| |||||
- 
- ב"ה - Today in Judaism - Today is Friday, 20 Kislev, 5778 · December 8, 2017 - Chaf Kislev - "Rosh Hashanah of Chassidism" - Candle Lighting - Light Candles before sunset ––:––---
Today's Laws & Customs:
• "Rosh Hashanah of Chassidism"
The Rosh Hashanah ("new year") of Chassidism, marking the liberation of Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi and the subsequent blossoming of Chabad Chassidism, is celebrated for two days, Kislev 19-20. (The Rebbe was released from prison on the 19th, but his full freedom was only obtained late in the evening -- Kislev 20 on the Jewish Calendar.) The two days are celebrated with farbrengens (Chassidic gatherings) and an increased commitment to the ways and teachings of Chassidism. Tachnun (supplication) and similar prayers are omitted. For more information and links, see entries for yesterday Kislev 19.
• Chabad custom: Omit TachanunIn Chabad practice, Tachanun (confession of sins) and similar prayers are omitted today.
Today in Jewish History:
• Ezra's Address (347 BCE)Ezra, head of the Sanhedrin and the leader of the Jewish people at the time of the building of the Second Temple, made an historic address to a three-day assemblage of Jews in Jerusalem, exhorting them to adhere to the teachings of the Torah and to dissolve their interfaith marriages (the Jewish people were on the verge of complete assimilation at the time, following their 70-year exile in Babylonia).
Links: On Intermarriage
• Tanya Published (1796)
The first printing of the "bible of Chassidism", the Tanya, the magnum opus of Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, founder of Chabad.
Links: The Longer Shorter Way; Lessons in Tanya (includes an English translation of the Hebrew text plus explanatory commentary in English); 28 Teachings
Daily Quote: Said Rabbi Yossi: May it be my lot to be counted among those who are accused of something of which they are innocent
— (Talmud, Moed Katan 18b)
Daily Torah Study:
Chumash: Vayeishev, 6th Portion Genesis 39:7-39:23 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation
• Video Class
• Daily Wisdom (short insight)
Genesis Chapter 39
7Now it came to pass after these events that his master's wife lifted up her eyes to Joseph, and she said, "Lie with me." זוַיְהִ֗י אַחַר֙ הַדְּבָרִ֣ים הָאֵ֔לֶּה וַתִּשָּׂ֧א אֵֽשֶׁת־אֲדֹנָ֛יו אֶת־עֵינֶ֖יהָ אֶל־יוֹסֵ֑ף וַתֹּ֖אמֶר שִׁכְבָ֥ה עִמִּֽי:
his master’s wife lifted up her eyes, etc: Wherever it says אַחַר, it means immediately following. [From Gen. Rabbah 44:5]
ותשא אשת אדוניו וגו': כל מקום שנאמר אחר סמוך:
8But he refused, and he said to his master's wife, "Behold, with me my master knows nothing about anything in the house, and all he has he has given into my hand. חוַיְמָאֵ֓ן | וַיֹּ֨אמֶר֙ אֶל־אֵ֣שֶׁת אֲדֹנָ֔יו הֵ֣ן אֲדֹנִ֔י לֹֽא־יָדַ֥ע אִתִּ֖י מַה־בַּבָּ֑יִת וְכֹ֥ל אֲשֶׁר־יֶשׁ־ל֖וֹ נָתַ֥ן בְּיָדִֽי:
9In this house, there is no one greater than I, and he has not withheld anything from me except you, insofar as you are his wife. Now how can I commit this great evil, and sin against God?" טאֵינֶ֨נּוּ גָד֜וֹל בַּבַּ֣יִת הַזֶּה֘ מִמֶּ֒נִּי֒ וְלֹֽא־חָשַׂ֤ךְ מִמֶּ֨נִּי֙ מְא֔וּמָה כִּ֥י אִם־אוֹתָ֖ךְ בַּֽאֲשֶׁ֣ר אַתְּ־אִשְׁתּ֑וֹ וְאֵ֨יךְ אֶֽעֱשֶׂ֜ה הָֽרָעָ֤ה הַגְּדֹלָה֙ הַזֹּ֔את וְחָטָ֖אתִי לֵֽאלֹהִֽים:
and sin against God: The sons of Noah were commanded against immorality. [From Sanh. 56a]
וחטאתי לא-להים: בני נח נצטוו על העריות:
10Now it came about when she spoke to Joseph day in and day out, that he did not obey her, to lie beside her [and] to be with her. יוַיְהִ֕י כְּדַבְּרָ֥הּ אֶל־יוֹסֵ֖ף י֣וֹם | י֑וֹם וְלֹֽא־שָׁמַ֥ע אֵלֶ֛יהָ לִשְׁכַּ֥ב אֶצְלָ֖הּ לִֽהְי֥וֹת עִמָּֽהּ:
to lie beside her: even without intercourse. [From Gen. Rabbah 87:6]
לשכב אצלה: אפילו בלא תשמיש:
to be with her: in the World to Come. [From Gen. Rabbah 87:6]
להיות עמה: לעולם הבא:
11And it came about on a certain day, that he came to the house to do his work, and none of the people of the house were there in the house. יאוַֽיְהִי֙ כְּהַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֔ה וַיָּבֹ֥א הַבַּ֖יְתָה לַֽעֲשׂ֣וֹת מְלַאכְתּ֑וֹ וְאֵ֨ין אִ֜ישׁ מֵֽאַנְשֵׁ֥י הַבַּ֛יִת שָׁ֖ם בַּבָּֽיִת:
And it came about on a certain day: That is to say that a special day arrived, a day of rejoicing, a religious festival when they (the household) all went to the temple of their idols. She said, “I have no more fitting day to consort with Joseph than today.” So she said to them,“I am ill, and I cannot go.” [from Sotah 36b]
ויהי כהיום הזה: כלומר ויהי כאשר הגיע יום מיוחד, יום צחוק, יום איד שלהם שהלכו כולם לבית עבודה זרה, אמרה אין לי יום הגון להזקק ליוסף כהיום הזה. אמרה להם חולה אני ואיני יכולה לילך:
to do his work: [There is a controversy between] Rav and Shmuel. One said: his actual work, and the other said: to perform his needs with her, but his father’s image appeared, etc., as is stated in Sotah (36b).
לעשות מלאכתו: רב ושמואל, חד אמר מלאכתו ממש, וחד אמר לעשות צרכיו עמה, אלא שנראית לו דמות דיוקנו של אביו וכו', כדאיתא במסכת סוטה (דף לו ב):
12So she grabbed him by his garment, saying, "Lie with me!" But he left his garment in her hand and fled and went outside. יבוַתִּתְפְּשֵׂ֧הוּ בְּבִגְד֛וֹ לֵאמֹ֖ר שִׁכְבָ֣ה עִמִּ֑י וַיַּֽעֲזֹ֤ב בִּגְדוֹ֙ בְּיָדָ֔הּ וַיָּ֖נָס וַיֵּצֵ֥א הַחֽוּצָה:
13Now it happened, when she saw that he had left his garment in her hand and had fled outside, יגוַֽיְהִי֙ כִּרְאוֹתָ֔הּ כִּֽי־עָזַ֥ב בִּגְד֖וֹ בְּיָדָ֑הּ וַיָּ֖נָס הַחֽוּצָה:
14that she called to the people of her house, and she spoke to them, saying, "Look! He brought us a Hebrew man to mock us. He came to me to lie with me, but I called loudly. ידוַתִּקְרָ֞א לְאַנְשֵׁ֣י בֵיתָ֗הּ וַתֹּ֤אמֶר לָהֶם֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר רְא֗וּ הֵ֥בִיא לָ֛נוּ אִ֥ישׁ עִבְרִ֖י לְצַ֣חֶק בָּ֑נוּ בָּ֤א אֵלַי֙ לִשְׁכַּ֣ב עִמִּ֔י וָֽאֶקְרָ֖א בְּק֥וֹל גָּדֽוֹל:
“Look! He brought us…”: Heb. הֵבִיא [without a noun or pronoun. Although the pronoun is sometimes absent, the antecedent is usually clear, whereas here there is no antecedent.] This is an elliptical expression:“He brought us,” but [Scripture] does not specify who brought him; she was referring to her husband.
ראו הביא לנו: הרי זה לשון קצרה, הביא לנו ולא פירש מי הביאו, ועל בעלה אומרת כן:
Hebrew: Heb. עִבְרִי, from the other side of the river (עֵבֶר הַנָהָר) from the sons of Eber (Gen. Rabbah 42:8). (Other editions: from the other side of the river.)
עברי: מעבר הנהר, מבני עבר:
15And it happened that when he heard that I raised my voice and called out, he left his garment beside me, and he fled and went outside." טווַיְהִ֣י כְשָׁמְע֔וֹ כִּֽי־הֲרִימֹ֥תִי קוֹלִ֖י וָֽאֶקְרָ֑א וַיַּֽעֲזֹ֤ב בִּגְדוֹ֙ אֶצְלִ֔י וַיָּ֖נָס וַיֵּצֵ֥א הַחֽוּצָה:
16So she left his garment beside her, until his master came home. טזוַתַּנַּ֥ח בִּגְד֖וֹ אֶצְלָ֑הּ עַד־בּ֥וֹא אֲדֹנָ֖יו אֶל־בֵּיתֽוֹ:
his master: [The master] of Joseph.
אדוניו: של יוסף:
17And she told him the same thing, saying, "The Hebrew slave that you brought to us came to me to mock me. יזוַתְּדַבֵּ֣ר אֵלָ֔יו כַּדְּבָרִ֥ים הָאֵ֖לֶּה לֵאמֹ֑ר בָּ֣א אֵלַ֞י הָעֶ֧בֶד הָֽעִבְרִ֛י אֲשֶׁר־הֵבֵ֥אתָ לָּ֖נוּ לְצַ֥חֶק בִּֽי:
came to me: to mock me; the Hebrew slave that you brought to us.
בא אלי: לצחק בי העבד העברי אשר הבאת לנו:
18And it happened when I raised my voice and called out, that he left his garment beside me and fled outside." יחוַיְהִ֕י כַּֽהֲרִימִ֥י קוֹלִ֖י וָֽאֶקְרָ֑א וַיַּֽעֲזֹ֥ב בִּגְד֛וֹ אֶצְלִ֖י וַיָּ֥נָס הַחֽוּצָה:
19Now it came about when his master heard his wife's report that she spoke to him, saying, "Your slave did such things to me," that his wrath burned. יטוַיְהִי֩ כִשְׁמֹ֨עַ אֲדֹנָ֜יו אֶת־דִּבְרֵ֣י אִשְׁתּ֗וֹ אֲשֶׁ֨ר דִּבְּרָ֤ה אֵלָיו֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר כַּדְּבָרִ֣ים הָאֵ֔לֶּה עָ֥שָׂה לִ֖י עַבְדֶּ֑ךָ וַיִּ֖חַר אַפּֽוֹ:
Now it came about when his master heard, etc.: During intercourse she told him this, and that is the meaning of“Your slave did such things to me,” [meaning] such acts of intimacy. [From Gen. Rabbah 87:9]
ויהי כשמוע אדוניו וגו': בשעת תשמיש אמרה לו כן, וזהו שאמרה כדברים האלה עשה לי עבדך, עניני תשמיש כאלה:
20So Joseph's master took him and put him into prison, the place where the king's prisoners were imprisoned, and he was there in the prison. כוַיִּקַּח֩ אֲדֹנֵ֨י יוֹסֵ֜ף אֹת֗וֹ וַיִּתְּנֵ֨הוּ֙ אֶל־בֵּ֣ית הַסֹּ֔הַר מְק֕וֹם אֲשֶׁר־אֲסִירֵ֥י כתיב אסורי הַמֶּ֖לֶךְ אֲסוּרִ֑ים וַֽיְהִי־שָׁ֖ם בְּבֵ֥ית הַסֹּֽהַר:
21The Lord was with Joseph, and He extended charisma to him, and He gave him favor in the eyes of the warden of the prison. כאוַיְהִ֤י יְהֹוָה֙ אֶת־יוֹסֵ֔ף וַיֵּ֥ט אֵלָ֖יו חָ֑סֶד וַיִּתֵּ֣ן חִנּ֔וֹ בְּעֵינֵ֖י שַׂ֥ר בֵּֽית־הַסֹּֽהַר:
and he extended charisma to him: Heb. חָסֶד. [It means] that he was well-liked by all who saw him, an expression of“a beautiful and charismatic (וַחִסוּדָה) bride” in the Mishnah (Derech Eretz Rabbah , ch. 6) [from a midrash quoted by Yalkut Shimoni, vol. 2, 1053.]
ויט אליו חסד: שיהא מקובל לכל רואיו, לשון כלה נאה וחסודה שבמשנה (כתובות יז א):
22So the warden of the prison delivered all the prisoners who were in the prison into Joseph's hand, and whatever they did there, he [was the one who] did it. כבוַיִּתֵּ֞ן שַׂ֤ר בֵּֽית־הַסֹּ֨הַר֙ בְּיַד־יוֹסֵ֔ף אֵ֚ת כָּל־הָ֣אֲסִירִ֔ם אֲשֶׁ֖ר בְּבֵ֣ית הַסֹּ֑הַר וְאֵ֨ת כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֤ר עֹשִׂים֙ שָׁ֔ם ה֖וּא הָיָ֥ה עֹשֶֽׂה:
he [was the one who] did it: As the Gen. Targum renders: by his command it was done.
הוא היה עושה: כתרגומו במימריה הוה מתעביד:
23The warden of the prison did not inspect anything [that was] in his (Joseph's) hand, for the Lord was with him, and whatever he did the Lord made prosper. כגאֵ֣ין | שַׂ֣ר בֵּֽית־הַסֹּ֗הַר רֹאֶ֤ה אֶת־כָּל־מְא֨וּמָה֙ בְּיָד֔וֹ בַּֽאֲשֶׁ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אִתּ֑וֹ וַֽאֲשֶׁר־ה֥וּא עֹשֶׂ֖ה יְהֹוָ֥ה מַצְלִֽיחַ:
since the Lord was with him: Heb. בַּאִשֶׁר. Because the Lord was with him.
באשר ה' אתו: בשביל שה' אתו:
Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 97 - 103
• Hebrew text
• English text
Chapter 97
1. When the Lord will reveal His kingship, the earth will exult; the multitudes of islands will rejoice.
2. Clouds and dense darkness will surround Him; justice and mercy will be the foundation of His throne.
3. Fire will go before Him and consume His foes all around.
4. His lightnings will illuminate the world; the earth will see and tremble.
5. The mountains will melt like wax before the Lord, before the Master of all the earth.
6. The heavens will declare His justice, and all the nations will behold His glory.
7. All who worship graven images, who take pride in idols, will be ashamed; all idol worshippers will prostrate themselves before Him.
8. Zion will hear and rejoice, the towns of Judah will exult, because of Your judgments, O Lord.
9. For You, Lord, transcend all the earth; You are exceedingly exalted above all the supernal beings.
10. You who love the Lord, hate evil; He watches over the souls of His pious ones, He saves them from the hand of the wicked.
11. Light is sown for the righteous, and joy for the upright in heart.
12. Rejoice in the Lord, you righteous, and extol His holy Name.
Chapter 98
This psalm describes how Israel will praise God for the Redemption.
1. A psalm. Sing to the Lord a new song, for He has performed wonders; His right hand and holy arm have wrought deliverance for Him.
2. The Lord has made known His salvation; He has revealed His justice before the eyes of the nations.
3. He has remembered His kindness and faithfulness to the House of Israel; all, from the farthest corners of the earth, witnessed the deliverance by our God.
4. Raise your voices in jubilation to the Lord, all the earth; burst into joyous song and chanting.
5. Sing to the Lord with a harp, with a harp and the sound of song.
6. With trumpets and the sound of the shofar, jubilate before the King, the Lord.
7. The sea and its fullness will roar in joy, the earth and its inhabitants.
8. The rivers will clap their hands, the mountains will sing together.
9. [They will rejoice] before the Lord, for He has come to judge the earth; He will judge the world with justice, and the nations with righteousness.
Chapter 99
This psalm refers to the wars of Gog and Magog, which will precede the Redemption.
1. When the Lord will reveal His kingship, the nations will tremble; the earth will quake before Him Who is enthroned upon the cherubim,
2. [before] the Lord Who is in Zion, Who is great and exalted above all the peoples.
3. They will extol Your Name which is great, awesome and holy.
4. And [they will praise] the might of the King Who loves justice. You have established uprightness; You have made [the laws of] justice and righteousness in Jacob.
5. Exalt the Lord our God, and bow down at His footstool; He is holy.
6. Moses and Aaron among His priests, and Samuel among those who invoke His Name, would call upon the Lord and He would answer them.
7. He would speak to them from a pillar of cloud; they observed His testimonies and the decrees which He gave them.
8. Lord our God, You have answered them; You were a forgiving God for their sake, yet bringing retribution for their own misdeeds.
9. Exalt the Lord our God, and bow down at His holy mountain, for the Lord our God is holy.
Chapter 100
This psalm inspires the hearts of those who suffer in this world. Let them, nevertheless, serve God with joy, for all is for their good, as in the verse: "He whom God loves does He chastise." The psalm also refers to the thanksgiving sacrifice-the only sacrifice to be offered in the Messianic era.
1. A psalm of thanksgiving. Let all the earth sing in jubilation to the Lord.
2. Serve the Lord with joy; come before Him with exultation.
3. Know that the Lord is God; He has made us and we are His, His people and the sheep of His pasture.
4. Enter His gates with gratitude, His courtyards with praise; give thanks to Him, bless His Name.
5. For the Lord is good; His kindness is everlasting, and His faithfulness is for all generations.
Chapter 101
This psalm speaks of David's secluding himself from others, and of his virtuous conduct even in his own home.
1. By David, a psalm. I will sing of [Your] kindness and justice; to You, O Lord, will I chant praise!
2. I will pay heed to the path of integrity-O when will it come to me? I shall walk with the innocence of my heart [even] within my house.
3. I shall not place an evil thing before my eyes; I despise the doing of wayward deeds, it does not cling to me.
4. A perverse heart shall depart from me; I shall not know evil.
5. He who slanders his fellow in secret, him will I cut down; one with haughty eyes and a lustful heart, him I cannot suffer.
6. My eyes are upon the faithful of the land, that they may dwell with me; he who walks in the path of integrity, he shall minister to me.
7. He that practices deceit shall not dwell within my house; the speaker of lies shall have no place before my eyes.
8. Every morning I will cut down all the wicked of the land, to excise all evildoers from the city of the Lord.
Chapter 102
An awe-inspiring prayer for the exiled, and an appropriate prayer for anyone in distress.
1. A prayer of the poor man when he is faint [with affliction], and pours out his tale of woe before the Lord.
2. O Lord, hear my prayer, let my cry reach You!
3. Hide not Your face from me on the day of my distress; turn Your ear to me; on the day that I call, answer me quickly.
4. For my days have vanished with the smoke; my bones are dried up as a hearth.
5. Smitten like grass and withered is my heart, for I have forgotten to eat my bread.
6. From the voice of my sigh, my bone cleaves to my flesh.
7. I am like the bird of the wilderness; like the owl of the wasteland have I become.
8. In haste I fled; I was like a bird, alone on a roof.
9. All day my enemies disgrace me; those who ridicule me curse using my name.1
10. For I have eaten ashes like bread, and mixed my drink with tears,
11. because of Your anger and Your wrath-for You have raised me up, then cast me down.
12. My days are like the fleeting shadow; I wither away like the grass.
13. But You, Lord, will be enthroned forever, and Your remembrance is for all generations.
14. You will arise and have mercy on Zion, for it is time to be gracious to her; the appointed time has come.
15. For Your servants cherish her stones, and love her dust.
16. Then the nations will fear the Name of the Lord, and all the kings of the earth Your glory,
17. when [they see that] the Lord has built Zion, He has appeared in His glory.
18. He turned to the entreaty of the prayerful, and did not despise their prayer.
19. Let this be written for the last generation, so that the newborn nation will praise the Lord.
20. For He looked down from His holy heights; from heaven, the Lord gazed upon the earth,
21. to hear the cry of the bound, to untie those who are doomed to die,
22. so that the Name of the Lord be declared in Zion, and His praise in Jerusalem,
23. when nations and kingdoms will gather together to serve the Lord.
24. He weakened my strength on the way; He shortened my days.
25. I would say: "My God, do not remove me in the midst of my days! You Whose years endure through all generations.”
26. In the beginning You laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands.
27. They will perish, but You will endure; all of them will wear out like a garment; You will exchange them like a robe, and they will vanish.
28. But You remain the same; Your years will not end.
29. The children of Your servants will abide; their seed shall be established before You.
FOOTNOTES
1.When swearing, they would say, “If I am lying, may I become like the miserable Jews” (Metzudot).
Chapter 103
David's prayer when he was ill, this psalm is an appropriate prayer on behalf of the sick, especially when offered by the sick person himself while his soul is yet in his body. He can then bless God from his depths, body and soul. Read, and find repose for your soul.
1. By David. Bless the Lord, O my soul; and all my being, His holy Name.
2. My soul, bless the Lord; forget not all His favors:
3. Who forgives all your sins, Who heals all your illnesses;
4. Who redeems your life from the grave, Who crowns you with kindness and mercy;
5. Who satisfies your mouth with goodness; like the eagle, your youth is renewed.
6. The Lord executes righteousness and justice for all the oppressed.
7. He made His ways known to Moses, His deeds to the Children of Israel.
8. The Lord is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger and of great kindness.
9. He will not contend for eternity, nor harbor ill will forever.
10. He has not dealt with us according to our transgressions, nor requited us according to our sins.
11. For as high as heaven is above the earth, so has His kindness been mighty over those who fear Him.
12. As far as the east is from the west, so has He distanced our transgressions from us.
13. As a father has compassion on his children, so has the Lord had compassion on those who fear Him.
14. For He knows our nature; He is mindful that we are but dust.
15. As for man, his days are like grass; like a flower of the field, so he sprouts.
16. When a wind passes over him, he is gone; his place recognizes him no more.
17. But the kindness of the Lord is forever and ever upon those who fear Him, and His righteousness is [secured] for children's children,
18. to those who keep His covenant, and to those who remember His commands to do them.
19. The Lord has established His throne in the heavens, and His kingship has dominion over all.
20. Bless the Lord, you His angels who are mighty in strength, who do His bidding to obey the voice of His speech.
21. Bless the Lord, all His hosts, His servants who do His will.
22. Bless the Lord, all His works, in all the places of His dominion. My soul, bless the Lord!
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, beginning of Compiler's Foreword
• English Text (Lessons in Tanya)
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
Friday, Kislev 20, 5778 · December 8, 2017
Today's Tanya Lesson
Likutei Amarim, beginning of Compiler's Foreword
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Yehoshua B. Gordon Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Manis Freidman Listen • Download MP3
Compiler’s Foreword
As we have seen from the title page, the Alter Rebbe perceives himself as a mere compiler rather than as an author.
והיא אגרת השלוחה לכללות אנשי שלומינו יצ״ו יברכם צורנו וישמרם
Being a letter sent to all Anash — members of our fellowship, i.e., the chassidim), may [G‑d] our Stronghold bless and guard them.1
אליכם אישים אקרא
To you [worthy] men, do I call.
שמעו אלי רודפי צדק מבקשי ה׳ וישמע אליכם אלקים, למגדול ועד קטן
Listen to me, you who pursue righteousness, who seek G‑d, and may the Almighty listen to you, both great in spiritual stature and small,
כל אנ״ש דמדינתינו וסמוכות שלה
all Anash in our land and in nearby countries:
איש על מקומו יבוא לשלום וחיים עד העולם נצח סלה ועד
may each in his own place achieve peace and eternal life.
אמן, כן יהי רצון
Amen. May this be His Will.
* * *
הנה מודעת זאת כי מרגלא בפומי דאינשי בכל אנ״ש לאמר
It is well known that all Anash are wont to say
כי אינה דומה שמיעת דברי מוסר לראייה וקריאה בספרים
that hearing words of moral guidance from a teacher addressing his student individually and directly is not the same as seeing and reading such guidance in books, which are impersonal and addressed to the reading audience at large.
The spoken word will have far greater effect than the written word, for two reasons. The first:
שהקורא קורא לפי דרכו ודעתו
For the reader, who gains such instruction in books, will read it after his own manner and mind,
ולפי השגת ותפיסת שכלו באשר הוא שם
and will absorb the written message according to his mental grasp and comprehension at that particular time.
ואם שכלו ודעתו מבולבלים, ובחשיכה יתהלכו בעבודת ה׳
Hence, if his intellect and mind are confused and wander about in darkness in ideas pertaining tothe service of G‑d
בקושי יכול לראות את האור כי טוב הגנוז בספרים
he will find it difficult to see the beneficial light hidden in books,
אף כי מתוק האור לעינים ומרפא לנפש
although this light be pleasant to the eyes and therapeutic for the soul.
In the case of personal guidance, on the other hand, the mentor can ensure that his message is understood fully and correctly.
The Alter Rebbe now points out a second disadvantage in written advice. By its very nature its ability to inspire even the understanding reader is restricted to a specific audience. A book does not allow for the subjective differences between one reader’s character and another’s. It will, of necessity, leave some of its readership untouched.
The Alter Rebbe next distinguishes between two categories of inspirational books. In those books belonging to the first category this problem is more obvious and acute; in those of the second category, less so.
The first category embraces those books that argue for pious conduct on grounds of human intellect. These will surely not affect all readers equally; owing to the diversity of mind and temperament among readers, what profoundly inspires one reader, will leave another indifferent.
The second category comprises those works founded on the teachings of our Sages. It would seem at first glance that in such books the problem of subjective differences between readers would be irrelevant. Since they are based on Torah, which is pertinent to every Jew without exception, surely every Jew could be guided and inspired by them.
The Alter Rebbe points out, however, that not every Jew is privileged to find his place in Torah and to derive the instruction applicable to him as an individual. Thus the problem still obtains, though to a lesser degree.
ובר מן דין
Aside from this aforementioned possibility that the reader’s intellectual shortcomings may prevent him from perceiving the light concealed in the holy books, there is yet another difficulty:
הנה ספרי היראה הבנויים על פי שכל אנושי, בודאי אינם שוין לכל נפש
Those books on piety founded on human intelligence surely do not affect all people equally,
כי אין כל השכלים והדעות שוות
for not all intellects and minds are alike,
ואין שכל אדם זה מתפעל ומתעורר ממה שמתפעל ומתעורר שכל חבירו
and the intellect of one man is not affected and aroused by that which affects and arouses the intellect of another.
וכמו שאמרו רז״ל גבי ברכת חכם הרזים על ששים ריבוא מישראל
As our Sages have said, in reference to the blessing of “He who is wise in secrets” ordained by the Sages to be recited on [witnessing a gathering of] 600,000 Jews,2 whereby we praise G‑d’s omniscience in knowing the secrets of them all:
שאין דעותיהם דומות זו לזו וכו׳
“For their minds (i.e., thoughts, opinions and feelings) are all different from one another.”3
וכמו שכתב הרמב״ן ז״ל במלחמות שם בפירוש הספרי גבי יהושע, שנאמר בו: איש אשר רוח בו
So too does Ramban (of blessed memory) [explain the reason for the blessing] in his Milchamot,4 elaborating on the comment of Sifrei on the verse5 describing Joshua as “a man in whom there is spirit”;
שיכול להלוך נגד רוחו של כל אחד ואחד
Sifrei explains “that he was able to meet the spirit of every man.”6
אלא אפילו בספרי היראה אשר יסודותם בהררי קדש
But even those works of mussar whose foundation is in the peaks of holiness, meaning that they are founded
מדרשי חז״ל אשר רוח ה׳ דבר בם ומלתו על לשונם
on the Midrashim of our Sages “in whom the spirit of G‑d speaks, and His word is on their tongues,”7 — even in the case of such works the aforementioned problem obtains.
ואורייתא וקודשא בריך הוא כולא חד
For although “Torah and the Holy One, blessed be He, are one,”8
וכל ששים רבוא נשמות כללות ישראל, ופרטיהם ופרטי פרטיהם
and all 600,000 general souls of Israel, and the individual souls that are their offshoots,9
עד ניצו׳ קל שבקלים ופחותי הערך שבעמינו בני ישראל
down to even the [soul-]spark residing within the most worthless and least estimable members of our people, the Children of Israel,
כולהו מתקשראן באורייתא ואורייתא היא המקשרת אותן להקדוש ברוך הוא
are all bound up with the Torah and the Torah is what binds them to G‑d,
כנודע בזהר הקדוש
as is known from the holy Zohar,10 and since the Torah does contain what is pertinent to every Jew, those works founded on the Torah ought to appeal to every Jewish reader, —
הרי זה דרך כללות לכללות ישראל
yet this is [said] in a general way for the Jewish people as a whole.
This statement of the Zohar speaks of the bond between Jewry in general with the Torah in its entirety. It does not refer to a particular Jew seeking individual instruction in a specific area in the Torah.
ואף שניתנה התורה לידרש בכלל ופרט ופרטי פרטות
It is true that the Torah lends itself to interpretation by the rule of “general principles and specific applications,” and these applications may be further broken down to even more specific details,
לכל נפש פרטית מישראל המושרשת בה
to apply to each individual soul in Israel rooted in the Torah.
Thus the Torah contains not only general instruction for the nation as a whole, but also specific instruction for each individual. Therefore, despite subjective differences between people, every Jew could theoretically find in such works instruction pertinent to his circumstances.
הרי אין כל אדם זוכה להיות מכיר מקומו הפרטי שבתורה
Yet, not every man is privileged to recognize his specific place in the Torah, so that he may know how to derive specific guidance from it.
והנה אף בהלכות איסור והיתר הנגלות לנו ולבנינו
Even in the [Torah-]laws governing things forbidden and permissible which have been11“revealed to us and to our children [equally]“ (for despite the differences between generations, the law applies equally to all, complete objectivity prevailing), —
מצאנו ראינו מחלוקת תנאים ואמוראים מן הקצה אל הקצה ממש
even in these laws we witness arguments from one extreme to the other between tannaim and amoraim, with one tanna, for instance, declaring perfectly permissible that which another tanna rules absolutely forbidden.
ואלו ואלו דברי אלקים חיים
Yet12 “these as well as those are the words of the living G‑d.“
לשון רבים
In this phrase the words “living G‑d” appear in the plural form13
על שם מקור החיים לנשמות ישראל
because [the diversity of opinions in the Halachah stems from plurality in] the source of life of the souls of Israel — within the “living G‑d” (i.e., within G‑d as He is the source of life).
הנחלקות דרך כלל לשלשה קוין: ימין, ושמאל, ואמצע, שהם חסד וגבורה וכו׳
The souls, and hence also their source, so to speak, are divided into three general categories: right, left and center, representing kindness (Chesed), severity (Gevurah)... [and beauty (Tiferet)-.
ונשמות ששרשן ממדת חסד הנהגתן גם כן להטות כלפי חסד להקל כו׳ כנודע
Those souls which are rooted in the attribute of kindness tend to be lenient in their halachic decisions, being inclined toward kindness, which dictates that the object be declared permissible and thus capable of being sanctified if used for a sacred purpose, and so on, with the attribute of severity dictating stringency in halachic decisions, and the attribute of beauty mediating, as is known.
In his Iggeret HaKodesh, the Alter Rebbe applies this principle to the legal arguments between the Schools of Shammai and Hillel. The School of Shammai was usually stringent, because their spiritual source was the attribute of severity; the school of Hillel usually lenient because of their source in the attribute of kindness. In certain decisions, however, their positions were reversed. For the realm of holiness is governed by the principle of mutual incorporation (התכללות), with kindness containing elements of severity and vice versa.
Now if one’s individual spiritual tendencies affect the way he views the Torah even in the area of the Halachah, which is intrinsically objective,
וכל שכן וקל וחומר בהנסתרות לה׳ אלקינו
surely, how much more so, will subjective differences play a role in “matters hidden to G‑d Almighty,”
דאינון דחילו ורחימו
namely, to one’s awe and love of G‑d, which are subjective by their very nature, for they express themselves
דבמוחא ולבא דכל חד וחד לפום שיעורא דיליה
in the mind and heart of each person according to his own measure (his שעור ),
לפום מה דמשער בלביה
according to his heart’s estimation (השערה), and according to the “gate” (שער) that he makes in his heart, to permit his intellectual understanding (of G‑dliness) to pervade his heart and generate within him a love and awe of G‑d,
כמו שכתוב בזהר הקדוש על פסוק: נודע בשערים בעלה וגו׳
The Zohar interprets the “husband” of this verse as a reference to G‑d, Who is the “husband” of the community of Israel. We “know” and attach ourselves to Him “by the she‘arim,” which the Zohar interprets in the sense of shaar (“gate”), shiur (“measure”), and hash’arah (“estimation”), as explained above. At any rate, we see that being inspired in the love and fear of G‑d is intrinsically subjective. To return to the thread of our earlier argument: If even in the objective halachah we find differences of opinion arising from the variety in human nature, we will surely find a variety of response to inspirational literature. The chassidic saying quoted above, that “seeing” (in books — even Torah books) “is not the same as hearing” (inspiration from a teacher), seems quite justified. How then could the Alter Rebbe now propose to offer the Tanya to his followers as a substitute for the personal guidance that he had been giving them until this time
In answer the Alter Rebbe states that the Tanya is addressed to his chassidim, with whom he has a long-standing relationship, and whose specific needs for guidance are known to him from their personal audiences with him. They will therefore find the advice provided in the Tanya relevant to their individual needs.
Chassidim would add that this includes all those who study the Tanya: the Alter Rebbe knew them all and addressed himself to each one’s needs in the service of G‑d, as though they had spoken to him in private audience. As the Rebbe Rashab phrased it,16 “To study the Tanya is to converse with the Alter Rebbe.”
* * *
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | The abbreviation may also represent: “May our Stronghold and Redeemer preserve them,” or some similar expression. Compare the phrase (in the morning prayer): “Stronghold of Israel, arise to the aid of Israel...” It is possible that the Alter Rebbe wrote the words in abbreviation to allow for a variety of interpretations of the blessing. (— Comment of the Rebbe) |
| 2. | The reading in the text is ששים ריבוא — “sixty ten-thousands,” corresponding to the number of adult male Israelites in the Exodus from Egypt (Shmot 12:37; Bamidbar 11:21). |
| 3. | Berachot 58a. |
| 4. | Commenting on Alfasi’s omission of this passage in the Gemara. |
| 5. | Bamidbar 27:18. |
| 6. | Rashi, too (ibid.), cites the interpretation that “he could meet the spirit of every man,” yet the Alter Rebbe quotes it from Ramban. This may be because Ramban suggests the possibility that a great sage may be the equivalent of, and incorporate within himself, the minds of 600,000. (Ramban accordingly explains why, as the Gemara relates, Rabbi Chananya the son of Rabbi Icka recited the blessing of “he who is wise in secrets” when he met Rav Papa and Rav Huna the son of Rabbi Yehoshua.) However, recognizing such a sage requires a discerning mind on the part of the observer, and for this reason Ramban rules in practice that one should recite the blessing only when he actually sees 600,000 people. We see from Ramban, at any rate, that the alternative possibility theoretically exists. The chassidim, who “know” and “recognize” the Alter Rebbe (as he says of them later), know him to be such a sage “who can meet the spirit of every man”; for inasmuch as his was a “comprehensive soul” (נשמה כללית), he contained within himself the spirit of every one of them. |
| 7. | Paraphrase of II Shmuel 23:2. |
| 8. | Cf. Zohar I, 24a; II 60a. |
| 9. | See Tanya, ch. 37. |
| 10. | III, p. 73b. |
| 11. | Based on the verse (Devarim 29:28): “The hidden things are for G‑d Almighty, and the revealed things are for us and our children....” |
| 12. | Eruvin 13b. |
| 13. | אלקים חיים, rather than אלקה חי. |
| 14. | P. 103a, b. |
| 15. | Mishlei 31:23. |
| 16. | Torat Shalom p. 56. |
• Sefer Hamitzvot:
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassFriday, Kislev 20, 5778 · December 8, 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 355
Out of Wedlock Intimacy
"There shall be no indecent women among the daughters of Israel"—Deuteronomy 23:18.
It is forbidden for a man and woman to be intimate unless married to each other.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Out of Wedlock Intimacy
Negative Commandment 355
Translated by Berel Bell
The 355th prohibition is that we are forbidden from having relations with a woman without [giving her] a Kesubah and acquiring her (kiddushin).
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "There may not be any prostitutes among Jewish girls."
This same commandment is repeated, but using a different expression, in G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "Do not defile your daughter with premarital relations." The Sifra says, " 'Do not defile your daughter' — this command is directed towards a man who hands over his unmarried daughter for sexual relations without marriage, as well as a girl who herself has sexual relations without marriage."
Now listen as I explain why the prohibition is repeated with this wording,3 and what the repetition adds. G‑d (exalted be He) has already instructed us in the Torah that a man who has relations with a virgin incurs none of the punishments4, regardless of whether he seduced or raped her. Rather, he must pay a monetary fine and marry the girl that he harmed, as explained in the Torah.5
Accordingly, a person might think that since the offender is only required to pay a fine, therefore this is looked upon as a purely financial case. Therefore, just as a person, if he wishes, is allowed to give away his money to another person, or to forgive a debt, so too, [he might think,] he may take his unmarried daughter and give her to a man to have relations with her. This would be like forgiving a debt due to him, since the 50 silver [shekels which the seducer or rapist must pay] go to the father. Alternatively, a person might think that [since this is purely a financial matter,] he may give his daughter on condition that the man pays a certain amount of money.
Therefore, the Torah prohibited this and said, "Do not defile your daughter with premarital relations." The monetary fine only refers to a case where the seduction or rape actually occurred. But it is still completely forbidden for them to engage in sexual relations, even when they both agree.
The Torah also reveals the reason for this prohibition: ["Do not defile your daughter with premarital relations,] and you will then not make the land sexually immoral, and the land [will not] be filled with perversion." The explanation of this: seduction and rape occur very rarely, but if the Torah allowed premarital relations when both parties agree, it would occur often and become widespread throughout the world.
This is a fine and wondrous explanation of this verse, and fits all the sayings of our Sages and laws of the Torah.
This prohibition, i.e. the prohibition of [having relations with] an unmarried woman, is punishable by lashes.
The details of this mitzvah are explained in Kesubos and Kiddushin.
FOOTNOTES
1.Deut. 23:18.
2.Lev. 19:29.
3.Directed to the father, unlike the other verse, which is phrased as a general prohibition.
4.. Such as lashes or execution.
5.Ex. 22:15. Deut. 22:28. See P220, P218.
Rambam:
• 1 Chapter A Day: Tefilah and Birkat Kohanim Tefilah and Birkat Kohanim - Chapter Eleven
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassTefilah and Birkat Kohanim - Chapter Eleven
1
Wherever ten Jews live, it is necessary to establish a place for them to congregate for prayer at the time of each prayer service.
This place is called a Beit K'nesset. The inhabitants of a city can compel each other to construct a synagogue and to purchase scrolls containing the Torah, the Prophets, and the Sacred Writings.
א
כל מקום שיש בו עשרה מישראל צריך להכין לו בית שיכנסו בו לתפלה בכל עת תפלה ומקום זה נקרא בה"כ וכופין בני העיר זה את זה לבנות להם בה"כ ולקנות להם ספר תורה נביאים וכתובים:
Commentary on Halachah 1
2
When a synagogue is built, it should be built only at the highest point of the city [as implied by Proverbs 1:21]: "She cries at the head of the public places." It should be built [so that] its height exceeds [that of] all the other buildings in the city [as implied by Ezra 9:9]: "to lift up the house of our God."
The entrance to the synagogue should open only on the east [as implied by Numbers 3:38]: "...And those who camped before the sanctuary on the east."
In [the synagogue], a heichal, where the Torah scroll is placed, should be constructed. The heichal should be constructed in the direction to which the people pray in that city, so that they will face the heichal when they stand to pray.
ב
כשבונין בית הכנסת אין בונין אותה אלא בגבהה של עיר שנאמר בראש הומיות תקרא ומגביהין אותה עד שתהא גבוהה מכל חצרות העיר שנאמר ולרומם את בית אלהינו ואין פותחין פתחי הכנסת אלא במזרח שנאמר והחונים לפני המשכן קדמה ובונין בו היכל שמניחין בו ספר תורה ובונין היכל זה ברוח שמתפללין כנגדו באותה העיר כדי שיהיו פניהם אל מול ההיכל כשיעמדו לתפלה:
Commentary on Halachah 2
3
A platform is placed in the center of the hall, so that the one who reads the Torah or one who gives a sermon can stand on it, so that all the others will hear him.
When one positions the tevah which contains the Torah scroll, one should position it in the center of the hall, in the direction of the heichal and facing the people.
ג
ומעמידין בימה באמצע הבית כדי שיעלה עליה הקורא בתורה או מי אשר אומר לעם דברי כבושין כדי שישמעו כולם וכשמעמידין התיבה שיש בה ספר תורה מעמידין אותה באמצע ואחורי התיבה כלפי ההיכל ופניה כלפי העם:
Commentary on Halachah 3
4
How do the people sit in the synagogue? The elders sit facing the people with their backs toward the heichal. All the people sit row after row, each row facing the back of the row before it. Thus, all the people face the sanctuary, the elders, and the tevah.
When the leader of the congregation stands to pray, he stands on the ground, before the tevah, facing the sanctuary like the others.
ד
כיצד העם יושבין בבתי כנסיות הזקנים יושבין ופניהן כלפי העם ואחוריהם כלפי ההיכל וכל העם יושבין שורה לפני שורה ופני השורה לאחורי השורה שלפניה עד שיהיו פני כל העם כלפי הקודש וכלפי הזקנים וכלפי התיבה ובעת ששליח ציבור עומד לתפלה עומד בארץ לפני התיבה ופניו לפני הקדש כשאר העם:
Commentary on Halachah 4
5
Synagogues and houses of study should be treated with respect. They should be swept clean and mopped.
All the Jews in Spain, the west, Babylonia, and Eretz Yisrael, are accustomed to light lamps in the synagogue and spread mats over the floor to sit on. In European communities, they sit on chairs.
ה
בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות נוהגין בהן כבוד ומכבדים אותן ומרביצין אותן ונוהגין כל ישראל בספרד ובמערב בשנער ובארץ הצבי להדליק עששיות בבתי כנסיות ולהציע בקרקען מחצלאות כדי לישב עליהם ובערי אדום יושבין בה על הכסאות:
Commentary on Halachah 5
6
No lightheadedness - i.e., jests, frivolity, and idle conversation - should be seen in a synagogue. We may not eat or drink inside [a synagogue], nor use [a synagogue] for our benefit, nor stroll inside one.
On a sunny [day], one should not enter [a synagogue to seek shade] from the sun, and on a rainy [day], [one should not enter a synagogue to seek shelter] from the rain. [However,] the sages and their students are permitted to eat and drink in a synagogue because of the difficulty [observing the prohibition would cause them].
ו
בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות אין נוהגין בהן קלות ראש כגון שחוק והיתול ושיחה בטלה ואין אוכלין בהן ואין שותין בהן ואין ניאותין בהן ואין מטיילין בהן ואין נכנסין בהן בחמה מפני החמה ובגשמים מפני הגשמים וחכמים ותלמידיהם מותרין לאכול ולשתות בהן מדוחק:
Commentary on Halachah 6
7
It is forbidden to calculate accounts in [a synagogue], unless the accounts are connected with a mitzvah: for example, the collection of charity, the redemption of captives, or the like.
[Similarly,] eulogies should not be recited inside them, except a eulogy that involves many [of the inhabitants of the city]; for example, [if] there were a eulogy of the great sages of that city for which all the people would gather together and come.
ז
ואין מחשבין בהן חשבונות אא"כ היו חשבונות של מצוה כגון קופה של צדקה ופדיון שבויים וכיוצא בהן ואין מספידין בהן אלא הספד של רבים כגון שיהיה שם הספד גדולי חכמי אותה העיר שכל העם מתקבצין ובאין בגללן:
Commentary on Halachah 7
8
If a synagogue or a house of study has two entrances, one should not use it for a shortcut, i.e., to enter through one entrance and leave through the other to reduce [the distance one] travels, because it is forbidden to enter [these buildings] except for a mitzvah.
ח
היה לבית הכנסת או לבית המדרש שני פתחין לא יעשנו קפנדריא כדי שיכנס בפתח זה ויצא בפתח שכנגדו לקרב הדרך שאסור ליכנס בהן אלא לדבר מצוה:
Commentary on Halachah 8
9
A person who has to enter a synagogue to call a child or his friend should enter and read [a portion of the written law] or relate a teaching [of the oral law] and then call his friend, so that he will not have entered [a synagogue] for his personal reasons alone.
If he does not know [how to study], he should ask one of the children [to] tell him the verse he is studying or, [at the very least,] wait a while in the synagogue and then leave, since spending time [in the synagogue] is one of the aspects of the mitzvah as implied by [Psalms 84:5]: "Happy are those who dwell in Your house."
ט
מי שצריך ליכנס לבית הכנסת לקרות תינוק או חבירו יכנס ויקרא מעט או יאמר שמועה ואחר כך יקרא חבירו כדי שלא יכנס בשביל חפציו בלבד ואם אינו יודע יאמר לתינוק מן התינוקות קרא לי הפסוק שאתה קורא בו או ישהה מעט בבית הכנסת ואח"כ יצא שהישיבה שם מעסקי המצות היא שנאמר אשרי יושבי ביתך וגו':
Commentary on Halachah 9
10
A person who enters [a synagogue] to pray or to study is permitted to leave by the opposite door to shorten his way.
A person is permitted to enter a synagogue [holding] his staff, [wearing] his shoes, wearing [only] lower garments, or with dust on his feet. If it is necessary for him to spit, he may spit in the synagogue.
י
מי שנכנס להתפלל או לקרות מותר לו לצאת בפתח שכנגדו כדי לקרב את הדרך ומותר לאדם ליכנס לבית הכנסת במקלו במנעלו ובאפונדתו ובאבק שעל רגליו ואם היה צריך לרוק ירוק בבית הכנסת:
Commentary on Halachah 10
11
Synagogues and houses of study that have been destroyed remain holy [as can be inferred from Leviticus 26:31]: "I will destroy your sanctuaries." [Our Sages explained]: Even though they are destroyed, they remain holy.
Just as one must treat them with respect while they are standing, so must they be treated [with respect] when they are destroyed with the exception of sweeping and mopping them. [When destroyed], they need not be swept or mopped.
If grass grows in them, it should be pulled out and left there so that it will be seen by the people [in the hope that] it will rouse their spirits and rebuild them.
יא
בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות שחרבו בקדושתן הן עומדות שנאמר והשימותי את מקדשיכם אף על פי שהן שוממין בקדושתן הן עומדין וכשם שנוהגין בהן כבוד ביישובן כך נוהגין בהן בחורבנם חוץ מכיבוד וריבוץ שאין מכבדין אותן ואין מרביצין אותן עלו בהן עשבים תולשין אותם ומניחין אותן במקומן כדי שיראו אותן העם ותעור רוחם ויבנום:
Commentary on Halachah 11
12
One should not tear down a synagogue in order to build another in its place or in another place. Instead, one should build the [new synagogue] and then, one [may] tear down the [previous] one lest unforeseen difficulties arise [which prevent it] from being built.
This applies even to a single wall of [a synagogue]. One should build the new wall next to the old wall and then, tear down the old wall.
יב
אין סותרין בית הכנסת כדי לבנות אחר במקומו או במקום אחר אבל בונין אחר ואחר כך סותרין זה שמא יארע להם אונס ולא יבנו אפילו כותל אחד ממנו בונה החדש בצד הישן ואח"כ סותר הישן:
Commentary on Halachah 12
13
When does the above apply? When its foundations are not ruined or its walls are not leaning perilously. However, if its foundation is destroyed or its walls are leaning perilously, it should be destroyed immediately and [then, efforts to] rebuild it should be begun immediately throughout the day and night lest times become difficult and it remain destroyed.
יג
בד"א שלא חרבו יסודותיו או שלא נטו כתליו ליפול אבל אם חרבו יסודותיו או שנטו כתליו ליפול סותרין אותו מיד ומתחילין לבנות במהרה ביום ובלילה שמא תדחק השעה וישאר חרב:
Commentary on Halachah 13
14
It is permitted to transform a synagogue into a house of study. However, it is forbidden to transform a house of study into a synagogue because the sanctity of a house of study exceeds that of a synagogue and one must proceed to a higher rung of holiness, but not descend to a lower rung.
Similarly, the inhabitants of a city who sold a synagogue may purchase an ark with the proceeds. If they sold an ark, they may purchase a mantle or a case for a Torah scroll with the proceeds. If they sold a mantle or a case, they may buy chumashim with the proceeds. If they sold chumashim, they may buy a Torah scroll with the proceeds. If they sold a Torah scroll, the proceeds may only be used to purchase another Torah scroll, for there is no level of holiness above that of a Torah scroll.
The same [laws apply] to [any money] which remains.
יד
מותר לעשות בית הכנסת בית המדרש אבל בית המדרש אסור לעשותו בית הכנסת שקדושת בית המדרש יתירה על קדושת בית הכנסת ומעלין בקדש ולא מורידין וכן בני העיר שמכרו בית הכנסת יש להן ליקח בדמיו תיבה מכרו תיבה יש להן ליקח בדמיה מטפחות או תיק לספר תורה מכרו מטפחות או תיק לוקחים בדמיו חומשים מכרו חומשין לוקחין בדמיו ספר תורה אבל אם מכרו ספר תורה אין לוקחין בדמיו אלא ספר תורה אחר שאין שם קדושה למעלה מקדושת ספר תורה וכן במותריה:
Commentary on Halachah 14
15
Similar [principles apply] if a congregation collected money to build a house of study or a synagogue or to purchase an ark, a mantle or a case [for a Torah scroll], or a Torah scroll, and desired to change [the purpose for which] all the [funds] had been [originally] collected.
It is forbidden to change [the purpose for which the funds will be used] except from a matter of lesser sanctity to one of greater sanctity. However, if [the congregation] accomplished the purpose for which they had [originally] collected [the funds], they may use the remainder for whatever they desire.
All the components of a synagogue are considered like the synagogue itself. The curtain hanging before the ark is considered like the mantle of a Torah scroll. If a condition was made concerning them, the terms of the condition are binding.
טו
וכן אם גבו העם מעות לבנות בית המדרש או לבית הכנסת או לקנות תיבה או מטפחות ותיק או ספר תורה ורצו לשנות כל מה שגבו אין משנין אותן אלא מקדושה קלה לקדושה חמורה ממנה אבל אם עשו מה שגבו לעשות והותירו משנין המותר לכל מה שירצו וכל כלי בית הכנסת כבית הכנסת פרוכת שעל הארון שמניחים בו הספרים כמטפחות הספרים ואם התנו עליהם הרי הן כפי התנאי:
Commentary on Halachah 15
16
When do the above statements permitting the sale of a synagogue apply? In regard to a synagogue in a village. Since it was constructed for the sake of the inhabitants of that village alone, so that they can pray inside it, they are permitted to sell it if they all desire to do so.
In contrast, a synagogue in a metropolis, since it was constructed for the sake of all the people in the world, [i.e.,] so that anyone who comes to that country can come and pray in it, it is considered as [the property] of [the entire] Jewish people and it can never be sold.
טז
במה דברים אמורים שמותר למכור בית הכנסת בבית הכנסת של כפרים שלא עשו אותו אלא על דעת בני הכפר לבדם שיהיה להם להתפלל בו שאם רצו כולם למוכרו מותרין אבל בית הכנסת של כרכין הואיל ועל דעת כל אנשי העולם נעשה שיבוא ויתפלל בו כל הבא אל המדינה נעשה של כל ישראל ואין מוכרין אותו לעולם:
Commentary on Halachah 16
17
The inhabitants of a village who desire to sell their synagogue in order to build another synagogue with the money, or to buy an ark or Torah scroll with the money, must establish as a condition [of the sale] that the purchaser not use the building for a bathhouse, a leatherworks, a mikveh, or a laundry.
If, at the time of the sale, the seven officials of the community made a condition in the presence of the entire community that the purchaser be allowed to use the building for the above purposes, he may.
יז
בני הכפר שרצו למכור בית הכנסת שלהן או לבנות בדמיו בית הכנסת אחר או לקנות בדמיו תיבה או ספר תורה צריכין להתנות על הלוקח שלא לעשות אותו לא מרחץ ולא בורסקי והוא המקום שמעבדין בו את העורות ולא בית הטבילה ולא בית המים ואם התנו שבעה טובי העיר במעמד אנשי העיר בשעת מכירה שיהא הלוקח מותר לעשות בו כל אלו מותר:
Commentary on Halachah 17
18
Similarly, if the seven officials of the community made a condition in the presence of the entire community that [after the community accomplished the purpose for which they sold the synagogue], the remainder of the funds could be used for mundane purposes, they may be used for such purposes. Thus, after the money has been used for building another synagogue, for purchasing an ark, a mantle or case [for a Torah scroll], chumashim, or a Torah scroll, the remainder may be used for mundane purposes in accordance with their condition, and may be used for whatever they please.
יח
וכן אם התנו שבעה טובי העיר במעמד אנשי העיר על מותר הדמים שיהיו חולין הרי הן חולין וכשלוקחין הדמים ובונין מהן בית הכנסת אחר או שיקנו מהם תיבה או מטפחות ותיק או חומשין או ספר תורה השאר יהא חולין כמו שהתנו ויעשו בהן מה שירצו:
Commentary on Halachah 18
19
Similarly, if all the inhabitants of a city - or a majority of them - accept [the authority of] a single individual, whatever actions he takes [in regard to a synagogue] are binding. He may sell [the synagogue] or give [it as a gift] alone, as he sees fit, and establish whatever conditions he desires.
יט
וכן אם קבלו עליהן כל אנשי העיר או רובם אדם אחד כל מה שעשה עשוי והוא מוכר ונותן לבדו כפי מה שיראה ויתנה כפי מה שיראה:
Commentary on Halachah 19
20
Just as it is permitted to sell a synagogue, it is permitted to give it away as a present. If the community had not received any benefit from giving it as a gift, it would not have given it. However, it cannot be rented or given as security.
Similarly, when a synagogue is being torn down so that it can be rebuilt, it is permitted to sell the bricks, timber, and soil, exchange them, or give them as gifts. However, it is forbidden to lend them, since their sanctity only departs in return for money or benefit which is equivalent to money.
כ
כשם שמותר להם למכור בית הכנסת כך נותנין אותו במתנה שאילו לא היה להם לציבור הנייה במתנה זו לא נתנוהו אבל לא משכירין אותו ולא ממשכנין אותו וכן כשסותרין בתי כנסיות לבנותן מותרין למכור ולהחליף ולתת במתנה הלבנים והעצים והעפר שלהן אבל להלוותן אסור שאין הקדושה עולה מהן אלא בדמים או בהנייה שהיא כדמים:
Commentary on Halachah 20
21
Although the people pray in a city's main street on fast days and ma'amadot, because too many people gather to fit within a synagogue, [the street] does not possess any quality of sanctity, because [praying there is only a temporary measure] and it is not established as a place of prayer.
Similarly, buildings and courtyards where people gather to pray do not possess any measure of sanctity, because they were not designated for prayer alone. Rather, [people] pray within them as a temporary measure, as a person prays within his home.
כא
רחובה של עיר אע"פ שהעם מתפללין בו בתעניות ובמעמדות מפני שהקיבוץ רב ואין בתי כנסיות מכילין אותן אין בו קדושה מפני שהוא עראי ולא נקבע לתפלה וכן בתים וחצרות שהעם מתקבצין בהם לתפלה אין בהם קדושה מפני שלא קבעו אותם לתפלה בלבד אלא עראי מתפללים בהן כאדם שמתפלל בתוך ביתו:
Commentary on Halachah 21
Rambam:
• 3 Chapters A Day: Ishut Ishut - Chapter Eleven, Ishut Ishut - Chapter Twelve, Ishut Ishut - Chapter Thirteen
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassIshut - Chapter Eleven
1
[The following laws apply when a man] weds a virgin who was widowed or divorced or who underwent the rite of chalitzah.1If she was widowed or divorced or underwent the rite of chalitzah after erusin alone, the ketubah [to which she is entitled from her second husband] is 200 zuz. If, however, she had been wed, the ketubah [to which she is entitled from her second husband] is 100 zuz. Once she is wed, she is considered to be a non-virgin.2
Similar [rules apply when a man] weds a virgin [bride] who is [a Canaanite maidservant] who has been freed, who is a convert, or who was held captive [by gentiles and freed]. If the maidservant had been freed, the convert had converted, or the women held captive had been redeemed before they reached the age of three years and one day,3 they are entitled to a ketubah of 200 zuz. If [this took place after they reached that age, their ketubah is [only] 100 [zuz].
א
הנושא בתולה שנתאלמנה או שנתגרשה או נחלצה. אם מן האירוסין נתאלמנה או נתגרשה או נחלצה כתובתה מאתים. ואם מן הנישואין כתובתה מאה. שמשנשאת הרי היא כבעולה. וכן הנושא בתולה משוחררת או גיורת או שבויה אם נשתחררה השפחה ונתגיירה הכותית ונפדית השבויה והן פחותות מבת ג' שנים ויום אחד כתובתן מאתים. ואם היו בנות ג' שנים ויום אחד ומעלה כתובתן מאה:
2
Why did our Sages ordain that these women receive a ketubah of [only] 100 [zuz] even though they are virgins? Because it is a presumption that can be accepted as fact that a woman who is wed will engage in marital relations, and similarly, that a maidservant, a gentile woman and a woman held captive by gentiles will have engaged in relations. Hence, they ordained that such women would be entitled to [only] 100 [zuz],whether they engaged in relations or not. With regard to all matters, they are considered to be non-virgins.
ב
ומפני מה תיקנו חכמים לאלו כתובה מאה ואף ע"פ שהן בתולות הואיל וחזקת הנשואה שתבעל וחזקת השפחה והכותית והשבויה שתבעל תיקנו לאלו מאה בין נבעלו בין לא נבעלו והרי הן כבעולות לכל דבר:
3
A mukat etz4 [is granted] a ketubah of 100 [zuz]. Even if [her husband] wed her under the presumption that she was a virgin and then he discovered that she was a mukat etz, she is entitled to a ketubah of 100 [zuz].5
When a girl of less than three years of age engages in sexual relations, even when her partner is an adult male, she [is entitled to] a ketubah of 200 [zuz]. Ultimately, she will heal and be a virgin like all others.
Similarly, when a boy below the age of nine engages in sexual relations with an adult woman, she [is entitled to] a ketubah of 200 [zuz], as if she had never engaged in relations.6 For it is only after a boy reaches the age of nine years and one day that relations with him are of consequence. Before that age, they are of no consequence.
ג
מוכת עץ כתובתה מאה אפילו נשאת על מנת שהיא בתולה שלימה ונמצאת מוכת עץ כתובתה מאה. קטנה מבת ג' שנים ולמטה שנבעלה אפילו בא עליה אדם גדול כתובתה מאתים סופה שתחזור בתולה כשאר הבתולות. וכן גדולה שבא עליה קטן מבן ט' שנים ולמטה כתובתה מאתים כאילו לא נבעלה כלל שביאת בן תשע שנים ויום אחד ביאתו ביאה פחות מזה אין ביאתו ביאה:
4
Whether a virgin is a bogeret,7, blind,8 or an aylonit,9 she [is entitled to] a ketubah of 200 [zuz]. By contrast, no provision was made for a ketubah for a woman who is a deaf mute or mentally incompetent. [The rationale is] that no provision has been made for the marriage of a mentally incompetent woman at all.
With regard to a woman who is a deaf mute, although our Sages made provision for her marriage, they did not entitle her to a ketubah, so that a man would not refrain from marrying her. Just as she is not entitled to a ketubah, so too, [her husband] is not [obligated to provide] her with her livelihood or grant her any other [of the ordinary] conditions of the marriage contract.
If one wed a woman who was a deaf mute and her difficulty was remedied, she is entitled to a ketubah and to the other conditions of the marriage contract. [The amount of] her ketubah is 100 zuz.10
ד
בתולה שהיא בוגרת או סומא או אילונית כתובתן מאתים. אבל החרשת והשוטה לא תיקנו להן כתובה. השוטה לא תיקנו לה נישואין כלל. והחרשת אע"פ שיש לה נישואין מדבריהם לא תיקנו לה כתובה כדי שלא ימנעו מלשאת אותה. וכשם שאין לה כתובה כך אין לה מזונות ולא תנאי מתנאי כתובה. ואם כנס החרשת ונתפקחה יש לה כתובה ותנאי כתובה וכתובתה מאה:
5
When a man marries a woman who is a deaf mute or mentally incompetent and writes her a ketubah for 10,000 [zuz], the obligation is binding; it was he who desired to diminish his assets.
ה
נשא חרשת או שוטה וכתב להן מאה מנה כתובתן קיימת מפני שרצה להזיק נכסיו:
6
[The following rules apply when] a deaf mute or a mentally incompetent man married a woman who was mentally competent. Even if afterwards the deaf mute's disability disappears and the mentally incompetent person gains stability, they are under no obligation to their wives. If, however, [the men] desire to remain [married] to [the women] after their own wellbeing has been restored, [the wives] are entitled to a ketubah, and its value should be 100 zuz.
If the deaf mute's marriage was made by the court, and they write [his wife] a ketubah against his assets, she is entitled to everything that the court has prescribed for her. A court will not arrange a marriage for a mentally incompetent person at all. Since the sages' injunction will not be maintained in his instance,11 they did not ordain marriage for him at all.
Similarly, our Sages did not ordain marriage for a male below the age of majority; [the rationale is that] ultimately he will gain the potential to enter into a comprehensive marriage bond.
Why then did they ordain marriage for a girl below the age of majority12 although she too will ultimately gain the potential for a comprehensive marriage bond? So that she will not be treated in a wanton manner.13
A youth should not be [allowed to] marry until he has been examined, and it has been determined that he has manifested signs of physical maturity.
ו
חרש או שוטה שנשאו נשים פקחות אעפ"י שנתפקח החרש ונשתפה השוטה אין לנשיהם עליהם כלום. רצו לקיימן אחר שהבריאו יש להן כתובה וכתובתן מאה. ואם בית דין הם שהשיאו החרש וכתבו לה כתובתה על נכסיו נוטלת כל מה שכתבו לה בית דין. אבל השוטה אין בית דין משיאין אותו בכל מקום. ומפני שאין תקנת חכמים עומדת בו לא תיקנו לו נישואין. וכן הקטן לא תיקנו לו חכמים נישואין הואיל וסופו לבוא לידי נישואין גמורין. ומפני מה תיקנו נישואין לקטנה ואע"פ שהיא באה לידי נישואין גמורין. כדי שלא ינהגו בה מנהג הפקר. ואין משיאין את הקטן עד שבודקין אותו ויודעים שהביא סימנין:
7
When a male below the age of majority marries a woman, she is not entitled to a ketubah, even if he is already nine years and one day old. If he attains majority and remains [married] to her, she is entitled to the fundamental requirement of the ketubah.14
Similarly, when a man converts together with his wife, she is entitled to a ketubah [of 100 zuz]. It was with this intent that he maintained their marriage.15
ז
קטן אפילו בן ט' שנים ויום אחד שנשא אשה אין לה כתובה. ואם הגדיל וקיימה אחר שהגדיל יש לה עיקר כתובה. וכן גר שנתגייר הוא ואשתו כתובתה מנה שע"מ כן קיימה:
8
Whenever a virgin bride is entitled to a ketubah of 200 [zuz], there is [the possibility of issuing] a claim against her, [denying] her virginity. Whenever, by contrast, a bride is entitled to a ketubah of [only] 100 [zuz],16 or the Sages did not entitle her to a ketubah at all,17 there is no [possibility of issuing] a claim against her [denying] her virginity. [Similarly,] if [a groom] enters into privacy with his arusah before their wedding, there is no [possibility of issuing] a claim against her [denying] her virginity.18
ח
כל בתולה שכתובתה מאתים יש לה טענת בתולים. וכל שכתובתה מאה או שלא תיקנו לה חכמים כתובה אין לה טענת בתולים. והמתייחד עם ארוסתו קודם נישואין אין לה טענת בתולים:
9
What is meant by a claim [denying a woman's] virginity? [A man] married a woman on the assumption that she was a virgin, and [after the wedding] claims that he did not find signs of virginity. For there are two signs of virginity: a) [hymenal] bleeding at the conclusion of her first sexual experience; b) tightness that is felt during sexual relations at that time.19
ט
ומה היא טענת בתולים. זה שנשא אשה שחזקתה שהיא בתולה וטוען ואומר לא מצאתיה בתולה. ושני סימנין הן לבתולה. האחד דמים ששותתין ממנה בסוף ביאה ראשונה. והשני הדוחק שימצא בה בביאה ראשונה בשעת תשמיש:
10
When [a man] weds a virgin who is granted a ketubah of 200 [zuz], and claims that he did not discover signs of her virginity, the woman is questioned [regarding the matter]. If she says, "It is true that he did not find me a virgin, but this is because I fell, and I was struck by a piece of wood or the ground, and my hymen was damaged," her word is accepted and she is entitled to a ketubah of [100 zuz].20
Although [her husband] claims: "Perhaps you engaged in intercourse, and I am under no obligation to you,"21 his claim is not accepted, for his claim is not absolute.22 He may, however, have a ban of ostracism issued, conditional on her having engaged in relations with another man.
י
הנושא את הבתולה שכתובתה מאתים וטען ואמר לא מצאתיה בתולה. שואלין אותה אם אמרה אמת הוא לא מצאני בתולה מפני שנפלתי והכני עץ או קרקע והלכו בתולי הרי זו נאמנת ותחזור כתובתה למנה. אע"פ שהוא טוען ואומר שמא איש בא עליך ואין לך כלום אין משגיחין בטענתו. ויש לו להחרים סתם שלא בא עליה איש שאין הדבר ודאי לו:
11
If [the woman] says, "It is true that he did not find me a virgin, for another man raped me after I had been consecrated by him," her word is accepted, and she is entitled to a ketubah of 200 [zuz] as before.23
If [her husband] claims: "Perhaps you were raped before you were consecrated, and the agreement I entered was based on false premises. Or perhaps you willingly engaged in relations after you were consecrated" [his claim is not accepted]. He may, however, have a ban of ostracism issued conditionally against anyone who makes a false claim to have him incur a financial obligation for which he is not liable.
יא
אמרה היא אמת אמר שלא מצאני בתולה ואיש בא עלי באונס אחר שנתארסתי לו. הרי זו נאמנת וכתובתה מאתים כמו שהיתה. ואם טען ואמר שמא עד שלא ארסתיך נאנסת ומקחי מקח טעות או אחר שארסתיך נבעלת ברצונך. הרי זה מחרים סתם על מי שטוען שקר כדי לחייבני ממון שאיני חייב בו:
12
If he claims, "I did not find her a virgin," and she claims, "He has not had intercourse with me and I am still a virgin," she should be examined. Alternatively, he should have relations with her under the surveillance of witnesses [and the truth will be clarified].24
If she claims, "He had relations with me and he found me a virgin like all others, and his claim is false," he is questioned [and asked to clarify his statements]. We ask him: "Why do you say that she was not a virgin?" If he answers: "Because she did not have hymenal bleeding," we check her family [history]. Perhaps [the women of] this [family] are known not to have [vaginal] bleeding at all: neither menstrual bleeding nor hymenal bleeding. If this was found to be true, we presume [that she was a virgin, and she is entitled to a ketubah of 200 zuz].
If the women in her family are not known to have such a condition, we check her [physical state]; perhaps she is afflicted by a serious infirmity that has parched her body's natural fluids, or [perhaps] she was afflicted by hunger. Therefore, we have her bathe, eat and drink until she becomes healthy. At which point, [the couple] engage in relations again to see if she manifests hymenal bleeding or not.
If she is not hampered by sickness, hunger or the like, the [husband's] claim that she was not a virgin [is accepted]. [This applies] even if he felt tightness during relations. Since there was no hymenal bleeding, her hymen was not intact. For every virgin will manifest hymenal bleeding, whether she is a minor or above the age of majority, whether a na'arah or a bogeret, unless [this is prevented by an external factor,] illness or the like, as explained.
If [the husband] said: "[I claim that she was not a virgin,] because I did not feel tightness [during intercourse]. Instead, I found an open passageway," we inquire with regard to [the woman's] age. Perhaps she is a bogeret, and most bogrot do not have tightness that can be felt substantially [during intercourse], for as she grew older [the adhesion of] her limbs lessened, and the virginal [tightness] disappeared.
If she had not become a bogeret yet, we ask him: "Perhaps you leaned on the side or [entered] gently25 during intercourse, and therefore you did not feel any tightness?" If he replies: "No. I found an open passageway," [his] claim that she was not a virgin [is accepted] with regard to any woman who has not reached the age of bagrut, regardless of whether she was a minor or a na'arah, or whether she was healthy or sick. For the vaginal channel of every virgin is closed. Even if she manifests hymenal bleeding, she is not considered to be a virgin, because the vaginal channel was open.26
יב
טען ואמר לא מצאתיה בתולה והיא אומרת לא בא עלי ועדיין אני בתולה בודקין. אותה או חוזר ובועל בפני עדים. אמרה בא עלי ובתולה מצאני ככל הבתולות ושקר הוא טוען. שואלין אותו ואומרין לו מה היה הדבר עד שאמרת שאינה בתולה. אם אמר מפני שלא מצאתי לה דם בודקין במשפחתה שמא אין להם דם כלל לא דם נדה ולא דם בתולים אם נמצאו כולן כן הרי זו בחזקתה. לא נמצאו בנות משפחתה כן בודקין אותה שמא חולי גדול יש בה שיבש לחלוחית האיברים או שהיתה מתענת ברעב. מרטיבין אותה ומאכילין אותה ומשקין אותה עד שתבריא ותבעל שנית ונראה אם תוציא דם אם לאו. ואם אין שם חולי ולא רעב ולא כיוצא בו הרי זו טענת בתולים. ואע"פ שמצא דוחק בעת תשמיש הואיל ולא יצא דם אין כאן בתולים. שכל בתולה יש לה דם בין קטנה בין גדולה בין נערה בין בוגרת אלא מפני החולי כמו שביארנו. ואם אמר מפני שלא מצאתי דוחק אלא פתח פתוח מצאתי שואלין על שנותיה שמא בוגרת היא שרוב הבוגרות אין להן דוחק שמרגישין בו הרבה שהרי גדלה ונתרפו איבריה וכלו בתוליה. ואם לא בגרה עדיין אומרין לו שמא הטיתה או בעלתה בנחת ולפיכך לא הרגשת בדוחק. אם אמר לא כי אלא ודאי פתח פתוח היה הרי זו טענת בתולים לכל בתולה שלא בגרה בין קטנה בין נערה בין בריאה בין חולה שכל נערה בתולה פתחה סתום הוא. ואף ע"פ שיצא הדם הואיל ומצא פתח פתוח אין כאן בתולים:
13
There are geonim who rule that for a bogeret, the claim that she did not have hymenal bleeding is not valid, but the claim that her vaginal channel was open is valid. This does not appear [to be based on the proper text of] the Talmud. They had inaccurate versions of the text. I have investigated many texts, including those of an early era,27 and I have discovered the version to be as I ruled. For a bogeret, the only valid claim is [that she did not manifest] hymenal bleeding.28
יג
יש גאונים שהורו שהבוגרת אין לה טענת דמים ויש לה טענת פתח פתוח. ואין דרך הגמרא מראה דבר זה וטעות היה בנוסחאות שלהם. וכבר בדקתי על ספרים רבים וקדמונים ומצאתי שהדבר כמו שביארנו שאין לבוגרת אלא טענת דמים בלבד:
14
Our Sages were those who instituted the fundamental requirement of a marriage contract for a woman and they also instituted [the following consideration]: Whenever [a man] makes a claim that his wife was not a virgin, and the woman disputes his claim, [the husband's claim] is accepted. It is the woman's responsibility to bring support for her claim, not the man's. [The rationale is] that we assume that a man will not labor to prepare a [wedding] feast and then mar it, turning his celebration into mourning.29
יד
חכמים הם שתיקנו עיקר כתובה לאשה והם התקינו ואמרו שכל הטוען טענת בתולים והאשה מכחשת אותו נאמן ועליה להביא ראיה לא על האיש. שחזקה היא שאין אדם טורח בסעודה ומפסידה והופך שמחתו אבל:
15
Until when may a husband issue a claim denying his wife's virginity? If [the couple] went into privacy, only immediately [thereafter].30 If they did not enter into privacy, he has this option even after 30 days.
טו
ועד מתי יש לו לטעון טענת בתולים. אם נסתרה מיד. ואם לא נסתרה אפילו לאחר שלשים יום:
16
All the geonim have ruled that our Sages' statement that the husband's statements are accepted even though his wife disputes his claim applies only with regard to nullifying the obligation for the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract. Nevertheless, the woman is entitled to the additional amount [to which her husband committed himself]31 unless there is clear proof that she was not a virgin, or she admitted that she was not a virgin before she was consecrated and that she deceived him.
Therefore, [the husband] may require her to take an oath while holding a sacred article,32 as must be done by all others who must take oaths before they collect [the money due them].33 Afterwards, she may collect the additional sum.
She, by contrast, does not have the option of requiring him to take an oath that he did not discover her to be a virgin, before she must forfeit the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract, for it is a presumption accepted as fact that a person will not labor to prepare a [wedding] feast and then mar it. She may, however, have a ban of ostracism issued conditionally, applying to anyone who lodges false claims against her.
טז
הורו כל הגאונים שזה שאמרו חכמים שהוא נאמן אם הכחישתו אשתו להפסידה. עיקר הכתובה אבל התוספת יש לה. אלא אם כן נודע בראיה ברורה שהיתה בעולה או שהודה לו שהיא בעולה קודם שתתארס והטעתו. לפיכך יש לו להשביעה בנקיטת חפץ כדין כל הנשבעין ונוטלין ואחר כך תגבה התוספת. ואין לה להשביעו שלא מצאה בתולה ואחר כך תפסיד עיקר כתובה שחזקה היא שאין אדם טורח בסעודה ומפסידה. ויש לה להחרים סתם על מי שטען עליה שקר:
17
If [the husband] desires to remain married to [his wife] after causing her to forfeit the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract, he must write her [a new ketubah for] 100 [zuz]. For it is forbidden for a man to live with his wife for even one moment without a ketubah, as we have explained.34
יז
הרי שרצה לקיימה אחר שהפסידה עיקר הכתובה חוזר וכותב לה מאה. לפי שאסור לאדם לשהות עם אשתו שעה אחת בלא כתובה כמו שביארנו:
FOOTNOTES
1.I.e., the woman had been consecrated or wed, but before she and her husband engaged in marital relations, she was either widowed or divorced.
2.Even if there are witnesses to the fact that her husband died directly after they entered the chuppah (Ketubot 11a).
3.The rationale is that even if a woman engaged in sexual relations before the age of three, her hymen will grow back, as stated in Halachah 3, based on Ketubot 11b.
4.Literally, "one struck by a piece of wood," a woman who claims that she did not have hymenal bleeding at the time of her first sexual experience, because she had previously been "struck by a piece of wood" and caused to bleed at that time. As mentioned in Halachah 10, the term is used to refer to any woman who claims that her failure to have hymenal bleeding resulted from causes other than intercourse.
5.Although one might think that the marriage would be annulled, because the husband was operating under a misconception (מקח טעות), Ketubot 11b rules that this is not so. As long as she had not engaged in sexual relations previously, their marriage is binding.
6.The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 67:4) follows the ruling of Tosafot, Ketubot 11b, who explain that this law applies only when the woman's hymen remains intact despite these relations.
7.This point is necessary to mention because of the factors stated in Halachah 12.
8.Ketubot 36b explains that we are afraid that such a woman might have suffered hymenal bleeding from causes other than intercourse, but will not have noticed the fact.
9.Rashi (Ketubot 36a) explains that since an aylonit is considered a bogeret, this point must be clarified, as it must with regard to a bogeret. The above ruling applies only when the husband was aware that the woman was an aylonit. If he was not aware of that fact, the woman is not entitled to a ketubah at all, as explained in Chapter 24, Halachah 2.
10.Even if she was a virgin at the time of their original marriage, at present she is not a virgin.
11.I.e., a marriage between a mentally incompetent man and an ordinary woman will constantly be pained by strife and will not last. In contrast, a deaf mute is more passive, and his household will not necessarily be characterized by friction (Yevamot 112b).
12.This refers to a girl who has been orphaned of her father, or who was divorced after being wed. The Torah - and not our Sages - gives a father the right to consecrate his daughter before she becomes a na'arah.
13.If the girl remains unmarried, the prohibitions against relations with her are not as severe, and the Sages feared that they would not be upheld. If she were allowed to marry, the prohibition against adultery would be respected, and she would be treated differently. Moreover, her husband will guard against her association with other men.
14.I.e., only the fundamental requirements of the ketubah, but not any additional amount that the youth added to the marriage contract, unless he renews that commitment after he reaches majority. Otherwise, that commitment - like any commitment made by a minor - is of no substance. Moreover, he is obligated for the fundamental requirement of the ketubah only when he engaged in marital relations with his wife after he attained majority. If not, the marriage - and thus the marriage contract - is of no consequence.
With regard to the fundamental requirements of the ketubah, the Rambam writes in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Ketubot 9:8) that she is entitled to either 200 or 100 zuz, depending on her status at the time of the wedding.
15.Rabbenu Asher differs and maintains that the laws applying to a convert are the same as those applying to a minor. Both opinions are alluded to by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 67:11). (See the Beit Shmuel 67:12, which explains the Rambam's position: Even if a convert made a commitment of more than 100 zuz to his wife, any sum above 100 zuz is considered to be an addition to the ketubah and is therefore no longer binding when the convert accepts his new status as a Jew.)
16.I.e., even a woman who was widowed after the wedding, before engaging in relations with her husband. Even though her second husband marries her under the impression that she is a virgin, there is no possibility of issuing such a claim against her.
17.The obligation to grant a virgin bride a ketubah of 200 zuz is Rabbinic in origin. At the same time that our Sages instituted that obligation, they granted the husband a safeguard: that his word would be accepted with regard to a claim denying the woman's virginity. In these instances, since the woman was not granted the additional money, the safeguard provided by the Sages also does not apply (Maggid Mishneh).
18.We suspect that the groom had relations with her and later forgot the matter (Rashi, Ketubot 9b). See also note 30.
19. As stated in the following halachot, unless there are other factors that support the woman's position, as will be explained, the husband's claim is accepted. We assume that the husband would not go to the time and expense of preparing a wedding feast and then mar the celebration by denying his wife's virginity unless the claim were true (Ketubot 10a).
20.Unless there are witnesses who can testify that the woman engaged in relations previously, the only question before the court is the amount of the woman's ketubah. She is permitted to remain married to her husband, because there is no proof that she willingly engaged in sexual relations with another person after she was consecrated. (See Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 18:10.)
An exception to the above is a woman married to a priest. Issuing a claim questioning her virginity places the entire foundation of their marriage in doubt.
21. I.e., the husband claims that he has entered into a mekach ta'ut, an agreement based on false premises. He had desired to marry a virgin, and he was not prepared to marry a woman who had had relations with another man. Therefore, he desires to have the marriage annulled entirely.
22.I.e., he is not certain that she had engaged in relations with another man. In all matters of Torah law, whenever one person has a claim that is absolute (bari, in this instance the woman's claim that her hymen was damaged by factors other than intercourse) and one that is not absolute (shema, the man's claim), the claim that is absolute is accepted.
23.Since she was raped against her will, she is not forced to suffer a loss and is entitled to the full amount of the ketubah.
24.The intent is not that witnesses should observe the couple engaging in relations. This is forbidden, as stated in Chapter 14, Halachah 16. Instead, the intent is that they should inspect the sheet before and after the couple engage in relations for signs of hymenal bleeding.
25.Other authorities (and their opinion is quoted in the Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 68:6) state: "Maybe you did not enter gently?" - i.e., because of the husband's hurry to complete the sexual act, he did not feel the tightness.
The Ramah (loc. cit.) quotes the opinion of Rabbenu Asher, who states that the claim: "I discovered an open passageway," can be made only by a man who has been married before. If he was not married before, he would not have the experience to know the difference between virginal tightness and a non-virgin's state.
26.The Ramban and the Rashba state that the claim that the woman's vaginal channel was open can be made only in an instance in which the sheet on which the couple had relations was lost. If, however, the sheet is available, it should be inspected. If it has signs of blood, she is considered a virgin; and if not, she is not. This opinion is mentioned in the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.), but does not appear to have been accepted.
27.See Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh 15:2, where the Rambam states that he had available texts of the Talmud that were almost 500 years old. These would have been written approximately 200 years after the time of the Talmud's composition.
28.The Rambam's ruling is substantiated by our text of the Talmud (Ketubot 36b) and the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 68:3). The differing opinion mentioned by the Rambam is that of Rabbenu Chanan'el.
29.Based on this rationale, the Maggid Mishneh mentions opinions that state that the man's word is accepted only when he prepared the wedding feast. If he did not, the woman's word is accepted.
30.We assume that the couple had relations and he discovered her to be a virgin. The fact that he issued a claim against her afterwards stemmed from discontent for other reasons, without any connection to her personal state.
31.Although there are authorities (among them Rabbenu Asher) who offer reasons why the husband's word should be accepted in this instance as well, the prevailing view (and the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 68:8) follows the Rambam's decision. The rationale is that the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract is a Rabbinic injunction, and the same authority that obligated the husband to meet this requirement rescinded it when he lodged a claim denying her virginity. The additional amount, by contrast, is a present to which the husband voluntarily obligated himself, and that obligation may be nullified only if it is proven that it was made under false premises.
32.See Hilchot Sh'vuot 11:8, which states that such an oath is administered while the person is holding a Torah scroll. Significantly, the Rambam's ruling here represents a change of mind from his statements in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Ketubot 1:3), where he states that in such a situation the woman is required to take merely a sh'vuat hesset, a less severe oath.
33.I.e., the situation is analogous to a person who holds a promissory note and may be asked to take an oath that it is valid before he can collect it, as explained in Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh 14:2-3.
34.Chapter 10, Halachah 10.
Ishut - Chapter Twelve
1
When a man marries a woman, whether she is a virgin or a non-virgin, whether she is above the age of majority or a minor, and whether she was born Jewish, is a convert or a freed slave, he incurs ten responsibilities toward her and receives four privileges.1
א
כשנושא אדם אשה בין בתולה בין בעולה בין גדולה בין קטנה אחת בת ישראל ואחת הגיורת או המשוחררת יתחייב לה בעשרה דברים ויזכה בארבעה דברים:
2
With regard to his ten responsibilities: three stem from the Torah. They include sha'arah, kesutah v'onatah.2 Sha'arah means providing her with subsistence.3 Kesutah means supplying her with garments, and onatah refers to conjugal rights.
The seven responsibilities ordained by the Rabbis are all conditions [of the marriage contract] established by the court. The first is the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract. The others are referred to as t'na'ei ketubah, the conditions of the marriage contract. They are:
a) to provide medical treatment if she becomes sick;
b) to redeem her if she is held captive:
c) to bury her if she dies;
d) the right for her to continue living in his home after his death as long as she remains a widow;
e) the right for her daughters to receive their subsistence from his estate after his death until they become consecrated;
f) the right for her sons to inherit her ketubah in addition to their share in her husband's estate together with their brothers [borne by other wives, if she dies before her husband does].
ב
והעשרה שלשה מהן מן התורה ואלו הן. שארה. כסותה. ועונתה. שארה אלו מזונותיה. כסותה כמשמעו. עונתה לבא עליה כדרך כל הארץ. והשבעה מדברי סופרים וכולן תנאי בית דין הם. האחד מהם עיקר כתובה. והשאר הם הנקראין תנאי כתובה ואלו הן. לרפאתה אם חלתה. ולפדותה אם נשבית. לקוברה אם מתה. ולהיות נזונת מן נכסיו. ויושבת בביתו אחר מותו כל זמן אלמנותה. ולהיות בנותיה ממנו ניזונות מנכסיו אחרי מותו עד שתתארסנה. ולהיות בניה הזכרים ממנו יורשין כתובתה יותר על חלקם בירושה שעם אחיהם:
3
The four privileges that the husband is granted are all Rabbinic in origin. They are:
a) the right to the fruits of her labor;
b) the right to any ownerless object she discovers;
c) the right to benefit from the profits of her property during her lifetime;
d) the right to inherit her [property] if she dies during his lifetime. His rights to her property supersede [the rights of] all others.4
ג
והארבעה שזוכה בהן כולם מדברי סופרים ואלו הן. להיות מעשה ידיה שלו. ולהיות מציאתה שלו. ושיהיה אוכל כל פירות נכסיה בחייה. ואם מתה בחייו יירשנה. והוא קודם לכל אדם בירושה:
4
Our Sages also ordained that the fruits of a wife's labor should parallel her subsistence, [the obligation to] redeem her should parallel [the right to] the benefit from her property, and [the obligation to] bury her should parallel [the right to] inherit [the property mentioned in] her ketubah.
Therefore, if a woman says: "I will not [hold you obligated for] my subsistence, but I will not work,"5 she is given this option, and she cannot be compelled to work.6 If, however, her husband says: "I will not provide for your subsistence, and I will not receive the right to the fruits of your labor," he is not given this option, lest the woman be unable to earn her subsistence.7 Because of this institution, [the obligation to provide for a woman's] subsistence is considered to be one of the t'na'ei ketubah.8
ד
ועוד תקנו חכמים שיהיו מעשה ידי האשה כנגד מזונותיה. ופדיונה כנגד אכילת פירות נכסיה. וקבורתה כנגד ירושתו לכתובתה. לפיכך אם אמרה האשה איני ניזונית ואיני עושה שומעין לה ואין כופין אותה. אבל אם אמר הבעל איני זנך ואיני נוטל כלום ממעשה ידיך אין שומעין לו שמא לא יספקו לה מעשה ידיה במזונותיה. ומפני תקנה זו יחשבו המזונות מתנאי הכתובה:
5
Whether or not these matters were written in the marriage contract - indeed, even if a marriage contract was not written and the couple merely married - once they marry, the husband is granted the four privileges mentioned, and the woman is granted the ten rights mentioned. There is no need to state them explicitly.9
ה
כל הדברים האלו אף ע"פ שלא נכתבו בשטר הכתובה ואפילו לא כתבו כתובה אלא נשא סתם כיון שנשאה זכה בארבעה דברים שלו וזכתה האשה בעשרה דברים שלה ואינן צריכין לפרש:
6
If the husband made a stipulation that he would not be responsible for one of these obligations - or the wife made a stipulation that [her husband] would not be granted one of these privileges - [and the other party agreed,] the stipulation is binding,10 with the exception of three matters with regard to which it is impossible for a stipulation to be made. Indeed, if a stipulation is made with regard to these three matters, it is of no consequence. These [three] are: [the woman's] conjugal rights, the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract and [the husband's right] to inherit [his wife's property].
ו
התנה הבעל שלא יתחייב באחד מן הדברים שהוא חייב בהן. או שהתנת האשה שלא יזכה הבעל באחד מן הדברים שהוא זוכה בהם התנאי קיים חוץ משלשה דברים שאין התנאי מועיל בהן. וכל המתנה עליהן תנאו בטל. ואלו הן. עונתה. ועיקר כתובתה. וירושתה:
7
What is implied? If [the groom] made a stipulation with his bride that he is not obligated to give her conjugal rights, his stipulation is of no substance. For he has made a stipulation against what is written in the Torah, and the stipulation does not concern financial matters.11
ז
כיצד התנה עם האשה שאין לה עליו עונה תנאו בטל וחייב בעונתה. שהרי התנה על מ"ש בתורה ואינו תנאי ממון:
8
When a man makes a stipulation to reduce the amount of the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract - or he writes a ketubah for either 200 or 100 [zuz], but she writes that she has already received a portion of the sum, when in fact she did not12 - his stipulation is of no substance.13 For whenever a person establishes a marriage contract with a virgin for less than 200 [zuz] or with a non-virgin for less than 100 [zuz], the sexual relations [he conducts with his wife] are considered promiscuous.14
ח
התנה עמה לפחות מעיקר כתובה או שכתב לה מאתים או מאה עיקר כתובה וכתבה לו שנתקבלה מהן כך וכך והיא לא נתקבלה תנאו בטל שכל הפוחת לבתולה ממאתים ולאלמנה ממאה הרי בעילתו בעילת זנות:
9
If he makes a stipulation after he weds her15 that he will not inherit her property, his stipulation is of no consequence. Although the husband's [right to] inherit [his wife's property] is a rabbinic institution, [our Sages] reinforced their edict, [giving it the power of a statute of] the Torah.
With regard to [the Torah's statutes of] inheritance, all stipulations that are made are of no consequence, despite the fact that financial matters are concerned, as [derived from Numbers 27:11]: "the statutes of judgment."16
With regard to other [aspects of the marriage contract], a stipulation [made by the husband and accepted by his wife] is binding. For example, if he made a stipulation that he is not obligated to supply her with her subsistence or with clothing, or that he would not receive the benefits from her property, his stipulation is binding.
ט
התנה עמה אחר שנשאה שלא יירשנה תנאו בטל ואף ע"פ שירושת הבעל מדברי סופרים עשו חיזוק לדבריהם כשל תורה. וכל תנאי שבירושה בטל ואע"פ שהוא ממון שנאמר בה לחוקת משפט. ובשאר הדברים תנאו קיים כגון שהתנה עמה שאין לה שאר וכסות. על מנת שלא יאכל פירות נכסיה וכל כיוצא בזה. תנאו קיים:
10
What is the amount that is designated for a woman's subsistence? We allot her bread for two meals every day, according to the norm of the people of her town, for a person who is neither sick nor a glutton.
The allotment is also made according to the type of bread eaten as a staple in that locale, be it wheat or barley, or rice, millet, or other grains, as is customary [in that locale]. Similarly, she is allotted other foods that are eaten together with bread - i.e., legumes, vegetables and the like. [She is also allotted] oil for food and to light a lamp and also fruit. She is also [allotted] a small amount of wine, if it is the local custom for women to drink wine.
On the Sabbath, she is allotted three meals,17 and meat or fish according to the local custom. And she is given a me'ah18 of silver for her private needs - e.g., a p'rutah for laundry, or for the bath and the like.
י
כמה מזונות פוסקין לאשה פוסקין לה לחם שתי סעודות בכל יום סעודה בינונית של כל אדם באותה העיר כאדם שאינו לא חולה ולא גרגרן ומאותו מאכל של אנשי אותה העיר. אם חטים חטים ואם שעורים שעורים. וכן אורז ודוחן או משאר מינין שנהגו בהן. ופוסקין לה פרפרת לאכול בה את הפת כגון קטנית או ירקות וכיוצא בהן. ושמן לאכילה ושמן להדלקת הנר ופירות ומעט יין לשתות אם היה מנהג המקום שישתו הנשים יין. ופוסקין לה שלש סעודות בשבת ובשר או דגים כמנהג המקום. ונותן לה בכל שבת ושבת מעה כסף לצרכיה כגון פרוטה לכבוס או למרחץ וכיוצא בהן:
11
To whom does the above apply? To a poor Jewish man. But if the husband is wealthy, [the support he is required to provide his wife is apportioned] according to his wealth. If he is wealthy enough to provide her with several dishes of meat each day, he is compelled to do so, and she is allotted [subsistence] commensurate with his wealth.
If he is extremely poor and is unable to provide his wife with even the bread that she requires,19 he is compelled to divorce her.20 He remains indebted for her ketubah until he finds the means to provide payment for it.
יא
במה דברים אמורים בעני שבישראל אבל אם היה עשיר הכל לפי עשרו. אפילו היה ממונו ראוי לעשות לה כמה תבשילי בשר בכל יום כופין אותו ופוסקין לה מזונות כפי ממונו. ואם היה עני ביותר ואינו יכול ליתן לה אפי' לחם שהיא צריכה לו כופין אותו להוציא ותהיה כתובתה חוב עליו עד שתמצא ידו ויתן:
12
When a husband desires to provide his wife with subsistence as befits her, on condition that she should eat and drink alone,21 and that he should eat and drink alone, he is given this prerogative, provided he eats together with her on Friday night.22
יב
בעל שרצה ליתן לאשתו מזונותיה הראויות לה ותהיה אוכלת ושותה לעצמה והוא שותה ואוכל לעצמו הרשות בידו ובלבד שיאכל עמה מלילי שבת ללילי שבת:
13
When a woman has been allotted subsistence, and [the entire allotment was not used], the remainder belongs to her husband.23
If her husband is a priest, he is not entitled to provide her with all her provisions from terumah. [He is not given this option] because it is very difficult for her to protect [the terumah] from contacting ritual impurity, and to eat it while ritually pure [herself].24 Instead, he should give her half her provisions from ordinary [food] and half from terumah.
יג
האשה שפסקו לה מזונות והותירו המותר לבעל. היה בעלה כהן אינו נותן לה כל מזונותיה תרומה מפני שטורח גדול הוא לה לשמרן מדברים המטמאין ולאכלן בטהרה אלא נותן לה מחצה חולין ומחצה תרומה:
14
Just as a man is required to provide his wife with her subsistence, he is required to provide for the maintenance of his children, both male and female, until they reach the age of six.25Afterwards, he should continue to provide for their maintenance until they reach majority, as ordained by our Sages.26
If, however, he does not, he should be rebuked and embarrassed publicly, and appeals should be made to him. If he [persists in his] refusal, a public announcement is made with regard to him: "So and so is cruel and does not desire to provide for the maintenance of his children. He is worse than an impure bird, which does provide for its chicks." Nevertheless, he should not be compelled to provide for the maintenance [of children] six and older.
יד
כשם שאדם חייב במזונות אשתו כך הוא חייב במזונות בניו ובנותיו הקטנים עד שיהיו בני שש שנים. מכאן ואילך מאכילן עד שיגדלו כתקנת חכמים. ואם לא רצה גוערין בו ומכלימין אותו ופוצרין בו. ואם לא רצה מכריזין עליו בציבור ואומרים פלוני אכזרי הוא ואינו רוצה לזון בניו והרי פחות הוא מעוף טמא שהוא זן את אפרוחיו. ואין כופין אותו לזונם אחר שש:
15
To what does the above apply? To a person who is not known to have resources, and it is not known whether or not he is capable of giving charity. If, however, he has resources and he possesses the means to give an amount to charity that would provide for [his children's] needs, his property is expropriated against his will27 for the purposes of charity,28 and [his children's] needs are provided for until they reach majority.
טו
בד"א באיש שאינו אמוד ואין ידוע אם ראוי ליתן צדקה או אינו ראוי אבל אם היה אמוד שיש לו ממון הראוי ליתן ממנו צדקה המספקת להן מוציאין ממנו בעל כרחו משום צדקה וזנין אותן עד שיגדלו:
16
When a person travels to another country [and leaves his wife behind], [the following rules apply] should his wife come to court to place a claim [against her husband] for her subsistence. For the first three months from the day her husband departed, she is not given an allotment for her subsistence. [The rationale is that] it is an accepted assumption that a person does not depart without leaving provisions for his household.29
Afterwards,30 an allotment is made for her subsistence. If her husband owns property, the court expropriates his property and sells it to provide for his wife's subsistence. [When doing so,] no account is made for his wife's earnings until her husband comes.31 If it is discovered that she earned [money during the time that he was away], he is granted that sum.
Moreover, even if the matter is not taken to court, and instead the woman sells [her husband's property] on her own32 in order to pay for her subsistence, the sale is binding. There is no need for a public announcement [regarding the sale of the property].33 Similarly, the woman is not required to take an oath [that her husband did not leave her money] until her husband comes and lodges a claim [against her], or until she comes to claim [the money due her, as stated in her] ketubah in the event of her husband's death. [In the latter instance, together with the oaths she is required to take to collect her ketubah,]34 on the basis of the principle of gilgul shevu'ah,35 [she is also required to take an oath] that she did not sell [any more of her husband's property than] was necessary for her subsistence.
טז
מי שהלך למדינה אחרת ובאה אשתו לב"ד לתבוע מזונות. שלשה חדשים הראשונים מיום הליכתו אין פוסקין לה בהן מזונות שחזקה שאין אדם מניח ביתו ריקן מכאן ואילך פוסקין לה מזונות. ואם היו לו נכסים ב"ד יורדין לנכסיו ומוכרין למזונותיה. ואין מחשבין עמה על מעשה ידיה עד שיבא בעלה אם מצאה שעשתה הרי אלו שלו. וכן אם לא עמדה בדין אלא מכרה לעצמה למזונות מכרה קיים ואינה צריכה הכרזה ולא שבועה עד שיבא בעלה ויטעון או עד שתבוא לגבות כתובתה אחר מותו מגלגלין עליה שלא מכרה אלא למזונות שהיא צריכה להן:
17
Just as the court [expropriates and] sells [the property of] a husband who travelled [to another country to provide for] the subsistence of [his] wife, so too, it [expropriates and] sells property to provide for the subsistence of his sons and daughters who are six years old or less. If, however, they are more than six [years old], [the court] does not provide for their subsistence from his property when he is not present, even when he is reputed to have means.36
Similarly, when a person loses his mental faculties, the court expropriates his property and sells it to provide subsistence and other necessities for his wife and his children below the age of six.37
יז
וכשם שב"ד מוכרין למזון האשה שהלך בעלה כך מוכרין למזון בניו ובנותיו כשהן בני שש שנים או פחות. אבל יתר על שש אינן זנין אותן מנכסיו שלא בפניו אע"פ שהוא אמוד. וכן מי שנשתטה ב"ד יורדין לנכסיו ומוכרים וזנין אשתו ובניו ובנותיו שהן בני שש שנים או פחות ומפרנסין אותן:
18
Some geonim ruled that an assessment should not be made for the subsistence of a woman whose husband journeyed overseas, or who died, unless she evinces possession of her ketubah document. If she does not evince possession of her ketubah, she is not entitled to subsistence. Perhaps she has already received payment for her ketubah from her husband, or perhaps she forfeited her ketubah in his favor, as will be explained.38 Others maintain that an assessment is made on her behalf for her subsistence, for we accept it as a presumption that she neither received payment for nor forfeited [her ketubah]. Hence, she is not required to show her ketubah [when presenting her claim].
I favor [the latter view] with regard to [a woman] whose husband has departed,39 since her claim to her subsistence stems from the Torah itself.40 With regard to a woman whose husband died, however, she is not entitled to her subsistence until she brings her ketubah, for she [derives her subsistence] by virtue of a rabbinic enactment. Furthermore, her subsistence is paid from property belonging to [her husband's] heirs, and [the court] always advances claims in support of the interests of an heir.41
יח
יש מן הגאונים שהורה שאין פוסקין מזונות לאשה שהלך בעלה למדינת הים או שמת בעלה עד שיהא שטר כתובה יוצא מתחת ידה. ואם לא תוציא שטר כתובה אין לה מזונות שמא נטלה כתובתה מבעלה או מחלה לו כתובתה שאין לה מזונות כמו שיתבאר. ויש מי שהורה שפוסקין לה מזונות בחזקת שלא נטלה ולא מחלה ואין מצריכין אותה להביא כתובה. ודעתי נוטה לזה במי שהלך בעלה הואיל ויש לה מזונות מן התורה. אבל אם מת בעלה אין לה מזונות עד שתביא כתובה. מפני שהיא אוכלת בתקנת חכמים ועוד שניזונת מנכסי יורשים ולעולם טוענין ליורש:
19
If [a woman's] husband departed on a journey, and she borrowed money for her subsistence, [her husband] is required to pay [the debt] when he returns.42
If a person voluntarily took the initiative of providing for her subsistence, when [her husband] returns the husband is not required to pay [that person]. The other person forfeited his money, [the rationale being] that [the husband] did not instruct him to provide for her, nor did she [request the assistance] as a loan.43
יט
הלך בעלה ולותה ואכלה כשיבוא חייב לשלם. עמד אחד מדעת עצמו וזנה משלו אם יבוא הבעל אינו חייב לשלם לו והרי זה איבד את מעותיו מפני שלא צוהו לזונה והיא לא לותה ממנו:
20
When a husband [who plans to] depart on a journey tells his wife: "Use your earnings to purchase your subsistence," she has no [right to demand] her subsistence [from him afterwards]. For if she had not accepted this agreement, and she had not felt confident, she could have issued a claim against him, or told him, "My earnings are not sufficient for me."44
כ
הבעל שאמר לאשתו בשעה שהלך טלי מעשה ידייך במזונותייך אין לה מזונות שאילו לא רצתה בדבר זה ולא סמכה דעתה היה לה לתובעו או לומר לו אין מעשה ידי מספיקין לי:
21
[The following rule applies if] the woman took the matter to court and was awarded an assessment for her subsistence, the court sold [her husband's landed property] and gave her [the proceeds] - or she sold [the property] herself - and afterwards, the husband came and claimed that he left provisions for her. She is required to take an oath, while holding a sacred article, that he did not make provisions for her [and then she is not held liable].
[The following rule applies when a husband departed on a journey, and the woman] did not take the matter to court, nor sell his property, but instead waited until he returned. [If upon his return there is a dispute,] he claims: "I made [provisions for you]," while she claims, "You did not make provisions. Instead, I borrowed money from this person to provide for myself," he is required to take a rabbinic oath45 that he left provisions for her, and then he is not held liable. She remains responsible for the debt.46
כא
הרי שעמדה בדין ופסקו לה מזונות ומכרו בית דין ונתנו לה. או שמכרה היא לעצמה ובא הבעל ואמר הנחתי לה מזונות הרי זו נשבעת בנקיטת חפץ שלא הניח לה. לא תבעה ולא מכרה אלא שהתה עד שבא הוא אומר הנחתי והיא אומרת לא הנחת אלא לויתי מזה ונתפרנסתי נשבע שבועת היסת שהניח לה ונפטר וישאר החוב עליה:
22
[In the above instance,] if she sold movable property, claiming that she sold it to provide for her subsistence, and her husband claimed that he had left provisions for her, she is required to take a rabbinic oath that he did not leave her any provisions.47
If she did not issue a claim against him, did not borrow money, and she did not sell his property, but instead strained herself during the day and during the night and earned her livelihood, she is not entitled to any recompense.48
כב
מכרה מטלטלין ואמרה למזונות מכרתי והוא טוען ואומר מזונותייך הנחתי נשבעת שבועת היסת שלא הניח. הרי שלא תבעה ולא לותה ולא מכרה אלא דחקה עצמה ביום ובלילה ועשתה ואכלה אין לה כלום:
23
[The following rules apply when] a man takes a vow that his wife should not derive any benefit from him [or his property]. Whether he specified the span of the vow or did not specify the span of the vow, we grant him an interval of thirty days.49 If the span of his vow is concluded, or even though it is not concluded, but he has his vow annulled, this is acceptable. If not, he must divorce his wife,50 and pay her [the money due her because of] her ketubah.
During those thirty days, she should work and [attempt to] sustain herself [through her labor]. One of [her husband's] friends should provide her51 with those things she needs that she cannot purchase through the fruits of her labor, if the fruits of her labor are not sufficient for her.
כג
המדיר את אשתו מליהנות לו בין שפירש עד זמן פלוני בין שלא פירש אלא סתם ממתינין לו שלשים יום. אם תמו ימי נדרו או שלא תמו והתיר נדרו הרי זה מוטב ואם לאו יוציא ויתן כתובה. ובאותן הל' יום תהיה היא עושה ואוכלת ויהיה אחד מחביריו מפרנס אותה דברים שהיא צריכה להן יתר על מעשה ידיה אם אין מעשה ידיה מספיקין לכל:
24
When a person makes a vow [preventing] his wife from tasting one of the species of produce,52 he should be given an interval of thirty days. [If he prolongs the situation] beyond this time, he is required to divorce [his wife] and pay [her the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah. [This ruling applies] even when his vow prevents her from eating undesirable food, or a species that she has never tasted in her life.
[The following rules apply when a woman] took a vow not to partake of a particular species of produce, and [her husband] allowed the vow to stand, or she took a Nazarite vow and he did not annul it.53 If he desires to remain married to her and for her not to partake of this species or to be a Nazarite, he may.54 If, however, he says: "I do not desire a woman with vows," he may divorce her, but he is required to pay her the money due her because of her ketubah. [The rationale is that] he had the option to nullify [her vow], and instead, he willingly allowed the vow to stand.
כד
המדיר את אשתו שלא תטעום אחד מכל הפירות ממתינין לו עד ל' יום יתר על כן יוציא ויתן כתובה. אפילו הדירה שלא תאכל מאכל רע אפילו הדירה ממין שלא אכלה אותו מימיה יוציא אחר ל' יום ויתן כתובה. נדרה היא שלא תאכל אחד מכל הפירות וקיים לה הוא את נדרה או נדרה בנזיר ולא הפר לה. אם רצה שתשב תחתיו ולא תאכל פירות או תהיה נזירה תשב. ואם אמר איני רוצה באשה נדרנית יוציא ויתן כתובה שהרי היה בידו להפר והוא קיים לה ברצונו:
FOOTNOTES
1.These ten responsibilities and four privileges are all explained in detail in the chapters that follow, through Chapter 23.
2.These requirements are mentioned in Exodus 21:10. The verse forbids a husband from denying his wife these rights. Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 262) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 46) consider this to be one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
3.Note the commentary of the Ramban on Exodus (loc. cit.), which interprets sha'arah and kesutah as also referring to conjugal rights and maintains that the obligation to provide a wife with her subsistence and with garments is Rabbinic. Most authorities, however, follow the Rambam's understanding.
4.The Ra'avad and others maintain that the husband's right to inherit his wife's property stems from the Torah itself. The matter is the subject of a difference of opinion between our Sages (Ketubot 83b), and there is no explicit resolution of the question in the Talmud. Rav Kapach maintains that the early manuscripts of the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Ketubot 9:1; Bava Batra 8:1) indicate that the Rambam himself originally subscribed to the view mentioned by the Ra'avad and changed his mind later in life. (See also Halachah 9.)
5.With regard to the other two matters that are linked the husband's obligation to redeem her and to bury her, the woman does not have this option. Although this arrangement was instituted for the woman's benefit, our Sages did not give her a choice regarding these matters, because they desired to ensure that the woman would not be forced to remain in captivity among the gentiles and that she would be buried (Shulchan Aruch and Ramah, Even HaEzer 69:5).
6.Our Sages instituted this arrangement for the woman's benefit, since a woman's income could not ordinarily provide for her subsistence. Accordingly, the option of whether or not to forego the arrangement is in the woman's hands. If a woman can earn more than her subsistence, she is also entitled to forego the above arrangement.
Even in such a situation, the woman is still responsible for taking care of the household tasks (Maggid Mishneh).
7.The husband may, however, tell his wife: "Endeavor to earn your subsistence, and I will compensate for whatever deficiency remains" (Ramah, Even HaEzer 69:4).
8.I.e., although the t'na'ei ketubah are rabbinic in origin, and the obligation to provide for the woman's subsistence is from the Torah, since the linkage of it with her wages is rabbinic, the obligation is considered to be part of the t'na'ei ketubah.
9.I.e., they are obligations that apply universally and are not dependent on the consent of a particular couple.
10.The principle upon which this statement is based is that any stipulation to which both parties agree that concerns monetary rights - even those that are granted to a person by the Torah - is binding (Kiddushin 19b). For a person has the option to waive his right to property or privileges that justly belong to him (Rashi, loc. cit.). Therefore, a woman may waive even the rights to her subsistence or clothing that the Torah itself grants her.
11.Instead, the failure to provide a woman with conjugal rights is considered to cause her physical anguish (Rashi, loc. cit.). Although the Mordechai maintains that conjugal rights can also be considered monetary matters, for it is possible to give a woman enough money that she would be willing to forego her rights, the Rambam's view is accepted by most authorities.
12.I.e., the woman writes a receipt for part of the sum on her ketubah.
With regard to this instance, the Tur (Even HaEzer 66) differs and maintains that the man is not obligated to pay her the full sum.
13.Although this is a situation that concerns financial matters, our Sages desired that the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract be a binding institution, and therefore did not allow any modification of this obligation. Hence, the stipulation is nullified.
Note the Maggid Mishneh, who mentions views that differ with that of the Rambam and maintains that if the man desires to divorce the woman, he is not obligated to give her the sum for which the Sages obligated him. It is only when he wants to remain married to her that our Sages enforced their requirement.
14.The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 66:9) states that even though the man's stipulations are of no consequence, the sexual relations he conducts with his wife are considered promiscuous, because she may be unaware of the law and not know the amount due her.
15.A different ruling applies if the stipulation is made between erusin and nisu'in, as explained in Chapter 23, Halachah 6.
16.See Hilchot Nachalot 6:1.
17.For a woman is obligated to eat three meals on the Sabbath as a man is (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 291:6).
Note the slight difference between the Rambam's statements here and those in Hilchot Matnot Aniyim 9:13.
18.A me'ah is one sixth of a dinar (Kiddushin 12a). Based on the Rambam's statements in Hilchot Shekalim, ch. 1, it is evident that this is a coin of relatively small value, approximately 1.5 grams of pure silver.
19.The Beit Shmuel 70:7 states that if he can provide her with bread, even if he cannot provide her with other food, he is not obligated to divorce her. (See, however, Chelkat Mechokek 70:12.)
The Chatam Sofer (Even HaEzer, Responsum 131) states that the Rambam's words imply that if the husband cannot support his wife from his own earnings, he is compelled to divorce her, even if she herself has the means to provide herself with subsistence.
20.The rationale is that since he cannot provide her with subsistence, he is obligated to give her the opportunity to find another husband who can.
The Hagahot Maimoniot question whether the husband can be compelled to seek to hire himself out as a laborer, or the court's only resort is to compel him to divorce his wife. Although that text does not favor either approach, the latter opinion is quoted by the Ramah (Even HaEzer 70:3). The Ramah also mentions the opinion of Tosafot (Ketubot 63a), which states that a husband who has no resources is not compelled to divorce his wife.
21.I.e., even in a separate dwelling (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Ketubot 5:9).
22.In his Commentary on the Mishnah (loc. cit.), the Rambam states that this prerogative may in no way infringe on the husband's obligation to provide his wife with conjugal rights. In addition, he must share the Friday night meal with her, implying that this is for the sake of communication, not only as preparation for marital relations, as understood by some commentaries.
Note the Ramah (Even HaEzer 70:2), who objects to the Rambam's ruling, and states that a man is given this prerogative only if his wife consents.
23.Note Mishneh LaMelech and the Dagul MeRevavah (Even HaEzer 70), which state that this applies only when the woman purchased her food at a lower price than was originally estimated. If, however, she starved herself and consumed less than was allotted her, she, and not her husband, is entitled to the remainder.
24.Food that is terumah may not be eaten if it contracts ritual impurity, nor may it be eaten by a person who is himself ritually impure.
25.Rabbenu Nissim maintains that this obligation is incumbent on a father from the Torah itself, as an extension of his obligation to provide for his wife. Rabbenu Asher, however, maintains that the father's obligation is independent of the marriage bond. Even if he fathers children outside marriage, he is liable for their support.
26.The obligation to provide for one's children's subsistence until majority was one of the enactments instituted by the Sanhedrin after this body was relocated in Usha in the Galilee after the destruction of Jerusalem. At that time, several enactments were passed to direct the functioning of the Jewish community in this new phase. (See Ketubot 49b.)
Today, most rabbinic authorities maintain that because of changes in the socio-economic system, it is proper for a father to continue supporting his children well past the age of Bar or Bat Mitzvah.
27.As evident from Halachah 17, this applies only when the father is present. The Rambam maintains that a person's property may not be expropriated for this purpose outside his presence.
28.See Hilchot Matnot Aniyim 10:16, which states:
Although he is not obligated, when a person provides subsistence for his older sons and daughters, so that the males can study the Torah and the females will follow the straight path, . . . it is an act of charity, and indeed, a great act of charity.
And Chapter 7, Halachah 10, of that source, states:
When a person does not desire to give charity, . . . the court compels him, and administers stripes for rebelliousness until he meets the assessment made for him. [Moreover,] when he is present, his property is expropriated [for this purpose].
29.The Ramah (Even HaEzer 70:5) quotes opinions that state that this ruling applies only when the husband left home in an atmosphere of peace. In such a situation, we can be sure that he has provided for his family. If, however, he left home annoyed with his wife, it is plausible to assume that he did not provide for her needs.
30.I.e., after three months, or after she approaches the court. If she waits longer than three months, she is not given any payment for the previous period (Ramah, ibid.).
31.Rabbenu Asher differs and maintains that the court should consider the amount the woman can earn when deciding on the size of her allotment. His rationale is that before expropriating a person's property, we should try to act in his interests. Although many authorities speak in favor of Rabbenu Asher's logic, they rule according to the Rambam's decision. (See Chelkat Mechokek 70:20.)
The Avnei Milu'im 70:3 explains the Rambam's position, stating that the husband is granted the right to his wife's earnings only when he provides for her subsistence willingly. When he forces her to approach the court to receive her subsistence, he has no claim on her earnings.
32.There is a debate among the authorities whether or not she must consult experts with regard to the evaluation of the object. (See Chelkat Mechokek 70:21.)
33.Generally, when property is sold by the court, it is necessary that a public announcement be made informing people of the sale, to attract customers and assure competitive bidding. (See Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh 22:6.) In this instance, no such requirement is made, in order that the woman will not have to wait to receive the funds she requires.
34.See Chapter 16, Halachah 4.
35.Whenever a person is required to take an oath, the plaintiff can obligate him to take an oath on another claim. In this instance, since the woman is obligated to take an oath to her husband's heirs to collect the money due her for her ketubah, she can be required to take an additional oath regarding the sale of his property for her subsistence.
36.We do not expropriate his property and provide for his children as an act of charity, because it is possible that he is giving charity in the place to which he has journeyed.
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 71:2) states that if the person had supported his older children before leaving on his journey, provisions should be made for his children while he is away. It can be assumed that this would be his desire. The Ramah also mentions the opinion of Rabbenu Nissim, which states that if he possesses means, support should be provided for his children from his property as an act of charity. This view is not, however, accepted by most later authorities.
37.The Maggid Mishneh states that the Rambam's wording appears to imply that no provision is made for his older children, even when he has the means to support them. The Maggid Mishneh, however, refers to Hilchot Nachalot 11:11, which states that when a person who has means loses control of his faculties, the court levels an assessment for charity on his estate. Accordingly, it would appear that if the man has the means to give charity, his property is expropriated to pay for his children's subsistence, even if they are over six.
The Tur (Even HaEzer 71) states that in such an instance, the court should expropriate funds for the subsistence of the person's older children even if the person's estate is not large enough for an assessment for charity to be leveled against it. The rationale is that we assume that, like the majority of people, this person would also desire to support his children. The Chelkat Mechokek 71:6 maintains that the Shulchan Aruch follows this view, and not that of the Rambam.
38.See Chapter 17, Halachah 19.
39.Rabbenu Asher and others do not accept the Rambam's distinction, and maintain that the court should also protect the interests of a person who is in another country and cannot defend himself. Nevertheless, in his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Karo defends the Rambam's decision, explaining that in contrast to an heir, the husband has the potential to take his claim to court when he returns. In his Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 70:5), he quotes the Rambam's ruling. This ruling is also accepted by the later authorities.
40.See Halachah 2.
41.Since the heir himself was not aware of the details of his benefactor's affairs, he cannot necessarily advance claims in his own interests. Therefore, the court acts to protect them. (See Bava Batra 23a.)
42.The Ramah (Even HaEzer 70:8) states that the benefactor must lodge a claim against the wife, who in turn must lodge a claim against her husband.
43.Although the husband is obligated to pay for his wife's subsistence, our Sages rule that when a person pays a debt on behalf of a colleague without being instructed to do so, the debtor is not at all obligated to his patron.
44.Although our Sages associated a woman's earnings with her subsistence, they made this association for the woman's sake and gave her the prerogative of accepting or declining such a request. In a responsum, the Rambam writes that if it is not logical to assume that she could earn the funds required for her subsistence, for her to forfeit her rights, she must explicitly consent to her husband's stipulation.
45.I.e., a less severe oath instituted by the Rabbis. (See Hilchot To'en V'Nit'an 1:3.)
46.She, however, does not have the opportunity of paying the debt until she is divorced or becomes widowed, because all her property is under lien to her husband, and he is entitled to her earnings.
47.Since it was movable property and not landed property that was sold, the oath that the woman is required to take is more lenient than that mentioned in the previous halachah. The rationale is that had she desired to lie, she could have claimed that the goods were stolen or lost.
48.I.e., she cannot demand reimbursement for the difference between her earnings and the amount she would ordinarily be entitled to for her subsistence (Chelkat Mechokek 70:41). If she earned more than her subsistence, the additional funds belong to her, not to her husband (Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 70:11).
49.Based on Ketubot 59b, Rabbenu Asher and Rabbenu Nissim object to the Rambam's ruling. Since the husband is liable to provide for his wife's subsistence, the vow he takes cannot override that obligation, except in specific instances. In both the Kessef Mishneh, and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 235:2), Rav Yosef Karo follows these views.
50.After thirty days, the matter will become public knowledge and the woman will suffer ridicule. Therefore, her husband is obligated to divorce (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Ketubot 7:1).
51.The Mishnah (Ketubot, op. cit.) states that her husband should appoint a person to provide for her. As the Talmud explains (Ketubot 71a), this does not mean that he should appoint this person as an agent, for this is forbidden by his vow. Instead, he should say, "Whoever provides for my wife will not suffer a loss."
52.As the Maggid Mishneh explains, this refers to a situation in which the husband took a vow that if his wife partakes of a particular species of produce, she will be forbidden to benefit from his property (or according to the Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 235:3, that sexual relations between them will be forbidden). If, however, the husband takes a vow that his wife may not eat a particular type of produce, that vow is nullified. For a person cannot take a vow to restrict the actions of another person.
53.For, as Numbers 30:8-9 relates, a husband has the right to nullify or uphold the vows his wife takes.
54.As Rav Yosef Karo mentions in both the Kessef Mishneh and the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.), other opinions require the husband to divorce his wife in such a situation.
Ishut - Chapter Thirteen
1
To what extent is he required to provide her with garments? Annually, he must purchase for her clothes that were worth 50 zuz in the coinage prevalent [in the Talmudic period], these being worth six and one fourth dinarim of pure silver.1
He should provide her with new [garments] during the rainy season. After these garments become worn, she should wear them in the summer. Frayed garments - that which remains from her garments from the previous year - belong to her; she should wear them while she is in the niddah state.
She is granted a belt for her loins, a cap for her head and new shoes on each festival.
א
כמה הכסות שהוא חייב ליתן לה. בגדים של נ' זוז משנה לשנה ממטבע אותן הימים שנמצאו הג' ששה דינרין ורביע דינר כסף. נותנין לה חדשים בימות הגשמים ולובשת בלאותיהן בימות החמה. והשחקים והם מותר הכסות הרי הן שלה כדי שתתכסה בהם בימי נדתה. ונותנין לה חגורה למתניה וכפה לראשה ומנעל ממועד למועד:
2
When does the above apply? In [the Talmudic period,] and in Eretz Yisrael, but in other ages or in other countries, there is no fixed amount of money [determined for this purpose]. For there are some places where garments are very expensive, and others where they are inexpensive.
The fundamental principle is2 that he is obligated to provide her with appropriate clothes for the winter and the summer, the minimal that are worn by a married woman in that country.
ב
בד"א באותן הימים ובארץ ישראל אבל בשאר זמנים ושאר המקומות אין הדמים עיקר. יש מקומות שיהיו שם הבגדים ביוקר הרבה או בזול הרבה. אלא העיקר שסומכין עליו שמחייבין אותו ליתן לה בגדים הראויים בימות הגשמים ובימות החמה בפחות שלובשת כל אשה בעלת בית שבאותה המדינה:
3
Included in the [obligation to provide her with] garments is the requirement to provide her with household goods and a dwelling place.3
With which household goods is he obligated to provide her? With a bed and its spreads, a reed or woven rug to sit on, and utensils with which to eat and drink - e.g., a pot, a plate, a cup, a bottle and the like.
With regard to her dwelling? He must rent a dwelling at least four cubits by four cubits. It must have a yard outside for her use and a latrine [nearby].
ג
ובכלל הכסות שהוא חייב ליתן לה כלי בית ומדור שיושבת בו. ומה הן כלי בית מטה מוצעת ומפץ או מחצלת לישב עליה. וכלי אכילה ושתיה כגון קדרה וקערה וכוס ובקבוק וכיוצא בהן. והמדור ששוכר לה בית של ד' אמות על ד' אמות ותהיה רחבה חוצה לה כדי להשתמש בה. ויהיה לו בית הכסא חוץ ממנו:
4
Similarly, he is obligated to provide her with ornaments - e.g., colored cloths to wrap her head and forehead, eye-makeup, rouge and the like - so that she will not appear unattractive to him.
ד
וכן מחייבין אותו ליתן לה תכשיטים כגון בגדי צבעונין להקיף על ראשה ופדחתה ופוך ושרק וכיוצא בה כדי שלא תתגנה עליו:
5
When does the above apply? With regard to a poor Jewish man. Concerning a rich man, by contrast, all [of his obligations are judged] according to the extent of his wealth.4 If it would be appropriate for him to buy her silk and embroidered clothing and golden articles, he is compelled to provide her with these.
Similarly, the dwelling [he is required to give her] is judged according to his wealth, as are the ornaments and the household goods. If he does not have the means to provide her with the minimum required of a poor Jewish man, he is compelled to divorce her.5 The money due her by virtue of her ketubah is considered to be a debt that he is required to pay when he gains the means.
ה
בד"א בעני שבישראל אבל בעשיר הכל לפי עשרו. ואפילו היה ראוי לקנות לה כלי משי ורקמה וכלי זהב כופין אותו ונותן. וכן המדור לפי עשרו והתכשיט וכלי הבית הכל לפי עשרו. ואם קצרה ידו ליתן לה אפילו כעני שבישראל כופין אותו להוציא ותהיה הכתובה עליו חוב עד שיעשיר:
6
[A man] is obligated to provide the necessary clothing, dwelling and household goods, not only for his wife, but also for his sons and daughters who are six years old or less.6 He is not, however, required to provide for them according to his wealth; all that is necessary is that he provide for their needs.
This is the governing principle: whenever a husband [or his estate] is required to provide for a person's subsistence - whether the husband is alive or deceased - the husband [or his estate] is also obligated to provide for the person's clothing, household goods and dwelling. Whenever a court must sell [a person's property] to provide for [a dependent's] subsistence,7 they also sell [his property] to provide [the dependent] with clothing, household goods and a dwelling.
ו
ולא האשה בלבד אלא בניו ובנותיו הקטנים בני שש או פחות חייב ליתן להם כסות המספקת להם וכלי תשמיש ומדור לשכון בו. ואינו נותן להם לפי עשרו אלא כפי צרכן בלבד. זה הכלל כל מי שיש לו עליו מזונות בין בחייו בין אחר מותו יש לו כסות וכלי בית ומדור. וכל שב"ד מוכרין למזונותיו כך מוכרין לכסותו וכלי ביתו ומדורו:
7
When a woman's husband has departed on a journey, and the court allots [money from his property] for her subsistence, her clothes, her household goods and the renting of a dwelling, they do not allot her money for ornaments. For she does not have a husband [present] for whom to make herself attractive. If, by contrast, a woman's husband loses his mental faculties or becomes a deaf mute, she is granted an allotment for ornaments.8
The laws that apply to the claims and counterclaims between a woman and her husband with regard to garments, clothing and the rental of a dwelling [in the event of the husband's departure on an extended journey] are the same as those that apply with regard to her subsistence. If he claims to have provided for her and she denies [his claim], the same rulings apply to all claims.
ז
האשה שהלך בעלה ופסקו לה ב"ד מזונות וכסות וכלי בית ושכר מדור אין פוסקין לה תכשיט שהרי אין לה בעל שתתקשט לו. אבל מי שנשתטה בעלה או שנתחרש פוסקין לה תכשיט. ודין הבעל עם אשתו בטענת הכסות והכלים ושכר המדור כדינם בטענת המזונות אם אמר הוא נתתי והיא אומרת לא נתת דין אחד לכל:
8
[The following rules apply if a husband] takes a vow that prevents9 his wife from wearing any type of ornament. If the couple are poor, they may remain married for a year while the vow is in effect.10 If [it remains in effect] for a longer period, he must either absolve himself of the vow, or divorce [his wife] and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah.
If the couple are wealthy, they may remain married for a month while the vow is in effect. If [it remains in effect] for a longer period, he must either absolve himself of the vow or divorce [his wife] and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah.
ח
המדיר את אשתו שלא תתקשט באחד מכל המינין. בעניות שנה אחת יקיים יתר על כן או יתיר את נדרו או יוציא ויתן כתובה. ובעשירות ל' יום יקיים יתר על כן יתיר את נדרו או יוציא ויתן כתובה:
9
[The following rules apply if a husband] takes a vow that prevents his wife from going to the bathhouse. [The couple may remain married for only] one week in a large city and two weeks in a village [if the vow remains in effect]. If he takes a vow that prevents his wife from wearing shoes [the couple may remain married for only] three days11 in a village and one day in a large city.12 If [the vow remains in effect] for a longer period, he must either absolve himself of the vow or divorce [his wife] and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah.
ט
הדירה שלא תלך למרחץ. בכרכים שבת אחת בכפרים שתי שבתות. שלא תנעול מנעל. בכפרים ג' ימים ובכרכים מעת לעת. יתר על זה יתיר את נדרו או יוציא ויתן כתובה:
10
If [a husband] takes a vow that prevents his wife from borrowing or lending household goods that are frequently lent and borrowed between neighbors - e.g., a sifter, a sieve, a mill, an oven or the like - he must either absolve himself of the vow, or divorce [his wife] and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah.13 [The rationale is that his vow] causes her to have a bad reputation among her neighbors.
Similarly, if she takes an oath14 not to borrow or lend [neighbors] a sifter, a sieve, a mill, an oven or the like, or not to weave attractive garments for her sons in places where it is customary to do so, he may divorce her without paying her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah. [The rationale is that her vow] causes him to have a reputation as a miser among his neighbors.
י
הדירה שלא תשאל ולא תשאיל מכלי הבית שדרך כל השכנות לשאול אותן ולהשאילן כגון נפה וכברה רחים ותנור וכיוצא בהם. יתיר את נדרו או יוציא ויתן כתובה מפני שמשיאה שם רע בשכונתיה. וכן היא שנדרה שלא תשאל ולא תשאיל נפה וכברה ורחים ותנור וכיוצא בהם ושלא תארוג בגדים נאים לבנים במקום שדרכן לארוג אותם לבנים תצא בלא כתובה מפני שמשיאתו שם רע בשכונתו שהוא כילי:
11
In a place where it is customary for a woman not to go out to the market place wearing merely a cap on her head, but also a veil that covers her entire body like a cloak, her husband must provide at least the least expensive type of veil for her. If he is wealthy, [he must provide her with a veil whose quality] is commensurate with his wealth.
[He must give her this veil] so that she can visit her father's home, a house of mourning or a wedding celebration. For every woman should be given the opportunity to visit her father and to go to a house of mourning or a wedding celebration as an expression of kindness to her friends and relatives, for [this will have a reciprocal effect], and they will return the visits. For a woman [at home] is not confined in a jail, from which she cannot come and go.
Nevertheless, it is uncouth for a woman always to leave home - this time to go out and another time to go on the street. Indeed, a husband should prevent a wife from doing this and not allow her to go out more than once or twice a month, as is necessary.15 For there is nothing more attractive for a woman than to sit in the corner of her home, as [implied by Psalms 45:14]: "All the glory of the king's daughter is within."
יא
מקום שדרכן שלא תצא אשה לשוק בכפה שעל ראשה בלבד עד שיהיה עליה רדיד החופה את כל גופה כמו טלית נותן לה בכלל הכסות רדיד הפחות מכל הרדידין. ואם היה עשיר נותן לה לפי עשרו כדי שתצא בו לבית אביה או לבית האבל או לבית המשתה. לפי שכל אשה יש לה לצאת ולילך לבית אביה לבקרו ולבית האבל ולבית המשתה לגמול חסד לרעותיה או לקרובותיה כדי שיבואו הם לה. שאינה בבית הסוהר עד שלא תצא ולא תבוא. אבל גנאי הוא לאשה שתהיה יוצאה תמיד פעם בחוץ פעם ברחובות. ויש לבעל למנוע אשתו מזה ולא יניחנה לצאת אלא פעם אחת בחודש או כמה פעמים בחודש לפי הצורך. שאין יופי לאשה אלא לישב בזוית ביתה שכך כתוב כל כבודה בת מלך פנימה:
12
[The following rules apply when a husband] takes a vow that prevents his wife from going to her father's home. If he lives in the same city, [the husband] is granted a respite of one month. [If he desires to maintain his vow at the beginning of] the second month, he must divorce [his wife] and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah. If [the wife's father lives] in another city, [the husband] is granted respite until the first festival.16 [If he desires to maintain his vow until] the second [festival], he must divorce [his wife] and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah.
יב
המדיר את אשתו שלא תלך לבית אביה בזמן שהוא עמה בעיר חודש אחד ממתינין לו שנים יוציא ויתן כתובה. ובזמן שהוא בעיר אחרת רגל אחד ממתינין לו שנים יוציא ויתן כתובה:
13
[The following rules apply when a husband] takes a vow that prevents his wife from going to a house of mourning or to wedding celebrations. He must either absolve himself of the vow or divorce [his wife] and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah. For this is like placing her in jail and locking her in.
If [the husband] claims: "[I forbade her from going] because of indecent people who were present at that house of mourning or wedding," and it was discovered that indeed, indecent people were present, he is given the prerogative [of making that vow].
יג
המדיר את אשתו שלא תלך לבית האבל או לבית המשתה. או יתיר את נדרו או יוציא ויתן כתובה שזה כמי שאסרה בבית הסוהר ונעל בפניה. ואם היה טוען מפני בני אדם פרוצים שיש באותו בית האבל או בבית המשתה והוחזקו שם פרוצים שומעין לו:
14
When a person tells his wife, "I do not desire that your father, your mother, your brothers and your sisters come into my domain," he is given that prerogative. Instead, she should visit them when an [unusual] event occurs to them. And she should visit her father's house once a month and on each festival. They, by contrast, should visit her only when an unusual event of great import occurs - e.g., sickness or birth. For a person should not be forced to have others enter his domain.
Similarly, if [the wife] says: "I do not want your mother and your sisters to visit, nor will I live together with them in one courtyard, because they cause me difficulties and distress," she is given that prerogative.17 For a person should not be forced to have others dwell with him in his domain.
יד
האומר לאשתו אין רצוני שיבואו לביתי אביך ואמך אחיך ואחיותיך שומעין לו ותהיה היא הולכת להם כשיארע להם דבר. ותלך לבית אביה פעם בחודש ובכל רגל ורגל. ולא יכנסו הם לה אלא אם אירע לה דבר כגון חולי או לידה. שאין כופין את האדם שיכנסו אחרים ברשותו. וכן היא שאמרה אין רצוני שיכנסו אצלי אמך ואחיותיך ואיני שוכנת עמהם בחצר אחת מפני שמריעין לי ומצירין לי שומעין לה. שאין כופין את האדם שישבו אחרים עמו ברשותו:
15
When a husband says: "I will not dwell in this home, because there are wicked or indecent people or gentiles in this neighborhood, and I fear them," he is given that prerogative. This applies even if it has not been established that there are indecent people living there. For our Sages ordained:18 "Keep away from a bad neighbor." Even if the dwelling belongs to the woman, she is forced to leave it, and they should establish their dwelling among worthy people.19
The same law applies if the woman makes such a demand. Although [the husband] says, "I do not object to them," her will is followed. [The rationale is that] she can say, "I do not want to get a bad reputation in these neighborhoods."
טו
האיש שאמר איני דר במדור זה מפני שבני אדם רעים או פרוצים או עכו"ם בשכונתי ואני מתירא מהם שומעים לו. ואע"פ שלא הוחזקו בפריצות שכך צוו חכמים הרחק משכן רע. ואפילו היה המדור שלה מוציאין אותה ממנו ושוכן בין בני אדם כשרים. וכך היא שאמרה כן אעפ"י שהוא אומר אני איני מקפיד עליהם שומעין לה מפני שהיא אומרת אין רצוני שיצא עלי שום רע בשכנות אלו:
16
All of the earth is divided into different lands - e.g., the Land of Canaan, the Land of Egypt, the Land of Yemen, the Land of Ethiopia, the Land of Babylonia and the like.20 Every land is subdivided into large cities21 and villages. With regard to the subject of marriage, the cities of Eretz Yisrael are considered to be divided into three different lands: Judea, Transjordan and the Galilee.
טז
כל הישוב ארצות ארצות הוא. כגון ארץ כנען וארץ מצרים וארץ תימן וארץ כוש וארץ שנער וכיוצא בהן. וכל ארץ וארץ ממדינות וכפרים. וערי ישראל לענין נישואין ג' ארצות היו יהודה ועבר הירדן והגליל:
17
When a man from one of these lands marries a woman in another land, she is compelled to follow him to his land, or to accept a divorce without receiving [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah. [The rationale is that,] although it was not specifically stated, [it can be assumed] that he married her on this condition.22
When, however, a person marries a woman in a particular land and he23 is from that land, he does not have the right to [compel] her to move to another land. He may, nevertheless, [compel] her to move from city to city and from village to village within that land.
He may not, however, [compel] her to move from a city to a village, or from a village to a city. For there are certain advantages to living in a city, and other advantages to living in a village.
יז
איש שהיה מארץ מן הארצות ונשא אשה בארץ אחרת כופין אותה ויוצאה עמו לארצו או תצא בלא כתובה שע"מ כן נשאה אף ע"פ שלא פירש. אבל הנושא אשה באחת מן הארצות והיא מאנשי אותה הארץ אינו יכול להוציאה לארץ אחרת. אבל מוציאה ממדינה למדינה ומכפר לכפר באותה הארץ ואינו יכול להוציאה ממדינה לכפר ולא מכפר למדינה שיש דברים שישיבת המדינה טובה להם ויש דברים שישיבת הכפרים טובה להם:
18
When he [compels] her to move from one city to another, or from one village to another within a particular land, he may not compel her to move from pleasant surroundings24 to unpleasant surroundings, nor from unpleasant [surroundings] to pleasant ones. [Although the latter move would seemingly be to her benefit, she still must consent,] because she must care for and check herself in the pleasant surroundings, so that she will not be considered inferior and unattractive.25
Similarly, [her husband] may not [compel] her to move from an area inhabited primarily by Jews to an area inhabited primarily by gentiles. Wherever [the couple lives], they should move26 from an area inhabited primarily by gentiles to an area inhabited primarily by Jews.
יח
וכשמוציאה ממדינה למדינה ומכפר לכפר באותה הארץ אינו יכול להוציאה מנוה היפה לנוה הרע ולא מרע ליפה. מפני שהיא צריכה להטפל ולבדוק עצמה בנוה היפה כדי שלא תהיה בו קלה וכעורה. וכן לא יוציאה ממקום שרובו ישראל למקום שרובו עכו"ם. ובכל מקום מוציאין ממקום שרובו עכו"ם למקום שרובו ישראל:
19
When does the above apply? When moving from one place in the diaspora to another, or from one place in Eretz Yisrael to another. But if [the husband desires to move] from the diaspora to Eretz Yisrael, the woman should be compelled to move.27 [This applies even when moving involves leaving] pleasant surroundings for unpleasant ones. Even [when it is necessary to leave] an area inhabited primarily by Jews for an area inhabited primarily by gentiles, one should [move to Eretz Yisrael].
One should not leave Eretz Yisrael for the diaspora,28 even if the move enables one to relocate from unpleasant [surroundings] to pleasant ones, and even when it enables one to move from an area inhabited primarily by gentiles to an area inhabited primarily by Jews.
יט
בד"א מחוצה לארץ לח"ל או מארץ ישראל לארץ ישראל אבל מחוצה לארץ לארץ ישראל כופין אותה לעלות אפילו מנוה היפה לנוה הרע ואפילו ממקום שרובו ישראל למקום שרובו עכו"ם מעלין. ואין מוציאין מארץ ישראל לחוצה לארץ ואפילו מנוה הרע לנוה היפה [ואפילו ממקום] שרובו עכו"ם למקום שרובו ישראל:
20
When a husband desires to move to Eretz Yisrael and [his wife] does not desire to do so, he may divorce her without paying her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah. If she desires to move [to Eretz Yisrael] and he does not desire to do so, he must divorce her and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah.29
The same laws apply with regard to moving from other places in Eretz Yisrael to Jerusalem. [Just as] everyone should move to Eretz Yisrael, and no one should leave there, [so too,] everyone should move to Jerusalem, and no one should leave there.30
כ
אמר האיש לעלות לארץ ישראל והיא אינה רוצה תצא בלא כתובה. אמרה היא לעלות והוא אינו רוצה יוציא ויתן כתובה. והוא הדין לכל מקום מארץ ישראל עם ירושלים. שהכל מעלין לארץ ישראל ואין הכל מוציאין משם. הכל מעלין לירושלים ואין הכל מוציאין משם:
FOOTNOTES
1.For a zuz was only one eighth pure silver.
2.See Halachah 5.
3.I.e., the obligation to provide one's wife with household goods and a dwelling stems from the Torah itself and is not merely a Rabbinic ordinance.
4.I.e., a man is obligated to provide his wife with the clothes appropriate for a woman of her social standing (or his social standing, if he is of higher social standing than she) in the country in which they dwell.
5.For she should be given the opportunity to marry a man who can provide her with her basic necessities. (See Chapter 12, Halachah 11 and notes.)
6.Similarly, if he is capable of giving charity, he should provide for his sons and daughters above the age of six, as explained in Chapter 12, Halachah 15 (Chelkat Mechokek 73:5).
7.See Chapter 12, Halachah 16.
8.Rashi, Ketubot 48a, explains the difference between the two instances. When the husband left on the journey, he decided to leave his wife without adornments. Hence, we may not expropriate the money for them from his property. When, by contrast, a man loses his mental faculties, the court attempts to support the man's wife as her husband would have liked to. And we assume that he would have preferred that his wife have ornaments to adorn herself.
9.See the notes on Chapter 12, Halachah 24.
10.A poor woman does not wear ornaments very frequently and will not feel deprived if she does not adorn herself for a year. A rich woman, by contrast, cannot bear not to wear ornaments for such an extended period.
11.This law is based on the Jerusalem Talmud (Ketubot 7:4). The standard printed text of that source, however, has a slightly different version, stating "three months" instead of three days.
12.These rulings were dependent on the socio-economic conditions prevalent in the Talmudic period. If the norms are different in other societies, the rulings also change.
13.The Maggid Mishneh states that the husband is given thirty days to consider absolving his vow. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 74:3) states he must divorce her immediately. If the husband makes the vow dependent on marital relations, he is given a week to consider the matter (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit. 74:3).
14.Note the slight deviation between the wording chosen by the Rambam and that employed by the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.).
15.While the spirit of the Rambam's words is appreciated, in most communities the norm is for women to leave their homes far more frequently.
16.For it is customary for a daughter to visit her parents during the festivals.
17.Based on the views of the Ra'avad and others, the Ramah (Even HaEzer 74:10) explains that the woman's rights are different from her husband's. Since the dwelling belongs to him, he may invite his mother and sisters. Nevertheless, efforts should be made to mediate between them and his wife. If necessary, a man or a woman should be placed in the home to see who is the cause of the difficulty.
18.Avot 1:7.
19.See Hilchot De'ot 6:1, where the Rambam emphasizes the importance of eschewing an undesirable environment and dwelling in a favorable one.
20.The Ramah (Even HaEzer 75:1) states that it is a difference in language that divides one land from another. The Rivash (Responsum 177) states that the determining factor is the government of the land. This matter is discussed by the later authorities, particularly in light of the emergence of large countries comprising many times the area of Eretz Yisrael in the Talmudic period. Many commentaries define a land as a place inhabited by people who speak the same language and are governed by the same authority. Even that is common today.
21.Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Ketubot 13:10). The contemporary translation of מדינה as "state" or "country" is not appropriate in this context.
22.The Ramah (Even HaEzer 75:1) quotes the opinion of Rabbenu Tam (Ketubot 110b), which states that when the two come from different lands and the marriage is held in one of these lands, the place where the couple marries determines their future dwelling. If, however, they each come from a different land from that in which the marriage is held, the woman may compel her husband to live in her native land. See also the opinion of Terumat HaDeshen (Responsum 416, quoted by the Ramah, loc. cit.), which states that if the man cannot earn a livelihood in the locale in which he is living, he may compel his wife to follow him to any place where he can.
23.Our text follows the version found in many manuscripts and early printings of the Mishneh Torah and that which is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 75:1). The standard published version states "she" instead of "he."
24.I.e., the neighborhood and its scenery. Our translation is based on the Ma'aseh Rokeach. Others translate נוה as "dwelling" - i.e., the home in which the couple reside.
25.The Rambam appears to be saying that the woman must dress and present herself in an appropriate way in an attractive setting, and she might not desire to make such an effort. Rashi (Ketubot 110b) explains that the change in lifestyle may cause illness.
26.Our translation is based on the Bayit Chadash (Even HaEzer 75), which states that the woman may compel her husband to make such a move. Note, however, the Chelkat Mechokek 75:12, which states that this interpretation need not be accepted.
27.As reflected in Hilchot Melachim, Chapter 5, the Rambam does not consider living in Eretz Yisrael a mitzvah [in contrast to the view of the Ramban (Hosafot l'Sefer HaMitzvot, Positive Mitzvah 4) and others, who do]. Nevertheless, he states (Hilchot Melachim 5:12): "At all times... a person should dwell in Eretz Yisrael... rather than in the diaspora."
The commentaries interpret the expression "At all times" to include even the present age. Tosafot, Ketubot 110b, explains that because we are unsure how to fulfill the agricultural laws of Eretz Yisrael, there is no obligation to live there in the present age. Others explain that because of the dangers that exist in Eretz Yisrael, there is no obligation. (See Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 75:5.) As reflected in this ruling and in one of his responsa, the Rambam negates those views and advocates living in Eretz Yisrael, even in the present age.
28.See Hilchot Melachim 5:9, which states that it is forbidden to leave Eretz Yisrael for the purpose of settling in the diaspora, unless there is a famine of extreme severity. Even then, abandoning the land is not considered desirable. In Hilchot Melachim 5:12, he states: "Whoever leaves [Eretz Yisrael] for the diaspora is considered as though he worships idols."
29.As mentioned above, there are opinions that maintain that in the present age, there is no obligation to dwell in Eretz Yisrael. According to these views, this ruling does not apply. Although the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 75:4-5) also mentions the opposing view, it appears to follow the opinion stated by the Rambam. Nevertheless, many Ashkenazic authorities maintain (see Ba'er Heteiv 75:19) that at present one may not divorce a woman without paying her the money due her for her ketubah because she does not desire to move to Eretz Yisrael. Although the Pitchei Teshuvah 75:7 speaks extensively about the positive value of living in Eretz Yisrael in the present age, it mentions another factor - the difficulty of earning a living in Eretz Yisrael - and states that unless one is assured of being able to sustain himself through work - as opposed to receiving charity - one may not compel one's family to relocate.
30.There are opinions (Mordechai, at the conclusion of Ketubot) that maintain that in the present age, when there is no Temple, there is no difference between Jerusalem and other cities in Eretz Yisrael. Nevertheless, the fact that this law is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 75:4), a text that deals only with laws applicable at present, appears to imply that the Rambam's ruling should be applied in the present age as well.
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class
Friday, Kislev 20, 5778 · 08 December 2017
"Today's Day"
Sunday, Kislev 20, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Vayeishev, first parsha with Rashi.
Tehillim: 97-103.
Tanya: Approbation by the rabbis...of blessed memory (p.x).
The first printing of the "Book of the Intermediates" - Tanya - was completed on Tuesday, Kislev 20, 5557 (1796) in Slavita. It included Part I - Sefer Shel Benonim, - Part II - Chinuch Katan - and Shaar Hayichud Veha'emunah.
Igeret Hateshuvah, first edition, was printed in Zolkvi 5559 (1799); second edition, first printing, Shklov 5566 (1806).
Igeret Hakodesh, first printing, Shklov 5574 (1814).
The corrected edition of all four parts was printed in Vilna (Rom edition) in 5660 (1900) and has been reprinted many times since.
Daily Thought:
True Lies
In prayer, we are taught, we must stand in perfect stillness, as though overwhelmed and absorbed in the Infinite Light.
But isn’t that a lie? Aren’t we pretending to be something far beyond who we really are?
No—it is the truth. That is the true state of our soul, and the body reflects the soul. Everything that stands between—our minds, our hearts and our egos—all may be oblivious to the state of our souls, but the physical body can still reflect it.
How could that be? How could the physical body reflect that which the mind and heart cannot?
Don’t be so surprised. Very often the most lofty and spiritual can find no other place to be manifest but in the most simple and physical.
-------
No comments:
Post a Comment