| |||||
- ב"ה - Today in Judaism - Today is Wednesday, Av 24, 5777 · August 16, 2017Today in Jewish History:
• Hasmonean Holiday (circa 100 BCE)
The Hasmoneans reinstated the rule of Jewish civil law, replacing Hellenist secular law, and declared this day a holiday.
Daily Quote:
If you only knew the power of verses of Psalms and their effect in the highest Heavens, you would recite them constantly. Know that the chapters of Psalms shatter all barriers, they ascend higher and still higher with no interference; they prostrate themselves in supplication before the Master of all worlds, and they effect and accomplish with kindness and compassion [Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Lubavitch ("Tzemach Tzeddek, 1789-1866)]
Daily Torah Study:
Daily Torah Study:
Chumash: Re'eh, 4th Portion Deuteronomy 14:1-14:21 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation
• Video Class
• Daily Wisdom (short insight)
• 3 Chapters A Day: Malveh veLoveh Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 10, Malveh veLoveh Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 11, Malveh veLoveh Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 12
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Wednesday, Menachem Av 24, 5777 · 16 August 2017
"Today's Day"
Wednesday, Menachem Av 24, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Re'ei, Revi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 113-118.
Tanya: Now, this radiation (p. 427) ...the great quantity." (p. 427).
A tradition handed down from Rebbe to Rebbe: During the well-known conflict (between chassidim and their opponents) the chassidim told the Alter Rebbe about the terrible abuse they suffered from the plain misnagdic1 folk. The Rebbe said: Grandfather (as he called the Baal Shem Tov)2 deeply loved simple folk. In my first days in Mezritch, the Rebbe, (the Maggid) said: "It was a frequent customary remark of the Rebbe (Baal Shem Tov) that love of Israel is love of G-d. "You are children of Hashem your G-d"3; when one loves the father one loves the children.
FOOTNOTES
1.The opponents to chassidim termed themselves misnagdim, lit. "opponents."
2.See Supplementary Footnotes.
3.Devarim 14:1.
Daily Thought:
Making Room
He is a very big G-d. As soon as you take up any space at all, there is no room left for Him.
But take no space at all, and He gives you the entire universe.
-------
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation
• Video Class
• Daily Wisdom (short insight)
Deuteronomy Chapter 14
1You are children of the Lord, your God. You shall neither cut yourselves nor make any baldness between your eyes for the dead. אבָּנִ֣ים אַתֶּ֔ם לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה אֱלֹֽהֵיכֶ֑ם לֹ֣א תִתְגֹּֽדְד֗וּ וְלֹֽא־תָשִׂ֧ימוּ קָרְחָ֛ה בֵּ֥ין עֵֽינֵיכֶ֖ם לָמֵֽת:
You shall neither cut yourselves: Do not make cuts and incisions in your flesh [to mourn] for the dead, in the manner that the Amorites do, because you are the children of the Omnipresent and it is appropriate for you to be handsome and not to be cut or have your hair torn out.
לא תתגודדו: לא תתנו גדידה ושרט בבשרכם על מת כדרך שהאמוריים עושין, לפי שאתם בניו של מקום ואתם ראוין להיות נאים ולא גדודים ומקורחים:
[nor make any baldness] between your eyes: [i.e.,] near the forehead. Elsewhere, however, it says: “They shall not make their head bald” (Lev. 21: 5), to make the entire head like between the eyes (בֵּין עֵינַיִם) [i.e., one must not make bald spots on any part of the head]. — [Sifrei]
בין עיניכם: אצל הפדחת. ובמקום אחר הוא אומר (ויקרא כא, ה) לא יקרחו קרחה בראשם, לעשות כל הראש כבין העינים:
2For you are a holy people to the Lord, your God, and the Lord has chosen you to be a treasured people for Him, out of all the nations that are upon the earth. בכִּ֣י עַ֤ם קָדוֹשׁ֙ אַתָּ֔ה לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה אֱלֹהֶ֑יךָ וּבְךָ֞ בָּחַ֣ר יְהֹוָ֗ה לִֽהְי֥וֹת לוֹ֙ לְעַ֣ם סְגֻלָּ֔ה מִכֹּל֙ הָֽעַמִּ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֖ר עַל־פְּנֵ֥י הָֽאֲדָמָֽה:
For you are a holy people: Your holiness stems from your forefathers, and, moreover, “the Lord has chosen you.” - [Sifrei]
כי עם קדוש אתה: קדושת עצמך מאבותיך. ועוד, ובך בחר ה':
3You shall not eat any abomination. גלֹ֥א תֹאכַ֖ל כָּל־תּֽוֹעֵבָֽה:
[You shall not eat] any abomination: Anything that I have declared to be an abomination for you-for instance, if he made a slit in the ear of a firstborn [animal], in order to [be permitted to] slaughter it in the country [i.e., outside the Temple walls, where blemished firstborns must be slaughtered]. This is a thing that I have declared to be an abomination for you, for“no blemish shall be in it” (Lev. 22:21) [meaning that one may not make a blemish on a firstborn or on any sacrificial animal. Our verse] comes to teach here that one may not slaughter [the firstborn] and eat it based on that [deliberately made] blemish. [Another example is] if one cooked meat in milk, which is a thing that I declared an abomination for you; and here Scripture admonishes against eating it. — [Chul. 114b]
כל תועבה: כל שתעבתי לך, שאם צרם אוזן בכור כדי לשוחטו במדינה, הרי דבר שתעבתי לך כל מום לא יהיה בו, ובא ולמד כאן שלא ישחט ויאכל על אותו המום. בשל בשר בחלב הרי דבר שתעבתי לך, והזהיר כאן על אכילתו:
4These are the animals that you may eat: ox, lamb, and kid, דזֹ֥את הַבְּהֵמָ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר תֹּאכֵ֑לוּ שׁ֕וֹר שֵׂ֥ה כְשָׂבִ֖ים וְשֵׂ֥ה עִזִּֽים:
5gazelle, deer, and antelope, ibex, chamois, bison, and giraffe. האַיָּ֥ל וּצְבִ֖י וְיַחְמ֑וּר וְאַקּ֥וֹ וְדִישֹׁ֖ן וּתְא֥וֹ וָזָֽמֶר:
This is the animal [which you may eat…] the gazelle, and the deer, and the antelope: [Since the verse begins with“This is the animal (בְּהֵמָה) …” and then goes on to enumerate types of wild beasts (חַיָּה),] we learn that the category of wild beasts (חַיָּה) is included in the category of (בְּהֵמָה) , [which usually refers only to domestic animals]. - [Sifrei ; Chul. 71a] We learn also that unclean domestic and wild animals are more numerous than clean [ones] since the less numerous are always enumerated. [Therefore, the clean animals are enumerated here.] - [Sifrei; Chul. 63a]
זאת הבהמה וגו', איל וצבי ויחמור : למדנו שהחיה בכלל בהמה ולמדנו שבהמה וחיה טמאה, מרובה מן הטהורה, שבכל מקום פורט את המועט:
and the ibex: Heb. וְאַקּוֹ. This is rendered by Targum [Onkelos] as יַעִלָא, [like the Hebrew יָעֵל in the expression] יַעִלֵי סָלַע (Job 39:1). This is known as estainboc [in Old French, mountain goat.
ואקו: מתורגם יעלא (איוב לט, א) יעלי סלע הוא אשטנבו"ק [יעל סלע]:
and the bison: Heb. וּתְאוֹ.[Onkelos renders this:] וְתוּרְבָּלָא, [which is the equivalent of] תּוֹר הַיַעַר,“the ox of the forest,” for בָּאלָא means“forest” in the Aramaic language.
ותאו: תורבלא, שור היער. באלא יער, בלשון ארמי:
6And every animal that has a split hoof and has a hoof cloven into two hoof sections, [and] chews the cud among the animals that you may eat. ווְכָל־בְּהֵמָ֞ה מַפְרֶ֣סֶת פַּרְסָ֗ה וְשֹׁסַ֤עַת שֶׁ֨סַע֙ שְׁתֵּ֣י פְרָס֔וֹת מַֽעֲלַ֥ת גֵּרָ֖ה בַּבְּהֵמָ֑ה אֹתָ֖הּ תֹּאכֵֽלוּ:
split: Heb. מַפְרֶסֶת, split, as the Targum [Onkelos renders it].
מפרסת: סדוקה כתרגומו:
hoof: Heb. פַּרְסָה, plante [in French].
פרסה: פלנט"א [כף רגל]:
[and has a hoof] cloven [into two hoof sections]: [Hooves] cloven into two“nails,” for there are [animals with hooves] split but not entirely cloven into [two] nails; such animals are unclean.
ושסעת: חלוקה בשתי צפרנים שיש סדוקה ואינה חלוקה בצפרנים והיא טמאה:
among the animals - [that you may eat]: Heb. בַּבְּהֵמָה This [means literally“within the animal”], meaning that anything found inside the beast, you may eat. From here [our Rabbis] said that a fetus becomes permitted to be eaten through the [proper] slaughtering of its mother [without requiring its own slaughtering]. — [Chul. 69a]
בבהמה: משמע מה שנמצא בבהמה אכול, מכאן אמרו שהשליל ניתר בשחיטת אמו:
7But you shall not eat of those that chew the cud, or of those that have the split hooves: the cloven one, the camel, the hyrax, and the hare, for they chew the cud, but do not have split hooves; they are unclean for you. זאַ֣ךְ אֶת־זֶ֞ה לֹ֤א תֹֽאכְלוּ֙ מִמַּֽעֲלֵ֣י הַגֵּרָ֔ה וּמִמַּפְרִיסֵ֥י הַפַּרְסָ֖ה הַשְּׁסוּעָ֑ה אֶת־הַ֠גָּמָ֠ל וְאֶת־הָֽאַרְנֶ֨בֶת וְאֶת־הַשָּׁפָ֜ן כִּי־מַֽעֲלֵ֧ה גֵרָ֣ה הֵ֗מָּה וּפַרְסָה֙ לֹ֣א הִפְרִ֔יסוּ טְמֵאִ֥ים הֵ֖ם לָכֶֽם:
the cloven one: This is a certain creature that has two backs and two spinal columns (Chul. 60b). Our Rabbis said: Why are [these animals and birds] repeated [here, since they are already mentioned in Lev. 11]? Because of the [animal called] שְׁסוּעָה, and in [the category of] fowl because of the רָאָה, both of which are not mentioned in Torath Kohanim [i.e., Lev.]. — [Chul. 63b]
השסועה: בריה היא שיש לה שני גבין ושתי שדראות. אמרו רבותינו למה נשנו, בבהמות מפני השסועה, ובעופות מפני הראה, שלא נאמרו בתורת כהנים:
8And the pig, because it has a split hoof, but does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you. You shall neither eat of their flesh nor touch their carcass. חוְאֶת־הַֽ֠חֲזִ֠יר כִּֽי־מַפְרִ֨יס פַּרְסָ֥ה הוּא֙ וְלֹ֣א גֵרָ֔ה טָמֵ֥א ה֖וּא לָכֶ֑ם מִבְּשָׂרָם֙ לֹ֣א תֹאכֵ֔לוּ וּבְנִבְלָתָ֖ם לֹ֥א תִגָּֽעוּ:
nor touch their carcass: Our Rabbis explained [that this refers only to] the Festival[s], for a person is obliged to purify himself for the Festival. One might think that [all Israelites] are prohibited [from touching a carcass] during the entire year. Therefore, Scripture states [in reference to the uncleanness of a corpse], “Say to the kohanim … [none shall be defiled for the dead…]” (Lev. 21:1). Now if in the case of the uncleanness caused by a [human] corpse, which is a stringent [kind of uncleanness, only] kohanim are prohibited regarding it but [ordinary] Israelites are not prohibited, then in the case of uncleanness caused by a carcass [of an animal], which is light [i.e., a less stringent uncleanness], how much more so [is the case that ordinary Israelites are permitted to touch these carcasses]!
ובנבלתם לא תגעו: רבותינו פירשו, ברגל. שאדם חייב לטהר את עצמו ברגל. יכול יהיו מוזהרים בכל השנה, תלמוד לומר (ויקרא כא, א) אמור אל הכהנים וגו' ומה טומאת המת חמורה, כהנים מוזהרים ואין ישראל מוזהרים, טומאת נבלה קלה לא כל שכן:
9These you may eat of all that are in the waters; all that have fins and scales, you may eat. טאֶת־זֶה֙ תֹּֽאכְל֔וּ מִכֹּ֖ל אֲשֶׁ֣ר בַּמָּ֑יִם כֹּ֧ל אֲשֶׁר־ל֛וֹ סְנַפִּ֥יר וְקַשְׂקֶ֖שֶׂת תֹּאכֵֽלוּ:
10But whatever does not have fins and scales, you shall not eat; it is unclean for you. יוְכֹ֨ל אֲשֶׁ֧ר אֵין־ל֛וֹ סְנַפִּ֥יר וְקַשְׂקֶ֖שֶׂת לֹ֣א תֹאכֵ֑לוּ טָמֵ֥א ה֖וּא לָכֶֽם:
11You may eat every clean bird. יאכָּל־צִפּ֥וֹר טְהֹרָ֖ה תֹּאכֵֽלוּ:
You may eat every clean bird: [“Every”] comes to include [as permissible to eat] the bird that is set free [in the purification rite] of a metzora (see Lev. 14:7). - [Sifrei ; Kid. 57a]
כל צפור טהורה תאכלו: להתיר משולחת שבמצורע:
12But these are those from which you shall not eat: The eagle [or the griffin vulture], the ossifrage, the osprey; יבוְזֶ֕ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר לֹא־תֹֽאכְל֖וּ מֵהֶ֑ם הַנֶּ֥שֶׁר וְהַפֶּ֖רֶס וְהָֽעָזְנִיָּֽה:
But these are those from which you shall not eat: [The word “which” comes] to forbid [as food] the [bird that is] slaughtered [in the purification rite of a metzora]. — [Sifrei; Kid. 57a]
וזה אשר לא תאכלו מהם: לאסור את השחוטה:
13and the white vulture, and the black vulture, and the kite after its species; יגוְהָֽרָאָה֙ וְאֶת־הָ֣אַיָּ֔ה וְהַדַּיָּ֖ה לְמִינָֽהּ:
the white vulture and the black vulture: רָאָה, אַיָּה and דַּיָּה are [names for] the same [or similar] bird. Why is its name called רָאָה ? Because it sees (רוֹאֶה) very well. And why does [Scripture] admonish you with all its names? In order not to give an opponent any opportunity to disagree, so that the one who wishes to prohibit should not call it רָאָה, and the one who wishes to permit it will say,“This one is named דַּיָּה,” or “This one is named אַיָּה,” and Scripture did not prohibit this one!" And in the case of birds, [Scripture] enumerates the unclean species, to teach that the clean birds are more numerous than the unclean [in contrast with Rashi on verses 4-5, regarding animals]. Therefore, it enumerates the fewer ones. - [Chul. 63b]
והראה ואת האיה וגו': היא ראה היא איה היא דיה. ולמה נקרא שמה ראה, שרואה ביותר. ולמה הזהיר בכל שמותיה, שלא ליתן פתחון פה לבעל דין לחלוק, שלא יהא האוסרה קורא אותה ראה והבא להתיר אומר, זו דיה שמה או איה שמה, וזו לא אסר הכתוב. ובעופות פרט לך הטמאים, ללמד שהעופות הטהורים מרובים על הטמאים, לפיכך פרט את המועט:
14And every raven after its species; ידוְאֵ֥ת כָּל־עֹרֵ֖ב לְמִינֽוֹ:
15And the ostrich, and the owl, and the gull, and the hawk after its species; טווְאֵת֙ בַּ֣ת הַיַּֽעֲנָ֔ה וְאֶת־הַתַּחְמָ֖ס וְאֶת־הַשָּׁ֑חַף וְאֶת־הַנֵּ֖ץ לְמִינֵֽהוּ:
16The falcon, and the ibis, and the bat; טזאֶת־הַכּ֥וֹס וְאֶת־הַיַּנְשׁ֖וּף וְהַתִּנְשָֽׁמֶת:
the bat: Heb. וְהַתִּנְשֶׁמֶת, calve-soriz [in Old French], bat, [chauve souris in modern French. Note that Rashi on Isa. 2:20 brings this laaz for עִטַלֵּף, whereas here and in Lev. 11:18, he brings it for תִּנְשֶׁמֶת and does not identify עִטַלֵּף.
והתנשמת: קלב"א שורי"ץ [עטלף]:
17And the pelican, and the magpie, and the cormorant; יזוְהַקָּאָ֥ת וְאֶת־הָֽרָחָ֖מָה וְאֶת־הַשָּׁלָֽךְ:
the cormorant: [or the gull] Heb. שָׁלָךְ, [a bird] that draws out (שׁוֹלֶה) fish from the sea. — [Chul. 63b]
שלך: השולה דגים מן הים:
18And the stork, and the heron and its species, and the hoopoe, and the atalef. יחוְהַ֣חֲסִידָ֔ה וְהָֽאֲנָפָ֖ה לְמִינָ֑הּ וְהַדּֽוּכִיפַ֖ת וְהָֽעֲטַלֵּֽף:
and the hoopoe: וְהַדּוּכִיפַת. The wild rooster, [which is called] in Old French haruppe, and which has a double crest. — [Gittin 68]
דוכיפת: הוא תרנגול הבר ובלע"ז הרופ"א [דוכיפת] וכרבלתו כפולה:
19And every flying insect is unclean for you; they may not be eaten. יטוְכֹל֙ שֶׁ֣רֶץ הָע֔וֹף טָמֵ֥א ה֖וּא לָכֶ֑ם לֹ֖א יֵֽאָכֵֽלוּ:
flying insects: שֶׁרֶץ. These are the lowly [creatures] that swarm on the ground: flies, hornets, and the unclean species of locusts. [All these] are called שֶׁרֶץ.
שרץ העוף: הם הנמוכים הרוחשים על הארץ, כגון זבובין וצרעים וחגבים טמאים, הם קרויים שרץ:
20You may eat any clean fowl. ככָּל־ע֥וֹף טָה֖וֹר תֹּאכֵֽלוּ:
You may eat every clean fowl: But not the unclean ones. Here [Scripture] comes to attach a positive commandment to the negative commandment. Similarly, in the case of [clean] animals, it says:“that you may eat” (verse 6), [but] not the unclean ones. A prohibition inferred from a positive commandment [is regarded as] a positive commandment, so that one [who eats such food] transgresses a positive and a negative commandment.
כל עוף טהור תאכלו: ולא את הטמא. בא ליתן עשה על לא תעשה. וכן בבהמה, אותה תאכלו ולא בהמה טמאה, לאו הבא מכלל עשה עשה, לעבור עליהם בעשה ולא תעשה:
21You shall not eat any carcass. You may give it to the stranger who is in your cities, that he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner; for you are a holy people to the Lord, your God. You shall not cook a kid in its mother's milk. כאלֹא־תֹֽאכְל֣וּ כָל־נְ֠בֵלָ֠ה לַגֵּ֨ר אֲשֶׁר־בִּשְׁעָרֶ֜יךָ תִּתְּנֶ֣נָּה וַֽאֲכָלָ֗הּ א֤וֹ מָכֹר֙ לְנָכְרִ֔י כִּ֣י עַ֤ם קָדוֹשׁ֙ אַתָּ֔ה לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה אֱלֹהֶ֑יךָ לֹֽא־תְבַשֵּׁ֥ל גְּדִ֖י בַּֽחֲלֵ֥ב אִמּֽוֹ:
You shall not eat any carcass. You may give it] to the stranger who is within your cities: [i.e.,] a resident alien (גֵּר תּוֹשָׁב), who has accepted upon himself not to worship idols, but he eats carcasses [animals not ritually slaughtered]. — [Sifrei]
לגר אשר בשעריך: גר תושב שקבל עליו שלא לעבוד עבודה זרה ואוכל נבלות:
for you are a holy people to the Lord: Sanctify yourself with that which is permitted to you; i.e., there are things which are technically permissible, but which some people treat as forbidden. In the presence of these people, do not treat those things as permissible. — [Sifrei]
כי עם קדוש אתה לה': קדש את עצמך במותר לך. דברים המותרים ואחרים נוהגים בהם איסור, אל תתירם בפניהם:
You shall not cook a kid [in its mother’s milk]: [This is stated] three times [here, in Exod. 23:19, and in Exod. 34:26], to exclude wild animals, fowl, and unclean animals [from the prohibition of cooking meat in milk]. — [Chul. 113a]
ולא תבשל גדי: שלש פעמים. פרט לחיה ולעופות ולבהמה טמאה:לא תבשל גדי וגו':
Tehillim: Psalm Chapters 113 - 118
• Hebrew text
• English text
Tehillim: Psalm Chapters 113 - 118
• Hebrew text
• English text
Chapter 113
This psalm recounts some of the wonders of the exodus from Egypt.
1. Praise the Lord! Offer praise, you servants of the Lord; praise the Name of the Lord.
2. May the Name of the Lord be blessed from now and to all eternity.
3. From the rising of the sun to its setting, the Name of the Lord is praised.
4. The Lord is high above all nations; His glory transcends the heavens.
5. Who is like the Lord our God, Who dwells on high
6. [yet] looks down so low upon heaven and earth!
7. He raises the poor from the dust, lifts the destitute from the dunghill,
8. to seat them with nobles, with the nobles of His people.
9. He transforms the barren woman into a household, into a joyful mother of children. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 114
This psalm explains why the tribe of Judah merited kingship.
1. When Israel went out of Egypt, the House of Jacob from a people of a foreign tongue,
2. Judah became His holy [nation], Israel, His domain.
3. The sea saw and fled, the Jordan turned backward.
4. The mountains skipped like rams, the hills like young sheep.
5. What is the matter with you, O sea, that you flee; Jordan, that you turn backward;
6. mountains, that you skip like rams; hills, like young sheep?
7. [We do so] before the Master, the Creator of the earth, before the God of Jacob,
8. Who turns the rock into a pool of water, the flintstone into a water fountain.
Chapter 115
A prayer that God bring this long exile to an end, for the sake of His Name-that it not be desecrated.
1. Not for our sake, Lord, not for our sake, but for the sake of Your Name bestow glory, because of Your kindness and Your truth.
2. Why should the nations say, "Where, now, is their God?”
3. Indeed, our God is in heaven; whatever He desires, He does.
4. Their idols are of silver and gold, the product of human hands.
5. They have a mouth, but cannot speak; they have eyes, but cannot see;
6. they have ears, but cannot hear; they have a nose, but cannot smell;
7. their hands cannot touch; their feet cannot walk; they can make no sound in their throat.
8. Those who make them will become like them-all who put their trust in them.
9. Israel, trust in the Lord; He is their help and their shield.
10. House of Aaron, trust in the Lord; He is their help and their shield.
11. You who fear the Lord, trust in the Lord; He is their help and their shield.
12. The Lord who is ever mindful of us, may He bless: May He bless the House of Israel; may He bless the House of Aaron;
13. may He bless those who fear the Lord, the small with the great.
14. May the Lord increase [blessing] upon you, upon you and upon your children.
15. You are blessed by the Lord, the Maker of heaven and earth.
16. The heavens are the Lord's heavens, but the earth He gave to the children of man.
17. The dead cannot praise the Lord, nor any who descend into the silence [of the grave].
18. But we will bless the Lord from now to eternity. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 116
This psalm contains magnificent praises to God. It also describes David's love for God, in light of all the miracles He performed for him. David does not know how to repay God, declaring it impossible to pay back for all God has done for him.
1. I would love if the Lord would listen to my voice, to my supplications;
2. if He would turn His ear to me on the days when I call.
3. The pangs of death encompassed me and the misery of the grave came upon me; I encounter trouble and sorrow.
4. I invoke the Name of the Lord, "Lord, I implore you, deliver my soul!”
5. The Lord is gracious and righteous; our God is compassionate.
6. The Lord watches over the simpletons; I was brought low, and He saved me.
7. Return, my soul, to your tranquility, for the Lord has bestowed goodness upon you.
8. For You have delivered my soul from death, my eyes from tears, my feet from stumbling.
9. I shall walk before the Lord in the lands of the living.
10. I had faith even when I declared, "I am greatly afflicted";
11. [even when] I said in my haste, "All men are deceitful.”
12. How can I repay the Lord for all His beneficences to me?
13. I will raise the cup of deliverance and proclaim the Name of the Lord.
14. I will pay my vows to the Lord in the presence of all His people.
15. Grievous in the eyes of the Lord is the death of His pious ones.
16. I thank you, Lord, that since I am Your servant, I am Your servant the son of Your maidservant, You have loosened my bonds.
17. To You I will bring an offering of thanksgiving, and proclaim the Name of the Lord.
18. I will pay my vows to the Lord in the presence of all His people,
19. in the courtyards of the House of the Lord, in the midst of Jerusalem. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 117
This psalm of two verses alludes to the Messianic era, when the Children of Israel will enjoy their former glory. All will praise God, in fulfillment of the verse, "All will then call in the Name of God."
1. Praise the Lord, all you nations; extol Him, all you peoples.
2. For His kindness was mighty over us, and the truth of the Lord is everlasting. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 118
This psalm describes David's immense trust in God. It also contains many praises to God, Who has fulfilled that which He has promised us.
1. Offer praise to the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is everlasting.
2. Let Israel declare that His kindness is everlasting.
3. Let the House of Aaron declare that His kindness is everlasting.
4. Let those who fear the Lord declare that His kindness is everlasting.
5. From out of distress I called to God; with abounding relief, God answered me.
6. The Lord is with me, I do not fear-what can man do to me?
7. The Lord is with me among my helpers, and I will see [the downfall of] my enemies.
8. It is better to rely on the Lord than to trust in man.
9. It is better to rely on the Lord than to trust in nobles.
10. All the nations surrounded me, but in the Name of the Lord I will cut them down.
11. They surrounded me, they encompassed me, but in the Name of the Lord I will cut them down.
12. They surrounded me like bees, yet they shall be extinguished like fiery thorns; in the Name of the Lord I will cut them down.
13. You [my foes] repeatedly pushed me to fall, but the Lord helped me.
14. God is my strength and song, and He has been a help to me.
15. The sound of rejoicing and deliverance reverberates in the tents of the righteous, "The right hand of the Lord performs deeds of valor.
16. The right hand of the Lord is exalted; the right hand of the Lord performs deeds of valor!”
17. I shall not die, but I shall live and recount the deeds of God.
18. God has indeed chastised me, but He did not give me up to death.
19. Open for me the gates of righteousness; I will enter them and praise God.
20. This is the gate of the Lord, the righteous will enter it.
21. I offer thanks to You, for You have answered me, and You have been my deliverance.
22. The stone which the builders scorned has become the chief cornerstone.
23. From the Lord has this come about; it is wondrous in our eyes.
24. This is the day which the Lord has made; let us be glad and rejoice on it.
25. We implore You, Lord, deliver us. We implore You, Lord, grant us success.
26. Blessed is he who comes in the Name of the Lord; we bless you from the House of the Lord.
27. The Lord is a benevolent God and He has given us light; bind the festival offering with cords until [you bring it to] the horns of the altar.
28. You are my God and I will praise You, my God-and I will exalt You.
29. Praise the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is everlasting.
Tanya: Iggeret HaKodesh, end of Epistle 7
• English Text (Lessons in Tanya)
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
Wednesday, Menachem Av 24, 5777 · August 16, 2017
Today's Tanya Lesson
Iggeret HaKodesh, end of Epistle 7
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Yehoshua B. Gordon Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Manis Freidman Listen • Download MP3Until now the Alter Rebbe has explained the term “our portion.” He now goes on to explain the term “our lot” (in the above-quoted verse, ומה נעים גורלנו — “and how pleasant is our lot”), signifying something bestowed exclusively, and merited only by lot.
והנה אף שגילוי זה, על ידי עסק התורה והמצות, הוא שוה לכל נפש מישראל בדרך כלל
Though this manifestation [of light] through a person’s involvement in the Torah and the commandments is, generally, equal in every individual Jew,
כי תורה אחת ומשפט אחד לכולנו
for we all have1 “one Torah and one law,”
All Jews are equally obliged to study the Torah and to observe its mitzvot; generally speaking, the resultant illumination from Above is likewise drawn down equally to them all.
אף על פי כן, בדרך פרט, אין כל הנפשות או הרוחות והנשמות שוות בענין זה
nevertheless, in a more specific way, in regard to this manifestation of light that radiates through the study of Torah and the performance of the commandments, not every nefesh (the lowest level of the soul) and ruach (“spirit”, a higher level of the soul) and neshamah (a yet higher level of the soul) is equal,
לפי עת וזמן גלגולם ובואם בעולם הזה
for this depends on the period and time of their reincarnation and their coming into this world.
Most souls of present generations are incarnations of souls that had descended into this world in earlier times; they descended once again in order to rectify some aspect of their previous incarnation. The degree of radiation the soul receives from Above through the performance of a particular mitzvahdepends upon the era in which the soul finds itself in this world.
וכמאמר רז״ל: אבוך במאי הוי זהיר טפי, אמר ליה: בציצית
Our Sages, of blessed memory, quote the question:2 “With what [commandment] was your father most careful?” To which the answer was, “With [the commandment of] tzitzit.”
This means that the performance of this commandment kindled within this man a particularly luminous revelation, and it was this G‑dly light that inspired his scrupulous performance. In the spirit of this teaching, and in view of the fact that the three root letters of the word זהיר (translated above as “careful”) also mean “luminous”, the above-quoted question has been under-stood [by the MittelerRebbe] as follows:3 “As a result of which commandment was your father most luminous?”
וכן אין כל הדורות שוין
Likewise, not all the generations4 are the same.
Not only do souls differ: generations differ as well. There have been generations whose primary spiritual challenge was the study of Torah; in other generations it was charity;5 and so on. The reason for this is that the souls of those generations were especially illuminated by the performance of those specific commandments.
כי כמו שאברי האדם, כל אבר יש לו פעולה פרטית ומיוחדת
For just as with the organs of man, each organ has its particular and distinctive function,
העין לראות והאזן לשמוע
the eye to see and the ear to hear,
כך בכל מצוה מאיר אור פרטי ומיוחד מאור אין סוף ברוך הוא
so, too, through each commandment — the commandments being known as the “Organs of the King”6 — there radiates a particular and distinctive light from the [infinite] Ein Sof-light.
ואף שכל נפש מישראל צריכה לבוא בגלגול לקיים כל תרי״ג מצות
And although every Jewish soul needs to be reincarnated in order to fulfill all 613 commandments,
How, then, can we say that a soul that descends to this world in a given period will receive its G‑dly illumination as an individualized bequest, thereby necessitating particular scrupulousness in specific commands?
מכל מקום לא נצרכה אלא להעדפה וזהירות וזריזות יתירה
this [heightened attention focused on a particular commandment] is necessary only for the sake of an addi-tional measure of vigilance and zeal,
ביתר שאת ויתר עז, כפולה ומכופלת
[a zeal] doubly and exceedingly elevated and powerful,
למעלה מעלה מזהירות שאר המצות
far surpassing one’s zeal in [the fulfillment of] the other commandments.
וזהו שאמר: במאי הוי זהיר טפי, טפי דייקא
Hence the word “most” used by the above-quoted individual when he asked, “With what [commandment] was [your father] most careful?”
For scrupulous observance indeed applies to all commandments: the question was only, which command earned his keenest attention.
והנה יתרון האור הזה הפרטי לנשמות פרטיות
Now, the superiority of this individual light [that is bestowed] upon individual souls through the performance of a particular commandment
אינו בבחינת טעם ודעת מושג
is not in the category of apprehensible reason,
אלא למעלה מבחינת הדעת
but transcends it.
שכך עלה במחשבה לפניו יתברך
For thus it arose in G‑d’s thought, so to speak — that certain souls be granted additional illumination through the performance of particular commandments.
ודוגמתו למטה הוא בחינת הגורל ממש
And its model below is truly the concept of a “lot”.
For the fact that one person wins a “lot” while others do not, is likewise not in the category of apprehensible reason. Rather, so has it been deemed from Above; as the verse indicates,7 “The lot is cast into the lap, and from G‑d is its disposition.”
This, then, is the meaning of “how pleasant is our lot.” The disposition of a particular degree of G‑dly illumination to a specific soul through the performance of a select command is wholly dependent upon a consideration that transcends logic: it is a “lot” determined from Above.
FOOTNOTES
1. Bamidbar 15:16.
2. Shabbat 118b.
3. Sefer HaToldot Admur HaEmtza’i, p. 25; Sefer HaSichot 5702, p. 21; Sefer HaMaamarim 5701, p. 240.
4. Note of the Rebbe: “It would seem that this [variation with the different generations] is already included in the differences of ‘period and time’ discussed above. It would be worth examining the manuscripts of Iggeret HaKodesh; possibly the above text should read, ‘the commandments.’”
5. Note of the Rebbe: “See Iggeret HaKodesh, Epistles 5 and 9.”
6. Tikkunei Zohar, Tikkun 30.
7. Mishlei 16:33.
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvot:
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Today's Mitzvah
Menachem Av 24, 5777 · August 16, 2017
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Mendel Kaplan Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Berel Bell Listen • MP3 Download
Positive Commandment 199
Making Collateral Available to the Debtor when Needed
"As the sun sets, you shall surely return the pledge to him"—Deuteronomy 24:13.
A creditor is commanded to return a debt collateral to its Jewish owner when he is in need of it. If the collateral is an item he needs during the daytime – e.g., the tools of his trade or an article of clothing – the creditor must return it to the debtor every day, and only take possession of it during the nighttime. If the collateral is an item needed by night – e.g., linens, blankets or pajamas – he must return it at night and only take possession of it again in the morning.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Making Collateral Available to the Debtor when Needed
Positive Commandment 199
Translated by Berel Bell
The 199th mitzvah is that we are commanded to return a security deposit to its Jewish owner when he needs it. If the objects are needed during the day, such as tools he works with, you must give them to him during the day and hold them only at night. If they are needed at night, such as a mat and blanket for sleeping, you must give them to him during the night and hold them only during the day.
In the words of the Mechilta: "The verse,1 'You must return it to him before sunrise' refers to a garment worn during the day, which you give to him for the entire day. What is the source for the law that a garment worn at night must be given to him for the entire night? The verse,2 'Return the security to him before the sun sets.' " Therefore our Sages said, "A day garment may be held at night and a night garment held during the day; the day garment is returned for the day and the night garment for the night."
It has already been explained in tractate Makkos3 that the verse4 "[When you make any kind of loan to your neighbor,] do not go into his house to take something as security" is a lav she'nitak l'aseh (a prohibition with a remedial positive commandment) — the positive command being "Return the security to him." In the words of the Sifri: "The verse 'Return [the security to him]' teaches that an article that is used during the day must be returned for the day, and one used at night for the night. A quilt is returned for the night and a plow for the day."
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the 9th chapter of tractate Bava Metzia.5
FOOTNOTES
1.Ex. 22:25.
2.Deut. 24:13.
3.16a.
4.Deut. 24:10.
5.113a
Negative Commandment 240
Withholding Collateral from the Debtor when it's Needed
"You shall not sleep while holding his security"—Deuteronomy 24:12.
It is forbidden for a creditor to withhold a debt's collateral from its owner, the debtor, when he cannot do without it due to his poverty (see Positive Commandment 199). Rather he must return the collateral to him—an item used during the daytime must be returned for the duration of every day, and an item used at night must be returned for the duration of every night. As the Mishnah says, "He must return the pillow at night and the plow for the day."
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Withholding Collateral from the Debtor when it's Needed
Negative Commandment 240
Translated by Berel Bell
The 240th prohibition is that we are forbidden from holding someone's security deposit during the time that he needs it. An article which is used during the day must be returned for the day, and one used at night for the night, as the Mishneh says,1 "A pillow is returned for the night and a plow for the day."
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "you may not go to sleep with his security." The Sifri explains, "[The verse means] 'you may not go to sleep with his security' in your possession." Instead, anything which he cannot replace due to his poverty must be returned to him, as explained in the verse,3 "[If you take your neighbor's garment as security, you must return it to him before sunset.] This alone is his covering, the garment for his skin."
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the 9th chapter of tractate Bava Metzia.
FOOTNOTES
1.Bava Metzia 113a.
2.Deut. 24:12.
3.Ex. 22:26.
Rambam:• 1 Chapter A Day: Edut Edut - Chapter 14
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
RambamTanya: Iggeret HaKodesh, end of Epistle 7
• English Text (Lessons in Tanya)
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
Wednesday, Menachem Av 24, 5777 · August 16, 2017
Today's Tanya Lesson
Iggeret HaKodesh, end of Epistle 7
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Yehoshua B. Gordon Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Manis Freidman Listen • Download MP3Until now the Alter Rebbe has explained the term “our portion.” He now goes on to explain the term “our lot” (in the above-quoted verse, ומה נעים גורלנו — “and how pleasant is our lot”), signifying something bestowed exclusively, and merited only by lot.
והנה אף שגילוי זה, על ידי עסק התורה והמצות, הוא שוה לכל נפש מישראל בדרך כלל
Though this manifestation [of light] through a person’s involvement in the Torah and the commandments is, generally, equal in every individual Jew,
כי תורה אחת ומשפט אחד לכולנו
for we all have1 “one Torah and one law,”
All Jews are equally obliged to study the Torah and to observe its mitzvot; generally speaking, the resultant illumination from Above is likewise drawn down equally to them all.
אף על פי כן, בדרך פרט, אין כל הנפשות או הרוחות והנשמות שוות בענין זה
nevertheless, in a more specific way, in regard to this manifestation of light that radiates through the study of Torah and the performance of the commandments, not every nefesh (the lowest level of the soul) and ruach (“spirit”, a higher level of the soul) and neshamah (a yet higher level of the soul) is equal,
לפי עת וזמן גלגולם ובואם בעולם הזה
for this depends on the period and time of their reincarnation and their coming into this world.
Most souls of present generations are incarnations of souls that had descended into this world in earlier times; they descended once again in order to rectify some aspect of their previous incarnation. The degree of radiation the soul receives from Above through the performance of a particular mitzvahdepends upon the era in which the soul finds itself in this world.
וכמאמר רז״ל: אבוך במאי הוי זהיר טפי, אמר ליה: בציצית
Our Sages, of blessed memory, quote the question:2 “With what [commandment] was your father most careful?” To which the answer was, “With [the commandment of] tzitzit.”
This means that the performance of this commandment kindled within this man a particularly luminous revelation, and it was this G‑dly light that inspired his scrupulous performance. In the spirit of this teaching, and in view of the fact that the three root letters of the word זהיר (translated above as “careful”) also mean “luminous”, the above-quoted question has been under-stood [by the MittelerRebbe] as follows:3 “As a result of which commandment was your father most luminous?”
וכן אין כל הדורות שוין
Likewise, not all the generations4 are the same.
Not only do souls differ: generations differ as well. There have been generations whose primary spiritual challenge was the study of Torah; in other generations it was charity;5 and so on. The reason for this is that the souls of those generations were especially illuminated by the performance of those specific commandments.
כי כמו שאברי האדם, כל אבר יש לו פעולה פרטית ומיוחדת
For just as with the organs of man, each organ has its particular and distinctive function,
העין לראות והאזן לשמוע
the eye to see and the ear to hear,
כך בכל מצוה מאיר אור פרטי ומיוחד מאור אין סוף ברוך הוא
so, too, through each commandment — the commandments being known as the “Organs of the King”6 — there radiates a particular and distinctive light from the [infinite] Ein Sof-light.
ואף שכל נפש מישראל צריכה לבוא בגלגול לקיים כל תרי״ג מצות
And although every Jewish soul needs to be reincarnated in order to fulfill all 613 commandments,
How, then, can we say that a soul that descends to this world in a given period will receive its G‑dly illumination as an individualized bequest, thereby necessitating particular scrupulousness in specific commands?
מכל מקום לא נצרכה אלא להעדפה וזהירות וזריזות יתירה
this [heightened attention focused on a particular commandment] is necessary only for the sake of an addi-tional measure of vigilance and zeal,
ביתר שאת ויתר עז, כפולה ומכופלת
[a zeal] doubly and exceedingly elevated and powerful,
למעלה מעלה מזהירות שאר המצות
far surpassing one’s zeal in [the fulfillment of] the other commandments.
וזהו שאמר: במאי הוי זהיר טפי, טפי דייקא
Hence the word “most” used by the above-quoted individual when he asked, “With what [commandment] was [your father] most careful?”
For scrupulous observance indeed applies to all commandments: the question was only, which command earned his keenest attention.
והנה יתרון האור הזה הפרטי לנשמות פרטיות
Now, the superiority of this individual light [that is bestowed] upon individual souls through the performance of a particular commandment
אינו בבחינת טעם ודעת מושג
is not in the category of apprehensible reason,
אלא למעלה מבחינת הדעת
but transcends it.
שכך עלה במחשבה לפניו יתברך
For thus it arose in G‑d’s thought, so to speak — that certain souls be granted additional illumination through the performance of particular commandments.
ודוגמתו למטה הוא בחינת הגורל ממש
And its model below is truly the concept of a “lot”.
For the fact that one person wins a “lot” while others do not, is likewise not in the category of apprehensible reason. Rather, so has it been deemed from Above; as the verse indicates,7 “The lot is cast into the lap, and from G‑d is its disposition.”
This, then, is the meaning of “how pleasant is our lot.” The disposition of a particular degree of G‑dly illumination to a specific soul through the performance of a select command is wholly dependent upon a consideration that transcends logic: it is a “lot” determined from Above.
FOOTNOTES
1. Bamidbar 15:16.
2. Shabbat 118b.
3. Sefer HaToldot Admur HaEmtza’i, p. 25; Sefer HaSichot 5702, p. 21; Sefer HaMaamarim 5701, p. 240.
4. Note of the Rebbe: “It would seem that this [variation with the different generations] is already included in the differences of ‘period and time’ discussed above. It would be worth examining the manuscripts of Iggeret HaKodesh; possibly the above text should read, ‘the commandments.’”
5. Note of the Rebbe: “See Iggeret HaKodesh, Epistles 5 and 9.”
6. Tikkunei Zohar, Tikkun 30.
7. Mishlei 16:33.
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvot:
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassToday's Mitzvah
Menachem Av 24, 5777 · August 16, 2017
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Mendel Kaplan Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Berel Bell Listen • MP3 Download
Positive Commandment 199
Making Collateral Available to the Debtor when Needed
"As the sun sets, you shall surely return the pledge to him"—Deuteronomy 24:13.
A creditor is commanded to return a debt collateral to its Jewish owner when he is in need of it. If the collateral is an item he needs during the daytime – e.g., the tools of his trade or an article of clothing – the creditor must return it to the debtor every day, and only take possession of it during the nighttime. If the collateral is an item needed by night – e.g., linens, blankets or pajamas – he must return it at night and only take possession of it again in the morning.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Making Collateral Available to the Debtor when Needed
Positive Commandment 199
Translated by Berel Bell
The 199th mitzvah is that we are commanded to return a security deposit to its Jewish owner when he needs it. If the objects are needed during the day, such as tools he works with, you must give them to him during the day and hold them only at night. If they are needed at night, such as a mat and blanket for sleeping, you must give them to him during the night and hold them only during the day.
In the words of the Mechilta: "The verse,1 'You must return it to him before sunrise' refers to a garment worn during the day, which you give to him for the entire day. What is the source for the law that a garment worn at night must be given to him for the entire night? The verse,2 'Return the security to him before the sun sets.' " Therefore our Sages said, "A day garment may be held at night and a night garment held during the day; the day garment is returned for the day and the night garment for the night."
It has already been explained in tractate Makkos3 that the verse4 "[When you make any kind of loan to your neighbor,] do not go into his house to take something as security" is a lav she'nitak l'aseh (a prohibition with a remedial positive commandment) — the positive command being "Return the security to him." In the words of the Sifri: "The verse 'Return [the security to him]' teaches that an article that is used during the day must be returned for the day, and one used at night for the night. A quilt is returned for the night and a plow for the day."
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the 9th chapter of tractate Bava Metzia.5
FOOTNOTES
1.Ex. 22:25.
2.Deut. 24:13.
3.16a.
4.Deut. 24:10.
5.113a
Negative Commandment 240
Withholding Collateral from the Debtor when it's Needed
"You shall not sleep while holding his security"—Deuteronomy 24:12.
It is forbidden for a creditor to withhold a debt's collateral from its owner, the debtor, when he cannot do without it due to his poverty (see Positive Commandment 199). Rather he must return the collateral to him—an item used during the daytime must be returned for the duration of every day, and an item used at night must be returned for the duration of every night. As the Mishnah says, "He must return the pillow at night and the plow for the day."
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Withholding Collateral from the Debtor when it's Needed
Negative Commandment 240
Translated by Berel Bell
The 240th prohibition is that we are forbidden from holding someone's security deposit during the time that he needs it. An article which is used during the day must be returned for the day, and one used at night for the night, as the Mishneh says,1 "A pillow is returned for the night and a plow for the day."
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "you may not go to sleep with his security." The Sifri explains, "[The verse means] 'you may not go to sleep with his security' in your possession." Instead, anything which he cannot replace due to his poverty must be returned to him, as explained in the verse,3 "[If you take your neighbor's garment as security, you must return it to him before sunset.] This alone is his covering, the garment for his skin."
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the 9th chapter of tractate Bava Metzia.
FOOTNOTES
1.Bava Metzia 113a.
2.Deut. 24:12.
3.Ex. 22:26.
Rambam:• 1 Chapter A Day: Edut Edut - Chapter 14
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Edut - Chapter 14
1
Whenever a witness is disqualified from testifying on behalf of a colleague because he is married to the witness' relative, if that relative's wife dies, even if she left him sons, he is considered to have been released from any connection and is acceptable as a witness.
א
כל מי שאין אתה מעיד לו מפני שהוא בעל קרובתך אם מתה אשתו אע"פ שהניחה לו בנים הרי זה נתרחק וכשר:
2
When a person knew of evidence concerning a colleague before he became his son-in-law, and then became his son-in-law, he is not acceptable. The same law applies if a person was in control of his senses and then became a deaf-mute, was able to see and became blind - even though he is aware of the measure of land concerning which he testifies and can define its boundaries, or was intellectually and emotionally sound and then lost control of his faculties.
If, by contrast, a person knew of evidence concerning a colleague before he became his son-in-law, became his son-in-law, and then that colleague's daughterdied, the witness is acceptable. Similar laws apply if a person was in control of his senses, became a deaf-mute, and then regained control of his senses, was intellectually and emotionally sound, lost control of his faculties, and then regained control of them, or was able to see, became blind, and then regained his sight.
The general principle is: Whenever a person is an acceptable witness at the initial and the final stages, he is acceptable even though in the interim, he was not acceptable as a witness. If, however, initially he is unacceptable, even though ultimately, he would be acceptable, he is disqualified. Therefore when a person is aware of evidence as a child, it is of no consequence for him to testify with regard to it when he attains majority.
ב
מי שהיה יודע לחבירו עדות עד שלא נעשה חתנו ונעשה חתנו או שידע העדות והוא פקח ואח"כ נתחרש פתוח ונסתמא אע"פ שיכול לכוין מדת הקרקע שהוא מעיד בה ומסיים מצריה שפוי ונשתטה הרי זה פסול אבל אם היה יודע לו עדות עד שלא נעשה חתנו ונעשה חתנו ומתה בתו פקח ונתחרש וחזר ונתפקח שפוי ונשתטה וחזר ונשתפה פתוח ונסתמא וחזר ונתפתח כשר זה הכלל כל שתחלתו וסופו בכשרות אף על פי שנפסל בינתים כשר תחלתו בפסלות אף על פי שסופו בכשרות פסול לפיכך מי שהיה יודע בעדות והוא קטן ובא והעיד בה כשהוא גדול אינה כלום:
3
There are matters concerning which we rely on the testimony which a person gives after he attains majority with regard to events that he observed when he was a child. The rationale is that these are matters of Rabbinical origin. The matters are as follows; a person's word is accepted when he states: a) "This is the signature of my father," "...my teacher," "...or my brother," the rationale is that the validation of legal documents is a Rabbinic requirement;
b) "I remember that when so-and-so was married, they performed the customs performed for a virgin"; since most women marry when virgins and a ketubah is a Rabbinic institution;
c) "This place is a beit hapras," for the ritual impurity associated with such a place is a Rabbinic safeguard;
d) "We would proceed until this point on the Sabbath," because the restriction of the Sabbath limits until only 2000 cubits is a Rabbinic restriction;
e) "So-and-so would leave school to immerse himself in a mikveh and eat terumah in the evening" or "he would receive a portion of terumah with us;"
f) "We would bring challah and presents of meat to so-and-so, the priest"; this applies when the presents were sent with the person himself;
g) "My father told me, 'This family is acceptable; this family is not acceptable";
h) "We ate from the fruit-barrel brought by the brothers of so-and-so to inform others that their brother, so-and-so, married a woman that was not appropriate for him.
All of the latter four points involve establishing a person as a priest to enable him to partake of terumah that is separated at present because of Rabbinic decree or to prevent him from partaking of it.
ג
ויש דברים שסומכין בהן על עדות שמעיד כשהוא גדול הואיל והם דברים של דבריהם ואלו הן הדברים שאדם נאמן להעיד בגודלו על מה שראה בקטנו נאמן אדם לומר זה כתב ידו של אבי או של רבי או של אחי מפני שקיום שטרות מדבריהם זכור אני בפלונית שנישאת ונעשה לה מנהג הבתולות הואיל ורוב נשים בתולות נישאות וכתובה מדבריהם שהמקום הזה בית הפרס מפני שטומאתו מדבריהם ועד כאן היינו באין בשבת שצמצום התחום עד אלפים אמה בלבד מדבריהם שהיה איש פלוני יוצא מבית הספר לטבול ולאכול בתרומתו לערב ושהיה חולק עמנו תרומה ושהיינו מוליכים חלה ומתנות לפלוני כהן ע"י עצמו ואמר לי אבא משפחה זו כשרה משפחה זו פסולה ואכלנו בקצצה של פלוני שהאכילוני אחיו כדי להודיע שאחיהם פלוני נשא אשה שאינה הוגנת לו שכל אלו הדברים להחזיק זה הכהן לאכול בתרומה של דבריהם או לדחותו ממנה:
4
The leniency granted in all these situations to accept the testimony of a person who reached majority with regard to what he knew when he was a minor is not granted when a gentile or a servant witnessed such matters and gave such testimony after he converted and was freed.
ד
כל אלו שמעיד בהן הגדול במה שידע כשהיה קטן אם היה עכו"ם או עבד כשראה דברים אלו והעיד אחר שנתגייר ונשתחרר אינו נאמן:
5
If, before becoming a robber, a person knew of evidence concerning a colleague and recorded that evidence in a legal document and then became a robber, he cannot testify with regard to his signature. If, however, his signature to the legal document was validated in court before he became a robber, the legal document is acceptable.
Similarly, if a witness becomes a person's son-in-law, he may not testify concerning his signature on a legal document involving his father-in-law. Others, however, may testify concerning the son-in-law's signature. Even though the document is not validated by the court until after the witness becomes a person's son-in-law, it is acceptable. The disqualification of a witness because of a transgression is not the same as the disqualification of a witness because of a family connection, for a person disqualified because of a transgression is suspected of forging the document.
ה
מי שהיה יודע לחבירו בעדות עד שלא נעשה גזלן ונעשה גזלן הוא אינו מעיד על כתב ידו אבל אם הוחזק כתב ידו שבשטר זה בבית דין קודם שיעשה גזלן הרי זה שטר כשר וכן אם נעשה חתנו הוא אינו מעיד על כתב ידו אבל אחרים מעידין אע"פ שלא הוחזק בבית דין אלא אחר שנעשה חתנו הרי זה כשר שאינו דומה הפסול בעבירה לפסול בקריבה שהפסול בעבירה חשוד לזייף:
6
When a legal document has only two witnesses signed upon it and they are related to each other or one of them is disqualified because of a transgression, even if the document was transferred in the presence of acceptable witnesses, it is worthless, like a shard, because of the invalid signatures inside it.
ו
שטר שיש בו שני עדים בלבד ושניהם קרובים זה לזה או אחד משניהם פסול בעבירה אף על פי שמסר לו השטר בפני עדים כשרים הרי הוא כחרס מפני שהוא מזוייף מתוכו:
7
The following rule applies when a person composes one legal document including testimony that he is granting all of his property to two people and the witnesses to the document are related to one of the recipients of the present, but not related to the other. The document is not acceptable, because it is one statement of testimony.
If, however, he writes in one legal document that he is giving this-and-this courtyard to Reuven and this-and-this field to Shimon, and the witnesses are related to one, but not to the other, the present given to the recipient to whom the witnesses are not related is binding. Even though the two statements are included in one legal document, they are considered as separate testimonies. To what can the matter be compared to a person who says: "Serve as witnesses that I gave Reuven this-and-this, that I gave Shimon this-and-this, and that I borrowed such-and-such from Levi." Although they were all included in the same legal document and there is only one person transferring the property, they are considered as three distinct statements.
ז
הכותב כל נכסיו לשני בני אדם בעדות אחת והעדים קרובים לאחד ממקבלי המתנה ורחוקים מן השני הרי השטר פסול מפני שהוא עדות אחת אבל אם כתב בשטר אחד שנתתי לראובן חצר פלונית ושנתתי לשמעון שדה פלונית נמצאו העדים קרובים לזה ורחוקים מזה זה שהם רחוקים ממנו מתנתו קיימת שאלו שתי עדויות אע"פ שהן בשטר אחד למה זה דומה לאומר היו עלי עדים שנתתי לראובן כך וכך ושנתתי לשמעון כך וכך ושלויתי מלוי כך וכך שאף על פי שכתב בשטר אחד והמקנה איש אחד הרי אלו שלש עדויות שאינן תלויות זו בזו:
Rambam• 3 Chapters A Day: Malveh veLoveh Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 10, Malveh veLoveh Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 11, Malveh veLoveh Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 12
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 10
1
Just as it is permitted for a seller to take an order based on the market price; so, too, it is permitted to give a loan of produce without any conditions, to be returned without any conditions, without establishing a time when it must be returned once the market price has been established.
What is implied? If there was a fixed market price for wheat that was known by both the borrower and the lender, when the borrower borrows ten se'ah of wheat from a colleague, he is obligated to return ten se'ah, even though the price of wheat increased. The rationale is that when he borrowed the wheat from him, the market price was known. If he had wanted to, he could have purchased wheat and returned it, since a minimum term of the loan was not established.
א
כשם שמותר למוכר לפסוק על שער שבשוק כך מותר ללוות הפירות סתם ופורעין סתם בלא קביעת זמן על השער שבשוק, כיצד היה השער קבוע וידוע לשניהם ולוה מחבירו עשר סאין חייב להחזיר לו עשר סאין אע"פ שהוקרו החיטים שהרי כשלוה ממנו היה השער ידוע ואילו רצה היה קונה ומחזיר לו שהרי לא קבע לו זמן. 1
2
If the borrower possesses some of the type of produce that he seeks to borrow, it is permissible for him to borrow this produce without any conditions, to be returned without any conditions, without establishing a time when it is due. Even if he possesses only a se'ah, he may borrow many se'ah because of it. Even if he possesses only a drop of oil or wine, he may borrow several jugs of wine and oil because of it.
If he did not possess any of that type of produce and the market price was not established yet, or the borrower and the lender did not know the market price, it is forbidden to lend a se'ah of produce for a se'ah to be returned at a later date. Similarly, with regard to other types of produce, a person should not lend them out until he establishes a financial equivalent. The following rules apply when a person makes a loan of produce without establishing a financial equivalent, and it decreases in value. The borrower must return the measure or the weight of the fruit he borrowed. If they increased in value, the lender may take only the amount they were worth at the time of the loan.
Even if a person possesses that type of produce, or the market price had already been established, it is forbidden to make a loan of produce that must be repaid on a specific date. Instead, the loan must be made without any stipulation, and it can be repaid whenever the borrower desires to repay it.
ב
היה לו מאותו המין שלוה ה"ז מותר ללוות סתם בלא קביעת זמן ופורע סתם אע"פ שעדיין לא יצא השער, ואפילו היתה לו סאה בלבד לוה עליה כמה סאין, היתה לו טיפה אחת של שמן או של יין לוה עליה כמה גרבי יין ושמן, לא היתה לו מאותו המין כלום ולא נקבע שער השוק עדיין או שלא ידעו שער השוק ה"ז אסור ללוות סאה בסאה, וכן בשאר הפירות לא ילוה אותן עד שיעשה אותן דמים, ואם לוה ולא עשה אותן [דמים] והוזלו מחזיר לו פירות כמדה שלוה או כמשקל ואם הוקר נוטל דמים שהיו שוין בשעת הלואה, אע"פ שיש לו מאותו המין או שהיה השער קבוע בשוק הרי זה אסור ללוות פירות בפירות עד זמן קבוע אלא לוה סתם ופורע באיזה זמן שיפרע.
3
A person should not tell a colleague: "Lend me a kor of wheat and I will return a kor to you at the time when wheat is brought to the granaries." He may, however, tell him: "Lend me wheat until my son comes, or until I find the key to my storehouse."
ג
לא יאמר אדם לחבירו הלוני כור חטים ואני אחזיר לך כור לגורן אלא אומר לו הלוני עד שיבא בני או עד שאמצע המפתח.
4
The following rules apply if a person lent out produce until a fixed date: If the produce diminished in value, the borrower should return the produce at the time set. If the produce increased in value, the borrower should pay him the money that it was worth at the time of the loan.
ד
לוה פירות עד זמן קבוע אם הוזלו מחזיר לו פירות בזמן שקבע ואם הוקרו נותן לו דמים שהיו שוין בשעת ההלואה.
5
A person may lend wheat to his sharecroppers to be used as seed, in return for wheat to be paid back after the harvest. This applies both before the sharecropper enters the field and after he entered the field.
When does this apply? In a place where it is customary that the sharecropper supplies the seed for the crops. For the owner of the field has the right to remove the sharecropper from the field whenever he does not supply it.
Different laws apply in places where it is customary for the owner of the field to provide the seed. If the sharecropper did not enter the field yet, it is permitted for the owner to lend wheat for wheat to be returned in the future, for he still has the prerogative of removing the sharecropper from the field. Thus, when the sharecropper entered the field, he entered with the intent of returning the wheat the owner lent him.
If, however, the loan was made after the sharecropper entered the field, since the owner can no longer have him removed, he is like any other person. It is forbidden to lend him wheat for seed in return for wheat to be paid back at a later date. He may, however, lend him wheat according to its market value if he does not make any stipulations.
ה
מלוה אדם את אריסיו חטים בחטים לזרע בין קודם שירד האריס לשדה בין אחר שירד, בד"א במקום שנהגו שיתן האריס את הזרע שהרי ביד בעל הקרקע לסלקו כל זמן שלא נתן אבל במקום שדרך בעל הקרקע ליתן את הזרע אם עדיין לא ירד האריס ה"ז מותר להלוות חטים בחטים שעדיין יש לו לסלקו נמצא בעת שירד לשדה ירד על דעת שיחזיר לו חטים שהלוהו, אבל אחר שירד לשדה הואיל ואינו יכול לסלקו הרי הוא ככל אדם ואסור להלוותו חטים בחטים לזרע אבל מלוהו סתם על שער שבשוק.
6
A loan may not be repaid with a loan of produce. To explain: A person owed a colleague money. The lender told the borrower: "Give me my money, because I want to purchase wheat with it."
The borrower responded: "Go out and establish the money I owe you as a debt of wheat according to the present market price."
If the borrower possesses an equivalent quantity of wheat, this is permitted. If, however, he does not have that type of produce, this is forbidden. For our Sages said that it is permitted to place an order based on a commodity's market price, even though the seller does not possess any of that commodity, only when the purchaser is paying money for the acquisition. It is, however, forbidden to transfer a debt of money into a debt of produce unless the borrower possesses the produce.
The concept can be extended when, in the above situation, the borrower did possess wheat and the debt was transferred into a debt of wheat. Similar rules apply if afterwards the lender comes and tells him: "Give me the wheat, because I want to sell it and use the money to purchase wine," and in response, the borrower tells him: "Go out and consider the debt as a debt of wine, according to the present market price of wine." If he possesses wine, it is permitted and it is considered as if he owes him wine. If he does not possess wine, it is forbidden.
If the borrower did not possess the commodity desired, but nevertheless, transgressed and transferred the debt into a debt of that commodity, he is not required to pay the debt in the commodity. Even though he did purchase the commodity afterwards, he should pay the lender the money he lent him.
ו
מי שהיה נושה בחבירו מעות ואמר לו תן לי מעותי שאני רוצה ליקח בהן חטים אמר לו צא ועשה אותן עלי כשער של עכשיו ויהיה לך אצלי חטים בהלואה, אם יש לו חטים כשיעור מעותיו מותר ואם אין [לו] אותו המין ה"ז אסור שלא אמרו חכמים שמותר לפסוק על שער שבשוק אע"פ שאין לו כלום מאותו המין אלא בנותן מעותיו לקנות בהן פירות אבל הרוצה להעמיד הלואתו על גב הפירות אסור עד שיהיו לו פירות, היה ללוה חטים ועשה הלואתו עליו חטים ובא אחר זמן ואמר לו תן לי חטים שאני רוצה למוכרן וליקח בדמיהן יין אמר לו צא ועשה אותן עלי יין כשער שבשוק עתה, אם יש לו יין הרי זה מותר ונעשית הלואתו אצלו יין ואם אין לו יין אסור, הרי שלא היה לו ועבר והחזיר ההלואה פירות אף על פי שקנה פירות אחר כך אינו חייב ליתן לו פירות אלא נותן לו מעות שהלוהו.
FOOTNOTES
1.כשם שמותר למוכר וכו' אע"פ שיש לו כו' ה"ז אסור וכו' עד באיזה זמן שיפרע. א"א חדוש זה לא שמענו מעולם אלא אם יש לו או על שער שבשוק לוה סאה בסאה סתם בלא עשיית דמים אפילו לזמן קצוב עכ"ל.
Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 11
1
When a person lends money to a colleague in the presence of witnesses, or a borrower tells witnesses: "Serve as witnesses for me that I owe this person a maneh" or "You are my witnesses that I owe this person a maneh," the obligation established is referred to as a milveh b'al peh, "a loan supported by an oral commitment." Such a debt need not be repaid in the presence of witnesses.' Therefore, if the debtor claims: "I repaid the debt," he is required to take a sh'vuat hesset and is discharged.
When, by contrast, a person lends money to a colleague and has the debt supported by a promissory note, the debtor must repay him in the presence of witnesses. Therefore, if the debtor claims: "I paid this promissory note," his words are not accepted. Instead, we tell him: "Bring witnesses who testify that you paid or "Arise and pay the debt you owe him."
Therefore, when a person tells witnesses: "Serve as witnesses for me that I owe this person a maneh" they may not write down a record of their testimony and give it to the lender, unless the borrower tells them: "Write a promissory note, sign it and give it to the lender. The rationale is that their testimony, which is only oral, should not be given the legal power of a promissory note. Even when the borrower gives such instructions, they should consult with him after they have signed the promissory note. Only afterwards, may they give the promissory note to the lender in his hand.
If they performed a kinyan with the borrower affirming that he owes the lender a maneh, the witnesses may write a promissory note and give it to the lender, even though the borrower did not instruct them to do so. The rationale is that when a kinyan is performed without any further instructions, it is ready to be recorded in a legal document. There is no need to consult the borrower.
א
המלוה את חבירו בפני עדים או שאמר לעדים היו עלי עדים שאני חייב לזה מנה או אתם עדי שאני חייב לזה מנה זו נקראת מלוה על פה וא"צ לפורעו בעדים לפיכך אם טען ואמר אחר כך פרעתי נשבע היסת ונפטר, אבל המלוה את חבירו בשטר צריך לפרעו בעדים לפיכך אם טען ואמר פרעתי שטר זה אינו נאמן אלא אומרים לו או הבא עדים או עמוד ושלם לו חובו, לפיכך האומר לעדים היו עלי עדים שאני חייב לזה מנה אין כותבין עדותן ונותנין למלוה שלא יחזירו למלוה על פה עדות בשטר עד שיאמר להן הלוה כתבו שטר וחתמו ותנו לו, אף על פי שאמר להן כך צריכין להמלך בו אחר שחתמו בשטר ואח"כ נותנין השטר ביד המלוה, קנו מידו שהוא חייב לו מנה הרי אלו כותבין ונותנין אע"פ שלא אמר להן כתובו שסתם קנין לכתיבה עומד ואינן צריכין להמלך בו. 1
2
When a borrower writes a document by himself and witnesses write testimony upon it and give it to the lender, it is an acceptable promissory note.
Similarly, should the borrower compose a promissory note - even when there are no witnesses who sign it - and give it to the lender in the presence of witnesses, the loan is considered to be backed by a promissory note, provided that it is written with a script that cannot be forged and that the witnesses in whose presence it was transferred read it.
There are Geonim who ruled that the borrower should tell the witnesses in whose presence the promissory note was transferred: "Sign the note or testify that it was transferred in your presence."
ב
לוה שכתב שטר בכתב ידו והעיד בו עדים ונתנו למלוה הרי זה שטר כשר, וכן אם כתב שטר אע"פ שאין בו עדים ונתנו למלוה בפני עדים הרי זו מלוה בשטר והוא שיהיה כתב שאינו יכול להזדייף ויקראו אותו העדים שנמסר בפניהם, ויש מן הגאונים שהורה שצריך לומר לעדים שמסרו בפניהם חתמו והעידו שנמסר בפניכם.
3
If the lender produces a note written by the borrower , which states that he owes the lender money, but there are no witnesses who have signed it, it is considered as merely a loan supported by an oral commitment with regard to all matters. This applies even if the authenticity of his writing was verified.
Hence, if the borrower claims to have paid the debt, and the lender denies receiving payment, the borrower need only take a sh'vuat hesset before being dismissed. Nor may the lender use this note to expropriate property from the heirs, nor from the purchasers.
ג
הוציא עליו כתב ידו שהוא חייב לו ואין שם עדים אע"פ שהוחזק כתב ידו בבית דין הרי זה כמלוה ע"פ לכל דבר, ואם טען שפרע נשבע היסת ונפטר ואינו גובה בכתב זה לא מן היורשין ולא מן הלקוחות.
4
Whenever a loan is supported by a promissory note, the lender may use this note to expropriate property from the heirs and from the purchasers, as will be explained. When, by contrast, a loan is merely supported by an oral commitment, the lender may expropriate payment from the heirs, but not from the purchasers. The rationale for this restriction is that such a loan does not become public knowledge. Therefore, the lender may not expropriate property because of such an obligation.
A loan supported by a promissory note, by contrast, does become public knowledge. Therefore, it may be used to expropriate property that was sold. The purchaser of such property caused himself a loss, because he did not inquire to the extent that he discovered that the property of the person he purchased it from was on lien because of the loan that person had taken. For according to Scriptural Law, all property belonging to a borrower is on lien to the loan.
ד
כל מלוה בשטר גובה אותה מן היורשין ומן הלקוחות כמו שיתבאר, ומלוה על פה גובה אותה מן היורשין ואינו גובה אותה מן הלקוחות לפי שאין לה קול לפיכך לא יטרוף בה, אבל מלוה שבשטר קול יש לה והלוקח הפסיד על עצמו שלא שאל עד שידע שנכסיו של זה משועבדין במלוה שעליו, שכל נכסי הלוה תחת שיעבוד המלוה מן התורה.
5
When a person sells his field in the presence of witnesses, and a creditor of the seller expropriates the field from the purchaser, the purchaser may expropriate the money due him from property that was on lien to the sale that had been sold to others, as will be explained. The rationale is that whenever a person makes a sale, it is done in public and becomes common knowledge.
ה
המוכר שדהו בעדים ויצאת מתחת ידי הלוקח אע"פ שאין שם שטר ביד הלוקח הרי זה חוזר וטורף מנכסים משועבדים כמו שיתבאר שכל המוכר בפרהסיא מוכר וקול יש לו.
6
A loan that is supported by an oral commitment alone may be collected from heirs only in one of the following three instances:
a) the person who is liable admits his debt, and while mortally ill stated that he still owes so-and-so a debt;
b) the loan was given for a specific time, and the time for payment had not come; we operate under the presumption that a person will not pay a debt until it is due;
c) because of his failure to pay, the debtor was placed under a ban of ostracism until he would make restitution, and he died while under that ban.
In all these instances, the creditor may collect the debt from the heirs without having to take an oath. If, however, witnesses come and testify that the deceased owed a colleague a maneh, or that he borrowed money in their presence, the creditor may not collect anything from the heirs, because it is possible that the deceased repaid the loan. For a person who borrowed money from a colleague in the presence of witnesses does not have to repay him in the presence of witnesses. Similarly, if a person shows heirs a note from their father stating that he owes the claimant money, he may not collect anything because of it, as we have explained.
ו
אין ההלואה שעל פה נגבית מן היורשין אלא באחד מג' דברים אלו כשחייב מודה בה וצוה בחליו שיש לפלוני עליו חוב עדיין, או שהיתה ההלואה לזמן ולא הגיע זמן לפרעה וחזקה היא שאין אדם פורע בתוך זמנו, או שנדוהו עד שיתן ומת בנדויו כל אלו גובין מן היורשין בלא שבועה, אבל אם באו עדים שהיה חייב לזה מנה או בפנינו הלוהו אינו גובה מן היורש כלום שמא פרעו שהמלוה את חבירו בעדים אין צריך לפרעו בעדים, וכן אם מוציא כתב יד אביהן שהוא חייב לו אינו גובה בו כלום כמו שביארנו.
7
The following rules apply when a borrower does not own movable property, but does own landed property. If the court is aware that he has deposited his money in the hands of other people, we compel him to sell the landed property and pay his creditor.
If this is not known to them, they issue a ban of ostracism against anyone who knows that the debtor possesses movable property and does not bring it to court. Afterwards, they take possession of property he owns that is of intermediate worth and expropriate it for the creditor, as will be explained.
When does the above apply? When payment is collected from the debtor himself. When, however, a person comes to collect payment from heirs -whether they are above or below majority - he does not have the right to collect from the movable property belonging to the estate even if it was entrusted or loaned to another person. For movable property inherited by heirs is not under lien according to Scriptural Law. '
ז
לוה שאין לו מטלטלין ויש לו קרקע אם נודע לבית דין שתולה מעותיו ביד אחרים כופין אותו למכור וליתן לבעל חובו, ואם לא נודע להם דבר זה מחרימין על מי שידע לו מטלטלין ולא יביאם ואח"כ יורדין לבינונית שבנכסיו ומגבין לבעל חובו כמו שיתבאר, בד"א בזמן שנפרעין מן הלוה עצמו אבל הבא ליפרע מן היורש בין קטן בין גדול לא יפרע מן המטלטלין אפילו היו מופקדין או מלוה אצל אחרים שהמטלטלין אינו תחת שיעבוד בעל חוב מן התורה.
8
It is a mitzvah for the heirs to pay a debt left by their father from the movable property that he left. If an heir does not desire to make restitution, however, he is not compelled to do so. If the creditor seized property belonging to the debtor in the debtor's lifetime, he may collect his due from it.
If a creditor claims that he seized property during the debtor's lifetime, and the debtor's heir claims that the creditor seized the property after the debtor's death, the heir has the responsibility of proving his claim. Alternatively, the lender must take an oath that he was owed so-and-so much - he can claim up to the value of the property in his possession - and include in his oath that he seized the property in the debtor's lifetime.
If the property that he seized included promissory notes, and the lender claims that he is holding them as security for a debt and that he seized them during the debtor's lifetime, the lender must prove that he seized them during the debtor's lifetime. If he cannot bring proof, he should return them to the heirs. The difference is that with regard to promissory notes, he is not claiming the acquisition of the obligation itself, but rather proof that such an obligation exists.
ח
מצוה על היתומין לפרוע חוב אביהן מן המטלטלין שהניח ואם לא רצה היורש ליתן אין כופין אותו ואם תפס ב"ח מחיים גובה מהן, טען שמחיים תפסן והיורש טען שאחר מיתה תפס על היורש להביא ראיה או ישבע המלוה שכך וכך הוא חייב לו ויכול לטעון עד כדי דמיהן וכולל בשבועתו שמחיים תפס, היו הדברים שתפס שטרות וטען שהן משכון בידו על חובו ושמחיים תפס על המלוה להביא ראיה שמחיים תפס, ואם לא הביא ראיה יחזיר ליורשים מפני שאינו טוען לקנות גופם אלא לראיה שבהן.
9
When heirs expropriated landed property because of a debt that others owed their father, a creditor of their father's can expropriate it from them. The rationale is that this land was in effect their father's.
ט
יתומים שגבו קרקע בחוב שהיה לאביהן אצל אחרים יש לבעל חוב של אביהם לחזור ולגבות אותה מהן שהרי קרקע זו של אביהם היא.
10
The above principles can be extended and applied in the following situation. Reuven sold a field to Shimon, accepting financial responsibility for the sale. Shimon did not pay immediately, but instead had Reuven consider the price of the field as a loan. Reuven died afterwards. Reuven's creditor then came to expropriate the field from Shimon. Instead of giving the creditor the field, Shimon appeased him with money, and he departed.
According to the law, Reuven's heirs may come and demand that Shimon pay the debt that he owed Reuven, for that loan is not on lien to Reuven's creditor.
Therefore, if Shimon is clever, he should give Reuven's heirs the land he purchased from them as payment for the debt that he accepted upon himself. He can then expropriate the property from them, because of the money that he gave to Reuven's creditor so that he would not expropriate it from him. This option is available because Reuven took financial responsibility for the field Shimon purchased.
י
ראובן שמכר שדה לשמעון באחריות וזקף שמעון דמי השדה עליו מלוה לראובן ומת ראובן ובא בעל חוב של ראובן לטרוף משמעון השדה ופייסו שמעון במעות והלך לו הדין נותן שיבאו יורשי ראובן ויתבעו שמעון במלוה שזקף עליו שהרי אינה משועבדת לב"ח של ראובן, לפיכך אם היה שמעון פקח נותן להן הקרקע שלקח מראובן במלוה שזקף על עצמו וחוזר וטורף אותה מהן מפני המעות שנתן לב"ח של ראובן כדי שלא יטרוף אותה ממנו שהרי באחריות לקחה מראובן.
11
All of the Geonim have ordained, however, that a creditor may expropriate movable property from the heirs in payment for a debt. This judgment is enforced universally in all courts of law.
In the West, however, they would have a provision written in the promissory notes giving the creditor the right to collect the debt from either landed property or movable property in the creditor's lifetime or after his death. Thus, this provision gives the creditor more power to collect the debt than the ordinance of the Geonim.
This is a great safeguard, because it is possible that the borrower will not have known about ordinance, and thus the property of the heirs will be expropriated unjustly, because an ordinance of the later Sages does not have the legal power to be binding upon heirs.
יא
כבר תקנו גאונים האחרונים כולם שיהיה ב"ח גובה מטלטלין מן היורשין וכן דנין ישראל בכל ב"ד שבעולם, אבל במערב היו כותבין בשטרי חובות שיש לגבות מן הקרקע ומן המטלטלין בין בחייו בין אחר מותו ונמצא גובה על תנאי זה יותר מן התקנה, וסייג גדול עשו בדבר שמא לא ידע הלוה בתקנה זו ונמצא ממון יתומים יוצא שלא כדין שאין כח בתקנת אחרונים לחייב בה יתומים.
FOOTNOTES
1.לפיכך האומר היו עלי עדים וכו' עד ביד המלוה. א"א אני קבלתי שלא נאמר בגמרא אלא בכותב כתובה לאשתו ומוסיף לה אבל בהודאות והלואות לא צריך לאימלוכי ביה עכ"ל.
Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 12
1
We do not expropriate payment from heirs unless they are past majority. When the heirs are below majority, by contrast, we do not collect a debt supported by a promissory note from them.
א
אין נפרעין מן היורשין אלא א"כ היו גדולים אבל יורשין קטנים אין נפרעין מהן ש"ח =שטר חוב=. 1
2
Even if the promissory note contains all the stipulations in the world, the creditor may not use it to collect the debt until the heirs attain majority, lest they have proof that would disavow the promissory note.
ב
ואפילו היה בו כל תנאי שבעולם לא יפרע בו המלוה כלום עד שיגדילו היתומים שמא יש להן ראיה ששוברין בו את השטר.
3
If the loan was a debt at interest owed to a gentile, we appoint a guardian, attach the property that the minor inherited, sell it, and pay the debt. The rationale is that the interest consumes the estate.
Similarly, if a woman demands payment of the money due her by virtue of her ketubah - whether she is the deceased's widow or divorcee - we appoint a guardian for the heirs and attach the deceased's property, so that the woman will gain favor in the eyes of others; i.e., so that she will have a minimum of property so that she will remarry. Hence, if the woman hurried and remarried and then came to demand payment of the money due her by virtue of her ketubah from the estate acquired by the heirs, we do not pay heed to her until the heirs come of age." The rationale is that she is no longer entitled to receive her sustenance from the estate of the deceased, and she has remarried.
ג
היתה המלוה רבית של עכו"ם שהרי הרבית אוכלת בנכסיהן מעמידין להם אפוטרופוס ונזקקין לנכסיהן ומוכרין ופורעין החוב, וכן אשה שתבעה כתובתה בין אלמנה בין גרושה מעמידים להם אפוטרופוס ונזקקין משום חן האשה כדי שיהיה לה כלום שתנשא בו האשה לאחר, לפיכך אם קפצה האשה ונשאת ואחר כך באת לתבוע כתובתה מנכסי יתומים אין נזקקין לה עד שיגדלו היתומים שהרי אין לה מזונות והרי נשאת.
4
Several of the Geonim have ruled that if the estate left to the heirs does not have more than the money due the woman because of her ketubah, or it contains less than that amount, we do not pay heed to her. For the heirs will have no benefit from paying the money due the woman because of her ketubah.
According to this opinion, our Sages said: "We attach the estate left to heirs to pay a woman the money due her by virtue of her ketubah from it," only so that the estate would not become devalued because of the need to pay for the widow's sustenance." And in this instance, since the woman takes everything, of what value is it to the heirs who are below majority that the property is attached? These views were not concerned with increasing the favor of the woman in the eyes of others.
ד
הורו מקצת הגאונים שאם היו הנכסים כנגד הכתובה בלבד או פחותים ממנה אין נזקקין לה שהרי אין כאן זכות ליתומים שלא אמרו נזקקין לנכסי יתומים להפרע מהן הכתובה אלא כדי שלא יפחתו הנכסים מחמת המזונות וזאת הואיל והיא נוטלת הכל מה זכות יש ליתומים הקטנים בדבר זה עד שנזקקין להן ולא חשו לחן האשה. 2
5
If the testator gave a command, saying: "Give a maneh to so-and-so," we pay heed to the claim, after appointing a guardian for the heirs to advance arguments on behalf of the interests of the heirs. If the testator says: "Give this maneh to so-and-so" or "... this field to so-and-so," we make the endowment; there is no need to appoint a guardian for the heirs.
ה
צוה המורישן ואמר תנו מנה לפלוני נזקקין אחר שמעמידין להן אפוטרופוס לטעון טענתם, אמר תנו מנה זה לפלוני או שדה זו לפלוני נותנין ואין צריכים להעמיד להן אפוטרופוס.
6
If it is discovered that land in the estate does not rightfully belong to the heirs, but instead, the plaintiff claims that the property was stolen by the person whose property they inherited, we pay heed to the claim and appoint a guardian to argue and enter into litigation on their behalf. If it is discovered that the property was in fact stolen, we return it to its owners.
Similarly, if a minor had his servants mount an attack and enter property belonging to a colleague and take control of it, we do not say that we will wait until he attains majority before the matter is adjudicated. Instead, we expropriate the property from him immediately. When he attains majority, if he has witnesses who support his claim, he should bring his witnesses.
ו
נמצאת קרקע שאינה שלהן אלא טען הטוען שהיא גזל ביד מורישיו נזקקין להן ומעמידים להן אפוטרופוס לטעון ולדון, אם נמצאת גזולה מחזירים אותה לבעליה, וכן קטן שתקף בעבדיו וירד לתוך שדה חבירו וכבשה אין אומרין נמתין לו עד שיגדיל אלא מוציאין אותה מידו ולכשיגדיל אם יש לו עדים יביא עדיו.
7
When land is presumed to be the property of minors, the land is not expropriated from them until they attain majority even in the following situation. Another person comes and claims that he had purchased that land from the person from whom they inherited it, and the purchaser has witnesses who will testify that he established his possession of this land and benefited from it for three years in the lifetime of the deceased. The rationale is that we accept the testimony of witnesses only when delivered in the presence of the litigant against whom they are testifying. And the minor is considered as if he is not present.
If, however, the plaintiff produced a deed of sale that states that the field is property that he purchased, he must validate the authenticity of the deed of sale. Afterwards, he may expropriate the property from the heirs after a guardian is appointed for them.
ז
קרקע שהיתה בחזקת קטנים ובא אחר וטען שהיא לקוחה ממורישן ויש לו עדים שהחזיק בה ואכלה שני חזקה בחיי אביהן אין מוציאין אותה מידן עד שיגדילו שאין מקבלין עדים שלא בפני בעל דין והקטן כאילו אינו עומד כאן הוא חשוב, אבל אם הוציא שטר שהיא לקוחה בידו הרי זה מקיים את השטר ומוציאין אותה מידן אחר שמעמידים להם אפוטרופוס.
8
When the court attaches property belonging to heirs for the purpose of selling it, they evaluate the property and then announce the sale for 30 consecutive days or on Mondays and Thursdays over the span of 60 consecutive days. Announcements are made in the morning and the evening, when workers enter the city, and when workers are sent out to their tasks. Whoever desires to purchase the property can bring his workers there to investigate it.
When an announcement is made, the borders of the field are clarified. They make known its yield, the evaluation given by the court and the reason it is being sold - to repay a creditor or to pay a woman the money due her by virtue of her ketubah. For there are some people who desire to repay a creditor and others who desire to pay a woman the money due her by virtue of her ketubah.
ח
כשנזקקין ב"ד לנכסי יתומים למכור שמין את הקרקע ואח"כ מכריזין עליה שלשים יום רצופין או ששים יום שני וחמישי ומכריזים בבקר ובערב בשעת הכנסת פועלים ובשעת הוצאת פועלין וכל מי שרוצה לקנות יוליך הפועלין לבקר לו, ובשעה שמכריזין מסיימים את השדה במצריה ומודיעין כמה יפה ובכמה הוא שומה ומפני מה רוצים למכרה אם להגבות לב"ח או לכתובת אשה לפי שיש מי שרוצה ליתן לב"ח ויש מי שרוצה להגבות לאשה.
9
When an adrachta is written with regard to property belonging to heirs -whether they are above majority or below majority - the court must write: "And we identified the property as belonging to so-and-so, the deceased." If they did not write this, the adrachta is invalid, and a purchaser may not benefit from the proceeds of the property even though the announcements of the property's sale were completed.
ט
וכשכותבין האדרכתא על נכסי יתומים בין גדולים בין קטנים כותבין בה והכרנו שהנכסים האלו הן של פלוני המת, ואם לא כתבו כך הרי אדרכתא זו פסולה ואין אוכלין בה פירות אפילו לאחר ששלמו ההכרזות.
10
When a court sells property without announcing its sale beforehand, it is considered as if they erred in a matter explicitly stated in the Mishnah. The sale is nullified, and the property is sold again after announcements are made.
When a court sells property, the financial responsibility for it is incumbent on the heirs.
י
בית דין שמכרו שלא בהכרזה נעשו כמי שטעו בדבר משנה וחוזרים ומוכרין בהכרזה, וב"ד שמכרו האחריות על היתומים.
11
When a court made announcements in the proper manner, investigated the matter thoroughly and carefully evaluated the property, their sale is binding even though they erred and sold property worth a maneh for 200, or property worth 200 for a maneh.
The following rules apply when, by contrast, the court was not careful in evaluating the property or did not compose a notice of evaluation, which details its assessment and the announcement of the sale of the property, and it erred in its appraisal. If they evaluated it at a sixth more than its value or at a sixth less than its value, the sale is nullified. If the error was less than a sixth, the sale is binding.
Similar concepts apply if a court sold landed property at a time when it was not necessary to announce its sale beforehand. If it erred and devalued the property by a sixth or overvalued it by a sixth, their sale is nullified. This applies even if it announced the sale beforehand. If their error was less than a sixth, its sale is binding even though it did not announce the sale. For an announcement was not necessary in these situations.
In which situations is it not necessary to make announcements before the sale of property? When land is sold to bury the deceased, for the sustenance of his wife and his daughters, or to pay the head-tax to the king, it is not necessary to announce the sale, because the matter is pressing.
Similar concepts apply if a court sold types of property whose sale need not be announced beforehand. If it erred and devalued the property by a sixth or overvalued it by a sixth, the sale is nullified. If the error was less than a sixth, the sale is binding.
These are the types of property whose sale need not be announced beforehand: servants, promissory notes and movable property; servants, because they may flee; promissory notes and movable property, because they may be stolen. Instead, these articles should be evaluated by the court and sold immediately. If the market place is close to the city, they should be taken to the market place and sold there.
יא
ובית דין שהכריזו כראוי ובדקו יפה יפה ודקדקו בשומא אע"פ שטעו ומכרו שוה מנה במאתים או מאתים במנה הרי מכרן קיים, אבל אם לא בדקו בשומא ולא כתבו אגרת בקורת שהיא דקדוק השומא וההכרזה וטעו והותירו שתות או פחתו שתות מכרן בטל פחות משתות מכרן קיים, וכן אם מכרו קרקע בעת שאינן צריכין להכריז עליה וטעו שתות או הותירו שתות מכרן בטל אע"פ שהכריזו, פחות משתות מכרן קיים אע"פ שלא הכריזו שאינן צריכין הכרזה באותו העת, איזהו העת שאינן צריכין הכרזה בעת שימכרו קרקע לקבורה או למזון האשה והבנות או ליתן מנת המלך אין צריכין הכרזה לפי שהדבר נחוץ, וכן ב"ד שמכרו דברים שאינן טעונין הכרזה וטעו בשתות מכרן בטל פחות משתות מכרן קיים, ואלו הן הדברים שאין מכריזין עליהם העבדים והשטרות והמטלטלין, העבדים שמא ישמעו ויברחו, והשטרות והמטלטלין שמא יגנבו, לפיכך שמין אותן בבית דין ומוכרין אותן מיד, ואם השוק קרוב למדינה מוליכין אותן לשוק.
FOOTNOTES
1.אין נפרעין מן היורשין וכו' עד את השטר. א"א הרב ז"ל אומר שאם האמינו עליו ועל יורשיו שמועיל בו נאמנות ואם כתב בו שיהא נאמן אפילו על שובר ואפילו על מאה עדים למה אינו גובה אלא לפי הקושיות שהקשו על רב אשי במס' ערכין ולא תירצו זה התירוץ בשטר שיש בו נאמנות ש"מ אין שום נאמנות מועיל לקטנים עכ"ל.
2.הורו מקצת הגאונים וכו' עד שנזקקין להן שלא חשו לחן האשה. א"א הם לא חשו ומרימר דהוא בתרא וכן עולא חששו עכ"ל.
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class
"Today's Day"
Wednesday, Menachem Av 24, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Re'ei, Revi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 113-118.
Tanya: Now, this radiation (p. 427) ...the great quantity." (p. 427).
A tradition handed down from Rebbe to Rebbe: During the well-known conflict (between chassidim and their opponents) the chassidim told the Alter Rebbe about the terrible abuse they suffered from the plain misnagdic1 folk. The Rebbe said: Grandfather (as he called the Baal Shem Tov)2 deeply loved simple folk. In my first days in Mezritch, the Rebbe, (the Maggid) said: "It was a frequent customary remark of the Rebbe (Baal Shem Tov) that love of Israel is love of G-d. "You are children of Hashem your G-d"3; when one loves the father one loves the children.
FOOTNOTES
1.The opponents to chassidim termed themselves misnagdim, lit. "opponents."
2.See Supplementary Footnotes.
3.Devarim 14:1.
Daily Thought:
Making Room
He is a very big G-d. As soon as you take up any space at all, there is no room left for Him.
But take no space at all, and He gives you the entire universe.
-------
No comments:
Post a Comment