Today in Jewish History:
• Passing of Rabbi Eliezer ben Eliyahu Ashkenazi (1585)
Rabbi Eliezer ben Eliyahu Ashkenazi (1512-1585) was a highly regarded Talmudist, as well as a physician. He authored various works, including Ma'ase ha-Shem -- a commentary on the historical portions of the Pentateuch, also including a commentary on the Passover Hagaddah -- and Yosef Lekach, dedicated and named after Don Yosef Nasi, the Duke of Naxos.
Daily Quote:
Fortunate is the man who places his trust in G-d, and does not turn to the haughty[Psalms 4:5]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Vayeishev, 6th Portion Genesis 39:7-39:23 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class
• Genesis Chapter 39
7Now it came to pass after these events that his master's wife lifted up her eyes to Joseph, and she said, "Lie with me." זוַיְהִ֗י אַחַר֙ הַדְּבָרִ֣ים הָאֵ֔לֶּה וַתִּשָּׂ֧א אֵֽשֶׁת־אֲדֹנָ֛יו אֶת־עֵינֶ֖יהָ אֶל־יוֹסֵ֑ף וַתֹּ֖אמֶר שִׁכְבָ֥ה עִמִּֽי:
his master’s wife lifted up her eyes, etc: Wherever it says אַחַר, it means immediately following. [From Gen. Rabbah 44:5] ותשא אשת אדוניו וגו': כל מקום שנאמר אחר סמוך:
8But he refused, and he said to his master's wife, "Behold, with me my master knows nothing about anything in the house, and all he has he has given into my hand. חוַיְמָאֵ֓ן | וַיֹּ֨אמֶר֙ אֶל־אֵ֣שֶׁת אֲדֹנָ֔יו הֵ֣ן אֲדֹנִ֔י לֹֽא־יָדַ֥ע אִתִּ֖י מַה־בַּבָּ֑יִת וְכֹ֥ל אֲשֶׁר־יֶשׁ־ל֖וֹ נָתַ֥ן בְּיָדִֽי:
9In this house, there is no one greater than I, and he has not withheld anything from me except you, insofar as you are his wife. Now how can I commit this great evil, and sin against God?" טאֵינֶ֨נּוּ גָד֜וֹל בַּבַּ֣יִת הַזֶּה֘ מִמֶּ֒נִּי֒ וְלֹֽא־חָשַׂ֤ךְ מִמֶּ֨נִּי֙ מְא֔וּמָה כִּ֥י אִם־אוֹתָ֖ךְ בַּֽאֲשֶׁ֣ר אַתְּ־אִשְׁתּ֑וֹ וְאֵ֨יךְ אֶֽעֱשֶׂ֜ה הָֽרָעָ֤ה הַגְּדֹלָה֙ הַזֹּ֔את וְחָטָ֖אתִי לֵֽאלֹהִֽים:
and sin against God: The sons of Noah were commanded against immorality. [From Sanh. 56a] וחטאתי לא-להים: בני נח נצטוו על העריות:
10Now it came about when she spoke to Joseph day in and day out, that he did not obey her, to lie beside her [and] to be with her. יוַיְהִ֕י כְּדַבְּרָ֥הּ אֶל־יוֹסֵ֖ף י֣וֹם | י֑וֹם וְלֹֽא־שָׁמַ֥ע אֵלֶ֛יהָ לִשְׁכַּ֥ב אֶצְלָ֖הּ לִֽהְי֥וֹת עִמָּֽהּ:
to lie beside her: even without intercourse. [From Gen. Rabbah 87:6] לשכב אצלה: אפילו בלא תשמיש:
to be with her: in the World to Come. [From Gen. Rabbah 87:6] להיות עמה: לעולם הבא:
11And it came about on a certain day, that he came to the house to do his work, and none of the people of the house were there in the house. יאוַֽיְהִי֙ כְּהַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֔ה וַיָּבֹ֥א הַבַּ֖יְתָה לַֽעֲשׂ֣וֹת מְלַאכְתּ֑וֹ וְאֵ֨ין אִ֜ישׁ מֵֽאַנְשֵׁ֥י הַבַּ֛יִת שָׁ֖ם בַּבָּֽיִת:
And it came about on a certain day: That is to say that a special day arrived, a day of rejoicing, a religious festival when they (the household) all went to the temple of their idols. She said, “I have no more fitting day to consort with Joseph than today.” So she said to them,“I am ill, and I cannot go.” [from Sotah 36b] ויהי כהיום הזה: כלומר ויהי כאשר הגיע יום מיוחד, יום צחוק, יום איד שלהם שהלכו כולם לבית עבודה זרה, אמרה אין לי יום הגון להזקק ליוסף כהיום הזה. אמרה להם חולה אני ואיני יכולה לילך:
to do his work: [There is a controversy between] Rav and Shmuel. One said: his actual work, and the other said: to perform his needs with her, but his father’s image appeared, etc., as is stated in Sotah (36b). לעשות מלאכתו: רב ושמואל, חד אמר מלאכתו ממש, וחד אמר לעשות צרכיו עמה, אלא שנראית לו דמות דיוקנו של אביו וכו', כדאיתא במסכת סוטה (דף לו ב):
12So she grabbed him by his garment, saying, "Lie with me!" But he left his garment in her hand and fled and went outside. יבוַתִּתְפְּשֵׂ֧הוּ בְּבִגְד֛וֹ לֵאמֹ֖ר שִׁכְבָ֣ה עִמִּ֑י וַיַּֽעֲזֹ֤ב בִּגְדוֹ֙ בְּיָדָ֔הּ וַיָּ֖נָס וַיֵּצֵ֥א הַחֽוּצָה:
13Now it happened, when she saw that he had left his garment in her hand and had fled outside, יגוַֽיְהִי֙ כִּרְאוֹתָ֔הּ כִּֽי־עָזַ֥ב בִּגְד֖וֹ בְּיָדָ֑הּ וַיָּ֖נָס הַחֽוּצָה:
14that she called to the people of her house, and she spoke to them, saying, "Look! He brought us a Hebrew man to mock us. He came to me to lie with me, but I called loudly. ידוַתִּקְרָ֞א לְאַנְשֵׁ֣י בֵיתָ֗הּ וַתֹּ֤אמֶר לָהֶם֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר רְא֗וּ הֵ֥בִיא לָ֛נוּ אִ֥ישׁ עִבְרִ֖י לְצַ֣חֶק בָּ֑נוּ בָּ֤א אֵלַי֙ לִשְׁכַּ֣ב עִמִּ֔י וָֽאֶקְרָ֖א בְּק֥וֹל גָּדֽוֹל:
“Look! He brought us…”: Heb. הֵבִיא [without a noun or pronoun. Although the pronoun is sometimes absent, the antecedent is usually clear, whereas here there is no antecedent.] This is an elliptical expression:“He brought us,” but [Scripture] does not specify who brought him; she was referring to her husband. ראו הביא לנו: הרי זה לשון קצרה, הביא לנו ולא פירש מי הביאו, ועל בעלה אומרת כן:
Hebrew: Heb. עִבְרִי, from the other side of the river (עֵבֶר הַנָהָר) from the sons of Eber (Gen. Rabbah 42:8). (Other editions: from the other side of the river.) עברי: מעבר הנהר, מבני עבר:
15And it happened that when he heard that I raised my voice and called out, he left his garment beside me, and he fled and went outside." טווַיְהִ֣י כְשָׁמְע֔וֹ כִּֽי־הֲרִימֹ֥תִי קוֹלִ֖י וָֽאֶקְרָ֑א וַיַּֽעֲזֹ֤ב בִּגְדוֹ֙ אֶצְלִ֔י וַיָּ֖נָס וַיֵּצֵ֥א הַחֽוּצָה:
16So she left his garment beside her, until his master came home. טזוַתַּנַּ֥ח בִּגְד֖וֹ אֶצְלָ֑הּ עַד־בּ֥וֹא אֲדֹנָ֖יו אֶל־בֵּיתֽוֹ:
his master: [The master] of Joseph. אדוניו: של יוסף:
17And she told him the same thing, saying, "The Hebrew slave that you brought to us came to me to mock me. יזוַתְּדַבֵּ֣ר אֵלָ֔יו כַּדְּבָרִ֥ים הָאֵ֖לֶּה לֵאמֹ֑ר בָּ֣א אֵלַ֞י הָעֶ֧בֶד הָֽעִבְרִ֛י אֲשֶׁר־הֵבֵ֥אתָ לָּ֖נוּ לְצַ֥חֶק בִּֽי:
came to me: to mock me; the Hebrew slave that you brought to us. בא אלי: לצחק בי העבד העברי אשר הבאת לנו:
18And it happened when I raised my voice and called out, that he left his garment beside me and fled outside." יחוַיְהִ֕י כַּֽהֲרִימִ֥י קוֹלִ֖י וָֽאֶקְרָ֑א וַיַּֽעֲזֹ֥ב בִּגְד֛וֹ אֶצְלִ֖י וַיָּ֥נָס הַחֽוּצָה:
19Now it came about when his master heard his wife's report that she spoke to him, saying, "Your slave did such things to me," that his wrath burned. יטוַיְהִי֩ כִשְׁמֹ֨עַ אֲדֹנָ֜יו אֶת־דִּבְרֵ֣י אִשְׁתּ֗וֹ אֲשֶׁ֨ר דִּבְּרָ֤ה אֵלָיו֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר כַּדְּבָרִ֣ים הָאֵ֔לֶּה עָ֥שָׂה לִ֖י עַבְדֶּ֑ךָ וַיִּ֖חַר אַפּֽוֹ:
Now it came about when his master heard, etc.: During intercourse she told him this, and that is the meaning of“Your slave did such things to me,” [meaning] such acts of intimacy. [From Gen. Rabbah 87:9] ויהי כשמוע אדוניו וגו': בשעת תשמיש אמרה לו כן, וזהו שאמרה כדברים האלה עשה לי עבדך, עניני תשמיש כאלה:
20So Joseph's master took him and put him into prison, the place where the king's prisoners were imprisoned, and he was there in the prison. כוַיִּקַּח֩ אֲדֹנֵ֨י יוֹסֵ֜ף אֹת֗וֹ וַיִּתְּנֵ֨הוּ֙ אֶל־בֵּ֣ית הַסֹּ֔הַר מְק֕וֹם אֲשֶׁר־אֲסִירֵ֥י כתיב אסורי הַמֶּ֖לֶךְ אֲסוּרִ֑ים וַֽיְהִי־שָׁ֖ם בְּבֵ֥ית הַסֹּֽהַר:
21The Lord was with Joseph, and He extended charisma to him, and He gave him favor in the eyes of the warden of the prison. כאוַיְהִ֤י יְהֹוָה֙ אֶת־יוֹסֵ֔ף וַיֵּ֥ט אֵלָ֖יו חָ֑סֶד וַיִּתֵּ֣ן חִנּ֔וֹ בְּעֵינֵ֖י שַׂ֥ר בֵּֽית־הַסֹּֽהַר:
and he extended charisma to him: Heb. חָסֶד. [It means] that he was well-liked by all who saw him, an expression of“a beautiful and charismatic (וַחִסוּדָה) bride” in the Mishnah (Derech Eretz Rabbah , ch. 6) [from a midrash quoted by Yalkut Shimoni, vol. 2, 1053.] ויט אליו חסד: שיהא מקובל לכל רואיו, לשון כלה נאה וחסודה שבמשנה (כתובות יז א):
22So the warden of the prison delivered all the prisoners who were in the prison into Joseph's hand, and whatever they did there, he [was the one who] did it. כבוַיִּתֵּ֞ן שַׂ֤ר בֵּֽית־הַסֹּ֨הַר֙ בְּיַד־יוֹסֵ֔ף אֵ֚ת כָּל־הָ֣אֲסִירִ֔ם אֲשֶׁ֖ר בְּבֵ֣ית הַסֹּ֑הַר וְאֵ֨ת כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֤ר עֹשִׂים֙ שָׁ֔ם ה֖וּא הָיָ֥ה עֹשֶֽׂה:
he [was the one who] did it: As the Gen. Targum renders: by his command it was done. הוא היה עושה: כתרגומו במימריה הוה מתעביד:
23The warden of the prison did not inspect anything [that was] in his (Joseph's) hand, for the Lord was with him, and whatever he did the Lord made prosper. כגאֵ֣ין | שַׂ֣ר בֵּֽית־הַסֹּ֗הַר רֹאֶ֤ה אֶת־כָּל־מְא֨וּמָה֙ בְּיָד֔וֹ בַּֽאֲשֶׁ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אִתּ֑וֹ וַֽאֲשֶׁר־ה֥וּא עֹשֶׂ֖ה יְהֹוָ֥ה מַצְלִֽיחַ:
since the Lord was with him: Heb. בַּאִשֶׁר. Because the Lord was with him. באשר ה' אתו: בשביל שה' אתו:
---------------------
Daily Tehillim: Chapters 106 - 107
• Hebrew text
• English text
• Chapter 106
The psalmist continues the theme of the previous psalm, praising God for performing other miracles not mentioned previously, for "who can recount the mighty acts of God?" Were we to try, we could not mention them all!
1. Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is everlasting.
2. Who can recount the mighty acts of the Lord, or proclaim all His praises?
3. Fortunate are those who preserve justice, who perform deeds of righteousness all the time.
4. Remember me, Lord, when You find favor with Your people; be mindful of me with Your deliverance;
5. to behold the prosperity of Your chosen, to rejoice in the joy of Your nation, to glory with Your inheritance.
6. We have sinned as did our fathers, we have acted perversely and wickedly.
7. Our fathers in Egypt did not contemplate Your wonders, they did not remember Your abundant kindnesses, and they rebelled by the sea, at the Sea of Reeds.
8. Yet He delivered them for the sake of His Name, to make His strength known.
9. He roared at the Sea of Reeds and it dried up; He led them through the depths, as through a desert.
10. He saved them from the hand of the enemy, and redeemed them from the hand of the foe.
11. The waters engulfed their adversaries; not one of them remained.
12. Then they believed in His words, they sang His praise.
13. They quickly forgot His deeds, they did not wait for His counsel;
14. and they lusted a craving in the desert, they tested God in the wilderness.
15. And He gave them their request, but sent emaciation into their souls.
16. They angered Moses in the camp, and Aaron, the Lord's holy one.
17. The earth opened and swallowed Dathan, and engulfed the company of Abiram;
18. and a fire burned in their assembly, a flame set the wicked ablaze.
19. They made a calf in Horeb, and bowed down to a molten image.
20. They exchanged their Glory for the likeness of a grass-eating ox.
21. They forgot God, their savior, Who had performed great deeds in Egypt,
22. wonders in the land of Ham, awesome things at the Sea of Reeds.
23. He said that He would destroy them-had not Moses His chosen one stood in the breach before Him, to turn away His wrath from destroying.
24. They despised the desirable land, they did not believe His word.
25. And they murmured in their tents, they did not heed the voice of the Lord.
26. So He raised His hand [in oath] against them, to cast them down in the wilderness,
27. to throw down their progeny among the nations, and to scatter them among the lands.
28. They joined themselves to [the idol] Baal Peor, and ate of the sacrifices to the dead;
29. they provoked Him with their doings, and a plague broke out in their midst.
30. Then Phineas arose and executed judgement, and the plague was stayed;
31. it was accounted for him as a righteous deed, through all generations, forever.
32. They angered Him at the waters of Merivah, and Moses suffered on their account;
33. for they defied His spirit, and He pronounced [an oath] with His lips.
34. They did not destroy the nations as the Lord had instructed them;
35. rather, they mingled with the nations and learned their deeds.
36. They worshipped their idols, and they became a snare for them.
37. They sacrificed their sons and daughters to demons.
38. They spilled innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan; and the land became guilty with blood.
39. They were defiled by their deeds, and went astray by their actions.
40. And the Lord's wrath blazed against His people, and He abhorred His inheritance;
41. so He delivered them into the hands of nations, and their enemies ruled them.
