Candle Lighting
Light Candles before sunset ––:––
Today's Laws & Customs:
• Count "Fourteen Days to the Omer" Tonight
Tomorrow is the fourteenth day of the Omer Count. Since, on the Jewish calendar, the day begins at nightfall of the previous evening, we count the omer for tomorrow's date tonight, after nightfall: "Today is fourteen days, which are two weeks, to the Omer." (If you miss the count tonight, you can count the omer all day tomorrow, but without the preceding blessing).
The 49-day "Counting of the Omer" retraces our ancestors' seven-week spiritual journey from the Exodus to Sinai. Each evening we recite a special blessing and count the days and weeks that have passed since the Omer; the 50th day is Shavuot, the festival celebrating the Giving of the Torah at Sinai.
Tonight's Sefirah: Malchut sheb'Gevurah -- "Receptiveness in Restraint"
The teachings of Kabbalah explain that there are seven "Divine Attributes" -- Sefirot -- that G-d assumes through which to relate to our existence: Chessed, Gevurah, Tifferet, Netzach, Hod,Yesod and Malchut ("Love", "Strength", "Beauty", "Victory", "Splendor", "Foundation" and "Sovereignty"). In the human being, created in the "image of G-d," the seven sefirot are mirrored in the seven "emotional attributes" of the human soul: Kindness, Restraint, Harmony, Ambition, Humility, Connection and Receptiveness. Each of the seven attributes contain elements of all seven--i.e., "Kindness in Kindness", "Restraint in Kindness", "Harmony in Kindness", etc.--making for a total of forty-nine traits. The 49-day Omer Count is thus a 49-step process of self-refinement, with each day devoted to the "rectification" and perfection of one the forty-nine "sefirot."
Links:
How to count the Omer
The deeper significance of the Omer Count
Today in Jewish History:
• Jericho's Wall Collapses (1273 BCE)
On the seventh day of the encirclement of Jericho (see Jewish History for the 22nd of Nissan), the Jews, accompanied by the Holy Ark, circled the city seven times. After the blowing of theshofar, the walls miraculously crashed and sank, leaving the city open and unprotected. Jericho was easily conquered, becoming the first fortified Canaanite city to fall to the Children of Israel in their conquest of the Promised Land.
Links:
Joshua chapter six with commentary
Crossing the Jordan
• Buchenwald Liberated by American Forces (1945)
The Buchenwald concentration camp was founded in 1937 near the town of Weimar, Germany. Approximately 250,000 prisoners were incarcerated in this camp until its liberation in 1945.
Weimar is a German city known for its highly cultured citizenry. It was the home of many of the upper class intellectual members of Europe’s society. Among others, Goethe, Schiller, Franz Liszt, and Bach lived in Weimar.
Though technically not an extermination camp, approximately 56,000 prisoners were murdered in Buchenwald (not including many others who died after being transferred to other extermination camps). They died from vicious medical experiments, summary executions, torture, beatings, starvation, and inhuman work conditions. The camp was also known for its brutality. German officers would force inmates to eat their meager soup ration off the mud on the ground; would keep them standing in the cold until they froze to death; and they would even use skin of dead inmates to make lamp shades.
On the 29th of Nissan 1945 the Sixth Armored Division of the United States Third Army liberated the camp.
Among the more famous inmates who spent time in Buchenwald are Rabbi Israel Meir Lau, former Chief Rabbi of Israel, and Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel.
Links:
The Holocaust
Ethics Based on Torah
• Rebbe's Call (1991)
On the eve of Nissan 28, 5751 (April 11, 1991), the Lubavitcher Rebbe issued an emotional call to his followers, and to the world Jewish community, to increase their efforts to bring Moshiach and the ultimate redemption. Spoken in an anguished voice and couched in uncharacteristically personal terms, the Rebbe's words deeply shocked the Chassidim present in the Rebbe's synagogue and reverberated worldwide. "How is it that the Redemption has not yet been attained?" the Rebbe cried. "That despite all that has transpired and all that has been done, Moshiach has still not come? What more can I do? I have done all I can to bring the world to truly demand and clamor for the Redemption...The only thing that remains for me to do is to give over the matter to you. Do all that is in your power to achieve this thing--a most sublime and transcendent light that needs to be brought down into our world with pragmatic tools... I have done all I can. I give it over to you. Do all that you can to bring the righteous redeemer, immediately! I have done my part. From this point on, all is in your hands..."
Links:
Transmission
Moshiach: an Anthology
Moshiach and the Future Redemption
Daily Quote:
The duration of our galut (exile) is comparable to the fetus' nine months of incubation in its mother's womb. The messianic redemption represents the moment of birth.[Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi (Torah Or, p. 109)]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Acharei, 6th Portion Leviticus 18:6-18:21 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class• Leviticus Chapter 18
• Hebrew text
• English text• Chapter 135
• Lessons in Tanya• English Text
• Count "Fourteen Days to the Omer" Tonight
Tomorrow is the fourteenth day of the Omer Count. Since, on the Jewish calendar, the day begins at nightfall of the previous evening, we count the omer for tomorrow's date tonight, after nightfall: "Today is fourteen days, which are two weeks, to the Omer." (If you miss the count tonight, you can count the omer all day tomorrow, but without the preceding blessing).
The 49-day "Counting of the Omer" retraces our ancestors' seven-week spiritual journey from the Exodus to Sinai. Each evening we recite a special blessing and count the days and weeks that have passed since the Omer; the 50th day is Shavuot, the festival celebrating the Giving of the Torah at Sinai.
Tonight's Sefirah: Malchut sheb'Gevurah -- "Receptiveness in Restraint"
The teachings of Kabbalah explain that there are seven "Divine Attributes" -- Sefirot -- that G-d assumes through which to relate to our existence: Chessed, Gevurah, Tifferet, Netzach, Hod,Yesod and Malchut ("Love", "Strength", "Beauty", "Victory", "Splendor", "Foundation" and "Sovereignty"). In the human being, created in the "image of G-d," the seven sefirot are mirrored in the seven "emotional attributes" of the human soul: Kindness, Restraint, Harmony, Ambition, Humility, Connection and Receptiveness. Each of the seven attributes contain elements of all seven--i.e., "Kindness in Kindness", "Restraint in Kindness", "Harmony in Kindness", etc.--making for a total of forty-nine traits. The 49-day Omer Count is thus a 49-step process of self-refinement, with each day devoted to the "rectification" and perfection of one the forty-nine "sefirot."
Links:
How to count the Omer
The deeper significance of the Omer Count
Today in Jewish History:
• Jericho's Wall Collapses (1273 BCE)
On the seventh day of the encirclement of Jericho (see Jewish History for the 22nd of Nissan), the Jews, accompanied by the Holy Ark, circled the city seven times. After the blowing of theshofar, the walls miraculously crashed and sank, leaving the city open and unprotected. Jericho was easily conquered, becoming the first fortified Canaanite city to fall to the Children of Israel in their conquest of the Promised Land.
Links:
Joshua chapter six with commentary
Crossing the Jordan
• Buchenwald Liberated by American Forces (1945)
The Buchenwald concentration camp was founded in 1937 near the town of Weimar, Germany. Approximately 250,000 prisoners were incarcerated in this camp until its liberation in 1945.
Weimar is a German city known for its highly cultured citizenry. It was the home of many of the upper class intellectual members of Europe’s society. Among others, Goethe, Schiller, Franz Liszt, and Bach lived in Weimar.
Though technically not an extermination camp, approximately 56,000 prisoners were murdered in Buchenwald (not including many others who died after being transferred to other extermination camps). They died from vicious medical experiments, summary executions, torture, beatings, starvation, and inhuman work conditions. The camp was also known for its brutality. German officers would force inmates to eat their meager soup ration off the mud on the ground; would keep them standing in the cold until they froze to death; and they would even use skin of dead inmates to make lamp shades.
On the 29th of Nissan 1945 the Sixth Armored Division of the United States Third Army liberated the camp.
Among the more famous inmates who spent time in Buchenwald are Rabbi Israel Meir Lau, former Chief Rabbi of Israel, and Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel.
Links:
The Holocaust
Ethics Based on Torah
• Rebbe's Call (1991)
On the eve of Nissan 28, 5751 (April 11, 1991), the Lubavitcher Rebbe issued an emotional call to his followers, and to the world Jewish community, to increase their efforts to bring Moshiach and the ultimate redemption. Spoken in an anguished voice and couched in uncharacteristically personal terms, the Rebbe's words deeply shocked the Chassidim present in the Rebbe's synagogue and reverberated worldwide. "How is it that the Redemption has not yet been attained?" the Rebbe cried. "That despite all that has transpired and all that has been done, Moshiach has still not come? What more can I do? I have done all I can to bring the world to truly demand and clamor for the Redemption...The only thing that remains for me to do is to give over the matter to you. Do all that is in your power to achieve this thing--a most sublime and transcendent light that needs to be brought down into our world with pragmatic tools... I have done all I can. I give it over to you. Do all that you can to bring the righteous redeemer, immediately! I have done my part. From this point on, all is in your hands..."
Links:
Transmission
Moshiach: an Anthology
Moshiach and the Future Redemption
Daily Quote:
The duration of our galut (exile) is comparable to the fetus' nine months of incubation in its mother's womb. The messianic redemption represents the moment of birth.[Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi (Torah Or, p. 109)]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Acharei, 6th Portion Leviticus 18:6-18:21 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class• Leviticus Chapter 18
6No man shall come near to any of his close relatives, to uncover [their] nakedness. I am the Lord. ואִ֥ישׁ אִישׁ֙ אֶל־כָּל־שְׁאֵ֣ר בְּשָׂר֔וֹ לֹ֥א תִקְרְב֖וּ לְגַלּ֣וֹת עֶרְוָ֑ה אֲנִ֖י יְהוָֹֽה:
No man shall come near: Heb. תִקְרְבוּ לֹא. [This comes] to admonish the female as [it does] the male. Therefore, it is stated in the plural form. — [Torath Kohanim 18:136]
לא תקרבו: להזהיר הנקבה כזכר, לכך נאמר לשון רבים:
I am the Lord: faithful to pay a reward [not only for fulfilling positive commandments but also to the one who saves himself from sinning]. — [Torath Kohanim 18:145]
אני ה': נאמן לשלם שכר:
7You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father or the nakedness of your mother; she is your mother; you shall not uncover her nakedness. זעֶרְוַ֥ת אָבִ֛יךָ וְעֶרְוַ֥ת אִמְּךָ֖ לֹ֣א תְגַלֵּ֑ה אִמְּךָ֣ הִ֔וא לֹ֥א תְגַלֶּ֖ה עֶרְוָתָֽהּ:
the nakedness of your father: This [refers to] your father’s wife. [But how do we know this?] Perhaps it is only to be interpreted literally [as an admonition against relations with one’s father, in addition to the general admonition against pederasty]. [The answer is:] It says here, “The nakedness of your father,” and it says further, “has uncovered his father’s nakedness” (Lev. 20:11). Just as in the latter verse, Scripture is speaking of his father’s wife [as that verse begins with, “And a man who cohabits with his father’s wife”], here, too, [Scripture is speaking of] his father’s wife. - [Sanh. 54a]
ערות אביך: זו אשת אביך, או אינו אלא כמשמעו, נאמר כאן ערות אביך, ונאמר להלן (ויקרא כ יא) ערות אביו גלה, מה להלן אשת אביו, אף כאן אשת אביו:
or the nakedness of your mother: [It comes] to include [in the prohibition,] his mother who is not his father’s wife. — [Sanh. 54a]
וערות אמך: להביא אמו שאינה אשת אביו:
8You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's wife; it is your father's nakedness. חעֶרְוַ֥ת אֵֽשֶׁת־אָבִ֖יךָ לֹ֣א תְגַלֵּ֑ה עֶרְוַ֥ת אָבִ֖יךָ הִֽוא:
the nakedness of your father’s wife: [This admonition is repeated] to include [in the prohibition, one’s father’s wife, even] after the death [of one’s father]. — [Sanh. 54a]
ערות אשת אביך: לרבות לאחר מיתה:
9The nakedness of your sister, whether your father's daughter or your mother's daughter, whether born to one who may remain in the home or born to one who must be sent outside you shall not uncover their nakedness. טעֶרְוַ֨ת אֲחֽוֹתְךָ֤ בַת־אָבִ֨יךָ֙ א֣וֹ בַת־אִמֶּ֔ךָ מוֹלֶ֣דֶת בַּ֔יִת א֖וֹ מוֹלֶ֣דֶת ח֑וּץ לֹ֥א תְגַלֶּ֖ה עֶרְוָתָֽן:
your father’s daughter: Included in the meaning [of the verse] is also a daughter born from a woman [the father] raped [i.e., not the father’s wife]. — [Yev. 22b]
בת אביך: אף בת אנוסה במשמע:
whether born to one who may remain in the home or to one who must remain outside: מוֹלֶדֶת בַּית אוֹ מוֹלֶדֶת חוּץ, lit. born in the house or born outside. Whether they say to your father, “[You may] keep her mother [as your wife],” or whether they say to your father, “[You must] send her mother away,” for example, a mamzereth, or a nethinah [an offspring of the Gibeonites (see Josh. 9:327)]. — [Yev. 23a]
מולדת בית או מולדת חוץ: בין שאומרים לו לאביך קיים את אמה ובין שאומרים לו לאביך הוצא את אמה, כגון ממזרת או נתינה:
10The nakedness of your son's daughter or your daughter's daughter you shall not uncover their nakedness, for they are your own nakedness. יעֶרְוַ֤ת בַּת־בִּנְךָ֙ א֣וֹ בַת־בִּתְּךָ֔ לֹ֥א תְגַלֶּ֖ה עֶרְוָתָ֑ן כִּ֥י עֶרְוָֽתְךָ֖ הֵֽנָּה:
The nakedness of your son’s daughter [or your daughter’s daughter]: Scripture is speaking of his daughter born from a woman he had raped. [The case, however,] of [his son’s] daughter and his daughter’s daughter [who stem] from his wife, we learn from (verse 17 below), “You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter; you shall not take [in marriage] her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter” about [whose nakedness] Scripture says, “You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter” whether this daughter stems from him or from another man. — [Yev. 22b]
ערות בת בנך וגו: בבתו מאנוסתו הכתוב מדבר, ובתו ובת בתו מאשתו אנו למדין מערות אשה ובתה לא תגלה, בין שהיא ממנו ובין שהיא מאיש אחר:
The nakedness of your son’s daughter: How much more so, then, should one’s own daughter [be prohibited]! But since a Scriptural admonition must not be derived from an inference from minor to major, [but must be explicitly mentioned], they learned it from a gezeirah shavah [an exposition linking common words within verses of this passage, which is considered as if explicitly mentioned] in Tractate Yevamoth (3a).
ערות בת בנך: קל וחומר לבתך, אלא לפי שאין מזהירין מן הדין למדוה מגזרה שוה במסכת יבמות (ג א):
11The nakedness of the daughter of your father's wife, born to your father she is your sister: you shall not uncover her nakedness. יאעֶרְוַ֨ת בַּת־אֵשֶׁ֤ת אָבִ֨יךָ֙ מוֹלֶ֣דֶת אָבִ֔יךָ אֲחֽוֹתְךָ֖ הִ֑וא לֹ֥א תְגַלֶּ֖ה עֶרְוָתָֽהּ:
The nakedness of the daughter of your father’s wife: [This verse] teaches us that one is not liable to the punishment [of excision, if he cohabited with] his sister who stems from a handmaid or a non-Jewess. Therefore, it says, “the daughter of your father’s wife” - [i.e.,] a woman fit to enter into marriage [thus excluding a handmaid and non-Jewess, marriage with whom is not binding]. — [Yev. 23a]
ערות בת אשת אביך: לימד שאינו חייב על אחותו משפחה ונכרית לכך נאמר בת אשת אביך בראויה לקידושין:
12You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's sister; she is the close relative of your father. יבעֶרְוַ֥ת אֲחֽוֹת־אָבִ֖יךָ לֹ֣א תְגַלֵּ֑ה שְׁאֵ֥ר אָבִ֖יךָ הִֽוא:
13You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother's sister, for she is the close relative of your mother. יגעֶרְוַ֥ת אֲחֽוֹת־אִמְּךָ֖ לֹ֣א תְגַלֵּ֑ה כִּֽי־שְׁאֵ֥ר אִמְּךָ֖ הִֽוא:
14You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's brother you shall not come near his wife; she is your aunt. ידעֶרְוַ֥ת אֲחִֽי־אָבִ֖יךָ לֹ֣א תְגַלֵּ֑ה אֶל־אִשְׁתּוֹ֙ לֹ֣א תִקְרָ֔ב דֹּדָֽתְךָ֖ הִֽוא:
You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s brother: And what is “his nakedness?” “you shall not come near his wife.”
ערות אחי אביך לא תגלה: ומה היא ערותו, אל אשתו לא תקרב:
15You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter in law; she is your son's wife you shall not uncover her nakedness. טועֶרְוַ֥ת כַּלָּֽתְךָ֖ לֹ֣א תְגַלֵּ֑ה אֵ֤שֶׁת בִּנְךָ֙ הִ֔וא לֹ֥א תְגַלֶּ֖ה עֶרְוָתָֽהּ:
[she is] your son’s wife: [Scripture says:] I have stated [the law] only [in the case of a woman] with whom your son has a marital tie. [This] excludes a woman he has raped, a handmaid, or a non-Jewess [with whom the son has cohabited]. — [Torath Kohanim 20:108]
אשת בנך היא: לא אמרתי אלא בשיש לבנך אישות בה, פרט לאנוסה ושפחה ונכרית:
16You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother's wife: it is your brother's nakedness. טזעֶרְוַ֥ת אֵֽשֶׁת־אָחִ֖יךָ לֹ֣א תְגַלֵּ֑ה עֶרְוַ֥ת אָחִ֖יךָ הִֽוא:
17You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter; you shall not take [in marriage] her son's daughter or her daughter's daughter, to uncover her nakedness they are close relatives, it is evil counsel. יזעֶרְוַ֥ת אִשָּׁ֛ה וּבִתָּ֖הּ לֹ֣א תְגַלֵּ֑ה אֶת־בַּת־בְּנָ֞הּ וְאֶת־בַּת־בִּתָּ֗הּ לֹ֤א תִקַּח֙ לְגַלּ֣וֹת עֶרְוָתָ֔הּ שַֽׁאֲרָ֥ה הֵ֖נָּה זִמָּ֥ה הִֽוא:
You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter: Scripture prohibits [relations with the second woman] only through a marital tie with the first one [whether the woman or her daughter]. Hence, Scripture says, לֹא תִקַּח, denoting “taking (קִיחָה) in marriage.” Similarly, when it comes to stating the punishment [of those who transgress this matter, Scripture says], “[And a man] who takes (יִקַּח) a woman and her mother [in marriage…they shall burn him and them in fire]” (Lev. 20:14), [also using] the expression of קִיחָה, “taking [in marriage].” But if he raped a woman, he is permitted to marry her daughter. — [Yev. 97a]
ערות אשה ובתה: לא אסר הכתוב אלא ע"י נשואי הראשונה, לכך נאמר לא תקח, לשון קיחה, וכן לענין העונש אשר יקח את אשה ואת אמה (ויקרא כ יד), לשון קיחה, אבל אנס אשה מותר לישא בתה:
they are close relatives: Heb. שַׁאֲרָה הֵנָּה, they are related to one another.
שארה הנה: קרובות (הן) זו לזו:
evil counsel: Heb. זִמָּה, counsel [like the word זָמַם, plotted]; as the Targum renders: עֲצַת חֶטְאִין, counsel of sins, which your [evil] inclination has counseled you to sin.
זמה: עצה כתרגומו עצת חטאין, שיצרך יועצך לחטוא:
18And you shall not take a woman with her sister [in marriage] as rivals, to uncover the nakedness of one upon the other, in her lifetime. יחוְאִשָּׁ֥ה אֶל־אֲחֹתָ֖הּ לֹ֣א תִקָּ֑ח לִצְרֹ֗ר לְגַלּ֧וֹת עֶרְוָתָ֛הּ עָלֶ֖יהָ בְּחַיֶּֽיהָ:
a woman with her sister: both at the same time.
אל אחתה: שתיהן כאחת:
as rivals: Heb. לִצְרֹר, an expression similar to צָרָה, rival, to make one a rival to the other.
לצרר: לשון צרה לעשות את זו צרה לזו:
in her lifetime: This teaches you that if he divorced her, he may not marry her sister while she is still alive. — [Yev.. 8b]
בחייה: למדך שאם גרשה לא ישא את אחותה כל זמן שהיא בחיים:
19And to a woman during the uncleanness of her separation, you shall not come near to uncover her nakedness. יטוְאֶל־אִשָּׁ֖ה בְּנִדַּ֣ת טֻמְאָתָ֑הּ לֹ֣א תִקְרַ֔ב לְגַלּ֖וֹת עֶרְוָתָֽהּ:
20You shall not lie carnally with your neighbor's wife, to become defiled by her. כוְאֶל־אֵ֨שֶׁת֙ עֲמִ֣יתְךָ֔ לֹֽא־תִתֵּ֥ן שְׁכָבְתְּךָ֖ לְזָ֑רַע לְטָמְאָה־בָֽהּ:
21And you shall not give any of your offspring to pass through for Molech. And you shall not profane the Name of your God. I am the Lord. כאוּמִזַּרְעֲךָ֥ לֹֽא־תִתֵּ֖ן לְהַֽעֲבִ֣יר לַמֹּ֑לֶךְ וְלֹ֧א תְחַלֵּ֛ל אֶת־שֵׁ֥ם אֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ אֲנִ֥י יְהוָֹֽה:
for Molech: A form of idolatry, named Molech, and this was the manner of its worship, that one would hand over one’s child to the pagan priests, who would make two huge fires. The child was then passed through on foot between these two fires. — [Sanh. 64b, see Rashi there.]
למלך: עבודה זרה היא ששמה מולך, וזו היא עבודתה, שמוסר בנו לכומרים ועושין שתי מדורות גדולות ומעבירין את הבן ברגליו בין שתי מדורות האש:
And you shall not give: This refers to the handing him over to the pagan priests.
לא תתן: זו היא מסירתו לכומרים:
to pass through for Molech: This refers to passing [the child] between the fire[s].
להעביר למלך: זו (היא) העברת האש:
Daily Tehillim: Chapters 135 - 139• Hebrew text
• English text• Chapter 135
1. Praise the Lord! Praise the Name of the Lord; offer praise, you servants of the Lord-
2. who stand in the House of the Lord, in the courtyards of the House of our God.
3. Praise the Lord, for the Lord is good; sing to His Name, for He is pleasant.
4. For God has chosen Jacob for Himself, Israel as His beloved treasure.
5. For I know that the Lord is great, our Master is greater than all supernal beings.
6. All that the Lord desired He has done, in the heavens and on earth, in the seas and the depths.
7. He causes mists to rise from the ends of the earth; He makes lightning for the rain; He brings forth the wind from His vaults.
8. It was He who struck down the firstborn of Egypt, of man and beast.
9. He sent signs and wonders into the midst of Egypt, on Pharaoh and on all his servants.
10. It was He who struck down many nations, and slew mighty kings:
11. Sichon, king of the Amorites; Og, king of Bashan; and all the kingdoms of Canaan.
12. And He gave their lands as a heritage, a heritage to His people Israel.
13. Lord, Your Name is forever; Lord, Your remembrance is throughout all generations.
14. Indeed, the Lord will judge on behalf of His people, and have compassion on His servants.
15. The idols of the nations are silver and gold, the product of human hands.
16. They have a mouth, but cannot speak; they have eyes, but cannot see;
17. they have ears, but cannot hear; nor is there breath in their mouth.
18. Like them will their makers become-all who trust in them.
19. House of Israel, bless the Lord; House of Aaron, bless the Lord;
20. House of Levi, bless the Lord; you who fear the Lord, bless the Lord.
21. Blessed is the Lord from Zion, who dwells in Jerusalem. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 136
This psalm contains twenty-six verses, corresponding to the twenty-six generations between the creation of the world and the giving of the Torah.
1. Praise the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is forever.
2. Praise the God of the supernal beings, for His kindness is forever.
3. Praise the Master of the heavenly hosts, for His kindness is forever.
4. Who alone performs great wonders, for His kindness is forever.
5. Who makes the heavens with understanding, for His kindness is forever.
6. Who spreads forth the earth above the waters, for His kindness is forever.
7. Who makes the great lights, for His kindness is forever.
8. The sun to rule by day, for His kindness is forever.
9. The moon and stars to rule by night, for His kindness is forever.
10. Who struck Egypt through its firstborn, for His kindness is forever.
11. And brought Israel out of their midst, for His kindness is forever.
12. With a strong hand and with an outstretched arm, for His kindness is forever.
13. Who split the Sea of Reeds into sections, for His kindness is forever.
14. And brought Israel across it, for His kindness is forever.
15. And cast Pharaoh and his army into the Sea of Reeds, for His kindness is forever.
16. Who led His people through the desert, for His kindness is forever;
17. Who struck down great kings, for His kindness is forever.
18. And slew mighty kings, for His kindness is forever.
19. Sichon, king of the Amorites, for His kindness is forever.
20. And Og, king of Bashan, for His kindness is forever.
21. And gave their land as a heritage, for His kindness is forever.
22. A heritage to Israel His servant, for His kindness is forever.
23. Who remembered us in our humiliation, for His kindness is forever.
24. And redeemed us from our oppressors, for His kindness is forever.
25. Who gives food to all flesh, for His kindness is forever.
26. Praise the God of heaven, for His kindness is forever.
Chapter 137
Referring to the time of the destruction of the Temple, this psalm tells of when Nebuchadnezzar would ask the Levites to sing in captivity as they had in the Temple, to which they would reply, "How can we sing the song of God upon alien soil?" They were then comforted by Divine inspiration.
1. By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat and wept as we remembered Zion.
2. There, upon the willows, we hung our harps.
3. For there our captors demanded of us songs, and those who scorned us-rejoicing, [saying,] "Sing to us of the songs of Zion.”
4. How can we sing the song of the Lord on alien soil?
5. If I forget you, Jerusalem, let my right hand forget [its dexterity].
6. Let my tongue cleave to my palate if I will not remember you, if I will not bring to mind Jerusalem during my greatest joy!
7. Remember, O Lord, against the Edomites the day of [the destruction of] Jerusalem, when they said, "Raze it, raze it to its very foundation!”
8. O Babylon, who is destined to be laid waste, happy is he who will repay you in retribution for what you have inflicted on us.
9. Happy is he who will seize and crush your infants against the rock!
Chapter 138
David offers awesome praises to God for His kindness to him, and for fulfilling His promise to grant him kingship.
1. By David. I will thank You with all my heart, in the presence of princes I shall praise You.
2. I will bow toward Your Holy Sanctuary, and praise Your Name for Your kindness and for Your truth; for You have exalted Your word above all Your Names.
3. On the day that I called out You answered me, You emboldened me, [You put] strength in my soul.
4. Lord, all the kings of the land will give thanks to You when they hear the words of Your mouth.
5. And they will sing of the Lord's ways, for the glory of the Lord is great.
6. For though the Lord is exalted, He sees the lowly; the High One castigates from afar.
7. If I walk in the midst of distress, keep me alive; against the wrath of my enemies stretch out Your hand, and let Your right hand deliver me.
8. Lord, complete [Your kindness] on my behalf. Lord, Your kindness is forever, do not forsake the work of Your hands.
Chapter 139
A most prominent psalm that guides man in the ways of God as no other in all of the five books of Tehillim. Fortunate is he who recites it daily.
1. For the Conductor, by David, a psalm. O Lord, You have probed me, and You know.
2. You know my sitting down and my standing up; You perceive my thought from afar.
3. You encircle my going about and my lying down; You are familiar with all my paths.
4. For there was not yet a word on my tongue-and behold, Lord, You knew it all.
5. You have besieged me front and back, You have laid Your hand upon me.
6. Knowledge [to escape You] is beyond me; it is exalted, I cannot know it.
7. Where can I go [to escape] Your spirit? And where can I flee from Your presence?
8. If I ascend to the heavens, You are there; if I make my bed in the grave, behold, You are there.
9. Were I to take up wings as the dawn and dwell in the furthest part of the sea,
10. there, too, Your hand would guide me; Your right hand would hold me.
11. Were I to say, "Surely the darkness will shadow me," then the night would be as light around me.
12. Even the darkness obscures nothing from You; and the night shines like the day-the darkness is as light.
13. For You created my mind; You covered me in my mother's womb.
14. I will thank You, for I was formed in an awesome and wondrous way; unfathomable are Your works, though my soul perceives much.
15. My essence was not hidden from You even while I was born in concealment, formed in the depths of the earth.
16. Your eyes beheld my raw form; all [happenings] are inscribed in Your book, even those to be formed in future days-to Him they are the same.
17. How precious are Your thoughts to me, O God! How overwhelming, [even] their beginnings!
18. Were I to count them, they would outnumber the sand, even if I were to remain awake and always with You.
19. O that You would slay the wicked, O God, and men of blood [to whom I say], "Depart from me!”
20. They exalt You for wicked schemes, Your enemies raise [You] for falsehood.
21. Indeed, I hate those who hate You, Lord; I contend with those who rise up against You.
22. I hate them with the utmost hatred; I regard them as my own enemies.
23. Search me, Lord, and know my heart; test me and know my thoughts.
24. See if there is a vexing way in me, then lead me in the way of the world.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 44• Lessons in Tanya• English Text
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Friday, Nissan 28, 5776 · May 6, 2016
• Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 44
• In the previous chapter the Alter Rebbe explained that there are two broad categories in the love of G‑d, ahavah rabbahand ahavat olam. Ahavah rabbah cannot be attained by man unaided. It is granted as a gift from above when an individual merits it; reflection alone on G‑d’s greatness can in no way engender this level of love. Ahavat olam, however, results from intense and sustained meditation on the greatness of G‑d.
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Friday, Nissan 28, 5776 · May 6, 2016
והנה כל מדרגת אהבה מב׳ מדרגות אלו, אהבה רבה ואהבת עולם, נחלקת לכמה בחינות ומדרגות לאין קץ, כל חד לפום שיעורא דיליה
Each of the two grades of love — ahavah rabbah and ahavat olam — is subdivided into limitless shades and gradations, in each individual according to his [spiritual] capacity,
כמו שכתוב בזהר הקדוש על פסוק: נודע בשערים בעלה, דא קודשא בריך הוא, דאיהו אתידע ואתדבק לכל חד לפום מה דמשער בלביה וכו׳
As it is written in the holy Zohar1 on the verse,2 “Her husband is known in the gates,” that “This refers to the Holy One, blessed be He, so called since He is the ”husband“ of the ”Congregation of Israel,“ Who makes Himself known and attaches Himself to every one according to the extent which one measures in one’s heart....”
Thus, two individuals may have the same general level of love of G‑d, yet their particular, individual levels of love will differ.
ולכן נקראים דחילו ורחימו: הנסתרות לה׳ אלקינו
Therefore, fear and love are called3 “the secret things [known] to the L‑rd our G‑d,” for people cannot know the varying degrees of love of G‑d harbored in the hearts of others,
ותורה ומצות הן הנגלות לנו ולבנינו לעשות כו׳
while the Torah and mitzvot are those things which are4 “revealed to us and to our children to do....”
They are found in all Jews equally,
כי תורה אחת ומשפט אחד לכולנו, בקיום כל התורה ומצות בבחינת מעשה
for we have all one Torah and one law, insofar as the fulfillment of all the Torah and mitzvot in actual performance is concerned. All Jews perform mitzvot in the very same manner; the greatest Jew and the smallest both put on the same tefillin.
מה שאין כן בדחילו ורחימו, שהם לפי הדעת את ה׳ שבמוח ולב
It is otherwise with fear and love, which vary according to the knowledge of G‑d in the mind and heart,
Here, Jews are not equal. He whose knowledge of G‑dliness is greater, will experience the love and fear of G‑d to a greater degree than his less knowledgeable colleague.
כנ״ל
as has been explained earlier, in ch. 42.
The Alter Rebbe explained in the previous chapter that ahavah rabbah cannot be attained alone, while ahavat olam can. He now goes on to explain that there is a manner of love of G‑d which incorporates the qualities of both ahavah rabbah andahavat olam. It has the qualities of the former since it comes from above, and exists in the soul of every Jew in the form of an inheritance from the Patriarchs. However, in order for this love to be revealed, it is necessary for the individual to contemplate and comprehend G‑dliness, as is the case with ahavat olam, which is revealed through man’s service.
אך אחת היא אהבה הכלולה מכל בחינות ומדרגות אהבה רבה ואהבת עולם, והיא שוה לכל נפש מישראל, וירושה לנו מאבותינו
Yet there is one singular and unique love which incorporates something of all the distinctions and gradations of both ahavah rabbah and ahavat olam, and is found equally in every Jewish soul, as our inheritance from our Patriarchs.
והיינו מה שכתב הזהר על פסוק: נפשי אויתיך בלילה וגו׳
And that is what the Zohar says on the verse:5 “My soul, I desire You at night.”
The Zohar notes that the verse is grammatically anomalous. It should either say, “My soul desires You,” or alternatively, “I desire You.” Therefore the Zohar explains that “My soul” refers to G‑d, the Soul of all beings. In effect, the Jew says to G‑d: “You are my Soul, therefore I desire you.” And as the Zohar6 goes on to say:
דירחים לקודשא בריך הוא רחימותא דנפשא ורוחא, כמה דאתדבקו אילין בגופא, וגופא רחים לון וכו׳, וזה שכתוב: נפשי אויתיך, כלומר: מפני שאתה ה׳ נפשי וחיי האמיתים, לכך אויתיך, פירוש: שאני מתאוה ותאב לך כאדם המתאוה לחיי נפשו, וכשהוא חלש ומעונה מתאוה ותאב שתשוב נפשו אליו
“One should love G‑d with a love of the soul and the spirit, as they are attached to the body and the body loves them....” This is the interpretation of the verse: “My soul, I desire You,” which means, “Since you, G‑d, are my true soul and life, therefore do I desire You.” That is to say, “I long and yearn for You like a man who craves the life of his soul, and when he is weak and exhausted he longs and yearns for his soul to revive in him (lit., ‘to return to him’).
Truly, the pleasure of living is the greatest pleasure of all, and a man will forgo all manner of pleasure in order to stay alive. Nevertheless we do not feel the pleasure of simply being alive because “a constant pleasure is not felt to be pleasurable.” However, when a person is weak and tired, and his life-force is not as manifest as it should be, then he feels the desire to live and senses the pleasure of simply being alive.
וכן כשהוא הולך לישן מתאוה וחפץ שתשוב נפשו אליו כשיעור משנתו, כך אני מתאוה ותאב לאור אין סוף ברוך הוא, חיי החיים האמיתיים, להמשיכו בקרבי על ידי עסק התורה בהקיצי משנתי בלילה, דאורייתא וקודשא בריך הוא כולא חד
“Likewise when he goes to sleep, at which time his life-force is in a state of concealment, for7 ‘Sleep is one sixtieth of death,’ he longs and yearns for his soul to be restored to him when he awakens from his sleep. So do I long and yearn to draw within me the infinite light of the blessed Ein Sof, the Life of true life, through engaging in the [study of the] Torah when I awaken during the night from my sleep”; for the Torah and the Holy One, blessed be He, are one and the same.
Thus, the individual’s love of G‑d will encourage him in his Torah study, since He realizes that this will enable him to draw down the infinite light of the Ein Sof and become united with G‑d. Just as creation is renewed continuously (8“In His goodness He renews each day, continuously, the work of Creation”), Torah, too,9 “should be viewed every day as if it were new.” So, too, regarding the love and yearning for G‑d brought about through the study of Torah: he should experience this just as one yearns and desires for the full restoration of his vitality — a desire which is both revealed and powerful.
כמו שכתב הזהר שם: דבעי בר נש מרחימותא דקודשא בריך הוא למיקם בכל לילא לאשתדלא בפולחניה עד צפרא כו׳
So the Zohar says, (ibid.), “Out of love for the Holy One, blessed be He, a man should rise each night and exert himself in His service until the morning....”
This, then, is the love expressed in the phrase, “My soul, I desire You,” the innate love that a Jew feels when he realizes that G‑d is his true soul and Source of life. This love must be revealed — by pondering deeply and often how G‑d is the Source of all life, as will be explained later on in this chapter.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Zohar I, 103b. |
| 2. | Mishlei 31:23. |
| 3. | Devarim 29:28. |
| 4. | Devarim 29:28. |
| 5. | Yeshayahu 26:9. |
| 6. | Zohar III, 68a. |
| 7. | Berachot 57b. |
| 8. | Siddur, morning prayers. |
| 9. | Cf. Rashi on Devarim 26:16. |
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Friday, Nissan 28, 5776 · May 6, 2016
• Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 120
Leaving Sacrificial Meat Uneaten
"You shall leave none of it until the morning"—Leviticus 22:30.
It is forbidden to leave over sacrificial meat past the deadline when it may be eaten.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 120
Leaving Sacrificial Meat Uneaten
"You shall leave none of it until the morning"—Leviticus 22:30.
It is forbidden to leave over sacrificial meat past the deadline when it may be eaten.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• Leaving Sacrificial Meat Uneaten
Negative Commandment 120
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 120th prohibition is that we are forbidden from leaving over any part of the Thanksgiving offering (todah) until the morning [of the next day].
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "[It must be eaten on the same day] with nothing left over until the [next] morning." From this offering we derive the principle for the other offerings: that whatever remains after the time designated for their consumption becomes nosar.2 One then is obligated to burn it, since this is a lav she'nitak l'aseh,3 and burning it is a positive commandment, as we explained in Positive Commandment 91.
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 22:30.
2.See N131.
3.A prohibition that has a corresponding positive commandment to rectify the prohibited act.
• 1 Chapter: Pesulei Hamukdashim Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 6 • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 6
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 6
Halacha 1
If one of [the animals designated as] a sin-offering that was consigned to death or an ox that was condemned to be stoned1 becomes intermingled with any other sacrificial animals - even in a ratio of one to a myriad - they should all be consigned to death.2 [The rationale is that] living animals are important and are never considered insignificant [in a mixture].3
Halacha 2
If [sacrificial animals] became intermingled with [animals that are] forbidden to be offered on the altar,6 they should all be allowed to pasture until they contract disqualifying physical blemishes. They should then be sold and the proceeds from the sale of the most choice animal among them7 should be used to bring sacrifices from the type in which [the forbidden animal] became intermingled.8
Halacha 3
If sacrificial animals become intermingled with unblemished ordinary animals, the ordinary animals in the mixture should be sold as sacrifices of that type, and they should all be sacrificed.
What is implied? If four animals that were designated as peace-offerings became intermingled with four unblemished ordinary animals, the four ordinary animals9 should be sold to someone who is obligated to bring peace-offerings and they should all be offered as peace-offerings. Similar laws apply with regard to burnt-offerings and guilt-offerings.
The proceeds of the sale are considered as ordinary money, for they are the proceeds of the sale of ordinary animals.
Halacha 4
When an ox that was consecrated became intermingled with ordinary animals, the largest among them is considered as the consecrated one10 and the others should be sold for sacrifices of that type.11 If sacrifices of the most sacred order became intermingled with animals consecrated for the same purpose,12 each one should be offered for the sake of its owner, even though none [of the owners] recognize their sacrificial animal.
When does the above apply? With regard to sacrifices to be brought by women in which there is no obligation for semichah.13 With regard to sacrifices to be brought by men, since each one of them is obligated to perform semichah on his sacrifice,14 these animals should not be offered until each one gives his portion [in the sacrificial animal] to his colleague15 or until they all become blemished and are sold. [In that instance,] each one should then bring a sacrificial animal equal in value to the more select of that type.
Halacha 5
Halacha 6
Just as we may not reduce the time [in which sacrifices] may be eaten,18so too, we may not limit the people eligible to partake of them,19 nor the place where they can be eaten.20 Instead,21 what should be done? All [of the sacrificial animals of mixed identity] should be allowed to pasture until they contract a disqualifying physical blemish. Then each one should be sold individually. He should purchase a sacrifice for each type of the value of the most choice animal. He must suffer the loss22 from his own resources.
Halacha 7
Even though the person already sacrificed the burnt-offering or the peace-offering which he was obligated to bring,23 he should nevertheless bring a different burnt-offering and peace-offering from the proceeds [of the sale] of the mixture.
Halacha 8
When a sin-offering becomes intermingled with a peace-offering, [the two] should be allowed to pasture until they contracted disqualifying physical blemishes and were redeemed. He for should bring a peace-offering of the value of the most choice animal and a sin-offering of the value of the most choice animal. If he took the initiative and offered another [animal as a] sin-offering for the sin-offering that was set aside for him first,24 they should all be consigned to death.25
Halacha 9
Similarly, if money for a sin-offering becomes mixed together with money for a guilt-offering, one should take two animals and transfer the holiness of the money for the sin-offering wherever it is on [the animal set aside as] a sin-offering and transfer the holiness of the money for the guilt-offering on [the animal set aside as] a guilt-offering.
Halacha 10
When a thanksgiving-offering becomes mixed with an animal exchanged for it,28 they should both be offered and the bread [that accompanies the thanksgiving-offering] should be waved with [both of] them.29
If a thanksgiving-offering becomes mixed with other sacrificial animals, even if the person offered [another animal as] his thanksgiving-offering, all [the sacrificial animals] should be allowed to pasture until they contract a blemish. He should then bring another thanks-offering of the value of the most choice animal and the other offering of the value of the most choice animal.30
Halacha 11
If [a thanksgiving-offering] becomes mixed with a nazirite's ram, they should both be sacrificed31 and the bread waved with them.
Halacha 12
When a firstborn offering becomes intermingled with a Paschal sacrifice, they should both be allowed to pasture until they contract a disqualifying physical blemish, and then eaten as a [blemished] firstborn offering.32
Why aren't they sacrificed?33 Because a Paschal sacrifice may be eaten by any person until midnight34 and the firstborn offering is eaten for two days and is eaten only by priests. [We follow the principles that] we do not cause sacrifices to be disqualified35 and we do not reduce the amount of people eligible to partake of them.36
Halacha 13
Similarly, when a tithe offering becomes intermingled with a Paschal sacrifice, when they contract a disqualifying physical blemish, they should be eaten according to the prescriptions regarding a tithe offering.37 When a firstborn and a tithe offering become intermingled, they may be eaten [as ordinary meat]38 after contracting a disqualifying physical blemish.39
Halacha 14
Similarly, when other sacrificial animals become intermingled with a firstborn or a tithe offering, they should be allowed to pasture until they contract a disqualifying physical blemish. They may be eaten according to the restrictions applying to a firstborn offering or a tithe offering that became blemished.
Halacha 15
When a guilt-offering became intermingled with a peace-offering, even though only the fats and the organs are offered and the meat is eaten, they should not be offered.40 Instead, they should be allowed to pasture until they contract a disqualifying blemish and bring a guilt-offering of the value of the more choice one and a peace-offering of the value of the more choice one. [The owner should] suffer the loss of the difference [between the value of these animals and the animals lost] from his own resources. If he took the initiative and offered his guilt-offering first, they should both [be allowed to pasture until they become blemished and sold, with the proceeds] used for freewill offerings.41
Halacha 16
It is possible for sacrificial animals of any type to become intermingled with other sacrificial animals of the same species with the exception of [animals consecrated] as sin offerings and [those consecrated as] guilt-offerings, because guilt offerings may be brought only from male sheep42 and sin-offerings are brought from female sheep.43
Halacha 17
Halacha 18
[The following rules apply with regard to] any animal found between Jerusalem and Migdal Eder46 or that radius to any other direction.47 If it is a female [that can be estimated to be] a year old, it is placed in a closed room to die, lest it be a sin-offering.48 If it [appears to be] two years old, it should be brought as a peace-offering49 and bread should be brought with it, lest it be a thanksgiving-offering.50
If a male that [appears to be] two years old is found, there is no way of correcting the situation, for it is possible that it is a guilt-offering whose owner has not yet received atonement.51
If one found a male animal that is a year old, he should allow it to pasture until it becomes blemished, bring two animals in its stead and make a stipulation, stating: "If the [blemished animal] was a burnt-offering, this is designated as a burnt-offering in place of it. If it was a peace-offering, this is a peace-offering in place of it."52 He then offers the first as a burnt-offering. Its accompanying offerings53 should be brought from communal funds.54 The other should be brought as a peace-offering together with bread, lest it be a thanksgiving-offering.
What should be done with the animal that was found? It should be eaten after it contracts a blemish. For even if it was a firstborn offering or a tithe offering, it could be eaten after it was blemished.55 If it was a Paschal sacrifice whose time had passed, it is considered as a peace-offering. And during the time the Paschal sacrifice [must be offered], everyone is careful regarding it.56 If one might ask: Maybe it is a guilt-offering of a nazirite or a person purified fromtzara'at?57 These are not frequently found. Therefore [the Sages] showed no concern about them.
Halacha 19
If sacrifices became intermingled with other sacrifices after the animals were slaughtered, they should be eaten according to the laws pertaining to the more severe category.58 If [such sacrifices] became intermingled with sacrificial animals that were disqualified or ordinary animals that were slaughtered in the Temple Courtyard,59 they should [be left] until their form is no longer recognizable60 and then be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt.
Halacha 20
Halacha 21
When a limb from a blemished [sacrificial] animal becomes mixed with the limbs of sacrificial animals - even one in a thousand63 - they should all be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt.64 Even if all the limbs [of the sacrifices] were offered except for one, it should be burnt in the Temple Courtyard in the place where sacrificial animals that were disqualified are burnt.
Halacha 22
When pieces [of meat] from sacrifices of the most sacred order become mixed with sacrifices of a lesser degree of holiness or those which are eaten for one day65 become mixed with those eaten for two days, they should be eaten according to the prescriptions of the more severe of the two.
Halacha 23
When a piece [of meat] from a sin-offering that has become impure becomes intermingled with 100 pieces of meat from a pure sin-offering or a slice of the showbread that has become impure becomes intermingled with 100 slices of the showbread that are pure, [the mixture] may be considered acceptable,66as we explained in [Hilchot] Terumot.67
Halacha 24
If, however, a piece [of meat] from a sin-offering became mixed with 100 pieces of ordinary meat or a piece of the showbread which is pure becomes mixed with 100 pieces of ordinary bread, [the mixture] should not be considered as acceptable.68 Instead, the entire mixture should be eaten by priests, as is true with regard to any mixture of consecrated food and ordinary food.69
FOOTNOTES
1.
For killing a human; see Exodus 21:29-32;Hilchot Nizkei Mammon, ch. 10. As stated inHilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 3:6, such an animal is unfit for sacrifice on the altar. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Zevachim8:1), the Rambam states that, in this context, the term also applies to an ox that was sodomized by - or forced to participate in sexual relations with - a Jew, for it is also condemned to be executed.
2.
For it is possible that every animal is that animal condemned to die.
3.
I.e., according to Scriptural Law, a forbidden substance is considered as insignificant if mixed with a larger volume of permitted substances (Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot15:1). Even according to Rabbinic Law, it is considered insignificant if mixed with more than sixty times its volume in most situations (ibid.:5). Nevertheless, this situation is an exception for the reason stated by the Rambam.
4.
For their designated purpose.
5.
This is a general principle applicable in many contexts, as stated in Chapter 4, Halachah 24; Chapter 3, Halachah 22; and Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 15:4. Thus the fact that as an initial preference the animal should not have been sacrificed is not significant, for according to Scriptural Law, the presence of the forbidden animal is nullified. Hence, after the fact, the sacrifice is acceptable.
6.
E.g., animals that were set aside for sacrifice to false deities, an animal given to a prostitute, or one exchanged for a dog. See a full listing of such animals in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 3:11.
7.
For perhaps the sacrificial animal was the most choice.
8.
After selling the animals, the person obligated to bring the offerings must say: "The holiness of the sacrificial animal is transferred to these funds" and with those funds, he should purchase a new sacrificial animal.
9.
Even though the owner does not know which four animals they are, he may sell them (Rav Yosef Corcus). To avoid the difficulty mentioned in the following halachah, however, the owners must specify which animals are being given to the purchaser.
10.
And should be sacrificed for the purpose for which the animal was consecrated originally.
11.
For it is possible that any one of them is the consecrated animal.
12.
E.g., burnt-offerings with burnt-offerings.
13.
See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 3:5
14.
Although, after the fact, the sacrifice is acceptable if semichah is not performed, as an initial preference, one should not offer it unless that rite could be performed.
15.
Rabbi Akiva Eiger questions the Rambam's statements here, noting that in Hilchot Meilah4:8, the Rambam rules that a person cannot sell an animal set aside as a peace-offering or as a burnt-offering. By the same reasoning, it would seem that it would be forbidden to make the exchange mentioned here.
16.
I.e., in the example given above, to offer both of them as a burnt-offering.
17.
See the explanation of this principle in Halachah 12. This rationale is given byZevachim 8:3 with regard to a peace-offering and a guilt-offering that became mixed together, for it is possible that the meat of one of the animals will not be finished during the first night and will therefore be disqualified, lest it be that of the guilt-offering. This is undesirable, because perhaps it is from the peace-offering and thus it will be disqualified, before its appropriate time (for peace-offerings may be eaten on the following day as well).
This explanation of this concept is slightly different for a mixture of a peace-offering and a burnt-offering, since a burnt-offering is not eaten at all. Instead, in that instance, offering the peace-offering as a burnt-offering is forbidden, based on Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 5:4 which states that it is forbidden to offer the meat of sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity on the altar. As a result, the meat of the sacrifice is disqualified.
18.
As explained in the previous note. See alsoHilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 10:12.
19.
For example, a firstborn offering which may be eaten only by priests, became mixed with a tithe offering that can be eaten be anyone.
20.
Sacrifices of the most sacred order may be eaten only in the Temple Courtyard, while sacrifices of lesser sanctity may be eaten throughout the city of Jerusalem.
21.
I.e., for this reason, we do not merely take one animal for one type of sacrifice and another for the other.
22.
The difference between the price of the most choice animal and the other animal.
23.
Using another animal so that he will not delay the fulfillment of his obligation.
24.
I.e., before these animals became blemished.
25.
As is the law with regard to an animal set aside as a sin-offering that was lost and another was offered in its place (Chapter 4, Halachah 1). Since the animal cannot be sacrificed because its identity is unknown, it is as if it was lost (see Rav Yosef Corcus who discusses this issue). Since it is not known which one of the mixture was consigned to death, both are given that fate.
26.
As stated in Chapter 5, Halachah 1, with regard to money set aside for a sin-offering that was lost.
27.
Rambam LeAm states that this refers to the money that remains after some of the money was used to purchase a sin-offering.
28.
I.e., he desires to transfer its holiness to the other animal, in which instance, we follow the rule (Leviticus 27:33): "It and the animal exchanged for it shall be holy."
29.
There is an obligation to wave the thanksgiving-offering together with its bread (Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 9:6-7). When an animal designated as a thanksgiving-offering is exchanged for another animal, the holiness of the original offering is not nullified. Nevertheless, the second animal should also be offered as a sacrifice, but bread should not be offered together with it (Chapter 12, Halachah 8). In this instance, since we do not know which is the original animal and which is the one exchanged for it, the bread should be waved with both of them.
30.
The Ra'avad states that bread should not be brought with the second thanksgiving-offering. The Kessef Mishneh states that, since the thanksgiving-offering had already been brought, this is obvious. The Ra'avad mentioned the matter only lest one will think that it is parallel to the situation described in the first clause.
31.
The forearm of the nazirite's ram may be eaten only by the priests (Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 10:4). Thus to a certain extent, the amount of people eligible to partake of the sacrifice is being reduced (see Ra'avad), because a thanksgiving-offering can be eaten by everyone (Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot). Nevertheless, since only one limb is involved, it is not considered significant (Kessef Mishneh).
32.
A blemished firstborn animal may be eaten as ordinary meat. There are, however, some restrictions that apply; see Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 1:12; Hilchot Bechorot1:18.
Pesachim 98b states that one should also transfer the holiness of the blemished Paschal sacrifice to another animal and offer it as a peace-offering. The Rambam mentions this point in his restatement of the law in Hilchot Korban Pesach 4:8.
33.
For they are both sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity. As Pesachim 98b relates even if there is company of priests, they should not offer these animals on the fourteenth of Nisan for the reason stated by the Rambam.
34.
I.e., according to Rabbinic decree (Hilchot Korban Pesach 8:15).
35.
As the firstborn offering could be, if forced to be eaten within the time restrictions of the Paschal sacrifice.
36.
As would be done with regard to the people eligible to partake of the Paschal sacrifice.
37.
After contracting a blemish, a animal set aside as a tithe offering may be eaten as ordinary meat. There are, however, some restrictions which apply; see Hilchot Bechorot 6:6. As above, the holiness of the Paschal sacrifice must be transferred to another animal.
38.
But only by a priest.
39.
In this instance, there is no obligation to offer an animal in their stead.
40.
For doing so would reduce the amount of time in which the peace-offering could be partaken.
41.
This ruling combines that of Halachah 9 with regard to sin-offerings with that of Chapter 4, Halachah 14.
42.
Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 1:10.
43.
Ibid.:9.
44.
One arbitrarily being taken for one sacrifice and the other, for the second sacrifice.
45.
Thus even though as an initial preference, the animals should not have been sacrificed because of the confusion about their identities, after the fact, the sacrifices are acceptable.
46.
A small town not far from Jerusalem.
47.
I.e., since it was found close to Jerusalem, we must consider the possibility that it had been consecrated for a sacrifice. Hence, it must be treated as a sacrificial animal with regard to all the possible consequences.
48.
We suspect that its owner had attained atonement through another sacrifice. Hence the animal is consigned to death, as stated in Chapter 4, Halachah 1.
49.
At this age, it is unacceptable to be offered as a sin-offering or a burnt-offering. We do not suspect that it was lost earlier and wandered aimlessly until this time.
50.
Although a thanksgiving-offering must be eaten by midnight, while a peace-offering may be eaten for an extra day, the Rambam's wording does not imply that a second animal should be brought. Instead, he should bring one animal and stipulate: "If it is a peace-offering,.... If it is a thanksgiving offering..." (Kessef Mishneh). The Lechem Mishneh, however, states that one could infer from Kiddushin 55b, that two offerings should be brought.
51.
And thus it could not be used for another purpose. If the owner had attained atonement, it should be allowed to pasture until it becomes blemished as stated in Chapter 4, Halachah 14.
52.
For a male animal of that age could be consecrated for either of these types of sacrifices.
53.
The meal, oil, and wine.
54.
Shekalim 7:5 states that originally our Sages would obligate the person who found the animal to bring the accompanying offerings from his own resources. The financial burden, however, was apparently too great and the people would abandon the animals they found so that they would not be obligated in this manner. When the Sages realized this, they ordained that the accompanying offerings be brought by the community.
55.
Without having to be redeemed.
56.
So it would not have been lost.
57.
For these individuals also must bring male animals that are a year old.
58.
In the previous halachot, the Rambam favored the alternative of letting the intermingled animals pasture until they contract a blemish so that none of the sacrifices will be placed under unnecessary restrictions. In this instance, since the animals have already been slaughtered, this alternative is no longer viable (Rav Yosef Corcus).
59.
The meat of the latter two types of animals is forbidden to be eaten.
60.
In practice, this phrase, used by the Talmud in several instances (Pesachim 34b, et al), is interpreted (Rashi, Menachot 46b) as meaning "to be left overnight." For it is forbidden to burn sacrifices until they have been disqualified.
61.
The meat from the burnt-offering may not be eaten and the meat from the sin-offering may not be burnt on the altar. Hence, the mixture should be left overnight, at which point, it is disqualified and consigned to be burnt.
62.
See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 7:3.
63.
Since the limbs of the disqualified animals are significant entities, their presence is never nullified in the mixture.
64.
And burnt there. The rationale is that since the limbs of the blemished animals are forbidden to be eaten and forbidden to be burnt on the altar, the entire mixture must also be done away with.
65.
I.e., if sacrifices of a lesser degree of holiness that are only eaten for one day (thanksgiving offerings) become mixed with other sacrifices of a lesser degree of holiness, which (with the exception of the Paschal sacrifice) are all eaten for two days and one night. See the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Zevachim8:3).
66.
The rationale is that there is enough acceptable meat or bread to render the presence of the unacceptable meat or bread insignificant.
Some commentaries have suggested that, based on Yevamot 81b, we are forced to say that this is speaking about small pieces of meat that are not significant enough to be used to honor guests. If they are larger and significant, their presence in the mixture is never nullified. However, it is more likely that since the concept that significant pieces of meat are nullified is a Rabbinic safeguard, it was not applied in this instance (seeLechem Mishneh, Kessef Mishneh to the law from Hilchot Terumah cited in the following note).
67.
Hilchot Terumot 14:14.
68.
Since there is an option for the entire mixture to be eaten by priests, there is no reason for leniency.
69.
The commentaries note that the Rambam's ruling here is in direct contradiction to his ruling in Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 15:13 where he states that when a piece of the showbread becomes intermingled with pieces of ordinary bread, the mixture is permitted if there is 101 times the amount of ordinary bread.
In his gloss to Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot, the Kessef Mishneh explains that here, the Rambam is speaking about pieces of the showbread that are ritually pure. Hence the entire mixture should be eaten by the priests. In Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot, by contrast, we are speaking about pieces of the showbread that are impure. If the showbread was a significant part of the mixture, the entire mixture would have to be burnt. Since it is not significant, we considered its existence negated.
(As evident from a comparison to that source, the laws governing sacrificial foods are more stringent than those applying toterumah.
• 3 Chapters: Pesulei Hamukdashim Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 5, Pesulei Hamukdashim Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 6, Pesulei Hamukdashim Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 7 • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download• Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 5
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class• Friday, Nissan 28, 5776 · May 6, 2016• "Today's Day"
Audio: Listen | Download• Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 5
Halacha 1
When a person sets aside money for a sin-offering and dies, the money should be [thrown] to the Mediterranean Sea.1 Similarly, when a person sets aside money for a sin-offering, the money is lost, another sin-offering is offered in its place, and then the [initial] money is found after atonement was achieved, [the money should be thrown] to the Mediterranean Sea.2
Halacha 2
When a person sets aside money for a sin-offering, the money is lost, and he set aside other money in its stead, but did not have the opportunity to purchase a sin-offering with the later funds before the first funds were found, he should purchase a sin-offering with the combined funds.3 The remainder should be used for freewill offerings.4
Halacha 3
When a person sets aside money for a sin-offering, the money is lost, and he set aside [an animal] as a sin-offering in its stead, but before he sacrificed it, the [original] funds were found and the [animal was discovered] to have a disqualifying physical blemish, it should be sold and he should purchase a sin-offering with the combined funds.5 The remainder should be used for freewill offerings.
Halacha 4
When a person set aside [an animal] as a sin-offering, it was lost, he set aside money in its stead, but was not able to purchase [an animal] as a sin-offering with it before the [first] animal was found, but it [was discovered] to have a disqualifying physical blemish, it should be sold and he should purchase a sin-offering with the combined funds. The remainder should be used for freewill offerings.
Halacha 5
Halacha 6
If he set aside [an animal for] a sin-offering or the money for a sin-offering, because he thought that he was obligated [to bring one] and then he discovered that he was not so obligated, [the animal or the money] is of ordinary status; it is not consecrated.8
If he set aside two [animals for] sin-offerings or the money for two [animals] because he thought was obligated to bring both and then it was discovered that he was only liable to bring one, he should bring one as a sacrifice and the other should be used for freewill offerings.9
Halacha 7
When he picks up coins in his hand or was in the process of collecting them and said: "I will bring my sin-offering from these," the remainder are not consecrated.10Similarly, it appears to me11 that an inference can be drawn [from this ruling] to [similar situations involving] other sacrifices and the remainder are not considered as consecrated.12
Halacha 8
When a person sets aside money for a meal-offering of a sinner13 and brings a meal-offering from those funds, or he set aside a meal-offering itself, and [in either of the above instances, money] was left over, the remainder should be used to bring a freewill meal-offering.14Any extra [meal15 left after] the tenth of the ephah that is brought by the High Priest as his chavitin offering16 should be left to rot.17Similarly, the remainder [of meal left after preparing] the bread for a thanksgiving offering or the bread for a nazirite's offering18 should be left to rot.19
Halacha 9
[Any money] left over [from that set aside to purchase] pairs of doves forzavim, zavot or for women after childbirth,22 sin-offerings, or guilt-offerings should be used for freewill offerings. They should be offered as burnt-offerings, as explained.23
[Any money] left over [from that set aside to purchase] burnt-offerings should be used for burnt-offerings, [to purchase] peace-offerings, for peace-offerings, [to purchase] meal-offerings, for meal-offerings, [to purchase] a Paschal sacrifice, for peace-offerings,24[to purchase] nazirite-offerings, for nazirite-offerings,25 [to purchase] the offerings for a particular nazirite, for [freewill] offerings to be brought by that nazirite.26
When does the ruling that [money] left over [from that set aside to purchase] a sin-offering should be used for freewill offerings apply? With regard to a fixed sin-offering. When, however, one was obligated to bring an adjustable guilt offering27 and set aside money for a sin-offering of an animal and became poor, he should bring a fowl instead.28He may transfer the holiness from those funds to the fowl and benefit from them.29 Similarly, if he set aside money for a fowl and became poor, he should bring a [meal-offering] of a tenth of an ephahinstead.30 He may transfer the holiness from those funds to [the meal] and benefit from them.
Halacha 10
If a person set aside an animal [for an adjustable guilt-offering], it contracted a disqualifying physical blemish, [and he became poor],31 it may be sold and the proceeds used to purchase a fowl.32 If, however, he set aside a fowl [for such an offering], it was disqualified, [and he became poor], he may not sell it and bring a tenth of an ephah from the proceeds of the sale, for a fowl [that was consecrated] may not be redeemed, as stated in [Hilchot] Issurei HaMizbeiach.33
Halacha 11
[The following rules apply to] all those obligated by the Torah34 to bring pairs of doves35 who set aside money for those doves. If they desired to use all the money for sin-offerings of fowl alone, they may.36 If they desire to use it for burnt-offerings of fowl, they may. Even if they had [originally] said: "This is the money for my sin-offering and this is the money for my burnt-offering," he may mix the money together and buy the two offerings together, or use the money solely for sin-offerings, or solely for burnt-offerings. [The rationale is that the identity of] pairs of doves is designated only when purchased by the owners or when offered by a priest.37
Halacha 12
Therefore if one set aside money for a pair of doves without making a determination and died, all of the money that was undetermined should be used for freewill offerings. [The rationale is that] it is all fit to used for a burnt-offering.38
Halacha 13
[The following laws apply when someone] was obligated to bring a sin-offering and he said: "I pledge a burnt-offering," and set aside money saying: "This is for my obligation." If he desires, he may use them to bring an animal as a sin-offering or he may use them to bring an animal as a burnt-offering.39 If he died and left the money, it should be taken to the Mediterranean Sea.40
FOOTNOTES
1.
The ruling is comparable to that governing an animal set aside as a sin-offering whose owner died mentioned in Chapter 4, Halachah 1. Since this money was set aside to be used for a sin-offering, it may not be used for any other purpose. Hence, it should be cast in a place where no one will benefit from it. See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Temurah 4:2).
Although the term Yam HaMelech is generally translated as "the Dead Sea," it literally means "the Salt Sea." In several places in his Commentary to the Mishnah, however, the Rambam interprets the term as referring to the Mediterranean.
2.
I.e., this ruling is comparable to that governing an animal set aside as a sin-offering which was lost and the owner attained atonement through the sacrifice of another animal, as stated in Chapter 4, op. cit.
3.
Since both sets of money were set aside for the purchase of a sin-offering, they should be used primarily for that purpose. It is preferable to purchase a more expensive animal for a sin-offering than to have more money left over to purchase burnt-offerings.
4.
Since the money was not used as of yet and the person did not yet gain atonement, any funds that remain can be used for another purpose.
5.
For the same reasoning as in the previous halachah.
6.
He should not, combine the two to purchase a single offering.
7.
See Chapter 4, Halachah 5.
8.
For the consecration was made in error and hence is not binding. See Chapter 4, Halachah 20.
9.
I.e., with regard to money, the money should be used to purchase freewill offerings. With regard to an animal, the animal should be left to pasture until it contracts a disqualifying blemish. It should then be sold and the proceeds used for freewill offerings (Kessef Mishneh). Since he did not specify which of the animals should be associated with the particular sin and he is liable for one sin-offering, the remaining animal is not considered to have been consecrated in error (Rav Yosef Corcus).
10.
Since he said, "from these," the implication is that all of the coins were not consecrated, only those necessary to purchase the animal for the sin-offering.
11.
This phrase introduces a conclusion drawn by the Rambam through logic that is not based on any explicit prior Rabbinic source. The rationale is that when bringing a sin-offering it is likely that the person feels remorse and is willing to give more to attain atonement. Nevertheless, none of the extra money is consecrated. It follows logically that this principle should also apply with regard to a freewill offering in which instance the donor may not be as powerfully motivated.
12.
The Ra'avad accepts the Rambam's conclusion with regard to sacrifices that one is obligated to bring, but differs with regard to burnt-offerings and peace-offerings that one gives of his own volition. In those instances, he maintains that the extra money should be used for those sacrifices. The Kessef Mishneh, however, substantiates the Rambam's approach.
13.
See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 12:4;Hilchot Shegagot 10:4.
14.
Note the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Shekalim 2:5) which states that since we are speaking about what remains after bringing a sin-offering, it should be used to bring freewill burnt-offerings.
15.
I.e., in this and the following situations, the person required to bring a meal-offering brought more than the required amount.
16.
See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 13:2.
17.
For the concept that the remainder of what was set aside should be used for burnt-offerings was stated with regard to sin-offerings and not these types of sacrifices (Menachot 108a).
18.
See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 9:5 which states that the bread are integral parts of these two types of offerings.
19.
The rationale is that these breads are not considered as independent sacrifices, but as elements of the thanksgiving or nazirite offerings. Hence they were consecrated - and may only be used for - those sacrifices.
20.
For wine libations are sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity. Hence the laws governing them are the same as those governing sin-offerings and guilt-offerings.
21.
Hilchot Shekalim 3-13.
22.
The requirement for these individuals to bring doves as sacrifices is mentioned inHilchot Mechusrei Kapparah 1:3.
23.
Ibid. 2:2-3, and in several instances in this and the previous chapter.
24.
For they are both sacrifices of a lesser degree of holiness [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Shekalim 2:5)].
25.
See Hilchot Nizirut 9:1 which states: "[The following rules apply when a person] sets aside money for the sacrifices of [poor] nazirites, those sacrifices were offered, and there is money left over. He should bring sacrifices of other nazirites with those funds." In his Commentary to the Mishnah,op. cit., the Rambam interprets this teaching as referring to nazirites who desire to pool their offerings.
26.
Since the money was designated for the offerings of that particular person, it cannot be used for the sacrifices of another nazirite.
27.
See Hilchot Shegagot 1:3 and ch. 10, which explains that there are certain transgressions for which the atonement offering required varies according to the transgressor's financial capacity.
28.
As obligated of a person who violated these sins but did not have the means to purchase an animal as a sacrifice.
29.
Keritot 27b derives this law through a process of Biblical exegesis.
30.
As obligated of a person who violated these sins but did not have the means to purchase doves as a sacrifice.
31.
The bracketed additions are based onHilchot Shegagot 10:11.
32.
Even though the animal had already been purchased for the sacrifice, since it was disqualified and his status changed, he is allowed to use the proceeds from its sale to bring a lesser offering.
33.
Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 6:4. This applies only to a fowl itself. Money set aside for a fowl may be redeemed, as stated in the previous halachah.
34.
I.e., the individuals mentioned at the beginning of Halachah 9.
35.
Generally, a pair of doves includes one to be offered as a burnt-offering and one as a sin-offering.
36.
The person must, however, bring another dove(s) for the other burnt- or sin-offerings, he or she is obligated to bring.
37.
I.e., if the owners specify which doves are to be offered for which specific offering, the fowl is designated for that purpose. Alternatively, if such a distinction was not made, they become designated by the priest at the time he offers them (Keritot 28a; see Chapter 8, Halachah 8).
38.
Were, however, the fowl to have been designated for sin-offerings, they would be consigned to die, as evident from Halachah 1. See also the previous chapter.
39.
The Ra'avad differs and, based on Nazir27a, maintains that the text should read: "He should not bring a sin-offering.... He should not bring a burnt-offering." He also explains that this version is preferable, for, otherwise, there would be no reason why the money mentioned in the following clause should be consigned to be destroyed. Seemingly, there is no difference between that clause and the situation mentioned in the previous halachah.
The Kessef Mishneh maintains that the Rambam had a different version of that text. Because of the difficulties, the Ra'avad raised, the Kessef Mishneh suggests a third version: If he desires to bring a sin-offering, he should. If he desires to bring a burnt-offering, he should not.
40.
According to the Rambam, since he has an obligation to bring a sin-offering and did not clarify his intent, we must accept the possibility that the money is associated with a sin-offering and must be done away with, as stated in Halachah 1.
Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 6
Halacha 1
If one of [the animals designated as] a sin-offering that was consigned to death or an ox that was condemned to be stoned1 becomes intermingled with any other sacrificial animals - even in a ratio of one to a myriad - they should all be consigned to death.2 [The rationale is that] living animals are important and are never considered insignificant [in a mixture].3
Halacha 2
If [sacrificial animals] became intermingled with [animals that are] forbidden to be offered on the altar,6 they should all be allowed to pasture until they contract disqualifying physical blemishes. They should then be sold and the proceeds from the sale of the most choice animal among them7 should be used to bring sacrifices from the type in which [the forbidden animal] became intermingled.8
Halacha 3
If sacrificial animals become intermingled with unblemished ordinary animals, the ordinary animals in the mixture should be sold as sacrifices of that type, and they should all be sacrificed.
What is implied? If four animals that were designated as peace-offerings became intermingled with four unblemished ordinary animals, the four ordinary animals9 should be sold to someone who is obligated to bring peace-offerings and they should all be offered as peace-offerings. Similar laws apply with regard to burnt-offerings and guilt-offerings.
The proceeds of the sale are considered as ordinary money, for they are the proceeds of the sale of ordinary animals.
Halacha 4
When an ox that was consecrated became intermingled with ordinary animals, the largest among them is considered as the consecrated one10 and the others should be sold for sacrifices of that type.11 If sacrifices of the most sacred order became intermingled with animals consecrated for the same purpose,12 each one should be offered for the sake of its owner, even though none [of the owners] recognize their sacrificial animal.
When does the above apply? With regard to sacrifices to be brought by women in which there is no obligation for semichah.13 With regard to sacrifices to be brought by men, since each one of them is obligated to perform semichah on his sacrifice,14 these animals should not be offered until each one gives his portion [in the sacrificial animal] to his colleague15 or until they all become blemished and are sold. [In that instance,] each one should then bring a sacrificial animal equal in value to the more select of that type.
Halacha 5
Halacha 6
Just as we may not reduce the time [in which sacrifices] may be eaten,18so too, we may not limit the people eligible to partake of them,19 nor the place where they can be eaten.20 Instead,21 what should be done? All [of the sacrificial animals of mixed identity] should be allowed to pasture until they contract a disqualifying physical blemish. Then each one should be sold individually. He should purchase a sacrifice for each type of the value of the most choice animal. He must suffer the loss22 from his own resources.
Halacha 7
Even though the person already sacrificed the burnt-offering or the peace-offering which he was obligated to bring,23 he should nevertheless bring a different burnt-offering and peace-offering from the proceeds [of the sale] of the mixture.
Halacha 8
When a sin-offering becomes intermingled with a peace-offering, [the two] should be allowed to pasture until they contracted disqualifying physical blemishes and were redeemed. He for should bring a peace-offering of the value of the most choice animal and a sin-offering of the value of the most choice animal. If he took the initiative and offered another [animal as a] sin-offering for the sin-offering that was set aside for him first,24 they should all be consigned to death.25
Halacha 9
Similarly, if money for a sin-offering becomes mixed together with money for a guilt-offering, one should take two animals and transfer the holiness of the money for the sin-offering wherever it is on [the animal set aside as] a sin-offering and transfer the holiness of the money for the guilt-offering on [the animal set aside as] a guilt-offering.
Halacha 10
When a thanksgiving-offering becomes mixed with an animal exchanged for it,28 they should both be offered and the bread [that accompanies the thanksgiving-offering] should be waved with [both of] them.29
If a thanksgiving-offering becomes mixed with other sacrificial animals, even if the person offered [another animal as] his thanksgiving-offering, all [the sacrificial animals] should be allowed to pasture until they contract a blemish. He should then bring another thanks-offering of the value of the most choice animal and the other offering of the value of the most choice animal.30
Halacha 11
If [a thanksgiving-offering] becomes mixed with a nazirite's ram, they should both be sacrificed31 and the bread waved with them.
Halacha 12
When a firstborn offering becomes intermingled with a Paschal sacrifice, they should both be allowed to pasture until they contract a disqualifying physical blemish, and then eaten as a [blemished] firstborn offering.32
Why aren't they sacrificed?33 Because a Paschal sacrifice may be eaten by any person until midnight34 and the firstborn offering is eaten for two days and is eaten only by priests. [We follow the principles that] we do not cause sacrifices to be disqualified35 and we do not reduce the amount of people eligible to partake of them.36
Halacha 13
Similarly, when a tithe offering becomes intermingled with a Paschal sacrifice, when they contract a disqualifying physical blemish, they should be eaten according to the prescriptions regarding a tithe offering.37 When a firstborn and a tithe offering become intermingled, they may be eaten [as ordinary meat]38 after contracting a disqualifying physical blemish.39
Halacha 14
Similarly, when other sacrificial animals become intermingled with a firstborn or a tithe offering, they should be allowed to pasture until they contract a disqualifying physical blemish. They may be eaten according to the restrictions applying to a firstborn offering or a tithe offering that became blemished.
Halacha 15
When a guilt-offering became intermingled with a peace-offering, even though only the fats and the organs are offered and the meat is eaten, they should not be offered.40 Instead, they should be allowed to pasture until they contract a disqualifying blemish and bring a guilt-offering of the value of the more choice one and a peace-offering of the value of the more choice one. [The owner should] suffer the loss of the difference [between the value of these animals and the animals lost] from his own resources. If he took the initiative and offered his guilt-offering first, they should both [be allowed to pasture until they become blemished and sold, with the proceeds] used for freewill offerings.41
Halacha 16
It is possible for sacrificial animals of any type to become intermingled with other sacrificial animals of the same species with the exception of [animals consecrated] as sin offerings and [those consecrated as] guilt-offerings, because guilt offerings may be brought only from male sheep42 and sin-offerings are brought from female sheep.43
Halacha 17
Halacha 18
[The following rules apply with regard to] any animal found between Jerusalem and Migdal Eder46 or that radius to any other direction.47 If it is a female [that can be estimated to be] a year old, it is placed in a closed room to die, lest it be a sin-offering.48 If it [appears to be] two years old, it should be brought as a peace-offering49 and bread should be brought with it, lest it be a thanksgiving-offering.50
If a male that [appears to be] two years old is found, there is no way of correcting the situation, for it is possible that it is a guilt-offering whose owner has not yet received atonement.51
If one found a male animal that is a year old, he should allow it to pasture until it becomes blemished, bring two animals in its stead and make a stipulation, stating: "If the [blemished animal] was a burnt-offering, this is designated as a burnt-offering in place of it. If it was a peace-offering, this is a peace-offering in place of it."52 He then offers the first as a burnt-offering. Its accompanying offerings53 should be brought from communal funds.54 The other should be brought as a peace-offering together with bread, lest it be a thanksgiving-offering.
What should be done with the animal that was found? It should be eaten after it contracts a blemish. For even if it was a firstborn offering or a tithe offering, it could be eaten after it was blemished.55 If it was a Paschal sacrifice whose time had passed, it is considered as a peace-offering. And during the time the Paschal sacrifice [must be offered], everyone is careful regarding it.56 If one might ask: Maybe it is a guilt-offering of a nazirite or a person purified fromtzara'at?57 These are not frequently found. Therefore [the Sages] showed no concern about them.
Halacha 19
If sacrifices became intermingled with other sacrifices after the animals were slaughtered, they should be eaten according to the laws pertaining to the more severe category.58 If [such sacrifices] became intermingled with sacrificial animals that were disqualified or ordinary animals that were slaughtered in the Temple Courtyard,59 they should [be left] until their form is no longer recognizable60 and then be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt.
Halacha 20
Halacha 21
When a limb from a blemished [sacrificial] animal becomes mixed with the limbs of sacrificial animals - even one in a thousand63 - they should all be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt.64 Even if all the limbs [of the sacrifices] were offered except for one, it should be burnt in the Temple Courtyard in the place where sacrificial animals that were disqualified are burnt.
Halacha 22
When pieces [of meat] from sacrifices of the most sacred order become mixed with sacrifices of a lesser degree of holiness or those which are eaten for one day65 become mixed with those eaten for two days, they should be eaten according to the prescriptions of the more severe of the two.
Halacha 23
When a piece [of meat] from a sin-offering that has become impure becomes intermingled with 100 pieces of meat from a pure sin-offering or a slice of the showbread that has become impure becomes intermingled with 100 slices of the showbread that are pure, [the mixture] may be considered acceptable,66as we explained in [Hilchot] Terumot.67
Halacha 24
If, however, a piece [of meat] from a sin-offering became mixed with 100 pieces of ordinary meat or a piece of the showbread which is pure becomes mixed with 100 pieces of ordinary bread, [the mixture] should not be considered as acceptable.68 Instead, the entire mixture should be eaten by priests, as is true with regard to any mixture of consecrated food and ordinary food.69
FOOTNOTES
1.
For killing a human; see Exodus 21:29-32;Hilchot Nizkei Mammon, ch. 10. As stated inHilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 3:6, such an animal is unfit for sacrifice on the altar. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Zevachim8:1), the Rambam states that, in this context, the term also applies to an ox that was sodomized by - or forced to participate in sexual relations with - a Jew, for it is also condemned to be executed.
2.
For it is possible that every animal is that animal condemned to die.
3.
I.e., according to Scriptural Law, a forbidden substance is considered as insignificant if mixed with a larger volume of permitted substances (Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot15:1). Even according to Rabbinic Law, it is considered insignificant if mixed with more than sixty times its volume in most situations (ibid.:5). Nevertheless, this situation is an exception for the reason stated by the Rambam.
4.
For their designated purpose.
5.
This is a general principle applicable in many contexts, as stated in Chapter 4, Halachah 24; Chapter 3, Halachah 22; and Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 15:4. Thus the fact that as an initial preference the animal should not have been sacrificed is not significant, for according to Scriptural Law, the presence of the forbidden animal is nullified. Hence, after the fact, the sacrifice is acceptable.
6.
E.g., animals that were set aside for sacrifice to false deities, an animal given to a prostitute, or one exchanged for a dog. See a full listing of such animals in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 3:11.
7.
For perhaps the sacrificial animal was the most choice.
8.
After selling the animals, the person obligated to bring the offerings must say: "The holiness of the sacrificial animal is transferred to these funds" and with those funds, he should purchase a new sacrificial animal.
9.
Even though the owner does not know which four animals they are, he may sell them (Rav Yosef Corcus). To avoid the difficulty mentioned in the following halachah, however, the owners must specify which animals are being given to the purchaser.
10.
And should be sacrificed for the purpose for which the animal was consecrated originally.
11.
For it is possible that any one of them is the consecrated animal.
12.
E.g., burnt-offerings with burnt-offerings.
13.
See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 3:5
14.
Although, after the fact, the sacrifice is acceptable if semichah is not performed, as an initial preference, one should not offer it unless that rite could be performed.
15.
Rabbi Akiva Eiger questions the Rambam's statements here, noting that in Hilchot Meilah4:8, the Rambam rules that a person cannot sell an animal set aside as a peace-offering or as a burnt-offering. By the same reasoning, it would seem that it would be forbidden to make the exchange mentioned here.
16.
I.e., in the example given above, to offer both of them as a burnt-offering.
17.
See the explanation of this principle in Halachah 12. This rationale is given byZevachim 8:3 with regard to a peace-offering and a guilt-offering that became mixed together, for it is possible that the meat of one of the animals will not be finished during the first night and will therefore be disqualified, lest it be that of the guilt-offering. This is undesirable, because perhaps it is from the peace-offering and thus it will be disqualified, before its appropriate time (for peace-offerings may be eaten on the following day as well).
This explanation of this concept is slightly different for a mixture of a peace-offering and a burnt-offering, since a burnt-offering is not eaten at all. Instead, in that instance, offering the peace-offering as a burnt-offering is forbidden, based on Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 5:4 which states that it is forbidden to offer the meat of sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity on the altar. As a result, the meat of the sacrifice is disqualified.
18.
As explained in the previous note. See alsoHilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 10:12.
19.
For example, a firstborn offering which may be eaten only by priests, became mixed with a tithe offering that can be eaten be anyone.
20.
Sacrifices of the most sacred order may be eaten only in the Temple Courtyard, while sacrifices of lesser sanctity may be eaten throughout the city of Jerusalem.
21.
I.e., for this reason, we do not merely take one animal for one type of sacrifice and another for the other.
22.
The difference between the price of the most choice animal and the other animal.
23.
Using another animal so that he will not delay the fulfillment of his obligation.
24.
I.e., before these animals became blemished.
25.
As is the law with regard to an animal set aside as a sin-offering that was lost and another was offered in its place (Chapter 4, Halachah 1). Since the animal cannot be sacrificed because its identity is unknown, it is as if it was lost (see Rav Yosef Corcus who discusses this issue). Since it is not known which one of the mixture was consigned to death, both are given that fate.
26.
As stated in Chapter 5, Halachah 1, with regard to money set aside for a sin-offering that was lost.
27.
Rambam LeAm states that this refers to the money that remains after some of the money was used to purchase a sin-offering.
28.
I.e., he desires to transfer its holiness to the other animal, in which instance, we follow the rule (Leviticus 27:33): "It and the animal exchanged for it shall be holy."
29.
There is an obligation to wave the thanksgiving-offering together with its bread (Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 9:6-7). When an animal designated as a thanksgiving-offering is exchanged for another animal, the holiness of the original offering is not nullified. Nevertheless, the second animal should also be offered as a sacrifice, but bread should not be offered together with it (Chapter 12, Halachah 8). In this instance, since we do not know which is the original animal and which is the one exchanged for it, the bread should be waved with both of them.
30.
The Ra'avad states that bread should not be brought with the second thanksgiving-offering. The Kessef Mishneh states that, since the thanksgiving-offering had already been brought, this is obvious. The Ra'avad mentioned the matter only lest one will think that it is parallel to the situation described in the first clause.
31.
The forearm of the nazirite's ram may be eaten only by the priests (Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 10:4). Thus to a certain extent, the amount of people eligible to partake of the sacrifice is being reduced (see Ra'avad), because a thanksgiving-offering can be eaten by everyone (Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot). Nevertheless, since only one limb is involved, it is not considered significant (Kessef Mishneh).
32.
A blemished firstborn animal may be eaten as ordinary meat. There are, however, some restrictions that apply; see Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 1:12; Hilchot Bechorot1:18.
Pesachim 98b states that one should also transfer the holiness of the blemished Paschal sacrifice to another animal and offer it as a peace-offering. The Rambam mentions this point in his restatement of the law in Hilchot Korban Pesach 4:8.
33.
For they are both sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity. As Pesachim 98b relates even if there is company of priests, they should not offer these animals on the fourteenth of Nisan for the reason stated by the Rambam.
34.
I.e., according to Rabbinic decree (Hilchot Korban Pesach 8:15).
35.
As the firstborn offering could be, if forced to be eaten within the time restrictions of the Paschal sacrifice.
36.
As would be done with regard to the people eligible to partake of the Paschal sacrifice.
37.
After contracting a blemish, a animal set aside as a tithe offering may be eaten as ordinary meat. There are, however, some restrictions which apply; see Hilchot Bechorot 6:6. As above, the holiness of the Paschal sacrifice must be transferred to another animal.
38.
But only by a priest.
39.
In this instance, there is no obligation to offer an animal in their stead.
40.
For doing so would reduce the amount of time in which the peace-offering could be partaken.
41.
This ruling combines that of Halachah 9 with regard to sin-offerings with that of Chapter 4, Halachah 14.
42.
Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 1:10.
43.
Ibid.:9.
44.
One arbitrarily being taken for one sacrifice and the other, for the second sacrifice.
45.
Thus even though as an initial preference, the animals should not have been sacrificed because of the confusion about their identities, after the fact, the sacrifices are acceptable.
46.
A small town not far from Jerusalem.
47.
I.e., since it was found close to Jerusalem, we must consider the possibility that it had been consecrated for a sacrifice. Hence, it must be treated as a sacrificial animal with regard to all the possible consequences.
48.
We suspect that its owner had attained atonement through another sacrifice. Hence the animal is consigned to death, as stated in Chapter 4, Halachah 1.
49.
At this age, it is unacceptable to be offered as a sin-offering or a burnt-offering. We do not suspect that it was lost earlier and wandered aimlessly until this time.
50.
Although a thanksgiving-offering must be eaten by midnight, while a peace-offering may be eaten for an extra day, the Rambam's wording does not imply that a second animal should be brought. Instead, he should bring one animal and stipulate: "If it is a peace-offering,.... If it is a thanksgiving offering..." (Kessef Mishneh). The Lechem Mishneh, however, states that one could infer from Kiddushin 55b, that two offerings should be brought.
51.
And thus it could not be used for another purpose. If the owner had attained atonement, it should be allowed to pasture until it becomes blemished as stated in Chapter 4, Halachah 14.
52.
For a male animal of that age could be consecrated for either of these types of sacrifices.
53.
The meal, oil, and wine.
54.
Shekalim 7:5 states that originally our Sages would obligate the person who found the animal to bring the accompanying offerings from his own resources. The financial burden, however, was apparently too great and the people would abandon the animals they found so that they would not be obligated in this manner. When the Sages realized this, they ordained that the accompanying offerings be brought by the community.
55.
Without having to be redeemed.
56.
So it would not have been lost.
57.
For these individuals also must bring male animals that are a year old.
58.
In the previous halachot, the Rambam favored the alternative of letting the intermingled animals pasture until they contract a blemish so that none of the sacrifices will be placed under unnecessary restrictions. In this instance, since the animals have already been slaughtered, this alternative is no longer viable (Rav Yosef Corcus).
59.
The meat of the latter two types of animals is forbidden to be eaten.
60.
In practice, this phrase, used by the Talmud in several instances (Pesachim 34b, et al), is interpreted (Rashi, Menachot 46b) as meaning "to be left overnight." For it is forbidden to burn sacrifices until they have been disqualified.
61.
The meat from the burnt-offering may not be eaten and the meat from the sin-offering may not be burnt on the altar. Hence, the mixture should be left overnight, at which point, it is disqualified and consigned to be burnt.
62.
See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 7:3.
63.
Since the limbs of the disqualified animals are significant entities, their presence is never nullified in the mixture.
64.
And burnt there. The rationale is that since the limbs of the blemished animals are forbidden to be eaten and forbidden to be burnt on the altar, the entire mixture must also be done away with.
65.
I.e., if sacrifices of a lesser degree of holiness that are only eaten for one day (thanksgiving offerings) become mixed with other sacrifices of a lesser degree of holiness, which (with the exception of the Paschal sacrifice) are all eaten for two days and one night. See the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Zevachim8:3).
66.
The rationale is that there is enough acceptable meat or bread to render the presence of the unacceptable meat or bread insignificant.
Some commentaries have suggested that, based on Yevamot 81b, we are forced to say that this is speaking about small pieces of meat that are not significant enough to be used to honor guests. If they are larger and significant, their presence in the mixture is never nullified. However, it is more likely that since the concept that significant pieces of meat are nullified is a Rabbinic safeguard, it was not applied in this instance (seeLechem Mishneh, Kessef Mishneh to the law from Hilchot Terumah cited in the following note).
67.
Hilchot Terumot 14:14.
68.
Since there is an option for the entire mixture to be eaten by priests, there is no reason for leniency.
69.
The commentaries note that the Rambam's ruling here is in direct contradiction to his ruling in Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 15:13 where he states that when a piece of the showbread becomes intermingled with pieces of ordinary bread, the mixture is permitted if there is 101 times the amount of ordinary bread.
In his gloss to Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot, the Kessef Mishneh explains that here, the Rambam is speaking about pieces of the showbread that are ritually pure. Hence the entire mixture should be eaten by the priests. In Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot, by contrast, we are speaking about pieces of the showbread that are impure. If the showbread was a significant part of the mixture, the entire mixture would have to be burnt. Since it is not significant, we considered its existence negated.
(As evident from a comparison to that source, the laws governing sacrificial foods are more stringent than those applying toterumah.
Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 7
Halacha 1
Whenever anyone who is unacceptable to perform Temple service performs the rite of melikah,1 the melikah is unacceptable. [Nevertheless,] even though the dove [killed by such a melikah] is unacceptable, it is not considered as anevelah2 of a kosher fowl with regard to the laws of ritual impurity.3
Similarly, if one performed melikah at night or slaughtered an ordinary dove in [the Temple Courtyard] or a consecrated dove outside [the Temple Courtyard], they are not nevelot.4
Halacha 2
If one performed melikah on turtle-doves before they reached the appropriate age or on young doves who passed the appropriate age5 or on a dove whose wing shriveled, whose eye was lost6 or whose leg was cut off,7 it is considered as a nevelah in all contexts. This is the general principle: Any disqualifying factor that takes place after [a dove] entered the Temple Courtyard8 disqualifies it, but does not render it a nevelah. If the disqualifying factor did not take place after it was brought into the Temple Courtyard, [the dove] is a nevelah in all contexts.
Halacha 3
For this reason, when a person performs melikah and the animal is discovered to be tereifah,9 he performed melikah with a knife,10 or performedmelikah on an ordinary dove in [the Temple Courtyard] or a consecrated dove outside [the Temple Courtyard],11 they are considered as a nevelah in all contexts. For melikah permits and purifies only a dove that is acceptable to [be offered on] the altar.12
Halacha 4
In contrast, if melikah was performed on a dove that was sodomized, set aside for pagan sacrifice, worshiped, given to a prostitute as her fee, exchanged for a dog, was a tumtum13 or an androgynus,14 it is considered as a nevelah in all contexts. It causes a person's garments to become impure when it [enters his] gut.15 The rationale is that the holiness [of a sacrifice] does not fall upon them16 and thus it is not considered as having been disqualified [after entering] the Temple Courtyard.
Halacha 5
We already explained in [Hilchot] Ma'aseh Hakorbanot,17 that [the blood from] a sin-offering of fowl is presented on the lower [half of the altar] and [the blood from] a burnt-offering of fowl is presented on the upper [half of the altar].18When [the blood from] a sin-offering of fowl is presented on the upper [half of the altar], it is unacceptable. [This applies] whether the blood was presented in the manner of a sin-offering19 or in the manner of a burnt-offering,20 whether it was offered for the sake of a burnt-offering or for the sake of a sin-offering.
Halacha 6
Similarly, when [the blood from] a burnt-offering of fowl was presented on the lower [half of the altar], even if he performed melikah on one of the signs of ritual slaughter21 on the lower half and the other sign on the upper half, it is unacceptable. [This applies] whether the melikah was performed in the manner of a burnt-offering or in the manner of a sin-offering,22 whether it was offered for the sake of a sin-offering or for the sake of a burnt-offering.
Halacha 7
When melikah was performed on a sin-offering of a fowl on the lower half of the altar in the manner as it should be performed for a burnt-offering for the sake of a sin-offering, as it should be performed for a sin-offering for the sake of a burnt-offering,23 or as it should be performed for a burnt-offering for the sake of a burnt-offering,24 it is unacceptable.
Halacha 8
Similarly, when a burnt-offering of a fowl was presented on the upper [half of the altar] in the manner as it should be performed for a sin-offering for the sake of a burnt-offering or as it should be performed for a sin-offering for the sake of a sin-offering, it is unacceptable. If, however, he performs it as it should be performed for a burnt-offering for the sake of a sin-offering, it is acceptable,25 but it is not considered as if the owner fulfilled his obligation.26
Halacha 9
All of these fowl that are disqualified because of the place [in the altar] where their blood was presented, because of the difference in the manner in which [melikah] is performed, or the intent for which they are offered, are not considered as a fowl that has become a nevelah with regard to the laws of ritual impurity. Similarly, when a sin-offering or a burnt-offering of fowl becomes piggul,27 impure,28 or notar29 it does not cause impurity in one's gut30 as does a fowl that has become a nevelah, for all of these became disqualified [after having entered] the Temple Courtyard.31
Halacha 10
When a sin-offering of fowl is brought because of a doubt, it should be offered as required, but not eaten.32 Instead, it should be burnt like all other sacrificial animals that become disqualified.33
When is such a sacrifice brought because of a doubt? When there is an unresolved question whether a woman is a zavah,34 impure because of childbirth,35or the like. There is no concept of an animal being brought as a sin-offering because of a doubt, because if a person is unsure whether or not he committed a sin, he should bring a conditional guilt-offering, as will be explained in Hilchot Shegagot.36
Halacha 11
[The following rules apply when] a sin-offering of fowl is brought because of a doubt and then it is discovered that the woman is definitely obligated to bring [the sacrifice]. If she realized this before melikah was performed on the [the dove], it should be offered with certainty and eaten.37 If she did not discover this until after melikah was performed, the sprinkling and presentation of its blood [on the altar] should be completed. Then it should be burnt,38 so that it will not be said that a sin-offering of fowl brought because of a doubt is eaten. For at the outset, [this offering] was brought because of a doubt.
Halacha 12
If, after melikah was performed, she discovered that she was not obligated to bring a sacrifice, it should be buried.39
FOOTNOTES
1.
The process of snipping of the head of a sacrificial dove. See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 7:8.
2.
An animal that dies without ritual slaughter.
3.
A person who eats the corpse of a kosher fowl that was not slaughtered according to Torah Law contracts ritual impurity as stated in Hilchot Sha'ar Avot HaTuma'ah 3:1.
4.
In all of these instances, it is forbidden to partake of the meat of these doves. Formelikah is acceptable only during the day (see Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 4:1), ordinary doves slaughtered in the Temple Courtyard are considered as tereifah(Hilchot Shechitah 2:1-2), and sacrificial doves slaughtered outside the Temple Courtyard are disqualified (see Hilchot Sha'ar Avot HaTuma'ah 3:9). Nevertheless, since melikah is a valid process for killing sacrificial doves and the doves that were slaughtered in the wrong locations were slaughtered properly, the corpses do not convey impurity as a corpse of a nevelahwould.
5.
As stated in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 3:2, young doves are acceptable as offerings only when they are still underdeveloped, before they begin to sprout yellow feathers and turtle-doves are acceptable only after they pass this stage of development.
6.
I.e., not merely blinded, but having lost the eye.
7.
And thus was disqualified as a sacrifice, as other doves which have lost a limb or organ (Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 3:1.
8.
Our translation is based on Rashi, Zevachim68b. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Zevachim 7:5), the Rambam defines the term as meaning disqualification due to the intent of the priest, a factor which disqualifies him from performing service, or because of the place the offering was slaughtered.
9.
A dove which is tereifah is not acceptable as a sacrifice (Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 3:1).
10.
Melikah may only performed with the priest's hands.
11.
See Hilchot Sha'ar Avot HaTuma'ah 3:12.
12.
I.e., melikah is not an acceptable means of slaughter. It is acceptable only for sacrificial doves. Therefore when it is performed on a dove that is not acceptable as a sacrifice or in a place where a sacrifice is unacceptable, it is considered as if the animal has merely been killed.
13.
An animal whose sexual organ is covered by a mound of flesh and thus its gender cannot be determined.
14.
An animal which has both male and female sexual organs. All of the animals mentioned above are not acceptable as sacrifices, as stated in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach, chs. 3-4.
15.
As stated in Hilchot Sha'ar Avot HaTuma'ah3:1, a person and his garments do not become impure from eating a nevelah of a kosher fowl until he swallows it. While it is in his mouth, he and his garments are pure.
16.
Since these types of animals are fundamentally unacceptable, they are not considered as sacrificial animals. SeeHilchot Issurei HaMizbeiach 3:10.
17.
Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 6:20; 7:6.
18.
As mentioned in Hilchot Mechusrei Kapparah, ch. 1, after purification, a zav (a male with discharges resembling, but not identical with gonorrhea), a zavah (a woman with vaginal bleeding outside her menstrual cycle) and a woman after childbirth, are required to bring a pair of doves, one as a sin-offering and one, as a burnt-offering. The remainder of this chapter and the three subsequent chapters deal with the possibilities that a dove designated as a sin-offering becomes intermingled with one designated as a burnt-offering.
A convert also must bring a pair of two doves and they are offered as burnt-offerings, but since this is a rare occurrence, it is not taken into consideration [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kinnim 1:2)].
19.
As described in Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot6:20.
20.
As described in ibid. 7:6.
21.
Ritual slaughter involves slitting two "signs" - the windpipe and the gullet. These two organs must also be slit during melikah.
22.
In addition to the place on the altar where the blood of the two is offered, there are two differences between the way melikah is performed for a burnt-offering and for a sin-offering:
a) The head of the dove may not be severed while performing melikah on a sin-offering. For a burnt-offering, by contrast, there is an obligation that the head be separated.
b) The blood of a burnt-offering is squeezed out on the wall of the altar. The blood of a sin-offering, by contrast, is sprinkled on the altar.
23.
For a sin-offering is not acceptable if it is not offered for the proper intent (see Chapter 15, Halachah 1).
24.
I.e., not only is the offering unacceptable as a sin-offering; it is also unacceptable as a burnt-offering (Radbaz).
25.
For a burnt-offering is acceptable even if it is not offered for the proper intent.
26.
See also Hilchot Meilah 3:7.
27.
As will be explained in chs. 14-16, when a person slaughters an animal with the intent of partaking of its meat at times other than those which are permitted, the sacrifice is considered as piggul and it is forbidden to partake of its meat.
28.
As stated in ibid.:12, when sacrificial meat becomes impure, it is forbidden to partake of it.
29.
As explained in Chapter 18, Halachot 9-10, when sacrificial meat is left beyond the time when it should be eaten, it is called notar and it is forbidden to partake of it.
30.
As stated in Hilchot Sha'ar Avot HaTuma'ah3:1, a person and his garments do not become impure from eating a nevelah of a kosher fowl until he swallows it. While it is in his mouth, he and his garments are pure.
31.
Our translation is based on Rashi, Zevachim68b. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Zevachim 7:5), the Rambam defines the term as meaning disqualification due to the intent of the priest, a factor which disqualifies him from performing service, or because of the place the offering was slaughtered.
32.
The sacrifices may not be eaten, for if the women were not obligated to bring them, the doves are considered as ordinary animals slaughtered in the Temple Courtyard which are forbidden to be eaten (see Hilchot Mechusrei Kapparah 1:6-7).
Hilchot Shegagot 11:2 explains that the women the Rambam mentions are allowed to bring the sacrifices because of a doubt even though it is forbidden to offer a sin-offering if one is not liable, because their purification process is not completed until the sacrifice is offered. Hence they are granted this leniency to allow them to become ritually pure.
33.
See Chapter 2, Halachah 20; Chapter 19, Halachah 10.
34.
A woman had a series of vaginal secretions, but there is a doubt whether they render her a zavah or not.
35.
A woman becomes impure because of childbirth even when she miscarries. There are times when there is a question whether a miscarriage is serious enough to render her impure or not.
36.
Hilchot Shegagot 8:1.
37.
As would an ordinary sin-offering.
38.
As it would have been originally.
39.
So that no one will benefit from it. None of the remaining rites should be performed, since there is no need to bring the offering.
Keritot 26b explains that this is a Rabbinic safeguard. According to Scriptural Law, it is permitted to benefit from the dove, as long as its blood was not presented on the altar.
• English Text | Video Class• Friday, Nissan 28, 5776 · May 6, 2016• "Today's Day"
Monday Nissan 28, 13th day of the omer 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: K'doshim, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 135-139.
Tanya: Ch. 44. Each of (p. 231)...until the morning... (p. 233).
Chassidim asked the Alter Rebbe: "Which is the superior avoda, love of G-d or love of Israel?" He replied: "Both love of G-d and love of Israel are equally engraved in every Jew's neshama, ruach, and nefesh.1 Scripture is explicit: 'I have loved you, says the L-rd.'2 It follows that love of Israel is superior - for you love whom your beloved loves."
FOOTNOTES
1.Different levels or aspects of the soul. The two loves thoroughly permeate the soul on every level.
2.Malachi 1:2.
• Daily Thought:
Be Real
What is your job in this world? It is to be real.
Act real, mean what you say, think and really be thinking, talk to your Creator and let the words flow from your heart. Every cell of your body down to your fingernails should be real.
Yes, everyone knows there are so many things to accomplish in life, and everyone agrees it’s better if they’re done with sincerity.
That’s not what’s meant. There’s just one thing you’re here to accomplish: To be real.[Hayom Yom, 20 Adar I.]
---------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment