| |||||
Chabad.org Calendar 
ב"ה Today in JudaismToday is Shabbat, Iyar 27, 5778 · May 12, 2018
Omer: Day 42 - Malchut sheb'Yesod
Today's Laws & Customs
• Ethics of the Fathers: Chapter 5
In preparation for the festival of Shavuot, we study one of the six chapters of the Talmud's Ethics of the Fathers ("Avot") on the afternoon of each of the six Shabbatot between Passover and Shavuot; this week we study Chapter Five. (In many communities -- and such is the Chabad custom -- the study cycle is repeated through the summer, until the Shabbat before Rosh Hashanah.)
Link: Ethics of the Fathers, Chapter 5
• Count "Forty-Three Days to the Omer" Tonight
Tomorrow is the forty-third day of the Omer Count. Since, on the Jewish calendar, the day begins at nightfall of the previous evening, we count the omer for tomorrow's date tonight, after nightfall: "Today is forty-three days, which are six weeks and one day, to the Omer." (If you miss the count tonight, you can count the omer all day tomorrow, but without the preceding blessing).
The 49-day "Counting of the Omer" retraces our ancestors' seven-week spiritual journey from the Exodus to Sinai. Each evening we recite a special blessing and count the days and weeks that have passed since the Omer; the 50th day is Shavuot, the festival celebrating the Giving of the Torah at Sinai.
Tonight's Sefirah: Chessed sheb'Malchut -- "Kindness in Receptiveness"
The teachings of Kabbalah explain that there are seven "Divine Attributes" -- Sefirot -- that G-d assumes through which to relate to our existence: Chessed, Gevurah,Tifferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod and Malchut ("Love", "Strength", "Beauty", "Victory", "Splendor", "Foundation" and "Sovereignty"). In the human being, created in the "image of G-d," the seven sefirot are mirrored in the seven "emotional attributes" of the human soul: Kindness, Restraint, Harmony, Ambition, Humility, Connection and Receptiveness. Each of the seven attributes contain elements of all seven--i.e., "Kindness in Kindness", "Restraint in Kindness", "Harmony in Kindness", etc.--making for a total of forty-nine traits. The 49-day Omer Count is thus a 49-step process of self-refinement, with each day devoted to the "rectification" and perfection of one the forty-nine "sefirot."
Links:
How to count the Omer
The deeper significance of the Omer Count
Daily Torah Study
Chumash: Behar-Bechukotai, 7th Portion Leviticus 27:16-27:34 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation
• Video Class
• Daily Wisdom (short insight)
Leviticus Chapter 27
16 And if a man consecrates some of the field of his inherited property to the Lord, the valuation shall be according to its sowing: an area which requires a chomer of barley seeds at fifty silver shekels. טז וְאִ֣ם | מִשְּׂדֵ֣ה אֲחֻזָּת֗וֹ יַקְדִּ֥ישׁ אִישׁ֙ לַֽיהֹוָ֔ה וְהָיָ֥ה עֶרְכְּךָ֖ לְפִ֣י זַרְע֑וֹ זֶ֚רַע חֹ֣מֶר שְׂעֹרִ֔ים בַּֽחֲמִשִּׁ֖ים שֶׁ֥קֶל כָּֽסֶף:
the valuation shall be according to its sowing: And not according to its value, whether it is a field of good quality or a field of bad quality, their redemption from consecration is equal, [namely]: The area requiring a kor (a chomer in Scripture) of barley seeds [must be redeemed] for fifty [silver] shekels. This is Scripture’s decree. — [Torath Kohanim 27:90] Now, this applies to one who comes to redeem it at the beginning of the Jubilee cycle [namely, in its first year]. However, if he comes to redeem it in the middle [of the Jubilee cycle, i.e., after the first year has elapsed], he must pay according to the calculation of one sela (i.e., a shekel) and a pundyon (one forty-eighth of a shekel) per year [depending on how many years until the next Jubilee (see Rashi on verse 18 below)]. — [Arachin 25a] [And why so?] Because property is consecrated only according to the years of the Jubilee cycle-if it is redeemed [within the Jubilee cycle], very good, [i.e., it reverts to its original owners and is no longer Temple property]; but if not, the [Temple] treasurer sells it to someone else at the aforementioned rate, and it remains in the purchaser’s possession until the next Jubilee, just like any other fields which are sold. Then, when it leaves the possession of this purchaser [in the Jubilee], it reverts to the kohanim of that watch, namely, [namely, the shift officiating] when [Yom Kippur of that] Jubilee occurs, and is apportioned among them. — [Arachin 28b] [The kohanim are divided into 24 family watches, or shifts, each in rotation for two or three one-week periods every year.] This is the law stated regarding one who consecrates a field. I will now explain it according to the order of the verses. והיה ערכך לפי זרעו: ולא כפי שוויה. אחת שדה טובה ואחת שדה רעה, פדיון הקדשן שוה, בית כור שעורים בחמשים שקלים, כך גזירת הכתוב. והוא שבא לגאלה בתחלת היובל, ואם בא לגאלה באמצעו, נותן לפי החשבון סלע ופונדיון לשנה, לפי שאינה הקדש אלא למנין שני היובל, שאם נגאלה הרי טוב, ואם לאו הגזבר מוכרה בדמים הללו לאחר ועומדת ביד הלוקח עד היובל כשאר כל השדות המכורות, וכשהיא יוצאה מידו חוזרת לכהנים של אותו משמר שהיובל פוגע בו ומתחלקת ביניהם, זהו המשפט האמור במקדיש שדה. ועכשיו אפרשנו על סדר המקראות:
17Now, if he consecrates his field from [when] the Jubilee year [has ended], it shall remain at [its full] valuation. יזאִם־מִשְּׁנַ֥ת הַיֹּבֵ֖ל יַקְדִּ֣ישׁ שָׂדֵ֑הוּ כְּעֶרְכְּךָ֖ יָקֽוּם:
Now, if he consecrates his field from [when] the Jubilee year [has ended]: If, as soon as the Jubilee year has ended, he immediately consecrates [his property i.e., within that first year of the next Shemittah and Jubilee cycle], and then he comes to redeem it immediately [i.e., before that first year has ended]. אם משנת היבל יקדיש וגו': אם משעברה שנת היובל מיד הקדישה ובא לגאלה מיד:
it shall remain at [its full] valuation: i.e., like this aforementioned (in verse 16) valuation, it shall be, [namely,] he must give fifty silver shekels [for the size of field stated]. — [see Arachin 24b] כערכך יקום: כערך הזה האמור יהיה, חמשים כסף יתן:
18But if he consecrates his field after the Jubilee, the kohen shall calculate the money for him, according to the remaining years until the [next] Jubilee year, and it shall be deducted from the valuation. יחוְאִם־אַחַ֣ר הַיֹּבֵל֘ יַקְדִּ֣ישׁ שָׂדֵ֒הוּ֒ וְחִשַּׁב־ל֨וֹ הַכֹּהֵ֜ן אֶת־הַכֶּ֗סֶף עַל־פִּ֤י הַשָּׁנִים֙ הַנּ֣וֹתָרֹ֔ת עַ֖ד שְׁנַ֣ת הַיֹּבֵ֑ל וְנִגְרַ֖ע מֵֽעֶרְכֶּֽךָ:
But if he consecrates his field after the Jubilee, [the kohen should calculate the money for him….: [And not only in this case, but] likewise, if [the original owner] had consecrated the property immediately after the Jubilee ended, and it remained in the possession of the treasurer, and this one comes to redeem it after [this first year following] the Jubilee - ואם אחר היבל יקדיש: וכן אם הקדישה משנת היובל ונשתהה ביד גזבר ובא זה לגאלה אחר היובל:
the kohen shall calculate the money for him, according to the remaining years [until the (next) Jubilee year]: according to the rate. How? [Scripture] has stated the fixed value [of redemption for a field whose size is that stated in our verse,] for forty-nine years as fifty [silver] shekels, i.e., one shekel for each of the [49] years and an extra shekel [paid over] all the [49] years. Now, a shekel is equivalent to 48 pundyons . Thus, one sela [i.e., a shekel] and one pundyon for each year, except that one pundyon is missing for all of them [i.e., if we figure fifty shekels, we have only 49 shekels and 48 pundyons , which is less than a sela and a pundyon per year, but the redeemer is required to pay one extra pundyon per a 49-year period, for] our Rabbis taught (Bech. 50a) that, the [extra] pundyon is a surcharge for [currency exchange of] small coins [i.e., if someone comes to purchase a silver shekel with pundyons , he will be charged 49 of them, the extra pundyon being a surcharge for attaining the more significant single shekel coin rather than many small coins. This surcharge, then, is passed on to the one who wishes to redeem the field. Hence, at an annual rate of one shekel and one pundyon, the redeemer is actually paying one forty-ninth of a pundyon currency exchange surcharge every year]. And therefore, someone who comes to redeem [a field], must pay one sela [i.e., a shekel] and one pundyon for every year left until the next Jubilee year. וחשב לו הכהן את הכסף על פי השנים הנותרת: כפי חשבון. כיצד, הרי קצב דמיה של ארבעים ותשע שנים חמשים שקל, הרי שקל לכל שנה, ושקל יתר בין כולן, והשקל ארבעים ושמנה פודיונין, הרי סלע ופונדיון לשנה אלא שחסר פונדיון אחד לכולן, ואמרו רבותינו שאותו פונדיון קלבון לפרוטרוט, והבא לגאול יתן סלע ופונדיון לכל שנה לשנים הנותרות עד שנת היובל:
thereby deducting from the [full] valuation [amount]: the number of years from the [preceding] Jubilee year until the redemption year. ונגרע מערכך: מנין השנים שמשנת היובל עד שנת הפדיון:
19If the one who consecrated it redeems the field, he shall add to it a fifth of the valuation money, and it shall be his. יטוְאִם־גָּאֹ֤ל יִגְאַל֙ אֶת־הַשָּׂדֶ֔ה הַמַּקְדִּ֖ישׁ אֹת֑וֹ וְ֠יָסַ֠ף חֲמִשִׁ֧ית כֶּֽסֶף־עֶרְכְּךָ֛ עָלָ֖יו וְקָ֥ם לֽוֹ:
If the [one who consecrated it] redeems the field: The person who consecrated it must add a fifth to this set amount. — [see Rashi on preceding verse; Mizrachi] ואם גאל יגאל: המקדיש אותו, יוסיף חומש על הקצבה הזאת:
20But if he does not redeem the field, and if he has sold the field to someone else it may no longer be redeemed. כוְאִם־לֹ֤א יִגְאַל֙ אֶת־הַשָּׂדֶ֔ה וְאִם־מָכַ֥ר אֶת־הַשָּׂדֶ֖ה לְאִ֣ישׁ אַחֵ֑ר לֹֽא־יִגָּאֵ֖ל עֽוֹד:
But if he does not redeem the field: [i.e., if] the one who consecrated [the field does not redeem it]. ואם לא יגאל את השדה: המקדיש:
and if… has sold: [i.e., if] the treasurer (Arachin 25b) has sold ואם מכר: הגזבר:
the field to someone else-it may no longer be redeemed: to revert to the possession of the one who consecrated it [i.e., the original owner, come Jubilee]. — [Sifthei Chachamim] את השדה לאיש אחר לא יגאל עוד: לשוב ליד המקדיש:
21But, when the field leaves in the Jubilee, it shall be holy to the Lord like a field devoted; his inherited property shall belong to the kohen. כאוְהָיָ֨ה הַשָּׂדֶ֜ה בְּצֵאת֣וֹ בַיֹּבֵ֗ל קֹ֛דֶשׁ לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה כִּשְׂדֵ֣ה הַחֵ֑רֶם לַכֹּהֵ֖ן תִּֽהְיֶ֥ה אֲחֻזָּתֽוֹ:
But, when the field leaves in the Jubilee: the possession of the one who had purchased it from the treasurer, just like all fields that leave the possession of their purchasers, come Jubilee. והיה השדה בצאתו ביבל: מיד הלוקחו מן הגזבר, כדרך שאר שדות היוצאות מיד לוקחיהם ביובל:
holy to the Lord: This does not mean that it reverts to the treasurer as sacred property designated for maintenance of the Holy Temple. Rather, it is “like a field devoted” which is given to the kohanim, as it is said, “Anything devoted in Israel shall belong to you” (Num. 18:14). This too shall be divided in Jubilee among the kohanim of the watch at that time, namely, when Yom Kippur of that Jubilee occurs. — [Arachin 28b] קדש לה': לא שישוב להקדש בדק הבית ליד הגזבר אלא כשדה החרם הנתון לכהנים, שנאמר (במדבר יח יד) כל חרם בישראל לך יהיה, אף זו תתחלק ביובל לכהנים של אותו משמר, שיום הכפורים של יובל פוגע בו:
22And if he consecrates to the Lord a field that he had acquired, that is not part of his inherited property, כבוְאִם֙ אֶת־שְׂדֵ֣ה מִקְנָת֔וֹ אֲשֶׁ֕ר לֹ֖א מִשְּׂדֵ֣ה אֲחֻזָּת֑וֹ יַקְדִּ֖ישׁ לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
And if [he consecrates…] a field that he had acquired…: There is a difference between an acquired field (שְׂדֵה מִקְנֶה) and a field that is part of inherited property (שְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה), namely, that the acquired field is not apportioned among the kohanim in the Jubilee because [the acquirer] can consecrate the field only until Jubilee, for in the Jubilee, the field is destined to leave his possession and revert to the original owner [from whom he acquired it]. Therefore, if he [the original owner (Panim Yafoth; Malbim)] comes to redeem [his property,] he must redeem it with that same fixed rate of valuation for a field that was part of an inherited property. [Should the one who consecrated it redeem it, according to the Sages, he redeems it according to its market value.] But if he does not redeem it, and the treasurer sells it to someone else, or if he does redeem it [according to Tos., Arachin 26b, the reading in Rashi is: If no one redeemed it, and it remained in the possession of the treasurer] in the Jubilee year the field reverts to the one from whom the one who consecrated it bought it, [i.e., the original owner of the field]. Now, lest you say that [the expression] לַאֲשֶׁר קָנֵהוּ מֵאִתּוֹ (in verse 24 below) [refers to] the one from whom this acquirer most recently acquired the field, namely, the treasurer [and that our verse is thus stating here that come Jubilee, the field “reverts” to the treasurer]. Therefore, it was necessary to state (verse 24),“namely, the one whose inherited land it was,” i.e., inherited from his ancestors-referring, therefore, to the original owner who had sold [the field] to the one who consecrated it. — [Arachin 26b] ואם את שדה מקנתו וגו': חלוק יש בין שדה מקנה לשדה אחוזה, ששדה מקנה לא תתחלק לכהנים ביובל, לפי שאינו יכול להקדישה אלא עד היובל, שהרי ביובל היתה עתידה לצאת מידו ולשוב לבעלים, לפיכך אם בא לגאלה, יגאל בדמים הללו הקצובים לשדה אחוזה. ואם לא יגאל וימכרנה גזבר לאחר, או אם לא יגאל הוא, בשנת היובל ישוב השדה לאשר קנהו מאתו, אותו שהקדישה. ופן תאמר לאשר קנהו הלוקח הזה האחרון מאתו, וזהו הגזבר, לכך הוצרך לומר לאשר לו אחוזת הארץ (פסוק כד), מירושת אבות, וזהו בעלים הראשונים שמכרוה למקדיש:
23the kohen shall calculate for him the amount of the valuation until the Jubilee year, and he shall give the valuation on that day, holy to the Lord. כגוְחִשַּׁב־ל֣וֹ הַכֹּהֵ֗ן אֵ֚ת מִכְסַ֣ת הָֽעֶרְכְּךָ֔ עַ֖ד שְׁנַ֣ת הַיֹּבֵ֑ל וְנָתַ֤ן אֶת־הָֽעֶרְכְּךָ֙ בַּיּ֣וֹם הַה֔וּא קֹ֖דֶשׁ לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
24In the Jubilee year, the field shall return to the one from whom he bought it namely, the one whose inherited land it was. כדבִּשְׁנַ֤ת הַיּוֹבֵל֙ יָשׁ֣וּב הַשָּׂדֶ֔ה לַֽאֲשֶׁ֥ר קָנָ֖הוּ מֵֽאִתּ֑וֹ לַֽאֲשֶׁר־ל֖וֹ אֲחֻזַּ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ:
25Every valuation shall be made according to the holy shekel, whereby one shekel is the equivalent of twenty gerahs. כהוְכָ֨ל־עֶרְכְּךָ֔ יִֽהְיֶ֖ה בְּשֶׁ֣קֶל הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ עֶשְׂרִ֥ים גֵּרָ֖ה יִֽהְיֶ֥ה הַשָּֽׁקֶל:
Every valuation shall be made according to the holy shekel: i.e., every valuation regarding which shekels are written, will be made according to the holy shekel. וכל ערכך יהיה בשקל הקדש: כל ערכך שכתוב בו שקלים יהיה בשקל הקדש:
one shekel is the equivalent of twenty gerahs: Twenty ma’ahs. This was how it was originally. However, in later times, they “added a sixth” [i.e., instead of a dinar being worth five ma’ahs (or gerahs), it became worth six ma’ahs (or gerahs)]. And indeed, our Rabbis taught: “A dinar is comprised of six ma’ahs of silver, and [since a shekel is worth four dinars,] there are twenty-four ma’ahs to one sela (i.e., shekel)” [as opposed to twenty ma’ahs in the shekel of the Torah]. — [Bech. 50a] עשרים גרה: עשרים מעות כך היו מתחילה ולאחר מכאן הוסיפו שתות. ואמרו רבותינו שש מעה כסף דינר, עשרים וארבע מעות לסלע:
26However, a firstborn animal that must be [sacrificed as] a firstborn to the Lord no man may consecrate it; whether it be an ox or sheep, it belongs to the Lord. כואַךְ־בְּכ֞וֹר אֲשֶׁ֨ר יְבֻכַּ֤ר לַֽיהֹוָה֙ בִּבְהֵמָ֔ה לֹֽא־יַקְדִּ֥ישׁ אִ֖ישׁ אֹת֑וֹ אִם־שׁ֣וֹר אִם־שֶׂ֔ה לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה הֽוּא:
no man may consecrate it: for the purpose of any other sacrifice, because it does not belong to him [but from its birth, a firstborn animal is designated as holy, to be given to the kohanim]. — [Torath Kohanim 27:107] לא יקדיש איש אתו: לשם קרבן אחר, לפי שאינו שלו:
27Now, if [someone consecrates] an unclean animal, he may redeem [it] by [paying] the valuation, and he shall add its fifth to it, and if it is not redeemed, it shall be sold for the valuation [price]. כזוְאִ֨ם בַּבְּהֵמָ֤ה הַטְּמֵאָה֙ וּפָדָ֣ה בְעֶרְכֶּ֔ךָ וְיָסַ֥ף חֲמִֽשִׁת֖וֹ עָלָ֑יו וְאִם־לֹ֥א יִגָּאֵ֖ל וְנִמְכַּ֥ר בְּעֶרְכֶּֽךָ:
Now, if [someone consecrates] an unclean animal: [lit., “And if it is with an unclean animal….”] This verse does not refer back to firstborn animals [discussed in the preceding verse], for it cannot state of a firstborn unclean animal that “he may redeem [it] by [paying] the valuation” [for the only unclean animal to which the law of the firstborn applies is a donkey (see Exod. 13: 12-13)]; and this [verse] cannot refer to a donkey, because the firstborn of a donkey can be redeemed only with a lamb (see Exod. 13:13), which becomes a gift to the kohen and is not given to the Sanctuary [as does the valuation money in our verse]. Rather, our verse here is referring back to consecration [of one’s possessions to the Temple], for Scripture above (verses 11-13) was speaking about the redemption of a clean animal that had been [consecrated and subsequently] blemished (see Rashi there), and here, our verse is speaking about one who consecrates an unclean animal for maintenance of the Temple. — [Men. 101a] ואם בבהמה הטמאה וגו': אין המקרא הזה מוסב על הבכור, שאין לומר בבכור בהמה טמאה ופדה בערכך. וחמור אין זה, שהרי אין פדיון פטר חמור אלא טלה, והוא מתנה לכהן ואינו להקדש, אלא הכתוב מוסב על ההקדש. שהכתוב שלמעלה (פסוק יא) דבר בפדיון בהמה טהורה שהוממה, וכאן דבר במקדיש בהמה טמאה לבדק הבית:
he may redeem [it] by [paying] the valuation: According to how much the kohen will assess its value. ופדה בערכך: כפי מה שיעריכנה הכהן:
and if it is not redeemed: By the owner, ואם לא יגאל: ע"י בעלים:
it shall be sold for the valuation [price]: to others. — [Torath Kohanim 27: 108] ונמכר בערכך: לאחרים:
28However, anything that a man devotes to the Lord from any of his property whether a person, an animal, or part of his inherited field shall not be sold, nor shall it be redeemed, [for] all devoted things are holy of holies to the Lord. כחאַ֣ךְ כָּל־חֵ֡רֶם אֲשֶׁ֣ר יַֽחֲרִם֩ אִ֨ישׁ לַֽיהֹוָ֜ה מִכָּל־אֲשֶׁר־ל֗וֹ מֵֽאָדָ֤ם וּבְהֵמָה֙ וּמִשְּׂדֵ֣ה אֲחֻזָּת֔וֹ לֹ֥א יִמָּכֵ֖ר וְלֹ֣א יִגָּאֵ֑ל כָּל־חֵ֕רֶם קֹֽדֶשׁ־קָֽדָשִׁ֥ים ה֖וּא לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
However, anything that a man devotes…: Our Rabbis are in dispute regarding this matter [of devoted property]: Some say that unqualified vows of devoted property [i.e., he says, “This is hereby devoted (חֵרֶם),” and does not specify,] go [automatically] to Sanctuary moneys [designated for maintenance of the Temple. Now, according to this ruling,] what then is the meaning of, “Anything devoted in Israel shall belong to you”? (Num. 18:14). This refers to vows of devoted property specifically designated to the kohanim, whereby someone says explicitly: “This is (חֵרֶם) devoted for the kohen .” But some [Rabbis] say that unqualified vows of devoted property go [automatically] to the kohanim . — [Arachin 28b] אך כל חרם וגו': נחלקו רבותינו בדבר יש אומרים סתם חרמים להקדש, ומה אני מקיים (במדבר יח יד) כל חרם בישראל לך יהיה, בחרמי כהנים שפירש ואמר הרי זה חרם לכהן, ויש שאמרו סתם חרמים לכהנים:
shall not be sold, nor shall it be redeemed: But, it must be given to the kohen . [For] according to those who rule that unqualified vows of devoted property go [automatically] to the kohanim (see preceding Rashi), they explain this verse as referring to unqualified vows of devoted property, while those who rule that unqualified vows of devoted property go [automatically] to [Sanctuary moneys designated for] maintenance of the Temple, explain this verse as referring to vows of devoted property specifically designated to the kohanim. For all agree that devoted property specifically designated to kohanim does not have any redemption, until it falls into the possession of the kohen [and the property then becomes completely non-consecrated and can even be sold by the kohen (Sifthei Chachamim)]. Devoted property to the One on High [i.e., specifically designated to the maintenance of the Holy Temple, on the other hand], may be redeemed [at its market value even before it reaches the Temple treasury, and its redemption moneys go for maintenance of the Holy Temple, and the property itself then becomes non-consecrated]. — [Sifthei Chachamim ; Arachin 29a] לא ימכר ולא יגאל: אלא ינתן לכהן. לדברי האומר סתם חרמים לכהנים, מפרש מקרא זה בסתם חרמים. והאומר סתם חרמים לבדק הבית, מפרש מקרא זה בחרמי כהנים, שהכל מודים שחרמי כהנים אין להם פדיון עד שיבואו ליד כהן, וחרמי גבוה נפדים:
all devoted things are holy of holies: Those who rule that unqualified vows of devoted property go for maintenance of the Holy Temple, bring this verse as proof [to their position]. However, those who rule that unqualified vows of devoted property go to the kohanim, explain the phrase here, “all devoted things are holy of holies (קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים),” to mean that the act of devoting items to the kohanim can take effect upon [animal sacrifices with the degree of] “holy of holies” [indicated by the use of the double expression here, קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים] and [moreover, even the single expression itself here, קֹדֶשׁ, indicates that this act can take effect upon sacrifices with a degree] of lesser holiness. Thus, [if someone undertakes to bring a sacrifice, allocates which animal he is to sacrifice and then subsequently devotes that animal to the kohanim,] he must give [the relevant money (see below)] to the kohen [and then sacrifices the animal for the offering he had undertaken], just as we have learnt in Tractate Arachin (28b): If [he made] a vow (נֶדֶר) [to bring a sacrifice, i.e., he said, “I take upon myself (to bring an animal as such-and-such a sacrifice)” (see Rashi on Lev. 22: 18)-in this case, if an animal he had then allocated becomes lost or blemished, he must fulfill his vow with a replacement animal, for his vow was to bring a sacrifice and was not limited to that particular animal. Therefore, in the case of a devoted vow (נֶדֶר),] he must give [to the kohen, money worth] the full value [of the animal, for it is still considered fully his when he devoted it to the kohen]. And if [he committed himself in the form of] a donation (נְדָבָה) [saying, “This particular animal is to be brought as such-and-such a sacrifice” (see Rashi on Lev. 22:18)-in this case, if the animal he had allocated becomes lost or blemished, he need not replace it, for his undertaking was limited only to that particular animal, and therefore the animal is no longer considered his. Therefore, in the case of a devoted donation (נְדָבָה) ,] he need give only [the monetary value of] the “benefit” for the [animal which means: Since in case the animal is lost or dies, he would not be required to bring another one in replacement, then once he has set the animal aside for the purpose of that particular sacrifice, he is considered to have already fulfilled his duty, and so, his actual sacrificing it becomes simply a gift to God, as it were. Enjoying this gesture of presenting a gift to God is the “benefit” he has from that animal and which is also the extent of his monetary ownership. This “benefit” is valued as follows: Someone else, who was not obligated to bring this sacrifice, is asked how much he would pay to have this animal sacrificed in his name as a gift to God. The amount that this person states is the amount that the one devoting must give to the kohen , and then he must bring the animal as a sacrifice, as per his undertaking to bring a donation]. — [Mishnah Arachin 8:6-7 and see Rashi on Talmud Arachin 28b] כל חרם קדש קדשים הוא: האומר סתם חרמים לבדק הבית מביא ראיה מכאן, והאומר סתם חרמים לכהנים מפרש כל חרם קדש קדשים הוא לה', ללמד שחרמי כהנים חלים על קדשי קדשים ועל קדשים קלים, ונותן לכהן, כמו ששנינו במסכת ערכין (כח ב) אם נדר נותן דמיהם, ואם נדבה נותן את טובתה:
[Anything that a man devotes… from any of his property -] whether it be a person: For example, if he devotes his non-Jewish male or female servants [for they are considered his property]. — [Arachin 28a] מאדם: כגון שהחרים עבדיו ושפחותיו הכנענים:
29Any devoting of a person who has been devoted, need not be redeemed [for] he is to be put to death. כטכָּל־חֵ֗רֶם אֲשֶׁ֧ר יָֽחֳרַ֛ם מִן־הָֽאָדָ֖ם לֹ֣א יִפָּדֶ֑ה מ֖וֹת יוּמָֽת:
Any devoting… who has been devoted: [This verse refers to] someone who [has been sentenced to death, and, as he] is going out to be executed, another person declares, “I hereby make a personal commitment [to pay] his valuation!” his words have no validity. — [Arachin 6b] כל חרם אשר יחרם וגו': היוצא ליהרג ואמר אחד ערכו עלי, לא אמר כלום:
[And why not? Because] he is to be put to death: i.e., he is on his way to be executed, and therefore, he “cannot be redeemed”-he has no market value [as a slave] or any valuation. מות יומת: הרי הולך למות, לפיכך לא יפדה אין לו לא דמים ולא ערך:
30Any tithe of the Land, whether it be from the seed of the land or the fruit of the tree it is the Lord's. It is holy to the Lord. לוְכָל־מַעְשַׂ֨ר הָאָ֜רֶץ מִזֶּ֤רַע הָאָ֨רֶץ֙ מִפְּרִ֣י הָעֵ֔ץ לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה ה֑וּא קֹ֖דֶשׁ לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
Any tithe of the Land: Scripture is speaking about the Second Tithe. — [Torath Kohanim 27:112] וכל מעשר הארץ: במעשר שני הכתוב מדבר:
the seed of the land: [Regarding the Second Tithe, Scripture says, “the tithes of your grain, of your wine and of your oil” (Deut. 14:23 and see Rashi there). Thus, here, “the seed of the land” refers to] grain [and] מזרע הארץ: דגן:
the fruit of the tree: [refers to] wine and oil. מפרי העץ: תירוש ויצהר:
It is the Lord’s: [The Second Tithe does not belong to God in the sense that one is forbidden to have benefit from it, for indeed it is eaten in Jerusalem by the one who brings it (Sifthei Chachamim) Rather,] God has acquired this [Second Tithe], and it is from His very Table, as it were, that He invites you to come up and eat it in Jerusalem, as it is said, “And you shall eat before the Lord, your God, [in the place which He will choose to establish His Name therein;] the tithes of your grain, of your wine and of your oil…” (Deut. 14: 23). - [Kid. 53a] לה' הוא: קנאו השם ומשולחנו צוה לך לעלות ולאכלו בירושלים, כמו שנאמר (דברים יד כג) ואכלת לפני ה' אלהיך מעשר דגנך תירושך וגו':
31And if a man redeems some of his tithe, he shall add its fifth to it. לאוְאִם־גָּאֹ֥ל יִגְאַ֛ל אִ֖ישׁ מִמַּֽעַשְׂר֑וֹ חֲמִֽשִׁית֖וֹ יֹסֵ֥ף עָלָֽיו:
[redeem] some of his tithe [… he shall add its fifth]: ] [“of his tithe,”] but not, of someone else’s tithe. Thus, one who redeems his friend’s tithe, does not add a fifth [to its value]. — [Kid. 24a] And what is [the purpose of] its redemption? In order to permit its being eaten anywhere [outside Jerusalem]. And [instead] he must bring the money [of its redemption] up to Jerusalem and eat [food there, bought with that money], as it is stated, “[And if… the place is too distant from you…] Then you will turn it into money [… and… go to the place which… God will choose. And you will turn that money into whatever your soul desires… and you will eat there before… God]” (Deut. 14:24-26). ממעשרו: ולא ממעשר חברו, הפודה מעשר של חברו אין מוסיף חומש. ומה היא גאולתו, כדי להתירו באכילה בכל מקום. והמעות יעלה ויאכל בירושלים, כמו שנאמר (דברים יד כד) ונתת בכסף וגו':
32Any tithe of cattle or flock of all that pass under the rod, the tenth shall be holy to the Lord. לבוְכָל־מַעְשַׂ֤ר בָּקָר֙ וָצֹ֔אן כֹּ֥ל אֲשֶׁר־יַֽעֲבֹ֖ר תַּ֣חַת הַשָּׁ֑בֶט הָֽעֲשִׂירִ֕י יִֽהְיֶה־קֹּ֖דֶשׁ לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
of all that pass under the rod: When one comes to tithe them, he lets them out [of the pen] through the gate, one by one, and he strikes [every] tenth animal with a rod that has been painted with vermillion (red dye), so that it is identifiable as the tithe. So he must do with every year’s lambs and calves, [but with no other animals, as Scripture states, “Any tithe of cattle or flock”]. — [Bech. 58b] תחת השבט: כשבא לעשרן מוציאן בפתח זה אחר זה, והעשירי מכה בשבט צבוע בסיקרא להיות ניכר שהוא מעשר, כן עושה [לגדיים] לטלאים ולעגלים של כל שנה ושנה:
[the tenth] shall be holy: that its blood and sacrificial portions be offered upon the altar, while its meat is eaten by the owner [with nothing given to the kohanim], because it is not enumerated with other [items categorized as] “gifts to the kehunah,” nor do we find that its meat must be given to kohanim. יהיה קדש: ליקרב למזבח דמו ואמוריו, והבשר נאכל לבעלים, שהרי לא נמנה עם שאר מתנות כהונה, ולא מצינו שיהא ניתן לכהנים:
33He shall not inspect [a tithed animal] for a good or a bad one, nor shall he offer a substitute for it. And if he does replace it, then [both] that one and its replacement are holy; it cannot be redeemed. לגלֹ֧א יְבַקֵּ֛ר בֵּֽין־ט֥וֹב לָרַ֖ע וְלֹ֣א יְמִירֶ֑נּוּ וְאִם־הָמֵ֣ר יְמִירֶ֔נּוּ וְהָֽיָה־ה֧וּא וּתְמֽוּרָת֛וֹ יִֽהְיֶה־קֹּ֖דֶשׁ לֹ֥א יִגָּאֵֽל:
He shall not inspect [a tithed animal]…: Since [Scripture] says, “[there will you bring…] the choice of your vows [which you will vow to the Lord]” (Deut. 12:11), one might think that he should select and take out the best [animal for the tithe]. Scripture, therefore, says, “He shall not inspect [a tithed animal] for a good or a bad one”-i.e., whether [the tenth animal] is unblemished or blemished, [since it is the tenth,] holiness has come upon it [exclusively]. This does not mean that a blemished animal can be sacrificed, but that he should eat it according to the law of tithes and that it must not be shorn or used for labor. — [Bech. 14b, 31b] לא יבקר וגו': לפי שנאמר (שם יב יא) וכל מבחר נדריכם, יכול יהא בורר ומוציא את היפה, תלמוד לומר לא יבקר בין טוב לרע, בין תם בין בעל מום חלה עליו קדושה, ולא שיקרב בעל מום, אלא יאכל בתורת מעשר ואסור ליגזז וליעבד:
34These are the commandments that the Lord commanded Moses to [tell] the children of Israel on Mount Sinai. לדאֵ֣לֶּה הַמִּצְוֹ֗ת אֲשֶׁ֨ר צִוָּ֧ה יְהֹוָ֛ה אֶת־משֶׁ֖ה אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל בְּהַ֖ר סִינָֽי:
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation
• Video Class
• Daily Wisdom (short insight)
Leviticus Chapter 27
16 And if a man consecrates some of the field of his inherited property to the Lord, the valuation shall be according to its sowing: an area which requires a chomer of barley seeds at fifty silver shekels. טז וְאִ֣ם | מִשְּׂדֵ֣ה אֲחֻזָּת֗וֹ יַקְדִּ֥ישׁ אִישׁ֙ לַֽיהֹוָ֔ה וְהָיָ֥ה עֶרְכְּךָ֖ לְפִ֣י זַרְע֑וֹ זֶ֚רַע חֹ֣מֶר שְׂעֹרִ֔ים בַּֽחֲמִשִּׁ֖ים שֶׁ֥קֶל כָּֽסֶף:
the valuation shall be according to its sowing: And not according to its value, whether it is a field of good quality or a field of bad quality, their redemption from consecration is equal, [namely]: The area requiring a kor (a chomer in Scripture) of barley seeds [must be redeemed] for fifty [silver] shekels. This is Scripture’s decree. — [Torath Kohanim 27:90] Now, this applies to one who comes to redeem it at the beginning of the Jubilee cycle [namely, in its first year]. However, if he comes to redeem it in the middle [of the Jubilee cycle, i.e., after the first year has elapsed], he must pay according to the calculation of one sela (i.e., a shekel) and a pundyon (one forty-eighth of a shekel) per year [depending on how many years until the next Jubilee (see Rashi on verse 18 below)]. — [Arachin 25a] [And why so?] Because property is consecrated only according to the years of the Jubilee cycle-if it is redeemed [within the Jubilee cycle], very good, [i.e., it reverts to its original owners and is no longer Temple property]; but if not, the [Temple] treasurer sells it to someone else at the aforementioned rate, and it remains in the purchaser’s possession until the next Jubilee, just like any other fields which are sold. Then, when it leaves the possession of this purchaser [in the Jubilee], it reverts to the kohanim of that watch, namely, [namely, the shift officiating] when [Yom Kippur of that] Jubilee occurs, and is apportioned among them. — [Arachin 28b] [The kohanim are divided into 24 family watches, or shifts, each in rotation for two or three one-week periods every year.] This is the law stated regarding one who consecrates a field. I will now explain it according to the order of the verses. והיה ערכך לפי זרעו: ולא כפי שוויה. אחת שדה טובה ואחת שדה רעה, פדיון הקדשן שוה, בית כור שעורים בחמשים שקלים, כך גזירת הכתוב. והוא שבא לגאלה בתחלת היובל, ואם בא לגאלה באמצעו, נותן לפי החשבון סלע ופונדיון לשנה, לפי שאינה הקדש אלא למנין שני היובל, שאם נגאלה הרי טוב, ואם לאו הגזבר מוכרה בדמים הללו לאחר ועומדת ביד הלוקח עד היובל כשאר כל השדות המכורות, וכשהיא יוצאה מידו חוזרת לכהנים של אותו משמר שהיובל פוגע בו ומתחלקת ביניהם, זהו המשפט האמור במקדיש שדה. ועכשיו אפרשנו על סדר המקראות:
17Now, if he consecrates his field from [when] the Jubilee year [has ended], it shall remain at [its full] valuation. יזאִם־מִשְּׁנַ֥ת הַיֹּבֵ֖ל יַקְדִּ֣ישׁ שָׂדֵ֑הוּ כְּעֶרְכְּךָ֖ יָקֽוּם:
Now, if he consecrates his field from [when] the Jubilee year [has ended]: If, as soon as the Jubilee year has ended, he immediately consecrates [his property i.e., within that first year of the next Shemittah and Jubilee cycle], and then he comes to redeem it immediately [i.e., before that first year has ended]. אם משנת היבל יקדיש וגו': אם משעברה שנת היובל מיד הקדישה ובא לגאלה מיד:
it shall remain at [its full] valuation: i.e., like this aforementioned (in verse 16) valuation, it shall be, [namely,] he must give fifty silver shekels [for the size of field stated]. — [see Arachin 24b] כערכך יקום: כערך הזה האמור יהיה, חמשים כסף יתן:
18But if he consecrates his field after the Jubilee, the kohen shall calculate the money for him, according to the remaining years until the [next] Jubilee year, and it shall be deducted from the valuation. יחוְאִם־אַחַ֣ר הַיֹּבֵל֘ יַקְדִּ֣ישׁ שָׂדֵ֒הוּ֒ וְחִשַּׁב־ל֨וֹ הַכֹּהֵ֜ן אֶת־הַכֶּ֗סֶף עַל־פִּ֤י הַשָּׁנִים֙ הַנּ֣וֹתָרֹ֔ת עַ֖ד שְׁנַ֣ת הַיֹּבֵ֑ל וְנִגְרַ֖ע מֵֽעֶרְכֶּֽךָ:
But if he consecrates his field after the Jubilee, [the kohen should calculate the money for him….: [And not only in this case, but] likewise, if [the original owner] had consecrated the property immediately after the Jubilee ended, and it remained in the possession of the treasurer, and this one comes to redeem it after [this first year following] the Jubilee - ואם אחר היבל יקדיש: וכן אם הקדישה משנת היובל ונשתהה ביד גזבר ובא זה לגאלה אחר היובל:
the kohen shall calculate the money for him, according to the remaining years [until the (next) Jubilee year]: according to the rate. How? [Scripture] has stated the fixed value [of redemption for a field whose size is that stated in our verse,] for forty-nine years as fifty [silver] shekels, i.e., one shekel for each of the [49] years and an extra shekel [paid over] all the [49] years. Now, a shekel is equivalent to 48 pundyons . Thus, one sela [i.e., a shekel] and one pundyon for each year, except that one pundyon is missing for all of them [i.e., if we figure fifty shekels, we have only 49 shekels and 48 pundyons , which is less than a sela and a pundyon per year, but the redeemer is required to pay one extra pundyon per a 49-year period, for] our Rabbis taught (Bech. 50a) that, the [extra] pundyon is a surcharge for [currency exchange of] small coins [i.e., if someone comes to purchase a silver shekel with pundyons , he will be charged 49 of them, the extra pundyon being a surcharge for attaining the more significant single shekel coin rather than many small coins. This surcharge, then, is passed on to the one who wishes to redeem the field. Hence, at an annual rate of one shekel and one pundyon, the redeemer is actually paying one forty-ninth of a pundyon currency exchange surcharge every year]. And therefore, someone who comes to redeem [a field], must pay one sela [i.e., a shekel] and one pundyon for every year left until the next Jubilee year. וחשב לו הכהן את הכסף על פי השנים הנותרת: כפי חשבון. כיצד, הרי קצב דמיה של ארבעים ותשע שנים חמשים שקל, הרי שקל לכל שנה, ושקל יתר בין כולן, והשקל ארבעים ושמנה פודיונין, הרי סלע ופונדיון לשנה אלא שחסר פונדיון אחד לכולן, ואמרו רבותינו שאותו פונדיון קלבון לפרוטרוט, והבא לגאול יתן סלע ופונדיון לכל שנה לשנים הנותרות עד שנת היובל:
thereby deducting from the [full] valuation [amount]: the number of years from the [preceding] Jubilee year until the redemption year. ונגרע מערכך: מנין השנים שמשנת היובל עד שנת הפדיון:
19If the one who consecrated it redeems the field, he shall add to it a fifth of the valuation money, and it shall be his. יטוְאִם־גָּאֹ֤ל יִגְאַל֙ אֶת־הַשָּׂדֶ֔ה הַמַּקְדִּ֖ישׁ אֹת֑וֹ וְ֠יָסַ֠ף חֲמִשִׁ֧ית כֶּֽסֶף־עֶרְכְּךָ֛ עָלָ֖יו וְקָ֥ם לֽוֹ:
If the [one who consecrated it] redeems the field: The person who consecrated it must add a fifth to this set amount. — [see Rashi on preceding verse; Mizrachi] ואם גאל יגאל: המקדיש אותו, יוסיף חומש על הקצבה הזאת:
20But if he does not redeem the field, and if he has sold the field to someone else it may no longer be redeemed. כוְאִם־לֹ֤א יִגְאַל֙ אֶת־הַשָּׂדֶ֔ה וְאִם־מָכַ֥ר אֶת־הַשָּׂדֶ֖ה לְאִ֣ישׁ אַחֵ֑ר לֹֽא־יִגָּאֵ֖ל עֽוֹד:
But if he does not redeem the field: [i.e., if] the one who consecrated [the field does not redeem it]. ואם לא יגאל את השדה: המקדיש:
and if… has sold: [i.e., if] the treasurer (Arachin 25b) has sold ואם מכר: הגזבר:
the field to someone else-it may no longer be redeemed: to revert to the possession of the one who consecrated it [i.e., the original owner, come Jubilee]. — [Sifthei Chachamim] את השדה לאיש אחר לא יגאל עוד: לשוב ליד המקדיש:
21But, when the field leaves in the Jubilee, it shall be holy to the Lord like a field devoted; his inherited property shall belong to the kohen. כאוְהָיָ֨ה הַשָּׂדֶ֜ה בְּצֵאת֣וֹ בַיֹּבֵ֗ל קֹ֛דֶשׁ לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה כִּשְׂדֵ֣ה הַחֵ֑רֶם לַכֹּהֵ֖ן תִּֽהְיֶ֥ה אֲחֻזָּתֽוֹ:
But, when the field leaves in the Jubilee: the possession of the one who had purchased it from the treasurer, just like all fields that leave the possession of their purchasers, come Jubilee. והיה השדה בצאתו ביבל: מיד הלוקחו מן הגזבר, כדרך שאר שדות היוצאות מיד לוקחיהם ביובל:
holy to the Lord: This does not mean that it reverts to the treasurer as sacred property designated for maintenance of the Holy Temple. Rather, it is “like a field devoted” which is given to the kohanim, as it is said, “Anything devoted in Israel shall belong to you” (Num. 18:14). This too shall be divided in Jubilee among the kohanim of the watch at that time, namely, when Yom Kippur of that Jubilee occurs. — [Arachin 28b] קדש לה': לא שישוב להקדש בדק הבית ליד הגזבר אלא כשדה החרם הנתון לכהנים, שנאמר (במדבר יח יד) כל חרם בישראל לך יהיה, אף זו תתחלק ביובל לכהנים של אותו משמר, שיום הכפורים של יובל פוגע בו:
22And if he consecrates to the Lord a field that he had acquired, that is not part of his inherited property, כבוְאִם֙ אֶת־שְׂדֵ֣ה מִקְנָת֔וֹ אֲשֶׁ֕ר לֹ֖א מִשְּׂדֵ֣ה אֲחֻזָּת֑וֹ יַקְדִּ֖ישׁ לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
And if [he consecrates…] a field that he had acquired…: There is a difference between an acquired field (שְׂדֵה מִקְנֶה) and a field that is part of inherited property (שְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה), namely, that the acquired field is not apportioned among the kohanim in the Jubilee because [the acquirer] can consecrate the field only until Jubilee, for in the Jubilee, the field is destined to leave his possession and revert to the original owner [from whom he acquired it]. Therefore, if he [the original owner (Panim Yafoth; Malbim)] comes to redeem [his property,] he must redeem it with that same fixed rate of valuation for a field that was part of an inherited property. [Should the one who consecrated it redeem it, according to the Sages, he redeems it according to its market value.] But if he does not redeem it, and the treasurer sells it to someone else, or if he does redeem it [according to Tos., Arachin 26b, the reading in Rashi is: If no one redeemed it, and it remained in the possession of the treasurer] in the Jubilee year the field reverts to the one from whom the one who consecrated it bought it, [i.e., the original owner of the field]. Now, lest you say that [the expression] לַאֲשֶׁר קָנֵהוּ מֵאִתּוֹ (in verse 24 below) [refers to] the one from whom this acquirer most recently acquired the field, namely, the treasurer [and that our verse is thus stating here that come Jubilee, the field “reverts” to the treasurer]. Therefore, it was necessary to state (verse 24),“namely, the one whose inherited land it was,” i.e., inherited from his ancestors-referring, therefore, to the original owner who had sold [the field] to the one who consecrated it. — [Arachin 26b] ואם את שדה מקנתו וגו': חלוק יש בין שדה מקנה לשדה אחוזה, ששדה מקנה לא תתחלק לכהנים ביובל, לפי שאינו יכול להקדישה אלא עד היובל, שהרי ביובל היתה עתידה לצאת מידו ולשוב לבעלים, לפיכך אם בא לגאלה, יגאל בדמים הללו הקצובים לשדה אחוזה. ואם לא יגאל וימכרנה גזבר לאחר, או אם לא יגאל הוא, בשנת היובל ישוב השדה לאשר קנהו מאתו, אותו שהקדישה. ופן תאמר לאשר קנהו הלוקח הזה האחרון מאתו, וזהו הגזבר, לכך הוצרך לומר לאשר לו אחוזת הארץ (פסוק כד), מירושת אבות, וזהו בעלים הראשונים שמכרוה למקדיש:
23the kohen shall calculate for him the amount of the valuation until the Jubilee year, and he shall give the valuation on that day, holy to the Lord. כגוְחִשַּׁב־ל֣וֹ הַכֹּהֵ֗ן אֵ֚ת מִכְסַ֣ת הָֽעֶרְכְּךָ֔ עַ֖ד שְׁנַ֣ת הַיֹּבֵ֑ל וְנָתַ֤ן אֶת־הָֽעֶרְכְּךָ֙ בַּיּ֣וֹם הַה֔וּא קֹ֖דֶשׁ לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
24In the Jubilee year, the field shall return to the one from whom he bought it namely, the one whose inherited land it was. כדבִּשְׁנַ֤ת הַיּוֹבֵל֙ יָשׁ֣וּב הַשָּׂדֶ֔ה לַֽאֲשֶׁ֥ר קָנָ֖הוּ מֵֽאִתּ֑וֹ לַֽאֲשֶׁר־ל֖וֹ אֲחֻזַּ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ:
25Every valuation shall be made according to the holy shekel, whereby one shekel is the equivalent of twenty gerahs. כהוְכָ֨ל־עֶרְכְּךָ֔ יִֽהְיֶ֖ה בְּשֶׁ֣קֶל הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ עֶשְׂרִ֥ים גֵּרָ֖ה יִֽהְיֶ֥ה הַשָּֽׁקֶל:
Every valuation shall be made according to the holy shekel: i.e., every valuation regarding which shekels are written, will be made according to the holy shekel. וכל ערכך יהיה בשקל הקדש: כל ערכך שכתוב בו שקלים יהיה בשקל הקדש:
one shekel is the equivalent of twenty gerahs: Twenty ma’ahs. This was how it was originally. However, in later times, they “added a sixth” [i.e., instead of a dinar being worth five ma’ahs (or gerahs), it became worth six ma’ahs (or gerahs)]. And indeed, our Rabbis taught: “A dinar is comprised of six ma’ahs of silver, and [since a shekel is worth four dinars,] there are twenty-four ma’ahs to one sela (i.e., shekel)” [as opposed to twenty ma’ahs in the shekel of the Torah]. — [Bech. 50a] עשרים גרה: עשרים מעות כך היו מתחילה ולאחר מכאן הוסיפו שתות. ואמרו רבותינו שש מעה כסף דינר, עשרים וארבע מעות לסלע:
26However, a firstborn animal that must be [sacrificed as] a firstborn to the Lord no man may consecrate it; whether it be an ox or sheep, it belongs to the Lord. כואַךְ־בְּכ֞וֹר אֲשֶׁ֨ר יְבֻכַּ֤ר לַֽיהֹוָה֙ בִּבְהֵמָ֔ה לֹֽא־יַקְדִּ֥ישׁ אִ֖ישׁ אֹת֑וֹ אִם־שׁ֣וֹר אִם־שֶׂ֔ה לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה הֽוּא:
no man may consecrate it: for the purpose of any other sacrifice, because it does not belong to him [but from its birth, a firstborn animal is designated as holy, to be given to the kohanim]. — [Torath Kohanim 27:107] לא יקדיש איש אתו: לשם קרבן אחר, לפי שאינו שלו:
27Now, if [someone consecrates] an unclean animal, he may redeem [it] by [paying] the valuation, and he shall add its fifth to it, and if it is not redeemed, it shall be sold for the valuation [price]. כזוְאִ֨ם בַּבְּהֵמָ֤ה הַטְּמֵאָה֙ וּפָדָ֣ה בְעֶרְכֶּ֔ךָ וְיָסַ֥ף חֲמִֽשִׁת֖וֹ עָלָ֑יו וְאִם־לֹ֥א יִגָּאֵ֖ל וְנִמְכַּ֥ר בְּעֶרְכֶּֽךָ:
Now, if [someone consecrates] an unclean animal: [lit., “And if it is with an unclean animal….”] This verse does not refer back to firstborn animals [discussed in the preceding verse], for it cannot state of a firstborn unclean animal that “he may redeem [it] by [paying] the valuation” [for the only unclean animal to which the law of the firstborn applies is a donkey (see Exod. 13: 12-13)]; and this [verse] cannot refer to a donkey, because the firstborn of a donkey can be redeemed only with a lamb (see Exod. 13:13), which becomes a gift to the kohen and is not given to the Sanctuary [as does the valuation money in our verse]. Rather, our verse here is referring back to consecration [of one’s possessions to the Temple], for Scripture above (verses 11-13) was speaking about the redemption of a clean animal that had been [consecrated and subsequently] blemished (see Rashi there), and here, our verse is speaking about one who consecrates an unclean animal for maintenance of the Temple. — [Men. 101a] ואם בבהמה הטמאה וגו': אין המקרא הזה מוסב על הבכור, שאין לומר בבכור בהמה טמאה ופדה בערכך. וחמור אין זה, שהרי אין פדיון פטר חמור אלא טלה, והוא מתנה לכהן ואינו להקדש, אלא הכתוב מוסב על ההקדש. שהכתוב שלמעלה (פסוק יא) דבר בפדיון בהמה טהורה שהוממה, וכאן דבר במקדיש בהמה טמאה לבדק הבית:
he may redeem [it] by [paying] the valuation: According to how much the kohen will assess its value. ופדה בערכך: כפי מה שיעריכנה הכהן:
and if it is not redeemed: By the owner, ואם לא יגאל: ע"י בעלים:
it shall be sold for the valuation [price]: to others. — [Torath Kohanim 27: 108] ונמכר בערכך: לאחרים:
28However, anything that a man devotes to the Lord from any of his property whether a person, an animal, or part of his inherited field shall not be sold, nor shall it be redeemed, [for] all devoted things are holy of holies to the Lord. כחאַ֣ךְ כָּל־חֵ֡רֶם אֲשֶׁ֣ר יַֽחֲרִם֩ אִ֨ישׁ לַֽיהֹוָ֜ה מִכָּל־אֲשֶׁר־ל֗וֹ מֵֽאָדָ֤ם וּבְהֵמָה֙ וּמִשְּׂדֵ֣ה אֲחֻזָּת֔וֹ לֹ֥א יִמָּכֵ֖ר וְלֹ֣א יִגָּאֵ֑ל כָּל־חֵ֕רֶם קֹֽדֶשׁ־קָֽדָשִׁ֥ים ה֖וּא לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
However, anything that a man devotes…: Our Rabbis are in dispute regarding this matter [of devoted property]: Some say that unqualified vows of devoted property [i.e., he says, “This is hereby devoted (חֵרֶם),” and does not specify,] go [automatically] to Sanctuary moneys [designated for maintenance of the Temple. Now, according to this ruling,] what then is the meaning of, “Anything devoted in Israel shall belong to you”? (Num. 18:14). This refers to vows of devoted property specifically designated to the kohanim, whereby someone says explicitly: “This is (חֵרֶם) devoted for the kohen .” But some [Rabbis] say that unqualified vows of devoted property go [automatically] to the kohanim . — [Arachin 28b] אך כל חרם וגו': נחלקו רבותינו בדבר יש אומרים סתם חרמים להקדש, ומה אני מקיים (במדבר יח יד) כל חרם בישראל לך יהיה, בחרמי כהנים שפירש ואמר הרי זה חרם לכהן, ויש שאמרו סתם חרמים לכהנים:
shall not be sold, nor shall it be redeemed: But, it must be given to the kohen . [For] according to those who rule that unqualified vows of devoted property go [automatically] to the kohanim (see preceding Rashi), they explain this verse as referring to unqualified vows of devoted property, while those who rule that unqualified vows of devoted property go [automatically] to [Sanctuary moneys designated for] maintenance of the Temple, explain this verse as referring to vows of devoted property specifically designated to the kohanim. For all agree that devoted property specifically designated to kohanim does not have any redemption, until it falls into the possession of the kohen [and the property then becomes completely non-consecrated and can even be sold by the kohen (Sifthei Chachamim)]. Devoted property to the One on High [i.e., specifically designated to the maintenance of the Holy Temple, on the other hand], may be redeemed [at its market value even before it reaches the Temple treasury, and its redemption moneys go for maintenance of the Holy Temple, and the property itself then becomes non-consecrated]. — [Sifthei Chachamim ; Arachin 29a] לא ימכר ולא יגאל: אלא ינתן לכהן. לדברי האומר סתם חרמים לכהנים, מפרש מקרא זה בסתם חרמים. והאומר סתם חרמים לבדק הבית, מפרש מקרא זה בחרמי כהנים, שהכל מודים שחרמי כהנים אין להם פדיון עד שיבואו ליד כהן, וחרמי גבוה נפדים:
all devoted things are holy of holies: Those who rule that unqualified vows of devoted property go for maintenance of the Holy Temple, bring this verse as proof [to their position]. However, those who rule that unqualified vows of devoted property go to the kohanim, explain the phrase here, “all devoted things are holy of holies (קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים),” to mean that the act of devoting items to the kohanim can take effect upon [animal sacrifices with the degree of] “holy of holies” [indicated by the use of the double expression here, קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים] and [moreover, even the single expression itself here, קֹדֶשׁ, indicates that this act can take effect upon sacrifices with a degree] of lesser holiness. Thus, [if someone undertakes to bring a sacrifice, allocates which animal he is to sacrifice and then subsequently devotes that animal to the kohanim,] he must give [the relevant money (see below)] to the kohen [and then sacrifices the animal for the offering he had undertaken], just as we have learnt in Tractate Arachin (28b): If [he made] a vow (נֶדֶר) [to bring a sacrifice, i.e., he said, “I take upon myself (to bring an animal as such-and-such a sacrifice)” (see Rashi on Lev. 22: 18)-in this case, if an animal he had then allocated becomes lost or blemished, he must fulfill his vow with a replacement animal, for his vow was to bring a sacrifice and was not limited to that particular animal. Therefore, in the case of a devoted vow (נֶדֶר),] he must give [to the kohen, money worth] the full value [of the animal, for it is still considered fully his when he devoted it to the kohen]. And if [he committed himself in the form of] a donation (נְדָבָה) [saying, “This particular animal is to be brought as such-and-such a sacrifice” (see Rashi on Lev. 22:18)-in this case, if the animal he had allocated becomes lost or blemished, he need not replace it, for his undertaking was limited only to that particular animal, and therefore the animal is no longer considered his. Therefore, in the case of a devoted donation (נְדָבָה) ,] he need give only [the monetary value of] the “benefit” for the [animal which means: Since in case the animal is lost or dies, he would not be required to bring another one in replacement, then once he has set the animal aside for the purpose of that particular sacrifice, he is considered to have already fulfilled his duty, and so, his actual sacrificing it becomes simply a gift to God, as it were. Enjoying this gesture of presenting a gift to God is the “benefit” he has from that animal and which is also the extent of his monetary ownership. This “benefit” is valued as follows: Someone else, who was not obligated to bring this sacrifice, is asked how much he would pay to have this animal sacrificed in his name as a gift to God. The amount that this person states is the amount that the one devoting must give to the kohen , and then he must bring the animal as a sacrifice, as per his undertaking to bring a donation]. — [Mishnah Arachin 8:6-7 and see Rashi on Talmud Arachin 28b] כל חרם קדש קדשים הוא: האומר סתם חרמים לבדק הבית מביא ראיה מכאן, והאומר סתם חרמים לכהנים מפרש כל חרם קדש קדשים הוא לה', ללמד שחרמי כהנים חלים על קדשי קדשים ועל קדשים קלים, ונותן לכהן, כמו ששנינו במסכת ערכין (כח ב) אם נדר נותן דמיהם, ואם נדבה נותן את טובתה:
[Anything that a man devotes… from any of his property -] whether it be a person: For example, if he devotes his non-Jewish male or female servants [for they are considered his property]. — [Arachin 28a] מאדם: כגון שהחרים עבדיו ושפחותיו הכנענים:
29Any devoting of a person who has been devoted, need not be redeemed [for] he is to be put to death. כטכָּל־חֵ֗רֶם אֲשֶׁ֧ר יָֽחֳרַ֛ם מִן־הָֽאָדָ֖ם לֹ֣א יִפָּדֶ֑ה מ֖וֹת יוּמָֽת:
Any devoting… who has been devoted: [This verse refers to] someone who [has been sentenced to death, and, as he] is going out to be executed, another person declares, “I hereby make a personal commitment [to pay] his valuation!” his words have no validity. — [Arachin 6b] כל חרם אשר יחרם וגו': היוצא ליהרג ואמר אחד ערכו עלי, לא אמר כלום:
[And why not? Because] he is to be put to death: i.e., he is on his way to be executed, and therefore, he “cannot be redeemed”-he has no market value [as a slave] or any valuation. מות יומת: הרי הולך למות, לפיכך לא יפדה אין לו לא דמים ולא ערך:
30Any tithe of the Land, whether it be from the seed of the land or the fruit of the tree it is the Lord's. It is holy to the Lord. לוְכָל־מַעְשַׂ֨ר הָאָ֜רֶץ מִזֶּ֤רַע הָאָ֨רֶץ֙ מִפְּרִ֣י הָעֵ֔ץ לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה ה֑וּא קֹ֖דֶשׁ לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
Any tithe of the Land: Scripture is speaking about the Second Tithe. — [Torath Kohanim 27:112] וכל מעשר הארץ: במעשר שני הכתוב מדבר:
the seed of the land: [Regarding the Second Tithe, Scripture says, “the tithes of your grain, of your wine and of your oil” (Deut. 14:23 and see Rashi there). Thus, here, “the seed of the land” refers to] grain [and] מזרע הארץ: דגן:
the fruit of the tree: [refers to] wine and oil. מפרי העץ: תירוש ויצהר:
It is the Lord’s: [The Second Tithe does not belong to God in the sense that one is forbidden to have benefit from it, for indeed it is eaten in Jerusalem by the one who brings it (Sifthei Chachamim) Rather,] God has acquired this [Second Tithe], and it is from His very Table, as it were, that He invites you to come up and eat it in Jerusalem, as it is said, “And you shall eat before the Lord, your God, [in the place which He will choose to establish His Name therein;] the tithes of your grain, of your wine and of your oil…” (Deut. 14: 23). - [Kid. 53a] לה' הוא: קנאו השם ומשולחנו צוה לך לעלות ולאכלו בירושלים, כמו שנאמר (דברים יד כג) ואכלת לפני ה' אלהיך מעשר דגנך תירושך וגו':
31And if a man redeems some of his tithe, he shall add its fifth to it. לאוְאִם־גָּאֹ֥ל יִגְאַ֛ל אִ֖ישׁ מִמַּֽעַשְׂר֑וֹ חֲמִֽשִׁית֖וֹ יֹסֵ֥ף עָלָֽיו:
[redeem] some of his tithe [… he shall add its fifth]: ] [“of his tithe,”] but not, of someone else’s tithe. Thus, one who redeems his friend’s tithe, does not add a fifth [to its value]. — [Kid. 24a] And what is [the purpose of] its redemption? In order to permit its being eaten anywhere [outside Jerusalem]. And [instead] he must bring the money [of its redemption] up to Jerusalem and eat [food there, bought with that money], as it is stated, “[And if… the place is too distant from you…] Then you will turn it into money [… and… go to the place which… God will choose. And you will turn that money into whatever your soul desires… and you will eat there before… God]” (Deut. 14:24-26). ממעשרו: ולא ממעשר חברו, הפודה מעשר של חברו אין מוסיף חומש. ומה היא גאולתו, כדי להתירו באכילה בכל מקום. והמעות יעלה ויאכל בירושלים, כמו שנאמר (דברים יד כד) ונתת בכסף וגו':
32Any tithe of cattle or flock of all that pass under the rod, the tenth shall be holy to the Lord. לבוְכָל־מַעְשַׂ֤ר בָּקָר֙ וָצֹ֔אן כֹּ֥ל אֲשֶׁר־יַֽעֲבֹ֖ר תַּ֣חַת הַשָּׁ֑בֶט הָֽעֲשִׂירִ֕י יִֽהְיֶה־קֹּ֖דֶשׁ לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
of all that pass under the rod: When one comes to tithe them, he lets them out [of the pen] through the gate, one by one, and he strikes [every] tenth animal with a rod that has been painted with vermillion (red dye), so that it is identifiable as the tithe. So he must do with every year’s lambs and calves, [but with no other animals, as Scripture states, “Any tithe of cattle or flock”]. — [Bech. 58b] תחת השבט: כשבא לעשרן מוציאן בפתח זה אחר זה, והעשירי מכה בשבט צבוע בסיקרא להיות ניכר שהוא מעשר, כן עושה [לגדיים] לטלאים ולעגלים של כל שנה ושנה:
[the tenth] shall be holy: that its blood and sacrificial portions be offered upon the altar, while its meat is eaten by the owner [with nothing given to the kohanim], because it is not enumerated with other [items categorized as] “gifts to the kehunah,” nor do we find that its meat must be given to kohanim. יהיה קדש: ליקרב למזבח דמו ואמוריו, והבשר נאכל לבעלים, שהרי לא נמנה עם שאר מתנות כהונה, ולא מצינו שיהא ניתן לכהנים:
33He shall not inspect [a tithed animal] for a good or a bad one, nor shall he offer a substitute for it. And if he does replace it, then [both] that one and its replacement are holy; it cannot be redeemed. לגלֹ֧א יְבַקֵּ֛ר בֵּֽין־ט֥וֹב לָרַ֖ע וְלֹ֣א יְמִירֶ֑נּוּ וְאִם־הָמֵ֣ר יְמִירֶ֔נּוּ וְהָֽיָה־ה֧וּא וּתְמֽוּרָת֛וֹ יִֽהְיֶה־קֹּ֖דֶשׁ לֹ֥א יִגָּאֵֽל:
He shall not inspect [a tithed animal]…: Since [Scripture] says, “[there will you bring…] the choice of your vows [which you will vow to the Lord]” (Deut. 12:11), one might think that he should select and take out the best [animal for the tithe]. Scripture, therefore, says, “He shall not inspect [a tithed animal] for a good or a bad one”-i.e., whether [the tenth animal] is unblemished or blemished, [since it is the tenth,] holiness has come upon it [exclusively]. This does not mean that a blemished animal can be sacrificed, but that he should eat it according to the law of tithes and that it must not be shorn or used for labor. — [Bech. 14b, 31b] לא יבקר וגו': לפי שנאמר (שם יב יא) וכל מבחר נדריכם, יכול יהא בורר ומוציא את היפה, תלמוד לומר לא יבקר בין טוב לרע, בין תם בין בעל מום חלה עליו קדושה, ולא שיקרב בעל מום, אלא יאכל בתורת מעשר ואסור ליגזז וליעבד:
34These are the commandments that the Lord commanded Moses to [tell] the children of Israel on Mount Sinai. לדאֵ֣לֶּה הַמִּצְוֹ֗ת אֲשֶׁ֨ר צִוָּ֧ה יְהֹוָ֛ה אֶת־משֶׁ֖ה אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל בְּהַ֖ר סִינָֽי:
Tehillim: Chapters 120 - 134
• Hebrew text
• English text
Shabbat, 27 Iyar 5778 / May 12, 2018
Chapter 120
This psalm rebukes slanderers, describing how the deadly effect of slander reaches even further than weapons.
1. A song of ascents. I have called out to the Lord in my distress, and He answered me.
2. O Lord, rescue my soul from the lips of falsehood, from a deceitful tongue.
3. What can He give you, and what [further restraint] can He add to you, O deceitful tongue?
4. [You resemble] the sharp arrows of a mighty one, and the coals of broom-wood.1
5. Woe unto me that I sojourned among Meshech, that I dwelt beside the tents of Kedar.
6. Too long has my soul dwelt among those who hate peace.
7. I am for peace, but when I speak, they are for war.
FOOTNOTES
1.Which remain hot on the inside while appearing cool to the touch (Rashi).
Chapter 121
This psalm alludes to the Lower Paradise, from which one ascends to the Higher Paradise. It also speaks of how God watches over us.
1. A song of ascents. I lift my eyes to the mountains-from where will my help come?
2. My help will come from the Lord, Maker of heaven and earth.
3. He will not let your foot falter; your guardian does not slumber.
4. Indeed, the Guardian of Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps.
5. The Lord is your guardian; the Lord is your protective shade at your right hand.
6. The sun will not harm you by day, nor the moon by night.
7. The Lord will guard you from all evil; He will guard your soul.
8. The Lord will guard your going and your coming from now and for all time.
Chapter 122
The psalmist sings the praises of Jerusalem and tells of the miracles that happened there.
1. A song of ascents by David. I rejoiced when they said to me, "Let us go to the House of the Lord.”
2. Our feet were standing within your gates, O Jerusalem;
3. Jerusalem that is built like a city in which [all Israel] is united together.
4. For there the tribes went up, the tribes of God-as enjoined upon Israel-to offer praise to the Name of the Lord.
5. For there stood the seats of justice, the thrones of the house of David.
6. Pray for the peace of Jerusalem; may those who love you have peace.
7. May there be peace within your walls, serenity within your mansions.
8. For the sake of my brethren and friends, I ask that there be peace within you.
9. For the sake of the House of the Lord our God, I seek your well-being.
Chapter 123
The psalmist laments the length of time we have already suffered in exile.
1. A song of ascents. To You have I lifted my eyes, You Who are enthroned in heaven.
2. Indeed, as the eyes of servants are turned to the hand of their masters, as the eyes of a maid to the hand of her mistress, so are our eyes turned to the Lord our God, until He will be gracious to us.
3. Be gracious to us, Lord, be gracious to us, for we have been surfeited with humiliation.
4. Our soul has been overfilled with the derision of the complacent, with the scorn of the arrogant.
Chapter 124
1. A song of ascents by David. Were it not for the Lord Who was with us-let Israel declare-
2. were it not for the Lord Who was with us when men rose up against us,
3. then they would have swallowed us alive in their burning rage against us.
4. Then the waters would have inundated us, the torrent would have swept over our soul;
5. then the raging waters would have surged over our soul.
6. Blessed is the Lord, Who did not permit us to be prey for their teeth.
7. Our soul is like a bird which has escaped from the fowler's snare; the snare broke and we escaped.
8. Our help is in the Name of the Lord, the Maker of heaven and earth.
Chapter 125
1. A song of ascents. Those who trust in the Lord are as Mount Zion which never falters, but abides forever.
2. Mountains surround Jerusalem, and the Lord surrounds His people from this time and forever.
3. For the rod of wickedness will never come to rest upon the lot of the righteous; therefore the righteous need not stretch their hand to iniquity.
4. Be beneficent, O Lord, to the good and to those who are upright in their hearts.
5. But as for those that turn to their perverseness, may the Lord lead them with the workers of iniquity. Peace be upon Israel.
Chapter 126
The psalmist speaks of the future, comparing our Divine service in exile to one who sows arid land, then cries and begs God to send rain upon it so that the seed not be wasted. When he merits to reap the crop, he offers thanks to God.
1. A song of ascents. When the Lord will return the exiles of Zion, we will have been like dreamers.
2. Then our mouth will be filled with laughter, and our tongue with songs of joy; then will they say among the nations, "The Lord has done great things for these.”
3. The Lord has done great things for us; we were joyful.
4. Lord, return our exiles as streams to arid soil.
5. Those who sow in tears will reap with songs of joy.
6. He goes along weeping, carrying the bag of seed; he will surely return with songs of joy, carrying his sheaves.
Chapter 127
King David instructs his generation, and especially his son Solomon, to be sure that all one's actions be for the sake of Heaven. He also criticizes those who toil day and night in pursuit of a livelihood.
1. A song of ascents for Solomon. If the Lord does not build a house, then its builders labor upon it in vain. If the Lord will not guard a city, the vigilance of its watchman is in vain.
2. It is in vain for you, you who rise early, who sit up late, and who eat the bread of tension, for in fact He gives His loved ones sleep.
3. Behold, the heritage of the Lord is children; the fruit of the womb is a reward.
4. As arrows in the hand of a mighty man, so are the children of youth.
5. Fortunate is the man who has his quiver full of them; they will not find themselves shamed when they speak with enemies in public places.
Chapter 128
This psalm extols one who enjoys the fruits of his own labor, avoiding theft and deception, even refusing gifts. It also describes behavior appropriate to the God-fearing.
1. A song of ascents. Fortunate is every man who fears the Lord, who walks in His ways.
2. When you eat of the labor of your hands, you will be happy, and you will have goodness.
3. Your wife will be like a fruitful vine in the inner chambers of your house; your children will be like olive saplings around your table.
4. Behold, so will be blessed the man who fears the Lord.
5. May the Lord bless you out of Zion, and may you see the goodness of Jerusalem all the days of your life.
6. And may you see children [born] to your children; peace upon Israel.
Chapter 129
The psalmist laments the troubles of Israel.
1. A song of ascents. Much have they persecuted me from my youth on. Let Israel declare it now-
2. "Much have they persecuted me from my youth on, [but] they have not prevailed against me.”
3. The plowmen plowed upon my back; they wished to make their furrow long.
4. But the Lord is just; He cut the cords of the lawless.
5. They will be humiliated and will be turned back, all the haters of Zion.
6. They will be as grass upon the rooftops that withers before one plucks it,
7. wherewith the reaper has never filled his hand, nor the sheaf-binder his arm;
8. and of which the passers-by never have said: "The blessing of the Lord be upon you; we bless you in the name of the Lord."
Chapter 130
The psalmist prays for an end to this long exile.
1. A song of ascents. Out of the depths I call to You, O Lord.
2. My Lord, hearken to my voice; let Your ears be attentive to the sound of my pleas.
3. God, if You were to preserve iniquities, my Lord, who could survive?
4. But forgiveness is with You, that You may be held in awe.
5. I hope in the Lord; my soul hopes, and I long for His word.
6. My soul yearns for the Lord more than those awaiting the morning wait for the morning.
7. Israel, put your hope in the Lord, for with the Lord there is kindness; with Him there is abounding deliverance.
8. And He will redeem Israel from all its iniquities.
Chapter 131
In this prayer, David declares that never in the course of his life was he haughty, nor did he pursue greatness or worldly pleasures.
1. A song of ascents, by David. O Lord, my heart was not proud, nor were my eyes haughty; I did not seek matters that were too great and too wondrous for me.
2. Surely I put my soul at peace and soothed it like a weaned child with his mother; my soul was like a weaned child.
3. Let Israel hope in the Lord from this time forth and forever.
Chapter 132
David composed this psalm while he and the elders of Israel wore sackcloth, in mourning over the plague that had descended upon the land, and their being distant from the Holy Temple. David therefore offers intense prayers, entreating God to remember the hardship and sacrifice he endured for the sake of the Temple.
1. A song of ascents. O Lord, remember unto David all his suffering,
2. how he swore to the Lord, and vowed to the Mighty Power of Jacob:
3. "I will not enter into the tent of my house; I will not go up into the bed that is spread for me;
4. I will not give sleep to my eyes, nor slumber to my eyelids;
5. until I will have found a place for the Lord, a resting place for the Mighty Power of Jacob.”
6. Lo, we heard of it in Ephrath; we found it in the field of the forest.
7. We will come to His resting places; we will prostrate ourselves at His footstool.
8. Ascend, O Lord, to Your resting place, You and the Ark of Your might.
9. May Your priests clothe themselves in righteousness, and may Your pious ones sing joyous songs.
10. For the sake of David Your servant, turn not away the face of Your anointed.
11. For the Lord has sworn to David a truth from which He will never retreat: "From the fruit of your womb will I set for you upon the throne.
12. If your sons will keep My covenant and this testimony of mine which I will teach them, then their sons, too, will sit on the throne for you until the end of time.
13. For the Lord has chosen Zion; He has desired it for His habitation.
14. This is My resting place to the end of time. Here will I dwell, for I have desired it.
15. I will abundantly bless her sustenance; I will satisfy her needy with bread.
16. I will clothe her priests with salvation, and her pious ones will sing joyous songs.
17. There I will cause David's power to flourish; there I have prepared a lamp for My anointed.
18. His enemies will I clothe with shame, but upon him, his crown will blossom."
Chapter 133
1. A song of ascents, by David. Behold, how good and how pleasant it is when brothers dwell together.
2. Like the precious oil [placed] upon the head, flowing [in abundance] down the beard, the beard of Aaron which rests upon his garments.
3. Like the dew of Hermon which comes down upon the mountains of Zion, for there the Lord has commanded blessing, life unto eternity.
Chapter 134
The psalmist exhorts the scholarly and pious to rise from their beds at night, and go to the House of God.
1. A song of ascents. Behold: Bless the Lord, all you servants of the Lord who stand in the House of the Lord in the nights.
2. Lift up your hands in holiness and bless the Lord.
3. May the Lord, Who makes heaven and earth, bless you from Zion.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 52
• English Text (Lessons in Tanya)
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
Shabbat, Iyar 27, 5778 · May 12, 2018
Today's Tanya Lesson
Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 52
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Yehoshua B. Gordon Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Manis Freidman Listen • Download MP3
אבל השכינה עצמה, שהיא ראשית הגילוי ועיקרו, מה שאין סוף ברוך הוא מאיר לעולמות בבחינת גילוי, והיא מקור כל המשכות החיות שבכל העולמות
But as for the Shechinah itself, namely, the origin and core of the manifestation whereby the blessed Ein Sof illumines the Worlds in a revealed form and which is the source of all streams of vitality in the Worlds,
שכל החיות שבהם אינו רק אור המתפשט ממנה כאור המתפשט מהשמש
(1their entire vitality being no more than the light which is diffused from it like the light radiated from the sun), —
אי אפשר לעולמות לסבול ולקבל אור שכינתה, שתשכון ותתלבש בתוכם ממש, בלא לבוש המעלים ומסתיר אורה מהם
concerning the Shechinah itself, the source of all vitality for the worlds: the worlds cannot endure or receive the light of this Shechinah, that it might actually dwell and enclothe itself in them, without a “garment” to screen and conceal its light from them,
שלא יתבטלו במציאות לגמרי במקורם, כביטול אור השמש במקורו בגוף השמש, שאין נראה שם אור זה, רק עצם גוף השמש בלבד
so that they may not become entirely nullified and lose their identity within their source, just as the light of the sun is nullified in its source, namely, in the sun itself — where this light cannot be seen, but only the integral mass of the sun itself.
So, too, since the Shechinah is the source of vitality of the whole of creation, all of which receives but a ray of the Shechinah, then if the Shechinah itself — the actual source — would be manifest, all created beings would be nullified in that source. Their situation would be exactly similar to the sun’s rays as they are found within the orb of the sun, where they are completely nullified.
In order for the Shechinah to dwell within the Worlds and their creatures, there must therefore be a “garment” which serves to conceal its light. Only then can creation receive the Shechinah and not be nullified out of existence.
But what manner of “garment” can possibly conceal the Shechinah and yet itself not be affected by it, so that it, too, will not become nullified? Since the Shechinah is the source of all creation, it is of course the source of the concealing “garment” too.
In other words: If the Shechinah is manifest in the “garment”, i.e., if the garment is enveloped by its source,then it follows that it should be nullified out of existence, just as the sun’s rays cease to exist within the body of the sun. In effect, this would make the “garment” cease serving as a “garment” to conceal the Shechinah.
The Alter Rebbe anticipates this question by stating that the “garment” is G‑d’s Will and wisdom, which are enclothed in Torah and the mitzvot. Since this “garment” belongs to a plane even higher than (the source of the world’s vitality known as) the Shechinah, it is not nullified by it.
However, asks the Rebbe, according to this explanation the question becomes even stronger: If creation cannot receive the light of the Shechinah, then surely it cannot receive the light of the “garment” which is even higher than the Shechinah.
This, the Rebbe says, is answered by the Alter Rebbe when he says, “only that it has descended by means of obscuring gradations.” This means to say: Since G‑d’s Will and wisdom as found in Torah and the mitzvot“descended” in the gradations of the Worlds, being able to clothe themselves even in material things, they therefore can serve as a “garment” to conceal the light of the Shechinah.
We now understand why the “garment” itself is not nullified by the light of the Shechinah, as well as how created beings can receive this “garment” within themselves, for it is none other than G‑d’s Will and wisdom which He enclothed in Torah and the mitzvot — as shall presently be explained.
ומהו הלבוש שיוכל להסתירה ולהלבישה ולא יתבטל במציאות באורה, הוא רצונו יתברך וחכמתו וכו׳ המלובשים בתורה ומצותיה, הנגלית לנו ולבנינו
But what is this “garment” which is able to conceal and clothe it (the Shechinah) yet will not itselfbe completely nullified within its light? — This is His blessed Will and wisdom, and so forth(“and so forth” referring to the levels of Binah and Daat which are part of “intelligence” Above, as mentioned earlier), which are clothed in the Torah and its mitzvot that are revealed to us and our children,
Why are G‑d’s Will and wisdom and so forth able to act as a concealing “garment” for the light of theShechinah without themselves being nullified by it?
דאורייתא מחכמה נפקת, היא חכמה עילאה, דלעילא לעילא מעלמא דאתגליא
for “the Torah issues from wisdom,” namely Chochmah Ila‘ah (“Supernal Wisdom,” which is the level of Chochmah of Atzilut), that is immeasurably higher than the world of manifestation (which is the Shechinah),
As mentioned earlier, Shechinah refers to the initial stage of revelation, for which reason it is called the “world of manifestation.” Since Chochmah Ila‘ah is entirely beyond the pale of revelation it is therefore immeasurably higher than the Shechinah.
דאיהו חכים ולא בחכמה ידיעה וכו׳
for “He is wise,” with the wisdom of Chochmah of Atzilut, “but not with a knowable wisdom,” and so forth.
וכמו שנתבאר לעיל, שאור אין סוף ברוך הוא מלובש ומיוחד בחכמה עילאה, והוא יתברך וחכמתו אחד
And as has previously been explained, the [infinite] light of the blessed Ein Sof is clothed in and united with the Supernal Wisdom — and He and His wisdom are One.
Thus, Chochmah as well as the other levels of Divine “intelligence” (such as Binah and Daat) are far superior to the level of the light of the Shechinah. They are therefore able to serve as a “garment” concealing theShechinah, without being nullified by its light. But how can Divine “intelligence” serve as a “garment”, and how can created beings accept this garment when it is in fact loftier than the Shechinah itself? The Alter Rebbe now answers this question.
רק שירדה בסתר המדרגות ממדריגה למדריגה בהשתלשלות העולמות, עד שנתלבשה בדברים גשמיים, שהן תרי״ג מצות התורה
— Only this is because it (Supernal Wisdom and the Torah2) has descended by means of obscuring gradations, from a higher grade to a lower grade, with the descent of the Worlds, until it (the Torah)has clothed itself in material things, namely, the 613 commandments of the Torah.
FOOTNOTES
1. Parentheses are in the original text.
2. The Rebbe notes: “Possibly this alludes only to Torah. See above, ch. 4, where exactly the same expression is used. See also beginning of ch. 53: ‘The Supernal Wisdom of Atzilut, which is the totality of the Torah.’ — This matter requires further investigation.”
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvot:
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Shabbat, Iyar 27, 5778 · May 12, 2018
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.
Positive Commandment 98
Ritual Impurity of Food and Drink
We are commanded regarding food and drink that have contracted ritual impurity. [I.e., one must follow all the laws associated with this impurity.]
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Ritual Impurity of Food and Drink
Positive Commandment 98
The 98th mitzvah is that we are commanded to rule according to the appropriate laws regarding the tumah of food and drink.1 This mitzvah includes all the laws of tumas ochlin u'mashkin.2
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 11:34.
2.See Hilchos Ochlin 1:1-4.
• Hebrew text
• English text
Shabbat, 27 Iyar 5778 / May 12, 2018
Chapter 120
This psalm rebukes slanderers, describing how the deadly effect of slander reaches even further than weapons.
1. A song of ascents. I have called out to the Lord in my distress, and He answered me.
2. O Lord, rescue my soul from the lips of falsehood, from a deceitful tongue.
3. What can He give you, and what [further restraint] can He add to you, O deceitful tongue?
4. [You resemble] the sharp arrows of a mighty one, and the coals of broom-wood.1
5. Woe unto me that I sojourned among Meshech, that I dwelt beside the tents of Kedar.
6. Too long has my soul dwelt among those who hate peace.
7. I am for peace, but when I speak, they are for war.
FOOTNOTES
1.Which remain hot on the inside while appearing cool to the touch (Rashi).
Chapter 121
This psalm alludes to the Lower Paradise, from which one ascends to the Higher Paradise. It also speaks of how God watches over us.
2. My help will come from the Lord, Maker of heaven and earth.
3. He will not let your foot falter; your guardian does not slumber.
4. Indeed, the Guardian of Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps.
5. The Lord is your guardian; the Lord is your protective shade at your right hand.
6. The sun will not harm you by day, nor the moon by night.
7. The Lord will guard you from all evil; He will guard your soul.
8. The Lord will guard your going and your coming from now and for all time.
Chapter 122
The psalmist sings the praises of Jerusalem and tells of the miracles that happened there.
1. A song of ascents by David. I rejoiced when they said to me, "Let us go to the House of the Lord.”
2. Our feet were standing within your gates, O Jerusalem;
3. Jerusalem that is built like a city in which [all Israel] is united together.
4. For there the tribes went up, the tribes of God-as enjoined upon Israel-to offer praise to the Name of the Lord.
5. For there stood the seats of justice, the thrones of the house of David.
6. Pray for the peace of Jerusalem; may those who love you have peace.
7. May there be peace within your walls, serenity within your mansions.
8. For the sake of my brethren and friends, I ask that there be peace within you.
9. For the sake of the House of the Lord our God, I seek your well-being.
Chapter 123
The psalmist laments the length of time we have already suffered in exile.
1. A song of ascents. To You have I lifted my eyes, You Who are enthroned in heaven.
2. Indeed, as the eyes of servants are turned to the hand of their masters, as the eyes of a maid to the hand of her mistress, so are our eyes turned to the Lord our God, until He will be gracious to us.
3. Be gracious to us, Lord, be gracious to us, for we have been surfeited with humiliation.
4. Our soul has been overfilled with the derision of the complacent, with the scorn of the arrogant.
Chapter 124
1. A song of ascents by David. Were it not for the Lord Who was with us-let Israel declare-
2. were it not for the Lord Who was with us when men rose up against us,
3. then they would have swallowed us alive in their burning rage against us.
4. Then the waters would have inundated us, the torrent would have swept over our soul;
5. then the raging waters would have surged over our soul.
6. Blessed is the Lord, Who did not permit us to be prey for their teeth.
7. Our soul is like a bird which has escaped from the fowler's snare; the snare broke and we escaped.
8. Our help is in the Name of the Lord, the Maker of heaven and earth.
Chapter 125
1. A song of ascents. Those who trust in the Lord are as Mount Zion which never falters, but abides forever.
2. Mountains surround Jerusalem, and the Lord surrounds His people from this time and forever.
3. For the rod of wickedness will never come to rest upon the lot of the righteous; therefore the righteous need not stretch their hand to iniquity.
4. Be beneficent, O Lord, to the good and to those who are upright in their hearts.
5. But as for those that turn to their perverseness, may the Lord lead them with the workers of iniquity. Peace be upon Israel.
Chapter 126
The psalmist speaks of the future, comparing our Divine service in exile to one who sows arid land, then cries and begs God to send rain upon it so that the seed not be wasted. When he merits to reap the crop, he offers thanks to God.
1. A song of ascents. When the Lord will return the exiles of Zion, we will have been like dreamers.
2. Then our mouth will be filled with laughter, and our tongue with songs of joy; then will they say among the nations, "The Lord has done great things for these.”
3. The Lord has done great things for us; we were joyful.
4. Lord, return our exiles as streams to arid soil.
5. Those who sow in tears will reap with songs of joy.
6. He goes along weeping, carrying the bag of seed; he will surely return with songs of joy, carrying his sheaves.
Chapter 127
King David instructs his generation, and especially his son Solomon, to be sure that all one's actions be for the sake of Heaven. He also criticizes those who toil day and night in pursuit of a livelihood.
1. A song of ascents for Solomon. If the Lord does not build a house, then its builders labor upon it in vain. If the Lord will not guard a city, the vigilance of its watchman is in vain.
2. It is in vain for you, you who rise early, who sit up late, and who eat the bread of tension, for in fact He gives His loved ones sleep.
3. Behold, the heritage of the Lord is children; the fruit of the womb is a reward.
4. As arrows in the hand of a mighty man, so are the children of youth.
5. Fortunate is the man who has his quiver full of them; they will not find themselves shamed when they speak with enemies in public places.
Chapter 128
This psalm extols one who enjoys the fruits of his own labor, avoiding theft and deception, even refusing gifts. It also describes behavior appropriate to the God-fearing.
1. A song of ascents. Fortunate is every man who fears the Lord, who walks in His ways.
2. When you eat of the labor of your hands, you will be happy, and you will have goodness.
3. Your wife will be like a fruitful vine in the inner chambers of your house; your children will be like olive saplings around your table.
4. Behold, so will be blessed the man who fears the Lord.
5. May the Lord bless you out of Zion, and may you see the goodness of Jerusalem all the days of your life.
6. And may you see children [born] to your children; peace upon Israel.
Chapter 129
The psalmist laments the troubles of Israel.
1. A song of ascents. Much have they persecuted me from my youth on. Let Israel declare it now-
2. "Much have they persecuted me from my youth on, [but] they have not prevailed against me.”
3. The plowmen plowed upon my back; they wished to make their furrow long.
4. But the Lord is just; He cut the cords of the lawless.
5. They will be humiliated and will be turned back, all the haters of Zion.
6. They will be as grass upon the rooftops that withers before one plucks it,
7. wherewith the reaper has never filled his hand, nor the sheaf-binder his arm;
8. and of which the passers-by never have said: "The blessing of the Lord be upon you; we bless you in the name of the Lord."
Chapter 130
The psalmist prays for an end to this long exile.
1. A song of ascents. Out of the depths I call to You, O Lord.
2. My Lord, hearken to my voice; let Your ears be attentive to the sound of my pleas.
3. God, if You were to preserve iniquities, my Lord, who could survive?
4. But forgiveness is with You, that You may be held in awe.
5. I hope in the Lord; my soul hopes, and I long for His word.
6. My soul yearns for the Lord more than those awaiting the morning wait for the morning.
7. Israel, put your hope in the Lord, for with the Lord there is kindness; with Him there is abounding deliverance.
8. And He will redeem Israel from all its iniquities.
Chapter 131
In this prayer, David declares that never in the course of his life was he haughty, nor did he pursue greatness or worldly pleasures.
1. A song of ascents, by David. O Lord, my heart was not proud, nor were my eyes haughty; I did not seek matters that were too great and too wondrous for me.
2. Surely I put my soul at peace and soothed it like a weaned child with his mother; my soul was like a weaned child.
3. Let Israel hope in the Lord from this time forth and forever.
Chapter 132
David composed this psalm while he and the elders of Israel wore sackcloth, in mourning over the plague that had descended upon the land, and their being distant from the Holy Temple. David therefore offers intense prayers, entreating God to remember the hardship and sacrifice he endured for the sake of the Temple.
1. A song of ascents. O Lord, remember unto David all his suffering,
2. how he swore to the Lord, and vowed to the Mighty Power of Jacob:
3. "I will not enter into the tent of my house; I will not go up into the bed that is spread for me;
4. I will not give sleep to my eyes, nor slumber to my eyelids;
5. until I will have found a place for the Lord, a resting place for the Mighty Power of Jacob.”
6. Lo, we heard of it in Ephrath; we found it in the field of the forest.
7. We will come to His resting places; we will prostrate ourselves at His footstool.
8. Ascend, O Lord, to Your resting place, You and the Ark of Your might.
9. May Your priests clothe themselves in righteousness, and may Your pious ones sing joyous songs.
10. For the sake of David Your servant, turn not away the face of Your anointed.
11. For the Lord has sworn to David a truth from which He will never retreat: "From the fruit of your womb will I set for you upon the throne.
12. If your sons will keep My covenant and this testimony of mine which I will teach them, then their sons, too, will sit on the throne for you until the end of time.
13. For the Lord has chosen Zion; He has desired it for His habitation.
14. This is My resting place to the end of time. Here will I dwell, for I have desired it.
15. I will abundantly bless her sustenance; I will satisfy her needy with bread.
16. I will clothe her priests with salvation, and her pious ones will sing joyous songs.
17. There I will cause David's power to flourish; there I have prepared a lamp for My anointed.
18. His enemies will I clothe with shame, but upon him, his crown will blossom."
Chapter 133
1. A song of ascents, by David. Behold, how good and how pleasant it is when brothers dwell together.
2. Like the precious oil [placed] upon the head, flowing [in abundance] down the beard, the beard of Aaron which rests upon his garments.
3. Like the dew of Hermon which comes down upon the mountains of Zion, for there the Lord has commanded blessing, life unto eternity.
Chapter 134
The psalmist exhorts the scholarly and pious to rise from their beds at night, and go to the House of God.
1. A song of ascents. Behold: Bless the Lord, all you servants of the Lord who stand in the House of the Lord in the nights.
2. Lift up your hands in holiness and bless the Lord.
3. May the Lord, Who makes heaven and earth, bless you from Zion.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 52
• English Text (Lessons in Tanya)
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
Shabbat, Iyar 27, 5778 · May 12, 2018
Today's Tanya Lesson
Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 52
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Yehoshua B. Gordon Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Manis Freidman Listen • Download MP3
אבל השכינה עצמה, שהיא ראשית הגילוי ועיקרו, מה שאין סוף ברוך הוא מאיר לעולמות בבחינת גילוי, והיא מקור כל המשכות החיות שבכל העולמות
But as for the Shechinah itself, namely, the origin and core of the manifestation whereby the blessed Ein Sof illumines the Worlds in a revealed form and which is the source of all streams of vitality in the Worlds,
שכל החיות שבהם אינו רק אור המתפשט ממנה כאור המתפשט מהשמש
(1their entire vitality being no more than the light which is diffused from it like the light radiated from the sun), —
אי אפשר לעולמות לסבול ולקבל אור שכינתה, שתשכון ותתלבש בתוכם ממש, בלא לבוש המעלים ומסתיר אורה מהם
concerning the Shechinah itself, the source of all vitality for the worlds: the worlds cannot endure or receive the light of this Shechinah, that it might actually dwell and enclothe itself in them, without a “garment” to screen and conceal its light from them,
שלא יתבטלו במציאות לגמרי במקורם, כביטול אור השמש במקורו בגוף השמש, שאין נראה שם אור זה, רק עצם גוף השמש בלבד
so that they may not become entirely nullified and lose their identity within their source, just as the light of the sun is nullified in its source, namely, in the sun itself — where this light cannot be seen, but only the integral mass of the sun itself.
So, too, since the Shechinah is the source of vitality of the whole of creation, all of which receives but a ray of the Shechinah, then if the Shechinah itself — the actual source — would be manifest, all created beings would be nullified in that source. Their situation would be exactly similar to the sun’s rays as they are found within the orb of the sun, where they are completely nullified.
In order for the Shechinah to dwell within the Worlds and their creatures, there must therefore be a “garment” which serves to conceal its light. Only then can creation receive the Shechinah and not be nullified out of existence.
But what manner of “garment” can possibly conceal the Shechinah and yet itself not be affected by it, so that it, too, will not become nullified? Since the Shechinah is the source of all creation, it is of course the source of the concealing “garment” too.
In other words: If the Shechinah is manifest in the “garment”, i.e., if the garment is enveloped by its source,then it follows that it should be nullified out of existence, just as the sun’s rays cease to exist within the body of the sun. In effect, this would make the “garment” cease serving as a “garment” to conceal the Shechinah.
The Alter Rebbe anticipates this question by stating that the “garment” is G‑d’s Will and wisdom, which are enclothed in Torah and the mitzvot. Since this “garment” belongs to a plane even higher than (the source of the world’s vitality known as) the Shechinah, it is not nullified by it.
However, asks the Rebbe, according to this explanation the question becomes even stronger: If creation cannot receive the light of the Shechinah, then surely it cannot receive the light of the “garment” which is even higher than the Shechinah.
This, the Rebbe says, is answered by the Alter Rebbe when he says, “only that it has descended by means of obscuring gradations.” This means to say: Since G‑d’s Will and wisdom as found in Torah and the mitzvot“descended” in the gradations of the Worlds, being able to clothe themselves even in material things, they therefore can serve as a “garment” to conceal the light of the Shechinah.
We now understand why the “garment” itself is not nullified by the light of the Shechinah, as well as how created beings can receive this “garment” within themselves, for it is none other than G‑d’s Will and wisdom which He enclothed in Torah and the mitzvot — as shall presently be explained.
ומהו הלבוש שיוכל להסתירה ולהלבישה ולא יתבטל במציאות באורה, הוא רצונו יתברך וחכמתו וכו׳ המלובשים בתורה ומצותיה, הנגלית לנו ולבנינו
But what is this “garment” which is able to conceal and clothe it (the Shechinah) yet will not itselfbe completely nullified within its light? — This is His blessed Will and wisdom, and so forth(“and so forth” referring to the levels of Binah and Daat which are part of “intelligence” Above, as mentioned earlier), which are clothed in the Torah and its mitzvot that are revealed to us and our children,
Why are G‑d’s Will and wisdom and so forth able to act as a concealing “garment” for the light of theShechinah without themselves being nullified by it?
דאורייתא מחכמה נפקת, היא חכמה עילאה, דלעילא לעילא מעלמא דאתגליא
for “the Torah issues from wisdom,” namely Chochmah Ila‘ah (“Supernal Wisdom,” which is the level of Chochmah of Atzilut), that is immeasurably higher than the world of manifestation (which is the Shechinah),
As mentioned earlier, Shechinah refers to the initial stage of revelation, for which reason it is called the “world of manifestation.” Since Chochmah Ila‘ah is entirely beyond the pale of revelation it is therefore immeasurably higher than the Shechinah.
דאיהו חכים ולא בחכמה ידיעה וכו׳
for “He is wise,” with the wisdom of Chochmah of Atzilut, “but not with a knowable wisdom,” and so forth.
וכמו שנתבאר לעיל, שאור אין סוף ברוך הוא מלובש ומיוחד בחכמה עילאה, והוא יתברך וחכמתו אחד
And as has previously been explained, the [infinite] light of the blessed Ein Sof is clothed in and united with the Supernal Wisdom — and He and His wisdom are One.
Thus, Chochmah as well as the other levels of Divine “intelligence” (such as Binah and Daat) are far superior to the level of the light of the Shechinah. They are therefore able to serve as a “garment” concealing theShechinah, without being nullified by its light. But how can Divine “intelligence” serve as a “garment”, and how can created beings accept this garment when it is in fact loftier than the Shechinah itself? The Alter Rebbe now answers this question.
רק שירדה בסתר המדרגות ממדריגה למדריגה בהשתלשלות העולמות, עד שנתלבשה בדברים גשמיים, שהן תרי״ג מצות התורה
— Only this is because it (Supernal Wisdom and the Torah2) has descended by means of obscuring gradations, from a higher grade to a lower grade, with the descent of the Worlds, until it (the Torah)has clothed itself in material things, namely, the 613 commandments of the Torah.
FOOTNOTES
1. Parentheses are in the original text.
2. The Rebbe notes: “Possibly this alludes only to Torah. See above, ch. 4, where exactly the same expression is used. See also beginning of ch. 53: ‘The Supernal Wisdom of Atzilut, which is the totality of the Torah.’ — This matter requires further investigation.”
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvot:
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassShabbat, Iyar 27, 5778 · May 12, 2018
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.
Positive Commandment 98
Ritual Impurity of Food and Drink
We are commanded regarding food and drink that have contracted ritual impurity. [I.e., one must follow all the laws associated with this impurity.]
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Ritual Impurity of Food and Drink
Positive Commandment 98
The 98th mitzvah is that we are commanded to rule according to the appropriate laws regarding the tumah of food and drink.1 This mitzvah includes all the laws of tumas ochlin u'mashkin.2
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 11:34.
2.See Hilchos Ochlin 1:1-4.
Rambam:
• 1 Chapter A Day: Ishut Ishut - Chapter Twenty Two
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Shabbat, 27 Iyar 5778 / May 12, 2018
TODAY
VIDEO & AUDIO CLASSES
Yehoshua B. Gordon - Rambam: Ishut, Chapter 22 (53:11)
Watch Listen Download
SIE Rambam - 22nd Perek: Laws of Ishus (44:35)
Listen Download
Ishut - Chapter Twenty Two
1
The husband takes precedence over any other person with regard to the inheritance of his wife's estate.1
When does the husband acquire this right? When his wife leaves her father's domain, even though she has not entered the chuppah.2 Since the woman has entered her husband's domain, he [has the right] to inherit [her estate].א
הבעל קודם לכל אדם בירושת אשתו. ומאימתי יזכה בירושתה משתצא מרשות האב ואע"פ שעדיין לא נכנסה לחופה הואיל ונעשית ברשות בעלה יירשנה:
2
What is implied? When a woman has been consecrated and her father hands her over to her husband or to his agents, or the agents of the woman's father hand her over to her husband or to his agents, and the woman dies on the way, before she enters the chuppah, her husband inherits her estate, even though her dowry is still in her father's home.3
Similarly, if the father or his agents went together with the husband, and the husband entered into privacy in a courtyard together with [his bride] with the intent of marriage,4 and afterwards she dies, her husband inherits [her estate].
If, however, [the woman and] her husband or his agents are still accompanied by her father or his agents on their journey to the husband's house, her father inherits [her estate] if she dies, even if her dowry is already in her husband's home. [This law applies even if the woman] and her husband entered a courtyard together to spend the night, as travelers lodge together in one inn.5 [The rationale is that] she is accompanied by her father or his agents, and [her husband] has not entered into privacy with her for the sake of marriage.ב
כיצד האשה שנתארסה ומסרה אביה לבעלה או לשלוחי בעלה. או מסרוה שלוחי האב לבעלה או לשלוחיו ומתה בדרך קודם שתכנס לחופה אף ע"פ שכתובתה עדיין בבית אביה בעלה יורשה. וכן אם הלך האב או שלוחי האב עם הבעל ונכנס עמה בעלה בדרך לחצר ונתיחד עמה שם לשם נשואין ומתה הרי זה יירשנה בעלה. אבל אם עדיין האב עם הבעל להוליכה לבית בעלה או שהלכו שלוחי האב עם שלוחי הבעל או עם הבעל אפילו נכנס הבעל עמה לחצר ללון כדרך שלנין עוברי דרכים בפונדק אחד הואיל והאב או שלוחיו עמה ועדיין לא נתייחד עמה לשם נשואין אם מתה יירשנה אביה אע"פ שכתובתה בבית בעלה:
3
Similarly, when a bogeret, an orphan, or a widow6goes from her father's house to her husband's home on her own initiative without being accompanied by her husband or his agents, and dies on the way, her husband does not inherit [her estate].7ג
וכן אם היתה בוגרת או יתומה או אלמנה והלכה היא בעצמה מבית אביה לבית בעלה ואין עמה לא בעלה ולא שלוחיו ומתה בדרך אין הבעל יורש אותה:
4
Although a man marries a woman with whom he is forbidden [to have relations], if she dies [during his lifetime], he inherits her estate when his consecration of her is binding.8 Similarly, a man who marries a k'tanah[after her father's death]9 inherits her estate if she dies in his lifetime, even though his consecration of her is not binding entirely.
When, by contrast, a mentally capable man marries a deaf mute, he is not entitled to inherit her estate when she dies.10 When, however, a deaf mute marries a mentally capable woman and dies, he should inherit her estate. For she is capable of understanding and married him voluntarily. [In doing so,] she gave him a right to her property.11ד
הנושא אשה שהיא אסורה לו הואיל ויש לו בה קידושין אם מתה תחתיו יירשנה. וכן הנושא את הקטנה אעפ"י שאין קידושיה קידושין גמורים אם מתה תחתיו יירשנה. אבל הפקח שנשא חרשת אם מתה לא יירשנה. והחרש שנשא פקחת ומתה יירשנה שהרי היא בת דעת ולדעתה נשאת וזיכתה לו ממונה:
5
When a k'tanah was consecrated with her father's consent, but married without his consent - whether in his presence or outside his presence - her father has a right to object, as we have explained.12 [In such a situation,] if the girl dies, her husband should not inherit her estate, even if the father remains silent, unless he expressed his consent to her marriage.ה
קטנה שנתקדשה לדעת אביה ונשאת שלא לדעת אביה בין בפניו בין שלא בפניו יכול האב למחות כמו שביארנו. ואפילו שתק האב אם מתה אין הבעל יורשה אלא אם כן רצה האב בנישואיה:
6
The geonim ruled that when a woman falls sick and asks her husband to divorce her so that he will not inherit her estate, her words are of no consequence, [even if] she [agrees to] forfeit her ketubah. Even if she says: "I hate him and no longer desire to live with him," her words are not heeded, and she is not judged as a woman who rebels against her husband.13 This is a desirable ruling.ו
הורו הגאונים שהאשה שחלתה ובקשה מבעלה שיגרשנה ותצא בלא כתובה כדי שלא יירשנה אין שומעין לה. ואפילו אמרה אני שונאה אותו ואיני רוצה לעמוד עמו אין שומעין לה ואין דנין אותה כדין מורדת. ודין יפה הוא זה:
7
During a woman's lifetime, her husband enjoys the benefits of all the property she owns, regardless of whether it is classified as nichsei tzon barzel or nichsei m'log. If she dies in her husband's lifetime, her husband inherits everything.
Therefore, if the woman sold property classified as nichsei m'log after she married, even if she became the owner of that property before she became consecrated, her husband may expropriate the income from that property from the purchasers throughout his wife's lifetime. He may not, however, expropriate the land itself, for he has no right to the land itself, if it is classified as nichsei m'log, until his wife dies.14
If she dies in his lifetime, he may expropriate the land from the purchasers15 without paying them for it.16 If the actual money that [the woman] took from the purchasers still exists, however, it must be returned to the purchasers. The husband cannot say: "Perhaps this money was found [by my wife]" [and on that basis take it as his own].17ז
כל נכסים שיש לאשה בין נכסי צאן ברזל בין נכסי מלוג הבעל אוכל כל פירותיהן בחייה ואם מתה בחיי בעלה יורש בעלה הכל. לפיכך אם מכרה האשה נכסי מלוג אחר שנשאת אעפ"י שאותן הנכסים נפלו לה קודם שתתארס הבעל מוציא הפירות מיד הלקוחות כל ימי חייה. אבל לא גוף הקרקע שאין לו כלום בגוף נכסי מלוג עד שתמות. מתה בחייו מוציא הגוף מיד הלקוחות בלא דמים. ואם הדמים שלקחה מיד הלקוחות קיימין בעצמן מחזירן ללקוחות. ואינו יכול לומר שמא מציאה הן:
8
When does the above apply? With regard to property about which the husband knew.18 When, however, a woman inherits property in another country without her husband's knowledge and sells it, the sale is binding.19
Similarly, if a woman sells [property]20 between her consecration and the consummation of the marriage bond, the sale is binding. For the husband has no right to his wife's property until their marriage is consummated.ח
בד"א בנכסים הידועין לבעל אבל אם נפלו לה נכסים במדינה אחרת ולא ידע בהן הבעל ומכרה אותן מכרה קיים. וכן ארוסה שמכרה קודם הנישואין מכרה קיים שאין לבעל בנכסי ארוסתו כלום עד שיכנוס:
9
When a woman signs over all21 of her property to another person - regardless of whether or not that person is a relative - before she marries, even when there is a provision that if she is divorced or if she becomes a widow, this present is nullified - as will be explained in Hilchot Matanah22 - her husband is not entitled to benefit from the income of this property. And if she dies in his lifetime, he does not inherit it.
[The rationale is] that she gave this property away before she married. When she dies during her husband's lifetime, the recipient of the present acquires full title to it.
Moreover, [the same laws apply] even if she gave away a portion of her property - or all her holdings - before she married and wrote [in the deed of transfer] to the recipient: "Acquire the property from this time onward, [dependent] on my consent."23 [Although] the recipient does not acquire complete ownership until the woman expresses her consent,24 her husband is not entitled to benefit from the income of this property. And if she dies in his lifetime, he does not inherit it.25ט
האשה שכתבה כל נכסיה לאחר בין קרוב בין רחוק קודם שתנשא אע"פ שאם נתגרשה או נתאלמנה תבטל המתנה כמו שיתבאר בהלכות מתנה. אין הבעל אוכל פירותיהן ואם מתה בחייו אינו יורשן שהרי נתנה אותן קודם שתנשא. וכשתמות בחיי בעלה יקנה מקבל המתנה מתנתו קנין גמור. ולא עוד אלא אפילו נתנה מקצת נכסיה או כולם קודם נישואיה וכתבה למקבל קנה מהיום ולכשארצה שהרי לא קנה קנין גמור עד שתרצה אין הבעל אוכל פירות אותה המתנה. ואם מתה אינו יורשה:
10
While a woman is waiting for her yavam [to marry her according to the rite of yibbum], she may sell or give as a present property that she acquires during the time she is in this status.26 Until he marries the yevamah, the yavam has no right to benefit from the property, even the nichsei tzon barzel,27 that she brought to his [deceased] brother's household.
If the yevamah dies in this status, her heirs from her father's household inherit her nichsei m'log28 and half of her nichsei tzon barzel.29 Her husband's heirs inherit [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah30 and the remaining half of her nichsei tzon barzel, and they are responsible for her burial.31י
שומרת יבם יש לה למכור וליתן במתנה נכסים שנפלו לה כשהיא שומרת יבם ואין ליבם פירות אפילו בנכסי צאן ברזל שהכניסה לאחיו עד שיכנוס. מתה כשהיא שומרת יבם יורשיה מאביה יורשין בנכסי מלוג שלה וחצי נכסי צאן ברזל ויורשי הבעל יורשים כתובתה וחצי נכסי צאן ברזל. ויורשי הבעל חייבין בקבורתה:
11
The money due a yevamah by virtue of her ketubahis considered to be a lien on her [late] husband's estate. Therefore, a yavam is not entitled to sell any of his brother's property32 - neither before yibbum nor after yibbum.
If he sells the deceased's property, gives it away as a present, divides it with his brothers - whether before yibbum or after yibbum - his actions are of no consequence. For it is already obligatory to make this property available to the widow so that she can collect [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah from it.יא
שומרת יבם כתובתה על כל נכסי בעלה. לפיכך אין היבם יכול למכור בנכסי אחיו בין קודם יבום בין אחר יבום. ואם מכר או נתן מתנה או חלק עם אחיו בנכסי המת בין קודם יבום בין אחר יבום לא עשה כלום שכבר נתחייבו נכסים אלו לאלמנה לגבות מהן כתובתה:
12
When a man marries his yevamah at a time when there is produce growing on the land left by her husband, this produce should be sold,33 and the proceeds used to purchase land from which the yavam will derive the benefit that accrues.יב
כנס את יבמתו והניח אחיו פירות מחוברין לקרקע ימכרו וילקח בהן קרקע והיבם אוכל פירותיהן:
13
When, [by contrast, the deceased] left produce that was already harvested, money or movable property, it becomes the property of the yavam. He may use it as he sees fit, and [the yevamah's] objections are of no consequence.
[The rationale is that the woman's right] to collect [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah from movable property stems only from an enactment of the geonim, and this enactment does not have the power to prevent [the yavam from taking possession] of his brother's property,34and cause him to be restrained from dealing with them because of this lien.יג
הניח פירות תלושין מן הקרקע וכן אם הניח מעות ומטלטלין הכל של יבם. ומשתמש בהן כמו שירצה ואינה יכולה לעכב. שהמטלטלין אין הכתובה נגבית מהן אלא בתקנת הגאונים ואין כח בתקנה זו למונעו מנכסי אחיו ולאוסרן עליו באחריות זו שלא ישא ויתן בהם:
14
[The following rules apply when] a yevamah's [first husband was not obligated to] grant her a ketubah35or [when] she waived her ketubah in his favor. The yavamacquires his brother's estate and may sell [portions of it] or give them away as he desires. When he marries his yevamah, he is obligated to compose a ketubah for 100 [zuz]. All of his property will be considered as being on lien for the ketubah, [i.e., the same laws apply to her] as apply to other women who have a ketubah.36יד
יבמה שלא היתה לה כתובה או שמחלה כתובתה זכה בנכסי אחיו ומוכר ונותן כחפצו. וכשיכנוס את יבמתו יכתוב לה כתובה מאה ויהיו כל נכסיו אחראין לכתובתה כשאר כל הנשים שיש להן כתובה:
15
When a woman sells nichsei tzon barzel - whether to her husband or to others - after she marries, her act is of no consequence.37
Similarly, if her husband sells landed property belonging to his wife - whether it be nichsei tzon barzel or nichsei m'log - his act is of no consequence.38טו
האשה שמכרה או שנתנה אחר שנשאת בנכסי צאן ברזל בין לבעלה בין לאחרים לא עשתה כלום. וכן בעל שמכר קרקע בנכסי אשתו בין נכסי צאן ברזל בין נכסי מלוג לא עשה כלום:
16
[Should the husband] sell movable property that is classified as nichsei tzon barzel39 - although he is not allowed to make such a sale - the sale is binding.40
If both [the husband and the wife] sell nichsei m'log, the sale is binding,41 regardless of whether the purchaser purchased the property from the husband first and then from the wife, or if he first purchased it from the wife and then from the husband.טז
מכר מטלטלין של נכסי צאן ברזל אף ע"פ שאינו רשאי אם מכר ממכרו ממכר. מכרו שניהם בנכסי מלוג בין שלקח מן האיש תחלה וחזר ולקח מן האשה בין שלקח מן האשה וחזר ולקח מן האיש מכרן קיים:
17
Similarly, when a woman sells her nichsei m'log to her husband or gives them to him as a present, the sale or the gift is binding. She cannot rationalize her actions by saying, "[This was not my true intent.] I did it [only] to appease my husband."42 With regard to other property, however, she may offer such a rationalization.יז
וכן האשה שמכרה או נתנה נכסי מלוג לבעלה ממכרה ומתנתה קיימין ואינה יכולה לומר בנכסי מלוג נחת רוח עשיתי לבעלי. אבל בשאר נכסים יש לה לומר:
18
What is implied? When a woman sells her nichsei tzon barzel to her husband or gives them to him as a present, her husband does not acquire this property. [This applies to] landed property and movable property [in this category], to a field that was designated for her from which [she could collect the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah, a field belonging to her that was specifically mentioned in her ketubah or a field that [her husband mentioned in her ketubah] as his present to her [to be included in her dowry].43
[In all the above instances,] even though [the husband] formalized the transaction with his wife through an act of contract that she voluntarily agreed to, she has the prerogative of recanting whenever she desires.44 [We assume that] she gave the present or made the sale only for the sake of maintaining peace in her home.45
Accordingly, a husband has no way of substantiating his claim to his wife's property46 except with regard to nichsei m'log, as explained [in the previous halachah].47יח
כיצד האשה שמכרה או נתנה לבעלה מנכסי צאן ברזל בין קרקע בין מטלטלין או שדה שייחד לה בכתובתה או שדה שכתב לה בכתובתה או שדה שהכניס לה שום משלו לא קנה בעלה. ואע"פ שקנו מיד האשה ברצונה חוזרת בכל עת שתרצה. שלא נתנה ולא מכרה אלא מפני שלום ביתה. לפיכך אין לבעל ראיה בנכסי אשתו כלל חוץ מנכסי מלוג כמו שביארנו:
19
It appears to me that a woman is not entitled [to nullify her statements, based on the rationale]: "I did it [only] to appease my husband," when her nichsei tzon barzel were lost or stolen, and she waived the debt in favor of her husband. [This applies even when the commitment] is formalized in the presence of witnesses.48
To what can this be compared? To a man and a woman who formalized an agreement in which she forgoes the responsibility [he had taken for property that had been classified as nichsei tzon barzel] and considers it instead nichsei m'log.49 For the husband is not bringing a proof for the sake of taking possession or maintaining possession of property, merely to free himself of the obligation to pay a claim [his wife will issue].50
If, by contrast, she gives him movable property that exists and was considered to be nichsei tzon barzel, the husband does not acquire it. For the wife may rationalize her conduct saying: "I did this to appease my husband."יט
נכסי צאן ברזל שאבדו או שנגנבו ומחלה האשה אותם לבעלה וקנו ממנה בעדים יראה לי שאינה יכולה לומר נחת רוח עשיתי לבעלי. הא למה זה דומה למי שקנו מידה שאין לה אחריות שהחזירה נכסים אלו נכסי מלוג. שהרי אין הבעל מביא ראייה ליטול כלום ולא להחזיק בנכסים אלא להפטר מתביעתה מלשלם. אבל אם נתנה לו מתנה מטלטלי צאן ברזל הקיימין לא קנה מפני שיש לה לומר נחת רוח עשיתי לבעלי:
20
When a husband sells [the right to] the benefits from landed property [that belongs to his wife, to another person, while the legal owner of the property remains his wife, the sale] is of no consequence. [The rationale is that] the reason our Sages granted a man [the right to] the benefit that accrues from his wife's property is [to afford him additional income] so that he will spend more generously on the household expenses.51
[Based on that rationale,] if he sells the benefit to be derived [from the landed property to another person] and takes the money and invests it in a business [which offers profit], he is given that prerogative.כ
בעל שמכר קרקע לפירות לא עשה כלום. מפני שלא התקינו פירות לאיש אלא כדי להרויח בהוצאת הבית. לפיכך אם מכר לפירות ולקח אותן המעות לסחורה שומעין לו:
21
[The following laws apply if] the woman possesses financial resources [that she brings to the household]. If they are nichsei tzon barzel, her husband may use them for commercial enterprises.52
If they are nichsei m'log - regardless of whether she brought them to the household at the time of marriage or she inherited them or received them as a present53 [- landed property should be purchased with them, from which her husband is entitled to the benefit that accrues].54[Similarly,] if she inherited or was given movable property, it should be sold, and the proceeds of the sale should be used to purchase landed property, from which her husband is entitled to the benefit that accrues.כא
היו לאשה כספים. אם נכסי צאן ברזל הן הרי זה נושא ונותן בהן. ואם נכסי מלוג הן בין שהכניסה אותן לו בין שנפלו לה בירושה או נתנו לה במתנה או נפלו לה מטלטלין או נתנו לה הרי אלו ימכרו וילקח בהן קרקע והוא אוכל פירותיהן:
22
Similarly, if a woman was injured by others,55 all the money that is ordained to be given to her should be used to purchase land, from which her husband is entitled to the benefit that accrues, as stated in Hilchot Chovel.56כב
וכן האשה שחבלו בה אחרים כל המעות הראויות לתת לה ילקח בהן קרקע והבעל אוכל פירותיהן כמו שיתבאר בהלכות חובל:
23
[The following law applies when] a woman inherits servants [while she is married]. Even if they are old, they should not be sold, because they bring honor to her family's household.
[The following law applies when] she inherits olive trees or vines, but did not [inherit] the land on which these trees were planted. If they produce enough to pay for their upkeep, they should not be sold, because they bring honor to her family's household. If they do not, they should be sold as firewood, land should be purchased with the proceeds, from which the husband is entitled to the benefit that accrues.כג
נפלו לה עבדים אע"פ שהן זקנים לא ימכרו מפני שבח בית אביה. נפלו לה זיתים וגפנים ולא היה לה בגוף הקרקע שהאילנות בה כלום. אם עושין כדי טיפולן לא ימכרו מפני שבח בית אביה ואם לאו הרי אלו ימכרו לעצים וילקח בהן קרקע והוא אוכל פירות:
24
When [a married woman] inherits produce that is still attached to the land [on which it is growing], it becomes her husband's [property].57 When the produce has been uprooted from the land, it should be sold and used to purchase landed property, from which her husband is entitled to the benefit that accrues.
When, however, a husband divorces his wife, and there was produce that was still attached to the ground, it belongs to the woman. If it has already been reaped, it belongs to the man.58כד
נפלו לה פירות מחוברין לקרקע הרי אלו של בעל. תלושין מן הקרקע שלה וימכרו וילקח בהן קרקע והוא אוכל פירות. אבל המגרש את אשתו והיו לה פירות מחוברין לקרקע בשעת גירושין הרי אלו שלה ואם היו תלושין הרי אלו שלו:
25
A husband is obligated to provide for the sustenance and all the needs of the servants59 and livestock that belong to his wife and are classified as nichsei m'log. They must work for him, and he is entitled to the benefit that accrues. Therefore, a baby born to a maid classified as nichsei m'log belongs to the husband. And a calf born to a cow that is classified as nichsei m'log belongs to the husband.
If, however, the husband divorces his wife and she desires to pay the worth of a child born from a maidservant who is classified as nichsei m'log and take the child as her property because this brings honor to her family's household, she is given that prerogative.60כה
עבדי נכסי מלוג ובהמת נכסי מלוג הבעל חייב במזונות שלהן ובכל צרכיהם והן עושין לו והוא אוכל פירותיהם. לפיכך ולד שפחת מלוג לבעל. ולד בהמת מלוג לבעל. ואם גירשה ורצתה האשה ליתן דמים וליטול ולד השפחה מפני שבח בית אביה שומעין לה:
26
[The following laws apply when] a woman brings two utensils or two maidservants to the household and has them classified as nichsei tzon barzel. They were [originally] evaluated at 1000 zuz; afterwards, their value increased and they were evaluated at 2000 zuz. If the woman's husband divorces her, she is entitled to one [utensil or maidservant] for the 1000 zuz that she is owed. With regard to the other - if she desires to pay its value and take it because of the honor it brings to her father's household, she has that prerogative.כו
הכניסה לו שני כלים או שתי שפחות בתורת נכסי צאן ברזל ושמו אותן עליו באלף זוז והוקרו ועמדו באלפים וגירשה נוטלת אחד באלף שלה. והשני אם רצתה שתתן דמיו ותטול משום שבח בית אביה שומעין לה:
27
When a man gives a present to his wife - regardless of whether he gave her landed property, or he gave her money and she bought landed property - her husband is not entitled to the benefits that accrue from the present [that was given].61
Similarly, when a man gives a woman a present on the condition that her husband not be entitled to derive the benefits from it, but rather the benefits that accrue will belong to the wife to be used for whatever she desires,62[the provision is binding, and] the husband is not entitled to the benefits that accrue from this present.
Similarly, if a woman sells the rights to her ketubah [in the event of her divorce or her husband's death],63 the money she receives belongs to her, and her husband is not entitled to derive the benefit that accrues from it.כז
הנותן מתנה לאשתו בין שנתן לה קרקע בין שנתן לה מעות ולקחה בהן קרקע אין לבעל פירות במתנה זו. וכן הנותן מתנה לאשה ע"מ שלא יהיה הבעל אוכל פירותיה אלא יהיו פירותיה לאשה למה שתרצה אין הבעל אוכל פירות מתנה זו. וכן המוכרת כתובתה בטובת הנאה אותן הדמים לאשה ואין הבעל אוכל פירותיהן:
28
When a calf born from cattle that was classified as nichsei m'log is stolen, and the thief is apprehended and forced to pay twice the amount, the woman receives the extra payment. [The rationale is that] this is not the benefit that our Sages granted [the husband].64
When a man injures his wife, the entire [amount he must pay] - the damages and the restitution for the pain and the embarrassment - belongs to the woman,65 and the husband is not entitled to the benefits that accrue from [property purchased with this money], as explained in Hilchot Chovel.66כח
ולד בהמת מלוג שנגנב ונמצא הגנב ושלם שנים הכפל לאשה שאין זה פרי שתקנו לו חכמים. החובל באשתו כל הנזק והצער והבושת שלה ואין הבעל אוכל פירות כמו שיתבאר בהלכות חובל:
29
[The following rules apply when] a husband sells landed property [that he owns] to his wife. If the husband knew about the funds with which she purchased the land previously, the sale is binding,67 and the husband is entitled to the benefit that accrues from that land.
If, however, [the existence of] these funds was concealed, she does not acquire the land. For the husband may [explain that he did not really intend to complete the sale]. [His intent was] to reveal the existence of funds that his wife had hidden. The funds that were revealed should be used to purchase landed property,68 from which the husband is entitled to the benefits that accrue.69כט
המוכר קרקע לאשתו אם היו המעות שלקחה בהן את הקרקע מבעל גלויין וידועין לבעל קנתה והבעל אוכל פירות אותה הקרקע. ואם היו מעות טמונין לא קנתה שהבעל אומר לא מכרתי אלא כדי להראות המעות שטמנה ואותן המעות שנראו ילקח בהן קרקע והבעל אוכל פירות:
30
When funds or movable property are discovered in a woman's possession, and she claims that they were given her as a present, while her husband claims that they stem from the fruits of her labor and hence belong to him, it is the woman's claim that is accepted.70 [The husband] may, however, have a ban of ostracism [conditionally] issued against anyone who makes false statements.71[The funds should be used] to purchase landed property, from which [the husband] is entitled to the benefit that accrues.72
If the woman claims that the funds were given to her with the provision that her husband have no control over them, but rather that they be used for whatever purpose she desires, she must bring proof [that such a provision was made].73 [The rationale is that] the prevailing assumption is that a husband has the right to the benefits from all the funds found in a woman's possession, unless she brings proof otherwise.ל
הרי שנמצאו מעות או מטלטלין ביד האשה היא אומרת במתנה נתנו לי והוא אומר ממעשה ידיך הם שהם שלי הרי זו נאמנת. ויש לו להחרים על מי שטוענת דבר שאינו כן. וילקח בהן קרקע והוא אוכל פירות. ואם אמרה על מנת כן נתנו לי על מנת שלא יהיה לבעלי רשות בהן אלא אעשה בהן כל מה שארצה עליה להביא ראיה. שכל ממון שנמצא ביד האשה בחזקת הבעל הוא שיאכל פירותיו עד שתביא ראיה:
31
If [a wife] tells [her husband]: "You gave me [these funds] as a present," she is required to take a Rabbinic oath that her husband gave her [the funds]. [After she takes that oath,] her husband is not entitled to the benefit [from the property purchased with these funds].74לא
אמרה לו אתה נתת לי במתנה נשבעת שבועת היסת שנתן לה הבעל ואינו אוכל פירותיהן:
32
One should not accept an article for safekeeping that was given by a wife, a servant or a minor.75 If one transgressed and accepted [an article given by] a woman, one should return it to the woman.76 If she dies, one should return it to her husband.77
If one accepted [an article given by] a servant, one should return it to the servant. If he dies, one should return it to his master. If one accepted [an article given by] a minor, one should purchase a Torah scroll with the proceeds or an article that will provide [the minor] with benefit.78
[The following rules apply] with regard to all [the abovementioned individuals], if at the time of their death, they say: "The article I gave for safekeeping belongs to so and so." If the person caring for the article operates under the presumption that the person who entrusted it to him is true to his word, he should carry out the command he was given. If not, he should give [the article] to the person's heirs.לב
אין מקבלין פקדונות לא מן הנשים ולא מן העבדים ולא מן הקטנים. ואם עבר וקיבל מן האשה יחזיר לאשה. מתה יחזיר לבעלה. קיבל מן העבד יחזיר לעבד ואם מת יחזיר לרבו. קיבל מן הקטן יקנה לו בו ס"ת או דבר שאוכל פירותיהם. וכולם שאמרו בשעת מיתתן פקדון זה של פלוני הוא אם היו בחזקת נאמנין אצל זה שהפקדון אצלו יעשה כמו שצוו ואם לאו יתן ליורשיהם:
33
[The following rules apply when] a woman has financial resources sufficient [to purchase property] from which the husband would derive the benefits [but they disagree with regard to the property fit to purchase]; he suggests that this type of property be purchased, and she desires that another type be purchased. A property should be purchased that brings a large revenue and requires little upkeep,79 regardless of whether this is the article desired by [the husband] or by [the wife]. We do not purchase any article that does not renew itself,80 lest the entire property be used and the principal lost.לג
האשה שהיו לה כספים הראויות לבעל לאכול פירותיהם הוא אומר כך וכך ילקח בהם והיא אומרת איני לוקחת בהן אלא כך וכך לוקחים דבר שפירותיו מרובים ויציאתו מעוטה. בין שהיה הדבר כרצונו או שהיה כרצונה. ואין לוקחין אלא דבר שגזעו מחליף שמא יאכל הכל ונמצא הקרן אבד:
34
[The following rule applies when] a woman brings to her husband's household a goat [that she is entitled] to milk, a sheep [that she is entitled] to shear or a date palm whose fruit [she is entitled to take], although she is entitled only to these benefits [and not to the principal]. [Her husband] is entitled to [these benefits] although the principal is dwindling.81
Similarly, if she brought utensils or articles of clothing to his household that were classified as nichsei m'log, he may use them, wearing them or using them as spreads or as covers until the articles themselves are destroyed. If he divorces [his wife], he is not required to pay for any nichsei m'log that became worn out.לד
האשה שהכניסה לבעלה עז לחלבה ורחל לגיזתה ודקל לפירותיו אע"פ שאין לה אלא פירות אלו בלבד הרי זה אוכל והולך עד שתכלה הקרן. וכן אם הכניסה לו כלי תשמיש בתורת נכסי מלוג הרי זה משתמש בהן ולובש ומציע ומכסה עד שיכלה הקרן. וכשיגרש אינו חייב לשלם הבלאות של נכסי מלוג:
35
The geonim [issued the following] ruling. A husband takes responsibility for the diminished value of nichsei tzon barzel. Nevertheless, if [such property] exists [at the time a woman's ketubah is due for payment,] and still serves its initial purpose, the woman must take it regardless of its condition at that time.82
If they are no longer fit to serve their initial purpose, it is as if they were stolen or lost, and the husband is obligated to pay the value appraised originally at the time of the marriage.
This is the common custom. Whenever a man marries, he accepts responsibility for [the woman's] dowry as contingent on this custom.83 On the basis of this custom, just as the husband does not pay for the depreciation of the article, so too, he does not take the appreciation of the property if it increases in value.
A husband has the right to compel some of the servants and maidservants who belong to his wife to serve him84 in the home of another woman he has married.85 [This applies] regardless of whether the servants are classified as nichsei m'log or nichsei tzon barzel. The husband may not, however, take these servants to another city without his wife's consent.לה
הורו הגאונים שנכסי צאן ברזל אע"פ שפחיתתן על הבעל אם היו הבלאות קיימין והיו עושין מעין מלאכתן נוטלת כליה כמה שהן. ואם לא היו עושין מעין מלאכתן הרי הן כמו שנגנבו או אבדו שהוא חייב לשלם בדמיהם ששמו אותן עליו בשעת נישואין. ומנהג פשוט הוא זה. וכל הנושא על מנהג זה קיבל עליו אחריות הנדוניא. וכשם שאינו משלם הפחת כך אינו נוטל את השבח אם הותירו דמיהן לפי מנהג זה. יש לבעל לכוף מקצת עבדי אשתו ואמהותיה שיהיו משמשין אותו בבית אשה אחרת שנשא בין שהיו עבדי מלוג בין שהיו עבדי צאן ברזל. אבל אינו יכול להוליכן לעיר אחרת שלא מדעת אשתו:
FOOTNOTES
1.As explained in Chapter 12, Halachah 3 and notes, this is one of the four privileges our Sages granted a husband as part of the marriage contract. (See also Hilchot Nachalot 1:8.)
2.The second phase of marriage, nisu'in, does not start until the woman enters the chuppah, and it is only at that time that the marriage contract takes effect. Nevertheless, an exception is made in this instance, as explained in the following halachot and notes.
3.The Ramah (Even HaEzer 57:1) cites the opinion of the Tur and other Ashkenazic authorities, which is that the husband does not have a right to inherit his wife's dowry until it enters his possession.
4.Moreover, if the courtyard belongs to the husband, it is assumed that the couple entered for the sake of marriage, even when they do not explicitly state so. This is the view of all authorities, and the Maggid Mishneh explains that it is also shared by the Rambam.
5.If the courtyard belonged to her, this intent is understood even when it is not explicitly stated.
6.This law applies even if the widow is still a minor, as reflected in Chapter 3, Halachah 12.
7.Once she is met by her husband or his agents, however, he is entitled to inherit her estate.
8.See Chapter 1, Halachot 6 and 7; Chapter 4, Halachah 14.
9.Or after she becomes divorced or widowed in her father's lifetime (Chapter 4, Halachot 7 and 8).
10.The rationale is that she is not entitled to a ketubah (Chapter 11, Halachah 4). Moreover, since she is not responsible for her actions, she has no right to transfer her property.
11.Although the Ra'avad objects to this ruling, the Shulchan Aruch(Even HaEzer 90:3) quotes the Rambam's view.
12.Chapter 3, Halachah 13.
13.See Chapter 14, Halachah 8.
14.The advantage in the purchaser's continuing to own the land itself is that if the husband dies before his wife, her sale is binding, and the land becomes the purchaser's property. From this time onward, he is entitled to benefit from the land as well.
Rabbenu Asher differs with the Rambam on this issue and maintains that the husband has the right to take the property from the purchaser, even during his wife's lifetime. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 90:9) follows the Rambam's view, while the Ramah quotes that of Rabbenu Asher.
15.Even the Ramah and Rabbenu Asher accept this ruling.
16.There is a difference of opinion with regard to this matter among the geonim, but all the later authorities accept this view. The rationale is that the husband's right to the land supersedes that of the purchaser. The money that the purchaser paid is considered to have become a debt owed him by the woman's estate, and the husband is not required to pay his wife's debts.
17.A husband is entitled to any ownerless object discovered by his wife. His claim is not accepted, however, if he states that money that appears to have come from the sale of property came from the discovery of a lost object. There is no need for witnesses to testify that this is the money from the sale. It is sufficient that it appears to be so. If, however, the money has been changed into a different coinage or currency, the husband is not required to return it (Maggid Mishneh).
18.In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Ketubot 8:2), the Rambam states that this refers to property located in the bride and groom's city or the surrounding locale, as opposed to property owned by her in more distant locales. It is questionable, however, if the same geographic restrictions apply in today's global village.
19.The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 90:11) states that preferably, a woman should not sell this property, because her husband is entitled to inherit it.
The commentaries explain that when the husband knows of his wife's financial holdings, it is an implicit part of the marriage contract - and perhaps part of his intent in entering into the marriage relationship - that he will inherit this property. When, however, he is unaware of her ownership of property, this motive cannot be given as the reason for his desire to enter this relationship.
It must be added that as soon as the husband becomes aware of this property, it is considered to be part of the woman's nichsei m'log and is bound by all the laws pertaining to such property (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit.:12). Moreover, if the woman dies without selling this property, her husband is entitled to inherit it, although he was never aware of his wife's ownership of it during her lifetime.
20.The Tur (Even HaEzer 90) states that the woman has the full right to sell any property that she owned before she was consecrated. With regard to property that she acquired after she was consecrated, it is preferable that she not sell it - but if she sells it, the husband has no claim to it.
21.As explained in Hilchot Zechiyah UMatanah, slightly different rules apply if the woman signed over only a portion of her property.
22.Hilchot Zechiyah UMatanah 6:12. It is clearly obvious that the woman's intent in giving the present is to protect her holdings from being inherited by her husband.
23.In his gloss on Ketubot 79a, Rabbenu Nissim explains that the Rambam equates this provision with the one mentioned in the previous clause. The only difference between the two is one of tact. The provision in this clause is more gently worded, so that the intent to free the woman's holdings from her husband is less obvious.
24.Unlike the Rambam, Rabbenu Asher and other authorities maintain that the woman need not explicitly mention her consent to the present. All that is necessary is that she refrain from nullifying it.
25.Rabbenu Nissim asks, according to the approach of the Rambam (in contrast to the approach of Rabbenu Asher mentioned in the previous note): If the woman did not explicitly mention her consent to the present before her death, why does her husband have no right to inherit her property? The provision on which the present was based was never fulfilled.
Seemingly, this property can be compared to a woman's property of which her husband was unaware. As mentioned in the notes on the previous halachah, the husband has the right to inherit such property, and thus he should also inherit the property mentioned in this clause.
Rabbenu Nissim explains that since the Rambam maintains that a husband's right to inherit his wife's property is a Rabbinical ordinance, there is room for leniency when, as in the present case, it is obvious that the woman did not desire her husband to inherit her estate. Obviously motivated by the same question, but unwilling to offer such a resolution, Rav David Arameah explains that the Rambam's ruling applies in an instance when the woman in fact expressed her consent to the present before her death.
26.As mentioned in the notes on Halachah 8, preferably a woman should not sell property she acquires after her consecration. One might think that the same principle applies to a yevamah, for she also shares a bond to her yavam. There is, however, a distinction between the two: a woman who is consecrated will most likely be married, while a yevamah may be freed from her obligation through chalitzah. Hence, there are no restrictions placed upon her with regard to the sale of her holdings.
27.The difference between nichsei m'log and nichsei tzon barzel is that with regard to nichsei m'log, the object itself belongs to the woman, while the property regarded as nichsei tzon barzel is considered to belong to her late husband. He was, however, obligated to pay his wife for the value designated at the time of marriage (Chapter 16, Halachah 1).
Since the nichsei tzon barzel are considered to belong to the yevamah's late husband's estate, one might think that the yavamwould have a right to them. Hence, it is necessary to clarify that he is given this right only after marriage.
As mentioned by the Ra'avad and the Maggid Mishneh, most authorities differ with the Rambam on this point. The Maggid Mishneh maintains that the yavam is entitled to half of the benefit that accrues from the nichsei tzon barzel. This opinion is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 160:6). (The Rambam's opinion is also quoted, but it appears that the other opinion is favored.) The Ramah mentions the opinion of the Ra'avad which goes even further and gives the yavam rights to half the benefits of nichsei m'log that the yevamah acquired while she was married to her deceased husband.
28.For this property belongs to her outright.
29.A division is necessary because this property is considered to belong to the yevamah's late husband, as explained above. Therefore, his heirs have a claim to it. Nevertheless, since he died in his wife's lifetime, and she did not receive payment for this property, her own heirs also have a claim.
This ruling is also disputed by other authorities, who maintain that all the nichsei tzon barzel are considered the property of the husband's heirs, together with the woman's ketubah. The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.:7) quotes the Rambam's view, while the Ramah quotes that of the other authorities.
The Ramah also adds that these laws do not apply in the Ashkenazic community in the present era - or in other communities - where the rite of yibbum is not practiced, and instead, the yevamah is freed from her obligation through the rite of chalitzah. Since the yevamah will not marry the yavam, he has no rights with regard to her property.
30.I.e., both the essential requirement of the ketubah and any additional amount added by her deceased husband.
31.For our Sages associated a woman's burial with the inheritance of her ketubah (Chapter 12, Halachah 14).
32.Even if the value of the property left by the deceased brother is many times the value of the woman's ketubah, none of the property may be sold, lest the remaining property be destroyed and the woman have difficulty collecting the money due her by virtue of her ketubah from the purchasers (Ketubot 81b).
33.I.e., since the produce requires the land, it is considered as if it were landed property, and the money received from the sale has the same status as the landed property mentioned in the previous halachah.
34.The Maggid Mishneh, the Rivash (Responsa 365 and 366), and the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 168:5) emphasize that the law stated by the Rambam applies only when the husband did not follow the suggestion (Chapter 16, Halachah 8) of stating explicitly in the ketubah that the woman may collect from movable property the money due her by virtue of her ketubah. (There are other authorities who differ with the Rambam and maintain that even if the provision is not stated explicitly in the woman's ketubah, the movable property should be sold and land purchased.)
35.E.g., he died after he consecrated her, but before he consummated the marriage - in which instance, the woman is obligated to undergo either yibbum or chalitzah, and yet her deceased husband was not obligated to grant her a ketubah.
36.Since she has no claim to her deceased husband's property, she is not judged by the laws pertaining to a yevamah, but rather by those pertaining to other women.
37.If she sells the land to her husband, the sale is rescinded because she can claim that she did not sell it willingly; she did so only to appease her husband (Bava Batra 49b). If she sells the land to others, the sale is rescinded because her husband has a right to benefit from her property, and she cannot take away this right from him without his consent. If, however, the husband agrees to her sale, it is binding, as stated in Hilchot Mechirah30:3).
Note the ruling of the Ramah (Even HaEzer 90:13), who writes that if the husband dies, the sale made by the woman is effective retroactively. (But see also the gloss of the Beit Shmuel 90:46.)
38.With regard to nichsei m'log, it is obvious that the husband's sale is of no consequence, for the woman owns this type of property. With regard to nichsei tzon barzel, which are considered to be the husband's property, there are authorities (e.g., the Ra'avad) who differ with the Rambam and maintain that the sale is valid until the time comes when the woman desires to collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah.
The commentaries support the Rambam's opinion, explaining that even though the woman has the potential to expropriate the property afterwards by force of law, the sale should be nullified. For women are not comfortable presenting claims in court. If the sale were allowed to remain binding, the only way the woman could receive her due would be by lodging a legal claim. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 90:13) quotes the Rambam's view.
39.If the woman is divorced, she is entitled to this property. Hence, the husband does not have the prerogative of selling it.
40.The husband is allowed to destroy this property through frequent use. Therefore, the woman does not rely on receiving this property, and thus if he sells it the sale is binding (Maggid Mishneh, gloss on Hilchot Mechirah 30:5; Chelkat Mechokek90:45).
This is the opinion of the Rambam and Rabbenu Tam, and is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 90:14). Rabbenu Asher, the Rashba and others differ and maintain that the sale is of no consequence. Their view is quoted by the Ramah.
41.Although both the husband and his wife have a share in the property, since the purchaser dealt with both of them, the sale is binding.
42.Since this property itself belongs to her, there is no reason for her husband to become upset if she does not desire to sell it to him.
43.See Chapter 23, Halachah 11; Hilchot Mechirah 30:3.
There is a difference of opinion among the Rabbis if similar laws apply when a woman waives her claim to property mentioned in her ketubah in favor of her husband. The Ra'avad and Rabbenu Asher maintain that her deed is of consequence, while the Rashba and the Ramban state that it is not. The Maggid Mishneh maintains that the Rambam subscribes to the latter view.
44.The Kessef Mishneh emphasizes that until the woman recants, the transaction is binding. The Beit Meir, however, objects, explaining that the Rambam's wording in Hilchot Mechirah 30:3 does not indicate such a distinction.
45.Her husband will pressure her by saying, "You are either planning my death or considering a divorce. Otherwise, you would not hesitate to sell this property to me" (Bava Batra 49b, 50a).
46.Even if he has a deed or witnesses that testify to the claim, his wife may also negate his claim based on the above rationale.
47.The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 90:16) states that if the woman explicitly accepts responsibility for the field if expropriated from the husband, then the transaction is binding.
48.Based on the Rambam's statements in Chapter 17, Halachah 19, it is questionable why witnesses are necessary. See Chelkat Mechokek 90:1, Beit Shmuel 90:6.
49.A husband is not obligated to pay for nichsei m'log that have been destroyed, lost or stolen, while in such situations, he is obligated to pay the original value for nichsei tzon barzel. Thus, by changing the status of her property, the woman is in effect waiving a financial obligation due her from her husband.
There is reason to say that just as a woman can say that she was forced to give or sell this property to her husband to appease him, she could also say that she was also forced to waive her husband's obligation in the loss or theft of this property. The Rambam, however, does not accept this rationale. Since this obligation is due only after the husband's death or divorce, there is nothing pressuring her husband to pay it. If he demands that his wife waive this obligation, she may refuse, asking him: "Is it because you want to divorce me that you are asking me to waive this obligation?" (Maggid Mishneh).
50.The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's ruling. Nevertheless, it is the Rambam's decision which is accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 90:18).
51.If, at the outset, the husband sold the rights to benefit from the property for a lump sum, it is possible that all that money would be spent in a short period of time and that afterwards, there would be nothing left for household expenses (Chelkat Mechokek 85:41).
52.For their value is explicitly stated in the woman's ketubah and will be returned to her in the event of divorce or her husband's death.
53.For money that a woman acquires while married is automatically considered to be nichsei m'log.
54.In this way, the woman is assured that the principal will remain hers. If the husband desires to use the money for commercial enterprises, he may afterwards sell the right to benefit from the property, as mentioned in the previous halachah.
55.E.g., people other than her husband. If her husband himself injures her, he is not entitled to benefit from the proceeds of her property, as mentioned in Halachah 28.
56.Hilchot Chovel UMazik 4:15. As stated in that source, the husband also has a right to receive a certain portion of the damages as his own funds to which his wife has no right.
57.Although in most instances, produce that is still attached to land is considered equivalent to landed property, an exception is made in this case, because the husband is entitled to the benefit that accrues from his wife's property.
58.For he is entitled to receive all the benefit from her property throughout the duration of their marriage.
59.See Hilchot Avadim 9:7, which states that a husband does not have the prerogative of telling a servant: "Work for me, but I will not provide for your sustenance."
60.The Rambam's wording implies that the concept of maintaining the honor of one's household applies only with regard to the children of one's servants, and not to the offspring of one's livestock. See the Beit Shmuel 85:38, which quotes a difference of opinion among the Rabbis on this issue.
61.Bava Batra 51b states that a person who gives a present gives with a generous spirit. Therefore, we may assume that the husband gives the gift to his wife without wanting to restrict her in any way.
62.The specific wording of the provision that the giver must make is discussed in Hilchot Zechiyah UMatanah 3:13.
63.The person purchasing the rights to the woman's ketubah is taking a risk, because it is possible that she will die in her husband's lifetime and then he will not receive anything.
64.Our Sages entitled a husband to derive the benefit that would ordinarily accrue from property belonging to his wife - e.g., produce that grows on a field, rent from a home, labor from a servant. They did not grant him rights to benefits that arise from abnormal circumstances.
65.The Rambam does not mention two other payments that a person who inflicts an injury would ordinarily pay: shevet - reimbursement for the wages that were not earned during the period of convalescence, because the husband is entitled to his wife's wages - and ripui - payment for the medical treatment required, because a husband is always required to pay for his wife's medical care.
66.Hilchot Chovel UMazik 4:16. This differs from instances in which the injury is inflicted by other parties, in which case the husband also has a right to receive a certain portion of the damages as his own funds, to which his wife has no right.
67.The husband cannot claim that the funds belonged to him, but since he could not take them from his wife in any other way, he sold the property to her as a ruse. This applies even if he makes a definite claim (ta'anat bari) that the funds belong to him (Chelkat Mechokek 85:22,24).
68.This ruling depends on the halachah to follow, which states that a woman's claim is accepted with regard to money found in her possession.
69.The Rambam's ruling is cited by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 85:9). The Ramah mentions the opinion of Rabbenu Asher, who states that if the husband makes a definite claim that the hidden funds belong to him, his claim is accepted.
70.The Jerusalem Talmud (Ketubot 6:1) states that a present will be spoken about. Therefore, the woman will be afraid to claim that she was given a present unless the claim was true.
71.He cannot, however, require his wife to take an oath unless he lodges a definite claim against her (Maggid Mishneh).
72.If, however, a woman was given responsibility to deal freely with the property belonging to her husband's household, and she claims that funds discovered in her possession belong to her privately, her claim is not accepted (Bava Batra 52b; Ramah, Even HaEzer 85:12).
73.Although the giving of a present will become public knowledge, the details of the present might not. Therefore, the woman is required to substantiate her statements. Otherwise, we assume that this present was given without any extraordinary conditions (Ma'aseh Rokeach).
The Maggid Mishneh mentions the opinion of the Rashba, who differs and maintains that the woman's claim is also accepted in this instance as well. This opinion is mentioned by the later authorities.
74.The rationale is that a woman will not be brazen enough to make false statements in her husband's presence with regard to a matter that he knows to be true (Maggid Mishneh).
75.For the likelihood is that the article belongs to the husband, master or father, respectively. It is forbidden to assist a person who takes property that is not his or her own. Moreover, if no one accepts the article for safekeeping, it is likely that it will be returned (Bava Batra 51b).
76.For there is no proof that the article was stolen.
77.For even if the article is rightfully hers, he inherits her property.
78.The entrusted article should not be given to the minor, for it is possible that he will not care for it properly and it will be destroyed (Rashbam, Bava Batra 52a).
79.In every society, the nature of the type of article purchased depends on the conditions prevalent at that time (Chelkat Mechokek 85:33).
80.The Hebrew literally means "whose bark is renewed" - i.e., reaping the benefits one year will not prevent them from being reaped in the future.
81.I.e., in this instance, the goat's milk is not sold and the money used to purchase property that produces benefit, but rather the goat's milk is used for the household.
82.Even if they are worth substantially less than they were originally.
83.As the Kessef Mishneh emphasizes, at different times and in different countries, other customs have prevailed. It is the prevalent custom in one's own locale that is binding.
84.The servants may be compelled to serve the husband; they may not, however, be compelled to serve his second wife (Beit Yosef, Even HaEzer 85).
85.For having the woman's servants serve her husband in his other wife's home, also elevates the woman's own standard of living (Ketubot 80b).
• 1 Chapter A Day: Ishut Ishut - Chapter Twenty Two
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassShabbat, 27 Iyar 5778 / May 12, 2018
TODAY
VIDEO & AUDIO CLASSES
Yehoshua B. Gordon - Rambam: Ishut, Chapter 22 (53:11)
Watch Listen Download
SIE Rambam - 22nd Perek: Laws of Ishus (44:35)
Listen Download
Ishut - Chapter Twenty Two
1
The husband takes precedence over any other person with regard to the inheritance of his wife's estate.1
When does the husband acquire this right? When his wife leaves her father's domain, even though she has not entered the chuppah.2 Since the woman has entered her husband's domain, he [has the right] to inherit [her estate].א
הבעל קודם לכל אדם בירושת אשתו. ומאימתי יזכה בירושתה משתצא מרשות האב ואע"פ שעדיין לא נכנסה לחופה הואיל ונעשית ברשות בעלה יירשנה:
2
What is implied? When a woman has been consecrated and her father hands her over to her husband or to his agents, or the agents of the woman's father hand her over to her husband or to his agents, and the woman dies on the way, before she enters the chuppah, her husband inherits her estate, even though her dowry is still in her father's home.3
Similarly, if the father or his agents went together with the husband, and the husband entered into privacy in a courtyard together with [his bride] with the intent of marriage,4 and afterwards she dies, her husband inherits [her estate].
If, however, [the woman and] her husband or his agents are still accompanied by her father or his agents on their journey to the husband's house, her father inherits [her estate] if she dies, even if her dowry is already in her husband's home. [This law applies even if the woman] and her husband entered a courtyard together to spend the night, as travelers lodge together in one inn.5 [The rationale is that] she is accompanied by her father or his agents, and [her husband] has not entered into privacy with her for the sake of marriage.ב
כיצד האשה שנתארסה ומסרה אביה לבעלה או לשלוחי בעלה. או מסרוה שלוחי האב לבעלה או לשלוחיו ומתה בדרך קודם שתכנס לחופה אף ע"פ שכתובתה עדיין בבית אביה בעלה יורשה. וכן אם הלך האב או שלוחי האב עם הבעל ונכנס עמה בעלה בדרך לחצר ונתיחד עמה שם לשם נשואין ומתה הרי זה יירשנה בעלה. אבל אם עדיין האב עם הבעל להוליכה לבית בעלה או שהלכו שלוחי האב עם שלוחי הבעל או עם הבעל אפילו נכנס הבעל עמה לחצר ללון כדרך שלנין עוברי דרכים בפונדק אחד הואיל והאב או שלוחיו עמה ועדיין לא נתייחד עמה לשם נשואין אם מתה יירשנה אביה אע"פ שכתובתה בבית בעלה:
3
Similarly, when a bogeret, an orphan, or a widow6goes from her father's house to her husband's home on her own initiative without being accompanied by her husband or his agents, and dies on the way, her husband does not inherit [her estate].7ג
וכן אם היתה בוגרת או יתומה או אלמנה והלכה היא בעצמה מבית אביה לבית בעלה ואין עמה לא בעלה ולא שלוחיו ומתה בדרך אין הבעל יורש אותה:
4
Although a man marries a woman with whom he is forbidden [to have relations], if she dies [during his lifetime], he inherits her estate when his consecration of her is binding.8 Similarly, a man who marries a k'tanah[after her father's death]9 inherits her estate if she dies in his lifetime, even though his consecration of her is not binding entirely.
When, by contrast, a mentally capable man marries a deaf mute, he is not entitled to inherit her estate when she dies.10 When, however, a deaf mute marries a mentally capable woman and dies, he should inherit her estate. For she is capable of understanding and married him voluntarily. [In doing so,] she gave him a right to her property.11ד
הנושא אשה שהיא אסורה לו הואיל ויש לו בה קידושין אם מתה תחתיו יירשנה. וכן הנושא את הקטנה אעפ"י שאין קידושיה קידושין גמורים אם מתה תחתיו יירשנה. אבל הפקח שנשא חרשת אם מתה לא יירשנה. והחרש שנשא פקחת ומתה יירשנה שהרי היא בת דעת ולדעתה נשאת וזיכתה לו ממונה:
5
When a k'tanah was consecrated with her father's consent, but married without his consent - whether in his presence or outside his presence - her father has a right to object, as we have explained.12 [In such a situation,] if the girl dies, her husband should not inherit her estate, even if the father remains silent, unless he expressed his consent to her marriage.ה
קטנה שנתקדשה לדעת אביה ונשאת שלא לדעת אביה בין בפניו בין שלא בפניו יכול האב למחות כמו שביארנו. ואפילו שתק האב אם מתה אין הבעל יורשה אלא אם כן רצה האב בנישואיה:
6
The geonim ruled that when a woman falls sick and asks her husband to divorce her so that he will not inherit her estate, her words are of no consequence, [even if] she [agrees to] forfeit her ketubah. Even if she says: "I hate him and no longer desire to live with him," her words are not heeded, and she is not judged as a woman who rebels against her husband.13 This is a desirable ruling.ו
הורו הגאונים שהאשה שחלתה ובקשה מבעלה שיגרשנה ותצא בלא כתובה כדי שלא יירשנה אין שומעין לה. ואפילו אמרה אני שונאה אותו ואיני רוצה לעמוד עמו אין שומעין לה ואין דנין אותה כדין מורדת. ודין יפה הוא זה:
7
During a woman's lifetime, her husband enjoys the benefits of all the property she owns, regardless of whether it is classified as nichsei tzon barzel or nichsei m'log. If she dies in her husband's lifetime, her husband inherits everything.
Therefore, if the woman sold property classified as nichsei m'log after she married, even if she became the owner of that property before she became consecrated, her husband may expropriate the income from that property from the purchasers throughout his wife's lifetime. He may not, however, expropriate the land itself, for he has no right to the land itself, if it is classified as nichsei m'log, until his wife dies.14
If she dies in his lifetime, he may expropriate the land from the purchasers15 without paying them for it.16 If the actual money that [the woman] took from the purchasers still exists, however, it must be returned to the purchasers. The husband cannot say: "Perhaps this money was found [by my wife]" [and on that basis take it as his own].17ז
כל נכסים שיש לאשה בין נכסי צאן ברזל בין נכסי מלוג הבעל אוכל כל פירותיהן בחייה ואם מתה בחיי בעלה יורש בעלה הכל. לפיכך אם מכרה האשה נכסי מלוג אחר שנשאת אעפ"י שאותן הנכסים נפלו לה קודם שתתארס הבעל מוציא הפירות מיד הלקוחות כל ימי חייה. אבל לא גוף הקרקע שאין לו כלום בגוף נכסי מלוג עד שתמות. מתה בחייו מוציא הגוף מיד הלקוחות בלא דמים. ואם הדמים שלקחה מיד הלקוחות קיימין בעצמן מחזירן ללקוחות. ואינו יכול לומר שמא מציאה הן:
8
When does the above apply? With regard to property about which the husband knew.18 When, however, a woman inherits property in another country without her husband's knowledge and sells it, the sale is binding.19
Similarly, if a woman sells [property]20 between her consecration and the consummation of the marriage bond, the sale is binding. For the husband has no right to his wife's property until their marriage is consummated.ח
בד"א בנכסים הידועין לבעל אבל אם נפלו לה נכסים במדינה אחרת ולא ידע בהן הבעל ומכרה אותן מכרה קיים. וכן ארוסה שמכרה קודם הנישואין מכרה קיים שאין לבעל בנכסי ארוסתו כלום עד שיכנוס:
9
When a woman signs over all21 of her property to another person - regardless of whether or not that person is a relative - before she marries, even when there is a provision that if she is divorced or if she becomes a widow, this present is nullified - as will be explained in Hilchot Matanah22 - her husband is not entitled to benefit from the income of this property. And if she dies in his lifetime, he does not inherit it.
[The rationale is] that she gave this property away before she married. When she dies during her husband's lifetime, the recipient of the present acquires full title to it.
Moreover, [the same laws apply] even if she gave away a portion of her property - or all her holdings - before she married and wrote [in the deed of transfer] to the recipient: "Acquire the property from this time onward, [dependent] on my consent."23 [Although] the recipient does not acquire complete ownership until the woman expresses her consent,24 her husband is not entitled to benefit from the income of this property. And if she dies in his lifetime, he does not inherit it.25ט
האשה שכתבה כל נכסיה לאחר בין קרוב בין רחוק קודם שתנשא אע"פ שאם נתגרשה או נתאלמנה תבטל המתנה כמו שיתבאר בהלכות מתנה. אין הבעל אוכל פירותיהן ואם מתה בחייו אינו יורשן שהרי נתנה אותן קודם שתנשא. וכשתמות בחיי בעלה יקנה מקבל המתנה מתנתו קנין גמור. ולא עוד אלא אפילו נתנה מקצת נכסיה או כולם קודם נישואיה וכתבה למקבל קנה מהיום ולכשארצה שהרי לא קנה קנין גמור עד שתרצה אין הבעל אוכל פירות אותה המתנה. ואם מתה אינו יורשה:
10
While a woman is waiting for her yavam [to marry her according to the rite of yibbum], she may sell or give as a present property that she acquires during the time she is in this status.26 Until he marries the yevamah, the yavam has no right to benefit from the property, even the nichsei tzon barzel,27 that she brought to his [deceased] brother's household.
If the yevamah dies in this status, her heirs from her father's household inherit her nichsei m'log28 and half of her nichsei tzon barzel.29 Her husband's heirs inherit [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah30 and the remaining half of her nichsei tzon barzel, and they are responsible for her burial.31י
שומרת יבם יש לה למכור וליתן במתנה נכסים שנפלו לה כשהיא שומרת יבם ואין ליבם פירות אפילו בנכסי צאן ברזל שהכניסה לאחיו עד שיכנוס. מתה כשהיא שומרת יבם יורשיה מאביה יורשין בנכסי מלוג שלה וחצי נכסי צאן ברזל ויורשי הבעל יורשים כתובתה וחצי נכסי צאן ברזל. ויורשי הבעל חייבין בקבורתה:
11
The money due a yevamah by virtue of her ketubahis considered to be a lien on her [late] husband's estate. Therefore, a yavam is not entitled to sell any of his brother's property32 - neither before yibbum nor after yibbum.
If he sells the deceased's property, gives it away as a present, divides it with his brothers - whether before yibbum or after yibbum - his actions are of no consequence. For it is already obligatory to make this property available to the widow so that she can collect [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah from it.יא
שומרת יבם כתובתה על כל נכסי בעלה. לפיכך אין היבם יכול למכור בנכסי אחיו בין קודם יבום בין אחר יבום. ואם מכר או נתן מתנה או חלק עם אחיו בנכסי המת בין קודם יבום בין אחר יבום לא עשה כלום שכבר נתחייבו נכסים אלו לאלמנה לגבות מהן כתובתה:
12
When a man marries his yevamah at a time when there is produce growing on the land left by her husband, this produce should be sold,33 and the proceeds used to purchase land from which the yavam will derive the benefit that accrues.יב
כנס את יבמתו והניח אחיו פירות מחוברין לקרקע ימכרו וילקח בהן קרקע והיבם אוכל פירותיהן:
13
When, [by contrast, the deceased] left produce that was already harvested, money or movable property, it becomes the property of the yavam. He may use it as he sees fit, and [the yevamah's] objections are of no consequence.
[The rationale is that the woman's right] to collect [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah from movable property stems only from an enactment of the geonim, and this enactment does not have the power to prevent [the yavam from taking possession] of his brother's property,34and cause him to be restrained from dealing with them because of this lien.יג
הניח פירות תלושין מן הקרקע וכן אם הניח מעות ומטלטלין הכל של יבם. ומשתמש בהן כמו שירצה ואינה יכולה לעכב. שהמטלטלין אין הכתובה נגבית מהן אלא בתקנת הגאונים ואין כח בתקנה זו למונעו מנכסי אחיו ולאוסרן עליו באחריות זו שלא ישא ויתן בהם:
14
[The following rules apply when] a yevamah's [first husband was not obligated to] grant her a ketubah35or [when] she waived her ketubah in his favor. The yavamacquires his brother's estate and may sell [portions of it] or give them away as he desires. When he marries his yevamah, he is obligated to compose a ketubah for 100 [zuz]. All of his property will be considered as being on lien for the ketubah, [i.e., the same laws apply to her] as apply to other women who have a ketubah.36יד
יבמה שלא היתה לה כתובה או שמחלה כתובתה זכה בנכסי אחיו ומוכר ונותן כחפצו. וכשיכנוס את יבמתו יכתוב לה כתובה מאה ויהיו כל נכסיו אחראין לכתובתה כשאר כל הנשים שיש להן כתובה:
15
When a woman sells nichsei tzon barzel - whether to her husband or to others - after she marries, her act is of no consequence.37
Similarly, if her husband sells landed property belonging to his wife - whether it be nichsei tzon barzel or nichsei m'log - his act is of no consequence.38טו
האשה שמכרה או שנתנה אחר שנשאת בנכסי צאן ברזל בין לבעלה בין לאחרים לא עשתה כלום. וכן בעל שמכר קרקע בנכסי אשתו בין נכסי צאן ברזל בין נכסי מלוג לא עשה כלום:
16
[Should the husband] sell movable property that is classified as nichsei tzon barzel39 - although he is not allowed to make such a sale - the sale is binding.40
If both [the husband and the wife] sell nichsei m'log, the sale is binding,41 regardless of whether the purchaser purchased the property from the husband first and then from the wife, or if he first purchased it from the wife and then from the husband.טז
מכר מטלטלין של נכסי צאן ברזל אף ע"פ שאינו רשאי אם מכר ממכרו ממכר. מכרו שניהם בנכסי מלוג בין שלקח מן האיש תחלה וחזר ולקח מן האשה בין שלקח מן האשה וחזר ולקח מן האיש מכרן קיים:
17
Similarly, when a woman sells her nichsei m'log to her husband or gives them to him as a present, the sale or the gift is binding. She cannot rationalize her actions by saying, "[This was not my true intent.] I did it [only] to appease my husband."42 With regard to other property, however, she may offer such a rationalization.יז
וכן האשה שמכרה או נתנה נכסי מלוג לבעלה ממכרה ומתנתה קיימין ואינה יכולה לומר בנכסי מלוג נחת רוח עשיתי לבעלי. אבל בשאר נכסים יש לה לומר:
18
What is implied? When a woman sells her nichsei tzon barzel to her husband or gives them to him as a present, her husband does not acquire this property. [This applies to] landed property and movable property [in this category], to a field that was designated for her from which [she could collect the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah, a field belonging to her that was specifically mentioned in her ketubah or a field that [her husband mentioned in her ketubah] as his present to her [to be included in her dowry].43
[In all the above instances,] even though [the husband] formalized the transaction with his wife through an act of contract that she voluntarily agreed to, she has the prerogative of recanting whenever she desires.44 [We assume that] she gave the present or made the sale only for the sake of maintaining peace in her home.45
Accordingly, a husband has no way of substantiating his claim to his wife's property46 except with regard to nichsei m'log, as explained [in the previous halachah].47יח
כיצד האשה שמכרה או נתנה לבעלה מנכסי צאן ברזל בין קרקע בין מטלטלין או שדה שייחד לה בכתובתה או שדה שכתב לה בכתובתה או שדה שהכניס לה שום משלו לא קנה בעלה. ואע"פ שקנו מיד האשה ברצונה חוזרת בכל עת שתרצה. שלא נתנה ולא מכרה אלא מפני שלום ביתה. לפיכך אין לבעל ראיה בנכסי אשתו כלל חוץ מנכסי מלוג כמו שביארנו:
19
It appears to me that a woman is not entitled [to nullify her statements, based on the rationale]: "I did it [only] to appease my husband," when her nichsei tzon barzel were lost or stolen, and she waived the debt in favor of her husband. [This applies even when the commitment] is formalized in the presence of witnesses.48
To what can this be compared? To a man and a woman who formalized an agreement in which she forgoes the responsibility [he had taken for property that had been classified as nichsei tzon barzel] and considers it instead nichsei m'log.49 For the husband is not bringing a proof for the sake of taking possession or maintaining possession of property, merely to free himself of the obligation to pay a claim [his wife will issue].50
If, by contrast, she gives him movable property that exists and was considered to be nichsei tzon barzel, the husband does not acquire it. For the wife may rationalize her conduct saying: "I did this to appease my husband."יט
נכסי צאן ברזל שאבדו או שנגנבו ומחלה האשה אותם לבעלה וקנו ממנה בעדים יראה לי שאינה יכולה לומר נחת רוח עשיתי לבעלי. הא למה זה דומה למי שקנו מידה שאין לה אחריות שהחזירה נכסים אלו נכסי מלוג. שהרי אין הבעל מביא ראייה ליטול כלום ולא להחזיק בנכסים אלא להפטר מתביעתה מלשלם. אבל אם נתנה לו מתנה מטלטלי צאן ברזל הקיימין לא קנה מפני שיש לה לומר נחת רוח עשיתי לבעלי:
20
When a husband sells [the right to] the benefits from landed property [that belongs to his wife, to another person, while the legal owner of the property remains his wife, the sale] is of no consequence. [The rationale is that] the reason our Sages granted a man [the right to] the benefit that accrues from his wife's property is [to afford him additional income] so that he will spend more generously on the household expenses.51
[Based on that rationale,] if he sells the benefit to be derived [from the landed property to another person] and takes the money and invests it in a business [which offers profit], he is given that prerogative.כ
בעל שמכר קרקע לפירות לא עשה כלום. מפני שלא התקינו פירות לאיש אלא כדי להרויח בהוצאת הבית. לפיכך אם מכר לפירות ולקח אותן המעות לסחורה שומעין לו:
21
[The following laws apply if] the woman possesses financial resources [that she brings to the household]. If they are nichsei tzon barzel, her husband may use them for commercial enterprises.52
If they are nichsei m'log - regardless of whether she brought them to the household at the time of marriage or she inherited them or received them as a present53 [- landed property should be purchased with them, from which her husband is entitled to the benefit that accrues].54[Similarly,] if she inherited or was given movable property, it should be sold, and the proceeds of the sale should be used to purchase landed property, from which her husband is entitled to the benefit that accrues.כא
היו לאשה כספים. אם נכסי צאן ברזל הן הרי זה נושא ונותן בהן. ואם נכסי מלוג הן בין שהכניסה אותן לו בין שנפלו לה בירושה או נתנו לה במתנה או נפלו לה מטלטלין או נתנו לה הרי אלו ימכרו וילקח בהן קרקע והוא אוכל פירותיהן:
22
Similarly, if a woman was injured by others,55 all the money that is ordained to be given to her should be used to purchase land, from which her husband is entitled to the benefit that accrues, as stated in Hilchot Chovel.56כב
וכן האשה שחבלו בה אחרים כל המעות הראויות לתת לה ילקח בהן קרקע והבעל אוכל פירותיהן כמו שיתבאר בהלכות חובל:
23
[The following law applies when] a woman inherits servants [while she is married]. Even if they are old, they should not be sold, because they bring honor to her family's household.
[The following law applies when] she inherits olive trees or vines, but did not [inherit] the land on which these trees were planted. If they produce enough to pay for their upkeep, they should not be sold, because they bring honor to her family's household. If they do not, they should be sold as firewood, land should be purchased with the proceeds, from which the husband is entitled to the benefit that accrues.כג
נפלו לה עבדים אע"פ שהן זקנים לא ימכרו מפני שבח בית אביה. נפלו לה זיתים וגפנים ולא היה לה בגוף הקרקע שהאילנות בה כלום. אם עושין כדי טיפולן לא ימכרו מפני שבח בית אביה ואם לאו הרי אלו ימכרו לעצים וילקח בהן קרקע והוא אוכל פירות:
24
When [a married woman] inherits produce that is still attached to the land [on which it is growing], it becomes her husband's [property].57 When the produce has been uprooted from the land, it should be sold and used to purchase landed property, from which her husband is entitled to the benefit that accrues.
When, however, a husband divorces his wife, and there was produce that was still attached to the ground, it belongs to the woman. If it has already been reaped, it belongs to the man.58כד
נפלו לה פירות מחוברין לקרקע הרי אלו של בעל. תלושין מן הקרקע שלה וימכרו וילקח בהן קרקע והוא אוכל פירות. אבל המגרש את אשתו והיו לה פירות מחוברין לקרקע בשעת גירושין הרי אלו שלה ואם היו תלושין הרי אלו שלו:
25
A husband is obligated to provide for the sustenance and all the needs of the servants59 and livestock that belong to his wife and are classified as nichsei m'log. They must work for him, and he is entitled to the benefit that accrues. Therefore, a baby born to a maid classified as nichsei m'log belongs to the husband. And a calf born to a cow that is classified as nichsei m'log belongs to the husband.
If, however, the husband divorces his wife and she desires to pay the worth of a child born from a maidservant who is classified as nichsei m'log and take the child as her property because this brings honor to her family's household, she is given that prerogative.60כה
עבדי נכסי מלוג ובהמת נכסי מלוג הבעל חייב במזונות שלהן ובכל צרכיהם והן עושין לו והוא אוכל פירותיהם. לפיכך ולד שפחת מלוג לבעל. ולד בהמת מלוג לבעל. ואם גירשה ורצתה האשה ליתן דמים וליטול ולד השפחה מפני שבח בית אביה שומעין לה:
26
[The following laws apply when] a woman brings two utensils or two maidservants to the household and has them classified as nichsei tzon barzel. They were [originally] evaluated at 1000 zuz; afterwards, their value increased and they were evaluated at 2000 zuz. If the woman's husband divorces her, she is entitled to one [utensil or maidservant] for the 1000 zuz that she is owed. With regard to the other - if she desires to pay its value and take it because of the honor it brings to her father's household, she has that prerogative.כו
הכניסה לו שני כלים או שתי שפחות בתורת נכסי צאן ברזל ושמו אותן עליו באלף זוז והוקרו ועמדו באלפים וגירשה נוטלת אחד באלף שלה. והשני אם רצתה שתתן דמיו ותטול משום שבח בית אביה שומעין לה:
27
When a man gives a present to his wife - regardless of whether he gave her landed property, or he gave her money and she bought landed property - her husband is not entitled to the benefits that accrue from the present [that was given].61
Similarly, when a man gives a woman a present on the condition that her husband not be entitled to derive the benefits from it, but rather the benefits that accrue will belong to the wife to be used for whatever she desires,62[the provision is binding, and] the husband is not entitled to the benefits that accrue from this present.
Similarly, if a woman sells the rights to her ketubah [in the event of her divorce or her husband's death],63 the money she receives belongs to her, and her husband is not entitled to derive the benefit that accrues from it.כז
הנותן מתנה לאשתו בין שנתן לה קרקע בין שנתן לה מעות ולקחה בהן קרקע אין לבעל פירות במתנה זו. וכן הנותן מתנה לאשה ע"מ שלא יהיה הבעל אוכל פירותיה אלא יהיו פירותיה לאשה למה שתרצה אין הבעל אוכל פירות מתנה זו. וכן המוכרת כתובתה בטובת הנאה אותן הדמים לאשה ואין הבעל אוכל פירותיהן:
28
When a calf born from cattle that was classified as nichsei m'log is stolen, and the thief is apprehended and forced to pay twice the amount, the woman receives the extra payment. [The rationale is that] this is not the benefit that our Sages granted [the husband].64
When a man injures his wife, the entire [amount he must pay] - the damages and the restitution for the pain and the embarrassment - belongs to the woman,65 and the husband is not entitled to the benefits that accrue from [property purchased with this money], as explained in Hilchot Chovel.66כח
ולד בהמת מלוג שנגנב ונמצא הגנב ושלם שנים הכפל לאשה שאין זה פרי שתקנו לו חכמים. החובל באשתו כל הנזק והצער והבושת שלה ואין הבעל אוכל פירות כמו שיתבאר בהלכות חובל:
29
[The following rules apply when] a husband sells landed property [that he owns] to his wife. If the husband knew about the funds with which she purchased the land previously, the sale is binding,67 and the husband is entitled to the benefit that accrues from that land.
If, however, [the existence of] these funds was concealed, she does not acquire the land. For the husband may [explain that he did not really intend to complete the sale]. [His intent was] to reveal the existence of funds that his wife had hidden. The funds that were revealed should be used to purchase landed property,68 from which the husband is entitled to the benefits that accrue.69כט
המוכר קרקע לאשתו אם היו המעות שלקחה בהן את הקרקע מבעל גלויין וידועין לבעל קנתה והבעל אוכל פירות אותה הקרקע. ואם היו מעות טמונין לא קנתה שהבעל אומר לא מכרתי אלא כדי להראות המעות שטמנה ואותן המעות שנראו ילקח בהן קרקע והבעל אוכל פירות:
30
When funds or movable property are discovered in a woman's possession, and she claims that they were given her as a present, while her husband claims that they stem from the fruits of her labor and hence belong to him, it is the woman's claim that is accepted.70 [The husband] may, however, have a ban of ostracism [conditionally] issued against anyone who makes false statements.71[The funds should be used] to purchase landed property, from which [the husband] is entitled to the benefit that accrues.72
If the woman claims that the funds were given to her with the provision that her husband have no control over them, but rather that they be used for whatever purpose she desires, she must bring proof [that such a provision was made].73 [The rationale is that] the prevailing assumption is that a husband has the right to the benefits from all the funds found in a woman's possession, unless she brings proof otherwise.ל
הרי שנמצאו מעות או מטלטלין ביד האשה היא אומרת במתנה נתנו לי והוא אומר ממעשה ידיך הם שהם שלי הרי זו נאמנת. ויש לו להחרים על מי שטוענת דבר שאינו כן. וילקח בהן קרקע והוא אוכל פירות. ואם אמרה על מנת כן נתנו לי על מנת שלא יהיה לבעלי רשות בהן אלא אעשה בהן כל מה שארצה עליה להביא ראיה. שכל ממון שנמצא ביד האשה בחזקת הבעל הוא שיאכל פירותיו עד שתביא ראיה:
31
If [a wife] tells [her husband]: "You gave me [these funds] as a present," she is required to take a Rabbinic oath that her husband gave her [the funds]. [After she takes that oath,] her husband is not entitled to the benefit [from the property purchased with these funds].74לא
אמרה לו אתה נתת לי במתנה נשבעת שבועת היסת שנתן לה הבעל ואינו אוכל פירותיהן:
32
One should not accept an article for safekeeping that was given by a wife, a servant or a minor.75 If one transgressed and accepted [an article given by] a woman, one should return it to the woman.76 If she dies, one should return it to her husband.77
If one accepted [an article given by] a servant, one should return it to the servant. If he dies, one should return it to his master. If one accepted [an article given by] a minor, one should purchase a Torah scroll with the proceeds or an article that will provide [the minor] with benefit.78
[The following rules apply] with regard to all [the abovementioned individuals], if at the time of their death, they say: "The article I gave for safekeeping belongs to so and so." If the person caring for the article operates under the presumption that the person who entrusted it to him is true to his word, he should carry out the command he was given. If not, he should give [the article] to the person's heirs.לב
אין מקבלין פקדונות לא מן הנשים ולא מן העבדים ולא מן הקטנים. ואם עבר וקיבל מן האשה יחזיר לאשה. מתה יחזיר לבעלה. קיבל מן העבד יחזיר לעבד ואם מת יחזיר לרבו. קיבל מן הקטן יקנה לו בו ס"ת או דבר שאוכל פירותיהם. וכולם שאמרו בשעת מיתתן פקדון זה של פלוני הוא אם היו בחזקת נאמנין אצל זה שהפקדון אצלו יעשה כמו שצוו ואם לאו יתן ליורשיהם:
33
[The following rules apply when] a woman has financial resources sufficient [to purchase property] from which the husband would derive the benefits [but they disagree with regard to the property fit to purchase]; he suggests that this type of property be purchased, and she desires that another type be purchased. A property should be purchased that brings a large revenue and requires little upkeep,79 regardless of whether this is the article desired by [the husband] or by [the wife]. We do not purchase any article that does not renew itself,80 lest the entire property be used and the principal lost.לג
האשה שהיו לה כספים הראויות לבעל לאכול פירותיהם הוא אומר כך וכך ילקח בהם והיא אומרת איני לוקחת בהן אלא כך וכך לוקחים דבר שפירותיו מרובים ויציאתו מעוטה. בין שהיה הדבר כרצונו או שהיה כרצונה. ואין לוקחין אלא דבר שגזעו מחליף שמא יאכל הכל ונמצא הקרן אבד:
34
[The following rule applies when] a woman brings to her husband's household a goat [that she is entitled] to milk, a sheep [that she is entitled] to shear or a date palm whose fruit [she is entitled to take], although she is entitled only to these benefits [and not to the principal]. [Her husband] is entitled to [these benefits] although the principal is dwindling.81
Similarly, if she brought utensils or articles of clothing to his household that were classified as nichsei m'log, he may use them, wearing them or using them as spreads or as covers until the articles themselves are destroyed. If he divorces [his wife], he is not required to pay for any nichsei m'log that became worn out.לד
האשה שהכניסה לבעלה עז לחלבה ורחל לגיזתה ודקל לפירותיו אע"פ שאין לה אלא פירות אלו בלבד הרי זה אוכל והולך עד שתכלה הקרן. וכן אם הכניסה לו כלי תשמיש בתורת נכסי מלוג הרי זה משתמש בהן ולובש ומציע ומכסה עד שיכלה הקרן. וכשיגרש אינו חייב לשלם הבלאות של נכסי מלוג:
35
The geonim [issued the following] ruling. A husband takes responsibility for the diminished value of nichsei tzon barzel. Nevertheless, if [such property] exists [at the time a woman's ketubah is due for payment,] and still serves its initial purpose, the woman must take it regardless of its condition at that time.82
If they are no longer fit to serve their initial purpose, it is as if they were stolen or lost, and the husband is obligated to pay the value appraised originally at the time of the marriage.
This is the common custom. Whenever a man marries, he accepts responsibility for [the woman's] dowry as contingent on this custom.83 On the basis of this custom, just as the husband does not pay for the depreciation of the article, so too, he does not take the appreciation of the property if it increases in value.
A husband has the right to compel some of the servants and maidservants who belong to his wife to serve him84 in the home of another woman he has married.85 [This applies] regardless of whether the servants are classified as nichsei m'log or nichsei tzon barzel. The husband may not, however, take these servants to another city without his wife's consent.לה
הורו הגאונים שנכסי צאן ברזל אע"פ שפחיתתן על הבעל אם היו הבלאות קיימין והיו עושין מעין מלאכתן נוטלת כליה כמה שהן. ואם לא היו עושין מעין מלאכתן הרי הן כמו שנגנבו או אבדו שהוא חייב לשלם בדמיהם ששמו אותן עליו בשעת נישואין. ומנהג פשוט הוא זה. וכל הנושא על מנהג זה קיבל עליו אחריות הנדוניא. וכשם שאינו משלם הפחת כך אינו נוטל את השבח אם הותירו דמיהן לפי מנהג זה. יש לבעל לכוף מקצת עבדי אשתו ואמהותיה שיהיו משמשין אותו בבית אשה אחרת שנשא בין שהיו עבדי מלוג בין שהיו עבדי צאן ברזל. אבל אינו יכול להוליכן לעיר אחרת שלא מדעת אשתו:
FOOTNOTES
1.As explained in Chapter 12, Halachah 3 and notes, this is one of the four privileges our Sages granted a husband as part of the marriage contract. (See also Hilchot Nachalot 1:8.)
2.The second phase of marriage, nisu'in, does not start until the woman enters the chuppah, and it is only at that time that the marriage contract takes effect. Nevertheless, an exception is made in this instance, as explained in the following halachot and notes.
3.The Ramah (Even HaEzer 57:1) cites the opinion of the Tur and other Ashkenazic authorities, which is that the husband does not have a right to inherit his wife's dowry until it enters his possession.
4.Moreover, if the courtyard belongs to the husband, it is assumed that the couple entered for the sake of marriage, even when they do not explicitly state so. This is the view of all authorities, and the Maggid Mishneh explains that it is also shared by the Rambam.
5.If the courtyard belonged to her, this intent is understood even when it is not explicitly stated.
6.This law applies even if the widow is still a minor, as reflected in Chapter 3, Halachah 12.
7.Once she is met by her husband or his agents, however, he is entitled to inherit her estate.
8.See Chapter 1, Halachot 6 and 7; Chapter 4, Halachah 14.
9.Or after she becomes divorced or widowed in her father's lifetime (Chapter 4, Halachot 7 and 8).
10.The rationale is that she is not entitled to a ketubah (Chapter 11, Halachah 4). Moreover, since she is not responsible for her actions, she has no right to transfer her property.
11.Although the Ra'avad objects to this ruling, the Shulchan Aruch(Even HaEzer 90:3) quotes the Rambam's view.
12.Chapter 3, Halachah 13.
13.See Chapter 14, Halachah 8.
14.The advantage in the purchaser's continuing to own the land itself is that if the husband dies before his wife, her sale is binding, and the land becomes the purchaser's property. From this time onward, he is entitled to benefit from the land as well.
Rabbenu Asher differs with the Rambam on this issue and maintains that the husband has the right to take the property from the purchaser, even during his wife's lifetime. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 90:9) follows the Rambam's view, while the Ramah quotes that of Rabbenu Asher.
15.Even the Ramah and Rabbenu Asher accept this ruling.
16.There is a difference of opinion with regard to this matter among the geonim, but all the later authorities accept this view. The rationale is that the husband's right to the land supersedes that of the purchaser. The money that the purchaser paid is considered to have become a debt owed him by the woman's estate, and the husband is not required to pay his wife's debts.
17.A husband is entitled to any ownerless object discovered by his wife. His claim is not accepted, however, if he states that money that appears to have come from the sale of property came from the discovery of a lost object. There is no need for witnesses to testify that this is the money from the sale. It is sufficient that it appears to be so. If, however, the money has been changed into a different coinage or currency, the husband is not required to return it (Maggid Mishneh).
18.In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Ketubot 8:2), the Rambam states that this refers to property located in the bride and groom's city or the surrounding locale, as opposed to property owned by her in more distant locales. It is questionable, however, if the same geographic restrictions apply in today's global village.
19.The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 90:11) states that preferably, a woman should not sell this property, because her husband is entitled to inherit it.
The commentaries explain that when the husband knows of his wife's financial holdings, it is an implicit part of the marriage contract - and perhaps part of his intent in entering into the marriage relationship - that he will inherit this property. When, however, he is unaware of her ownership of property, this motive cannot be given as the reason for his desire to enter this relationship.
It must be added that as soon as the husband becomes aware of this property, it is considered to be part of the woman's nichsei m'log and is bound by all the laws pertaining to such property (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit.:12). Moreover, if the woman dies without selling this property, her husband is entitled to inherit it, although he was never aware of his wife's ownership of it during her lifetime.
20.The Tur (Even HaEzer 90) states that the woman has the full right to sell any property that she owned before she was consecrated. With regard to property that she acquired after she was consecrated, it is preferable that she not sell it - but if she sells it, the husband has no claim to it.
21.As explained in Hilchot Zechiyah UMatanah, slightly different rules apply if the woman signed over only a portion of her property.
22.Hilchot Zechiyah UMatanah 6:12. It is clearly obvious that the woman's intent in giving the present is to protect her holdings from being inherited by her husband.
23.In his gloss on Ketubot 79a, Rabbenu Nissim explains that the Rambam equates this provision with the one mentioned in the previous clause. The only difference between the two is one of tact. The provision in this clause is more gently worded, so that the intent to free the woman's holdings from her husband is less obvious.
24.Unlike the Rambam, Rabbenu Asher and other authorities maintain that the woman need not explicitly mention her consent to the present. All that is necessary is that she refrain from nullifying it.
25.Rabbenu Nissim asks, according to the approach of the Rambam (in contrast to the approach of Rabbenu Asher mentioned in the previous note): If the woman did not explicitly mention her consent to the present before her death, why does her husband have no right to inherit her property? The provision on which the present was based was never fulfilled.
Seemingly, this property can be compared to a woman's property of which her husband was unaware. As mentioned in the notes on the previous halachah, the husband has the right to inherit such property, and thus he should also inherit the property mentioned in this clause.
Rabbenu Nissim explains that since the Rambam maintains that a husband's right to inherit his wife's property is a Rabbinical ordinance, there is room for leniency when, as in the present case, it is obvious that the woman did not desire her husband to inherit her estate. Obviously motivated by the same question, but unwilling to offer such a resolution, Rav David Arameah explains that the Rambam's ruling applies in an instance when the woman in fact expressed her consent to the present before her death.
26.As mentioned in the notes on Halachah 8, preferably a woman should not sell property she acquires after her consecration. One might think that the same principle applies to a yevamah, for she also shares a bond to her yavam. There is, however, a distinction between the two: a woman who is consecrated will most likely be married, while a yevamah may be freed from her obligation through chalitzah. Hence, there are no restrictions placed upon her with regard to the sale of her holdings.
27.The difference between nichsei m'log and nichsei tzon barzel is that with regard to nichsei m'log, the object itself belongs to the woman, while the property regarded as nichsei tzon barzel is considered to belong to her late husband. He was, however, obligated to pay his wife for the value designated at the time of marriage (Chapter 16, Halachah 1).
Since the nichsei tzon barzel are considered to belong to the yevamah's late husband's estate, one might think that the yavamwould have a right to them. Hence, it is necessary to clarify that he is given this right only after marriage.
As mentioned by the Ra'avad and the Maggid Mishneh, most authorities differ with the Rambam on this point. The Maggid Mishneh maintains that the yavam is entitled to half of the benefit that accrues from the nichsei tzon barzel. This opinion is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 160:6). (The Rambam's opinion is also quoted, but it appears that the other opinion is favored.) The Ramah mentions the opinion of the Ra'avad which goes even further and gives the yavam rights to half the benefits of nichsei m'log that the yevamah acquired while she was married to her deceased husband.
28.For this property belongs to her outright.
29.A division is necessary because this property is considered to belong to the yevamah's late husband, as explained above. Therefore, his heirs have a claim to it. Nevertheless, since he died in his wife's lifetime, and she did not receive payment for this property, her own heirs also have a claim.
This ruling is also disputed by other authorities, who maintain that all the nichsei tzon barzel are considered the property of the husband's heirs, together with the woman's ketubah. The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.:7) quotes the Rambam's view, while the Ramah quotes that of the other authorities.
The Ramah also adds that these laws do not apply in the Ashkenazic community in the present era - or in other communities - where the rite of yibbum is not practiced, and instead, the yevamah is freed from her obligation through the rite of chalitzah. Since the yevamah will not marry the yavam, he has no rights with regard to her property.
30.I.e., both the essential requirement of the ketubah and any additional amount added by her deceased husband.
31.For our Sages associated a woman's burial with the inheritance of her ketubah (Chapter 12, Halachah 14).
32.Even if the value of the property left by the deceased brother is many times the value of the woman's ketubah, none of the property may be sold, lest the remaining property be destroyed and the woman have difficulty collecting the money due her by virtue of her ketubah from the purchasers (Ketubot 81b).
33.I.e., since the produce requires the land, it is considered as if it were landed property, and the money received from the sale has the same status as the landed property mentioned in the previous halachah.
34.The Maggid Mishneh, the Rivash (Responsa 365 and 366), and the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 168:5) emphasize that the law stated by the Rambam applies only when the husband did not follow the suggestion (Chapter 16, Halachah 8) of stating explicitly in the ketubah that the woman may collect from movable property the money due her by virtue of her ketubah. (There are other authorities who differ with the Rambam and maintain that even if the provision is not stated explicitly in the woman's ketubah, the movable property should be sold and land purchased.)
35.E.g., he died after he consecrated her, but before he consummated the marriage - in which instance, the woman is obligated to undergo either yibbum or chalitzah, and yet her deceased husband was not obligated to grant her a ketubah.
36.Since she has no claim to her deceased husband's property, she is not judged by the laws pertaining to a yevamah, but rather by those pertaining to other women.
37.If she sells the land to her husband, the sale is rescinded because she can claim that she did not sell it willingly; she did so only to appease her husband (Bava Batra 49b). If she sells the land to others, the sale is rescinded because her husband has a right to benefit from her property, and she cannot take away this right from him without his consent. If, however, the husband agrees to her sale, it is binding, as stated in Hilchot Mechirah30:3).
Note the ruling of the Ramah (Even HaEzer 90:13), who writes that if the husband dies, the sale made by the woman is effective retroactively. (But see also the gloss of the Beit Shmuel 90:46.)
38.With regard to nichsei m'log, it is obvious that the husband's sale is of no consequence, for the woman owns this type of property. With regard to nichsei tzon barzel, which are considered to be the husband's property, there are authorities (e.g., the Ra'avad) who differ with the Rambam and maintain that the sale is valid until the time comes when the woman desires to collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah.
The commentaries support the Rambam's opinion, explaining that even though the woman has the potential to expropriate the property afterwards by force of law, the sale should be nullified. For women are not comfortable presenting claims in court. If the sale were allowed to remain binding, the only way the woman could receive her due would be by lodging a legal claim. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 90:13) quotes the Rambam's view.
39.If the woman is divorced, she is entitled to this property. Hence, the husband does not have the prerogative of selling it.
40.The husband is allowed to destroy this property through frequent use. Therefore, the woman does not rely on receiving this property, and thus if he sells it the sale is binding (Maggid Mishneh, gloss on Hilchot Mechirah 30:5; Chelkat Mechokek90:45).
This is the opinion of the Rambam and Rabbenu Tam, and is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 90:14). Rabbenu Asher, the Rashba and others differ and maintain that the sale is of no consequence. Their view is quoted by the Ramah.
41.Although both the husband and his wife have a share in the property, since the purchaser dealt with both of them, the sale is binding.
42.Since this property itself belongs to her, there is no reason for her husband to become upset if she does not desire to sell it to him.
43.See Chapter 23, Halachah 11; Hilchot Mechirah 30:3.
There is a difference of opinion among the Rabbis if similar laws apply when a woman waives her claim to property mentioned in her ketubah in favor of her husband. The Ra'avad and Rabbenu Asher maintain that her deed is of consequence, while the Rashba and the Ramban state that it is not. The Maggid Mishneh maintains that the Rambam subscribes to the latter view.
44.The Kessef Mishneh emphasizes that until the woman recants, the transaction is binding. The Beit Meir, however, objects, explaining that the Rambam's wording in Hilchot Mechirah 30:3 does not indicate such a distinction.
45.Her husband will pressure her by saying, "You are either planning my death or considering a divorce. Otherwise, you would not hesitate to sell this property to me" (Bava Batra 49b, 50a).
46.Even if he has a deed or witnesses that testify to the claim, his wife may also negate his claim based on the above rationale.
47.The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 90:16) states that if the woman explicitly accepts responsibility for the field if expropriated from the husband, then the transaction is binding.
48.Based on the Rambam's statements in Chapter 17, Halachah 19, it is questionable why witnesses are necessary. See Chelkat Mechokek 90:1, Beit Shmuel 90:6.
49.A husband is not obligated to pay for nichsei m'log that have been destroyed, lost or stolen, while in such situations, he is obligated to pay the original value for nichsei tzon barzel. Thus, by changing the status of her property, the woman is in effect waiving a financial obligation due her from her husband.
There is reason to say that just as a woman can say that she was forced to give or sell this property to her husband to appease him, she could also say that she was also forced to waive her husband's obligation in the loss or theft of this property. The Rambam, however, does not accept this rationale. Since this obligation is due only after the husband's death or divorce, there is nothing pressuring her husband to pay it. If he demands that his wife waive this obligation, she may refuse, asking him: "Is it because you want to divorce me that you are asking me to waive this obligation?" (Maggid Mishneh).
50.The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's ruling. Nevertheless, it is the Rambam's decision which is accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 90:18).
51.If, at the outset, the husband sold the rights to benefit from the property for a lump sum, it is possible that all that money would be spent in a short period of time and that afterwards, there would be nothing left for household expenses (Chelkat Mechokek 85:41).
52.For their value is explicitly stated in the woman's ketubah and will be returned to her in the event of divorce or her husband's death.
53.For money that a woman acquires while married is automatically considered to be nichsei m'log.
54.In this way, the woman is assured that the principal will remain hers. If the husband desires to use the money for commercial enterprises, he may afterwards sell the right to benefit from the property, as mentioned in the previous halachah.
55.E.g., people other than her husband. If her husband himself injures her, he is not entitled to benefit from the proceeds of her property, as mentioned in Halachah 28.
56.Hilchot Chovel UMazik 4:15. As stated in that source, the husband also has a right to receive a certain portion of the damages as his own funds to which his wife has no right.
57.Although in most instances, produce that is still attached to land is considered equivalent to landed property, an exception is made in this case, because the husband is entitled to the benefit that accrues from his wife's property.
58.For he is entitled to receive all the benefit from her property throughout the duration of their marriage.
59.See Hilchot Avadim 9:7, which states that a husband does not have the prerogative of telling a servant: "Work for me, but I will not provide for your sustenance."
60.The Rambam's wording implies that the concept of maintaining the honor of one's household applies only with regard to the children of one's servants, and not to the offspring of one's livestock. See the Beit Shmuel 85:38, which quotes a difference of opinion among the Rabbis on this issue.
61.Bava Batra 51b states that a person who gives a present gives with a generous spirit. Therefore, we may assume that the husband gives the gift to his wife without wanting to restrict her in any way.
62.The specific wording of the provision that the giver must make is discussed in Hilchot Zechiyah UMatanah 3:13.
63.The person purchasing the rights to the woman's ketubah is taking a risk, because it is possible that she will die in her husband's lifetime and then he will not receive anything.
64.Our Sages entitled a husband to derive the benefit that would ordinarily accrue from property belonging to his wife - e.g., produce that grows on a field, rent from a home, labor from a servant. They did not grant him rights to benefits that arise from abnormal circumstances.
65.The Rambam does not mention two other payments that a person who inflicts an injury would ordinarily pay: shevet - reimbursement for the wages that were not earned during the period of convalescence, because the husband is entitled to his wife's wages - and ripui - payment for the medical treatment required, because a husband is always required to pay for his wife's medical care.
66.Hilchot Chovel UMazik 4:16. This differs from instances in which the injury is inflicted by other parties, in which case the husband also has a right to receive a certain portion of the damages as his own funds, to which his wife has no right.
67.The husband cannot claim that the funds belonged to him, but since he could not take them from his wife in any other way, he sold the property to her as a ruse. This applies even if he makes a definite claim (ta'anat bari) that the funds belong to him (Chelkat Mechokek 85:22,24).
68.This ruling depends on the halachah to follow, which states that a woman's claim is accepted with regard to money found in her possession.
69.The Rambam's ruling is cited by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 85:9). The Ramah mentions the opinion of Rabbenu Asher, who states that if the husband makes a definite claim that the hidden funds belong to him, his claim is accepted.
70.The Jerusalem Talmud (Ketubot 6:1) states that a present will be spoken about. Therefore, the woman will be afraid to claim that she was given a present unless the claim was true.
71.He cannot, however, require his wife to take an oath unless he lodges a definite claim against her (Maggid Mishneh).
72.If, however, a woman was given responsibility to deal freely with the property belonging to her husband's household, and she claims that funds discovered in her possession belong to her privately, her claim is not accepted (Bava Batra 52b; Ramah, Even HaEzer 85:12).
73.Although the giving of a present will become public knowledge, the details of the present might not. Therefore, the woman is required to substantiate her statements. Otherwise, we assume that this present was given without any extraordinary conditions (Ma'aseh Rokeach).
The Maggid Mishneh mentions the opinion of the Rashba, who differs and maintains that the woman's claim is also accepted in this instance as well. This opinion is mentioned by the later authorities.
74.The rationale is that a woman will not be brazen enough to make false statements in her husband's presence with regard to a matter that he knows to be true (Maggid Mishneh).
75.For the likelihood is that the article belongs to the husband, master or father, respectively. It is forbidden to assist a person who takes property that is not his or her own. Moreover, if no one accepts the article for safekeeping, it is likely that it will be returned (Bava Batra 51b).
76.For there is no proof that the article was stolen.
77.For even if the article is rightfully hers, he inherits her property.
78.The entrusted article should not be given to the minor, for it is possible that he will not care for it properly and it will be destroyed (Rashbam, Bava Batra 52a).
79.In every society, the nature of the type of article purchased depends on the conditions prevalent at that time (Chelkat Mechokek 85:33).
80.The Hebrew literally means "whose bark is renewed" - i.e., reaping the benefits one year will not prevent them from being reaped in the future.
81.I.e., in this instance, the goat's milk is not sold and the money used to purchase property that produces benefit, but rather the goat's milk is used for the household.
82.Even if they are worth substantially less than they were originally.
83.As the Kessef Mishneh emphasizes, at different times and in different countries, other customs have prevailed. It is the prevalent custom in one's own locale that is binding.
84.The servants may be compelled to serve the husband; they may not, however, be compelled to serve his second wife (Beit Yosef, Even HaEzer 85).
85.For having the woman's servants serve her husband in his other wife's home, also elevates the woman's own standard of living (Ketubot 80b).
Rambam:
• 3 Chapters A Day: Tum'at Okhalin Tum'at Okhalin - Chapter 13, Tum'at Okhalin Tum'at Okhalin - Chapter 14, Tum'at Okhalin Tum'at Okhalin - Chapter 15
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Tum'at Okhalin - Chapter 13
1
When a person draws water with a cylinder, the water remaining in the cylinder is considered as having been willfully uprooted for three days. After being left for three days, however, it is not considered to have been uprooted willfully. Instead, if liquid remains there, it does not make foods subject to impurity.א
הממלא בקילון המים הנשארים בקילון הרי הן תלושין ברצון עד שלשה ימים אבל אחר שלשה ימים אינן תלושין ברצון אלא אם נשאר שם משקה אינו מכשיר:
2
When wood was exposed to liquids willfully, but rain fell upon it against the person's will, if there was more rain than liquid, all of the liquid on the wood is considered to have come against the person's will. If he brought wood out so that the rain would fall upon it, even though there is a majority of rainwater, all of the liquid is considered as having been poured on the wood willfully.
When a person's feet or the feet of his animal were filled with mud and he crossed a river and rinsed them, if he was happy, the water on his or their feet is considered to have been uprooted willfully. If he was not happy, they are not considered as uprooted willfully.ב
עצים שנפלו עליהן משקין ברצון וירדו עליהן גשמים שלא לרצון אם רבו הרי כולן שלא לרצון הוציאן שירדו עליהן גשמים אף על פי שרבו הרי כולן לרצון היו רגליו או רגלי בהמתו מלאות טיט ועבר בנהר ורחצו אם שמח הרי המים העולין עליהן תלושין ברצון ואם לאו אינן ברצון:
3
When a person brings wooden wheels and implements used for oxen into water during the summer when the east wind blows so that the cracks in the wood will seal, the water that ascends with them is considered as having been uprooted willfully.ג
המוריד את הגלגלים ואת כלי הבקר בשעת הקדים למים כדי שיסתמו הסדקין שבעץ הרי המים העולין בהן תלושין ברצון:
4
When a person leads an animal down to a stream to drink, the water that ascend with its mouth is considered as having been uprooted willfully. The water that ascends on its feet are not considered as having been uprooted willfully, unless he had the intent that its feet be rinsed. When the animal's feet are diseased, and in the threshing season, even the water on its feet is considered as having been uprooted willfully.
If a deafmute, a mentally or emotionally compromised person, or a minor brought the animal to drink, even if he intended that its feet be washed, the water that ascends on its feet is not considered to have been uprooted willfully, because the deeds of such individuals are halachically significant, but their intent is not.ד
המוריד את הבהמה לשתות המים העולין בפיה תלושין ברצון וברגליה אינן כתלושין ברצון אלא אם חישב שיודחו רגליה ובשעת החורף והדיש אף שברגליה תלושין ברצון הורידה חרש שוטה וקטן אע"פ שחשב שיודחו רגליה המים העולין ברגליה אינן תלושין ברצון שיש להן מעשה ואין להן מחשבה:
5
When a person immerses himself in water, the water on his body is considered to have been uprooted willfully. If, however, one passes through water, all of the water on his body is not considered to have been willfully uprooted.ה
הטובל במים הרי כל המים שעל בשרו תלושין ברצון אבל העובר במים כל המים שעל בשרו אינן תלושין ברצון:
6
When a person immerses himself in a river and there was another river before him and he crossed it, the second water nullifies the presence of the first water and the water on his body is not considered as having been uprooted willfully.
Similarly, if a person's friend pushed him or his animal into a pool, the presence of the first water is nullified. If, however, he pushed him in jest, the second water does not nullify the first and the water that is on his body is considered as having been uprooted willfully.
If a person immerses himself in a river and ascended and then, rain fell upon him, should there be more rainwater than river water on his body, the rainwater nullifies the presence of the first water and the water on his body is not considered as having been uprooted willfully.ו
מי שטבל בנהר והיה לפניו נהר אחר ועבר בו ביטלו השניים את הראשונים והרי המים שעליו אינן תלושין ברצון וכן אם דחהו חבירו לשכרו או לשכר בהמתו בטלו המים הראשונים אבל אם דחהו דרך שחוק לא בטלו אלא הרי המים שעליו תלושין לרצון טבל בנהר ועלה וירדו עליו גשמים אם רבו עליו גשמים הרי בטלו מים הראשונים והרי כל המים שעליו אינן תלושין ברצון:
7
When a person is swimming on the surface of water, the water he splashes is not considered as having been uprooted willfully. The water on his body, however, is considered as having been uprooted willfully. If he intended to splash water on a friend, the water he splashes is considered as uprooted willfully.ז
השט על פני המים המים הניתזין אינן תלושין ברצון והמים העולין עליו תלושין ברצון אם נתכוון להתיז על חבירו אף הניתזין תלושין ברצון:
8
When a person makes a squirting spout in the water, the water squirted from it and within it are not considered as uprooted willfully.ח
העושה צפור במים המים הניתזין ואת שבה אינם תלושין ברצון:
9
When a person measures a cistern to find out how deep it is, the water that ascends on his hand and on the article with which he measures is considered as having been uprooted willfully. If he measures its width, the water that ascends on his hand and on the article with which he measures is not considered as having been uprooted willfully.
If a person extends his hand or foot into a cistern to see whether it contains water, the water that ascends on his hand or foot is not considered as having been uprooted willfully. If he extends them to see how much water is there, the water that ascends on his hand or foot is considered as having been uprooted willfully. If he casts a stone into a cistern to see if it contains water, the water that is splashed is not considered as uprooted willfully. Similarly, the water on the stone is not considered as uprooted willfully.ט
המודד את הבור לידע עומקו מים העולין בידו ובדבר שמדד בו תלושין ברצון ואם מדד רוחבו מים העולין בידיו או בדבר שמדד בו אינן תלושין ברצון פשט ידו או רגלו לבור לידע אם יש בו מים הרי המים העולין בידו או ברגלו אינן תלושין ברצון פשטן לידע כמה מים שם העולין בהן תלושין ברצון זרק אבן לבור לידע אם יש בו מים מים הניתזין אינן ברצון ושעל האבן אינן כתלושין:
10
If a person beats a hide from which the wool has not been separated while it is outside the water, the water that is expelled from is considered as having been uprooted willfully, for his desire is that the water be expelled. If, however, he beats it while it is in the water, the water is not considered as having been uprooted willfully.י
החובט על השלח חוץ למים הנתזין ממנו תלושין ברצון שהרי רצונו שיצאו חבט עליו והוא בתוך המים אינן תלושין ברצון:
11
The water that ascends on a ship, its reservoir, and its oars is not considered to have been uprooted willfully. Similarly, the water on the snares, nets, and meshes is not considered to have been uprooted willfully. If one shakes them out, it is considered to have been uprooted willfully.
Similarly, the water on the table-coverings or coverings for bricks is not considered to have been uprooted willfully. If one shakes them out, it is considered to have been uprooted willfully.יא
המים העולין בספינה ובעיקל ובמשוטות אינן תלושין ברצון ובמצודות וברשתות ובמכמורות אינם תלושין ברצון ואם ניער תלושין ברצון וכן המים שעל הקסיה [של] שלחנות ועל השפה של לבנים אינן ברצון ואם ניער הרי אלו ברצון:
12
When a person takes a ship out to the Mediterranean Sea to strengthen it, takes a peg out to the rain to harden it, or takes a firebrand out to the rain to make it a coal, the water on them is considered to have been uprooted willfully. If, however, one takes a glowing peg or a firebrand out to the rain to quench their fire, the water on them is not considered to have been uprooted willfully.יב
המוליך את הספינה לים הגדול לצרפה המוציא מסמר לגשמים לצרפו המניח את האוד בגשמים לעשותו [פחם] הרי המים שעליהן תלושין ברצון אבל המוציא את המסמר ואת האוד לגשמים לכבותן אין המים שעליהן תלושין ברצון:
13
When one lowers a chain with a hook into a cistern to lift up a container or a pitcher or one lowered a basket into a cistern so that a chicken would sit on it, the water on these objects is not considered to have been uprooted willfully.יג
שלשל את המשולת לבור להעלות בה כלי או קיתון שלשל את הכלכלה לבור כדי שתשב עליה (את) התרנגולת אין המים שעליה תלושין ברצון:
14
When one smoothes out cress to remove the water on it or one squeezes the water on his hair into his garments, the water that emerges is considered to have been uprooted willfully. The water that remains is not considered to have been uprooted willfully, because he desired that all of the water be purged originally.
The cress itself becomes susceptible to impurity, because the water makes it susceptible to impurity when it departs. If he removed the water from it with all his power, it does not become susceptible to impurity.יד
הממחק את הכרישה להסיר המים שעליה והסוחט שערו בכסותו המים היוצאין תלושין ברצון והנשארין אינן תלושין ברצון מפני שרצונו שיצאו מכולן וכרישה עצמה הוכשרה שבשעת פרישתה מכשירין ואם ניתק המים מעליה בכל כחו לא הוכשרה:
15
When a person shakes a tree to cause food that had been placed there or an impure object to descend, the water which sputters from it is not considered to have been uprooted willfully. If he shook it to remove the liquids, the liquids that fall are considered to have been uprooted willfully. The liquids that remain inside it are not considered to have been uprooted willfully even though they moved from place to place, because his intent was that they be removed entirely. Similarly, if the liquids sputter on produce that is connected to the ground, they are not considered to have been uprooted willfully.טו
המרעיד את האילן להשיר ממנו אוכלין או להשיר טומאה המים הניתזין ממנה אינן תלושין ברצון הרעידו להשיר ממנו משקין היוצאין הרי הן תלושין והנשארין בו אף על פי שנשרו ממקום למקום אינן תלושין ברצון מפני שהוא מתכוון שיצאו מכולו וכן אם נתזו על המחוברין אינן תלושין ברצון:
16
When a person shakes a tree and water from it falls on another tree or a branch and then the water fell on other branches under which there were plants and vegetables attached to the ground, the water on the plants or the vegetables are not considered to have been uprooted willfully.טז
המרעיד את האילן ונפל על חבירו או סוכה ונפלה על חבירתה ותחתיהן זרעים וירקות מחוברים לקרקע ונפלו המים על הפירות המחוברין שתחתיהן אותן המים שבזרעים ושבירקות אינן תלושין ברצון:
17
As explained in Hilchot Terumot , when one poured water over wine dregs that were terumah, the first and second batches produced are forbidden to non-priests. If the dregs had come from grapes consecrated for improvements for the Temple, even the third batch is forbidden. And if the grapes were consecrated for use for the Altar, all mixtures are forbidden. If the grapes are definitely from the second tithe, only the first batch is forbidden.
Just as these groundrules were established with regard to prohibitions, so too, they are applied with regard to the mixture making foods susceptible to ritual impurity. For example, water became mixed with dregs on its own accord and an animal drank one mixture after another. An animal is mentioned, because if, by contrast, a person would remove the first water, even though the water fell on its own accord, since a person gave thought to it and objected to its presence, it is considered significant and imparts impurity.יז
שמרים של תרומה שנתן עליהן מים כבר ביארנו בתרומות שהראשון והשני אסור לזרים ושל הקדש בדק הבית אף השלישי אסור ושל קדשי מזבח לעולם אסור ושל מעשר שני הודאי ראשון בלבד אסור כשם שאמרו לענין איסורן כך אמרו לענין הכשירן כגון שנתמדו מאליהן והיתה בהמה שותה ראשון ראשון שאם היה האדם הוא שמסיר המים הראשונים אע"פ שמאליהן נפלו כיון שחשבן והקפיד עליהן מכשירין:
Tum'at Okhalin - Chapter 14
1
When water from a drainpipe descends into produce and the owner mixed the produce so that it would dry, the produce does not become susceptible to impurity.א
פירות שירד הדלף לתוכן ועירבן כדי שיתנגבו לא הוכשרו:
2
When a person brings his produce to the roof so that it does not become worm-infested and dew descends upon it, it does not become susceptible to impurity. If he intended that the dew descend upon it, it becomes susceptible to impurity. Therefore, if a deafmute, a intellectually or emotionally compromised individual, or a minor brought the produce up to the roof, even if they had the intent that dew descend upon it, it does not become susceptible to impurity. The rationale is that their deeds are significant according to Scriptural Law, but their intent is not significant, even according to Rabbinic Law.
If minors turned the produce over on the roof, it becomes susceptible to impurity. For if the intent of a minor is obvious from his actions, his intent has an effect according to Rabbinic Law.ב
המעלה פירותיו לגג מפני הכנימה וירד עליהן הטל לא הוכשר ואם נתכוון שירד עליהן הטל הוכשרו לפיכך אם העלום חרש שוטה וקטן אף על פי שחישבו שירד הטל עליהן לא הוכשרו שיש מעשה להן דין תורה ואין להן מחשבה אפילו מדברי סופרים הפכו בהן קטנים על הגג הרי אלו מוכשרין שאם היתה מחשבה של קטן ניכרת מתוך מעשיו מחשבתו מועלת מדבריהן:
3
When a person brings bundles of vegetables, dried figs, or garlic to a roof so that they will be preserved and dew descended upon them, they do not become susceptible to ritual impurity. We do not say that since everyone knows that dew will descend, it is as if he willfully exposed them to water. The rationale is that he brought them up to the roof solely so that they should be preserved.ג
המעלה את האגודות ואת הקציעות ואת השום לגג בשביל שימתינו וירד עליהן הטל לא הוכשרו ואין אומרין הואיל והכל יודעין שהטל יורד הרי זה ברצונו שהרי לא העלם אלא כדי שימתינו:
4
When a person brings wheat to be ground into flour and rain falls upon it, if he was happy, it becomes susceptible to impurity. When his olives had been placed on the roof and rain descended, if he was happy, they were made susceptible to impurity. When donkey-drivers were crossing a river and their sacks fell into the water, and they lifted them up, if they were happy that the produce became wet, the produce was made susceptible to impurity. The water that is on the sacks is considered as having been uprooted willfully, for they were happy that the sacks became wet.ד
המוליך חיטין לטחון וירדו עליהן גשמים אם שמח הוכשרו היו זיתיו נתונין בגג וירדו עליהן גשמים אם שמח הוכשרו החמרים שהיו עוברים בנהר ונפלו שקיהן במים והעלום אם שמחו הוכשרו הפירות והמים שעל השקין הנם תלושין ברצון שהרי שמחו:
5
When a sack that was filled with seeds and was placed on the edge of a river, at the opening to a cistern, or on the steps leading to a storage cavern of water, if they absorbed water, they become susceptible to impurity.ה
שק שהוא מלא זרעונים ונתון על גבי הנהר או על פי הבור או על מעלות המערה ושאבו הוכשרו:
6
When an earthenware jug containing produce was placed in liquids or a jug containing liquids was placed among produce and the produce absorbed the liquids, it becomes susceptible to impurity.
With regard to which liquids was the above said: With regard to water, wine, and vinegar. Other liquids are not absorbed through the walls of earthenware containers causing produce to be made susceptible to ritual impurity.ו
חבית שהיא מלאה פירות שנתנה בתוך המשקין או מלאה משקין שנתנה בתוך הפירות ושאבו הוכשרו באלו משקין אמרו במים וביין ובחומץ אבל שאר המשקין אין משאבין מן החרס כדי שיכשירו הפירות שבצידן:
7
The following rules apply when a person removes a hot loaf of bread from an oven and places it on the opening of a jug of wine: If the loaf was from wheat flour, it does not become susceptible to impurity. If it was from barley flour, it does become susceptible to impurity, because barley is absorbent. Similarly, if the wine was impure, if the loaf was from wheat, it is pure. If it was from barley, it becomes impure, because it absorbed impure liquids.ז
הרודה פת חמה ונתנה ע"פ חבית של יין אם היתה פת חיטין לא הוכשרה ואם היתה של שעורים הוכשרה מפני שהשעורים שואבות וכן אם היה היין טמא והיה פת חיטים טהורה ואם היתה שעורים נטמאה מפני ששאבה משקין טמאין:
8
When a person sprinkles water on the floor of his house and then placed wheat upon it and it became moist, if it became moist because of the water, it becomes susceptible to impurity. If it became moist because of the stone, it does not become susceptible to impurity.
When a person washes his garment in a kneading trough and afterwards he placed wheat in it and it became moist, if it became moist because of the water, it becomes susceptible to impurity. If it became moist because of the kneading trough, it does not become susceptible to impurity.ח
המרבץ את ביתו ונתן בו חטים וטננו אם מחמת המים הוכשרו ואם מחמת הסלע לא הוכשרו המכבס את כסותו בעריבה ונתן בה חטים וטננו אם מחמת המים הוכשרו ואם מחמת העריבה לא הוכשרו:
9
When a person buries his produce in sand so that it will become moist, it becomes subject to impurity. When he buries it in dry mud, if the mud is moist enough that a hand that touches it will become wet, the produce becomes subject to impurity. If not, it does not.ט
הטומן פירות בחול כדי שירטיבו הוכשרו הטומן בטיט הנגוב אם יש בו משקה טופח הוכשרו ואם לאו לא הוכשרו:
10
When a person sprinkles water on his grainheap, he need not worry that his wheat became susceptible to impurity if the kernels came in contact with water even though he is satisfied that this happened.י
המרבץ את גורנו אינו חושש שמא יוכשרו חטיו אם טננו בו ואף ע"פ שהוא שמח:
11
When a person gathers grasses upon which dew had descended to use for covering wheat, the wheat does not become susceptible to impurity. If this was his intent, it does become susceptible.יא
המלקט עשבים כשהטל יורד עליהן לחפות בהן החיטין לא הוכשרו ואם נתכוון לכך הוכשרו:
12
When a person sprinkles impure water on the floor of his house and then placed stalks of grain there and they become moist, they become impure if there is enough moisture upon them that the hand of one who touches them also becomes moist. If not, they are pure.יב
המרבץ את ביתו במים טמאים ונתן בו שבולים וטננו אם יש עליהן משקה טופח הרי אלו טמאין ואם לאו טהורין:
13
When a person shakes a bunch of vegetables that had liquid on them and the liquid descended from the upper ones to the lower ones, they do not become susceptible to impurity.יג
הנוער אגודה של ירק שהיו עליה משקין וירדו מצד העליון לצד התחתון לא הוכשר:
14
When a person lifts sacks full of produce from the river and places them one on top of the other, the lower one becomes susceptible to impurity because of the water descending from the upper one, for he willfully placed one on top of the other.יד
המעלה שקין מלאין פירות מן הנהר ונתנן זה ע"ג זה הוכשר התחתון במים שירדו לו מן העליון שהרי ברצונו הניח זה על גבי זה:
15
When a person blows on lentils to see if they are good for the purpose of cooking, if water collects on them, they become susceptible to impurity because of the moisture in his breath which is a derivative of water. Similarly, when a person eats sesame seeds with his finger, they become susceptible to impurity because of the moisture in his breath and on his finger.טו
הנופח בעדשים לבודקן אם הן יפות והזיעו הוכשרו בהבל פיו מפני שהוא מתולדות המים וכן האוכל שומשמין באצבע הוכשרו במשקה פיו ושעל אצבעו:
16
When a person bites food and then it falls from his hand, the liquid on the food is not considered as having been placed there willfully. If a person was eating olives that had been broken open, moist dates, or any other produce whose pit he desired to suck, but it fell from his mouth, the liquid on it is considered as having been placed there willfully. If he was eating dry olives, dried dates, any other produce whose pit he does not desire to suck, and it fell from his mouth, the liquid on it is not considered as having been placed there willfully.טז
נשך באוכל ונפל האוכל הרי המשקה שעל האוכל שלא לרצון היה אוכל זיתים פצועים ותמרים רטובות וכל שהוא רוצה למוץ את גרעינתו ונפל מפיו הרי המשקה שעליו ברצון היה אוכל זיתים נגובין ותמרים יבישות וכל שאינו רוצה למוץ את גרעינתו ונפל מפיו הרי המשקה שעליו שלא ברצון:
17
We have already explained that when a person gathered endives for an animal and washed them, but changed his mind afterwards and thought to use them for human consumption, they need to be exposed to water a second time to make foods susceptible to impurity. If, however, there was tangible moisture on them when he thought to use them for human consumption, they are susceptible to impurity.יז
עולשין שליקטן לבהמה והדיחן וחישב עליהן לאדם אח"כ כבר ביארנו שהן צריכים הכשר שני ואם היה עליהן משקה טופח כשחישב עליהן לאדם הרי אלו מוכשרין:
Tum'at Okhalin - Chapter 15
1
Water that is in a container contracts impurity, whether it entered the container willfully or against one's desires. It imparts impurity to foods and keilim whether it came in contact with them willfully or against one's will. Water collected on the earth, by contrast, e.g., water in a cistern, storage trench, or storage cavern or water in a pit that does not contain 40 se'ah, does not contract impurity unless it comes in contact with the source of impurity willfully, nor does it impart impurity unless it comes in contact with the food willfully.
What is implied? When there was less than 40 se'ah of water collected on the ground, whether it was drawn or it was not drawn, and a human corpse fell into this water or an impure person walked through it, it is pure. If, however, an impure person drank from this water, one filled an impure container with it, or impure liquids willfully fell into it, the water becomes impure even though it is still collected on the ground. If a pure person drank from this water after it became impure on the ground or one filled a pure container with it, the person who drank and the container with which the water was drawn becomes impure, because he drank or the container was filled intentionally.
If a loaf that was terumah fell into such water, it is pure as it was originally, because the water imparts impurity only when foods come in contact with it willfully. Therefore, if one washed his hand and removed a loaf, the loaf contracts impurity from the water on the person's hand, because it was removed willfully.א
מים שבכלים מתטמאין בין לרצון בין שלא לרצון ומטמאין אוכלים וכלים בין שנפל עליהן ברצון בין שלא נפל עליהן ברצון אבל מים שבקרקעות כגון מי בורות שיחין ומערות ומי גבאים שאין בהם ארבעים סאה אין מתטמאין אלא לרצון ואין מטמאין אלא ברצון כיצד מים שבקרקע שאין בהן ארבעים סאה בין שהיו שאובין בין שאינן שאובין שנפל לתוכן המת או שהלך בהן הטמא הרי אלו טהורין אבל אם שתה מהן אדם טמא או שמילא בהן בכלי טמא או שנפלו לתוכן משקין טמאין ברצון הרי אלו טמאין ואף על פי שהן בקרקע שתה מהן הטהור אחר שנטמאו בקרקע או שמילא בהן בכלי טהור נטמא השותה ונטמא הכלי שהרי ברצון שתה או מילא נפל לתוכן ככר של תרומה הרי הוא טהור כשהיה שאין מתטמאין אלא לרצון לפיכך אם הדיח ידו והוציא הככר נטמא הככר במים שבידיו שהרי הן ברצון:
2
The following laws apply to water that is collected in a pit and other types of water collected on the ground, e.g., water in a cistern, storage trench, or storage cavern, rainwater that stopped flowing and collected in one place or mikveot that do not contain 40 se'ah that became impure. If rain then descended, causing there to be more rainwater than the water originally collected, even if the original water did not flow out, those bodies of water become pure. Therefore, during the rainy season, all water collected on the ground, e.g., water collected in a pit or the like, is assumed to be pure.ב
מי גבאים וכיוצא בהן ממים שבקרקעות כגון מי בורות שיחין ומערות ומי תמצית שפסקו ומקואות שאין בהן ארבעים סאה שנטמאו וירדו להם גשמים ורבו מי גשמים עליהם אע"פ שלא שטפו הרי הן טהורין לפיכך כל המים שבקרקעות כגון מי גבאים וכיוצא בהן בשעת הגשמים הכל בחזקת טהרה:
3
Different laws apply when the rains cease. When such bodies of water are close to a town or a thoroughfare, they are impure, because it can be assumed that an impure person drank from them and/or water was drawn from them in impure containers. Those that are distant are pure until the majority of people begin walking. Once they do, they are all assumed to impure, because those who journey on caravans drink from them.
When does the above apply? With regard to water in a pit from which it is possible to drink. If, however, there is water in a pit that it is impossible to drink from except through great effort, it is assumed to be pure unless the footprints of a person or large animal were evident. If, however, the footprints of a small animal were found, the water is pure, because it is possible that the animal descended on its own accord.ג
פסקו הגשמים הקרובים לעיר או לדרך טמאין שהן בחזקת ששתה מהן הטמא ושמלאו מהן בכלים טמאין והרחוקים טהורים עד שיהלכו רוב האדם הלכו הכל בחזקת טומאה שההולכים בשיירות ממלאין ושותין מהן בד"א בגבא שאפשר לשתות ממנה אבל בגבא שאי אפשר לשתות ממנה אלא בדוחק גדול ה"ז בחזקת טהרה (שהן בחזקת טהורין) עד שימצא מקום פרסות רגלי אדם או פרסות רגלי בהמה גסה ניכרת בו אבל מצא פרסות רגלי בהמה דקה הרי זה טהור שאפשר שירדה ושתת:
4
In the rainy season, it can be assumed that the mud and the water in the hollows at the entrance of stores in the public domain are pure. When the rains cease, they are considered as drainage water. The ruling concerning water in the marketplace depends on the majority. .
When wine, milk, or honey fall into a pit filled with water, the ruling depends on the majority. When oil falls into it, the mixture can contract and impart impurity without the owner's desire even when it congeals. The rationale is that it is impossible that droplets will not remain mixed with the water.ד
חזקת טיט וגמומיות שבפתחי חנויות בר"ה בשעת הגשמים שהן טהורין פסקו הגשמים הרי הן כמי שפיכות ושבשווקין הולכין בהן אחר הרוב גבא שנפל לתוכו יין או חלב או דבש הולכין בו אחר הרוב נפל לתוכו שמן אף על פי שהקפיאהו הרי זה מתטמא ומטמא שלא ברצון לפי שאי אפשר לו לצאת ידי צחצחית:
5
Oil and other liquids aside from water are governed by the same laws whether they are collected in the earth or in containers.ה
שמן ושאר המשקין חוץ מן המים הרי הן בקרקע כמות שהן בכלים דין אחד הוא:
6
Streams of rainwater that are still flowing - even if they do not contain 40 se'ah, since they are on the earth and their water is flowing - do not contract ritual impurity. Even if an impure person drank from them, drew water from them with an impure container, or poured impure water into them, they are still pure with regard to all matters.ו
מי תמצית שלא פסקו אף ע"פ שאין בהן ארבעים סאה הואיל והן בקרקע והרי המים נמשכין ובאין להן אינן מקבלין טומאה ואע"פ ששתה מהן הטמא ומילא מהן בכלי טמא או נתן לתוכן מים טמאים הרי הן טהורין לכל דבר:
7
When a person was eating terumah with impure hands, e.g., a dried fig that had not come into contact with water, if he inserted his hand into his mouth to remove a pebble, were he to turn over his finger while doing so, the fig would become impure because of his saliva. For the saliva would become impure because of the person's hand, because he uprooted the saliva from its place. If, however, he did not turn over his finger, it is pure. The rationale is that, before he turns over his finger or sucks it, the liquid in his mouth is comparable to water on the earth that was not uprooted from its place, but instead, is on the ground. As explained, such water only contracts and imparts impurity due to willful actions. This person desired only to remove the pebble.
The following rules apply when, in addition to the dried fig, there was a pundiyon in his mouth and he extended his hand to remove it and the fig from his mouth. If he had placed the coin in his mouth because he was thirsty, the saliva on it is considered as removed from its place and the fig contracts impurity from the moisture in his mouth that contracted impurity because of his hand.ז
מי שהיה אוכל תרומה בידים טמאות כגון דבילה שלא הוכשרה והכניס ידו לתוך פיו ליטול צרור אם הפך נטמאת הדבילה ברירו שהרי נטמא ביד מפני שעקרו ואם לא הפך טהורה שהמשקה שבפיו קודם שיהפכנו או ימוצצנו להוציאו דומה למים שלא נתלשו אלא הן עדיין בקרקע שאין מתטמאין ואין מטמאין אלא ברצון כמו שביארנו וזה אין רצונו אלא ליטול הצרור היה פונדיון לתוך פיו ופשט ידו ליטלו והדבילה בתוך פיו אם הניחו לצמאו הרי זה הרוק כעקור ונטמאת הדבילה מחמת משקה פיו שנטמא מחמת ידיו:
8
The following rules apply when a woman was partaking of food that is terumah which had not been made susceptible to impurity while she was removing the coals from an impure oven. If she was poked by a splinter that caused her to bleed and she was sucking her finger because of the blood or she burnt her finger and inserted it into her mouth, the terumah in her mouth contracted impurity.ח
האשה שהיתה אוכלת אוכלין של תרומה שאינן מוכשרין והיתה גורפת את התנור הטמא והכה הקוץ ויצא ממנה דם ומצצה אצבעה מפני הדם או שנכוית ונתנה אצבעה בפיה נטמאת התרומה שבפיה שהרי רצונה להוציא המשקה מפיה ולעוקרו במציצת אצבע:
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class
Shabbat, 27 Iyar 5778 / May 12, 2018
TODAY
Tuesday Iyar 27, 42nd day of the omer 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Bamidbar, Shlishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 120-134.
Tanya: These garments, (p. 269)...the blessed En Sof.(p. 271).
My father1 related that he heard from his father2 quoting his father (the Tzemach Tzedek), who heard the Alter Rebbe refer to himself as the son of the Maggid (his Rebbe), and as the grandson of the Baal Shem Tov.
Compiled and arranged by the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, of righteous memory, in 5703 (1943) from the talks and letters of the sixth Chabad Rebbe, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn, of righteous memory.
FOOTNOTES
1.R. Shalom Dovber.
2.R. Shmuel.
***
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassTum'at Okhalin - Chapter 13
1
When a person draws water with a cylinder, the water remaining in the cylinder is considered as having been willfully uprooted for three days. After being left for three days, however, it is not considered to have been uprooted willfully. Instead, if liquid remains there, it does not make foods subject to impurity.א
הממלא בקילון המים הנשארים בקילון הרי הן תלושין ברצון עד שלשה ימים אבל אחר שלשה ימים אינן תלושין ברצון אלא אם נשאר שם משקה אינו מכשיר:
2
When wood was exposed to liquids willfully, but rain fell upon it against the person's will, if there was more rain than liquid, all of the liquid on the wood is considered to have come against the person's will. If he brought wood out so that the rain would fall upon it, even though there is a majority of rainwater, all of the liquid is considered as having been poured on the wood willfully.
When a person's feet or the feet of his animal were filled with mud and he crossed a river and rinsed them, if he was happy, the water on his or their feet is considered to have been uprooted willfully. If he was not happy, they are not considered as uprooted willfully.ב
עצים שנפלו עליהן משקין ברצון וירדו עליהן גשמים שלא לרצון אם רבו הרי כולן שלא לרצון הוציאן שירדו עליהן גשמים אף על פי שרבו הרי כולן לרצון היו רגליו או רגלי בהמתו מלאות טיט ועבר בנהר ורחצו אם שמח הרי המים העולין עליהן תלושין ברצון ואם לאו אינן ברצון:
3
When a person brings wooden wheels and implements used for oxen into water during the summer when the east wind blows so that the cracks in the wood will seal, the water that ascends with them is considered as having been uprooted willfully.ג
המוריד את הגלגלים ואת כלי הבקר בשעת הקדים למים כדי שיסתמו הסדקין שבעץ הרי המים העולין בהן תלושין ברצון:
4
When a person leads an animal down to a stream to drink, the water that ascend with its mouth is considered as having been uprooted willfully. The water that ascends on its feet are not considered as having been uprooted willfully, unless he had the intent that its feet be rinsed. When the animal's feet are diseased, and in the threshing season, even the water on its feet is considered as having been uprooted willfully.
If a deafmute, a mentally or emotionally compromised person, or a minor brought the animal to drink, even if he intended that its feet be washed, the water that ascends on its feet is not considered to have been uprooted willfully, because the deeds of such individuals are halachically significant, but their intent is not.ד
המוריד את הבהמה לשתות המים העולין בפיה תלושין ברצון וברגליה אינן כתלושין ברצון אלא אם חישב שיודחו רגליה ובשעת החורף והדיש אף שברגליה תלושין ברצון הורידה חרש שוטה וקטן אע"פ שחשב שיודחו רגליה המים העולין ברגליה אינן תלושין ברצון שיש להן מעשה ואין להן מחשבה:
5
When a person immerses himself in water, the water on his body is considered to have been uprooted willfully. If, however, one passes through water, all of the water on his body is not considered to have been willfully uprooted.ה
הטובל במים הרי כל המים שעל בשרו תלושין ברצון אבל העובר במים כל המים שעל בשרו אינן תלושין ברצון:
6
When a person immerses himself in a river and there was another river before him and he crossed it, the second water nullifies the presence of the first water and the water on his body is not considered as having been uprooted willfully.
Similarly, if a person's friend pushed him or his animal into a pool, the presence of the first water is nullified. If, however, he pushed him in jest, the second water does not nullify the first and the water that is on his body is considered as having been uprooted willfully.
If a person immerses himself in a river and ascended and then, rain fell upon him, should there be more rainwater than river water on his body, the rainwater nullifies the presence of the first water and the water on his body is not considered as having been uprooted willfully.ו
מי שטבל בנהר והיה לפניו נהר אחר ועבר בו ביטלו השניים את הראשונים והרי המים שעליו אינן תלושין ברצון וכן אם דחהו חבירו לשכרו או לשכר בהמתו בטלו המים הראשונים אבל אם דחהו דרך שחוק לא בטלו אלא הרי המים שעליו תלושין לרצון טבל בנהר ועלה וירדו עליו גשמים אם רבו עליו גשמים הרי בטלו מים הראשונים והרי כל המים שעליו אינן תלושין ברצון:
7
When a person is swimming on the surface of water, the water he splashes is not considered as having been uprooted willfully. The water on his body, however, is considered as having been uprooted willfully. If he intended to splash water on a friend, the water he splashes is considered as uprooted willfully.ז
השט על פני המים המים הניתזין אינן תלושין ברצון והמים העולין עליו תלושין ברצון אם נתכוון להתיז על חבירו אף הניתזין תלושין ברצון:
8
When a person makes a squirting spout in the water, the water squirted from it and within it are not considered as uprooted willfully.ח
העושה צפור במים המים הניתזין ואת שבה אינם תלושין ברצון:
9
When a person measures a cistern to find out how deep it is, the water that ascends on his hand and on the article with which he measures is considered as having been uprooted willfully. If he measures its width, the water that ascends on his hand and on the article with which he measures is not considered as having been uprooted willfully.
If a person extends his hand or foot into a cistern to see whether it contains water, the water that ascends on his hand or foot is not considered as having been uprooted willfully. If he extends them to see how much water is there, the water that ascends on his hand or foot is considered as having been uprooted willfully. If he casts a stone into a cistern to see if it contains water, the water that is splashed is not considered as uprooted willfully. Similarly, the water on the stone is not considered as uprooted willfully.ט
המודד את הבור לידע עומקו מים העולין בידו ובדבר שמדד בו תלושין ברצון ואם מדד רוחבו מים העולין בידיו או בדבר שמדד בו אינן תלושין ברצון פשט ידו או רגלו לבור לידע אם יש בו מים הרי המים העולין בידו או ברגלו אינן תלושין ברצון פשטן לידע כמה מים שם העולין בהן תלושין ברצון זרק אבן לבור לידע אם יש בו מים מים הניתזין אינן ברצון ושעל האבן אינן כתלושין:
10
If a person beats a hide from which the wool has not been separated while it is outside the water, the water that is expelled from is considered as having been uprooted willfully, for his desire is that the water be expelled. If, however, he beats it while it is in the water, the water is not considered as having been uprooted willfully.י
החובט על השלח חוץ למים הנתזין ממנו תלושין ברצון שהרי רצונו שיצאו חבט עליו והוא בתוך המים אינן תלושין ברצון:
11
The water that ascends on a ship, its reservoir, and its oars is not considered to have been uprooted willfully. Similarly, the water on the snares, nets, and meshes is not considered to have been uprooted willfully. If one shakes them out, it is considered to have been uprooted willfully.
Similarly, the water on the table-coverings or coverings for bricks is not considered to have been uprooted willfully. If one shakes them out, it is considered to have been uprooted willfully.יא
המים העולין בספינה ובעיקל ובמשוטות אינן תלושין ברצון ובמצודות וברשתות ובמכמורות אינם תלושין ברצון ואם ניער תלושין ברצון וכן המים שעל הקסיה [של] שלחנות ועל השפה של לבנים אינן ברצון ואם ניער הרי אלו ברצון:
12
When a person takes a ship out to the Mediterranean Sea to strengthen it, takes a peg out to the rain to harden it, or takes a firebrand out to the rain to make it a coal, the water on them is considered to have been uprooted willfully. If, however, one takes a glowing peg or a firebrand out to the rain to quench their fire, the water on them is not considered to have been uprooted willfully.יב
המוליך את הספינה לים הגדול לצרפה המוציא מסמר לגשמים לצרפו המניח את האוד בגשמים לעשותו [פחם] הרי המים שעליהן תלושין ברצון אבל המוציא את המסמר ואת האוד לגשמים לכבותן אין המים שעליהן תלושין ברצון:
13
When one lowers a chain with a hook into a cistern to lift up a container or a pitcher or one lowered a basket into a cistern so that a chicken would sit on it, the water on these objects is not considered to have been uprooted willfully.יג
שלשל את המשולת לבור להעלות בה כלי או קיתון שלשל את הכלכלה לבור כדי שתשב עליה (את) התרנגולת אין המים שעליה תלושין ברצון:
14
When one smoothes out cress to remove the water on it or one squeezes the water on his hair into his garments, the water that emerges is considered to have been uprooted willfully. The water that remains is not considered to have been uprooted willfully, because he desired that all of the water be purged originally.
The cress itself becomes susceptible to impurity, because the water makes it susceptible to impurity when it departs. If he removed the water from it with all his power, it does not become susceptible to impurity.יד
הממחק את הכרישה להסיר המים שעליה והסוחט שערו בכסותו המים היוצאין תלושין ברצון והנשארין אינן תלושין ברצון מפני שרצונו שיצאו מכולן וכרישה עצמה הוכשרה שבשעת פרישתה מכשירין ואם ניתק המים מעליה בכל כחו לא הוכשרה:
15
When a person shakes a tree to cause food that had been placed there or an impure object to descend, the water which sputters from it is not considered to have been uprooted willfully. If he shook it to remove the liquids, the liquids that fall are considered to have been uprooted willfully. The liquids that remain inside it are not considered to have been uprooted willfully even though they moved from place to place, because his intent was that they be removed entirely. Similarly, if the liquids sputter on produce that is connected to the ground, they are not considered to have been uprooted willfully.טו
המרעיד את האילן להשיר ממנו אוכלין או להשיר טומאה המים הניתזין ממנה אינן תלושין ברצון הרעידו להשיר ממנו משקין היוצאין הרי הן תלושין והנשארין בו אף על פי שנשרו ממקום למקום אינן תלושין ברצון מפני שהוא מתכוון שיצאו מכולו וכן אם נתזו על המחוברין אינן תלושין ברצון:
16
When a person shakes a tree and water from it falls on another tree or a branch and then the water fell on other branches under which there were plants and vegetables attached to the ground, the water on the plants or the vegetables are not considered to have been uprooted willfully.טז
המרעיד את האילן ונפל על חבירו או סוכה ונפלה על חבירתה ותחתיהן זרעים וירקות מחוברים לקרקע ונפלו המים על הפירות המחוברין שתחתיהן אותן המים שבזרעים ושבירקות אינן תלושין ברצון:
17
As explained in Hilchot Terumot , when one poured water over wine dregs that were terumah, the first and second batches produced are forbidden to non-priests. If the dregs had come from grapes consecrated for improvements for the Temple, even the third batch is forbidden. And if the grapes were consecrated for use for the Altar, all mixtures are forbidden. If the grapes are definitely from the second tithe, only the first batch is forbidden.
Just as these groundrules were established with regard to prohibitions, so too, they are applied with regard to the mixture making foods susceptible to ritual impurity. For example, water became mixed with dregs on its own accord and an animal drank one mixture after another. An animal is mentioned, because if, by contrast, a person would remove the first water, even though the water fell on its own accord, since a person gave thought to it and objected to its presence, it is considered significant and imparts impurity.יז
שמרים של תרומה שנתן עליהן מים כבר ביארנו בתרומות שהראשון והשני אסור לזרים ושל הקדש בדק הבית אף השלישי אסור ושל קדשי מזבח לעולם אסור ושל מעשר שני הודאי ראשון בלבד אסור כשם שאמרו לענין איסורן כך אמרו לענין הכשירן כגון שנתמדו מאליהן והיתה בהמה שותה ראשון ראשון שאם היה האדם הוא שמסיר המים הראשונים אע"פ שמאליהן נפלו כיון שחשבן והקפיד עליהן מכשירין:
Tum'at Okhalin - Chapter 14
1
When water from a drainpipe descends into produce and the owner mixed the produce so that it would dry, the produce does not become susceptible to impurity.א
פירות שירד הדלף לתוכן ועירבן כדי שיתנגבו לא הוכשרו:
2
When a person brings his produce to the roof so that it does not become worm-infested and dew descends upon it, it does not become susceptible to impurity. If he intended that the dew descend upon it, it becomes susceptible to impurity. Therefore, if a deafmute, a intellectually or emotionally compromised individual, or a minor brought the produce up to the roof, even if they had the intent that dew descend upon it, it does not become susceptible to impurity. The rationale is that their deeds are significant according to Scriptural Law, but their intent is not significant, even according to Rabbinic Law.
If minors turned the produce over on the roof, it becomes susceptible to impurity. For if the intent of a minor is obvious from his actions, his intent has an effect according to Rabbinic Law.ב
המעלה פירותיו לגג מפני הכנימה וירד עליהן הטל לא הוכשר ואם נתכוון שירד עליהן הטל הוכשרו לפיכך אם העלום חרש שוטה וקטן אף על פי שחישבו שירד הטל עליהן לא הוכשרו שיש מעשה להן דין תורה ואין להן מחשבה אפילו מדברי סופרים הפכו בהן קטנים על הגג הרי אלו מוכשרין שאם היתה מחשבה של קטן ניכרת מתוך מעשיו מחשבתו מועלת מדבריהן:
3
When a person brings bundles of vegetables, dried figs, or garlic to a roof so that they will be preserved and dew descended upon them, they do not become susceptible to ritual impurity. We do not say that since everyone knows that dew will descend, it is as if he willfully exposed them to water. The rationale is that he brought them up to the roof solely so that they should be preserved.ג
המעלה את האגודות ואת הקציעות ואת השום לגג בשביל שימתינו וירד עליהן הטל לא הוכשרו ואין אומרין הואיל והכל יודעין שהטל יורד הרי זה ברצונו שהרי לא העלם אלא כדי שימתינו:
4
When a person brings wheat to be ground into flour and rain falls upon it, if he was happy, it becomes susceptible to impurity. When his olives had been placed on the roof and rain descended, if he was happy, they were made susceptible to impurity. When donkey-drivers were crossing a river and their sacks fell into the water, and they lifted them up, if they were happy that the produce became wet, the produce was made susceptible to impurity. The water that is on the sacks is considered as having been uprooted willfully, for they were happy that the sacks became wet.ד
המוליך חיטין לטחון וירדו עליהן גשמים אם שמח הוכשרו היו זיתיו נתונין בגג וירדו עליהן גשמים אם שמח הוכשרו החמרים שהיו עוברים בנהר ונפלו שקיהן במים והעלום אם שמחו הוכשרו הפירות והמים שעל השקין הנם תלושין ברצון שהרי שמחו:
5
When a sack that was filled with seeds and was placed on the edge of a river, at the opening to a cistern, or on the steps leading to a storage cavern of water, if they absorbed water, they become susceptible to impurity.ה
שק שהוא מלא זרעונים ונתון על גבי הנהר או על פי הבור או על מעלות המערה ושאבו הוכשרו:
6
When an earthenware jug containing produce was placed in liquids or a jug containing liquids was placed among produce and the produce absorbed the liquids, it becomes susceptible to impurity.
With regard to which liquids was the above said: With regard to water, wine, and vinegar. Other liquids are not absorbed through the walls of earthenware containers causing produce to be made susceptible to ritual impurity.ו
חבית שהיא מלאה פירות שנתנה בתוך המשקין או מלאה משקין שנתנה בתוך הפירות ושאבו הוכשרו באלו משקין אמרו במים וביין ובחומץ אבל שאר המשקין אין משאבין מן החרס כדי שיכשירו הפירות שבצידן:
7
The following rules apply when a person removes a hot loaf of bread from an oven and places it on the opening of a jug of wine: If the loaf was from wheat flour, it does not become susceptible to impurity. If it was from barley flour, it does become susceptible to impurity, because barley is absorbent. Similarly, if the wine was impure, if the loaf was from wheat, it is pure. If it was from barley, it becomes impure, because it absorbed impure liquids.ז
הרודה פת חמה ונתנה ע"פ חבית של יין אם היתה פת חיטין לא הוכשרה ואם היתה של שעורים הוכשרה מפני שהשעורים שואבות וכן אם היה היין טמא והיה פת חיטים טהורה ואם היתה שעורים נטמאה מפני ששאבה משקין טמאין:
8
When a person sprinkles water on the floor of his house and then placed wheat upon it and it became moist, if it became moist because of the water, it becomes susceptible to impurity. If it became moist because of the stone, it does not become susceptible to impurity.
When a person washes his garment in a kneading trough and afterwards he placed wheat in it and it became moist, if it became moist because of the water, it becomes susceptible to impurity. If it became moist because of the kneading trough, it does not become susceptible to impurity.ח
המרבץ את ביתו ונתן בו חטים וטננו אם מחמת המים הוכשרו ואם מחמת הסלע לא הוכשרו המכבס את כסותו בעריבה ונתן בה חטים וטננו אם מחמת המים הוכשרו ואם מחמת העריבה לא הוכשרו:
9
When a person buries his produce in sand so that it will become moist, it becomes subject to impurity. When he buries it in dry mud, if the mud is moist enough that a hand that touches it will become wet, the produce becomes subject to impurity. If not, it does not.ט
הטומן פירות בחול כדי שירטיבו הוכשרו הטומן בטיט הנגוב אם יש בו משקה טופח הוכשרו ואם לאו לא הוכשרו:
10
When a person sprinkles water on his grainheap, he need not worry that his wheat became susceptible to impurity if the kernels came in contact with water even though he is satisfied that this happened.י
המרבץ את גורנו אינו חושש שמא יוכשרו חטיו אם טננו בו ואף ע"פ שהוא שמח:
11
When a person gathers grasses upon which dew had descended to use for covering wheat, the wheat does not become susceptible to impurity. If this was his intent, it does become susceptible.יא
המלקט עשבים כשהטל יורד עליהן לחפות בהן החיטין לא הוכשרו ואם נתכוון לכך הוכשרו:
12
When a person sprinkles impure water on the floor of his house and then placed stalks of grain there and they become moist, they become impure if there is enough moisture upon them that the hand of one who touches them also becomes moist. If not, they are pure.יב
המרבץ את ביתו במים טמאים ונתן בו שבולים וטננו אם יש עליהן משקה טופח הרי אלו טמאין ואם לאו טהורין:
13
When a person shakes a bunch of vegetables that had liquid on them and the liquid descended from the upper ones to the lower ones, they do not become susceptible to impurity.יג
הנוער אגודה של ירק שהיו עליה משקין וירדו מצד העליון לצד התחתון לא הוכשר:
14
When a person lifts sacks full of produce from the river and places them one on top of the other, the lower one becomes susceptible to impurity because of the water descending from the upper one, for he willfully placed one on top of the other.יד
המעלה שקין מלאין פירות מן הנהר ונתנן זה ע"ג זה הוכשר התחתון במים שירדו לו מן העליון שהרי ברצונו הניח זה על גבי זה:
15
When a person blows on lentils to see if they are good for the purpose of cooking, if water collects on them, they become susceptible to impurity because of the moisture in his breath which is a derivative of water. Similarly, when a person eats sesame seeds with his finger, they become susceptible to impurity because of the moisture in his breath and on his finger.טו
הנופח בעדשים לבודקן אם הן יפות והזיעו הוכשרו בהבל פיו מפני שהוא מתולדות המים וכן האוכל שומשמין באצבע הוכשרו במשקה פיו ושעל אצבעו:
16
When a person bites food and then it falls from his hand, the liquid on the food is not considered as having been placed there willfully. If a person was eating olives that had been broken open, moist dates, or any other produce whose pit he desired to suck, but it fell from his mouth, the liquid on it is considered as having been placed there willfully. If he was eating dry olives, dried dates, any other produce whose pit he does not desire to suck, and it fell from his mouth, the liquid on it is not considered as having been placed there willfully.טז
נשך באוכל ונפל האוכל הרי המשקה שעל האוכל שלא לרצון היה אוכל זיתים פצועים ותמרים רטובות וכל שהוא רוצה למוץ את גרעינתו ונפל מפיו הרי המשקה שעליו ברצון היה אוכל זיתים נגובין ותמרים יבישות וכל שאינו רוצה למוץ את גרעינתו ונפל מפיו הרי המשקה שעליו שלא ברצון:
17
We have already explained that when a person gathered endives for an animal and washed them, but changed his mind afterwards and thought to use them for human consumption, they need to be exposed to water a second time to make foods susceptible to impurity. If, however, there was tangible moisture on them when he thought to use them for human consumption, they are susceptible to impurity.יז
עולשין שליקטן לבהמה והדיחן וחישב עליהן לאדם אח"כ כבר ביארנו שהן צריכים הכשר שני ואם היה עליהן משקה טופח כשחישב עליהן לאדם הרי אלו מוכשרין:
Tum'at Okhalin - Chapter 15
1
Water that is in a container contracts impurity, whether it entered the container willfully or against one's desires. It imparts impurity to foods and keilim whether it came in contact with them willfully or against one's will. Water collected on the earth, by contrast, e.g., water in a cistern, storage trench, or storage cavern or water in a pit that does not contain 40 se'ah, does not contract impurity unless it comes in contact with the source of impurity willfully, nor does it impart impurity unless it comes in contact with the food willfully.
What is implied? When there was less than 40 se'ah of water collected on the ground, whether it was drawn or it was not drawn, and a human corpse fell into this water or an impure person walked through it, it is pure. If, however, an impure person drank from this water, one filled an impure container with it, or impure liquids willfully fell into it, the water becomes impure even though it is still collected on the ground. If a pure person drank from this water after it became impure on the ground or one filled a pure container with it, the person who drank and the container with which the water was drawn becomes impure, because he drank or the container was filled intentionally.
If a loaf that was terumah fell into such water, it is pure as it was originally, because the water imparts impurity only when foods come in contact with it willfully. Therefore, if one washed his hand and removed a loaf, the loaf contracts impurity from the water on the person's hand, because it was removed willfully.א
מים שבכלים מתטמאין בין לרצון בין שלא לרצון ומטמאין אוכלים וכלים בין שנפל עליהן ברצון בין שלא נפל עליהן ברצון אבל מים שבקרקעות כגון מי בורות שיחין ומערות ומי גבאים שאין בהם ארבעים סאה אין מתטמאין אלא לרצון ואין מטמאין אלא ברצון כיצד מים שבקרקע שאין בהן ארבעים סאה בין שהיו שאובין בין שאינן שאובין שנפל לתוכן המת או שהלך בהן הטמא הרי אלו טהורין אבל אם שתה מהן אדם טמא או שמילא בהן בכלי טמא או שנפלו לתוכן משקין טמאין ברצון הרי אלו טמאין ואף על פי שהן בקרקע שתה מהן הטהור אחר שנטמאו בקרקע או שמילא בהן בכלי טהור נטמא השותה ונטמא הכלי שהרי ברצון שתה או מילא נפל לתוכן ככר של תרומה הרי הוא טהור כשהיה שאין מתטמאין אלא לרצון לפיכך אם הדיח ידו והוציא הככר נטמא הככר במים שבידיו שהרי הן ברצון:
2
The following laws apply to water that is collected in a pit and other types of water collected on the ground, e.g., water in a cistern, storage trench, or storage cavern, rainwater that stopped flowing and collected in one place or mikveot that do not contain 40 se'ah that became impure. If rain then descended, causing there to be more rainwater than the water originally collected, even if the original water did not flow out, those bodies of water become pure. Therefore, during the rainy season, all water collected on the ground, e.g., water collected in a pit or the like, is assumed to be pure.ב
מי גבאים וכיוצא בהן ממים שבקרקעות כגון מי בורות שיחין ומערות ומי תמצית שפסקו ומקואות שאין בהן ארבעים סאה שנטמאו וירדו להם גשמים ורבו מי גשמים עליהם אע"פ שלא שטפו הרי הן טהורין לפיכך כל המים שבקרקעות כגון מי גבאים וכיוצא בהן בשעת הגשמים הכל בחזקת טהרה:
3
Different laws apply when the rains cease. When such bodies of water are close to a town or a thoroughfare, they are impure, because it can be assumed that an impure person drank from them and/or water was drawn from them in impure containers. Those that are distant are pure until the majority of people begin walking. Once they do, they are all assumed to impure, because those who journey on caravans drink from them.
When does the above apply? With regard to water in a pit from which it is possible to drink. If, however, there is water in a pit that it is impossible to drink from except through great effort, it is assumed to be pure unless the footprints of a person or large animal were evident. If, however, the footprints of a small animal were found, the water is pure, because it is possible that the animal descended on its own accord.ג
פסקו הגשמים הקרובים לעיר או לדרך טמאין שהן בחזקת ששתה מהן הטמא ושמלאו מהן בכלים טמאין והרחוקים טהורים עד שיהלכו רוב האדם הלכו הכל בחזקת טומאה שההולכים בשיירות ממלאין ושותין מהן בד"א בגבא שאפשר לשתות ממנה אבל בגבא שאי אפשר לשתות ממנה אלא בדוחק גדול ה"ז בחזקת טהרה (שהן בחזקת טהורין) עד שימצא מקום פרסות רגלי אדם או פרסות רגלי בהמה גסה ניכרת בו אבל מצא פרסות רגלי בהמה דקה הרי זה טהור שאפשר שירדה ושתת:
4
In the rainy season, it can be assumed that the mud and the water in the hollows at the entrance of stores in the public domain are pure. When the rains cease, they are considered as drainage water. The ruling concerning water in the marketplace depends on the majority. .
When wine, milk, or honey fall into a pit filled with water, the ruling depends on the majority. When oil falls into it, the mixture can contract and impart impurity without the owner's desire even when it congeals. The rationale is that it is impossible that droplets will not remain mixed with the water.ד
חזקת טיט וגמומיות שבפתחי חנויות בר"ה בשעת הגשמים שהן טהורין פסקו הגשמים הרי הן כמי שפיכות ושבשווקין הולכין בהן אחר הרוב גבא שנפל לתוכו יין או חלב או דבש הולכין בו אחר הרוב נפל לתוכו שמן אף על פי שהקפיאהו הרי זה מתטמא ומטמא שלא ברצון לפי שאי אפשר לו לצאת ידי צחצחית:
5
Oil and other liquids aside from water are governed by the same laws whether they are collected in the earth or in containers.ה
שמן ושאר המשקין חוץ מן המים הרי הן בקרקע כמות שהן בכלים דין אחד הוא:
6
Streams of rainwater that are still flowing - even if they do not contain 40 se'ah, since they are on the earth and their water is flowing - do not contract ritual impurity. Even if an impure person drank from them, drew water from them with an impure container, or poured impure water into them, they are still pure with regard to all matters.ו
מי תמצית שלא פסקו אף ע"פ שאין בהן ארבעים סאה הואיל והן בקרקע והרי המים נמשכין ובאין להן אינן מקבלין טומאה ואע"פ ששתה מהן הטמא ומילא מהן בכלי טמא או נתן לתוכן מים טמאים הרי הן טהורין לכל דבר:
7
When a person was eating terumah with impure hands, e.g., a dried fig that had not come into contact with water, if he inserted his hand into his mouth to remove a pebble, were he to turn over his finger while doing so, the fig would become impure because of his saliva. For the saliva would become impure because of the person's hand, because he uprooted the saliva from its place. If, however, he did not turn over his finger, it is pure. The rationale is that, before he turns over his finger or sucks it, the liquid in his mouth is comparable to water on the earth that was not uprooted from its place, but instead, is on the ground. As explained, such water only contracts and imparts impurity due to willful actions. This person desired only to remove the pebble.
The following rules apply when, in addition to the dried fig, there was a pundiyon in his mouth and he extended his hand to remove it and the fig from his mouth. If he had placed the coin in his mouth because he was thirsty, the saliva on it is considered as removed from its place and the fig contracts impurity from the moisture in his mouth that contracted impurity because of his hand.ז
מי שהיה אוכל תרומה בידים טמאות כגון דבילה שלא הוכשרה והכניס ידו לתוך פיו ליטול צרור אם הפך נטמאת הדבילה ברירו שהרי נטמא ביד מפני שעקרו ואם לא הפך טהורה שהמשקה שבפיו קודם שיהפכנו או ימוצצנו להוציאו דומה למים שלא נתלשו אלא הן עדיין בקרקע שאין מתטמאין ואין מטמאין אלא ברצון כמו שביארנו וזה אין רצונו אלא ליטול הצרור היה פונדיון לתוך פיו ופשט ידו ליטלו והדבילה בתוך פיו אם הניחו לצמאו הרי זה הרוק כעקור ונטמאת הדבילה מחמת משקה פיו שנטמא מחמת ידיו:
8
The following rules apply when a woman was partaking of food that is terumah which had not been made susceptible to impurity while she was removing the coals from an impure oven. If she was poked by a splinter that caused her to bleed and she was sucking her finger because of the blood or she burnt her finger and inserted it into her mouth, the terumah in her mouth contracted impurity.ח
האשה שהיתה אוכלת אוכלין של תרומה שאינן מוכשרין והיתה גורפת את התנור הטמא והכה הקוץ ויצא ממנה דם ומצצה אצבעה מפני הדם או שנכוית ונתנה אצבעה בפיה נטמאת התרומה שבפיה שהרי רצונה להוציא המשקה מפיה ולעוקרו במציצת אצבע:
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class
Shabbat, 27 Iyar 5778 / May 12, 2018
TODAY
Tuesday Iyar 27, 42nd day of the omer 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Bamidbar, Shlishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 120-134.
Tanya: These garments, (p. 269)...the blessed En Sof.(p. 271).
My father1 related that he heard from his father2 quoting his father (the Tzemach Tzedek), who heard the Alter Rebbe refer to himself as the son of the Maggid (his Rebbe), and as the grandson of the Baal Shem Tov.
Compiled and arranged by the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, of righteous memory, in 5703 (1943) from the talks and letters of the sixth Chabad Rebbe, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn, of righteous memory.
FOOTNOTES
1.R. Shalom Dovber.
2.R. Shmuel.
***
No comments:
Post a Comment