Today in Jewish History:
• Passing of R. Chaim Brisker (1918)
Passing of Rabbi Chaim Soloveichik of Brisk (1853-1918), outstanding Talmudic scholar and Jewish leader.
Daily Quote:
"And the Breastplate shall not budge from the Apron" (Exodus 28:28) -- a person's most sublime spiritual feelings (symbolized by the High Priest's Breastplate, worn over the heart) most form an inseparable continuum with his or her most ordinary actions (represented by the Apron, worn in back, over the lower part of the body)[The Lubavitcher Rebbe]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Eikev, 5th Portion Deuteronomy 10:12-11:9 with Rashi
• Chapter 10
12And now, O Israel, what does the Lord, your God, demand of you? Only to fear the Lord, your God, to walk in all His ways and to love Him, and to worship the Lord, your God, with all your heart and with all your soul, יבוְעַתָּה יִשְׂרָאֵל מָה יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ שֹׁאֵל מֵעִמָּךְ כִּי אִם לְיִרְאָה אֶת יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לָלֶכֶת בְּכָל דְּרָכָיו וּלְאַהֲבָה אֹתוֹ וְלַעֲבֹד אֶת יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכָל לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל נַפְשֶׁךָ:
And now, O Israel: Even though you did all this, His mercy and His affection are still upon you, and with all that you have sinned against Him, He demands nothing of you, except only to fear [the Lord, your God,…] ועתה ישראל: אף על פי שעשיתם כל זאת, עודנו רחמיו וחבתו עליכם, ומכל מה שחטאתם לפניו אינו שואל מכם כי אם ליראה וגו':
Only to fear [the Lord your God,…]: Our Rabbis derived from this verse [“And now… what does… God demand of you”] that everything is in the hands of Heaven except the fear of Heaven (Ber. 33b). כי אם ליראה וגו': רבותינו דרשו מכאן הכל בידי שמים חוץ מיראת שמים:
13to keep the commandments of the Lord and His statutes, which I command you this day, for your good. יגלִשְׁמֹר אֶת מִצְוֹת יְהֹוָה וְאֶת חֻקֹּתָיו אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוְּךָ הַיּוֹם לְטוֹב לָךְ:
To keep the commandments of the Lord: and this too, is not for nothing, but-for your good-that you should receive a reward. לשמור את מצות ה': ואף היא לא לחנם, אלא לטוב לך, שתקבלו שכר:
14Behold, to the Lord, your God, belong the heavens and the heavens of the heavens, the earth, and all that is on it. ידהֵן לַיהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ הַשָּׁמַיִם וּשְׁמֵי הַשָּׁמָיִם הָאָרֶץ וְכָל אֲשֶׁר בָּהּ:
Behold, to the Lord your God belong: everything, and even so-“Only your forefathers the Lord desired”-out of everything [i.e., the whole universe]. הן לה' אלהיך: הכל ואף על פי כן רק באבותיך חשק ה' מן הכל:
15Only your forefathers the Lord desired, to love them, and He chose their seed after them you, out of all peoples, as it is this day. טורַק בַּאֲבֹתֶיךָ חָשַׁק יְהֹוָה לְאַהֲבָה אוֹתָם וַיִּבְחַר בְּזַרְעָם אַחֲרֵיהֶם בָּכֶם מִכָּל הָעַמִּים כַּיּוֹם הַזֶּה:
[And He chose…] you: Just as you see yourselves as the most beloved of all peoples, as it is this day. בכם: כמו שאתם (רואים אתכם) חשוקים מכל העמים היום הזה:
16You shall circumcise the foreskin of your heart, therefore, and be no more stiffnecked. טזוּמַלְתֶּם אֵת עָרְלַת לְבַבְכֶם וְעָרְפְּכֶם לֹא תַקְשׁוּ עוֹד:
the foreskin of your heart: Heb. עָרְלַת לְבַבְכֶם, the blockage and covering of your heart. ערלת לבבכם: אוטם לבבכם וכיסויו:
17For the Lord, your God, is God of gods and the Lord of the lords, the great mighty and awesome God, Who will show no favor, nor will He take a bribe. יזכִּי יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם הוּא אֱלֹהֵי הָאֱלֹהִים וַאֲדֹנֵי הָאֲדֹנִים הָאֵל הַגָּדֹל הַגִּבֹּר וְהַנּוֹרָא אֲשֶׁר לֹא יִשָּׂא פָנִים וְלֹא יִקַּח שֹׁחַד:
and Lord of the lords: meaning that no lord will be able to deliver you from His hand. ואדני האדנים: לא יוכל שום אדון להציל אתכם מידו:
Who will show no favor: if you cast off His yoke, לא ישא פנים: אם תפרקו עולו:
Nor will He take a bribe: -i.e., to appease Him with money. ולא יקח שחד: לפייסו בממון:
18He executes the judgment of the orphan and widow, and He loves the stranger, to give him bread and clothing. יחעֹשֶׂה מִשְׁפַּט יָתוֹם וְאַלְמָנָה וְאֹהֵב גֵּר לָתֶת לוֹ לֶחֶם וְשִׂמְלָה:
He executes the judgment of the orphan and widow: [previously, in verse 17,] we had a description of God’s power. Now alongside His power, we find [a description of] His humility (Meg. 31a). עשה משפט יתום ואלמנה: הרי גבורה, ואצל גבורתו אתה מוצא ענותנותו:
and He loves the stranger, to give him bread and clothing: and this [provision of bread and clothing] is a matter of great importance, for the very essence of our father Jacob prayed for this [as it says],“And if He will give me bread to eat and a garment to wear” (Gen. 28: 20). - [Gen. Rabbah 70:5] ואהב גר לתת לו לחם ושמלה: ודבר חשוב הוא זה, שכל עצמו של יעקב אבינו על זה התפלל, (בראשית כח, כ) ונתן לי לחם לאכול ובגד ללבוש:
19You shall love the stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. יטוַאֲהַבְתֶּם אֶת הַגֵּר כִּי גֵרִים הֱיִיתֶם בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם:
[You shall love the stranger] for you were strangers: Do not reproach others with your own defect. — [B. M. 59b] כי גרים הייתם: מום שבך אל תאמר לחברך:
20You shall fear the Lord, your God, worship Him, and cleave to Him and swear by His Name. כאֶת יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ תִּירָא אֹתוֹ תַעֲבֹד וּבוֹ תִדְבָּק וּבִשְׁמוֹ תִּשָּׁבֵעַ:
You shall fear the Lord, your God: and worship Him and cleave to Him. After you have all these qualities, then you may swear by His Name. את ה' אלהיך תירא: ותעבוד לו ותדבק בו ולאחר שיהיו בך כל המדות הללו אז בשמו תשבע:
21He is your praise and He is your God, Who did these great and awesome things for you, which your eyes have seen. כאהוּא תְהִלָּתְךָ וְהוּא אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה אִתְּךָ אֶת הַגְּדֹלֹת וְאֶת הַנּוֹרָאֹת הָאֵלֶּה אֲשֶׁר רָאוּ עֵינֶיךָ:
22With seventy souls, Your forefathers descended to Egypt, and now the Lord, your God, has made you as the stars of heaven in abundance. כבבְּשִׁבְעִים נֶפֶשׁ יָרְדוּ אֲבֹתֶיךָ מִצְרָיְמָה וְעַתָּה שָׂמְךָ יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ כְּכוֹכְבֵי הַשָּׁמַיִם לָרֹב:
Chapter 11
1[Therefore] you shall love the Lord, your God, keep His charge, His statutes, His ordinances, and His commandments, all the days. אוְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ וְשָׁמַרְתָּ מִשְׁמַרְתּוֹ וְחֻקֹּתָיו וּמִשְׁפָּטָיו וּמִצְוֹתָיו כָּל הַיָּמִים:
2And you shall know this day; that [I speak] not with your children, who did not know and who did not see the chastisement of the Lord, your God, His greatness, His mighty hand, and His outstretched arm, בוִידַעְתֶּם הַיּוֹם כִּי | לֹא אֶת בְּנֵיכֶם אֲשֶׁר לֹא יָדְעוּ וַאֲשֶׁר לֹא רָאוּ אֶת מוּסַר יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם אֶת גָּדְלוֹ אֶת יָדוֹ הַחֲזָקָה וּזְרֹעוֹ הַנְּטוּיָה:
And you shall know this day: Set your attention to know, understand, and accept my reproof. וידעתם היום: תנו לב לדעת ולהבין ולקבל תוכחתי:
that not with your children: am I now speaking, who would be able to say, “We did not know or see all this.” כי לא את בניכם: אני מדבר עכשיו שיוכלו לומר אנו לא ידענו ולא ראינו בכל זה:
3His signs, and His deeds, which He performed in the midst of Egypt, to Pharaoh, king of Egypt and to his entire land, גוְאֶת אֹתֹתָיו וְאֶת מַעֲשָׂיו אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה בְּתוֹךְ מִצְרָיִם לְפַרְעֹה מֶלֶךְ מִצְרַיִם וּלְכָל אַרְצוֹ:
4and what He did to the army of Egypt, to its steeds, and to its chariots, that He caused the waters of the Red Sea to inundate them when they pursued you, and the Lord destroyed them, to this day, דוַאֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לְחֵיל מִצְרַיִם לְסוּסָיו וּלְרִכְבּוֹ אֲשֶׁר הֵצִיף אֶת מֵי יַם סוּף עַל פְּנֵיהֶם בְּרָדְפָם אַחֲרֵיכֶם וַיְאַבְּדֵם יְהֹוָה עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה:
5and what He did for you in the desert, until you arrived at this place, הוַאֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לָכֶם בַּמִּדְבָּר עַד בֹּאֲכֶם עַד הַמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה:
6and what He did to Dathan and Abiram, sons of Eliab, the son of Reuben, that the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them up and their households and their tents, and all the possessions at their feet, in the midst of all Israel. ווַאֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לְדָתָן וְלַאֲבִירָם בְּנֵי אֱלִיאָב בֶּן רְאוּבֵן אֲשֶׁר פָּצְתָה הָאָרֶץ אֶת פִּיהָ וַתִּבְלָעֵם וְאֶת בָּתֵּיהֶם וְאֶת אָהֳלֵיהֶם וְאֵת כָּל הַיְקוּם אֲשֶׁר בְּרַגְלֵיהֶם בְּקֶרֶב כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל:
[That the earth opened its mouth, and swallowed them up…] in the midst of all Israel: Wherever one of them fled, there the earth split under him and swallowed him up; these are the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Nehemiah said to him: But has it not already been stated, “And the earth opened its mouth” (Num. 16:32), and not, “its mouths” [implying that the earth opened up at only one place]? Rabbi Judah said to him: How, then, do you [Reggio ed.] explain: “in the midst of all Israel” [implying it opened up in many areas]? Rabbi Nehemiah replied to him: The earth began to slope as a funnel, and wherever one of them happened to be, he rolled down until he reached the place where the earth was split (Tanchuma Buber , addendum to Korach 4). בקרב כל ישראל: כל מקום שהיה אחד מהם בורח, הארץ נבקעת מתחתיו ובולעתו, אלו דברי רבי יהודה. אמר לו רבי נחמיה, והלא כבר נאמר (במדבר טז לב) ותפתח הארץ את פיה, ולא פיותיה. אמר לו, ומה אני מקיים בקרב כל ישראל. אמר לו שנעשית הארץ מדרון כמשפך, וכל מקום שהיה אחד מהם [בורח] היה מתגלגל ובא עד מקום הבקיעה:
and all the possessions at their feet: Heb. וְאֶת כָּל-הַיְקוּם אֲשֶׁר בְּרַגְלֵיהֶם This is a man’s money, which sets him on his feet. - [San. 110a] ואת כל היקום אשר ברגליהם: זה ממונו של אדם שמעמידו על רגליו:
7But your eyes, which have seen all the great work of the Lord, which He did. זכִּי עֵינֵיכֶם הָרֹאֹת אֵת כָּל מַעֲשֵׂה יְהֹוָה הַגָּדֹל אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה:
But your eyes, which have seen: This is connected to the verse stated above (verse 2), “That [I speak] not with your children, who did not know…,” but rather with you-“your eyes, which have seen…” [i.e. to you, whose eyes have seen…] כי עיניכם הרואות: מוסב המקרא על האמור למעלה, (פסוק ב) כי לא את בניכם אשר לא ידעו וגו' כי אם עמכם אשר עיניכם הרואות וגו':
8[Therefore] keep all the commandments that I command you this day, in order that you may be strong and come and possess the land to which you are crossing, to possess it, חוּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֶת כָּל הַמִּצְוָה אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוְּךָ הַיּוֹם לְמַעַן תֶּחֶזְקוּ וּבָאתֶם וִירִשְׁתֶּם אֶת הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אַתֶּם עֹבְרִים שָׁמָּה לְרִשְׁתָּהּ:
9and in order that you may prolong your days on the land that the Lord swore to your forefathers to give to them and to their seed a land flowing with milk and honey. טוּלְמַעַן תַּאֲרִיכוּ יָמִים עַל הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע יְהֹוָה לַאֲבֹתֵיכֶם לָתֵת לָהֶם וּלְזַרְעָם אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבָשׁ:Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 104 - 105
• Chapter 104
This psalm tells of the beauty of creation, describing that which was created on each of the six days of creation. It proclaims the awesomeness of God Who sustains it all-from the horns of the wild ox to the eggs of the louse.
1. My soul, bless the Lord! Lord my God, You are greatly exalted; You have garbed Yourself with majesty and splendor.
2. You enwrap [Yourself] with light as with a garment; You spread the heavens as a curtain.
3. He roofs His heavens with water; He makes the clouds His chariot, He moves [them] on the wings of the wind.
4. He makes the winds His messengers, the blazing fire His servants.
5. He established the earth on its foundations, that it shall never falter.
6. The depths covered it as a garment; the waters stood above the mountains.
7. At Your exhortation they fled; at the sound of Your thunder they rushed away.
8. They ascended mountains, they flowed down valleys, to the place which You have assigned for them.
9. You set a boundary which they may not cross, so that they should not return to engulf the earth.
10. He sends forth springs into streams; they flow between the mountains.
11. They give drink to all the beasts of the field; the wild animals quench their thirst.
12. The birds of the heavens dwell beside them; they raise their voice from among the foliage.
13. He irrigates the mountains from His clouds above; the earth is satiated from the fruit of Your works.
14. He makes grass grow for the cattle, and vegetation requiring the labor of man to bring forth food from the earth;
15. and wine that gladdens man's heart, oil that makes the face shine, and bread that sustains man's heart.
16. The trees of the Lord drink their fill, the cedars of Lebanon which He planted,
17. wherein birds build their nests; the stork has her home in the cypress.
18. The high mountains are for the wild goats; the rocks are a refuge for the rabbits.
19. He made the moon to calculate the festivals; the sun knows its time of setting.
20. You bring on darkness and it is night, when all the beasts of the forest creep forth.
21. The young lions roar for prey, and seek their food from God.
22. When the sun rises, they return and lie down in their dens.
23. Then man goes out to his work, to his labor until evening.
24. How manifold are Your works, O Lord! You have made them all with wisdom; the earth is full of Your possessions.
25. This sea, vast and wide, where there are countless creeping creatures, living things small and great;
26. there ships travel, there is the Leviathan that You created to frolic therein.
27. They all look expectantly to You to give them their food at the proper time.
28. When You give it to them, they gather it; when You open Your hand, they are satiated with goodness.
29. When You conceal Your countenance, they are terrified; when You take back their spirit, they perish and return to their dust.
30. When You will send forth Your spirit they will be created anew, and You will renew the face of the earth.
31. May the glory of the Lord be forever; may the Lord find delight in His works.
32. He looks at the earth, and it trembles; He touches the mountains, and they smoke.
33. I will sing to the Lord with my soul; I will chant praise to my God with my [entire] being.
34. May my prayer be pleasant to Him; I will rejoice in the Lord.
35. May sinners cease from the earth, and the wicked be no more. Bless the Lord, O my soul! Praise the Lord!
Chapter 105
When David brought the Holy Ark up to the City of David, he composed this psalm and sang it before the Ark. He recounts all the miracles that God performed for the Jews in Egypt: sending before them Joseph, who was imprisoned, only to be liberated by God, eventually attaining the status of one who could imprison the princes of Egypt without consulting Pharaoh.
1. Offer praise to the Lord, proclaim His Name; make His deeds known among the nations.
2. Sing to Him, chant praises to Him, speak of all His wonders.
3. Glory in His holy Name; may the heart of those who seek the Lord rejoice.
4. Search for the Lord and His might; seek His countenance always.
5. Remember the wonders that He has wrought, His miracles, and the judgements of His mouth.
6. O descendants of Abraham His servant, children of Jacob, His chosen ones:
7. He is the Lord our God; His judgements extend over the entire earth.
8. He remembers His covenant forever, the word which He has commanded to a thousand generations;
9. the covenant which He made with Abraham, and His oath to Isaac.
10. He established it for Jacob as a statute, for Israel as an everlasting covenant,
11. stating, "To you I shall give the land of Canaan"-the portion of your inheritance,
12. when they were but few, very few, and strangers in it.
13. They wandered from nation to nation, from one kingdom to another people.
14. He permitted no one to wrong them, and admonished kings for their sake:
15. "Do not touch my anointed ones, and do not harm my prophets.”
16. He called for a famine upon the land; he broke every source of bread.
17. He sent a man before them; Joseph was sold as a slave.
18. They afflicted his foot with chains, his soul was put into iron;
19. until the time that His words came, the decree of the Lord purified him.
20. The king sent [word] and released him, the ruler of nations set him free.
21. He appointed him master of his house and ruler of all his possessions,
22. to imprison his princes at will, and to enlighten his elders.
23. Thus Israel came to Egypt, and Jacob sojourned in the land of Ham (Egypt).
24. He multiplied His nation greatly, and made it mightier than its adversaries.
25. He turned their hearts to hate His nation, to conspire against His servants.
26. He sent Moses, His servant; Aaron, whom He had chosen.
27. They placed among them the words of His signs, miracles in the land of Ham.
28. He sent darkness and made it dark, and they did not defy His word.
29. He transformed their waters to blood, and killed their fish.
30. Their land swarmed with frogs in the chambers of their kings.
31. He spoke, and hordes of wild beasts came, and lice throughout their borders.
32. He turned their rains to hail, flaming fire in their land;
33. it struck their vine and fig tree, it broke the trees of their borders.
34. He spoke, and grasshoppers came, locusts without number;
35. and it consumed all grass in their land, it ate the fruit of their soil.
