Today's Laws & Customs:
• Count "Twenty-Five Days to the Omer" Tonight
Tomorrow is the twenty-fifth 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 twenty-five days, which are three weeks and four days, 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: Netzach sheb'Netzach -- "Ambition in Ambition"
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
Daily Quote:
Even when I walk in the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for You are with me[Psalms 23:4]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Emor, 3rd Portion Leviticus 22:17-22:33 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class• Leviticus Chapter 22
17And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, יזוַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר:
18Speak to Aaron and to his sons and to all the children of Israel and say to them: Any man whatsoever from the house of Israel or from the strangers among Israel who offers up his sacrifice for any of their vows or for any of their donations that they may offer up to the Lord as a burnt offering יחדַּבֵּ֨ר אֶל־אַֽהֲרֹ֜ן וְאֶל־בָּנָ֗יו וְאֶל֙ כָּל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וְאָֽמַרְתָּ֖ אֲלֵהֶ֑ם אִ֣ישׁ אִישׁ֩ מִבֵּ֨ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֜ל וּמִן־הַגֵּ֣ר בְּיִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל אֲשֶׁ֨ר יַקְרִ֤יב קָרְבָּנוֹ֙ לְכָל־נִדְרֵיהֶם֙ וּלְכָל־נִדְבוֹתָ֔ם אֲשֶׁר־יַקְרִ֥יבוּ לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה לְעֹלָֽה:
their vows: [when a person declares:] “It is incumbent upon me” [i.e., a personal commitment to bring a burnt offering," and therefore, if the animal he set aside is lost or blemished, he must fulfill his vow with a replacement animal, whereas];
נדריהם: הרי עלי:
their donations: [when a person declares:] “Behold, [I hereby consecrate] this [animal for a burnt offering,” since the declaration falls on the animal rather than on the person, if the consecrated animal is lost or blemished, the person is not responsible]. — [Meg. 8a]
נדבותם: הרי זו:
19to be favorable for you, [it shall be] an unblemished, male, from cattle, from sheep, or from goats. יטלִרְצֹֽנְכֶ֑ם תָּמִ֣ים זָכָ֔ר בַּבָּקָ֕ר בַּכְּשָׂבִ֖ים וּבָֽעִזִּֽים:
to be favorable for you: [God is saying here:] “Bring Me something that is worthy to appease (לִרְצוֹת) for you before Me, that will make you favorable (רָצוֹן) before Me.” [This word לִרְצֹנְכֶם has the meaning of] apaisement in French [like “appeasement” in English]. And what [animal] is worthy of attaining God’s appeasement?
לרצנכם: הביאו דבר הראוי לרצות אתכם לפני, שיהא לכם לרצון אפיימני"ט בלע"ז [פיוס]. ואיזהו הראוי לרצון:
an unblemished, male, from cattle, from sheep, or from goats: But with burnt-offerings of birds, no unblemished or male [birds] are required, and it is not rendered invalid if it has a defect unless a limb is missing. — [Torath Kohanim 22:106]
תמים זכר בבקר בכשבים ובעזים: אבל בעולת העוף אין צריך תמות וזכרות, ואינו נפסל במום אלא בחסרון אבר:
20Any [animal] that has a blemish, you shall not offer up, for it will not be favorable for you. ככֹּ֛ל אֲשֶׁר־בּ֥וֹ מ֖וּם לֹ֣א תַקְרִ֑יבוּ כִּי־לֹ֥א לְרָצ֖וֹן יִֽהְיֶ֥ה לָכֶֽם:
21And if a man offers up a peace offering to the Lord for declaring a vow or as a donation from cattle or from the flock to be accepted, it shall be unblemished. It shall not have any defect in it. כאוְאִ֗ישׁ כִּֽי־יַקְרִ֤יב זֶֽבַח־שְׁלָמִים֙ לַֽיהֹוָ֔ה לְפַלֵּא־נֶ֨דֶר֙ א֣וֹ לִנְדָבָ֔ה בַּבָּקָ֖ר א֣וֹ בַצֹּ֑אן תָּמִ֤ים יִֽהְיֶה֙ לְרָצ֔וֹן כָּל־מ֖וּם לֹ֥א יִֽהְיֶה־בּֽוֹ:
for declaring a vow: For verbally designating [a particular animal. If he designated it merely in his mind, this does not obligate him as a vow]. — [Sifthei Chachamim]
לפלא נדר: להפריש בדיבורו:
22[An animal that has] blindness, or [a] broken [bone], or [a] split [eyelid or lip], or [one that has] warts, or dry lesions or weeping sores you shall not offer up [any of] these to the Lord, nor shall you place [any] of these as a fire offering upon the altar to the Lord. כבעַוֶּ֩רֶת֩ א֨וֹ שָׁב֜וּר אֽוֹ־חָר֣וּץ אֽוֹ־יַבֶּ֗לֶת א֤וֹ גָרָב֙ א֣וֹ יַלֶּ֔פֶת לֹֽא־תַקְרִ֥יבוּ אֵ֖לֶּה לַֽיהֹוָ֑ה וְאִשֶּׁ֗ה לֹֽא־תִתְּנ֥וּ מֵהֶ֛ם עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּ֖חַ לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
[An animal that has] blindness: עַוֶּרֶת. [This is] a noun, the feminine equivalent of עִוָּרוֹן, that the animal shall not have the defect of blindness.
עורת: שם דבר של מום עורון בלשון נקבה, שלא יהא בו מום של עורת:
or [a] broken [bone]: [lit., “or broken,” i.e., the animal] shall not be [broken].
או שבור: לא יהיה:
or [a] split [eyelid or lip]: חָרוּץ [lit. cut], an eyelid that was split or notched, and similarly, its lip which was split or notched. — [Torath Kohanim 22:113]
חרוץ: ריס של עין שנסדק או שנפגם, וכן שפתו שנסדקה או נפגמה:
or [one that has] warts: Verrue [wart] in French.
יבלת: ורוא"ה בלע"ז [יבלת]:
or dry lesions: Heb. גָרָב, a type of lichen, as יַלֶּפֶת (see Rashi on 21:20). The יַלֶּפֶת is similar to “And Samson grasped (וַיִּלְפֹּת)” (Jud. 16:29) for it bonds (מְלַפֶּפֶת) itself to him until the day of [his] death, for it has no cure. — [Bech. 41a]
גרב: מין חזזית וכן ילפת. ולשון ילפת, כמו (שופטים טז כט) וילפת שמשון, שאחוזה בו עד יום מיתה, שאין לה רפואה:
you shall not offer up [(any of) these]: [This prohibition is stated] three times [here and in verses 20 and 25], as an admonition against (a) consecrating them, (b) slaughtering them and (c) dashing their blood. — [Temurah 6b]
לא תקריבו: שלש פעמים, להזהיר על הקדשן ועל שחיטתן ועל זריקת דמן:
nor shall you place [(any) of these] as a fire-offering: [This is] an admonition against the burning them [on the altar]. — [Temurah 6b; Torath Kohanim 22:116]
ואשה לא תתנו: אזהרת הקטרתן:
23As for an ox or sheep that has mismatching limbs or uncloven hooves you may make it into a donation, but as a vow, it will not be accepted. כגוְשׁ֥וֹר וָשֶׂ֖ה שָׂר֣וּעַ וְקָל֑וּט נְדָבָה֙ תַּֽעֲשֶׂ֣ה אֹת֔וֹ וּלְנֵ֖דֶר לֹ֥א יֵֽרָצֶֽה:
mismatching limbs: i.e., one limb bigger than its [normal] counterpart. — [see Rashi on verse 21:18 above and Sifthei Chachamim there; Bech. 40a]
שרוע: אבר גדול מחבירו:
uncloven hooves: its hooves are uncloven [i.e., resembling those of a horse or donkey]. — [Bech. 40a]
וקלוט: פרסותיו קלוטות:
you may make it into a donation: [i.e., it may be sold and its money donated] to the maintenance of the Holy Temple.
נדבה תעשה אתו: לבדק הבית:
but as a vow: for the altar. — [Torath Kohanim 22:118]
ולנדר: למזבח:
it will not be accepted: What consecration comes to grant acceptance (לִרְצוֹת) ? I must say the consecration for the altar. - [Torath Kohanim 22:118][See Sifthei Chachamim, Mizrachi, and Nachalath Yaakov]
לא ירצה: איזהו הקדש בא לרצות, הוי אומר זה הקדש המזבח:
24[Any animal whose testicles were] squashed, crushed, pulled out, or severed, you shall not offer up to the Lord, and in your land, you shall not do [it]. כדוּמָע֤וּךְ וְכָתוּת֙ וְנָת֣וּק וְכָר֔וּת לֹ֥א תַקְרִ֖יבוּ לַֽיהֹוָ֑ה וּבְאַרְצְכֶ֖ם לֹ֥א תַֽעֲשֽׂוּ:
[Any animal] whose testicles were squashed, crushed, pulled out, or severed: [These terms refer to damage] to the testicles or the membrum. — [Bech. 39b]
ומעוך וכתות ונתוק וכרות: בביצים או בגיד:
squashed: Heb. וּמָעוּךְ, its testicles were squashed by hand.
מעוך: ביציו מעוכין ביד:
crushed: וְכָתוּת, more severely crushed than מָעוּךְ.
כתות: כתושים יותר ממעוך:
pulled out: Heb. נָתוּק, torn off by hand, until the threads upon which they are suspended snapped, but they are still contained within the scrotum, and the scrotum was not torn off.
נתוק: תלושין ביד עד שנפסקו חוטים שתלויים בהן, אבל נתונים הם בתוך הכיס, והכיס לא נתלש:
or severed: Heb., וְכָרוּת, severed with an instrument, but still contained within the scrotum.
וכרות: כרותין בכלי ועודן בכיס:
squashed: Heb. וּמָעוּךְ [Onkelos] renders this as וְדִימְרִיס, which is its equivalent in Aramaic, an expression of crushing.
ומעוך: תרגומו ודימריס, זה לשונו בארמית, לשון כתישה:
crushed: וְכָתוּת, [Onkelos] renders this as וְדִירְסִיס, like, “[and he will smite] the great house into splinters (רְסִיסִים)” (Amos 6:11), little pieces; likewise, קָנֶה הַמְרֻסָּס, meaning “a reed that is broken into pieces” (Shab. 80b).
וכתות: תרגומו ודירסיס, כמו (עמוס ו יא) הבית הגדול רסיסים, בקיעות דקות, וכן (שבת פ ב) קנה המרוסס:
and in your land, you shall not do: this thing, to castrate any livestock or wild animal, even of an unclean species. This is why [our verse] says here “in your land” -to include any species found in your land. — [Torath Kohanim 22:121] for it is impossible to say that castration is prohibited only in Eretz Israel [“your land,”] because [the prohibition of] castration is an obligation [associated with] the body [of a person], and every commandment associated with the body [of a person] applies both in the Land [of Israel] and outside the Land [of Israel]. - [Kid. 36b]
ובארצכם לא תעשו: דבר זה, לסרס שום בהמה וחיה ואפילו טמאה, לכך נאמר בארצכם, לרבות כל אשר בארצכם, שאי אפשר לומר לא נצטוו על הסרוס אלא בארץ, שהרי סרוס חובת הגוף הוא, וכל חובת הגוף נוהגת בין בארץ בין בחוצה לארץ:
25And from the hand of a gentile you shall not offer up as food for your God any of these [blemished animals], for their injury is upon them, there is a defect on them; they will not be accepted for you. כהוּמִיַּ֣ד בֶּן־נֵכָ֗ר לֹ֥א תַקְרִ֛יבוּ אֶת־לֶ֥חֶם אֱלֹֽהֵיכֶ֖ם מִכָּל־אֵ֑לֶּה כִּ֣י מָשְׁחָתָ֤ם בָּהֶם֙ מ֣וּם בָּ֔ם לֹ֥א יֵֽרָצ֖וּ לָכֶֽם:
from the hand of a gentile: [lit., “and from the hand of a foreigner,” i.e.,] if a non-Jew brought a sacrifice and handed it over to the kohen to offer it up to Heaven, you shall not offer up on his behalf any blemished animal. And even though blemished animals are not deemed invalid as sacrifices from the children of Noah [i.e., by all non-Jews] unless they have a limb missing-that [rule] applies [only] to private altars in the fields. However, on the altar in the Mishkan, you shall not offer them up (Temurah 7b). You shall, however, accept an unblemished animal from them. That is why Scripture states earlier in this passage (verse 18 above), אִישׁ אִישׁ, “Any man whatsoever,” [where this double expression comes] to include non-Jews, who make vows and donations like Israelites. — [Temurah 2b]
ומיד בן נכר: נכרי שהביא קרבן ביד כהן להקריבו לשמים לא תקריבו לו בעל מום. ואף על פי שלא נאסרו בעלי מומין לקרבן בני נח אלא אם כן מחוסרי אבר, זאת נוהגת בבמה שבשדות, אבל על המזבח שבמשכן לא תקריבוה, אבל תמימה תקבלו מהם, לכך נאמר למעלה איש איש (לעיל פסוק יח), לרבות את הנכרים שנודרים נדרים ונדבות כישראל:
their injury: Heb. מָשְׁחָתָם, [as Onkelos renders it:] חִבּוּלְהוֹן, “their injury.”
משחתם: חבולהון:
they will not be accepted for you: to atone for you.
לא ירצו לכם: לכפר עליכם:
26And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: כווַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר:
27When an ox or a sheep or a goat is born, it shall remain under its mother for seven days, and from the eighth day onwards, it shall be accepted as a sacrifice for a fire offering to the Lord. כזשׁ֣וֹר אוֹ־כֶ֤שֶׂב אוֹ־עֵז֙ כִּ֣י יִוָּלֵ֔ד וְהָיָ֛ה שִׁבְעַ֥ת יָמִ֖ים תַּ֣חַת אִמּ֑וֹ וּמִיּ֤וֹם הַשְּׁמִינִי֙ וָהָ֔לְאָה יֵֽרָצֶ֕ה לְקָרְבַּ֥ן אִשֶּׁ֖ה לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
When [an ox or a sheep or a goat] is born: [The expression “is born” comes] to exclude [from sacrifice an animal] delivered by Caesarean section. - [Chul. 38b]
כי יולד: פרט ליוצא דופן:
28An ox or sheep you shall not slaughter it and its offspring in one day._ כחוְשׁ֖וֹר אוֹ־שֶׂ֑ה אֹת֣וֹ וְאֶת־בְּנ֔וֹ לֹ֥א תִשְׁחֲט֖וּ בְּי֥וֹם אֶחָֽד:
it and its offspring: [This prohibition] applies to the female [i.e., the mother] animal, namely, that it is prohibited to slaughter a mother animal and its male or female offspring [on the same day]. The prohibition does not apply, however, to males [i.e., to the father animals], and it is permissible to slaughter the father animal along with its male or female offspring [on the same day]. — [Chul. 78b]
אתו ואת בנו: נוהג בנקבה, שאסור לשחוט האם והבן או הבת, ואינו נוהג בזכרים, ומותר לשחוט האב והבן [או האב והבת]:
[you shall not slaughter] it and its offspring: Also included [in this prohibition is slaughtering] its offspring and [then] it. — [Chul. 82a]
אתו ואת בנו: אף בנו ואותו במשמע:
29And when you slaughter a thanksgiving offering to the Lord, you shall slaughter it so that it should be acceptable for you. כטוְכִֽי־תִזְבְּח֥וּ זֶֽבַח־תּוֹדָ֖ה לַֽיהֹוָ֑ה לִרְצֹֽנְכֶ֖ם תִּזְבָּֽחוּ:
you shall slaughter it so that it should be acceptable for you: From the very beginning of your slaughtering, take care that it should be “acceptable for you.” And what makes it acceptable?"
לרצנכם תזבחו: תחלת זביחתכם הזהרו שתהא לרצון לכם. ומהו הרצון:
It shall be eaten on that day: [Now, although it has already been stated that thanksgiving-offerings must be eaten on the day of sacrificing (Lev. 7:15), the Torah repeats this here] exclusively to warn us that the slaughtering must be performed on this condition. Do not slaughter it with the intention of eating it on the next day, for if you have this invalidating intention in mind, the sacrifice will not be “acceptable for you” (Torath Kohanim 22:135) [Indeed, it will be rejected (פִּגּוּל; see Rashi Lev. 7:18)]. Another explanation of לִרְצֹנְכֶם is: “knowingly.” From here, [we learn that] if someone slaughtered an animal in an incidental manner [i.e., according to Rashi , without intending to slaughter, just to pick up the knife or to throw it. According to Tosafoth, if he did not intend to slaughter, but only to sever the organs, or if he thought that it was an ordinary animal, and did not realize that it was to be slaughtered as a holy sacrifice], then [even though the animal is fit to be eaten as ordinary non-consecrated meat, nevertheless,] regarding being slaughtered as a holy sacrifice, it is deemed unfit. — [Chul. 13a] Now, although Scripture has already stated [that a sacrifice is “not acceptable” if, while slaughtering, one intended to eat it after its permissible time] in the case of sacrifices that may be eaten for two days (see Lev. 7:18), it specifies it again regarding those sacrifices that must be eaten on the same day (see Rashi Lev. 7:15), namely, that they [too] must be slaughtered with the intention of eating them within their permissible time.
ביום ההוא יאכל: לא בא להזהיר אלא שתהא שחיטה על מנת כן, אל תשחטוהו על מנת לאכלו למחר, שאם תחשבו בו מחשבת פסול לא יהא לכם לרצון. דבר אחר לרצונכם, לדעתכם, מכאן למתעסק שפסול בשחיטת קדשים. ואף על פי שפרט בנאכלים לשני ימים, חזר ופרט בנאכלין ליום אחד שתהא זביחתן על מנת לאכלן בזמנן:
30It shall be eaten on that day; do not leave it over until morning. I am the Lord. לבַּיּ֤וֹם הַהוּא֙ יֵֽאָכֵ֔ל לֹֽא־תוֹתִ֥ירוּ מִמֶּ֖נּוּ עַד־בֹּ֑קֶר אֲנִ֖י יְהֹוָֽה:
It shall be eaten on that day: [As explained above (see preceding Rashi)], Scripture states this here only to warn us that the slaughtering must be performed with this intention. For if it meant to fix the time limit for eating it, this has already been stated, “And the flesh of his thanksgiving peace-offering [shall be eaten on the day that it is offered…]” (Lev. 7:15). - [Torath Kohanim 7:113]
ביום ההוא יאכל: לא בא להזהיר אלא שתהא שחיטה על מנת כן, שאם לקבוע לו זמן אכילה, כבר כתוב (ויקרא ז טו) ובשר זבח תודת שלמיו וגו':
I am the Lord: Know Who decreed this matter, and do not perceive it as unimportant.
אני ה': דע מי גזר על הדבר ואל יקל בעיניך:
31You shall keep My commandments and perform them. I am the Lord. לאוּשְׁמַרְתֶּם֙ מִצְוֹתַ֔י וַֽעֲשִׂיתֶ֖ם אֹתָ֑ם אֲנִ֖י יְהֹוָֽה:
You shall keep [My commandments]: This refers to learning [God’s commandments and “keeping” them organized and memorized in one’s heart]
ושמרתם: זו המשנה:
and perform them: meaning [putting them into] action. — [Mizrachi; Torath Kohanim 22:136]
ועשיתם: זה המעשה:
32You shall not desecrate My Holy Name. I shall be sanctified amidst the children of Israel. I am the Lord Who sanctifies you, לבוְלֹ֤א תְחַלְּלוּ֙ אֶת־שֵׁ֣ם קָדְשִׁ֔י וְנִ֨קְדַּשְׁתִּ֔י בְּת֖וֹךְ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל אֲנִ֥י יְהֹוָ֖ה מְקַדִּשְׁכֶֽם:
You shall not desecrate [My Holy Name]: By transgressing My commandments intentionally. Now, is it not already implied by the verse “ You shall not desecrate [My Holy Name,” that if you do not transgress, God’s Name will be sanctified? So] what do we learn by Scripture adding “I shall be sanctified [amidst the children of Israel]?” [It teaches us:] Surrender your life [and do not transgress God’s commandments], and [thus] sanctify My Name. Now, one might think [that this commandment applies even] in private [i.e., if he is not in the presence of ten or more Jews]. Scripture, therefore, says here “[I shall be sanctified] amidst the children of Israel” [i.e., one is obliged to sacrifice one’s life to avoid transgressing God’s commandments only in the presence of ten or more Jews]. And when one sacrifices oneself, one shall do so with the willingness to die, anyone who [submits to] sacrifices himself while assuming [that God will surely perform] a miracle [for him and save his life], for this person, God does not perform a miracle, for so we find in [the case of] Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah, that [when the evil Nebuchadnezzar threatened to throw them into a fiery furnace], they did not submit themselves on the condition [that God would perform] a miracle, as Scripture says, “[Behold, there is our God Whom we worship; He can save us from the burning, fiery furnace and from your hands, O king!] But if not, let it be known to you, O king [that we will not worship your god, neither will we prostrate ourselves to the golden image that you have set up]!” (Dan. 3:17-18). [We see here that whatever the outcome,] whether [God would] rescue [them] or not- [they declared, regardless] “Let it be known to you, O king [that we will not prostrate ourselves…]!” - [Torath Kohanim 22:137]
ולא תחללו: לעבור על דברי מזידין. ממשמע שנאמר ולא תחללו, מה תלמוד לומר ונקדשתי, מסור עצמך וקדש שמי. יכול ביחיד, תלמוד לומר בתוך בני ישראל, וכשהוא מוסר עצמו, ימסור עצמו על מנת למות, שכל המוסר עצמו על מנת הנס, אין עושין לו נס, שכן מצינו בחנניה מישאל ועזריה שלא מסרו עצמן על מנת הנס, שנאמר (דניאל ג יח) והן לא, ידיע להוא לך מלכא די לאלהך לא איתנא פלחין וגו', מציל ולא מציל, ידיע להוא לך וגו':
33Who took you out of the land of Egypt, to be a God to you. I am the Lord. לגהַמּוֹצִ֤יא אֶתְכֶם֙ מֵאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרַ֔יִם לִֽהְי֥וֹת לָכֶ֖ם לֵֽאלֹהִ֑ים אֲנִ֖י יְהֹוָֽה:
Who took you out [of the land of Egypt]: on this very condition [i.e., to be willing to sacrifice your lives in sanctification of My Holy Name. — [Torath Kohanim 22:138] [And do not think that since it is an obligation, you will not receive reward for sacrificing yourselves, for]
המוציא אתכם: על מנת כן:
I am the Lord: faithful to give reward [to those who fulfill My Torah. — [Torath Kohanim 22:138]
אני ה': נאמן לשלם שכר:
Daily Tehillim: Chapters 49 - 54• Hebrew text
• English text• Chapter 49
This psalm is a strong message and inspiration for all, rich and poor alike, rebuking man for transgressions which, owing to habit, he no longer considers sinful; yet, these sins incriminate man on the Day of Judgement. The psalm speaks specifically to the wealthy, who rely not on God but on their wealth.
1. For the Conductor, by the sons of Korach, a psalm.
2. Hear this, all you peoples; listen, all you inhabitants of the world;
3. sons of common folk and sons of nobility, rich and poor alike.
4. My mouth speaks wisdom, and the thoughts of my heart are understanding.
5. I incline my ear to the parable; I will unravel my riddle upon the harp.
6. Why am I afraid in times of trouble? [Because] the sins I trod upon surround me.
7. There are those who rely on their wealth, who boast of their great riches.
8. Yet a man cannot redeem his brother, nor pay his ransom to God.
9. The redemption of their soul is too costly, and forever unattainable.
10. Can one live forever, never to see the grave?
11. Though he sees that wise men die, that the fool and the senseless both perish, leaving their wealth to others-
12. [nevertheless,] in their inner thoughts their houses will last forever, their dwellings for generation after generation; they have proclaimed their names throughout the lands.
13. But man will not repose in glory; he is likened to the silenced animals.
14. This is their way-their folly remains with them, and their descendants approve of their talk, Selah.
15. Like sheep, they are destined for the grave; death shall be their shepherd, and the upright will dominate them at morning; their form will rot in the grave, away from its abode.
16. But God will redeem my soul from the hands of the grave, for He will take me, Selah.
17. Do not fear when a man grows rich, when the glory of his house is increased;
18. for when he dies he will take nothing, his glory will not descend after him.
19. For he [alone] praises himself in his lifetime; but [all] will praise you if you better yourself.
20. He will come to the generation of his forefathers; they shall not see light for all eternity.
21. Man [can live] in glory but does not understand; he is likened to the silenced animals.
Chapter 50
This psalm speaks of many ethics and morals. The psalmist rebukes those who fail to repent humbly and modestly. He also admonishes those who do not practice that which they study, and merely appear to be righteous; they sin and cause others to sin.
1. A psalm by Asaph. Almighty God, the Lord, spoke and called to the earth, from the rising of the sun to its setting.
2. Out of Zion, the place of perfect beauty, God appeared.
3. Our God will come and not be silent; a fire will consume before Him, His surroundings are furiously turbulent.
4. He will call to the heavens above, and to the earth, to avenge His people:
5. "Gather to Me My pious ones, those who made a covenant with me over a sacrifice.”
6. Then the heavens declared His righteousness, for God is Judge forever.
7. Listen, my people, and I will speak; O Israel, and I will testify against you-I am God your God.
8. Not for [the lack of] your sacrifices will I rebuke you, nor for [the lack of] your burnt offerings which ought to be continually before Me.
9. I do not take oxen from your house, nor goats from your pens;
10. for every beast of the forest is Mine, the cattle of a thousand mountains.
11. I know every bird of the mountains, and the crawling creatures of the field are in My possession.
12. Were I hungry, I would not tell you, for the world and everything in it is mine.
13. Do I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats?
14. Offer confession as a sacrifice to God, and fulfill your vows to the Most High,
15. and call to Me on the day of distress; I will free you, and you will honor Me.
16. But to the wicked, God said, "What does it help you to discuss My laws, and bear My covenant upon your lips?
17. For you hate discipline, and throw My words behind you.
18. When you see a thief you run with him, and your lot is with adulterers.
19. You sent forth your mouth for evil, and attach your tongue to deceit.
20. You sit down to talk against your brother; your mother's son you defame.
21. You have done these things and I kept silent, so you imagine that I am like you-[but] I will rebuke you and lay it clearly before your eyes.
22. Understand this now, you who forget God, lest I tear you apart and there be none to save you.
23. He who offers a sacrifice of confession honors Me; and to him who sets right his way, I will show the deliverance of God."
Chapter 51
This psalm speaks of when Nathan the prophet went to David's palace, and rebuked him for his sin with Bathsheba. David then secluded himself with God, offering awe-inspiring prayers and begging forgiveness. Every person should recite this psalm for his sins and transgressions.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David,
2. when Nathan the prophet came to him after he had gone to Bathsheba.
3. Be gracious to me, O God, in keeping with Your kindness; in accordance with Your abounding compassion, erase my transgressions.
4. Cleanse me thoroughly of my wrongdoing, and purify me of my sin.
5. For I acknowledge my transgressions, and my sin is always before me.
6. Against You alone have I sinned, and done that which is evil in Your eyes; [forgive me] so that You will be justified in Your verdict, vindicated in Your judgment.
7. Indeed, I was begotten in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.
8. Indeed, You desire truth in the innermost parts; teach me the wisdom of concealed things.
9. Purge me with hyssop and I shall be pure; cleanse me and I shall be whiter than snow.
10. Let me hear [tidings of] joy and gladness; then the bones which You have shattered will rejoice.
11. Hide Your face from my sins, and erase all my trespasses.
12. Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew within me an upright spirit.
13. Do not cast me out of Your presence, and do not take Your Spirit of Holiness away from me.
14. Restore to me the joy of Your deliverance, and uphold me with a spirit of magnanimity.
15. I will teach transgressors Your ways, and sinners will return to You.
16. Save me from bloodguilt, O God, God of my deliverance; my tongue will sing Your righteousness.
17. My Lord, open my lips, and my mouth shall declare Your praise.
18. For You do not desire that I bring sacrifices, nor do You wish burnt offerings.
19. The offering [desirable] to God is a contrite spirit; a contrite and broken heart, God, You do not disdain.
20. In Your goodwill, bestow goodness upon Zion; rebuild the walls of Jerusalem.
21. Then will You desire sacrifices [offered in] righteousness, olah and other burnt offerings; then they will offer bullocks upon Your altar.
Chapter 52
David laments his suffering at the hands of Doeg, and speaks of Doeg's boasts about the evil he committed. David asks, "What does he think? Does he consider the doing of evil a mark of strength?" David also curses Doeg and those like him.
1. For the Conductor, a maskil by David,
2. when Doeg the Edomite came and informed Saul, saying to him, "David has come to the house of Achimelech.”
3. Why do you boast with evil, O mighty one? God's kindness is all day long.
4. Your tongue devises treachery; like a sharpened razor it works deceit.
5. You love evil more than good, falsehood more than speaking righteousness, Selah.
6. You love all devouring words, a deceitful tongue.
7. God will likewise shatter you forever; He will excise and pluck you from the tent, and uproot you from the land of the living forever.
8. The righteous will see it and be awed, and they will laugh at him:
9. "Here is the man who did not make God his stronghold, but trusted in his great wealth, and drew strength from his treachery.”
10. But I am like a fresh olive tree in the house of God; I trust in God's kindness forever and ever.
11. I will thank you forever for what You have done; I will hope in Your Name, for You are good to Your pious ones.
Chapter 53
This psalm speaks of when Titus pierced the curtain of the Holy of Holies with his sword, and thought he had killed "himself" (a euphemism for God).
1. For the Conductor, on the machalat,1 a mas-kil2 by David.
2. The fool says in his heart, "There is no God!" They have acted corruptly and committed abominable deeds; not one does good.
3. God looked down from heaven upon mankind, to see if there was any man of intelligence who searches for God.
4. But they all regressed together; they have become corrupt; there is none who does good, not even one.
5. Indeed, the evildoers who devour My people as they devour bread, who do not call upon God, will come to realize.
6. There they will be seized with fright, a fright such as never was; for God scatters the bones of those encamped against you. You shamed them, for God rejected them.
7. O that out of Zion would come Israel's deliverance! When God returns the captivity of His people, Jacob will exult, Israel will rejoice.
FOOTNOTES
1.A musical instrument (Rashi).
2.A psalm intended to enlighten and impart knowledge(Metzudot).
Chapter 54
A prayer to God asking that in His might He save all who hope for His kindness. Read, and you will discover an awe-inspiring and wondrous prayer that should be said by all in the appropriate time.
1. For the Conductor, with instrumental music, a maskil by David,
2. when the Ziphites came and said to Saul, "Behold, David is hiding among us!”
3. O God, deliver me by Your Name, and vindicate me by Your might.
4. God, hear my prayer, listen to the words of my mouth.
5. For strangers have risen against me, and ruthless men have sought my soul; they are not mindful of God, Selah.
6. Behold, God is my helper; my Lord is with those who support my soul.
7. He will repay the evil of my watchful enemies; destroy them by Your truth.
8. With a free-will offering I will sacrifice to You; I will offer thanks to Your Name, O Lord, for it is good.
9. For He has saved me from every trouble, and my eye has seen [the downfall of] my enemy.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 46• 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:
• Tuesday, Iyar 9, 5776 · May 17, 2016
• Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 46
• וזה שאמר אסף ברוח הקדש בעד כל כנסת ישראל שבגולה
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Tuesday, Iyar 9, 5776 · May 17, 2016
This is also the meaning of what Asaf said,1 under Divine inspiration, on behalf of the whole community of Israel who were later to be in exile:2
The barriers that conceal holiness are particularly strong during the time of exile. Concerning that time Asaf said:
ואני בער ולא אדע, בהמות הייתי עמך, ואני תמיד עמך
“And I am foolish and know and feel not; I was as a beast before You. [Yet] I am continually with You.”
כלומר, שאף על פי שאני כבהמה בהיותי עמך
This means3 that even though I am as a “beast” when I am with You,
Even when I perform a mitzvah and am thus united with You, I am still like a beast.
ולא אדע ולא ארגיש בנפשי יחוד זה
my soul being unaware of, and insensitive to, this union achieved between my soul and G‑d through performing amitzvah; for were I to be aware and sensitive, my soul would be affected in a manner
שתפול עליה אימתה ופחד תחלה, ואחר כך אהבה רבה בתענוגים או כרשפי אש
which should bring down upon it fear and awe first, followed by a great love of delights, a love wherein the soul derives great pleasure from G‑dliness, or a love like fiery flames of ardent longing for G‑dliness,
כמדת הצדיקים שנזדכך חומרם
like the quality of the tzaddikim whose corporeality has been refined;
When tzaddikim perform a mitzvah they actually feel how it unifies their soul with G‑d. This, in turn, awakens within their soul a feeling of fear and awe of G‑d, followed by a feeling of intense love of Him. This, of course, is not the case with these who “feel not.”
וכנודע שדעת הוא לשון הרגשה בנפש, והוא כולל חסד וגבורה
for, as is known, the term Daat connotes a sensitivity of the soul, and this is comprised of Chesed andGevurah.
Chesed gives rise to love and Gevurah to fear. Only when one possesses the attribute of Daat and spiritual sensitivity, will one experience the kinds of love and fear of G‑d described above.
אף על פי כן אני תמיד עמך, כי אין החומר מונע יחוד הנפש באור אין סוף ברוך הוא, הממלא כל עלמין
Nevertheless, “I am continually with You,” for the corporeality of the body does not prevent the union of the soul with the light of the blessed Ein Sof, Who fills all worlds,
Corporeality can only prevent the soul from being conscious of its unity with G‑d, inasmuch as it hinders the revelationand awareness of the unity accomplished during the performance of a mitzvah. It cannot, however, hinder the actual unity objectively effected.
וכמו שכתוב: גם חושך לא יחשיך ממך
and as it is written:4 “Even darkness cannot obscure You.”
ובזה
Accordingly,5 since (as above) every Jew who performs a mitzvah is granted the unity and sanctity of “Supreme Holiness,” even when he does not perceive it, as does a tzaddik,
יובן חומר עונש איסור מלאכה בשבתות וחמץ בפסח, השוה לכל נפש
one will be able to understand the severity of the punishment for transgressing the prohibition of work on Sabbath or that of leavened bread on Passover, which equally applies to all.
The very same severe punishment applies equally to the loftiest tzaddik and to the coarsest boor, were either of them, heaven forfend, to transgress one of the above-mentioned prohibitions. The reason:
-לפי שאף בנפש בור ועם הארץ גמור מאיר אור קדושת שבת ויום טוב, ונידון בנפשו בכרת וסקילה על חילול קדושה זו
For even in the soul of an uncultured and completely illiterate person shines the light of the sanctity of Sabbath or Festival; hence he faces capital punishment by Karet for eating leavened bread on Passover and stoning for doing a prohibited form of labor on Sabbath, for the profanation of this sanctity which illuminates his soul.
Though a particular individual may not feel this sanctity, still, as explained earlier, this sanctity does indeed illuminate his soul. This being the case, the soul of this individual is tainted by his misdeed in a manner equal to that of a tzaddik in similar circumstances. It is for this reason that the manner of punishment applies equally to all.
וגם משהו חמץ, או טלטול מוקצה, פוגם בקדושה שעל נפשו כמו בקדושת נפש הצדיק
Similarly, the transgression involving the slightest amount of leaven on Passover, or the moving of muktzeh on Sabbath, blemishes the sanctity which rests on his (the uncultured person’s) soul just as it would the sanctity of the soul of a tzaddik,
כי תורה אחת לכולנו
for we all have one Torah: the laws of the Torah apply equally to all Jews.
From all the above it becomes eminently clear that though a person may not feel the sanctity brought about by the performance of a mitzvah, so much so that he is likened to a beast, nevertheless, through his performance of a mitzvah, this “beast” is unified with G‑d to the same degree as the greatest sage. Indeed, this is the implication of the verse, “Beasts I am with You, [yet] I am constantly with You.”
The Alter Rebbe now goes on to say that there is a definite reason why the similarity to a beast is described in the plural (“beasts I am with you”). This tells us that the performance of a mitzvah on the level of a beast — with neither comprehension nor feeling — is related to the spiritual level which transcends comprehension and feeling, this level too being termed “beast” since it is not in the realm of comprehension, rather transcending it. Thus there are two levels of “beasts”, that which is lower than the realm of comprehension and that which is above it. Both are alluded to by the same word, since the two are connected.
ומה שכתוב: בהמות, לשון רבים
(6And as for the use of the plural form “beasts”, which is inconsistent both with the singular form mentioned earlier (“and I am a fool”) and with the singular form mentioned later (“And I am constantly...”),
לרמז כי לפניו יתברך גם בחינת דעת העליון, הכולל חסד וגבורה, נדמה כבהמות ועשייה גופנית לגבי אור אין סוף
this intimates that before Him, even Daat Elyon (“Supernal Knowledge”) — which comprises Chesed andGevurah — is like “beasts” and a physical creation (i.e., the physical world of Asiyah, not its spiritual counterpart),when compared with the light of the Ein Sof,
כמו שכתוב: כולם בחכמה עשית
as it is written:7 “You made (עשית) them all with wisdom,” thereby comparing the level of Chochmah (“wisdom”) with Asiyah (“physical creation”). From G‑d’s perspective, Chochmah and Asiyah are equally distant.
ונקרא בהמה רבה, כמו שכתוב במקום אחר
And this is called Behemah Rabbah (“a great beast”), denoting that level of “beast” which transcends understanding rather than that which lacks comprehension, as is explained elsewhere.
והוא שם ב״ן, בגימטריא בהמ״ה, שלפני האצילות
And this is the level of the Supernal Name of “Ban” (one of the four variations of the Tetragrammaton, corresponding with the number 52), with the same numerical equivalent of the Hebrew word Behemah (“beast”), which is on a level even preceding Atzilut).
We thus see that even one who performs mitzvot on the level of a “fool” or “beast”, neither comprehending nor sensing the unity and holiness achieved and drawn down through his actions, — even such a person, too, attains a union with the level of “beast” that transcends even that most lofty of levels — Daat of Atzilut.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Tehillim 73:22-23. |
| 2. | Concerning the statement that “this is also the meaning of what Asaf said, under Divine inspiration...,” the Rebbe remarks that the Alter Rebbe is not in the habit of naming the individual who authored a specific verse, nor is he in the habit of remarking that it was first uttered under Divine inspiration. An exception was made here, the Rebbe explains, because Asaf is addressing himself to the problem of “a wicked man who prospers” and “a righteous man who suffers.” Asaf is also speaking either about himself, or, at least, about those Jews who lived in his time, for in the same chapter he explicitly says “...until I came to the Holy Temple.” I.e., he is referring to a time when the Temple is standing. Now at that time corporeality did not conceal G‑dliness to the same degree as it does now. This being so, how do Asaf’s words apply to our times? The Alter Rebbe answers this by saying that in this verse Asaf was not talking about himself and his generation, but about the Jewish community in times of exile. Though he was no prophet (as Rashi states in Megillah 14a), he was nevertheless able to speak of the future, for he spoke under Divine inspiration. Daniel likewise foresaw and foretold many future episodes, even though (as Rashi mentions in his commentary to Daniel) he too was no prophet. In the next footnote the Rebbe will offer evidence that in the verse, “So foolish was I...,” Asaf speaks of the Jews in time of exile. |
| 3. | The Rebbe notes that with the words “This means,” the Alter Rebbe is saying, that unlike the previous verses which speak of Asaf’s own time, this verse refers to the Jewish community in exile. Proof that this is indeed so, lies in the fact that after saying, “And I am foolish and know not,” he goes on to say, “I was as a beast before You.” If Asaf is speaking of himself, his final words are superfluous. We must therefore say that he is speaking of the time of exile, when the veil of corporeality is so palpable that “even when I am with You” — even in the midst of performing a mitzvah, at which time a Jew is at one with G‑d — still “I am as a beast,” unable to feel this union with G‑d. This also explains why the Alter Rebbe quotes the beginning of the verse (“And I am foolish and know not”), when he mainly addresses himself to the latter part of the verse. He does so because the opening words prove that the phrase, “I was as a beast before You,” speaks of the Jewish people in times of exile. |
| 4. | Tehillim 139:12. |
| 5. | The Rebbe explains that with the Alter Rebbe’s statement — “Accordingly, one will be able to understand...” — a number of very problematic issues are resolved. Firstly: How is it possible that an illiterate person be subject to the same severe punishment as a tzaddik, for transgressing the prohibition of work on the Sabbath or that of leavened bread on Passover? The punishment results from the individual’s desecration of the sanctity which pervades the Sabbath and festivals. However, this sanctity does not rest upon the illiterate person. Why, then, should he be so severely punished? Even if we posit that the illiterate person, too, possesses some miniscule measure of the sanctity of the Sabbath and Festivals, we must still understand why the same measure of punishment “equally applies to all.” Reason dictates that the illiterate’s punishment should be much less severe than that of the tzaddik, inasmuch as he harbors but an echo of the sanctity enjoyed by the tzaddik. According to what the Alter Rebbe has just now explained, the matter becomes entirely understandable. For within the soul of the illiterate person there radiates the light of the sanctity of those holy days in the same measure as within the soul of a tzaddik. The only difference between the two is that the tzaddik feels this sanctity while the illiterate person does not. The Rebbe adds that this explanation also helps us understand why the Alter Rebbe cited evidence specifically from transgressing the prohibitions of the Sabbath and Festivals. These prohibitions, says the Rebbe, are not intrinsic to the acts themselves, for doing these selfsame things on any other day is not prohibited at all. Rather, these are prohibitions which apply to the individual: he is not permitted to perform such labor on the Sabbath. This being so, we must surely say that the light of Sabbath illumines the soul of an illiterate person just as it does that of atzaddik. Were we not to say so, then the question of why the punishment is not for the inherent wrong of the act itself, but for the person's performance of this act on the Shabbath. If the illiterate person's soul is not illumined to the same degree as the tzaddik's, it is unthinkable that the punishment should be the same. |
| 6. | Parentheses are in the original text. |
| 7. | Tehillim 104:24. |
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Tuesday, Iyar 9, 5776 · May 17, 2016
• Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 125
Eating the Paschal Offering Boiled or Underdone
"Do not eat it underdone nor boiled in water"—Exodus 12:9.
It is forbidden to eat of a Paschal Offering that has been cooked or is underdone. Rather it must be fully roasted.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• Eating the Paschal Offering Boiled or Underdone
Removing the Paschal Offering from its Designated Location of Consumption
"You shall not take any of the meat out of the house"—Exodus 12:46.
It is forbidden to remove any part of the Paschal Offering from the home where those who are eating it have convened for the Passover meal.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• Removing the Paschal Offering from its Designated Location of Consumption
An Apostate Eating from the Paschal Offering
"No stranger shall eat of it"—Exodus 12:43.
It is forbidden to give an apostate to eat of the Paschal Offering.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• An Apostate Eating from the Paschal Offering
A Gentile Eating of the Paschal Offering
"A foreigner and a hired servant shall not eat it"—Exodus 12:45.
It is forbidden to give a gentile – even one who follows the Seven Noahide Laws – to eat of the Paschal Offering.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• A Gentile Eating of the Paschal Offering
An Uncircumcised Male Eating of the Paschal Offering
"And no uncircumcised person shall eat of it"—Exodus 12:48.
An uncircumcised male is forbidden to partake of the Paschal Offering.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• An Uncircumcised Male Eating of the Paschal Offering
Breaking a Bone of the Paschal Offering
"Neither shall you break a bone of it"—Exodus 12:46.
It is forbidden to break any bone of the bones of the Paschal Offering.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• Breaking a Bone of the Paschal Offering
Breaking a Bone of the Second Passover Offering sacrifice
"Neither shall you break a bone of it"—Numbers 9:12.
It is forbidden to break any bone of the bones of the Second Passover Offering.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 125
Eating the Paschal Offering Boiled or Underdone
"Do not eat it underdone nor boiled in water"—Exodus 12:9.
It is forbidden to eat of a Paschal Offering that has been cooked or is underdone. Rather it must be fully roasted.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• Eating the Paschal Offering Boiled or Underdone
Negative Commandment 125
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 125th prohibition is that we are forbidden from eating the Pesach offering cooked or underdone [in any liquid1] — only roasted.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "Do not eat it raw or cooked."
I have already explained to you in the Ninth Introductory Principle of this work that one who transgresses this prohibition is punished by lashes.3
FOOTNOTES
1.Hilchos Korban Pesach 8:7.
2.Ex. 12:9.
3.Whether one eats only underdone meat, or only cooked meat, or both underdone and cooked meat, he receives one set of lashes. This is because it is a lav she'b'klalus, an inclusive prohibition.
Negative Commandment 123Removing the Paschal Offering from its Designated Location of Consumption
"You shall not take any of the meat out of the house"—Exodus 12:46.
It is forbidden to remove any part of the Paschal Offering from the home where those who are eating it have convened for the Passover meal.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• Removing the Paschal Offering from its Designated Location of Consumption
Negative Commandment 123
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 123rd prohibition is that we are forbidden from taking out any meat of the Pesach offering from the place that we have gathered to eat it.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "Do not bring any of its meat outside."
In the words of the Mechilta,3 "The expression, 'outside,' means outside the place where it is eaten."
One is prohibited to eat whatever is brought outside, and it is considered like treifah.4
Our Sages said in tractate Pesachim,5 "One who takes out meat of the Pesach offering from one group to another, even though he transgresses a prohibition, it is still pure." One who eats it [also] transgresses a prohibition."6
There7 it says, "One who takes out meat of the Pesach offering from one group to another is not punished unless he places it down. This is because the expression, 'to take out' [hotza'a] is used, just as regarding Shabbos.8 If he does place it down, he is punished by lashes.
The details of this mitzvah too are explained in the seventh chapter of Pesachim.
FOOTNOTES
1.The Pesach offering must be eaten by a specified group of people in a specified location. Hilchos Korban Pesach 9:1.
2.Ibid., 12:46.
3.Mechilta D'Rashbi.
4.See N181.
5.Pesachim 85a.
6.Even if it was brought back to the group, it may not be eaten; the meat is considered as treifah. See Hilchos Korban Pesach 9:2. Hilchos Ma'aseh HaKorbanos 11:6.
7.Ibid., 85b.
8.One may not carry an object outside on Shabbos, but is punished only if one performs both the akirah (lifting up the object from where it was sitting) and the hanachah (placing it down in the new location).
Negative Commandment 128An Apostate Eating from the Paschal Offering
"No stranger shall eat of it"—Exodus 12:43.
It is forbidden to give an apostate to eat of the Paschal Offering.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• An Apostate Eating from the Paschal Offering
Negative Commandment 128
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 128th prohibition is that we are forbidden from feeding meat from the Pesach offering to a Jew who has converted [to another religion].
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "Any ben neichar2 may not eat it." The one who explains the Oral Tradition [i.e. Onkelos] says [the phrase, "Any ben neichar means], "any Jew who has converted."3 In the words of the Mechilta,4 "The phrase, 'Any ben neichar,' refers to a Jew who has converted and worshipped idolatry."5
FOOTNOTES
1.Ex. 12:43.
2.Literally, "son of a stranger."
3.Targum Onkelos, Ex. 12:43.
4.Mechilta D'Rashbi.
5.See Hilchos Korban Pesach 9:7, where the Rambam explains the expression ben neichar (literally, "son of a stranger") as meaning, "one who serves a strange god."
Negative Commandment 126A Gentile Eating of the Paschal Offering
"A foreigner and a hired servant shall not eat it"—Exodus 12:45.
It is forbidden to give a gentile – even one who follows the Seven Noahide Laws – to eat of the Paschal Offering.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• A Gentile Eating of the Paschal Offering
Negative Commandment 126
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 126th prohibition is that we are forbidden from feeding meat from the Pesach offering to [any non-Jew,1 even] a ger toshav.2
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement3 (exalted be He), "A toshav or [non-Jewish] hired hand may not eat it."
FOOTNOTES
1.Hilchos Korban Pesach 9:7.
2.A non-Jew who has accepted the 7 Noachide commandments. See N51, and footnotes there.
3.Ibid., 12:45.
Negative Commandment 127An Uncircumcised Male Eating of the Paschal Offering
"And no uncircumcised person shall eat of it"—Exodus 12:48.
An uncircumcised male is forbidden to partake of the Paschal Offering.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• An Uncircumcised Male Eating of the Paschal Offering
Negative Commandment 127
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 127th prohibition is that an uncircumcised man is forbidden from eating the Pesach sacrifice.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "But no uncircumcised man may eat it."
If he eats from it when uncircumcised, he is punished by lashes.
FOOTNOTES
1.This prohibition applies even if the man is a Jew who may not be circumcised for health reasons, i.e. a hemophiliac. (Rashi, Pesachim 28b.)
2.Ibid., 12:48.
Negative Commandment 121Breaking a Bone of the Paschal Offering
"Neither shall you break a bone of it"—Exodus 12:46.
It is forbidden to break any bone of the bones of the Paschal Offering.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• Breaking a Bone of the Paschal Offering
Negative Commandment 121
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 121st prohibition is that we are forbidden from breaking any bone of the Pesach offering.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "Do not break any of its bones."
One who breaks one of its bones is punished by lashes. Our Sages explicitly said,2 "One who breaks a bone from a Pesach offering which was [brought when the congregation3 was] pure is punished by lashes.
FOOTNOTES
1.Ibid., 12:46.
2.Pesachim Chapter 7, Mishneh 11.
3.If the offering was brought when the congregation was impure, one is not punished for breaking a bone. Hilchos Korban Pesach, 10:1.
Negative Commandment 122Breaking a Bone of the Second Passover Offering sacrifice
"Neither shall you break a bone of it"—Numbers 9:12.
It is forbidden to break any bone of the bones of the Second Passover Offering.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• Breaking a Bone of the Second Passover Offering sacrifice
Negative Commandment 122
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 122nd prohibition is that we are also forbidden from breaking any bone of the second Pesach offering.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He) also here,1 "Do not break any of its bones."
One who breaks one of its bones is also punished by lashes.
Our Sages said in tractate Pesachim,2 "The Torah did not need to write, 'Do not break any of its bones,' regarding the second Pesach offering, since it is already written,3 'You shall follow all the laws of the [first] Pesach offering.'4 [It is written to include] both bones which contain marrow and those which do not contain marrow."5
The laws regarding breaking a bone [of the Pesach offering] are explained in the seventh chapter of Pesachim.6
FOOTNOTES
1.Num. 9:12, like that of the first Pesach offering, Ex. 12:46.
2.85a.
3.Num. 9:12.
4.And this would include the prohibition of breaking any bones.
5.This is in contrast with the first Pesach offering, which excludes bones that do not contain marrow. Hilchos Korban Pesach 10:3. See, however, ibid., 10:15.
6.85a.
• 1 Chapter: Pesulei Hamukdashim Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 17 • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 17
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Pesulei Hamukdashim - Chapter 17
Halacha 1
Whenever blood must be presented on the outer altar and the first presentation was made with a proper intent and a second or further presentation was made for the sake of a different sacrifice or he had a [disqualifying] intent with regard to place or time, atonement is achieved and the sacrifice is acceptable.1
If the first presentation [of blood] was made with a [disqualifying] intent with regard to time and [the priest] completed the presentation of the blood with a [disqualifying] intent with regard to place, [the sacrifice] is piggul. [The rationale is that] the first presentation of the blood is of fundamental importance.2
In contrast, with regard to all of the presentations of blood on the inner altar - since they are all absolute requirements [for the offering of the sacrifice], as we explained3 - if one of presentations was not made as required, but instead, one had a disqualifying intent, the sacrifice is unacceptable,4 even if all the other presentations were made as required.
Halacha 2
If one had a [disqualifying] intent with regard to time when making the first [of the presentations of the blood on the inner altar]5 and had no specific intent6regarding the remainder or he presented all of them as required with the exception of the final one, which he presented with a [disqualifying] intent with regard to time, [the sacrifice] is disqualified, but it is not piggul. [It is not given that distinction] unless one makes [all] the presentations with a [disqualifying] intent with regard to time, for they are all considered as one presentation.
Halacha 3
[Having a disqualifying intent while] immersing one's finger in the blood of a sin-offering7 [whose blood is offered] on the inner altar can cause a sacrifice to become piggul.8
What is implied? If at the time [the priest] immersed his finger in the blood, he had a disqualifying intent concerning time, it is as if he had such an intent when presenting [the blood on the altar].
Halacha 4
If a priest was standing in the Temple Courtyard and he had a disqualifying intent concerning time with regard to one of the sin-offerings [whose blood is offered] on the inner altar with regard to an aspect of the sacrifice that is performed in the Sanctuary, [the offering] is not piggul. If he had such an intent with regard to an aspect that is performed in the Temple Courtyard, it is piggul.
Halacha 5
What is implied? If a priest was standing in the Temple Courtyard and said: "I am slaughtering [this animal] with the intent of presenting its blood tomorrow,"9[the offering] is not piggul, because presenting the blood is performed inside, in the Sanctuary.
Halacha 6
If [a priest] was standing in the Sanctuary and he said: "I am presenting [the blood] with the intent to pour the remaining [blood]10 on the following day, [the offering] is not piggul, because he had a disqualifying intent inside [the Temple Sanctuary] regarding a service performed outside. If, however, he was standing in the Temple Courtyard and slaughtered [the animal] with the intent to pour out the remainder [of the blood] on the following day or to offer the fats and the organs on the following day, [the offering] is piggul, for he had a [disqualifying] intent while outside concerning a service that is performed outside.
Halacha 7
A [disqualifying intent] concerning a thanksgiving-offering causes the bread [that accompanies it] to become piggul, but a [disqualifying intent] concerning the bread does not cause the thanksgiving-offering to become piggul.11
What is implied? When one slaughtered a thanksgiving-offering and had the intent to partake of its meat, cast its blood on the altar, or offer its fats and organs on the following day, the offering and the bread are piggul. If he had the intent to partake of the bread on the following day, the bread alone is piggul; the thanksgiving-offering is not piggul.12
Halacha 8
Similar concepts apply with regard to the two sheep offered on Shavuot with the two breads offered with them. If one had a [disqualifying] intent concerning time with regard to the sheep, the two breads are considered as piggul. If he had the intent to partake of the two breads on the following day, the two breads are piggul and the sheep are not piggul.13 If while performing one of the four [significant] services, [the priest] had the intent partake of an olive-sized portion of the meat of the sacrifice together with the bread14 tomorrow, the bread alone is piggul15 and the thanksgiving-offering or the sheep are notpiggul.
Halacha 9
When [a priest] offers the two bowls of frankincense that accompany the showbread and, while offering them, had the intent to partake of the showbread on the following day, the bread is piggul.16
Halacha 10
When one slaughters the two sheep for Shavuot and has the intent to eat one of the loaves on the following day, they are both piggul.17
Halacha 11
If one offered the two bowls [of frankincense] and he had the intent to partake of one of the two arrangements of bread on the following day, both arrangements are piggul.18
Halacha 12
Similarly, if one had a [disqualifying] thought concerning time with regard to one of the breads of the thanksgiving-offering or with regard to one of the breads of meal-offering baked in an oven, all of the breads are piggul.
Halacha 13
If, by contrast, one of the two breads [of Shavuot], one of the two arrangements [of the showbread], or one of the breads of the thanksgiving offering19- whether before the casting on the altar20 or afterwards - becomes impure, only that bread or that arrangement are forbidden to be eaten. What is pure may be eaten in its state of purity.
Halacha 14
If, while performing the sacrificial service associated with one of the two sheep, [the priest] had the intent to eat an olive-sized portion of the two breads on the following day - and similarly, if while offering one of the two bowls [of frankincense], he had the intent to partake of an olive-sized portion of the showbread on the following day, the bread is disqualified, but it is not piggul. [It is given that distinction] only when he has a [disqualifying] intent while performing all the services that permit the bread to be eaten: [i.e.,] bringing both sheep and offering both bowls [of frankincense] on the altar's pyre.
Halacha 15
If one slaughtered one [of the sheep] and had the intent to eat half an olive-sized portion from one loaf on the following day and slaughtered the second lamb and had the intent of eating half an olive-sized portion on the following day, [the two intents] are combined to render the loaves piggul.21 Similar concepts apply with regard to the two bowls [of frankincense] and the two arrangements [of showbread].
Halacha 16
If one had a [disqualifying] intent concerning time with regard to one of the two sheep and offered the second with a proper intent, the one that was offered with a [disqualifying] intent concerning time is piggul and the other is acceptable.22
Halacha 17
If one slaughtered one of [these two sheep] and had the intent while slaughtering it to partake of the meat of the other one on the following day, they are both acceptable. For the intent one has with regard to one is of no consequence regarding the second.
Halacha 18
The two lambs [offered on] Shavuot do not cause the bread to be sanctified unless they are slaughtered.
What is implied? If one slaughtered them and cast their blood [on the altar] for the sake of another sacrifice, he did not sanctify the bread. If he slaughtered them with the proper intent and cast their blood [on the altar] for the sake of another sacrifice, the bread is sanctified, but is not sanctified.23
If they slaughtered it for the sake of another sacrifice even though he cast [the blood] for the proper intent, the bread was not sanctified.
Halacha 19
When the two loaves were taken out [of the Temple Courtyard] between the slaughter [of the two sheep] and the casting [of their blood] and the blood of the sheep was cast on the altar with a [disqualifying] intent concerning time, the bread becomes piggul even though it is outside [the Temple Courtyard]. For casting [the blood] has an effect on [bread] that was taken out even though it is still outside [the Temple Courtyard].24
Halacha 20
When the two sheep offered on Shavuos were slaughtered with the proper intent and the breads were lost, they are disqualified if their blood was cast [on the altar] with the desired intent.25 If their blood was cast [on the altar] with a [disqualifying] intent concerning time26 after the bread was lost, there is an unresolved doubt if [the meat of the sheep] is permitted to be eaten or not.27
FOOTNOTES
1.
Hence the person(s) bringing the sacrifice are not required to bring another one.
2.
See Chapter 2, Halachah 1.
Chapter 16, Halachah 1, states that when a disqualifying intent concerning place is combined with a disqualifying intent concerning time, the sacrifice is disqualified, but is not piggul. In the present instance, it is placed in the more severe category, because once the fundamental presentation was made in a manner that rendered the sacrifice piggul, the subsequent intentions the priest had are of no consequence.
3.
Chapter 2, Halachah 3.
4.
However, it is not piggul. The Kessef Mishneh explains that it is not consideredpiggul because one must have the disqualifying intent concerning time when performing all of the presentations.
5.
See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 5:7.
6.
Literally, the Rambam's words mean: "Remained silent with regard to the others."
7.
See ibid.:8.
8.
The commentaries note that this ruling appears to run contrary to the statements ofZevachim 44a: "If one had a disqualifying intent that would render an offering piggulinside the Sanctuary, the offering is notpiggul." Rambam LeAm suggests that Rabbi Elazar the author of the statement cited does not accept the concept that one's intent when immersing one's finger in the blood can cause an offering to be considered as piggul. If, however, he would have accepted that concept, he would also have accepted the Rambam's ruling here.
9.
When they should be presented on the day the sacrificial animal is slaughtered.
10.
On the outer altar (see Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 5:10).
11.
For the bread is secondary to and dependent on the sacrifice, but the sacrifice is not dependent on the bread [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Menachot 2:3)]. See also Chapter 15, Halachah 13.
12.
Rashi's commentary to Menachot 15a implies that it is forbidden to eat the meat. From the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, it would appear that the meat is permitted entirely.
13.
Here, also, the bread is considered as secondary to the sacrifice, but the sacrifice is not secondary to the meat [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.)].
14.
I.e., half an olive-sized portion of meat and half an olive-sized portion of bread (Rashi,Menachot, loc. cit.).
15.
Menachot, loc. cit., mentions both of the situations spoken about in this halachah. One opinion maintains that the ruling was given both with regard to the bread on Shavuos and the bread of the thanksgiving-offering. A second view maintains that it was given with regard to the breads and the offering of Shavuos, for they are interrelated as evidenced by the fact that they are waved together (Leviticus 23:20). It is possible, however, that it does not apply to the thanksgiving-offering. The Rambam accepts the more stringent view, because of the doubt involved (Kessef Mishneh).
16.
For it is the offering of the bowls of frankincense that enable the breads to be eaten.
17.
For the two loaves are considered as a single offering.
18.
Here too both arrangments are considered as a single offering.
19.
The commentaries have noted the apparent contradiction to Chapter 12, Halachah 14. See the notes to that halachah.
20.
Of the blood of the sacrifices or the frankincense for the showbreads [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Menachot 2:2)].
21.
For he had a disqualifying intent concerning time with regard to the entire offering that would enable the bread to be eaten.
22.
In this context, each of the sheep is considered as an independent entity.
23.
It appears that the Rambam follows the view of Ravva (Menachot 13b) that bread is considered as consecrated, but it is forbidden to be eaten .
24.
The place where the bread is located is not of consequence.
25.
For as stated in Hilchot Temidim UMusafim8:15, the offering of the bread is a fundamental requirement for the offering of the sheep and if the bread is lost, the sheep should be destroyed by fire.
26.
The Kessef Mishneh maintains that this is a printing error and the text should read "with an intent for another sacrifice." This view, however, is not borne out by the manuscripts and early printings of theMishneh Torah.
27.
According to the Kessef Mishneh, the Rambam's ruling can be explained as follows: One might think that the meat would be permitted to be eaten, because they are peace-offerings and when a peace-offering is offered for the sake of another offering, it is permitted to be eaten, as stated in Chapter 15, Halachah 1. On the other hand, since the sheep are associated with the bread and the bread is lost, there is room to say that they have been disqualified. A question concerning this issue was raised by Menachot 47b. Rav Yosef Corcus maintains that according to the Rambam, the question was left unresolved. Rashi maintains that the question is rhetorical and that the meat is disqualified.
The Kessef Mishneh notes, however, that Rabbenu Yehoshua, one of the Rambam's descendants, was asked about the matter and explained the question according to the existing text. According to his view, the issue is that since the blood was cast on the altar after the bread was lost, the Sages had a question whether to consider their meat as ordinary meat or whether the meat should still be considered as sacrificial meat, because the sheep were slaughtered before the bread was lost.
• 3 Chapters: Korban Pesach Korban Pesach - Perek 6, Korban Pesach Korban Pesach - Perek 7, Korban Pesach Korban Pesach - Perek 8
English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download• Korban Pesach - Perek 6
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class• Tuesday, Iyar 9, 5776 · May 17, 2016
English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download• Korban Pesach - Perek 6
Halacha 1
Which impure individuals are prevented from offering until the second Pesach? Anyone who cannot partake of the Paschal sacrifice on the fifteenth of Nisan because of his impurity, e.g., zavim, zavot, niddot, women impure because of childbirth, and those who were intimate with a women in theniddah state. By contrast, those who are impure because they touched an animal corpse, a dead crawling animal, and the like on the day of the fourteenth of Nisan, should immerse themselves and the Paschal sacrifice should be sacrificed on their behalf after they immerse themselves. In the evening, when the day of their impurity is concluded, they may partake of the Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 2
When the seventh day of the purification process of one who is impure because of contact with a human corpse falls on the fourteenth of Nisan - even though he has immersed himself and had the ashes of the red heifer sprinkled upon him and thus he is fit to partake of sacrificial foods in the evening - the Paschal sacrifice should not be slaughtered for him. His offering is postponed until the second Pesach. This is derived from Numbers 9:6 "And the men who were impure because of a human corpse and were not able to offer the Paschal sacrifice on that day." According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught that this occurred on the seventh day of their purification process. This is what they were asking: Should the Paschal sacrifice be slaughtered for them and they would partake of it in the evening? Moses explained to them that it should not be slaughtered for them.
When does the above apply? When one became impure because of one of the types of impurity for which a Nazirite would be required to shave. If, however, one became impure because of other types of impurity resulting from contact with a corpse for which a Nazirite is not required to shave, the Paschal sacrifice may be slaughtered for him on the seventh day of his purification process after he immersed himself and had the ashes of the red heifer sprinkled upon him. In the evening, when the day of his impurity is concluded, he may partake of the Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 3
When a zav experiences two discharges and then counts seven clean days and immerses on the seventh day, the Paschal sacrifice may be sacrificed on his behalf and he may partake of it in the evening. If he experienced a zavdischarge after the blood was cast on the altar, he is exempt from bringing the second Paschal sacrifice.
Similarly, a woman who is watching a day because of a discharge on the previous day may immerse on the day she is watching, as explained in the laws of forbidden relations. The Paschal sacrifice may be slaughtered on her behalf and she may partake of it in the evening. If she experiences uterine bleeding after the blood of the Paschal sacrifice was cast on the altar, she is exempt from bringing the second Paschal sacrifice.
A Paschal sacrifice is not slaughtered on behalf of a woman who is impure because of menstrual bleeding on her seventh day of impurity. For she may not immerse herself until the night of the eighth day and she is not fit to partake of sacrificial meat until the night of the ninth day.
Halacha 4
When the day when one of those requiring atonement may bring his sacrifice falls on the fourteenth of Nisan, one may slaughter the Paschal sacrifice on their behalf. Their sacrifices may be offered on the fourteenth of Nisan, whether before the Paschal sacrifice is slaughtered or afterwards. They may partake of their Paschal sacrifices in the evening.
We do not slaughter the Paschal sacrifice on their behalf until they entrust their sacrifices required to regain purity to the court, lest they be negligent and fail to offer them.
Halacha 5
When the eighth day of the purification process of a person suffering fromtzara'at falls on the fourteenth of Nissan, but he experiences a seminal emission that day, he may immerse himself, enter the Women's Courtyard, and bring his sacrifices. Although a person who immersed on a particular day is forbidden from entering the Temple Courtyard that day, as was explained inHilchot Bi'at HaMikdash.since this is the day that the Paschal sacrifice is to be offered at its appointed time, a positive commandment whose omission is punishable by karet comes and supersedes a Rabbinic commandment.
Halacha 6
When the seventh day of the purification process of one who became impure due to contact with a human corpse falls on the Sabbath, the ashes of the Red Heifer are not sprinkled upon him until the following day. Even if his seventh day falls on the thirteenth of Nisan which is a Sabbath, the sprinkling of the ashes should be postponed until the fourteenth. The ashes should be sprinkled upon him, but the Paschal sacrifice should not be slaughtered on his behalf, as we explained. Instead, his offering is postponed and he brings the second Paschal sacrifice.
One might argue: The prohibition against sprinkling the ashes on the Sabbath was instituted as a shvut and the failure to bring the Paschal sacrifice is punishable by karet. How then could the Sages uphold their prohibition in the face of a prohibition punishable by karet? In resolution, it can be explained that the day on which he is forbidden to have the ashes sprinkled upon him is not the time when the sacrifice punishable by karet is obligated to be brought. Therefore they upheld their words as instituted, even though this matter will lead to it having to stand in a place punishable by karet.
Halacha 7
When an uncircumcised Jew circumcises himself on the day before Pesach, the Paschal sacrifice sacrifice may be slaughtered on his behalf after his circumcision. The Paschal sacrifice should not, by contrast, be slaughtered on behalf of a convert who converted on the fourteenth of Nisan and circumcised himself and immersed in a mikveh, for he may not partake of the sacrifice in the evening. He is like one who departs from a grave who requires seven days of purification and then can he become pure. This is a decree lest this convert become impure due to contact with a corpse in the following year on the fourteenth of Nisan and immerse himself and seek to partake of the Paschal sacrifice in the evening, saying: "Last year, the Jews did this for me, when I circumcised myself and immersed, and partook of the Paschal sacrifice in the evening."
Behold, this decree is of Rabbinic origin and the failure to bring the Paschal sacrifice is punishable by karet. How then could the Sages uphold their prohibition in the face of a prohibition punishable by karet on the day of the sacrifice which is the fourteenth of Nisan? The rationale is that the convert is not obligated in the observance of mitzvot until he circumcises himself and immerses himself in a mikveh. He should not immerse himself until he becomes healed from the circumcision, as we explained with regard to the concept of conversion. Therefore they upheld their words in this instance, because this person who circumcised himself should not have immersed until he was healed. Thus he would not have incurred an obligation to bring the Paschal sacrifice at all.
Halacha 8
If a person came through a beit hapras, he should proceed and sift, proceed and sift. If he did not find a bone and did not contract impurity, he should slaughter and partake of his Paschal sacrifice, even though he walked in abeit hapras. The rationale is that the impurity of a beit hapras is a Rabbinic institution, as will be explained in Hilchot Tum'at Meit, and the Sages did not uphold their decree in the face of an obligation punishable by karet, as we explained. Similarly, a beit hapras that was trod upon is pure with regarding to bringing a Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 9
A person in the acute state of onein mourning is fit to partake of the Paschal sacrifice in the evening. The rationale is that the restrictions of aninut at night are Rabbinic in origin and our Sages did not uphold their decree in the face of an obligation punishable by karet. Instead, the Paschal sacrifice should be slaughtered on his behalf. He must immerse and afterwards partake of it. The immersion is necessary so that he makes a distinction from the state of aninutand does not divert his attention.
When does the above apply? When the deceased for whom he must mourn passes away after midday on the fourteenth of Nisan and thus he was already obligated to bring the Paschal sacrifice. If, however, the deceased passed away before midday, the Paschal sacrifice should not be slaughtered on his behalf. Instead, his offering is postponed until the second Pesach. If, however, the Paschal sacrifice was slaughtered on his behalf and the blood poured on the altar, he should immerse himself and partake of it in the evening.
If the deceased relative passed away on the thirteenth of Nisan and was buried on the fourteenth, on the day of the burial, he must observe aninutaccording to Rabbinic decree and that decree does not encompass the night following the fourteenth. Therefore one may slaughter the Paschal sacrifice on his behalf. He should immerse and partake of it and other sacrifices in the evening. The day when one hears of a close relative's death and the day when one gathers the bones of one's dead is equivalent to the day of burial. Therefore if one had the bones of his dead gathered on the fourteenth of Nisan or heard that a close relative died, the Paschal sacrifice may be slaughtered on his behalf. He immerses himself and may partake of sacrificial food in the evening.
Halacha 10
When a person is digging in a mound from an avalanche in search of the body of a deceased person, the Paschal sacrifice should not be slaughtered on his behalf, lest he find a corpse in the mound and he be impure at the time of slaughter. If the Paschal sacrifice was slaughtered on his behalf and a corpse was not found, he may partake of the sacrifice in the evening.
The following rules apply if the corpse was discovered after the blood was poured on the altar. If it became known to him that he was certainly impure at the time the blood was poured, e.g., the mound was round, he is obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice. If the matter is in doubt, i.e., maybe he was not standing over the impurity at the time the blood was poured and did not become impure until afterwards, he is exempt from the second Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 11
The following rules apply when a person journeyed on a road and later a corpse was discovered lying across the width of the road. If the corpse could be deemed as the impurity likened to the depths, even though the person is considered as impure with regard to terumah, he is considered as pure with regard to the Paschal sacrifice. He may slaughter and partake of the Paschal sacrifice even though it is possible that he touched the corpse.Since the impurity is likened to the depths, he is pure with regard to the Paschal sacrifice. Even though the corpse is intact and extends from one end of the path to the other, he may offer his Paschal sacrifice unless he knows with certainty that he became impure because of it.
When does the above apply? When he was walking on foot, for it is possible that he did not touch it. If, however, he was riding on a beast or carrying a burden, he is impure even though it is impurity likened to the depths, for it is impossible that he will not have touched, moved, or stood over the corpse. We have already explained impurity likened to the depths in Hilchot Nizirut.
Halacha 12
When a person offered the Paschal sacrifice under the presumption that he was pure and afterwards, it was discovered that he was impure due to impurity likened to the depths, he is not obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice. This is a law conveyed by the Oral Tradition. If, however, it becomes known to him that he was impure due to impurity that was known, he is obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 13
When a person contracted impurity from a human corpse and had the ashes of the red heifer sprinkled upon him on the third and seventh day [as required, but on his seventh day he unknowingly became impure because of a grave "likened to the depths" and brought a Paschal sacrifice under the presumption that he was pure and afterwards, he discovered that he had contracted the impurity "likened to the depths," he is not obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice, for once he immersed himself on the seventh day, his initial impurity ceased. If, however, he had contracted the impurity "likened to the depths" on the sixth day of his impurity and without knowing, he brought a Paschal sacrifice, he is obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice. The rationale is that a person who is impure must operate under the presumption that he is impure until he has definitely become pure, because there is a basis for the presumption of his impurity.
Korban Pesach - Perek 7
Halacha 1
The following rules apply when there were many individuals who were ritually impure due to contact with a human corpse on the first Pesach. If they were the lesser portion of the Jewish people, their offering is postponed to the second Pesach like other impure individuals. If, however, the majority of the Jewish people were impure due to contact with a human corpse or the priests or the sacred utensils were impure due to contact with a human corpse, their offering is not postponed. Instead, they should all offer the Paschal sacrifice in a state of ritual impurity, those ritually impure together with those who are pure.
This is derived from Numbers 9:6 which states: "And the men who were impure because of contact with the corpse of a human soul." Implied is that the offerings of individuals are postponed until the second Pesach, but those of the community are not postponed. This concept applies only with regard to the ritual impurity associated with a human corpse, as explained in Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash.
Halacha 2
If the Jewish people were half ritually pure and half impure, they should all offer the sacrifice on the first Pesach. Those who are pure offer the sacrifice by themselves in a state of ritual purity and those who are impure offer it by themselves in a state of impurity and partake of it in impurity. If the impure outnumbered the pure even by one, they should all offer it in impurity.
Halacha 3
If the men were half impure due to contact with a human corpse and half pure and when you count the women together with the men, the majority will be pure, those who are pure should offer the first Paschal sacrifice. Those who are impure do not bring neither the first Paschal sacrifice or the second. They do not bring the first, because they are the lesser portion of the people. And they do not bring the second, because the women's offering of the second Paschal sacrifice is a matter of choice. Thus the impure persons are merely half the people and half the people do not bring the second Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 4
If the majority of the Jewish people were zavim, afflicted by tzara'at, or had relationships with niddot and the lesser portion were impure due to contact with a human corpse, those impure because of contact with a corpse should not offer the first Paschal sacrifice, because they are the lesser portion of the people. Nor do they offer the second, because individuals do not bring the second except at the time the majority of the people offered the first Paschal sacrifice. In this instance, since the majority of the Jewish people did not offer the first Paschal sacrifice, the lesser portion who are impure because of contact with a corpse should not bring the second Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 5
If the majority of the Jewish people were impure because of contact with a human corpse and a lesser portion were zavim and the like, those who are impure because of contact with a corpse offer the first Paschal sacrifice, Those who are zavim and the like do not offer either the first Paschal sacrifice or the second. They do not offer the first, because the restrictions against offering in a state of impurity were suspended with regard to communal offerings only for those impure due to contact with a human corpse. Nor do they bring the second, because a second Paschal sacrifice is brought only when the first was brought in a state of ritual purity. If the first was brought in a state of impurity, there is no second offering.
Halacha 6
The following laws apply when a third of the Jewish people were pure, a third were zavim and the like, and a third were impure because of contact with a human corpse. Those who were impure because of contact with a corpse should not offer the first Paschal sacrifice, nor the second. They do not offer the first, because they are the lesser portion when compared to the aggregate of those who are pure and the zavvim. They should not offer the second, because the lesser portion of the people offered the first, as we explained.
How do we calculate whether the majority of the people are impure or pure? We do not make a calculation of all those who seek to partake of it, because it is possible that 20 people will be enumerated on one Paschal sacrifice and they will send it with one person to slaughter it on their behalf. Instead, we calculate all of those who seek to enter the Temple Courtyard while they are outside. Before the first group enters the Temple Courtyard, the calculation is made.
Halacha 7
When an individual becomes impure because of a questionable situation regarding ritual impurity in a private domain, as will be explained in the appropriate place, his offering is postponed until the second Pesach. When the majority of the Jewish people become impure because of a questionable situation in a private domain, they should all offer it in a state of impurity.
Halacha 8
When the Paschal sacrifice was offered in a state of impurity, it should also be eaten in a state of impurity, for from the outset, it was brought only to be eaten. It may not be eaten by all those who are impure, only by those impure because of contact with a human corpse. For them, this impurity is suspended. This also applies to those impure because of contact with other sources of impurity.
Those who are impure because of an impurity that results from a physical condition, e.g., zavvim, zavot, niddot, women after childbirth, those afflicted bytzara'at, should not partake of it. If, however, they do partake of it, they are exempt. According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that when a sacrifice is eaten by those who are pure, those who are impure are liable for partaking of it in impurity. When it is eaten by those who are impure, there is no liability for partaking of it in impurity. Even if those who are impure because of contact with a human corpse partook of the fats and organs to be offered on the altar, they are exempt.
When does the statement that a Paschal sacrifice may be eaten while ritually impure apply? When the people became impure before the blood was poured on the altar.If, however, they became impure after the blood was poured, it should not be eaten.
Halacha 9
If the Paschal sacrifice was slaughtered in a state of ritual purity and the majority of the Jewish people became impure before its blood was poured on the altar, the blood should be poured on the altar, but the Paschal sacrifice should not be eaten. This is a Rabbinical decree lest the majority of the people become impure after the blood was poured in a following year and it be eaten in a state of impurity.
The following rules apply if the sacred utensils were impure because of [contact with a dead crawling animal or the like. Although the sacred utensils do not cause the persons to become impure, as will be explained in the appropriate place, since they cause the meat to become impure, the Paschal sacrifice should only be brought by those who are pure and it should be eaten, even though it is impure. It is preferable that it be eaten when the meat is impure thus superseding only an ordinary negative prohibition than it be eaten by individuals whose bodies are impure. That would be a prohibition punishable by karet, as explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim.
Korban Pesach - Perek 8
Halacha 1
Partaking of the meat of the Paschal sacrifice on the night of the fifteenth of Nisan is a positive commandment, as Exodus 12:8 states: "And you shall eat the meat on this night, roasted on the fire. With matzot and bitter herbs shall you eat it."
Halacha 2
Matzah and bitter herbs are not indispensable elements of the mitzvah. If one did not find matzah or bitter herbs, he fulfills his obligation by eating the meat of the Paschal sacrifice alone. There is no mitzvah to partake of bitter herbs without the Paschal sacrifice, as implied by Numbers 9:11: "Eat it with matzotand bitter herbs."
Halacha 3
The optimum manner of performing the mitzvah is to partake of the Paschal sacrifice when one is already sated. Therefore if one sacrificed festive peace-offerings on the fourteenth of Nisan, one should partake of them first and then partake of the meat of the Paschal sacrifice to be satiated from the festive offering. Even if one does not eat more than an olive-size portion, he fulfills his obligation.
Similarly, partaking of the second Paschal sacrifice on the fifteenth of the month of Iyar is a positive commandment, as stated: "Eat it with matzot and bitter herbs."
Halacha 4
Both of them are eaten only roasted with fire. One who partakes of an olive-sized portion from their meat lightly-roasted or cooked in liquid on the nights of Pesach is liable for lashes, as Exodus 12:9 states: "Do not partake of it lightly-roasted or cooked in water." If one partook of a Paschal sacrifice that was both lightly-roasted and cooked, he is liable for only one set of lashes, because both these forbidden activities are included in one prohibition.
If, before nightfall, one partakes of a Paschal sacrifice that was lightly-roasted or cooked, he is not liable for lashes, as can be inferred for the continuation of the above verse: "except roasted in fire." Implied is that at the time it is a mitzvah to partake of the sacrifice roasted, one is liable for partaking of it lightly-roasted or cooked. If one partook of a sacrifice prepared in this manner while it was still day, he is exempt.
Halacha 5
If one partook of an olive-sized portion of a roasted Paschal sacrifice while it is still day, he violates a positive commandment, as Exodus 12:8 states: "And they shall eat the meat on that night," i.e., at night and not during the day. A prohibition resulting from a positive commandment is considered as a positive commandment.
Halacha 6
The term na which the Torah mentioned in its prohibition refers to meat which began to be subjected to fire. It became roasted slightly, but was not yet fit for human consumption. If, however, one partakes of the meat of the Paschal sacrifice while raw, he is not liable for lashes, but he did nullify a positive commandment, for it is written: "roasted with fire." Implied is that if it is not roasted, it is prohibited.
If one roasted it to the full extent until it became charred, he is exempt.
Halacha 7
The term "cooked" which the Torah mentioned in its prohibition refers to cooking the meat in water, other liquids, or fruit juice. The use of the phrasebashail mevushal by Exodus 12:9 includes all types of cooking.
Halacha 8
If one roasted it and afterwards cooked it, cooked it and afterwards, roasted it, or pot-roasted it, and partook of it, he is liable. It is, however, permitted to apply wine, oil, honey, other liquids, and fruit juice to it, but not water. After it is roasted, it is permitted to dip the meat in liquids and in fruit juice.
Halacha 9
One may not roast the Paschal sacrifice on a stoneware utensil or a metal utensil, for it is written: "roasted with fire," i.e., and not roasted by anything else. Therefore if the utensil was perforated so that the fire could affect the meat, one may roast with it. One may not roast it with a metal spit, because the entire spit will be hot and will roast the meat where it touches it.
Halacha 10
When one kindles an oven, removes all the fire, and then hangs the Paschal sacrifice in the oven and roasts it, it is forbidden to partake of it, because this is not "roasted with fire." If the sacrificial animal was cut up and hung over coals, it is considered "roasted with fire." If he roasted it over lime, clay, or the hot springs of Tiberias, it is forbidden, because this is not "roasted with fire."
How is the animal offered as a Paschal sacrifice roasted? One pierces it from its mouth until its anus with a wooden spit and hangs it in an oven with the fire beneath it.. One hangs its legs and its intestines in the oven, outside of it. One should not place them inside of its body cavity, for this is comparable to cooking. They would choose a pomegranate spit to roast it so that it will not cast its sap into the meat and cook it.
Halacha 11
If the meat touches the earthenware sides or floor of the oven, one should skin off that place, because it is roasted because of the earthenware.
Halacha 12
If its juices drip on the earthenware and then return to it, that place should be cut off. For any juice and liquid which it emits while being roasted is forbidden, for it is not roasted meat.
Halacha 13
If its juices drip on flour, he should take a handful from the place the juice fell and discard it.
Halacha 14
The following laws apply if one applied oil that is terumahto the Paschal sacrifice. If the company was made up of priests, they should partake of it. If the company was made up of Israelites and the meat is still raw, it should be washed and dried and then it may be roasted. If it has been roasted, the outer portion should be skinned off.
If oil from the second tithe was applied to it, one should not charge the other members of the company for its value, for the second tithe should not be redeemed in Jerusalem, as explained in the appropriate place.
We do not roast two Paschal sacrifices together lest they become intermingled. This applies even to a goat and a lamb.
Halacha 15
We already stated in several places that the Paschal sacrifice should be eaten only until midnight to distance a person from transgression. According to Scriptural Law, one may partake of it throughout the entire night until dawn.
We already explained in Hilchot Chametz UMatzah that the Paschal sacrifice requires the recitation of Hallel during the time that it is being eaten and that the members of the company do not partake of the meat after they fell asleep, even if they did so at the beginning of the night.
• English Text | Video Class• Tuesday, Iyar 9, 5776 · May 17, 2016
• Iyar 9, 24th day of the omer
Friday Iyar 9, 24th day of the omer 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Emor, Shishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 49-54.
Tanya: This is also (p. 245)...preceding Atzilut.) (p. 247).
Our teacher the Baal Shem Tov said: Every single thing one sees or hears is an instruction for his conduct in the service of G-d. This is the idea of avoda, service, to comprehend and discern in all things a way in which to serve G-d.
• Daily Thought:
Divine Delights
G‑d has many delights:
The delight that comes from a pure and simple act of love.
Greater than that, the delight that comes from an act of beauty sparkling in the darkness.
Greater than that, the delight when a child who has run away from Him returns with all her heart.
All the world was formed from G‑d’s delight. There is nothing else.
---------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment