם רִאשֹׁנָה יִסָּעוּ:
these shall journey first: When the cloud was seen departing, the kohanim would sound the trumpets, and the camp of Judah would set off first. And when they traveled, they journeyed forward retaining the same positions in which they camped: the Levites and the wagons in the center, the division of Judah to the east, that of Reuben to the south, that of Ephraim to the west, and that of Dan to the north. ראשנה יסעו: כשרואין הענן מסתלק, תוקעין הכהנים בחצוצרות ונוסע מחנה יהודה תחלה, וכשהולכין הולכין כדרך חנייתן, הלוים והעגלות באמצע, דגל יהודה במזרח, ושל ראובן בדרום, ושל אפרים במערב, ושל דן בצפון:
10The legions under the division of the camp of Reuben were to the south. The prince of the children of Reuben was Elitzur the son of Shedeur. ידֶּגֶל מַחֲנֵה רְאוּבֵן תֵּימָנָה לְצִבְאֹתָם וְנָשִׂיא לִבְנֵי רְאוּבֵן אֱלִיצוּר בֶּן שְׁדֵיאוּר:
11His legion numbered forty six thousand, five hundred. יאוּצְבָאוֹ וּפְקֻדָיו שִׁשָּׁה וְאַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת:
12Camping next to him, the tribe of Simeon. The prince of the children of Simeon was Shelumiel the son of Zurishaddai. יבוְהַחוֹנִם עָלָיו מַטֵּה שִׁמְעוֹן וְנָשִׂיא לִבְנֵי שִׁמְעוֹן שְׁלֻמִיאֵל בֶּן צוּרִישַׁדָּי:
13His legion numbered fifty nine thousand, three hundred. יגוּצְבָאוֹ וּפְקֻדֵיהֶם תִּשְׁעָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים אֶלֶף וּשְׁלשׁ מֵאוֹת:
14[Then] the tribe of Gad. The prince of the children of Gad was Eliasaph the son of Re'uel. ידוּמַטֵּה גָּד וְנָשִׂיא לִבְנֵי גָד אֶלְיָסָף בֶּן רְעוּאֵל:
15His legion numbered forty five thousand, six hundred and fifty. טווּצְבָאוֹ וּפְקֻדֵיהֶם חֲמִשָּׁה וְאַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף וְשֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת וַחֲמִשִּׁים:
16The total sum for the legions of Reuben's camp was one hundred and fifty one thousand, four hundred and fifty; they shall be the second to set out. טזכָּל הַפְּקֻדִים לְמַחֲנֵה רְאוּבֵן מְאַת אֶלֶף וְאֶחָד וַחֲמִשִּׁים אֶלֶף וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת וַחֲמִשִּׁים לְצִבְאֹתָם וּשְׁנִיִּם יִסָּעוּ:
17Then the Tent of Meeting shall set out, [with] the Levite camp, in the center of the other camps. Just as they camp, so shall they travel, each man in his place, by their divisions. יזוְנָסַע אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד מַחֲנֵה הַלְוִיִּם בְּתוֹךְ הַמַּחֲנֹת כַּאֲשֶׁר יַחֲנוּ כֵּן יִסָּעוּ אִישׁ עַל יָדוֹ לְדִגְלֵיהֶם:
Then the Tent of Meeting shall set out: After these two divisions. ונסע אהל מועד: לאחר שני דגלים הללו:
just as they camp, so shall they travel: As I explained, they journeyed as they camped; each division marching on its designated side. כאשר יחנו כן יסעו: כמו שפירשתי, הליכתן כחנייתן, כל דגל מהלך לרוח הקבועה לו:
in his place: Heb. עַל יָדוֹ, lit., on his hand. On his place. The term יָד does not depart from its usual meaning; the direction of his side is called עַל יָדוֹ, that which is by his hand, closest to him and within reach of his hand; en son aise in Old French. [According to Greenberg, on his place, i.e., the place adjacent to him. According to Gukovitski, at his ease (i.e., within easy reach). According to Berliner, on his side.] על ידו: על מקומו, ואין לשון יד זז ממשמעו, רוח של צדו, קרוי על ידו, הסמוכה לו לכל הושטת ידו. אי"ן שו"ן איש"א בלע"ז [על ידו]:
18The legions under the division of the camp of Ephraim were to the west. The prince of the children of Ephraim was Elishama'the son of 'Amihud. יחדֶּגֶל מַחֲנֵה אֶפְרַיִם לְצִבְאֹתָם יָמָּה וְנָשִׂיא לִבְנֵי אֶפְרַיִם אֱלִישָׁמָע בֶּן עַמִּיהוּד:
19His legion numbered forty thousand, five hundred. יטוּצְבָאוֹ וּפְקֻדֵיהֶם אַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת:
20Next to him, the tribe of Manasseh. The prince of the children of Manasseh was Gamliel the son of Pedahzur. כוְעָלָיו מַטֵּה מְנַשֶּׁה וְנָשִׂיא לִבְנֵי מְנַשֶּׁה גַּמְלִיאֵל בֶּן פְּדָהצוּר:
Next to him: Heb. וְעָלָיו, as the Targum [Onkelos] renders it:“and those closest to him.” ועליו: כתרגומו ודסמיכין עלוהי:
21His legion numbered thirty two thousand, two hundred. כאוּצְבָאוֹ וּפְקֻדֵיהֶם שְׁנַיִם וּשְׁלשִׁים אֶלֶף וּמָאתָיִם:
22[Then] the tribe of Benjamin. The prince of the children of Benjamin was Abidan the son of Gid'oni. כבוּמַטֵּה בִּנְיָמִן וְנָשִׂיא לִבְנֵי בִנְיָמִן אֲבִידָן בֶּן גִּדְעֹנִי:
23His legion numbered thirty five thousand, four hundred. כגוּצְבָאוֹ וּפְקֻדֵיהֶם חֲמִשָּׁה וּשְׁלשִׁים אֶלֶף וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת:
24The total sum for the legions under the division of the camp of Ephraim was one hundred and eight thousand, one hundred; they shall be the third to set out. כדכָּל הַפְּקֻדִים לְמַחֲנֵה אֶפְרַיִם מְאַת אֶלֶף וּשְׁמֹנַת אֲלָפִים וּמֵאָה לְצִבְאֹתָם וּשְׁלִשִׁים יִסָּעוּ:
25The legions under the division of the camp of Dan were to the north. The prince of the children of Dan was Ahi'ezer the son of Ammishaddai. כהדֶּגֶל מַחֲנֵה דָן צָפֹנָה לְצִבְאֹתָם וְנָשִׂיא לִבְנֵי דָן אֲחִיעֶזֶר בֶּן עַמִּישַׁדָּי:
26His legion numbered sixty two thousand, seven hundred. כווּצְבָאוֹ וּפְקֻדֵיהֶם שְׁנַיִם וְשִׁשִּׁים אֶלֶף וּשְׁבַע מֵאוֹת:
27Camping next to him was the tribe of Asher. The prince of the children of Asher was Pag'iel the son of 'Ocran. כזוְהַחֹנִים עָלָיו מַטֵּה אָשֵׁר וְנָשִׂיא לִבְנֵי אָשֵׁר פַּגְעִיאֵל בֶּן עָכְרָן:
28His legion numbered forty one thousand, five hundred. כחוּצְבָאוֹ וּפְקֻדֵיהֶם אֶחָד וְאַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת:
29[Then] the tribe of Naphtali. The prince of the children of Naphtali was Ahira' the son of 'Enan. כטוּמַטֵּה נַפְתָּלִי וְנָשִׂיא לִבְנֵי נַפְתָּלִי אֲחִירַע בֶּן עֵינָן:
30His legion numbered fifty three thousand, four hundred. לוּצְבָאוֹ וּפְקֻדֵיהֶם שְׁלשָׁה וַחֲמִשִּׁים אֶלֶף וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת:
31The total sum for the legions under the division of the camp of Dan was one hundred and fifty seven thousand, six hundred; they shall be the last to set out. לאכָּל הַפְּקֻדִים לְמַחֲנֵה דָן מְאַת אֶלֶף וְשִׁבְעָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים אֶלֶף וְשֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת לָאַחֲרֹנָה יִסְעוּ לְדִגְלֵיהֶם:
32These are the numbers of the Israelites according to their fathers' houses. The total number of legions of the camps was six hundred and three thousand, five hundred and fifty. לבאֵלֶּה פְּקוּדֵי בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם כָּל פְּקוּדֵי הַמַּחֲנֹת לְצִבְאֹתָם שֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת אֶלֶף וּשְׁלשֶׁת אֲלָפִים וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת וַחֲמִשִּׁים:
33However, the Levites were not counted with the rest of the Israelites, as the Lord commanded Moses. לגוְהַלְוִיִּם לֹא הָתְפָּקְדוּ בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהוָֹה אֶת משֶׁה:
34The Israelites did all that the Lord had commanded Moses; they encamped by their divisions, and so did they journey each man with his family, according to his father's house. לדוַיַּעֲשׂוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהוָֹה אֶת משֶׁה כֵּן חָנוּ לְדִגְלֵיהֶם וְכֵן נָסָעוּ אִישׁ לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָיו עַל בֵּית אֲבֹתָיו:Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 1 - 9
• Chapter 1
This psalm inspires man to study Torah and avoid sin. One who follows this path is assured of success in all his deeds, whereas the plight of the wicked is the reverse.
1. Fortunate is the man that has not walked in the counsel of the wicked, nor stood in the path of sinners, nor sat in the company of scoffers.
2. Rather, his desire is in the Torah of the Lord, and in His Torah he meditates day and night.
3. He shall be like a tree planted by streams of water, that yields its fruit in its season, and whose leaf does not wither; and all that he does shall prosper.
4. Not so the wicked; rather, they are like the chaff that the wind drives away.
5. Therefore the wicked will not endure in judgement, nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous.
6. For the Lord minds the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked will perish.
Chapter 2
This psalm warns against trying to outwit the ways of God. It also instructs one who has reason to rejoice, to tremble—lest his sins cause his joy to be overturned.
1. Why do nations gather, and peoples speak futility?
2. The kings of the earth rise up, and rulers conspire together, against the Lord and against His anointed:
3. “Let us sever their cords, and cast their ropes from upon us!”
4. He Who sits in heaven laughs, my Master mocks them.
5. Then He speaks to them in His anger, and terrifies them in His wrath:
6. “It is I Who have anointed My king, upon Zion, My holy mountain.”
7. I am obliged to declare: The Lord said to me, “You are my son, I have this day begotten you.
1
8. Ask of Me, and I will make the nations your inheritance, and the ends of the earth your possession.
9. Smash them with a rod of iron, shatter them like a potter’s vessel.”
10. Now be wise, you kings; be disciplined, you rulers of the earth.
11. Serve the Lord with awe, and rejoice with trembling.
12. Yearn for purity—lest He become angry and your path be doomed, if his anger flares for even a moment. Fortunate are all who put their trust in Him
Chapter 3
When punishment befalls man, let him not be upset by his chastisement, for perhaps--considering his sins—he is deserving of worse, and God is in fact dealing kindly with him.
1. A psalm by David, when he fled from Absalom his son.
2. Lord, how numerous are my oppressors; many rise up against me!
3. Many say of my soul, “There is no salvation for him from God—ever!”
4. But You, Lord, are a shield for me, my glory, the One Who raises my head.
5. With my voice I call to the Lord, and He answers me from His holy mountain, Selah.
6. I lie down and sleep; I awake, for the Lord sustains me.
7. I do not fear the myriads of people that have aligned themselves all around me.
8. Arise, O Lord, deliver me, my God. For You struck all my enemies on the cheek, You smashed the teeth of the wicked.
9. Deliverance is the Lord’s; may Your blessing be upon Your people forever
Chapter 4
This psalm exhorts man not to shame his fellow, and to neither speak nor listen to gossip and slander. Envy not the prosperity of the wicked in this world, rather rejoice and say: “If it is so for those who anger Him . . . [how much better it will be for those who serve Him!”]
1. For the Conductor, with instrumental music, a psalm by David.
2. Answer me when I call, O God [Who knows] my righteousness. You have relieved me in my distress; be gracious to me and hear my prayer.
3. Sons of men, how long will you turn my honor to shame, will you love vanity, and endlessly seek falsehood?
4. Know that the Lord has set apart His devout one; the Lord will hear when I call to Him.
5. Tremble and do not sin; reflect in your hearts upon your beds, and be silent forever.
6. Offer sacrifices in righteousness, and trust in the Lord.
7. Many say: “Who will show us good?” Raise the light of Your countenance upon us, O Lord.
8. You put joy in my heart, greater than [their joy] when their grain and wine abound.
9. In peace and harmony I will lie down and sleep, for You, Lord, will make me dwell alone, in security.
Chapter 5
A prayer for every individual, requesting that the wicked perish for their deeds, and the righteous rejoice for their good deeds.
1. For the Conductor, on the nechilot,1 a psalm by David.
2. Give ear to my words, O Lord, consider my thoughts.
3. Listen to the voice of my cry, my King and my God, for to You I pray.
4. Lord, hear my voice in the morning; in the morning I set [my prayers] before you and hope.
5. For You are not a God Who desires wickedness; evil does not abide with You.
6. The boastful cannot stand before Your eyes; You hate all evildoers.
7. You destroy the speakers of falsehood; the Lord despises the man of blood and deceit.
8. And I, through Your abundant kindness, come into Your house; I bow toward Your holy Sanctuary, in awe of You.
9. Lead me, O Lord, in Your righteousness, because of my watchful enemies; straighten Your path before me.
10. For there is no sincerity in their mouths, their heart is treacherous; their throat is an open grave, [though] their tongue flatters.
11. Find them guilty, O God, let them fall by their schemes; banish them for their many sins, for they have rebelled against You.
12. But all who trust in You will rejoice, they will sing joyously forever; You will shelter them, and those who love Your Name will exult in You.
13. For You, Lord, will bless the righteous one; You will envelop him with favor as with a shield.
Chapter 6
This is an awe-inspiring prayer for one who is ill, to pray that God heal him, body and soul. An ailing person who offers this prayer devoutly and with a broken heart is assured that God will accept his prayer.
1. For the Conductor, with instrumental music for the eight-stringed harp, a psalm by David.
2. Lord, do not punish me in Your anger, nor chastise me in Your wrath.
3. Be gracious to me, O Lord, for I languish away; heal me, O Lord, for my bones tremble in fear.
4. My soul is panic-stricken; and You, O Lord, how long [before You help]?
5. Relent, O Lord, deliver my soul; save me for the sake of Your kindness.
6. For there is no remembrance of You in death; who will praise You in the grave?
7. I am weary from sighing; each night I drench my bed, I melt my couch with my tears.
8. My eye has grown dim from vexation, worn out by all my oppressors.
9. Depart from me, all you evildoers, for the Lord has heard the sound of my weeping.
10. The Lord has heard my supplication; the Lord accepts my prayer.
11. All my enemies will be shamed and utterly terrified; they will then repent and be shamed for a moment.
1
Chapter 7
Do not rejoice if God causes your enemy to suffer—just as the suffering of the righteous is not pleasant. David, therefore, defends himself intensely before God, maintaining that he did not actively harm Saul. In fact, Saul precipitated his own harm, while David’s intentions were only for the good.
1. A shigayon 1 by David, which he sang to the Lord concerning Kush the Benjaminite.
2. I put my trust in You, Lord, my God; deliver me from all my pursuers and save me.
3. Lest he tear my soul like a lion, crushing me with none to rescue.
4. Lord, my God, if I have done this, if there is wrongdoing in my hands;
5. if I have rewarded my friends with evil or oppressed those who hate me without reason—
6. then let the enemy pursue and overtake my soul, let him trample my life to the ground, and lay my glory in the dust forever.
7. Arise, O Lord, in Your anger, lift Yourself up in fury against my foes. Stir me [to mete out] the retribution which You commanded.
8. When the assembly of nations surrounds You, remove Yourself from it and return to the heavens.
9. The Lord will mete out retribution upon the nations; judge me, O Lord, according to my righteousness and my integrity.
10. Let the evil of the wicked come to an end, but establish the righteous—O righteous God, Searcher of hearts and minds.
11. [I rely] on God to be my shield, He Who saves the upright of heart.
12. God is the righteous judge, and the Almighty is angered every day.
13. Because he does not repent, He sharpens His sword, bends His bow and makes it ready.
14. He has prepared instruments of death for him; His arrows will be used on the pursuers.
15. Indeed, he conceives iniquity, is pregnant with evil schemes, and gives birth to falsehood.
16. He digs a pit, digs it deep, only to fall into the trap he laid.
17. His mischief will return upon his own head, his violence will come down upon his own skull.
18. I will praise the Lord according to His righteousness, and sing to the Name of the Lord Most High
Chapter 8
This psalm is a glorious praise to God for His kindness to the lowly and mortal human in giving the Torah to the inhabitants of the lower worlds, arousing the envy of the celestial angels. This idea is expressed in the Yom Kippur prayer, “Though Your mighty strength is in the angels above, You desire praise from those formed of lowly matter.”
1. For the Conductor, on the gittit,1 a psalm by David.
2. Lord, our Master, how mighty is Your Name throughout the earth, You Who has set Your majesty upon the heavens!
3. Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings You have established might, to counter Your enemies, to silence foe and avenger.2
4. When I behold Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars which You have set in place—
5. what is man that You should remember him, son of man that You should be mindful of him?
6. Yet, You have made him but a little less than the angels, and crowned him with honor and glory.
7. You made him ruler over Your handiwork, You placed everything under his feet.
8. Sheep and cattle—all of them, also the beasts of the field;
9. the birds of the sky and the fish of the sea; all that traverses the paths of the seas.
10. Lord, our Master, how mighty is Your Name throughout the earth.
Chapter 9
One should praise God for saving him from the hand of the enemy who stands over and agonizes him, and for His judging each person according to his deeds: the righteous according to their righteousness, and the wicked according to their wickedness.
1. For the Conductor, upon the death of Labben, a psalm by David.
2. I will thank the Lord with all my heart; I will recount all Your wonders.
3. I will rejoice and exult in You; I will sing to Your Name, O Most High.
4. When my enemies retreat, they will stumble and perish from before You.
5. You have rendered my judgement and [defended] my cause; You sat on the throne, O righteous Judge.
6. You destroyed nations, doomed the wicked, erased their name for all eternity.
7. O enemy, your ruins are gone forever, and the cities you have uprooted—their very remembrance is lost.
8. But the Lord is enthroned forever, He established His throne for judgement.
9. And He will judge the world with justice, He will render judgement to the nations with righteousness.
10. The Lord will be a stronghold for the oppressed, a stronghold in times of trouble.
11. Those who know Your Name put their trust in You, for You, Lord, have not abandoned those who seek You.
12. Sing to the Lord Who dwells in Zion, recount His deeds among the nations.
13. For the Avenger of bloodshed is mindful of them; He does not forget the cry of the downtrodden.
14. Be gracious to me, O Lord; behold my affliction at the hands of my enemies, You Who raises me from the gates of death,
15. so that I may relate all Your praises in the gates of the daughter of Zion, that I may exult in Your deliverance.
16. The nations sank into the pit that they made; in the net they concealed their foot was caught.
17. The Lord became known through the judgement He executed; the wicked one is snared in the work of his own hands; reflect on this always.
18. The wicked will return to the grave, all the nations that forget God.
19. For not for eternity will the needy be forgotten, nor will the hope of the poor perish forever.
20. Arise, O Lord, let not man prevail; let the nations be judged in Your presence.
21. Set Your mastery over them, O Lord; let the nations know that they are but frail men, Selah.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 53• Lessons in Tanya
• Tuesday, Sivan 1, 5775 · May 19, 2015
Today's Tanya Lesson
Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 53
The Alter Rebbe explained in the previous chapter that the light of the Shechinah, an illumination utterly transcending the realm of the world, must have a “garment” which enables it to radiate there. The “garment” of the Shechinah is Torah.
In every World there is found the “intelligence” of that particular World, namely, theSefirot of Chochmah, Binah and Daat of that World. They constitute the shrine of the Holy of Holies in which the Shechinah resides. After the levels of ChaBaD (in which resides theShechinah) descend into the level of Malchut of a particular World, the creatures of that World are then created.
By vesting itself in Malchut, moreover, the light of the Shechinah is then able to descend into the shrine of the Holy of Holies of the next lower World. The Alter Rebbe explained this process as it applies to all Worlds down to and including the spiritual World of Asiyah.
In ch. 53 he will go on to explain how the light of the Shechinah descends and illuminates this physical world. During the times of the First and Second Temple the Shechinah was housed in the Holy of Holies. Today it finds its abode in a Jew’s study of Torah and performance of the mitzvot.
He will also explain the difference between the level of the illumination of the Shechinahin the First and Second Beit HaMikdash on the one hand, and the level of Shechinah which is drawn down through the study of Torah and the performance of mitzvot, on the other.
והנה כשהיה בית ראשון קיים, שבו היה הארון והלוחות בבית קדשי קדשים, היתה שכינה, שהיא מלכות דאצילות, שהיא בחינת גילוי אור אין סוף ברוך הוא
At the time the First Temple stood, in which the Ark and the Tablets were housed in the Holy of Holies, the Shechinah — which is Malchut of Atzilut, that is, the revealed light of the Ein Sof, a light which intrinsically is infinite and transcends all Worlds, and which nevertheless was revealed in them —
שורה שם, ומלובשת בעשרת הדברות
dwelled there, and was clothed in the Ten Commandments which were engraved upon the Tablets found in the Ark in the Holy of Holies,
ביתר שאת ויתר עז, בגילוי רב ועצום יותר, מגילויה בהיכלות קדשי קדשים שלמעלה בעולמות עליונים
far more intensely, and with a greater and mightier revelation, than its revelation in the shrines of the Holy of Holies above in the upper Worlds.
This refers to the Worlds of Asiyah and Yetzirah.1 For even in the World of Yetzirah, theShechinah illumines only insofar as it has previously clothed itself in the shrine of the Holy of Holies of the World of Beriah. The level of Shechinah manifest in the First Temple, however, though it too was manifest only through having first been enclothed in Malchut of Beriah, was less completely concealed. Even after this concealment, therefore, the illumination in the First Temple was still on the level of the World of Beriah, and not of Yetzirah.
The Alter Rebbe now answers the following question: Inasmuch as the Temple was located in this physical world, how was it possible for the Shechinah to be found there to a higher degree than in the upper Worlds? He answers:
כי עשרת הדברות הן כללות התורה כולה
For the Ten Commandments are the all-embracing principles of the whole Torah,
As explained in the Azharot of R. Saadya Gaon, the Ten Commandments incorporate all 613 mitzvot of the Torah. See also beginning of Tanya, ch. 20.
דנפקא מגו חכמה עילאה, דלעילא לעילא מעלמא דאתגליא
which derives from the level of Supernal Chochmah, i.e., Chochmah of Atzilut, that is far higher than the “world of manifestation.”
It is far higher than Malchut of Atzilut, which is called the “world of manifestation” because it reveals the light of Ein Sof to the Worlds.
As explained earlier, for this reason the Torah is able to act as a “garment” that does not become nullified in the light of the Shechinah which garbs itself in it — since its source is higher than the Shechinah. However, in order for Torah to act as a concealing “garment” it must descend lower than the level of the Shechinah, thereby enabling the light of theShechinah to be received by created beings.
However, as Torah descended into the Ten Commandments engraved on the Tablets, it did not do so in a manner that would make it similar to other physical things. Rather, as will soon be explained, it remained on a level which is higher than the previously mentioned upper Worlds.
וכדי לחקקן בלוחות אבנים גשמיים, לא ירדה ממדרגה למדרגה כדרך השתלשלות העולמות עד עולם הזה הגשמי
In order to engrave them on material tablets of stone, it (Supernal Chochmah, which is Torah) did not descend degree by degree, parallel to the order of descent of the Worlds which descend by stages from a higher world to a lower world, until it reached this material world.
Generally, in order for a flow of Divine light to arrive at this physical world, it must first descend from World to World, coming down through the Worlds of Yetzirah and spiritualAsiyah, both of which are higher than its ultimate destination, this world. This, however, was not the case with the Tablets.
כי עולם הזה הגשמי מתנהג בהתלבשות הטבע הגשמי
For this material world functions through the garb of material nature,
והלוחות מעשה אלקים המה
while the Tablets are “the work of G‑d,”2 a Divine creation, in which G‑dliness — not nature — is revealed,
והמכתב מכתב אלקים הוא
“and the writing is the writing of G‑d,”3 writing in which G‑dliness is perceived,
שלמעלה מהטבע של עולם הזה הגשמי הנשפע מהארת השכינה שבהיכל קדשי קדשים דעשיה, שממנה נמשך אור וחיות לעולם העשיה, שגם עולם הזה בכללו
beyond the nature of this material world which is derived from the radiation of the Shechinah in the shrine of the Holy of Holies of Asiyah, from which light and vitality issue to the World of Asiyah, in which this physical world is also included.
The ray of the Shechinah which is in the shrine of the Holy of Holies of Asiyah, gives this physical world its vitality after first being garbed in Malchut of Asiyah, as explained earlier. This was not the case with the Tablets.
אלא בחינת חכמה עילאה דאצילות, שהיא כללות התורה שבי׳ הדברות, נתלבשה במלכות דאצילות ודבריאה לבדן
But the level of the Supernal Chochmah of Atzilut, consisting of the totality of the Torah as it is encapsulated in the Ten Commandments, clothed itself inMalchut of Atzilut and of Beriah alone, and did not clothe itself further in the lower Worlds,
והן לבדן המיוחדות באור אין סוף שבתוכן
and they alone (Chochmah of Atzilut as it is garbed in Malchut of Atzilut and Malchut ofBeriah, without further vestment), united as they are with the [infinite] light of Ein Sof that is within them,
הן הנקראות בשם שכינה השורה בקדשי קדשים דבית ראשון, על ידי התלבשותה בי׳ הדברות, החקוקות בלוחות שבארון בנס
are referred to as the Shechinah which rested in the Holy of Holies of the First Temple, through its being vested in the Ten Commandments, which were engraved by miraculous means in the Tablets reposing in the Ark.
As the Sages tell us,4 the letters mem and samach, circular letters hewn through the entire thickness of the stone, stood in their place miraculously.
ומעשה אלקים חיים
Moreover, the Ten Commandments upon the Tablets were the work of the Living G‑d —Elokim Chayim,
הוא עלמא דאתכסיא המקנן בעולם הבריאה, כנודע ליודעי ח״ן
(5this being, in terms of the Sefirot, Binah of Atzilut, which is known as “the concealed world” which nests in the World of Beriah, as is known to those familiar with the Esoteric Discipline).
Those familiar with the Kabbalah know that Binah of Atzilut radiates into the World ofBeriah, a world which still remains in the category of “a concealed world” — i.e., it is categorized as a World, but not a World whose independent being is revealed, in that the World of Beriah is aware of how it is wholly dependent on G‑d.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | The Rebbe notes that while the simple explanation of the phrase, “the upper Worlds,” would tend to favor the explanation given above — that it refers to the Worlds of Asiyah andYetzirah, a more thorough analysis indicates that this is not so. Were this indeed the case it would be extremely difficult to understand why the Alter Rebbe points out at length that the Ten Commandments are the “all-embracing principles of the whole Torah,” and so on. Moreover, why the lengthy explanation even before this — that theShechinah resided in the Holy Temple “far more intensely, and with a greater and mightier revelation,” than in the upper Worlds? How is this “far more intensely,” and so on, when the only difference is whether or not the Shechinah was garbed in Yetzirah? Most importantly, in Shaar HaTalmud Torah of the Alter Rebbe’s Siddur, it is almost surely indicated that what was revealed in the Holy Temple was a degree of Shechinah which surpassed the revelation in all of the higher Worlds. This is also indicated in Or HaTorah, Bamidbar, end of p. 16. The Rebbe therefore understands that the Alter Rebbe speaks of two distinct qualities found in the Holy Temple. The first is that the revelation in the Holy Temple was greater than in all Worlds, because therein was found the Ten Commandments, which are the “all-embracing principles of the whole Torah.” Because of this, the revelation of the Shechinah was the illumination of Chochmah of Atzilut, after it had been clothed in Malchut of Atzilut andMalchut of Beriah. A second quality found in the illumination of the Shechinah in the Holy Temple was the manner of its descent: it clothed itself only in Malchut of Atzilut and Malchut of Beriah (for “in order to engrave them on material tablets... [the Shechinah] did not descend...”). Thus the manner in which the Shechinah was drawn down surpasses only the World ofYetzirah, but as to the actual illumination that shone there, this was a light which was higher than that in all the upper Worlds. The special quality it possessed: (a) in the Temple there was revealed the essence of the light of Ein Sof, since the Tablets were there, as mentioned earlier; (b) in the Temple there was a “comprehension of essence,” and not only “knowledge of manifestation”; (c) the Temple was illumined by a revelation that transcended both transcendent and immanent manifestations of G‑dliness. This was due to the Supernal Delight (oneg ha‘elyon) that was found there. This was why “The place of the Ark did not take up space” — at one and the same time, it both took up space and yet did not take up space. Space derives from the immanence of G‑dliness. That which transcends space derives from the transcendence of G‑dliness. That which transcends both these levels finds expression in there being space — and yet at the same time this very real space occupies no space whatever. |
| 2. | Shmot 32:16. |
| 3. | Shmot 32:16. |
| 4. | Megillah 2b. |
| 5. | Parentheses are in the original text. |
• Sefer Hamitzvos:Tuesday, Sivan 1, 5775 · May 19, 2015
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 74
A Non-Priest Serving in the Holy Temple
"And a stranger shall not come near to you"—Numbers 18:4.
It is forbidden for anyone not of the seed of Aaron [i.e. a non-priest] to serve in the Holy Temple.
A Non-Priest Serving in the Holy Temple
A Non-Priest Serving in the Holy Temple
Negative Commandment 74
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 74th prohibition is that a zar is forbidden from serving [in the Temple]. The term zar refers to anyone who is not a descendant of Aharon [i.e. a non-Kohen].
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "A zar may not come close to you [to perform the Temple service]."
Scripture states explicitly that one who transgresses this prohibition is punished by a heavenly death penalty in the verse,2 "A zar who performs the service shall die." The Sifri says, "The verse 'A zar who performs the service shall die,' refers to one who performs the Temple service. This teaches the punishment, but what is the actual prohibition? That is the verse, 'A zar may not come close to you.' " Both the prohibition and the punishment are repeated in the verse,3 "The Israelites shall therefore no longer come forth to the ohel moed, since they can then become guilty of sin and die."
In tractate Yoma,4 it is explained for which types of service a zar is punished by death: "A zar is punishable by death for the following four types of service — sprinkling [the blood on the altar], burning [the fats, etc. on the altar], spilling wine [on the altar], and spilling water [on the altar]."
The details of this mitzvah are explained there and in the last chapter of tractate Zevachim.5
FOOTNOTES
1.Num. 18:4.
2.Ibid., 18:7.
3.Ibid., 18:22.
4.24a.
5.113b.
Positive Commandment 61
Unblemished Sacrifices
"It shall be perfect to be accepted"—Leviticus 22:21.
When offering a sacrifice, we are required to ensure that it is "complete"—devoid of any of the blemishes enumerated in the Torah (as well as those blemishes not written explicitly in the Torah, but included by Mosaic tradition).
The same is true regarding the wine libations and the oil and flour used in the meal offerings—they are to be of premium quality and free of any defect.
Unblemished Sacrifices
Positive Commandment 61
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 61st mitzvah is that we are commanded that every sacrifice that we bring must be complete, i.e. clean of any blemish as defined by Scripture and the Oral Tradition.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "It must be unblemished in order to be acceptable."
The Sifra says, "The verse, 'It must be unblemished in order to be acceptable,' constitutes a positive commandment." From the verse,3 "These [sacrifices] and their libations must be without blemish for you [to present them]," our Sages derived that the wine used for libations, their oil, and their flour must be the finest and free of any imperfection.4
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the eighth chapter of Menachos.5
FOOTNOTES
1.Scripture mentions 12 blemishes that invalidate an animal for a sacrifice, and the Sages enumerate a total of 73. See chapters 6 and 7 of Bechoros, Hilchos Bi'as HaMikdash, chapter 7, Hilchos Issurei HaMizbe'ach, chapter 2.
2.Lev. 22:21.
3.Num. 28:31.
4.E.g. wine which has been affected by smoke or flour which has become wormy. See Hilchos Issurei HaMizbe'ach Ch. 6.
5.87a. In our versions, this is chapter 9.
Negative Commandment 91
Designating a Blemished Animal for a Sacrifice
"Whatever has a blemish you shall not offer"—Leviticus 22:20.
It is forbidden to designate (i.e. sanctify) an animal with a permanent blemish for a sacrifice.
Designating a Blemished Animal for a Sacrifice
Negative Commandment 91
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 91st prohibition is that we are forbidden from designating a blemished animal as a sacrifice for the altar.
And the source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "Do not offer any blemished animal."
The Sifra says, "The verse, 'Do not offer any blemished animal' means that you may not designate it."
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 22:20.
Negative Commandment 92
Slaughtering a Blemished Animal for a Sacrifice
"You shall not offer these to G‑d"—Leviticus 22:22.
It is forbidden to slaughter an animal with a permanent blemish for a sacrifice.
Slaughtering a Blemished Animal for a Sacrifice
Negative Commandment 92
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 92nd prohibition is that we are forbidden from slaughtering a blemished animal as a sacrifice.
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), regarding blemished animals, "Do not offer them to G‑d."
The Sifra says, "The verse, 'Do not offer them to G‑d' means that you may not slaughter them."
FOOTNOTES
1.Ibid., 22:22.
Negative Commandment 93
Sprinkling the Blood of a Blemished Animal on the Altar
"You shall not offer to G‑d"—Leviticus 22:24.
It is forbidden to sprinkle the blood of an animal with a permanent blemish on the altar.
Sprinkling the Blood of a Blemished Animal on the Altar
Negative Commandment 93
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 93rd prohibition is that we are forbidden from sprinkling the blood of a blemished animal on the altar.
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's additional statement1 regarding blemished animals, "Do not offer them to G‑d."
The Oral Tradition explains that this prohibition forbids sprinkling the blood of blemished animals. This is the first opinion quoted [in the Talmudic passage], and is the final conclusion. R. Yossi the son of R. Yehudah, however, says that it prohibits receiving the blood [in a pan immediately after slaughter]. This corresponds to the statement of the Sifra, "The verse, 'Do not offer them to G‑d' means that you may not receive the blood."
Our Sages said in tractate Temurah,2 "According to the first opinion quoted, what is the meaning of the verse, 'Do not offer them to G‑d'? [If he holds] it teaches that you may not sprinkle the blood — didn't he derive this from the phrase,3 'on the altar'?!"
The meaning of this objection is that the verse, "Do not place any of them on the altar as a burnt-offering to G‑d," implies that anything that is placed on the altar may not come from [blemished animals].4
The answer is given, "It is normal for Scripture to speak in this way."
This means that the prohibition, "Do not place any of them on the altar as a burnt-offering" comes only to prohibit burning the fats. Nothing additional can be derived from the phrase, "on the altar" because the verse would not make sense without them. How else could it have been written? To write, "Do not place any of them as a burnt-offering" [leaving out "on the altar"] would leave the statement incomplete!
From this discussion it is clear that the verse, "Do not offer th
FOOTNOTES
1.Ibid., 22:24. All three verses (Lev. 22:20,22,24) all use the same phrase "Do not offer" (lo takrivu).
2.7a. The following discussion from tractate Temurah demonstrates that the prohibition involves sprinkling the blood, not receiving the blood.
After an animal is designated as a sacrifice, it is slaughtered, its blood is received in a vessel and then sprinkled on the altar. In addition, certain fats (cheilev) are burned on top of the altar.
If the animal was blemished, there are separate prohibitions for the designation (N91), slaughter (N92), and burning (N94). The question here is what does our verse (Lev. 22:24) come to prohibit, receiving the blood or sprinkling the blood.
The Talmud first tries to say that the verse must refer to both, because if it only meant the fats, it could have omitted the words, "on the altar." This phrase, the Talmud suggests, must come to include something that is placed "on the altar" but not burnt, i.e. the blood. And if this verse prohibits sprinkling blood, then our verse, "Do not offer them to G‑d" is extra — and can therefore serve as a source to prohibit receiving the blood.
The Talmud concludes that the phrase "on the altar" is not extra, and therefore sprinkling the blood must be learned from our verse, "Do not offer them to G‑d." Since it needs a separate verse, sprinkling the blood must be counted as a separate mitzvah.
3.Lev. 22:22. See N94.
4.Without the words, "on the altar," the verse clearly prohibits burning parts of the offering. The attempt here is to portray these words "on the altar" as teaching us something additional, i.e. that the blood may not be sprinkled, since it is also placed "on the altar."
Shevitat Yom Tov - Chapter Seven
Halacha 1
Although Chol HaMo'ed is not referred to as a Sabbath,1 since it is referred to as "a holy convocation" and it was a time when the Chagigah sacrifices were brought in the Temple, it is forbidden to perform labor2 during this period, so that these days will not be regarded as ordinary weekdays that are not endowed with holiness at all. A person who performs forbidden labor on these days is given stripes for rebelliousness, for the prohibition is Rabbinic in origin.3
Not all the types of "servile labor" forbidden on a holiday are forbidden on it, for the intent of the prohibition is that the day not be regarded as an ordinary weekday with regard to all matters. Therefore, some labors are permitted on it, and some are forbidden.
Halacha 2
These are [the labors that are permitted]: Any labor may be performed if it would result in a great loss if not performed, provided it does not involve strenuous activity.
What is implied? We may irrigate parched land on [Chol Ha]Mo'ed,4but not land that is well-irrigated. For if parched land is not irrigated, the trees on it will be ruined.
When a person irrigates [such land], he should not draw water and irrigate [the land, using water] from a pool or rain water, for this involves strenuous activity.5He may, however, irrigate it [using water] from a spring:6 whether an existing spring, or a spring that must be uncovered anew. He may extend the spring and irrigate [his land using this water]. The same applies in all similar situations.
Halacha 3
A person may turn over his olives during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed,7 grind them, press them, fill jugs up with oil, and seal them as he does on weekdays. Whenever the failure to perform a labor would lead to a loss, one may perform the labor in its ordinary way without deviating from one's regular practice.
Halacha 4
It is forbidden for a person to delay the performance of these or similar labors intentionally so that he will be able to perform them during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed when he has free time. Whenever a person ignores his work, leaving it for [Chol Ha]Mo'ed with the intention of performing it then, and actually [begins] to do so, the [Jewish] court must destroy [the fruits of this labor] and/or declare it ownerless, [free to be acquired] by anyone.10
If a person [delayed] his work, with the intention [of performing it on Chol HaMo'ed] and died, we do not punish his son, and cause him a loss. [On the contrary,] we do not prevent the son from performing the labor on [Chol Ha]Mo'ed so that he will not suffer a loss.
Halacha 5
[The following rules apply when] a person must sew a garment or build a structure during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed: If he is an ordinary person and not skilled in the performance of that labor, he may perform it in his ordinary manner. If, however, he is a skilled craftsman, he [must deviate from his ordinary practice, and] perform the labor as an ordinary person would.
What is implied? When sewing, he should sew stitches as a weaver would.11When building, he should place the stones down, but should not put mortar upon them. One may smooth [plaster over] cracks [in a roof] with a roller, with one's hands and with one's feet as one would do with a trowel.12 The same applies in other similar situations.
Halacha 6
[The following rule applies when] a person has grain that is still growing in the ground, and he has no other food to eat except this [grain]:13 Although he would not suffer a loss [if he did not harvest the grain], we do not require him to buy what he needs at the marketplace and [wait] until after the festival to harvest.
Instead, he may harvest [the grain] he needs,14 collect it in sheaves, thresh it, winnow it, separate it, and grind it, provided he does not thresh it with oxen.15For any labor performed [during Chol HaMo'ed] that does not involve a loss must be [performed] in a manner departing from the norm. The same applies in other similar situations.
Halacha 7
[Food]16 that one desires to pickle that can be eaten during a festival may be pickled [during Chol HaMo'ed]. If, however, the pickled food will not be ready until after the festival, it is forbidden to pickle it [during Chol HaMo'ed].
One may catch as many fish as one can17 during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed and salt them all, for it is possible for him partake of them during the festival if he squeezes them many times by hand until they become soft.
Halacha 8
One may set beer to ferment during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed for the sake of the festival. If it is not for the sake of the festival, it is forbidden. This applies both to beer made from dates18 and beer made from barley.
Even if a person has aged beer, he may act with guile and [prepare fresh beer to] drink, for the guile of this act would not be noticeable to an observer.19 The same applies in other similar situations.
Halacha 9
Whenever labors that are necessary for the festival are performed [during Chol HaMo'ed] by professionals, they must be performed in a private manner.20What is implied? Hunters, millers, and grape-harvesters, whose intent is to sell their products in the marketplace, must perform these activities in a private manner for the sake of the festival. If these activities are not performed for the sake of the festival, [the products] are forbidden. If they perform these activities for the sake of the festival and the products remain afterwards, they may be used.
Halacha 10
We may perform [any labors that are] necessary for the sake of the community at large during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed.21
What is implied? We may fix breaches in waterworks in the public domain; we may fix the highways and the roads; we may dig cisterns, trenches, and grottos for the public;22 we may dig rivulets so that they will have water to drink; we may store water in cisterns and grottos belonging to the public and may fix the cracks [in their walls];23 we may remove brambles from the roads; and we may measure mikvaot.24 When the amount of water in a mikveh is lacking, we may direct water to it to complete its measure.
Halacha 11
The agents of the court may go out to declare ownerless fields that contain a mixture of species.25 We may redeem captives [taken by gentiles], endowment evaluations,26 entitlements,27 and consecrated articles.28
We may have a woman suspected of adultery drink [the required mixture],29 we may burn a red heifer,30 we may break the neck of a calf,31 we may pierce the ear of a slave,32 and we may purify a leper.33 We may also designate the site of graves whose markings were washed away by rain, so that the priests will not walk there.34 All these are activities necessary for the community at large.
Halacha 12
Similarly, we may judge monetary disputes,35 cases involving the punishment by lashing, and capital cases during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed. When a person does not accept a judgment, a ban of ostracism may be issued against him during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed. Just as cases may be judged during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed, we may write court documents and any similar articles during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed.
What is implied? The judges may write an account of the evaluation of [a debtor's property] for his creditor, a statement of the property sold to feed a person's wife and daughters,36 and a bill of chalitzah37 and of miyyun.38Similarly, we may write any legal document that the judges require to remind them - e.g., a record of the claims of the litigants, or a statement of the concessions they made - e.g., that so and so is acceptable [to testify regarding] my case, that so and so may serve as a judge.39
When a person requires a loan and the lender will not grant him the loan on a verbal commitment alone, it is permitted to have a promissory note written. Similarly, a bill of divorce,40 a bill of marriage, a receipt [for payment of a debt], and a deed [recording a present may be written during Chol HaMo'ed], for all these resemble matters necessary for the community at large.41
Halacha 13
It is forbidden to write [professionally] during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed; this includes even Torah scrolls, tefillin42 and mezuzot. Nor may one check [the letters of a Torah scroll],43 not even a single letter in the scroll kept in the Temple courtyard,44 for this is not a labor that is necessary for the sake of the festival.45
Halacha 14
It is permitted to write social correspondence during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed. Similarly, one may make a reckoning of one's budget and costs. For a person does not take much care when writing these matters, and this is thus like the performance of a task by an ordinary person.48
Halacha 15
We may take care of all the needs of a corpse during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed.49 We may cut its hair, wash its shrouds, and make a coffin for it. If there are no boards available, we may bring beams and cut boards from them in a discreet manner inside a building.50 If [the coffin is intended for] an important person, it may be made in the marketplace.51
We may not, however, cut down a tree from the forest to cut boards for a coffin, nor may we quarry out stones to build a grave.
Halacha 16
We may not inspect leprous blotches during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed,52 lest the person be declared impure and his festival be transformed into a period of mourning.
We may neither marry, nor perform the act of yibbum53 during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed, so that the happiness of the festival will not be obscured by the happiness of the marriage. One may, however, remarry one's divorcee, and one may betroth54 a woman during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed, provided one does not make a feast for the betrothal or the wedding,55 so that no other rejoicing will be combined with the rejoicing of the festival.
Halacha 17
We may not cut hair,56 nor may we launder clothes during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed. [This is] a decree, [instituted] lest a person wait until [Chol Ha]Mo'ed and enter the first day of the holiday unkempt.57 Therefore, anyone who was unable to cut his hair or launder his clothes on the day before the commencement of the holiday may launder his clothes and cut his hair during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed.
Halacha 18
What is implied? The [following] individuals are permitted to cut their hair and launder their clothes during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed: a mourner whose seventh day of mourning falls on [the first day of] a holiday58- or even if [his seventh day] falls on the day before the holiday, but it is a Sabbath, when it is forbidden to cut hair, a person who returns from an overseas journey - provided he did not travel for pleasure, but rather for business purposes and the like - a person who is freed from captivity, or freed from prison,59 a person who was under a ban of ostracism60 that was not lifted until [Chol Ha]Mo'ed, a person who took an oath not to cut his hair, or not to launder his clothes and did not ask a wise man to abrogate his oath61 until [Chol Ha]Mo'ed.62
Halacha 19
In all the above situations, if any of the persons had the opportunity to cut their hair before the festival but failed to do so, they are forbidden from doing so [during Chol HaMo'ed].
In contrast, when the time for a nazarite or a leper to shave has already arrived,63 whether it arrived during the festival or before the festival, they may shave during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed, even if they had the opportunity [to shave their hair before the holiday], so that they will not delay the offering of their sacrifices. [Similarly,] anyone who terminates a state of ritual impurity and becomes pure is permitted to cut his hair during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed.64
Halacha 20
It is permitted to cut one's mustache during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed and to cut one's nails,69 even using a utensil.70
A woman may remove the hair from her underarms and her pubic hair by hand, or with a utensil.71 Similarly, she may undergo all cosmetic treatments during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed: [e.g.,] she may paint her eyes, part her hair, apply rouge to her face, and apply lime to her skin72 and the like, provided she can remove it73during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed.
Halacha 21
A zav,74 a zavah,75 a niddah,76 a woman who gave birth,77 and all those who emerge from a state of ritual impurity during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed are permitted to launder their garments.78
A person who has only one garment should79 wash it during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed. Hand towels, barber's towels,80 and bathing towels are permitted to be laundered. Similarly, undergarments81 are permitted to be laundered during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed,82 because they must continually be laundered, even if they were laundered on the day preceding the holiday.
Halacha 22
One may not become involved in commercial enterprise during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed, whether one sells or purchases.83 If, however, the matter is one that involves the loss [of an opportunity] that is not always available after the festival84 - e.g., ships or caravans that have arrived or that are preparing to depart and they are selling their wares cheaply or purchasing dearly - it is permissible to sell and to purchase from them [during Chol HaMo'ed].
We may not purchase buildings, servants, and animals that are not necessary during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed.85
Halacha 23
Merchants selling produce, garments, and utensils may sell them discreetly for the sake of the festival.86 What is implied? If [the merchant's] store opens to a corner or to a lane, he may operate it in his ordinary manner. If it opens into the public thoroughfare, he should open one door and close the other. On the day before Shemini Atzeret,87 one may take out one's produce and adorn the marketplace with it, as an expression of honor for the holiday.
Spice merchants88 may sell their wares in their ordinary manner, in public [during Chol HaMo'ed].
Halacha 24
Whatever is forbidden to be done during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed, one may not instruct a gentile to do [on one's behalf].
If a person does not have food to eat,89 a person may perform any task that is forbidden during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed or involve himself in any commercial enterprise to earn his livelihood.90
It is permissible for a rich man to hire a poor employee who does not have food to eat to perform tasks that are forbidden during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed, so that the worker will be paid a wage with which he can purchase his sustenance. Similarly, we may purchase articles that are not necessary for the festival, because the seller is in need and lacks food.
Halacha 25
We may hire a worker during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed to perform a task after the festival, provided he does not weigh, measure, or count [the amount of work he must perform] as he would on an ordinary day.
When a gentile has been contracted to perform a task for a Jew,91 [the Jew] should prevent him from performing it during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed. [This applies] even if the gentile [works] outside [the city's] Sabbath limits.92 For the people at large know that this task [is being performed] for the sake of a Jew and they will suspect that he hired the gentile to perform it for him during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed. For not all people are aware of the distinction between a hired laborer and a contractor. Therefore, [lest a mistaken impression arise,] it is forbidden.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
Which, as mentioned in Chapter 1, Halachah 2, is the proof-text requiring us to cease the performance of work on the holidays.
|
| 2. |
As evident from the continuation of the Rambam's statements, here the definition of labor is not - in contrast to the Sabbath and holidays - the 39 labors necessary to build the Sanctuary, but rather labor in the conventional sense: mundane activity that will prevent one from appreciating the festive mood of the holidays.
|
| 3. |
There are several Talmudic passages (e.g., Jerusalem Talmud, Pesachim 4:1) that quote verses from the Torah prohibiting the performance of work on Chol HaMo'ed. Nevertheless, according to the Rambam (and his position is shared by the Tur, Orach Chayim 530), these verses are merelyasmachtot, allusions cited by the Rabbis as support for the decrees they instituted. [Significantly, however, the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Mo'ed Katan 1:1) contains an expression that indicates that he conceives of the prohibition against work on Chol HaMo'ed as part of the Oral Tradition given to Moses on Sinai.]
There are, however, other authorities [Yereim (the conclusion of section 304), the Ramban, and the Rashba] who maintain that the prohibition against work on Chol HaMo'ed is Scriptural in origin. The Be'ur Halachah 530 quotes the opinions of many authorities who accept this view.
The difference between these two perspectives is not merely theoretical in nature. One of the basic principles of Torah law is that when there is a doubt with regard to a question of Scriptural law, the more stringent view must be adopted. When, by contrast, there is a doubt with regard to a question of Rabbinic law, the more lenient view may be adopted. If the prohibition against working on Chol HaMo'ed is Scriptural in origin, then the more stringent view must be adopted in cases of doubt. Should, however, the prohibition be Rabbinic in origin, a lenient view may be adopted.
|
| 4. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 537:1) rules more stringently, stating that this is permitted, only when one had already begun irrigating the land before the commencement of the holiday.
|
| 5. |
For he will have to carry water in buckets continually to irrigate the entire field [Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Mo'ed Katan 1:1)].
|
| 6. |
For the water in the spring flows on its own accord (Ibid.).
|
| 7. |
This and the other activities mentioned in this halachah are phases in the process of extracting oil from olives.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam on this point and allows the olives to be turned over only if they have been turned over once before. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 538:1) follows the Ra'avad's view.
|
| 8. |
E.g., at night (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit.:2). It is necessary to do this in a discreet manner, rather than publicly, for one cannot be sure that thieves will come. Thus, the loss is not inevitable (Maggid Mishneh, citing the Ramban). If, however, it is impossible to bring the produce in discreetly, one may do so in a manner that will attract attention (Ramah).
|
| 9. |
The Maggid Mishneh explains that the new dimension contributed by this law is that the grapes in question are still attached to the ground, and they may nevertheless be harvested.
|
| 10. |
Rav Moshe HaCohen and others have objected to the Rambam's ruling, maintaining that the court does not have the right to declare a person's property ownerless. He interprets Mo'ed Katan 12b, the source for the Rambam's statement, differently, stating that the passage gives the court license to prevent the person from carrying out the labors that he had postponed, thus causing the produce to be ruined.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 538:6) follows the Rambam's ruling. The Ramah adds that if a person performs work with property belonging to others - e.g., a tailor or a scribe - and thus this punishment cannot be administered, he should be placed under a ban of ostracism and/or giving stripes for rebelliousness for working on Chol HaMo'ed.
|
| 11. |
Our translation is taken from Rav Kappach's edition of the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Mo'ed Katan 1:8). Others interpret this term to mean "sew the stitches far apart." TheShulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 541:5) interprets the phrase to mean "like a dog's teeth."
In his notes, the Ramah states that most ordinary people may be regarded as skilled with regard to sewing. Hence, everyone should employ this stringency.
|
| 12. |
One may not, however, use a trowel.
|
| 13. |
This ruling is based on a narrative in Mo'ed Katan 12b concerning Rav, who harvested his field during Chol HaMo'ed because he did not have any flour. From the Rambam's wording, it appears that he allows this leniency even when the person has financial resources at his disposal; he lacks merely the grain itself.
Rav Moshe HaCohen differs with the Rambam's ruling, stating that if the person possesses money and can buy flour in the marketplace, he is not allowed to harvest his field. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 537:15) quotes the Rambam's decision.
|
| 14. |
The Mishnah Berurah 537:52 states that one is allowed to perform only that labor which is necessary to provide him with grain for the holiday. He is not allowed to do any more. Nevertheless, in his Sha'ar HaTziyun 537:49, he brings other opinions that would allow a person to do more work if no additional expense is required.
|
| 15. |
From the Rambam's wording, it appears that the reason it is forbidden to use oxen is that it is necessary to depart from one's ordinary routine. In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Karo offers a different rationale - that using oxen will make the matter public knowledge.
The difference between these two views is not only theoretical. According to the Rambam, it would be permitted to use other animals - e.g., horses or donkeys - to thresh, for this would also represent a departure from one's ordinary practice. According to Rav Yosef Karo, this would be forbidden because this would also become public knowledge. The Mishnah Berurah 537:52,53 quotes Rav Yosef Karo's view.
The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) also states that if one is threshing the grain for others as well as for oneself, it is permitted to use oxen.
|
| 16. |
Mo'ed Katan 11a mentions this concept with regard to pickling fish. The same principle can be applied to pickling vegetables, except that with regard to vegetables the pickling process usually takes longer and the vegetables will not be ready to be eaten during the festival if the pickling process was begun during Chol HaMo'ed. [See Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 533:3) and commentaries.]
|
| 17. |
I.e., even if one catches far more than one needs for the festival itself. The rationale is that since some fish taste better than others, one can explain that one is continuing to fish to catch an especially tasty fish for the festival (Mishnah Berurah 533:18).
|
| 18. |
As was customary in Babylonia in Talmudic times.
|
| 19. |
For he can explain to others that he prefers fresh beer over aged beer (Mo'ed Katan 12b). Moreover, the observers may not even know that he possesses aged beer (Mishnah Berurah533:9).
The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's ruling, stating that it follows only a minority opinion in Mo'ed Katan 12b. In support of the Rambam, the Or Sameach cites a passage in Shabbat 139b, which follows the same rationale. The Ramah (Orach Chayim 533:1) quotes the Ra'avad's view, while the Mishnah Berurah (loc. cit.) states that one may rely on the Rambam's view.
|
| 20. |
These and other professionals perform a large amount of work at one time. Therefore, even when such a professional is in fact preparing this work for the purpose of the holiday, an observer might not appreciate this and might think that he is producing work for after the holiday. A private individual, by contrast, does not perform a large amount of such work at one time, and an observer will realize that his intent is for the festival (Mishnah Berurah 533:22.)
|
| 21. |
Rabbenu Asher (in his gloss on Mo'ed Katan 2a) gives one reason for this leniency: during the year, all the members of the community are involved in their own affairs and do not have the time to concern themselves with the public welfare. On Chol HaMo'ed, when people are freed from their own concerns, they can turn their attention to the needs of the community at large. Another reason is obvious from the quote from the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah cited in the notes on the following halachah.
|
| 22. |
With regard to cisterns and trenches belonging to a private individual, see Chapter 8, Halachah 4.
|
| 23. |
The Kessef Mishneh emphasizes that this applies to cisterns or waterworks that are not necessarily needed for the holiday itself. Even though they will not be needed until afterwards, they may be fixed during Chol HaMo'ed because they are for the benefit of the public.
|
| 24. |
To be acceptable for the immersion of a man or woman, a mikveh must contain at least 40 se'ah. In contemporary measure, certain authorities maintain that this figure is equivalent to approximately 250 liters. Shiurei Mikveh mentions many views, concluding that the minimum acceptable figure is 454 liters, and that one should try to reach 921.6 liters. The Chazon Ish cites a figure of 573.3 liters.
|
| 25. |
It is forbidden to sow two types of produce without adequate distinction in the same field (Leviticus 19:19). This prohibition is called the prohibition of kilayim.
In the beginning of the month of Adar (early spring), the court would send agents to notify farmers about this prohibition. From the fifteenth of Adar, they sent agents out to check if there werekilayim in the fields. Originally, the court's agents would remove the kilayim from the fields. The farmers then became lax, and left this work to the court's agents. Therefore, the Sages declared that whenever kilayim are found in a field, the court's agents should declare the field ownerless. During Chol HaMo'ed Pesach, when the crops bloom, the court would send agents out again (Hilchot Kilayim 2:15-17).
In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Mo'ed Katan 1:2), the Rambam explains the reason why this activity was performed during Chol HaMo'ed: The wages for the court's agents were paid from the Temple treasury (terumat halishcah). Since there was very little other work available during Chol HaMo'ed, it would be easy to find people willing to work for low wages, and thus the Temple treasury would save.
|
| 26. |
The Hebrew term ערכין is discussed in Leviticus 27:1-8 and Hilchot Arachin VaCharamin, Chapter 1. It involves giving a specific sum to the Temple treasury for a person, depending on a person's age. In some contexts, the term ערכין is also used with regard to fields and animals consecrated to the Temple treasury.
|
| 27. |
This term is used to refer to the Hebrew חרם, a term implying that a person renounces his ownership of his property and dedicates it either to the Temple treasury or to the priests. (SeeLeviticus 27:28-29, Numbers 18:14; Hilchot Arachin VaCharamin 6:1.)
|
| 28. |
This refers to an article consecrated to the Temple treasury. In all three instances, the sum the person who made the dedication is required to pay may be evaluated during Chol HaMo'ed.
|
| 29. |
A woman suspected of adultery (a sotah) is brought to the Temple and required to drink a mixture of water, dust, and ink from a scroll containing a curse. (See Numbers 5:23-24; Hilchot Sotah, Chapter 3.)
|
| 30. |
A person who became ritually impure through contact with a human corpse must be purified by having the ashes of a red heifer sprinkled upon him (Numbers, Chapter 19). The slaughter of the red heifer and the preparation of these ashes is described in Hilchot Parah Adumah, Chapter 3.
|
| 31. |
When a corpse is found outside a populated area and the killer's identity is unknown,Deuteronomy 21:4 specifies a process of atonement that involves decapitating a calf. (See Hilchot Rotzeach, Chapter 9.)
|
| 32. |
A Hebrew servant sold by the court who desires to remain in servitude rather than regain his freedom must have his ear pierced. (See Exodus 21:6; Hilchot Avadim 3:9.)
|
| 33. |
A leper becomes ritually impure. The purification ceremony is discussed in Leviticus, Chapter 14;Hilchot Tum'at Tzara'at, Chapter 11.
|
| 34. |
Priests are forbidden to contract the impurity that stems from a human corpse. One of the ways of contracting such impurity is by standing over a grave. For this reason, graves would be marked with lime. During the rainy season, the lime might wash off. (See Hilchot Tum'at Meit 8:9.)
|
| 35. |
The Jewish court does not summon litigants during Nisan and Tishrei (Hilchot Sanhedrin 25:9). Nevertheless, should they come on their own accord, sessions may be held during Chol HaMo'ed (ibid., 11:1, 13:5)
|
| 36. |
This refers to a legal record of the sale of property from a deceased person's estate to provide for the support of his wife and daughters, or alternatively, a similar record required when a person goes on a journey and leaves his wife without support. (See Hilchot Ishut, Chapters 18 and 19.)
|
| 37. |
A childless widow is required to marry her deceased husband's brother. She is released from this obligation through a ritual act referred to as chalitzah. (See Deuteronomy 25:7-10.) After this ritual is performed, the court composes a legal record for the woman. See Hilchot Yibbum UChalitzah4:29.
|
| 38. |
When a girl's father dies before she reaches the age of majority, our Sages gave her the opportunity to marry on a conditional basis. If upon attaining the age of majority, or beforehand, she no longer desires to continue her marriage, she does not require a formal divorce. All she need do is state her desire to terminate the marriage. Should she do this, a legal record is composed and granted to her. (See Hilchot Gerushin, Chapter 11.)
|
| 39. |
Although the Torah and the Sages disqualified certain individuals from serving as witnesses or judges, a litigant may, nevertheless, agree to allow such an individual to serve in this capacity (Hilchot Sanhedrin, Chapter 7). The judges may desire to have a written record of the commitment the litigant made.
|
| 40. |
Rashi (Mo'ed Katan 18b) states that this leniency is granted because the person desires to depart on a journey, implying that if that is not the case, a bill of divorce may not be composed. TheShulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 545:5) quotes the law without qualification, reflecting the Rambam's position. Note, however, Mishnah Berurah 545:20.
|
| 41. |
Although these are all personal matters, since they represent the ongoing needs of a community they are considered to involve the interest of the community at large (Mishnah Berurah 545:20). The Ra'avad differs and maintains that the reason is that the person may suffer a loss if these documents are not composed.
|
| 42. |
The Kessef Mishneh interprets this ruling as an indication that the Rambam maintains that one should not wear tefillin on Chol HaMo'ed. Significantly, in his gloss on Hilchot Tefillin 4:10, theKessef Mishneh focuses on the latter half of this halachah and interprets it as an indication that one must wear tefillin at this time. (See the notes on that halachah for a more detailed discussion of this matter.)
|
| 43. |
This refers to an instance in which there is a scroll available for the communal Torah readings. If there is no scroll available, a Torah scroll may be checked and corrected (Kessef Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 545:2). Following this line of thinking, all texts that are required to be studied on the holiday may be written.
|
| 44. |
The Jerusalem Talmud (Sanhedrin 2:6) relates that since a Torah scroll must be checked for accuracy against an existing scroll, a scroll was kept in the Temple Courtyard for that purpose. (See Hilchot Sefer Torah 7:2.)
|
| 45. |
There is a difference of opinion among the Rabbis with regard to texts that are needed for the community at large, but are not required for the festival itself. From the Rambam's wording, it is clear that he would forbid writing such texts. There are, however, more lenient opinions, and they are favored by the Ramah (loc. cit.:1).
|
| 46. |
This purple thread was used for tzitzit in Talmudic times.
|
| 47. |
According to the Rambam, there is no difference between writing tefillin and mezuzot, and other professions. Only when the wages he earns are required for his livelihood is he allowed to work.
The Ramah (loc. cit.:3) expresses a more lenient view. Since writing tefillin is a mitzvah, it is allowed on Chol HaMo'ed, provided the profits from one's work will enable one to celebrate the holiday in a more lavish manner.
|
| 48. |
The Rambam is explaining that since one is not performing a skilled task, there is no prohibition against this labor. The Ra'avad and Rav Moshe HaCohen differ with the Rambam's rationale and maintain that one is allowed to write social correspondence on Chol HaMo'ed because it is possible that after Chol HaMo'ed, one will have difficulty finding a person with whom to send the letter. One may keep one's accounts, because this is necessary in order to be able to know how much to spend on the holiday.
Although most Sephardic authorities (including the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 545:5) follow the Rambam's view, the Ashkenazic authorities tend towards the Ra'avad's explanation and forbid writing on Chol HaMo'ed unless a loss is involved. The Ramah thus states that it is customary not to write on Chol HaMo'ed. Nevertheless, the Mishnah Berurah 545:35 states that the more lenient view is generally followed. When writing on Chol HaMo'ed, many do so in a slightly irregular manner, thus adding more halachic weight to the lenient position.
|
| 49. |
Even those that involve the performance of labors that require professional expertise (Mishnah Berurah 547:19).
|
| 50. |
Discretion is necessary, for if the boards are made in public, a passerby might not realize that they are intended for a corpse.
|
| 51. |
For if the deceased's identity is well known, everyone will realize that the boards are for his coffin. In later generations, the Ashkenazic custom was to cut the boards and make the coffin in the courtyard of the synagogue. For most people in a community are aware of a person's death and the fact that the work is carried out in the synagogue courtyard indicates that it is not being performed for a private matter (Hagahot Maimoniot). (See also Mishnah Berurah 547:20.)
|
| 52. |
Although leprosy conveys ritual impurity, that status must be established through the inspection of the suspect portion of the body by a priest. (See Leviticus 13:2.) For the reason explained by the Rambam, the priest should delay his inspection until after the conclusion of the holiday.
As the passage in Leviticus continues, there are times when a person who is suspected of having leprosy must undergo a second (or third) inspection, and carrying out this inspection may be to his benefit. In the Mishnah (Mo'ed Katan 1:5), there is a difference of opinion concerning whether these inspections are carried out during Chol HaMo'ed. Rabbi Meir maintains that they are. If the ruling is lenient, it is delivered; if it is stringent, it is withheld. The Sages maintain that no inspections are carried out during Chol HaMo'ed. Although it appears that the Rambam accepts their view, other opinions explain that he follows Rabbi Meir's view.
Significantly, in Hilchot Tum'at Tzara'at 9:7, the Rambam states, "We inspect leprous blotches every day, with the exception of the Sabbath and yom tov." The latter term does not usually include Chol HaMo'ed.
(We have translated tzara'at as leprosy for this is the common practice. In fact, the Biblical condition described by this Hebrew term differs from the disease known as leprosy today.)
|
| 53. |
The marriage of a person to his brother's childless widow (Deuteronomy 25:5).
|
| 54. |
Torah law defines matrimony as a two-stage process involving betrothal (erusin) and marriage (nisuin). Betrothal establishes the husband-and-wife bond. From that time onward, a woman may not marry anyone else, but neither may the couple live together. Marriage, by contrast, signals the consummation of this relationship, the beginning of the couple's life as a single unit. Today, the common Jewish practice is to complete both stages of the wedding bond in a single ceremony under the wedding canopy.
|
| 55. |
This refers to the remarriage of one's divorcee. The act of remarriage is permitted during Chol HaMo'ed; a feast is not.
|
| 56. |
This refers both to cutting one's hair and - for those who are accustomed - to shaving.
|
| 57. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 531:1) states that it is a mitzvah to cut one's hair on the day prior to a holiday.
|
| 58. |
A mourner is forbidden to cut his hair or launder his clothes. Indeed, the prohibition against cutting hair continues throughout the thirty days of mourning (Hilchot Eivel 6:2). On this basis, the commentaries question the Rambam's statements. And although the commencement of a holiday nullifies the need to keep the prohibitions of the thirty days of mourning, this is true only when a person has observed a full seven days of mourning before the commencement of the holiday (Ibid. 10:5-6).
For this reason, the Kessef Mishneh and the Radbaz (Vol. VI, Responsum 2164) interpret the leniency mentioned by the Rambam here as referring only to laundering. In his Shulchan Aruch, when mentioning the leniencies regarding cutting hair, Rav Yosef Karo makes no mention of a mourner.
|
| 59. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 531:4) states that this applies even when a person had been imprisoned by Jews who would have allowed him to cut his hair before the holiday. Since he was upset because of his imprisonment, he did not desire to cut his hair (Mishnah Berurah 531:9).
|
| 60. |
For while under a ban of ostracism, it is forbidden to cut one's hair or launder one's clothes (Hilchot Talmud Torah 7:4).
|
| 61. |
The authority of a wise man to abrogate an oath is discussed in Hilchot Sh'vuot, Chapter 6.
From the wording of the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Mo'ed Katan 3:1), it would appear that this leniency applies only when one did not have the opportunity of approaching a wise man with this request before Chol HaMo'ed. Accordingly, if one had such an opportunity, it would appear that the vow cannot be abrogated until after the holiday. See Mishnah Berurah 531:11.
|
| 62. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 531:3) mentions that a person who was prevented from cutting his hair or laundering his clothes by forces beyond his control - e.g., he was detained by contractual negotiations, or he was sick - is not given the opportunity to perform these activities during Chol HaMo'ed. The Mishnah Berurah 531:5 mentions the reason for this stringency: In these instances, the factor holding the person back from cutting his hair or laundering his clothes is not publicly known. In contrast, in all the instances mentioned by the Rambam, the reason why the person did not cut his hair or launder his clothes is common knowledge.
|
| 63. |
After completing the term of his vow, a nazarite must shave his head and bring several sacrifices (Numbers 6:18; Hilchot Nezirut 8:2-3). Similarly, as part of his purification process a leper must shave off all the hair of his body twice (Leviticus 14:8-9; Hilchot Tum'at Tzara'at 11:1-2).
|
| 64. |
A person who is impure may not take part in the festive sacrifices of the Temple. Therefore, it is possible that he did not prepare himself for the holiday. Some also cite Sefer HaMitzvot (Positive Commandment 112), which states that every person who is ritually impure must inform others about his state and make this evident from his physical appearance. One of the ways of doing this would be not to cut one's hair (Rambam La'Am).
|
| 65. |
For the reason for the decree - that one cut one's hair before the holiday - is not relevant for a child, who is not responsible for his conduct.
|
| 66. |
From the Rambam's wording, it appears that he is speaking about an extremely young infant. Nevertheless, the Pri Megadim interprets this as referring to any child under Bar Mitzvah age. (See Mishnah Berurah 531:16.)
|
| 67. |
The prophet Samuel and King David divided the priests into 24 watches, which rotated in the performance of the Temple service. Each watch would serve in the Temple for a week at a time. (See Hilchot Klei HaMikdash 4:3.)
|
| 68. |
This prohibition was instituted for a reason similar to the prohibition against cutting one's hair during Chol HaMo'ed: By preventing the priests from cutting their hair during the week they served in the Temple, the Sages insured that they came to the Temple with their hair already cut (Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash 1:12).
|
| 69. |
Both fingernails and toenails (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 532:1).
|
| 70. |
Although the Shulchan Aruch (ibid.) quotes the Rambam's ruling, the Ramah states that it is customary not to cut nails with a utensil during Chol HaMo'ed. [Significantly, the Rambam's ruling with regard to Chol HaMo'ed differs from his ruling regarding the mourning rites (Hilchot Eivel 5:2).]
|
| 71. |
Women are, however, forbidden to cut the hair from their head, as men are (Mishnah Berurah56:16).
|
| 72. |
This was done to remove hair and make the woman's complexion ruddier (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah; Mo'ed Katan 1:7).
|
| 73. |
Our translation is based on the Yemenite manuscripts of the Mishneh Torah and the citation of this law in the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 546:5).
|
| 74. |
A male with a condition resembling gonorrhea, which causes a discharge from his organ other than semen or urine. Such a discharge renders him ritually impure. (See Leviticus 15:2-3; Hilchot Mechusarei Kapparah, Chapter 2.)
|
| 75. |
A woman who experiences vaginal bleeding at times other than when she expects her monthly period. This discharge renders her ritually impure. (See Leviticus 15:25, Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah, Chapter 6.)
|
| 76. |
A woman who becomes impure because of her monthly menstrual bleeding. (See Leviticus 15:19;Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah, Chapters 4 and 5.)
|
| 77. |
The impurity of a woman who gives birth is mentioned in Leviticus, Chapter 12; Hilchot Mechusarei Kapparah, Chapter 1.
|
| 78. |
In the era when all the aspects of the laws of ritual impurity were observed, those who were ritually impure could not participate in the festive celebrations as others could. Therefore, they were not required to launder their clothes. Moreover, at times, these garments were themselves impure and required ritual immersion and laundering.
The Shulchan Aruch does not mention these laws. Although there are certain dimensions of the ritual impurity associated with a zavah, a niddah, and a woman who gives birth that are observed in the present era - e.g., the prohibitions against intimacy - since we are all ritually impure, these individuals' state of impurity does not preclude them from joining in our festive celebrations. Hence, they must prepare their garments before the commencement of the holiday.
|
| 79. |
Our translation is based on the notes of Rav Kappach, who interprets this ruling as not merely a leniency allowing the person to launder his garment during Chol HaMo'ed, but as a charge obligating him to do so, so that he will not wear a soiled garment during the festival season.
|
| 80. |
Others interpret this term as referring to the coverings of sacred texts. (See Maggid Mishneh.)
|
| 81. |
The Hebrew phrase כלי פתשן literally means "linen garments." We have translated the term according to the function these items served in the Talmudic era.
|
| 82. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 534:2) states that although this is the law, it is customary to be stringent and forbid this. The Mishnah Berurah 534:14, however, mentions certain leniencies - e.g., having them laundered by a gentile. At present when laundering clothes has become a much easier process, the Rabbis have granted greater leniency.
|
| 83. |
The Magen Avraham 539:1 explains that the rationale for this prohibition is that commercial activity involves much effort, and this runs contrary to the atmosphere desired by the Sages for Chol HaMo'ed.
|
| 84. |
As the Maggid Mishneh mentions, there is a difference of opinion among the Rabbis whether the loss of opportunity mentioned refers to a loss the person will suffer - he will either have to pay more for an article that he needs or will not be able to sell an article that he wishes to sell - or if it includes also the opportunity to realize a greater profit. In his Beit Yosef (Orach Chayim 539), Rav Yosef Karo explains that the majority of the Rabbis follow the more lenient view, and he rules accordingly in his Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 539:5).
The Rabbis also ruled with regard to a situation that does not involve a departure from the norm - i.e., as opposed to the instance mentioned by the Rambam, no special situation like visiting merchants arose - but the situation is nevertheless such that were the person not to sell his goods during Chol HaMo'ed, he would not profit to the same degree as if he sold them afterwards. In such a situation, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 539:4) rules that one may sell the goods during Chol HaMo'ed, provided that he uses a portion of the profit he makes to enhance his celebration of the festival. Moreover, the Shulchan Aruch restricts this license to a person of moderate means. If the person is affluent and would celebrate the festival amply regardless, he is not allowed to sell his goods during Chol HaMo'ed, unless he will be forced to sell them for less than the principal afterwards.
|
| 85. |
The laws regarding the sale of these entities are more stringent than those involving other items, because the sale of these entities becomes public knowledge quickly.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 539:10) also mentions that these entities may be sold if their sale is necessary for the livelihood of the seller (as mentioned in Halachah 24). The Mishnah Berurah 539:40 adds that one may buy such entities from a gentile. (With regard to the purchase of land from a gentile in Eretz Yisrael, see Hilchot Shabbat 6:11) Others discuss whether it is permissible to buy such an entity during Chol HaMo'ed, if it is likely that a similar entity will not be available after Chol HaMo'ed.
|
| 86. |
All three items mentioned by the Rambam refer to articles that can be stored, and it is thus not directly obvious that one is purchasing the article for use during Chol HaMo'ed (Mishnah Berurah539:34). If produce will not last beyond the festival, it may be sold during Chol HaMo'ed with no restrictions.
|
| 87. |
Shemini Atzeret, in contrast to the last days of Pesach, is considered a holiday in its own right. Therefore, it is proper to adorn the marketplace with produce in its honor. Although this expression of honor is not allowed with regard to the last days of Pesach, it is permitted to sell one's wares openly, without any restrictions, on the day preceding those holidays (Mishnah Berurah 539:37).
|
| 88. |
Or anyone else whose wares testify to the fact that they will be used during Chol HaMo'ed (ibid.:33).
|
| 89. |
There are two interpretations of the expression "does not have food to eat." The Magen Avraham542:1 understands this simply; a person may not hire himself to perform labor unless he has no food whatsoever to eat. The Eliyahu Rabba, however, maintains that this refers to a person who possesses the minimum necessary for subsistence, but lacks the means to celebrate the festival in an ample way. As indicated by the Sha'ar HaTziyun 542:12, it appears that the authorities follow the more stringent view. Neither view, however, requires a person to pawn his household goods to purchase food instead of working to earn his livelihood.
See also the Mishnah Berurah 542:7, which states that even according to the more lenient views, an effort should be made to perform the labor discreetly. For an observer may not realize that the person performing the labor is doing so out of necessity.
|
| 90. |
See the Mishnah Berurah 542:8, which states that it is preferable for a person to sell merchandise instead of working during Chol Hamo'ed. Also, as reflected in the Sha'ar HaTziyun (loc. cit.), even the more stringent views that prevent a person from hiring himself out as a laborer if he possesses his minimum necessities grant him the leniency of selling merchandise in order to celebrate the festival in comfort.
|
| 91. |
The Maggid Mishneh states that this applies only to a building project that all know belongs to a Jew. It is, however, permissible for a gentile to take work home and perform it on a Jew's behalf if he is hired as a contractor and not as a laborer. This conception is also borne out by the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 543:2).
|
| 92. |
In this regard, the laws regarding Chol HaMo'ed are more stringent than those applying to the Sabbath and the holidays. Since on the Sabbath and the holidays it is forbidden to go beyond the city's Sabbath limits, the gentile's performance of the task will not become public knowledge. On Chol HaMo'ed, by contrast, there are no restrictions on travel, and it is possible that many people will become aware of the gentile's activities (Maggid Mishneh). (See also Hilchot Shabbat 6:14-15.)
|
Biat Hamikdash - Chapter 8
Halacha 1
There are a total of 90 physical blemishes that [disqualify] humans alone. In particular, they are: There are eight involving the head:
a) one who has the center of his forehead depressed below as if it was pushed down with one's hand;
b) one who has the center of his forehead raised up above, like an egg;1
c) one who has the sides of his head emerge toward his face like a hammer;
d) one whose head projects outward abnormally from his neck;
e) one whose head is abnormally large to the extent that it sits on his neck like a turnip on top of its leaves;2
f) one who is bald and has no hair whatsoever on his head. If, however, he has a row of hair extending across the back of his head from ear to ear, it is acceptable.
g) a person's whose hair extends from ear to ear on the front of his head, but he is bald on the remainder of his head, he is unacceptable;
h) a person whose hair extends around his entire head from the front and the back, but he has no hair on the top of his head. He also is deemed bald and is unacceptable.
Halacha 2
There are two involving the neck. They are:
a) one whose neck is sunk [into his trunk] so much that it appears to be placed on his shoulders;
b) one whose neck is so long that it appears unconnected with his shoulders.
Halacha 3
There are four involving the ears. They are:
a) one whose two ears are very small;
b) one whose two ears are very swollen like sponges;
c) one whose ears hang down low;
d) one who has one ear differ from another in appearance.3
Halacha 4
There are five involving the eyebrows. They are:
a) one who does not have any hair at all on his eyebrows. This is the meaning of the term gibein mentioned in the Torah; 4
b) one whose eyebrows hang low;5
c) one who has only one eyebrow;6
d) one who has more than two eyebrows;
e) one who has one eyebrow that is different in appearance than the other, whether the hair on one is long and on the other, short, or the hair on one is black and, on the other, white or red, since there is a difference in appearance, he is unacceptable.
Halacha 5
There are four involving the eyelids. They are:
a) one who does not have any hair at all on his eyelids;
b) one who has very thick hair on his eyelids;
c) one who has an eyelid whose hair is different from that of the other eyelid, e.g., one is black and the other white, one is thin and the other is thick;
d) one whose eyelids are closed slightly and do not open wide like those of other people.
Halacha 6
There are eleven involving the eyes. They are:
a) one whose two eyes are positioned above their appropriate place, close to his forehead;
b) one whose two eyes are positioned below their appropriate place;
c) one whose two eyes are round and are not extended slightly as other eyes are;
d) one whose eyes pop out like the eyes of a tiger and like the eyes of a person who looks at someone when he is very angry;
e) one whose eyes are very large, like those of a calf;
f) one whose eyes are small, like those of a duck;
g) one who is continuously tearing;
h) one who has fluid [continuously]7 dripping from the tip of his eyes near his nose or the ends of his eyes near his temples;
i) one who contracts his eyelids and squints slightly when he sees light or when he wishes to look at something carefully;
j) a person who is cross-eyed to the extent that he sees two storeys of the same building as one.8 This defect can be noticed when such a person is speaking with one person and it appears that he is speaking with another;
k) one who has one eye that is different than the other, whether in place, in appearance, e.g., one is black and the other is of mixed color, or one is small and one is large. Since there is a difference between them, he is unacceptable.
Halacha 7
There are six involving the nose. They are:
a) one whose bridge of the nose is sunken, even [if it is not sunken] to the extent that he can apply ointment to both of his eyes at once.9 This is the meaning of the term charum mentioned in the Torah;10
b) one whose middle of the nose projects upward;
c) one whose tip of the nose points downward;
d) one whose tip of the nose is crooked;
e) one whose nose is disproportionately large;
f) one whose nose is disproportionately small. How is this measured? With one's pinky. If one's nose is larger or smaller than his pinky, it is considered a blemish.
Halacha 8
There are three involving the lips. They are:
a) one whose upper lip extends beyond his lower lip;
b) one whose lower lip extends beyond his upper lip;
c) one whose mouth [hangs] loosely and [hence,] spittle is continually descending from his mouth.
Halacha 9
There are three involving the belly. They are:
a) one whose belly is swollen;
b) one whose navel projects outward, rather that being concave like that of other people;
c) one whose breasts are extended and lie on his stomach like the breasts of a woman.
Halacha 10
There are three involving the back. They are:
a) one whose spine is crooked;
b) one who has a vertebra that slipped out of the spinal column, regardless of whether it projected outward, penetrated inward, or slipped to the side. This is included in the term baal chatoteret11;
c) a person with a hunchback. Even though a vertebra has not slipped from its place, this is still considered a blemish.
Halacha 11
There are six involving the hands. They are:
a) one who has an extra finger on his hands, even if he has six on each hand.12If he cuts the extra finger off, he is acceptable. If, however, it had a bone, he is unacceptable, even if he cuts it off;
b) one who is lacking one of the fingers of his hand;
c) one who has two fingers webbed and connected until below the joint.13 If he cut and separated them to the joint, he is acceptable. Which joint is implied? The first joint that is next to the palm of one's hand;
d) one whose fingers are bent over each other;
e) one who has a projection emerging from his thumb;
f) a left-handed person. If he is ambidextrous, he is acceptable.
Halacha 12
There are four involving the reproductive organs. They are:
a) one who has a very large and long scrotum that reaches his knees;
b) one whose organ is so long it reaches his knees;
c) one whose membranes surrounding his testicles were crushed;
d) one whose membranes surrounding his testicles are inflated. This is the meaning of the term miruach ashech mentioned in the Torah;14
Halacha 13
There are fifteen involving the thighs and the legs. They are:
a) one who is bow-legged to the extent that even when he stands with his feet together, his knees will not touch each other;
b) one whose ankle-bone projects outward. The ankle bone is the round bone that is above the heel, toward the inside of the body. It resembles the weaving needle with which women weave;
c) one whose heel juts outward to the extent that his shin appears to be in the center of his foot;
d) some whose feet are wide like a duck's even though they are not webbed like a duck's;
e) one who has a projection emerging from his large toe;15
f) one who has an extra toe on his feet, even if he has six on each foot. If he cuts the extra toe off, he is acceptable, provided it does not have a bone;
g) one who is lacking one of the toes of his hand;
h) one whose toes are bent over each other;
j) one whose are webbed until below the joint. If they were connected and he cut and separated them, he is acceptable;
k) one whose foot is entirely straight; i.e., the width of his forefoot and his toes is the same as the width of his heels, and they appear as one straight unit;
l) one whose foot is curved so that his forefoot and toes and his heel appears as the two ends of a bow;
m) one whose foot is hollow; i.e., his mid-foot is upraised above the earth and it is as if he is standing on his heel and his toes;
n) one whose ankles click with each other when he walks;
o) one whose knees click with each other when he walks;
p) one who is left-footed.
Halacha 14
There are four that involve the entire body:
a) one whose trunk is disproportionately larger than his limbs;
b) one whose trunk is disproportionately smaller than his limbs;
c) one who is extremely tall;16
d) a dwarf, i.e., one who is extremely short, so that they are distinguished from people at large.
Halacha 15
There are eight involving the skin. They are:
a) a Kushite;
b) an albino whose skin is white like cheese;
c) one who is red-skinned like scarlet;
d) one who has pure blotches on his skin,17 i.e., [the appearance of] the skin changed because of an internal factor, like a bohak;18
e) [the appearance of] the skin changed because of an external factor, like the scarring of a burn; this is also one of the distinguishing marks that are pure [with regard to tzara'at];19
f) one who has a facial mole that has hair, even if it is not the size of an isar,20but rather of the smallest size;21
g) one who has a facial mole the size of an isar or more;22h) one afflicted with warts, [when] a person's flesh or skin should distend or the fluids in the skin should distend to any part throughout the body, this is a blemish.
Halacha 16
There are four other blemishes possible for a human:
a) one who is deaf;
b) one who is intellectually or emotionally unstable;
c) an epileptic, even if his seizures come at far intervals;
d) one who suffers from severe depression,23 whether on a consistent basis or from time to time.
Halacha 17
Thus there are a total of 140 blemishes that may disqualify a priest.24 They are: eight involving the head, two involving the neck, nine involving the ears, five involving the eyebrows, seven involving the eyelids, nineteen involving the eyes, nine involving the nose, nine involving the mouth, three involving the belly, three involving the back, seven involving the hands, sixteen involving the reproductive organs, twenty involving the legs, eight involving the entire body, eight involving the skin, seven involving the body's strength and odor. They have all been outlined one by one.
The following disqualify [a priest] because of the impression they may create:25
a) one who has lost the hair of his eyelids even though the roots remain;
b) one whose teeth have been removed.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
The Ra'avad (and this is also Rashi's interpretation of Bechorot 43a) differs with the Rambam's interpretation of this disqualifying factor. The Kessef Mishneh maintains that the Rambam had a different version of that Talmudic passage.
|
| 2. |
The accompanying drawing is taken from the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot7:1). Similarly, all of the disqualifying factors mentioned here are discussed there and in the following mishnah.
|
| 3. |
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 7:3), the Rambam explains that when a person has a pair of organs, it is expected that they be identical and a deviation is considered a blemish.
|
| 4. |
Leviticus 21:20. The Rambam chooses the first interpretation of this term offered by Bechorot 7:2. Rashi follows the second interpretation, overly long eyebrows. In his Commentary to the Mishnah, the Rambam states that the two opinions both agree that these two conditions are blemishes, the difference of opinion between them concerns only the definition of the term gibein in the Torah.
|
| 5. |
Reaching his eyelids [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid.)].
|
| 6. |
Some interpret this simply. Others understand it as meaning that the person's two eyebrows are connected above his nose so that they appear as one long eyebrow.
|
| 7. |
The bracketed addition is made on the basis of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 7:3).
|
| 8. |
I.e., while focusing on one storey, he will see the other.
|
| 9. |
I.e., for most people, the bridge of the nose interposes between one eye and the other and it is impossible to apply ointment to them both in one motion. There are certain individuals whose bridge of the nose is so sunk that they can do so.
Bechorot 7:3 defines charum as having a bridge of the nose sunk to the extent that the above is possible. Nevertheless, in the Talmud, another opinion is cited which states that as long as the bridge is sunken more than what is ordinary, it is considered a blemish even if it does not reach such an extreme state. The Rambam accepts this view, because it appears to be favored by the Talmud (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 10. | |
| 11. |
This term is used by the Mishnah (Bechorot 7: 1). Although the term is generally interpreted as meaning a hunchback in contemporary Hebrew, the implication above is also included in the Talmudic term.
|
| 12. |
And thus the two hands appear the same.
|
| 13. |
I.e., to the end of one's fingers.
|
| 14. | |
| 15. |
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam concerning this point. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishnehjustify the Rambam's view.
|
| 16. |
Bechorot 45b explains that although a tall person is considered attractive, if he is exceptionally tall, people consider it objectionable.
|
| 17. |
I.e., blotches that are not associated with the impurity resulting from tzara'at.
|
| 18. |
See Hilchot Tuma'at Tzara'at 1:1 for a definition of this term.
|
| 19. |
With regard to the impurity of tzara'at. See ibid. 6:4.
|
| 20. |
An isar is a Roman coin that the Talmud mentions in various halachic contexts (Kiddushin 2a,Bava Metzia 51b, Mikvaot 9:5, et al.). The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 34:2) quotes Rashba as stating that in his (medieval) times the size of an isar was already not known. More recently,Middos VeShiurei Torah, p. 169, gives the diameter of an isar as 23 mm. Thus its area would be slightly more than 3.6 cm.
|
| 21. |
Since it has hair, it is considered objectionable, regardless of its size.
|
| 22. |
If it smaller, it is not that noticeable, and hence, it is not considered a blemish.
|
| 23. |
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 7:5), the Rambam describes this condition as severe melancholia to the extent that the person's physical functioning is impaired.
|
| 24. |
I.e., the total of those mentioned in this and the previous chapter.
|
| 25. |
See Chapter 6, Halachot 5-6.
|
Biat Hamikdash - Chapter 9
Halacha 1
When a non-priest serves in the Temple, his service is invalid and he is liable for death at the hand of heaven, as [Numbers 18:7] states: "A non-priest who draws close will die." According to the Oral Tradition, we have learned that one does not become liable unless he draws close to perform service.1 Where is the warning concerning this?2 [Ibid.:4] states: "A non-priest shall not draw close to you."3
What is meant by a non-priest? Anyone who is not a male descendant of Aaron, as [Leviticus 1:8] states: "And the sons of Aaron shall arrange" and [Leviticus 3:8] states: "And the sons of Aaron shall set afire." [These service are performed by] "the sons of Aaron" and not the daughters of Aaron.4
Halacha 2
Although non-priests are warned not to perform any of the services associated with offering sacrifices, they are liable for death [at the hand of Heaven] only for performing "complete service,"5 not on service that is followed by other service.6 [Thus] a non-priest is liable for death only for four services: a) sprinkling;7 b) setting afire [sacrifices on the altar];8 c) pouring water [on the altar] on Sukkot, and d) pouring wine on the altar at all times.
Halacha 3
How is one liable for sprinkling? Whether he dashed [blood] inside [the Temple building]9 or outside, [in the Temple Courtyard],10 performed sprinkle one of the sprinklings of blood or performed one of the sprinklings of the sacrifices brought by a person afflicted with tzara'at,11 he is liable for death.
Halacha 4
How is one liable for setting afire [sacrifices on the altar]? Whether he set afire limbs [of animal sacrifices], a handful of floor, or of frankincense12 on the altar - or even if he turned over limbs that had not been consumed by fire and hastened their being burnt,13 he is liable for death, provided he set afire an olive-sized portion of these entities. Similarly, if one sets afire incense on the golden altar, when he sets afire an olive-sized portion,14 he is liable. In contrast, one who sets fire to incense on Yom Kippur in the Holy of Holies is not liable for death for this until he sets fire to a handful, for that is the measure explicitly [required] by the Torah.15
Halacha 5
[A non-priest] who arranges two logs of wood on the altar's pyre is considered comparable to one who set [sacrificial] limbs afire and he is liable for death [at the hand of heaven for doing so]. For the wood is also considered as a sacrifice.16
In contrast, [a non-priest] who pours [oil onto the flour offerings], one who mixes [the flour offerings with oil],17 one who breaks [the wafers of meal offerings] into pieces, one who salts [the sacrifices], one who waves [the sacrifices], one who brings [a meal offering] close to the altar, one who arranges the showbread or the bowls of incense on the [golden] table, one who prepares the lamps [of theMenorah],18 one who kindles light on the altar, one who takes a fistful [of flour or incense], and one who receives the blood [of a sacrifice], even though he disqualifies his service, he is warned against doing so and is liable for lashes for doing so, he is not liable for death at the hand [of Heaven]. [The rationale is that] all of these services are followed by another service and they do not represent the completion of the offering [of a given sacrifice].
Halacha 6
The slaughter of sacrificial animals is acceptable if performed by non-priests.19[This applies even to] sacrifices of the most holy order, both individual sacrifices and communal sacrifices, as [Leviticus 1:5] states: "And he shall slaughter the bull before God and the sons of Aaron shall offer it." Implied is that from receiving [the blood], the mitzvah belongs to the priesthood. Similarly, skinning an animal, cutting it up, and bringing wood to the altar are acceptable when performed by non-priests, for with regard to the limbs, [ibid.:9] states: "And the priest shall set afire everything on the altar," this refers to bringing limbs [from sacrificial animals] to the [altar's] ramp. [We may infer that] bringing such limbs requires a priest, but not bringing wood.
Halacha 7
Halacha 8
The removal of the ashes [from the altar] must be performed by a priest,22as [Leviticus 6:3] states: "And the priest will put on his linen fit tunic...." If an Israelite removes [the ash], he is liable for lashes.
He is not liable for death [at the hand of Heaven] even though this is a service that is not followed by another service.23 [This is derived as follows. The verse that speaks of the punishment of death at the hand of Heaven, Numbers 18:7,] speaks of "work of giving."24 [Implied is that] the work of giving must be performed by a priest alone. If a non-priest offered [a sacrifice], he is liable for death. The service of removal25 does not make a non-priest liable for death. Similarly, if a non-priest cleaned the inner altar or the Menorah, he is not liable for death.
Halacha 9
[If a non-priest] arranged the wood on the altar, the arrangement should be taken apart and rearranged by a priest, because the [initial] arrangement is unacceptable.26
Halacha 10
Halacha 11
Halacha 12
When a non-priest performs [Temple] service on the Sabbath, he is liable for violating the Sabbath laws36 and for serving as a non-priest.37 Similarly, when a priest with a physical blemish serves while ritually impure, he is liable [both] for [serving] while impure and for serving with a blemish.38
Halacha 13
Any priest who served a false deity, whether willingly or inadvertently - even if he repented completely - may never serve in the Temple,39 as [Ezekiel 44:13] states: "They40 shall not draw near to Me, to serve Me." [This prohibition applies] whether [a priest] serves the false deity in its rites, e.g., he became a priest to the false deity, he bowed down to it, or acknowledged its [divinity] and accepted it as god. [In all these instances,] he is disqualified [to serve in the Temple] forever.
If [such a priest] transgressed and performed service, his sacrifice is not considered as a pleasing fragrance41 even if he acted inadvertently when he served, bowed down to, or acknowledged [the false deity]. If, by contrast, one slaughtered an animal for a false deity inadvertently and then transgressed and offered a sacrifice [in the Temple], the sacrifice is considered a pleasing fragrance and is accepted, for he did not perform service for the false deity or become its priest; all he did was slaughter an animal for it42 and that was performed inadvertently. Nevertheless, as an initial preference, he should not perform service [in the Temple].
Halacha 14
If one transgressed and built a shrine outside the Temple and offered a sacrifice to God there,43 it is not considered as a Temple to a false deity. Nevertheless, any priest who serves in such a shrine should never serve in the Temple. Similarly, utensils that were used there should never be used in the Temple. Instead, they should be entombed. It appears to me44 that if a priest who served in such [a shrine] performs service in the Temple, it does not invalidate it.45
Halacha 15
Thus there are eighteen factors that disqualify [a person] from serving [in the Temple]. They are: a) one who served a false deity;46 b) a non-priest;47 c) one with a disqualifying physical blemish;48 d) one who is uncircumcised;49e) one who is impure;50 f) one who immersed that day [and must wait until nightfall to become pure];51 g) one who is lacking atonement;52 h) one who is in a state of acute mourning;53 i) one who is intoxicated;54 j) one who is lacking the priestly garments;55 k) one who is wearing extra garments;56 l) one whose garments were torn;57 m) one whose hair has grown long;58 n) one who did not wash his hands and feet;59 o) one who sits;60 p) one who had an entity intervening between his hand and the sacred utensil [he is using];61 q) one who had an entity intervening between his foot and the earth;62 r) one who served with his left hand.63
All of the above are disqualified from serving and if they serve, they invalidate their service with the exception of those with long hair, those with torn garments, and one who slaughtered for a false deity inadvertently. If these individuals serve, their service is acceptable.
Blessed be God who offers assistance.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
I.e., and it does not forbid merely entering the Temple or ascending the Altar.
|
| 2. |
I.e., where is stated the prohibition for which this punishment is given? (Sifri)
|
| 3. |
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 74) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 390) include this prohibition among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
|
| 4. |
Thus restricting the priestly service to males and excluding females. The Radbaz questions why two verses are necessary to exclude the women of the priestly family. He explains that since they are permitted to part of terumah and certain sacrificial foods, they are not entirely similar to Israelites. Hence, a second verse is necessary.
|
| 5. |
Service which is the final stage in a sacrifice being brought to the altar (Yoma 24a).
|
| 6. |
E.g., receiving the blood, carrying the blood or the limbs to the altar.
|
| 7. |
See Halachah 3.
|
| 8. |
See Halachah 4.
|
| 9. |
As performed by the High Priest on Yom Kippur and also when offering certain atonement offerings.
|
| 10. |
The sprinkling or dashing of blood on the external altar.
|
| 11. |
See Hilchot Mechusrei Kapparah 4:2 where these sprinklings are mentioned. Rav Yosef Corcus questions why the water libations and the wine libations are considered as separate categories and the sprinkling of blood and oil are not. He explains that the two different libations stem from entirely different commandments. The sprinkling of the oil, by contrast, is not a commandment in its own right, but an ancillary element to the offering of a sacrifice and that sacrifice also involves sprinkling blood. Hence, the two are included in the mitzvah.
|
| 12. |
I.e., entities that are usually set afire on the altar.
|
| 13. |
As Sh'vuot 17b states, this applies even if the entity would have ultimately been consumed by fire without his activity, but his act hastens its consumption.
|
| 14. |
For one to be liable, a portion of this minimum size is necessary, for an incense offering may not be smaller, as stated in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 5:2. Hence, if he sets afire less, he is not performing service. Even though a larger amount of incense is offered each day, that is a Rabbinic enactment and not a Scriptural requirement (Radbaz).
|
| 15. |
Leviticus 16:12; Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 5:26. If he sets fire to a lesser amount, he is not performing service. Hence, he is not liable.
|
| 16. |
See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 14:1. Arranging these two logs is the final stage in the arrangement of wood on the altar. Hence a non-priest is liable (Radbaz).
|
| 17. |
Rabbi Akiva Eiger cites Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 12:23 which states that the preliminary stages of the offering of a meal offering may be performed by a non-priest.
|
| 18. |
See Halachah 7.
|
| 19. |
Se also Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 5:1; Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 1:1.
|
| 20. |
Even as an initial preference (Radbaz). The Ra'avad differs and maintains that, after the fact, if a non-priest kindled the lamps, it is valid, but as an initial preference, he is not allowed to kindle them. The Radbaz brings support for the Rambam's position from Yoma 24b which states that kindling the lamps of the Menorah is not an act of service. Since it is not an act of service, asks the Radbaz, why should a non-priest be restricted from performing it? How is it different from the slaughter of an animal?
The Minchat Chinuch (mitzvah 98) reinforces the Ra'avad's question, asking how is it possible for the Menorah to be lit outside its proper place? The Rambam LeAm explains that the mitzvah is not lighting the lamps, but rather putting the lamps in their place.
|
| 21. |
I.e., out from the Temple building to a place in the courtyard where a non-priest is allowed to stand. Note the discussion of the meaning of the term hatavah in Hilchot Temidim UMusafim 3:12 and notes.
|
| 22. |
See ibid. 2:10.
|
| 23. |
See Halachah 2.
|
| 24. |
I.e., the verse has two connotations: a) that the priestly service is a gift to the priests, b) (and this is the focus here), that the priestly service involves giving: offering sacrificial substances on the altar.
|
| 25. |
I.e., the removal of the ashes.
|
| 26. |
Because arranging the wood is considered sacrificial service (Radbaz). The Kessef Mishnehpoints out that from Yoma 27-28a, one might conclude that it is permitted for a non-priest to arrange the wood of the altar. Nevertheless, according to the Rambam that passage only absolves a non-priest from the punishment of death. It does not grant him permission to arrange the wood.
|
| 27. |
The commentaries question why the Rambam omits a priest who does not wear the priestly garments. Rav Yosef Corcus explains that it is not necessary to mention such a person because in Hilchot K'lei HaMikdash 10:4, the Rambam stated that a priest who does not wear the priestly garments is considered as a non-priest.
|
| 28. |
I.e., each one is liable according to the punishment appropriate for him. An impure priest and one who did not wash his hands and feet are liable for death and one who is physically blemished is liable for lashes (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 29. |
I.e., services that are not followed by other services which involve giving.
|
| 30. |
And must wait until the evening before performing service.
|
| 31. |
E.g., a person afflicted with tzara'at who must bring an atonement offering before serving.
|
| 32. |
With another type of impurity.
|
| 33. |
Since he violated many prohibitions with one act of service, he is liable for a sacrifice for each violation.
The Ra'avad cites a Tosefta that does not accept the Rambam's ruling on this point and instead, maintains that he is liable for only one sacrifice. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh, however, support the Rambam's ruling, explaining that each of the prohibitions expands the scope of the obligation. See Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 7:2 and Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 8:6 which discusses the ground rules for these concepts.
|
| 34. |
Even if he also possessed all the other disqualifying factors.
|
| 35. |
For all of the other prohibitions were given only to a priest. They do not apply to a non-priest (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 36. |
For the Temple services involve performance of forbidden labors. These prohibitions are superseded by the obligation to offer the sacrifices, but since a non-priest's service is not valid, he is considered as liable for these prohibited acts.
|
| 37. |
Here also although a single act is performed, since two different prohibitions are involved, he is liable for both of them. We do not follow the principle: One prohibition does not fall on another prohibition, because the prohibition against performing the Sabbath labors is greater in scope, encompassing other acts besides the Temple service.
|
| 38. |
For the ritual impurity increases the scope of his liability, making him liable also for entering the Temple and partaking of sacrifices. Since it is of a greater scope, we do not follow the principle, one prohibition does not fall on another (Radbaz).
|
| 39. |
A parallel also exists with regard to the recitation of the priestly blessing. See Hilchot Nesiat Kapayim 15:3. There the Rambam also excludes a priest who was compelled to serve idols and he cites a different prooftext, II Kings 23:9.
|
| 40. |
The priests who "who distanced themselves from Me during Israel's straying, when they strayed after false deities" (Ezekiel 44:10).
|
| 41. |
I.e., though it is not disqualified, it is not considered as desirable.
|
| 42. |
Note a parallel in Hilchot Shechitah 2:15.
|
| 43. |
The Rambam is not speaking about a mere hypothetical situation. As he relates in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Menachot 13:10), Chonio, the son of Shimon the Just entered into a power struggle with his brother Shimi to inherit his father's position as High Priest. Chonio incurred the people's wrath, because he brought about a very deprecating situation in the Temple. He fled to Alexandria where he established a following, constructed a temple to God resembling the Temple in Jerusalem, and offered sacrifices there just like those offered in Jerusalem. Needless to say, our Sages shunned Chonio's shrine, because its sacrificial worship violated the prohibition against offering sacrifices outside the Temple. Indeed, the majority of those who worshiped there were non-Jewish Egyptians whom Chonio had attracted to God's service.
|
| 44. |
This represents a conclusion reached by the Rambam on the basis of deduction without a prior Rabbinic source.
|
| 45. |
Since they were disqualified by Rabbinic decree, after the fact, their service is acceptable (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 46. |
Halachah 13.
|
| 47. |
Halachah 1.
|
| 48. |
Chapter 6, Halachot 1-2.
|
| 49. |
Ibid.:8.
|
| 50. |
Chapter 4, Halachah 1.
|
| 51. |
Ibid.:4.
|
| 52. |
Ibid.:5.
|
| 53. |
Chapter 2, Halachah 7.
|
| 54. |
Chapter 1, Halachah 1.
|
| 55. |
Hilchot K'lei HaMikdash 10:4.
|
| 56. |
Ibid.:5.
|
| 57. |
Chapter 1, Halachah 14.
|
| 58. |
Ibid.:8-9.
|
| 59. |
Chapter 5, Halachah 1.
|
| 60. |
Ibid.:17.
|
| 61. |
Ibid.
|
| 62. |
Ibid.
|
| 63. |
Ibid.:18.
|
Issurei Mizbeiach - Chapter 1
Halacha 1
It is a positive commandment for all the sacrifices to be unblemished and of choice quality,1 as [Leviticus 22:21] states: "unblemished to arouse favor."2 This is a positive commandment.3
Halacha 2
[Conversely,] anyone who consecrates a blemished animal for the altar violates a negative commandment4 and is liable for lashes5 for consecrating it, as [ibid.:20] states: "Whatever has a blemish should not be sacrificed." According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that this is a warning against consecrating a blemished animal. Even one who consecrates such an animal for the money to pay for libations6 is liable for lashes, for this represents a disgrace to the sacrifices.7
Halacha 3
[When a person consecrates an animal and] intends to say [that it is consecrated as] a peace offering, but actually says "as a burnt offering," or [intended to consecrate it] as a burnt offering, but said, "a peace offering," his statements are of no consequence unless his mouth and his heart are identical.8 Therefore if one intended to consecrate a blemished animal as a burnt offering, but consecrated it as peace offering or intended to consecrate it as a peace offering, but consecrated it as burnt offering, he is not liable for lashes even though he intended to perform a transgression.
If someone thought that it was permitted to consecrate a blemished animal for the altar and did so, the consecration is effective and he is not liable for lashes.9
Halacha 4
One who slaughters a blemished animal for the sake of a sacrifice10 is liable for lashes,11 for [ibid.:22] states: "Do not offer these12 to God." According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that this is a warning to one who slaughters.
Similarly, one who pours the blood of blemished animals on the altar is liable for lashes,13 for, with regard to them,14 [ibid.:24] states: "Do not offer to God." According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that this is a warning to one who pours the blood of blemished animals on the altar.
And also one who sets afire the selected portions of blemished sacrifices on the altar is liable for lashes,15 for, with regard to them,16 [ibid.:22] states: "Do not place them as a fire offering on the altar." This refers to the fats. Thus we can deduce that one who consecrates a blemished animal, slaughter it, poured its blood [on the altar], and set afire its selected portions is worthy of four sets of lashes.
Halacha 5
One transgresses the above commandments whether the animal has a permanent blemish or a temporary blemish, he violates all of these commandments, as [Deuteronomy 17:1] states: "Do not sacrifice to God your Lord an ox or a sheep that has a blemish." According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that this is a warning [against offering] an animal with a temporary blemish,17 for example, an animal had a moist skin eruption or a boil.18 If he sacrificed, it, he is liable for lashes.
Halacha 6
[The above applies], not only to sacrifices of the Jewish people, but also to the sacrifices brought by gentiles.19 If [a priest] offered [such sacrifices] and the animals were blemished, he is liable for lashes,20 as [Leviticus 22:25] states: "From the hands of foreigners, you may not offer the food of your God from all of these."21
Halacha 7
One who brings about a blemish in a sacrificial animal, e.g., he blinded its eye or cut off its hand,22 is liable for lashes.23 For with regard to a sacrifice, [Leviticus 22:21] states: "It shall not have any blemish." According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that this is a warning not to cause a blemish."
Lashes are given [for the violation of this prohibition] only when the Temple was standing, for then [the animal] was fit to be offered a sacrifice and [the person] disqualified it. In the present age, by contrast, even though one transgressed a negative commandment, he is not liable for lashes.24
Halacha 8
Halacha 9
[This prohibition applies] both with regard to one who causes a blemish in sacrificial animals themselves or in animals to which their holiness was transferred27with the exception of a firstborn or a tithed animal. In those instances, one who causes a blemish in an animal to which their holiness was transferred is not liable for lashes, for they are not fit to be sacrificed, as will be explained in the appropriate place.28 Similarly, one who causes a blemish in the ninth animal which was mistakenly called the tenth,29 is not liable for lashes.
Halacha 10
Although one who consecrates a blemished animal30 [for the sacrifices of] the altar is liable for lashes,31 [the animal] becomes consecrated. It must be redeemed [after] evaluation by a priest.32 It then reverts to the status of an ordinary [animal]33 and its money should be used to purchase [an animal for the same type of] sacrifice. This law also applies when a consecrated animal contracts a disqualifying blemish.34
It is a positive commandment to redeem sacrificial animals that contracted disqualifying blemishes and cause them to revert to the status of an ordinary animals so that one may partake of them,35 as [Deuteronomy 12:15] states: "Nevertheless, whenever your heart desires, you may slaughter and partake of meat." According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that the verse is speaking about consecrated animals that must be redeemed.36We already explained in[Hilchot] Arachin37 that [Leviticus 27:11]: "With regard to any impure animal38 of which a sacrifice should not be brought as an offering to God, [you shall have the animal stand before the priest...]",39 is speaking about blemished animals that have been redeemed.
Halacha 11
What are the differences between [the laws pertaining to an animal] with a permanent blemish and one with a temporary blemish? If an animal with a permanent blemish40 gives birth while it is consecrated,41 the offspring must be redeemed; it then receives the status of an ordinary animal even if it is unblemished.42[The rationale is that] a secondary entity should not be treated with greater severity than the primary entity.43 If it became pregnant before it was redeemed and it gave birth after it was redeemed, the offspring has the status of an ordinary animal.44If [the consecrated animal that was blemished] died before it was redeemed, it should be redeemed after it died.45 [The rationale is that] holiness never encompassed its actual body only on its worth, because it had a permanent blemish.46
If, by contrast, one consecrates an animal that possesses a temporary blemish or he consecrates an unblemished animal and after he consecrated it, it contracted a permanent blemish [different laws apply]. If it died before it was redeemed, it should be buried like other unblemished consecrated animals,47because it must be stood before the court and evaluated,48 as we explained in[Hilchot] Arachin.49 If it was slaughtered before it was redeemed, it may be redeemed as long as it is making convulsive motions.50 Afterwards, one may partake of it. If it gave birth, its offspring may be sacrificed.51 If it became pregnant before it was redeemed52and it gave birth before it was redeemed, the offspring is forbidden.53 It may not be redeemed. What should be done? Before the mother is redeemed, the offspring should be dedicated to the same [type of] sacrifice as its mother,54 because it may not be offered because of [the sanctification of] its mother, because its [holiness] comes from sanctification that was suspended.55
Halacha 12
Whenever a consecrated animal that was disqualified56 is redeemed, it may be slaughtered in a butchers' market and sold there, [after] being weighed with a scale like ordinary meat.57 [The only] exceptions are the firstborn animals and the tithes.58
[The rationale for the distinction is that] selling the animal in the market causes its price to rise. Therefore other sacrifices whose value remains consecrated - for they are sold and the proceeds of the sale are used to bring another animal as a sacrifice - it should be sold in the market like an ordinary animal.59 In contrast, with regard to a first born animal and a tithed animal - since the proceeds of their sale do not remain consecrated, instead, the animals may be eaten [as ordinary meat,] because of the blemish, as will be explained60 - they may not be slaughtered in a butchers' market or sold there.61 Even if [the value of] the firstborn animal was consecrated,62 it should not be weighed in a scale and sold in a market.63 [The rationale is that] one may consecrate only an article that he has acquired in a complete and total manner.64
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
See the conclusion of these halachot (Chapter 7, Halachah 11).
|
| 2. |
The Sifra explains that the phrase should be understood, not only as a description.
|
| 3. |
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 61) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 286) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
|
| 4. |
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 91) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 285) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. One is liable for merely consecrating such an animal even if it is never actually offered on the altar (Sefer HaChinuch).
|
| 5. |
The Sefer HaChinuch questions why lashes should be given, because the transgression does not involve a deed, but explains that it can be considered comparable to temurah, exchanging an animal for a sacred animal. There too the exchange/consecration of the animal is considered as significant enough to warrant lashes.
|
| 6. |
And thus the animal will be sold, rather than offered on the altar itself.
|
| 7. |
For as above, the sacrifices should be associated only with perfect and unblemished animals. Anything less is an insult to He to Whom they are offered.
|
| 8. |
See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 14:12; Hilchot Nizirut 9:8. This is a general principle: Whenever a person wants to take a vow, consecrate an article, or set it aside as holy, his statements must reflect the will of his heart.
|
| 9. |
Since he did not know of the prohibition involved, his act does not minimize the holiness of the sacrifices. Hence the consecration is effective. And since, he did not act intentionally. He is not liable for lashes. The Ra'avad takes issue with the Rambam on this point, based on his understanding of Temurah 17a. The commentaries elaborate on this difference of opinion.
|
| 10. |
The Kessef Mishnehemphasizes that he must slaughter the animal for the sake of a sacrifice to be liable.
|
| 11. |
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 92) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 288) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
|
| 12. |
The verse speaks of animals with physical blemishes.
|
| 13. |
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 93) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 289) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
|
| 14. |
The verse speaks of animals with physical blemishes.
|
| 15. |
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 94) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 290) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
|
| 16. |
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 92) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 288) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
|
| 17. |
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 95) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 494) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. In his hasagot to Sefer HaMitzvot, the Ramban differs and maintains that this should not be considered as a separate commandment, but rather as an element of the above commandments. Even according to the Rambam, this one negative commandment includes all of the three prohibitions mentioned above.
|
| 18. |
See Chapter 2, Halachah 7, where these blemishes are listed.
|
| 19. |
See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 3:2-3 for a description of these sacrifices.
|
| 20. |
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 96) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 292) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
|
| 21. |
The verse speaks of animals with physical blemishes.
|
| 22. |
The examples the Rambam gives are permanent blemishes. Generally, temporary blemishes cannot be brought about by human acts. Moreover, even if a person does cause a temporary blemish, he does not violate this prohibition. There is a logical basis for this conclusion, because as long as the animal is not permanently blemished, it is not disqualified as an offering (Radbaz;Minchat Chinuch, mitzvah 287).
|
| 23. |
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 97) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 287) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
|
| 24. |
The Radbaz explains that this concept can be derived from the prooftext cited in Halachah 1: "unblemished to arouse favor." Implied is that when a sacrificial animal can arouse favor, i.e., when there is a Temple where it can be offered, it must be unblemished. If that is not the case, there is no penalty for causing such a blemish.
The Kessef Mishnehand other commentaries have noted that the Rambam's ruling appears to be in contradiction with Avodah Zarah 13b which implies that there is no prohibition at all in causing a blemish in the present era, because there is no Temple where the sacrifices can be offered. TheMinchat Chinuch (loc. cit.) and others explain that the difference can be resolved on the basis of the Rambam's ruling (Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 6:15) that if the altar is constructed on the Temple Mount, sacrifices may be brought even if the entire Temple has not been rebuilt.
|
| 25. |
From Chapter 2, Halachah 15, it would appear that if the first merely brought about a temporary blemish, the second would be liable.
|
| 26. |
For the animal was already disqualified due to the actions of the first person. Although the second person is not liable for lashes, he is still considered to have violated a Scriptural prohibition.
|
| 27. |
Although it is forbidden to transfer the holiness of a sacrificial animal to another animal, once that act has been performed, the second animal is consecrated and the prohibitions associated with a sacrifice apply to it.
|
| 28. |
Hilchot Temurah 3:1.
|
| 29. |
As explained in Hilchot Bechorot 8:1-2, when a person is tithing his flocks and he mistakenly calls the ninth animal to emerge, the tenth. In such an instance, a certain measure of holiness is conveyed upon that animal and it cannot be eaten until it becomes blemished. It should not, however, be offered on the altar. Since it is not fit to be offered, causing a blemish in it does not make one liable for lashes.
|
| 30. |
This is speaking about an animal with a permanent blemish. The laws that apply if it has merely a temporary blemish are mentioned in the following halachah.
|
| 31. |
As stated in Halachah 1.
|
| 32. |
As indicated by the sources cited by the Rambam at the conclusion of this halachah, the evaluation of the animal's worth must be made by a priest and not by any other person.
|
| 33. |
Once such an animal has been redeemed, it may be shorn or used for labor (Hilchot Me'ilah 1:9).
|
| 34. |
I.e., they should be redeemed and a sacrifice brought with the money, as stated in Hilchot Arachin5:11.
|
| 35. |
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 86) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 441) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
|
| 36. |
I.e., the new concept taught by the verse is not that one may slaughter ordinary animals and partake of their meat, for there is no need for a verse to teach us that. Instead, the new idea is that consecrated animals can be redeemed and then used as food. It is, however, forbidden to shear them and perform work with them even after they have been redeemed (Hilchot Me'ilah, loc. cit.).
|
| 37. |
Hilchot Arachin, loc. cit.
|
| 38. |
Bechorot 37b explains that the intent is not an animal from an impure species, but rather an animal from a kosher species that became disqualified because of a blemish, for there is a second verse (27:27) that speaks about evaluating non-kosher animals.
|
| 39. |
To be evaluated and then it may be redeemed.
|
| 40. |
It had a permanent blemish before it was consecrated.
|
| 41. |
I.e., before it was redeemed.
|
| 42. |
This represents a departure from the usual practice, because generally, unblemished animals are not redeemed, but are offered as sacrifices; see Teumrah 33b.
|
| 43. |
I.e., it would not be appropriate for the animal that was consecrated not to be offered as a sacrifice and its offspring, which was never directly consecrated, to be used for that purpose.
|
| 44. |
For it was redeemed together with its mother.
|
| 45. |
And then its meat can be used even as food for animals, and certainly for humans. Moreover, a formal process of evaluation by a court is not required before its redemption.
|
| 46. |
The Rambam is explaining why leniency is granted to redeem it after it died although generally we do not redeem a consecrated animal to feed its meat to the dogs (Chapter 2, Halachah 10; based on Temurah 6:5). In this instance, however, because the animal was blemished permanently, the consecration never affected its actual body, only its worth (i.e., it was not destined to be sacrificed itself, but rather to be sold and the proceeds used to purchase a sacrifice). Hence, after it dies, it can still be sold after it is redeemed.
|
| 47. |
Rather than redeemed. See Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 19:11.
|
| 48. |
And this process of evaluation must be performed while the animal is alive.
|
| 49. |
Hilchot Arachin 5:12.
|
| 50. |
For as long as it is making convulsive motions, it is considered alive and the process of evaluation can take place (ibid.:13).
|
| 51. |
See Hilchot Temurah 4:9.
|
| 52. |
But after it contracted a permanent blemish.
|
| 53. |
To be used for ordinary purposes by Rabbinic decree. Although according to Scriptural Law, its holiness has departed, our Sages forbade its use, lest many such animals be maintained and flocks of them raised (Bechorot 15b).
|
| 54. |
It then receives holiness on its own accord, independent of its mother.
|
| 55. |
Since the mother was unfit to be sacrificed because of its blemish, its holiness is considered to be suspended. Because the holiness of the mother was suspended, the offspring is not considered to be consecrated to the complete extent. Hence it must be consecrated again.
(It must be noted that the commentaries have questioned this ruling, because in Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 15:4, the Rambam writes that the holiness of consecrated animals is never suspended. It can, however, be explained that a suspension stemming from a permanent blemish is different, because the animal can never be fit for sacrifice again. See a parallel in Hilchot Temurah 3:4.)
|
| 56. |
Because of a blemish or similar reason.
|
| 57. |
I.e., we do not say that since the animal was originally consecrated, it is disrespectful to treat it in this manner after it was redeemed. The Radbaz adds that the purchaser need not be notified that the meat came from a sacrifice that was disqualified.
|
| 58. |
See Hilchot Bechorot 1:18; 6:5-7 which mentions the restrictions against selling such meat.
|
| 59. |
So that the best price could be received for it.
|
| 60. |
Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 6:18; Hilchot Bechorot 1:3; 6:4; Hilchot Temurah 3:1-2.
|
| 61. |
For this represents disdain for consecrated property.
|
| 62. |
By the priest who received it after it was blemished.
|
| 63. |
One might think that since its value will be given to the Temple treasury, one would be allowed to sell it like normal meat to increase its price, as explained above.
|
| 64. |
In this instance, the priest cannot sell this animal in the market as private property. Hence he does not have the right to give this privilege to the Temple treasury (Rashi, Zevachim 75b).
|
• Tuesday, Sivan 1, 5775 · 19 May 2015
"Today's Day"
Until Sivan 12, inclusively, do not say tachanun.
Torah lessons: Chumash: Bamidbar, Shishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 1-9.
Tanya: But what is (p. 273)...commandments of the Torah. (p. 273).
"Throw a stick into the air; it will fall back on ikrei, its root-side."1 Our fathers, the holy Rebbes, bequeathed a boundless heritage to the first chassidim, that their sons' children and their daughters' children throughout the generations, in whatever country and environment they may be, will have that "root" - which is the attraction of their "inwardness of heart" to the rock from which they were hewn. At times this element is covered and concealed in a number of garbs. This, then, is the avoda of whoever desires life - to remove these coverings, to establish for himself periods for the study of Chassidus, and to conduct himself in the manner of the Chassidic community.
FOOTNOTES
1. Bereishit Rabba, end of 53. Viz. Likutei Sichot Vol. 4, p. 1251. The stick will tend to land on its thick end which was nearest to the roots; ikrei also connotes "its essential element."
Daily Thought:
Power Talk
Talk is powerful. Speak bad about someone and you expose all the ugliness in him, in yourself and in whoever happens to be paying attention. Once exposed, the wound begins to fester and all are hurt.
Speak good about the same person, and the inner good within him, within you and within all who participate begins to shine.
____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment