| |||||
- 
- ב"ה - Today in Judaism - Today is Shabbat, 28 Kislev, 5778 · December 16, 2017 - Chanukah Day 4 - Menorah LightingPlease set your location to view Menorah lighting times ––:––
Torah Reading:
Mikeitz: Genesis 41:1 - 44:17
Chanukah 4: Numbers 7:30-35
Chanukah - Shabbat 1: Zachariah 2:14 - 4:7
Mikeitz: Genesis 41:1 At the end of two years, Pharaoh had a dream: he was standing beside the Nile River; 2 and there came up out of the river seven cows, sleek and fat; and they began feeding in swamp grass. 3 After them, there came up out of the river seven more cows, miserable-looking and lean; and they stood by the other cows at the edge of the river. 4 Then the miserable-looking and lean cows ate up the seven sleek, fat cows. At this point Pharaoh woke up. 5 But he went to sleep again and dreamt a second time: seven full, ripe ears of grain grew out of a single stalk. 6 After them, seven ears, thin and blasted by the east wind, sprang up. 7 And the thin ears swallowed up the seven full, ripe ears. Then Pharaoh woke up and realized it had been a dream.
8 In the morning he found himself so upset that he summoned all the magicians of Egypt and all its wise men. Pharaoh told them his dreams, but no one there could interpret them for him. 9 Then the chief cupbearer said to Pharaoh, “Today reminds me of something wherein I am at fault: 10 Pharaoh was angry with his officials and put me in the prison of the house of the captain of the guard, me and the chief baker. 11 One night both I and he had dreams, and each man’s dream had its own meaning. 12 There was with us a young man, a Hebrew, a servant of the captain of the guard; and we told him our dreams, and he interpreted them for us — he interpreted each man’s dream individually. 13 And it came about as he interpreted to us — I was restored to my office, and he was hanged.”
14 Then Pharaoh summoned Yosef, and they brought him quickly out of the dungeon. He shaved himself, changed his clothes, and came in to Pharaoh.
(A: ii) 15 Pharaoh said to Yosef, “I had a dream, and there is no one who can interpret it; but I’ve heard it said about you that when you hear a dream, you can interpret it.” 16 Yosef answered Pharaoh, “It isn’t in me. God will give Pharaoh an answer that will set his mind at peace.” (S: ii) 17 Pharaoh said to Yosef, “In my dream, I stood at the edge of the river; 18 and there came up out of the river seven cows, fat and sleek; and they began feeding in the swamp grass. 19 After them, there came up out of the river seven more cows, poor, miserable-looking and lean — I’ve never seen such bad-looking cows in all the land of Egypt! 20 Then the lean and miserable-looking cows ate up the first seven fat cows. 21 But after they had eaten them up, one couldn’t tell that they had eaten them; because they were as miserable-looking as before. At this point I woke up. 22 But I dreamed again and saw seven full, ripe ears of grain growing out of a single stalk. 23 After them, seven ears, thin and blasted by the east wind, sprang up. 24 And the thin ears swallowed up the seven ripe ears. I told this to the magicians, but none of them could explain it to me.”
25 Yosef said to Pharaoh, “The dreams of Pharaoh are the same: God has told Pharaoh what he is about to do. 26 The seven good cows are seven years, and the seven good ears of grain are seven years — the dreams are the same. 27 Likewise the seven lean and miserable-looking cows that came up after them are seven years, and also the seven empty ears blasted by the east wind — there will be seven years of famine. 28 This is what I told Pharaoh: God has shown Pharaoh what he is about to do. 29 Here it is: there will be seven years of abundance throughout the whole land of Egypt; 30 but afterwards, there will come seven years of famine; and Egypt will forget all the abundance. The famine will consume the land, 31 and the abundance will not be known in the land because of the famine that will follow, because it will be truly terrible. 32 Why was the dream doubled for Pharaoh? Because the matter has been fixed by God, and God will shortly cause it to happen.
33 “Therefore, Pharaoh should look for a man both discreet and wise to put in charge of the land of Egypt. 34 Pharaoh should do this, and he should appoint supervisors over the land to receive a twenty percent tax on the produce of the land of Egypt during the seven years of abundance. 35 They should gather all the food produced during these good years coming up and set aside grain under the supervision of Pharaoh to be used for food in the cities, and they should store it. 36 This will be the land’s food supply for the seven years of famine that will come over the land of Egypt, so that the land will not perish as a result of the famine.”
37 The proposal seemed good both to Pharaoh and to all his officials. 38 Pharaoh said to his officials, “Can we find anyone else like him? The Spirit of God lives in him!”
(iii) 39 So Pharaoh said to Yosef, “Since God has shown you all this — there is no one as discerning and wise as you — 40 you will be in charge of my household; all my people will be ruled by what you say. Only when I rule from my throne will I be greater than you.” 41 Pharaoh said to Yosef, “Here, I place you in charge of the whole land of Egypt.” 42 Pharaoh took his signet ring off his hand and put it on Yosef’s hand, had him clothed in fine linen with a gold chain around his neck 43 and had him ride in his second best chariot; and they cried before him, “Bow down!” Thus he placed him in charge of the whole land of Egypt. 44 Pharaoh said to Yosef, “I, Pharaoh, decree that without your approval no one is to raise his hand or his foot in all the land of Egypt.” 45 Pharaoh called Yosef by the name Tzafnat-Pa‘neach and gave him as his wife Osnat the daughter of Poti-Fera priest of On. Then Yosef went out through all the land of Egypt.
46 Yosef was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh king of Egypt; then he left Pharaoh’s presence and traveled through all the land of Egypt. 47 During the seven years of abundance, the earth brought forth heaps of produce. 48 He collected all the food of these seven years in the land of Egypt and stored it in the cities — the food grown in the fields outside each city he stored in that city. 49 Yosef stored grain in quantities like the sand on the seashore, so much that they stopped counting, because it was beyond measure.
50 Two sons were born to Yosef before the year of famine came; Osnat the daughter of Poti-Fera priest of On bore them to him. 51 Yosef called the firstborn M’nasheh [causing to forget], “Because God has caused me to forget all the troubles I suffered at the hands of my family.” 52 The second he called Efrayim [fruit], “For God has made me fruitful in the land of my misfortune.”
(iv) 53 The seven years of abundance in the land of Egypt ended; 54 and the seven years of famine began to come, just as Yosef had said. There was famine in all lands, but throughout the land of Egypt there was food. 55 When the whole land of Egypt started feeling the famine, the people cried to Pharaoh for food, and Pharaoh said to all the Egyptians, “Go to Yosef, and do what he tells you to do.” 56 The famine was over all the earth, but then Yosef opened all the storehouses and sold food to the Egyptians, since the famine was severe in the land of Egypt. 57 Moreover all countries came to Egypt to Yosef to buy grain, because the famine was severe throughout the earth.
42:1 Now Ya‘akov saw that there was grain in Egypt; so Ya‘akov said to his sons, “Why are you staring at each other? 2 Look,” he said, “I’ve heard that there’s grain in Egypt. Go down there and buy some for us from there, so that we can stay alive and not die!” 3 Thus Yosef’s ten brothers went down to buy grain from Egypt, 4 except for Binyamin, Yosef’s brother. Ya‘akov did not send him with his brothers, because he was afraid something might happen to him.
5 The sons of Isra’el came to buy along with the others that came, since the famine extended to the land of Kena‘an. 6 Yosef was governor over the land; it was he who sold to all the people of the land. Now when Yosef’s brothers came and prostrated themselves before him on the ground, 7 Yosef saw his brothers and recognized them; but he acted toward them as if he were a stranger and spoke harshly with them. He asked them, “Where are you from?” They answered, “From the land of Kena‘an to buy food.” 8 So Yosef recognized his brothers, but they didn’t recognize him.
9 Remembering the dreams he had had about them, Yosef said to them, “You are spies! You’ve come to spot our country’s weaknesses!” 10 “No, my lord,” they replied, “your servants have come to buy food. 11 We’re all the sons of one man, we’re upright men; your servants aren’t spies.” 12 “No,” he said to them, “you’ve come to spy out our country’s weaknesses.” 13 They said, “We, your servants, are twelve brothers, the sons of one man in the land of Kena‘an; the youngest stayed with our father, and another one is gone.” 14 “Just as I said,” replied Yosef, “you’re spies! 15 Here’s how you can prove you’re not lying: as Pharaoh lives, you will not leave here unless your youngest brother comes here. 16 Send one of you, and let him bring your brother. Meanwhile, you will be kept in custody. This will prove whether there is any truth in what you say. Otherwise, as Pharaoh lives, you are certainly spies.” 17 Then he put all of them together in prison for three days.
18 On the third day, Yosef said to them, “Do what I say, and stay alive, for I fear God. (v) 19 If you are upright men, let one of your brothers remain incarcerated in the prison you’re being kept in, while you go and carry grain back to relieve the famine in your homes. 20 But bring your youngest brother to me. In this way your statements will be verified, and you won’t die.”
So they did it. 21 They said to each other, “We are in fact guilty concerning our brother. He was in distress and pleaded with us; we saw it and wouldn’t listen. That’s why this distress has come upon us now.” 22 Re’uven answered them, “Didn’t I tell you, ‘Don’t wrong the boy’? But you wouldn’t hear of it. Now comes the reckoning for his blood!” 23 They had no idea that Yosef understood them, since an interpreter was translating for them. 24 Yosef turned away from them and wept; then he returned and spoke to them. He took Shim‘on from among them and put him in prison before their eyes. 25 Next he ordered that their containers be filled with grain, that every man’s money be put back in his pack and that they be given provisions for the journey. When these things had been done for them, 26 they loaded their grain on their donkeys and departed.
27 But at camp that night, as one of them opened his pack to give fodder to his donkey, he noticed his money — there it was, just inside his pack. 28 He said to his brothers, “My money has been restored — there it is, right in my pack!” At that, their hearts sank; they turned, trembling, to one another and said, “What is this that God has done to us?”
29 They returned to Ya‘akov their father in the land of Kena‘an and told him all that had happened to them. 30 “The man, the lord of the land, spoke harshly with us. He took us for spies in his country. 31 We said to him, ‘We are upright men, we’re not spies; 32 we are twelve brothers, sons of our father; one is gone, and the youngest stayed with our father in the land of Kena‘an.’ 33 But the man, the lord of the land, said to us, ‘Here is how I will know that you are upright men: leave one of your brothers with me, take grain to relieve the famine in your homes, and go on your way; 34 but bring your youngest brother to me. By this I will know that you aren’t spies, but are upright men; then I will return your brother to you; and you will do business in the land.’”
35 Next, as they emptied their packs, there was each man’s bag of money in his pack; and when they and their father saw their bags of money, they became afraid. 36 Ya‘akov their father said to them, “You have robbed me of my children! Yosef is gone, Shim‘on is gone, now you’re taking Binyamin away — it all falls on me!” 37 Re’uven said to his father, “If I don’t bring him back to you, you can kill my own two sons! Put him in my care; I will return him to you.” 38 But he replied, “My son will not go down with you. His brother is dead, and he alone is left. If anything were to happen to him while traveling with you, you would bring my gray hair down to Sh’ol with grief.”
43:1 But the famine was severe in the land; 2 so when they had eaten up the grain which they had brought out of Egypt, their father said to them, “Go again, buy us a little food.” 3 Y’hudah said to him, “The man expressly warned us, ‘You will not see my face unless your brother is with you.’ 4 If you will send our brother with us, we will go down and buy you food; 5 but if you will not send him, we will not go down; for the man said to us, ‘You will not see my face unless your brother is with you.’” 6 Isra’el said, “Why did you bring such trouble my way by telling the man you had another brother?” 7 They answered, “The man kept questioning us about ourselves and about our kinsmen. He asked, ‘Is your father still alive?’ ‘Do you have another brother?’ and we answered according to the literal meaning of his questions. How were we to know he would say, ‘Bring your brother down’?”
8 Y’hudah said to Isra’el his father, “Send the boy with me; and we will make preparations and leave; so that we may stay alive and not die, both we and you, and also our little ones. 9 I myself will guarantee his safety; you can hold me responsible. If I fail to bring him to you and present him to your face, let me bear the blame forever. 10 Except for our lengthy delay, we would have been there again by now.”
11 Their father Isra’el answered them, “If that’s how it is, do this: take in your containers some of the land’s best products, and bring the man a gift — some healing resin, a little honey, aromatic gum, opium, pistachio nuts and almonds. 12 Take twice the amount of money with you; and return the money that came back with you in your packs — it could have been an oversight. 13 Yes, and take your brother too; and get ready; and go again to the man. 14 May El Shaddai give you favor in the man’s sight, so that he will release to you your other brother as well as Binyamin. As for me, if I must lose my children, lose them I will.” 15 The men took that gift, and they took twice the money with them, and Binyamin; then they prepared, went down to Egypt and stood before Yosef.
(vi) 16 When Yosef saw Binyamin with them, he said to his household manager, “Take the men inside the house, kill the animals and prepare the meat. These men will dine with me at noon.” 17 The man did as Yosef ordered and brought the men into Yosef’s house.
18 Upon being ushered inside Yosef’s house, the men became fearful. They said, “It’s because of the money that was returned in our packs the first time that we have been brought inside — so that he can use it as an excuse to attack us, take us as slaves and seize our donkeys too.” 19 So they approached the manager of Yosef’s household and spoke to him at the entrance of the house: 20 “Please, my lord, the first time we indeed came down to buy food; 21 but when we got to camp, we opened our packs, and there inside our packs was each man’s money, the full amount. We have brought it back with us; 22 moreover, we have brought down other money to buy food. We have no idea who put our money in our packs.” 23 “Stop worrying,” he replied, “don’t be afraid. Your God and the God of your father put treasure in your packs. As for your money — I was the one who received it.” Then he brought Shim‘on out to them.
24 The man brought the men into Yosef’s house and gave them water, and they washed their feet, and he provided fodder for their donkeys. 25 Then they got their gift ready for Yosef’s arrival at noon, for they had heard that they were going to eat a meal there. 26 When Yosef arrived home, they went in the house and presented him with the gift they had brought with them, then prostrated themselves before him on the ground. 27 He asked them how they were and inquired, “Is your father well, the old man of whom you spoke? Is he still alive?” 28 They answered, “Your servant our father is well; yes, he is still alive,” as they bowed in respect. 29 He looked up and saw Binyamin his brother, his mother’s son, and said, “Is this your youngest brother, of whom you spoke to me?” and added, “May God be good to you, my son.”
(vii) 30 Then Yosef hurried out, because his feelings toward his brother were so strong that he wanted to cry; he went into his bedroom and there he wept. 31 Then he washed his face and came out, but he controlled himself as he gave the order to serve the meal. 32 They served him by himself, the brothers by themselves, and the Egyptians included at the meal by themselves — Egyptians don’t eat with Hebrews, because that is abhorrent to them. 33 So they sat there facing him, the firstborn in the place of honor, the youngest in last place; and the men expressed their amazement to each other. 34 Each was given his serving there in front of him, but Binyamin’s portion was five times as large as any of theirs. So they drank and enjoyed themselves with him.
44:1 Then he ordered the manager of his household, “Fill the men’s packs with food, as much as they can carry, and put each man’s money just inside his pack. 2 And put my goblet, the silver one, just inside the pack of the youngest, along with his grain money.” He did what Yosef told him to do.
3 At daybreak the men were sent off with their donkeys; 4 but before they were far from the city Yosef said to his manager, “Up, go after the men; and when you overtake them, say to them, ‘Why have you repaid good with evil? 5 Isn’t this the goblet my lord drinks from, indeed the one he uses for divination? What you have done is evil!’” 6 So he caught up with them and said these words to them. 7 They replied, “Why does my lord speak this way? Heaven forbid that we should do such a thing! 8 Why, the money we found inside our packs we brought back to you from the land of Kena‘an! So how would we steal silver or gold from your lord’s house? 9 Whichever one of us the goblet is found with, let him be put to death — and the rest of us will be my lord’s slaves!” 10 He replied, “Fine; let it be as you have said: whichever one it is found with will be my slave. But the rest of you will be blameless.” 11 Then each hurried to put his pack down on the ground, and each one opened his pack. 12 He searched, starting with the oldest and ending with the youngest; and the goblet was found in the pack belonging to Binyamin. 13 At this, they tore their clothes from grief. Then each man loaded up his donkey and returned to the city.
(A: Maftir) 14 Y’hudah and his brothers arrived at Yosef’s house. He was still there, and they fell down before him on the ground. (S: Maftir) 15 Yosef said to them, “How could you do such a thing? Don’t you know that a man such as myself can learn the truth by divination?” 16 Y’hudah said, “There’s nothing we can say to my lord! How can we speak? There’s no way we can clear ourselves! God has revealed your servants’ guilt; so here we are, my lord’s slaves — both we and also the one in whose possession the cup was found.” 17 But he replied, “Heaven forbid that I should act in such a way. The man in whose possession the goblet was found will be my slave; but as for you, go in peace to your father.”
Chanukah 4: Numbers 7:30 On the fourth day was Elitzur the son of Sh’de’ur, leader of the descendants of Re’uven. 31 He offered one silver dish weighing 130 shekels [three-and-a-quarter pounds] and one silver basin of seventy shekels (using the sanctuary shekel) [one-and-three-quarters pounds], both full of fine flour mixed with olive oil for a grain offering; 32 one gold pan of ten shekels [one-quarter pound], full of incense; 33 one young bull, one ram, one male lamb in its first year as a burnt offering, 34 one male goat as a sin offering, 35 and, for the sacrifice of peace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five male goats and five male lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Elitzur the son of Sh’de’ur.
Chanukah - Shabbat 1: Zachariah 2:14 (10) “Sing, daughter of Tziyon; rejoice! For, here, I am coming; and I will live among you,” says Adonai. 15 (11) When that time comes, many nations will join themselves to Adonai. “They will be my people, and I will live among you.” Then you will know that it was Adonai-Tzva’ot who sent me to you. 16 (12) Adonai will take possession of Y’hudah as his portion in the holy land, and he will again make Yerushalayim his choice. 17 (13) Be silent, all humanity, before Adonai; for he has been roused from his holy dwelling.’”
3:1 He showed me Y’hoshua the cohen hagadol standing before the angel of Adonai, with the Accuser [Zechariah 3:1 Hebrew: Satan] standing at his right to accuse him. 2 Adonai said to the Accuser, “May Adonai rebuke you, Accuser! Indeed, may Adonai, who has made Yerushalayim his choice, rebuke you! Isn’t this man a burning stick snatched from the fire?” 3 Y’hoshua was clothed in garments covered with dung; and he was standing before the angel, 4 who said to those standing in front of him, “Take those filthy garments off of him.” Then to him he said, “See, I am taking your guilt away. I will clothe you in fine robes.” 5 I said, “They should put a clean turban on his head.” So they put a clean turban on his head and gave him fine robes to wear, while the angel of Adonai stood by. 6 Then the angel of Adonai gave Y’hoshua this warning: 7 “Adonai-Tzva’ot says this: ‘If you will walk in my ways, obey my commission, judge my house and guard my courtyards; then I will give you free access among these who are standing here. 8 Listen, cohen gadol Y’hoshua, both you and your colleagues seated here before you, because these men are a sign that I am going to bring my servant Tzemach [Sprout]. 9 For look at the stone I have put in front of Y’hoshua: on one stone are seven eyes; I will engrave what is to be written on it,’ says Adonai-Tzva’ot; ‘and I will remove the guilt of this land in one day. 10 When that time comes,’ says Adonai-Tzva’ot, ‘you will all invite each other to join you under your vines and fig trees.’”
4:1 Then the angel that had been speaking with me returned and roused me, as if he were waking someone up from being asleep, 2 and asked me, “What do you see?” I answered, “I’ve been looking at a menorah; it’s all of gold, with a bowl at its top, seven lamps on it, and seven tubes leading to the lamps at its top. 3 Next to it are two olive trees, one on the right side of the bowl and the other on its left.” 4 I then asked the angel speaking with me, “What are these, my Lord?” The angel speaking with me said, 5 “Don’t you know what these are?” I said, “No, my Lord.” 6 Then he answered me, “This is the word of Adonai to Z’rubavel: ‘Not by force, and not by power, but by my Spirit,’ says Adonai-Tzva’ot. 7 ‘What are you, you big mountain? Before Z’rubavel you will become a plain; and he will put the capstone in place, as everyone shouts, “It’s beautiful! Beautiful!”’
---
Today's Laws & Customs:
• Blessing the New Month
This Shabbat is Shabbat Mevarchim ("the Shabbat that blesses" the new month): a special prayer is recited blessing the Rosh Chodesh ("Head of the Month") of upcoming month of Tevet, which falls on Monday and Tuesday of next week.
Prior to the blessing, we announce the precise time of the molad, the "birth" of the new moon. Click here for molad times.
It is a Chabad custom to recite the entire book of Psalms before morning prayers, and to conduct farbrengens (chassidic gatherings) in the course of the Shabbat.
Links: On the Significance of Shabbat Mevarchim; Tehillim (the Book of Psalms); The Farbrengen
• Hallel & Al HaNissim
Special prayers of thanksgiving -- Hallel (in its full version) and Al HaNissim -- are added to the daily prayers and Grace After Meals on all eight days of Chanukah. Tachnun (confession of sins) and similar prayers are omitted for the duration of trhe festival.
• Kindle Five Chanukah Lights after nightfall
In commemorartion of the miracle of Chanukah (see "Today in Jewish History" for Kislev 25) we kindle the Chanukah lights -- oil lamps or candles -- each evening of the eight-day festival, increasing the number of lights each evening. Tonight we kindle fivelights. (In the Jewish calendar, the day begins at nightfall; this evening, then, commences the 5th day of Chanukah).
IMPORTANT: Because of the prohibition to kindle fire on Shabbat, the Chanukah lights must be lit after after the Havdalah service marking the end of Shabbat at nightfall.
For a more detailed guide to Chanukah lighting (and additional Chanukah observances and customs) click here. For text and audio of the blessings recited before lighting, click here.
Today in Jewish History:
• 4th Day of Chanukah Miracle (139 BCE)
On the 25th of Kislev in the year 3622 from creation, the Maccabees liberated the Holy Temple in Jerusalem, after defeating the vastly more numerous and powerful armies of the Syrian-Greek king Antiochus IV, who had tried to forcefully uproot the beliefs and practices of Judaism from the people of Israel. The victorious Jews repaired, cleansed and rededicated the Temple to the service of G-d. But all the Temple's oil had been defiled by the pagan invaders; when the Jews sought to light the Temple's menorah (candelabra), they found only one small cruse of ritually pure olive oil. Miraculously, the one-day supply burned for eight days, until new, pure oil could be obtained. In commemoration, the Sages instituted the 8-day festival of Chanukah, on which lights are kindled nightly to recall and publicize the miracle.
Link: The Story of Chanukah
Daily Torah Study:
Chumash: Mikeitz, 7th Portion Genesis 43:30-44:17 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation
• Video Class
• Daily Wisdom (short insight)
Genesis Chapter 43
30And Joseph hastened, for his mercy was stirred toward his brother, and he wanted to weep; so he went into the room and wept there. לוַיְמַהֵ֣ר יוֹסֵ֗ף כִּֽי־נִכְמְר֤וּ רַֽחֲמָיו֙ אֶל־אָחִ֔יו וַיְבַקֵּ֖שׁ לִבְכּ֑וֹת וַיָּבֹ֥א הַחַ֖דְרָה וַיֵּ֥בְךְּ שָֽׁמָּה:
for his mercy was stirred: He (Joseph) asked him (Benjamin), “Have you a brother from your mother?” He replied, “I had a brother, but I do not know where he is.” “Have you any sons?” He replied, “I have ten.” He asked, “And what are their names?” He replied, “Bela and Becher, etc.” He asked, “What is the significance of these names?” He replied,“All of them are connected to my brother and the troubles that befell him. [My first son was named] Bela because he (my brother) was swallowed up (נִבְלַע) among the nations. [My second son was named] Becher because he (my brother) was the firstborn (בְּכוֹר) of my mother. [My third son was named] Ashbel because God put him (my brother) into captivity (שְׁבָאו ֹאֵל). [My fourth son was named] Gera because he (my brother) was a stranger (נִתְגַּיֵר) in a lodging place. And [my fifth son was named] Na’aman because he (my brother) was very pleasant [to look upon] (נָעִים). [My sixth and seventh sons were named] Ehi and Rosh because he was my brother (אָחִי), and he was my superior (רֹאשִׁי). [My eighth son was named] Muppim because he (my brother) learned from the mouth of (מִפִּי) my father. [My ninth son was named] Huppim because he (my brother) did not see my wedding (חוּפָּתִי), neither did I see his wedding (חוּפָּתוֹ). And [my tenth son was named] Ard because he (my brother) descended (יָרַד) among the nations.” This is as stated in Tractate Sotah (36b). Immediately, his (Joseph’s) mercy was stirred.
כי נכמרו רחמיו: שאלו יש לך אח מאם, אמר לו אח היה לי ואיני יודע היכן הוא. יש לך בנים, אמר לו יש לי עשרה, אמר לו ומה שמם, אמר לו (להלן מו כא) בלע ובכר וגו', אמר לו מה טיבן של שמות הללו, אמר לו כולם על שם אחי והצרות אשר מצאוהו, בלע שנבלע בין האומות. בכר שהיה בכור לאמי. אשבאל ששבאו אל. גרא שנתגייר באכסניא. ונעמן, שהיה נעים ביותר. אחי וראש אחי היה וראשי היה. מופים מפי אביו למד. וחופים שלא ראה חופתי ולא ראיתי אני חופתו. וארד שירד לבין האומות, כדאיתא במסכת סוטה (לו ב) מיד נכמרו רחמיו:
was stirred: Heb. נִכְמְרוּ, was heated. In the language of the Mishnah,“on a heating (כֹּמֶר) vessel of olives” (Sotah 74a), and in Aramaic,“because of the heating (מִכְמַר) of the meat” (Pes. 58a), and in the Scriptures,“Our skin is parched (נִכְמָרוּ) because of the heat of hunger” (Lam. 5:10). So is the way of all skin; when it is heated, it shrivels and shrinks. — [from Lam. Rabbah 5:10].
נכמרו: נתחממו, ובלשון משנה (ב"מ עד א) על הכומר של זיתים, ובלשון ארמי מכמר בשרא, ובמקרא (איכה ה י) עורנו כתנור נכמרו, נתחממו ונקמטו קמטים קמטים מפני זלעפות רעב. כן דרך כל עור כשמחממין אותו נקמט וכווץ:
31And he washed his face and came out, and he restrained himself and said, "Serve the food." לאוַיִּרְחַ֥ץ פָּנָ֖יו וַיֵּצֵ֑א וַיִּ֨תְאַפַּ֔ק וַיֹּ֖אמֶר שִׂ֥ימוּ לָֽחֶם:
and he restrained himself: Heb. וַיִתְאַפַּק, and he strengthened himself. וַיִתְאַפַּק is an expression of“the strong (אִפִיקֵי) shields” (Job 41:7), [meaning] strength, and similarly,“and loosens the belt of the strong (אִפִיקִים)” (ibid. 12:21).
ויתאפק: נתאמץ. והוא לשון (איוב יב כא) ומזיח אפיקים רפה, וכן (איוב מא ז) אפיקי מגנים, חוזק:
32And they set for him separately and for them separately, and for the Egyptians who ate with him separately, because the Egyptians could not eat food with the Hebrews, because it is an abomination to the Egyptians. לבוַיָּשִׂ֥ימוּ ל֛וֹ לְבַדּ֖וֹ וְלָהֶ֣ם לְבַדָּ֑ם וְלַמִּצְרִ֞ים הָאֹֽכְלִ֤ים אִתּוֹ֙ לְבַדָּ֔ם כִּי֩ לֹ֨א יֽוּכְל֜וּן הַמִּצְרִ֗ים לֶֽאֱכֹ֤ל אֶת־הָֽעִבְרִים֙ לֶ֔חֶם כִּי־תֽוֹעֵבָ֥ה הִ֖וא לְמִצְרָֽיִם:
because it is an abomination to the Egyptians: It is a hateful thing for the Egyptians to eat with the Hebrews, and Onkelos gave the reason for the matter.
כי תועבה הוא: דבר שנאוי הוא למצרים לאכול את העברים, ואונקלוס נתן טעם לדבר:
33They sat before him, the firstborn according to his age, and the youngest according to his youth, and the men looked at each other in astonishment. לגוַיֵּֽשְׁב֣וּ לְפָנָ֔יו הַבְּכֹר֙ כִּבְכֹ֣רָת֔וֹ וְהַצָּעִ֖יר כִּצְעִֽרָת֑וֹ וַיִּתְמְה֥וּ הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֖ים אִ֥ישׁ אֶל־רֵעֵֽהוּ:
the firstborn according to his age: He knocked his goblet and announced, “Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun, sons of one mother, sit in this order, which is the order of your births,” and so [did he order] all of them. When he reached Benjamin, he said,“This one has no mother, and I have no mother. Let him sit beside me.” - [from Gen. Rabbah 93:7]
הבכור כבכורתו: מכה בגביע וקורא ראובן שמעון לוי ויהודה יששכר וזבולון, בני אם אחת, הסבו כסדר הזה שהיא סדר תולדותיכם וכן כולם, כיון שהגיע לבנימין אמר זה אין לו אם ואני אין לי אם ישב אצלי:
34And he had portions brought to them from before him, and Benjamin's portion was five times as large as the portions of any of them, and they drank and became intoxicated with him. לדוַיִּשָּׂ֨א מַשְׂאֹ֜ת מֵאֵ֣ת פָּנָיו֘ אֲלֵהֶם֒ וַתֵּ֜רֶב מַשְׂאַ֧ת בִּנְיָמִ֛ן מִמַּשְׂאֹ֥ת כֻּלָּ֖ם חָמֵ֣שׁ יָד֑וֹת וַיִּשְׁתּ֥וּ וַיִּשְׁכְּר֖וּ עִמּֽוֹ:
portions: Heb. מַשְׂאֹת, meaning portions. — [from Targum Onkelos]
משאת: מנות:
five times as large: His portion with his brothers, Joseph’s portion, and those of Asenath, Manasseh, and Ephraim. — [from Gen. Rabbah 92:5, Targum Jonathan]
חמש ידות: חלקו עם אחיו ומשאת יוסף ואסנת ומנשה ואפרים:
and they drank and became intoxicated with him: Since the day that they had sold him, neither they nor he had drunk wine, but on that day they drank. — [from Gen. Rabbah 92:5]
וישכרו עמו: ומיום שמכרוהו לא שתו יין, ולא הוא שתה יין, ואותו היום שתו:
Genesis Chapter 44
1Then he commanded the overseer of his house, saying, "Fill the men's sacks with food, as much as they can carry, and put each man's money into the mouth of his sack. אוַיְצַ֞ו אֶת־אֲשֶׁ֣ר עַל־בֵּיתוֹ֘ לֵאמֹר֒ מַלֵּ֞א אֶת־אַמְתְּחֹ֤ת הָֽאֲנָשִׁים֙ אֹ֔כֶל כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֥ר יֽוּכְל֖וּן שְׂאֵ֑ת וְשִׂ֥ים כֶּֽסֶף־אִ֖ישׁ בְּפִ֥י אַמְתַּחְתּֽוֹ:
2And my goblet, the silver goblet, put into the mouth of the sack of the youngest, and his purchase money." And he did according to Joseph's word, which he had spoken. בוְאֶת־גְּבִיעִ֞י גְּבִ֣יעַ הַכֶּ֗סֶף תָּשִׂים֙ בְּפִי֙ אַמְתַּ֣חַת הַקָּטֹ֔ן וְאֵ֖ת כֶּ֣סֶף שִׁבְר֑וֹ וַיַּ֕עַשׂ כִּדְבַ֥ר יוֹסֵ֖ף אֲשֶׁ֥ר דִּבֵּֽר:
goblet: Heb. גְבִיעַ, a tall cup, called maderine (a long, narrow goblet).
גביעי: כוס ארוך, וקורין לו מדירנ"א בלע"ז [כוס הדורה מעץ]:
3The morning became light, and the men were sent [on their way] they and their donkeys. גהַבֹּ֖קֶר א֑וֹר וְהָֽאֲנָשִׁ֣ים שֻׁלְּח֔וּ הֵ֖מָּה וַֽחֲמֹֽרֵיהֶֽם:
4They had exited the city, but had not gone far when Joseph said to the overseer of his house, "Get up, pursue the men, and when you overtake them, say to them, 'Why have you repaid good with evil? דהֵ֠ם יָֽצְא֣וּ אֶת־הָעִיר֘ לֹ֣א הִרְחִ֒יקוּ֒ וְיוֹסֵ֤ף אָמַר֙ לַֽאֲשֶׁ֣ר עַל־בֵּית֔וֹ ק֥וּם רְדֹ֖ף אַֽחֲרֵ֣י הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֑ים וְהִשַּׂגְתָּם֙ וְאָֽמַרְתָּ֣ אֲלֵהֶ֔ם לָ֛מָּה שִׁלַּמְתֶּ֥ם רָעָ֖ה תַּ֥חַת טוֹבָֽה:
5Is not this the one my master drinks from? Why, he even divines with it! You have done evil by the way you have acted.' " ההֲל֣וֹא זֶ֗ה אֲשֶׁ֨ר יִשְׁתֶּ֤ה אֲדֹנִי֙ בּ֔וֹ וְה֕וּא נַחֵ֥שׁ יְנַחֵ֖שׁ בּ֑וֹ הֲרֵֽעֹתֶ֖ם אֲשֶׁ֥ר עֲשִׂיתֶֽם:
6He overtook them, and he said these words to them. ווַיַּשִּׂגֵ֑ם וַיְדַבֵּ֣ר אֲלֵהֶ֔ם אֶת־הַדְּבָרִ֖ים הָאֵֽלֶּה:
7And they said to him, "Why should my master say such words as these? Far be it from your servants to do a thing like this! זוַיֹּֽאמְר֣וּ אֵלָ֔יו לָ֚מָּה יְדַבֵּ֣ר אֲדֹנִ֔י כַּדְּבָרִ֖ים הָאֵ֑לֶּה חָלִ֨ילָה֙ לַֽעֲבָדֶ֔יךָ מֵֽעֲשׂ֖וֹת כַּדָּבָ֥ר הַזֶּֽה:
Far be it from your servants: Heb. חָלִילָה, it is profane for us (חוּלִין), an expression of disgrace. The Targum renders: חַס לְעַבְדָ, may your servants be spared, [i.e.,] may the Holy One, blessed be He, spare us from doing this. [May He never allow us to do such a thing!] There are many such expressions in the Talmud: חַס וְשָׁלוֹם, God forbid.
חלילה לעבדיך: חולין הוא לנו, לשון גנאי. ותרגום חס לעבדיך, חס מאת הקב"ה יהי עלינו מעשות זאת והרבה חס ושלום יש בתלמוד בלשון הזה:
8Behold, the money we found in the mouth of our sacks we returned to you from the land of Canaan; so how could we steal from your master's house silver or gold? חהֵ֣ן כֶּ֗סֶף אֲשֶׁ֤ר מָצָ֨אנוּ֙ בְּפִ֣י אַמְתְּחֹתֵ֔ינוּ הֱשִׁיבֹ֥נוּ אֵלֶ֖יךָ מֵאֶ֣רֶץ כְּנָ֑עַן וְאֵ֗יךְ נִגְנֹב֙ מִבֵּ֣ית אֲדֹנֶ֔יךָ כֶּ֖סֶף א֥וֹ זָהָֽב:
Behold, the money, etc.: This is one of the ten a fortiori conclusions (deductions from minor to major) mentioned in the Torah, and they are all enumerated in Gen. Rabbah (92:7). 10.
הן כסף אשר מצאנו: זה אחד מעשרה קל וחומר האמורים בתורה. וכולן מנויין בבראשית רבה (צב ז):
9Whichever one of your servants with whom it is found shall die, and also we will be slaves to my master." טאֲשֶׁ֨ר יִמָּצֵ֥א אִתּ֛וֹ מֵֽעֲבָדֶ֖יךָ וָמֵ֑ת וְגַם־אֲנַ֕חְנוּ נִֽהְיֶ֥ה לַֽאדֹנִ֖י לַֽעֲבָדִֽים:
10And he said, "Now indeed, so it is as you have spoken. [But] the one with whom it is found shall be my slave, and you shall be cleared." יוַיֹּ֕אמֶר גַּם־עַתָּ֥ה כְדִבְרֵיכֶ֖ם כֶּן־ה֑וּא אֲשֶׁ֨ר יִמָּצֵ֤א אִתּוֹ֙ יִֽהְיֶה־לִּ֣י עָ֔בֶד וְאַתֶּ֖ם תִּֽהְי֥וּ נְקִיִּֽם:
And he said, “Now indeed…”: Indeed, according to the law, it is as you have spoken, that you are all liable in this matter. I.e., [if there are] ten people, [and] in the possession of one a stolen article is found, they are all imprisoned. I will not treat you according to the strict letter of the law, however. [Instead, only] “the one with whom it (the goblet) is found shall be my slave.” - [from Gen. Rabbah 92:7]
גם עתה כדבריכם: אף זו מן הדין, אמת כדבריכם כן הוא שכולכם חייבים בדבר, עשרה שנמצאת גניבה ביד אחד מהם כולם נתפשים, אבל אני אעשה לכם לפנים משורת הדין, אשר ימצא אתו יהיה לי עבד:
11So they hastened, and each one lowered his sack to the ground, and each one opened his sack. יאוַיְמַֽהֲר֗וּ וַיּוֹרִ֛דוּ אִ֥ישׁ אֶת־אַמְתַּחְתּ֖וֹ אָ֑רְצָה וַיִּפְתְּח֖וּ אִ֥ישׁ אַמְתַּחְתּֽוֹ:
12He searched; he started with the eldest and finished with the youngest, and the goblet was found in Benjamin's sack. יבוַיְחַפֵּ֕שׂ בַּגָּד֣וֹל הֵחֵ֔ל וּבַקָּטֹ֖ן כִּלָּ֑ה וַיִּמָּצֵא֙ הַגָּבִ֔יעַ בְּאַמְתַּ֖חַת בִּנְיָמִֽן:
he started with the eldest: so that they would not detect that he knew where it was. — [from Gen. Rabbah 92:8]
בגדול החל: שלא ירגישו בו שהיה יודע היכן הוא:
13So they rent their garments, and each one loaded his donkey, and they returned to the city. יגוַיִּקְרְע֖וּ שִׂמְלֹתָ֑ם וַיַּֽעֲמֹס֙ אִ֣ישׁ עַל־חֲמֹר֔וֹ וַיָּשֻׁ֖בוּ הָעִֽירָה:
and each one loaded his donkey: They were very strong men, and they did not have to assist each other to load [the donkeys]. — [from Midrash Tanchuma, Mikeitz 10]
ויעמס איש על חמורו: בעלי זרוע היו ולא הוצרכו לסייע זה את זה לטעון:
and they returned to the city: It was [in fact] a [major] metropolis. So why does the Torah say,“to the city,” meaning a city of any size? Because it was of no more importance to them (the brothers) than an average-sized city (village) of ten people as regards [to fighting a] war. — [from Gen. Rabbah 92:8]
וישבו העירה: מטרפולין היתה והוא אומר העירה, עיר כל שהיא, אלא שלא היתה חשובה בעיניהם אלא כעיר בינונית של עשרה בני אדם לענין המלחמה:
14And Judah and his brothers came to Joseph's house, and he was still there, and they fell before him upon the ground. ידוַיָּבֹ֨א יְהוּדָ֤ה וְאֶחָיו֙ בֵּ֣יתָה יוֹסֵ֔ף וְה֖וּא עוֹדֶ֣נּוּ שָׁ֑ם וַיִּפְּל֥וּ לְפָנָ֖יו אָֽרְצָה:
and he was still there: for he was waiting for them. — [from Midrash Tanchuma, Mikeitz 10]
עודנו שם: שהיה ממתין להם:
15And Joseph said to them, "What is this deed that you have committed? Don't you know that a person like me practices divination?" טווַיֹּ֤אמֶר לָהֶם֙ יוֹסֵ֔ף מָֽה־הַמַּֽעֲשֶׂ֥ה הַזֶּ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר עֲשִׂיתֶ֑ם הֲל֣וֹא יְדַעְתֶּ֔ם כִּֽי־נַחֵ֧שׁ יְנַחֵ֛שׁ אִ֖ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֥ר כָּמֹֽנִי:
Don’t you know that a person like me practices divination?: Don’t you know that a person as esteemed as I knows how to test and ascertain through knowledge, reason, and discernment that you stole the goblet?- [from Targum Onkelos]
הלא ידעתם כי נחש ינחש וגו': הלא ידעתם כי איש חשוב כמוני יודע לנחש ולדעת מדעת ומסברא ובינה כי אתם גנבתם הגביע:
16And Judah said, "What shall we say to my master? What shall we speak, and how shall we exonerate ourselves? God has found your servants' iniquity, behold, we are my lord's servants, both we and the one in whose possession the goblet has been found." טזוַיֹּ֣אמֶר יְהוּדָ֗ה מַה־נֹּאמַר֙ לַֽאדֹנִ֔י מַה־נְּדַבֵּ֖ר וּמַה־נִּצְטַדָּ֑ק הָֽאֱלֹהִ֗ים מָצָא֙ אֶת־עֲוֹ֣ן עֲבָדֶ֔יךָ הִנֶּנּ֤וּ עֲבָדִים֙ לַֽאדֹנִ֔י גַּם־אֲנַ֕חְנוּ גַּ֛ם אֲשֶׁר־נִמְצָ֥א הַגָּבִ֖יעַ בְּיָדֽוֹ:
God has found: We know that we have not sinned, but this has come from the Omnipresent to bring this upon us. The Creditor has found a place to collect His debt. — [from Gen. Rabbah 92:9]
הא-להים מצא: יודעים אנו שלא סרחנו, אבל מאת הקב"ה נהיתה להביא לנו זאת. מצא בעל חוב מקום לגבות שטר חובו:
and how shall we exonerate ourselves: Heb. נִצְטַדָּק, an expression of justice (צֶדֶק) . Similarly, every word whose radical begins with a “zaddi,” and is to be used in the form of “hithpa’el” or “nithpa’el” (the reflexive voice), a “teth” is substituted for the “tav” [of the “hithpa’el”] and it is not placed before the first letter of the radical but in the middle of the radical letters. E.g.,“shall we exonerate ourselves (נִצְטַדָּק),” from the root צדק, justice;“was drenched (יִצְטַבַּע)” (Dan. 4:30), from the root צבע, to drench;“and disguised as ambassadors (וַיִצְטַיָרוּ)” (Josh. 9:4), from the root of“a faithful emissary (צִיר)” (Prov. 13:17);“we took…for our provision (הִצְטַיַדְנוּ)” (Josh. 9:12) from the root of“provisions (צֵידָה) for the way” (Gen. 42:25). [In cont-rast, in the case of] a word whose radical begins with a “sammech” or “sin,” when it is used in the “hith-pa’el,” [it is] a “tav” [that] separates the letters of the radical, e.g.,“and the grasshopper will drag itself along (וְיִסְתַּבֵּל)” (Eccl. 12:5), from the root kcx;“I looked (מִסְתַּכֵּל) at these horns” (Dan. 7: 8), from the root סכל“And the statutes of Omri shall be observed (וְיִשְׁתַּמֵר)” (Micah 6:16), from the root שׁמר“and he who turns away from evil is considered mad (מִשְׁתּוֹלֵל)” (Isa. 59: 15), from the root of“He leads counselors away with madness (שׁוֹלָל)” (Job 12:17);“tread (מִסְתּוֹלֵל) upon My people” (Exod. 9:17), from the root of“a way that is not trodden (סְלוּלָה)” (Jer. 18:15).
ומה נצטדק: לשון צדק, וכן כל תיבה שתחלת יסודה צד"י והיא באה לדבר בלשון מתפעל או נתפעל נותן טי"ת במקום תי"ו, ואינה נתנת לפני אות ראשונה של יסוד התיבה אלא באמצע אותיות העקר, כגון נצטדק מגזרת צדק, (דניאל ד ל) ויצטבע מגזרת צבע, (יהושע ט ד) ויצטירו מגזרת (משלי יג יז) ציר אמונים, (יהושע ט יב) הצטיידנו מגזרת (לעיל מב כה) צדה לדרך. ותיבה שתחלתה סמ"ך או שי"ן כשהיא מתפעלת התי"ו מפרדת את אותיות העקר, כגון (קהלת יב ה) ויסתבל החגב, מגזרת סבל, (דניאל ז ח) מסתכל הוית בקרניא, (מיכה ו טז) וישתמר חקות עמרי, מגזרת שמר, (ישעיה נט טו) וסר מרע משתולל, מגזרת (איוב יב יז) מוליך יועצים שולל, (שמות ט יז) מסתולל בעמי, מגזרת (ירמיה יח טו) דרך לא סלולה:
17But he said, "Far be it from me to do this! The man in whose possession the goblet was found he shall be my slave, but as for you go up in peace to your father." יזוַיֹּ֕אמֶר חָלִ֣ילָה לִּ֔י מֵֽעֲשׂ֖וֹת זֹ֑את הָאִ֡ישׁ אֲשֶׁר֩ נִמְצָ֨א הַגָּבִ֜יעַ בְּיָד֗וֹ ה֚וּא יִֽהְיֶה־לִּ֣י עָ֔בֶד וְאַתֶּ֕ם עֲל֥וּ לְשָׁל֖וֹם אֶל־אֲבִיכֶֽם:
Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 135 - 139
• Hebrew text
• English text
Chapter 135
1. Praise the Lord! Praise the Name of the Lord; offer praise, you servants of the Lord-
2. who stand in the House of the Lord, in the courtyards of the House of our God.
3. Praise the Lord, for the Lord is good; sing to His Name, for He is pleasant.
4. For God has chosen Jacob for Himself, Israel as His beloved treasure.
5. For I know that the Lord is great, our Master is greater than all supernal beings.
6. All that the Lord desired He has done, in the heavens and on earth, in the seas and the depths.
7. He causes mists to rise from the ends of the earth; He makes lightning for the rain; He brings forth the wind from His vaults.
8. It was He who struck down the firstborn of Egypt, of man and beast.
9. He sent signs and wonders into the midst of Egypt, on Pharaoh and on all his servants.
10. It was He who struck down many nations, and slew mighty kings:
11. Sichon, king of the Amorites; Og, king of Bashan; and all the kingdoms of Canaan.
12. And He gave their lands as a heritage, a heritage to His people Israel.
13. Lord, Your Name is forever; Lord, Your remembrance is throughout all generations.
14. Indeed, the Lord will judge on behalf of His people, and have compassion on His servants.
15. The idols of the nations are silver and gold, the product of human hands.
16. They have a mouth, but cannot speak; they have eyes, but cannot see;
17. they have ears, but cannot hear; nor is there breath in their mouth.
18. Like them will their makers become-all who trust in them.
19. House of Israel, bless the Lord; House of Aaron, bless the Lord;
20. House of Levi, bless the Lord; you who fear the Lord, bless the Lord.
21. Blessed is the Lord from Zion, who dwells in Jerusalem. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 136
This psalm contains twenty-six verses, corresponding to the twenty-six generations between the creation of the world and the giving of the Torah.
1. Praise the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is forever.
2. Praise the God of the supernal beings, for His kindness is forever.
3. Praise the Master of the heavenly hosts, for His kindness is forever.
4. Who alone performs great wonders, for His kindness is forever.
5. Who makes the heavens with understanding, for His kindness is forever.
6. Who spreads forth the earth above the waters, for His kindness is forever.
7. Who makes the great lights, for His kindness is forever.
8. The sun to rule by day, for His kindness is forever.
9. The moon and stars to rule by night, for His kindness is forever.
10. Who struck Egypt through its firstborn, for His kindness is forever.
11. And brought Israel out of their midst, for His kindness is forever.
12. With a strong hand and with an outstretched arm, for His kindness is forever.
13. Who split the Sea of Reeds into sections, for His kindness is forever.
14. And brought Israel across it, for His kindness is forever.
15. And cast Pharaoh and his army into the Sea of Reeds, for His kindness is forever.
16. Who led His people through the desert, for His kindness is forever;
17. Who struck down great kings, for His kindness is forever.
18. And slew mighty kings, for His kindness is forever.
19. Sichon, king of the Amorites, for His kindness is forever.
20. And Og, king of Bashan, for His kindness is forever.
21. And gave their land as a heritage, for His kindness is forever.
22. A heritage to Israel His servant, for His kindness is forever.
23. Who remembered us in our humiliation, for His kindness is forever.
24. And redeemed us from our oppressors, for His kindness is forever.
25. Who gives food to all flesh, for His kindness is forever.
26. Praise the God of heaven, for His kindness is forever.
Chapter 137
Referring to the time of the destruction of the Temple, this psalm tells of when Nebuchadnezzar would ask the Levites to sing in captivity as they had in the Temple, to which they would reply, "How can we sing the song of God upon alien soil?" They were then comforted by Divine inspiration.
1. By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat and wept as we remembered Zion.
2. There, upon the willows, we hung our harps.
3. For there our captors demanded of us songs, and those who scorned us-rejoicing, [saying,] "Sing to us of the songs of Zion.”
4. How can we sing the song of the Lord on alien soil?
5. If I forget you, Jerusalem, let my right hand forget [its dexterity].
6. Let my tongue cleave to my palate if I will not remember you, if I will not bring to mind Jerusalem during my greatest joy!
7. Remember, O Lord, against the Edomites the day of [the destruction of] Jerusalem, when they said, "Raze it, raze it to its very foundation!”
8. O Babylon, who is destined to be laid waste, happy is he who will repay you in retribution for what you have inflicted on us.
9. Happy is he who will seize and crush your infants against the rock!
Chapter 138
David offers awesome praises to God for His kindness to him, and for fulfilling His promise to grant him kingship.
1. By David. I will thank You with all my heart, in the presence of princes I shall praise You.
2. I will bow toward Your Holy Sanctuary, and praise Your Name for Your kindness and for Your truth; for You have exalted Your word above all Your Names.
3. On the day that I called out You answered me, You emboldened me, [You put] strength in my soul.
4. Lord, all the kings of the land will give thanks to You when they hear the words of Your mouth.
5. And they will sing of the Lord's ways, for the glory of the Lord is great.
6. For though the Lord is exalted, He sees the lowly; the High One castigates from afar.
7. If I walk in the midst of distress, keep me alive; against the wrath of my enemies stretch out Your hand, and let Your right hand deliver me.
8. Lord, complete [Your kindness] on my behalf. Lord, Your kindness is forever, do not forsake the work of Your hands.
Chapter 139
A most prominent psalm that guides man in the ways of God as no other in all of the five books of Tehillim. Fortunate is he who recites it daily.
1. For the Conductor, by David, a psalm. O Lord, You have probed me, and You know.
2. You know my sitting down and my standing up; You perceive my thought from afar.
3. You encircle my going about and my lying down; You are familiar with all my paths.
4. For there was not yet a word on my tongue-and behold, Lord, You knew it all.
5. You have besieged me front and back, You have laid Your hand upon me.
6. Knowledge [to escape You] is beyond me; it is exalted, I cannot know it.
7. Where can I go [to escape] Your spirit? And where can I flee from Your presence?
8. If I ascend to the heavens, You are there; if I make my bed in the grave, behold, You are there.
9. Were I to take up wings as the dawn and dwell in the furthest part of the sea,
10. there, too, Your hand would guide me; Your right hand would hold me.
11. Were I to say, "Surely the darkness will shadow me," then the night would be as light around me.
12. Even the darkness obscures nothing from You; and the night shines like the day-the darkness is as light.
13. For You created my mind; You covered me in my mother's womb.
14. I will thank You, for I was formed in an awesome and wondrous way; unfathomable are Your works, though my soul perceives much.
15. My essence was not hidden from You even while I was born in concealment, formed in the depths of the earth.
16. Your eyes beheld my raw form; all [happenings] are inscribed in Your book, even those to be formed in future days-to Him they are the same.
17. How precious are Your thoughts to me, O God! How overwhelming, [even] their beginnings!
18. Were I to count them, they would outnumber the sand, even if I were to remain awake and always with You.
19. O that You would slay the wicked, O God, and men of blood [to whom I say], "Depart from me!”
20. They exalt You for wicked schemes, Your enemies raise [You] for falsehood.
21. Indeed, I hate those who hate You, Lord; I contend with those who rise up against You.
22. I hate them with the utmost hatred; I regard them as my own enemies.
23. Search me, Lord, and know my heart; test me and know my thoughts.
24. See if there is a vexing way in me, then lead me in the way of the world.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 4
• English Text (Lessons in Tanya)
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
Shbbat, Kislev 28, 5778 · December 16, 2017
Today's Tanya Lesson
Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 4
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Yehoshua B. Gordon Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Manis Freidman Listen • Download MP3
Until now it has been explained that the divine soul has three garments in which it clothes itself: the thought, speech and action of Torah and the commandments. The Alter Rebbe now goes on to state that, unlike physical garments, which are less important than their wearer, the garments of the divine soul are even loftier than the soul which “wears” them. Thus, “wearing” its garments — i.e., thinking and speaking words of Torah, and acting in performance of the commandments — elevates the soul to a higher level. For, since Torah and the commandments are one with G-d, the Jew, by donning the garments of Torah and the commandments, also becomes united with him. In the Alter Rebbe’s words:
והנה שלשה לבושים אלו מהתורה ומצותיה, אף שנקראים לבושים לנפש רוח ונשמה
Now these three “garments” deriving from the Torah and its commandments, though they are called [merely] “garments” of the Nefesh, Ruach and Neshamah,
עם כל זה גבהה וגדלה מעלתם לאין ק׳ וסוף על מעלת נפש רוח ונשמה עצמן
nevertheless, their quality (the quality of the garments of the Torah and its commandments) is infinitely higher and greater than that of the Nefesh, Ruach and Neshamah themselves,
כמו שכתוב בזהר, דאורייתא וקודשא בריך הוא כולא חד
[for] as explained in the Zohar,1 Torah and the Holy One, blessed be He, are truly one.
פירוש: דאורייתא, היא חכמתו ורצונו של הקדוש ברוך הוא, והקדוש ברוך הוא בכבודו ובעצמו, כולא חד
This means: Since Torah is the wisdom and Will of the Holy One, blessed be He (i.e., the wisdom of Torah expresses G-d’s wisdom; its practical application and laws — e.g., whether or not a particular object is kosher — expresses His Will), it is one with His glory and essence,
כי הוא היודע והוא המדע וכו׳ כמו שכתוב לעיל בשם הרמב״ם
since He is the Knower, the Knowledge... and the Known, as explained above in ch. 2 in the name of Maimonides (— that these three aspects, separate and distinct in terms of human intellect, are, as they relate to G-d, one and the same entity: they are all G-dliness).
The Torah, being G-d’s intellect, is thus one with G-d Himself, and when a Jew understands and unites himself with it, he is united with G-d Himself.
From the above we understand that since the garments of thought and speech of Torah study and the active performance of the commandments are united with G-d, they are even higher than the soul itself.
However, a question presents itself: How can it be said that in understanding Torah one comprehends G-d’s wisdom and Will, when G-d’s wisdom — like G-d Himself — is infinitely beyond man’s limited comprehension? This will now be explained:
ואף דהקדוש ברוך הוא נקרא אין סוף, ולגדולתו אין חקר, ולית מחשבה תפיסא ביה כלל
Although the Holy One, blessed be He, is called Ein Sof (“Infinite”), and2 “His greatness can never be fathomed,” and3 “No thought can apprehend him at all,”
וכן ברצונו וחכמתו
and so are also His Will and His wisdom (infinite and unfathomable),
כדכתיב: אין חקר לתבונתו, וכתיב: החקר אלוקה תמצא, וכתיב: כי לא מחשבותי מחשבותיכם
as it is written,4 “There is no searching of His understanding”; and it is also written,5 “When you will search (to understand) G-d, will you find?”; and it is further written,6 “For My thoughts are not like your thoughts,” says G-d to man;
Thus human thought is incapable of grasping Divine “thought”. How, then, can it be said that in understanding Torah man grasps G-d’s wisdom?
To this the Alter Rebbe answers that G-d “compressed” and “lowered” His wisdom, clothing it in the physical terms and objects of Torah and its commandments, so that it might be accessible to human intelligence, in order that man may thereby be united with G-d.
הנה על זה אמרו: במקום שאתה מוצא גדולתו של הקדוש ברוך הוא, שם אתה מוצא ענותנותו
concerning this disparity between human intelligence and Divine wisdom, our Sages have said,7 “Where you find the greatness of the Holy One, blessed be He, there you find His humility.”
I.e., how can we approach G-d’s greatness, to “find” it and be united with it? — Through His “humility”, by His lowering Himself to our level.
וצמצם הקדוש ברוך הוא רצונו וחכמתו בתרי״ג מצות התורה ובהלכותיהן
G-d compressed His Will and wisdom in the 613 commandments of the Torah and in their laws,
As mentioned above, the logic of the law represents Divine wisdom, and the ruling, Divine Will —
ובצרופי אותיות תורה נביאים וכתובים
and in the letter-combinations of Scripture (Torah, Nevi‘im and Ketuvim),
The very letters and words of Scripture contain G-d’s Will and wisdom; wherefore even one who is ignorant of their meaning fulfills the precept of Torah study by merely reciting them —
ודרשותיהן שבאגדות ומדרשי חכמינו ז״ל
and G-d’s Will and wisdom are also contained in the exposition of these verses found in the Aggadotand Midrashim of our Sages, of blessed memory.
בכדי שכל הנשמה או רוח ונפש שבגוף האדם תוכל להשיגן בדעתה
In all of these did G-d “compress” His Will and wisdom in order that every Neshamah or even the lower soul-levels of Ruach and Nefesh, situated as they are in the human body, will be able to grasp them with its intellect,
ולקיימן כל מה שאפשר לקיים מהן במעשה דבור ומחשבה
and [in order] that it (the Nefesh or Ruach or Neshamah) fulfill them, as far as they can be fulfilled, in action, speech and thought;
ועל ידי זה תתלבש בכל עשר בחינותיה בשלשה לבושים אלו
thereby clothing itself with all its ten faculties in these three garments (of the thought, speech and action of Torah and mitzvot).
ולכן נמשלה התורה למים: מה מים יורדים ממקום גבוה למקום נמוך
Therefore has the Torah been compared to water,8 for just as water descends from a higher level to a lower level,
The water which reaches the lower level is the same water that left its source within the higher level; unlike light, for example, which also travels from its source, but in whose case it is not the source (the luminous body) itself that is transmitted, but only a ray of it; and unlike intellect which can also be communicated from one person to another, but in whose case, too, it is not the source (the teacher’s mind) itself that transmits itself to the lower level (the student’s mind), but only the idea, a product of the source.
כך התורה ירדה ממקום כבודה
Just as we find in the analogy of water, so has Torah descended from its place of glory, i.e., the lofty spiritual plane which is its source.
שהיא רצונו וחכמתו יתברך, ואורייתא וקודשא בריך הוא כולא חד, ולית מחשבה תפיסא ביה כלל
In its original state it is G-d’s Will and wisdom, and “Torah is one and the same with G-d,” Whom no thought can apprehend at all — on that plane, Torah is incomprehensible to man, as is G-d Himself.
ומשם נסעה וירדה בסתר המדריגות ממדרגה למדרגה בהשתלשלות העולמות
From there the Torah has journeyed in a descent through hidden stages, stage after stage, in the Hishtalshelut of the Worlds (i.e., the chain-like order of interconnected spiritual “Worlds”, explained more fully in ch. 2; Torah descended through all these levels —)
עד שנתלבשה בדברים גשמיים ועניני עולם הזה, שהן רוב מצות התורה ככולן והלכותיהן
until it clothed itself in material matters and things of this corporeal world, which comprise nearly all the Torah’s commandments and their laws.
Nearly all the mitzvot involve material objects: tzitzit are made of wool, tefillin of leather, and so on. Even the “spiritual” mitzvot involve material objects in their halachot — the laws governing their practical application. For example, the mitzvah of loving one’s fellow, although essentially a “spiritual” mitzvah, as it consists of an emotion — love, demands that one aid his fellow-Jew materially, financially, etc.; these being concrete, material expressions of a “spiritual” mitzvah.
ובצרופי אותיות גשמיות בדיו על הספר, עשרים וארבעה ספרים שבתורה נביאים וכתובים
Thus, the Torah clothed itself in the material objects with which the mitzvot are performed and also in the physical letter combinations written with ink in a book, namely the twenty-four books of Torah, Nevi‘im, and Ketuvim.
(As mentioned above, the letters and words contain the holiness of G-d’s Will and wisdom.)
כדי שתהא כל מחשבה תפיסא בהן, ואפילו בחינת דבור ומעשה שלמטה ממדרגת מחשבה תפיסא בהן ומתלבשת בהן
Torah underwent this great descent so that every human thought be able to grasp them, and so that even speech and action, which are on a level lower than thought, be able to grasp them (— G-d’s Will and wisdom) and clothe themselves in them — by performing the commandments in speech and action.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Part I, 24a; II, 60a. |
| 2. | Tehillim 145:3. |
| 3. | Introduction to Tikkunei Zohar. |
| 4. | Yeshayahu 40:28. |
| 5. | Iyov 11:7. |
| 6. | Yeshayahu 55:8. |
| 7. | Megillah 31a. |
| 8. | Bava Kama 17a. |
• Sefer Hamitzvot:
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassShabbat, Kislev 28, 5778 · December 16, 2017
Today's Mitzvah
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
Important Message Regarding This Lesson
The Daily Mitzvah schedule runs parallel to the daily study of 3 chapters of Maimonides' 14-volume code. There are instances when the Mitzvah is repeated a few days consecutively while the exploration of the same Mitzvah continues in the in-depth track.
Negative Commandment 356
Remarrying a Divorced Wife Who Remarried in the Interim
"Her first husband who sent her away may not marry her again"—Deuteronomy 24:4.
It is forbidden for a man to remarry a woman he divorced if she has remarried [and subsequently been divorced again or widowed] in the interim.
Full text of this Mitzvah »Remarrying a Divorced Wife Who Remarried in the Interim
Negative Commandment 356
Translated by Berel Bell
The 356th prohibition is that a man is forbidden from remarrying his divorced wife, if she was married to another man in the interim.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He) [that if her second husband divorces her or dies,] "then her first husband who divorced her cannot remarry her."
The punishment for transgression of this prohibition is malkos (lashes).
The details of this mitzvah are explained in a number of passages in Yevamos.
FOOTNOTES
1.Even if the second husband passed away or divorced her.
2.Deut. 24:4.
Rambam:
• 1 Chapter A Day: Tefillin, Mezuzah and Sefer Torah Tefillin, Mezuzah and Sefer Torah - Chapter Four
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassTefillin, Mezuzah and Sefer Torah - Chapter Four
1
Where are the head tefillin placed? They should be placed at the point of the skull, the end of the hairline towards the face, the place where a child's brain [can be felt] to pulsate.
Care must be taken to position them in the center, so that they will be "between the eyes." The knot should be at the top portion of the neck, the bottom of the skull.
א
היכן מניחין תפילין של ראש מניחין אותן על הקדקד שהוא סוף השיער שכנגד הפנים והוא המקום שמוחו של תינוק רופס בו וצריך לכוין אותם באמצע כדי שיהיו בין העינים ויהיה הקשר בגובה העורף שהוא סוף הגולגולת:
Commentary on Halachah 1
2
The arm [tefillin] should be tied to one's left arm at the muscle - i.e., the bulging flesh of the arm between the shoulder and the elbow. Thus, if one presses his arm to his ribs, the tefillah will be opposite his heart, thus fulfilling the directive [Deuteronomy 6:6], "And these words... shall be upon your heart."
ב
ושל יד קושר אותה על שמאלו על הקיבורת והוא הבשר התופח שבמרפק שבין פרק הכתף ובין פרק הזרוע שנמצא כשהוא מדבק מרפקו לצלעיו תהיה תפלה כנגד לבו ונמצא מקיים והיו הדברים האלה על לבבך:
Commentary on Halachah 2
3
A person who places the arm tefillah on his palm, or the head tefillah on his forehead, follows the way of the Sadducees. A person who makes his tefillin rounded like a nut does not fulfill the mitzvah at all.
A left-handed person puts tefillin on his right hand, since [figuratively,] it is his left hand. If he is ambidextrous, he should place them on his left hand - i.e., his left hand in a literal sense.
The places where to tie and place the tefillin were received as part of the oral tradition.
ג
המניח תפלה של יד על פס ידו או של ראש על מצחו הרי זה דרך צדוקים העושה תפלתו עגולה כאגוז אין בה מצוה כלל איטר מניח תפילין בימינו שהוא שמאל שלו ואם היה שולט בשתי ידיו מניח אותה בשמאלו שהוא שמאל כל אדם ומקום קשירת התפילין ומקום הנחתן מפי השמועה למדום:
Commentary on Halachah 3
4
The [absence of the] head tefillah does not preclude [wearing tefillin] on the arm, and similarly, the [absence of the] arm tefillah does not preclude [wearing tefillin] on the head. They are two mitzvot, each one to be considered independently.
What blessings are recited? On the head tefillin, one recites: "[Blessed are You...] who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us concerning the mitzvah of tefillin." On the arm tefillin, one recites: "[Blessed are You...] who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to put on tefillin."
ד
תפלה של ראש אינה מעכבת של יד ושל יד אינה מעכבת של ראש מפני שהן שתי מצות זו לעצמה וזו לעצמה וכיצד מברכין על של ראש מברך אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו על מצות תפילין ועל של יד מברך אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו להניח תפילין:
Commentary on Halachah 4
5
When does the above apply? When one puts on only one of them. If, however, one puts them both on, one recites only a single blessing, "...to put on tefillin."
One should tie the tefillin on one's arm, and afterwards put on the head tefillin. When one removes them, the head tefillin should be removed, and then the arm tefillin.
ה
בד"א כשהניח אחת מהן אבל אם הניח שתיהן מברך ברכה אחת והיא להניח תפילין וקושר של יד ואחר כך מניח של ראש וכשהוא חולץ חולץ של ראש ואח"כ חולץ של יד:
Commentary on Halachah 5
6
[After] reciting the blessing, "...to put on tefillin," and tying the tefillin on one's arm, one is forbidden to talk - even to respond to a greeting from one's teacher - until he puts on the head tefillin. If he talks, it is considered to be a transgression. [In such an instance,] one is required to recite the second blessing, "...concerning the mitzvah of tefillin," and then put on the head tefillin.
ו
מי שבירך להניח תפילין וקשר תפילין של יד אסור לו לספר ואפילו להשיב שלום לרבו עד שיניח של ראש ואם שח הרי זו עבירה וצריך לברך ברכה שנייה על מצות תפילין ואחר כך מניח של ראש:
Commentary on Halachah 6
7
Whenever a person puts on tefillin - even if he removes them and puts them on several times throughout the day - he should recite a blessing for them.
With regard to all mitzvot: one recites a blessing for them before performing them. Therefore, one should recite the blessing for the arm tefillah after placing it on one's muscle, before tying it, since tying it comprises the fulfillment of the mitzvah.
ז
תפילין כל זמן שמניחן מברך עליהן ואפילו חולץ ולובש כמה פעמים ביום וכל המצות כולן מברך עליהם קודם לעשייתן לפיכך צריך לברך על התפלה של יד אחר הנחה על הקיבורת קודם קשירתן שקשירתן זו היא עשייתן:
Commentary on Halachah 7
8
When a person removes his tefillin to place them in a container, he should not place the arm tefillah below and the head tefillah above, because when he wants to put them on, he will encounter the head tefillah first. Thus, he will [be forced to] ignore it and take out the arm tefillah, since one should not put on the head tefillah before the arm tefillah.
[This is undesirable because] it is forbidden for a person to ignore one mitzvah and proceed to the fulfillment of another mitzvah. Rather, as soon as a mitzvah comes to a person's hand, he should occupy himself with it. Therefore, a person should place the arm tefillin above, so that he will encounter it first, and thus put on the tefillin in the proper sequence.
ח
כשחולץ אדם תפיליו להצניען בכלי לא יניח של יד מלמטה ושל ראש מלמעלה מפני שבשעה שהוא רוצה ללובשן יפגע בשל ראש תחלה ונמצא שמניחה ומוציא של יד לפי שאין לובשין של ראש קודם של יד ואסור לאדם להניח מצוה ולעבור ממנה למצוה אחרת אלא מצוה שתבוא לידו של אדם בתחלה בה הוא מתעסק לפיכך צריך להניח של יד למעלה כדי שיפגע בה תחלה וילבש על הסדר:
Commentary on Halachah 8
9
A container that was made for tefillin to be placed in and which was used for that purpose becomes holy. It is forbidden to use it for mundane purposes.
If a container was prepared for that purpose, but never used for it, or if a container was temporarily used for tefillin, but was not prepared for that purpose, it does not become holy. Rather, it is considered an ordinary article as before.
It is forbidden to suspend tefillin. [This applies regardless of whether one suspends them] by their straps or from the tefillah itself. One may, however, suspend the bag in which they are placed.
ט
כלי שהכינו להניח בו תפילין והניחם בו נתקדש ואסור להשתמש בו בדברי חול הכינו ולא הניח בו או שהניח בו עראי ולא הכינו לא נתקדש והרי הוא חול כמו שהיה ואסור לתלות את התפילין בין ברצועה בין בתפלה עצמה אבל תולה הוא את הכיס שהתפילין מונחין בו:
Commentary on Halachah 9
10
The time for wearing tefillin is the day and not the night, as [Exodus 13:10] states: "And you shall observe this statute in its appointed time, from day to day." "This statute" refers to the mitzvah of tefillin.
Similarly, Sabbaths and holidays are not days on which tefillin [are worn], as [Exodus 13:9] states: "And they shall be a sign for you." Since the Sabbaths and the holidays are themselves signs, [the sign of tefillin is unnecessary].
When does the time to put them on begin? When one can see a colleague standing four cubits away and recognize him. [It continues] until sunset.
י
זמן הנחת התפילין ביום ולא בלילה שנאמר מימים ימימה חוקה זו היא מצות תפילין וכן שבתות וימים טובים אינן זמן תפילין שנאמר והיה לאות ושבתות וימים טובים הן עצמן אות ומאימתי זמן הנחתן משיראה את חבירו ברחוק ארבע אמות ויכירהו עד שתשקע החמה:
Commentary on Halachah 10
11
It is permitted for a person who put on tefillin before sunset to continue wearing them after nightfall. They may even remain upon him the entire night.
This law, however, is not to be taught in public. Instead, everyone should be taught not to wear tefillin at night and to remove them before sunset.
A person who puts on tefillin after sunset transgresses a Scriptural prohibition, as [implied by Exodus 13:10]: "And you shall observe this statute... from day to day."
יא
מי שהניח תפילין קודם שתשקע החמה וחשכה עליו אפילו הן עליו כל הלילה מותר ואין מורין דבר זה לרבים אלא מלמדין את הכל שלא יניחו תפילין עליהן בלילה אלא יחלצו אותן משתשקע החמה וכל המניח תפילין לכתחלה אחר שתשקע החמה עובר בלאו שנאמר ושמרת את החקה הזאת וגו' מימים ימימה:
Commentary on Halachah 11
12
When a person is wearing tefillin in the midst of a journey and the sun sets, marking the commencement of the Sabbath, he should cover them with his hand until he reaches his home and then, remove them.
If he is sitting in the house of study and the sun sets, marking the commencement of the Sabbath, he should cover them with his hand until he reaches his home, and then remove them.
If there is a house located near the wall [of a city] where they would be safe, he should place them there. If, however, he did not remove his tefillin after sunset because he did not have a place where they would be safe, it is permissible for him to continue wearing them in order to protect them.
יב
היה בא בדרך ותפילין בראשו ושקעה עליו החמה וקדש היום מניח ידו עליהן עד שהוא מגיע לביתו וחולץ היה יושב בבית המדרש ותפילין בראשו וקדש עליו היום מניח ידו עליהן עד שמגיע לביתו וחולץ ואם יש בית סמוך לחומה שמשתמרין בו מניחן שם ואם לא חלץ תפיליו מששקעה החמה מפני שלא היה לו מקום לשמרן ונמצאו עליו כדי לשמרן מותר:
Commentary on Halachah 12
13
All those who are exempt from the obligation to recite the Shema are exempt from the obligation to wear tefillin. If a minor knows [the importance of] guarding his tefillin, his father should obtain tefillin for him, to educate him regarding the performance of mitzvot.
A person with stomach problems and anyone who can contain his excretory functions only with difficulty are exempt from the obligation to wear tefillin. [In contrast,] all those ritually impure are obligated to wear tefillin like one who is pure.
A person who suffers discomfort, or someone who is disturbed and cannot concentrate his thoughts, is exempt from the obligation to wear tefillin, since a person who wears tefillin is forbidden to divert his attention from them.
Priests who are in the midst of [the Temple] service, Levites who chant on the platform, and Israelites while they are attending the Temple [ceremonies] are exempt from the obligation to pray and to wear tefillin.
יג
כל הפטור מקריאת שמע פטור מתפילין קטן שיודע לשמור תפיליו אביו לוקח לו תפילין כדי לחנכו במצות חולי מעים וכל מי שלא יכול לשמור את נקביו אלא בצער פטור מן התפילין וכל הטמאים כולן חייבין בתפילין כטהורים מצטער ומי שאין דעתו מיושבת ונכונה עליו פטור מן התפילין שהמניח תפילין אסור לו להסיח דעתו מהן כהנים בשעת העבודה והלוים בשעה שאומרים השיר של הדוכן וישראל בשעה שעומדים במקדש פטורין מן התפלה ומן התפילין:
Commentary on Halachah 13
14
A person should touch his tefillin [from time to time] during the entire time he is wearing them, so that he will not divert his attention from them even for a single moment, for their holiness surpasses that of the tzitz. The tzitz has God's name [written] upon it only once, while the head tefillin - and similarly, the arm tefillin - contain the name י-ה-ו-ה 21 times.
יד
חייב אדם למשמש בתפיליו כל זמן שהם עליו שלא יסיח דעתו מהם אפילו רגע אחד שקדושתן גדולה מקדושת הציץ שהציץ אין בו אלא שם אחד ואלו יש בהם אחד ועשרים שם של יו"ד ה"א בשל ראש וכמותן בשל יד:
Commentary on Halachah 14
15
tefillin require a clean body; i.e., that one should be careful not to release gas while wearing them.
Accordingly, it is forbidden to sleep while wearing them - neither a long sleep nor a nap. If, however, one places a cloth over them and a woman is not with him, one may nap while wearing them. What should he do? Place his head between his knees and sleep while sitting.
טו
תפילין צריכין גוף נקי שיזהר שלא תצא ממנו רוח מלמטה כל זמן שהם עליו לפיכך אסור לישן בהם לא שינת קבע ולא שינת עראי אלא אם הניח עליהן סודר ולא היתה עמו אשה ישן בהם שינת עראי וכיצד הוא עושה מניח ראשו בין ברכיו והוא יושב וישן:
Commentary on Halachah 15
16
A person who has tefillin wound around his hand is permitted to sleep with them. [This applies] even to a long sleep.
He may eat only a snack while wearing them. If, however, he enters to partake of a regular meal, he should remove them and place them on the table until after he washes his hands [at the conclusion of the meal]. Afterwards, he should put them on and recite grace over his meal while wearing them.
טז
היו תפיליו כרוכין בידו מותר לישן בהם אפילו שינת קבע ואינו אוכל בהם אלא אכילת עראי אבל אם נכנס לסעודת קבע חולצן ומניחן על שלחנו עד שיטול ידיו ואח"כ יניחם ויברך על מזונו והוא לבוש בהן:
Commentary on Halachah 16
17
[The following rules apply with regard to a person] wearing tefillin who must use the lavatory: [He should remove his tefillin but,] while he enters, he should not place them in the holes [of the outer wall of the lavatory] which are near the public domain, lest they be taken by passersby.
What should he do? Even if he [merely] has to urinate, he should remove his tefillin four cubits away [from the lavatory] and roll them in his clothes like a Torah scroll, holding them near his heart with his right hand. He must take care that the strap does not protrude more than a handbreadth from his hand. Afterwards, he should enter and relieve himself. After leaving the lavatory and walking more than four cubits away, he should put them on.
יז
היה לבוש תפילין והוצרך לבית הכסא לא יניח התפילין בחורין הסמוכין לרשות הרבים ויכנס שמא יטלום עוברי דרכים כיצד יעשה אפילו הוצרך להשתין מים חולץ תפיליו ברחוק ארבע אמות וגוללן בבגדו כמין ספר תורה ואוחזן בימינו כנגד לבו ויזהר כדי שלא תהא רצועה יוצאת מתחת ידו טפח ונכנס ועושה צרכיו וכשיצא מרחיק ארבע אמות מבית הכסא ולובשן:
Commentary on Halachah 17
18
When does the above apply? In a permanent lavatory where drops [of urine] will not sprinkle upon him. In contrast, in a place that is temporarily being used as a lavatory, one should not enter, [holding tefillin] wound up in one's hand. Instead, one should remove them [outside the lavatory] and give them to a colleague to guard.
Urine cannot be expelled [without drops sprinkling] even in a permanent lavatory unless one squats. If [the floor is covered] with soft dust, [drops will not sprinkle] even when one stands. If the floor is hard, one should stand on an incline [and urinate], so that drops will not sprinkle on him.
יח
במה דברים אמורים בבית הכסא הקבוע שאין ניצוצות ניתזות עליו אבל בית הכסא עראי לא יכנס בהן כשהם גלולים אלא חולץ אותן ונותנן לחבירו לשמרן ואין מי רגלים כלין אפילו בבית הכסא קבוע אלא בישיבה ואם היה עפר תחוח אפי' בעמידה היה במקום קשה יעמוד במקום מדרון כדי שלא ינתזו ניצוצות עליו:
19
When a person is wearing tefillin and must relieve himself in the evening, when there would be no time left in the day to put them on again after he finishes, he should not enter a lavatory, [holding them] rolled up in his clothes.
What should he do [instead]? He should remove them and place them in their container if it is a handbreadth in size, or in another container which is not specific for them even though it is not a handbreadth in size. He should hold the container in his hand when he enters the lavatory. Similarly, if he needs to relieve himself at night, he should place them in a container and enter the lavatory, holding the tefillin in his hand.
יט
היה לבוש בתפילין והוצרך לבית הכסא לעת ערב ולא נשאר מן היום כדי ללבשן אחר שיצא לא יכנס בהם גלולים בבגדו ואפילו להשתין מים בבית הכסא קבוע אלא כיצד יעשה חולצן ומניחן בכליין אם היה בו טפח או בכלי שאינו כליין אף על פי שאין בו טפח ואוחז הכלי בידו ונכנס וכן אם הוצרך בלילה מניחן בכלי ואוחז הכלי בידו ונכנס:
20
If a person forgot and entered a lavatory while wearing tefillin, he should cover them with his hand until he completes expelling the first issue of feces or urine, and then leave the lavatory, remove the tefillin, return, and complete relieving himself. Were one to interrupt in the midst of expelling the first outburst of feces or urine, he might become very dangerously ill.
כ
שכח ונכנס לבית הכסא והוא לבוש תפילין מניח ידו עליהן עד שיגמור עמוד ראשון ויוצא וחולץ אחר כך נכנס ועושה צרכיו שאם יפסיק בעמוד ראשון בין בגדולים בין בקטנים יבוא לידי חלאים שיש בהן סכנה גדולה:
21
If a person forgot and had intercourse while wearing tefillin, he should not hold either the straps or the compartments themselves until he washes his hands. [Then, he should] remove them. [This restriction was instituted] because hands are active.
כא
שכח ושמש מטתו בתפילין הרי זה לא יאחז לא ברצועה ולא בקציצה עד שיטול ידיו ויטלם מפני שהידים עסקניות:
22
[The following rules apply to] a person who enters a bathhouse: In the rooms where people stand clothed, it is permitted to put on tefillin. In the rooms where some of the people stand naked and some clothed, one need not remove one's tefillin, nor, at the outset, should one put tefillin on there. In the rooms where [everyone] stands naked, one should remove one's tefillin and, needless to say, one should not put them on.
כב
הנכנס לבית המרחץ מקום שבני אדם עומדין לבושין מותר להניח תפילין ומקום שבני אדם עומדין שם מקצתן ערומים ומקצתן לבושין אינו חולץ תפיליו ואינו מניח שם תפילין לכתחלה ומקום שבני אדם עומדים ערומים חולץ תפיליו ואין צריך לומר שאינו מניח:
23
A person should not walk in a cemetery wearing his head tefillin. Even [outside a cemetery], a person should remove his tefillin if he comes within four cubits of a corpse or a grave, until he distances himself four cubits from them.
A person should not put on tefillin [when he is naked]. He must first cover his genitalia and put on his clothes.
A person who is carrying a load on his head should remove his head tefillin [and not put it on again] until he puts down his load. It is even forbidden to wear a handkerchief around one's head when wearing tefillin. One may, however, wear a hat over the tefillin.
כג
לא יהלך אדם בבית הקברות ותפילין בראשו ואפילו בתוך ארבע אמות של מת או בתוך ארבע אמות של קבר צריך לחלוץ תפיליו עד שירחיק ארבע אמות ולא ילבש אדם תפילין עד שיכסה ערותו וילבש בגדיו הנושא משאוי על ראשו חולץ תפיליו של ראש עד שיסיר המשאוי מעליו ואפילו מטפחת אסור להניח על הראש שיש בו תפילין אבל צונף הוא מצנפתו על תפיליו:
Commentary on Halachah 23
24
When tefillin or a Torah scroll are in a room, it is forbidden to engage in sexual relations, unless they are removed or placed into a container, and that container placed into a second container which is not specific to them. If, however, the second container designated for them, even ten containers are considered as a single container.
Should a person place [the sacred articles] in two containers, he may place them at the head of his bed, between a cushion and a pillow, as long as they are not under his head, so that he can protect them. [This applies] even if his wife is together with him in bed.
כד
בית שיש בו תפילין או ספר תורה אסור לשמש בו מטתו עד שיוציאם או יניחם בכלי ויניח הכלי בכלי אחר שאינו כליין אבל אם היה הכלי השני מזומן להם אפי' עשרה כלים ככלי אחד הן חשובין ואם הניחן כלי בתוך כלי מותר להניחן תחת מראשותיו בין כר לכסת שלא כנגד ראשו כדי לשמרן ואפי' אשתו עמו במטה:
Commentary on Halachah 24
25
The holiness associated with tefillin is very great. As long as a person is wearing tefillin on his head and arm, he will be humble and God-fearing and will not be drawn to frivolous behavior or empty speech. He will not turn his thoughts to evil matters, but rather will direct his heart to words of truth and justice.
Accordingly, a person should try to wear [tefillin] throughout the entire day, for this is the mitzvah associated with them. Among the praises conveyed upon Rav, the student of Rabbenu Hakadosh, was that he was never seen walking four cubits without [reciting words of] Torah, without tzitzit, and without tefillin.
כה
קדושת תפילין קדושתן גדולה היא שכל זמן שהתפילין בראשו של אדם ועל זרועו הוא עניו וירא שמים ואינו נמשך בשחוק ובשיחה בטילה ואינו מהרהר מחשבות רעות אלא מפנה לבו בדברי האמת והצדק לפיכך צריך אדם להשתדל להיותן עליו כל היום שמצותן כך היא אמרו עליו על רב תלמידו של רבינו הקדוש שכל ימיו לא ראוהו שהלך ארבע אמות בלא תורה או בלא ציצית או בלא תפילין:
Commentary on Halachah 25
26
Although it is a mitzvah to wear [tefillin] throughout the entire day, it is most important during prayer. Our Sages declared: "Whoever recites the Shema without tefillin is considered as if he is giving false testimony."
Whoever does not wear tefillin transgresses eight positive commandments, for in each of the four passages contained in the tefillin we are commanded to wear both head and arm tefillin. [The rewards for wearing tefillin are also great.] Whoever wears tefillin regularly will live long, as [implied by Isaiah 38:16]: "God is upon them, they shall live."
כו
אע"פ שמצותן ללבשן כל היום בשעת תפלה יותר מן הכל אמרו חכמים כל הקורא קריאת שמע בלא תפילין כאלו מעיד עדות שקר בעצמו וכל שאינו מניח תפילין עובר בשמונה עשה שהרי בארבע פרשיות צוה על תפילין של ראש ועל תפילין של יד וכל הרגיל בתפילין מאריך ימים שנאמר ה' עליהם יחיו:
Rambam:
• 3 Chapters A Day: Gerushin Gerushin - Chapter Ten, Gerushin Gerushin - Chapter Eleven, Gerushin Gerushin - Chapter Twelve
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassGerushin - Chapter Ten
1
Whenever in this text1 we have used the terms "the get is void," or "the divorce is not effective," the intent is that the get is void according to Scriptural law. The woman is married in the full sense of the term. If she remarries, she must leave [her second husband]; any child she bears him is illegitimate.
If the husband [of a woman who receives such a get] is a priest, she is not forbidden to him as a divorced woman,2 with one exception: a person who divorces his wife and tells her: "You are divorced from me, but you are not permitted to marry anyone else."3 Although such a divorce is not binding, according to Rabbinic law4 such a woman is forbidden to marry a priest, as [implied by Leviticus 21:7]: "[They may not take] a woman divorced from her husband." Our Sages interpreted this to mean: "Even if she is divorced only from her husband and not permitted to marry any one else, she is forbidden to the priesthood. This is the "wisp of a get" that disqualifies [a woman] from [marrying a member of] the priesthood by Rabbinic decree.
א
כל מקום שאמרנו בחבור זה שהגט בטל או אינו גט או אינה מגורשת הרי זה גט בטל מן התורה ועדיין היא אשת איש גמורה. ואם נשאת תצא והולד ממזר ואם היה בעלה כהן לא נאסרה עליו משום גרושה. חוץ מן המגרש את אשתו ואמר לה הרי את מגורשת ממני ואין את מותרת לכל שאף על פי שאין זה גט הרי זו פסולה לכהונה מדבריהן שנאמר ואשה גרושה מאישה אמרו חכמים אפילו לא נתגרשה אלא מאישה ולא הותרה לכל נאסרה לכהונה וזהו ריח הגט שפוסל בכהונה מדבריהם:
2
Whenever, in this text, we have used the term "the get is unacceptable," the intent is that the get is unacceptable merely according to Rabbinic decree.5 Thus, according to Scriptural law, the woman is forbidden to the priesthood.6
A priori, she should not remarry. If, however, she has remarried, she need not leave [her second husband].7 Children born [from her second marriage] are legitimate. A second get that is acceptable should be given to her, while she remains married to her [second] husband.
Should it be impossible to have a second [get] composed, if her second husband is scrupulous and voluntarily divorces her this is praiseworthy, provided she has not borne [him] children. If, however, she has borne him children, he should not divorce her because of [our Sages'] disqualification of her get, lest this cause his sons' reputation to be sullied.
ב
וכל מקום שאמרנו בחבור זה שהגט פסול הרי זה פסול מדברי סופרים בלבד ונפסלה בו מן הכהונה מדברי תורה. ולא תנשא לכתחלה ואם נשאת לא תצא והולד כשר. וכותבין לה גט אחר כשר ונותנין לה והיא תחת בעלה. ואם אי אפשר לכתוב אחר והיה הבעל ותיק וגירש מעצמו הרי זה משובח אם אין לה בנים. אבל אם יש לה בנים לא יוציא מפני פסול הגט שמא יוציא לעז על בניו:
3
Whenever, in this text, we have used the term "the status of the divorce is in doubt," the woman should not remarry. If she has remarried, she must leave her second husband, and there is a doubt regarding the legimitacy of any children that she bears [her second husband], for her own status is in doubt, and she may be forbidden to engage in marital relations.8
If [a man] divorces his wife with an unacceptable get, or the status of [their] divorce is in doubt, and he desires to remarry her, she is permitted to her husband. He does not have to renew the marriage,9 recite the seven marriage blessings,10 or write her a new marriage contract,11 unless she has been divorced in a manner that is binding.
ג
וכל מקום שאמרנו בחיבור זה הרי זו ספק גירושין או שהיא ספק מגורשת לא תנשא ואם נשאת תצא והולד ספק ממזר מפני שהיא ספק ערוה. וכן אם גירש את אשתו בגט פסול או שהיתה ספק מגורשת ורצה להחזירה הרי זו מותרת לבעלה. ואינו צריך לחדש הנישואין ולברך שבע ברכות ולכתוב כתובה עד שתתגרש גירושין גמורין:
4
Our Sages ordained that whenever [a woman] who was given a get that is void remarries, she must be divorced by her second husband, lest people say: "A married woman has been allowed to remarry without [receiving] a get."12 And she must receive a [second] get from her first husband, so that she be permitted to marry anyone else.
She is forbidden to remarry both her first and second husband forever.13 [This applies] even if she entered into marital relations [with her second husband] without knowing of the prohibition involved. [This prohibition was instituted]14 lest people say: "The man remarried his divorcee after she was married [to another man]." If one of the two transgressed and remarried her, he should be compelled to send her away.
ד
כל מי שנשאת בגט בטל הרי זו צריכה גט מבעל שני מדבריהן כדי שלא יאמרו אשת איש יוצאה בלא גט. וצריכה גט מן הראשון להתירה לשאר העם. ונאסרה על שניהם לעולם אע"פ שנבעלה בשגגה. כדי שלא יאמרו החזיר זה גרושתו אחר שנשאת. ואם עבר אחד משניהן והחזירה יוציא:
5
A similar law applies when a woman remarries [after] witnesses testified that her [first] husband died, and later her first husband returns. [This applies] regardless of whether her [first] husband was a mentally sound individual or a deaf-mute, or whether she remarried a mentally sound person or a deaf-mute, who cannot establish a marriage bond in a complete sense.15 She must be divorced by both of them; both must give her a get, and she is forbidden to engage in marital relations with either of them again.
ה
וכן הדין באשה שבאו עדים שמת בעלה ונשאת ואחר כך בא בעלה בין שהיה בעלה פקח בין שהיה חרש בין שנשאת לפקח בין שנשאת לחרש שאין קדושיו קדושין גמורים תצא משניהם וצריכה גט מזה ומזה ונאסרה על שניהם עולמית:
6
If [after witnesses testified that a woman's husband died or that she was given a get], she was consecrated [but the marriage bond was not yet consummated],16 and then her first husband returned, or it was discovered that the get was void, she is permitted to her first husband. Nor must she be divorced by the second husband, for a marriage bond cannot be established with a woman who is forbidden because of a severe prohibition.
[In this instance, we do not require a divorce out of fear that] someone say: "A married woman is being released without a get." Since the marriage was not consummated, the person will rationalize: "The consecration was made on condition, and that condition was not fulfilled."
ו
הרי שנתקדשה ואחר כך בא בעלה או נמצא הגט בטל הרי זו מותרת לבעלה ואינה צריכה גט משני שאין קידושין תופסין בעריות. ואין חוששין שמא יאמרו אשת איש יוצאה בלא גט כיון שלא נשאת יאמרו תנאי היה בקידושין ולא נתקיים:
7
[The following laws apply when] a woman married, and afterwards it was discovered that her get was void, or [it had been reported that her first husband died,] and he returned. Neither her first nor her second husband is entitled to an ownerless object that she discovers17 nor to the profits from her work.18 Neither can he annul her vows.19 None of the benefits that either of them received after she married [her second husband] should be expropriated from them.20 Neither of them is obligated to pay her the money due her by virtue of her marriage contract,21 nor to fulfill any of the stipulations of the marriage contract.22
Neither of them is required to pay for her sustenance. If she took [money or property for this purpose] from either of them, she must return it. Neither of them is held responsible for any of the property she brought to the marriage that became worn out or was lost,23 even nichsei tzon barzel.24
A child born to [the second husband] is illegitimate. If the first husband engages in relations with her before she is divorced by the second husband, a child born of this union is illegitimate by virtue of Rabbinic decree.
If the second [husband] divorced her and she received the money due her by virtue of her marriage contract, and afterwards her [first] husband came or it was discovered that the divorce was void, we do not expropriate the money she received for her sustenance or by virtue of her marriage contract.25
ז
האשה שנשאת ונמצא הגט בטל. או בא בעלה אחר ששמעה שמת. אין הבעל הראשון והשני זכאין לא במציאתה ולא במעשי ידיה ולא בהפרת נדריה. וכל פירות שאכלו שניהן אחר שנשאת אין מוציאין מהן. ואין לה כתובה ולא תנאי מתנאי כתובה ולא מזונות לא על זה ולא על זה. ואם נטלה מזה או מזה תחזיר. וכל מה שבלה או אבד מנכסיה ואפילו מנכסי צאן ברזל אין מוציאין אותן לא מזה ולא מזה. והולד מן השני ממזר. ואם בא עליה הראשון קודם שגירש השני הרי הולד ממזר מדבריהם. גירשה השני ונטלה ממנו כתובה ואחר כך בא בעלה או נמצא הגט בטל אין מוציאין מידה מה שנטלה לא מן המזונות ולא מן הכתובה:
8
Similar laws apply when one of two brothers consecrated a woman.26 The brother who consecrated the woman departed, and afterwards it was reported that he died. The other brother performed the rite of yibbum, marrying his brother's wife, and then the brother returned.
The woman must be divorced by both husbands, receiving a get from both of them, and all the stringencies mentioned above apply to her. Similarly, if a man consecrated a woman, she journeyed to another country, the husband heard that she died and married her sister,27 and afterwards it was discovered that she had not died: he must divorce both women, and all the stringencies mentioned above apply to both of them.
ח
וכן הדין באחין שקדש אחד אשה והלך אחיו ושמע בו שמת ויבם את אשתו ואחר כך בא תצא מזה ומזה וצריכה גט מזה ומזה וכל הדברים האלו בה. וכן אם קדש אשה והלכה למדינה אחרת ושמע שמתה ונשא אחותה ואחר כך נודע שלא מתה צריכות שתיהן ממנו גט וכל הדרכים האלו בהן:
9
[Different rules apply, however, if a man] married a woman who journeyed to another country, he heard that she died, he married her sister, and then it was discovered that his [first] wife was alive. The sister does not require a get, and his [first] wife is permitted to him.
Similar laws apply with regard to other women forbidden by severe prohibitions28 who were married under the assumption that the marriage was permitted,29 and it is discovered that the prohibition still applied. They do not require a divorce, for a marriage bond cannot be established with a woman forbidden by such a severe prohibition.
ט
אבל אם הלכה אשתו הנשואה למדינה אחרת ושמע בה שמתה ונשא אחותה ונמצאת אשתו קיימת אין אחותה צריכה ממנו גט ואשתו מותרת. וכן שאר העריות שנשאן בחזקת היתר ונמצאו ערוה אינן צריכות גט שאין קדושין תופסין בעריות:
10
Why did they require that the sister of the woman whom the man consecrated be given a get?30 Lest people say that the [first] kiddushin were given conditionally, [the condition was not fulfilled,] and thus the law would allow marriage to her sister. Since the [first] woman's sister was divorced with a get, she - i.e., the man's first arusah - is forbidden [to him], lest people think that he married his divorcee's sister.
י
ומפני מה הצריכו אחות ארוסתו גט שמא יאמרו תנאי היה באירוסין וכדת נשא אחותה. והואיל ויצאה אחותה בגט. אחותה שהיא ארוסתו הראשונה אסורה כדי שלא יאמרו נשא אחות גרושתו:
11
A scribe composed [a get], but erred and gave the get to the husband and the receipt [for the woman's marriage contract] to the woman, or the man and wife erred, and the husband took the get and the wife the receipt, and thus they thought they were divorced.31
[The following rules apply] if afterwards the get is discovered in the possession of the man. If the woman has not remarried, she is considered as if she has not been divorced; it [appears to] have been revealed that the divorce did not ever take place. The husband should give her the get in the presence [of witnesses], and the divorce takes effect from the time the get is given.
If, however, she had [already] remarried, and afterwards the husband produces the get, claiming that she has not been divorced, for he is in possession of the get and it never reached her, we do not accept his claim. She is not forbidden to her [second] husband.32 Instead, we operate under the presumption that she has been divorced, the get fell from her hand and was found by [her first husband], who desires to cause her to be forbidden to her second husband.33
יא
כתב הסופר וטעה ונתן גט לאיש ושובר לאשה. או שטעו הן ונטל הבעל הגט ונטלה היא השובר וכמדומה להן שנתגרשה ולאחר זמן הרי הגט יוצא מתחת ידי האיש. אם לא נשאת הרי זו אינה מגורשת ונתגלה הדבר שעדיין לא נתגרשה ויתן לה הגט בפנינו ותהיה מגורשת משעת נתינתו. ואם נשאת ואחר כך הוציא הבעל את הגט ואמר עדיין לא נתגרשה שהרי הגט בידי ולא הגיע לידה אין שומעין לו לאוסרה על בעלה. אלא הרי זו בחזקת גרושה ונפל הגט מידה ומצאו זה והרי בא לאוסרה על הבעל השני:
12
When a person divorces his wife because of unsavory reports,34 or because she is indiscriminate with regard to vows, he is told: "Inform her that you are divorcing her to chastise her, and know that you will never be able to remarry her."35
Why is [a man forbidden] to remarry such a woman? This is a decree, [instituted] lest she marry another man, repent and live chastely with him. Her first [husband] may then say: "If I had known that this would be the case, I would not have divorced her." Thus, it resembles a divorce given on a condition that was not fulfilled,36 in which case, retroactively, the get would be void. Therefore, we tell him: "Make a firm resolve to divorce her, knowing that you will never remarry her."
If, however, he transgresses and remarries her before she is consecrated to another man,37 he need not divorce her.
יב
המוציא את אשתו משום שם רע או משום שהיא פרוצה בנדרים אומרין לו הודיעה שמפני זה אתה מוציאה כדי לייסרה ודע שאין אתה מחזירה לעולם. ומפני מה המוציא את זו לא יחזירה לעולם גזירה שמא תנשא לאחר ותעשה תשובה ותהיה צנועה תחתיו ויאמר הראשון אילו הייתי יודע שכן הוא לא הייתי מגרשה ונמצא כמגרש על תנאי ולא נתקיים שנמצא הגט בטל למפרע. לפיכך אומרים לו גמור בלבך לגרשה שאין זו חוזרת לך לעולם. ואם עבר והחזיר קודם שנתקדשה לאחר לא יוציא:
13
Similarly, if [a man] divorces his wife because she is an aylonit38 or because she always experiences menstrual bleeding in the midst of sexual relations,39 he should never remarry her.
[This is a decree, instituted] lest she marry another man and have children if she was an aylonit, or her condition be healed if she suffered from menstrual bleeding. [Her first husband] may then say: "If I had known that this would be the case, I would not have divorced her." Thus, [it would appear] that her get is void and her children illegitimate. If, however, he transgresses and remarries her [before she is consecrated to another man], he need not divorce her.
יג
וכן המוציא את אשתו משום אילונית. או משום שרואה דם בכל עת תשמיש הרי זה לא יחזיר לעולם. שמא תנשא לאחר ותלד האילונית ותתרפא הנדה ויאמר אילו הייתי יודע שכן הוא לא הייתי מגרשה ונמצא הגט בטל והבנים ממזרים. ואם עבר והחזיר לא יוציא:
14
When an agent brings a get from the diaspora and says, "It was written and signed in my presence" [to validate the signatures to the get],40 he should not marry her. We fear that perhaps he was attracted to her and therefore testified on her behalf.
[For this same reason,] when one witness testifies that a woman's husband died,41 and she [is given license to] marry on the basis of his testimony, he should not marry her. Similarly, a sage who ruled that a woman is forbidden to her husband because of a vow42 should not marry her.
Similarly, when a man is reputed to have had relations with a maid-servant, and afterwards she was granted her freedom, or when [a man is reputed to have had relations] with a gentile woman, and afterwards she converted, he should not marry her.43 Similarly, if a gentile or a servant had relations with a Jewish woman, and afterwards the gentile converted or the servant was freed, he should not marry this woman.44 In all these instances, if a couple transgress and marry,45 they should not be forced to separate46.
יד
שליח שהביא גט חוץ לארץ ואמר בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם הרי זה לא ישאנה. שאנו חוששין שמא עיניו נתן בה ולפיכך העיד לה. וכן העד האחד שהעיד לאשה שמת בעלה ונשאת על פיו הרי זה לא ישאנה. וכן החכם שאסר את האשה על בעלה בנדר הרי זה לא ישאנה. וכן הנטען על השפחה ונשתחררה על הנכרית ונתגיירה ה"ז לא ישאנה. וכן עכו"ם ועבד הבא על בת ישראל אף על פי שחזר העכו"ם ונתגייר העבד ונשתחרר ה"ז לא ישאנה. וכולן אם עברו ונשאו אין מוציאין מידם:
15
In all the above instances, if these men had wives and their wives died, or they divorced their wives at their wives' initiative,47 they are permitted to marry [the women mentioned above]; there is no need for hesitation.
Similarly if these women married other men and became widowed or were divorced, they are permitted to marry [the men mentioned above]; there is no need for hesitation.
טו
וכולן שהיו להם נשים ומתו נשותיהן או שנתגרשו והיו הנשים הן שהרגילו את בעליהן לגרשם הרי אלו מותרות להנשא להן לכתחלה. וכן אם הלכו נשים אלו ונשאו לאחרים ונתאלמנו או נתגרשו הרי אלו מותרות להנשא להן לכתחלה:
16
All these women are permitted to marry [any relatives of the men involved]. [A woman may marry] the son of the witness who testified on her behalf, the son of the sage who declared that she was forbidden to her husband, the son of the man with whom she was reputed to have had relations, or any other relative of theirs. [The rationale for this leniency is that] a person will not commit a sin so that another person will benefit.
A woman is permitted to marry one of [the two witnesses] to her divorce or to her mi'un, or to marry one of the judges in whose presence she performed the rite of chalitzah. Our suspicions are aroused only when [the woman's license to marry depends on] the testimony of one witness.48
A person should always shy away from serving as a witness to mi'un,49 and make himself available [as a witness to enable] the rite of chalitzah [to be performed].
טז
וכל אחת מהן מותרת להנשא לבן העד שהעיד לה. או לבן החכם שאסרה על בעלה. או לבן הנטען עליה או לשאר קרובין שאין אדם חוטא כדי שיהנה אחר. ומותרת האשה להנשא לאחד מעדי גירושיה או מעדי מיאוניה. או לאחד מן הדיינים שחלצה בפניהם שאין חוששין אלא לעדות אחד. ולעולם יתרחק אדם מעדות מיאון ויתקרב לחליצה:
17
When a man divorces his wife and then engages in relations with her in the the presence of witnesses before she marries another man,50 we assume that since she was [originally] his wife, he remarried her and engaged in relations with the intent of consecrating her, and not as a licentious act.
[The above rule applies] regardless of whether they were divorced after marriage, or only after consecration. And this applies even if we saw that he paid her money.51 For it is an accepted presumption that a person will not enter into sexual relations with his wife with a licentious intent, when he has the possibility of having these relations considered to be a mitzvah.
For this reason, this woman is definitely considered to be consecrated,52 and requires a second divorce [in order to marry another man].
יז
המגרש את אשתו וחזר ובעלה בפני עדים קודם שתנשא לאחר בין שגירשה מן הנשואין בין מן האירוסין הואיל ואשתו היתה הרי זו בחזקת שהחזירה ולשם קידושין בעל ולא לשם זנות. ואפילו ראו אותו שנתן לה מעות. שחזקה היא שאין אדם עושה בעילתו באשתו בעילת זנות והרי בידו לעשותה בעילת מצוה. לפיכך הרי זו בחזקת מקודשת קידושי ודאי וצריכה ממנו גט שני:
18
[There is an extension to the above principle.] If a man entered into privacy with his divorcee in the presence of witnesses, the two witnesses observed [their conduct] simultaneously,53 and [the couple] had been married previously, we suspect that they engaged in sexual relations.
The witnesses to their entrance into privacy are thus considered to be witnesses to sexual relations. For a person who consecrates his wife via sexual relations need not engage in relations in the presence of witnesses. [All that] is necessary that [the couple] enter into privacy in the presence of witnesses and engage in relations in privacy, as explained.54
Since [it is possible that the couple engaged in relations], the status of the woman is in doubt, because we suspect that she has been consecrated. Because of this suspicion, she requires a [second] get. If, however, the woman had merely been consecrated and was divorced [before she was married], we do not suspect [that they engaged in sexual relations], because they did not share such familiarity.55
יח
נתייחד עמה בפני עדים והוא שיהיו שני העדים כאחד. אם היתה מגורשת מן הנשואין חוששין לה שמא נבעלה והן הן עדי יחוד הן הן עדי ביאה. שכל המקדש בביאה אינו צריך לבעול בפני עדים אלא יתייחד בפניהן ויבעול כמו שבארנו. לפיכך צריכה גט מספק והרי היא ספק מקודשת. ואם היתה מגורשת מן האירוסין אין חוששין לה שהרי אין לבו גס בה:
19
Several of the geonim have ruled that any woman with whom a man engaged in sexual relations in the presence of witnesses requires a get, [the rationale for their ruling being that] a person will not carry out sexual relations with a licentious intent.
[Moreover,] they extended [the application of] this principle, until they decided to rule that when a man's maidservant bore him a son, we take the matter into account, and the man's wife is not [allowed to perform] the rite of yibbum [if he dies without children],56 lest he have freed his maidservant57 and afterwards engaged in relations with her [with the intent of consecrating her]. And there are those who ruled that we can definitely assume that he freed her [and consecrated her],58 for a man will not carry out sexual relations with a licentious intent.
I considered these opinions to be far from the paths of the Torah judgment, and it is not fit for one to rely on them. Our Sages made such statements only with regard to [a man's] wife whom he divorced, or to a person who consecrated a woman conditionally and then entered into sexual relations without clarifying his intent.59 For in these instances the woman is the man's wife, and with regard to a man's wife we assume that he will not enter into sexual relations with a licentious intent unless he explicitly states that this is his intent, or that he is entering into these relations with a condition in mind.60
With regard to other women, however, [we do not follow this assumption]. Instead, whenever [a man enters into relations with] a wanton woman, we assume that he had a licentious intent,61 unless he explicitly states that he intends to consecrate her. Needless to say, this applies with regard to a maidservant62 or to a gentile woman,63 for our marriage laws do not apply with regard to them at all, and we have no suspicions [with regard to marriage] at all. A son born by them is assumed to be a gentile or a servant until it is definitively substantiated that his mother was freed or converted.
יט
הורו מקצת הגאונים שכל אשה שתבעל בפני עדים צריכה גט. חזקה שאין אדם עושה בעילתו בעילת זנות. והגדילו והוסיפו בדבר זה שעלה על דעתם עד שהורו שמי שיש לו בן משפחתו חוששין לו ולא תתייבם אשתו שמא שחרר שפחתו ואחר כך בא עליה. ויש מי שהורה שודאי שחררה שאין אדם עושה בעילתו בעילת זנות. וכל הדברים האלה רחוקים הם בעיני עד מאד מדרכי ההוראה ואין ראוי לסמוך עליהן. שלא אמרו חכמים חזקה זו אלא באשתו שגירשה בלבד או במקדש על תנאי ובעל סתם שהרי אשתו היא ובאשתו היא שחזקתו שאינו עושה בעילת זנות עד שיפרש שהיא בעילת זנות או יפרש שעל תנאי הוא בועל. אבל בשאר הנשים הרי כל זונה בחזקת שבעל לשם זנות עד שיפרש כי הוא לשם קדושין. ואין צריך לומר בשפחה או כותית שאינה בת קדושין שאין חוששין להן כלל. והרי הבן מהן בחזקת כותי ועבד עד שיודע בודאי שנשתחררה אמו או נתגיירה:
20
When it has been assumed that a woman is either married or consecrated, and a rumor is spread in [her] city that she has been divorced, [the rumor] is not given credence, and we continue to operate under the assumption [that there was no change in her status].64 [This applies] even if the majority, or even the entire city spread this rumor.
[Different rules apply, however, in the following instance.] A rumor was spread through the city that a woman was consecrated, and that rumor was reported in court, in which case we suspect that the woman was consecrated, as explained.65 Afterwards, a rumor was spread that she was divorced from those kiddushin; we consider her to be divorced.66 [Since] she was forbidden on the basis of a rumor, she is permitted on the basis of a rumor.
כ
מי שהוחזקה אשת איש בין מן הנשואין בין מן האירוסין ויצא שמה בעיר מגורשת. אפילו רוב העיר או כולה מעבירין הקול שנתגרשה אין חוששין לה והרי היא בחזקתה. אבל אם יצא שמה בעיר מקודשת והוחזק הקול בבית דין שהרי היא מקודשת בספק כמו שבארנו ואחר כך יצא עליה קול שנתגרשה מאותן הקידושין הקול אסרה והקול התירה והרי זו מגורשת:
21
[A man] should not marry a woman if he intends to divorce her.67 Nor should he maintain her as a wife68 and live with her, if he intends to divorce her.69
A man should not divorce his first wife unless he discovers an incident of sexual misconduct,70, as [Deuteronomy 24:1] states: "When he finds evidence of sexual misconduct...." One should not hurry to divorce one's first wife.71 With regard to a second wife, by contrast, if one hates her, one may send her away.72
כא
לא ישא אדם אשה ודעתו לגרשה. ולא תהיה יושבת תחתיו ומשמשתו ודעתו לגרשה. ולא יגרש אדם אשתו ראשונה אלא אם כן מצא בה ערות דבר שנאמר כי מצא בה ערות דבר וגו'. ואין ראוי לו למהר לשלח אשתו ראשונה. אבל שניה אם שנאה ישלחנה:
22
It is a mitzvah to divorce a woman who possesses unsavory character traits and does not conduct herself modestly73, as is the practice of proper daughters of Israel, as [implied by Proverbs 22:10]: "Drive away the scoffer, and contention will depart."
When a woman has been divorced for loose moral conduct,74 it is not fitting for a proper man to marry her, lest people say: "This one sent away this wicked woman, and this one brought her home."
כב
אשה רעה בדעותיה ושאינה צנועה כבנות ישראל הכשרות מצוה לגרשה שנאמר גרש לץ ויצא מדון. ואשה שנתגרשה משום פריצות אין ראוי לאדם כשר שישאנה. שלא יאמרו זה הוציא רשעה מביתו וזה מכניסה:
23
When a man's wife becomes a deaf-mute,75 he may divorce her, [by giving her] a get, and the divorce is effective. If, however, [his wife] loses control of her mental or emotional faculties,76 he may not divorce her until she regains stability.
This is a prescript ordained by our Sages so that she will not [be divorced and left] unattended, [and be violated] by immoral people, for she is unable to care for herself. Therefore, [her husband] should provide a place for her, provide her with food and drink from her own resources,77 and marry another woman. He is not obligated to provide her with her sustenance, garments and conjugal rights.78 [For although our Sages compelled the husband to remain married to such a woman, they did not compel him to live with her as man and wife,] because a mentally sound individual cannot endure living with a mentally incapable person in one dwelling.
[The husband] is not obligated to provide her with medical treatment,79 nor to redeem her if she is taken captive. If he divorces her, the divorce is binding.80 He should remove her from his home, and he is not obligated to care for her.
כג
מי שנתחרשה אשתו הרי זה מגרשה בגט ותהיה מגורשת. אבל אם נשתטית אינו מוציא עד שתבריא. ודבר זה תקנת חכמים הוא כדי שלא תהא הפקר לפרוצין שהרי אינה יכולה לשמור עצמה. לפיכך מניחה ונושא אחרת ומאכילה ומשקה משלה. ואין מחייבין אותו בשאר כסות ועונה שאין כח בבן דעת לדור עם השוטים בבית אחד. ואינו חייב לרפאותה ולא לפדותה. ואם גירשה הרי זו מגורשת ומוציאה מביתו ואינו חייב לחזור ולהטפל בה:
FOOTNOTES
1.
In the Talmud, by contrast, the terms bateil and pasul do not have these specific meanings. There are times when pasul is used to connote a get that is unacceptable according to Scriptural law, and bateil to refer to a get that is unacceptable according to Rabbinic law (Maggid Mishneh). (See also the responsum of the Rambam quoted by the Maggid Mishneh in his gloss on Chapter 8, Halachah 4.)
2.
The Ra'avad differs and maintains that the priest should be forbidden to remain married to a woman he divorced with such a get, lest the impression be created that the prohibition against a priest's marrying a divorcee can be waived. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 150:3), however, accepts the Rambam's ruling.
3.
See Chapter 8, Halachah 5.
4.
The Maggid Mishneh explains that the Rambam considers the proof-text that he quotes as an asmachta - i.e., a support from the Torah invented by the Rabbis to uphold their decree. The Maggid Mishneh himself differs, noting that Gittin 82a appears to indicate that the prohibition is of Scriptural origin.
Kin'at Eliyahu explains that the Rambam's conception can be resolved based on his statements in Sefer HaMitzvot (General Principle 2), that any law that is not explicitly stated in the Torah, but rather derived through the Thirteen Principles of Biblical exegesis, is considered to be Rabbinic in origin (midivrei soferim). This classification does not, however, in any way diminish the status of this practice, and it is as though it were explicitly stated in the Torah. (See the commentaries on Hilchot Ishut 1:2.) Similarly, in this instance the prohibition is not explicit in the Torah, but rather derived through exegesis. Thus, it has the status of Scriptural law, but is considered to be Rabbinic in origin.
It must be emphasized that just as the woman is prohibited from remarrying a priest if divorced, she is also prohibited from remaining married to her husband, if he is a priest [Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 150:3)].
5.
I.e., according to Scriptural law, the divorce is binding. Our Sages, however, disqualified the divorce and forbade the woman from remarrying until a get is given that presents no halachic difficulties.
6.
Similarly, if her first husband is a priest, he may no longer become impure while caring for her burial (Hilchot Eivel 2:13).
7.
Since her divorce is effective according to Scriptural law, our Sages did not abrogate her second marriage.
8.
I.e., in these instances, our Sages were unsure whether or not the get is valid according to Scriptural law. Because of the doubt, the woman is not allowed to engage in marital relations with anyone other than her first husband until an acceptable get is given. The first husband can no longer annul her vows, nor does he have the right to inherit her property if she dies in his lifetime.
9.
The Rambam's intent is somewhat questionable. The Maggid Mishneh and the Kessef Mishneh explain that even in this situation, the husband must consecrate his wife a second time.
10.
For the marriage blessings should not be recited if there is a doubt whether they are necessary. Even with regard to a get that was disqualified by Rabbinic law, since the woman should not remarry, the blessings should not be recited (Maggid Mishneh).
11.
The marriage contract states: "When you [may] marry another person, you may collect the sum mentioned within." Since such a woman is not fit to remarry, and she could not collect the money due her by virtue of her original marriage contract, that contract remains in effect (Maggid Mishneh).
12.
Although her second marriage is void, and thus, according to Scriptural law there is no need for a get, our Sages established such a requirement because of the impression that might be created.
13.
When a woman commits adultery, she is forbidden to engage in marital relations both with her husband and with the adulterer (even after being divorced from her husband). In this instance, the woman's second marriage is an adulterous relationship. Therefore, she may not remain married to either of her husbands.
14.
I.e., the abovementioned prohibition stems from Scriptural law. It applies, however, only when the prohibition against adultery was willfully violated. Nevertheless, even when adultery was committed unwittingly, the woman is forbidden to both husbands: to her second husband, because her marriage to her first husband has not been terminated, and to her first husband, because of the Rabbinical decree mentioned by the Rambam.
15.
As explained in Hilchot Ishut 4:9, a deaf-mute's mental capacity is considered insufficient for him to establish a marriage bond. Nevertheless, our Sages ordained that if a deaf-mute man or woman enters into a marriage relationship, that relationship is binding according to Rabbinic law, regardless of whether the mate is also a deaf-mute or is fully mentally competent.
Since a deaf-mute's marriage is not effective according to Torah law, there is room to suppose that the woman should be allowed to remarry her first husband, for the difference between a deaf-mute's marriage and an ordinary marriage is obvious. And conversely, one might assume that since a deaf-mute is not held responsible for his actions, if a woman's second husband were a deaf-mute, they would be allowed to remain married. For these reasons, it is necessary to state that the stringencies apply in these instances as well.
16.
Since the woman did not enter into forbidden marital relations, there is no reason to penalize her (Yevamot 89a).
17.
The second husband is not entitled to the article, because he is not truly her husband. The first husband is not entitled to it because our Sages granted a husband rights to ownerless articles his wife discovers to prevent friction from arising in the home, and in this instance, since he is required to divorce her, there is no need to prevent friction (Yevamot 90b).
18.
A husband is granted the profits from his wife's work in return for providing for her sustenance. Since neither of the husbands is required to provide for her, neither is entitled to this benefit (Ibid.).
19.
The Torah granted a husband the right to annul his wife's vows so that she will remain attractive to him. In this instance, the husband should not be attracted to the wife (Ibid.).
20.
Our Sages explained that the woman should have been entitled to be recompensed for these benefits. Nevertheless, they were withheld from her as a penalty for her actions. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 17:56) does rule that the benefits that her second husband received after her first husband returned (or after the get was discovered void) should be returned to her.
21.
Our Sages instituted the requirement of a marriage contract so that a husband would be deterred by the financial burden he would have to bear, and would not consider divorce a light matter. In this instance, however, our Sages desire the divorce. Therefore, they did not impose a financial burden (Yevamot 89a).
22.
It is only when a woman is entitled to the money due her by virtue of her marriage contract that the stipulations apply (Ibid.).
23.
I.e., she is judged as a woman who was divorced because of adultery, who is penalized, as stated in Hilchot Ishut 24:10. She is, however, entitled to take all her property that remains intact [Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.)].
24.
Property for which the husband takes financial responsibility (Hilchot Ishut 16:1).
25.
For when she received the funds, they were not aware of the prohibition (Jerusalem Talmud, Yevamot 10:1).
26.
As reflected in the following halachot, based on Yevamot 94b, it appears that only when the woman has been merely consecrated is a get required from the second husband. For it is possible for an onlooker to think that perhaps the first kiddushin were given conditionally, and the marriage to the second brother is binding. Lest a misconception arise and one think that a married woman can be released without a get, the second husband is required to give a get.
If she was married to - not merely consecrated by - her first husband, a get is not required from the second husband, because when his brother returns, everyone will realize that his marriage to his brother's wife is not binding. Rabbenu Asher makes a further distinction and states that when the woman was married to - not merely consecrated by - the first brother, she and her first husband may continue living together as man and wife, despite the fact that she erred and performed the rite of yibbum. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 159:4) follows the Rambam's ruling, while the Ramah follows that of Rabbenu Asher.
27.
It is forbidden to marry two sisters in each other's lifetime. Once a man's wife dies, however, he may marry her sister. (See also Hilchot Yibbum 3:11.)
28.
The intent is the Hebrew term arayot, a word with a specific meaning. As explained in Hilchot Ishut 1:5, this refers to a woman with whom sexual relations are forbidden and punishable by karet.
29.
E.g., one was unaware of the family connection.
30.
For, as mentioned, a marriage bond cannot be established with one of the arayot.
If the man married the first sister, then there is no possibility of such a misconception arising. A man will never marry a woman conditionally, for if the condition is not fulfilled, their marital relations are considered to be sinful. We assume that a person will not take that risk (Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 15:27). (Note, however, Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 2:10 and the gloss of the Ra'avad.)
31.
The wording used by the Rambam here is somewhat confusing. For the scribe should give the get to the husband, who should give it to his wife. The intent appears to be, as in the source for this halachah, Gittin 80a, that the scribe gave the man the receipt and the woman the get, and they exchanged them. Thus, the woman was never given the get by her husband.
32.
Indeed, we do not even require that, as a safeguard, the first husband give her the get while she is married to her second husband (Beit Shmuel 151:2).
The Beit Shmuel also states that this law applies even if the woman was merely consecrated by the second husband, but their marriage had not been consummated.
33.
In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Gittin 8:7), the Rambam explains that the husband is acting out of spite, seeking to prevent his divorcee from remarrying. Rashi (Gittin 80a) offers a different rationale.
34.
See Hilchot Ishut 24:16.
35.
This represents the Rambam's interpretation of Gittin 45b, 46b. Other halachic authorities view this situation slightly differently. The various views are listed in the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 10:3).
36.
I.e., it is as if he gave her the get on the condition that she remain unchaste, and, because of her repentance, that condition was not fulfilled. Most authorities maintain that since this condition was not actually stated, such a complaint would not be heeded by the court. Nevertheless, since the matter might become a subject for gossip, her first husband is bound by these restrictions (Tosafot, Gittin 46a). From one of the Rambam's responsa, however, it appears that he maintains that the get would actually be void in such an instance.
37.
If, however, she was consecrated by another man, even if she was divorced before their marriage was consummated, she may not remarry her first husband and must be divorced by him if they do remarry, as stated in Chapter 11, Halachah 12.
38.
A woman who suffers from physical disorders and lacks female physical characteristics. She is unable to bear children. (See Hilchot Ishut 2:6, 15:7, 24:1.)
39.
See Hilchot Ishut 25:8-9.
40.
See Chapter 7, Halachah 5. If, however, a person brings a get from one place in Eretz Yisrael to another, the permission granted to the woman to remarry does not depend on his statements. Therefore, he is permitted to marry her (Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 12:1).
41.
See Chapter 12, Halachah 15.
42.
I.e., a woman took a vow that caused her to be forbidden to derive benefit from her husband, in which case he is required to divorce her. She asked a sage to annul the vow, but he could not find a halachic basis to do so (Yevamot 25b).
43.
For this would substantiate the initial rumor and make the couple a subject of gossip (Yevamot 24b). On this basis, there are authorities who rule that if the rumor is substantiated - e.g., a couple are openly living together, or were married in a secular court - the woman should be encouraged to convert, and they should be married according to Jewish law.
Indeed, we find a responsum of the Rambam himself regarding a man who had an attractive female servant, and it was rumored that they had spent time together in private. The Rambam advises that the man be compelled to free the servant and either marry her or send her away. He acknowledges that doing so would violate the Rabbinic decree mentioned in this halachah, but states that because of the permissive state of morals prevalent in his society, there is no alternative.
44.
From Yevamot (loc. cit.), it would appear that the reason for this restriction is that people should not say that the man converted in order to marry. This is undesirable. (See Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 13:14.) With regard to this prohibition as well, it has become customary in the present time to show leniency.
45.
There are opinions that state that if the woman has merely been consecrated, but the marriage bond has not been consummated, the couple should be forced to separate. (See Maggid Mishneh; Beit Shmuel 12:2). There are other opinions, however, that maintain that the consecration is equivalent to the consummation of the marriage. Rav David Arameah cites Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 21:31 as an indication that the Rambam follows the latter view.
46.
The Maggid Mishneh quotes the Rashba as maintaining that a witness who brought a get and said "It was written and signed in my presence," should be forced to divorce the woman if he marries her. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 12:1) quotes the Rambam's ruling. See Chelkat Mechokek 12:1.
47.
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 12:4) writes that if the man's wife was sick at the time that the woman became eligible for marriage, the prohibition remains in effect. For it possible that he was waiting for her to die.
The Chelkat Mechokek 12:2 extends this stringency to include a man and wife whose marriage was known to be plagued by strife. Even if the divorce came at the woman's initiative, it is possible that the man expected it and had planned another alternative.
48.
It is unlikely that two individuals will sin so that one may benefit (Jerusalem Talmud, Yevamot 2:12). The Hagahot Maimoniot, nevertheless, state that "a master of his soul" should avoid such a marriage.
49.
Lest the woman later regret her decision (Yevamot 109b).
50.
If the woman has remarried and divorced, however, the presumption stated does not apply, for it is forbidden for her first husband to remarry her (Beit Shmuel 149:2).
51.
Although this would make it appear more likely that the man was relating to her as a prostitute and not as a wife, it is not sufficient cause for us to negate our presumption (Gittin 73b).
52.
The Beit Shmuel 149:3 interprets this to mean that if another person consecrates her afterwards, we consider it as if he had consecrated a married woman, and he is not required to divorce her.
53.
It is not sufficient for one to have observed them in private at one time, and the other at a different time, for the two witnesses who observe the consecration of a woman must be together at that time.
54.
Hilchot Ishut 3:5; see also Hilchot Ishut 14:16, which states that it is forbidden to engage in sexual relations in the presence of others.
55.
The previous halachah dealt with an instance in which relations were observed; hence, no distinction was made whether the couple was divorced before or after their first marriage was consummated. In this instance, they merely entered into privacy together. If, however, we know for a fact that a couple shared familiarity before the marriage bond was completed, a second get is required (Maggid Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 149:2).
56.
A son borne by a maidservant is not considered to have any connection to his father. These authorities, however, suspect that the woman was freed and then married, and that the child thus shares a connection with his father. According to this opinion, chalitzah is, nevertheless, required.
57.
For until the maidservant is freed, she cannot be married.
58.
These authorities do not even require chalitzah.
59.
See Hilchot Ishut 7:23.
60.
The Radbaz and others state that if the witnesses know that the woman is in the niddah state, we do not assume that the couple entered into relations for the sake of marriage. If they are prepared to violate the prohibition of niddah, we assume that they will have no hesitation to conduct relations outside marriage. [Some modern authorities consider taking this concept even further. Although a man and a woman claim that their intent is "marriage," if they violate the laws of niddah, their conception of marriage is not kedat Moshe viYisrael, "according to the faith of Moses and Israel," and Torah law does not require a divorce. See the responsum of the Rivash cited below.]
61.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam on this matter and maintains that if a man is in general known to be moral and observant, we assume that he will not enter into sexual relations with a licentious intent. This applies even if he entered into relations with a maidservant. If, however, the man has a reputation for wanton behavior, this assumption is not applied. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 149:5) follows the Rambam's view.
In the law that follows, the Shulchan Aruch explains that if a Jewish man and woman marry according to gentile law, we do not consider them to be man and wife according to Torah law. This ruling is based on a ruling of the Rivash (Responsum 6), which explains that a Jewish marriage must be "according to the faith of Moses and Israel," and a couple who marry according to gentile law, regardless of their desire to live together, are not establishing their union on this foundation.
62.
See Hilchot Nachalot 4:6.
63.
In this instance, the Ra'avad accepts the Rambam's ruling, for it is impossible for a man to compel a woman to convert.
64.
Thus, if her husband was a priest (who may not marry a divorced woman), he may remain married to her. We do not suspect that he divorced her and remarried her. (See Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 17:20.)
65.
See Hilchot Ishut 9:22.
66.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and interprets Gittin 88b, the source for this halachah, as referring to an instance where there is one rumor that says that the woman was consecrated and then divorced. Although Rashi and others interpret the passage as the Rambam does, the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 46:7) appears to merge both views into a single understanding.
67.
If the man informs a woman that he intends to divorce her, he may marry her for a brief amount of time (Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 21:28; Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 119:1).
68.
He did not intend to divorce her originally, made this decision after they married, but lives together with her as husband and wife with the thought of divorcing her in the future.
69.
Children conceived during this time will have severely tainted personalities, as stated in Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 21:12.
70.
There is somewhat of a difficulty with the Rambam's ruling. The opinion he cites is that of the School of Shammai, as mentioned at the conclusion of the tractate of Gittin. The School of Hillel differs and maintains that if a woman wrongs her husband, even with regard to as insignificant a matter as burning his meal, he may divorce her. Rabbi Akiva goes even further and maintains that even if a person finds a more attractive woman, he may divorce his wife.
Most authorities agree that in this, as in most other instances, the halachah follows the School of Hillel. Why then does the Rambam (and the Shulchan Aruch [Even HaEzer 119:3]) follow the opinion of the School of Shammai?
Among the resolutions offered is that the difference of opinion between the Schools of Shammai and Hillel applies only with regard to a second marriage. With regard to a first marriage, by contrast, even the School of Hillel accepts the School of Shammai's stringency (Beit Yosef, Even HaEzer 119).
Note also the statements of the Ramah, who rules that the prohibition applied only during the Talmudic era, when a woman could be divorced against her will. In the present era, when a woman must willingly accept a divorce, this prohibition does not apply.
71.
See Gittin 90b, which states that whenever a man divorces his first wife, the altar itself cries.
On the surface, the wording used by the Rambam is problematic. First he says that it is forbidden to divorce one's first wife, and then he states that one should not hurry, implying that one may, but that it is ethical not to be impulsive about the matter. The Chelkat Mechokek 119:2 offers two resolutions: a) The prohibition exists only when, as was possible in the Talmudic era, the husband is divorcing his first wife against her will. If she is willing to accept the divorce, there is no prohibition; one should, however, proceed without haste. b) Even when one hears about improper sexual conduct, one should not be hasty about the matter. Instead, the incident should be investigated carefully to determine if in fact any wrongdoing occurred.
72.
Although divorce is undesirable, an unhealthy marriage is even more undesirable, and a marriage should be terminated if there are severe ill feelings between a couple.
73.
The implication is both that she is continually contending with her husband and that she is immodest. In such an instance, it is a mitzvah to divorce her, even if she is a man's first bride (Chelkat Mechokek 119:4).
74.
See Hilchot Ishut 24:12.
75.
This refers to a situation in which a woman married while fully capable and became a deaf-mute while married. Since a deaf-mute is considered to be mentally incapable, such a person is unable to establish a marriage bond that is binding according to Scriptural law. Our Rabbis made certain provisions for the marriage of such individuals, as explained in Hilchot Ishut 4:9. In this instance, however, since the woman was not a deaf-mute at the time of marriage, the marriage is binding according to Scriptural law.
The law teaches us that since according to Scriptural and Talmudic law, a woman can be divorced against her will, the fact that the woman is mentally incapable does not prevent her husband from divorcing her. Since a woman who is a deaf-mute is not totally incapable of caring for herself, our Sages did not make provisions for her, as they did for a woman who becomes mentally unsound.
76.
This also refers to a situation in which the woman lost control of her faculties after marriage. If, however, she was mentally unstable at the outset, any marriage that she enters into is not binding at all (Hilchot Ishut, loc. cit.).
77.
He must, however, put at the woman's disposal the money due her by virtue of her marriage contract and the money due from her dowry (Chelkat Mechokek 119:9).
78.
This ruling does not apply in the Ashkenazic community, nor in other places where the custom is to follow the ban of Rabbenu Gershom not to divorce one's wife against her will. In these communities, the husband is required to provide for his wife's sustenance and garments from his own resources. The rationale is that since he is not able to divorce her - for she is not capable of consenting to the divorce - he remains liable to bear the financial burden of supporting her (Chelkat Mechokek 119:9).
The husband is not, however, obligated to give her conjugal rights. The Bayit Chadash (Even HaEzer 119) and the Chelkat Mechokek 119:12 state that in such a situation, the husband may be granted license to marry a second wife by 100 rabbis.
79.
Even according to the law in Talmudic times, many differ with the Rambam's thesis and maintain that the husband is obligated for his wife's medical expenses.
The Ra'avad protests that in many instances, a person with mental disorders can be rehabilitated, and he maintains that the husband should be required to pay for such treatment. The Beit Shmuel 119:11 states that even the Rambam would agree to such an obligation.
In the Ashkenazic community today, just as a husband is required to supply his wife with her sustenance in such a situation, he is also held liable for all her medical expenses (Ramah, Even HaEzer 119:6, Chelkat Mechokek 119:12).
80.
As the Ra'avad mentions, in an instance when a woman has lost mental competence to the extent that she cannot safeguard the get she was given, all authorities agree that the divorce is not binding. Even when she has that degree of mental competence, there are many authorities that maintain that the divorce is not effective. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 119:6) quotes the Rambam's view, as interpreted by the Ra'avad. The Ramah follows the more stringent views.
Gerushin - Chapter Eleven
1
One should not marry a girl below the age of majority.1 When a man marries an orphan girl below the age of majority, and [before she attains majority] she [decides that] she does not desire [to remain married to] this husband, she rejects [the marriage] and departs; a get is not required, because a consecration effected by a minor does not establish a marriage bond in the full sense, as explained.2 [The annulment of a marriage in this manner is referred to as mi'un.]
Similarly, when a girl below majority was married at her father's initiative,3 but was then widowed or divorced while still a minor, she is considered to be an orphan, although her father is alive.4 If she marries again while she is below the age of majority, she may annul her marriage through mi'un.
א
אין נושאין את הקטנה. והנושא קטנה יתומה ולא רצתה בבעל הרי זו ממאנת והולכת ואינה צריכה ממנו גט. שאין קדושין של קטנה קדושין גמורין כמו שבארנו. וכן קטנה שהשיאה אביה ונתאלמנה או נתגרשה כשהיא קטנה הרי היא כיתומה בחיי אביה. ואם נישאת כשהיא קטנה הרי זו ממאנת:
2
Although the marriage of a woman who is a deaf-mute is a Rabbinic institution like that of a minor, our Sages did not give her the right to annul it through mi'un, so that men would not refrain from marrying her.5
ב
החרשת אע"פ שנישואיה מדברי סופרים כנישואי קטנה לא תקנו לה שתמאן כדי שלא ימנעו מלנשאה:
3
A minor can annul her marriage via mi'un whether she has been merely consecrated or [even if] the marriage has been consummated. [She can exercise this privilege] in her husband's presence, or outside his presence. Just as she can annul her marriage to her husband, she can annul her relationship to a yavam.6
Just as she can annul one marriage through mi'un, so too, she can annul a second marriage or a third marriage. Indeed, [she can exercise this privilege] any number of times.7
As long as she is a minor, she has the right to annul her marriage through mi'un. When a minor does not exercise the right of mi'un and becomes consecrated to another man despite the fact that she was married, [the consecration is binding]. Becoming consecrated is [obviously] a rejection [- and thus an annulment - of her previous marriage].
ג
ממאנת היא הקטנה בין מן האירוסין בין מן הנשואין. בין בפני בעלה בין שלא בפניו. וכשם שממאנת בבעל כך ממאנת ביבם. וממאנת בבעל זה וממאנת בשני אם נשאת לאחר וכן בשלישי אפילו כמה פעמים כל זמן שהיא קטנה יש לה למאן. וקטנה שלא מיאנה אע"פ שהיא נשואה והלכה ונתקדשה לאחר כשהיא קטנה קידושיה הם הם מיאוניה:
4
Until when may a girl annul her marriage through mi'un? Throughout the entire time she is a minor, until she becomes a na'arah,8 or until it is known that she becomes classified as an aylonit.9
When does the above10 apply? When her husband did not engage in marital relations with her after she became twelve years and one day old. If, however, the couple engaged in relations after she reached this age, since these relations consecrate her according to Scriptural law, as explained,11 she no longer has the right to annul her marriage through mi'un.
Similarly, [when the woman reaches this age, we assume that she has lost her right to annul her marriage through mi'un]. She need not be checked for signs of physical maturity, for it is assumed that she has manifested them.12
ד
עד מתי הבת ממאנת כל זמן שהיא קטנה. עד שתהיה נערה או עד שיוודע שהיא אילונית. במה דברים אמורים בשלא בא עליה הבעל אחר שנעשית בת י"ב שנה ויום אחד. אבל אם הגיעה לזמן הזה ונבעלה הואיל והבעילה קונה מן התורה כמו שבארנו הרי זו אינה ממאנת. ואינה צריכה בדיקה למיאון שחזקתה שהביאה סימנין:
5
If she has undergone a physical inspection, and no signs of maturity were discovered, but she engaged in marital relations after the age when she could have manifested signs of maturity, we suspect that pubic hairs had grown and later fell off. Because of the doubt, the marriage must be dissolved with a get.
If a woman [who engaged in marital relations with her husband after reaching the age of twelve attempts to] annul her marriage through mi'un after undergoing a physical examination,13 and then is consecrated by another person, [her second husband also] must dissolve their relationship with a get, because of the doubt involved.14 If she married [the second husband], she must be divorced by both husbands and there is a doubt concerning the legitimacy of a child born to either of them [after her consecration to her second husband].15
ה
הרי שנבדקה ולא נמצאו לה סימנים הואיל ונבעלה אחר שהגיעה לזמן הראוי לסימנין הרי זו חוששין לה שמא הביאה ונשרו. ולפיכך צריכה גט מספק. ואם מיאנה אחר שנבדקה ונתקדשה לאחר צריכה ממנו גט מספק. ואם נשאת תצא מזה ומזה והולד ספק ממזר משניהם:
6
When a minor does not exercise her right to mi'un and attains majority, she no longer has this privilege. [This applies] even when she did not engage in marital relations with her husband after reaching the age of twelve years and one day. Since she has attained majority, it is a Rabbinic decree that a divorce is required [if the marriage must be dissolved].
[The rationale for this ruling is as follows:] The couple did not engage in marital relations after she reached the age of na'arut, in which instance it would be necessary to suspect that she manifested signs of physical maturity, and accordinly, there would be a doubt whether or not a marriage bond had been established. Nor did they engage in relations after she attained majority, in which instance she would become a married woman in all regards. Accordingly, the only reason she requires a get is the fact of her marriage as a minor, which is a Rabbinic institution.
Based on the above, if another man consecrated her after she attained majority, [when she had not engaged in marital relations with her first husband from the age of twelve onward,] the second man's consecration is binding.16 As such, if her first husband divorces her, her second husband may consummate the marriage. If, however, her second husband divorces her, her first husband may not continue his marriage with her. [This is a decree, instituted] lest people say: "He remarried his divorcee after she was consecrated."17
If her second husband engaged in marital relations with her before her first husband divorced her, she must be divorced by both men. [This is a decree instituted] because [the situation] resembles an instance in which a woman heard that her husband died, she married, and then her first husband returned.18 [The laws governing the two situations are not entirely analogous. In this instance,] a child fathered by the second husband is not illegitimate.19 But if her first husband engages in relations with her before her second husband divorces her, any child born is illegitimate.20
ו
קטנה שלא מיאנה והגדילה ואע"פ שלא בעלה בעלה משנעשית בת שתים עשרה שנה ויום אחד הרי זו אינה ממאנת שהרי הגדילה. וצריכה גט מדברי סופרים. שהרי לא בא עליה אחר שהגיעה לשני נערות עד שנחוש לה שמא הביאה סימנין ותהיה ספק מקודשת. ולא בא עליה אחר שהגדילה כדי שתהיה אשת איש גמורה. ונמצאת שאינה צריכה גט אלא מנשואי קטנות שהן מדברי סופרים. לפיכך אם עמדה ונתקדשה אחר שגדלה תופסין בה קדושין של שני. ואם גירש הראשון יכנוס השני. אבל אם גירש שני לא יקיים ראשון שמא יאמרו החזיר גרושתו מאחר שנתארסה. ואם בא עליה שני קודם שיגרש ראשון תצא מזה ומזה מפני שדומה לאשה ששמעה שמת בעלה ונשאת ואחר כך בא בעלה ואין הולד מן השני ממזר. ואם בא עליה ראשון קודם שגירש שני הולד ממזר:
7
In which instances must a minor perform the rite of mi'un [to nullify her marriage]? [Our Sages established the following guidelines.] If she was between six and ten [when she was consecrated], we investigate the extent of her sagacity.
If she knows to guard [the money given to her to effect] the kiddushin, appreciates that it was given for that purpose and will guard it differently from the way in which she would guard a nut, a date or the like, she must perform the rite of mi'un [to nullify her marriage].
If she does not know to guard [the money given to her to effect] the kiddushin, she need not perform the rite of mi'un [to nullify her marriage]. Instead, she returns to her mother's home as if she had never been consecrated. If she is less than six, even if she knows [how to guard the money given her,] she need not perform the rite of mi'un. If she is more than ten, even if she is very inept, she must perform the rite of mi'un.21
Whenever a girl's brother, mother or relatives arranged for her marriage without telling her of the identity of the groom, she need not perform the rite of mi'un [to nullify her marriage].22
ז
אי זו היא קטנה שצריכה למאן מבת שש עד בת עשר שנים בודקין אותה לפי יופי דעתה אם יודעת לשמור קדושיה ושהן קדושין לא שתשמור אותן כדרך שמשמרת האגוז ותמרה וכיוצא בהן הרי זו צריכה מיאון. ואם אינה יודעת לשמור קדושיה אינה צריכה למאן אלא הולכת לבית אמה כאילו לא נתקדשה מעולם. ופחותה מבת שש אפילו יודעת לשמור אינה צריכה מיאון ויתירה על בת עשר אפילו סכלה ביותר צריכה מיאון. וכל מי שהשיאוה אחיה או אמה או קרוביה שלא לדעתה אינה צריכה למאן:
8
What does the rite of mi'un entail? She tells two witnesses:23 "I no longer desire my husband so and so," "I no longer desire to be consecrated [to the man] to whom my mother - or my brother - consecrated me," or the like.
[The above applies] even if the two individuals are guests dining in her husband's home and she is serving them. If she tells them, "I no longer desire my husband so and so," she has performed mi'un.
ח
כיצד ממאנת אומרת בפני שני עדים אין רצוני בפלוני בעלי. או אין רצוני בקידושין שקדשוני אמי או אחי וכיוצא בדברים אלו. אפילו היו אורחין מסובין בבית בעלה והיא עומדת ומשקה עליהן ואמרה איני רוצה בפלוני בעלי הרי זה מיאון:
9
The two individuals in whose presence the minor performs the rite of mi'un should write the following for her: "On this and this day, _______________the daughter of _____________ rejected her husband." They sign the document and give it to her. This is the essential portion of a deed of mi'un.
A deed of mi'un does not resemble a bill of divorce, in which the giving of the bill effects the divorce.24 It need not be written with the proper intent, nor must it be transferred, nor do any of the laws required for a bill of divorce apply with regard to it. The wording used for a get is not used for it, lest it appear to be a get.25 It is merely a legal record.
ט
השנים שממאנת הקטנה בפניהן כותבין לה ביום פלוני מיאנה פלונית בת פלוני בפנינו בפלוני בעלה וחותמין ונותנין לה. וזה הוא גופו של גט מיאון. וגט מיאון אינו כגט הגירושין שנתינתו מגרשה ואינו צריך כתיבה לשמה ולא מסירה ולא דבר ממשפטי גט הגירושין. ואין כותבין בו טופסי הגט שמא יראה כגט גירושין לפי שאינו אלא כמעשה בית דין:
10
The two individuals before whom a girl makes a statement of mi'un must know the identity of the girl and her husband. Therefore, whoever sees [a girl] make a statement of mi'un [in the presence of two other people] and hears that statement, is entitled to write a legal record of this statement, even though he was not aware of [the girl's] identity beforehand.26
It has become customary for the Jewish people to write a legal record of a statement of mi'un, employing the following text.
י
השנים שממאנת בפניהן צריכין שיהו מכירין אותה ואת בעלה שמיאנה בו. לפיכך כל מי שראה אותה שמיאנה ושמע מיאוניה יש לו לכתוב גט מיאון לה אע"פ שאין מכירה. וכבר נהגו ישראל לכתוב גט מיאון בנוסח זה:
11
A legal record of a statement of mi'un:
On this day of the week, and on this day of the month, in this year according to the following reckoning,27 so and so, the daughter of so and so (her father's name) issued a protest in our presence, saying: "My mother or my brother misled me and had me married - or consecrated - to so and so, the son of so and so (his father's name) while I was a minor. I am now making a statement in your presence that I do not desire him, nor can I live with him." We have had so and so undergo a physical examination,28 and it has been established that she is still a minor. [Hence,] we have written and signed this [legal document] and have given it to her to serve as support and clear evidence.
So and so, the son of so and so (his father's name), a witness;
So and so, the son of so and so (his father's name), a witness.
יא
גט מיאון בכך בשבת כך וכך יום לחדש פלוני שנת כך וכך למנין פלוני מיאנה פלונית בת פלוני בפנינו ואמרה שאמי או אחי הטעוני והשיאוני או קידשוני ואני קטנה לפלוני בר פלוני והשתא גליתי דעתי קדמיכון דלא צבינא ביה ולא קאימנא עמיה ובדקנא פלונית דא ואתברר לנא דעדיין קטנה היא וכתבנא וחתמנא ויהיבנא לה לזכות ולראיה ברורה: פלוני בר פלוני עד: פלוני בר פלוני עד:
12
When a man divorces his wife, and she becomes consecrated to another man, she is forbidden to her first [husband], even though she has not engaged in marital relations [with her second husband]. If her first [husband] remarries her and engages in sexual relations with her,29 he [transgresses a negative commandment,30 and] is punished by lashes. He is forced to divorce her, as [implied by Deuteronomy 24:4]: "Her first husband, who sent her away, may not [return and remarry her]."
יב
המגרש את אשתו ונתקדשה לאחר אע"פ שלא בעלה נאסרה על הראשון. ואם החזיר הראשון ובעלה לוקה וכופין אותו להוציא שנאמר לא יוכל בעלה הראשון וגו':
13
If she engaged in promiscuous relations with another man while she was divorced, she is permitted to remarry her husband, for it is written [Deuteronomy 24:2]: "And she departed from his home and went and became another man's [wife]." It is "becom[ing] another man's [wife]" - i.e., being consecrated - which causes her to become forbidden to remarry her [first] husband.
יג
זינתה עם אחר כשהיא גרושה מותרת לחזור לבעלה שנאמר ויצאה מביתו והלכה והיתה לאיש אחר. הוייתה לאיש אחר שהיא הקדושין היא שאוסרת אותה על בעלה לחזור לו:
14
Included in this prohibition is that every woman who engaged in adulterous relations becomes forbidden to her husband. He is punished by lashes [for engaging in marital relations with her],31as [implied by the inclusion of the phrase] "after she has become tainted" in [Deuteronomy 24:4]: "And [an adulterous woman] has been tainted." There is one exception: the wife of an Israelite32 who was raped.33
Therefore, whenever a woman becomes forbidden to her husband, because she violated his warning against entering into privacy with another man,34 and he engages in relations with her, he is punished by stripes of rebellion.35 If after divorcing his wife [for such reasons], the husband transgresses and remarries her, he must divorce her.
יד
ובכלל לאו זה שכל אשה שזינתה תחת בעלה נאסרה עליו ולוקה עליה שנאמר אחרי אשר הוטמאה והרי נטמאה. אא"כ היתה אשת ישראל שנאנסה. לפיכך כל אשה שנאסרה על בעלה על ידי קינוי וסתירה אם בעל אותה מכין אותו מכת מרדות. ואם עבר והחזירה אחר שגירשה יוציא בגט:
15
A deaf-mute may divorce his wife with signals, as explained.36 [If such a woman] went and became consecrated to another deaf-mute [and is then divorced], she is forbidden to be remarried to her first husband. Needless to say, [this applies if her second husband] was a mentally competent individual.
If, however, a woman who had been married to a mentally competent individual and was divorced, married a deaf-mute and was divorced, she is permitted to remarry her first husband.37
טו
חרש שגירש ברמיזה כמו שבארנו. והלכה ונתקדשה לחרש אחר ואין צריך לומר לפקח אסורה לחזור לבעלה החרש. אבל אשתו של פקח שנתגרשה והלכה ונשאת לחרש ונתגרשה מותרת לחזור לבעלה הפקח:
16
A girl who leaves her husband by virtue of the rite of mi'un is not considered to be divorced by him.38 The laws applying to her relations with her husband whom she rejected are the same as those applying to a man who has never consecrated her. She is permitted to marry his relatives. He is permitted to marry her relatives. Nor is she disqualified from marrying into the priesthood.
If she married another man and was divorced or widowed, or she nullified her relationship with him through mi'un, she is permitted to remarry him. Moreover, even if her first husband divorced her [while she was still a minor], remarried her, she then nullified their relationship via mi'un and married another man and was divorced by him, she may remarry her first husband.39
[The rationale is that] whenever a girl leaves a marriage via the rite of mi'un, it is considered as if she had never been divorced via a get, and she may remarry her first husband. [This applies] even if she was once divorced [by this man] before mi'un.
When, by contrast, a man divorces his wife - who is a minor - with a get, she marries another man and then nullifies the marriage through mi'un, she may not remarry her first husband, because although her final marriage was terminated by mi'un, her marriage [to her first husband] was terminated by a divorce.40 Needless to say, this applies if the second husband divorced her or he died.
Similarly, she is forbidden to the father of her first husband, his son and his brothers, as are other divorced women. [This applies despite the fact that] she terminates her marriage to her second husband via mi'un.
טז
הממאנת (באיש) אינה מגורשת ממנו. ודינה עם בעלה שמיאנה בו כדינה עם מי שלא קידשה מעולם. היא מותרת בקרוביו והוא מותר בקרובותיה ולא פסלה מן הכהונה. ואם נשאת לאחר וגירשה האחר או מת או מיאנה בו מותרת לחזור לראשון. ולא עוד אלא אפילו גירשה הראשון והחזירה ומיאנה בו ונשאת לאחר אחר שמיאנה בו וגירשה האחר מותרת לחזור לראשון. שכל היוצאת במיאון אע"פ שקדמו גט הרי זו כמי שלא נתגרשה ממנו בגט מעולם ומותרת לחזור לו. אבל המגרש את הקטנה בגט ונשאת לאחר ומיאנה בו אסורה לחזור לראשון מפני שיצאת ממנו בגט אע"פ שיצאת מן האחרון במיאון. ואין צריך לומר אם גירשה האחרון או מת. וכן אסורה לאבי הראשון ולבנו ולאחיו כשאר הגרושות אף על פי שיצאת מן האחרון במיאון:
17
When a girl nullifies her connection to a yavam through mi'un, she remains forbidden to his father, for she appears to be his daughter-in-law, since [that was her status] when his son died. She is, however, permitted to marry [her late husband's] other relatives.41 Thus, although she rejected a potential yavam with mi'un, she is permitted to marry his brother.
יז
הממאנת ביבם אסורה לאביו מפני שנראת ככלתו בעת שמת בנו אבל לשאר קרובים מותרת. לפיכך אם מיאנה באחד מן היבמין מותרת לאחיו:
18
Whenever a woman is divorced or widowed, she should neither marry nor be consecrated42 until 90 days pass between the day she was divorced or her husband died and the day on which she became consecrated. [This interval was required] to see whether or not she is pregnant, and thus to differentiate between the seed of the first husband and the seed of the second husband.43
יח
כל אשה שנתגרשה או שנתאלמנה הרי זו לא תנשא ולא תתארס עד שתמתין תשעים יום חוץ מיום שנתגרשה או שמת בעלה בו וחוץ מיום שנתארסה בו. כדי שיודע אם היא מעוברת או אינה מעוברת להבחין בין זרעו של ראשון לזרעו של שני:
19
We count [these 90 days] from the day the get is written; [this applies] even when it was written on a conditional basis, or it did not reach the woman until years afterwards. [The rationale is] that from the time [a get] is written, [a woman's husband] no longer enters into privacy with her.44
יט
ומיום כתיבת הגט מונין למגורשת. ואפילו היה על תנאי או שלא הגיע לידה אלא לאחר כמה שנים מיום הכתיבה מונין. שהרי אינו מתיחד עמה משכתבו לה:
20
[Included] in this decree of our Sages is that even a woman who is not fit to give birth, and even one who was divorced or widowed after merely being consecrated, must wait 90 days. I.e., even a minor, an elderly woman, a barren woman or an aylonit, even a woman whose husband was overseas, sick or imprisoned, and indeed, even a woman who is a virgin despite being consecrated, must wait 90 days.45
כ
וגזירת חכמים היא שאפילו אשה שאינה ראויה לילד ואפילו נתגרשה או נתאלמנה מן האירוסין צריכה להמתין תשעים יום. אפילו קטנה או זקנה או עקרה או אילונית. ואפילו בעלה במדינת הים או חולה או חבוש בבית האסורין. ואפילו בתולה מן האירוסין צריכות להמתין תשעים יום:
21
A maidservant who was freed and a non-Jewish woman who was converted are required to wait 90 days [before they marry].46 Even a gentile and his wife who convert together are required to separate for 90 days to differentiate between seed that was conceived in holiness and seed that was not conceived in holiness.
Similarly, although the Torah prescribed only [an interim of] 30 days for her own sake, a yefat to'ar47 must wait 90 days [to marry her captor] for the sake of the definition of her child's [status].48 The 30 [days mentioned by the Torah] are included in the 90-day interim.
כא
שפחה שנשתחררה וגיורת שנתגיירה ממתינין תשעים יום. ואפילו גר ואשתו שנתגיירו מפרישין אותן תשעים יום כדי להבחין בין זרע שנזרע בקדושה לזרע שלא נזרע בקדושה. וכן יפת תאר אע"פ שנתנה לה תורה שלשים יום לתקנת עצמה צריכה להמתין תשעים יום לתקנת הולד. והשלשים מכלל התשעים:
22
A girl who annuls her marriage through mi'un need not wait [before remarrying]; our Sages' decree applied only to a divorcee. Similarly, a woman who has promiscuous relations need not wait, for she guards herself against becoming pregnant. Similarly, a woman who was raped or seduced need not wait.
כב
הממאנת אינה צריכה להמתין לא גזרו אלא בירושה. וכן המזנה אינה צריכה להמתין מפני שמשמרת עצמה שלא תתעבר. וכן אנוסה ומפותה אינן צריכות להמתין:
23
[The following rule applies when] a girl below the age of majority who is not fit to give birth was married under a mistaken conception, discovered that she is forbidden to remain married to her husband and was forced to separate by the court. She need not wait, for this is an unlikely occurrence, and our Sages did not apply their decrees to situations that are out of the ordinary.49
כג
מי שנישאת בטעות ונודע שהיא אסורה לבעלה והוציאוה ב"ד מתחתיו. אם היתה קטנה שאינה ראויה לילד אינה צריכה להמתין. שזה דבר שאינו מצוי הוא וכל דבר שאינו מצוי ברוב לא גזרו בו:
24
When, within this 90-day period, [a man] consecrates [a woman who is required to wait], he is placed under a ban of ostracism.50 If he consecrates the woman and then temporarily flees [to a distant country], he is not placed under a ban of ostracism.51 If he consummates the marriage within the 90-day period, the couple are forced to separate until the conclusion of the interval, at which time they are allowed to live together as man and wife.
כד
המארס בתוך תשעים יום מנדין אותו. אירס וברח אין מנדין אותו. כנס בתוך תשעים יום מפרישין אותן עד אחר זמן ויעמוד עם אשתו:
25
Similarly, our Sages decreed that a man should not marry a woman who is pregnant with a child conceived by another man, or a woman who is nursing a child conceived by another man, even though the parentage of the fetus is known.52
[The restriction concerning] a pregnant woman [was instituted,] lest [the other man] harm the fetus during sexual relations, for he is not concerned about his colleague's child. [And the decree concerning] a nursing mother [was instituted], lest the woman's milk spoil and her second husband fail to show concern for restoring her ability to nurse, by providing her with a diet that will remedy her difficulty.
כה
וכן גזרו חכמים שלא ישא אדם מעוברת חבירו ומינקת חבירו. ואף על פי שהזרע ידוע למי היא מעוברת. שמא יזיק הולד בשעת תשמיש שאינו מקפיד על בן חבירו. ומניקה שמא יתעכר החלב והוא אינו מקפיד לרפאות החלב בדברים המועילין לחלב כשיתעכר:
26
For how long is the woman considered to be a nursing mother? For twenty-four months.53 This does not include the day the child was born, nor the day the woman becomes consecrated.
כו
כמה הוא זמן היניקה כ"ד חדש חוץ מיום שנולד בו ומיום שנתארסה בו:
27
Just as it is forbidden to marry such a woman, it is forbidden to consecrate her until this time period passes. Even if [a woman] gives her child to a nursemaid or weans him during these 24 months, she should not marry.54 If her son dies, she is permitted to marry. We do not fear that perhaps she will kill [her son for this reason].
כז
כשם שאסור לישא כך אסור לארס עד אחר זמן זה. אפילו נתנה בנה למניקה או שגמלתו בתוך כ"ד חדש לא תנשא. מת בנה מותרת לינשא ואין חוששין שמא תהרגנו:
28
If a man transgresses and marries a pregnant or nursing woman during this period, he should divorce her,55 even if he is a priest.56 If the man is an Israelite, he may remarry her after the 24 months of nursing pass.
If [a man] marries [such a woman] and then flees and returns after [the prescribed] period and lives together with his wife, there is no difficulty.
[A man who] consecrates a pregnant or nursing woman is not forced to divorce her.57 He may not, however, consummate the marriage until the nursing period passes or until the child dies.
כח
עבר ונשא מעוברת או מניקה בתוך זמן זה יוציא בגט ואפילו היה כהן. ואם היה ישראל יחזירנה אחר כ"ד חדש של מניקה. נשא וברח ולאחר זמן בא וישב עם אשתו אין בכך כלום. אירס מעוברת או מניקה אין כופין אותו להוציא ולא לכנוס עד אחר זמן היניקה או עד שימות הולד:
FOOTNOTES
1.
I.e., even though a father has the right to consecrate his daughter before she reaches majority and arrange for her marriage, "it is not proper for him to act in this manner." Instead, our Sages enjoined that a person should not consecrate his daughter while she is a minor until she matures and says, "I would like [to marry] so and so" (Hilchot Ishut 3:19). Similarly, from the husband's point of view, he should not marry a girl until she is mature, lest she change her mind afterwards (Tosafot, Kiddushin 41a).
2.
Our Sages ordained that an orphan girl below the age of majority could be married, so that someone would care for her and protect her. With regard to such a marriage, the Rambam writes in Hilchot Ishut 4:8: "The consecration is not absolutely binding according to Scriptural law; it is merely a Rabbinic institution. [According to Scriptural law, the outcome] is tentative. If she continues living with her husband until she reaches the age of majority, the kiddushin are finalized, and she becomes a married woman in the complete sense of the term. There is no need for [her husband] to consecrate her again after she attains majority. If she does not want [to continue] living with him, she must perform mi'un; she then leaves [the relationship] without a divorce."
3.
In which instance, the marriage is binding according to Scriptural law and cannot be annulled through mi'un.
4.
Once a girl is married, her father no longer has any authority over her, even though he is alive (Hilchot Ishut 3:12).
5.
In the instance of a minor, her right to annul the marriage lasts only until she reaches majority. With regard to a deaf-mute, by contrast, there would be no limit to this privilege. This would be regarded unfavorably by a husband (Yevamot 113a).
6.
I.e., if her husband dies without children and she does not desire to marry the yavam, she can dissolve the marriage by mi'un.
7.
Although a girl has the right to marry and dissolve her marriage as often as she desires, our Rabbis did not approve of such conduct and counselled that the Jewish court should arrange a marriage of a minor only when it does not appear likely that she will seek to dissolve the marriage (Hagahot Maimoniot).
8.
I.e., when she becomes twelve years old and manifests physical signs of maturity, as explained in Hilchot Ishut 2:3.
9.
A woman who does not manifest any female physical characteristics. If she shows clear signs of such a condition, she is placed in this category at age 20. If she does not show such signs, but also does not manifest signs of female physical maturity, she is not placed into this category until age 35 (Ibid.:4).
10.
That a girl can annul her marriage despite the fact that she has passed the age of twelve, when she has not manifested female physical characteristics.
11.
Hilchot Ishut 1:2.
12.
I.e., our ordinary assumption is that a woman has manifested signs of maturity. Therefore, if a woman wants to annul the marriage after she reaches the age of twelve, she must undergo a physical inspection to show that she has not manifested signs of physical maturity. If no signs are discovered, and she has not engaged in relations with her husband after reaching the age of twelve, she may exercise the right of mi'un.
13.
In which no signs of physical maturity were discovered.
14.
Since no signs of physical maturity were discovered, it is possible that the girl is still a minor and that the annulment of her first marriage - and thus her subsequent consecration - is acceptable. But it is also possible that, as mentioned in the previous halachah, pubic hairs grew and fell off, and that through engaging in marital relations she had been consecrated by her first husband. Because of the doubt involved, she must be divorced by both men.
15.
Since it is possible that her first marriage is binding, the legitimacy of a child fathered by her second husband is in doubt. And conversely, since it is possible that the marriage to her second husband is binding, there are also doubts concerning the legitimacy of a child fathered afterwards by the first husband.
16.
I.e., even if she had not yet been divorced by her first husband. Since the second man's consecration has the power of Scriptural law, it takes priority.
17.
Which is forbidden, as stated in Halachah 12.
18.
The resemblance is that the woman married a second husband before her marriage with the first was severed.
19.
Because her marriage to her first husband is not binding according to Scriptural law.
20.
For her second marriage is binding according to Scriptural law.
21.
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 155:2) quotes opinions that maintain that the above applies only when the girl's marriage was arranged by her brother or her mother. If she arranged the marriage herself, it is not binding, even according to Rabbinic law. The Ra'avad mentions a third opinion, which states that for a girl between the ages of six and ten, the marriage must be arranged by her family to be binding. After the age of ten, it is binding even if she arranged it herself.
22.
Our translation is based on the Jerusalem Talmud (Yevamot 13:2), which explains that this refers to an instance in which a girl's family members prepared her for marriage without informing her who her groom would be.
23.
Rabbenu Chanan'el and other authorities maintain that, a priori, three individuals should be present. Although the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 155:4) mentions this opinion, the Rambam's view appears to be favored.
24.
I.e., a deed of mi'un is merely a legal record. The act of mi'un - i.e., the girl's statement that she no longer desires to live with her husband - is what nullifies their marriage. In contrast, it is the transfer of the get, the bill of divorce, that causes the divorce to take effect.
25.
Yevamot 107b-108a relates that originally, the Sages would have a legal record of mi'un written using wording that somewhat resembled a bill of divorce. They saw, however, that this created the impression that the husband was forbidden to marry the girl's close relatives. Since this is not the case, as mentioned in Halachah 16, they altered the wording used for the legal record.
26.
Our additions are made on the basis of the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 155:8). We assume that the other witnesses were aware of the law and would have objected to the girl's making such statements if they did not know her identity and that of her husband. (See a parallel in Hilchot Yibbum VaChalitzah 4:29. Note, however, the Beit Shmuel 155:11 who differs.)
27.
I.e., from the creation or from the beginning of Alexander the Great's rule, as stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 27.
28.
I.e., she was checked by women on whom the court can rely, as stated in Hilchot Ishut 2:20.
29.
Needless to say, the Rambam is not speaking about an instance in which the woman is still married to her second husband. That would be adultery, a sin punishable by execution. Rather, this applies even if the first husband remarries his wife after she is divorced by her second husband.
The husband is punished by lashes only if he both remarries her and engages in sexual relations with her. Neither act alone incurs that punishment (Kiddushin 78a).
30.
Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 356) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 580) count this as one of the Torah's 613 commandments.
31.
Note the Kessef Mishneh, which cites an apparent contradiction between the Rambam's statements here and those in Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 1:22 and Hilchot Sanhedrin, Chapter 19, from which it would appear that a man is not punished by lashes for engaging in relations with his wife in such a situation.
32.
But not a priest. (See Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 18:27.)
33.
Or who engaged in adulterous relations unwittingly. (See Hilchot Ishut 24:19.)
34.
I.e., a sotah.
35.
Stripes of rebellion is the punishment given for the violation of a Rabbinic injunction. It refers to a less form of corporal punishment than lashes.
The husband is prohibited from engaging in relations with such a wife because it is possible that he will violate a prohibition of Scriptural law. Nevertheless, since it has not been definitely established that his wife committed adultery, he is not punished by lashes (Maggid Mishneh).
36.
Chapter 2, Halachah 17. This applies only when the person was a deaf-mute when he originally consecrated his wife.
37.
Since the marriage to the deaf-mute is not binding according to Scriptural law, it is as if she had never married a second husband. Based on a difference in the version of the Jerusalem Talmud (Yevamot 14:1) that was available to him, the Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's ruling.
38.
Divorce nullifies a marriage from the time of divorce onward. Mi'un, by contrast, voids the marriage entirely, causing it to be considered as if it had never taken place.
39.
The mi'un that terminated the second marriage reveals that the first marriage was not binding according to Scriptural law, and that a get was not actually required. (See Rashi, Yevamot 108a.)
40.
Yevamot 108b explains that she is not permitted to remarry her first husband because we are afraid that he will change his mind and influence her to nullify her marriage to her second husband via mi'un. We suspect that she will be able to be influenced by him, because she still is attracted to him - for it was he who divorced her, not she who nullified the marriage through mi'un. In the first instance, we do not harbor such suspicions, for it was she who rejected her first husband, nullifying the marriage through mi'un.
41.
The Rashba and the Ramban differ, and maintain that the woman is forbidden to the other relatives of the deceased, with the exception of his brothers. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 155:11) mentions both opinions, but favors that of the Rambam.
42.
She may, however, become engaged to be married during this time, provided she does not enter into privacy with her fiance (Ramah, Even HaEzer 13:1).
43.
The laws governing forbidden marital relationships revolve around paternal relationships, as do the laws of yibbum. For these reasons, it is very important to determine who in fact is the father of a child.
44.
And thus it is impossible that he be the father of the woman's child. (See Chapter 3, Halachah 5; Chapter 8, Halachah 2.)
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 13:1) differs and quotes Rabbenu Asher, who maintains that the counting should begin from the day the get reached the woman for whom it was intended.
45.
Yevamot 42b explains that this decree was applied universally lest people begin to search for loopholes.
46.
The Maggid Mishneh and the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 13:5) interpret this to be referring to a woman who was married as a non-Jew, and not one who was unmarried. Note the Radbaz (Vol. I, Responsa 196), who differs and maintains that this applies even to an unmarried gentile woman.
47.
A female captive who is taken as a wife by her captor, as described in Deuteronomy 21:11 and Hilchot Melachim, Chapter 8.
48.
This refers to the second time the captor has relations with her. It is possible for a child to be conceived during their first sexual encounter, in which instance the child also has the status of a convert.
49.
If, however, the woman was old enough to conceive a child while married to the man with whom relations are forbidden, she is required to wait. For it is necessary to discern if a child was conceived in the forbidden relationship or not.
50.
The Ra'avad states that the intent of the ban of ostracism should be to compel the man to divorce his wife. (See the Ramah, Even HaEzer 13:10, who quotes this opinion.)
51.
The Ramah (loc. cit.) states that he is advised to flee.
52.
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 13:11) mentions that leniency is often shown in instances where a pregnant woman would be likely to engage in sexual relations with the father of the child, or with other men during this interim period, with the hope that marriage will prevent her from unchaste conduct.
53.
The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 13:11) states that in a leap year, the extra month should be counted as one of the 24. The Ramah, however, states that, a priori, in such a situation, an additional month should be added to the restriction. (Note Beit Shmuel 13:22.)
54.
Rashi (Ketubot 60b) states that the restriction is upheld lest women be encouraged to take these options rather than continue nursing their children.
If, however, the woman gave her child to a nursemaid in her first husband's lifetime or is physically incapable of nursing, there are no restrictions against her remarrying (Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 13:11).
55.
The Ra'avad states that he is placed under a ban of ostracism until he divorces her. This ruling is cited by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 13:12).
56.
Who may not remarry his divorcee.
57.
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 13:12) is more stringent and equates consecration with marriage.
Gerushin - Chapter Twelve
1
When a woman comes and says, "I was married, and now I am divorced," her word is accepted, because the source for the statements [on which basis the woman was] forbidden [states that she is] permitted.1
If the prevailing assumption is that a woman was married,2 and she comes and says, "My husband divorced me," her word is not accepted [as a basis] for her to be allowed to be remarried.3 She has, however, disqualified herself [from marrying into] the priesthood forever.4If her husband dies [childless], we suspect that there might have been truth to her words, and she performs the rite of chalitzah, rather than the rite of yibbum.5
א
האשה שבאה ואמרה אשת איש הייתי וגרושה אני נאמנת. שהפה שאסר הוא הפה שהתיר. הוחזקה אשת איש ובאה ואמרה גירשני בעלי אינה נאמנת להתיר עצמה לשוק. אבל פסלה עצמה לכהונה לעולם. ואם מת בעלה חוששין לדבריה וחולצת ולא מתיבמת:
2
When a woman has two witnesses who state that she has been divorced, she is permitted to marry a priori, although she does not possess her get. If she produces a get that was in her possession and says: "My husband divorced me with this," her word is accepted, and she is permitted to marry, even though [the signatures of the witnesses to the get] have not been verified as we have explained.6
ב
היו לה שני עדים שהיא גרושה אע"פ שאין שם גט הרי זו תנשא לכתחלה. הוציאה גט מתחת ידה ואמרה גירשני בעלי בזה הרי זו נאמנת ותנשא בו. אף על פי שאינו מקויים כמו שביארנו:
3
[The following laws apply] when the husband comes and protests. If he states, "I never gave it to her. It fell from me and she found it," his statements are not accepted, because he admits that he wrote it for her sake, and it is now in her possession. If, however, the husband says: "[The get] was given conditionally," "It was entrusted to her for safekeeping," or "I never wrote such [a document]; it is a forgery,"7 [the woman] must have the signatures of the witnesses verified or have the witnesses to its transfer testify, as explained.8
If the signatures of the witnesses are not verified, she is not considered to be divorced with regard to the right to marry others. She has, however, disqualified herself [from marrying into] the priesthood, as stated.9 For she has disqualified herself by virtue of her own statements and caused herself to be considered as a forbidden object.10
ג
בא הבעל וערער אם אמר לא נתתיו לה אלא נפל ממני ומצאה אותו אינו נאמן. שהרי הודה שכתבו לה והרי הוא יוצא מתחת ידה. אבל אם אמר הבעל על תנאי היה. פקדון היה. מעולם לא כתבתיו. מזוייף הוא. יתקיים בחותמיו או בעדי מסירה כמו שביארנו. ואם לא נתקיים אינה מגורשת להיות מותרת לאחרים אבל פסלה נפשה מכהונה כמו שביארנו. שהרי פסלה עצמה בהודאת פיה ועשתה עצמה כחתיכה של איסור:
4
If she comes together with her husband and says, "My husband divorced me, but I lost my get," and the husband says, "I did not divorce her," her word is accepted, even though it has been assumed that she is his wife. [The rationale is:] it can be assumed that a woman would not make such brazen statements in the presence of her husband [if they were not true].11
ד
באה היא ובעלה היא אומרת גירשתני ואבד גיטי. והוא אומר לא גירשתיך אע"פ שהוחזקה אשתו הרי זו נאמנת. חזקה אין אשה מעיזה פניה בפני בעלה:
5
If a husband says: "I divorced my wife," his word is not accepted. Nevertheless, we suspect that it might be true, and therefore, the woman is considered to be one whose divorce is of doubtful status.12 Even when the woman also admits that she was divorced, his word is not accepted.
We fear that he is seeking to create difficulties for her,13 or that he divorced her with a get that was void, and she is not aware of the fact, or perhaps she will brazenly [state that she has been divorced, although that is not the case,] because he accepts her word, or because she is not aware of the seriousness of the prohibition. Therefore, we tell the husband: "If it is true [that you divorced her,] you are both here, divorce her again in our presence."
ה
אמר הבעל גירשתי את אשתי אינו נאמן וחוששים לדבריו ותהיה ספק מגורשת. ואפילו הודית לו שגירשה אינו נאמן שמא יתכוין לקלקלה או בגט בטל גירשה והיא אינה יודעת [או שמא תעיז פניה בו מפני שהוא מאמינה והיא אינה יודעת] כובד האיסור שלה. לפיכך אומרים לו אם אמת הדבר הרי אתם קיימים גרש אותה עתה בפנינו:
6
When two [individuals] say [that a woman] was divorced, and two others say14 [that] she was not divorced, she is still presumed to be married. [This ruling applies] even if her husband is present, and she tells him, "You divorced me." Since the witnesses support her, it is possible that she will speak brazenly [to her husband]. Therefore, if she remarries [in such a situation], she is compelled to leave [her second husband], and a child [born to them] is considered illegitimate.
ו
שנים אומרים נתגרשה ושנים אומרים לא נתגרשה אפילו הבעל עומד והיא אומרת לו גרשתני הרי זו בחזקת אשת איש גמורה מפני שהעדים סומכין אותה ואפשר שתעיז פניה. לפיכך אם נשאת תצא והולד ממזר:
7
When does the above apply? When the witnesses say: "She was divorced in the immediate past." For in such a situation, we tell her, "If it is true that you were divorced, produce your get."
If, however, the witnesses say: "She was divorced several days ago," there is the possibility that the get was lost. [Therefore, different laws apply.] Since she claims that she was definitely divorced, and two witnesses support her claim, although there are two witnesses who deny it, if she marries one of the witnesses, she is not compelled to leave [her second husband]. [The rationale is] that she and her husband, [the witness,] certainly know whether she is permitted [or not], and we assume that they would not create difficulties for themselves.15
Accordingly, [different rules apply] if she marries another person. Since he cannot be certain concerning the matter - and similarly, if she herself is uncertain about the matter, even if she marries one of her witnesses - she should be compelled to leave [her second husband]. The legitimacy of a child born to them is a matter of question.
ז
בד"א כשאמרו עכשיו נתגרשה שהרי אומרין לה אם אמת הדבר הוציאי גיטך. אבל אם אמרו העדים מכמה ימים נתגרשה יש לומר אבד הגט והואיל והיא אומרת גרושה אני בודאי ושני עדים מעידין לה אע"פ שהשנים מכחישין אותן אם נשאת לאחד מעדיה לא תצא, שהרי הוא ובעלה יודעין בודאי שהיא מותרת. וחזקה היא שאין מקלקלין עצמן. אבל אם נשאת לאחר הואיל והדבר אצלו ספק. וכן אם אמרה איני יודעת אפילו נשאת לאחד מעדיה הרי זו תצא והולד ספק ממזר:
8
[The following rules apply when] two [individuals] say, "We saw that she was divorced," and two others say, "We did not see this." If they all lived in a single courtyard,16 she should not marry.17 If, however, she marries, she need not leave [her second husband], and we do not doubt the legitimacy of a child born to them. [The rationale is that] people often divorce in privacy.
ח
אמרו שנים ראינוה שנתגרשה ושנים אומרים לא ראינוה. אם היו כולם שרוים בחצר אחת הרי זו לא תנשא ואם נשאת לא תצא והולד כשר שבני אדם עשויין לגרש בצנעה:
9
[The following rule applies when] we there is no existing presumption that a woman was married, one witness comes and says, "She was married, but divorced," and another witness states, "She was not divorced." Since they both are testifying that she was married, and [only] one witness says she was divorced, she should not marry [a second man]. [The rationale is that] the statements of one [witness] are of no consequence [when they must counteract a definition of status established] on the basis of the testimony of two [witnesses].18 If she remarries, she should be compelled to leave [her second husband].
ט
האשה שלא הוחזקה אשת איש ובא עד אחד ואמר אשת איש היתה ונתגרשה. ובא עד אחד ואמר לא נתגרשה הרי שניהן מעידין שהיא אשת איש ואחד מעיד שהיא גרושה ואין דבריו של אחד במקום שנים ולפיכך לא תנשא ואם נשאת תצא:
10
[The following ruling is rendered when] a woman and two men come from another country. One [of the men] says: "This is my wife, and this is my servant," the other says: "This is my wife, and this is my servant," and the woman says: "They are both my servants." The woman is free to marry anyone. For although two witnesses testified to her being married, since each one of them gave testimony that concerns himself, their statements are not accepted.
י
אשה ושני אנשים שבאו ממדינה אחרת, זה אומר זו אשתי וזה עבדי. וזה אומר זו אשתי וזה עבדי. והאשה אומרת שניהן עבדי. הרי היא מותרת לכל ואע"פ ששניהן החזיקוה באשת איש הואיל וכל אחד מהן העיד לעצמו אינן נאמנין:
11
When an agent charged by the woman with receiving her get takes out a get that was in his possession, and the husband states that the get is a forgery, the authenticity of the get should be verified via the signatures of the witnesses, or via the witnesses who observed the transfer, as we have explained.19
If the husband says: "I gave him [the get] for safekeeping," and the agent says, "He gave it to me for the sake of divorce," the agent's word is accepted.20 A similar rule applies if the woman is in possession of the get21 and she says, "This agent gave it to me," the agent corroborates her statements and says that it was given to him by the husband for the purpose of divorce. The agent's word is accepted,22 even if the husband protests that he gave it to him for safekeeping, and the woman is considered to be divorced.
יא
שליח קבלה שהוציא גט מתחת ידו והבעל אומר מזוייף הוא יתקיים בחותמיו או בעדי מסירה כמו שביארנו. אמר הבעל לפקדון נתתיו לו והשליח אומר לגירושין נתנו לי השליח נאמן. וכן אם היה הגט יוצא מתחת ידי האשה והיא אומרת שליח זה נתנו לי, והשליח אומר כן נתתיו לה ולגירושין נתנו לי, והבעל אומר לא נתתיו לו אלא לפקדון, השליח נאמן והיא מגורשת:
12
When the get is lost,23 [more stringent rules apply]. Even if the husband says that he gave it to an agent24 for the sake of divorce, and the agent says that he gave it to the woman, the status of the divorce is a matter of question.25 For our prevailing assumption is that the woman is married, and it is only [the statements of] one witness26 and her husband [who are contradicting that].
Even if the woman herself says, "In my presence, [my husband] gave the get to the agent for the purpose of divorce, and he divorced me," [the ruling remains unchanged]. Since her husband and the agent support her, it is possible that she will speak brazenly27 and in fact, she was not divorced.
יב
אבד הגט אע"פ שהבעל אומר לגירושין נתתיו לשליח והשליח אומר נתתיו לה הרי זו ספק מגורשת שהרי הוחזקה אשת איש ואין כאן אלא עד אחד ובעל. ואפילו אמרה האשה בפני נתנו לו לגירושין ונתנו השליח לי הואיל והבעל והשליח סועדין אותה אפשר שתעיז פניה ושמא לא נתגרשה:
13
[The following rule applies when] an agent appointed by the woman to receive her get receives it from [her husband] and sends it to her, [giving it to an agent to give to her] in the presence of two witnesses. Although the woman does not know whether [the get] was sent to her by her husband, her agent or her husband's agent, she is divorced, as has been explained.28
יג
שליח קבלה שקיבל גט לאשה ושלחו לה בפני שני עדים והגיע הגט לידה ונטלתו והרי הגט יוצא מתחת ידה. והיא אינה יודעת אם בעלה שלחו לה או שליח קבלה שלה או שלוחו של בעלה. הרי זו מגורשת כמו שביארנו:
14
[In the above situation,] if the husband comes and protests that he did not write [the get], or that the get is void, the signatures [of the witnesses] should be verified. [This is sufficient to counter the husband's protest, the rationale being that] there are witnesses that [the get] was in the possession of the agent of the woman, and his aegis is considered to be equivalent to her own.29 Although she did not know [the purpose for which the get was given to the original agent], the witnesses knew.
If, however, the signatures [of the witnesses] cannot be verified, the divorce is not effective.
יד
בא בעל וערער שלא כתבו. או שהוא גט בטל יתקיים בחותמיו שהרי עדים מעידים שהגט שנתנו לה יצא מתחת יד שלוחה שידו כידה. ואע"פ שהיא אינה יודעת הרי העדים ידעו ואם לא נתקיים אינה מגורשת:
15
[The following rules apply when] the prevailing presumption is that a woman is married, and she and her husband travel overseas at a time when their relationship is peaceful, and peace abides in the world at large.30 If she comes and says, "My husband died," her word is accepted and she is granted permission to marry or to perform the rite of yibbum on this basis.
[The rationale is that] we assume that a woman will not bring difficulties upon herself, causing herself to be forbidden to both her first and her second husbands, causing herself to lose the right to collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah from both husbands and causing her children to be deemed illegitimate when the matter is likely to become openly revealed, and when she will not be able to deny the matter or offer any argument in her defense. For if her husband is alive, he will ultimately return, or [at least,] it will become known that he is alive.
Similarly, if one witness comes and testifies that the woman's husband died, she is granted permission to marry by virtue of his testimony, because [the truth of] the matter will ultimately be revealed.31 Similarly, the testimony of a servant, a woman, a maid-servant or a witness testifying on the basis of statements he heard from others is accepted regarding a person's death.32 On the basis of such testimony, the man's wife is granted permission to remarry or perform the rite of yibbum.
טו
מי שהוחזקה אשת איש והלכה היא ובעלה למדינת הים ושלום בינו לבינה ושלום בעולם ובאה ואמרה מת בעלי נאמנת ותנשא או תתיבם. חזקה שאינה מקלקלת עצמה ותאסור עצמה על בעלה הראשון ועל זה ותפסיד כתובתה מזה ומזה ולהיות בניה ממזרין בדבר העשוי להגלות לכל. ואי אפשר להכחיש ולא לטעון טענה שאם הוא חי סופו לבא או יודע שהוא חי. וכן אם בא עד אחד והעיד לה שמת בעלה תנשא על פיו שהדבר עשוי להגלות. אפילו עבד או אשה או שפחה ועד מפי עד מפי עבד מפי שפחה מפי קרוביו נאמנים לומר מת פלוני ותנשא אשתו או תתיבם על פיהם:
16
Any person who offers testimony is believed with regard to matters of this nature, with the exception of five women, who are presumed to hate each other. Their testimony is not [accepted] with regard to the death of the other's husband,33 lest they intend to cause her to be forbidden to him, although he is still alive.34They are the woman's mother-in-law, the daughter of her mother-in-law,35[her husband's] other wife, her yevamah,36 her husband's daughter [from another marriage].37
[Indeed, with regard to such testimony,] a gentile's statements delivered in the course of conversation are accepted and can serve as the basis for a woman to remarry, as will be explained.38 If the gentile makes his statements with the intent that they serve as testimony, his word is not accepted.
טז
והכל נאמנים להעיד לה עדות זו חוץ מחמש נשים שחזקתם שונאות זו את זו שאין מעידות זו לזו במיתת בעלה שמא יתכוונו לאוסרה עליו ועדיין הוא קיים. ואלו הן. חמותה. ובת חמותה. וצרתה. ויבמתה. ובת בעלה. אפילו עכו"ם המסיח לפי תומו נאמן ומשיאין על פיו כמו שיתבאר. ואם נתכוון להעיד אינו נאמן:
17
Similar laws apply to a person who is disqualified [from serving as a witness] by Scriptural law, because of the commission of a sin.39 If he comes to give testimony on behalf of a woman, [saying] that her husband died, his word is not accepted.40 If he makes these statements in the course of conversation, his word is accepted, for he is not regarded as less than a gentile.
A person who is disqualified [from serving as a witness] by Rabbinic law,41 by contrast, may give testimony regarding [the death of] a woman's [husband].42
יז
וכן הפסול בעבירה מן התורה אם בא להעיד באשה שמת בעלה אינו נאמן. ואם היה מסיח לפי תומו נאמן אין זה פחות מן העכו"ם. אבל פסול מדבריהם נאמן לעדות אשה:
18
[The following rules apply if] one witness came and testified that a woman's husband has died, and she was granted permission to remarry on the basis of his testimony, and afterwards another witness came and contradicted the testimony of the first, saying that he did not die. The woman's status is not changed, and she is still permitted to remarry.43
[The rationale is that] the testimony of one witness is accepted with regard to [the death of] a woman's [husband] in the same way as is the testimony of two witnesses with regard to other matters. [This testimony is being challenged by the testimony of one witness,] and the words of one witness are not considered when there is [testimony from] two [witnesses].44
יח
בא עד אחד והעיד שמת בעלה והתירוה להנשא על פיו ואחר כך בא אחר והכחיש את הראשון ואמר לא מת הרי זו לא תצא מהיתרה ותנשא. שעד אחד נאמן בעדות אשה כשני עדים בשאר עדויות ואין דבריו של אחד במקום שנים:
19
If two [witnesses] come at the same time,45 one saying "he died," and the other saying, "he did not die," or a woman says, "he died," and another woman says, "he did not die," she should not marry. And if she marries, she should leave her second husband,46 for the matter is one of doubt.47
If, however, she marries the witness who testified on her behalf, and she herself says, "I am certain that he died,"48 she need not leave her second husband.49 If two witnesses come and say that her first husband did not die, [a more stringent ruling is delivered]. Even though she married, she must leave her second husband.
יט
באו שניהם כאחד זה אומר מת וזה אומר לא מת. אשה אומרת מת ואשה אומרת לא מת. הרי זו לא תנשא ואם נשאת תצא מפני שהיא ספק. ואם נשאת לעד שהעיד לה והיא אומרת ברי לי שמת הרי זו לא תצא. באו שנים ואמרו לא מת אע"פ שנשאת תצא:
20
When does the above50 apply? When the one witness upon whose testimony [the woman was granted permission to] marry was equivalent to the two witnesses who contradicted his testimony. For example, she married based on the testimony of one man, and two men came and said that her husband did not die. Or she married based on the testimony of one woman or on the basis of her own testimony, and two women or two men who were disqualified from serving as witnesses by Rabbinic law testified that her husband did not die.
If, however, one acceptable witness says that her husband died, and many51 women or men who were disqualified from serving as witnesses by Rabbinic law testify that her husband did not die, the situation is considered to be equally balanced.52 Thus, if she marries one of the witnesses53 who testified on her behalf, and she herself says, "I am certain that he died," she need not leave her second husband.
כ
במה דברים אמורים בשהיה העד אחד שנשאת על פיו כמו השנים שבאו והכחישו אותו. כגון שנשאת על פי איש ובאו שנים ואמרו לא מת. או שנשאת על פי אשה או על פי עצמה ובאו שתי נשים או שני פסולין של דבריהן ואמרו לא מת. אבל עד כשר אומר מת ונשים רבות אומרות לא מת או פסולין אומרים לא מת הרי זה כמחצה על מחצה, ואם נשאת לאחד מעדיה והיא אומרת ודאי מת הרי זו לא תצא:
21
When one woman testifies that [her husband] died, or she herself says that [her husband] died, and afterwards,54 one acceptable witness comes and says that he did not die, [the woman] should not remarry; and if she remarried, she should leave her second husband.
כא
אשה אומרת מת או היא שאמרה מת בעלי ואח"כ בא עד כשר ואמר לא מת הרי זו לא תנשא ואם נשאת תצא:
22
When one woman says that [a man] did not die, and two women say that he did die, [his wife] may remarry. Similarly, if ten women say that [a man] did not die, and eleven women say that he did die, [his wife] may remarry. For we say, "two [witnesses] are considered as 100," only with regard to acceptable witnesses.55 With regard to witnesses whose testimony would ordinarily be disqualified, by contrast, [the law is that we] follow the majority, whether this leads to a more lenient ruling or a more stringent ruling.
כב
אשה אומרת לא מת ושתי נשים אומרות מת הרי זו תנשא. וכן אם אמרו עשר נשים לא מת ואחת עשרה אומרות מת הרי זו תנשא שאין אומרים שנים כמאה אלא בעדים כשרים אבל בפסולין הלך אחר הרוב בין להקל בין להחמיר:
23
When two [witnesses] say that [a man] died, and two other witnesses say that he did not die, [his wife] may not remarry. If she has remarried, she should leave [her second husband],56 because the matter is one of doubt.
If she marries one of the witnesses who testified on her behalf, and she herself says, "I am certain that he died," she need not leave her second husband.
כג
שני עדים אומרים מת ושנים אומרים לא מת הרי זו לא תנשא ואם נשאת תצא מפני שהיא ספק. ואם נשאת לאחד מעדיה והיא אומרת ברי לי שמת הרי זו לא תצא:
24
[The following laws apply when] a person has two wives and one of them comes and says, "My husband died." She may marry on the basis of her own testimony, as we have explained.57 Her husband's other wife is forbidden to marry, for one of a man's wives may not testify on behalf of the other.
Even if the woman [who said that her husband died] married first, [the other wife is still forbidden to marry]. We do not say that if her husband had not actually died, she would not cause herself to be forbidden to him. [Instead, we suspect that] perhaps her hatred for the other wife is so great that she desires for them both to become forbidden to him.58
If one says, "My husband died," and her husband's other wife denies this, saying that he did not die, [the wife who testifies that he has died] may remarry. Just as the other wife's testimony does not cause her to be permitted, it does not cause her to be forbidden.
If one says, "[My husband] died," and the other says, "He was killed," they both are granted permission to remarry, for they both are testifying that he is no longer alive.59
כד
מי שיש לו שתי נשים ובאה אחת מהן ואמרה מת בעלי הרי זו תנשא על פי עצמה כמו שביארנו. וצרתה אסורה שאין צרה מעידה לחבירתה. ואפילו נשאת זו תחלה אין אומרין אילו לא מת בעלה לא היתה אוסרת עצמה עליו. שמא משנאתה בצרתה רוצה היא שיאסרו שתיהן עליו. זאת אומרת מת בעלי וצרתה מכחשת אותה ואומרת לא מת הרי זו תנשא. כשם שאינה מעידה לה להתירה כך אינה יכולה להעיד לה לאוסרה. זאת אומרת מת וצרתה אומרת נהרג הואיל ושתיהן אומרות שאינו קיים הרי אלו ינשאו:
FOOTNOTES
1.
She is not contradicting her original statements, but rather adding information, and that information serves as the basis for changing her status. This ruling applies even if she makes her second statement after a significant time has passed since she made her first statement (Maggid Mishneh). Rav Moshe HaCohen objects, maintaining that her second statement must be made directly after her first statement. Although the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 152:6) quotes both opinions, it appears that the Rambam's opinion is favored.
2.
I.e., we do not know for certain that she has been married, but she and her husband have lived together as man and wife. See Sefer HaKovetz, which notes that the Rambam's wording deviates from his source (Ketubot 2:5), which mentions that witnesses say that the woman was married.
3.
Instead, she is considered to be married to her husband until she brings proof to the contrary. If she remarries, she is forced to leave her second husband (Maggid Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 152:7). There is a difference of opinion among the authorities regarding whether her second husband is required to give her a formal divorce. (See Beit Shmuel 152:12.)
4.
I.e., should her present husband die, she would not be allowed to marry a priest. (See Halachah 3.)
5.
I.e., we do not accept her statements entirely, and therefore require her to undergo chalitzah. Nevertheless, because there is a possibility that her statements are true, we do not allow her to undergo yibbum, for if she had in fact been divorced, relations with her late husband's brother would be forbidden.
6.
Chapter 7, Halachah 24. As mentioned in the notes on that halachah, the Ra'avad differs with the Rambam concerning this issue. Both opinions are quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 142:13-14), but later (loc. cit. 152:9), the Shulchan Aruch mentions only the Rambam's view.
7.
I.e., these two phrases are part of a single claim. This translation is based on manuscripts of the Mishneh Torah that state ומזוייף, "And it is a forgery." The standard printed version omits the first vav leading to the conclusion that the Rambam is speaking about two claims. This conception is also reflected in the statement of the law in the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 152:10).
8.
See Chapter 7, Halachah 2.
9.
See Halachah 1.
10.
I.e., although we do not accept her statements, we require her to abide by all the stringencies they imply.
11.
There are several qualifications to this principle: First, the woman must make this statement in the presence of her husband. If he is not present, we fear that she will speak brazenly (Hilchot Ishut 4:13). And, as implied by Halachot 6 and 14 of this chapter, if there is one witness who supports the woman's statements, her word is not accepted. We fear that the support the witness gives her will encourage her to lie. Similarly, as reflected in the following halachah, if her husband supports her, her word is not accepted.
In Hilchot Ishut (loc. cit.), the Ra'avad states that the woman's word should be accepted only insofar as to require her to receive a get if she remarries. She is not given license to remarry, nor may she collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah from her first husband unless she proves that she has been divorced. The Ramah (Even HaEzer 17:2) quotes both views. He states, however, that in the present age, since brazen behavior is more common, the presumption upon which the Rambam's ruling rests is no longer a viable support.
12.
See Chapter 10, Halachah 3.
13.
I.e., that she will remarry and then he will prove that her second marriage is adulterous, in which case she will be bound by all the stringencies stated in Chapter 10, Halachot 4 and 7.
14.
As reflected by Halachah 8, in this instance the testimony of the witnesses must be to the effect that the divorce was not carried out in an adequate manner.
15.
This assumption has sufficient legal power to counterbalance the prevailing assumption that the woman is still married. (See Beit Shmuel 152:5.)
16.
If they do not all live in such proximity, there is no question, and a priori, she is given permission to remarry (Beit Shmuel 152:6).
17.
We assume that if in fact she had been divorced, the matter would have attracted the attention of all those dwelling in the courtyard.
18.
I.e., both the witnesses say that she was married, and only one says that she was divorced. Note the contrast to the parallel situation with regard to kiddushin as mentioned in Hilchot Ishut 9:31.
19.
See Halachah 3. In this respect, there is no difference between the woman's agent and herself.
20.
The Rambam's ruling applies even when the husband, the wife and the agent are all in the same city. Even though one might think that in such an instance, if the husband's intent was to divorce his wife, he would have given the get to her directly and not to an agent, the agent's word is accepted.
There is another opinion in Gittin 64a, which maintains that in the same city, the agent's word is not accepted, and several Rishonim follow this view. Both opinions are mentioned by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 141:55), but the Rambam's opinion appears to be favored. The Ramah states that the agent's word is accepted only while he is in possession of the get.
21.
When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) appears to favor an opinion that accepts the woman's corroboration of the agent's statement, even when she is not in possession of the get.
22.
I.e., even though the agent is no longer in possession of the get, his word is accepted. Since the woman has the potential to return it to him, it is considered as if it is still in his possession (Beit Shmuel 141:83).
23.
When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 141:56) states that it applies when there are no witnesses who saw the get in the woman's possession.
24.
This halachah is speaking about an agent who acts on behalf of the husband, giving the get to his wife.
25.
On one hand, there is a legal principle: "One can assume that an agent has carried out his mission," and yet our Sages maintain that this construct should be accepted only with regard to the stringencies it implies (Gittin 64b). As such, with regard to marrying into the priesthood and the like, the woman is considered as if she has been divorced. Nevertheless, she is not given permission to remarry unless she has the signatures of the witnesses to the get verified, or if the witnesses to its transfer testify to that effect.
26.
See Chapter 9, Halachah 32 and the gloss of the Maggid Mishneh on that halachah.
27.
See Halachot 4 and 6.
28.
The reference is to Halachah 11. There is a slight difference in this instance, because the original agent is not necessarily making these statements to the court himself. Nevertheless, as long as witnesses saw the get in the possession of the original agent, the statements of the agent who gave the get to the woman are accepted.
29.
As mentioned in the notes on Halachah 11, there are opinions that maintain that this applies only when the husband, the agent and the woman are located in different cities. If all three are located in the same city, these opinions maintain that the husband's word should be accepted if he states that he gave the agent the get for safekeeping. In this instance, as well, although both views are mentioned by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 141:57), the Rambam's view is favored.
Moreover, as mentioned in those notes, the Ramah maintains that if the get is no longer in possession of the agent, his word is not accepted.
30.
As will be explained, different rules apply if the couple is known to quarrel (Chapter 13, Halachah 1), or war prevails throughout the world (Chapter 13, Halachah 2).
31.
As reflected by the Rambam's statements at the conclusion of Chapter 13, it appears that according to Scriptural law, the testimony of one witness is accepted in instances of this nature.
32.
The testimony of such individuals is never accepted according to Scriptural law. The acceptance of such testimony in this instance is a leniency adopted by the Sages so that Jewish women will be able to remarry. (See the conclusion of Chapter 13.)
This halachah begins the discussion of the subject of agunot, women whose husbands are missing and presumed to have died. In previous generations, this was a recurrent difficulty, for business journeys were replete with danger, and moreover, pogroms and persecution were constant threats. Often, men disappeared and were presumed to have died or to have been killed, and yet there was no conclusive proof to that effect. Indeed, a significant amount of the Rabbinic literature of previous generations was devoted to questions of this nature.
In the present age, with the communications revolution and the advent of more highly developed means of identification, these problems have been minimized. But they still arise. After each of Israel's wars, lengthy investigations were necessary before permission to remarry was granted to the wives of the casualties. And when, heaven forbid, there are Jews killed in plane crashes and the like, Rabbis must make careful inquiries based on the principles reflected in the halachot that follow.
33.
See Halachah 24, which states that the testimony of these women is not considered at all, regardless of whether they say that the woman's husband is alive or that he has died.
34.
I.e., we fear that out of hatred, these women will testify that a woman's husband has died so that she will marry another person, and when her first husband returns she will be forced to leave both relationships.
The Kessef Mishneh states that the phrase "although he is still alive" is meant to exclude an instance in which a woman's husband died and she remarried. The five women who share these close family ties with her first husband are not disqualified from giving testimony with regard to the death of her second husband. The implication is that these women's hatred has a specific objective: to cause the woman to be divorced from her husband. Once she is no longer married to him, they no longer harbor such feelings.
The Beit Shmuel 17:13 and Rabbi Akiva Eiger question this ruling on the basis of the Rambam's wording in Chapter 7, Halachah 3, which states: "These are the women who we presume hate each other . . . another woman married to the same man - this applies even if this woman has since remarried." Nevertheless, this halachah can be interpreted to mean that although the other woman has remarried, she wants the woman who was married to her first husband also to be forbidden to him.
35.
Who we assume would identify with her mother. Moreover, the daughter of the mother-in-law may have a personal grudge, because the other woman will enjoy the inheritance of her parents' estate.
36.
I.e., the woman married to her husband's brother, whom her husband would have to marry if his brother died without children. Since it is possible that they will share the same husband, there may be enmity between them.
37.
I.e., she is jealous of the woman who took her mother's place.
Because of the bad feelings that characterize the relationship between these pairs, testimony is also disqualified in the reverse of the above situations. For example, if the husband of the daughter of a woman's husband is missing, the woman may not testify about the matter, although she has no natural reason to hate the other woman.
38.
See Chapter 13, Halachah 11, which explains that when the gentile makes statements casually, relating events that took place, his word is accepted.
39.
This refers to two categories of individuals: a) one who transgresses a prohibition punishable by lashes, and b) one who violates a prohibition of the Torah that involves taking money unjustly. (See Hilchot Edut, Chapter 10.)
40.
We fear that he is able to be bribed to give false testimony.
41.
E.g., a person who takes interest forbidden by Rabbinic law, or a gambler (Hilchot Edut 10:3). (See also Hilchot Edut 11:1-5, which mentions other base individuals whose testimony was disqualified.)
42.
Although our Sages disqualified the testimony of such individuals in other instances, they relaxed this restriction in this regard, so that the woman would be granted the opportunity to remarry.
43.
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 17:37) follows the ruling of Rabbenu Asher, who maintains that the woman should not remarry because of the gossip that might ensue.
44.
Or, as in the case at hand, the testimony of one witness that is considered to be equivalent to that of two.
45.
When the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 17:37) quotes this law, it states that the witness who says that the husband did not die came before the woman was granted license to remarry. See Beit Shmuel 17:110.
46.
In the previous instance, a ruling was already delivered, and the testimony of one witness is not sufficient to detract from that ruling. In this halachah, by contrast, a ruling has not been issued, and one witness has no more halachic power than the other.
47.
See Hilchot Shegagot 8:3, where the Rambam states that the woman and her second husband are obligated to bring the guilt offering sacrificed to bring atonement when one is in doubt of whether or not one committed a transgression.
48.
This is interpreted by most commentaries to mean: "I know that he died." Rashi (Ketubot 22b) states that it means: "I know that if he were alive, he would have returned by now," but this interpretation is not accepted by the later authorities.
49.
The rationale for this decision is stated above in Halachah 7. At the outset, however, she should not remarry, not even to this witness (Beit Shmuel 17:113). There are, moreover, significant halachic authorities who rule that she must leave her second husband. Their opinion is also mentioned in the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.), but the Rambam's opinion appears to be favored.
50.
I.e., the stringency mentioned at the conclusion of the previous halachah.
51.
I.e., the number is not significant. The same law applies whether two or 200 come.
52.
Thus, she may not marry at all (and if she marries, may not remain married to her second husband unless she marries the witness, as the Rambam continues in Halachah 19). The Maggid Mishneh and the Ramah (Even HaEzer 17:37) emphasize that this applies only when the women or the witnesses who are usually disqualified come before the woman is granted permission to marry. If, however, she is granted permission to marry on the basis of the testimony of an acceptable witness, the testimony of these individuals does not cause that license to be rescinded.
53.
The wording used by the Rambam is slightly confusing, for we are speaking about an instance when only one acceptable witness testifies on her behalf. (See Beit Shmuel 17:118.)
54.
According to the Maggid Mishneh, this applies even if the woman was granted license to remarry before the other witness came. This opinion is reflected in the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 17:38). If, however, two women testify that a woman's husband has died, and permission is granted for the woman to remarry, the testimony of a single acceptable witness is not sufficient for that license to be revoked (Maggid Mishneh; Ramah, Even HaEzer 17:38).
55.
I.e., if the same situation occurred with regard to acceptable witnesses, the laws stated in the following halachah would apply. With regard to acceptable witnesses, as long as two witnesses dissent, it makes no difference how many witnesses support the other opinion.
56.
This applies even when the woman married after receiving license from a Rabbinic court. If two witnesses come afterwards and testify that her first husband is still alive, we give credence to their statements (Beit Shmuel 17:128).
57.
See Halachah 15.
58.
I.e., she is marrying with the intent that the other wife will follow suit and also marry. Then her first husband will return, and they will both become forbidden to him. In describing this sequence, Yevamot 120a recalls Samson's prayer (Judges 16:30): "May I die together with the Philistines" - i.e., she will harm herself in order to harm her rival.
59.
The fact that their testimonies contradict each other is not significant.
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class
Shabbat, Kislev 28, 5778 · 16 December 2017
"Today's Day"
Monday, Kislev 28, Fourth Day of Chanuka, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Mikeitz, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 135-139.
Tanya: For when the intellect (p. 11)...with its offshoots (p. 11).
It was customary for the Tzemach Tzedek to have a sort of farbrengen on one of the evenings of Chanuka with his family, including his daughters-in-law. This was called "latkes evening." This was also the practice of the Alter Rebbe and the Mitteler Rebbe. Among the stories the Rebbes told at this meal were some which were widely talked about every Chanuka, though they had been discussed the year before.
My father would give Chanuka-gelt on the evening of the fourth or fifth light.
Daily Thought:
Darkness With Hope
There are dark jewels in this world that can be salvaged, purified and taken as precious bounty for the good.
And there is darkness itself, the absence of light, that must only wait its time to expire.
How can we tell between them?
If the darkness fights back, there is hope.
It means there is something there worth fighting for.
---
No comments:
Post a Comment