36. Then He smote every firstborn in their land, the first of all their potency.
37. And He took them out with silver and gold, and none among His tribes stumbled.
38. Egypt rejoiced at their leaving, for the fear [of Israel] had fallen upon them.
39. He spread out a cloud for shelter, and a fire to illuminate the night.
40. [Israel] asked, and He brought quail, and with the bread of heaven He satisfied them.
41. He opened a rock and waters flowed; they streamed through dry places like a river,
42. for He remembered His holy word to Abraham His servant.
43. And He brought out His nation with joy, His chosen ones with song.
44. He gave them the lands of nations, they inherited the toil of peoples,
45. so that they might keep His statutes and observe His laws. Praise the Lord!
Tanya: Iggeret HaKodesh, beginning of Epistle 7• Lessons in Tanya
• Thursday, Menachem Av 21, 5775 · August 6, 2015
Iggeret HaKodesh, beginning of Epistle 7
• Sefer Hamitzvos:Thursday, Menachem Av 21, 5775 · August 6, 2015
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Positive Commandment 106
Ritual Impurity of a Zavah
We are commanded regarding the ritual impurity of a zavah [a woman who experiences menses three consecutive days outside the normal menstrual period.
When contracted, one must follow all the laws associated with this impurity. E.g.,] how she contracts this ritual impurity and how, after she becomes a zavah, she can pass on this impurity to others.
• 1 Chapter: Gerushin Gerushin - Chapter Four
Hayom Yom:
• Thursday, Menachem Av 21, 5775 · 06 August 2015
"Today's Day"
Sunday Menachem Av 21 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Re'ei, first parsha with Rashi.
Tehillim: 104-105.
Tanya: VI. "But he who (p. 419) ...of our salvation..." (p. 423).
Activism on behalf of the ways of Chassidus means that even when a chassid is in the marketplace, deeply involved in his business, he still thinks about what he can do for chassidic concerns and the welfare of chassidim. When he encounters a business acquaintance among the market people he should seek to persuade him to attend the shi'urim (public study sessions) in Chassidus, or to attend a farbrengen.
Activism on behalf of the ways of Chassidus is a personal obligation, regardless whether one is great or limited in knowledge of Chassidus.
אשרינו מה טוב חלקנו, ומה נעים גורלנו כו׳
“Fortunate are we. How good is our portion, how pleasant is our lot....”1
In this prayer, which is recited as part of the introductory morning prayers preceding Hodu, we offer thanks to G‑d for our “portion” and “lot” — His self-revelation to every individual Jew. These same terms appear together in a similar context in the following two successive verses:2
ה׳ מנת חלקי וכוסי וגו׳, חבלים נפלו לי וגו׳
“G‑d is the allotment3 of my portion and of my cup; [You support my lot]. The tracts [apportioned by lot] have fallen unto me pleasantly; [yea, I have a goodly heritage].”
These verses together indicate that the Jews’ pleasant portion and lot is an irradiation of G‑dly light. A question, however, arises: Why is the G‑dliness that illumines our souls referred to by both terms, both as “our portion” and as “our lot,” when “portion” can refer to any one of several identical benefactions, while “lot” indicates something which is granted exclusively to a particular individual who wins a lottery, for example, having been chosen by “lot”?
להבין לשון חלקנו וגורלנו
In order to understand the terms “our portion” and “our lot,”
צריך לבאר היטב לשון השגור במאמרי רז״ל: אין לו חלק באלקי ישראל
one must properly explain a common4 expression in the teachings of our Sages, of blessed memory, viz.: “He has no part in the G‑d of Israel.”
כי הגם דלכאורה לא שייך לשון חלק כלל באלקות יתברך
Now it would seem that a term like “part” cannot possibly be applied to G‑d,
שאינו מתחלק לחלקים, חס ושלום
because He is not divisible into parts, Heaven forfend.
G‑d is the ultimate in simple and uncompounded unity, the very antithesis of divisibility; nevertheless we find that our Sages here use the term “part” in relation to G‑d. How can this be?
We must perforce conclude that though G‑d Himself is indivisible, the G‑dly illumination that descends into Jewish souls can be described with the word “part”, inasmuch as it is revealed in parts, so to speak, as shall soon be explained.
אך הענין, כמו שכתוב ביעקב: ויקרא לו אל אלקי ישראל
This concept can be understood by considering a verse concerning Jacob:5“And he called Him ‘E‑l, G‑d of Israel.’ ”
The Alter Rebbe now goes on to explain the meaning of the verse in order to answer a number of simple questions: (a) Until this verse the name “Jacob” is used consistently; why does this verse suddenly change to “Israel”? (b) How does this conclusion of the verse relate to its beginning, “And he set up an altar”? (c) What is novel about the epithet, “E‑l, G‑d of Israel”?
פירוש
The meaning [of this verse is as follows]:
כי הנה באמת הקב״ה כשמו כן הוא
In truth, the Holy One, blessed is He, is true to His Name.
On the one hand, the phrase “Holy One” (in the Hebrew original, קדוש) implies that G‑d stands above and apart from creation, while “blessed be He” (where the Hebrew ברוך, lit., “blessed”, also means to descend and be revealed) implies that the level of G‑dliness which previously was “holy” and “apart” — the indirect “He” in the phrase quoted — is drawn down into the world in a revealed manner, as will soon be explained.
כי אף דאיהו ממלא כל עלמין עליונים ותחתונים
Though He permeates all the upper and lower worlds,
מרום המעלות עד מתחת לארץ הלזו החומרית
from the peak of all levels to this lowly corporeal world,
G‑d permeates and is present to an equal degree in all worlds. It should be noted that the term “permeates all worlds” used here, does not refer to the degree of contracted G‑dliness that is generally said to “fill all worlds” according to their individual capacity to retain it. Rather, here the Alter Rebbe refers to G‑d’s permeating all worlds to an equal degree.
כמו שכתוב: הלא את השמים ואת הארץ אני מלא
as it is written,6 “Do I not fill the heavens and the earth” —
אני ממש
i.e., “I, My very self,”
דהיינו מהותו ועצמותו, כביכול, ולא כבודו לבד
meaning G‑d’s very Being and Essence, as it were, and not only His glory —
In another verse we find,7 “The earth is filled with His glory.” That verse alludes merely to the “glory” and radiation of G‑dliness. Here, however, the words “I fill” refer to G‑d’s very Essence permeating all worlds.
Now, although G‑d Himself permeates and is to be found in all worlds:
אף על פי כן הוא קדוש ומובדל מעליונים ותחתונים, ואינו נתפס כלל בתוכם, חס ושלום
He is nevertheless “holy” in the sense of “apart from” the upper and lower worlds, and is not at all contained in them, Heaven forfend,
כתפיסת נשמת האדם בגופו, על דרך משל
in the way, by analogy, that the soul of man is contained in his body, and is affected by the changes within it. Unlike the soul, G‑d is not at all affected by the worlds in which He is to be found,
כמו שכתוב במקום אחר באריכות
as explained elsewhere at length.8
ולזאת
For this reason, i.e., since G‑d is entirely distinct and apart from all worlds,
לא היו יכולים לקבל חיותם ממהותו ועצמותו לבדו, כביכול
they could not receive their life-force from His Being and Essence in itself, as it were.
רק התפשטות החיות אשר הקב״ה מחיה עליונים ותחתונים
Rather, the diffusion of the life-force whereby the Holy One, blessed be He, animates the upper and lower worlds
הוא, על דרך משל, כמו הארה מאירה משמו יתברך
is, metaphorically speaking, like a radiation shining forth from His Name,
G‑d’s Name is itself a mere radiation; from it there emanates yet another radiation.
שהוא ושמו אחד
for He and His Name are One — for which reason a ray that emanates from His Name is able to animate the various worlds.
וכמו שכתוב: כי נשגב שמו לבדו
Thus it is written,9 “For [even] His Name alone is exalt-ed”; i.e., G‑d’s Name is exalted “alone”, standing apart from all the worlds which it transcends,
רק זיוו והודו על ארץ ושמים וגו'
while only His reflection and10 “His splendor are on the earth and the heavens.”
Thus, all of creation exists from but a radiation of G‑d’s Name, which, as previously mentioned, is itself merely a radia-tion.
והארה זו מתלבשת ממש בעליונים ותחתונים, להחיותם
This radiation actually vests itself in the upper and lower worlds in order to animate them.
At this level, the G‑dly life-force is not merely present in created beings and worlds, but actually vests itself in them: it contracts and adapts to the spiritual capacity of each particular world in which it is vested, and is integrated within it.
ונתפסת בתוכם על ידי ממוצעים רבים
It is contained in them by means of many intermediaries, i.e., levels that are related both to the levels above and below them, thereby enabling them to serve as conduits for the transference of the radiation,
וצמצומים רבים ועצומים
and by means of numerous and intense contractions,
“Numerous” describes the quantitative diminution of Divine light and life-force; “intense” alludes to their qualitative diminution, whereby the light that emerges after the contraction is entirely different from the light that originally emanated before being screened and contracted.
בהשתלשלות המדרגות, דרך עלה ועלול וכו׳
in a downward, chainlike progression through the levels of the various worlds, in a sequence of cause and effect, and so on.
Within every world the lower level develops from the higher level by way of cause and effect, the higher level serving as the cause and source of the lower.
After all these contractions and descents, then, the light manifests itself within the various worlds by becoming vested in them.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Siddur Tehillat HaShem, p. 17. |
| 2. | Tehillim 16:5-6. |
| 3. |
The Rebbe here refers the reader to Tanya, Part I, ch. 18, which states that “the blessed Ein Sofis garbed in the faculty of wisdom in the human soul, of whatever sort of a Jew he may be, ...[and this faculty of Chochmah] is beyond any graspable knowledge or intelligence.”
[I.e., G‑d apportions His light to various individuals in a superrational manner — by lot, so to speak.]
|
| 4. | Commenting on the term “common”, the Rebbe notes: “So far, I have found the above-quoted expression (‘He has no part...’) in one place only (in Midrash Tanchuma, end of Parshat Tazria). In many places, by contrast, we find, ‘You have no part [in the G‑d of Israel],’ (as in BereishitRabbah 2:4, with further references indicated there, and as quoted in Torah Or, beginning of p. 30a). We likewise find, ‘They have no part [in the G‑d of Israel]’ (Berachot 63b). [Why, then, does the Alter Rebbe quote the less frequent form?] It is quite possible that [with a statement as drastic as this] the Alter Rebbe did not want [to address the reader in] the second person nor [apply it to others in] the plural form — a reluctance that may readily be appreciated.” |
| 5. | Bereishit 33:20. |
| 6. | Yirmeyahu 23:24. |
| 7. | Yeshayahu 6:3. |
| 8. | Likkutei Amarim, Part I, ch. 42. |
| 9. | Tehillim 148:13. |
| 10. | Tehillim 148:13. |
• Sefer Hamitzvos:Thursday, Menachem Av 21, 5775 · August 6, 2015
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Positive Commandment 106
Ritual Impurity of a Zavah
We are commanded regarding the ritual impurity of a zavah [a woman who experiences menses three consecutive days outside the normal menstrual period.
When contracted, one must follow all the laws associated with this impurity. E.g.,] how she contracts this ritual impurity and how, after she becomes a zavah, she can pass on this impurity to others.
Ritual Impurity of a Zavah
Positive Commandment 106
Translated by Berel Bell
The 106th mitzvah is that we are commanded regarding the tumah of a zavah. This mitzvah includes the laws of how she becomes a zavah1 and how, after becoming a zavah, she conveys tumah to others.2
FOOTNOTES
1.See Hilchos Issurei Bi'ah, Chapter 6.
2.See Hilchos M'tamei Mishkav U'Moshav
Gerushin - Chapter Four
Halacha 1
A get may be written only with a substance that leaves a permanent impression - e.g., ink,1 sikra, kumus, kankantum2 or the like. If, however, [a get] is written with a substance that does not leave a permanent impression - e.g., beverages, fruit juices or the like - the get is void.
If [a get] is written with lead, a stylus or charcoal,3it is acceptable. At the outset, however, these substances should not be used.
Halacha 2
A priori, we may write with gallnut juice on paper, on a hide or the like. We may not use it to write on parchment that has been treated with gallnut juice, for it will not be distinct. If such a get is written, it is void. The same applies in all similar situations.
Halacha 3
What is implied? If a get is written on paper with erasures,6 on parchment that has not been fully processed, on a shard, on leaves, on the arm of a servant or on the horn of a cow,7 [it is acceptable, provided the husband] gives [his wife] the servant, the cow,8 the paper, the parchment or the like in the presence of witnesses.
Halacha 4
When the get is tattooed on the hand of a servant,9the signature of the witnesses is also tattooed there,10 and he is in the possession of [the wife], the divorce is effective, even though there are no witnesses to [the servant's] transfer,11 for [the tattoo] cannot be forged.
Even when it is known to us that the servant [previously] belonged to the husband, the get is tattooed on his hand, and he is in the possession of the woman, and she says: "He was given to me in the presence of witnesses," the status of the divorce is in doubt.12 For the possession of living beings that can move independently is not considered proof of their ownership.13
Halacha 5
If a get is engraved on a tablet [with a stylus], and it is signed by witnesses, and [the tablet] is in [the woman's] possession, the divorce is effective. [This applies] even when it is known to us that the tablet [had previously] belonged to [the wife].14For a woman is allowed to write her get herself. The verification of a getis dependent on [the witnesses who] signed it, if there are no witnesses to its transfer.15
Halacha 6
[The following laws apply when] a get is engraved on a board, on a stone or on a metal plate: If the scribe engraved the form of the letters,16 it is acceptable. This is considered writing, as [reflected by] the verse, [Jeremiah 17:1]: "Written with a pen of iron" - i.e., hewed out. Similarly, if one engraved the letters from the back of the plate until they projected from the front of the plate [the get is acceptable].
If, however, one hewed out the inside of the letter, [and the area around it,] until the form of the letter protruded on both sides, like the protruding writing on golden dinarim, the get is void, because this is not considered writing.17
Halacha 7
Halacha 8
Halacha 9
Regardless of the language in which a get is written, the scribe must be careful that the wording of the get does not allow for two meanings. It should not [leave] the reader [in doubt, wondering]: "Perhaps this was his intention" - i.e., something other than divorce - "or perhaps this was his intention" - i.e., divorce.26 Instead, [whatever] the language [of the get], the wording should unequivocally state one concept: that so and so divorces so and so.
Halacha 10
Similarly, regardless of the letters used, the penmanship [of the scribe] must be clear, so that children who know those letters would be able to read it. [The intent is] children who are not overly bright, nor those who are overly slow, but rather those of average intelligence.27
The writing should not be crooked, nor incoherent, lest one letter be confused with another, changing the meaning of the text.28
Halacha 11
If [the wording of a get] has two implications, or its writing is crooked or incoherent to the extent that it is possible to understand a different concept from it, it is unacceptable. [It is not void,] because it may be read as referring to a divorce and its meaning involves divorce.
Although a priori it is permissible to write a get in any language, it has already become universal Jewish practice to write gittin in Aramaic, using the following text.29
Halacha 12
This is the text of the get:
On this day of the week, on this day of the month, in this year from creation - or according to the chronology employed for legal documents30 - according to the reckoning that we keep here in [the name of the place where the get is being given], in the following way, I [the husband's name,] the son of [his father's name], from [the name of his city]31 or by whatever names or nicknames32 by which I, my father, my place or his place are called, desire out of independent will without anyone forcing me, to dismiss, to release, to divorce you, [the woman's name,] the daughter of [her father's name], from [the name of her city] or by whatever names or nicknames you, your father, your place or his place is known.33[Although] previously, you were my wife, now I am dismissing, releasing and divorcing you, so that you have the license and the authority to go and marry any man whom you desire. No one will protest [your actions] from the present day onward. You are free [to marry] any man. This will serve you as a bill of divorce, a get dismissing you, and a letter releasing you, from me, according to the faith of Moses and Israel.
The witnesses sign below, as we explained:34 [The witness's name] the son of [his father's name], a witness, [the witness's name] the son of [his father's name], a witness.
Halacha 13
When a get is written using the above text and wording, [the following rules should be adhered to:] The word ודן should not be written with a yud, so that it might be read as ודין, which might be interpreted as meaning: "There will be a judgment between me and you."
The word ואגרת should not be written with a yud, lest it be read as ואי גרת, meaning "If you commit adultery."
The word למהך should not be written with a yud, lest it be read as לי מהך - i.e., that it is a joke for me.35
The words תהוייין and תצבייין should not be written with only two yuddin, lest a reader get the impression that the man is speaking with two women, and rather than divorce the one, he is divorcing two others.
Similarly, he should elongate the [latter] vav in the word וכדו lest it resemble ayud, which would cause the word to be read as uch'dei, in which instance, it would mean that "I am divorcing you on this condition." By the same token, he should elongate the vav in the words תרוכין and שבוקין, lest they resembleyuddin, in which instance it would mean that he is telling her that she is releasing and divorcing him.
In a similar fashion, care must be taken in every language and with every form of lettering to make certain that [the wording of the get] does not leave the possibility for two implications.
Halacha 14
If [a scribe] wrote [a get] using this text and did not elongate the vavinmentioned, did not write the extra yuddin, or wrote the yuddin that we said should not be written, the get is unacceptable.36 Similarly, [if a get is written] in another language, and imprecise wording or writing is used, it is unacceptable.
Halacha 15
[The following rules apply if] a letter or a word of a get was rubbed out or written between the lines. If it is from the standard portion of the get, it is acceptable. If it is from the portions of the get that are of fundamental importance, the get is void. If, however, at the conclusion of the get, it is stated that the particular letter has been written between the lines or has been rubbed out, the get is acceptable, as other legal documents would be,37 even if [the difficulty] concerns the portions of the get that are of fundamental importance.38
Similarly, if a get was discovered to be torn [both] horizontally and vertically, as is customary for a court [to tear a legal document], the get is void, as would be other legal documents.39 If, however, it is torn in a way other than the manner customary for a court [to tear a legal document], it is acceptable.
Halacha 16
If [the get] has faded, rotted or become [filled with holes like] a sieve, it is acceptable. [The following rules apply if] it has been rubbed out or the letters have become blurred, but their form remains. If it can be read, it is acceptable;40 if not, it is void.
Halacha 17
When does the above41 apply? When the woman is in possession of a get that has been signed by witnesses, and there are no witnesses to its transfer. If, however, there are witnesses who testify that the get was transferred in their presence, and at that time it was acceptable, the divorce is binding.42
[This applies] even if the fundamental portions of the get were written on erased parchment or between the lines, or [the get] was torn [both] horizontally and vertically when it was given to [the woman] in their presence.43
Halacha 18
[The following rules apply when] five men write a single get to divorce their five wives. The get is acceptable if the wording they use is inclusive - i.e., they wrote "On the day of the week, so and so divorced so and so, and so and so divorced so and so..." - every husband making a statement to his wife. Similarly, each of them told his wife: "so that you have the license to...," including the entire standard portion of the get. Two witnesses must sign below.
[This get] must be given to each of the women in the presence of witnesses who observe its transfer. If no witnesses observe its transfer at all, the woman who is in possession of the get is considered to be divorced.44
[Different rules apply if,] by contrast, [the scribe] wrote: "On the day of the week, so and so divorced so and so...," completing the entire text of the get and then began writing a second get directly under it in the same scroll. [He continued] writing: "On the day of the week, so and so divorced so and so...," and so completed the entire text of the second get and similarly completed all the gittinin this manner [on the same scroll], and the witnesses signed below [the finalget].
If this scroll was given to each of the women in the presence of witnesses who observed the transfer, all their divorces are effective.45 [More stringent rules apply] if there are no witnesses who observed the transfer, and the scroll is in the possession of one of the women: If hers was the last get written on the scroll and the signatures of the witnesses are read together with [that statement], her divorce is effective.46 If the scroll is in the possession of one of the women whose gittin precede the last one, the status of her divorce is in doubt.
Halacha 19
If [the scribe] writes: "We, so and so and so and so, divorce our wives, so and so and so and so,..." and then completes the get, the get is void, even though it was given to each one of them in the presence of witnesses who observed its transfer. [The rationale:] two women cannot be divorced with the same get, as [we can infer from Deuteronomy 24:1]: "And he shall write for her," [implied is:] for her and not for her and her colleague.
If after [writing the text as above], he continued and wrote individual statements for each one within the get, stating, "So and so is divorcing so and so, and so and so is divorcing so and so on this date,"47 the divorces are acceptable.
Halacha 20
[The following rules apply when a scribe] wrote two gittin in two columns on one scroll side by side. If there are two witnesses [whose signatures] are read [as a continuation of] one get, and two witnesses [whose signatures] are read [as a continuation of] the other get, the get is acceptable.48 Whichever woman is in possession of the get is divorced.49
Halacha 21
[In the above instance, if the gittin] were signed by only two witnesses, who signed across the width of both gittin, the divorce is valid only when the scroll is in the possession of the woman under whose get the signatures appear.50
If the scroll is in the possession of the woman under whose get the signatures of the witnesses do not appear, the get is not acceptable unless it is given to her in the presence of witnesses [who observe the transfer].51
Halacha 22
[The following rules apply if a scribe] writes two gittin, one above the other, and the witnesses sign between the two gittin - their signatures thus being below the first get and above the second get. If the scroll is in the possession of the woman under whose get the signatures appear, her divorce is valid, and the woman above whose get the signatures appear is not divorced.52
Halacha 23
If two gittin [were written in an arc,] with the beginning of one get facing the beginning of the other get, and the signature of the witnesses is located between the tops of both gittin, both are void. If they are transferred in the presence of witnesses, both are acceptable.
Halacha 24
[The following rules apply if the scribe did not complete the text of the get in one column,] left a portion unwritten and wrote it at the top of a second column. If the witnesses signed below, at the end of the second column, it is acceptable, provided it is obvious that the scroll was not cut off, and it was the scribe's intent to complete the get in the second column.
If, however, this is not apparent, the status of the divorce is in doubt, even if theget was given in the presence of witnesses. [The rationale is that] perhaps there were two gittin, and the portion below the get in the first column and a portion above the get in the second column were cut off.55
Halacha 25
If, after writing the get and completing it, [the scribe] wrote: "Give regards to so and so," "Greetings to you, so and so, my friend," or the like, and afterwards the witnesses signed beneath the greeting, the status of the divorce is doubtful,56despite the fact that the woman is in possession of the get. [The rationale is] perhaps the witnesses signed only for the greeting [without paying attention to the get].
If, however, the scribe wrote: "And give regards to so and so," "And greetings to you, so and so, my friend," or the like, the get is acceptable. Since [the greeting] accompanies the get,57 [we presume that the witnesses] signed with both these thoughts in mind.
If [the get] was given to her in the presence of witnesses, it is acceptable in either instance.58
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
In Hilchot Tefillin 1:4, the Rambam describes the process by which ink is made as follows:
|
| 2. |
In his Commentary on the Mishnah, Gittin 2:3, the Rambam mentions three Arabic terms for these words. Rav Kapach explains the meaning as follows: sikra refers to red clay that is used for painting. Kumus and kankantum are two similar substances, yellow and green powders, which when mixed with gallnut juice produce a black substance. Other commentaries offer different interpretations.
|
| 3. |
Our translation of these terms is based on the Aruch, as quoted by the Ramah (Even HaEzer125:2).
|
| 4. |
The Beit Shmuel 124:1 explains that, a priori, the Rambam allows a get to be written on a substance from which we are forbidden to benefit. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 124:1) differs and follows the opinion of Tosafot, which states that it is only after the fact that such a get is acceptable. The Ramah adds that if we are obligated to destroy the substance on which the getwas written, the get is void.
|
| 5. |
The Rambam rules that a get signed by acceptable witnesses is valid even when it was given without witnesses' observing the transfer (Chapter 1, Halachah 16). In this instance, however, even he maintains that witnesses must observe the transfer, for it is possible that the signatures of the witnesses on the get could be forged (Chelkat Mechokek 124:2).
|
| 6. |
The difficulty with a get written on a parchment with erasures is that the text can be erased again and additions or deletions made without making a noticeable difference in the final product. Thus, stipulations could be added to the get, or the signatures of the witnesses altered. Similarly, changes could be made to a get written on any of the other substances that follow.
Another type of legal document written on such parchment would not be acceptable. The laws pertaining to a get are different, for in this instance the purpose of the document is not to serve as proof of the divorce, but instead to effect the dissolution of the marriage bond. The purpose of other legal documents, by contrast, is to serve as an account of the transactions they record.
|
| 7. |
As stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 6, one may not detach the horn from the cow after the get was written on it, before giving the cow to the woman.
|
| 8. |
Normally mesirah, transferring the reigns of an animal, is not an acceptable means of acquiring a cow, as stated in Hilchot Mechirah 3:5. Nevertheless, an exception is made in this instance, because the fundamental purpose of this transaction is not to transfer the cow, but to transfer theget (Hafla'ah; see also the gloss of the Maggid Mishneh to Chapter 9, Halachah 3).
|
| 9. |
As reflected by a comparison to the second clause, this law applies when it is known that the servant belonged to the woman (Beit Shmuel 124:17). (See the notes on the following halachah.)
|
| 10. |
The commentaries question why the signature of the witnesses is significant, for by tattooing the servant they have committed a transgression that disqualifies them from serving as witnesses.
|
| 11. |
In this instance, the situation parallels the law described in Chapter 1, Halachah 16, which rules that a get signed by acceptable witnesses is acceptable, even when there are no witnesses to its transfer.
|
| 12. |
See the Chelkat Mechokek 124:19, which states that if there are witnesses to the transfer of the servant, or the husband admits that the servant was given to the woman, the divorce is effective.
|
| 13. |
See Hilchot To'en V'Nit'an 10:1.
|
| 14. |
Although the article on which the husband has the get written must belong to him, there is no difficulty in this instance, as will be explained.
|
| 15. |
We assume that the witnesses who signed the get would have signed it only after verifying that the woman gave the tablet to her husband for the purpose of the divorce.
|
| 16. |
I.e., he hewed out the lines that would normally be written.
|
| 17. |
I.e., the letter is formed by working around the letter, and not on the form of the letter itself. This law has a corollary that is applicable to contemporary halachah. If ink spills near a letter, the shape of the letter may not be formed by scratching out the ink blotch (Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 125:8).
|
| 18. |
Without writing.
|
| 19. |
In this instance, the writing will not remain permanently, but instead will be rubbed out in a short time. For this reason, the Rambam rules in Hilchot Shabbat 11:16 that sketching on a hide is not considered writing. Nevertheless, in this instance, since there is nothing lacking in the writing itself, the Rambam deems the get acceptable.
|
| 20. |
See the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 125:5), which mentions that there are some authorities who rule that etching is acceptable and sketching unacceptable, and others who accept sketching and disqualify etching.
|
| 21. |
I.e., one may use Rashi script, rather than ordinary Hebrew writing (Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 126:1). Indeed, in one of his responsa, the Rambam writes that his teacher, Rav Yosef Migash, preferred having a get written in Rashi script rather than using the letters used in writing a Torah scroll. The univeral custom at present, however, is to use the Assyrian script with which Torah scrolls are written [Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 126:1)].
|
| 22. |
I.e., there is no requirement to write it in Hebrew or Aramaic. Nevertheless, for centuries, it has been customary to use the standard Aramaic text quoted by the Rambam later on in this chapter.
|
| 23. |
In Chapter 1, Halachah 23, the Rambam allows a get to be read for the witnesses. Nevertheless, in this instance the Rambam requires the witnesses to read the get themselves. Since signing in another language is already a departure from the norm, no further leniency is granted (Ma'aseh Rokeach).
|
| 24. |
Gittin 9:7 gives an example of one witness signing in Greek and the other in Hebrew. Even though the two languages use different characters, and even require writing in different directions, the getis acceptable.
Each of the witnesses' signatures is a separate and independent statement. Therefore, there is no need for the two signatures to be in the same language. The get, by contrast, is a single unit and must be written in one language (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 25. |
This ruling is accepted by all authorities. Although the standard text of the get that is universally employed uses both Aramaic and Hebrew, this does not represent a contradiction. Our Sages explain that since both these languages were used at Mount Sinai, they are considered to be a single tongue (Ramah, Even HaEzer 126:1).
|
| 26. |
See Halachah 13 for examples of wording that could create such doubt.
|
| 27. |
See Hilchot Tefillin 1:19, which states that when a question arises concerning the writing for the parchments of the tefillin, a determination may be made on the basis of the reading of such a child.
|
| 28. |
See Halachah 13 for examples of steps taken to prevent such confusion from arising.
|
| 29. |
This basic text was already employed during the Talmudic era. At present, the later authorities in both the Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities have suggested minor emendations to the text quoted by the Rambam. As such, there are two standard gittin employed in Eretz Yisrael today.
|
| 30. |
This refers to the years dating back to the beginning of Alexander the Great's kingdom, as mentioned in Chapter 1, Halachah 27.
|
| 31. |
I.e., the city in which he dwells, not the city in which he was born (Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer128:2). The Shulchan Aruch continues, stating "At present, when we are constantly being exiled and must wander, our place of residence is not defined." Instead, if the man is present at the composition of the get, it is written "who is located at present in this and this place."
|
| 32. |
The Ashkenazi custom is not to employ this phrase and instead to specify all the names by which a person is called (Ramah, Even HaEzer 129:1).
|
| 33. |
The concepts mentioned in the notes above with regard to the husband's place and names also apply with regard to his wife's.
|
| 34. |
Chapter 1, Hilchot 15, 18, et al. In many manuscripts and early printings of the Mishneh Torah, the phrases that follow are omitted, leading some to consider them to be the additions of a printer.
|
| 35. |
Some texts of the Mishneh Torah also include the statement that space should be left between the leg of the heh and its roof. According to that text, לי מהך "for me, from now on."
|
| 36. |
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and maintains that the get is unacceptable only when the husband protests and maintains that he intentionally had the scribe make such a mistake. If he does not issue such a protest, the get is acceptable. The Maggid Mishneh also mentions that there is a difference if the woman subsequently married on the basis of the get or not, and the Turstates that the get may be disqualified on this basis only if the husband writes it himself, or the scribe writes it in response to his explicit instructions.
The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 126:22) quotes the Rambam's ruling, but also mentions that of the Ra'avad and the Tur. An exception, however, is made with regard to writing the three yuddin in the words תצבייין and תהוייין. If only two yuddin are written, the get is acceptable. (See also theBeit Shmuel 126:32.)
|
| 37. |
See Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh 27:8.
|
| 38. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 125:19) states that at present it is customary to discard a getwith a portion that has been rubbed out, instead of adding this line at the conclusion of the get. If, however, there is no alternative, a get is acceptable with an erasure, even if there is no explanation at the end, for we rely on the witnesses who observe the transfer (Beit Shmuel125:35).
|
| 39. |
The Ra'avad states that if the get had been certified by the court, it is acceptable even if it is torn in the above manner. The rationale is that we assume that the get was torn so that the woman would not be able to use it to demand payment of her ketubah a second time. The Rambam's ruling is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 125:20), and the Ra'avad's clarification is mentioned by the Chelkat Mechokek 125:41.
|
| 40. |
As reflected by the following halachah, this refers to an instance in which the get was given when it was acceptable, and its condition deteriorated afterwards.
|
| 41. |
I.e., the disqualifications mentioned in the previous two halachot.
|
| 42. |
This represents a difference between gittin and other legal documents, as reflected in Halachah 3 and notes (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 43. |
The Maggid Mishneh emphasizes that if the get is faded to the point that it cannot be read at the time it is transferred, the fact that the transfer is observed by witnesses is to no avail, and the divorce is void.
He also mentions the opinion of the Rashba, who states that a get that is torn vertically and horizontally before it is given to the woman is not acceptable. He does not, however, accept that decision. His rulings are paralleled by those of the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 125:21), which mentions both the Rambam's and the Rashba's views, but appears to favor that of the Rambam.
|
| 44. |
The others, by contrast, are not considered to be divorced, for we have no proof that the woman's husband in fact gave her this get. (See Gittin 86b.)
|
| 45. |
I.e., no attention is paid to the witnesses who signed the get. Each of the women received a getthat was written in acceptable manner, and whose transfer was observed by witnesses. This is sufficient for a divorce to be acceptable.
|
| 46. |
For hers is an acceptable get, signed by witnesses. We are not concerned with the fact that the scroll contains other gittin above it.
|
| 47. |
The get is acceptable only if the date that is stated in the beginning of the get is restated in the individual statement written for each woman. (See Beit Shmuel 130:13.)
|
| 48. |
If the get is given to both women in the presence of witnesses who observe the transfer, both are divorced (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 49. |
Even when there are no witnesses who observe the transfer.
|
| 50. |
I.e., under the first column, the witness signed "Ya'akov, the son of," and in the second column he continued "Yitzchak, a witness." The second witness did the same. In this instance, the witnesses have signed under the first get. If the witnesses signed their first names under one column, and signed "the son of so and so" in the second column, both gittin would be acceptable. For "the son of Ya'akov" is an acceptable signature."
This interpretation is based on the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Gittin 9:6). TheShulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 130:8) offers a slightly different interpretation.
|
| 51. |
I.e., the fact that the names of the fathers of the witnesses are located under the woman's getdoes not cause it to be considered a get with false signatures. (See Ramah, Even HaEzer 130:8.)
|
| 52. |
These laws apply even when there are no witnesses who observed the transfer of the scroll. If there are witnesses who observed the transfer of the scroll to the second woman, even the second get is acceptable.
If the scroll is in the possession of the woman above whose get the witnesses sign, both the gittinare unacceptable unless there are witnesses who observed their transfer.
|
| 53. |
When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 130:4) states that the get is pasul, unacceptable. That term implies that it is the Rabbis who disqualified the use of such a get, while according to Scriptural law it is acceptable.
|
| 54. |
The fact that the witnesses did not sign in the proper place does not make the get invalid.
|
| 55. |
And thus a portion of the get that the woman receives would not have been written for her sake. For this reason, even if the get was given in the presence of witnesses who observed the transfer, it is not acceptable unless the witnesses testify that the get was originally written in two columns (Maggid Mishneh).
|
| 56. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 130:3) uses the term pasul, "unacceptable," meaning that theget was disqualified by Rabbinic decree alone. (See Beit Shmuel 130:4.)
|
| 57. |
The word "and" (in Hebrew, the letter vav) establishes a connection between the two, and the greeting is not considered to be a separate entity.
|
| 58. |
In the first instance, even if we were to assume that the intent of the witnesses was to sign on the greeting, that does not disqualify the get. It is acceptable when given in the presence of witnesses.
|
Kelim - Chapter 18
Halacha 1
An earthenware k'li is not susceptible to ritual impurity unless it has a receptacle and was made with the intent that it serve as a receptacle. If, by contrast it does not have a receptacle or even if it has a receptacle, but it was not made to serve that purpose, it is not susceptible to impurity at all, neither according to Scriptural Law, nor Rabbinic decree. Accordingly, a chair, a bed, a bench, a candelabra, or a table made of earthenware or any similar k'li that does not have a receptacle are not susceptible to impurity.
Similarly, a large pipe even though water passes though it, and even it is curved, and even when it holds water, is pure, because it was not intended to contain water, but rather that the water should pass through it. Similarly, a barrel used by swimmers is not susceptible to impurity. This ruling also applies to cask at the side of the base of a large barrel , because it was made to serve as a handle for those who carry the large barrel and was not intended to serve as a receptacle.
Halacha 2
A lantern that has a receptacle for oil is susceptible to ritual impurity. If it lacks one, it is pure. Similarly, a potter's frame that has a receptacle is susceptible to impurity.
Halacha 3
A homeowner's funnel is pure. A perfumer's funnel is susceptible to impurity, because he turns it on its side so that his customers can smell the fragrance.
Halacha 4
Covers for jugs of wine, jugs of oil, and barrels are pure, for they were not made to serve as receptacles. If a cover was altered so that it could be functional, it is susceptible to impurity.
Halacha 5
When the cover of a frying pan has a hole or a protrusion on its top, it is pure. If it does not have a hole or a protrusion, it is susceptible to impurity, because a woman will use it to drain off the sauce in which vegetables were cooked. This is the general principle: Anything that serves an earthenware container while it is turned upside down is pure.
Halacha 6
A titrus, even though it has holes and water drips out from them, is nevertheless susceptible to impurity, because the water collects at its sides, and they are intended to serve as receptacles.
Halacha 7
An earthenware torch into which patches of cloth and oil are placed to burn, is susceptible to impurity. Similarly, a receptacle that is placed under a lamp to collect drops of oil is susceptible to impurity.
Halacha 8
A base that is placed under containers to collect the liquids that flow from the container is susceptible to impurity.
Halacha 9
A boat made of earthenware, even though it serves as a receptacle, is not susceptible to impurity. The rationale is that a boat is not in the category of thekeilim mentioned in the Torah. This applies whether it is made of earthenware or of wood and whether it is large or small.
Halacha 10
Whenever keilim have been broken and their form has been destroyed, their broken fragments are not susceptible to impurity even if those fragments are functional with the exception of the fragments of earthenware containers. With regard to them, we follow the principle: If there is an earthenware fragment that can serve as a receptacle, it is susceptible to impurity. This is derived fromLeviticus 11:33 which states: "Any earthenware container." According to the Oral Tradition, it was understood that this phrase was mentioned only to include the broken shards of earthenware containers.
When does the above apply? When the earthenware shard has a receptacle that can hold liquids when the shard is resting on its base and not leaning. If, however, it is fit to hold liquids only when it is leaned against a support, it is not susceptible to impurity.
Halacha 11
When an earthenware container cannot rest on its base because of a handle or it has a protrusion and the protrusion causes it to lean to one side, it is pure even though the handle was removed or the protrusion was broken. The rationale is that whenever an earthenware container is considered as pure for even one moment, it is never susceptible to impurity again.
Halacha 12
When there is an earthenware container that has a pointed base, e.g., a basin with a pointed base, that was broken and its base is still able to serve as a container, even though the base cannot hold liquids unless it is supported, e.g., the bases of containers used to draw water and the bases of goblets, they are susceptible to ritual impurity, for this is the way they were made at the outset, that their bases would contain liquids when they would be supported or held.
Halacha 13
How much liquid must the broken pieces of an earthenware container be able to contain to be susceptible to impurity? When the container while intact was between the size that would enable it to contain enough liquid to rub on a small person and the size of a barrel that could container a se'ah or close to that and it was broken, if the shards - either from the base or the wall - were able to contain a revi'it, they are susceptible to impurity.
Halacha 14
If the vessel was a large barrel that could contain between a se'ah and twose'ah or more, if the shard that remains is large enough to contain half a log, it is susceptible to impurity. If originally the vessel was extremely large - from a barrel that could contain two se'ah until a large vat - and it broke, if a shard that remained could contain a log, it is susceptible to impurity. If the shards would contain less than these measures, they are not susceptible to impurity.
Halacha 15
When a small earthenware container, e.g., a cruse or the like, breaks, but there remains from its bottom a shard that can hold even the slightest amount of liquid when resting on its base, even though it is very narrow, as thin as possible for a small container, it is susceptible to impurity. If a shard from its walls that could contain liquids remains, it is not susceptible to impurity. The rationale is that the walls of these containers and the like are fundamentally flat; they do not have a hollow that is apparent. Thus they are like flat earthenware implements.
Halacha 16
The prevailing assumption is that wherever shards are found, they are pure except those found in a potter's workshop, because the majority of those are considered as bases for keilim. And a base for an implement is susceptible to impurity even if it is a broken vessel.
Kelim - Chapter 19
Halacha 1
To what degree is it necessary for an earthenware utensil to be broken so that it can no longer serve as an effective container and, hence, have its impurity nullified if it was impure or no longer be considered as susceptible to impurity if it was pure?
For a container made for food - when it has a hole through which olives can fall. For a container made for liquids - when it has a hole through which liquids can seep in; i.e., when it is inserted into liquids, the liquids will seep into the container through the hole. If it was made for both foods and liquids, it is judged stringently and it is susceptible to impurity unless it has a hole large enough for olives to fall through.
The measure "enough for liquids to seep out" was stated only with regard to a base for containers, because it is made to collect liquids that flow from containers and if liquids seep from it, it no longer serves its function.
Halacha 2
There are five categories applicable with regard to an earthenware container:
a) if it has a hole through which liquids can seep out, it is pure with regard to contracting impurity as a base for containers, but it is still considered a container with regard to the consecration of water for the ashes of the red heifer;
b) if it has a hole that allows liquid to seep in, it is no longer considered as a container with regard to the consecration of water for the ashes of the red heifer, but it is still considered a container with regard to making produce subject to ritual impurity because of the liquids contained within it, as we explained;
c) if it has a hole large enough for a small root to emerge from it, the water it contains do not make produce subject to ritual impurity because the liquids contained within it are considered as if they are not in a container; nevertheless, it is still considered as a container with regard to holding olives and hence, it is susceptible to impurity;
d) if it has a hole large enough for olives to fall through, it is pure and it is regarded as a k'li made from animal turds or stone that is not susceptible to impurity, nevertheless, it is still considered as a container with regard to saving its contents when sealed closed in a building where a corpse is located unless its larger portion is broken, as we explained in Hilchot Tum'at Meit.
Halacha 3
The size of a hole necessary for a barrel not to contract impurity is one through which nuts would fall. The size of a hole necessary for a frying pan or a pot not to contract impurity is one through which olives would fall. Similarly, even when an earthenware kneading trough is large and contains 40 se'ah of liquids, if it has holes large enough for olives to fall through, even though one turns it on its side and kneads with it, it is pure, for it was not made with this intent at the outset.
Halacha 4
The size of a hole necessary for a cruse and a container not to contract impurity is one through which oil can seep through. The size of a hole necessary for a pitcher not to contract impurity is one through which water can seep in.
Halacha 5
When the opening of a lamp is removed, it is pure. A lamp of earth whose mouth was fired by the wick is not susceptible to impurity and is not considered as an earthenware container until the entire lamp was fired in a kiln like an earthenware container.
Halacha 6
When a barrel is broken, but it can hold liquids when it is turned on its side or if it was split and it is like two kneading troughs, it is still susceptible to impurity. If it became cracked and cannot be carried while holding half a kab of dried figs, it is pure.
Halacha 7
When the handles of a barrel are removed, it is considered as a base placed under a container. This is true even if only one handle was removed. If it was cracked below its handles, even though its handles are intact, it is also considered only as a base. If initially it was made without handles, it is considered as a barrel.
Halacha 8
The following laws apply when a barrel became cracked in the oven and thus two bases for containers were produced. If it cracked after the work necessary to fashion it was completed, each of the bases is susceptible to ritual impurity. If it was cracked before the work necessary to complete it was finished and afterwards, it was fired in the kiln, it is pure.
How can this matter be determined? If the broken pieces were flat and the clay was red beneath the surface, it can be assumed that it was broken before the work necessary to fashion it was completed. If the broken pieces were not flat and the clay was not red beneath the surface, it can be assumed that it was broken after the work necessary to fashion it was completed. Hence it is susceptible to impurity like other broken earthenware containers that are fit to be used.
Halacha 9
When a base to be placed under containers is cracked and it is not suitable to hold liquids, it is pure even though it is still suitable to hold food. The rationale is that it is made only to collect liquids that seep out as we explained. If it would leak, it would be useless, because a base is not placed under another base.
Similarly, a base that is broken or divided into two is pure, because it was not said that the remnants of remnants are susceptible to impurity. Instead, it is only the remnants of earthenware containers themselves that are susceptible to impurity.
Halacha 10
If there are protrusions emerging from a base, whether it is resting upright or leaning on its side, whenever the protrusions can hold olives if the base is filled with olives, it contracts impurity when the base is touched by impurity and when impurity enters the inner space opposite it. If it cannot hold olives, it contracts impurity when the base is touched by impurity, but does not contract impurity when impurity enters the inner space opposite it.
Halacha 11
What is meant by the statement: it contracts impurity when the base is touched by impurity, but does not contract impurity when impurity enters the inner space opposite it? If impurity touches the actual body of the inside of the base, the protrusion contracts impurity. If impurity enters the inner space of the base, even if it is directly opposite the protrusion, the protrusion does not contract impurity.
Halacha 12
What is meant by the statement that a base contracts impurity when impurity enters the inner space opposite it? That if impurity enters the inner space of the base opposite the protrusion, the protrusion contracts impurity together with the base.
Similar concepts apply whenever it is stated that an earthenware container, an oven, or a range contract impurity if touched by impurity, they contract impurity when impurity enters the inner space opposite them, or that they do not contract impurity when impurity enters the inner space opposite them. Similarly, whenever the concept of contracting impurity through contact is mentioned with regard to an earthenware container, an oven or a range, the intent is that the impurity will touch the inside of these entities. Contracting impurity via their inner space means that the impurity will not touch them at all, merely enter into their inner space.
Halacha 13
When a barrel was cracked and one held it together by smearing animal turds upon it - even though the shards would fall if the turds were removed - it remains susceptible to impurity, because its classification as a k'li was never nullified.
If it was broken and, after the shards fell apart, one stuck them together with turds or one brought shards from another place and stuck them together with turds - even though the shards would stand as a unit if the turds were removed - it is pure, because there was a time when it was no longer considered as a k'li. If one of the shards could hold a revi'it, that shard alone contracts impurity if impurity enters its inner space, because it is considered as a k'li in its own right. The remainder of the barrel does not contract impurity unless impurity touches it from the inside, because it is not a whole k'li.
Halacha 14
The following laws apply if a barrel was perforated, one plugged the hole with tar, and then the barrel was broken. If the shard plugged with tar could hold arevi'it, it is susceptible to impurity, because it is considered as a broken portion of a barrel and its classification as a k'li was never nullified.
If, however, one plugged a hole in a shard with tar after it was separated from the k'li, it is pure, even though it is now capable of holding a revi'it. The rationale is that when a shard is perforated, it is no longer considered as a k'li and it is pure. And once an earthenware container has been considered as pure for even one moment, it never becomes susceptible to impurity again.
Halacha 15
When a kettle was perforated and it was patched with tar, it is pure, because it cannot hold hot liquids as it holds cold ones. Similarly, keilim made from tar, beeswax, or the like are pure and are not considered as keilim.
Halacha 16
When an earthenware funnel was plugged with tar, it is not susceptible to impurity, because the tar does not cause it to be considered as a container. If, however, a wooden funnel is plugged in this manner, it is considered as a container and it is susceptible to impurity.
Kelim - Chapter 20
Halacha 1
We already explained that every accessory that is required by an implement when it is being used is considered as an integral element of the implement with regard to both contracting and imparting impurity. Therefore, when one coats an earthenware container which is intact and strong, if the container contracts impurity and foods and/or liquids touch the coating, they are pure. The rationale is that the container does not require this coating.
If, however, one coats an unsound earthenware container, the coating is considered as an integral element of the container. Similarly, when one reinforces an earthenware jug used to draw water by covering it with leather, parchment, or the like, if the jug was unsound, the coating is considered as an integral element of the container.
Halacha 2
When one coats an earthenware container in order to cook with it, the coating is not considered as joined to it. If one coats implements in order to heat tar in them, the coating is considered as joined to them.
Halacha 3
When there was a hole in a barrel and one plugged it with tar, tin, sulfur, lime, or gypsum, the filling is not considered as joined to it. If one plugged it with other substances, the filling is considered as joined to it.
Halacha 4
Moist substances that can be stretched that are used to coat casks of water so that water will not drip from the container are considered as integral elements of the container. Even if the container contracted impurity because of the presence of impurity within its inner space, food and/or liquids that touch the coating are impure.
Similarly, the coating of an oven is considered as the earthenware substance of the oven itself, provided the coating is no more than a handbreadth thick, because that it is what is necessary for an oven. Anything more than a handbreadth is not necessary for an oven and entities that touch a portion of the coating that is more than a handbreadth thick are pure. The coating necessary for a range is three fingerbreadths thick.
Halacha 5
When there was a hole in a barrel and one plugged it with more tar than was necessary, an entity that touches the portion that is necessary to plug it is impure. If it touches the portion that is not necessary, it is pure. When tar dripped onto a barrel, an entity that touches it is pure.
Halacha 6
When a samovar that was coated with both mortar and pieces of ground shards contracts impurity, one who touches the mortar contracts impurity. One who touches the ground shards does not contract impurity, because the ground shards do not attach themselves thoroughly to the container.
Halacha 7
When a coating was applied to the cover of a barrel and to the barrel, the covering is not considered as connected to it. If impure liquids touch the barrel, the cover does not contract impurity. If such liquids touch the cover, the outside of the barrel does not contract impurity.
Halacha 8
When a metal implement is covered with tar, the tar is not considered as joined to it. If it was designated for wine, the coating is considered an integral part of the container.
Halacha 9
The following laws apply when the carcass of a crawling animal comes in contact with dough that is in the cracks of a kneading trough. On Pesach, since there is a significant prohibition against the possession of dough, it is considered as an intervening substance and the contact of the carcass with it does not impart impurity to the kneading trough. Different laws apply throughout the year. If one is particular about it, the kneading trough does not contract impurity. If one desires that the dough remain, it is considered as part of the kneading trough and the kneading trough contracts impurity.
Halacha 10
The following laws apply to the strands and the straps attached to covers for books or handkerchiefs for children. Those that are sewn are considered as attached, while those that are merely tied are not. Similar laws apply to the straps attached to a hoe, a sack, and a bushel. Those joined to the handles of an earthenware container, by contrast, are not considered as attached - even if they are sewn - because there is no way they can be attached to an earthenware container.
Halacha 11
The following rules apply with regard to the extension of the handle of a hatchet: Within three fingerbreadths of the head is considered as joined. Anything that touches beyond three fingerbreadths is pure.
With regard to the portion of the handle that is held, the handbreadth next to the head is considered as attached. Anything that touches beyond that measure is pure.
Halacha 12
For the implement to be susceptible to impurity, the remnant of the shaft of a compass must be a handbreadth long. The handle of a jewelers' hammer must be a handbreadth. The handle of a goldsmith's hammer must be two handbreadths long, that of a carpenter, three handbreadths.
The remnant of a plow drawn by oxen is four handbreadths close to the metal peg implanted in its upper end. The handle of the hatchet with which one digs irrigation ditches is four handbreadths. The handle of a hatchet used to prune trees is five handbreadths. The handle of a small hammer is five handbreadths and that of an ordinary hammer is six. The handle of a hatchet used to chop firewood and that of one use to break up earth is six handbreadths. The handle of a hammer used by stonecutters is six handbreadths. The remnants of a plow that is close to the metal edge at the plow's end must be seven handbreadths. The handle of a ladle is eight handbreadths, that used by appliers of lime is ten handbreadths. With regard to any greater measure, if one desires to keep it, it is susceptible to impurity. The handles of any implements used when cooking over a fire, e.g., spits and skewers, are susceptible to impurity even if they are very long.
Halacha 13
When a staff is temporarily used as a handle for a hatchet, it is considered as attached to it at the time one is working with it. If a source of impurity comes in contact with the staff while one is breaking up earth or chopping with it, the head of the hatchet contracts impurity. If impurity touches the head, the staff contracts impurity.
Similarly, a diyustar which is made up of two wooden implements held together by a peg with which one sets up a loom is considered as attached at the time one works with it. If one affixed the diyustar to a beam, it is still susceptible to impurity and the beam is not considered as attached to it. If one made part of the beam a diyustar, any part of the beam that is necessary for the diyustar is considered as part of the diyustar. However, a person who touches the remainder of the beam is pure because the entire beam is not considered as joined to the diyustar.
Halacha 14
When a wagon contracts impurity, one who touches the metal bar, the wooden yoke, the eye, and the thick ropes - even at the time work is being performed - is pure.
One who touches the swordlike beam of wood, the kneelike piece of wood, the handle, a metal ring, the "cheeks" of the yoke, and the articles hanging from it. are impure.
Similarly, when a saw manned by two people becomes impure, one who touches either side contracts impurity. One who touches the strap or the band the shaft, and its supports remains pure, for these are not considered as attached to it. In contrast, one who touches the frame of a large saw is impure.
Halacha 15
When the lance in a carpenter's press becomes impure, one who touches the press itself is pure. When a drill becomes impure, one who touches the bow wound around it is pure, because it is not considered as attached to the drill.
When a bow was extended and the arrow extended within it, if the arrow contracts impurity, one who touches the bowstring or the bow does not contract impurity. This applies even when it is extended. Similarly, if the lance of a trap for field mice becomes impure, the trap does not contract impurity, even if it has been set.
Similarly, when a loom that is extended contracts impurity in the weaving process, one who touches all of the following: the upper beam and the lower beam, the heddles, the weaver's comb, the thread that is passed over purple thread when weaving a sheet of fabric, and a strand extending from the weave that will not be integrated within it is pure. The rationale is that all of these are not considered as joined to the garment. One, however, who touches the woof that has not yet been tightened, the woof that is standing, a thread that is woven as part of a purple fabric, and a strand extending from the weave that will be integrated with it is impure. The rationale is that all of these are considered as joined to the garment.
Halacha 16
One who touches wool that is on the base of a spindle of a loom or on a rod is pure. One who touches a spool before it has been uncovered, is impure. After it has been uncovered, he is pure.
Halacha 17
When a string is threaded through a needle, even if it is tied on both sides, it is not considered as joined to it. If it was inserted into a garment, the string is considered as connected to the garment, but the needle is not considered as connected to the garment. Moreover, not even the entire string is considered as connected to the garment, only what is necessary for sewing. What is not necessary is not considered as connected.
When a thread has unraveled from a garment, even if it is 100 cubits long, the entire thread is considered to be attached to the garment. When a rope is attached to an earthenware container, even if it is 100 cubits long, the entire rope is considered to be attached to it. If one tied another rope to the initial rope, the portion on the inside of the knot is considered as attached. The portion outside the knot is not considered as attached. When a rope is attached to a basket, it is not considered as attached unless one sewed one to the other.
• Thursday, Menachem Av 21, 5775 · 06 August 2015
"Today's Day"
Sunday Menachem Av 21 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Re'ei, first parsha with Rashi.
Tehillim: 104-105.
Tanya: VI. "But he who (p. 419) ...of our salvation..." (p. 423).
Activism on behalf of the ways of Chassidus means that even when a chassid is in the marketplace, deeply involved in his business, he still thinks about what he can do for chassidic concerns and the welfare of chassidim. When he encounters a business acquaintance among the market people he should seek to persuade him to attend the shi'urim (public study sessions) in Chassidus, or to attend a farbrengen.
Activism on behalf of the ways of Chassidus is a personal obligation, regardless whether one is great or limited in knowledge of Chassidus.
Daily Thought:
Cutting Off the Supply
All that exists feeds from G‑d’s hand. Even the evil that denies it has a G‑d must live off scraps tossed from Above.
To fight evil face-to-face is futile. Our strategy is to cut off its supply.
We know that between the G‑dly realm and evil lies a neutral ground, a battlefield. All supplies to the enemy must pass through this realm. This is the realm of all things permissible.
By taking all that is permissible and only using it for good, honestly and uprightly, with purpose that transcends our own selves, the supply lines are broken.
When every activity of life becomes a way to know G‑d, evil simply withers away and dies.[Tanya, p. 95.]
____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment