Torah Reading
Vayikra: Leviticus 1:
1 Adonai called to Moshe and spoke to him from the tent of meeting. He said, 2 “Speak to the people of Isra’el; say to them, ‘When any of you brings an offering to Adonai, you may bring your animal offering either from the herd or from the flock. 3 If his offering is a burnt offering from the herd, he must offer a male without defect. He is to bring it to the entrance of the tent of meeting, so that it can be accepted by Adonai. 4 He is to lay his hand upon the head of the burnt offering, and it will be accepted on his behalf to make atonement for him. 5 He is to slaughter the young bull before Adonai ; and the sons of Aharon, the cohanim, are to present the blood. They are to splash the blood against all sides of the altar, which is by the entrance to the tent of meeting. 6 He is to skin the burnt offering and cut it in pieces. 7 The descendants of Aharon the cohen are to put fire on the altar and arrange wood on the fire. 8 The sons of Aharon, the cohanim, are to arrange the pieces, the head and the fat on the wood which is on the fire on the altar. 9 He is to wash the entrails and lower parts of the legs with water, and the cohen is to cause all of it to go up in smoke on the altar as a burnt offering; it is an offering made by fire, a fragrant aroma for Adonai.
10 “‘If his offering is from the flock, whether from the sheep or from the goats, for a burnt offering, he must offer a male without defect. 11 He is to slaughter it on the north side of the altar before Adonai; and the sons of Aharon, the cohanim, are to splash its blood against all sides of the altar. 12 He is to cut it into pieces, and the cohen is to arrange them with the head and fat on the wood which is on the fire on the altar. 13 He is to wash the entrails and lower parts of the legs with water; and the cohen is to offer it all and make it go up in smoke on the altar as a burnt offering; it is an offering made by fire, a fragrant aroma for Adonai.
(ii) 14 “‘If his offering to Adonai is a burnt offering of birds, he must offer a dove or a young pigeon. 15 The cohen is to bring it to the altar, snap off its head and make it go up in smoke on the altar; its blood is to be drained out on the side of the altar. 16 He is to remove the food pouch and its feathers from its neck and discard it on the pile of ashes just east of the altar. 17 He is to pull it open with a wing on each side, but without tearing it in half. The cohen is to make it go up in smoke on the altar, on the wood which is on the fire, as a burnt offering; it is an offering made by fire, a fragrant aroma for Adonai.
2:1 “‘Anyone who brings a grain offering to Adonai is to make his offering of fine flour; he is to pour olive oil on it and put frankincense on it. 2 He is to bring it to the sons of Aharon, the cohanim. The cohen is to take a handful of fine flour from it, together with its olive oil and all its frankincense, and make this reminder portion go up in smoke on the altar as an offering made by fire, a fragrant aroma for Adonai. 3 But the rest of the grain offering will belong to Aharon and his sons; it is an especially holy part of the offerings for Adonai made by fire.
4 “‘When you bring a grain offering which has been baked in the oven, it is to consist of either unleavened cakes made of fine flour mixed with olive oil or matzah spread with olive oil. 5 If your offering is a grain offering cooked on a griddle, it is to consist of unleavened fine flour mixed with olive oil; 6 you are to break it in pieces and pour olive oil on it — it is a grain offering. (iii) 7 If your offering is a grain offering cooked in a pot, it is to consist of fine flour with olive oil.
8 “‘You are to bring the grain offering prepared in any of these ways to Adonai ; it is to be presented to the cohen, and he is to bring it to the altar. 9 The cohen is to remove the reminder portion of the grain offering and make it go up in smoke on the altar as an offering made by fire, a fragrant aroma for Adonai. 10 But the rest of the grain offering will belong to Aharon and his sons; it is an especially holy part of the offerings for Adonai made by fire.
11 “‘No grain offering that you bring to Adonai is to be made with leaven, because you are not to cause any leaven or honey to go up in smoke as an offering made by fire to Adonai. 12 As an offering of firstfruits you may bring these to Adonai, but they are not to be brought up onto the altar to make a fragrant aroma. 13 You are to season every grain offering of yours with salt — do not omit from your grain offering the salt of the covenant with your God, but offer salt with all your offerings.
14 “‘If you bring a grain offering of firstfruits to Adonai, you are to bring as the grain offering from your firstfruits kernels of grain from fresh ears, dry-roasted with fire. 15 Put olive oil on it, and lay frankincense on it; it is a grain offering. 16 The cohen is to cause the reminder portion of it, its grits and olive oil, with all its frankincense, to go up in smoke; it is an offering made by fire for Adonai.
3:1 (iv) “‘If his offering is a sacrifice of peace offerings, then, if he offers before Adonai an animal from the herd, then, no matter whether it is male or female, it must be without defect. 2 He is to lay his hand on the head of his offering and slaughter it at the entrance to the tent of meeting; and the sons of Aharon, the cohanim, are to splash the blood against all sides of the altar. 3 He is to present the sacrifice of the peace offerings as an offering made by fire to Adonai; it is to consist of the fat covering the inner organs, all the fat above the inner organs, 4 the two kidneys, the fat on them near the flanks, and the covering of the liver, which he will remove with the kidneys. 5 Aharon’s sons will make it go up in smoke on the altar on top of the burnt offering which is on the wood on the fire; it is an offering made by fire, a fragrant aroma for Adonai.
6 “‘If his offering for a sacrifice of peace offerings to Adonai is from the flock, then, when he offers it, no matter whether it is male or female, it must be without defect. 7 If he brings a lamb for his offering, then he is to present it before Adonai. 8 He is to lay his hand on the head of his offering and slaughter it at the entrance to the tent of meeting, and the sons of Aharon are to splash its blood against all sides of the altar. 9 From the sacrifices made as peace offerings, he is to present Adonai with an offering made by fire; it is to consist of its fat, the entire fat tail, which he will remove close to the lower backbone, the fat covering the inner organs, all the fat above the inner organs, 10 the two kidneys, the fat on them near the flanks, and the covering of the liver, which he will remove with the kidneys. 11 The cohen will make it go up in smoke on the altar; it is food, an offering made by fire to Adonai.
12 “‘If his offering is a goat, then he is to present it before Adonai. 13 He is to lay his hand on its head and slaughter it in front of the tent of meeting, and the sons of Aharon are to splash its blood against all sides of the altar. 14 He is to present from it his offering, an offering made by fire to Adonai ; it is to consist of the fat covering the inner organs, all the fat above the inner organs, 15 the two kidneys, the fat on them near the flanks, and the covering of the liver, which he will remove with the kidneys. 16 The cohen will make them go up in smoke on the altar; it is food, an offering made by fire to be a fragrant aroma; all the fat belongs to Adonai. 17 It is to be a permanent regulation through all your generations wherever you live that you will eat neither fat nor blood.’”
4:1 (v) Adonai said to Moshe, 2 “Tell the people of Isra’el: ‘If anyone sins inadvertently against any of the mitzvot of Adonai concerning things which should not be done, if he does any one of them, 3 then, if it is the anointed cohen who sinned and thus brought guilt on the people, he is to offer Adonai a young bull without defect as a sin offering for the sin he committed. 4 He must bring the bull to the entrance of the tent of meeting before Adonai, lay his hand on the bull’s head and slaughter the bull in the presence of Adonai. 5 The anointed cohen is to take some of the bull’s blood and bring it to the tent of meeting. 6 The cohen is to dip his finger in the blood and sprinkle some of the blood seven times in the presence of Adonai in front of the curtain of the sanctuary. 7 The cohen is to put some of the blood on the horns of the altar for fragrant incense before Adonai there in the tent of meeting. All the remaining blood of the bull he is to pour out at the base of the altar for burnt offerings, which is at the entrance to the tent of meeting. 8 He is to remove from the bull for the sin offering all of its fat — the fat covering the inner organs, all the fat above the inner organs, 9 the two kidneys, the fat on them near the flanks, and the covering of the liver, which he will remove with the kidneys 10 as it is removed from an ox sacrificed as a peace offering; and the cohen is to make these parts go up in smoke on the altar for burnt offerings. 11 But the bull’s hide and all its flesh, with its head, the lower parts of its legs, its inner organs and dung — 12 in other words, the entire bull — he is to bring outside the camp to a clean place, where the ashes are emptied out. There he is to burn it on wood with fire; there, where the ashes are emptied out, it is to be burned up.
13 “‘If the entire community of Isra’el inadvertently makes a mistake, with the assembly being unaware of the matter, and they do something against any of the mitzvot of Adonai concerning things which should not be done, they are guilty. 14 When the sin they have committed becomes known, then the assembly is to offer a young bull as a sin offering and bring it before the tent of meeting. 15 The leaders of the community are to lay their hands on the bull’s head and slaughter the bull in the presence of Adonai. 16 The anointed cohen is to bring some of the bull’s blood to the tent of meeting. 17 The cohen is to dip his finger in the blood and sprinkle it seven times in the presence of Adonai in front of the curtain. 18 He is to put some of the blood on the horns of the altar before Adonai, there in the tent of meeting. All the remaining blood he is to pour out at the base of the altar for burnt offerings, which is at the entrance to the tent of meeting. 19 He is to remove all its fat and make it go up in smoke on the altar. 20 This is what he is to do with the bull — he must do the same with this bull as he does with the one for the sin offering. Thus the cohen will make atonement for them, and they will be forgiven. 21 He is to bring the bull outside the camp and burn it as he burned the first bull; it is the sin offering for the assembly.
22 “‘When a leader sins and inadvertently does something against any of the mitzvot of Adonai concerning things which should not be done, he is guilty. 23 If the sin which he committed becomes known to him, he is to bring as his offering a male goat without defect, 24 lay his hand on the goat’s head and slaughter it in the place where they slaughter the burnt offering in the presence of Adonai ; it is a sin offering. 25 The cohen is to take some of the blood of the sin offering with his finger and put it on the horns of the altar for burnt offerings. Its remaining blood he is to pour out at the base of the altar for burnt offerings. 26 All its fat he is to make go up in smoke on the altar, like the fat of the sacrifice for peace offerings; thus the cohen will make atonement for him in regard to his sin, and he will be forgiven.
(vi) 27 “‘If an individual among the people commits a sin inadvertently, doing something against any of the mitzvot of Adonai concerning things which should not be done, he is guilty. 28 If the sin he committed becomes known to him, he is to bring as his offering a female goat without defect for the sin he committed, 29 lay his hand on the head of the sin offering and slaughter the sin offering in the place of burnt offerings. 30 The cohen is to take some of its blood with his finger and put it on the horns of the altar for burnt offerings. All its remaining blood he is to pour out at the base of the altar. 31 All its fat he is to remove, as the fat is removed from the sacrifice for peace offerings; and the cohen is to make it go up in smoke on the altar as a fragrant aroma for Adonai. Thus the cohen will make atonement for him, and he will be forgiven.
32 “‘If he brings a lamb as his sin offering, he is to bring a female without defect, 33 lay his hand on the head of the sin offering and slaughter it as a sin offering in the place where they slaughter burnt offerings. 34 The cohen is to take some of the blood of the sin offering with his finger and put it on the horns of the altar for burnt offerings. All its remaining blood he is to pour out at the base of the altar. 35 All its fat he is to remove, as the fat of a lamb is removed from the sacrifice for peace offerings; and the cohen is to make it go up in smoke on the altar on top of the offerings for Adonai made by fire. Thus the cohen will make atonement for him in regard to the sin he committed, and he will be forgiven.
5:1 “‘If a person who is a witness, sworn to testify, sins by refusing to tell what he has seen or heard about the matter, he must bear the consequences. 2 If a person touches something unclean, whether the carcass of an unclean wild animal, a domestic animal or a reptile, he is guilty, even though he may not be aware that he is unclean. 3 If he touches some human uncleanness, no matter what the source of his uncleanness is, and is unaware of it, then, when he learns of it, he is guilty. 4 If someone allows to slip from his mouth an oath to do evil or to do good, and he doesn’t remember that he clearly spoke this oath, then, no matter what it was about, when he learns of it, he is guilty. 5 A person guilty of any of these things is to confess in what manner he sinned 6 and bring his guilt offering to Adonai for the sin he committed; it is to be a female from the flock, either a lamb or a goat, as a sin offering; and the cohen will make atonement for him in regard to his sin.
7 “‘If he can’t afford a lamb, he is to bring as his guilt offering for the sin he committed two doves or two young pigeons for Adonai — the one as a sin offering and the other as a burnt offering. 8 He is to bring them to the cohen, who will offer the one for a sin offering first. He is to wring its neck but not remove the head, 9 sprinkle some of the blood of the sin offering on the side of the altar and drain out the rest of the blood at the base of the altar; it is a sin offering. 10 He is to prepare the second as a burnt offering in the manner prescribed. Thus the cohen will make atonement for him in regard to the sin which he committed, and he will be forgiven.
(vii) 11 “‘But if his means are insufficient even for two doves or two young pigeons, then he is to bring as his offering for the sin he committed two quarts of fine flour for a sin offering; he is not to put any olive oil or frankincense on it, because it is a sin offering. 12 He is to bring it to the cohen, and the cohen is to take a handful of it as its reminder portion and make it go up in smoke on the altar on top of the offerings for Adonai made by fire; it is a sin offering. 13 Thus the cohen will make atonement for him in regard to the sin he committed concerning any of these things, and he will be forgiven. The rest will belong to the cohanim, as with a grain offering.’”
14 Adonai said to Moshe, 15 “If anyone acts improperly and inadvertently sins in regard to the holy things of Adonai, he is to bring as his guilt offering for Adonai a ram without defect from the flock or its equivalent in silver shekels (using the sanctuary shekel as the standard), according to your appraisal of its value; it is a guilt offering. 16 In addition, he is to make restitution for whatever he did wrong in regard to the holy thing; moreover, he is to add to that one-fifth and give it to the cohen. Then the cohen will make atonement with the ram of the guilt offering, and he will be forgiven.
17 “If someone sins by doing something against any of the mitzvot of Adonai concerning things which should not be done, he is guilty, even if he is unaware of it; and he bears the consequences of his wrongdoing. 18 He must bring a ram without defect from the flock, or its equivalent according to your appraisal, to the cohen for a guilt offering; the cohen will make atonement concerning the error which he committed, even though he was unaware of it; and he will be forgiven. 19 It is a guilt offering — he is certainly guilty before Adonai.”
20 (6:1) Adonai said to Moshe, 21 (6:2) “If someone sins and acts perversely against Adonai by dealing falsely with his neighbor in regard to a deposit or security entrusted to him, by stealing from him, by extorting him, 22 (6:3) or by dealing falsely in regard to a lost object he has found, or by swearing to a lie — if a person commits any of these sins, 23 (6:4) then, if he sinned and is guilty, he is to restore whatever it was he stole or obtained by extortion, or whatever was deposited with him, or the lost object which he found, (Maftir) 24 (6:5) or anything about which he has sworn falsely. He is to restore it in full plus an additional one-fifth; he must return it to the person who owns it, on the day when he presents his guilt offering. 25 (6:6) He is to bring as his guilt offering to Adonai a ram without defect from the flock, or its equivalent according to your appraisal, to the cohen; it is a guilt offering. 26 (6:7) Thus the cohen will make atonement for him before Adonai, and he will be forgiven in regard to whatever it was he did that made him guilty.
Parshas Zachor: Deuteronomy 25: (Maftir) 17 “Remember what ‘Amalek did to you on the road as you were coming out of Egypt, 18 how he met you by the road, attacked those in the rear, those who were exhausted and straggling behind when you were tired and weary. He did not fear God. 19 Therefore, when Adonai your God has given you rest from all your surrounding enemies in the land Adonai your God is giving you as your inheritance to possess, you are to blot out all memory of ‘Amalek from under heaven. Don’t forget!
Zachor: I
Today's Laws & Customs:
• Parshat Zachor
Samuel 15:1
Sh’mu’el said to Sha’ul, “Adonai sent me to anoint you king over his people, over Isra’el. Now listen to what Adonai has to say. 2 Here is what Adonai-Tzva’ot says: ‘I remember what ‘Amalek did to Isra’el, how they fought against Isra’el when they were coming up from Egypt. 3 Now go and attack ‘Amalek, and completely destroy everything they have. Don’t spare them, but kill men and women, children and babies, cows and sheep, camels and donkeys.’”Today's Laws & Customs:
This being the Shabbat before Purim, on which we celebrate the foiling of Haman theAmalekite's plot to destroy the Jewish people, the weekly Parshah is supplemented with theZachor reading (Deuteronomy 25:17-19) in which we are commanded to remember the evil of Amalek and to eradicate it from the face of the earth.
"Parshat Zachor" is the second of four special readings added during or immediately before the month of Adar (the other three being "Shekalim", "Parah" and "Hachodesh")
Links:
The Zachor Reading with commentary
More on Amalek
Today in Jewish History:
• First Dispute Between Two Schools of Torah Thought (1st century CE)
The schools of Shammai and Hillel for the very first time disagreed regarding a case of Jewish law. This occurred around the turn of the 1st century. In the ensuing generations, the schools argued regarding many different laws, until the law was established according to the teachings of the "House of Hillel" -- with the exception of a few instances. According to tradition, following the arrival of the Moshiach the law will follow the rulings of the House of Shammai.
All throughout, the members of the two schools maintained friendly relations with each other.
Link: Houses of Shammai & Hillel
• Sixth Lubavitcher Rebbe arrives in America (1940)
After a 12-day sea voyage, the previous Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn (1880-1950), disembarked at the New York harbor on the 9th of Adar II of 1940, following his miraculous rescue from Nazi-occupied Warsaw.
Link: Vintage film clip of the Rebbe's arrival in NY, March 19, 1940; more about Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak of Lubavitch.
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Vayikra, 7th Portion Leviticus 5:11-5:26 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class• Leviticus Chapter 5
11But if he cannot afford two turtle doves or two young doves, then he shall bring as his sacrifice for his sin one tenth of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering. He shall not put oil over it, nor shall he place frankincense upon it, for it is a sin offering. יאוְאִם־לֹא֩ תַשִּׂ֨יג יָד֜וֹ לִשְׁתֵּ֣י תֹרִ֗ים אוֹ֘ לִשְׁנֵ֣י בְנֵֽי־יוֹנָה֒ וְהֵבִ֨יא אֶת־קָרְבָּנ֜וֹ אֲשֶׁ֣ר חָטָ֗א עֲשִׂירִ֧ת הָֽאֵפָ֛ה סֹ֖לֶת לְחַטָּ֑את לֹֽא־יָשִׂ֨ים עָלֶ֜יהָ שֶׁ֗מֶן וְלֹֽא־יִתֵּ֤ן עָלֶ֨יהָ֙ לְבֹנָ֔ה כִּ֥י חַטָּ֖את הִֽוא:
for it is a sin-offering: [and since a sinner is bringing it, albeit an unintentional sinner,] it is not proper that his offering should be embellished [by oil and frankincense]. — [Men. 6a] כי חטאת הוא: ואין בדין שיהא קרבנו מהודר:
12He shall bring it to the kohen, and the kohen shall scoop out a fistful as its reminder, and cause it to [go up in] smoke on the altar, upon the fires of the Lord. It is a sin offering. יבוֶֽהֱבִיאָהּ֘ אֶל־הַכֹּהֵן֒ וְקָמַ֣ץ הַכֹּהֵ֣ן | מִ֠מֶּ֠נָּה מְל֨וֹא קֻמְצ֜וֹ אֶת־אַזְכָּֽרָתָהּ֙ וְהִקְטִ֣יר הַמִּזְבֵּ֔חָה עַ֖ל אִשֵּׁ֣י יְהֹוָ֑ה חַטָּ֖את הִֽוא:
It is a sin-offering: [This teaches us that] if the offering underwent קְמִיצָה, the scooping out procedure, and הַקְטָרָה the burning procedure, both for the specific purpose of a sin-offering, it is valid; if [these procedures were performed] not for the specific purpose of a sin-offering, however, the offering is invalid. — [Torath Kohanim 5:342] חטאת הוא: נקמצה ונקטרה לשמה כשרה, שלא לשמה פסולה:
13Thus the kohen shall make atonement for his sin that he committed in any one of these [cases], and he shall be forgiven. And it shall belong to the kohen like the meal offering. יגוְכִפֶּר֩ עָלָ֨יו הַכֹּהֵ֜ן עַל־חַטָּאת֧וֹ אֲשֶׁר־חָטָ֛א מֵֽאַחַ֥ת מֵאֵ֖לֶּה וְנִסְלַ֣ח ל֑וֹ וְהָֽיְתָ֥ה לַכֹּהֵ֖ן כַּמִּנְחָֽה:
for his sin that he committed: Heb. עַל חַטָּאתוֹ. Here, Scripture changes the expression [previously used], for in the case of a rich man or a moderately poor man [who must bring a sin-offering] (see verses 6 and 10 above), it says, מֵחַטָּאתוֹ, “from his sin,” while here, in the case of a very poor man [who can afford only a meal-offering], it says, עַל חַטָּאתוֹ [literally, “upon his sin”]. Our Rabbis (Ker. 27b) derived from here that, if a person sinned while he was rich and set aside money for a sheep or goat [as his sin-offering], and subsequently, became poor [before he purchased his sacrifice], he is to bring from part of it, two turtle-doves [or young doves, for the verse alluded to this by “from his sin-offering,” from the money designated for it. Similarly,] if a person set aside money for two turtle-doves [or two young doves, as his sin-offering and before the purchase,] he became poorer, he is to bring from part of it a tenth of an ephah [of flour as his sin-offering]. [And in the same vein,] if a [very poor] person designated money for a tenth of an ephah [of flour as his sin-offering] and became rich [before purchasing the flour], he must add to it and bring the offering of a rich man. For this reason it says here, עַל חַטָּאתוֹ [as if to say, “in addition to his sin-offering”]. על חטאתו אשר חטא: כאן שנה הכתוב, שהרי בעשירות ובדלות נאמר (פסוק י) מחטאתו, וכאן בדלי דלות נאמר על חטאתו, דקדקו רבותינו (כריתות כז ב) מכאן, שאם חטא כשהוא עשיר והפריש מעות לכשבה או שעירה והעני, יביא ממקצתן שתי תורים. הפריש מעות לשתי תורים והעני יביא ממקצתן עשירית האיפה [לכך נאמר מחטאתו]. הפריש מעות לעשירית האיפה והעשיר, יוסיף עליהן ויביא קרבן עשיר, לכך נאמר כאן על חטאתו:
in any one of these [cases]: [literally, “from one from these,” thus meaning:] From one of these three [forms of] atonement described in the passage, namely, that of the rich, that of the poor, or that of the very poor. Now what is Scripture teaching us? [Since the Torah gives the three options for offerings, animals, birds, and flour, without specifying who may bring which option,] one might think that severe transgressions [namely contaminaing the sanctuary and its holy things, for which the punishment is excision,] must [be atoned for by bringing the “largest” category of sacrifices, namely] sheep or goats, moderate transgressions [namely the oath of the witnesses, not punishable by excision, but which the Torah likens unintentional sins to intentional sins] must be atoned by a “moderate” offering, namely] birds, and the lightest of transgressions [namely the oath of pronouncement, which has neither stringency, must be atoned for by the lightest offerings, namely,] one- tenth of an ephah [of flour]. Thus, Scripture comes to teach us [otherwise, by saying], מֵאַחַת מֵאֵלֶּה literally, “from one from these,” to liken light sins to grave sins regarding a sheep or a goat if he can afford it, and [likewise, to liken] grave sins to light sins regarding the one-tenth of an ephah [of flour], if [the sinner is] very poor. — [Torath Kohanim 5:343] [Although the Torah states in verse 7, “But if he cannot afford a sheep …,” and in verse 11, “But if he cannot afford two turtle-doves or two young doves …,” the text וְאִם לֹא תַגִּיעַ יָדוֹ דֵּי שֶׂה could be interpreted: “If his hand did not reach the treachery to necessitate the bringing of a sheep,” and וְאִם לֹא תַשִּׂיג יָדוֹ לִשְׁתֵּי תֹרִים “If his hand did not reach the treachery to necessitate the bringing of two turtle-doves or two young doves” (Mizrachi, Sifthei Chachamim).] \b and it shall belong to the \b0kohen like the meal-offering Heb. וְהָיְתָה לַכֹּהֵן כַּמִּנְחָה. [This comes] to teach [us] that the remaining portion of the meal-offering of a sinner is to be eaten [by the kohen]: this is according to its plain meaning. Our Rabbis, (Torath Kohanim 5:344; Men . 73b), however, explained [the passage to mean]: “And if it is for a kohen, it shall be like the meal-offering.” [That is to say: If this sinner is an ordinary Israelite, the remaining portion of the meal-offering is eaten by the kohen , as explained. However,] if this sinner is a kohen, the offering must be for him like any other meal-offering brought voluntarily by a kohen, which is included in “[Every meal-offering of a kohen shall be] completely [burnt]: it shall not be eaten” (Lev. 6:16). מאחת מאלה: מאחת משלש כפרות האמורות בענין, או בעשירות או בדלות או בדלי דלות. ומה תלמוד לומר, שיכול החמורין שבהם יהיו בכשבה או שעירה, והקלין יהיו בעוף, והקלין שבקלין יהיו בעשירית האיפה, תלמוד לומר מאחת מאלה, להשוות קלין לחמורין לכשבה ושעירה אם השיגה ידו, ואת החמורין לקלין לעשירית האיפה בדלי דלות:
14And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, ידוַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר:
15If a person commits a betrayal and trespasses unintentionally against [one] of the things sacred to the Lord, he shall bring as his guilt offering to the Lord an unblemished ram from the flock with a value of silver shekels, in accordance with the shekel of the Sanctuary for a guilt offering. טונֶ֚פֶשׁ כִּֽי־תִמְעֹ֣ל מַעַ֔ל וְחָֽטְאָה֙ בִּשְׁגָגָ֔ה מִקָּדְשֵׁ֖י יְהֹוָ֑ה וְהֵבִיא֩ אֶת־אֲשָׁמ֨וֹ לַֽיהֹוָ֜ה אַ֧יִל תָּמִ֣ים מִן־הַצֹּ֗אן בְּעֶרְכְּךָ֛ כֶּֽסֶף־שְׁקָלִ֥ים בְּשֶֽׁקֶל־הַקֹּ֖דֶשׁ לְאָשָֽׁם:
If [a person] commits a betrayal: Heb. כִּי תִמְעַל מַעַל. [The term] מְעִילָה everywhere [in Scripture], denotes nothing but a change [of status or position. Hence, here, the person changed the particular article’s status from sacred to mundane, through his misappropriation]. So it says: “And they betrayed (וַיִּמְעַלוּ) the God of their fathers, and they strayed after the gods of the peoples of the land” (I Chron. 5:25). Similarly, Scripture states regarding the סוֹטָה [a woman suspected of adultery] “and she commits a betrayal against him (וּמָעֲלָה בוֹ מָעַל).” (Num. 5:12). - [Torath Kohanim] [In both instances, betrayal represents a change of allegiance.] כי תמעל מעל: אין מעילה בכל מקום אלא שינוי, וכן הוא אומר (דה"א ה כה) וימעלו באלהי אבותיהם ויזנו אחרי אלהי עמי הארץ, וכן הוא אומר בסוטה (במדבר ה יב) ומעלה בו מעל:
and trespasses unintentionally against [one] of the things sacred to the Lord: meaning that he used sacred articles for his own benefit. Now, where [in Scripture] was one warned [against misappropriating sacred articles]? The word חטא is stated here in our verse, and later on (Lev. 22:9), regarding terumah [the kohen 's due from produce], [the word] חטא is stated: “that they do not bear a sin (חֵטְא) because of it”; thus, just as there [in the case of terumah], Scripture warns, so too, here, Scripture warns. But [if we are using the word חטא to link these two passages, the following could be suggested]: Just as there [in the case of terumah], He warned only one who eats [it], so too, here, Scripture is warning only one who eats [sacred food, but not for merely having benefit from a sacred article]. Therefore, Scripture says: תִמְעֹל מַעַל, the additional [word coming to include the general case of one deriving benefit from sacred articles]. — [See Torath Kohanim 11:347, Me’ilah 18b, Rashi on San. 84a, Makkoth 13a] וחטאה בשגגה מקדשי ה': שנהנה מן ההקדש. והיכן הוזהר, נאמר כאן חטא ונאמר להלן חטא בתרומה (ויקרא כב ט) ולא ישאו עליו חטא, מה להלן הזהיר, אף כאן הזהיר. אי מה להלן לא הזהיר אלא על האוכל, אף כאן לא הזהיר אלא על האוכל, תלמוד לומר תמעול מעל, ריבה:
of the things sacred to the Lord: Things specifically designated for the Name [of God]. Thus, קֳדָשִׁים קַלִּים [sacrifices with a lesser degree of holiness] are excluded. [Also, portions of sacrifices which may be eaten by the kohen, and are therefore not considered exclusively “designated to God,” are excluded]. — [Torath Kohanim 5:349] מקדשי ה': המיוחדים לשם, יצאו קדשים קלים:
ram: Heb. אַיִל, a term denoting strength, like “and the mighty (אֵילֵי) of the land, he took away” (Ezek. 17:13). Here, too, it means “strong,” [namely a ram] in its second year. — [Torath Kohanim 5: 350] איל: לשון קשה, כמו (יחזקאל יז יג) ואת אילי הארץ לקח, אף כאן קשה, בן שתי שנים:
with a value of silver shekels: namely, it must be worth two selaim. — [see Ker. 10b] [Sela in the Mishnah is the shekel of the Torah, and the minimum of שְׁקָלִים is two.] בערכך כסף שקלים: שיהא שוה שתי סלעים:
16And what he has trespassed against the holy thing he shall pay, and he shall add one fifth of its value to it, and he shall give it to the kohen. The kohen shall then make atonement for him through the ram of the guilt offering, and he shall be forgiven. טזוְאֵ֣ת אֲשֶׁר֩ חָטָ֨א מִן־הַקֹּ֜דֶשׁ יְשַׁלֵּ֗ם וְאֶת־חֲמִֽישִׁתוֹ֙ יוֹסֵ֣ף עָלָ֔יו וְנָתַ֥ן אֹת֖וֹ לַכֹּהֵ֑ן וְהַכֹּהֵ֗ן יְכַפֵּ֥ר עָלָ֛יו בְּאֵ֥יל הָֽאָשָׁ֖ם וְנִסְלַ֥ח לֽוֹ:
And what he has trespassed against the holy thing he shall pay: the principal and an [additional] fifth to the Holy Temple [treasury]. ואת אשר חטא מן הקדש ישלם: קרן וחומש להקדש:
17If a person sins and commits one of the commandments of the Lord which may not be committed, but he does not know, he is guilty, and he shall bear his transgression. יזוְאִם־נֶ֨פֶשׁ֙ כִּ֣י תֶֽחֱטָ֔א וְעָֽשְׂתָ֗ה אַחַת֙ מִכָּל־מִצְוֹ֣ת יְהֹוָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֖ר לֹ֣א תֵֽעָשֶׂ֑ינָה וְלֹֽא־יָדַ֥ע וְאָשֵׁ֖ם וְנָשָׂ֥א עֲוֹנֽוֹ:
but he does not know, he is guilty and…He shall bring: This section deals with one who has a doubt regarding a prohibition punishable by excision, whereby he does not know whether he has transgressed it [the prohibition] or not. For instance, [a piece of] prohibited animal fat (חֵלֶב) and [a piece of] permissible animal fat (שׁוּמָן) are placed before someone, and, thinking that both were permissible [fats], he ate one. Then, people told him, “One of those pieces was חֵלֶב, prohibited fat!” Now, the person did not know whether he had eaten the one piece that was חֵלֶב In this case, he must bring a sacrifice called an אָשָׁם תָלוּי [literally, a “pending guilt-offering” (Ker. 17b), which protects him [against punishment] so long as he does not know that he had indeed sinned. However, if afterwards, he did find out [that he had indeed sinned], then he must bring a sin-offering. — [Ker. 26b, Torath Kohanim 5:367] ולא ידע ואשם והביא: הענין הזה מדבר במי שבא ספק כרת לידו ולא ידע אם עבר עליו אם לאו, כגון חלב ושומן לפניו, וכסבור ששתיהן היתר, ואכל את האחת. אמרו לו אחת של חלב היתה, ולא ידע אם זו של חלב אכל, הרי זה מביא אשם תלוי ומגין עליו כל זמן שלא נודע לו שודאי חטא, ואם נודע לו לאחר זמן יביא חטאת:
but he does not know, he is guilty, and he shall bear his transgression: Rabbi Yose the Galilean says: “Here, Scripture punishes someone who did not [even] know [whether he had sinned or not]; how much more so will Scripture punish someone who does indeed know [that he has sinned]!” Rabbi Yose says: “If you wish to know the reward of the righteous, go forth and learn it from Adam, the first man. He was given only [one] negative commandment, and he transgressed it. Look how many deaths were decreed upon him and his descendants! [Before his sin, Adam was to have lived forever. Since he sinned, however, he and all mankind were punished with death.] Now, which measure is greater-the [bestowing of] goodness, or [the meting out of] punishment? One must say that the measure of goodness [is greater. See Rashi on Makk. 5b, Rivan on Makk. 23a]. So [if, through] the measure of punishment, which is less [than that of goodness] look how many deaths were decreed upon himself and his descendants, [through] the measure of goodness, which is greater, if someone [who does the opposite of Adam, i.e.,] refrains from eating [forbidden foods, like, for instance] פִּגּוּל [a sacrifice rendered invalid by improper intentions at the time of the performance of the ritual] or נוֹתָר [a portion of a sacrifice left over after its prescribed time], or if he fasts on Yom Kippur, then how much more so will he earn merit for himself, for his descendants, and for his descendants’ descendants, until the very end of all generations?!” Rabbi Akiva says: “Scripture states (Deut. 17:6 and 19:15), ‘By the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses…’ Now, if the testimony can be established through two witnesses, why does Scripture specify: ‘Or three witnesses’? But to include the third one, to be stringent with him, [as if he had accomplished something with his testomony] and to make his sentence just like these [two witnesses] with regard to punishment for plotting [if the witnesses are dicovered to have plotted against the defendant] (Deut. 19:16-21). [This translation follows the Reggio edition of Rashi, which reads עֹנֶשׁ זְמָמָה All other editions read עֹנֶשׁ וַהִזָמָה, punishment and refutation , which contemporary scholars have difficulty in clarifying. See Chavel, Leket Bahir, Yosef Hallel.] Now, if Scripture punishes someone who is an accessory to those who commit a sin, just like those who commit the sin, how much more so does Scripture bestow ample reward upon someone who is an accessory to those who fulfill a commandment, like those who fulfill a commandment!” Rabbi Eleazar Ben Azariah says: “‘When you reap your harvest in your field and forget a sheaf in the field…,” Scripture continues, ‘so that [the Lord your God] will bless you…’ (Deut. 24: 19). Here, Scripture has affixed a blessing for someone to whom a meritorious deed came without his knowing it. We must conclude from this, that if one had a sela [a coin] bound in the borders of his garment, and it falls out, and a poor man finds this coin and buys provisions with it, the Holy One, Blessed is He, affixes a blessing to him." - [Torath Kohanim 5:363] ולא ידע ואשם ונשא עונו: ר' יוסי הגלילי אומר הרי הכתוב ענש את מי שלא ידע, על אחת כמה וכמה שיעניש את שידע. רבי יוסי אומר אם נפשך לידע מתן שכרן של צדיקים, צא ולמד מאדם הראשון, שלא נצטוה אלא על מצות לא תעשה ועבר עליה, ראה כמה מיתות נקנסו עליו ולדורותיו. וכי איזו מדה מרובה, של טובה או של פורענות, הוי אומר מדה טובה. אם מדת פורענות המעוטה ראה כמה מיתות נקנסו לו ולדורותיו, מדה טובה המרובה, היושב לו מן הפיגולין והנותרות והמתענה ביום הכיפורים, על אחת כמה וכמה שיזכה לו ולדורותיו ולדורות דורותיו עד סוף כל הדורות. רבי עקיבא אומר הרי הוא אומר (דברים יז ו) על פי שנים עדים או שלשה עדים וגו', אם מתקיימת העדות בשנים, למה פרט לך הכתוב שלשה, אלא להביא שלישי להחמיר עליו ולעשות דינו כיוצא באלו לענין עונש והזמה. אם כך ענש הכתוב לנטפל לעוברי עבירה כעוברי עבירה, על אחת כמה וכמה שישלם שכר טוב לנטפל לעושי מצוה כעושי מצוה. רבי אלעזר בן עזריה אומר כי תקצור קצירך בשדך ושכחת עומר בשדה (דברים כד יט), הרי הוא אומר (דברים כד יט) למען יברכך וגו', קבע הכתוב ברכה למי שבאת על ידו מצוה בלא ידע, אמור מעתה היתה סלע צרורה בכנפיו ונפלה הימנו ומצאה העני ונתפרנס בה, הרי הקב"ה קובע לו ברכה:
18He shall bring an unblemished ram from the flock, with the value for a guilt offering, to the kohen. The kohen shall then make atonement for his unintentional sin which he committed and did not know, and he shall be forgiven. יחוְ֠הֵבִ֠יא אַ֣יִל תָּמִ֧ים מִן־הַצֹּ֛אן בְּעֶרְכְּךָ֥ לְאָשָׁ֖ם אֶל־הַכֹּהֵ֑ן וְכִפֶּר֩ עָלָ֨יו הַכֹּהֵ֜ן עַ֣ל שִֽׁגְגָת֧וֹ אֲשֶׁר־שָׁגָ֛ג וְה֥וּא לֹֽא־יָדַ֖ע וְנִסְלַ֥ח לֽוֹ:
with the value for a guilt-offering: Heb. בְּעֶרְכְּ, i. e., with the value stated above (see Rashi, verse 15) [namely, two selaim of silver]. — [Torath Kohanim 5: 364] בערכך לאשם: בערך האמור למעלה (פסוק טו):
for his unintentional sin which he committed and did not know: But if, afterwards, he did come to know [of his sin], he no longer has atonement with this guilt-offering, [and his sin remains unatoned] until he brings a sin-offering. To what can this be compared? To the עֶגְלָה עִרוּפָה [a calf whose neck is broken as an atonement for a city, outside whose precincts a human corpse is found, and the murderer is unknown]; if the neck [of this עֶגְלָה עִרוּפָה has already been broken, and subsequently, the murderer is found, the latter must be put to death [even though, like in the case of our verse, a sacrifice has already been offered]. — [Torath Kohanim 5:367] אשר שגג והוא לא ידע: הא אם ידע לאחר זמן, לא נתכפר לו באשם זה עד שיביא חטאת. הא למה זה דומה לעגלה ערופה שנתערפה ואחר כך נמצא ההורג, הרי זה יהרג:
19It is a guilt offering he has incurred guilt before the Lord. יטאָשָׁ֖ם ה֑וּא אָשֹׁ֥ם אָשַׁ֖ם לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
It is a guilt-offering he has incurred guilt: Heb. אָשַׁם אָשָׁם הוּא אָשֹׁם. [In this verse, the root אשׁם, “guilt,” appears three times.] The first is vocalized completely with kematzim [i.e., a kamatz under the first syllable and a kamatz under the second,] because it is a noun [meaning, “a guilt-offering”]. The last אָשַׁם is vocalized half with a kamatz and half with a patach [i.e., a kamatz under the first syllable and a patach under the second] because it is a verb form [meaning, “he has incurred guilt”]. If you ask that this whole verse is superfluous, [I will tell you that] it has already been expounded on in Torath Kohanim (5:368), [as follows]: The double expression אָשֹׁם אָשַׁם comes to include the case of אִשַׁם שִׁפְחָה חִרוּפָה [the guilt-offering to atone for one who violates a betrothed handmaid (seeLev. 19:20)], that it also consist of a ram (in the second year) [worth two selaim of silver] [This is the correct version because a ram is always a sheep in the second year (Sefer Hazikkaron). One might think that I am to include [in this law of two selaim] the guilt-offering of a Nazarite and of a person stricken with tzara’ath. Scripture, therefore, says הוּא [meaning: It is a guilt-offering worth two selaim, but not others which are not rams but lambs]. — [Torath Kohanim 5:369] אשם הוא אשם אשם: הראשון כולו קמץ שהוא שם דבר, והאחרון חציו קמץ וחציו פתח שהוא לשון פעל. ואם תאמר מקרא שלא לצורך הוא, כבר נדרש הוא בתורת כהנים. אשם אשם להביא אשם שפחה חרופה שיהא איל (בן שתי שנים) שוה שתי סלעים. יכול שאני מרבה אשם נזיר ואשם מצורע, תלמוד לומר הוא:
20And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, כוַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר:
21If a person sins, betraying the Lord by falsely denying to his fellow concerning a deposit, or money given in hand, or an object taken by robbery, or he withheld funds from his fellow, כאנֶ֚פֶשׁ כִּ֣י תֶֽחֱטָ֔א וּמָֽעֲלָ֥ה מַ֖עַל בַּֽיהֹוָ֑ה וְכִחֵ֨שׁ בַּֽעֲמִית֜וֹ בְּפִקָּד֗וֹן אֽוֹ־בִתְשׂ֤וּמֶת יָד֙ א֣וֹ בְגָזֵ֔ל א֖וֹ עָשַׁ֥ק אֶת־עֲמִיתֽוֹ:
If a person sins, [betraying the Lord]: [In verse 15 above, the verse is referring to misappropriating sacred articles. Thus, the sin is against God. However, here in our verse, Scripture says “betraying the Lord,” and then continues to discuss an item left by one’s fellow as a deposit. So what is the relevance of the verse saying, “betraying the Lord” ?] Rabbi Akiva said: What is Scripture teaching us, when it says, “betraying the Lord” ? Since every lender and borrower, buyer and seller, perform their transactions with witnesses and by documentation, therefore, if one denies a monetary claim, he would find himself contradicting witnesses and a document. However, when someone deposits an article with his fellow, he does not want anyone to know about it, except the Third Party between them [namely, God]. Therefore, when he denies, he is denying against the Third Party between them. — [Torath Kohanim 5:372] נפש כי תחטא: אמר ר' עקיבא מה תלמוד לומר ומעלה מעל בה', לפי שכל המלוה והלוה והנושא והנותן אינו עושה אלא בעדים ובשטר, לפיכך בזמן שהוא מכחש מכחש בעדים ובשטר, אבל המפקיד אצל חבירו אינו רוצה שתדע בו נשמה אלא שלישי שביניהם, לפיכך כשהוא מכחש, מכחש בשלישי שביניהם:
money given in hand: that he placed money into his hand, to do business with it or [as] a loan. — [Torath Kohanim 5:373] בתשומת יד: ששם בידו ממון להתעסק או במלוה:
or an article taken by robbery: that he robbed him of something. או בגזל: שגזל מידו כלום:
he withheld funds: [this refers to withholding the wages of] a hired worker. - [Torath Kohanim 5:373] או עשק: הוא שכר שכיר:
22or he found a lost article and he denied it and swore falsely regarding any one of all these cases whereby a man may sin, כבאֽוֹ־מָצָ֧א אֲבֵדָ֛ה וְכִ֥חֶשׁ בָּ֖הּ וְנִשְׁבַּ֣ע עַל־שָׁ֑קֶר עַל־אַחַ֗ת מִכֹּ֛ל אֲשֶׁר־יַֽעֲשֶׂ֥ה הָֽאָדָ֖ם לַֽחֲטֹ֥א בָהֵֽנָּה:
and he denied it: [meaning] that He denies [a claim] regarding any one of all these cases whereby a man may sin and swear falsely in denial of a monetary claim. וכחש בה: שכפר על אחת מכל אלה אשר יעשה האדם לחטוא ולהשבע על שקר לכפירת ממון:
23and it shall be, when he has sinned and is guilty, that he shall return the article which he had robbed, or the funds which he had withheld, or the item which had been deposited with him, or the article which he had found; כגוְהָיָה֘ כִּי־יֶֽחֱטָ֣א וְאָשֵׁם֒ וְהֵשִׁ֨יב אֶת־הַגְּזֵלָ֜ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר גָּזָ֗ל א֤וֹ אֶת־הָע֨שֶׁק֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר עָשָׁ֔ק א֚וֹ אֶת־הַפִּקָּד֔וֹן אֲשֶׁ֥ר הָפְקַ֖ד אִתּ֑וֹ א֥וֹ אֶת־הָֽאֲבֵדָ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר מָצָֽא:
when he has sinned and is guilty: When he himself recognizes that he must repent, knowing and acknowledging that he has sinned, and is guilty. [Some editions: and he intends to confess that he has sinned.] כי יחטא ואשם: כשיכיר בעצמו לשוב בתשובה, ולדעת ולהתודות כי חטא ואשם:
24or anything else, regarding which he had sworn falsely, he shall pay it with its principal, adding its fifths to it. He shall give it to its rightful owner on the day [he repents for] his guilt. כדאוֹ מִכֹּ֞ל אֲשֶׁר־יִשָּׁבַ֣ע עָלָיו֘ לַשֶּׁ֒קֶר֒ וְשִׁלַּ֤ם אֹתוֹ֙ בְּרֹאשׁ֔וֹ וַֽחֲמִֽשִׁתָ֖יו יֹסֵ֣ף עָלָ֑יו לַֽאֲשֶׁ֨ר ה֥וּא ל֛וֹ יִתְּנֶ֖נּוּ בְּי֥וֹם אַשְׁמָתֽוֹ:
the principal: Heb. בְּרֹאשׁוֹ This is the principal, which is the “main” (רֹאשׁ) money [from which profit is generated]. — [B.K. 110a] בראשו: הוא הקרן ראש הממון:
and its fifths: Heb. וַחִמִשִׁתָיו, [in the plural form.] The Torah includes many fifths of one principal sum. [What case is referred to here?] If a person [had paid back a principal to its rightful owner, but] denies that he owes the extra fifth [claiming, for example, that he had already paid this fifth] and swears later confesses [that he still owes this extra fifth-part], then [in addition to having to pay this fifth of the original principal sum,] he must also pay a fifth of this fifth- [since the fifth of the original principal reverts to becoming a small “principal” in its own right]. And so he continues to add [if he continues to deny, swear falsely and then admit], until the most recent fifth-part is worth less than one perutah. — [Torath Kohanim 5:387] וחמשתיו: רבתה תורה חמשיות הרבה לקרן אחת, שאם כפר בחומש ונשבע והודה, חוזר ומביא חומש על אותו חומש. וכן מוסיף והולך עד שיתמעט הקרן שנשבע לו פחות משוה פרוטה:
to its rightful owner: [lit., to whom it belongs, meaning:] The person to whom the money [rightfully] belongs. לאשר הוא לו: למי שהממון שלו:
25He shall then bring his guilt offering to the Lord: an unblemished ram from the flock with the [same] value, for a guilt offering, to the kohen. כהוְאֶת־אֲשָׁמ֥וֹ יָבִ֖יא לַֽיהֹוָ֑ה אַ֣יִל תָּמִ֧ים מִן־הַצֹּ֛אן בְּעֶרְכְּךָ֥ לְאָשָׁ֖ם אֶל־הַכֹּהֵֽן:
26And the kohen shall make atonement for him before the Lord, and he shall be forgiven for any one of all [cases] whereby one may commit [a sin], incurring guilt through it. כווְכִפֶּ֨ר עָלָ֧יו הַכֹּהֵ֛ן לִפְנֵ֥י יְהֹוָ֖ה וְנִסְלַ֣ח ל֑וֹ עַל־אַחַ֛ת מִכֹּ֥ל אֲשֶֽׁר־יַֽעֲשֶׂ֖ה לְאַשְׁמָ֥ה בָֽהּ
Daily Tehillim: Chapters 49 - 54
• Hebrew text
• English text•
• Lessons in Tanya• English Text
• Hebrew text
• English text•
Chapter 49
This psalm is a strong message and inspiration for all, rich and poor alike, rebuking man for transgressions which, owing to habit, he no longer considers sinful; yet, these sins incriminate man on the Day of Judgement. The psalm speaks specifically to the wealthy, who rely not on God but on their wealth.
1. For the Conductor, by the sons of Korach, a psalm.
2. Hear this, all you peoples; listen, all you inhabitants of the world;
3. sons of common folk and sons of nobility, rich and poor alike.
4. My mouth speaks wisdom, and the thoughts of my heart are understanding.
5. I incline my ear to the parable; I will unravel my riddle upon the harp.
6. Why am I afraid in times of trouble? [Because] the sins I trod upon surround me.
7. There are those who rely on their wealth, who boast of their great riches.
8. Yet a man cannot redeem his brother, nor pay his ransom to God.
9. The redemption of their soul is too costly, and forever unattainable.
10. Can one live forever, never to see the grave?
11. Though he sees that wise men die, that the fool and the senseless both perish, leaving their wealth to others-
12. [nevertheless,] in their inner thoughts their houses will last forever, their dwellings for generation after generation; they have proclaimed their names throughout the lands.
13. But man will not repose in glory; he is likened to the silenced animals.
14. This is their way-their folly remains with them, and their descendants approve of their talk, Selah.
15. Like sheep, they are destined for the grave; death shall be their shepherd, and the upright will dominate them at morning; their form will rot in the grave, away from its abode.
16. But God will redeem my soul from the hands of the grave, for He will take me, Selah.
17. Do not fear when a man grows rich, when the glory of his house is increased;
18. for when he dies he will take nothing, his glory will not descend after him.
19. For he [alone] praises himself in his lifetime; but [all] will praise you if you better yourself.
20. He will come to the generation of his forefathers; they shall not see light for all eternity.
21. Man [can live] in glory but does not understand; he is likened to the silenced animals.
Chapter 50
This psalm speaks of many ethics and morals. The psalmist rebukes those who fail to repent humbly and modestly. He also admonishes those who do not practice that which they study, and merely appear to be righteous; they sin and cause others to sin.
1. A psalm by Asaph. Almighty God, the Lord, spoke and called to the earth, from the rising of the sun to its setting.
2. Out of Zion, the place of perfect beauty, God appeared.
3. Our God will come and not be silent; a fire will consume before Him, His surroundings are furiously turbulent.
4. He will call to the heavens above, and to the earth, to avenge His people:
5. "Gather to Me My pious ones, those who made a covenant with me over a sacrifice.”
6. Then the heavens declared His righteousness, for God is Judge forever.
7. Listen, my people, and I will speak; O Israel, and I will testify against you-I am God your God.
8. Not for [the lack of] your sacrifices will I rebuke you, nor for [the lack of] your burnt offerings which ought to be continually before Me.
9. I do not take oxen from your house, nor goats from your pens;
10. for every beast of the forest is Mine, the cattle of a thousand mountains.
11. I know every bird of the mountains, and the crawling creatures of the field are in My possession.
12. Were I hungry, I would not tell you, for the world and everything in it is mine.
13. Do I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats?
14. Offer confession as a sacrifice to God, and fulfill your vows to the Most High,
15. and call to Me on the day of distress; I will free you, and you will honor Me.
16. But to the wicked, God said, "What does it help you to discuss My laws, and bear My covenant upon your lips?
17. For you hate discipline, and throw My words behind you.
18. When you see a thief you run with him, and your lot is with adulterers.
19. You sent forth your mouth for evil, and attach your tongue to deceit.
20. You sit down to talk against your brother; your mother's son you defame.
21. You have done these things and I kept silent, so you imagine that I am like you-[but] I will rebuke you and lay it clearly before your eyes.
22. Understand this now, you who forget God, lest I tear you apart and there be none to save you.
23. He who offers a sacrifice of confession honors Me; and to him who sets right his way, I will show the deliverance of God."
Chapter 51
This psalm speaks of when Nathan the prophet went to David's palace, and rebuked him for his sin with Bathsheba. David then secluded himself with God, offering awe-inspiring prayers and begging forgiveness. Every person should recite this psalm for his sins and transgressions.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David,
2. when Nathan the prophet came to him after he had gone to Bathsheba.
3. Be gracious to me, O God, in keeping with Your kindness; in accordance with Your abounding compassion, erase my transgressions.
4. Cleanse me thoroughly of my wrongdoing, and purify me of my sin.
5. For I acknowledge my transgressions, and my sin is always before me.
6. Against You alone have I sinned, and done that which is evil in Your eyes; [forgive me] so that You will be justified in Your verdict, vindicated in Your judgment.
7. Indeed, I was begotten in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.
8. Indeed, You desire truth in the innermost parts; teach me the wisdom of concealed things.
9. Purge me with hyssop and I shall be pure; cleanse me and I shall be whiter than snow.
10. Let me hear [tidings of] joy and gladness; then the bones which You have shattered will rejoice.
11. Hide Your face from my sins, and erase all my trespasses.
12. Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew within me an upright spirit.
13. Do not cast me out of Your presence, and do not take Your Spirit of Holiness away from me.
14. Restore to me the joy of Your deliverance, and uphold me with a spirit of magnanimity.
15. I will teach transgressors Your ways, and sinners will return to You.
16. Save me from bloodguilt, O God, God of my deliverance; my tongue will sing Your righteousness.
17. My Lord, open my lips, and my mouth shall declare Your praise.
18. For You do not desire that I bring sacrifices, nor do You wish burnt offerings.
19. The offering [desirable] to God is a contrite spirit; a contrite and broken heart, God, You do not disdain.
20. In Your goodwill, bestow goodness upon Zion; rebuild the walls of Jerusalem.
21. Then will You desire sacrifices [offered in] righteousness, olah and other burnt offerings; then they will offer bullocks upon Your altar.
Chapter 52
David laments his suffering at the hands of Doeg, and speaks of Doeg's boasts about the evil he committed. David asks, "What does he think? Does he consider the doing of evil a mark of strength?" David also curses Doeg and those like him.
1. For the Conductor, a maskil by David,
2. when Doeg the Edomite came and informed Saul, saying to him, "David has come to the house of Achimelech.”
3. Why do you boast with evil, O mighty one? God's kindness is all day long.
4. Your tongue devises treachery; like a sharpened razor it works deceit.
5. You love evil more than good, falsehood more than speaking righteousness, Selah.
6. You love all devouring words, a deceitful tongue.
7. God will likewise shatter you forever; He will excise and pluck you from the tent, and uproot you from the land of the living forever.
8. The righteous will see it and be awed, and they will laugh at him:
9. "Here is the man who did not make God his stronghold, but trusted in his great wealth, and drew strength from his treachery.”
10. But I am like a fresh olive tree in the house of God; I trust in God's kindness forever and ever.
11. I will thank you forever for what You have done; I will hope in Your Name, for You are good to Your pious ones.
Chapter 53
This psalm speaks of when Titus pierced the curtain of the Holy of Holies with his sword, and thought he had killed "himself" (a euphemism for God).
1. For the Conductor, on the machalat,1 a mas-kil2 by David.
2. The fool says in his heart, "There is no God!" They have acted corruptly and committed abominable deeds; not one does good.
3. God looked down from heaven upon mankind, to see if there was any man of intelligence who searches for God.
4. But they all regressed together; they have become corrupt; there is none who does good, not even one.
5. Indeed, the evildoers who devour My people as they devour bread, who do not call upon God, will come to realize.
6. There they will be seized with fright, a fright such as never was; for God scatters the bones of those encamped against you. You shamed them, for God rejected them.
7. O that out of Zion would come Israel's deliverance! When God returns the captivity of His people, Jacob will exult, Israel will rejoice.
FOOTNOTES
1.A musical instrument (Rashi).
2.A psalm intended to enlighten and impart knowledge(Metzudot).
Chapter 54
A prayer to God asking that in His might He save all who hope for His kindness. Read, and you will discover an awe-inspiring and wondrous prayer that should be said by all in the appropriate time.
1. For the Conductor, with instrumental music, a maskil by David,
2. when the Ziphites came and said to Saul, "Behold, David is hiding among us!”
3. O God, deliver me by Your Name, and vindicate me by Your might.
4. God, hear my prayer, listen to the words of my mouth.
5. For strangers have risen against me, and ruthless men have sought my soul; they are not mindful of God, Selah.
6. Behold, God is my helper; my Lord is with those who support my soul.
7. He will repay the evil of my watchful enemies; destroy them by Your truth.
8. With a free-will offering I will sacrifice to You; I will offer thanks to Your Name, O Lord, for it is good.
9. For He has saved me from every trouble, and my eye has seen [the downfall of] my enemy.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 36• Lessons in Tanya• English Text
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Shabbat, Adar II 9, 5776 · March 19, 2016
• Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 36
• ולזה נתן הקדוש ברוך הוא לישראל את התורה, שנקראת עוז וכח
For this purpose the Holy One, blessed be He, gave Israel the Torah which is called “might” and “strength” for it gives us strength to receive such revelation, without being overwhelmed by it,
וכמאמר רז״ל, שהקדוש ברוך הוא נותן כח בצדיקים לקבל שכרם לעתיד לבא
and as our Rabbis say,1 that G‑d gives tzaddikim the strength to receive their reward in the World to Come,
Why is this “strength” necessary?
שלא יתבטלו במציאות ממש באור ה׳ הנגלה לעתיד בלי שום לבוש
so that their existence should not dissolve within the divine light that will reveal itself in the hereafter without any garment,
כדכתיב: ולא יכנף עוד מוריך פירוש: שלא יתכסה ממך בכנף ולבוש , והיו עיניך רואות את מוריך
as it is written:2 “And your Teacher will no longer hide (יכנף) from you (3meaning — not as some interpret the verse: ”He will no longer withhold (יכנף) your rains (מוריך),“ but, following Rashi: ”He will no longer conceal Himself from you with the edge of a robe or garment (כנף)“), and your eyes will behold Your Teacher”;
וכתיב: כי עין בעין יראו וגו'
and it is also written:4 “For they shall see eye to eye...,” meaning that the human eye will see as the divine “eye” sees, i.e., we will clearly see the revelation of G‑d’s light;
וכתיב: לא יהיה לך עוד השמש לאור יומם וגו׳, כי ה׳ יהיה לך לאור עולם וגו׳
and it is further written:5 “The sun shall no longer be your light by day,... for G‑d will be your eternal light.”
The strength to receive this light, which will shine forth in the World to Come without “garment” or concealment, we derive from our present study of the Torah.
The Alter Rebbe stated earlier that the purpose of the entire Hishtalshelut is the revelation of Ein Sof-light in this world, which occurs when the darkness of the kelipot of this world is transformed into the light of holiness.
But, one may ask, this revelation will take place only in the hereafter; at present the Ein Sof-light is completely hidden! The Alter Rebbe replies that, indeed, the Messianic era constitutes the purpose for which this world was created.
ונודע שימות המשיח, ובפרט כשיחיו המתים
It is known that the Messianic era, especially the period after the resurrection of the dead,
הם תכלית ושלימות בריאת עולם הזה, שלכך נברא מתחילתו
is indeed the ultimate purpose and the fulfillment of this world. It is for this [purpose] that [this world] was originally created.*
*NOTE
At first glance this statement appears strange: One would have thought that the Messianic era represents, not the purpose of creation, but the reward for man’s efforts toward fulfilling that purpose.
The Alter Rebbe therefore clarifies:
הגהה
וקבלת שכר עיקרו באלף השביעי, כמו שכתוב בלקוטי תורה מהאר״י ז״ל
The [time of] receiving the reward is essentially in the seventh millennium, as is stated in Likkutei Torah of theAriZal (Rabbi Isaac Luria, of blessed memory), whereas the period until then constitutes the fulfillment of the world’s purpose.
END OF NOTE
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Sanhedrin 100b. |
| 2. | Yeshayahu 30:20. |
| 3. | Parentheses are in the original text. |
| 4. | Yeshayahu 52:8. |
| 5. | Ibid. 60:19. |
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Shabbat, Adar II 9, 5776 · March 19, 2016
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 42
Wearing a Mixture of Wool and Linen
"You shall not wear a garment of sha'atnez"—Deuteronomy 22:11.
It is forbidden to wear a garment woven [or sewn] of wool and linen, as was the practice of ancient pagan priests, and still practiced today [Ed.'s note: in Maimonides' times] amongst Egyptian monks.
Full text of this Mitzvah »•
Leaving the Edges of the Fields for the Poor
"...you shall leave them over"—Leviticus 19:10.
We are commanded to leave over the edge of our grain and fruit crops for the poor and the stranger.
This commandment applies to an individual tree as it does to a field, and only in the Land of Israel.
Full text of this Mitzvah »•
Reaping an Entire Harvest
"Do not remove the corners of your field when you reap the harvest"—Leviticus 23:22.
It is forbidden to harvest an entire field without leaving over the edge for the needy.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Shabbat, Adar II 9, 5776 · March 19, 2016Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 42
Wearing a Mixture of Wool and Linen
"You shall not wear a garment of sha'atnez"—Deuteronomy 22:11.
It is forbidden to wear a garment woven [or sewn] of wool and linen, as was the practice of ancient pagan priests, and still practiced today [Ed.'s note: in Maimonides' times] amongst Egyptian monks.
Full text of this Mitzvah »•
Wearing a Mixture of Wool and Linen
Negative Commandment 42
Translated by Berel Bell
The 42nd prohibition is that we are forbidden from wearing a garment woven1 from wool and linen, as the idolatrous priests of that time used to wear.2
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,3 "Do not wear shatnez."
This practice is well known even today among Coptic monks in Egypt.
One who transgresses this prohibition is punished by lashes.
The details of this mitzvah are explained in tractate Kilayim,4 as well as in tractate Shabbos5 and the end of tractate Makkos.6
FOOTNOTES
1.
In Hilchos Kilayim, 10:2-4, the Rambam rules that when the wool and linen are connected in other ways, this Torah prohibition also applies.
2.
See "Guide to the Perplexed," Part 3, Ch. 37.
3.
Deut. 22:11.
4.
Ch. 9.
5.
54a.
6.
Positive Commandment 120
20a.
Leaving the Edges of the Fields for the Poor
"...you shall leave them over"—Leviticus 19:10.
We are commanded to leave over the edge of our grain and fruit crops for the poor and the stranger.
This commandment applies to an individual tree as it does to a field, and only in the Land of Israel.
Full text of this Mitzvah »•
Leaving the Edges of the Fields for the Poor
Positive Commandment 120
Translated by Berel Bell
The 120th mitzvah is that we are commanded to leave over [for the poor] the corner (pe'ah) of [a field of] grain, [a tree of] fruit, etc.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 — after mentioning [several prohibitions, including taking for oneself] the corner of the field — "Leave them over [for the poor and the stranger]."
In tractate Makkos,2 it is explained that this mitzvah of pe'ah is a prohibition with a remedial positive commandment (lav shenitak l'aseh). The prohibition3 is contained in the verse,4 "Do not completely harvest the corners of your field." The positive commandment is contained in the verse, "Leave them over for the poor and the stranger."
The details of this mitzvah are explained in tractate Pe'ah.
The Biblical prohibition applies only in Eretz Yisroel.5
FOOTNOTES
1.
Lev. 19:10.
2.
16b.
3.
See below, N210, N214.
4.
Lev. 19:9.
5.
Negative Commandment 210
There is a Rabbinic requirement to give Pe'ah, as well as the following agricultural gifts, even outside Eretz Yisroel. See Hilchos Mat'nos Aniyim, 1:14.
Reaping an Entire Harvest
"Do not remove the corners of your field when you reap the harvest"—Leviticus 23:22.
It is forbidden to harvest an entire field without leaving over the edge for the needy.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• Reaping an Entire Harvest
Negative Commandment 210
Translated by Berel Bell
The 210th prohibition is that we are forbidden from completely harvesting a field. Rather, we must leave over a portion of the end of the field for the poor.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "Do not completely harvest the ends of your fields."
This prohibition is a lav shenitak l'aseh (a prohibition with a remedial positive commandment). Therefore, if one violated this law and harvested the entire field, he must give the poor enough of the harvested food to match what he should have left over to begin with. This positive commandment is contained in the verse, "Leave them for the poor and the stranger," as we previously explained.2
One must leave over the corner of a tree just like the corner of a field.
The Biblical prohibition applies only in Eretz Yisroel.3
The details of this mitzvah are found in the tractate devoted to this subject [i.e. Pe'ah].
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 23:22.
2.P120.
3.See note to P120 above
• 1 Chapter: Biat Hamikdash Biat Hamikdash - Chapter 3 • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Biat Hamikdash - Chapter 3
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Biat Hamikdash - Chapter 3
Halacha 1
It is a positive commandment to send all impure persons away from the Temple,1 as [Numbers 5:2] states: "And they shall send away from the camp all those with tzara'at and zav2 [afflictions] and all those who are impure because of contact with a corpse.
Halacha 2
"The camp" cited refers to "the camp of the Divine presence," i.e., from the entrance to the Courtyard of the Israelites onward.3 Should one infer that a person with tzaraat or zav ailments and one impure due to contact with a corpse are all three sent to the same place? With regard to one inflicted withtzara'at, [Leviticus 13:46] states: "He shall abide alone outside the camp where he dwells." [The camp from which he is sent] refers to the camp of the Israelites which parallels the area from the entrance to Jerusalem and beyond.4 [From this we conclude,]5 just like a person who is afflicted withtzara'at, because his impurity is more severe, is sent away in a more severe manner than others,6 so too, any individuals whose state of impurity is more severe than others should be sent out in a more sever manner.7
Therefore a person afflicted with tzara'at is sent outside of all three camps, i.e., outside of Jerusalem. [His impurity is considered more severe,] because he causes [a house] to be considered impure when he enters it.8 This does not apply with regard to a zav.
Halacha 3
Men with a zav condition,9 women with a zavah condition,10 niddot,11 and women who gave birth12 are sent outside two camps, i.e., outside the Temple Mount.13 [The rationale for this severity is that] they cause an entity upon which they are seated or upon which they are lying to become ritually impure,14 even if it is under a stone.15 [This does not apply] with regard to impurity [contracted] from a corpse.16
Halacha 4
A person who is impure because of contact with a human corpse - and even a corpse itself - is permitted to enter the Temple Mount. [This is derived fromExodus 13:19]: "And Moses took the bones of Joseph with him."17 "With him" [implies] into the camp of the Levites.18
Halacha 5
Halacha 6
From the Women's Courtyard,23 one who immersed himself that day is sent away,24 but not one who has not completed the purification process.25 For [the day on which] a person who has not completed the purification process [immersed himself] has already passed.26 The prohibition against a person who has immersed himself entering [this portion of] the camp of the Levites is Rabbinic in origin.27
Halacha 7
From the Courtyard of the Israelites28 and onward even one who has not completed his process of purification should not enter, because his process of purification is not yet consummated. [This is evident from Leviticus 12:8which, with regard to a woman who seeks purification after childbirth,]29states: "And the priest will bring atonement for her and she will become pure." One can infer that until then, she was not pure.30
Halacha 8
An impure person who [must be] sent away from the Temple Mount, violates a negative commandment31 if he enters there, as [can be inferred fromDeuteronomy 23:11 which] states: "And he shall go outside the camp" - this refers to the camp of the Shechinah - "and he shall not enter the midst of the camp" - this refers to the camp of the Levites.32 Similarly, a person afflicted bytzara'at who enters Jerusalem is liable for lashes.33 If, however, he enters any of the other walled cities34 [in Eretz Yisrael], although he is not allowed to,35as [implied by the verse]: "He shall abide alone, he is not liable for lashes."
Halacha 9
If one afflicted with tzara'at entered the Temple Mount, he is liable for 80 lashes.36 If, however, one who is impure because of contact with a human corpse or one who immersed himself that day entered the Women's Courtyard,37 or one who has not completed his process of purification entered the Israelites' Courtyard,38 he is not given lashes.39 He is, however, given stripes for rebellious conduct.40
Halacha 10
Just as there is a positive commandment to send impure persons out from the Temple, so too, if they enter, they violate a negative commandment,41 as [Numbers 5:3] states: "They shall not make your camp impure." This refers to the camp of the Shechinah.42
Halacha 11
What source teaches that one does not violate the prohibition unless he enters [the Temple], but that he he is exempt43 if he touches the Temple Courtyard from the outside? [Leviticus 12:4] states with regard to a woman who gives birth: "She shall not enter the Sanctuary."44
Halacha 12
When an impure person willfully enters the Temple, he is punishable bykaret,45 as [Leviticus 17:16] states: "If he will not clean [his garments] or wash his flesh, he will bear his iniquity."46 [If he enters] unknowingly, he is liable for an adjustable guilt offering,47 as [ibid. 5:2] states: "Or a soul that will touch any impure entity." One is liable for karet or a sacrifice only when one enters from the Israelites' Courtyard or onward or into an addition to the Courtyard that was sanctified in a consummate manner, as we explained.48
Halacha 13
What are the types of impurity for which one is liable [for entering] the Temple [while impure]?
a) Anyone who became impure through contact with a human corpse in a manner which would require a nazirite to shave [his head] because of them; these are explained in [Hilchot] Nizirut;49
b) one who touched a person or a utensil that became impure through those types of impurity for which a nazirite must shave [his head]; for such a person is considered as a second level of impurity to a primary object of impurity that touched a corpse;50
Halacha 14
The general principle is: Anyone who is required to immerse himself in water53according to Scriptural Law is liable for karet for entering the Temple [while impure] even after he immersed himself until nightfall [that day].54 If, however, one became impure due to impurity stemming from a human corpse that does not require a nazirite to shave [his head], he is exempt for entering the Temple, even though his impurity lasts for seven days.55
Halacha 15
Similarly, if one touches utensils that touched a human corpse or touches a person who is touching utensils that touch a corpse, even though he is considered as impure to the first degree with regard to terumah56 and with regard to imparting impurity to sacrificial foods, he is exempt for entering the Temple. For these matters are laws received through the Oral Tradition.57Although he is exempt, he is given stripes for rebellious conduct.58
Halacha 16
A person who brings a dead teeming animal59 or the like60 into the Temple or when he brings an impure person into the Temple, he is liable for karet, because he made God's sanctuary impure. If, however, he threw impure utensils into the Temple - even if they were utensils that touched a corpse61 - he is exempt from karet, but liable for lashes, as [implied by the prooftext cited above]: "If he will not clean [his garments]...."62 According to the Oral Tradition, [for entering the Temple without] washing his body, he is liable forkaret. [For entering without] cleaning his garments, he receives 40 lashes.
Halacha 17
It appears to me63 that he is liable for lashes only for his clothes that are a source of ritual impurity, i.e., clothes that were touched by a person who became impure through contact with a corpse that themselves become a source for ritual impurity, as will be explained.64 If, by contrast, one brings a garment which is of first degree impurity65 into the Temple, he is not liable for lashes.66 He does, however, receive stripes for rebellious conduct.
Halacha 18
Similarly, when an impure person inserts his hand [alone] into the Temple,67he is given stripes for rebellious conduct. Similarly, anyone who purposely enters the Temple before immersing himself68 while he is impure because of contact with objects that are sources of ritual impurity by virtue of Rabbinic decree, because he ate impure foods, or because he drank impure beverages is given stripes for rebellious conduct.
Halacha 19
When an impure person enters the Temple through the rooftops, he is exempt.69 [This is derived from the prooftext cited above:] "He shall not enter the Temple." [Implied is that] the Torah held him liable [only when he entered in] the way one usually enters.70Although he is exempt for karet, he is given stripes for rebellious conduct.
[This exemption applies] even if he enters in a compartment flying in the air,71whether he entered the Temple in this compartment through the roofs or through the entrances.
Halacha 20
In all places where one is liable for karet72 for a willful transgression or a sacrifice for an unknowing transgression, should an impure object be found there on the Sabbath, it should be removed.73 In other places,74 it should be covered with a utensil until after the Sabbath.75 When it is removed, it should be removed only with flat wooden utensil which do not contract ritual impurity,76 so that there should not be an increase in ritual impurity.77
Halacha 21
Both an impure person who entered the Temple when it was pure78 and a pure person who entered the Temple when there was impurity within it - e.g., a corpse was lying under a shelter in the Temple and he entered under that shelter - are liable for karet. [In the latter situation,] his entrance and his impurity occur at one time.
Halacha 22
It is forbidden for him to tarry, to bow, or to depart via a longer way. If he tarried or departed via a longer way even though he did not tarry, or he turned his face to the Sanctuary and bowed even if he did not tarry, he is liable forkaret. If he acted unknowingly, he must bring a sacrifice.81
Halacha 23
If he did not turn his face [toward the Sanctuary], but bowed as he was departing toward the outside area, he is not liable unless he tarrys.
How long a delay [creates a liability]? Enough time to read the verse:82 "And they bowed with their faces to the ground on the floor, prostrating themselves and giving thanks to God who is good and whose kindness is everlasting." This is the measure of the delay [for which one is liable].
Halacha 24
What is meant by [departing] via longer way? Any way for which it is possible to depart from the Temple via a shorter way.
If one departed via a shorter way, even if he did not run, but instead walked [slowly], positioning his heel by his toes,83 although it takes the entire day, he is exempt. If he took a longer path, even though he ran and pressed himself with all of his power and thus the amount of time it took for him to leave in this manner was less than it would take other men via the shorter way, he is liable, because he departed via the longer path.
If he departed via the shorter path, but walked some, then stood, tarried some, [and continued this pattern] until all of his delays together amount to the time it takes to bow, he is not liable for lashes if he acted willfully, nor is he liable for a sacrifice if he acted unknowingly, because there is an unresolved question concerning the matter.84 He is, however, given stripes for rebellious conduct.85
FOOTNOTES
1.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 31) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 362) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
2.
A physical affliction somewhat similar to gonorrhea that renders one ritually impure.
3.
See Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 7:11 which states:
The [encampment of the Jewish people] in the desert [was divided into] three areas:the camp of Israel... the camp of the Levites about which [Numbers 1:50] states: "They shall camp around the Sanctuary;", and the camp of the Shechinah[which included the area] beginning at the entrance to the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting inwards.Correspondingly, for [future] generations: [The area] from the entrance to Jerusalem to the Temple Mount is comparable to the camp of Israel. [The area] from the entrance to the Temple Mount until the entrance to the Temple Courtyard, the gate of Nicanor, is comparable to the camp of the Levites. And [the area] from the entrance to the Temple Courtyard inward, is comparable to the camp of the Shechinah.
See also the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 1:8).
4.
The verse implies that he must abide in a place where others do not dwell.
5.
The Sifra understands this to be an example of the principle of Biblical exegesis: A subject (a person impure because of tzara'at) was included in a general category (impure people) and then was singled out to teach us a new law (that he must dwell separate from all others). This does not only teach us about this instance, but about the entire category (that there are distinctions in the extent people with impurity must distance themselves).
6.
For in no other instance is an impure person required to depart from the camp of the Israelites. See also Halachah 8.
7.
Thus as the Rambam proceeds to explain in the following halachot, there are differences in the extent people with various types of impurities are forced to distance themselves.
8.
Hilchot Tuma'at Tzara'at 10:12.
9.
A physical affliction somewhat similar to gonorrhea that renders one ritually impure.
10.
I.e., they experience vaginal bleeding at times other than their ordinary monthly cycle. This causes them to be considered ritually impure.
11.
Women who are impure because of menstrual bleeding.
12.
This - or a miscarriage - renders a woman as ritually impure.
13.
Since there is an added dimension to the severity of their impurity, they must distance themselves in a more sever manner.
14.
See Hilchot Metamei Mishkav UMoshav 1:1.
15.
See ibid. 6:5, 7:1, which explains that even if there is a stone - which itself never contracts ritual impurity - intervening between the person's body and the entity, the entity becomes impure.
16.
See Hilchot Tuma'at Meit 5:14.
17.
Joseph had asked the Jewish people to bring his body from Egypt to be buried inEretz Yisrael. Moses brought his body with him from Egypt, transporting it on the entire journey through the desert.
18.
For that is where Moses had his personal dwelling.
19.
The rampart surrounding the walls of the courtyard (see Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 5:3).
20.
For through that act, the man also becomes ritually impure.
21.
This is a Rabbinic restriction. According to Scriptural Law, these places are not on a different rung of holiness than the other portions of the Temple Mount. This and the restrictions mentioned in the next two halachot are also found in Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 7:16-18.
22.
When a person must immerse himself to ascend from ritual impurity, according to Scriptural Law, he does not achieve that status until nightfall. Nevertheless, since he has already immersed, our Sages relaxed this and several other of the prohibitions that they had placed upon such individuals.
23.
A square courtyard outside the Temple Courtyard, as described in Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 5:7-9.
24.
For he is still impure, as stated in Chapter 4, Halachah 4.
25.
This term refers to a zav,, a zavah, a woman who gave birth or miscarried, or a convert, who even after immersing themselves in the mikveh, must bring a sacrifice before their purification process is complete. See Hilchot Mechusrei Kapparah1:1.
26.
The Sifri brings proof that one who has not yet completed the purification process is in a different category than a person who has immersed himself from the fact that the former is permitted to partake of terumah, while the latter is not.
27.
Zevachim 32b relates that this restriction was imposed by Yehoshefat, King of Judah.
28.
The first eleven cubits of the Temple Courtyard (see Hilchot Beit HaBechirah5:11). This area begins "the camp of theShechinah" into which all of those who are impure may not enter according to Scriptural Law.
29.
And from this example, we extrapolate with regard to others in that category.
30.
Even though she had already immersed herself. Hence, she and others in the same category may not enter an area which is reserved for those who are ritually pure. This is a Scriptural restriction.
31.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 78) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 565) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. Its violation is punishable by lashes.
32.
Which, as mentioned above, parallels the camp of the Levites.
The Kessef Mishneh notes that the Rambam's interpretation of the verse reverses the order found in Pesachim 68a and the Sifri. He suggests that perhaps the Rambam had a different version of that text.
33.
Significantly, in Hilchot Sanhedrin 19:4 where the Rambam lists those who are punished by lashes, he does not mention this instance.
34.
See Hilchot Megilah 1:4 and Hilchot Shemitah VeYovel 12:15 which explain that this term applies only to a city surrounded by a wall at the time when Joshua conquered the land. Even if the wall of such a city is destroyed, the city is still placed in that category. Moreover, if a city was not walled at the time of Joshua's conquest, even if it was walled afterwards, it is not placed in this category.
35.
See Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 7:13; Hilchot Tuma'at Tzara'at 10:7. Based on Tosafot(Berachot 5b), Rabbi Akiva Eiger states that these restrictions apply only during the era when the Jubilee year was observed.
36.
I.e., he violated two negative commandments: he entered Jerusalem and he entered the Temple Mount. Therefore he is liable for two sets of lashes. Significantly, in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim1:8, based on the Tosefta to Keilim), the Rambam states these concepts slightly differently.
The Kessef Mishneh adds that if the person afflicted with tzara'at enters the Temple Courtyard, he is liable for an addition set of lashes.
37.
As mentioned in Halachot 5-6, this constitutes the violation of a Rabbinical commandment. The Kessef Mishneh adds that if the person enters the Temple Courtyard, he is liable for 120 lashes.
38.
And thus violates a positive commandment, as indicated by Halachah 1.
39.
For he does not violate a Scriptural prohibition.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and maintains that since the person is impure, his entry into the Temple Courtyard violates a Scriptural prohibition and is punishable bykaret. The Kessef Mishneh cites a passage from Zevachim 17b which appears to support the Ra'avad's objection. To resolve the Rambam's ruling, the Kessef Mishneh, however, quotes Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 18:14, where the Rambam distinguishes between an impure person who has immersed and one who has not done so as of yet. He also quotes other opinions in support of the distinction the Rambam makes.
40.
A punishment instituted by the Rabbis for the violation of their decrees or positive commandments.
41.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 77) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 363) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
42.
I.e., the area encompassed by the Temple Courtyard.
43.
I.e., the act is forbidden, but one is not liable for lashes or a sin-offering for its violation.
44.
Implying that entry into the Temple area is what is forbidden.
45.
Literally, the soul's being cut off. This involves premature death in this world (before the age of 50, Mo'ed Kattan 28a) and the soul not meriting a portion in the world to come (Hilchot Teshuvah 8:1).
46.
Har HaMoriah explains that the Rambam quotes this verse rather than Numbers 19:13-20 which is more explicit, because the latter passage speaks only about one who became impure due to contact with a human corpse and the prohibition applies even when one became impure for other reasons.
47.
See Hilchot Shegagot 1:3 and ch. 10, which explains that there are certain transgressions for which the atonement offering required varies according to the transgressor's financial capacity.
48.
See Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 6:10-14 which describes the manner in which additions are made to the Temple Courtyard.
49.
See Hilchot Nizirut 7:1-6 which describes this subject in detail. As stated in Hilchot Tumat Meit 3:3: "All ritual impurity resulting from a corpse for which a nazirite is not required to shave does not stem from Scriptural Law." Implied is that since a nazirite is forbidden to cut his hair according to Scriptural Law, when he contracts ritual impurity stemming from a human corpse that is only Rabbinic in origin, he should not cut his hair, because then the Rabbinic safeguard would lead to the violation of Scriptural Law. Note also the commentary toHilchot Nizirut which explains that the Rambam is referring to ritual impurity that is not explicitly mentioned in the Torah, but could be considered of Scriptural origin, because it was derived through the laws of Biblical exegesis.
50.
A person or an object that touches a human corpse becomes a source of impurity that can cause other people or objects to become ritually impure (see Hilchot Tuma'at Meit 5:4-5).
The Ra'avad states however that a nazirite is not obligated to shave his head if he touched a utensil or a person that became impure due to contact with a corpse. Hence, he concludes, one should not be liable for entering the Temple after having contracted impurity in this manner. The Kessef Mishnehmaintains that the simple meaning of the passage in Nazir 54a appears to support the Ra'avad's understanding. Nevertheless, he cites a passage from the Jerusalem Talmud (Nazir 7:4) which could be interpreted as supporting the Rambam's ruling.
51.
There are entities that are considered sources of impurity according to Rabbinic Law. They do not make a person impure to the extent that he is liable for entering the Temple.
52.
See Sefer Taharah.
53.
I.e., in a mikveh.
54.
For as stated in Halachah 6, one who has immersed himself to emerge from ritual impurity is still impure until nightfall of that day. The Ra'avad differs and maintains that such a person is not liable for karet. The Radbaz cites the Rambam's ruling in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 18:14 which would seem to support the Ra'avad's ruling. It states that a person who was ritually impure, then immersed himself, and then partook of sacrificial foods before nightfall is liable for lashes, but is not liable for karet. Nevertheless, the Radbaz explains that a distinction can be made between these two situations.
55.
Although he is required to observe the strictures of someone who is ritually impure, he is not liable for entering the Temple.
56.
In Hilchot Tuma'at Meit 5:4, the Rambam describes the impurity caused by such situations.
57.
In ibid.:5, the Rambam continues: "Even though according to the Oral Tradition [one is rendered impure for such matters], this is not Scriptural Law. For it is not explicitly stated in the Torah that one who becomes impure through contact with a human corpse becomes a source of impurity and one who touches him becomes impure to the first degree." In this instance, however, the Rambam is probably following his renown approach that any concept that is not explicitly stated in the Torah is considered as "from the Oral Tradition" even though it was also conveyed to Moses at Sinai.
58.
For the Rabbis instituted decrees to insure that the prohibitions established by the Oral Tradition were observed.
59.
This is speaking about a situation where he brought the dead teeming animal into the Temple without touching it, since, as stated in Hilchot Shaar Avot HaTuma'ah 4:1, a dead teeming animal imparts ritual impurity only when one touches it and not when one carries it. For if the person had touched it, he would become impure and be liable forkaret entering the Temple in that state.
60.
I.e., another source of impurity that imparts impurity through touch, but not when carried.
61.
And thus serve as a source of impurity.
62.
The verse concludes: "He will bear his iniquity." "Clean[ing] his garments" refers to immersing them to remove their impurity.
63.
This expression implies that there is no Talmudic source for this ruling, but instead, it was derived by deduction.
64.
Hilchot Tuma'at Meit 5:2. There the Rambam states that if a person touching the corpse touches any other utensil at the same time, that utensil is considered as if it touched the corpse itself.
65.
I.e., the person touched the garments after he let go of the corpse.
66.
Since the object brought into the Temple is not a source for ritual impurity, the person is not liable for karet. The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and maintains that even bringing an object that is not a source for ritual impurity into the Temple causes one to be liable for lashes. The Kessef Mishnehsupports the Rambam's view, explaining that there is a logical basis for his conclusion. Since the Torah was lenient with regard to utensils (and garments), absolving one fromkaret even when the utensil was a source of impurity, we can conclude that leniency would also be shown with regard to lashes.
67.
I.e., he stands outside the Temple Courtyard and inserts only his hand. He is not given lashes, because his entire body has not entered the Temple Courtyard. Even the Rambam would agree that he is forbidden by Rabbinic decree to insert his hand. The Ra'avad is more stringent and rules that inserting part of one's body is equivalent to entering entirely. The Kessef Mishnehsupports the Rambam's ruling.
68.
The Rambam's words imply that once he immersed himself, he is not liable for stripes for rebellious conduct for entering the Temple even if night has not yet fallen. Since his impurity is only Rabbinic in origin and he has immersed himself, he is not given punishment. See Hilchot Shaar Avot HaTuma'ah 9:1.
69.
Such entry is, nevertheless, forbidden (Kessef Mishneh).
70.
I.e., on foot through the gate. The Mishneh LiMelech emphasizes that if he remains in the Temple for the amount of time for which he is liable (see Halachah 22), he is liable forkaret even if he entered through the rooftops.
71.
For this also is not the usual way of entry.
72.
I.e., in the Temple Courtyard.
73.
An object for which one has no purpose ismuktzeh and there is a Rabbinic prohibition against transporting it on the Sabbath. Nevertheless, Rabbinic prohibitions of this nature are not applied in the Temple (Rashi,Eruvin 104b).
74.
I.e., in the chambers that are considered as being separate entities from the Temple Courtyard.
75.
So that it will not be touched.
76.
See Hilchot Keilim 1:10. See also Hilchot Temidim UMusafim 3:6.
77.
I.e., if a priest would carry it out in his garment, he would be causing his garment to become impure. Hence, it was desirable to use a flat wooden utensil even if it takes time to find such a utensil (Eruvin, loc. cit.).
78.
As stated in Halachah 12.
79.
There is an unresolved question concerning whether such a person is liable in Sh'vuot17a. Hence, the Rambam rules leniently (Kessef Mishneh).
80.
If he departs in this manner, he is not liable for karet.
81.
An adjustable guilt offering.
82.
The Rambam is citing Sh'vuot 16b which quotes the description of the people's bowing in II Chronicles 7:3.
83.
I.e., taking very short steps. As long as he does not stop for the amount of time mentioned in the previous halachah, he is not liable.
84.
See Sh'vuot 17a. Hence we rule leniently.
85.
See Hilchot Sanhedrin 16:3, 18:5, and notes for a definition of this punishment and the situations where it is applied.
• 3 Chapters: Kilaayim Kilaayim - Chapter 9, Kilaayim Kilaayim - Chapter 10, Matnot Aniyim Matnot Aniyim - Chapter 1
English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download• Kilaayim - Chapter 9
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class•
------------------
English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download• Kilaayim - Chapter 9
Halacha 1
When a person causes a male to enter into relations with a female of a different species1 - whether a domesticated animal, a wild beast, a fowl, even different types of sea-animals2 - he is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law.3[This4 applies] in all places in Eretz Yisrael and in the Diaspora, as [Leviticus 19:19] states: "You shall not mate your animal with another species."
[This applies] whether the animal, beast, or fowl belongs to him or to a colleague.5 He is not liable for lashes until he actually inserts one animal's organ into the others. If, however, he merely placed one on top of the other or encouraged them verbally, he is given stripes for rebellious conduct.6
Halacha 2
Halacha 3
Halacha 4
[Although] two types of animals or beasts resemble each other11 and one can impregnate the other, since they are two species, they are considered as mixed species and it is forbidden to mate them.
Halacha 5
When a species has both a wild species and a domesticated species, e.g., a wild ox14 and an ox or a wild horse and a horse, it is permitted to mate them together, because they are one species. A duck and a wild duck, by contrast, are considered as mixed species with each other. [The reason is that] the domesticated duck has its testicles inside its body, while those of the wild duck are outside. This shows that they are different species.
Halacha 6
Offspring from mixed species whose mothers are from the same species may be mated.17 If [the mothers] are from two species, it is forbidden to mate them and one who mates them is liable for lashes. Similarly, if one mated the offspring [of such a union with an animal of any other species,] even of its mother's species, he is liable for lashes.18
What is implied? A male mule19 whose mother is a donkey may be mated with a female mule whose mother is a donkey. It is forbidden to mate it with [an animal of any other species,] even a donkey. It is, however, forbidden to mate a male mule whose mother is a horse with a female mule whose mother is a donkey. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
Therefore a person who wants to mate a male and female mule or to have [a carriage] drawn by two mules, he should check their identifying signs: their ears, their tails, and their voices. If they resemble each other, it is clear that their mother is from the same species and [the above activities] are permitted.
Halacha 7
Anyone who performs labor with two species of animals or wild beasts together when one of them is kosher and the other is not kosher20 is liable for lashes21in all places,22 as [Deuteronomy 22:10] states: "Do not plow with an ox and a donkey together."
Halacha 8
[The prohibition involves not only] an ox and a donkey, [but also] all other different species when one is non-kosher and the other, kosher, whether a domesticated animal with another domesticated animal, e.g., a pig and a lamb, or a beast together with a beast, e.g., a wild deer and an elephant, or a beast with a domesticated animal, e.g., a dog with a goat, or a deer with a pig or the like. For all of the above [types of combinations], one is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law, for a beast is considered as an animal, as we explained in Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot.27
According to Rabbinic Law, however, whenever it is forbidden to mate two species, it is also forbidden to plow with them together, to pull them, or to lead them. If one performs labor with [two such species] together, pulled them, or led them, he is liable for stripes for rebellious conduct. It is forbidden to lead an animal from dry land together with a sea-animal, e.g., a goat with a large fish. If one did so, he is exempt.28
Halacha 9
When a wagon is being drawn by mixed species, one who sits in the wagon is liable for lashes. Even though he did not lead them,29 [he is liable,] because sitting there causes the animal to pull the wagon. Similarly, if one person was sitting in a wagon and another leading the animals, they are both liable for lashes. Even 100 people who lead a team of mixed species are liable for lashes.
Halacha 10
It is permitted to perform a task with a human and an animal together or with a beast, e.g., a person can plow with an ox or pull a wagon with a donkey, or the like. [This is derived from the phrase:] "an ox and a donkey together," i.e., not a man and a donkey and not a man and an ox.
Halacha 11
When an animal has been sanctified but disqualified [and then redeemed]30even though it is one animal, the Torah considers it as two bodies. For it is consecrated and it is as if it is both a consecrated and an ordinary animal mixed as one. Thus this animal is like a non-kosher animal and a kosher animal mixed together and [Leviticus 27:11] states: "If any impure that may not be offered as a sacrifice." According to the Oral Tradition, [the verse] was interpreted as referring to animals that had been sanctified, but disqualified. Accordingly, a person who plows with an ox that had been sanctified but disqualified or mates such an ox is liable for lashes because of the prohibition against mixed species. This prohibition is part of the received tradition.
FOOTNOTES
1.
Even if both species are kosher (seeMinchat Chinuch, mitzvah 244); see Sifei Cohen, Yoreh De'ah 294:1.
2.
But not fish (Kessef Mishneh).
3.
I.e., he transgresses a negative commandment, included as one of the 365 negative commandments by Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 217) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 244).
4.
In contrast to the laws regarding sowing mixed species of crops (Chapter 1, Halachah 1) and sowing mixed species in a vineyard (Chapter 5, Halachah 2).
5.
Although the prooftext states "your animal," this is not meant as an exclusion (Sifra to that verse).
6.
The punishment given for violating a Rabbinic ordinance.
7.
For the owner is not involved in their mating. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 297:3) states that in a place where there is a suspicion that others will cause the two animals to mate, it is forbidden to place them in the same corral.
8.
Based on Bava Metzia 90a, the Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh state that the difficulty is that it is forbidden to give a gentile instructions to perform a prohibited activity. According to the Rambam (Hilchot Melachim10:6), it is forbidden for a gentile to crossbreed species. The Rama (loc. cit.:4), however, states that if the act is performed for the benefit of the gentile, there is no prohibition.
9.
I.e., if the mated species are not kosher.
10.
Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 1:13.
Here we see another difference with produce that grows from mixed species. The latter is forbidden, while in this instance, the mixed offspring is permitted. Implied is that the prohibition against mixed produce affects the cheftza, the actual substance of the forbidden entity, while the prohibition against mating mix species applies only to the gavra, the person performing the mating.
11.
In the text of the Mishneh Torah, this phrase is repeated a second time.
12.
Our translation is taken from the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kilayim 1:6).
13.
Our translation is taken from the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kilayim 1:6).
14.
The Radbaz notes that the term "wild ox" is sometimes used to refer to a buffalo which is considered a separate species and not part of the ox species. He states that here the intent is different and the Rambam is referring to a species of domesticated animal. See also Siftei Cohen 297:6.
15.
A ko'i is a hybrid born from breeding a deer and a goat. There is an unresolved question among our Sages if it is considered as a domesticated animal (behemah) or a wild beast [(chayah) the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, Bikkurim 2:8]. In Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 1:13, he states that the term refers to any hybrid that comes from mating a domesticated animal with a wild beast.
16.
In Hilchot Nazirut 2:10-11, the Rambam writes:
In certain matters, a ko'iresembles a wild beast. In other matters, it resembles a domesticated animal. In still other matters, it resembles both a wild beast and a domesticated animal and in still other matters, it resembles neither a domesticated animal, nor a wild beast....What is implied? [When] ako'i [is slaughtered, its] blood must be covered as the blood of a wild beast must. Its fat is forbidden as is the fat of a domesticated animal. It is considered a union of mixed species if it is mated with either a domesticated animal or a wild beast, as if it were neither a wild beast or a domesticated animal. And it must be ritually slaughtered as is required for both a domesticated animal or a wild beast. Similarly, there are other halachic considerations that apply with regard to it and they will all be explained in their appropriate place.
See Hilchot Shechitah 12:8-9; Hilchot Bikkurim 9:5; 10:7; Hilchot Sha'ar Avot HaTumah 1:6, et al, which mention other laws applying to this animal.
17.
As the Rambam emphasizes in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Kilayim 8:4), the fundamental principle is that the species of the mother is the determining factor whether the union is considered as mixed species or not.
18.
The Kessef Mishnehsuggests that since the determining factor is the species of the mother, the text should read "he is not liable for lashes." According to that interpretation, the bracketed additions in the translation are inappropriate.
19.
Which comes from mating a horse and a donkey.
20.
I.e., according to the Rambam - otherRishonim differ - according to Scriptural Law, one is permitted to work with two animals from two different kosher species. It is only mating them which is forbidden. The Rambam's understanding is based on his interpretation of the Mishnah (Kilayim 8:2) which he understands to be divided in half, the first clauses referring to the prohibition of mating stated in the previous halachah, and the latter clauses to the prohibition against working with different species. The commentaries note that the Rambam's perspective is shared by the Tikkunei Zohar, Tikkun 14.
21.
I.e., he transgresses a negative commandment, included as one of the 365 negative commandments by Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 218) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 550).
22.
I.e., not only in Eretz Yisrael (see Kiddushin36b).
23.
In which instance, one might think that one is not liable because he did not perform a deed.
24.
For that implies a combined activity [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kilayim 8:2)].
25.
For he has not had them perform a forbidden task.
26.
The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishnehemphasize that the animals from the two must be yoked or tied together in some way for one to be liable for leading them. If they are separate, he is not liable.
27.
Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 6:1 quotesDeuteronomy 14:4-5 which states: "These are the animals that you may eat: an ox... a gazelle and a deer," including both domesticated animals and beasts in the general category "animals."
28.
Bava Kama 55a raises the question whether one is liable for stripes for rebellious conduct for such an action or not, for the two cannot function as a team in the ordinary sense, sense the fish cannot leave the water and the goat will not enter it. Since the question is left unresolved, the Rambam maintains that the person is not liable.
29.
I.e., he was holding the reins of the animals.
30.
I.e., an animal was sanctified as an offering, but then developed a blemish that disqualifies it. It was redeemed and thus is considered as an ordinary animal in that after it is slaughtered, it may be eaten without any of the strictures associated with consecrated food. While alive, however, it is forbidden to work with it or shear it, like consecrated animals. See Rashi, Makkot22a. The Ra'avad and Tosafot offer different interpretations.
Kilaayim - Chapter 10
Halacha 1
The prohibition against mixed fabrics in clothes involves only wool1 and linen, as [Deuteronomy 22:11] states: "Do not wear sha'atnez, wool and linen together." In seaports, there is something like wool that grows on stones in the Mediterranean Sea2 whose appearance resembles gold and it is very soft. It is called kelech.3 It is forbidden [to be mixed] with linen because of the appearance it creates, because it resembles lambs' wool. Similarly, silk andkelech are forbidden because of the appearance it creates.4
Halacha 2
When a ewe is born to a she-goat, one is not liable for [mixing] its wool [with linen]. It is, however, forbidden according to Rabbinic decree, because of the impression it creates.
If wool and linen are connected in any manner, they are considered mixed fabrics according to Scriptural Law.5What is implied? When wool and linen were mixed together, combed together, and made into a smooth mass, they are considered as mixed fabrics. If they were mixed and combed as one and then a garment was woven from this combed fabric, they are considered mixed fabrics.
Halacha 3
If one sewed woolen fabric to linen6 - even if he sewed them with silk, sewed a woolen garment with linen thread, or a linen garment with woolen thread, one tied woolen threads with linen threads or braided them together, or even if one placed wool and linen together in a sack or a basket and wound them,7 they are considered as mixed fabrics. Even if one tied a braid of wool to a braid of linen, even if there is a strap of leather in between,8 they are considered mixed fabrics. [This law also applies] if one folded over woolen and linen fabric and tied them together. [The rationale is that the prooftext states:] "Wool and linen together." Since they are combined - regardless of how - they are forbidden.
Halacha 4
What is the source that teaches that all these prohibitions are Scriptural in origin? [We derive this from the fact that] the Torah had to explicitly state thatkilayim are permitted in tzitzit.9 As we learned according to the Oral Tradition,10 the passage concerning kilayim11 was positioned next to the passage concerning tzitzit12 solely to teach that kilayim are permitted in tzitzit. Now the tzitzit are strands that are tied together. Thus it can be derived that a connection of this type in a situation that does not involve a mitzvah is forbidden according to Scriptural Law.13 For the Torah would not exclude something that is forbidden only according to Rabbinic Law.
Halacha 5
There is no minimum measure for kilayim. Even the smallest thread of wool in a large linen garment or a thread of linen in a woolen garment is forbidden.14
Halacha 6
[The following laws apply when] one mixed the wool of ewes with the wool of camels and the like and made thread from them. If half [of the mixture] is from the ewes, it is considered as kilayim with flax. If, however, the majority is from the camels, it is permitted to mix them with flax, because the form of the entire mixture is that of camel wool. We do not pay attention to the strands of wool that are mixed with them, for they are not threads of wool.15
Halacha 7
Therefore when sheep hides are used to make garments,16 they are permitted even though they are sewed with flax. We are not concerned with the strands of wool - even though they become entwined with the linen threads used to sew it, because the wool is insignificant because of the minute amount that is there.17
Halacha 8
Similar [laws apply when] hemp and linen were mixed with each other. If the majority is hemp, it is permitted to weave these threads with woolen threads. If they are half and half, it is forbidden.
Halacha 9
Halacha 10
When a woolen garment becomes torn, it is permitted to join it together with threads of linen and tie them, but one may not sew them.20
Halacha 11
Halacha 12
It is permitted to make mixed fabrics and sell them.23 It is forbidden only to wear them or cover oneself with them.24 [This is derived from] the verses [Deuteronomy 22:11]: "Do not wear sha'atnez" and [Leviticus 19:19: "A garment that is of mixed fabrics, sha'atnez] shall not come upon you." [The association of the verses implies] that to be forbidden, [a garment must] "come upon [you]" as one wears it. If, however, it comes upon one not in a manner of wearing, i.e., a tent that is kilayim, it is permitted to sit under it.
Similarly, it is permitted according to Scriptural Law to sit on spreads25 that are made of kilayim. For "Shall not come upon you" [implies], that you may spread it under you. According to Rabbinic decree, however, even if there are ten spreads one on top of the other and the bottom one is kilayim, it is forbidden to sit on the top one, lest a strand [of kilayim] becomes wound around one's flesh.
Halacha 13
When does the above apply? With regard to [spreads made from] soft [fabrics], e.g., curtains and sheets. With regard to [those made from] firm [fabrics] that will not become wound [upon a person's body], e.g., pillows and cushions,26 it is permitted to sit or lie upon them, provided one's flesh does not touch them.27
Halacha 14
Similar [laws apply when] a drape is made from kilayim. If it is soft, it is forbidden lest a servant lean against it and it become draped around his body.28 If it was firm and would not be draped, it is permitted.
Halacha 15
Halacha 16
Seamtresses sewing garments may sew [kilayim] in their ordinary manner,31provided they do not intend [to benefit from them,32 using them as a shield] against the sun in the summer and the rain in the rainy season. The meticulous33 sew [with the garment lying] on the earth.34
Similarly, people who sell garments may sell them in the ordinary manner,35as long as they do not have the intent that the kilayim on their shoulders will protect them from the heat in the summer and warm them in the rainy season. The meticulous [hang the clothes on] a pole extended over their backs.
Halacha 17
A person should not pick up a hot egg with a cloth that is kilayim for he is [then] benefiting from the mixed fabrics as protection from the heat or from the cold.36 Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
Halacha 18
Halacha 19
The prohibition against [wearing] kilayim applies only to garments that [are worn] to provide warmth, e.g., a long shirt, a hat, pants, a belt, a dress, knee pants, gloves, or the like. However, small belts that people make with their pockets prepared to hold money, spices, or the like are permitted [despite the fact they contain kilayim] even though one's flesh touches them, because this is not the ordinary way in which one warms himself. [The same principles apply with regard to] a rag on which one places a bandage, poultice, dressing, or the like.
Halacha 20
A forehead piece of leather, silk or the like to which are attached strands of wool and strands of leather that hang over a persons face to chase away flies are not [forbidden] as kilayim, because this is not the manner through which a person derives warmth.
Halacha 21
It is permitted for a person who is leading animals to hold the leashes attached to them in his hand even though some of them are linen and some of them are wool. [He may] even wind them around his hand. If, however, he ties them all [together],39 they are considered as kilayim40 and it is forbidden for him to bind them around his hand.41
Halacha 22
Halacha 23
[The following law applies to] tickets47 that launderers and weavers make for clothes so that each person could identify his own. If the ticket was of wool on a linen garment or a linen ticket on a woolen garment, it is forbidden even though it is not significant for him.
Halacha 24
When a person joined a woolen cloth to a linen cloth with one thrust [of the needle and thread], they are not considered as having been joined together48and they are not considered as kilayim.49 If he gathered the two heads of the thread [and tied them] together50 or [joined the cloths with] two thrusts [of the needle and thread],51 they are considered as kilayim.
Halacha 25
It is permitted to make shrouds for the deceased from kilayim, for the deceased are not obligated in any mitzvot.52 [Kilayim] may be used as a saddle-blanket for a donkey53 and one may sit on it, provided his flesh is not touching it.54 He should not place this saddle-blanket on his shoulder even to take out the compost.55
Halacha 26
It is permissible to carry a corpse or an animal that is dressed in kilayim on one's shoulders.56
Halacha 27
When a thread of linen becomes lost within a woolen garment or a thread of wool becomes lost within a linen garment, the garment should not be sold to a gentile lest the gentile sell it to a Jew.57 Nor should he make it a saddle-blanket for a donkey, lest another person find it and tear it of the saddle-blanket and wear it, because the kilayim are not discernable within it.
What can be done to correct the situation regarding this garment? It should be dyed. Because wool and linen will not dye in the same manner. Thus [the lost thread] will become recognizable and then he should remove it. If it is not recognizable [after the dying], it is permitted [to use the garment], for perhaps [the lost thread] fell off. After all, he checked and did not find it. As we explained already in the laws of forbidden intimate relations,58 any prohibition arising from a doubt is of Rabbinical origin. Therefore, [our Sages] were lenient because of the doubt.59
Halacha 28
When a person purchases woolen garments from gentiles, he must check them very carefully, lest they be sewn with linen thread.60
Halacha 29
When a person sees kilayim that are forbidden by Scriptural Law on his friend - even if the latter is walking in the market place - he should jump up and rip it off him immediately.61 [This applies] even to his teacher from whom he has learned wisdom.62 For [the obligation to] honor people at large does not supercede a negative prohibition in the Torah.63
Why is such [a prohibition] superceded with regard to returning a lost object?64 Because the prohibition involves financial matters.65
Why is [a prohibition] superceded with regard to the ritual impurity associated with a corpse?66 Because Scripture made an exclusion regarding his sister.67According to the Oral Tradition,68 it was taught: For his sister, he may not become impure, but he may become impure for a corpse that it is a mitzvah to bury.
If, however, a prohibition is Rabbinic in origin, it is superceded by the consideration of a person's honor in all situations. Although the Torah states [Deuteronomy 17:11]: "Do not deviate from any of the statements they relate to you,"69 this prohibition is superceded by considerations of a person's honor. Accordingly, if [another person] has upon him sha'atnez that is forbidden according to Rabbinical law, one may not rip it off him in the marketplace, nor must [the person himself] remove it in the marketplace until he reaches home. If [the sha'atnez was forbidden] according to Scriptural Law, he must remove it immediately.
Halacha 30
A person who wears kilayim or covers himself with them is liable for lashes. If he was wearing kilayim the entire day, he is liable only for one set of lashes.70If he repeatedly stuck his head in and out of the garment - even though he did not take off the entire garment, he is liable for each time [he stuck his head out].71
When is he liable for only one set of lashes? When he received one warning. If, however, they warned him and told him: "Take it off, take it off," and he continued to wear it and remained wearing for the amount of time necessary to remove it and put it on after they warned him, he is liable [for lashes] for each interval that he waited,72 for he was warned regarding it and, nevertheless, did not remove [the forbidden garment].
Halacha 31
[The following laws apply when] a person dresses a colleague in kilayim. If the wearer acted consciously, he is liable for lashes73 and the person who dressed him is liable for "plac[ing] a stumbling block before the blind."74 If the person wearing the garment did not know that it was kilayim and the person who dressed him acted willfully, that person is liable for lashes75 and the wearer is exempt.
Halacha 32
When priests wear their priestly garments when they are not performing service even though they are in the Temple,76 they are liable for lashes because the sash contains kilayim77 and license to wear it was granted only while performing service, for that is a positive commandment like tzitzit.78
Blessed be the Merciful One who grants assistance.
FOOTNOTES
1.
When the term "wool" is used without any adjective, it refers only to sheep's wool (the Jerusalem Talmud, Kilayim 9:1).
2.
Although the Rambam uses the term Yam HaMelech, his intent is the Mediterranean Sea and not the Dead Sea. See Hilchot Tzitzit 2:2 and his Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 9:1) for other examples of such usage.
3.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Kilayim9:2), the Rambam states that this fabric is a type of silk. Others identify it with cissaros blossoms.
4.
For silk resembles linen and kelechresembles wool (ibid.).
Rav Yosef Corcus and the Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 298:1) state that certainly a mixture of wool and silk should be forbidden. Nevertheless, he continues that at present, silk is very common and recognized by everyone. Hence, there is no need to forbid it, because of the appearance it will create.
5.
The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's ruling, meaning that making a smooth mass is not sufficient to create an article forbidden by Scriptural Law. To explain the difference of opinion: The Mishnah (Kilayim 9:8-9) states:
The prohibition againstkilayim applies only with regard to fibers that are spun into thread and woven, as it is written: "Do not wear sha'atnez," [i.e., the prohibition applies to fibers that] are made into a smooth mass, spun, and woven.... Sheets of fabric are forbidden for they have been made into a smooth mass.
In his commentary to that mishnah, the Rambam states:
"Made into a smooth mass"- This refers to making fabric. It involves smoothing down the surface of the substance made into a even mass...."Spun" - This involves mixing wool and linen together and spinning them into threads."Woven" - That [these threads] should be woven together.... It implies connection and establishing union.If one mixed wool and linen together, spun them into threads, wove them into a garment, and smoothed its surface..., that garment will be considered as mixed fabrics. This applies with regard to mixed fabrics as defined by Scriptural Law. For, [according to Scriptural Law, a garment] is not considered as mixed fabrics unless [making it] involved all these three activities. Anything other than this [that involves wool and linen] is mixed fabrics [only] according to Rabbinic Law.Some of the Geonim wrote as above. I, however, consider that as incorrect. Instead, any one [of these activities] is sufficient to cause a garment to be considered as mixed fabrics according to Scriptural Law. The statement in tractate Niddah[61b which implies that all three activities are necessary] is not the wording of the Talmud, but an interpretation.
Our translation is taken from Rav Kappach's translation of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah which is a revised edition. Originally - and this is the version followed by the standard published text of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah - the Rambam wrote that the ruling that all three activities are necessary for the prohibition to be of Scriptural origin is "a correct ruling, concerning which there is no doubt." Thus originally the Rambam also subscribed to the opinion followed by the Ra'avad [which is also shared by Rashi (Niddah, loc. cit.), but later changed his mind [adopting the view stated here and in Tosafot(Niddah, loc. cit.)]. The Kessef Mishneh and the Radbaz discuss the issue in their glosses to the Mishneh Torah. See the Turand commentaries (Yoreh De'ah 300. TheSiftei Cohen 300:1 writes that the majority of the authorities follow Rashi's view. It must be emphasized that all of the opinions maintain that any combination of wool and linen is forbidden according to Rabbinic Law, the debate involves only the extent of the Scriptural prohibition.
6.
In the previous halachah, the Rambam stated that any one of the following activities: making fabrics into a smooth mass, spinning, or weaving them is sufficient to incur liability. He also gave examples regarding the first two types of activities mentioned. As mentioned in the previous note, he interprets the term "weaving" as creating a connection. In this halachah, he gives examples of how creating a connection between two fabrics causes one to be liable.
7.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Kilayim9:10), the Rambam explains that the sack or the basket causes the two fabrics to be considered as one. It is forbidden to carry the sack or basket on one's back, lest it be considered that one is benefiting from mixed fabrics.
This follows Rav Kappach's amended text of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah. The standard printed text follows a slightly different version.
8.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid.:9), the Rambam explains that we are speaking about attaching a thread of wool to one side of a leather strap and a thread of linen to the other. Since the two fabrics are connected, the Scriptural prohibition is involved. SeeShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 300:5) which takes a somewhat more lenient position.
9.
According to Scriptural Law, on a linen garment, the white strands of the tzitzitshould be made from linen, while thetecheilet (sky-blue) threads should be made from wool dyed that color using the blood of a chilazon. Although this is the Scriptural Law, according to Rabbinic decree, safeguards should be taken and mixed fabrics should not be used for tzitzit. SeeHilchot Tzitzit 3:6-7.
10.
Menachot 39a.
12.
Ibid.:12.
13.
I.e., it is not necessary that the fabrics be spun and smoothed out together.
14.
Unlike the laws of kashrut, concerning which a forbidden substance can become betal, of no consequence, if the kosher substance is greater than it according to Scriptural Law and 60 times its size according to Rabbinic Law, there is no such leniency in this instance.
Tosafot (Nidah 61b) explains the rationale for this ruling. Generally, a forbidden entity can become nullified, because it is of no consequence when compared to the kosher substance into which it is mixed. Such logic does not apply in this instance, because there is no prohibited object to be nullified. Both the linen and the wool are permitted. Hence, they remain significant no matter how small an amount there is.
Rabbenu Asher quotes this explanation, but questions it, noting that seemingly the same concepts apply with regard to a mixture of milk and meat. Both of them are permitted; it is their mixture that is forbidden and yet, one can become betal if there is 60 times the presence of the other substance. Rabbenu Asher, however, distinquishes between the two instances. In a mixture of milk and meat, what is significant is the flavor of the food. Hence, if the flavor of either the milk or meat can be detected, it is forbidden. If not, it is permitted. In the case of a mixture of fabrics, the existence of the mixed fabrics itself is what is forbidden. Hence, since neither are forbidden, they cannot become nullified. SeeSiftei Cohen 299:1 and Turei Zahav 299:1 who also discuss this concept. See also Halachah 27 which explains what should be done to detect a thread that is kilayim.
15.
The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishnehexplain that this is not a contradiction to the previous halachah. Indeed, were one to have separate threads of sheep's wool, the garment would be forbidden even if they were mixed with many times their sum of camel wool threads. For the sheep's wool threads are never nullified. In this instance, however, there is room for leniency, because there are no sheep's wool threads. As the threads are being made, the sheep's wool is combined with the camel's wool and since the majority is camel's wool, it is the determining factor. These concepts are also reflected in the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 299:1).
16.
I.e., of leather, not of wool.
17.
The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's rationale, explaining that it runs contrary to the principle stated in Halachah 5. He follows his thesis stated previously - see the notes to Halachah 2 - that according to Scriptural Law, mixed fabrics are only forbidden when they are smoothed into an even mass, spun, and woven together. If only one of those activities is performed, the prohibition is merely Rabbinical. In this instance, there is only one activity. Hence the prohibition is Rabbnical and since the amount of woolen strands are small is not substantial, there is room for leniency.
The Radbaz supports the Rambam's rationale, explaining that the fundamental point here is that the strands of wool are not threads. Hence, they are not of significance and the laws of mixed fabrics do not apply regarding them.
18.
And thus they do not touch each other.
19.
See Halachah 3.
20.
With regard to tzitzit, tying causes the garment to be considered as kilayim, because the wool and the linen are themselves tied together. In this instance, by contrast, the linen is not tied to the wool, but rather tied around it like a belt [Tur (Yoreh De'ah 300)].
21.
Surrounding both garments, but not tying the two together. Even though he cannot remove either of the garments without untying the knot, it is permitted. See Siftei Cohen 300:10.
22.
I.e., tie the linen and woolen garments together.
23.
I.e., there is no prohibition against benefiting from them.
24.
I.e., covering oneself with a blanket made from both linen and wool.
25.
I.e., blankets or sheets spread on the floor or on furniture.
26.
Our translation is taken from Rav Kapach's notes to the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kilayim 9:2) who interprets the Arabic term the Rambam employs as referring to cushions one places behind his back for support.
The Ra'avad cites the Jerusalem Talmud (Kilayim 9:1) which qualifies the leniency, stating that it applies only when the pillows and cushions are solid. If they are stuffed, they are forbidden lest they become wound around a person's flesh. This view is also cited by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah301:1).
27.
I.e., there must be something else interposing between one's flesh and thekilayim.
28.
Note the gloss of the Radbaz who explains why the Rambam deviates slightly from the wording used in his source, Beitzah 14b.
29.
Our translation is taken from the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kilayim 9:6). The slippers were worn to walk on cushions and spreads and not for the person's own benefit.
30.
The Radbaz asks: Since the person is not benefiting from wearing the slipper, what difference does it make whether it has a heel or not? He explains that if the slippers have heels, they appear as functional garments and hence, it is forbidden to wear them if they contain kilayim. Alternatively, if they have a heel, it is impossible that they will not warm one's feet. The Kessef Mishneh states that indeed even if the slippers have heels, it is permitted to wear them. The Rambam mentions slippers without heels, only because that was the kind of slippers worn at the time.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 301:13) quotes this law also with regard to wearing slippers like rubbers that are kilayim.
31.
I.e., draped over their legs.
32.
As mentioned above, the prohibition againstkilayim is twofold: not to wear them and not to have them come upon one's person. It is forbidden to wear kilayim under any circumstances (see Halachah 18), but it is forbidden to have them come upon one's person only if one benefits [Yevamot 4b; Beit Yosef (Yoreh De'ah 301)]. In this instance, although he may actually benefit from thekilayim, since he does not have the intent to benefit, the benefit is not significant. See the notes to Halachah 18.
33.
Our translation is taken from the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kilayim 9:5).
34.
So that the kilayim will not be draped over their bodies at all.
35.
I.e., draped over their shoulders and thus they are carrying the garments that arekilayim on their bodies.
36.
I.e., holding the hot egg will warm the cloth which in turn will warm his hands.
The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's ruling, noting that the Babylonian Talmud (Beitzah 16a) rules that there is no prohibition in a similar instance. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh show a source for the Rambam's ruling in the Jerusalem Talmud (Kilayim 9:3) and explain that there is no contradiction between that ruling and the passage from Beitzah.
37.
In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro connects this ruling to the concepts explained in Halachah 16. Wearing kilayim is forbidden under all circumstances, he explains, even if one does not receive any benefit. When, however, kilayim merely "come upon" one's body, there is no prohibition when one does not derive benefit. In his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 301:5), he quotes the Rambam's ruling.
The Tur and the Rama follow the opinion of Rabbenu Asher who maintains that even wearing kilayim is permitted, provided one does not intend to benefit from wearing them. This touches on an issue of a larger scope: Whether a prohibited that is not performed with the intent to benefit is forbidden or not. The Rambam apparently maintains that it is forbidden, while Rabbenu Asher maintains that it is permissible. This explanation is, however, difficult, for inHilchot Shabbat 1:5, the Rambam rules that according to Scriptural Law, there is no prohibition when one performs an act without an intent to benefit. The Radbaz explains that there is a difference of opinion concerning this matter among the Sages. Since the prohibitions of the Sabbath are regarded seriously by people at large, in that context, the Rambam did not worry about taking the more lenient position. The laws regarding kilayim are not considered as severe. Hence he felt it necessary to take a more stringent position. See also the Turei Zahav 301:7 and the Siftei Cohen 301:8 who offer explanations of the Rambam's view.
38.
I.e., if one's personal garments are not subject to customs duty, but merchandise is, one might desire to wear garments ofkilayim that were meant to be sold so that they will not be considered as merchandise and thus he would avoid paying customs duty for them. See Rav Kapach's edition of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kilayim 9:2).
See Hilchot Gezeilah 5:11-12 on which basis it can be derived when it is permitted to deceive a customs inspector and when doing so is forbidden.
39.
The Turei Zahav 300:11 maintains that we are speaking about a permanent knot, i.e. a double knot, even though the Beit Yosefstates that one knot is sufficient for there to be a prohibition involved.
40.
Since they are tied together, they considered as connected and part of one garment.
41.
For his hand will be warmed by them (Siftei Cohen 300:12). Even though he does not intend to benefit from the activity, it is still forbidden as above. As in Halachah 18, theShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 300:6) follows the Rambam's view, the Rama follows the opinion of Rabbenu Asher who grants leniency in such a situation.
42.
Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kilayim 9:3).
43.
Here the Rambam uses a slightly different interpretation than that found in his Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid.).
44.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid.), the Rambam explains this term as referring to the cloths which a person holds when reading from the Torah.
45.
The cloth a barber puts on the shoulders of the person receiving a haircut (ibid.).
46.
In his initial version of his Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.; which is followed in the standard printed version of the text), the Rambam rules that there is no prohibition involved in these instances. Later, however, based on the ruling of the Jerusalem Talmud, he changed his mind and forbade them for the reason given here.
47.
In the Talmudic era, laundry tickets were made of small fragments of cloth. If they were kilayim, there would be a difficulty involved.
48.
This concept also has ramifications with regard to the laws of ritual purity. If they are connected so loosely and an object that conveys impurity touches one, the other does not become impure, nor is one liable for separating them on the Sabbath [Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kilayim 9:10)].
49.
In the above source, the Rambam explains that if the two cloths are pulled in opposite directions, they will separate effortlessly.
50.
The bracketed additions are made on the basis of the commentary of the Rav Ovadiah of Bartenura to the above mishnah and the Turei Zahav 300:3. It appears from the Rambam, that he changed his understanding of the mishnah slightly, for there he interprets the two clauses as complementing each other and describing the same circumstance. Here, however, he describes them as two separate instances.
51.
The Radbaz notes that that in Hilchot Shabbat 10:9, the Rambam rules that for a person to be liable, in addition to sewing two stitches, he must tie the threads in a knot. He explains that the laws of the Sabbath are stricter than those applying to kilayim. For one to be liable on the Sabbath, one must perform a labor that has a permanent effect, while to be liable for kilayim, all that is necessary is that the two garments be connected at the time.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 300:2) quotes the ruling of the Rambam. The Turand the Rama follow the opinion of Rabbenu Asher who maintains that to be liable, one must tie the two threads.
52.
Tosafot, Niddah 61b notes that we must be careful not to wear tzitzit in the presence of a corpse lest this be considered as "mocking the poor," i.e., mocking the dead who can no longer observe the mitzvot [seeShulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 23:4)]. Nevertheless, wrapping a corpse in a garment that is forbidden is not considered as mockery, because since the person is not deriving benefit, even during his lifetime, there would be no prohibition.
The Or Zerua, Vol. II, sec. 421, emphasizes that even after the resurrection of the dead, there will be no difficulty with the dead being clothed in kilayim, for in that future era, the observance of mitzvot will be nullified.
53.
Provided it is obvious in contrast to Halachah 27.
54.
For it is firm and thus, as stated in Halachah 13, will not become wound around his body.
55.
For this is "bringing kilayim upon oneself." Furthermore, we cannot say that he is doing this unintentionally, because he is using the saddle-blankets to protect him from being sullied by the compost.
56.
This situation resembles the sellers of clothing mentioned in Halachah 16.
57.
See Halachot 6-7 above which emphasize that a thread of shaatnez can never become nullified.
58.
Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 18:17. See also Hilchot Sha'ar Avot HaTumah 16:1.
59.
The Ra'avad takes issue with the Rambam on this point. He agrees that according to Scriptural Law, one is not liable in a situation of doubt, but maintains that our Sages required us to be stringent when there is a doubt. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishnehagree with the Ra'avad in principle, but explain the Rambam's words as follows: Because all that is involved is a Rabbinic prohibition and this is an exceptional and abnormal situation, our Sages granted leniency.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 302:1) quotes the Rambam's ruling. The Tur and the Ramah follow the approach of the Ra'avad and allow leniency only when the prohibition against kilayim is Rabbinic in origin.
60.
This law is relevant at the present time as well, because the thread and the lining of garments are often made from linen. For this reason, Sha'atnez laboratories have been established in most major cities to examine garments to see if they contain linen.
61.
Despite the embarrassment it might cause, because every moment he wears it, he transgresses the prohibition against kilayim.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 303:1) quotes the Rambam's ruling. The Tur and the Rama maintain that this ruling applies only when the person is conscious of the transgression he is performing. If, however, he performs the violation unintentionally, the garment should not be removed from him in public.
62.
Whom he is obligated to honor (Hilchot Talmud Torah, ch. 5).
63.
Berachot 19b quotes Proverbs 21:30: "There is no wisdom; there is no understanding; and there is no counsel against God" and concludes: "Wherever there is a desecration of God's name (i.e., the transgression of a prohibition in public), deference is not granted to a master's honor."
64.
I.e., the Torah forbids ignoring the lost object and not trying to return it to its owner (Hilchot Gezeilah Va'Aveidah 11:1). Nevertheless, if the person who discovers the lost object is a Torah scholar and it is compromising to his honor to return it, he is not required to do so (ibid.:13).
65.
A person can waive his colleague's obligation to him with regard to financial matters. Hence, we assume that he would waive return of the article in consideration of the Sages' honor.
66.
I.e., a priest who is ordinarily forbidden to come in contact with the ritual impurity resulting from a human corpse (Hilchot Evel3:1) must bury a corpse that has no one else to bury it (ibid.:8).
67.
He is commanded to become impure for the burial of all his immediate relatives with the exception of his married sister (Leviticus 21:3).
68.
Berachot, loc. cit.
69.
I.e., one of the 365 prohibitions in the Torah forbids us from deviating from the commands of the Sages [Sefer HaMitzvot(negative commandment 312) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 496), Hilchot Mamrim1:2].
70.
For it is considered as if he violated only one transgression.
71.
Provided he received a warning each time (Kessef Mishneh).
72.
Although a person who violates a prohibition without committing a deed is not liable for lashes, there is a difference in this instance, because wearing the garment is considered as committing a deed (Ritba, as quoted byKessef Mishneh).
73.
He is not considered as if he did not perform a deed when committing this transgression, because as in the previous halachah, wearing the garment itself can be considered a deed. Moreover, when a person dresses a colleague, the person being dressed helps to some degree. That is sufficient a deed to warrant lashes (Kessef Mishneh).
74.
See Hilchot Rotzeach 12:14 which interprets this phrase from Leviticus 19:14 as a prohibition against causing a person who is unaware to commit a spiritually undesirable act.
75.
In one of his Responsa (Klal 2, Responsum 16), Rabbenu Asher differs and maintains that there is no prohibition involved other than "placing a stumbling block in front of the blind" and one is not liable for lashes for violating that prohibition since it is of a general scope.
The Radbaz explains that the Rambam considers the prohibition against Kilayim as also applicable to a person dressing a colleague. He questions, however, why the Rambam does not rule in a similar manner inHilchot Nazir 5:20.
76.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam concerning this point, maintaining that as long as the priests are in the Temple, it is permitted for them to wear the priestly garments.
77.
See Hilchot K'Lei HaMikdash 8:1, 11. The Ra'avad questions why the Rambam singles out the sash, other priestly garments (e.g., the choshen and the ephod) also containkilayim. The Kessef Mishneh states that the Rambam chose to highlight a garment used by an ordinary priest, not one used by the High Priest.
78.
And the observance of a positive commandment supercedes that of a negative commandment.
Matnot Aniyim - Chapter 1
Halacha 1
When a person harvests his field, he should not harvest the entire field. Instead, he should leave a small portion1 of the standing grain2 at the end of his field,3 as [Leviticus 23:22] states: "Do not completely remove [the grain in] the corners of your field when reaping."4 [This prohibition applies] to one who reaps5and one who uproots.6 [The grain] left [standing] is referred to as pe'ah.
Halacha 2
Just as one leaves [pe'ah] in his field, so too, [he must leave pe'ah] for trees. When he gathers his produce, he should leave some for the poor. If he transgressed and harvested the entire field or gathered all of the produce of the trees, he should take some of what was harvested or gathered and give it to the poor.7
Halacha 3
Halacha 4
Similarly, with regard to leket:12 When one harvests13or binds sheaves, he should not gather the stalks that fall during the harvest. Instead, he should leave them for the poor, as it is stated [ibid.]: "You shall not gather the gleanings of your harvest."14 If he transgresses and gathers them - even if ground them [into flour] and baked [them], he must give it to the poor, as it states [ibid.]: "Leave it for the poor and the stranger."15 If [this produce] is lost or consumed by fire after he gathered it, but before he gave it to the poor, he is liable for lashes.16
Halacha 5
Similar [laws apply to] individual grapes that fall during the grape harvest and to underdeveloped grape clusters, as it is stated [ibid. 19:10]: "Do not harvest underdeveloped grape clusters from your vineyard,17 nor gather individual grapes that fall in your vineyard.18 Leave it for the poor and the stranger."19
Similarly, if a person is binding sheaves of wheat into bundles and forgets one bundle, he may not go back and take it,20 as [Deuteronomy 24:19] states: "If you forget a sheave in the field, do not return to take it."21 If he transgressed and gathered it - even if he ground it [into flour] and baked [it], he must give it to the poor, as it states [ibid.]: "They shall be for the stranger, the orphan, and the widow." This is a positive commandment.22
Thus you have learned that they all are prohibitions that can be corrected by positive commandments. If one [transgresses and] does not fulfill the positive commandment involved, he is worthy of lashes.
Halacha 6
Just as [the prohibition against taking] forgotten produce (shichichah) applies with regard to sheaves, so too, it applies to standing grain.23 If one forgot standing grain and did not harvest it, it should be [given] to the poor. Just as [the prohibition against taking] forgotten produce applies with regard to grain and the like, so too, it applies to all [fruit-bearing] trees, as it is stated [ibid.:20]: "When you beat your olive tree,24 do not go back and take its glory." This law also applies to [produce from] other trees.
Halacha 7
Thus it can be concluded that there are four types of presents given to the poor in a vineyard: individual grapes that fall, underdeveloped grape clusters,pe'ah, and forgotten produce. There are three presents from a grain crop:leket, forgotten produce, and pe'ah, and two from trees: forgotten produce andpe'ah.
Halacha 8
Halacha 9
Whenever the term "stranger" is used with regard to [these] presents to the poor, the intent is a convert to Judaism.27 [This is evident from the wording used by Deuteronomy 14:29] with regard to the tithe [given to the] poor:28"And the Levite and the stranger will come." Just as the Levite is a member of the covenant, so too, the "stranger" is a member of the covenant. Nevertheless, we do not prevent gentiles from [taking] these presents. Instead, they [are allowed to] come together with the poor of Israel29 and take them as [an expression of the Torah's] ways of peace.
Halacha 10
With regard to [these] presents for the poor, it is said: "Leave it for the poor and the stranger." [Implied is that the obligation exists only] when the poor demand them. If the poor cease seeking them and searching for them, the remainder is permitted for any person.30 For - in contrast to terumah - the physical substance [of the crops] does not become consecrated. Nor is he required to give their worth to [the poor], for it is not stated [that he should] give them to the poor, but that he should "leave it." He is not commanded to leave it for the beasts and the wild fowl, but for the poor, and there are no poor.
Halacha 11
When is everyone allowed to collect the leket?31 When a second wave of gatherers gather after the first wave of gatherers and then depart.
When is everyone allowed to collect individual grapes that fall and underdeveloped grape clusters? When the poor walked through the vineyard and departed. What remains afterwards is permitted for every one.
When is everyone allowed to collect olives that were forgotten in Eretz Yisrael?32 If they were forgotten while on the tree, one is permitted to take them from Rosh Chodesh Kislev33 which is the time of the second rain34 in a late year.35 One is permitted, by contrast, [to take] masses of collected olives forgotten under a tree after the poor have ceased seeking them.
Halacha 12
As long as a poor person has the right to take olives left on the earth under the trees, he may take them,36 although people at large have already been granted license [to take] the forgotten produce on the tree itself.37 As long as one has the right to take forgotten produce from the tree itself, he may do so, even though he does not have the right to take forgotten produce from under the tree.38
Halacha 13
Halacha 14
According to Scriptural Law, all of these presents for the poor must be given only in Eretz Yisrael41 like terumah and the tithes, as [indicated by Leviticus 19:9]: "When you reap the harvest of your land" and [Deuteronomy 24:19]: "When you reap your harvest in your field." 42 It has already been explained in the Talmud that [the mitzvah of] pe'ah must be observed in the Diaspora according to Rabbinic decree. It appears to me43 that this law applies to all the remainder of these presents to the poor. All of their [obligations] must be observed in the Diaspora according to Rabbinic decree.44
Halacha 15
What is the minimum obligation for pe'ah? According to Scriptural Law, there is no minimum measure. Even if one leaves only one grain stalk, he fulfills his obligation. According to Rabbinic law, however, one must leave one-sixtieth [of the crop], whether in Eretz Yisrael or in the Diaspora. And one should add to the measure of one-sixtieth based on the size of the field, the amount of poor people, and the blessing in his crop.
What is implied? When a field is very small and leaving one-sixtieth would not be of any advantage to the poor person,45 he should increase the measure. Similarly, if there are many poor people, he should increase [the measure]. And if he sowed only a small amount and reaped a lot, he has been granted blessing and he should increase according to the blessing. Whoever adds to the pe'ah will be given additional reward. There is no limit to this increase.46
FOOTNOTES
1.
As stated in Halachah 15, according to Scriptural Law, there is no minimal requirement for the amount of grain one must leave.
2.
I.e., ideally, the mitzvah of pe'ah is fulfilled by leaving a portion of one's field unharvested and allow the poor to harvest it. See Pe'ah4:1.
3.
See Chapter 2, Halachah 12.
4.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 210) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 217) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
5.
I.e., harvests by cutting off produce above its roots.
6.
I.e., harvests by pulling the plant up by its roots.
7.
I.e., he can compensate for his initial failure to fulfill the mitzvah, by giving some of the produce already harvested.
8.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 120) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 216) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
9.
As explained in Halachah 9, the term "stranger" refers to a convert to Judaism.
10.
If, however, his crops were destroyed before he harvested them, he is not liable.
11.
Otherwise, he should give the pe'ah. By doing so, he corrects the transgression he performed previously.
The wording used by the Rambam clarifies his approach with regard to a difference of opinion among our Sages (Makkot 16b). Rabbi Yochanan says that for a person to be liable for the transgression of a negative commandment that can be corrected by a positive commandment, he must personally perform an action that prevents the positive commandment from being fulfilled. Resh Lakish differs and maintains that as long as he no longer has the opportunity of fulfilling the mitzvah, he is liable for the transgression. From the wording here, it appears that the Rambam follows the second view.
12.
See Chapter 4, Halachah 1, for more details concerning leket.
13.
The Hebrew terms imply both harvesting with a sickle or reaping by hand.
14.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 211) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 219) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
15.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 121) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 218) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
16.
I.e., the negative commandment can be corrected by the positive commandment, as stated in the previous halachah.
17.
This term is more specifically defined in Chapter 4, Halachah 15.
18.
This term is more specifically defined in Chapter 4, Halachot 17-18.
19.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 212) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 221) include the prohibition against harvesting underdeveloped clusters of grapes among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 123) andSefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 220) include the commandment to leave them for the poor in that grouping.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 213) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 223) include the prohibition against gathering individual grapes that fall among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. Sefer HaMitzvot(positive commandment 124) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 222) include the commandment to leave them for the poor in that grouping.
20.
More details concerning this mitzvah are found in Chapter 5, Halachah 1.
21.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 214) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 593) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
22.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 122) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 592) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
23.
The prooftext speaks about forgetting "a sheave in the field." Nevertheless, the Sifriinterprets the word "field" as indicating that standing grain in a field is also included in the prohibition.
24.
One of the ways of harvesting olives is to beat the trees so that the olives fall.
25.
The above translates the halachic constructtovat hana'ah. The intent is that the owner cannot say: "I will give the produce to the poor, but let me choose the poor man to whom I desire to give it."
26.
For when commanding that these presents be given, the Torah does not use the word "give," but rather "leave." Implied is that all the owner can do is leave it; he cannot take it and give it to a person at will (see Chullin131b).
27.
I.e., and not a non-Jew visiting Eretz Yisraeleven if he accepts the Seven Universal Laws Commanded to Noach's Descendants (a ger toshav).
28.
Our translation is based on manuscript copies and early printings of the Mishneh Torah. There is a printing error in the standard published text.
29.
The Radbaz interprets the Rambam's wording as implying that if gentiles come alone, not in the company of Jews, they should be sent away. Rav Yosef Corcus adds that if there are no Jewish poor, these presents should not be left for the gentile poor.
30.
Even the owner of the field. See the notes to Halachah 134 regarding this issue.
31.
This halachah gives examples that illustrate the general principle stated in the previous halachah.
32.
For as stated in Halachah 14, according to Scriptural Law, this is the only place of consequence for these presents.
33.
From this time onward, the olive-picking season is completed.
34.
The early winter rain which follows the spring rain.
35.
I.e., the Jewish calendar follows the moon, while the secular calendar follows the sun. Although adjustments are made to keep the two in sync, there are years when the Jewish months come earlier in the solar year and others when they come later.
36.
And ordinary people may not.
37.
For the appropriate time has already passed.
38.
For the poor might still consider collecting it.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's ruling, stating that it does not agree with the Rambam's source, Pe'ah 7:2. Indeed, in his own Commentary to the Mishnah, the Rambam offers a different interpretation than here. The Kessef Mishneh explains that the Rambam's ruling here is dependent on his understanding of the treatment of the subject by the Jerusalem Talmud.
39.
The Aruch HaShulchan interprets this as referring to produce that the poor have walked by several times without picking up.
40.
Since they are ownerless, he acquires them by virtue of their presence in his property.
41.
The boundaries of Eretz Yisrael are outlined in Hilchot Terumah, ch. 1.
42.
The emphasis of the terms "your land" and "your field" is land that has an inherent connection with the Jewish people.
43.
This phrase introduces a conclusion developed by the Rambam on the basis of deduction without an explicit source in previous Rabbinic literature.
44.
In this context, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 332:1) states: "If Jewish poor are not commonly found there, it is not necessary to leave [these presents]." (Significantly, the commentaries cite the Rambam, apparently Halachah 10, as the source.) The Rama continues stating that on this basis, it is no longer customary to leave these presents, because the likelihood is that they will be taken by gentiles. The statements of theSiftei Cohen 332:1 imply that this leniency is granted only in the Diaspora and not in Eretz Yisrael. There is, however, a difference of opinion concerning this issue and, in practice, even within the observant community, these mitzvot are not observed today even in Eretz Yisrael. For these reasons, the laws concerning these mitzvot are not included in the Shulchan Aruch.
45.
Because it is too small an amount to be significant.
46.
I.e., one can give as much as he desires. This is the intent of the mishnah recited each morning after the Blessings for Torah Study: "These are the matters for which there are no measure: pe'ah, bikkurim, appearing in the Temple, and Torah study," i.e., just like all the other subjects mentioned in that source, there is no upper limit to how much pe'ahone may leave.
• English Text | Video Class•
"Today's Day"
Shabbat, Adar II 9, 5776 · 19 March 2016
Tuesday Adar Sheini 9* 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Vayikra, Shlishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 49-54.
Tanya: For this purpose (p. 165)...of blessed memory. (p. 165).
In the b'racha Borei nefashot (p. 95), say al kol ma shebarata, "kol" with a cholam, not a kamatz.
The intense longing to be bound closely1 (to a Rebbe) can be satisfied only by learning maamarim of Chassidus which the Rebbe delivers as oral discourses and writes down; simply seeing him2 is not enough.
FOOTNOTES
*.On this day, in 5700 (1940), the Previous Rebbe o.b.m. arrived in the U.S.A. "The day marks the essential beginning of the 'dissemination of the wellsprings (of chassidus) to the outside' in this lower hemisphere"; a quotation - according to the memory of a listener - from the Rebbe of righteous memory, from a sicha of Shabbat Parshat Tetzaveh, 5745 (1985), in which the great significance and import of the day is explained at length.
1.See Sivan 24.
2.Lit. "Beholding his face."
•
Daily Thought:
Decisions
Sometimes you need to make a decision as follows:
There is a small but good thing you could do. You are afraid that by doing it, you may lose out on a much greater and longer-lasting good in the future.
We are not prophets. None of us can tell what tomorrow will bring. We can only live in the here and now, and do whatever good comes our way.
If it came your way now, it is yours to do now.
No comments:
Post a Comment