42. Their enemies oppressed them, and they were subdued under their hand.
43. Many times did He save them, yet they were rebellious in their counsel and were impoverished by their sins.
44. But He saw their distress, when He heard their prayer;
45. and He remembered for them His covenant and He relented, in keeping with His abounding kindness,
46. and He caused them to be treated mercifully by all their captors.
47. Deliver us, Lord our God; gather us from among the nations, that we may give thanks to Your Holy Name and glory in Your praise.
48. Blessed is the Lord, the God of Israel, forever and ever. And let all the people say, "Amen! Praise the Lord!"
Chapter 107
This psalm speaks of those who are saved from four specific perilous situations(imprisonment, sickness, desert travel, and sea travel) and must thank God, for their sins caused their troubles, and only by the kindness of God were they saved. It is therefore appropriate that they praise God and tell of their salvation to all.
1. Give thanks to the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is everlasting.
2. So shall say those redeemed by the Lord, those whom He redeemed from the hand of the oppressor.
3. He gathered them from the lands-from east and from west, from north and from the sea.
4. They lost their way in the wilderness, in the wasteland; they found no inhabited city.
5. Both hungry and thirsty, their soul languished within them.
6. They cried out to the Lord in their distress; He delivered them from their afflictions.
7. He guided them in the right path to reach an inhabited city.
8. Let them give thanks to the Lord, and [proclaim] His wonders to the children of man,
9. for He has satiated a thirsting soul, and filled a hungry soul with goodness.
10. Those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death, bound in misery and chains of iron,
11. for they defied the words of God and spurned the counsel of the Most High-
12. He humbled their heart through suffering; they stumbled and there was none to help.
13. They cried out to the Lord in their distress; He saved them from their afflictions.
14. He brought them out of darkness and the shadow of death, and sundered their bonds.
15. Let them give thanks to the Lord for His kindness, and [proclaim] His wonders to the children of man,
16. for He broke the brass gates and smashed the iron bars.
17. Foolish sinners are afflicted because of their sinful ways and their wrongdoings.
18. Their soul loathes all food, and they reach the gates of death.
19. They cried out to the Lord in their distress; He saved them from their afflictions.
20. He sent forth His command and healed them; He delivered them from their graves.
21. Let them give thanks to the Lord for His kindness, and [proclaim] His wonders to the children of man.
22. Let them offer sacrifices of thanksgiving, and joyfully recount His deeds.
23. Those who go down to the sea in ships, who perform tasks in mighty waters;
24. they saw the works of the Lord and His wonders in the deep.
25. He spoke and caused the stormy wind to rise, and it lifted up the waves.
26. They rise to the sky, plunge to the depths; their soul melts in distress.
27. They reel and stagger like a drunkard, all their skill is to no avail.
28. They cried out to the Lord in their distress, and He brought them out from their calamity.
29. He transformed the storm into stillness, and the waves were quieted.
30. They rejoiced when they were silenced, and He led them to their destination.
31. Let them give thanks to the Lord for His kindness, and [proclaim] His wonders to the children of man.
32. Let them exalt Him in the congregation of the people, and praise Him in the assembly of the elders.
33. He turns rivers into desert, springs of water into parched land,
34. a fruitful land into a salt-marsh, because of the wickedness of those who inhabit it.
35. He turns a desert into a lake, and parched land into springs of water.
36. He settles the hungry there, and they establish a city of habitation.
37. They sow fields and plant vineyards which yield fruit and wheat.
38. He blesses them and they multiply greatly, and He does not decrease their cattle.
39. [If they sin,] they are diminished and cast down through oppression, misery, and sorrow.
40. He pours contempt upon distinguished men, and causes them to stray in a pathless wilderness.
41. He raises the needy from distress, and makes their families [as numerous] as flocks.
42. The upright observe this and rejoice, and all the wicked close their mouth.
43. Let him who is wise bear these in mind, and then the benevolent acts of the Lord will be understood.
--------------Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Compiler's Foreword
• Lessons in Tanya
• English Text
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
• Friday, Kislev 22, 5776 · December 4, 2015
---------------------
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:
• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
• Friday, Kislev 22, 5776 · December 4, 2015
Today's Tanya Lesson
Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 1
תניא בסוף פרק ג׳ דנדה: משביעים אותו
We have learned (Niddah, end of ch. 3):1 “An oath is administered to him:
Before a Jew is born an oath is administered to him in heaven, charging him:
תהי צדיק ואל תהי רשע, ואפילו כל העולם כולו אומרים לך צדיק אתה היה בעיניך כרשע
‘Be righteous and be not wicked; and even if the whole world judging you by your actions tells you that you are righteous, regard yourself as wicked.’”
The soul of a Jew descends into a body for a purpose — in order to fulfill a specific spiritual mission in this world. To enable him to fulfill it a heavenly oath is administered to him that he “be righteous and not wicked,” and concurrently, that he regard himself as wicked and not righteous. The root (שׁבע) of the verb משׁביעים (“an oath is administered”) is virtually identical with the root (שׂבע) of the verb משׂביעים (“one causes [him] to be sated”). Accordingly, the oath charging him to be righteous may also be understood to mean that the soul is thereby invested (“sated”) with the power that enables it to fulfill its destiny in life on earth.
וצריך להבין, דהא תנן אבות פרק ב׳ : ואל תהי רשע בפני עצמך
This requires to be understood, for we have learned in the Mishnah [Avot, ch. 2],2 “Be not wicked in your own estimation.”
How, then, can we say that an oath is administered to the soul that it regard itself as wicked, when this directly contradicts the Mishnaic injunction not to regard oneself as wicked?3
וגם אם יהיה בעיניו כרשע ירע לבבו ויהיה עצב
Furthermore, if a person considers himself wicked, he will be grieved at heart and depressed,
ולא יוכל לעבוד ה׳ בשמחה ובטוב לבב
and consequently will not be able to serve G‑d joyfully and with a contented heart;
Apart from the previously mentioned contradiction from the Mishnah, an additional question is now raised. A cardinal principle in the service of G‑d is that it be performed with joy — joy at the privilege of serving Him either through performing a positive command or by refraining from that which is prohibited. How then can one be required to take an oath to consider himself wicked, when this will cause him to be depressed, making it impossible for him to serve G‑d with joy?
Furthermore, just as the first part of the oath, “Be righteous and be not wicked,” is vital to his success in realizing his life’s mission, so too the fulfillment of the second part of the oath, that he consider himself wicked, is imperative. How can this possibly be so, when such an attitude hinders his joyful service of G‑d?
ואם לא ירע לבבו כלל מזה
while if his heart will not be at all grieved by this self-appraisal,
I.e., if we should propose that in order to fulfill the oath the person will indeed regard himself as wicked, but at the same time will resolve that his wickedness shall not perturb him, so as not to encumber his joyful service of G‑d,
יכול לבוא לידי קלות חס ושלום
he may be led to irreverence, G‑d forbid, by such an attitude, with sin perturbing him not at all.
For although his original resolve that being wicked will not perturb him stems only from his sincere desire to serve G‑d with joy, yet such a resolution may very well lead to a situation where wickedness will truly not disturb him.
אך הענין
However, the [above] matter will be more clearly understood after a preliminary discussion of the true meaning of “righteous” and “wicked”.
כי הנה מצינו בגמרא ה׳ חלוקות: צדיק וטוב לו, צדיק ורע לו
We find in the Gemara4 five distinct types: a righteous man who prospers, materially as well as spiritually — he knows only good; a righteous man who suffers, in both a material as well as spiritual sense: spiritually, he has not yet vanquished all his evil, and in the material sense too he is wanting;
רשע וטוב לו, רשע ורע לו, ובינוני
a wicked man in whom there is some good and who prospers; a wicked man who suffers spiritually and materially;and an intermediate man — the Beinoni.
ופירשו בגמרא: צדיק וטוב לו — צדיק גמור
The Gemara explains: “the righteous man who prospers” is the consummate lit., “complete” tzaddik;
Once he has achieved this level, physical suffering — to cleanse the soul from the impurities of sin — is unnecessary; he therefore prospers materially as well.
צדיק ורע לו — צדיק שאינו גמור
the “righteous man who suffers” is the imperfect lit., “incomplete” tzaddik.
He therefore experiences some measure of material suffering, thereby cleansing the soul while it is yet clothed in the body, so that he will not have to endure any spiritual suffering in the World to Come.
Accordingly, the Gemara is not referring to two tzaddikim on the same spiritual level, one of whom prospers while the other suffers; rather, it speaks of two distinct levels of tzaddikim. The Gemara thus cites only two characterizations regarding the tzaddik — “consummate” and “imperfect” (lit., “complete” and “incomplete”). The terms “who prospers” or “who suffers” do not indicate his spiritual level: they merely describe his resultant material status.
וברעיא מהימנא פרשת משפטים פירש: צדיק ורע לו — שהרע שבו כפוף לטוב
In Ra‘aya Mehemna (Parshat Mishpatim)5 it is explained that “the righteous man who suffers” is one whose evil nature is subservient to his good nature.6
He is a tzaddik who still retains some vestige of evil, albeit subservient to his good nature. Accordingly, a “righteous man who prospers” is a tzaddik in whom there is only good, since he has totally transformed his evil nature.
According to the Zohar (of which Ra‘aya Mehemna is a part), the terms “who prospers” and “who suffers” also indicate and describe the level of the tzaddik. The “tzaddik who prospers” is a tzaddik in whom there is only good — the evil within him having already been transformed to good; the “tzaddik who suffers” is a tzaddik of lower stature — one who still harbors some evil.
However, we must now understand why redundant titles are given to each level of tzaddik: “complete tzaddik” and“tzaddik who prospers”; “incomplete tzaddik” and “tzaddik who suffers.” If the “complete tzaddik” is the “tzaddik who prospers” (i.e., in whom there is only good) and the “incomplete tzaddik” is the “tzaddik who suffers” (i.e., retains a vestige of evil), why then is it necessary to give each tzaddik two appellations?
The explanation provided further (in ch. 10) is that each descriptive term denotes a specific aspect of the divine service of the tzaddik. The terms “complete tzaddik” and “incomplete tzaddik” denote the level of service of the tzaddik’s G‑dly soul, i.e., the tzaddik’s love of G‑d, for it is by virtue of this love that he is called “tzaddik.” The “complete tzaddik” is he who has attained perfection in his love of G‑d in a manner of ahavah betaanugim (“love of delights”) — the serene love of fulfillment. The tzaddik whose ahavah betaanugim is as yet imperfect is called the “incomplete (or unperfected) tzaddik.”
The terms “tzaddik who prospers” and “tzaddik who suffers” denote the tzaddik’s status vis-à-vis his efforts in transforming his animal soul to holiness. For the tzaddik, through his lofty service of ahavah betaanugim, transforms the evil within him into holiness and good. The designation “tzaddik who prospers” indicates that he has already totally transformed the evil within him and now good alone remains, while the “tzaddik who suffers” is one who has not yet managed to totally transform the evil within him to good; a vestige of it still remains.
The explanations that follow make it abundantly clear that the evil referred to here is no more than an amorphous evil still harbored in the heart of the “incomplete tzaddik.” For the tzaddik has no association with actual evil that manifests itself in thought or speech, and most certainly not with the evil that finds expression in actions.
ובגמרא סוף פרק ט׳ דברכות: צדיקים יצר טוב שופטן כו׳, רשעים יצר הרע שופטן
In the Gemara (end of ch. 9 of Berachot7) [it is stated] that the righteous are “judged” i.e., motivated and ruled by their good nature, their good nature having the final say; the wicked are judged i.e., motivated and ruled by their evil nature, their evil nature having the final say;
בינונים זה וזה שופטן וכו׳
intermediate men are “judged” by both the good and evil nature.8
אמר רבה: כגון אנא בינוני. אמר ליה אביי: לא שביק מר חיי לכל בריה וכו׳
Rabbah declared: “I, for example, am a ‘Beinoni’.” Said Abbaye to him, “Master, you make it impossible for any creature to live.”
Abbaye argued thus: “If you are a Beinoni, then all those on a lower level than you fall into the category of the wicked, concerning whom our Sages say:9 ‘The wicked, even while alive, are considered dead.’ By calling yourself a Beinoni you thus make it impossible for anyone to live.”
ולהבין כל זה באר היטב
To understand all the aforesaid clearly [an explanation is called for].
In addition to the question which will soon follow — that according to the common conception of a Beinoni as a person having half mitzvot and half transgressions, how could a great sage like Rabbah mistake himself for a Beinoni — a further question is implied:
If a Beinoni is simply one having half mitzvot and half transgressions, then his status is readily identifiable, and there is no possible room for debate.
וגם להבין מה שאמר איוב בבא בתרא פרק א׳ : רבונו של עולם, בראת צדיקים בראת רשעים כו׳
And also to understand the statement of Job [Bava Batra ch. 1]10: “L‑rd of the Universe! You have created righteous men, You have created wicked men,....”
והא צדיק ורשע לא קאמר
for He does not decree [which persons are to be] righteous and wicked.
The Gemara11 relates that G‑d decrees that a child about to be born will be wise or foolish, strong or weak, and so on. However, whether the child will be righteous or wicked G‑d does not say: this is not predetermined; rather, it is left to the individual’s free choice.
How, then, are we to understand Job’s plaint, “You have created righteous men, You have created wicked men”?12
וגם להבין מהות מדריגת הבינוני
We must also understand the essential nature (mahut) of the rank of the Beinoni.
The mahut of a tzaddik is righteousness; the mahut of the wicked man is evil. What is the mahut — the essential nature — of the Beinoni?
שבודאי אינו מחצה זכיות ומחצה עוונות, שאם כן איך טעה רבה בעצמו לומר שהוא בינוני
He is certainly not one whose deeds are half virtuous and half sinful; for if this were so, how could Rabbah err in [classifying] himself as a Beinoni?
ונודע דלא פסיק פומיה מגירסא, עד שאפילו מלאך המות לא היה יכול לשלוט בו
— when it is known that his mouth never ceased studying [the Torah], so much so that even the Angel of Death had no dominion over him.13
Such was Rabbah’s diligence that he did not neglect his studies for even one moment. Qualitatively too, his learning was on so high a plane that the Angel of Death was unable to overpower him.
ואיך היה יכול לטעות במחצה עוונות, חס ושלום
How, then, could he err in considering that half his deeds were sinful, G‑d forbid?
ועוד, שהרי בשעה שעושה עונות נקרא רשע גמור
Furthermore, when can a person be considered a Beinoni? For at the time one sins until he repents he is deemed completely wicked,
ואם אחר כך עשה תשובה נקרא צדיק גמור
(and if he was sinful and then repented, thus ceasing to be wicked, he is deemed completely righteous14).
ואפילו העובר על איסור קל של דברי סופרים מקרי רשע, כדאיתא בפרק ב׳ דיבמות ובפרק קמא דנדה
Even he who violates a minor prohibition of the Rabbis is termed wicked, as is stated in Yevamot, ch. 2,15and in Niddah, ch. 1.16
ואפילו מי שיש בידו למחות ולא מיחה נקרא רשע בפרק ו׳ דשבועות
Moreover, even he who himself does not sin, but has the opportunity to forewarn another against sinning and fails to do so is termed wicked [Shevuot, ch. 617].
וכל שכן וקל וחומר במבטל איזו מצות עשה שאפשר לו לקיימה
All the more so he who neglects any positive law which he is able to fulfill,
כמו כל שאפשר לו לעסוק בתורה ואינו עוסק
for instance, whoever is able to study Torah and does not do so,
שעליו דרשו רבותינו ז״ל: כי דבר ה׳ בזה וגו׳ הכרת תכרת וגו׳
to whom our Sages18 have applied the verse,19 “Because he has despised the word of the L‑rd (i.e., the Torah),.[that soul] shall be utterly cut off....”
ופשיטא דמקרי רשע טפי מעובר איסור דרבנן
It is thus plain that such a person is called wicked, more so than he who violates a prohibition of the Sages.
ואם כן על כרחך הבינוני אין בו אפילו עון ביטול תורה
This being so, we must conclude that the Beinoni is not guilty even of the sin of neglecting to study Torah;
a sin most difficult to avoid, and counted among those sins that people transgress daily.20
ומשום הכי טעה רבה בעצמו לומר שהוא בינוני
This is why Rabbah mistook himself for a Beinoni.
Since a Beinoni is innocent even of neglecting Torah study, Rabbah could [mistakenly] consider himself a Beinoni, even though he scrupulously observed even the most minor commandments and never ceased from his studies.
הגהה
ומה שכתוב בזהר חלק ג׳ דף רל״א: כל שממועטין עונותיו וכו׳ —
NOTE
As for what is written in the Zohar III, p. 231: “He whose sins are few [is classed as a ‘righteous man who suffers’],”
implying that even according to the Zohar the meaning of a “righteous man who suffers” is one who does have sins, albeit few; and if so, a Beinoni must be one who is in part virtuous and in part sinful,
היא שאלת רב המנונא לאליהו
this is the query of Rav Hamnuna to Elijah.
אבל לפי תשובת אליהו שם הפי' צדיק ורע לו הוא כמ"ש בר"מ פרשה משפטים דלעיל
But according to Elijah’s answer [ibid.], the meaning of a “righteous man who suffers” is as stated in Ra‘aya Mehemna on Parshat Mishpatim, quoted above,21 i.e., that the “righteous man who suffers” is one whose evil nature is subservient to his good nature.
ושבעים פנים לתורה
And the Torah has seventy facets (modes of interpretation).22
The Rebbe notes that the words, “And the Torah has seventy facets,” help us understand Rav Hamnuna’s query. It is difficult to understand how Rav Hamnuna would even entertain the notion that a “righteous man who suffers” is one who actually sins, inasmuch as all the abovementioned questions clearly lead us to assume the opposite. Rav Hamnuna’s query, however, was prompted only by the fact that “the Torah has seventy facets,” and he thought that this was possibly one of these facets.
END OF NOTE
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Niddah 30b. |
| 2. | Avot 2:13. |
| 3. | The apparent contradiction between the two statements is resolved in ch. 13. See also chs. 14, 29 and 34. |
| 4. | Berachot 7a. |
| 5. | Zohar II, 117b. |
| 6. | This is an alternative interpretation of the words ורע לו which may be rendered literally as “evil [belongs] to him”; i.e, he is master of the evil nature in him. |
| 7. | 61b. |
| 8. | See beginning of ch. 9, and ch. 13. |
| 9. | Berachot 18b. |
| 10. | Bava Batra 16a. |
| 11. | Niddah 16b. |
| 12. | The question is answered in ch. 14 and ch. 27. |
| 13. | See Bava Metzia 86a. |
| 14. | The Rebbe notes that although the Gemara in Kiddushin 49b indicates only that the penitent sinner is considered atzaddik, it is explicitly stated in Or Zarua, sec. 112, that he is considered a tzaddik gamur. |
| 15. | 20a. |
| 16. | 12a. |
| 17. | 39b. |
| 18. | Sanhedrin 99a. |
| 19. | Bamidbar 15:31. |
| 20. | See below, end of ch. 25. |
| 21. | Zohar II, 117b. |
| 22. | Otiot deRabbi Akiva; comp. Bamidbar Rabbah 14:12. |
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:
• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
• Friday, Kislev 22, 5776 · December 4, 2015
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 35
Incantations
"There shall not be found among you... a charmer"—Deuteronomy 18:10-11.
It is forbidden to chant a magical incantation in the belief that it can offer relief. For example, in times ago people would whisper a certain incantation over a snake or scorpion bite, in the belief that it would alleviate the pain.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 38
Communication with the Dead
"There shall not be found among you... a necromancer"—Deuteronomy 18:11.
It is forbidden to do any act that supposedly elicits information from the dead. The Talmud speaks of people who would abstain from food and go to sleep in a cemetery—in the hope that the dead would appear and communicate with them.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 36
Consulting Ov
"There shall not be found among you... one who inquires of Ov"—Deuteronomy 18:10-11.
The Torah forbids us from consulting with an Ov practitioner, to ask him for advice or information based on his Ov experience.
The Ov practice consisted of burning a certain incense and doing certain acts known to the Ov followers. At that point, it would seem to the person engaging in these acts that he hears a voice emanating from beneath his armpit, which would answer questions that he posed.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 37
Consulting Yi'doni
"There shall not be found among you... one who inquires of Yid'oni"—Deuteronomy 18:10-11.
The Torah forbids us from consulting with a Yid'oni practitioner, to ask him for advice or information based on his Yid'oniexperience.
The Yid'oni practice consisted of inserting into one's mouth a bone from the yidoa fowl. After then burning incense, saying certain formulas and doing certain rites, the person would enter a trance-like state, and he would begin issuing predictions about the future.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 34
Witchcraft
"There shall not be found among you...one who practices witchcraft"—Deuteronomy 18:10.
We are forbidden from engaging in any form of magic or witchcraft.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 43
Sideburns
"You shall not round the corners of your heads"—Leviticus 19:27.
It is forbidden for a man to cut off his sideburns, leaving his hairline rounded at the sides, for such was the practice of ancient idol-worshippers. (This prohibition also applies if one cuts all his hair. Even if there is no hairline, the sideburns must never be cut off.)
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 44
Shaving
"You shall not destroy the corners of your beard"—Leviticus 19:27.
It is forbidden for a man to shave with a razor (or razor-like implement) the "corners" of his beard. The Sages identified five corners: the upper right cheek, the lower right cheek, the upper left cheek, the lower left cheek, and the chin. Shaving the beards with razors was the way of ancient pagan priests.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 40
Men Cross-Dressing
"A man shall not put on a woman's garment"—Deuteronomy 22:5.
It is forbidden for a man to don clothing or ornaments that are considered women's garment or gear in that locale. There are two reasons why a man would wear women's clothing, both anathema to G‑d: a) To facilitate lewd behavior, or b) in conformance with once-prevalent idolatrous ritual.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 39
Women Cross-Dressing
"A woman shall not wear that which pertains to a man"—Deuteronomy 22:5.
It is forbidden for a woman to don clothing or ornaments that are considered men's garment or gear in that locale.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
------------------------------------------------------------
Negative Commandment 41
Tattoos
"You shall not print any marks upon you"—Leviticus 19:28.
We are forbidden from tattooing our bodies. Tattooing was common practice amongst the ancient idol-worshippers.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 45
Scarring
"You shall not cut yourselves"—Deuteronomy 14:1.
It is forbidden to cut ourselves in the course of mourning a deceased—as this was a common practice amongst idol-worshippers. It is also forbidden to follow the ancient practice of self-mutilation as part of pagan ritual.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 171
Tearing Out Hair
"Do not make any baldness between your eyes for the dead"—Deuteronomy 14:1.
When a loved one dies, we mustn't allow our anguish to cause us to rip out our hair leaving a bald spot.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 35
Incantations
"There shall not be found among you... a charmer"—Deuteronomy 18:10-11.
It is forbidden to chant a magical incantation in the belief that it can offer relief. For example, in times ago people would whisper a certain incantation over a snake or scorpion bite, in the belief that it would alleviate the pain.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Incantations
Negative Commandment 35
Translated by Berel Bell
The 35th prohibition is that we are forbidden from practicing the ritual of chover ["incantations"], which is the recitation of utterances1 that the person believes are helpful for certain things and damaging for others.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He),2 "Among you there shall not be found anyone...who utters incantations ['chover chaver']."
In the words of the Sifri, "The prohibition of uttering incantations applies whether they are directed to a snake or to a scorpion." This means that he utters these incantations over them because he imagines that as a result they will not bite, or that he speaks over the location of the bite in order to stop the pain.
One who transgresses this prohibition is punished by lashes.3
The details of this mitzvah have been explained in the seventh chapter of tractate Shabbos.4
FOOTNOTES
1.
In Hilchos Avodah Zarah 11:10, the Rambam elaborates: "He makes utterances that are not in any language and that have no meaning — and in his foolishness he believes that these utterances have some effect."
2.
Deut. 18:10-11.
3.
In Hilchos Avodah Zarah ibid., the Rambam adds that lashes are given only where an action was performed in addition to the speaking, such as one who gestures with his hand or head, or who holds a key or a stone while speaking.
4.In our versions, Chapter Six, page 67a.
-------------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 38
Communication with the Dead
"There shall not be found among you... a necromancer"—Deuteronomy 18:11.
It is forbidden to do any act that supposedly elicits information from the dead. The Talmud speaks of people who would abstain from food and go to sleep in a cemetery—in the hope that the dead would appear and communicate with them.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Communication with the Dead
Negative Commandment 38
Translated by Berel Bell
The 38th prohibition is that we are forbidden from inquiring information from the dead — as is imagined by those who are truly dead,1 even thought they eat and feel — that when one performs certain actions and dresses a certain way, the deceased will come to him in his sleep and answer the questions he was asked.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He),2 "Among you there shall not be found anyone...who attempts to communicate with the dead."
Our Sages said in tractate Sanhedrin,3 "The verse,4 'who attempts to communicate with the dead,' refers to someone who starves himself and sleeps in the cemetery in order that an impure spirit shall rest upon him."
One who transgresses this prohibition is punished by lashes.
FOOTNOTES
1.See Berachos 18b, that, "The wicked, even during their lifetime, are called 'dead.'"
2.Deut. 18:10-11.
3.65b.
4.Deut. 18:11.
------------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 36
Consulting Ov
"There shall not be found among you... one who inquires of Ov"—Deuteronomy 18:10-11.
The Torah forbids us from consulting with an Ov practitioner, to ask him for advice or information based on his Ov experience.
The Ov practice consisted of burning a certain incense and doing certain acts known to the Ov followers. At that point, it would seem to the person engaging in these acts that he hears a voice emanating from beneath his armpit, which would answer questions that he posed.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Consulting Ov
Negative Commandment 36
Translated by Berel Bell
The 36th prohibition is that we are forbidden from requesting information or an answer to a question from one who performs the practice of ov.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He),2 "Among you there shall not be found anyone...who consults ov."
One who transgresses this prohibition, i.e. who consults the practitioner of ov, is not punished by death.3 It is nevertheless forbidden.4
FOOTNOTES
1.See N8, where the idolatrous practice of "ov" is described as burning a specific type of incense and performing certain actions. The person then imagines that he hears a voice speaking from under his armpit answering his questions. N8 is the prohibition of performing these acts, and N36 is the prohibition on one who goes to the practitioner.
2.Deut. 18:10-11.
3.In contrast to N8, which is a capital offense.
4.In Hilchos Avodah Zarah 11:14, the Rambam rules that if one acts based on the advice he receives, he is punished by lashes. If he merely consults the ov, but does not behave differently based on the advice, he receives lashes by Rabbinic decree, since no action was performed.
-------------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 37
Consulting Yi'doni
"There shall not be found among you... one who inquires of Yid'oni"—Deuteronomy 18:10-11.
The Torah forbids us from consulting with a Yid'oni practitioner, to ask him for advice or information based on his Yid'oniexperience.
The Yid'oni practice consisted of inserting into one's mouth a bone from the yidoa fowl. After then burning incense, saying certain formulas and doing certain rites, the person would enter a trance-like state, and he would begin issuing predictions about the future.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Consulting Yi'doni
Negative Commandment 37
Translated by Berel Bell
The 37th prohibition is that we are forbidden from requesting information or an answer to a question from one who performs the practice of yidoni.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "Among you there shall not be found anyone...who consults ov or yidoni."
In the words of the Sifra, "[In the verse],3 'Do not turn to the idols called ov or yidoni,' ov refers to a pitom4 who speaks5 from his armpit, and yidoni is one who speaks6 from his mouth. They are punished by stoning, and the one who consults them transgresses a prohibition.7
FOOTNOTES
1.See N9, where the Rambam quotes the description of the Sages, "Yidoni is when the person places a bone from a yadu'a in his mouth, and it speaks by itself."
2.Deut. 18:10-11.
3.Lev.19:31.
4.The Pitom is the one who performs this ritual (Rashi, Sanhedrin 65a). See N8.
5.I.e. imagines that he hears speaking. See note to N36 above.
6.I.e. imagines that he hears speaking. See note to N36 above.
7.But is not punished by stoning. Regarding lashes, see note to N36 above.
-------------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 34
Witchcraft
"There shall not be found among you...one who practices witchcraft"—Deuteronomy 18:10.
We are forbidden from engaging in any form of magic or witchcraft.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Witchcraft
Negative Commandment 34
Translated by Berel Bell
The 34th prohibition is that we are forbidden from performing any act of witchcraft.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He),1 "Among you there shall not be found anyone...who practices witchcraft."
One who transgresses this prohibition intentionally is punished by stoning, as said in G‑d's statement (exalted be He),2 "Do not allow a sorceress to live." If he did so unintentionally he must bring a sin-offering,
The details of this mitzvah have been explained in the seventh chapter of Sanhedrin.3
FOOTNOTES
1.Deut. 18:10.
2.Exodus 22:17.
3.67a.
------------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 43
Sideburns
"You shall not round the corners of your heads"—Leviticus 19:27.
It is forbidden for a man to cut off his sideburns, leaving his hairline rounded at the sides, for such was the practice of ancient idol-worshippers. (This prohibition also applies if one cuts all his hair. Even if there is no hairline, the sideburns must never be cut off.)
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Sideburns
Negative Commandment 43
Translated by Berel Bell
The 43rd prohibition is that we are forbidden from shaving1 the temples of our heads.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He),2 "Do not round off the corners of your head."
This prohibition also3 has the goal of preventing us from emulating idol worshippers, since it was the practice of idol worshippers to shave only the sides [of their heads]. For this reason the Sages had to explain in Tractate Yevamos4 that, "Shaving the entire head is also included in the prohibition of 'rounding,'" so that you should not say that the actual prohibition is shaving the temples and leaving the rest of the hair, as the idolatrous priests do; but if you shave the entire head, you are not emulating them. The Sages therefore informed us that it is prohibited to shave the temples in any manner — not by themselves and not with the rest of the head.
One is punished by lashes separately for each side; therefore one who shaves his entire head receives two sets of lashes. We do not count them as two separate commandments although there are two sets of lashes because there are no two phrases [in Scripture] for the one prohibition. If Scripture would say, "Do not round off the right corner of your head nor the left corner of your head," and we would find [that our Sages] stipulated two sets of lashes, then we could count them as two commandments. But since there is only one expression and one type of action, it counts as one commandment. And even though this prohibition is explained as including different parts of the body, and that one receives lashes for each part separately, this does not require it to be counted as more than one commandment.
The details of this mitzvah have been explained at the end of tractate Makkos.5 Women are exempt from this prohibition.6
FOOTNOTES
1.See Kapach 5731, footnote 13.
2.Lev.19:27.
3.As with the previous prohibitions.
4.5a.
5.20a.
6.In Hilchos Avodah Zarah 12:2, the Rambam quotes tractate Kiddushin 35b, and explains that this prohibition is in the same verse as the prohibition against shaving the beard. Just as the prohibition of shaving does not apply to women, so too this prohibition does not apply to women. See Kesef Mishneh, ibid.
--------------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 44
Shaving
"You shall not destroy the corners of your beard"—Leviticus 19:27.
It is forbidden for a man to shave with a razor (or razor-like implement) the "corners" of his beard. The Sages identified five corners: the upper right cheek, the lower right cheek, the upper left cheek, the lower left cheek, and the chin. Shaving the beards with razors was the way of ancient pagan priests.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Shaving
Negative Commandment 44
Translated by Berel Bell
The 44th prohibition is that we are forbidden from shaving the beard, which has five sections: the upper right jaw, the upper left jaw, the lower right jaw, the lower left jaw, and the chin.
This prohibition is contained in the following expression,1 "Do not destroy the corner of your beard," because all [the parts] are included in the term, "beard." Scripture does not write, "Do not destroy your beard," but, "Do not destroy the corner of your beard," meaning that one may not destroy even one corner from the entire beard.
The Oral Tradition explains that there are five corners, as we have categorized, and that one is punished by five sets of lashes if he shaves them all, even if he shaved them all at once. In the words of the Mishneh,2 "For [shaving] the beard [one receives] five [sets of lashes]: two for one side, two for the other side, and one for the bottom. Rabbi Eliezer says, 'If they were all shaved at once, one receives only one [set of lashes].'" The Talmud3 says, "We see that Rabbi Eliezer holds that it is all one prohibition." This is a clear proof that the first opinion holds that they constitute five separate prohibitions, and that is the law.
This [shaving of the beard] was also4 the practice of the idolatrous priests, as is well known today that among the adornments of the European ascetics5 is that they shave their beards.
It does not count as five separate commandments, since the prohibition is expressed in the singular ["beard"] and there is only one type of action, as we explained in the previous commandment.
The details of this mitzvah have been explained in the end of Makkos. This prohibition is also not binding upon women.
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev.19:27.
2.Makkos 3:5.
3.Ibid. 21a.
4.As was the case with the previous prohibitions.
5.The Rambam L'am edition translates, "European priests. Ibn Tibbon translates, "idolatrous priests." This seems to be the source of the vernacular reference, "galach," for a priest.
--------------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 40
Men Cross-Dressing
"A man shall not put on a woman's garment"—Deuteronomy 22:5.
It is forbidden for a man to don clothing or ornaments that are considered women's garment or gear in that locale. There are two reasons why a man would wear women's clothing, both anathema to G‑d: a) To facilitate lewd behavior, or b) in conformance with once-prevalent idolatrous ritual.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Men Cross-Dressing
Negative Commandment 40
Translated by Berel Bell
The 40th prohibition is that men are also1 forbidden from adorning themselves with women's ornaments.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "A man shall not wear a woman's garment."
Any man who adorns3 himself or wears an article which is known in that place to be specifically for women is punished by lashes.
You should know that this practice — of women adorning themselves with male articles or men with female articles — is sometimes done to arouse lust, as is well known among the nations; and sometimes done as a kind of idolatrous worship, as explained in books dealing with this subject.4 It is often stipulated in making some kame'ot5 that if a man is making it, he must wear women's clothing, and wear gold jewelry, pearls and the like; and if a woman is making it, she must wear armor and weapons. This is very well known among those who practice it.
FOOTNOTES
1.In addition to N39, which prohibits a woman from wearing men's garments. In the original Sefer HaMitzvos, that commandment comes first, but in his legal code (which is the order followed in this edition), he lists N40 before N39.
2.Deut. 22:5.
3.Kapach 5731, footnote 1 points out that this choice of words comes to include a man dying white hair black (see Hilchos Avodah Zarah 12:10).
4.See Guide to the Perplexed, Section III, Chapter 37, where the Rambam quotes the book, "Tumtum," as saying that when a men stands to serve Venus, he must wear a colored woman's garment, and when a woman stands to serve Mars, she must wear armor and weapons.
5.This term refers to a parchment bearing written letters or marks, or a collection of herbs and spices.
-----------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 39
Women Cross-Dressing
"A woman shall not wear that which pertains to a man"—Deuteronomy 22:5.
It is forbidden for a woman to don clothing or ornaments that are considered men's garment or gear in that locale.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Women Cross-Dressing
Negative Commandment 39
Translated by Berel Bell
The 39th prohibition is that we are forbidden from walking in the ways of heretics in that women wear male garments and their adornments.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He),2 "No male article shall be on a woman."
Any woman who wears a male article — which is known in that place to be specifically for men — is punished by lashes.
FOOTNOTES
1.This includes wearing armor or weapons (see N40 and Hilchos Avodah Zarah 12:10). It also includes cutting her hair as a man does (ibid.) or going with her hair uncovered (ibid. according to the Yemenite manuscripts quoted by Kapach 5731, footnote 99. These manuscripts have "t'galeh," ["uncovered"] with the letter "hei" instead of "t'gale'ach" ["cut"] with the letter "chet").
2.Deut. 22:5.
Negative Commandment 41
Tattoos
"You shall not print any marks upon you"—Leviticus 19:28.
We are forbidden from tattooing our bodies. Tattooing was common practice amongst the ancient idol-worshippers.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Tattoos
Negative Commandment 41
Translated by Berel Bell
The 41st prohibition is that we are forbidden from tattooing our bodies with blue, red or other markings, as is done by idol worshippers and common among the Copts to this day.
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement (exalted be He),1 "Do not make any tattoo marks."
One who transgresses this prohibition is punished by lashes.2
The details of this mitzvah have been explained in the end of tractate Makkos.
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev.19:28.
2.In Hilchos Avodah Zarah 12:11, the Rambam adds that this applies to the one who engraves the tattoo. The one who receives it is punished by lashes only if he actually helps in the engraving (rather than sitting passively).
-----------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 45
Scarring
"You shall not cut yourselves"—Deuteronomy 14:1.
It is forbidden to cut ourselves in the course of mourning a deceased—as this was a common practice amongst idol-worshippers. It is also forbidden to follow the ancient practice of self-mutilation as part of pagan ritual.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Scarring
Negative Commandment 45
Translated by Berel Bell
The 45th prohibition is that we are forbidden from intentionally bruising ourselves, as the idol worshippers do.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He),1 "Do not mutilate yourselves (lo sis'godidu)." This prohibition is repeated in different words:2 "Do not make cuts in your skin for the dead."
It has been explained in the Talmudic tractate Yevamos3 that the verse, "Do not mutilate yourselves," is needed for itself4, i.e. to teach us that one may not mutilate oneself for someone who died.
Our Sages said in tractate Makkos5 that "s'rita"6 and "g'didah"7 are the same.8 There it is also explained that [for cutting oneself] for the dead, one incurs punishment whether done by hand or with an instrument. [If one cut oneself] for an idol, one incurs punishment only when done with an instrument, as is written in the Prophets,9 "They cut themselves with swords and spears, according to their custom." When done by hand, however, one is exempt.10
Our Sages11 said that this prohibition also includes not stating conflicting messages12 or having public disagreement. They said, "The phrase "lo sis'godidu" means not to make different groups (agudos)." This is like a drash13; the verse itself they explain as meaning that one may not mutilate oneself for someone who died.
So too their statement,14 "Anyone who carries on a dispute transgresses a prohibition, as it is written,15 'Do not be like Korach and his congregation,'" is also a type of drash. As our Sages explain, the verse itself is a warning and a negative statement, not a prohibition.16 Our Sages explained that G‑d notified that anyone in future generations who disagrees with [the status of] the Kohanim and claims it for himself will not meet the same fate as Korach and will not be punished by being swallowed up.17 His punishment will instead be,18 "As G‑d said to him through [literally, 'by the hand of'] Moses," i.e. tzora'as, as G‑d (exalted be He) told Moshe,19 "Place your hand on your chest [… and his hand was covered with tzora'as like snow]," and as is explained regarding Uzziah.20
To return to this prohibition, its details have been explained in the end of Makkos,21 and one who transgresses it is punished by lashes.
FOOTNOTES
1.Deut. 14:1.
2.Lev.19:28.
3.13b.
4.The Talmud previously tried to establish that the phrase, "lo tit'god'du," prohibits different communities observing different practices. To this the Talmud responds that the phrase is needed "for itself." See below in this commandment.
5.21a.
6."Do not make cuts," from Lev. 19:28.
7."Do not mutilate," from Deut. 14:1.
8.This proves that the two verses refer to the same act and therefore count as just one prohibition.
9.Kings I, 18:28, referring to the false prophets of the idol Baal when they were tested by Elijah.
10.Although he is not punished with lashes, he nevertheless transgresses the prohibition.
11.Yevamos 13b.
12.Kapach 5731, in footnote 31 and P173, footnote 55, insists that the Arabic original is mistranslated by others, and was changed without his knowledge in the Rambam L'am edition.
13."An interpretation," seeming to indicate that the prohibition is Rabbinic in nature. In Hilchos Avodah Zarah (12:14), however, the Rambam seems to rule that it is included in the Biblical prohibition. See Kapach's edition of Mishneh Torah (ibid. footnote 34), S'dei Chemed (Klal Lamed, 78), and the sources quoted in Mishneh Torah, Frankel edition, Sefer HaMafte'ach, p. 479.
14.Sanhedrin 110a.
15.Num.17:5.
16.See Introductory Principle Eight, which discusses this commandment in particular.
17.Num. 16:32.
18.Ibid. 17 :5.
19.Exodus 4:6.
20.Chronicles II, 26:19. See Tanchuma, Tzav 15, and Introductory Principle Eight, where this interpretation is explained. King Uzziah attempted to usurp the position of Kohen, as Korach did, by offering incense in the Temple. His punishment, however, was tzora'as, rather than being swallowed up in the ground as Korach was. The Tanchuma learns that the statement, "Do not be like Korach and his congregation, as G‑d said to him by the hand of Moses," alludes to the fact that subsequent generations will be punished in this manner. This is because the phrase, "by the hand of Moses," alludes to "the hand of Moses" being covered with tzora'as in Exodus 4:6.
21.20a.
------------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 171
Tearing Out Hair
"Do not make any baldness between your eyes for the dead"—Deuteronomy 14:1.
When a loved one dies, we mustn't allow our anguish to cause us to rip out our hair leaving a bald spot.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Tearing Out Hair
Negative Commandment 171
Translated by Berel Bell
The 171st prohibition is that we are forbidden from tearing our hair from our head for someone who died, as the fools do.
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement,1 "Do not make a bald patch between your eyes for the dead."
This prohibition is repeated regarding Kohanim,2 "They shall not make bald patches on their head," in order to complete the commandment. From the phrase, "between your eyes," we would think that the prohibition applies only to the front of the head. The other verse therefore explains, "They shall not make bald patches on their head," to make the prohibition apply to the entire head as it does to "between your eyes." [On the other hand,] if it would only say, "They shall not make bald patches on their head," we would think it applies whether it is done for the dead or for another reason. The other verse therefore explains, "for the dead."
Whoever makes a bald patch the size of a "gris"3 by tearing the hair from his head for the dead is punished by lashes. He is punished by one set of lashes for each bald patch, regardless of whether he is a Kohen Gadol or a regular Jew.
This that Scripture repeats the prohibition regarding Kohanim,4 "They shall not shave the corners of their beards, not shall they make cuts in their flesh," is also to complete the commandment, as explained in the end of Makkos.5
FOOTNOTES
1.Deut. 14:1.
2.Lev.21:5.
3.Literally, a bean. In modern terms, this between 14-21 mm in diameter. See Shiurei Torah 3:20.
4.Lev. 21:5.
5.21a.
-------------------------------------------------------------
• 1 Chapter: Arachim Vacharamim Arachim Vacharamim - Chapter 8
• English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
• Arachim Vacharamim - Chapter 8
Halacha 1
On the fifthteenth of Adar, the court1 diverts their attention [from other concerns] and examines and investigates matters involving the needs of the community and consecrated property. They check the matter and research the [cases involved], so that consecrated property and dedication offerings will be redeemed and arachim and pledges of worth are collected from all those who are liable for them so that the entire nation will be prepared to give the gift of shekalim to maintain the House of our God.2
Halacha 2
Consecrated articles are redeemed only on the basis of [evaluation by] three experts. Similarly, when movable property is being taken as security when one is liable for arachim,3 it should be evaluated by three people.4 And when an animal or the like is designated as an airech, it should be evaluated by three people.
When, however, land is designated as an airech or if arachin for humans must be collected from landed property, it is evaluated only by ten people5 and one of them must be a priest. For the passage [that speaks about redemption] mentions a priest.6 Similarly, if a person says: "I pledge my worth," "...the worth of so-and-so," "...the worth of my hand," or "...the worth of my foot," when an evaluation of his worth, that of his hand, or that of his foot is made, it is made by ten people and one of them is a priest.7
Halacha 3
When consecrated property - whether landed property or movable property - is redeemed from the Temple treasury, an announcement is made before all those who might seek to redeem it.8 [The following rule applies if] one says: "I will [redeem] them for ten selaim," another says: "...for twenty," a third "...for thirty," a fourth "...for forty," and a fifth "...for fifty," and then the one who pledged fifty alone retracts. We expropriate ten [selaim] from the property [of the latter]9 and give the consecrated article to the one [who pledged to] give forty. Thus the Temple treasury receives fifty: Ten from one and forty from the other.
If the one who pledged forty also retracts, we expropriate ten [selaim] from his property and give the consecrated article to the one who pledged thirty. [If he and the others also retract,] we follow the same process until [the option is given to] the first. If the first who pledged ten also retracts, we announce the redemption of the consecrated article a second time and sell it. If it is redeemed for less than ten, we collect the difference from the person who [originally] pledged ten.
Halacha 4
When does the above apply? When they retracted one after the other. If, however, they all retracted at the same time, we divide the sum among them.
What is implied? The first one says: "I will [redeem] it for ten selaim," the second: "...for twenty," and a third "...for 24," and the second and third retract at the same time, we enable the first to redeem it for ten and we expropriate seven from the property of both the second and the third.10 Thus the Temple treasury collects 24. Similarly, if all three of them retract and the consecrated article is [ultimately] sold for three, we expropriate seven selaim from the property of all of them. These principles are followed in all instances.
Halacha 5
The [original] owners [of the consecrated article] are [given the opportunity to redeem the consecrated article] before all others, because they [are required to] add a fifth.11 They are not, however, required to add a fifth to the sum that they bid above other [potential] redeemers, only to what they initially pledged.
What is implied? The owners said: "We will [redeem] it for 20 [selaim]," and another person says: "I will redeem it for 20," the owners are given the option, because they add a fifth and pay 25." If another person comes and says: "I will redeem it for 21," and the [original] owners remain silent and do not add anything, we sell it to them for 25.12
If the owners increased [the bid of] 21, adding even a p'rutah,13 they are required to pay 26 [selaim] and a p'rutah: the 21 and a p'rutah which they pledged on their own initiative and the five which are the fifth from their original bid.
Similarly, if the second person said: "I will redeem it for 22," a third said, "...for 23," a fourth said, "...for 24," a fifth said, "...for 25," and [the original owner] added even a p'rutah to the sum of 25, they are compelled to give 30 and ap'rutah: the 25 and a p'rutah which they pledged on their own initiative and the five which are the fifth that they are obligated. For the owner is not required to add a fifth to the additions of the others. Instead, they must add the fifth from their original pledge to the final sum that they pledged.
Halacha 6
When does the above apply? When the consecrated property was not evaluated by three experts. If, however, three experts evaluated the consecrated property and said that it was worth what the last [bidder] pledged and the original owners then increased his bid by even a p'rutah, the additional fifth they must give [is calculated based on] the latter bid.14 They must, therefore, give 31 [selaim], a dinar,15 and a p'rutah.
Halacha 7
[The following rules apply when] the consecrated property was not evaluated, the owner pledged 20, someone else came and pledged 25, and the owner remained silent and did not add anything. The owner is still given priority, for he is also required to pay 25 because of the additional fifth. If another person came and pledged 26,16 he is given priority. If the owner desires to add even ap'rutah he must give 31 [selaim] and a p'rutah as we explained.17 This pattern is followed in all instances.
Halacha 8
In the present era, we do not consecrate property, nor make evaluation offerings or dedication offerings,18 for there is no Temple to make improvements upon. [The following laws apply] if one did consecrate property or make an evaluation offering or a dedication offering:19 If it was an animal, he should lock it in [a closed room] until it dies naturally. If it was produce, a garment, or a utensil, it should be set aside until it rots. If it was coins or metal utensils, they should be taken to the Dead Sea or the Mediterranean Sea20 to be destroyed.
Halacha 9
If a person consecrated a servant who accepted the mitzvot21 [incumbent on servants] or designates him as a dedication offering, he should redeem him and bring the money to the Dead Sea as is the law with regard to other pledges of the worth of an article or arachim in the present age.22 If the servant was a gentile,23 he may not be cast into a pit, nor may he be raised up from one.24
Halacha 10
It is permissible to redeem consecrated property for a p'rutah in the present age even as an initial and preferable option.25 Our Sages, however, ruled that it be redeemed for four zuzim or close to that sum to publicize the matter. In the era of the Temple, as an initial preference, it should be redeemed for its worth, as we explained.26
Halacha 11
In the present age, if a person made a dedication offering of movable property without specifying his intent, it should be given to the priests27 in that locale. If, however, he designated a field in Eretz Yisrael as a dedication offering without specifying his intent or designated it as a dedication offering to the priests, it is not a dedication offering.28 For [the laws of] a dedication offering of a field apply in the era that the Jubilee year is observed.29
If one designated landed property as a dedication offering for the priests in the Diaspora even in the present era, it is considered like movable property inEretz Yisrael30 and should be given to the priests.
Halacha 12
It is a mitzvah to consecrate property and designate dedication and evaluation offerings31 and it is appropriate for a person to observe these practices to subjugate his natural inclination32 so that he will not be parsimonious and to fulfill the charge of the prophets [Proverbs 3:9]: "Honor God with your wealth." Nevertheless, if a person never consecrated property nor designated a dedication or evaluation offering, it is of no consequence.33 For the Torah has given testimony, saying [Deuteronomy 23:23]: "If you will refrain from [uttering] a vow, you will not have sinned."
Halacha 13
A person should never consecrate all of his property or designate it as a dedication offering. A person who does so violates the Torah's guidance, for [Leviticus 27:28] speaks [of a person designating a dedication offering] "fromall that is his." [Implied is that he should not give] "all that is his," as our Sages explained.34This is not piety, but foolishness, for he will lose all his money and become dependent on others.35 We should not show mercy to such a person. In a similar vein, our Sages said:36 "A man of foolish piety is among those who destroy the world." Instead, a person who distributes his money for mitzvot should not distribute more than a fifth,37 and he should conduct himself as our Prophets advised [cf. Psalms 112:5]: "He arranges his affairs with judgment," both with regard to matters involving Torah and worldly concerns.38 Even with regard to the sacrifices for which a person is liable, the Torah showed compassion for [a person's] resources and dictated that the type of sacrifice be offered according to a person's financial capacity.39 How much more so should this approach be followed with regard to matters which a person is obligated only because of his vows. He should take such vows only in a manner appropriate for him, as [implied by Deuteronomy 16:17]: "Each man according to his generosity, according to the blessings of God, your Lord, which He has granted you."40
Blessed be God who grants assistance.
This concludes the sixth book with the help of the Omnipotent.
There are 43 chapters in this book.
In Hilchot Sh'vuot, there are 12 chapters.
In Hilchot Nedarim, there are 13 chapters.
In Hilchot Nizirut, there are 10 chapters.
In Hilchot Arachim Vacharamim, there are 8 chapters.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
I.e., the Sanhedrin, Israel's highest court.
|
| 2. |
There is a certain lack of clarity in the Rambam's words. For the donation of the half-shekel that was announced and collected in the month of Adar was for the sake of the communal offerings (Hilchot Shekalim 4:10).
|
| 3. |
See Chapter 3, Halachah 14.
|
| 4. |
A second opinion is always valuable lest one person err and a third is necessary, lest the two differ. None of the three is required to be a priest (Radbaz).
|
| 5. |
Megilah 23b derives this from the fact that Leviticus, ch. 27, mentions the word "priest" ten times when speaking of all of these types of evaluations.
|
| 6. |
It is not, however, necessary that all ten be priests (Megilah, loc. cit.).
|
| 7. |
In such an instance, the person - or his limb's - worth is evaluated like a servant being sold in the marketplace. Based on Leviticus 25:46, an equation is established between landed property and servants. Hence, the same evaluation process is used (Megilah, loc. cit.).
|
| 8. |
Note the contrast to Chapter 3, Halachot 19-20.
|
| 9. |
I.e., although he merely pledged the fifty, we follow the principle (Kiddushin 28b, et al): "A pledge to the Temple treasury is like transferring the article to an ordinary person." Nevertheless, he is only required to pay ten, since the Temple treasury can collect the forty from the other person.
|
| 10. |
I.e., since they retracted at the same time, the loss suffered by the Temple treasury is divided equally between them. The Ra'avad and Rashi (Arachin 27b) offer a different interpretation of how the sum is divided between the two. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh, however, justify the Rambam's view.
|
| 11. |
And thus if the original owner and another person pledge the same amount, the Temple treasury will receive more if the original owner is allowed to redeem it.
|
| 12. |
They are given the opportunity to redeem it, because the Temple treasury will benefit more from their redemption than that of the other person.
|
| 13. |
A copper coin of minimal value.
The Ra'avad and Rashi (Arachin 27b) maintain that even if the original owners do not raise the bid, they are liable for 26 selaim for they are liable for the sela added by the other bidder. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh justify the Rambam's approach.
|
| 14. |
Since this is the article's worth, it is appropriate that the fifth be calculated accordingly.
|
| 15. |
I.e., a fourth of 25 selaim is six selaim and a dinar. This is the additional fifth that the original owner is required to pay.
|
| 16. |
More precisely, anything above 25, so that his increase benefits the Temple treasury.
|
| 17. |
In Halachah 5.
|
| 18. |
This refers to dedication offerings for the sake of the Temple. With regard to dedication offerings to the priests, see Halachah 11.
|
| 19. |
Since the property was consecrated, it is forbidden to benefit from it. Hence, it must be disposed of in a manner in which no one will benefit. The Ra'avad emphasizes that the advice given by the Rambam applies in an instance when one does not desire to redeem the consecrated property. If one desires to redeem it, it is preferable to do so, following the guidelines set down in Halachah 10. The Kessef Mishneh states that the Rambam would not differ with this concept. See also the Rama (Yoreh De'ah 258:1) who suggests that if a person consecrates an article in the present age, he should ask a sage to repeal his vow.
|
| 20. |
I.e., a place where the money will be lost to human hands forever.
|
| 21. |
I.e., a gentile servant who is circumcised and immersed in the mikveh and then required to observe all the mitzvot incumbent upon women. See Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 13:11.
|
| 22. |
In this way, the holiness associated with the servant will be transferred to the article and the article left in a place where no one will benefit from it.
|
| 23. |
As the Rambam states in Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 14:9, after being purchased by a Jew, a gentile servant is given a year in which to decide whether he wishes to observe the mitzvot. The Rambam is speaking about the laws that apply in the midst of that year.
|
| 24. |
The Rambam makes similar statements with regard to idol-worshiping gentiles in Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 10:1; Hilchot Rotzeach 4:11. The Radbaz interprets the Rambam's intent in citing these concepts here as implying that the owner should not redeem the servant. Since he remains consecrated, it is forbidden to benefit from his labor.
|
| 25. |
In the present era, since nothing can be done with the money, our Sages allowed the consecrated property to be redeemed in this manner. Note the Rama (Yoreh De'ah 258:1) who rules that consecrated property cannot be redeemed in the present age. The Siftei Cohen 258:3, however, cites the Rambam's view.
|
| 26. |
Chapter 7, Halachah 8.
|
| 27. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 1.
|
| 28. |
The Ra'avad cites a view that maintains that even though the field is not given to the priests, it becomes consecrated and can no longer be used by the person for his individual concerns.
|
| 29. |
See Hilchot Shemitah ViYovel 10:9.
|
| 30. |
See the Tur (Choshen Mishpat 95) and commentaries which debate whether this principle applies in all matters or only in this limited context.
|
| 31. |
As listed at the beginning of this set of halachot.
|
| 32. |
See The Guide to the Perplexed, Vol. III, ch. 39, which states that the purpose for these mitzvot is to cultivate the trait of generosity. Also by consecrating his property, one uses his wealth for a holy purpose rather than his own indulgence.
|
| 33. |
Compare to the conclusion of Hilchot Nedarim.
|
| 34. |
Arachin 28a.
|
| 35. |
The Rambam is very critical of those who can support themselves on their own, but instead, make wrong choices in the name of piety and thus, require others to support them. See for example, Hilchot Matanot Aniyim 10:18 which states:
|
| 36. |
Sotah 20a.
|
| 37. |
Ketubot 50a derives this concept from Jacob's vow to tithe (Genesis 28:22). There the verb which conveys the promise to tithe is repeated, allowing for the concept of giving two tithes. See alsoHilchot Matanot Aniyim 7:5.
Yayin Malchut notes that in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Pe'ah 1:1), the Rambam writes that as an act of piety, a person may give more than a fifth. Nevertheless, there is not necessarily a contradiction between the two. In his Commentary to the Mishnah, the Rambam is speaking about giving to a needy who asks for alms. In response to that acute need, one may give more that a fifth. Here the Rambam is speaking about giving to charity when there is no acute need. Hence the limit should be adhered to.
In Iggeret HaTeshuvah, Rav Shneur Zalman of Liadi states that one may give more than a fifth of his resources to charity to atone for his sins, for just as one is not concerned with the amount one gives when it comes to healing a physical wound or blemish, so too, one should not be worried about cost when healing a spiritual blemish.
|
| 38. |
See Hilchot De'ot 5:10.
|
| 39. |
I.e., there are different obligations for certain sacrifices, e.g., the adjustable guilt offering (Leviticus 5:6-11), depending on one's means.
|
| 40. |
This verse specifically applies to the festive sacrifices a person brings for the pilgrimage festivals (see Hilchot Chagigah 1:2), but in an expanded sense, it applies to all offerings to the Temple
|
---------------------
• 3 Chapters: Avodat Kochavim Avodat Kochavim - Chapter Ten, Avodat Kochavim Avodat Kochavim - Chapter Eleven, Avodat Kochavim Avodat Kochavim - Chapter Twelve
• English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download
• Avodat Kochavim - Chapter Ten
---------------------
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class
• Friday, Kislev 22, 5776 · 04 December 2015
"Today's Day"Tuesday Kislev 22 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Vayeishev, Shlishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 106-107.
Tanya: I speak however (p.xiv)...May this be His will.
A practice instituted by the Rebbe: Every morning after davening - including Shabbat, festivals, Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur - say a portion of Tehillim1 as the book was apportioned for the days of the month. When Tehillim is completed with aminyan - Mourner's Kaddish is said. In a month of 29 days, say the last two portions on the 29th.
FOOTNOTES
1. See "Saying Tehillim," Kehot 1975.---------------------
• Daily Thought:
• 3 Chapters: Avodat Kochavim Avodat Kochavim - Chapter Ten, Avodat Kochavim Avodat Kochavim - Chapter Eleven, Avodat Kochavim Avodat Kochavim - Chapter Twelve
• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download• Avodat Kochavim - Chapter Ten
Halacha 1
We may not draw up a covenant with idolaters which will establish peace between them [and us] and yet allow them to worship idols, as [Deuteronomy 7:2] states: "Do not establish a covenant with them." Rather, they must renounce their [idol] worship or be slain. It is forbidden to have mercy upon them, as [Deuteronomy, ibid.] states: "Do not be gracious to them."
Accordingly, if we see an idolater being swept away or drowning in the river, we should not help him. If we see that his life is in danger, we should not save him. It is, however, forbidden to cause one of them to sink or push him into a pit or the like, since he is not waging war against us.
To whom do the above apply? To gentiles. It is a mitzvah, however, to eradicate Jewish traitors, minnim, and apikorsim, and to cause them to descend to the pit of destruction, since they cause difficulty to the Jews and sway the people away from God.
Halacha 2
From the above, we can infer that it is forbidden to offer medical treatment to an idolater even when offered a wage. If, however, one is afraid of the consequences or fears that ill feeling will be aroused, one may treat them for a wage, but to treat them free is forbidden.
[With regard to] a ger toshav, since we are commanded to secure his well-being, he may be given medical treatment at no cost.
Halacha 3
It is forbidden to sell them homes and fields in Eretz Yisrael. In Syria, one may sell them homes, but not fields.
One may rent them homes in Eretz Yisrael, provided that a neighborhood [of idolaters] is not established. Fewer than three [homes] does not constitute a neighborhood. It is, however, forbidden to rent them fields. In Syria, one may rent them fields.
Why did [the Rabbis issue] more stringent laws regarding fields? Because two difficulties are involved: One removes the obligation of tithes [from these fields], and one gives them a resting place in our land.
It is permitted to sell them houses and fields in the Diaspora, because it is not our land.
Halacha 4
Even when it is permitted to rent [homes to idolaters], it is not permitted to rent to them for use as a dwelling, because they will bring idols into them, as [Deuteronomy 7:26] states: "Do not bring an abomination into your home." It is, however, permitted to rent them homes to use as storehouses.
It is forbidden to sell them fruit, grain, or other produce while it is attached to the earth. One may sell [these products] after they have been harvested or [before they have been harvested], on the condition that they will be harvested, and he must harvest them.
Why is it forbidden to sell them [land or anything attached to the land]? Because [Deuteronomy 7:2] states: "Do not be gracious with them." [This phrase can also be interpreted:] "Do not give them a resting place in the land." As long as they do not have a resting place in the land, their stay will be a temporary one.
[This prohibition also] forbids speaking about [idolaters] in a praiseworthy manner. It is even forbidden to say, "Look how beautiful that idolater's body is." How much more so is it forbidden to praise their deeds or to hold their words dear, as [the phrase states]: "Do not be gracious with them." [This phrase can also be interpreted:] "Do not look at them graciously," for doing so will cause you to draw close to them and learn from their wicked behavior.
[Also implicit in the above phrase is that] it is forbidden to give them a present. A present may, however, be given to a ger toshav, [as implied byDeuteronomy 14:21:] "You may give it to the stranger in your gates so that he may eat it; or sell it to a gentile," [i.e., to an idolater]; it should be sold, not given.
Halacha 5
We should provide for poor idolaters together with poor Jews for the sake of peace. One should not rebuke idolaters [from taking] leket, shich'chah, andpe'ah, for the sake of peace. One may inquire about their well-being - even on their festivals - for the sake of peace.
One may never repeat good wishes to them. Also, one should not enter the house of a gentile on one of his festivals to wish him well. If one encounters him in the marketplace, one may greet him meekly with a serious countenance.
Halacha 6
All the above matters apply only in an era when Israel is in exile among the idolaters or in an era when the idolaters are in power. When, however, Israel is in power over them, it is forbidden for us to allow an idolater among us.
Even a temporary resident or a merchant who travels from place to place should not be allowed to pass through our land until he accepts the seven universal laws commanded to Noah and his descendants, as [Exodus 23:33] states: "They shall not dwell in your land" - i.e., even temporarily.
A person who accepts these seven mitzvot is a ger toshav. A ger toshav may be accepted only in the era when the [laws of the] Jubilee Year are observed. In an era when the [laws of the] Jubilee Year are not observed, however, we may accept only full converts [to Judaism].
Avodat Kochavim - Chapter Eleven
Halacha 1
We may not follow the statutes of the idolaters or resemble them in their [style] of dress, coiffure, or the like, as [Leviticus 20:23] states: "Do not follow the statutes of the nation [that I am driving out before you]," as [Leviticus 18:3] states: "Do not follow their statutes," and as [Deuteronomy 12:30] states: "Be careful, lest you inquire after them."
[All these verses] share a single theme: they warn us not to try to resemble [the gentiles]. Instead, the Jews should be separate from them and distinct in their dress and in their deeds, as they are in their ideals and character traits. In this context, [Leviticus 20:26] states: "I have separated you from the nations [to be Mine]."
[Thus,] one may not wear a garment which is unique to them or grow the tresses of our hair as they do. We may not shave our heads from the sides and leave hair in the center as they do. This is called a blorit. We may not shave the hair on the front of our faces from ear to ear and leave a growth at the back of our heads as they do. We may not build Temples in order that many people may enter as they do. Whoever performs one of the above or a deed of this nature is [liable for] lashes.
Halacha 2
When a Jew is cutting a idolater's hair, he must stop when he approaches within three fingerbreadths of his blorit on all sides.
Halacha 3
A Jew who has an important position in a gentile kingdom and must sit before their kings, and would be embarrassed if he did not resemble them, is granted permission to wear clothes which resemble theirs and shave the hair on his face as they do.
Halacha 4
It is forbidden to practice soothsaying as idolaters do, as [Leviticus 19:26] states: "Do not act as a soothsayer."
What is meant by a soothsayer? For example, those who say: Since my piece of bread fell out of my mouth, or my staff fell from my hand, I will not travel to this place today, since if I were to go I would not be able to accomplish my desires.
Since a fox passed on my right side, I will not go out of my door today, since if I were to go out I would meet a deceiver.
Similarly, [this category includes] those who hear the chirping of a bird and say: This will happen or this will not happen; it is beneficial to do this or it is detrimental to do this. [Also, it includes] those who say: Slaughter this rooster that crowed like a raven; slaughter this hen that crowed like a rooster.
Similarly, a person who sets up omens for himself; e.g., if this and this happens, I will do this. If it will not happen, I will not do it, as Eliezer, the servant of Abraham did, and the things of the like - all this is forbidden. Anyone who does one of these things because of such omens is [liable for] lashes.
Halacha 5
[A different ruling applies when] a person says, "This dwelling which I built will be a good omen for me"; "This woman whom I married or this animal that I purchased was blessed. From the time I purchased it onward, I have become rich."
The same applies to a person who rejoices and exclaims, "This is a good omen" when he asks a child, "Which verse are you studying?" and the child reads him a verse of blessing. This and the like are permitted, since the person did not perform an act or hold himself back from performing an act [because of the omen]. All he did was consider something that had already happened as a sign.
Halacha 6
What is meant by a diviner? This refers to a person who performs certain deeds to cause him to fall into a trance and have his mind cleared of all thoughts until he can predict the future, saying, "This will happen" or "This will not happen;" or saying, "it is proper to do such and such. Be careful to do so."
There are some diviners who use sand or stones [to obtain their answers]. Others prostrate themselves on the ground, make strange motions and scream. Others look at a metal or crystal mirror, fantasize, and speak. Still others carry a staff and lean on it and tap with it until they fall into a trance and speak. This is what the prophet [Hoshea (4:12) meant by] saying, "My people will inquire of their rods. Their staffs will tell them."
Halacha 7
It is forbidden to divine or to inquire of a diviner. A person who inquires of a diviner is given "stripes for rebelliousness." In contrast, the diviner himself is [punished by] lashes if he performs one of the above or other similar acts, as [Deuteronomy 18:10] states: "There shall not be found among you one who passes..., one who practices divination."
Halacha 8
Who is a fortuneteller? A person who tries to predict auspicious times, using astrology and saying, "This day will be a good day," "This day will be a bad day," "It is appropriate to perform a particular task on a certain day"; or "This year" or "This month will not be opportune for this particular matter."
Halacha 9
It is forbidden to tell fortunes. [This applies] even though one does not perform a deed, but merely relates the falsehoods which the fools consider to be words of truth and wisdom. Anyone who performs a deed because of an astrological calculation or arranges his work or his journeys to fit a time that was suggested by the astrologers is [liable for] lashes, as [Leviticus 19:26] states: "Do not tell fortunes."
Also included in the scope of this prohibition is one who performs magic tricks and deludes those who observe him into thinking that he performs wonders although he is not doing so. He is [liable for] lashes.
Halacha 10
Who is a person who casts spells? A person who chants incantations that have no meaning in people's speech or any connotation and imagines in his foolish perception that his words have an effect. Such people will say: If you cast a particular spell on a snake or a scorpion, they will do no harm. If you cast a particular spell on a person, he will never be harmed. Some of them will hold a key or a rock in their hands while they are talking, or perform other similar deeds. All of these are forbidden.
A person who casts spells is [punished by lashes] if he holds anything in his hand or performs an act while speaking, even if he merely gestures with his finger, as [Deuteronomy 18:10-11] states: "There shall not be found among you... one who casts spells." If, however, the person merely spoke without moving his finger or his head and without holding anything in his hand, and similarly, a person who has a spell cast upon him through the utterance of such incantations, thinking that this will help him, he is given "stripes for rebelliousness" because he participated in the foolish activities of a spell-caster.
All these deplorable incantations and strange names will not do harm, nor will they bring any benefit.
Halacha 11
When a person has been bitten by a scorpion or a snake, it is permitted to recite incantations over the bite. [This is permitted] - even on the Sabbath - in order to settle his mind and strengthen his feelings. Even though [the incantations] are of no avail, since the victim's life is in danger, permission was granted lest he become overly disturbed.
Halacha 12
A person who whispers an incantation over a wound and then recites a verse from the Torah, who recites a verse over a child so that he will not become scared, or who places a Torah scroll or tefillin over a baby so that it will sleep, is considered to be a soothsayer or one who cast spells. Furthermore, such people are included among those who deny the Torah, because they relate to the words of Torah as if they are cures for the body, when, in fact, they are cures for the soul, as [Proverbs 3:22] states: "And they shall be life for your soul."
It is, however, permitted for a healthy person to read verses [from the Bible] or chapters from Psalms so that the merit of reading them will protect him and save him from difficulties and injury.
Halacha 13
Who is one who seeks [information] from the dead? A person who starves himself and goes to sleep in a cemetery so that a deceased person will come to him in a dream and reply to his questions. There are others who wear special clothes, recite incantations, burn a particular type of incense, and sleep alone so that a deceased person will come to them and speak to them in a dream. To summarize: Anyone who performs a deed in order that a deceased person should come to him and give him information is [liable for] lashes, as [Deuteronomy 18:10] states: "There shall not be found among you one who passes..., one who seeks [information] from the dead."
Halacha 14
It is forbidden to inquire of a person who practices [divination with an] ov or ayid'oni, as [Deuteronomy 18:10-11] states: "There shall not be found among you one who passes..., one who seeks [information] from an ov or a yid'oni."
Thus, a person who practices [divination with an] ov or a yid'oni himself is stoned to death, and a person who inquires of them violates a negative commandment and receives stripes for rebelliousness. One who plans his deeds and acts according to their instructions is [liable for] lashes.
Halacha 15
A sorcerer must be condemned to execution by stoning. This applies when he commits a deed of sorcery. If, however, he merely deludes those who observe him into thinking that he is performing an act although he actually does not, he is given stripes for rebelliousness.
[The reason is] that the prohibition against sorcery is stated in the prohibition [Deuteronomy 18:10-11]: "There shall not be found among you one who... [practices sorcery]." It is, however, a prohibition which is punishable by execution by the court, as [Exodus 22:17] states: "Do not allow a witch to live." [Therefore,] lashes are not administered for its violation.
Halacha 16
All the above matters are falsehood and lies with which the original idolaters deceived the gentile nations in order to lead them after them. It is not fitting for the Jews who are wise sages to be drawn into such emptiness, nor to consider that they have any value as [implied by Numbers 23:23]: "No black magic can be found among Jacob, or occult arts within Israel." Similarly, [Deuteronomy 18:14] states: "These nations which you are driving out listen to astrologers and diviners. This is not [what God... has granted] you."
Whoever believes in [occult arts] of this nature and, in his heart, thinks that they are true and words of wisdom, but are forbidden by the Torah, is foolish and feebleminded. He is considered like women and children who have underdeveloped intellects.
The masters of wisdom and those of perfect knowledge know with clear proof that all these crafts which the Torah forbade are not reflections of wisdom, but rather, emptiness and vanity which attracted the feebleminded and caused them to abandon all the paths of truth. For these reasons, when the Torah warned against all these empty matters, it advised [Deuteronomy 18:13]: "Be of perfect faith with God, your Lord."
Avodat Kochavim - Chapter Twelve
Halacha 1
We may not shave the corners of our heads as the idolaters and their priests do, as [Leviticus 19:27] states: "Do not cut off the corners of your heads."
One is liable for each corner. Therefore, a person who shaves both his temples - even if he were to do so simultaneously and had received only a single warning – is [liable for] two measures of lashes.
[This prohibition applies equally to] one who shaves off only the corners of his head and leaves the remainder of his hair, and to one who shaves his entire head at once. Since he has shaved the corners, he is [liable for] lashes.
To whom does the above apply? To the person who shaves. The person [whose head] is shaven is not lashed unless he assists the one who is shaving him. One who shaves [the corners of] a child's [head] should be [liable for] lashes.
Halacha 2
A woman is exempt if she shaves the head of a man or has her own head shaven. [Since Leviticus 19:27] states: "Do not cut off the corners of your heads and do not destroy the corners of your beards," [an association between the two prohibitions is established]. Whoever is liable for shaving is liable for cutting off the corners. Therefore, because women are not liable for shaving - since they do not have beards - they are not liable for cutting off the corners [of their heads]. Accordingly, slaves are forbidden to cut off the corners of their heads, since they do possess beards.
Halacha 3
All the Torah's prohibitions apply equally to men and women, with the exception of the prohibition against shaving, cutting off the corners of one's head, and the prohibition against priests contracting impurity through contact with a dead body.
Women are not obligated with regard to all positive commandments which apply from time to time and are not constant obligations, with the exception of the sanctification of [the Sabbath] day, eating matzah on Pesach night, eating and offering the Paschal sacrifice, hakhel, and the festive peace-offering for which they are obligated.
Halacha 4
The status of a tumtum and an androgynous is doubtful. Therefore, the stringencies applying to both a man and a woman are applied to them, and they are obligated by all [the mitzvot]. If, however, they transgress, they are not [liable for] lashes.
Halacha 5
Although a woman is permitted to shave the corners of her own head, she is forbidden to shave the corners of a man's head. She is even forbidden to shave the corners of a child's [head].
Halacha 6
The Sages did not determine the amount [of hair] which must be left in the corners of our temples. We have, however, heard from our elders that one must leave at least forty hairs.
One may remove the [hairs from] the corners [of our heads] with scissors. The prohibition applies only to total removal with a razor.
Halacha 8
It is customary for pagan priests to remove their beards. Therefore, the Torah forbade the removal of one's beard.
The beard has five "corners": the upper and lower cheek on both the right and left sides, and the hair on the chin. One is [liable for] lashes for the removal of each "corner." A person who removes them all at the same time is [liable for] five measures of lashes.
One is liable only when one shaves with a razor, as [implied by Leviticus 19:27]: "Do not destroy the corners of your beard." [We can infer that this applies only] to shaving which utterly destroys [one's facial hair]. Therefore, a person who removes his beard with scissors is exempt.
A person who allows himself to be shaved is not [liable for] lashes unless he provides assistance. A woman who has facial hair is allowed to shave it. If she shaves a man's beard, she is exempt.
Halacha 8
It is permitted to shave one's mustache - i.e., the hair on the upper lip, and, similarly, the hair which hangs from the lower lip. Even though the removal [of this hair] is permitted, it is customary for the Jews not to destroy it entirely. Rather, its ends may be removed so that it will not interfere with eating or drinking.
Halacha 9
The Torah does not forbid the removal of hair from other portions of the body - e.g., the armpits or the genitalia. This is, however, prohibited by the Rabbis. A man who removes [such hair] is given stripes for rebelliousness.
Where does the above apply? In places where it is customary only for women to remove such hair, so that one will not beautify himself as women do. In places where it is customary for both men and women to remove such hair, one is not given stripes. It is permitted to remove hair from our other limbs with scissors in all communities.
Halacha 10
A woman should not adorn herself as a man does - e.g., she may not place a turban or a hat on her head or wear armor or the like. She may not cut [the hair of] her head as men do.
A man should not adorn himself as a woman does - e.g., he should not wear colored garments or golden bracelets in a place where such garments and such bracelets are worn only by women. Everything follows local custom.
A man who adorns himself as a woman does, and a woman who adorns herself as a man does, are [liable for] lashes. When a man removes white hairs from among the dark hairs of his head or beard, he should be lashed as soon as he removes a single hair, because he has beautified himself as a woman does. Similarly, if he dyes his hair dark, he is given lashes after dyeing a single hair.
A tumtum and an androgynous may not wrap their heads [in a veil] as women do, or cut [the hair of] their head as men do. If they do [either of the above], they are not [liable for] lashes.
Halacha 11
The tattooing which the Torah forbids involves making a cut in one's flesh and filling the slit with eye-color, ink, or with any other dye that leaves an imprint. This was the custom of the idolaters, who would make marks on their bodies for the sake of their idols, as if to say that they are like servants sold to the idol and designated for its service.
When a person makes a mark with one of the substances that leave an imprint after making a slit in any place on his body, he is [liable for] lashes. [This prohibition is binding on] both men and women.
If a person wrote and did not dye, or dyed without writing by cutting [into his flesh], he is not liable. [Punishment is administered] only when he writes and dyes, as [Leviticus 19:28] states: "[Do not make] a dyed inscription [on yourselves]."
To whom does this apply? To the person doing the tattooing. A person who is tattooed [by others], however, is not liable unless he assisted the tattooer to the extent that it is considered that he performed a deed. If he did not perform a deed, he is not lashed.
Halacha 12
A person who gouges himself for the dead is lashed, as [Leviticus 19:28] states: "Do not gouge your flesh for the dead." This [prohibition] applies both to priests and to Israelites.
A person who makes a single gouge for five dead people or five gouges for a single dead person is [liable for] five measures of lashes, provided he is given a warning for each individual matter.
Halacha 13
Gashing and gouging oneself are [governed by] a single [prohibition]. Just as the pagans would gouge their flesh in grief over their dead, they would mutilate themselves for their idols, as [I Kings 18:28] states: "And they mutilated themselves according to their custom."
This is also forbidden by the Torah, as [Deuteronomy 14:1] states: "Do not mutilate yourselves." [The difference between the two is that if one gouges himself in grief over] the dead, whether he did so with his bare hands or with an instrument, he is [liable for] lashes; for the sake of idols, if one uses an instrument, one is liable for lashes. If one does so with one's bare hands, one is exempt.
Halacha 14
This commandment also includes [a prohibition] against there being two courts which follow different customs in a single city, since this can cause great strife. [Because of the similarity in the Hebrew roots,] the prohibition against gashing ourselves [can be interpreted] to mean: "Do not separate into various different groupings."
Halacha 15
A person who creates a bald spot [on his head] for a dead person is [liable for] lashes, as [Deuteronomy 14:1] states: "Do not make a bald spot between your eyes for a dead person." When either a priest or an Israelite makes a bald spot [on his head] for a dead person, he is [liable for] only a single measure of lashes.
A person who makes four or five bald spots for a single dead person is [liable for] a measure of lashes equivalent to the number of bald spots he made, provided he received a separate warning for each bald spot. There is no difference whether one created the bald spot with his hands or with a potion. If a person dipped his fingers into a potion and positioned them in five places on his head at the same time, since he created five bald spots, he is [liable for] five measures of lashes even though only a single warning was given, for they were all created at the same time.
One is liable [for creating a bald spot] on any part of the head, [not only] "between the eyes" [as is inferred from Leviticus 21:5]: "Do not make a bald spot on your heads."
What is the measure of a bald spot? An area on one's head the size of a griswhich is free of hair.
Halacha 16
16. A person who makes a bald spot on his head or gouges his flesh because his house falls or because his ship sinks at sea is exempt. One is lashed only [if he carries out these acts] for the sake of a deceased person or if he gashes his flesh for the sake of an idol.
[The following laws apply] when a person creates a bald spot on a colleague's head, makes a gash on a colleague's flesh, or tattoos his colleague's flesh while his colleague assists him. If they both intended to violate the prohibition, both receive lashes. If one violated the prohibition inadvertently and the other did so intentionally, the one who performed the act intentionally is [liable for] lashes, and his colleague is exempt.
Commentary Halacha
In this chapter, the Rambam describes several prohibitions which comprise rites that do not involve the actual worship of idols. The Torah forbids them, however, because they are connected with ceremonial practices performed by idolaters. Note also the Guide for the Perplexed, Vol. III, Chapter 37, where the Rambam mentions this concept.
The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 181) takes issue with the Rambam's statements, noting that there is no statement in the Bible, the Mishnah, or the Talmud, which mentions this point. He objects to the association of the mitzvot with any particular rationale. From a halachic perspective, the mitzvot should be fulfilled because they are God's decrees, independent of any rational explanation.
The Beit Yosef (Yoreh De'ah, ibid.) defends the Rambam's statements, based on the ending of Hilchot Me'ilah, where the Rambam states:
It is proper for a person to meditate on the judgments of the holy Torah and know their ultimate rationale to the extent of his capacity.
There are other authorities who draw out halachic concepts from the association of these prohibitions with idol worship. For example, based on this connection, the Minchat Chinuch (Mitzvah 251) and Sefer HaKovetz forbid the removal of facial hair even when the prohibition against shaving is not violated, as mentioned in the commentary on Halachah 7.
We may not shave - The Torah's prohibition applies only to shaving. One may cut this hair with scissors, as explained in Halachah 6.
the corners of our heads - The definition of this term is found in Halachah 6.
as the idolaters and their priests do - Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 251) explains that this is a particularly severe prohibition, since its violation involves making a sign for idolatry on our own bodies.
as [Leviticus 19:27] states: "Do not cut off the corners of your heads." - Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 43) and Sefer HaChinuch (ibid.) consider this prohibition to be one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
One is liable for each corner. Therefore, a person who shaves both his temples - even if he were to do so simultaneously and had received only a single warning - is [liable for] two measures of lashes. - In Sefer HaMitzvot (ibid.), the Rambam explains that although this prohibition involves two different activities (shaving the right corner and shaving the left corner), it is not considered to be two mitzvot, because the Torah's expression forbidding such shaving includes both sides in the same phrase. Had the Torah mentioned both the right and left sides, it would be considered to be two mitzvot.
[This prohibition applies equally to] one who shaves off only the corners of his head and leaves the remainder of his hair - As mentioned in Chapter 11, Halachah 1, this style of cutting hair is referred to as a bloritand was practiced by the gentiles.
and to one who shaves his entire head at once - in which case, he does not resemble the gentiles (Sefer HaMitzvot, ibid.).
Since he has shaved the corners, he is [liable for] lashes. - From this, we see that the mitzvah is not dependent on the rationale mentioned above.
To whom does the above apply? To the person who shaves - either his own head or a colleague's head. When, however, a person shaves a colleague's head,
The person [whose head] is shaven is not lashed - The Ra'avad maintains that this person is not punished because he did not perform a deed. He is, however, considered to have transgressed the Torah's prohibition. The Kessef Mishneh disagrees and maintains that since he did not perform the deed of shaving, he is not considered to have violated the prohibition at all. This applies even when he specifically ordered the person who shaved him to do so. The Ra'avad's opinion is, however, supported by the Lechem Mishneh and other authorities.
unless he assists the one who is shaving him - by moving his head so that it is easier to shave.
One who shaves [the corners of] a child's - a minor below the age of 13
[head] should be [liable for] lashes. - A child would not be held responsible if he shaved himself, because a child is not held liable for the violation of any of the Torah's prohibitions until he reaches majority. Nevertheless, an adult is responsible for shaving the child's head (Nazir57b).
This point is not, however, accepted by all authorities. The Beit Yosef(Yoreh De'ah, ibid.) mentions other opinions which do not hold a person liable for shaving a child's head.
Commentary Halacha
A woman is exempt if she shaves the head of a man - who would be liable if he shaved his own head
or - assists the shaver while she
has her own head shaven. - The Kessef Mishneh differentiates between these two instances. With regard to shaving a man's head, he explains that although a woman is exempt, she is, nevertheless, forbidden to do so (Halachah 5). With regard to shaving her own head, there is no prohibition whatsoever.
[Since Leviticus 19:27] states: "Do not cut off the corners of your heads and do not destroy the corners of your beards," [an association between the two prohibitions is established]. - This association also teaches other concepts - among them, that one is liable only when one removes the hair with a razor.
Whoever is liable for shaving is liable for cutting off the corners. Therefore, because women are not liable for shaving - since they -generally
do not have beards - Although Kiddushin 35b mentions several ways to derive this concept through Biblical exegesis, the Rambam chooses to rely on the simple fact of the matter.
they are not liable for cutting off the corners [of their heads]. Accordingly, slaves - whose performance of mitzvot is generally equated with that of women (Chaggigah 4a)
are forbidden to cut off the corners of their heads, since they do possess beards. - Had the Rambam derived the above point from the exegesis of a Biblical verse, this conclusion would not be acceptable. Since, however, he derives the concept from logic, the same logic leads to the conclusion that slaves be held liable for this act (Kessef Mishneh).
Commentary Halacha
This halachah can be understood within the context of the Rambam's conception of the Mishneh Torah as a guide to the Oral Law in its entirety, as he states in his introduction to that text:
Directly after reading the Written Law, one will read this text and understand from it the entire Oral Law, without requiring to read any other text.
Thus, although the subject matter of this and the following halachah are of a far greater scope than the particular prohibition discussed previously, the Rambam mentions these principles for the sake of the text's more encompassing goal.
All the Torah's prohibitions apply equally to men and women -Kiddushin 35a derives this concept from Numbers 5:6, "When a man or a woman commits any of the transgressions that men commit...."
with the exception of the prohibition against shaving, cutting off the corners of one's head - as mentioned in the previous halachah,
and the prohibition against priests contracting impurity through contact with a dead body. - The verse prohibiting such contact,Leviticus 21:1, begins, "Speak unto the sons of Aharon...."Kiddushin 35b explains that this expression excludes women.
Women are not obligated with regard to all positive commandments which apply from time to time and are not constant obligations -This refers to mitzvot which are applicable only on certain days - e.g., the blowing of the shofar and the taking of the lulav and etrog - and also mitzvot that are applicable during the day and not the night - e.g., Tefillin.
with the exception of the sanctification of [the Sabbath] day -through the recitation of kiddush. Since women are obligated by the prohibition against working on the Sabbath, they are also obligated by the positive commandment of sanctifying its holiness (Berachot 20b).
The restriction of this mitzvah to the Sabbath follows the opinion of theLechem Mishnah, who maintains that the sanctification of the festivals is a Rabbinic injunction. There are, however, other opinions, which consider the mitzvah as applying to the festivals as well.
eating matzah on Pesach night - Since women are obligated by the prohibition against eating chametz, they are also obligated by the positive commandment of eating matzah (Pesachim 43b).
eating and offering the Paschal sacrifice - Pesachim 91b explains that the Torah uses the expression (Exodus 12:4): "According to the number of souls [in a household]... individuals should be designated for the lamb," to include women in the observance of this mitzvah.
hakhel - The gathering of the entire Jewish people to hear the reading of the Torah by the king which is held every seven years. (SeeDeuteronomy 31:10-13.) Here, the Torah explicitly mentions that women should attend.
and celebration of the festivals - Though in a larger sense this refers to all forms of celebration, in particular it refers to the offering of peace sacrifices in connection with the festival. (See Hilchot Chaggigah 1:1.)
In this instance as well, the Torah specifically mentions the obligation of women to participate in the celebrations, as Deuteronomy 16:14 states: "And you shall rejoice, you, your son, your daughter, your male and female servants...."
for which they are obligated. - Similarly, women are obligated to fulfill most positive commandments whose observance is not associated with a specific time - e.g., the belief in God, mezuzah, and Tzedakah. There are, however, several positive commandments whose observance is not associated with a specific time which women are not obligated to fulfill - e.g., Torah study, the redemption of the first born, and the remembrance of Amalek. (See also the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah,Kiddushin 1:7.)
Commentary Halacha
The status of a tumtum - The word tumtum has its roots in the wordatum, which means "a solid block." It refers to a person whose genitalia are covered by skin, and it is impossible to determine whether he is male or female. (See also Hilchot Ishut 2:25.)
Should a tumtum undergo an operation and it be revealed that he is either male or female, he is bound by the laws which apply to that gender.
and an androgynous - Androgynous is a combination of the Greek words meaning "man" and "woman." It refers to a person who possesses the sexual organs of both genders. (See also Hilchot Ishut 2:24.)
is doubtful - i.e., it is doubtful whether they are governed by the laws applying to a man or those applying to a woman. The doubts are, however, different in nature. With regard to a tumtum, we are doubtful what is his true gender. With regard to an androgynous, however, the question revolves around the Sages' failure to define his status.
Therefore, the stringencies applying to both a man - The obligation to perform all the positive commandments that are associated with time, and the various other commandments which men are obligated to perform, but women are not.
and a woman - Bikkurim 4:3 explains that this refers to the prohibition against being alone with men (yichud), and the laws of ritual impurity that apply to women.
are applied to them, and they are obligated by all [the mitzvot]. If, however, they transgress - any of the three commandments for which men are held liable and women are not
they are not [liable for] lashes. - Punishment is not administered when we are in doubt of the person's obligation.
Commentary Halacha
Although a woman is permitted to shave the corners of her own head - as mentioned in Halachah 2
she is forbidden to shave the corners of a man's head. - As stated in that halachah, she is not punished for doing so. The Ra'avad and theKessef Mishneh maintain that this prohibition is Rabbinic in origin. Other authorities, however, state that the prohibition stems from the Torah itself.
She is even forbidden to shave the corners of a child's [head]. -Though the child himself would not be held liable, an adult is liable for shaving the corners of his head, as stated in Halachah 1. Therefore, even a woman is forbidden to shave the corners of his head. Rabbenu Yitzchak Alfasi, based on Nazir 57b, does not accept the Rambam's view, and maintains that a woman may shave a child's head.
Commentary Halacha
The Sages did not determine the amount [of hair] which must be left in the corners of our temples. - The Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah181:1, defines "corners" as referring to the place where the skull is joined to the jaw. The Beit Lechem Yehudah writes that the area which the Ari zal would leave uncut extended slightly above his ears.
We have, however, heard from our elders that one must leave at least forty - The Tur's text of the Rambam stated "four" instead of "forty."
hairs. - In one of his responsa, the Rambam writes that the forbidden area is about the size of a thumb.
One may remove the [hairs from] the corners [of our heads] with scissors. - In one of his responsa, the Rambam writes that he would trim the corners of his head. He explains that - in contrast to the law applying to a Nazarite's hair - there is no positive commandment to allow this hair to grow and no need to do so. In many Jewish communities, however, it is customary to allow this hair to grow. Since its removal involves the violation of a Torah prohibition, they consider the growth of this hair as a sign of Jewish identity.
The prohibition applies only to total removal with a razor. - As is explained in the commentary on the following halachah, there is a debate among the Rabbinic authorities if it is permissible to remove this hair using scissors or even using implements whose effectiveness is equivalent to that of a razor.
Commentary Halacha
It is customary for pagan priests to remove their beards. - Note our commentary on Halachah 1. In Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 44), the Rambam notes that even in his time, it was customary for Christian monks to shave their faces.
Therefore, the Torah forbade the removal of one's beard. - Sefer HaMitzvot (ibid.) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 252) consider this prohibition to be one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
The beard has five "corners": the upper and lower cheek on both the right and left sides, and the hair on the chin. - The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 181:11) writes that there are many opinions with regard to the definition of these five "corners." There, "anyone who fears heaven should fulfill all the opinions and not shave any portion of his beard with a razor."
One is [liable for] lashes for the removal of each "corner." - As implied by the verse's mention of "the corners of your beard," and not merely "your beard" (Sefer HaMitzvot, ibid.).
A person who removes them all at the same time is [liable for] five measures of lashes. - Nevertheless, as explained in the commentary on Halachah 1, the prohibition is considered to be a single mitzvah, and not five.
One is liable only when one shaves with a razor, as [implied by Leviticus 19:27]: "Do not destroy the corners of your beard." [We can infer that this applies only] to shaving which utterly destroys [one's facial hair]. Therefore, a person who removes his beard with scissors is exempt. - From the Rambam's expression, it appears that the removal of facial hair with scissors is forbidden. One is not, however, punished for such an act (Sefer HaChinuch, ibid.; Ma'aseh Rokeach). The Beit Yosef (Yoreh De'ah 181) differs, and maintains that it is permitted to remove one's facial hair as long as one does not use a razor.
In addition, as mentioned in the commentary on Halachah 1, the Minchat Chinuch and Sefer HaKovetz explain that by mentioning the fact that gentile priests remove their facial hair, the Rambam implies that removing such hair violates the prohibition of following "the paths of the gentiles." (See Chapter 11, Halachah 1.) In the context of this prohibition, the means used to remove the facial hair are of no consequence.
Other authorities (Rashba, Vol. IV, Responsum 90; Shibbolei Leket;Tzemach Tzedek, Yoreh De'ah, Responsum 93) forbid the removal of one's facial hair within the context of the prohibition against a man's adorning himself in the same manner as a woman. (See Halachot 9 and 10.) In this context as well, it makes no difference how one removes the hair.
Many contemporary authorities have explained that in addition to all these points, growing a beard has been accepted as a sign that a person is God-fearing and precise in his observance of the mitzvot. Accordingly, anyone who desires to be viewed as such should not remove his beard even if he does not use a razor.
A person who allows himself to be shaved is not [liable for] lashes unless he provides assistance. - Note our commentary on Halachah 1.
A woman who has facial hair is allowed to shave it - since this is not the norm. Kiddushin 35b derives this concept from the exegesis of the verse from Leviticus quoted above.
If she shaves a man's beard, she is exempt. - It is, however, forbidden for her to do so, as explained in Halachah 1.
Commentary Halacha
It is permitted to shave one's mustache - i.e., the hair on the upper lip, and, similarly, the hair which hangs from the lower lip. - Mo'ed Katan 18a allows the shaving of this hair because it is not one of the five "corners" of the beard.
Even though the removal [of this hair] is permitted, it is customary for the Jews not to destroy it entirely. - This statement reinforces the interpretation mentioned in the previous halachah, that maintains which the Rambam did not allow one's facial hair to be removed by means other than shaving.
It must be noted that there are authorities who object to the shaving of the mustache. Rabbenu Chanan'el explained that the corners of the mustache are the two lower "corners" of the beard. Others (among them Rabbenu Yonah and the Bayit Chadash) associate its removal with the prohibitions against following the "ways of gentiles" and adorning oneself as does a woman.
Rather, its ends may be removed so that it will not interfere with eating or drinking. - The Rabbis have explained that it is proper manners to remove the hair which interferes with eating. Even the Kabbalists who would not touch their beards at all would trim their mustaches (Ben Ish Chai).
Commentary Halacha
The Torah does not forbid the removal of hair from other portions of the body - e.g., the armpits or the genitalia - which are often shaved by women.
This is, however, prohibited by the Rabbis - as an extension of the prohibition against a man beautifying himself in the same manner as a woman does. The classification of the removal of such hair as a Rabbinic prohibition is not agreed upon by all authorities. The Tzemach Tzedek(Yoreh De'ah, Responsum 93) brings opinions which maintain that shaving this hair is within the scope of the Torah prohibition.
The Kessef Mishneh explains the distinction between the Torah prohibition and the Rabbis' decree as follows: The Torah prohibition involves any adornment which is openly detectable. The Rabbis extended the scope of the prohibition and included even acts of beautification which are private.
A man who removes [such hair] is given stripes for rebelliousness. -The punishment given for violating any Rabbinic ordinance.
Where does the above apply? In places where it is customary only for women to remove such hair, so that one will not beautify himself as women do. - Which is prohibited, as mentioned in the following halachah.
In places where it is customary for both men - The Prisha (Yoreh De'ah 182) states that the word "men" refers even to gentiles. Even if gentile men follow this practice, a Jew is not punished for doing so.
and women to remove such hair, one is not given stripes. It is permitted - The expression, "one is not given stripes," and the contrasting statement, "It is permitted," lead to the conclusion that, even in these communities, it is forbidden for men to remove this hair. The Ramah (Yoreh De'ah 182:1) differs, and grants permission for men to remove such hair in these communities.
When there are medical reasons requiring the removal of such hair, even the more stringent views allow it to be shaved off (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 182:4).
to remove hair from our other limbs with scissors - but not with a razor (Siftei Cohen 182:3).
in all communities.
