Today is: Monday, Adar II 25, 5776 · April 4, 2016
Torah Reading
Tazria: Leviticus 12:1 Adonai said to Moshe, 2 “Tell the people of Isra’el: ‘If a woman conceives and gives birth to a boy, she will be unclean for seven days with the same uncleanness as in niddah, when she is having her menstrual period. 3 On the eighth day, the baby’s foreskin is to be circumcised. 4 She is to wait an additional thirty-three days to be purified from her blood; she is not to touch any holy thing or come into the sanctuary until the time of her purification is over. 5 But if she gives birth to a girl, she will be unclean for two weeks, as in her niddah; and she is to wait another sixty-six days to be purified from her blood.
6 “‘When the days of her purification are over, whether for a son or for a daughter, she is to bring a lamb in its first year for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or dove for a sin offering to the entrance of the tent of meeting, to the cohen. 7 He will offer it before Adonai and make atonement for her; thus she will be purified from her discharge of blood. Such is the law for a woman who gives birth, whether to a boy or to a girl. 8 If she can’t afford a lamb, she is to take two doves or two young pigeons, the one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering; the cohen will make atonement for her, and she will be clean.’”
13:1 Adonai said to Moshe and Aharon, 2 “If someone develops on his skin a swelling, scab or bright spot which could develop into the disease tzara‘at, he is to be brought to Aharon the cohen or to one of his sons who are cohanim. 3 The cohen is to examine the sore on his skin; if the hair in the sore has turned white, and the sore appears to go deep into the skin, it is tzara‘at, and after examining him the cohen is to declare him unclean. 4 If the bright spot on his skin is white, but it does not appear to go deep into the skin, and its hair has not turned white, then the cohen is to isolate him for seven days. 5 On the seventh day the cohen is to examine him again, and if the sore appears the same as before and has not spread on the skin, then the cohen is to isolate him for seven more days.
Today in Jewish History:
• Nebuchadnezzar died (397 BCE)
Death of King Nebuchadnezzar, the Babylonian emperor who conquered Jerusalem anddestroyed the first Holy Temple 26 years earlier, died on the 25th of Adar of the year 3364 from creation. (Jeremiah 52:31)
• Rebbetzin Chaya Mushka Schneerson's Birthday (1901)
Rebbetzin Chaya Mushkah Schneerson (1901-1988) of righteous memory, wife of the Lubavitcher Rebbe of righteous memory, was born on Shabbat, the 25th of Adar, in Babinovich, a town near the Russian city of Lubavitch, in the year 5661 from creation (1901). In an address delivered on the 25 of Adar of 1988 (the Rebbetzin's 87th birthday, and about a month after her passing), the Rebbe initiated an international birthday campaign, urging people to celebrate their birthdays and utilize the day as a time of introspection and making resolutions involving an increase in good deeds.
Links:
An on-line biography of the Rebbetzin
On the Jewish Birthday and the birthday customs
Daily Quote:
"Teshuvah out of love" [arises] from the depths of the heart, with great love, desire, and a craving soul to cleave to G-d; the soul thirsts for G-d like a parched and barren soil, because, up until now, it was in a barren wilderness and in the shadow of death... and very distant from the face of G-d... It is regarding repentance out of such great love that it has it been said that premeditated sins become, for him, like virtues, since through them he attained this great love...[Tanya, chapter 7]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Tazria, 2nd Portion Leviticus 13:6-13:17 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class• Leviticus Chapter 13
6And the kohen shall see him on the seventh day a second time. And, behold! the lesion has become dimmer, and the lesion has not spread on the skin, the kohen shall pronounce him clean. It is a mispachath. He shall immerse his garments and become clean. ווְרָאָה֩ הַכֹּהֵ֨ן אֹת֜וֹ בַּיּ֣וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי֘ שֵׁנִית֒ וְהִנֵּה֙ כֵּהָ֣ה הַנֶּ֔גַע וְלֹֽא־פָשָׂ֥ה הַנֶּ֖גַע בָּע֑וֹר וְטִֽהֲר֤וֹ הַכֹּהֵן֙ מִסְפַּ֣חַת הִ֔וא וְכִבֶּ֥ס בְּגָדָ֖יו וְטָהֵֽר:
has become dimmer: [I.e.,] it became dimmer in its appearance. Hence, if it remained the same in its appearance or spread, he is unclean. כהה: הוכהה מראיתו, הא אם עמד במראיתו או פשה טמא:
mispachath: The name of a clean lesion. מספחת: שם נגע טהור:
He shall immerse his garments and become clean: Since he was required to be quarantined, he is considered unclean and requires immersion. וכבס בגדיו וטהר: הואיל ונזקק להסגר נקרא טמא וצריך טבילה:
7However, if the mispachath.spreads on the skin after it has been shown it to the kohen for its purification, it shall be shown to the kohen a second time. זוְאִם־פָּשׂ֨ה תִפְשֶׂ֤ה הַמִּסְפַּ֨חַת֙ בָּע֔וֹר אַֽחֲרֵ֧י הֵרָֽאֹת֛וֹ אֶל־הַכֹּהֵ֖ן לְטָֽהֳרָת֑וֹ וְנִרְאָ֥ה שֵׁנִ֖ית אֶל־הַכֹּהֵֽן:
8The kohen shall look [at it]. And, behold! the mispachath has spread on the skin. The kohen shall pronounce him unclean. It is tzara'ath. חוְרָאָה֙ הַכֹּהֵ֔ן וְהִנֵּ֛ה פָּֽשְׂתָ֥ה הַמִּסְפַּ֖חַת בָּע֑וֹר וְטִמְּא֥וֹ הַכֹּהֵ֖ן צָרַ֥עַת הִֽוא:
The kohen shall pronounce him unclean: And as soon as [the kohen] has pronounced him unclean, he is then “definitely” [unclean, and when he is healed, he] requires the bird offerings, shaving, and the sacrifice, specified in the section commencing: “This shall be the law of the metzora ” (תּוֹרַת הַמְצֹרָע) זֹאת תִּהֶיה. — [see Lev., Chapter 14; Meg. 8b] וטמאו הכהן: ומשטמאו הרי הוא מוחלט וזקוק לצפרים ולתגלחת ולקרבן האמור בפרשת זאת תהיה:
It is tzara’ath: I.e., this mispachath [is tzara’ath]. צרעת הוא: המספחת הזאת:
tzara’ath: Heb. צָרַעַת. [The term] צָרַעַת is feminine [which is why the verse says צָרַעַת הִוא, using the feminine word for “it”]. [The term] נֶגַע, lesion, however, is masculine [thus in verse 3, for instance, it says צָרַעַת הוּא, using the masculine word for “it,” referring to the נֶגַע rather than to the tzara’ath]. צרעת: לשון נקבה:
9If a man has a lesion of tzara'ath, he shall be brought to the kohen. טנֶ֣גַע צָרַ֔עַת כִּ֥י תִֽהְיֶ֖ה בְּאָדָ֑ם וְהוּבָ֖א אֶל־הַכֹּהֵֽן:
10The kohen shall look [at it]. And, behold! there is a white se'eith on the skin, and either it has turned the hair white, or there is healthy, live flesh in the se'eith, יוְרָאָ֣ה הַכֹּהֵ֗ן וְהִנֵּ֤ה שְׂאֵֽת־לְבָנָה֙ בָּע֔וֹר וְהִ֕יא הָֽפְכָ֖ה שֵׂעָ֣ר לָבָ֑ן וּמִחְיַ֛ת בָּשָׂ֥ר חַ֖י בַּשְׂאֵֽת:
healthy flesh: Heb. מִחְיַת, sa(y)nement in Old French, a healing. [It means that] part of the white in the se’eith lesion reverts to appear like [healthy] flesh. This is also a sign of uncleanness. [Hence, a sign of uncleanness is] either white hair without a מִחְיַָה, or a מִחְיַָה, an area of normal flesh, even without white hair. And even though מִחְיַָה is mentioned only in connection with the se’eith, nevertheless, in all [major] manifestations [of the lesion of tzara’ath] and their related categories, it is a sign of uncleanness. — [Torath Kohanim 13:69] ומחית: שינמינ"ט בלע"ז [רפוי], שנהפך מקצת הלובן שבתוך השאת למראה בשר, אף הוא סימן טומאה, שער לבן בלא מחיה, ומחיה בלא שער לבן, ואף על פי שלא נאמרה מחיה אלא בשאת, אף בכל המראות ותולדותיהן הוא סימן טומאה:
11it is old tzara'ath on the skin of his flesh, and the kohen shall pronounce him unclean; he need not quarantine him because he is unclean. יאצָרַ֨עַת נוֹשֶׁ֤נֶת הִוא֙ בְּע֣וֹר בְּשָׂר֔וֹ וְטִמְּא֖וֹ הַכֹּהֵ֑ן לֹ֣א יַסְגִּרֶ֔נּוּ כִּ֥י טָמֵ֖א הֽוּא:
it is an old tzara’ath: It is an old lesion which is under the area of normal skin. This wound appears healthy on the surface, but it is full of fluid underneath, so that one should not say, “Since healthy skin has appeared over [the lesion], I shall pronounce it clean!” צרעת נושנת הוא: מכה ישנה היא תחת המחיה, וחבורה זו נראית בריאה מלמעלה ותחתיה מלאה לחה, שלא תאמר הואיל ועלתה מחיה אטהרנה:
12And if the tzara'ath has spread over the skin, whereby the tzara'ath covers all the skin of the [person with the] lesion, from his head to his feet, wherever the eyes of the kohen can see it, יבוְאִם־פָּר֨וֹחַ תִּפְרַ֤ח הַצָּרַ֨עַת֙ בָּע֔וֹר וְכִסְּתָ֣ה הַצָּרַ֗עַת אֵ֚ת כָּל־ע֣וֹר הַנֶּ֔גַע מֵֽרֹאשׁ֖וֹ וְעַד־רַגְלָ֑יו לְכָל־מַרְאֵ֖ה עֵינֵ֥י הַכֹּהֵֽן:
from his head: [I.e., from the head] of the person [down] to his feet. מראשו: של אדם ועד רגליו:
wherever the eyes of the kohen can see it: [This phrase] comes to exclude a kohen whose eyesight has dimmed. [I.e., a kohen with one blind eye or with impaired vision in both eyes may not pronounce the status of lesions.]- [Torath Kohanim 13:83] לכל מראה עיני הכהן: פרט לכהן שחשך מאורו:
13then the kohen shall look [at it]. And, behold! the tzara'ath has covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce [the person with] the lesion clean. He has turned completely white; he is clean. יגוְרָאָ֣ה הַכֹּהֵ֗ן וְהִנֵּ֨ה כִסְּתָ֤ה הַצָּרַ֨עַת֙ אֶת־כָּל־בְּשָׂר֔וֹ וְטִהַ֖ר אֶת־הַנָּ֑גַע כֻּלּ֛וֹ הָפַ֥ךְ לָבָ֖ן טָה֥וֹר הֽוּא:
14But on the day that live flesh appears in it, he shall become unclean. ידוּבְי֨וֹם הֵֽרָא֥וֹת בּ֛וֹ בָּשָׂ֥ר חַ֖י יִטְמָֽא:
But on the day that live flesh appears in it: If healthy flesh grows on it, [Scripture] has already explained that healthy flesh is a sign of uncleanness. [Therefore, what is this verse telling us here?] However, a case where the lesion was located on one of twenty-four tips of the limbs is not deemed unclean on account of healthy flesh because the lesion cannot be seen all at one glance [once an area of healthy flesh appears within the lesion], since these [limb tips] slope down on either side. [Therefore it is not deemed unclean.] If, however, such a tip of a limb altered [in its form], allowing its slanted facet to appear through fat-for example, when the tip of a limb became fat and broadened, and the healthy flesh (מִחְיַָה) became visible within [the lesion, thereby allowing the lesion to become visible all at one glance], Scripture teaches us [here] that it becomes unclean. — [Torath Kohanim 13:86] וביום הראות בו בשר חי: אם צמחה בו מחיה הרי כבר פירש שהמחיה סימן טומאה, אלא הרי שהיה הנגע באחד מעשרים וארבעה ראשי איברים שאין מטמאין משום מחיה, לפי שאין נראה הנגע כולו כאחד ששופע אילך ואילך, וחזר ראש האבר ונתגלה שפועו ע"י שומן, כגון שהבריא ונעשה רחב ונראית בו המחיה, למדנו הכתוב שתטמא:
But on the day [that live flesh] appears: [The verse could have simply said, “But when live flesh appears.”] What does Scripture teach us [by saying,] “on the day”]? It [comes] to teach that there is a day on which you [the kohen] look [i.e., examine the suspected lesion], and there is a day on which you do not look [i.e., when he may not examine it]. From here [our Rabbis] say that a bridegroom is exempt [from having a lesion examined] throughout all the seven days of the wedding feast, for himself, his garments, and his house. Similarly, during a Festival [people] are exempt [from having a lesion examined] throughout all the days of the Festival. - [Torath Kohanim 13:87] וביום: מה תלמוד לומר, ללמד יש יום שאתה רואה בו ויש יום שאין אתה רואה בו, מכאן אמרו חתן נותנין לו כל שבעת ימי המשתה לו ולכסותו ולביתו, וכן ברגל נותנין לו כל ימי הרגל:
15When the kohen sees the healthy, live flesh, he shall pronounce him unclean. The live flesh is unclean; it is tzara'ath. טווְרָאָ֧ה הַכֹּהֵ֛ן אֶת־הַבָּשָׂ֥ר הַחַ֖י וְטִמְּא֑וֹ הַבָּשָׂ֥ר הַחַ֛י טָמֵ֥א ה֖וּא צָרַ֥עַת הֽוּא:
it is tzara’ath: meaning, that flesh. Flesh (בָּשָׂר) is grammatically masculine. [Hence, the wording: צָרַעַת הוּא, rather than צָרַעַת הִיא, as in verse 8.] צרעת הוא: הבשר ההוא. בשר לשון זכר:
16But, if the healthy, live flesh once again turns white, he shall come to the kohen. טזא֣וֹ כִ֥י יָשׁ֛וּב הַבָּשָׂ֥ר הַחַ֖י וְנֶהְפַּ֣ךְ לְלָבָ֑ן וּבָ֖א אֶל־הַכֹּהֵֽן:
17And the kohen shall look at it. And, behold! the lesion has turned white; the kohen shall pronounce the lesion clean. He is clean. יזוְרָאָ֨הוּ֙ הַכֹּהֵ֔ן וְהִנֵּ֛ה נֶהְפַּ֥ךְ הַנֶּ֖גַע לְלָבָ֑ן וְטִהַ֧ר הַכֹּהֵ֛ן אֶת־הַנֶּ֖גַע טָה֥וֹר הֽוּא:
• Nebuchadnezzar died (397 BCE)
Death of King Nebuchadnezzar, the Babylonian emperor who conquered Jerusalem anddestroyed the first Holy Temple 26 years earlier, died on the 25th of Adar of the year 3364 from creation. (Jeremiah 52:31)
• Rebbetzin Chaya Mushka Schneerson's Birthday (1901)
Rebbetzin Chaya Mushkah Schneerson (1901-1988) of righteous memory, wife of the Lubavitcher Rebbe of righteous memory, was born on Shabbat, the 25th of Adar, in Babinovich, a town near the Russian city of Lubavitch, in the year 5661 from creation (1901). In an address delivered on the 25 of Adar of 1988 (the Rebbetzin's 87th birthday, and about a month after her passing), the Rebbe initiated an international birthday campaign, urging people to celebrate their birthdays and utilize the day as a time of introspection and making resolutions involving an increase in good deeds.
Links:
An on-line biography of the Rebbetzin
On the Jewish Birthday and the birthday customs
Daily Quote:
"Teshuvah out of love" [arises] from the depths of the heart, with great love, desire, and a craving soul to cleave to G-d; the soul thirsts for G-d like a parched and barren soil, because, up until now, it was in a barren wilderness and in the shadow of death... and very distant from the face of G-d... It is regarding repentance out of such great love that it has it been said that premeditated sins become, for him, like virtues, since through them he attained this great love...[Tanya, chapter 7]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Tazria, 2nd Portion Leviticus 13:6-13:17 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class• Leviticus Chapter 13
6And the kohen shall see him on the seventh day a second time. And, behold! the lesion has become dimmer, and the lesion has not spread on the skin, the kohen shall pronounce him clean. It is a mispachath. He shall immerse his garments and become clean. ווְרָאָה֩ הַכֹּהֵ֨ן אֹת֜וֹ בַּיּ֣וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי֘ שֵׁנִית֒ וְהִנֵּה֙ כֵּהָ֣ה הַנֶּ֔גַע וְלֹֽא־פָשָׂ֥ה הַנֶּ֖גַע בָּע֑וֹר וְטִֽהֲר֤וֹ הַכֹּהֵן֙ מִסְפַּ֣חַת הִ֔וא וְכִבֶּ֥ס בְּגָדָ֖יו וְטָהֵֽר:
has become dimmer: [I.e.,] it became dimmer in its appearance. Hence, if it remained the same in its appearance or spread, he is unclean. כהה: הוכהה מראיתו, הא אם עמד במראיתו או פשה טמא:
mispachath: The name of a clean lesion. מספחת: שם נגע טהור:
He shall immerse his garments and become clean: Since he was required to be quarantined, he is considered unclean and requires immersion. וכבס בגדיו וטהר: הואיל ונזקק להסגר נקרא טמא וצריך טבילה:
7However, if the mispachath.spreads on the skin after it has been shown it to the kohen for its purification, it shall be shown to the kohen a second time. זוְאִם־פָּשׂ֨ה תִפְשֶׂ֤ה הַמִּסְפַּ֨חַת֙ בָּע֔וֹר אַֽחֲרֵ֧י הֵרָֽאֹת֛וֹ אֶל־הַכֹּהֵ֖ן לְטָֽהֳרָת֑וֹ וְנִרְאָ֥ה שֵׁנִ֖ית אֶל־הַכֹּהֵֽן:
8The kohen shall look [at it]. And, behold! the mispachath has spread on the skin. The kohen shall pronounce him unclean. It is tzara'ath. חוְרָאָה֙ הַכֹּהֵ֔ן וְהִנֵּ֛ה פָּֽשְׂתָ֥ה הַמִּסְפַּ֖חַת בָּע֑וֹר וְטִמְּא֥וֹ הַכֹּהֵ֖ן צָרַ֥עַת הִֽוא:
The kohen shall pronounce him unclean: And as soon as [the kohen] has pronounced him unclean, he is then “definitely” [unclean, and when he is healed, he] requires the bird offerings, shaving, and the sacrifice, specified in the section commencing: “This shall be the law of the metzora ” (תּוֹרַת הַמְצֹרָע) זֹאת תִּהֶיה. — [see Lev., Chapter 14; Meg. 8b] וטמאו הכהן: ומשטמאו הרי הוא מוחלט וזקוק לצפרים ולתגלחת ולקרבן האמור בפרשת זאת תהיה:
It is tzara’ath: I.e., this mispachath [is tzara’ath]. צרעת הוא: המספחת הזאת:
tzara’ath: Heb. צָרַעַת. [The term] צָרַעַת is feminine [which is why the verse says צָרַעַת הִוא, using the feminine word for “it”]. [The term] נֶגַע, lesion, however, is masculine [thus in verse 3, for instance, it says צָרַעַת הוּא, using the masculine word for “it,” referring to the נֶגַע rather than to the tzara’ath]. צרעת: לשון נקבה:
9If a man has a lesion of tzara'ath, he shall be brought to the kohen. טנֶ֣גַע צָרַ֔עַת כִּ֥י תִֽהְיֶ֖ה בְּאָדָ֑ם וְהוּבָ֖א אֶל־הַכֹּהֵֽן:
10The kohen shall look [at it]. And, behold! there is a white se'eith on the skin, and either it has turned the hair white, or there is healthy, live flesh in the se'eith, יוְרָאָ֣ה הַכֹּהֵ֗ן וְהִנֵּ֤ה שְׂאֵֽת־לְבָנָה֙ בָּע֔וֹר וְהִ֕יא הָֽפְכָ֖ה שֵׂעָ֣ר לָבָ֑ן וּמִחְיַ֛ת בָּשָׂ֥ר חַ֖י בַּשְׂאֵֽת:
healthy flesh: Heb. מִחְיַת, sa(y)nement in Old French, a healing. [It means that] part of the white in the se’eith lesion reverts to appear like [healthy] flesh. This is also a sign of uncleanness. [Hence, a sign of uncleanness is] either white hair without a מִחְיַָה, or a מִחְיַָה, an area of normal flesh, even without white hair. And even though מִחְיַָה is mentioned only in connection with the se’eith, nevertheless, in all [major] manifestations [of the lesion of tzara’ath] and their related categories, it is a sign of uncleanness. — [Torath Kohanim 13:69] ומחית: שינמינ"ט בלע"ז [רפוי], שנהפך מקצת הלובן שבתוך השאת למראה בשר, אף הוא סימן טומאה, שער לבן בלא מחיה, ומחיה בלא שער לבן, ואף על פי שלא נאמרה מחיה אלא בשאת, אף בכל המראות ותולדותיהן הוא סימן טומאה:
11it is old tzara'ath on the skin of his flesh, and the kohen shall pronounce him unclean; he need not quarantine him because he is unclean. יאצָרַ֨עַת נוֹשֶׁ֤נֶת הִוא֙ בְּע֣וֹר בְּשָׂר֔וֹ וְטִמְּא֖וֹ הַכֹּהֵ֑ן לֹ֣א יַסְגִּרֶ֔נּוּ כִּ֥י טָמֵ֖א הֽוּא:
it is an old tzara’ath: It is an old lesion which is under the area of normal skin. This wound appears healthy on the surface, but it is full of fluid underneath, so that one should not say, “Since healthy skin has appeared over [the lesion], I shall pronounce it clean!” צרעת נושנת הוא: מכה ישנה היא תחת המחיה, וחבורה זו נראית בריאה מלמעלה ותחתיה מלאה לחה, שלא תאמר הואיל ועלתה מחיה אטהרנה:
12And if the tzara'ath has spread over the skin, whereby the tzara'ath covers all the skin of the [person with the] lesion, from his head to his feet, wherever the eyes of the kohen can see it, יבוְאִם־פָּר֨וֹחַ תִּפְרַ֤ח הַצָּרַ֨עַת֙ בָּע֔וֹר וְכִסְּתָ֣ה הַצָּרַ֗עַת אֵ֚ת כָּל־ע֣וֹר הַנֶּ֔גַע מֵֽרֹאשׁ֖וֹ וְעַד־רַגְלָ֑יו לְכָל־מַרְאֵ֖ה עֵינֵ֥י הַכֹּהֵֽן:
from his head: [I.e., from the head] of the person [down] to his feet. מראשו: של אדם ועד רגליו:
wherever the eyes of the kohen can see it: [This phrase] comes to exclude a kohen whose eyesight has dimmed. [I.e., a kohen with one blind eye or with impaired vision in both eyes may not pronounce the status of lesions.]- [Torath Kohanim 13:83] לכל מראה עיני הכהן: פרט לכהן שחשך מאורו:
13then the kohen shall look [at it]. And, behold! the tzara'ath has covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce [the person with] the lesion clean. He has turned completely white; he is clean. יגוְרָאָ֣ה הַכֹּהֵ֗ן וְהִנֵּ֨ה כִסְּתָ֤ה הַצָּרַ֨עַת֙ אֶת־כָּל־בְּשָׂר֔וֹ וְטִהַ֖ר אֶת־הַנָּ֑גַע כֻּלּ֛וֹ הָפַ֥ךְ לָבָ֖ן טָה֥וֹר הֽוּא:
14But on the day that live flesh appears in it, he shall become unclean. ידוּבְי֨וֹם הֵֽרָא֥וֹת בּ֛וֹ בָּשָׂ֥ר חַ֖י יִטְמָֽא:
But on the day that live flesh appears in it: If healthy flesh grows on it, [Scripture] has already explained that healthy flesh is a sign of uncleanness. [Therefore, what is this verse telling us here?] However, a case where the lesion was located on one of twenty-four tips of the limbs is not deemed unclean on account of healthy flesh because the lesion cannot be seen all at one glance [once an area of healthy flesh appears within the lesion], since these [limb tips] slope down on either side. [Therefore it is not deemed unclean.] If, however, such a tip of a limb altered [in its form], allowing its slanted facet to appear through fat-for example, when the tip of a limb became fat and broadened, and the healthy flesh (מִחְיַָה) became visible within [the lesion, thereby allowing the lesion to become visible all at one glance], Scripture teaches us [here] that it becomes unclean. — [Torath Kohanim 13:86] וביום הראות בו בשר חי: אם צמחה בו מחיה הרי כבר פירש שהמחיה סימן טומאה, אלא הרי שהיה הנגע באחד מעשרים וארבעה ראשי איברים שאין מטמאין משום מחיה, לפי שאין נראה הנגע כולו כאחד ששופע אילך ואילך, וחזר ראש האבר ונתגלה שפועו ע"י שומן, כגון שהבריא ונעשה רחב ונראית בו המחיה, למדנו הכתוב שתטמא:
But on the day [that live flesh] appears: [The verse could have simply said, “But when live flesh appears.”] What does Scripture teach us [by saying,] “on the day”]? It [comes] to teach that there is a day on which you [the kohen] look [i.e., examine the suspected lesion], and there is a day on which you do not look [i.e., when he may not examine it]. From here [our Rabbis] say that a bridegroom is exempt [from having a lesion examined] throughout all the seven days of the wedding feast, for himself, his garments, and his house. Similarly, during a Festival [people] are exempt [from having a lesion examined] throughout all the days of the Festival. - [Torath Kohanim 13:87] וביום: מה תלמוד לומר, ללמד יש יום שאתה רואה בו ויש יום שאין אתה רואה בו, מכאן אמרו חתן נותנין לו כל שבעת ימי המשתה לו ולכסותו ולביתו, וכן ברגל נותנין לו כל ימי הרגל:
15When the kohen sees the healthy, live flesh, he shall pronounce him unclean. The live flesh is unclean; it is tzara'ath. טווְרָאָ֧ה הַכֹּהֵ֛ן אֶת־הַבָּשָׂ֥ר הַחַ֖י וְטִמְּא֑וֹ הַבָּשָׂ֥ר הַחַ֛י טָמֵ֥א ה֖וּא צָרַ֥עַת הֽוּא:
it is tzara’ath: meaning, that flesh. Flesh (בָּשָׂר) is grammatically masculine. [Hence, the wording: צָרַעַת הוּא, rather than צָרַעַת הִיא, as in verse 8.] צרעת הוא: הבשר ההוא. בשר לשון זכר:
16But, if the healthy, live flesh once again turns white, he shall come to the kohen. טזא֣וֹ כִ֥י יָשׁ֛וּב הַבָּשָׂ֥ר הַחַ֖י וְנֶהְפַּ֣ךְ לְלָבָ֑ן וּבָ֖א אֶל־הַכֹּהֵֽן:
17And the kohen shall look at it. And, behold! the lesion has turned white; the kohen shall pronounce the lesion clean. He is clean. יזוְרָאָ֨הוּ֙ הַכֹּהֵ֔ן וְהִנֵּ֛ה נֶהְפַּ֥ךְ הַנֶּ֖גַע לְלָבָ֑ן וְטִהַ֧ר הַכֹּהֵ֛ן אֶת־הַנֶּ֖גַע טָה֥וֹר הֽוּא:
Daily Tehillim: Chapter 119, Verses 1-96
• Hebrew text
• English text• Verses 1-96
• Lessons in Tanya• English Text
• English text• Verses 1-96
David composed this prominent psalm in alphabetical sequence-eight verses for each letter. Every verse contains one of the following words (referring to different aspects of Torah): Way; Torah; Testimony; Precept; Commandment; Statement (translated here as Word or Promise); Word; Judgement (or Laws); Righteousness; Statute. Replete with morals and prayers, this psalm should be recited daily, as a powerful preparation for the service of God. (In verses beginning with one of the letters of the mnemonic PeReTZ BeN DaMaH, the word "עדותיך" is pronounced "eidvotecha.")
1. Fortunate are those whose way is artless, who walk with the Torah of the Lord.
2. Fortunate are those who keep His testimonies, who seek Him with all their hearts.
3. Indeed, they have not done iniquity; they walk in His ways.
4. You have commanded Your precepts to be observed diligently.
5. My wish is that my ways be directed to keep Your statutes.
6. Then I will not be ashamed, when I behold all Your commandments.
7. I will give thanks to You with uprightness of heart, when I learn Your righteous judgments.
8. I will keep Your statutes; do not utterly forsake me
9. How can a young man keep his way pure? By observing Your word.
10. With all my heart I have sought You; do not let me stray from Your commandments.
11. I have harbored Your word in my heart, that I might not sin against You.
12. Blessed are You, O Lord; teach me Your statutes.
13. With my lips I have declared all the judgments of Your mouth.
14. I have rejoiced in the way of Your testimonies, as I would with all riches.
15. I will speak of Your precepts, and gaze upon Your ways.
16. I will delight in Your statutes; I will not forget Your word.
17. Deal kindly with Your servant, that I may live to keep Your word.
18. Unveil my eyes, that I may behold wonders from Your Torah.
19. I am a sojourner on earth; do not hide Your commandments from me.
20. My soul is crushed with a longing for Your judgments every moment.
21. You have rebuked the accursed scoffers, those who stray from Your commandments.
22. Remove insult and contempt from me, for I have kept Your testimonies.
23. Though princes sat and spoke against me, Your servant speaks of Your statutes.
24. Indeed, Your testimonies are my delight; they are my counsellors.
25. My soul cleaves to the dust; revive me in accordance with Your word.
26. I have spoken of my ways, and You answered me; teach me Your statutes.
27. Make me understand the way of Your precepts, and I will speak of Your wonders.
28. My soul drips away out of grief; sustain me according to Your word.
29. Remove from me the way of falsehood, and graciously endow me with Your Torah.
30. I have chosen the way of faith; Your judgments have I laid before me.
31. I held fast to Your testimonies, O Lord; put me not to shame.
32. I will run on the path of Your commandments, for You will broaden my heart.
33. Teach me, O Lord, the way of Your statutes, and I will keep it to the last.
34. Grant me understanding and I will keep Your Torah; I will observe it with all my heart.
35. Direct me in the path of Your commandments, for that is my desire.
36. Incline my heart to Your testimonies, and not to greed.
37. Avert my eyes from seeing vanity; by Your ways give me life.
38. Fulfill for Your servant Your promise, which brings to the fear of You.
39. Remove my shame which I fear, for Your judgments are good.
40. Behold, I have longed for Your precepts; give me life in Your righteousness.
41. And let Your kindness come to fruition for me, O Lord, Your salvation as You promised.
42. I will offer a retort to those who taunt me, for I trust in Your word.
43. Do not at all remove the word of truth from my mouth, for I hope [to fulfill] Your judgments.
44. I will keep Your Torah continually, for ever and ever.
45. And I will walk in spacious paths, for I seek Your precepts.
46. I will speak of Your testimonies before kings, and I will not be ashamed.
47. And I will delight in Your commandments, which I love.
48. I will lift up my hands to Your commandments, which I love, and I will speak of Your statutes.
49. Remember the word [promised] to Your servant, by which You gave me hope.
50. This is my comfort in my affliction, for Your word has given me life.
51. [Though] the wicked ridicule me severely, I have not strayed from Your Torah.
52. When I remember Your judgments of old, O Lord, I take comfort.
53. Trembling seized me because of the wicked, those who forsake Your Torah.
54. Your statutes have been my songs in the house of my wanderings.
55. At night I remembered Your Name, O Lord, and I kept Your Torah.
56. All this came to me because I kept Your precepts.
57. The Lord is my portion; I pledged to keep Your words.
58. I pleaded before You with all my heart: have compassion upon me according to Your word.
59. I contemplated my ways, and returned my feet to Your testimonies.
60. I hurried and did not delay to keep Your commandments.
61. Bands of wicked men plundered me, [but] I did not forget Your Torah.
62. At midnight, I rise to thank You for Your righteous judgments.
63. I am a friend to all who fear You, and to those who keep Your precepts.
64. Your kindness, O Lord, fills the earth; teach me Your statutes.
65. You have dealt goodness to Your servant, O Lord, in accord with Your promise.
66. Teach me the goodness and wisdom of the [Torah's] reasons, for I believe in Your commandments.
67. Before I afflicted myself, I would blunder; but now I observe Your word.
68. You are good and benevolent; teach me Your statutes.
69. The wicked have smeared me with lies, [when in truth] I keep Your precepts with all my heart.
70. Their hearts grew thick as fat; but as for me, Your Torah is my delight.
71. It is for my good that I was afflicted, so that I might learn Your statutes.
72. The Torah of Your mouth is better for me than thousands in gold and silver.
73. Your hands have made me and prepared me; grant me understanding, that I may learn Your commandments.
74. Those who fear You will see me and rejoice, because I hoped in Your word.
75. I know, O Lord, that Your judgments are just; righteously have You afflicted me.
76. Let Your kindness be my comfort, as You promised to Your servant.
77. Let Your mercies come upon me, that I may live, for Your Torah is my delight.
78. Let the scoffers be shamed, for they have maligned me with falsehood; but I will meditate upon Your precepts.
79. May those who fear You return to me, and those who know Your testimonies.
80. May my heart be perfect in Your statutes, so that I not be shamed.
81. My soul longs for Your salvation; I hope for Your word.
82. My eyes long for Your promise, saying, "When will You comfort me?”
83. Though I became [dried out] like a wineskin in smoke, I did not forget Your statutes.
84. How many are the days of Your servant? When will You execute judgment upon my pursuers?
85. The wicked have dug pits for me, in violation of Your Torah.
86. All Your commandments teach truth, [yet] they pursue me with lies, help me!
87. They nearly consumed me upon the earth, but I did not forsake Your precepts.
88. As befits Your kindness, grant me life, and I will keep the testimony of Your mouth.
89. Forever, O Lord, Your word stands firm in the heavens.
90. Your faithfulness persists for all generations; You established the earth, and it stands.
91. They stand ready today [to execute] Your judgments, for all are Your servants.
92. Had Your Torah not been my delight, I would have perished in my affliction.
93. Never will I forget Your precepts, for through them You have sustained me.
94. I am Yours; save me, for I have sought Your precepts.
95. The wicked hope to destroy me, but I meditate upon Your testimonies.
96. To every goal I have seen a limit, but Your commandment is immensely broad.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 38• Lessons in Tanya• English Text
• Monday, Adar II 25, 5776 · April 4, 2016
• Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 38
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Monday, Adar II 25, 5776 · April 4, 2016
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Positive Commandment 119
Fruit of the Fourth Year
"All its fruit shall be holy for praise-giving to G‑d"—Leviticus 19:24.
We are commanded to sanctify the fruit produced by a tree in the fourth year [after its planting]. These fruit – like the Second Tithe – are brought to Jerusalem and eaten there by its owners. (The priests have no part of it.)
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• ולא שדבקות המחשבה ושכל האדם בו יתברך היא מצד עצמה למעלה מדבקות קיום המצות מעשיות בפועל ממש
It is not that attachment of man’s thought and intellect to G‑d is intrinsically superior to attachment through the actual, practical fulfillment of the mitzvot dependent on action —
כמו שכתוב לקמן
for as will be explained further on the unity with G‑d achieved by performance of mitzvot is described in the same terms as the unity of husband and wife — “kiddushin”, as we say in the blessing preceding the fulfillment of a mitzvah: “...G‑d,... Who sanctified us (קדשנו) with His commandments....” Naturally, man cannot attain this degree of unity with G‑d by his own efforts. It is only by G‑d’s kindness in charging us with the mitzvot that we become united with Him thereby.
Obviously, the quality of man’s attachment to G‑d through kavanah cannot surpass that of the performance of mitzvot,which possesses the G‑d-given ability to unite man with Him. Where, then, lies the superiority of kavanah over actual performance of mitzvot (described earlier as paralleling the superiority of soul over body)?
The Alter Rebbe now goes on to say that, like the actual mitzvot themselves, man’s kavanah in performing them expresses G‑d’s Will. It is the illumination of Divine Will contained in kavanah that is superior. In the Alter Rebbe’s words:
אלא מפני שזהו גם כן רצונו יתברך, לדבקה בשכל ומחשבה וכוונת המצות מעשיות ובכוונת קריאת שמע ותפלה ושאר ברכות
Rather kavanah is superior because this, too, is G‑d’s Will — that one attach himself to Him by intellect and thought, and [by] the kavanah of the active mitzvot, and by one’s kavanah during the recital of Shema,and in prayer and other blessings;
והארת רצון העליון הזה המאירה ומלובשת בכוונה זו
and the illumination of the Supernal Will that radiates and is clothed in this kavanah
היא גדולה לאין קץ למעלה מעלה מהארת רצון העליון המאירה ומלובשת בקיום המצות עצמן במעשה ובדבור בלי כוונה
is infinitely greater and loftier than the illumination of the Supernal Will that radiates and is clothed in the performance of the mitzvot themselves, in action and speech, without kavanah.
כגודל מעלת אור הנשמה על הגוף שהוא כלי ומלבוש הנשמה, כמו גוף המצוה עצמה שהוא כלי ומלבוש לכוונתה
This superiority of kavanah is similar to the superiority of the light of the soul over the body, which is a vessel and garment for the soul — just as the body of the actual mitzvah is a vessel and garment for its kavanah.For this reason, then, the performance of a mitzvah is likened to a body, and its kavanah to a soul.
ואף שבשתיהן, במצוה ובכוונתה, מלובש רצון אחד, פשוט בתכלית הפשיטות בלי שום שינוי וריבוי, חס ושלום, ומיוחד במהותו ועצמותו יתברך בתכלית היחוד
True, although both the actual mitzvah and its kavanah contain the same [Supernal] Will, which is perfectly simple, i.e., changeless and indivisible so that it cannot be said that kavanah contains “more” of G‑d’s Will and performance contains “less”, and [this Will] is united with G‑d’s essence and being in perfect unity,
אף על פי כן ההארה אינה שוה בבחינת צמצום והתפשטות
nevertheless, the illumination of the Supernal Will in one’s soul is different in terms of its contraction and expansion.*
In the performance of a mitzvah this illumination is in a state of “contraction”; one’s attachment to G‑d’s Will is not readily apparent. In the kavanah, however, the illumination is in a state of “expansion” and revelation in one’s soul: here, clearly, one’s thought and intellect are attached to G‑d.
*NOTE
In the note which follows, the Alter Rebbe traces the difference between mitzvot and their kavanah to their source in the Supernal Sefirot.
Each Sefirah consists of an or, a “light”, and a keli, a vessel or receptacle for the or. The kelim of the Sefirot have a well-defined character: one is Chochmah, another Binah, and so forth. The orot, however, are G‑dly energy, “simple” in the sense that they are devoid of definition, unlimited, and not restricted to any specific character.
Restated, this means that kelim are “contracted” and limited, while “orot” are “expanded” and unconfined — the very traits that differentiate between mitzvot and their kavanah.
הגהה
וכמו שכתוב בעץ חיים שכוונת המצות ותלמוד תורה היא במדרגת אור, וגוף המצות הן מדרגות ובחינת כלים
It is also so explained in Etz Chayim that kavanah in mitzvot and in Torah study is on the level of “light”, while the “body” i.e., performance of the mitzvot is the level and category of “vessels”.
שהם בחינת צמצום, שעל ידי צמצום האור נתהוו הכלים
These [vessels] represent “contraction”, for it is through contraction of the light that the vessels came into being,
כידוע ליודעי ח"ן
as is known to those familiar with the Kabbalah (lit., “esoteric wisdom”).
Similarly, the difference between mitzvot and their kavanah is one of contraction and expansion respectively, as explained above.
END OF NOTE
The Alter Rebbe now expands the analogy of body and soul to mitzvot and kavanah. He states that just as in the analogy all existence is classified into four categories, with two of them (mineral and vegetable) belonging in turn to the broader category of “body-beings”, and two (animal and man) to the broader category of “soul-beings”, so it is also with regard tomitzvot and kavanah.
The Alter Rebbe now resumes the thought intercepted by the above Note.
ונחלקת גם כן לארבע מדרגות
They, too (the mitzvot and their kavanah), are differentiated into four levels.
כי גוף המצות עצמן ממש הן ב׳ מדרגות, שהן מצות מעשיות ממש
For the “body” of the mitzvot themselves comprises two levels, namely, mitzvot consisting of real action(as opposed to speech, which is merely “regarded as action”),
ומצות התלויות בדבור ומחשבה, כמו תלמוד תורה וקריאת שמע ותפלה וברכת המזון ושאר ברכות
and mitzvot performed with speech and thought, such as Torah study, reciting the Shema, praying, saying the grace after meals, and other blessings. Both these levels — (a) action, and (b) thought and speech — are subdivisions of the category of the “body” of mitzvot.
וכוונת המצות, לדבקה בו יתברך, שהיא כנשמה לגוף
The kavanah of mitzvot, i.e., one’s intention to attach oneself to G‑d by performing the mitzvah, this (the kavanah)being like a soul for the body of the mitzvah,
נחלקת גם כן לשתי מדרגות, כמו שתי מדרגות הנשמה שהן בגוף החומרי שהן חי ומדבר
is likewise divided into two levels — corresponding to the two levels of soul found in material bodies, namely (a) in animals, and (b) in man.
The Alter Rebbe now goes on to discuss two levels in kavanah, the higher one of which is comparable to the soul of man, and the lower to the soul of animals.
Rambam:• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Monday, Adar II 25, 5776 · April 4, 2016Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Positive Commandment 119
Fruit of the Fourth Year
"All its fruit shall be holy for praise-giving to G‑d"—Leviticus 19:24.
We are commanded to sanctify the fruit produced by a tree in the fourth year [after its planting]. These fruit – like the Second Tithe – are brought to Jerusalem and eaten there by its owners. (The priests have no part of it.)
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• Fruit of the Fourth Year
Positive Commandment 119
Translated by Berel Bell
The 119th mitzvah is that we1 are commanded to treat as holy the fruit which grows in the fourth year [from when the tree was planted, called neta revai].
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "[And in the fourth year,] all its fruit shall be holy, and it shall be something for which G‑d is praised."
The law is that it must be brought to Jerusalem and eaten there by its owners, just like ma'aser sheni. The kohanim have no share in it, as the Sifri says: "The statement3 'The sacred offerings of each individual remain his own property, [and those which are given to the kohen become his]' gives all sanctified objects to the kohen except for the thanksgiving-offering, the peace-offering, the Pesach-offering, the ma'aser-offering, ma'aser sheni, and neta revai, which belong to the owner."
The details of this mitzvah are completely explained in the final chapter of tractate Ma'aser Sheni.
FOOTNOTES
1.Regarding the fulfillment of this mitzvah outside Eretz Yisroel, see Kapach, 5731, note 73.
2.Lev. 19:24.
3.Num. 5:10.
• 1 Chapter: Maaseh Hakorbanot Maaseh Hakorbanot - Chapter 3 • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Maaseh Hakorbanot - Chapter 3
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Maaseh Hakorbanot - Chapter 3
Halacha 1
Halacha 2
Men, women, and, servants may bring all of these types of sacrifices.4 From gentiles, by contrast, we accept only burnt offerings, as [derived fromLeviticus 22:28]: "From the hand of an alien, you shall not offer the food of your God [from all of these]."5 Even a burnt offering of fowl may be accepted from a gentile,6 even if he worships false deities.7
We do not, however, accept peace-offerings,8 meal-offerings, sin-offerings, or guilt-offerings9 from a gentile. Similarly, burnt-offerings that do not come as vows or pledges are not accepted from gentiles, e.g., a burnt-offering from a women who gave birth or the like or other burnt-offerings that do not come as vows or pledges.
Halacha 3
When a gentile brings peace-offerings, they should be sacrificed as burnt-offerings, for [the intention of] a gentile's heart is [for the sake] of heaven.10 If he gives them to a Jew with the intent that a Jew receive atonement,11 the Jew may partake of them like the peace-offerings of the Jewish people. Similarly, if he gives them to a priest, the priest may partake of them.
Halacha 4
When a Jew is an apostate who worships false deities or who desecrates the Sabbath in public,12 we do not accept any sacrifices from him at all. Even a burnt-offering that is accepted from a gentile is not accepted from this apostate. [This is derived from Leviticus 1:2 which] states: "A man from you who will sacrifice." According to the Oral Tradition,13 we learned: "From you," i.e., not all of you, excluding an apostate.
If, however, one was a heretic with regard to other transgressions, any sacrifice [he brings] is accepted so that he will repent. If, however, he was a heretic with regard to a transgression and it is public knowledge that he commits it and he has become accustomed to doing so, a sacrifice [that he brings atoning for] that transgression - whether committed to anger [God]14 or out of desire15 -is not accepted.16 What is implied? If a person was accustomed to eat fat - whether committed to anger [God] or out of desire - and then he inadvertently partook of fat and brought a sin-offering [for this transgression], it is not accepted.
Halacha 5
Gentiles do not bring accompanying offerings17 for the burnt-offerings they bring, as [can be inferred from Numbers 15:13]: "Every native among you shall do this."18 The accompanying offerings for their sacrifices are, however, brought from communal funds,19 as [ibid.:12] states: "So shall you do for each one according to their number."20 [These burnt offerings] do not requiresemichah,21 for semichah is performed only by a Jew, and by a male and not a female.22
Halacha 6
All of the offerings from domesticated animals that an individual brings23- whether those in which he is obligated or those promised through a vow - [require] semichah while they are alive with the exception of the firstborn offering, the tithe offering, and the Paschal sacrifice. [This is derived fromLeviticus 3:2]: "And he shall lean his hand on the head of his offering." According to the Oral Tradition,24 we learned that this refers to all the sacrifices with the exception of the firstborn offering, the tithe offering, and the Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 7
[A sacrifice of] a fowl does not require semichah.25
We already explained in Hilchot Shekalim26 that the law is that all the money concerning which it was decided that it should be given to the chest for freewill offerings27 should be used to purchase burnt-offerings. The person to which this money belonged does not perform semichah on that animal, nor does he bring the accompanying offerings.28 Instead, the accompanying offerings are brought from communal funds.29 Even if he was a priest, the service [of offering the sacrifice] and its hide belong to the men of the watch.30
Halacha 8
All people may perform semichah with the exception of a deafmute, a mentally and/or emotionally unstable individual, a minor,31 a servant, a woman,32 a blind man, and a gentile.33 An agent does not perform semichah, for semichahis performed only by the owners, as [implied by the prooftext]: "And he shall lean his hand." "His hand" and not the hand of his wife, his servant, or his agent.
Halacha 9
When five individuals bring a sacrifice [in partnership], they all performsemichah, one after the other. They should not perform semichah at the same time. 34
When a person died and left a sacrifice of a burnt offering or a peace offering, his heir should have it offered, perform semichah on it, and bring its accompanying offerings.35
Halacha 10
Semichah is not performed with regard to communal offerings except with regard to two sacrifices: the goat sent to Azazel36 and the bull brought because of a law being forgotten.37 Three members of the Sanhedrin performsemichah on it. This is a law conveyed by Moses our teacher that semichahis not performed on communal offerings other than these two.38
Halacha 11
Semichah is performed only in the Temple Courtyard.39 If one performedsemichah outside the Temple Courtyard, he should perform it again inside. If the one bringing the sacrifice was standing outside [the Temple Courtyard] and he extended his hands into [the Courtyard] and performed semichah, hissemichah is valid,40 provided he performed semichah with all his strength.41
Only a person who is ritually pure may perform semichah. If a person who is ritually impure performed semichah, the semichah [is acceptable].42
Halacha 12
The animal should be slaughtered in the place where semichah is performed.43 The animal must be slaughtered directly after semichah. If one slaughtered it in a different place or waited [before slaughtering it], the slaughter is acceptable.
Semichah is an incremental aspect of the mitzvah. Accordingly, if one did not perform semichah, the sacrifice [still] brings atonement; [the semichah] is not an indispensable requirement. Nevertheless, it is considered as if the sacrifice did not bring atonement.44
Halacha 13
The person performing semichah must do so with all his power, [placing] both hands45 on the head of the animal, as [Leviticus 1:4] states: "on the head of the burnt-offering." [Implied is his hands must be placed on the head] and not on the [animal's] neck or the side of its face,46 and that should not be any intervening substance between his hands and the animal.
Halacha 14
How is semichah performed? If the sacrifice was one of the offerings of the most sacred order, he should have the animal stand in the northern portion of the Temple Courtyard,47 facing the west. The person performing semichahstands to the east with his face to the west. He should place both his hands between its two horns and recite [the appropriate] confession, for a sin-offering, the sin which warrants a sin-offering and for a guilt-offering, the sin which warrants a guilt offering. For a burnt offering, he confesses the sin of [negating the observance of] a positive commandment or of a negative commandment that can be corrected by the observance of] a positive commandment.
FOOTNOTES
1.
See Halachah 9.
2.
See Chapter 1, Halachah 6, with regard to the distinction between these types of offerings.
3.
I.e., an entity of seemingly little value. One might think that bringing such an offering in partnership is not becoming to the altar. Even so, if one's intent is desirable, the offering is accepted (Radbaz, based onMenachot 110a).
4.
In this chapter, the Rambam outlines the types of individuals who may bring a sacrifice and the rite of semichah because that is an obligation on the person bringing the sacrifice.
5.
The Jerusalem Talmud (Avodah Zarah 2:1) notes that the prooftext states that it is forbidden to accept an offering from a gentile from a blemished animal. One can infer that if the animal is unblemished, the offering may be accepted.
The verse uses the term lechem, "food." That term is understood as referring only to a burnt-offering, as Numbers 28:2 states: "My food for my fires."And the burnt-offering is the only type of offering, consumed entirely by the fire of the altar (Radbaz).
6.
Although the prooftext speaks only of animals, our Sages understood that the leniency applies to fowl as well (Radbaz).
7.
As mentioned in Halachah 4, burnt offerings are not accepted from a Jew who worships false deities. Nevertheless, such restrictions are not placed upon gentiles.
8.
To offer them as peace-offerings. They are, however, brought as burnt-offerings, as stated in the following halachah.
9.
For the concept of atonement applies only with regard to the Jews' relationship with God.
10.
Rashi (Menachot 73b) interprets this as meaning that the gentile desires that his sacrifices be offered entirely to God and not have mortals partake of them.
11.
The Radbaz notes that peace-offerings are not intended to bring atonement and explains that this is referring to an instance where a Jew vowed to bring a peace offering and the gentile offered to bring it for him. One might think that since the gentile is bringing them they would be offered as burnt-offerings. Hence it is necessary to explain that they are peace offerings.
12.
See the conclusion of Hilchot Shabbat where the Rambam explains that the public desecration of the Sabbath is equivalent to idol worship, because they are both cornerstones of the Jewish faith. "Public" refers to a matter known about by ten people.
The Radbaz adds that we do not accept the sacrifices of a Jew who has abandoned Judaism and accepted a faith like Islam which does not involve idol worship. Such a person is included in the category (Hilchot Teshuvah 3:9) of an apostate with regard to the entire Torah.
13.
Chulin 5a-b.
14.
I.e., he had two cuts of meat before him of equal quality, one kosher and one non-kosher and he ate the non-kosher one solely for the intent of angering God (Gittin47a).
15.
Similarly, in Hilchot Edut 10:3, a distinction is not made with regard to the motivations for the transgression. There are other instances - see Hilchot Teshuvah, loc. cit.,Hilchot Matanot Aniyim 8;14, Hilchot Gezeilah ViAveidah 11:2, and Hilchot Rotzeach 4:10 - where the Rambam does make such a distinction.
16.
Since he frequently violates this transgression, we assume that he is not sincere in his desire for atonement for it, because a request for atonement must be accompanied by sincere regret. Sacrifices brought for other transgressions are, however, accepted from him. See Hilchot Shegagot 3:7.
17.
A meal offering and a wine libation.
18.
This verse concludes the passage commanding the offering of the accompanying offers, implying that it is only a native - i.e., a member of the Jewish people - who is required to bring them.
19.
I.e., the Temple treasury.
20.
Implying that the sacrifices themselves require that the accompanying offerings be brought.
21.
Leaning on the animal with all one's strength, as the Rambam proceeds to explain in the concluding halachot of the chapter.
22.
The prooftext for the obligation to performsemichah speaks of "the children of Israel," and uses the male form. Menachot 93b understands this to exclude gentiles andChagigah 16b understands it as excluding women. See also Halachah 8.
23.
This also includes offerings brought in partnership. The exclusion is only of communal offerings. See Halachah 10.
24.
Sifra to the verse; Menachot 92b.
25.
The Sifra derives this concept from the exegesis of Leviticus 1:4: "And he will lean his hand on the head of the burnt-offering." "The" implies that there are some burnt-offerings to which this does not apply.
26.
Hilchot Shekalim 2:3; 3:14.
27.
Money that was found between the chest of the freewill offerings and the chest of theshekalim that was closer to the chest of the freewill offerings.
28.
Since the money was placed in the chest for the freewill offering, it is no longer considered as his personal property, but as the property of the community. Hence, he is not the owner of the sacrifices and may not perform semichah on them. For that same reason, the community brings the accompanying offerings.
29.
A meal offering and a wine libation.
30.
The priests designated to serve in the Temple that week. Even though the person whose money was used is a priest and he has the right to offer sacrifices that he brings (Hilchot K'lei HaMikdash 4:7), in this instance, he cannot demand the right to offer the sacrifice.
31.
These three individuals are not considered as responsible for their actions and are free of the responsibility for all mitzvot.
32.
See Halachah 5.
33.
Gentiles are not obligated in any of the mitzvot. Hence the obligation of semichahdoes not apply to them.
34.
The Radbaz states that this concept is derived from the fact that the prooftext uses the term "his hand" in the singular.
35.
For he is acting in the place of the original owner.
36.
During the Yom Kippur services. The High Priest performs semichah on it.
37.
In both these instances, there is an explicit verse (Leviticus 16:21; 4:15) requiringsemichah for the sacrifice.
38.
I.e., were it not for that tradition, we might have derived the need for semichah for communal offerings from these two instances using Biblical exegesis [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Menachot 9:7)].
39.
Zevachim 32b explains that just as the slaughter of the animal must be performed "before God," in the Temple Courtyard, so too, semichah must be performed "before God," in that same place.
40.
This is indeed what is done when the atonement process of the people bringing the sacrifice has not been completed and they are not allowed to enter the Temple Courtyard until the sacrifice is offered.
41.
As required by Halachah 13.
42.
After the fact.
43.
Menachot 93b derives this concept from the subsequent law: that slaughter must be performed directly after semichah. It thus follows that one must slaughter the animal in the same place where semichah was performed, for otherwise, this is not considered as directly afterwards.
44.
Tosafot Yesheinim, Yoma 5a, explains that the intent is that although the person is not obligated to bring another sacrifice, in G‑d's eyes, his atonement is lacking.
45.
This is derived from Leviticus 16:21 which states such a requirement with regard to the goat sent to Azazel.
46.
Its cheeks (Rashi, Menachot 93b).
47.
The sacrifices of the most sacred order must be slaughtered in this portion of the Temple Courtyard, as stated in Chapter 5, Halachot 2-3. See also Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 5:16.
48.
See Hilchot Teshuvah 2:5 which states that a person seeking to repent must mention the particular sins that he violated.
49.
This is necessary, for without teshuvah, a sacrifice will not bring the person atonement (Hilchot Shegagot 3:10).
50.
For as stated in Chapter 5, Halachot 2-3, sacrifices of lesser sanctity (of which the peace offering is one) may be slaughtered anywhere in the Temple Courtyard.
51.
For a peace-offering is not offered to atone for a sin.
52.
As an example, the Or Sameach cites Psalm 100. The popular translation of II Chronicles 30:22 speaks of the people reciting confessions on their peace-offerings. Rashi and Metzudot, however, render the verb as meaning "offer thanks."
• 3 Chapters: Maaser Sheini Maaser Sheini - Chapter 8, Maaser Sheini Maaser Sheini - Chapter 9, Maaser Sheini Maaser Sheini - Chapter 10 • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download• Maaser Sheini - Chapter 8
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class• "Today's Day"
Audio: Listen | Download• Maaser Sheini - Chapter 8
Halacha 1
When a person [used money from the second tithe to] purchase a domesticated animal for a peace offering or a non-domesticated animal for ordinary meat from a person who is not a merchant and is not precise, the hide is considered as ordinary property.1This applies even if the value of the hide is greater than the value of the meat. When, by contrast, a person purchases an animal from a merchant, the hide is not considered as ordinary property.2
Halacha 2
Similar laws apply when a person purchases jugs of wine that are sealed.3In a place where it is customary for these jugs to be sold while sealed from a person who is not a merchant, the jugs are considered as ordinary property.4Therefore the seller must open the tops of the jugs so that they will not become ordinary property.5If the seller wishes to be stringent with himself and sell the wine in exact measure, the container is considered ordinary property.6
Halacha 3
If he purchased [the jugs of wine] while they were open7 or sealed in a place where it is customary to sell them open8 or he purchased them from a merchant who is precise in his sale,9 the jugs are not considered as ordinary property. If a person purchases baskets of figs and grapes together with their container,10 the container is not considered as ordinary property.11
Halacha 4
If a person purchases nuts, almonds, or the like, the shells are considered as ordinary property.12 If a person purchases a frond of dates,13 the frond is considered as ordinary property.14
[The following rules apply if] one purchases containers of dates. If they are pressed, the containers are considered as ordinary property.15 If not, they are not considered as ordinary property.
Halacha 5
When a person has wine16 from the second tithe and he lends17 his jugs for that [wine from] the second tithe, the second tithe does acquire the jugs, even though he seals them.
[The following laws apply if] he stored the wine in them without making any statement:18 If he designated [certain jugs] as the second tithe before he sealed their openings, the second tithe does not acquire the jugs.19 If he designated [the jugs] as the second tithe after he sealed their openings, the second tithe acquires the jugs.20 If [the owner] stored a revi'it21 of ordinary wine in the jug,22 or put oil, vinegar, brine,23 or honey from the second tithe without making any statement - whether before or after he sealed [the jugs] - the second tithe does not acquire the jugs.24
Halacha 6
When a deer that was purchased with money from the second tithe dies, it should be buried with its hide.25 If it was purchased while alive and slaughtered and then it became impure, it should be redeemed like other produce that became impure.26
[The following laws apply when a person] sets aside a dinar of money of the second tithe to purchase food against until he has exhausted its value and it becomes ordinary funds27 [and then the value of the coinage changes. For example,] the rate of exchange for a dinar was 20 me'ah.28 The person consumed ten me'ah's worth of food and then the value of the latter coinage decreased. Afterwards, the rate of exchange of a dinar was 40 me'ah. The person must spend another 20 me'ah on food before [the dinar] is considered as ordinary money.29
If the value of a me'ah increased and the rate of exchange for a dinar was tenme'ah, he must spend another five me'ah on food. Afterwards, [the dinar] is considered ordinary money.30
Halacha 7
When a person purchases produce with a sela of money from the second tithe and draws the produce into his domain, but did not pay for it before the value of the produce increased and it became worth two selaim, he is required to pay only a sela for the [produce]. [This is derived from the phrase]:31 "And he paid the money and it was acquired by him." [Implied is that the produce] is acquired by paying money.32 The profit is realized by the second tithe.33
Halacha 8
If he drew the produce into his possession when it was worth two selaim, but did not pay for it until the value of the produce decreased and it was worth only a sela, he should pay only one sela for them from the money of the second tithe. He must add another sela from ordinary funds and give it to the seller.34 If the seller was a common person, it is permitted for him to give him a second sela from money from the second tithe of demai.35
Halacha 9
If [the purchase] gave the seller two selaim of money from the second tithe, but did not draw the produce into his possession until its worth decreased to asela, what he redeemed is redeemed,38 and the attribute of judgment must be exercised between them.39 [The rationale for these laws is that] the redemption40 of the second tithe is like drawing it into possession.41
Halacha 10
If a person possessed ordinary produce in Jerusalem and money from the second tithe outside of Jerusalem, he may say: "The holiness of that money is transferred to this produce," and partake of them there in a state of ritual purity. The money then becomes ordinary funds in its location.42
Halacha 11
If one had money from the second tithe in Jerusalem and produce outside of Jerusalem, he may say: "The holiness of this money is transferred to that produce." The money then becomes ordinary money and the produce must be brought to Jerusalem and eaten there.43 For it is not necessary that the money and the produce be in the same place when the holiness of one is transferred to the other.
Halacha 12
When a person possesses money from the second tithe in Jerusalem which he needs [for other purposes]44 and a colleague possesses ordinary produce that he desires to eat, he should tell his colleague: "The holiness of this money is transferred to your produce." Thus that produce is considered as purchased with the money of the second tithe. The colleague should then partake of them in a state of ritual purity. Thus he does not lose anything and [his] money becomes as ordinary funds.45
Halacha 13
When does the above apply? When his friend who owns the produce is achavair.46 For produce that is definitely of the second tithe may be given only to a chavair.47 Therefore if the produce was [the second tithe of] demai, he may make such a stipulation with a common person as well.48
It is permitted to transfer the holiness of produce from the second tithe to produce or money belonging to a common person. We are not concerned that perhaps they are from the second tithe.49
Halacha 14
[The following laws apply when a person] sets aside a dinar from the second tithe to [which to transfer the holiness of food that] he eats continuously. If he proceeded to do so to the extent that less than a p'rutah's worth [of its value] remained [consecrated],50 the coin is considered as ordinary money.51
When does the above apply? With regard to [the second tithe of] demai.52With regard to produce that is definitely of the second tithe, [the coin] is not considered as ordinary money until less than a p'rutah's worth [of its value] remained [consecrated] after a fifth was added to it, e.g., less than four fifths of a p'rutah's worth [of its value] remain.53
Halacha 15
[The following laws apply when people who are] ritually impure and others who are ritually pure were eating together in Jerusalem and those who were ritually pure desired to [use their money from] the second tithe for food. They should place a sela from the second tithe aside and say: "The holiness of thissela is transferred to everything which those who are ritually pure eat."54 Thesela is then considered as ordinary property, for they eat and drank its value in a state of ritual purity. [This applies] provided the people who are impure do not touch the food55 and thus cause it to contract impurity.
FOOTNOTES
1.
I.e., the sacred quality of the second tithe no longer applies to it. It is as if the seller gave it to him as a present.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aser Sheni 1:3), the Rambam explains that when a seller is not meticulous in his business dealings and thinks that he sold only the meat and does not think about the hide, none of the money of the second tithe was use for the hide. Hence, the hide is considered as ordinary property.
2.
For a merchant is careful about getting a full price for his merchandise and will make sure to include the value of the hide in the price. Since the person will be using the money from the second tithe for the purchase, that purchase will also encompass the hide. Hence the hide is considered as the servants and land mentioned in Chapter 7, Halachah 17, and one must eat an equivalent amount of food in Jerusalem. Although ordinarily, one may not purchase non-food items with money from the second tithe, in this instance, an exception is made, because the meat cannot be purchased without the hide. See Radbaz.
3.
But not while they are open as the Rambam continues stating.
4.
I.e., like the sale of the hides mentioned in the previous halachah, when an ordinary person buys or sells wine, he does not take the value of the jugs into consideration. For the container is considered as subservient to the wine it contains. Indeed, the flavor of the wine is somewhat dependent on its container. Accordingly, the two are considered as a single entity. (See Eruvin27b which derives this concept through Biblical exegesis.) Hence, the money of the second tithe is not used for the containers.
5.
By opening the jugs, the seller indicates that he desires to consider the jugs independently [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aser Sheni 3:13)]. By opening a jug, the seller indicates that he wants the purchaser to pour it into his own containers.
6.
Since he is selling the wine at an exact fee per measure, he is not including the price of the jug in the price of the wine (Kessef Mishneh).
7.
As mentioned above, opening the container is an indication that the container should be considered as an independent entity.
8.
Since it is customary in this place to sell the containers open, even if one sells them while sealed, he is considered to have followed the general practice of considering the container as a separate entity.
9.
Following the same reasoning as in Halachah 1.
10.
I.e., the basket.
11.
For the fruit is sold independently of the baskets (Radbaz).
12.
For they are obviously secondary to the fruit within them. Even a merchant is not concerned about them. Hence, one may benefit from them without worrying about purchasing their worth in food to be eaten in Jerusalem.
13.
The dates together with the branches from which they are suspended.
14.
Since the dates are crushed, the container is obviously subservient to them, for they could not be sold without it. Hence, it is not considered as a separate entity.
15.
For the containers are considered as subservient to the dates.
16.
As opposed to other liquids as indicated by the conclusion of the halachah.
17.
We are speaking about a person using his own jugs. Nevertheless, the term "lends" is used because the person desires to retain possession of the jugs as ordinary property. He is merely "lending" them temporarily to be used for the second tithe. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aser Sheni3:12), the Rambam writes that the person must make an explicit statement of the above intent.
18.
I.e., he stored wine from which the second tithe had not been separated in jugs and then desired to set aside several jugs as the second tithe. This reflects a reversal of the Rambam's understanding in his Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.). The Radbaz explains, however, that the two rulings are not contradictory.
19.
Thus after the wine is poured out from them, he may use the jugs as ordinary property, without any further measures.
20.
For the wine and the container have an integral relationship as mentioned above. Indeed, our Sages compare it to separating wine in its jug to separating fruit in its peal. Thus if the value of the wine is transferred to money, the value of the jugs must also be included (Radbaz). Nevertheless, if one drinks the wine, the jug is no longer considered as consecrated to the second tithe and may be used for other purposes (Rambam LeAm).
21.
A measure of 86 or 150 cc depending on which Rabbinic authority one follows.
22.
By putting ordinary wine in the jug, he indicates that he does not desire that the jug be acquired by the second tithe.
23.
I.e., brine that was purchased with money from the second tithe.
24.
For in contrast to wine and its containers, the containers of these liquids are not necessary for the liquid itself and are always considered as separate from them.
25.
Since the animal was never eaten, the hide is not considered as a separate entity. Thus since it and the animal are consecrated with the holiness of the second tithe, they must be buried. The deer may not be redeemed, because "we do not redeem consecrated entities in order to use their meat to feed dogs [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aser Sheni 3:11); Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 2:10]. Rabbi Akiva Eiger questions this ruling, citing sources which indicate that in similar circumstances, the hide can be considered a separate entity and should be redeemed.
26.
See Chapter 2, Halachah 8; Chapter 7, Halachah 1. Needless to say, this same law applies when a person purchases meat and later that meat becomes impure (Radbaz, based on the above mishnah).
27.
In other words, the person set aside money that was consecrated from the second tithe. Nevertheless, instead of using that money, used ordinary money with the intent that the holiness associated with the second tithe by transferred to the ordinary money as that money was spent to purchase food.
28.
The Rambam is obviously speaking in hyperbole. The ordinary exchange rate of adinar is six me'ah (Hilchot Eruvin 1:12).
29.
I.e., he must use half a dinar for food. Now, however, he value of that half a dinar inme'ah has doubled. The rationale is that the value of the coinage from the second tithe is calculated at the time and place it is transferred.
30.
Again, he is using half a dinar, but now the value of that half a dinar in me'ah has been halved.
31.
The Rambam's wording has attracted the attention of the commentaries who note that there is no Biblical verse which uses that exact wording. See Leviticus 27:19 which uses somewhat similar expressions.
32.
The Rambam's wording has attracted the attention of the commentaries. Seemingly, the reason for the Rambam's ruling is that once the purchaser performed meshichah, he acquired the produce. Hence, when he pays for it, he pays the price at the time of its acquisition. This is not implied by the Rambam's wording. Indeed, as the Ra'avad emphasizes, the Rambam's wording implies the very opposite.
33.
I.e.., he must eat the entire amount of produce according to the stringencies required of produce of the second tithe. One might think that the purchaser would profit from the rise of the value of the produce, i.e., he could eat half of it as the second tithe and use the other half as his private property. Hence, the Rambam clarifies that this is not so. The Radbaz explains the Rambam's wording, explaining that the transfer of the holiness does not take place until he pays the money, but that afterwards, the produce is acquired by the second tithe according to its price at the time of acquisition.
34.
I.e., since he drew the produce into his possession when it was worth two selaim, he must pay that amount to the seller. Nevertheless, he may not pay that entire amount from the money of the second tithe, because now the produce is not worth that amount. Indeed, if the purchaser would give the seller the second sela from the money of the second tithe, the holiness of that money would not be transferred to the produce and the seller would be obligated to use it to purchase food which he would eat according to the stringencies of the second tithe.
35.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aser Sheni 4:6), the Rambam explains the rationale for this ruling. Since we are speaking about demai, there is only a question if there is a prohibition involved. Accordingly, since a common person is more lax in his observance and will violate even more severe prohibitions, we assume that he is not precise in his observance ofdemai. Hence, it can be given to him. The commentaries question that explanation, for even though he is not careful in his observance, we should not be responsible for him possibly performing a transgression. See Halachah 13 where this concept is also mentioned.
36.
I.e., the entire amount of produce is considered as produce of the second tithe, because as soon as the money from the second tithe is paid, its holiness is transferred to the produce.
37.
I.e., were it ordinary produce, the law would be that the seller should keep his word and complete the transaction. Nevertheless, since according to Rabbinic Law, a transaction is not completed with the payment of money, but rather when the purchaser draws the object into his possession, the purchaser does have the option of retracting. If he does so, however, he must be given the adjuration mi shepara(Hilchot Mechirah 7:1). Should the seller choose that option and retract entirely, he must treat the produce in his possession as produce of the second tithe. If he still wants to carry out the sale at one sela, he must give the purchaser back a sela. The purchaser must consider all the produce as the second tithe, but the sela he was given is ordinary money.
38.
I.e., the entire amount of produce is considered as produce of the second tithe, because as soon as the money from the second tithe is paid, its holiness is transferred to the produce.
39.
I.e., the holiness of the second tithe is transferred to the produce. Nevertheless, from the financial point of view, the purchaser has the option of accepting the adjuration mi shepara and retracting from the transaction. If he takes that option, the seller must return the two selaim to him and from that time on, he may treat them as ordinary money. And the seller must treat the produce as produce of the second tithe.
40.
The exchange of money for produce or vice versa.
41.
I.e., just as a business transaction is completed when the purchaser draws it into his possession, the transfer of the holiness of the second tithe is completed upon the payment of money.
42.
As the Rambam states at the conclusion of the following halachah, the money and the produce to not have to be in the same place when the holiness of one is transferred to the other.
43.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aser Sheni 2:4), the Rambam mentions another general principle that can be derived from this law: the holiness of money in the second tithe can be transferred even when the money is in Jerusalem. As mentioned above, the holiness of produce from the second tithe may not be transferred when that produce is in Jerusalem.
44.
I.e., for purposes other than food, drink, or smearing.
45.
Which he may use at will, in Jerusalem or outside that holy city.
46.
A person who is precise in the observance of the laws of the agricultural laws and the laws of ritual purity. See Hilchot Ma'aser, ch. 10.
47.
For this produce must be eaten in a state of ritual purity and a common person is not precise in his observance of those laws. See Chapter 3, Halachot 8-9.
48.
As mentioned in the notes to Halachah 8, since the obligation above is only Rabbinic in origin, we allow it to be given to a common person even if he might be lax in its observance.
49.
Since the common person is not careful in his observance of the second tithe, one might think that he already separated it from his produce, but is considering it as ordinary produce regardless. Were that the case, one could not transfer the holiness of other produce from the second tithe to it [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (T'vul Yom 4:5)].
The Ra'avad cites the Tosefta (Ma'aser Sheni 4:9) which places certain limitations on making such a transfer. The Radbaz explains that it is possible that these limitations were not accepted as halachah.
50.
I.e., he continued using that coin to redeem produce from the second tithe until all but less than a p'rutah's worth of the coins value had been used to redeem produce.
51.
And may be used for purposes other than the purchase of food and drink. The rationale is that anything less than ap'rutah's worth of value is not financially significant [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aser Sheni 4:8)].
52.
Since the obligation is only of Rabbinic origin, we are more lenient.
53.
In that way, when the fifth (one fifth of the new total) is added, the worth of the entire amount will be less than a p'rutah (ibid.).
54.
The Ra'avad [based on the Jerusalem Talmud (Ma'aser Sheni 2:10)] states that we are speaking about a situation where the person says: "When the person eats or drinks what he eats or drinks will be retroactively considered as the second tithe from the present time." It is necessary to make this qualification, because otherwise, at the time he eats or drinks, he will be partaking of ordinary food and the consecration would not take effect until the object no longer exists.
The Ra'avad also states that this ruling depends on the principle of bereirah, that retroactively the status of an object can be changed. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh note that there is somewhat of a difficulty in ascribing such a position to the Rambam, for the Rambam maintains that in questions of Scriptural Law, the principle ofbereirah does not apply. The Radbaz explains that since there is no prohibition involved, merely the question of when the transfer of holiness takes effect, all authorities agree that the principle ofbereirah applies.
55.
In certain instances, they may, however, touch the container in which the food is stored. See Ma'aser Sheni 2:10 and the Rambam's commentary for more details.
The commentaries suggest that the restrictions mentioned in Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 9:21 should also be observed.
Maaser Sheini - Chapter 9
Halacha 1
The produce of the fourth year (neta reva'i)1 is holy, as [Leviticus 19:24] states: "And in its fourth year, all of its produce shall be holy, consecrated unto God." The law applying to it is that it must be eaten in Jerusalem by its owners2in the same way as the second tithe.3 Just as the laws of the second tithe do not apply in Syria,4 so too, the laws of neta reva'i do not apply in Syria.5
With regard to neta reva'i, [Numbers 5:10] states: "A person's consecrated property shall be his."6 For there is no other consecrated property about which the Torah does not inform to whom it should be given with the exception of neta reva'i.7
Halacha 2
A person who desires to redeem neta reva'i should redeem it in the same manner as which he redeems the produce of the second tithe.8 If he redeems it for his own self, he must add a fifth [to its value].9 It may not be redeemed until it reaches the "phase of tithing,"10 as [implied by Leviticus 19:25]: "To increase its produce for you," [i.e., these laws do not apply] until [the crops] have become produce.11
[Neta reva'i] may not be redeemed while it is attached [to the ground],12 as is the law with regard to the second tithe. And it is the property of the Most High, as is the second tithe.13 Therefore, it cannot be acquired when given as a present14 unless it was given when it was not yet ripe.15
With regard to other matters, e.g., eating, drinking, and redemption, the laws that apply to it are those applying to the second tithe.
Halacha 3
Halacha 4
The laws of shichachah, pe'ah, peret,, and ollelot do not apply to a vineyard that is in its fourth year.18 Nor should terumah and the tithes be separated from it, as they are not separated from the second tithe.19 Instead, it should be brought to Jerusalem in its entirety or redeemed and the money taken to Jerusalem [and used for food there] like the second tithe.
Halacha 5
Our Sages ordained that grapes from a vineyard in its fourth year from a radius of a one-day journey from Jerusalem should be brought there to embellish the marketplaces of Jerusalem with fruit.20 After the Temple was destroyed, it may be redeemed even directly outside the city's wall.21 Other types of produce22 may be redeemed even directly outside the city's wall even during the time the Temple was standing.
Halacha 6
How is neta reva'i redeemed? One should evaluate [the size of] a basket [of fruit] through the agency of three men who estimate how much produce would a person [want] for a sela that he would pay for this fruit when it is considered that [in addition] he would have to pay the cost of watchmen, donkey-drivers,23 and workers. After the rate is established, he should place down the money and say: "The holiness of all [the produce] gathered from this [orchard] is transferred to this money," estimating how many baskets worth a sela [the field] contains.
Halacha 7
When a person had [an orchard that was in] its fourth year of growth in the Sabbatical year when everyone is allowed equal access to it, he must mark it with mounds of earth so that [those who take the produce] will recognize [its sacred quality] and not partake of it until they redeem it.28 If [the produce is] within the [three] orlah years,29it should be marked with baked clay30 so that [people] will shun it. [We use clay instead of mounds of earth], lest the latter crumble.31 [The rationale is that] the prohibition of orlah is more severe, because benefit from it is forbidden.32
Those who are meticulous in their observance of the Torah's prohibitions33would set aside money in the Sabbatical year and say: "The holiness of everything harvested from these fruits of the fourth year is transferred to this money."34 [The redemption must be carried out in this fashion,]35 because it is forbidden to redeem [the produce] while it is attached to the ground, as explained.36
Halacha 8
The first of Tishrei37 is the beginning of the year with regard to the reckoning of orlah and neta reva'i.
When do we begin counting the year with regard to these prohibitions? From the time the trees are planted. [A year does not have to be] from Rosh HaShanah to Rosh HaShanah. Instead, 30 days within a year are considered a year.38 [This applies] provided the planting takes root before these thirty days [begin]. How long does it take? Generally, the time for all trees to take root is two weeks.
Halacha 9
Thus when a person plants a tree 44 days before Rosh HaShanah, it is considered as if the tree had been planted for an entire year.39 Nevertheless, due to the prohibition of orlah, in the fourth year, the fruit from this planting is not permitted until the fifteenth of Shvat, which is "the New Year of the Trees."40
Halacha 10
What is implied? When a person plants a fruit tree on the fifteenth of Av41of the tenth year in the Jubilee cycle, it is considered as being orlah until the fifteenth of Shvat of the thirteenth year of the Jubilee cycle. Whatever fruit produced42 by the tree during this time is orlah, even though it did not ripen until several days43 after [that date]. From the fifteenth of Shvat from the thirteenth year of the Jubilee cycle until the fifteenth of Shvat of the fourteenth year, the produce is neta reva'i. Whatever fruit produced during this time isneta reva'i and must be redeemed.44 If the year is declared a leap year, [the produce grown in] the extra month is considered as orlah or neta reva'i.45
Halacha 11
Halacha 12
If one planted the tree between the first of Tishrei and the fifteenth of Shvat, he should count three years from day to day for orlah and [four years] from day to day for neta reva'i.48 I have seen Geonim who have a different approach49regarding the reckoning of orlah and neta reva'i. It is not appropriate to elaborate in rebuttal of them. Theirs is a scholarly error and we have already outlined the true path.
Halacha 13
Leaves, blossoms, sap, and fruit buds,50 are permitted in [the years of] orlahand neta reva'i.51 Grapes that were devastated by the west wind and ruined, grape seeds, grape peels, water mixed with grape dregs, the peels of pomegranates, their flowers, the shells of nuts, and seeds within a fruit are forbidden with regard to orlah52 and permitted with regard to neta reva'i.53Fruit that withers and falls from the tree are forbidden in all instances.54
FOOTNOTES
1.
I.e., the fourth year of a tree's growth. This has nothing to do with the seven year agricultural cycle. This mitzvah applies to all trees, not only vines. See Berachot 35a and commentaries.
2.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 119) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 247) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
3.
Because of this connection, the Rambam includes the laws pertaining to this mitzvah in this section of the Mishneh Torah. There is, however, a difference between neta reva'iand the second tithe. The second tithe must be separated by man and then it is deemed holy. Neta reva'i, by contrast, is inherently holy. There is no need for any activity on man's part.
4.
See Chapter 2, Halachah 1. See Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 10:15.
5.
Needless to say according to the Rambam, these laws do not apply in the Diaspora. TheShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 294:7) mentions the Rambam's ruling only as a minority opinion. That text rules according to Rabbenu Yonah who maintains that the mitzvah applies in the Diaspora as well as inEretz Yisrael. The Rama adds a third view: that neta reva'i must be observed with regard to grapes, but not with regard to any other type of produce.
6.
I.e., he may keep it as his own without giving it to anyone.
7.
I.e., in general, the Torah instructs to have consecrated articles offered on the altar or given to a priest. The Rambam is speaking here in broad terms, for in particular - as he mentions in his statements concerning neta reva'i in Sefer HaMitzvot, loc. cit.,, quotinh the Sifri, there are other consecrated articles, e.g., the second tithe, the tithe of domesticated animals, and the peace, thanksgiving, and Paschal sacrifices, which remain the private property of the owner.
8.
See Chapter 5 above. See also Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 10:17 for more particulars concerning this redemption.
9.
I.e., in general, the Torah instructs to have consecrated articles offered on the altar or given to a priest. The Rambam is speaking here in broad terms, for in particular - as he mentions in his statements concerning neta reva'i in Sefer HaMitzvot, loc. cit.,, quotinh the Sifri, there are other consecrated articles, e.g., the second tithe, the tithe of domesticated animals, and the peace, thanksgiving, and Paschal sacrifices, which remain the private property of the owner.
10.
I.e., when the produce reaches at least a third of its growth. See Hilchot Ma'aser 2:3-5.
11.
I.e., developed to a state where the produce itself has begun to form.
12.
The Kessef Mishneh quotes a responsa of the Ramban who states that theoretically, there are theoretical grounds to say thatneta reva'i can be redeemed even while it is attached to the ground. Certainly, in the present age,, when the produce need not be redeemed for its full worth, it can be redeemed while attached.
13.
See Chapter 3, Halachah 17.
14.
The Kessef Mishneh quotes a responsa of the Ramban who states that theoretically, there are theoretical grounds to say thatneta reva'i can be redeemed even while it is attached to the ground. Certainly, in the present age,, when the produce need not be redeemed for its full worth, it can be redeemed while attached.
15.
The Rambam's ruling is somewhat difficult to accept, because unripened fruit has still reached one third of its growth. The Tzafnat Paneach (gloss to Hilchot Arachin 6:19) explains that with regard to unripened fruit, the prohibition against using it for mundane purposes takes effect immediately, but it is not endowed with its holiness until it is ready to be eaten.
16.
For wine and oil are considered as ordinary uses of grapes and olives. Indeed, when the Torah refers to the obligation to tithe these fruits, it refers to them as wine and oil {the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Terumah 11:3)}.
17.
For this is not the ordinary manner in which they are used. See Hilchot Terumah 11:2.
18.
These are different types of presents given to the poor from one's fields, as described inHilchot Matanot Aniyim. These requirements do not apply in a vineyard of the fourth year, because that produce does not belong to one individually, but instead, is "the property of the Most High" [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aser Sheni5:3)].
19.
I.e., if one separated the second tithe before separating terumah and the first tithe, it is not necessary to separate terumah and the first tithe from the produce separated as the second tithe.
20.
The Jerusalem Talmud explains that in the time of the Temple, the people would prepare wine in a state of ritual purity. Hence, there were few grapes offered for sale in the marketplaces of the holy city. To offset that difficulty, our Sages ordained this practice.
The Rambam LeAm raises a question: It is forbidden to sell produce of the second tithe (Chapter 3, Halachah 17). Seemingly, this restriction should also apply to neta reva'i. How then should people bring their grapes to Jerusalem and sell them to merchants there who will resell them to people at large? That text explains that first the fruit should be redeemed and then sold after it was redeemed. Alternatively, there are authorities who explain that since each person will eat his grapes from the fourth year, there will be a surplus of fruit in the holy city.
21.
But not within the city itself. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.:2), the Rambam explains that the leniency was granted because, since the city is in the hands of the gentiles, there is no point in having its marketplaces embellished.
22.
Since other types of fruits were not used for wine, there was not a scarcity of them in Jerusalem's marketplaces.
23.
To transport the produce.
24.
The seventh year of the agricultural cycle inEretz Yisrael. As obvious from the laws that follow, the reckoning of the years for neta reva'i continues despite that cycle.
25.
For it is forbidden to work the land or guard one's field that year [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.:5)].
26.
This applies in other years, not the Sabbatical year.
27.
Like the Sabbatical year, he need not pay for guards, he may, however, have to pay for workers to harvest the produce. This does not apply in the Sabbatical year. Then each person gathers for himself (ibid.).
28.
I.e., anyone is allowed to take the produce which grows in the Sabbatical year. Hence, we are afraid that an outsider will unwittingly come and take it and partake of it without redeem it. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aser Sheni 5:1; based on Bava Kama 69a), the Rambam explains that it is necessary to make such provisions in the Sabbatical year alone. In an ordinary year, one need not do so, because it is forbidden to take produce from another person's field. Why should he? He knows the status of his own fruit and he need not make any provisions so that a thief will not transgress the prohibition against partaking of this produce.
29.
I.e., the first three years if its growth when it is forbidden to partake of it entirely.
30.
Our translation is taken from the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.).
31.
And the sign not be noticed.
32.
See Chapter 10, Halachah 2, Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 10:10. There is no prohibition against benefiting from fruits of the fourth year, by contrast.
33.
Our translation is taken from the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.).
34.
This will remove any possibility of a person transgressing, for as the produce is harvested, its holiness will be transferred to the money.
35.
I.e., there is a problem with redeeming the produce in this manner, because redeeming the produce in this manner, resembles the concept of bereirah, i.e., the money is set aside at the outset and the consecration takes effect only retroactively. According to the Rambam, bereirah is not effective in questions involving Scriptural Law. In truth, however, in this instance, we are not relying on bereirah, because the money is set aside and the redemption does not take place until the produce is harvested (Radbaz).
In addition, there is a further problem. When the reaper takes the produce, it is no longer in the owner's possession, and hence, one might think that it is not in his power to redeem it (see the Responsa of the Ramban, quoted by the Kessef Mishneh). For these reasons, it is not fully desirable to redeem the produce in this manner, but there is no real alternative as the Rambam continues to explain.
36.
See Halachah 2.
37.
I.e., Rosh HaShanah. See the following halachah with regard to the consideration given to the 15th of Shvat (Tu BeShvat) which is "the New Year of the Trees."
38.
I.e., we count neither from the "birthday" of each tree, nor from Rosh HaShanah. Rather the first year is considered as from the time the tree is planted and then each year, we begin count the coming years from Rosh HaShanah.
The concept that 30 days can be considered as a year is relevant in other halachic contexts. See Hilchot Ishut 2:4;Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 1:14.
39.
Note the parallel in Hilchot Shemitah 3:11.
40.
Similarly, in the fifth year, until Tu BeShvat, the produce is considered as neta reva'i.
41.
Thus there are 44 complete days before Rosh HaShanah. The same laws apply to any tree planted between Tu BeShvat and that date.
42.
I.e., it reached the "phase of tithing," one third of its growth. See Chapter 1, Halachah 2; Hilchot Shemitah 4:9. See also Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 294:4).
43.
Or weeks.
44.
Or taken to Jerusalem.
45.
Since the Torah speaks in terms of years and does not mention twelve months, all of the produce that grows during the year is included in the prohibition (Radbaz).
46.
This holds true for any tree planted between the 16th of Av and Rosh HaShanah.
47.
I.e., the reckoning is made from Rosh HaShanah, not from the fifteenth of Shvat. Although there are Rishonim who maintain that in this instance as well, we should reckon from the fifteenth of Shvat, the Ra'avad cites proof from the Jerusalem Talmud (Rosh HaShanah 1:2) to support the Rambam's view.
48.
Despite the Ra'avad's interpretation that the years should be counted from Tu BeShvat, Rav Yosef Corcus and the Kessef Mishnehinterpret the Rambam's words simply: We count three years from the day was planted (or perhaps two weeks later, to allow for rooting). Thus if a tree was planted on the 28th of Tishrei, three years later on the 28th of Tishrei, its fruit is permitted as neta reva'i.
49.
The Kessef Mishneh interprets this as referring to the approach of the Halachot Gedolot (as quoted by Tosafot, Rosh HaShanah 10a), Rabbenu Shimshon (Ma'aser Sheni 5:1), and Rabbenu Asher (at the conclusion of his Hilchot Orlah).
50.
Our definition of all these terms is based on the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Orlah 1:7).
51.
For the prohibition is against partaking of fruit and these are not fruit (ibid.).
52.
Because it is forbidden to derive any benefit whatsoever from orlah (ibid.:8).
53.
For the prohibition against neta reva'iinvolves only eating and these are not considered as food.
54.
With regard to both prohibitions.
Maaser Sheini - Chapter 10
Halacha 1
[The restrictions of] neta reva'i applies to all [plants to which] the prohibition oforlah applies.1 And all [plants] that are exempt from orlah are not obligated forneta reva'i, as [Leviticus 19:23-24] states: "For three years [your plants] will be orlah.... In the fourth year..."2
Halacha 2
When a person plants a fruit tree with the intent that it serve as a hedge for a garden or he planted it to use it as lumber and not for its fruit, it is exempt from the prohibition of orlah.3 If he planted it to serve as a hedge and then changed his mind and thought to use its fruit or he planted it for the sake of its fruit and then thought to use it as a hedge, since an intent that obligates it was involved, he is liable.4 If he planted it for three years as a hedge and afterwards, intended to use it for food, the laws of neta reva'i do not apply,5because whenever the laws of orlah do not apply, the laws of neta reva'i do not apply.
Halacha 3
When one planted a tree with the intent that the inner side will produce food and the outer side will serve as a hedge or the lower portion will produce food and the upper portion will serve as a hedge,6 the portion that was intended for food is liable in the prohibitions of orlah and the portion intended as a hedge or for lumber is exempt. For the matter is dependent on the intent of the one who plants it.
The prohibition of orlah applies to only the caper berries of the caper tree, but its leaves are permitted.7
Halacha 4
When a person plants trees for the sake of people at large8 in his own field, the prohibition of orlah applies. For the term "And you shall plant..."9[used in the prooftext cited above] implies even for the sake of people at large.
When does the above apply? In Eretz Yisrael. In the Diaspora, by contrast, [such trees] are exempt.10
Halacha 5
Halacha 6
[Trees] that grow on their own accord in rocky terrain18 are exempt.19 Even one who plants trees in an unsettled place is exempt, provided the tree does not produce enough fruit so that it would be worthwhile for a person to care for its produce until he brings it to a settled land.20 If, however, the tree produces enough that it is worthwhile to maintain it, the prohibition of orlah applies to it.
Halacha 7
When a person plants a tree for the sake of a mitzvah, e.g., he plants an esrog21 tree [to fulfill] the mitzvah of lulav [and esrog] or an olive tree [to produce oil] for the Menorah,22 the prohibition of orlah applies.23 If he consecrated [a tree] and then planted it, it is exempt.24 If he planted it and then consecrated it, the prohibition of orlah applies.25
Halacha 8
Halacha 9
When a tree is planted in a house, the prohibition of orlah applies. Trees planted by gentiles before our ancestors entered the [Holy] Land28 were exempt.29 After our ancestors entered the land, the prohibition applies even to [trees] planted by gentiles,30 as Leviticus 19:23] states: "When you enter the land and you plant...." [The prohibition begins from] the time of the entry into the land.
Halacha 10
Halacha 11
[With regard to] the prohibition of orlah, [planting a tree refers to] planting a seed,34 a bough from a tree, or uprooting the entire tree from one place and planting it in another.35 We begin counting [the three years] from the time of the planting.36
[The following laws apply if] a tree was shaken from its place, but not uprooted and then one filled the surrounding area with earth.37 If it could live without the surroundings having been filled with earth,38 it is exempt. If not, it is considered as if it was uprooted and replanted and the prohibition does apply.
Halacha 12
Similarly, when a tree was uprooted and there remained a root, even one as thin as a needle over which embroiderers wind thread,39 if one returned it to its original place and replanted it, it is exempt [from the prohibitions of orlah], because it could live.40
[The following rules apply if] the tree was uprooted entirely together with the clod of earth41 to which its roots were attached and he replanted it as it is, together with that earth. If it could live from that clod of earth even if it was not replanted, it is as if it was not uprooted. If not, [the laws of orlah] apply.
Halacha 13
Halacha 14
Whether one plants a tree, one extends one,44 or grafts it, [the laws of orlah] apply. When does the above apply? When one cut off a bough from the tree and planted it in the earth or grafted it to another plant. If, however, one extended a branch of an elder plant and then implanted it in the earth or grafted it onto another tree,45 [leaving] the bough connected to the elder tree, [the new growth] is exempt [from the prohibition of orlah].
Halacha 15
If the new growth which was originally extended grew and produced fruit and, afterwards, the source from which it was connected to the elder tree was separated, we count [the years of orlah] from the time that it was separated.46The fruit [that was growing on the tree before it was separated] is, however, permitted, because it grew while permitted. If he left [the fruit on the new tree] after the connection to the original tree was severed until their growth increased by a two-hundredth,47 the fruit is forbidden.48
Halacha 16
When a young tree49 was grafted on to an elder tree and there were fruit on the younger tree, the fruit on the younger tree50 are forbidden even if the fruit increases 200 times its size.51 For the basic fruit that comes from a forbidden entity52 cannot be elevated by the new permitted substances that grow.
Halacha 17
[The following rule applies when] a branch was extended from a tree and implanted in the earth and afterwards, the tree itself was entirely uprooted and it derives its nurture only from the branch implanted in the earth. The tree is considered as if it was planted at this time and the prohibition of orlah applies to it.53 [The three years] are counted for the tree and for whatever grew from the implanted branch from the time it was uprooted.54
Halacha 18
When a person extended a branch and implanted it in the earth and it grew, he then extended and implanted a branch from the new growth and it grew, and then he extended and implanted a branch from the third growth - and continued doing so even for 100 implants each connected with each other - since the connection with the primary plant has not been severed, all [of the fruit]55 is permitted.56 If [the connection to] the original plant is severed,57 [theorlah years] are counted from the time of the severance.
Halacha 19
A tree which grows from a stump is exempt from the prohibitions of orlah.58 [If it grows] from the roots,59 the prohibition of orlah applies.60
The prohibition of orlah applies to a dwarf vine which is less than a handbreadth high throughout its entire life,61 because it looks like a tree that is one year old. When does the above apply? To one tree or to [a group of five, planted in a pattern where] two are planted opposite another pair and a fifth is planted behind them.62 If, however, an entire vineyard is less than a handbreadth high, it would be a matter of common knowledge and its age is calculated in the same way as other trees.
Halacha 20
We may plant a branch from a tree that is orlah,63 but we may not plant a nut that is orlah, because it is produce and it is forbidden to benefit from it, as we explained in Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot.64 If one transgressed and planted a nut that is orlah, [the tree] that grows from it is permitted like other trees.65
Halacha 21
Similarly, one may not graft underdeveloped clusters of dates,66 because they are considered as food. If one transgressed and grafted them, the fruits are permitted. [The rationale is that] whenever an entity has two causes, one forbidden67and one which is permitted,68 since it comes as a result of both of them, it is permitted. Therefore [a plant] that grows from fruit that is orlah is permitted, because its growth was caused by the forbidden fruit and the earth which is permitted.
FOOTNOTES
1.
This is speaking about plants within Eretz Yisrael. As mentioned above, according to the Rambam, the laws of neta reva'i do not apply in the Diaspora (Kessef Mishneh).
2.
Since the Torah mentions them in direct sequence with each other, we assume that it is referring to the same type of trees in both instances.
3.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Orlah1:1), the Rambam explains that this concept is alluded to by Leviticus 19:23. When that verse states the prohibition against orlah, it says: "When you plant a tree of which you eat...," i.e., for the prohibition to apply, one must have the intent of partaking of the tree's fruit.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 294:23) states that it must be evident that the owner did not desire to grow the trees for their fruit, e.g., he planted them to close together to grow fruit properly.
4.
The three years of orlah are counted from the time the tree is planted regardless of when he thought of using it for food (Radbaz).
5.
Similarly, the prohibition of orlah does not apply, because he did not have the intent of growing it for its fruit until the three years in which the prohibition of orlah would apply were completed.
6.
The converse is also true. Even when the lower portion is prohibited because it was intended for food and the upper portion is permitted, because it was intended to be used as a hedge, we do not say that the lower portion causes the upper portion to be forbidden. Even though it grows from it, it remains permitted [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah294:23; Siftei Cohen 294:34).
7.
Although they are edible, they are not considered as food to this extent. TheShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 294:3) differs and accepts the Rambam's ruling only in the Diaspora. In Eretz Yisrael, even the leaves are considered as food.
8.
I.e., he does not plant the trees in order to partake of the food himself, but to leave it as ownerless, for any passers by to partake of them (the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Orlah 1:2)].
9.
More particularly, Pesachim 23a and theSifra (as quoted in the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah) derive this concept from the word lachem in that prooftext.
10.
The rationale for this ruling is that there is a difference of opinion concerning this ruling and we follow the general principle (Berachot36a): Whenever a Sage rules leniently with regard to the situation in Eretz Yisrael, we follow his opinion in the Diaspora."
11.
In all the situations mentioned in this halachah, there is reason to think that the prohibition of orlah does not apply. When trees are planted in the public domain, the land is not his. Based on the Jerusalem Talmud (Orlah 2:1), we can conclude that we are speaking about an instance where the person plants for his own self. If he plants trees in the public domain for people at large, the prohibition of orlah does not apply.
12.
One might think that since the ship is not connected to the ground, the prohibition oforlah does not apply. Instead, however, the ship is considered as a large flowerpot in which instance, a tree planted within it is obligated in the laws of orlah, as stated in Halachah 8.
13.
Since no one planted them, one might think the prohibition of orlah does not apply.
14.
If, however, trees grow by their own accord in the public domain, they are ownerless and the prohibition of orlah does not apply [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Orlah 1:2)].
15.
I.e., and afterwards, a Jew purchased the tree from him (ibid.).
The above explanation is taken from Rav Kappach's translation of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah and is also reflected in one of the Rambam's responsa. In Rav Kappach's notes, he explains that this represents an emendation of his original text (which is printed in the standard translations of the Commentary to the Mishnah). Those texts state that even if a gentile raises a tree himself, the prohibition of orlah apply. That view is followed by theShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 294:8).
16.
Since a gentile is not obligated in any of the mitzvot, one might think the prohibition oforlah does not apply. See also Halachah 9.
17.
We are not speaking about a person who steals land, because the ownership of the land is never stolen. At all times, it and the trees that grow on it are the property of the original owner (Bava Kama 117a). Instead, we are speaking about a person who stole a sapling and planted it. Whether or not the owner despairs of his loss, the prohibition oforlah apply.
18.
This law is taken from the Jerusalem Talmud (Orlah 1:1), only the standard versions of that text read chorshin, "forests," instead oftorshin, "rocky terrain." Rav Yosef Corcus suggests that the version of the Jerusalem Talmud available to the Rambam read like his text here. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh suggest emending the text here to read like the standard version of the Jerusalem Talmud.
19.
This applies even if the rocky terrain is a person's private property. We are forced to say that for the previous halachah already mentioned a tree that grew on its own accord in the public domain (Radbaz).
The rationale for this law is that since the soil is not good, the trees will not grow well and will only produce a minimal amount of fruit. Hence, it is considered as if one has planted these trees for purposes other than their fruit and the prohibition of orlah does not apply as stated in Halachah 2.
20.
Even if the person who planted the tree shows concern for the tree's fruit, he is not considered to have planted a tree for the purpose of fruit, for the nature of the situation prevents us from considering it as such.
21.
When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 294:24) mentions both planting a lulav and an esrog. That version is also acceptable, because the tree used for the lulav must be a date palm whose species produce edible fruit.
22.
The candelabrum in the Temple.
23.
For even though he is not seeking personal benefit from the fruit, he is seeking to use it for a mitzvah. Thus his intent is on the fruit itself.
24.
Because the prohibition of orlah does not apply to consecrated property.
25.
Because as soon as the tree was planted, the prohibition of orlah took effect. The obligation to observe them is not nullified by the consecration of the tree.
26.
Whether of wood or earthenware (Radbaz).
27.
A smaller plant that is planted in a flowerpot without a hole does not derive nurture from the ground. A tree's roots, by contrast, have more power and can derive nurture from the ground even when there is no hole [Jerusalem Talmud (Orlah 1:2)].
28.
Before the conquest of the land by Joshua.
29.
This law is not merely a historical point. It shares an element of contemporary relevance. At present, all of the agricultural laws relevant to Eretz Yisrael are observed only by virtue of Rabbinic decree. It will not be until the entire Jewish people return in the era of Mashiach, that these mitzvot will have the status of Scriptural commandments (seeHilchot Terumah 1:26 and notes). Thus the prohibition of orlah does not apply to trees planted by gentiles in Eretz Yisrael at present. If such trees are less than three years of age when Mashiach leads the entire people back into the land, the laws oforlah will not apply to them (Rambam LeAm).
30.
If the plant for the sake of a Jew, as stated in the notes to Halachah 5.
31.
As stated in Halachah 14, grafting is equivalent to planting.
32.
It is forbidden for a Jew to make such a graft. Once it is made, however, a Jew can benefit from the fruit. He must, however, wait the three orlah years (Radbaz).
33.
See Hilchot Melachim 10:10 which states that, with a few exceptions, if a gentile desires, he may observe any of the mitzvot of the Torah and he receives a reward for doing so.
34.
The Radbaz mentions that in warmer climates, it is possible for a tree to grow from a seed to the point that it can produce fruit in three years. In his Guide to the Perplexed, Vol. III., ch. 37, the Rambam states that the Torah mentions three years because it speaks about the majority of instances where trees are grown by planting boughs from other trees.
35.
Rambam LeAm questions why it is necessary for the Rambam to mention "another place." Even if he replanted the tree in its original place, the laws of orlah spply.
36.
I.e., in the case of a replanted tree, we do not consider the years it grew in its previous place.
37.
Replanting it, as it were.
38.
I.e., if the connection via its roots was strong enough to sustain it without filling the earth in around its roots.
39.
See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Orlah 1:4; Keilim 11:15; 13:5) for a more particular definition of this term.
40.
That thin root would be sufficient to provide it with its nurture even if one would not have replanted it.
41.
The Rambam, quoting Orlah 1:3, uses the term sela, usually translated as "rock" for the clod of earth, because the earth hardens around the mass of roots, as he explains in his Commentary to the Mishnah.
42.
The Rambam's wording implies that if the stump of the tree is above the earth, the laws of orlah do not apply. The commentaries have noted that this ruling appears to conflict with his ruling in Hilchot Shemitah 3:8.
43.
For this is considered like a new tree. See also Halachah 19.
44.
Havrachah, translated as "extending," is a technique that was used particular with regard to vines. After a vine had grown for a long time, the head of the vine is planted in the ground where it grows new roots and thus has the potential to better nurture the new growth. As evident from the continuation of the halachah, sometimes the connection to the original vine is severed and it continues to grow as entirely independent plant. Other times, the connection is allowed to continue and then it is considered only as an extension of the original plant. See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Orlah 1:5) and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 294:16).
45.
Thus the grafted branch will be receiving nurture from two sources (ibid.).
46.
For severing the connection is considered like planting it.
47.
See Hilchot Kilayim 5:22 which explains how this measure is calculated.
48.
For the prohibition of orlah is nullified in a mixture one/twohundredth the size of the forbidden matter. In the instance mentioned above, once the connection to the original tree is severed, everything which grows is considered as orlah. Thus the fruit remaining on the tree has both permitted and forbidden elements to its existence. If it grows more than the amount stated above, the prohibited substance within it is not nullified and it causes the entire fruit to become forbidden.
49.
I.e., one that was not yet three years old.
50.
Which are forbidden because they are orlah.
51.
From the Rambam's wording [which is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah294:22), the Siftei Cohen 294:32 infers that the new fruit that grows on the grafted branch afterwards is permitted.
52.
I.e., since at the outset, this fruit was forbidden, its fundamental nature is considered as forbidden and everything added to it is incidental.
53.
Since its original connection to the earth was severed, the tree is considered as having been planted at this time.
54.
For until then, whatever grew from the implanted branch was considered as part of the original tree and the years of orlah were never counted for it. Even though the years of orlah were counted for the original tree, since it is now being considered as part of the implanted branch, we must count the years of orlah again.
55.
Even from the later implants.
56.
Because they are all considered as part of the original plant.
57.
The implanted plants are considered as new entities and the prohibition of orlah applies to them.
58.
For the new growth is considered as an extension of the previous tree.
59.
I.e., it did not have a portion that projects above the ground (Bava Batra 82a).
60.
For it is considered as an entirely new tree.
61.
This is a Rabbinic decree, enacted for the reason stated by the Rambam.
62.
This was a common pattern to plant trees and was referred to as "a small vineyard" (Hilchot Kilayim 7:7). Even though it is a separate entity, because it is small, it is subject to the above Rabbinic decree.
63.
Because the prohibition against orlah applies only to the fruit and not to the plant as a whole [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Orlah1:9)].
64.
Chapter 10, Halachah 9.
65.
It is even permitted to partake of its fruit, as explained in the following halachah.
66.
Our translation is taken from Rav Kappach's translation of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.). The standard published text of that work and similarly, the gloss of the Radbaz to this halachah understands the term differently.
67.
The date cluster.
68.
The permitted date tree.
• English Text | Video Class• "Today's Day"
Monday, Adar II 25, 5776 · 04 April 2016
Thursday Adar Sheini 25* 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Sh'mini, Chamishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 119, 1-96.
Tanya: Not that an (p. 183)...in man (respectively). (p. 185).
The chassid, R. Mordechai Horodoker, related: The first aphorism we heard from the Alter Rebbe when we arrived in Lyozna was: What is forbidden is forbidden, and what is permitted is unnecessary. For some three or four years we labored with this until we integrated this manner (of service) into the various aspects of our lives. Only then did we enter into yechidus, to ask for a path in avoda.
FOOTNOTES
*.This day marks the birth, in 5661 (1901) of the Rebbetzin Chaya Mushka o.b.m., daughter of the Previous Rebbe o.b.m., and wife of the Rebbe of righteous memory.
• Daily Thought:
The Storyteller
Abandon the notion that there is a world and there is a G‑d. It is as fallacious as thinking there is a story and there is a storyteller.
There is only the storyteller, expressing himself in the story he tells.
There is only the Unknowable, expressing Himself as a world.
---------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment