Today in Judaism: 28 Sivan 5777 · Thursday, 22 June 2017 · Today is Thursday, Sivan 28, 5777 · June 22, 2017
Torah Reading:
Today in Jewish History:
• Lubavitcher Rebbe Arrives in US (1941)
After escaping Nazi-occupied Paris, and many perilous months in Vichy France, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson (1902-1994), and his wife, Rebbetzin Chaya Mushkah (1901-1988), boarded the SS Serpa Pinto in Lisbon, Portugal. On Monday, June 23--Sivan 28 on the Jewish calendar--at 10:30 A.M., they arrived in New York.
Shortly after his arrival, the Rebbe's father-in-law, the then Lubavitcher Rebbe Rabbi Yoseph Yitzchak Schneersohn (who had been rescued from Nazi-occupied Warsaw in 1940), appointed him to head the social and educational outreach programs of Chabad-Lubavitch. Thus the Rebbe began his decades-long revolutionary work to revitalize Jewish life in the Western Hemisphere, which spread, by means of the emissaries ("shluchim") he dispatched from his New York headquarters, to every part of the world.
Daily Quote:
And at that time there will be no hunger or war, no jealousy or rivalry. For the good will be plentiful, and all delicacies available as dust. The entire occupation of the world will be only to know G-d... the people Israel will be of great wisdom; they will perceive the esoteric truths and comprehend their Creator's wisdom as is the capacity of man. As it is written (Isaiah 11:9): "For the earth shall be filed with the knowledge of G-d, as the waters cover the sea." [Maimonides (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings 12:5)]
Daily Torah Study:
Numbers Chapter 17
| 16The Lord spoke to Moses saying: | | טזוַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר: |
| 17Speak to the children of Israel and take from them a staff for each father's house from all the chieftains according to their fathers' houses; [a total of] twelve staffs, and inscribe each man's name on his staff. | | יזדַּבֵּ֣ר | אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל וְקַ֣ח מֵֽאִתָּ֡ם מַטֶּ֣ה מַטֶּה֩ לְבֵ֨ית אָ֜ב מֵאֵ֤ת כָּל־נְשִֽׂיאֵהֶם֙ לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֔ם שְׁנֵ֥ים עָשָׂ֖ר מַטּ֑וֹת אִ֣ישׁ אֶת־שְׁמ֔וֹ תִּכְתֹּ֖ב עַל־מַטֵּֽהוּ: |
| 18Inscribe Aaron's name on the staff of Levi, for there is [only] one staff for the head of their fathers' house. | | יחוְאֵת֙ שֵׁ֣ם אַֽהֲרֹ֔ן תִּכְתֹּ֖ב עַל־מַטֵּ֣ה לֵוִ֑י כִּ֚י מַטֶּ֣ה אֶחָ֔ד לְרֹ֖אשׁ בֵּ֥ית אֲבוֹתָֽם: |
| for… one staff…: Although I have divided them into two families, the family of kehunah separate and the family of the Levites separate, it is, nevertheless, one tribe. | | כי מטה אחד: אף על פי שחלקתים לשתי משפחות משפחת כהונה לבד ולויה לבד מכל מקום שבט אחד הוא: |
| 19You shall place the staffs in the Tent of Meeting before the [Ark of] the Testimony where I commune with you. | | יטוְהִנַּחְתָּ֖ם בְּאֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֑ד לִפְנֵי֙ הָֽעֵד֔וּת אֲשֶׁ֛ר אִוָּעֵ֥ד לָכֶ֖ם שָֽׁמָּה: |
| 20The staff of the man whom I will choose will blossom, and I will calm down [turning away] from Myself the complaints of the children of Israel which they are complaining against you. | | כוְהָיָ֗ה הָאִ֛ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֶבְחַר־בּ֖וֹ מַטֵּ֣הוּ יִפְרָ֑ח וַֽהֲשִׁכֹּתִ֣י מֵֽעָלַ֗י אֶת־תְּלֻנּוֹת֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֲשֶׁ֛ר הֵ֥ם מַלִּינִ֖ם עֲלֵיכֶֽם: |
| and I will calm down: Heb. וַהֲשִׁכֹּתִי, as in“and the waters subsided וַיָּשֹׁכּוּ ” (Gen. 8:1); [and in]“and the king’s anger abated שָׁכָכָה” (Esther 7:10). | | והשכתי: כמו (בראשית ח, א) וישכו המים, (אסתר ז, י) וחמת המלך שככה: |
| 21Moses spoke to the children of Israel, and all their chieftains gave him a staff for each chieftain according to their fathers' houses, [a total of] twelve staffs, and Aaron's staff was amidst their staffs. | | כאוַיְדַבֵּ֨ר משֶׁ֜ה אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל וַיִּתְּנ֣וּ אֵלָ֣יו | כָּל־נְשִֽׂיאֵיהֶ֡ם מַטֶּה֩ לְנָשִׂ֨יא אֶחָ֜ד מַטֶּ֨ה לְנָשִׂ֤יא אֶחָד֙ לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֔ם שְׁנֵ֥ים עָשָׂ֖ר מַטּ֑וֹת וּמַטֵּ֥ה אַֽהֲרֹ֖ן בְּת֥וֹךְ מַטּוֹתָֽם: |
| amidst their staffs: He placed it in the middle so that they should not say that it blossomed because he had placed it close to the Divine Presence. — [Mid. Tanchuma Acharei Moth 8] | | בתוך מטותם: הניחו באמצע, שלא יאמרו מפני שהניחו בצד שכינה פרח: |
| 22Moses placed the staffs before the Lord in the Tent of the Testimony. | | כבוַיַּנַּ֥ח משֶׁ֛ה אֶת־הַמַּטֹּ֖ת לִפְנֵ֣י יְהֹוָ֑ה בְּאֹ֖הֶל הָֽעֵדֻֽת: |
| 23And on the following day Moses came to the Tent of Testimony, and behold, Aaron's staff for the house of Levi had blossomed! It gave forth blossoms, sprouted buds, and produced ripe almonds. | | כגוַיְהִ֣י מִמָּֽחֳרָ֗ת וַיָּבֹ֤א משֶׁה֙ אֶל־אֹ֣הֶל הָֽעֵד֔וּת וְהִנֵּ֛ה פָּרַ֥ח מַטֵּה־אַֽהֲרֹ֖ן לְבֵ֣ית לֵוִ֑י וַיֹּ֤צֵ֥א פֶ֨רַח֙ וַיָּ֣צֵ֥ץ צִ֔יץ וַיִּגְמֹ֖ל שְׁקֵדִֽים: |
| It gave forth blossoms: [This is to be understood] in its literal sense. | | ויצא פרח: כמשמעו: |
| buds: This is the budding of the fruit after the blossom falls off. | | ציץ: הוא חנטת הפרי כשהפרח נופל: |
| and produced ripe almonds: Heb. וַיִּגְמֹל, when the fruit was recognizable, it was recognized that they were almonds. A similar expression is as found in“and the child grew and was weaned וַיִּגָמֵל ” (Gen. 21:8). This expression is frequently found used in reference to fruits of the tree, as in“and the buds turn into ripening grapes גֹמֵל ” (Isa. 18:5). Now why [did it bear particularly] almonds? That is the fruit that blossoms quicker than other fruits. Likewise, he who opposes the kehunah ; his punishment comes quickly, as we find in the case of Uzziah:“and the tzara’ath shone upon his forehead” (II Chron. 26:19) (See also Rashi on Jer. 1:12). The Targum [Onkelos] renders ‘knotted almonds,’ like a cluster of almonds knotted together one on top of the other. | | ויגמל שקדים: כשהוכר הפרי הוכר שהן שקדים, לשון (בראשית כא, ח) ויגדל הילד ויגמל, ולשון זה מצוי בפרי האילן, כמו (ישעיה יח, ה) ובוסר גומל יהיה נצה. ולמה שקדים, הוא הפרי הממהר להפריח מכל הפירות, אף המעורר על הכהונה פורענותו ממהרת לבא, כמו שמצינו בעוזיה (ד"ה ב' כו, יט) והצרעת זרחה במצחו. ותרגומו וכפית שגדין, כמין אשכול שקדים יחד כפותים זה על זה: |
| 24Moses took out all the staffs from before the Lord, to the children of Israel; they saw and they took, each man his staff. | | כדוַיֹּצֵ֨א משֶׁ֤ה אֶת־כָּל־הַמַּטֹּת֙ מִלִּפְנֵ֣י יְהֹוָ֔ה אֶל־כָּל־בְּנֵ֖י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וַיִּרְא֥וּ וַיִּקְח֖וּ אִ֥ישׁ מַטֵּֽהוּ: |
• Hebrew text
• English text
Chapter 135
1. Praise the Lord! Praise the Name of the Lord; offer praise, you servants of the Lord-
2. who stand in the House of the Lord, in the courtyards of the House of our God.
3. Praise the Lord, for the Lord is good; sing to His Name, for He is pleasant.
4. For God has chosen Jacob for Himself, Israel as His beloved treasure.
5. For I know that the Lord is great, our Master is greater than all supernal beings.
6. All that the Lord desired He has done, in the heavens and on earth, in the seas and the depths.
7. He causes mists to rise from the ends of the earth; He makes lightning for the rain; He brings forth the wind from His vaults.
8. It was He who struck down the firstborn of Egypt, of man and beast.
9. He sent signs and wonders into the midst of Egypt, on Pharaoh and on all his servants.
10. It was He who struck down many nations, and slew mighty kings:
11. Sichon, king of the Amorites; Og, king of Bashan; and all the kingdoms of Canaan.
12. And He gave their lands as a heritage, a heritage to His people Israel.
13. Lord, Your Name is forever; Lord, Your remembrance is throughout all generations.
14. Indeed, the Lord will judge on behalf of His people, and have compassion on His servants.
15. The idols of the nations are silver and gold, the product of human hands.
16. They have a mouth, but cannot speak; they have eyes, but cannot see;
17. they have ears, but cannot hear; nor is there breath in their mouth.
18. Like them will their makers become-all who trust in them.
19. House of Israel, bless the Lord; House of Aaron, bless the Lord;
20. House of Levi, bless the Lord; you who fear the Lord, bless the Lord.
21. Blessed is the Lord from Zion, who dwells in Jerusalem. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 136
This psalm contains twenty-six verses, corresponding to the twenty-six generations between the creation of the world and the giving of the Torah.
1. Praise the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is forever.
2. Praise the God of the supernal beings, for His kindness is forever.
3. Praise the Master of the heavenly hosts, for His kindness is forever.
4. Who alone performs great wonders, for His kindness is forever.
5. Who makes the heavens with understanding, for His kindness is forever.
6. Who spreads forth the earth above the waters, for His kindness is forever.
7. Who makes the great lights, for His kindness is forever.
8. The sun to rule by day, for His kindness is forever.
9. The moon and stars to rule by night, for His kindness is forever.
10. Who struck Egypt through its firstborn, for His kindness is forever.
11. And brought Israel out of their midst, for His kindness is forever.
12. With a strong hand and with an outstretched arm, for His kindness is forever.
13. Who split the Sea of Reeds into sections, for His kindness is forever.
14. And brought Israel across it, for His kindness is forever.
15. And cast Pharaoh and his army into the Sea of Reeds, for His kindness is forever.
16. Who led His people through the desert, for His kindness is forever;
17. Who struck down great kings, for His kindness is forever.
18. And slew mighty kings, for His kindness is forever.
19. Sichon, king of the Amorites, for His kindness is forever.
20. And Og, king of Bashan, for His kindness is forever.
21. And gave their land as a heritage, for His kindness is forever.
22. A heritage to Israel His servant, for His kindness is forever.
23. Who remembered us in our humiliation, for His kindness is forever.
24. And redeemed us from our oppressors, for His kindness is forever.
25. Who gives food to all flesh, for His kindness is forever.
26. Praise the God of heaven, for His kindness is forever.
Chapter 137
Referring to the time of the destruction of the Temple, this psalm tells of when Nebuchadnezzar would ask the Levites to sing in captivity as they had in the Temple, to which they would reply, "How can we sing the song of God upon alien soil?" They were then comforted by Divine inspiration.
1. By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat and wept as we remembered Zion.
2. There, upon the willows, we hung our harps.
3. For there our captors demanded of us songs, and those who scorned us-rejoicing, [saying,] "Sing to us of the songs of Zion.”
4. How can we sing the song of the Lord on alien soil?
5. If I forget you, Jerusalem, let my right hand forget [its dexterity].
6. Let my tongue cleave to my palate if I will not remember you, if I will not bring to mind Jerusalem during my greatest joy!
7. Remember, O Lord, against the Edomites the day of [the destruction of] Jerusalem, when they said, "Raze it, raze it to its very foundation!”
8. O Babylon, who is destined to be laid waste, happy is he who will repay you in retribution for what you have inflicted on us.
9. Happy is he who will seize and crush your infants against the rock!
Chapter 138
David offers awesome praises to God for His kindness to him, and for fulfilling His promise to grant him kingship.
1. By David. I will thank You with all my heart, in the presence of princes I shall praise You.
2. I will bow toward Your Holy Sanctuary, and praise Your Name for Your kindness and for Your truth; for You have exalted Your word above all Your Names.
3. On the day that I called out You answered me, You emboldened me, [You put] strength in my soul.
4. Lord, all the kings of the land will give thanks to You when they hear the words of Your mouth.
5. And they will sing of the Lord's ways, for the glory of the Lord is great.
6. For though the Lord is exalted, He sees the lowly; the High One castigates from afar.
7. If I walk in the midst of distress, keep me alive; against the wrath of my enemies stretch out Your hand, and let Your right hand deliver me.
8. Lord, complete [Your kindness] on my behalf. Lord, Your kindness is forever, do not forsake the work of Your hands.
Chapter 139
A most prominent psalm that guides man in the ways of God as no other in all of the five books of Tehillim. Fortunate is he who recites it daily.
1. For the Conductor, by David, a psalm. O Lord, You have probed me, and You know.
2. You know my sitting down and my standing up; You perceive my thought from afar.
3. You encircle my going about and my lying down; You are familiar with all my paths.
4. For there was not yet a word on my tongue-and behold, Lord, You knew it all.
5. You have besieged me front and back, You have laid Your hand upon me.
6. Knowledge [to escape You] is beyond me; it is exalted, I cannot know it.
7. Where can I go [to escape] Your spirit? And where can I flee from Your presence?
8. If I ascend to the heavens, You are there; if I make my bed in the grave, behold, You are there.
9. Were I to take up wings as the dawn and dwell in the furthest part of the sea,
10. there, too, Your hand would guide me; Your right hand would hold me.
11. Were I to say, "Surely the darkness will shadow me," then the night would be as light around me.
12. Even the darkness obscures nothing from You; and the night shines like the day-the darkness is as light.
13. For You created my mind; You covered me in my mother's womb.
14. I will thank You, for I was formed in an awesome and wondrous way; unfathomable are Your works, though my soul perceives much.
15. My essence was not hidden from You even while I was born in concealment, formed in the depths of the earth.
16. Your eyes beheld my raw form; all [happenings] are inscribed in Your book, even those to be formed in future days-to Him they are the same.
17. How precious are Your thoughts to me, O God! How overwhelming, [even] their beginnings!
18. Were I to count them, they would outnumber the sand, even if I were to remain awake and always with You.
19. O that You would slay the wicked, O God, and men of blood [to whom I say], "Depart from me!”
20. They exalt You for wicked schemes, Your enemies raise [You] for falsehood.
21. Indeed, I hate those who hate You, Lord; I contend with those who rise up against You.
22. I hate them with the utmost hatred; I regard them as my own enemies.
23. Search me, Lord, and know my heart; test me and know my thoughts.
24. See if there is a vexing way in me, then lead me in the way of the world.
Tanya: Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, beginning of Chapter 9
• English Text (Lessons in Tanya)
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
Thursday, Sivan 28, 5777 · June 22, 2017
Today's Tanya Lesson
Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, beginning of Chapter 9
אבל לגבי הקב״ה, מדרגת החכמה שהיא תחלת מחשבה וראשיתה, היא סוף מעשה אצלו
In regard to the Holy One, blessed be He, however, the level of wisdom — which [in all created beings] is the beginning of thought and its genesis — is to Him the final stage of action;
דהיינו שנחשבת כאילו היא בחינת ומדרגת עשייה לגבי הקב״ה
i.e., in relation to the Holy One, blessed be He, [wisdom] is considered as if it were the quality and level of action,
כדכתיב: כולם בחכמה עשית
as it is written,1 “You have made them all with wisdom.”
At first glance, it would seem more appropriate for the verse to have said something such as “You have ‘intellected’ them all.” Why instead does it state, “You have made...,” when speaking of wisdom?
והיינו לומר, שכערך החיות שבעשיה גופנית וגשמיית לערך חיות החכמה
That is to say that [wisdom relative to Him] is as the quality of the life-force in physical and material action is in relation to the quality of the life-force of wisdom,
שהיא ראשית ומקור החיות באדם וכל הברואים גשמיים
[wisdom being] the beginning and source of the life-force in man and all the physical creatures.
I.e., the life-force of physicality is incomparably lower than wisdom, which is the source of all life-force.
שהוא כאין לגבי חיות שבאותיות הדבור, שהוא כאין לגבי חיות שבאותיות המחשבה
[For the life-force of physicality] is as nothing in comparison with the life-force in the letters of speech, which [in turn] is as nothing compared to the life-force in the letters of thought,
שהוא כאין לגבי חיות ומעלת המדות שמהן נמשכה מחשבה זו
which [in turn] is as nothing in comparison to the life-force and level of the emotive attributes from which this thought is derived,
For, as explained earlier, all letters of thought emanate from some emotion which brings them into being, so that the individual concerned should think these particular letters. Clearly, the life-force of these letters of thought bears no comparison to the life-force of the emotions from whence these letters emanate.
שהוא כאין לגבי חיות ומעלת ומדרגת החכמה בינה ודעת, מקור המדות
which [in turn] is as nothing in comparison to the life-force and level and degree of wisdom, understanding and knowledge, the source of the emotive attributes.
Thus, from the level of action to the lofty level of wisdom in the World of Atzilut there are but five levels, each of which is of no account in comparison to the level above it. Clearly, then, the lowest level of action is surely of absolutely no account in comparison to the highest level, which is the level of wisdom in the World of Atzilut. And just as action is infinitely distant from the wisdom of Atzilut, —
כן ממש ערך מדרגת ומעלת החכמה, שהיא ראשית ומקור החיות שבכל העולמות
Exactly so is the quality and level of wisdom, the beginning and source of the life-force in all the worlds,
For we are speaking here of the Sefirah of Chochmah of the World of Atzilut, which is the source of the entire World of Atzilut, the highest of all the worlds. As such it is also the source of all the worlds below it. Now this level of wisdom is as nothing —
לגבי הקב״ה בכבודו ובעצמו
in relation to the Holy One, blessed be He, in His Glory and Essence,
המרומם והמתנשא ריבוא רבבות מדרגות רוממות יותר מרוממות מדרגתהחכמה על בחינת חיות שבעשיה
Who is elevated and exalted by myriads of degrees of elevation more than the quality of wisdom is elevated over the quality of the life-force in action,
שהיא רוממות חמש מדרגות לבד, שהן מדרגות בחינות עשיה ודבור ומחשבה ומדות ושכל
for this is an elevation of only five degrees, namely, the levels of action, speech, thought, the emotive attributes, and intellect.
אבל הקב״ה רם ומתנשא ממדרגת החכמה רבבות מדרגות כאלו עד אין ק׳
The Holy One, blessed be He, however, is “high and exalted” above the level of wisdom by infinite myriads of such degrees.
This being so, why do we compare the distance of wisdom from G‑d to the distance of action from wisdom, when in actuality wisdom is infinitely more distant from Him?
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvot:
Thursday, Sivan 28, 5777 · June 22, 2017
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
"If a man shall cause his livestock to eat in a field..."—Exodus 22:4.
We are commanded regarding the laws [of liability] that apply if a person's animal causes financial loss by grazing [in another's field].
Damage Caused by a Grazing Animal
Damage Caused by a Grazing Animal
Positive Commandment 240
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He), "If a person allows his animal to graze in a field or a vineyard, [... he must pay for the damage]."
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the 2nd and 6th chapters of tractate Bava Kama and the 5th chapter of Gittin.
Footnotes
• 1 Chapter A Day: To`en veNit`an To`en veNit`an - Chapter 12
To`en veNit`an - Chapter 12
1 The three years mentioned in the previous chapter must be from day to day. Even if one day was lacking, a claim of ownership is not established and the person in possession of the property is removed from it.
When does the above apply? With regard to landed property that produces benefit at all times - e.g., houses, courtyards, cisterns, pits, storage cavities, stores, inns, bathhouses, dovecotes, olive presses, fields that are continually irrigated and hence can be used for sowing and for planting, gardens, and orchards, and also servants who go on their own initiative, as we have explained.
Different rules apply with regard to a field that is watered only from rain and a grove of trees. The "threes years" are not calculated from day to day.
Instead, after the person in possession partakes of three harvests from one type of produce, it is considered as if three years have passed.
What is implied? There was a date grove and the person in possession harvested it three times, a grape orchard and he harvested it three times, or an olive grove and he harvested it three times, he is considered to have established a claim of ownership. This applies even if the trees were planted one after the other, and there was not enough space left between them. Although ultimately, they will dry and have to be uprooted, since the person derived benefit from them for three harvests, he has established a claim of ownership.אשלש שנים שאמרנו מיום ליום אפילו היו חסרים יום אחד לא החזיק ומסלקין אותו ממנה, במה דברים אמורים בקרקעות שהן עושין פירות תמיד כגון הבתים והחצרות והבורות והשיחין והמערות והחנויות והפונדקות והמרחצאות והשובכות ובתי הבדין ושדה בית השלחין שמשקין אותם תמיד וזורעין בה ונוטעין והגנות והפרדסין, וכן עבדים המהלכין כמו שבארנו, אבל שדה הבעל שהיא שותה ממי גשמים בלבד ושדה אילן אינה מיום ליום אלא כיון שאכלו שלש תבואות ממין אחד הרי אלו כשלש שנים, כיצד היתה שדה תמרים וגדר שלש גדרות או שדה ענבים ובצר שלש בצירות או שדה זיתים ומסק שלש מסיקות הרי אלו כשלש שנים והחזיק, ואפילו היו האילנות רצופין ולא היה ביניהן הרחקה כראוי שהרי סופן ליבש הואיל ואוכלן שלש תבואות החזיק.
2 If a person brings witnesses who testify that he dwelled in this courtyard for three years or rented it out to a tenant for three years, he establishes a claim of ownership.
If the owner of the courtyard claims: "Maybe you - or your tenant - did not dwell there during the day and during the night," his claim is valid. We tell the person in possession: "Bring witnesses that throughout these years, you dwelled there during the day and during the night, or depart."
Even when witnesses come and testify, saying: "The person in possession rented the field to us, and we dwelled there during the day and during the night," if the owner of the field demands: "Let them bring witnesses that they dwelled there during the day and during the night," these tenants must bring proof that they dwelled there at all times. The rationale is that the matter is dependent on them and is not dependent on the claim of the person in possession of the property that they should testify on his behalf.בהביא עדים שהיה דר בחצר זו שלש שנים או ששכרה שלש שנים הרי זו חזקה, טען בעל החצר ואמר שמא לא שכן בה ביום ובלילה או שמא אלו שהשכירו להם לא שכנו בה ביום ובלילה הרי זו טענה, אומרים למחזיק או תביא עדים ששנים אלו גמורות ביום ובלילה או הסתלק, אפילו באו עדים ואמרו לנו השכיר ואנו דרנו בה ביום ובלילה וטען בעל השדה ואמר יביאו עדים שדרו בה ביום ובלילה, צריכין אלו השוכרין להביא ראיה שדרו בה תמיד, שזה הדבר תלוי בהן ואין תלוי בטענת המחזיק כדי שיעידו לו.
3 Different laws apply if the person in possession of the property or the witnesses were traveling salesmen who journey from village to village or the like. In such a situation, the court makes a claim on behalf of the owner at the outset. When he brings witnesses to try to substantiate his claim of ownership, the court tells him: "Bring witnesses who will testify that you manifested possession during the day and the night."
When does the above apply? With regard to courtyards, houses, and the like, in which people live during the day and the night. Different laws apply with regard to stores operated by merchants and the like, in which people dwell only during the day. In such a situation, if a person dwelled in the store for three years during the day, he establishes a claim of ownership.גהיה זה המחזיק או העדים שדרו בה מן הרוכלין המחזרין בעיירות וכיוצא בהן, טוענין אותו לכתחלה וכשיביא עדי חזקה אומר לו הבא עדים שהיית מחזיק בה ביום ובלילה, במה דברים אמורים בחצרות ובתים וכיוצא בהן שהן עשויות לדור בתוכן ביום ובלילה, אבל החנויות של תגרים וכיוצא כהן /בהן/ שאין דרין בהן אלא ביום כיון שדר בה שלש שנים ביום הרי זה חזקה.
4 The three years mentioned must be consecutive, one following the other. If a person in possession of a field sowed it one year and left it fallow the next year, and then sowed it one year and left it fallow the next year, he does not establish a claim of ownership. This applies even if he followed this pattern for many years.
If the custom of the farmers of that area was to leave fields fallow, the person is considered to have established a claim of ownership. This applies even if some of the local farmers sow their fields year after year, and some sow their fields for one year and leave them fallow the next. For the person in possession may claim: "I left it fallow only so that it will produce more in the year that I sow it."דשלש שנים שאמרנו צריך שיהיו רצופות זו אחר זו, הרי שהחזיק בשדה וזרעה שנה והובירה שנה וזרעה שנה והובירה שנה, אפילו עשה כן כמה שנים לא החזיק, היה דרכן של בני אותו המקום להוביר אע"פ שמקצתן זורעין שנה אחר שנה ומקצתן זורעין שנה ומובירין שנה הרי זה החזיק שהרי הוא אומר לא הוברתי אותה אלא כדי שתעשה הרבה בשנת הזריעה.
5 When two partners maintained possession of a field for six years, one partaking of the produce in the first, third and fifth years, and the other partaking of the produce in the second, fourth and sixth years, neither is considered to have established a claim of ownership. The rationale is that the owner of the field can say: "Since I neither saw nor heard of one person maintaining possession year after year, I did not protest."
Accordingly, if these partners composed a legal document attesting to their partnership and stating that they should each utilize the field in successive years, if three years pass in which they use it, they establish a claim of ownership. The rationale is that a legal document becomes public knowledge. Hence, if the owner did not protest, he forfeited his right.
Similar laws apply if two people maintain possession of a servant and use his services year after year. Ordinarily, they do not establish a claim of ownership. If they compose a legal document concerning the servant, they do.השני שותפין שהחזיקו בשדה שש שנים האחד אכלה ראשונה ושלישית וחמישית, והשני אכלה שניה ורביעית וששית לא עלתה חזקה לאחד מהם, שהרי בעל הקרקע אומר כיון שלא ראיתי ולא שמעתי שהחזיק בה אדם אחד שנה אחר שנה מפני זה לא מחיתי, לפיכך אם כתבו אלו השותפין שטר ביניהן שישתמשו בה שנה אחר שנה כיון שעבר שלש שנים עלתה להן חזקה, שהשטר יש לו קול והואיל ולא מיחה אבד זכותו, והוא הדין לעבד שהחזיקו בו שנים ונשתמשו בו שנה אחר שנה אם כתבו שטר ביניהן הרי החזיקו.
6 The following rules apply when a person who took possession of a property derived benefit from its produce for one year and then sold it, the purchaser derived benefit from its produce for one year and then sold it, and the second purchaser derived benefit from its produce for a year. If they sold it to each other with a deed of sale, the activities of the three are combined and a claim of ownership is established, because the previous owner did not protest.
If they did not record the transaction in a deed of sale, a claim of ownership is not established, because the original owners can say: "Since one person did not maintain a presence within it for three years, there was no necessity to issue a protest."ואכלה שנה זה המחזיק ומכרה ואכלה הלוקח שנה ומכר ללוקח שני ואכלה שנה, אם מכרו זה לזה בשטר שלשתן מצטרפין והרי זו חזקה מפני שלא מיחה, ואם מכרו שלא בשטר אינה חזקה שהבעלים הראשונים אומרים כיון שלא עמד בה איש אחד שלש שנים לא הוצרכתי למחות.
7 When a father derived benefit from a property for one year, and his son derived benefit for two years, or the father derived benefit for two years, and his son derived benefit for one year, a claim of ownership is established.
The same law applies if the father derived benefit for a year, the son derived benefit for a year, and the person who purchased it derived benefit for a year, provided that he purchased it with a deed of sale.זאכלה האב שנה והבן שתים האב שתים והבן שנה האב שנה והבן שנה והלוקח מן הבן שנה הרי זו חזקה והוא שלקח בשטר.
8 When a person seeking to establish a claim of ownership partakes of produce from a field for one year in the presence of the father who was the owner, and two years in the presence of his son, or two years in the presence of the father and one year in the presence of the son, a claim of ownership is established.
Similarly, a claim of ownership is established when the person in possession of the field partakes of its produce for one year in the presence of the father, one year in the presence of the son, and one year in the presence of a person who purchased the field from the son. This law applies when the son sold the field together with all his fields. In such an instance, the person in possession of the field will not appreciate that it was sold, and hence will not necessarily be careful to maintain possession of his deed of acquisition beyond the three-year period. If, however, the son sold the field as a discrete entity the property is expropriated and given to the purchaser. For there can be no greater protest against the squatter's possession than this.חאכלה בפני האב שהיה בעל השדה שנה ובפני בנו שתים, או בפני האב שתים ובפני הבן שנה, או בפני האב שנה ובפני בנו שנה ובפני לוקח מן הבן שנה, הרי זו חזקה, והוא שמכר הבן זו השדה בכלל שדותיו שהרי לא הכיר המחזיק שנמכרה ולפיכך לא נזהר בשטרו, אבל אם מכר הבן שדה זו בפני עצמה אין לך מחאה גדולה מזו.
9 If the person in possession left the field fallow year after year - even for many years - since he did not derive any benefit from it, he does not establish a claim of ownership.
Similarly, if he irrigated it or even irrigated it and did no more than break up large clumps of earth, since he did not benefit from its produce, he does not establish a claim of ownership.טנרה שנה אחר שנה אפילו כמה שנים הואיל ולא נהנה בה אינה חזקה, וכן אם פתח בה שבילי המים ופתח ושדד בלבד הואיל ולא אכל פירות אינה חזקה.
10 If the person in possession sowed it, but did not make any profit - i.e., he sowed a kor and reaped a kor - he does not establish a claim of ownership, since he did not derive any benefit from it.יזרעה ולא הרויח כלום אלא זרע כור ואסף כור לא החזיק שהרי לא נהנה.
11 If he harvests the field as straw, he does not establish a claim of ownership. If in that region it was common to sow to harvest straw because straw is very expensive, he does establish a claim of ownership.יאאכלה שחת לא החזיק, ואם היה המקום דרכן לזרוע לשחת מפני שדמיו יקרין הרי זו חזקה.
12 If the person in possession partook of produce of a field that was orlah, grew during the Sabbatical year, or contained mixed species, he establishes a claim of ownership despite the fact that he derived benefit through transgression.יבאכלה ערלה שביעית וכלאים אף על פי שנהנה בעבירה הרי זו חזקה.
13 If the property in question was a stone or a rocky area unfit to be sown, the person in possession must benefit from the land in an appropriate manner - e.g., use it to spread out fruits to dry, as a place for an animal to pasture, or the like. If he does not derive benefit throughout all these three years in an appropriate manner, he does not establish a claim of ownership.יגהיה המקום שהחזיק בו סלע או חלמיש שאינו ראוי לזריעה צריך ליהנות בו בדבר הראוי לה כגון שישטח בו הפירות או יעמיד בו בהמה וכיוצא בזה, ואם לא נהנה בו בכל אותן השלש שנים בדבר הראוי לו לא החזיק.
14 The following rules apply when a person would tie his animal in a specific place in a courtyard belonging to a colleague, he would raise chickens there, he would place an oven, a range or a mill there, or he would place his fertilizer there. Whether or not he erects a barrier there, if he uses the property for these purposes during the day and the night and claims that the owner of the courtyard sold or gave him that place, he establishes a claim of ownership.ידהיה מעמיד בהמה במקום מסויים מחצר חבירו או שהיה מגדל שם תרנגולין או מעמיד שם תנור וכירים וריחים, או שנתן שם זבלו, בין שהעמיד שם מחיצה בין שלא העמיד, אם נשתמש בדברים אלו וכיוצא בהן שלש שנים ביום ובלילה וטען על בעל החצר ואמר אתה נתת לי מקום זה או מכרתו לי הרי זו חזקה.
15 The following rules apply when a field is surrounded by a fence and a person took possession of it and sowed crops outside the fence, deriving benefit from the portion that is not protected. Even though he derives benefit year after year, he does not establish a claim of ownership. The rationale is that the owner can claim: "Since we saw that he was sowing crops in a place that was unprotected, we said: 'Whatever he sowed, the beasts of the field will eat. Therefore, we did not protest.'" This law also applies to anyone who sows crops in a place that is not protected and the crops are accessible to animals and other people.טושדה שהיא מוקפת גדר ובא זה שהחזיק בה וזרע חוץ לגדר ונהנה בכל מקום שאינו שמור, אע"פ שאכלו שנה אחר שנה לא עלתה לו חזקה, שהבעלים טוענין ואומרין כיון שראינו שזורע במקום מופקר אמרנו כל מה שזרע חית השדה תאכלנו ולפיכך לא מחיתי, והוא הדין לכל הזורע מקום שאינו שמור אלא רגל חיה ויד כל אדם מצויין בו.
16 When the person in possession derives benefit from the entire property with the exception of one portion fit to sow a quarter of a kav of grain, he establishes a claim of ownership over the entire field, with the exception of the portion from which he did not benefit. Even if that was a rocky portion in the midst of the field, since he did not use it in a way appropriate for it, he does not establish a claim of ownership over it.טזאכלה כולה חוץ מבית רובע החזיק בכולה חוץ מאותו בית רובע שלא נהנה בו, אפילו היה חלמיש בתוך השדה הואיל ולא נשתמש בו כראוי לו אין לזה בו חזקה.
17 The following rules apply when one person took possession of trees and derived benefit from their produce, and another took possession of the land, sowed crops there, and derived benefit from them, and each of them claims that the entire property belongs to him, because he purchased it from the owner. The person in possession of the trees is given the trees and the land necessary to tend to them - i.e., the space in which a person picking fruit can stand together with his basket for each tree. The person in possession of the land receives the remainder of the land.יזהחזיק אחד באילנות ואכל פירותיהן ואחד החזיק בקרקע וזרעה ואכל פירותיה וכל אחד משניהם טוען שהכל שלי ואני לקחתיו, זה שהחזיק באילנות ואכלן שלש שנים יש לו האילנות וקרקע שצריכין לו והוא כמלא האורה וסלו חוצה לכל אילן ואילן, וזה שהחזיק בקרקע יש לו שאר הקרקע.
18 Similarly, when a person benefits from all the produce of a tree for three years and then issues a claim against the owner of the tree: "You sold me this tree and its land," he is granted an amount of land equivalent to the thickness of the tree until the depths of the earth.יחוכן האוכל כל פירות אילן שלש שנים וטען על בעל האילן אתה מכרת לי אילן זה וקרקעו הרי זה יש לו קרקע כעובי האילן עד התהום.
19 The following laws apply when there are 30 trees within a tree grove large enough to sow three se'ah of grain. If a person in possession benefited from ten trees in the first year, ten in the second year, and ten in the third, he establishes his possession over the entire grove.
The above applies when the ten trees from which he benefited were spread through the entire area of the field, and the other trees did not produce any fruit. If, however, the other trees produced fruit and he did not partake of it, he establishes a claim of ownership only on the produce from which he partook.יטשדה אילן שהיו בו שלשים אילנות בתוך בית שלש סאין ואכל עשרה בשנה ראשונה ועשרה בשנה שניה ועשרה בשנה שלישית הוחזק בכל, והוא שהיו עשרה שאכל מפוזרות בכל בית השלש סאין ולא הוציאו שאר האילנות פירות, אבל אם הוציאו שאר האילנות פירות ולא אכלן לא הוחזק אלא במה שאכל.
20 When does the above apply? When he benefited from some of the fruit and the people reaped the remainder of the fruit. If, however, he left the fruit on the trees and benefited from the fruit from several portions throughout the entire grove, he establishes a claim of ownership concerning the entire field, even though he did not collect all its produce.כבמה דברים אמורים בשאכל הוא מקצת הפירות ובזזו העם שאר הפירות, אבל אם מניח פירותיהן עליהן הואיל ואכל אילן מכאן ואילן מכאן מכל השדה החזיק בכל השדה אע"פ שלא אסף כל פירותיה.
Hilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Three
1It is taken for granted that an animal is prone to eat fruit, vegetables or the like. Therefore, if [an animal] enters a domain belonging to another person and eats produce that it would normally eat, [the owner of the animal] is liable for the entire amount of the damages, as stated [in Exodus 22:4]: "And if he shall send forth his animals, and they shall pasture in another's field, payment should be exacted from his choice field." If [the animal] ate produce belonging to another person in the public domain, [the owner] is not liable. If [the animal] benefits [from eating the produce], the owner must pay for the benefit [his animal received], but not for the damages caused.אהבהמה מועדת לאכול פירות או ירקות וכיוצא בהן. לפיכך אם נכנסה לרשות הניזק ואכלה דברים שדרכה לאכלם משלם נזק שלם שנאמר ובער בשדה אחר מיטב שדהו וגו'. ואם אכלתם ברשות הרבים פטור ואם נהנית משלם מה שנהנית לא מה שהזיקה:
2What is implied? If [an animal] entered another person's domain and ate sesame seeds, chestnuts or the like that were worth a dinar, [the owner] must pay a dinar. If [the animal ate these foods] in the public domain and derived benefit, we consider [these foods] as if they were barley or fodder, and [the owner is required to] pay the wholesale price of fodder or barley.בכיצד נכנסה לרשות הניזק ואכלה שומשמין או לוט וכיוצא בהם בשוה דינר משלם דינר. ואם אכלתן ברשות הרבים ונהנית רואין אותן כאילו הם שעורים או עמיר ומשלם דמי עמיר או דמי שעורים בזול:
3If the animal ate foods that are harmful to it - e.g., it ate wheat - since it did not derive any benefit, [the owner] is not liable. If it ate substances that it would not usually eat - e.g., it ate a garment or a utensil - [the owner] should pay half the damages. [This applies] both in a private domain and in a public domain. [The rationale is that] this is a deviation. [Hence, the owner is liable for only half the damages. He is liable for damage caused in the public domain, however] because it is the ordinary practice of people to leave their utensils or garments in the public domain while they rest.גאכלה אוכלים הרעים לה כגון שאכלה חיטין הואיל ולא נהנית פטור. אכלה אוכלין שאין דרכה לאכלן כגון שאכלה כסות ג או כלים בין ברשות הניזק בין ברשות הרבים משלם חצי נזק שזה שינוי הוא ודרך בני אדם להניח כליהם וכסותן ברשות הרבים עד שינוחו מעט:
4There is a doubt [regarding the liability of the owner when his] animal is standing in a private domain, but takes produce [belonging to the owner of the private domain] from the public domain and eats it in that private domain. Therefore, [the owner] is liable only for the benefit [his animal] derived. If, however, the person whose property was damaged seizes possession of the full worth of the damage [caused by the animal], it should not be expropriated from him, for [the produce] was eaten in his domain.דבהמה שהיתה עומדת ברשות הניזק ותלשה פירות מרשות הרבים ואכלתן ברשות הניזק הרי הדבר ספק לפיכך אינה משלמת אלא מה שנהנית ואם תפש הניזק כמה שהזיקה אין מוציאין מידו שהרי ברשותו אכלה:
5When a dog entered a courtyard, took bread or meat, brought it into the public domain or to another courtyard and ate it there, [the owner] should pay for the benefit [the dog] received. If [the dog] ate [the food] in a field belonging to the owner of the courtyard, the [dog's owner] must pay the full extent of the damages as if it had been eaten in the courtyard, because it was eaten in a domain belonging to the person whose property was damaged. The same [laws] apply in all analogous situations.הכלב שנכנס לחצר ונטל פת או בשר והוציאן לרשות הרבים או לחצר אחר ואכלם שם מה שנהנה משלם. אכלם בשדה של בעל החצר משלם נזק שלם כאילו אכלן בתוך החצר שהרי ברשות הניזק אכל. וכן כל כיוצא בזה:
6[The following rules apply when] an animal eats foods that it would not ordinarily eat, but would eat under constraint: e.g., a cow that ate barley, a donkey that ate vetch or fish, a pig that ate a piece of meat, a dog that licked oil, a cat that ate dates and the like. If the foods were eaten in a domain belonging to the person whose property was damaged, [the owner] must pay the entire amount of the damage. [If the foods were eaten] in the public domain, he is not liable. If [the animal] benefited, the owner must pay for that benefit.ובהמה שאכלה אוכלין שאין דרכה לאכלן אבל אוכלתן על ידי הדחק. כגון פרה שאכלה שעורים וחמור שאכל כרשינים או דגים ְוחזיר שאכל חתיכה בשר וכלב שלקק את השמן וחתול שאכל תמרים וכן כל כיוצא באלו. אם אכלה ברשות הניזק משלם נזק שלם וברשות הרבים פטור. ואם נהנית משלם מה שנהנית:
7When a beast enters a private domain and seizes an animal or meat and eats it, [its owner] must pay the full extent of the damages, for this is its ordinary course of behavior. When, however, a dog eats small sheep, or a cat eats large cocks, this is considered to be a deviation, and [the owner] is liable for [only] half the damages.זחיה שנכנסה לרשות הניזק וטרפה ואכלה בהמה או בשר משלם נזק שלם שזהו דרכה. אבל ו כלב שאכל כבשים קטנים או חתול שאכל תרנגולים גדולים הרי זה שינוי ומשלם חצי נזק:
8When there is a basket of bread [in a private domain], and a donkey enters and breaks the basket and eats the bread, [the owner] is liable for the full extent of the damages, for this is [a donkey's] ordinary behavior. Similarly, if a goat sees a turnip or the like on the opening of a jug, stumbles over the jug and eats the turnip and breaks the jug, [the owner] must pay the full damages for both, for it is the ordinary pattern [for such an animal] to hang on to utensils and climb on them in order to eat. The same applies in all analogous situations. If, however, a donkey came in and ate bread and then broke a basket, [the owner] is liable for full damages for the bread, but only half damages for the basket. The same applies in all analogous situations.חסל שיש בו לחם ונכנס חמור ושבר הסל ואכל הלחם משלם על הסל ועל הלחם נזק שלם שזה הוא דרכו. וכן שעיר עזים שראה לפת וכיוצא בו על פי החבית ונסתבך בחבית ואכל את הלפת ושבר את החבית משלם על שניהם נזק שלם. כשם שדרכו לאכול כך דרכו להתלות בכלים ולעלות כדי לאכול וכן כל כיוצא בזה. אבל אם נכנס החמור ואכל את הלחם ואחר כך שבר את הסל על הלחם משלם נזק שלם ועל הסל חצי נזק וכן כל כיוצא בזה:
9When an animal eats [produce] in the marketplace, whether when walking or when standing, [its owner] must pay [only] for the benefit it received. This applies even if the animal turns [its head] to the corners of the marketplace and eats. If, however, the animal left the marketplace and went and stood at the corner of the marketplace and ate [produce], [its owner] must pay for the damages. If the animal ate from [produce in] the storefront, [the owner] must pay [only] for the benefit it received. If it ate from [produce] within the store, he must pay the full extent of the damages.טבהמה שאכלה מתוך הרחבה בין דרך הליכתה בין שעמדה ואכלה משלם מה שנהנית, ואפילו חזרה על צדי הרחבה ואכלה מהן. אבל אם הניחה את הרחבה והלכה ועמדה בצדי הרחבה ואכלה משלם מה שהזיקה. א אכלה מפתח החנות משלם מה שנהנית מתוך החנות משלם מה שהזיקה:
10If an animal was walking in the public domain and stretched out its neck and ate from [produce] that was [loaded onto] another animal's back, [its owner] must pay [only] for the benefit it received, for it is common for animals to eat from [a load] being carried by another. [This law applies] even when [the animal] stands. If it jumped to eat from the [produce] that was [loaded onto] another animal's back, [its owner] must pay the full extent of the damages, because the back of another animal is considered to be the private domain of the person who suffered the damage.יהיתה מהלכת ברשות הרבים ופשטה צוארה ואכלה מעל גבי חברתה ואפילו עמדה משלם מה שנהנית שכן דרך הבהמות לאכול זו מעל גבי זו. ואם קפצה ואכלה על גבי חברתה משלם מה שהזיקה שגבי חברתה כחצר הניזק הוא חשוב:
11When an animal slips on a stone or on urine and falls onto fruit or vegetables or eats them, [the owner] is required to pay [only] for the benefit it receives. Even if it walks from one row to another row, and even if it stays there the entire day, he is required to pay [only] for the benefit it receives. What benefit could it receive from falling? That it fell on a soft place and did not crush its limbs. If, by contrast, an animal descended [into private property] in an ordinary manner and ate produce, [the owner] must pay the full extent of the damages. Even if it soiled produce with its afterbirth, [the owner] must pay the full extent of the damages, because the first stage involved negligence. Similarly, if it was pushed by another animal and fell, [the owner] must pay the full extent of the damages, because he should have had them pass one by one so that they would not push each other.יאבהמה שהוחלקה באבן או במימי רגליה ונפלה לגינה ונחבטה על גבי פירות וירקות או שאכלה משלם מה שנהנית. אפילו הלכה מערוגה לערוגה ואפילו נשארה שם כל היום כולו אינו משלם אלא מה שנהנית. ומה הנאה יש לה בחביטה שהרי מצאה מקום רך ולא נתרסקו איבריה. אבל אם ירדה כדרכה ואכלה משלם מה שהזיקה. ואפילו טנפה פירות במי לידה משלם מה שהזיקה מפני שתחילתו בפשיעה. וכן אם דחפתה חברתה ונפלה משלם מה שהזיקה מפני שהיה לו להעבירן אחת אחת כדי שלא ידחפו זו את זו:
12If it slipped and fell [into another person's garden], departed and then returned to that garden, [the owner] must pay the full extent of the damages, even if it returned without his knowledge. He was obligated to watch it, [and prevent it] from returning. For it is known that if an animal knows the way to a garden, it will return on its own initiative.יב הוחלקה ונפלה ויצאת וחזרה לגינה אע"פ שחזרה שלא לדעת הבעלים משלם מה שהזיקה מפני שהיה לו לשמרה שלא תחזור שהדבר ידוע שכיון שידעה דרך הגינה הרי היא חוזרת מאליה:
13When a potter brings his wares into a person's courtyard without his permission, and an animal belonging to the owner [of the courtyard] broke the pottery, [the owner] is not liable. [Moreover,] if the animal is injured, the potter is liable. If he brought his wares in with [the owner's] permission, [the potter is not liable [for the animal's injury]. If the owner made a commitment to guard the pottery, he is liable [for the damages].יגהקדר שהכניס קדרותיו לחצר בעל הבית שלא ברשות ושברתן בהמתו של בעל הבית פטור, ואם הוזקה בהן בעל הקדרות חייב. ואם הכניס ברשות פטור. ואם קבל עליו בעל הבית לשמור את הקדרות בעל הבית חייב:
14Similarly, if [a person] brought produce into a courtyard belonging to another individual without his permission and the animal belonging to the owner [of the courtyard] ate it, [the owner of the courtyard] is not liable. If the animal slipped on it and suffered injuries, the owner of the produce is liable. If he brought the produce in with [the owner's] permission, [the owner of the produce] is not liable [for the animal's injury]. If the owner [of the courtyard] made a commitment to guard the produce, he is liable [for the damages to the produce]. If the person brought produce [into a courtyard] without permission, and an animal belonging to the owner of the courtyard ate it and suffered injury because it ate it, the owner of the produce is not liable. The animal should not have eaten it. When the owner of a courtyard allowed a person to bring his produce into [the courtyard] and left [the owner of the produce] to watch it, if an animal belonging to the owner of the courtyard ate from the produce and suffered damages, the owner of the produce is liable. Since he saw the animal eating produce that could damage it and took no action, he is liable. For the owner of the courtyard is not present to banish his animal from them. An incident occurred when a woman entered to bake in the house of her neighbors. They left her alone, so that they would not see her while she was kneading and baking. A goat belonging to the owner came and ate from [her raw] dough and died. The Sages obligated her to reimburse [the owners] for the goat. These principles apply in all similar situations.ידוכן אם הכניס פירותיו לחצר בעל הבית שלא ברשות ואכלתם בהמתו של בעל הבית פטור. ואם הוחלקה בהן והוזקה בעל הפירות חייב. ואם הכניס ברשות פטור. ואם קבל עליו בעל הבית לשמור את הפירות בעל הבית חייב. הכניסן שלא ברשות ואכלתן בהמתו של בעל הבית והוזקה באכילתן בעל הפירות פטור מפני שהיה לה שלא תאכל. ואם הכניסה ברשות והניחו בעלי החצר את זה שהרשהו בחצר לשמרו ואכלתן בהמתו של בעל הבית והוזקה באכילתן בעל הפירות חייב. שכיון שראה הבהמה אוכלת דברים המזיקין לה והניחה חייב שהרי אין בעלי החצר מצויין שם להעביר הבהמה מהן. ומעשה באשה שנכנסה לאפות בתנור בבית שכנותיה והניחוה ונתעלמו כדי שלא יביטו בה בעת לישתה ואפייתה ובא עז של בעל הבית ואכל הבצק ומת וחייבוה חכמים לשלם דמיו. וכן כל כיוצא בזה:
15When a person made a grain heap in a field belonging to a colleague without the latter's permission, and an animal belonging to the owner of the field ate it, [the owner of the field] is not liable. If the animal slipped on it and suffered injuries, the owner of the produce is liable. If the animal ate it and suffered injury because it ate it, [the owner of the produce] is not liable. If he had permission to make the grain heap, the owner of the field is liable, even if he did not accept the responsibility to guard [the grain pile]. Once a watchman in the granaries says: "Make your grain heap here," it is as if he told him: "Make your grain heap and I will guard it for you."טוהמגדיש בתוך שדה חבירו שלא ברשות ואכלתן בהמתו של בעל השדה פטור. ואם הוחלקה והוזקה בעל הפירות חייב. אכלתן והוזקה באכילתן פטור. ואם הגדיש ברשות בעל השדה חייב אע"פ שלא קבל עליו לשמור. שהשומר בגרנות כיון שאמר לו הגדש בכאן כמי שאמר לו הגדש ואני אשמור לך הוא חשוב:
Hilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Four
1When a person gathers sheep in a corral and locks them in with a gate that can withstand an ordinary wind, and [yet the sheep were able to] leave and cause damage, the owner is not liable. If [the gate] cannot withstand an ordinary wind or if the walls of the corral are shaky, [the owner] is not considered to have enclosed [the sheep] in a proper manner. [Thus, if they are able to] leave and cause damage, he is liable. Even if [the sheep] dug beneath [the gate to] get out, [the gate] was broken at night, or thieves broke it down, the owner of the sheep is liable [for the damage his sheep cause]. If, however, the gate was strong and it was broken at night or thieves broke in, and then [the sheep] departed and caused damage, [the owner] is not liable. If the thieves took the sheep out and then they caused damage, the thieves are liable.אהכונס צאן לדיר ונעל בפניהן בדלת שיכולה לעמוד ברוח מצויה ויצאה והזיקה פטור. ואם אינה יכולה לעמוד ברוח מצויה או שהיו כותלי הדיר רעועין הרי לא נעל בפניהם כראוי ואם יצאת והזיקה חייב. ואפילו חתרה ויצאת ואפילו נפרצה מחיצה בלילה או פרצוה ליסטים בעל הצאן חייב. היתה מחיצה בריאה ונפרצה בלילה או שפרצוה ליסטים ויצאת והזיקה פטור הוציאוה ליסטים והזיקה ליסטים חייבים:
2[The following rules apply when] a person breaks down a fence in front of an animal belonging to a colleague. If the fence was strong and sturdy, he is liable. If the wall was shaky, he cannot be held liable according to mortal law, but he has a moral obligation. Similarly, if a person places poison in front of an animal belonging to a colleague, he cannot be held liable according to mortal law, but he has a moral obligation.ב הפורץ גדר לפני בהמת חבירו ויצאת והזיקה. אם היה גדר חזק ובריא חייב. ואם היה כותל רעוע פטור בדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים. וכן הנותן סם המות לפני בהמת חבירו פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים:
3When a person brings an animal belonging to a colleague to crops belonging to a third individual, the person who brought the animal there is liable. Similarly, if a colleague hit an animal with a switch until it walked to crops belonging to a third individual, the person who switched it is liable.ג המעמיד בהמת חבירו על גבי קמת חבירו המעמיד חייב לשלם מה שהזיק. וכן אם הכישה עד שהלכה לקמת חבירו והזיקה זה שהכישה חייב:
4When a person entrusts his animal to an unpaid watchman, a paid watchman, a renter or a borrower, these individuals assume the owner's responsibilities. If [the animal] causes damages, the watchman is held liable. When does the above apply? When he did not guard the animal at all. If, however, he guarded the animal in an excellent manner, as he should, and it got loose and caused damage, the watchman is not liable, and the owners are liable, even if the animal kills a human being.Should the watchman guard the animal in an inferior manner, he is not held liable if he is an unpaid watchman. If he is a paid watchman, a renter or a borrower, he is held liable.דהמוסר בהמתו לשומר חנם או לנושא שכר או לשוכר או לשואל נכנסו תחת הבעלים ואם הזיקה חייב השומר. במה דברים אמורים בזמן שלא שמרוה כלל אבל אם שמרוה שמירה מעולה כראוי ויצאת והזיקה השומרים פטורין והבעלים חייבים אפילו המיתה את האדם. שמרוה שמירה פחותה אם שומר חנם הוא פטור ואם שומר שכר או שוכר או שואל הוא חייבין:
5If [a person] leaves an animal in the sun and it gets loose and causes damage, even if it must dig [under the fence to do so], the one who left it in the sun is liable. [The rationale is that because of] the discomfort [the animal] feels, it will do anything it possibly can to flee.ההניחה בחמה אפילו חתרה ויצאת והזיקה חייב זה שהניחה שם. שכיון שהניחה בחמה הרי היא מצטערת ובורחת ועושה כל שאפשר לה לעשות:
6When [a person] gives his animal to a deaf mute, a mentally incompetent individual or a minor to watch, the owner is liable. [This applies] even if the ox is tied, for an ox - and similarly other [animals] - will break open the knot and go out and cause damage. Even if the animal was guarded in an excellent manner, and it dug [under the fence] and escaped and caused damage, the owners are liable.ומסר בהמתו לחרש שוטה וקטן אע"פ שהיה השור קשור הבעלים חייבין. שדרך השור וכיוצא בו להתיר הקשר ולצאת ולהזיק. אפילו שמרוה שמירה מעולה וחתרה ויצאה והזיקה הבעלים חייבים:
7[The following rules apply when] a person entrusts his ox to five men, one of them was negligent, and the ox escaped and caused damage. If all five are required to guard the ox, the person who was negligent is liable. If the ox can still be watched by the others, they share in the liability.זמסר שורו לחמשה ופשע בו אחד מהן ויצא והזיק אם אינו משתמר אלא בחמשתן זה שפשע בשמירתו חייב. ואם משתמר בשארן אף אלו הנשארין חייב:
8[The following rules apply if a person] borrowed an ox under the presumption that it was an ordinary ox, and it was discovered that it had already been classified as one that gores. If the borrower knew that it had a tendency to gore, the owners are required to pay half the damages, for wherever the ox goes, it remains the owner's property. The borrower is also required to pay half the damages, because even if it had been an ordinary ox, as he had thought, he would have been required to pay half the damages, for he knew that the ox had a tendency to gore. If, however, the borrower did not know of this tendency, he is not liable at all, and the owners must pay the entire amount of the damages.חשאלו בחזקת תם ונמצא מועד. אם ידע השואל שהוא נגחן הבעלים משלמים חצי נזק שכל מקום שהוא הולך הרי שם בעליו עליו. והשואל משלם חצי נזק. שאפילו היה תם (כשעלה בדעתו) חצי נזק היה משלם שהרי ידע שהוא נגחן. ואם לא ידע שהוא נגחן אין השואל חייב כלום והבעלים משלמין נזק שלם:
9When a borrower borrows an ox that is classified as an ordinary ox, and it becomes classified as a goring ox when in the possession of the borrower, it is removed from that category when it is returned to its owner. Since the domain [under which the animal is] changes, its classification also changes. [If the ox gores,] the owners must pay half the damages, and the borrower is not held liable at all, for he returned it to its owners.טשאלו כשהוא תם והועד בבית השואל והחזירו לבעליו חוזר לתמותו. הואיל ונשתנית רשותו בטלה ההעדה והבעלים משלמין חצי נזק והשואל פטור שהרי החזירו:
10When a watchman accepts responsibility only for watching the body of an animal [entrusted to him], but [does not accept responsibility] for the damage it causes, if [the animal] causes damage the watchman is not held liable, and its owners are. If [the watchman] accepted responsibility [only] for the damages [the animal] causes, he is liable if it causes damage. If it is injured, the watchman is not liable, and the owners should sue the person who caused the injury.ישומר שקבל עליו שמירת גוף הבהמה בלבד אבל לא שמירת נזקיה והזיקה פטור מלשלם והבעלים חייבים. קבל שמירת נזקיה והזיקה חייב השומר. ואם הוזקה פטור והבעלים עושים דין עם המזיק:
11When a watchman entrusts [an animal] to another watchman, [and it causes damage], the first watchman is liable to pay the person whose property was damaged. For whenever one watchman delegates [an entrusted object] to another watchman, he is liable. For the person whose property was damaged will tell him: "Why didn't you watch it yourself instead of delegating it to someone else? Pay me yourself, and sue the watchman to whom you delegated it." If, however, the watchman entrusted [the animal] to his son, a member of his household or one of his helpers, they assume the responsibility that was the watchman's, and they are liable.יא מסר השומר לשומר אחר השומר הראשון חייב לשלם לניזק שהשומר שמסר לשומר חייב. והרי הניזק אומר לו למה לא שמרת אתה בעצמך ומסרת לאחר שלם לי אתה ולך ועשה דין עם השומר שמסרת לו אתה. מסרה השומר לבנו או לבן ביתו או למסעדו נכנסו תחת השומר וחייבים:
12[The following rule applies when] a watchman is liable to pay [for the damages an animal caused], but he is insolvent. If the animal that caused the damage is considered to be an ordinary animal, in which case half the damages must be paid from the body of the animal itself, the person whose property was damaged should take his due from the animal, and the sum that he collects should be considered to be a debt owed by the watchman to the owner of the animal.יבכל שומר שנתחייב לשלם ואין לו והיה המזיק תם שהוא משלם חצי נזק מגופו הרי הניזק משתלם מן הבהמה שהזיקה וישאר דמי מה שגבה הניזק חוב על השומר לבעל הבהמה:
13Whenever an animal causes damage to crops that are growing, the damage is assessed by comparison with a field sixty times the size of the crops that were damaged. The one who is liable - either the owner or the watchman - is obligated to pay that sum. What is implied? If [an animal] ate the amount of produce that would grow when a se'ah [of seeds] were sown in that field, we calculate the worth of an area in which sixty se'ah [of seeds] could be sown in that field, [evaluating] how much it would be worth [before the animal ate from it] and how much it is worth now. [The owner or the watchman] is liable for the remainder. Similarly, if the animal ate an amount of produce that would grow when a kav or a quarter of a kav were sown - [or even if it ate] one stalk of grain - the damages are assessed by comparison with a field sixty times the size of the crops that were damaged.יגכל בהמה שהזיקה פירות מחוברין משערין מה שהזיקה בששים ומשלם זה שנתחייב לשלם בין הבעלים בין השומרים. כיצד הרי שאכלה בית סאה שמין ששים בית סאה באותה השדה כמה היה שוה וכמה הוא שוה עתה אחר שנפסד בו הבית סאה ומשלם השאר. וכן אם אכלה קב או רובע אפילו קלח אחד שמין אותו בששים:
14When, [by contrast,] an animal ate fruit that ripened and no longer needed [the nurture of] the land, [the owner of the animal is required to] pay the full value of ripe produce. If [the animal ate] a se'ah, he must pay for a se'ah. If [it ate] two se'ah, he must pay for two se'ah. [The following laws apply if an animal] ate the fruit of one date palm, or a person gathered the fruit of a colleague's date palm and ate it. If it was a Roman date palm, whose fruit is not of very high quality, it should be measured in comparison with a orchard of date palms sixty times the size of its land. If it was a Persian date palm or the like, whose fruit is of very high quality, the date palm should be evaluated individually. An assessment should be made of its worth before the fruit was eaten and its worth after the fruit was eaten.ידאכלה פירות גמורין שאין צריכים לקרקע משלם דמי פירות גמורין בשוויהן אם סאה דמי סאה ואם סאתים דמי סאתים. הרי שאכלה ב פירות דקל אחד וכן הלוקט פירות דקל חבירו ואכל אם היה דקל רומי וכיוצא בו שאין התמרים שלו יפות משערין אותו בששים על גב הקרקע. ואם דקל פרסי וכיוצא בו הוא שהתמרים שלו יפות ביותר משערין הדקל בפני עצמו כמה היה שוה וכמה הוא שוה עתה:
Hilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Five
1[The following laws apply when] an animal was pasturing and entered fields and vineyards [belonging to others]. Even though it did not cause any damage, a warning should be given to its owner on three occasions. [Afterwards,] if he does not watch his animal and prevent it from pasturing [in other people's fields], the owner of the field has the right to slaughter the animal in a ritually acceptable manner, and tell its owners: "Come and sell your meat." [The rationale is that] it is forbidden for a person to cause damages and then to pay for the damages he caused. Even being an [indirect] cause of damage is forbidden.אבהמה שהיתה רועה ג ופרשה ונכנסה בשדות ובכרמים אע"פ שעדיין לא הזיקה מתרין בבעליה שלש פעמים. אם לא שמר בהמתו ולא מנעה מלרעות יש רשות לבעל השדה לשחטה [ג] שחיטה כשרה ואומר לבעליה בואו ומכרו בשר שלכם. מפני שאסור לאדם להזיק ולשלם מה שהזיק אפילו לגרום הנזק אסור:
2For this reason, our Sages forbade [our people] from raising small animals and small beasts in Eretz Yisrael, where there are fields and vineyards. One may, however, raise these animals in the forests and deserts of Eretz Yisrael.In Syria, it is permitted to raise these animals everywhere.בלפיכך אסרו חכמים לגדל א בהמה דקה וחיה דקה בארץ ישראל במקום השדות והכרמים אלא ביערים ובמדברות שבארץ ישראל. ומגדלין בסוריא בכל מקום:
3Joshua and his court established ten conditions at the time they divided the land [into ancestral plots]: a) One may pasture a small animal in forests that are thick with trees; one may not, however, pasture a large animal there. In a forest that is not thick with trees, one may not pasture either a large animal or a small animal without the permission of the owners. b) Any person is permitted to collect wood from a field belonging to a colleague. This refers to wood that is not valuable - comparable to thorns, brambles and prickly shrubs. Moreover, this refers to fresh twigs that are still connected to their source of nurture, and applies only when the person will not uproot them entirely. It is forbidden to take other types of wood. c) Any person may collect grass that is growing on its own accord anywhere, except for a field of fenugrec that was sown to be used as animal fodder. d) A person may cut off a branch from any tree in any place, except from the branches left in an old olive tree. One may not, however, cut off closer than the length of an egg from the place where the branches begin to spread from an olive tree. And one may cut only from the place where a shoot is joined to the trunk of a reed or a vine. With regard to other trees, one may cut from the center of the tree and not from its higher branches. [Although] permission was granted to cut off a branch, this applies only to [cutting] from a new branch that does not yet produce fruit, but not from an old branch that produces fruit. One may cut off [a branch] only from a portion of the tree that is not exposed to the sun. e) When a new spring of water emerges, the inhabitants of the city in whose territory it emerges may make use of it, even though its source is elsewhere. No others may take water from it together with them. f) Any person may catch fish in Lake Kinneret, provided he fishes with a small net. Only the tribe to which the lake was awarded as part of their ancestral portion may spread out large nets that will prevent the passage of other boats. g) Any person who needs to relieve himself may turn off the path, go behind any fence he sees and defecate there. [This applies] even with regard to a field of saffron. One may pick up a stone from there and clean oneself with it. h) Any person who loses his way in a vineyard or the like may break through the vines and ascend, or break through the vines and descend until he is able to find his way. i) When the public thoroughfare is filled with mud, or the ravines are filled with water, passersby may take side paths, even though they are private property. j) A corpse that has no one to bury it acquires its place and should be buried there by the person who finds it. This applies provided the corpse is not lying lengthwise across the path, or within the Sabbath boundaries of a city. In those instances, the corpse should be transported to a cemetery.געשרה תנאים ב התנה יהושע ובית דינו בשעה שחלק את הארץ, ואלו הן. א) התנה שמרעין בהמה דקה ביערים שאילניהן גסין. אבל אין מרעין שם בהמה גסה. וביער שאילניו דקים אין מרעין בו לא גסה ולא דקה אלא מדעת בעליו. ב) וכן התנה שיהיה כל אדם מותר ללקט עצים משדה חבירו. והוא שיהיו עצים פחותים וקרובים להיות קוצים כגון היזמי והיני. והוא שיהיו לחים ומחוברין ובלבד שלא ישרש. אבל שאר עצים אסור. ג) וכן התנה שיהיה כל אדם מותר ללקט עשבים העולין מאיליהן בכל מקום חוץ משדה תלתן שזרעה לבהמה. ד) וכן התנה שיהיה אדם קוטם נטיעה בכל מקום חוץ מגרופיות של זית ואינו קוטם מן האילנות אלא בזית כביצה ובקנים ובגפנים מן הפקק ולמעלה ובשאר האילן מתוכו* של אילן לא מחודו. וכשהתיר לקטום לא התיר אלא מחדש שאינו עושה פירות אבל לא מישן שעושה פירות. ואינו קוטם אלא ממקום שאינו רואה פני חמה. ה) וכן התנה שהמעיין היוצא בתחילה בני אותה העיר שיצא בגבולם מסתפקין ממנו אע"פ שאין עיקרו בחלקם ואין לאחרים להסתפק עמהם ממנו. ו) וכן התנה שיהיה כל אדם מותר לצוד דגים מים טבריה והוא שיצוד בחכה בלבד. אבל לא יפרוש קלע ויעמיד ספינה שם אלא בני השבט שהגיע אותו הים בחלקם. ז) וכן התנה שכל אדם שצריך לנקביו מסתלק מן הדרך ונכנס אחורי הגדר שפגע בו ונפנה שם ואפילו בשדה מליאה כרכום ונוטל משם צרור ומקנח. ח) וכן התנה שכל התועה בין הכרמים וכיוצא בהן מפסג ועולה מפסג ויורד עד שיצא לדרכו. ט) וכן התנה שבזמן שירבה הטיט בדרכי הרבים או נקיעי מים יש לעוברי דרכים להסתלק לצדדי הדרכים ומהלכין שם אע"פ שהן מהלכין בדרך שיש לה בעלים. י) וכן התנה שמת מצוה קונה מקומו ונקבר במקום שימצא בו. שלא יהא מוטל על המצר ולא בתוך תחום המדינה. אבל אם נמצא על המצר או שהיה בתוך התחום מביאו לבית הקברות:
4King Solomon ordained that passersby are permitted to walk on private paths in the fields during the summer months until the second phase of fall rains descend.דשלמה תקן שיהיו עוברי דרכים מותרין בימות החמה להלך בשבילין שבשדות שיש להן בעלים עד שתרד רביעה שנייה:
5These rules apply in all places, even in the diaspora.הותקנות אלו כולן נוהגות בכל מקום אפילו בחוצה לארץ:
6From the time dew descends in Babylonia, it is forbidden to walk through private pathways belonging to others.וומשירד הטל בבבל אסור להלך בשבילין שיש להן בעלים:
7Although it is forbidden to raise a small animal in Eretz Yisrael, one may maintain possession of one for 30 days prior to a pilgrimage festival, or prior to the wedding of one's son. A butcher may buy an animal for slaughter and may leave it for a certain time until he slaughters it, as long as it does not pasture with the flock. Instead, whoever maintains possession of a small animal must keep it within his house, so that it does not cause damage.זאע"פ שאין מגדלין בהמה דקה בארץ ישראל מותר לשהותה קודם לרגל שלשים יום וקודם למשתה בנו שלשים יום. והטבח לוקח ושוחט לוקח ומשהה עד שישחוט מעט מעט. ובלבד שלא תצא ותרעה בעדר אלא כל המשהה משהה בתוך ביתו כדי שלא תזיק:
8[Our Sages] established an equation between Babylonia and Israel, prohibiting the raising of small animals and beasts there as well. For [in Talmudic times,] the majority of the fields and vineyards there belonged to Jews.חוכבר עשו בבל כארץ ישראל לאסור בה גידול בהמה דקה וחיה דקה מפני שהיו רוב השדות והכרמים שם באותם הימים של ישראל:
9Similarly, our Sages forbade raising pigs in all places. Also, [our Sages forbade raising] dogs unless they are tied by a chain. One may, however, raise dogs in a city near the border. During the day [the dogs] should be chained, and at night let loose. Our Sages said: "Cursed be one who raises dogs and pigs, because they frequently cause a great degree of damage."טוכן אסרו חכמים לגדל חזירים בכל מקום. ולא את הכלב אלא אם כן היה קשור בשלשלת. אבל מגדל הוא כלבים בעיר הסמוכה לספר. ביום קושרו ובלילה מתירו. ואמרו חכמים ארור מגדל כלבים וחזירים מפני שהיזקן מרובה ומצוי:
10When a shepherd repents, he should not be obligated to sell [his entire herd] immediately. Instead, he should sell a bit at a time. Similarly, if a person has inherited dogs and pigs, he is not required to sell all of them immediately, but instead may sell them bit by bit.ירועה שעשה תשובה אין מחייבין אותו למכור מיד אלא מוכר על יד על יד. וכן מי שנפלו לו כלבים וחזירים בירושה אין מחייבין אותו למכור מיד אלא מוכר מעט מעט:
|
Audio: 
No comments:
Post a Comment