Commentary Halacha
A woman should not adorn herself as a man does - Sefer HaMitzvot(Negative Commandment 39) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 542) consider this prohibition to be one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. Curiously, with regard to this and the following prohibition, the Rambam departs from his usual custom and does not mention the Biblical proof-text, Deuteronomy 22:5, for these prohibitions.
e.g., she may not place a turban or a hat on her head - Needless to say, a hat that was styled for women is permitted. As the Rambam states later in the halachah, everything depends on local custom.
or wear armor - Many sources (e.g., Nazir 59a; Targum Onkelos on Deuteronomy, ibid.) directly associate this prohibition with a woman's donning armor or carrying weapons. Significantly, in the listing of mitzvot which precedes these halachot, the Rambam defines the mitzvah as prohibiting a woman from wearing "armament or a man's apparel."
or the like. She may not cut [the hair of] her head as men do - i.e., a woman's coiffure may not resemble a man's. The Yemenite manuscripts of the Mishneh Torah read יגלה, "reveal," instead of יגלח, "cut." According to that version, the Rambam is saying that when a woman goes out without covering her head, in addition to violating the basic laws of modesty (see Hilchot Ishut 24:11-12; Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 21:17), she is also transgressing this Torah prohibition.
A man should not adorn himself as a woman does - Sefer HaMitzvot(Negative Commandment 40) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 543) consider this prohibition to be one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
In Sefer HaMitzvot (ibid.), the Rambam mentions two rationales for this and the previous prohibition:
a) Such behavior would lead to licentiousness;
b) The pagans would often dress in this manner for their rituals.
a) Such behavior would lead to licentiousness;
b) The pagans would often dress in this manner for their rituals.
e.g., he should not wear colored garments or golden bracelets in a place where such garments and such bracelets are worn only by women. Everything follows local custom. - Accordingly, the definition of the pertinent rulings changes according to the norms of the society. Garments which might have been forbidden for men or women in one era may be permitted in another, depending on the standards set by the particular society.
A man who adorns himself as a woman does, and a woman who adorns herself as a man does, are [liable for] lashes. - Note the Ramah's statements, Orach Chayim 696:8, which state that on Purim or at a wedding, this prohibition may be waived for the sake of adding to the festive mood of the celebration. The Bayit Chadash and others, however, do not accept this leniency.
When a man removes white hairs from among the dark hairs of his head or beard - to prevent the process of aging from being detected
he should be lashed - for violating this prohibition. The Ra'avad (see also Sho'el UMeshiv, Vol. I, Responsum 210) differs, and maintains that such an act violates only a Rabbinic prohibition. His opinion, however, is not accepted by the later authorities (Darchei Teshuvah 182:15).
as soon as he removes a single hair, because he has beautified himself as a woman does. - Women are accustomed - and therefore, allowed - to hide their age, but not men.
Similarly, if he dyes his hair dark, he is given lashes after dyeing a single hair. - The prohibition applies only when one attempts to look younger. Dyeing one's hair grey is not forbidden (Turei Zahav 182:7).
A tumtum and an androgynous - whose status with regard to gender is doubtful, as explained in Halachah 4.
may not wrap their heads [in a veil] as women do, or cut [the hair of] their head as men do. - As the Rambam states in that halachah, "the stringencies of both a man and a woman are applied to them." Hence, they are not allowed to clothe themselves in a manner which is distinct to either a man or a woman.
According to the Yemenite manuscripts mentioned above which substitute יגלה, "reveal," for יגלח, "cut," this clause also must be amended accordingly.
If they do [either of the above],they are not [liable for] lashes -because we are unsure of their gender. Accordingly, it cannot be definitely said that a prohibition has been violated.
Commentary Halacha
The tattooing which the Torah forbids - Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 41) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 253) consider this prohibition to be one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
involves making a cut in one's flesh and filling the slit with eye-color, ink, or with any other dye that leaves an imprint. - The Minchat Chinuch (Mitzvah 253) states that the order mentioned by the Rambam is significant. If it is reversed and the ink is placed on the skin before an incision is made, one is exempt. TheSiftei Cohen (Yoreh De'ah 180:1), however, does not accept this view.
This was the custom of the idolaters, who would make marks on their bodies for the sake of their idols - branding themselves
as if to say that they are like servants sold to the idol and designated for its service. - In Sefer HaMitzvot (ibid.), the Rambam states that certain sects in Egypt followed these practices in his time as well.
When a person makes a mark with one of the substances that leave an imprint after making a slit in any place on his body, he is [liable for] lashes. - The Tosefta (Makkot 3:9) adds that one must have the intent that the inscription is made for the sake of idol worship. This point, however, is not accepted by the halachic authorities.
[This prohibition is binding on] both men and women. - TheShulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 180:4, states that one is exempt for branding a servant. The Ramah, however, explains that it is, nevertheless, forbidden to do so.
If a person wrote - by cutting into his flesh
and did not dye, or dyed without writing by cutting [into his flesh], he is not liable - for punishment. The Rambam's expression implies that although the person is not lashed, both of these acts are forbidden.
The Minchat Chinuch (ibid.) explains that the prohibition against writing on one's flesh applies only when the imprint left by the ink or dye is permanent. If it is removable, it is not forbidden. In this manner, he justifies the acts of people who jot down notes on their flesh when they have no paper available.
[Punishment is administered] only when he writes and dyes, as [Leviticus 19:28] states: "[Do not make] a dyed inscription [on yourselves]." - The two words "dyed inscription" imply that both activities must be performed for the person to be held liable.
To whom does this apply? To the person doing the tattooing - on himself or on a colleague.
A person who is tattooed [by others], however, is not liable unless he assisted the tattooer to the extent that it is considered that he performed a deed. If he did not perform a deed, he is not lashed. -The Kessef Mishneh compares this to the prohibition against shaving the corners of one's head (Halachah 1). Based on this comparison, there are authorities who maintain that although punishment is not administered - because punishment is administered only when a person commits a deed which violates a prohibition - the person who is tattooed is still considered to have transgressed this Torah prohibition.
Commentary Halacha
A person who gouges himself for the dead - The prohibition applies only when a person makes such gouges as a sign of bereavement over the dead. Even when he gouges himself as an expression of grief for other matters, he is not liable, as stated in Halachah 16. Nevertheless, as stated in the following halachah, one is also liable for gashing or gouging oneself for idols.
is lashed, as [Leviticus 19:28] states: "Do not gouge your flesh for the dead." - Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 45) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 467) consider this prohibition to be one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
This [prohibition] applies both to priests and to Israelites. - ThoughLeviticus 21:5 specifically forbids the priests from expressing their grief in this manner, that injunction is not considered to be a separate commandment. This prohibition applies to both men and women.
A person who makes a single gouge for five dead people -Makkot 20b and the Sifra derive this concept through the exegesis of the verse from Leviticus cited above. Although he performs only a single activity, the verse teaches us that he is held responsible for each person he has in mind.
or five gouges for a single dead person is [liable for] five measures of lashes - Each separate act warrants retribution.
provided he is given a warning for each individual matter. - Note Halachah 15, which explains an instance where one is liable for five measures of lashes even though only a single warning is given, Seemingly, the same law would apply in this instance (Turei Even).
Commentary Halacha
Gashing and gouging oneself - Based on Makkot 21a, it appears that gashing is done with an instrument, and gouging with one's bare hands. Nevertheless, they
are [governed by] a single [prohibition]. - Thus, regardless of how one performs the act, if one mutilates oneself in grief over the dead, one is held liable. There are opinions (see Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 180:7), however, which allow one to beat one's flesh in grief until blood flows.
Just as the pagans would gouge their flesh in grief over their dead, they would mutilate themselves for their idols - TheKessef Mishnehexplains that this mutilation was not part of the rites used to worship the false deity - for if so, a violator would be executed - but rather a voluntary act, intended to attract the deity's attention.
as [I Kings 18:28] states - regarding the prophets of the Baal who engaged in the confrontation with the prophet Elijah at Mount Carmel:
"And they mutilated themselves according to their custom." - This implies that this was not an isolated occurrence, but rather the routine followed by the Baal's priests.
This is also forbidden by the Torah, as [Deuteronomy 14:1] states: "Do not mutilate yourselves." - This injunction is not considered to be a separate commandment, but rather a further explanation of the mitzvah stated previously.
[The difference between the two is that if one gouges himself in grief over] the dead, whether he did so with his bare hands or with an instrument, he is [liable for] lashes; - Since the verse from Deuteronomy also concludes "for the dead," it appears that both gashing and gouging are forbidden essentially as mourning rites. There is, however, an added dimension to the prohibition against gashing; doing so
for the sake of idols - In such an instance
if one uses an instrument, one is liable for lashes. - Since that is the normal practice, as the verse from Kings continues: "With their swords and lances."
If one does so with one's bare hands, one is exempt. - Doing so is, nevertheless, forbidden (Tzemach Tzedek).
Commentary Halacha
This commandment also includes [a prohibition] - In Sefer HaMitzvot(Negative Commandment 45), the Rambam explains that the interpretation which follows is an allegory, and the simple meaning of the verse is to prohibit gashing oneself in grief. Nevertheless, it is significant that the Rambam includes this "allegory" in a text which is, as he states in his introduction, "halachot, halachot." Thus, he emphasizes how important unity is to the Jewish people.
There is an important halachic dimension to the Rambam's explanation inSefer HaMitzvot. One of the principles of Torah law is that punishment is never administered for the violation of a לאו שבכללות ("a prohibition which includes within it several different injunctions;" see Hilchot Sanhedrin18:2-3). If this allegorical interpretation of the mitzvah were considered to be included in the simple meaning of the mitzvah, this principle would also apply regarding this mitzvah, and lashes might not be administered when one gashed oneself in mourning (Kessef Mishneh).
against there being two courts which follow different customs in a single city, since this can cause great strife. - This decision has been the subject of much discussion among the Rabbis, because it appears to run contrary to one of the accepted principles of halachah.
The Rabbis concluded that whenever there is a difference in opinion between Abbaye and Ravva, the halachah follows Ravva, with the exception of six specific instances (יעל קגם). In the present case, the Rambam quotes Abbaye's opinion even though Ravva differs, stating that the prohibition applies only when one follows a divergent opinion without the support of a formal Rabbinical court (Yevamot 14a). When, however, there is a Rabbinical court which advocates each of the differing opinions - e.g., the differences of opinion between the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel - there is no prohibition against following either view until the halachah is determined by the supreme Sanhedrin.
Many authorities have advanced different explanations for the Rambam's decision. The most straightforward is that of the Radbaz (Vol. V, Responsum 1384), who explains that the Rambam favored Abbaye's view because of the emphasis on unity. Furthermore, selecting it over Ravva's in this instance does not represent a break with the accepted tradition, since the difference of opinion here does not center on positions adopted by Abbaye and Ravva independently, but rather on their interpretation of Resh Lakish's statements.
[Because of the similarity in the Hebrew roots,] - The Hebrew גדד means both "gash" and "group."
the prohibition against gashing ourselves [can be interpreted] to mean: "Do not separate into various different groupings." - It must be noted that the Shulchan Aruch does not quote this halachah as law. It would appear that while many of the subsequent Rabbis appreciate the ideal of unity this halachah espouses, they felt that compelling people to conform to a uniform standard would create more strife than would result from the existence of different views.
One of the practical applications of the issues under discussion is the issue of differences between Sephardic and Ashkenazic religious practices (and similarly, the variety of different approaches that exist within these two major groupings). All of the contemporary authorities agree that it is desirable for each group to adhere to its native customs without change. This plurality of halachic perspectives is an expression - and not a negation - of the all-encompassing unity that permeates Torah Judaism. (See Ezrat Cohen, Responsum 103.)
Commentary Halacha
A person who creates a bald spot [on his head] for a dead person -Even today, we find the colloquialism, "tear out his hair in grief."
is [liable for] lashes - Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 171) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 468) consider this prohibition to be one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. It is significant that the Rambam did not list this prohibition together with the previous ones in Sefer HaMitzvot.
as [Deuteronomy 14:1] states: "Do not make a bald spot between your eyes - Menachot 37b explains that here the intent is not the area which is literally "between the eyes," but rather the center of the head.
for a dead person." When either a priest or an Israelite makes a bald spot [on his head] for a dead person, he is [liable for] only a single measure of lashes. - Although, as the Rambam quotes below, Leviticus 21:5 states specifically that a priest may not create a bald spot on his head, that verse should not be understood to be a separate commandment, but rather a further elaboration of this prohibition.
In Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 171), the Rambam elaborates on this subject, explaining that since the mitzvah cannot be derived in its entirety from the verse in Deuteronomy, the verse in Leviticus is not considered to be a second mitzvah applying to priests alone, but rather a further definition of that same command.
A person who makes four or five bald spots for a single dead person is [liable for] a measure of lashes equivalent to the number of bald spots he made, provided he received a separate warning for each bald spot - as explained in Halachah 12. If, however, he creates a single bald spot for five individuals, he is [liable for] only a single measure of lashes. In contrast, were he to gouge himself once for each of these individuals he would receive a commensurate number of measures of lashes.
There is no difference whether one created the bald spot with his hands - pulling his hair out
or with a potion - that removes the hair chemically.
If a person dipped his fingers into a potion and positioned them in five places on his head at the same time, since he created five bald spots, he is [liable for] five measures of lashes - because it is considered as if he performed five different activities.
even though only a single warning was given - That warning can be applied to each of the bald spots he created
for they were all created at the same time.
One is liable [for creating a bald spot] on any part of the head, [not only] "between the eyes" - as mentioned in the verse from Deuteronomy quoted above.
[as is inferred from Leviticus 21:5]: "Do not make a bald spot on your heads." - Makkot 20b explains that this verse is used to define the scope of the prohibition for everyone, both priests and Israelites.
What is the measure of a bald spot? An area on one's head the size of a gris - Nega'im 6:1 defines a gris as an area which encompasses 36 hairs as they stand naturally on one's head. Contemporary authorities explain that this is approximately the size of an American dime or slightly smaller than an Israeli telephone token.
which is free of hair. - Rabbenu Asher disagrees and maintains that one is liable even if he removes two hairs. Furthermore, even the removal of a single hair is forbidden. (See Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 180:9; Gilyon HaMaharsha.)
Commentary Halacha
A person who makes a bald spot on his head or gouges his flesh -for sources of grief other than a person's death - e.g.,
because his house falls or because his ship sinks at sea is exempt. -Though it is forbidden to do, punishment is not administered.
One is lashed only [if he carries out these acts] for the sake of a deceased person - as mentioned in the Biblical proof-texts
or if he gashes his flesh - with a utensil
for the sake of an idol - as explained in Halachah 13.
[The following laws apply] when a person creates a bald spot on a colleague's head, makes a gash on a colleague's flesh, or tattoos his colleague's flesh while his colleague assists him. - As explained above, the person who performs these activities is held liable. In contrast, the person to whom these acts are done is held liable only if he assists in the performance of the deed.
If they both intended to violate the prohibition, both receive lashes. -Each is held liable as if he performed the prohibition himself in its entirety.
If one violated the prohibition inadvertently and one did so intentionally, the one who performed the act intentionally is [liable for] lashes, and his colleague is exempt. - Apparently, he is not required even to bring a sacrifice. The obligation to bring a sacrifice is a sign of Divine mercy, intended to allow a person to gain atonement. Since his colleague is [liable for] lashes for the transgression, he is not given the opportunity to atone for his part in the sin merely through offering a sacrifice.
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class
• Friday, Kislev 22, 5776 · 04 December 2015
"Today's Day"Tuesday Kislev 22 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Vayeishev, Shlishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 106-107.
Tanya: I speak however (p.xiv)...May this be His will.
A practice instituted by the Rebbe: Every morning after davening - including Shabbat, festivals, Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur - say a portion of Tehillim1 as the book was apportioned for the days of the month. When Tehillim is completed with aminyan - Mourner's Kaddish is said. In a month of 29 days, say the last two portions on the 29th.
FOOTNOTES
1. See "Saying Tehillim," Kehot 1975.---------------------
• Daily Thought:
The Escape Hatch
All of us need a small hatch through which we can climb out of our little spaceship once in a while.
So we can look at ourselves from the outside and see what is good and what needs repair and what could be put to better use. So we can look beyond ourselves and see how we compare to the vast universe.
In fact, we all have just such a hatch. We don’t use it much, however. Because we are so fearful of leaving our comfortable, well-defined selves and venturing into the vast Beyond.
But if we never leave, how will we grow?
---------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment