Today in Judaism – Today is: Sunday, 28 Kislev 5774 · 1 December 2013 - Chanukah 4

Today in Judaism – Today is: Sunday, 28 Kislev 5774 · 1 December 2013 - Chanukah 4

-------

Today’s Laws and Customs:

• Kindle Five Chanukah Lights tonight

In commemoration of the miracle of Chanukah (see "Today in Jewish History" for Kislev 25) we kindle the Chanukah lights -- oil lamps or candles -- each evening of the eight-day festival, increasing the number of lights each evening. Tonight we kindle five lights. (In the Jewish calendar, the day begins at nightfall; this evening, then, commences the 5th day of Chanukah).

The icon below displays the ideal Chanukah lighting time for your location; the lighting can be done, however, later in the evening as well. For more on Chanukah lighting times, click here. (If no time is displayed, click on icon to set your location.)

For a more detailed guide to Chanukah lighting click here. For text and audio of the blessings recited before lighting, click here.

Additional Chanukah observances and customs are listed below:

• Hallel & Al HaNissim

Special prayers of thanksgiving -- Hallel (in its full version) and Al HaNissim -- are added to the daily prayers and Grace After Meals on all eight days of Chanukah. Tachnun (confession of sins) and similar prayers are omitted for the duration of trhe festival.

• Latkes, Sufganiot & Dairy Foods

On Chanukah we eat foods fried in oil -- such as latkes (potato cakes) and sufganiot (doughnuts) -- in commemoration of the miracle of the oil.

It is also customary to eat dairy foods in commemoration of Judith's heroic deed.

• Dreidel

It is customary to play dreidel -- a game played with a spinning top inscribed with the Hebrew letters Nun, Gimmel, Hei and Shin, which spell the phrase Nes Gadol Hayah Sham, "a great miracle happened there." (It is said that when the Greeks forbade the study of Torah, Jewish children continued the study with their teachers in caves and cellars; when the agents of the king were seen approaching, the children would hide their scrolls and start to play with spinning tops...)

Links: About the dreidel

• Chanukah Gelt

It is an age-old custom to distribute gifts of Chanukah gelt ("Chanukah money") to children on Chanukah. (It was the custom of the rebbes of Chabad-Lubavitch to give Chanukah gelt to their children and other family members on the fourth or fifth night of Chanukah; more recently, however, the Lubavitcher Rebbe encouraged the giving of Chanukah gelt every day of the festival -- except for Shabbat, when handling money is forbidden.)

Today in Jewish History:

• 4th Day of Chanukah Miracle (139 BCE)

On the 25th of Kislev in the year 3622 from creation, the Maccabees liberated the Holy Temple in Jerusalem, after defeating the vastly more numerous and powerful armies of the Syrian-Greek king Antiochus IV, who had tried to forcefully uproot the beliefs and practices of Judaism from the people of Israel. The victorious Jews repaired, cleansed and rededicated the Temple to the service of G-d. But all the Temple's oil had been defiled by the pagan invaders; when the Jews sought to light the Temple's menorah (candelabra), they found only one small cruse of ritually pure olive oil. Miraculously, the one-day supply burned for eight days, until new, pure oil could be obtained. In commemoration, the Sages instituted the 8-day festival of Chanukah, on which lights are kindled nightly to recall and publicize the miracle.

Link: The Story of Chanukah

Daily Quote:

This toy only impresses one who has but a single world and many gods, not one who has one G-d and two worlds(Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn of Lubavitch to the Soviet agent who brandished a revolver in his face)

Daily Study - Chitas and Rambam for today: Chumash: Vayigash, 1st Portion Genesis 44:18-44:30 with Rashi

Chapter 44

18. Then Judah approached him and said, "Please, my lord, let now your servant speak something into my lord's ears, and let not your wrath be kindled against your servant, for you are like Pharaoh.     יח. וַיִּגַּשׁ אֵלָיו יְהוּדָה וַיֹּאמֶר בִּי אֲדֹנִי יְדַבֶּר נָא עַבְדְּךָ דָבָר בְּאָזְנֵי אֲדֹנִי וְאַל יִחַר אַפְּךָ בְּעַבְדֶּךָ כִּי כָמוֹךָ כְּפַרְעֹה:

Then…approached him… something into my lord’s ears: Let my words enter your ears. [From Gen. Rabbah 83:6]

ויגש אליו וגו'. דבר באזני א-דני: יכנסו דברי באזניך:

and let your wrath not be kindled: From here you learn that he spoke to him harshly.

ואל יחר אפך: מכאן אתה למד שדבר אליו קשות:

for you are like Pharaoh: This is its simple meaning. Its midrashic meaning is, however: You will ultimately be punished with צָרַעַת because of him, just as Pharaoh was punished because of my great-grandmother Sarah for the one night that he detained her (Gen. 12:17). Another explanation: Just as Pharaoh issues decrees and does not carry them out, makes promises and does not fulfill them, so do you. Now, is this the “setting of an eye,” concerning which you said [that you wanted] “to set your eye upon him” ? [See verse 21.] Another explanation: For like you, so is Pharaoh-if you provoke me, I will kill you and your master. [From Gen. Rabbah 93:6]

כי כמוך כפרעה: חשוב אתה בעיני כמלך זה פשוטו. ומדרשו, סופך ללקות עליו בצרעת כמו שלקה פרעה על ידי זקנתי שרה על לילה אחת שעכבה. דבר אחר מה פרעה גוזר ואינו מקיים, מבטיח ואינו עושה, אף אתה כן, וכי זו היא שימת עין שאמרת לשום עינך עליו. דבר אחר כי כמוך כפרעה אם תקניטני אהרוג אותך ואת אדוניך:

19. My lord asked his servants, saying, 'Have you a father or a brother?'       יט. אֲדֹנִי שָׁאַל אֶת עֲבָדָיו לֵאמֹר הֲיֵשׁ לָכֶם אָב אוֹ אָח:

My lord asked his servants: From the beginning, you came upon us with a pretext. Why did you have to ask all these [questions]? Were we looking to [marry] your daughter, or were you looking to [marry] our sister? Nonetheless, “we said to my lord” (verse 20). We did not conceal anything. [From Gen. Rabbah 93:8]

א-דני שאל את עבדיו: מתחלה בעלילה באת עלינו, למה היה לך לשאול כל אלה, בתך היינו מבקשים, או אחותנו אתה מבקש, ואף על פי כן ונאמר אל אדוני, לא כחדנו ממך דבר:

20. And we said to my lord, 'We have an old father and a young child of his old age, and his brother is dead, and he is left alone of his mother, and his father loves him.'    כ. וַנֹּאמֶר אֶל אֲדֹנִי יֶשׁ לָנוּ אָב זָקֵן וְיֶלֶד זְקֻנִים קָטָן וְאָחִיו מֵת וַיִּוָּתֵר הוּא לְבַדּוֹ לְאִמּוֹ וְאָבִיו אֲהֵבוֹ:

and his brother is dead: Out of fear, he made a false statement. He said [to himself], “If I tell him that he is alive, he will say, ‘Bring him to me.’” [from Gen. Rabbah 93:8]

ואחיו מת: מפני היראה היה מוציא דבר שקר מפיו. אמר אם אומר לו שהוא קיים, יאמר הביאוהו אצלי:

alone of his mother: From that mother, he has no other brother. [From Targum Jonathan ben Uzziel]

לבדו לאמו: מאותו האם אין לו עוד אח:

21. And you said to your servants, 'Bring him down to me, and I will set my eye[s] upon him.'     כא. וַתֹּאמֶר אֶל עֲבָדֶיךָ הוֹרִדֻהוּ אֵלָי וְאָשִׂימָה עֵינִי עָלָיו:

22. And we said to my lord, 'The boy cannot leave his father, for if he leaves his father, he will die.'       כב. וַנֹּאמֶר אֶל אֲדֹנִי לֹא יוּכַל הַנַּעַר לַעֲזֹב אֶת אָבִיו וְעָזַב אֶת אָבִיו וָמֵת:

for if he leaves his father, he will die: If he leaves his father, we are worried lest he die on the way, for his mother died on the way. [after Targum Jonathan ben Uzziel]

ועזב את אביו ומת: אם יעזוב את אביו דואגים אנו שמא ימות בדרך, שהרי אמו מתה בדרך:   

23. And you said to your servants, 'If your youngest brother does not come down with you, you will not see my face again.'    כג. וַתֹּאמֶר אֶל עֲבָדֶיךָ אִם לֹא יֵרֵד אֲחִיכֶם הַקָּטֹן אִתְּכֶם לֹא תֹסִפוּן לִרְאוֹת פָּנָי:

24. And it came to pass when we went up to your servant, my father, and we told him the words of my lord,     כד. וַיְהִי כִּי עָלִינוּ אֶל עַבְדְּךָ אָבִי וַנַּגֶּד לוֹ אֵת דִּבְרֵי אֲדֹנִי:

25. that our father said, 'Go back, buy us a little food.'       כה. וַיֹּאמֶר אָבִינוּ שֻׁבוּ שִׁבְרוּ לָנוּ מְעַט אֹכֶל:

26. But we said, 'We cannot go down; [only] if our youngest brother is with us will we go down, for we cannot see the man's face if our youngest brother is not with us.'     כו. וַנֹּאמֶר לֹא נוּכַל לָרֶדֶת אִם יֵשׁ אָחִינוּ הַקָּטֹן אִתָּנוּ וְיָרַדְנוּ כִּי לֹא נוּכַל לִרְאוֹת פְּנֵי הָאִישׁ וְאָחִינוּ הַקָּטֹן אֵינֶנּוּ אִתָּנוּ:

27. And your servant, my father, said to us, 'You know that my wife bore me two [children].      כז. וַיֹּאמֶר עַבְדְּךָ אָבִי אֵלֵינוּ אַתֶּם יְדַעְתֶּם כִּי שְׁנַיִם יָלְדָה לִּי אִשְׁתִּי:

28. The one went away from me, and I said, "He has surely been torn to pieces, and I have not seen him since."     כח. וַיֵּצֵא הָאֶחָד מֵאִתִּי וָאֹמַר אַךְ טָרֹף טֹרָף וְלֹא רְאִיתִיו עַד הֵנָּה:

29. Now if you take this one too away from me, and misfortune befalls him, you will bring down my hoary head in misery to the grave.'     כט. וּלְקַחְתֶּם גַּם אֶת זֶה מֵעִם פָּנַי וְקָרָהוּ אָסוֹן וְהוֹרַדְתֶּם אֶת שֵׂיבָתִי בְּרָעָה שְׁאֹלָה:

and misfortune befalls him: For Satan accuses at the time of danger. [From Gen. Rabbah 91:9]

וקרהו אסון: שהשטן מקטרג בשעת הסכנה:

you will bring down my hoary head in misery, etc.: Now that he is with me, I comfort myself over [the loss of] his mother and over [the loss of] his brother, but if this one [too] dies, it will seem to me as if the three of them died in one day. [From Gen. Rabbah ff. 93:8]   

והורדתם את שיבתי וגו': עכשיו כשהוא אצלי אני מתנחם בו על אמו ועל אחיו, ואם ימות זה דומה עלי ששלשתן מתו ביום אחד:

30. And now, when I come to your servant, my father, and the boy is not with us [since] his soul is attached to his (the boy's) soul,     ל. וְעַתָּה כְּבֹאִי אֶל עַבְדְּךָ אָבִי וְהַנַּעַר אֵינֶנּוּ אִתָּנוּ וְנַפְשׁוֹ קְשׁוּרָה בְנַפְשׁוֹ:

---

Daily Tehillim – Psalms Chapters 135 - 139

Psalm 135

Praise for God’s Goodness and Might

1 Praise the Lord!

    Praise the name of the Lord;

    give praise, O servants of the Lord,

2 you that stand in the house of the Lord,

    in the courts of the house of our God.

3 Praise the Lord, for the Lord is good;

    sing to his name, for he is gracious.

4 For the Lord has chosen Jacob for himself,

    Israel as his own possession.

5 For I know that the Lord is great;

    our Lord is above all gods.

6 Whatever the Lord pleases he does,

    in heaven and on earth,

    in the seas and all deeps.

7 He it is who makes the clouds rise at the end of the earth;

    he makes lightnings for the rain

    and brings out the wind from his storehouses.

8 He it was who struck down the firstborn of Egypt,

    both human beings and animals;

9 he sent signs and wonders

    into your midst, O Egypt,

    against Pharaoh and all his servants.

10 He struck down many nations

    and killed mighty kings—

11 Sihon, king of the Amorites,

    and Og, king of Bashan,

    and all the kingdoms of Canaan—

12 and gave their land as a heritage,

    a heritage to his people Israel.

13 Your name, O Lord, endures forever,

    your renown, O Lord, throughout all ages.

14 For the Lord will vindicate his people,

    and have compassion on his servants.

15 The idols of the nations are silver and gold,

    the work of human hands.

16 They have mouths, but they do not speak;

    they have eyes, but they do not see;

17 they have ears, but they do not hear,

    and there is no breath in their mouths.

18 Those who make them

    and all who trust them

    shall become like them.

19 O house of Israel, bless the Lord!

    O house of Aaron, bless the Lord!

20 O house of Levi, bless the Lord!

    You that fear the Lord, bless the Lord!

21 Blessed be the Lord from Zion,

    he who resides in Jerusalem.

Praise the Lord!

Psalm 136

God’s Work in Creation and in History

1 O give thanks to the Lord, for he is good,

    for his steadfast love endures forever.

2 O give thanks to the God of gods,

    for his steadfast love endures forever.

3 O give thanks to the Lord of lords,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

4 who alone does great wonders,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

5 who by understanding made the heavens,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

6 who spread out the earth on the waters,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

7 who made the great lights,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

8 the sun to rule over the day,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

9 the moon and stars to rule over the night,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

10 who struck Egypt through their firstborn,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

11 and brought Israel out from among them,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

12 with a strong hand and an outstretched arm,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

13 who divided the Red Sea[a] in two,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

14 and made Israel pass through the midst of it,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

15 but overthrew Pharaoh and his army in the Red Sea,[b]

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

16 who led his people through the wilderness,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

17 who struck down great kings,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

18 and killed famous kings,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

19 Sihon, king of the Amorites,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

20 and Og, king of Bashan,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

21 and gave their land as a heritage,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

22 a heritage to his servant Israel,

    for his steadfast love endures forever.

23 It is he who remembered us in our low estate,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

24 and rescued us from our foes,

    for his steadfast love endures forever;

25 who gives food to all flesh,

    for his steadfast love endures forever.

26 O give thanks to the God of heaven,

    for his steadfast love endures forever.

Psalm 137

Lament over the Destruction of Jerusalem

1 By the rivers of Babylon—

    there we sat down and there we wept

    when we remembered Zion.

2 On the willows[c] there

    we hung up our harps.

3 For there our captors

    asked us for songs,

and our tormentors asked for mirth, saying,

    “Sing us one of the songs of Zion!”

4 How could we sing the Lord’s song

    in a foreign land?

5 If I forget you, O Jerusalem,

    let my right hand wither!

6 Let my tongue cling to the roof of my mouth,

    if I do not remember you,

if I do not set Jerusalem

    above my highest joy.

7 Remember, O Lord, against the Edomites

    the day of Jerusalem’s fall,

how they said, “Tear it down! Tear it down!

    Down to its foundations!”

8 O daughter Babylon, you devastator![d]

    Happy shall they be who pay you back

    what you have done to us!

9 Happy shall they be who take your little ones

    and dash them against the rock!

Psalm 138

Thanksgiving and Praise

Of David.

1 I give you thanks, O Lord, with my whole heart;

    before the gods I sing your praise;

2 I bow down toward your holy temple

    and give thanks to your name for your steadfast love and your faithfulness;

    for you have exalted your name and your word

    above everything.[e]

3 On the day I called, you answered me,

    you increased my strength of soul.[f]

4 All the kings of the earth shall praise you, O Lord,

    for they have heard the words of your mouth.

5 They shall sing of the ways of the Lord,

    for great is the glory of the Lord.

6 For though the Lord is high, he regards the lowly;

    but the haughty he perceives from far away.

7 Though I walk in the midst of trouble,

    you preserve me against the wrath of my enemies;

you stretch out your hand,

    and your right hand delivers me.

8 The Lord will fulfill his purpose for me;

    your steadfast love, O Lord, endures forever.

    Do not forsake the work of your hands.

Psalm 139

The Inescapable God

To the leader. Of David. A Psalm.

1 O Lord, you have searched me and known me.

2 You know when I sit down and when I rise up;

    you discern my thoughts from far away.

3 You search out my path and my lying down,

    and are acquainted with all my ways.

4 Even before a word is on my tongue,

    O Lord, you know it completely.

5 You hem me in, behind and before,

    and lay your hand upon me.

6 Such knowledge is too wonderful for me;

    it is so high that I cannot attain it.

7 Where can I go from your spirit?

    Or where can I flee from your presence?

8 If I ascend to heaven, you are there;

    if I make my bed in Sheol, you are there.

9 If I take the wings of the morning

    and settle at the farthest limits of the sea,

10 even there your hand shall lead me,

    and your right hand shall hold me fast.

11 If I say, “Surely the darkness shall cover me,

    and the light around me become night,”

12 even the darkness is not dark to you;

    the night is as bright as the day,

    for darkness is as light to you.

13 For it was you who formed my inward parts;

    you knit me together in my mother’s womb.

14 I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.

    Wonderful are your works;

that I know very well.

15     My frame was not hidden from you,

when I was being made in secret,

    intricately woven in the depths of the earth.

16 Your eyes beheld my unformed substance.

In your book were written

    all the days that were formed for me,

    when none of them as yet existed.

17 How weighty to me are your thoughts, O God!

    How vast is the sum of them!

18 I try to count them—they are more than the sand;

    I come to the end[g]—I am still with you.

19 O that you would kill the wicked, O God,

    and that the bloodthirsty would depart from me—

20 those who speak of you maliciously,

    and lift themselves up against you for evil![h]

21 Do I not hate those who hate you, O Lord?

    And do I not loathe those who rise up against you?

22 I hate them with perfect hatred;

    I count them my enemies.

23 Search me, O God, and know my heart;

    test me and know my thoughts.

24 See if there is any wicked[i] way in me,

    and lead me in the way everlasting.[j]

Footnotes:

Psalm 136:13 Or Sea of Reeds

Psalm 136:15 Or Sea of Reeds

Psalm 137:2 Or poplars

Psalm 137:8 Or you who are devastated

Psalm 138:2 Cn: Heb you have exalted your word above all your name

Psalm 138:3 Syr Compare Gk Tg: Heb you made me arrogant in my soul with strength

Psalm 139:18 Or I awake

Psalm 139:20 Cn: Meaning of Heb uncertain

Psalm 139:24 Heb hurtful

Psalm 139:24 Or the ancient way. Compare Jer 6.16(New Revised Standard Version)

---

Tanya Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 3

Sunday, 28 Kislev 5774 / 1 December 2013

Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 3

כי השכל שבנפש המשכלת כשמתבונן ומעמיק מאד בגדולת ה׳

For when the intellect in the rational soul deeply contemplates and immerses itself exceedingly in the greatness of G-d,

איך הוא ממלא כל עלמין

how He fills all worlds,

i.e., how G-d animates all of creation with an immanent divine light and life-force (just as the soul fills and gives life to every part of the body) — a life-force which clothes itself in and unifies itself with each creature, and which adapts itself to the individual needs of that creature,

וסובב כל עלמין

and when one further contemplates how He encompasses all worlds,1

He illuminates the worlds with a G-dly light and life-force that is far beyond the capacity of the worlds to receive internally; rather, it affects them in an encompassing manner.

וכולא קמיה כלא חשיב

Or, when one contemplates another aspect of G-d’s greatness, namely, how in His presence all creation is considered as naught, —2

נולדה ונתעוררה מדת יראת הרוממות במוחו ומחשבתו

Upon contemplating and immersing oneself in any of the above-mentioned aspects of G-d’s greatness the middah of awe for the Divine Majesty will be born and aroused in one’s mind and thought,

לירא ולהתבושש מגדולתו יתברך, שאין לה סוף ותכלית

to fear and be humble before His blessed greatness, which is without end or limit,

i.e., the fear will be coupled and permeated with humility, as in the awe one feels in the presence of a very wise or righteous person, which expresses one’s bashfulness and humility before him,

ופחד ה׳ בלבו

and there will also be born a dread of G-d in his heart.

This explains how contemplating G-d’s greatness arouses a fear and dread of Him — an expression of the attribute of Gevurah.

ושוב יתלהב לבו באהבה עזה כרשפי אש, בחשיקה וחפיצה ותשוקה ונפש שוקקה

Next his contemplation will give birth to the attribute of Chesed, expressed as a love of G-d, so that his heart will glow with an intense love of G-d like fiery flames, with a passion, desire and longing, and a yearning soul

לגדולת אין סוף ברוך הוא

(each of these expressions — “fiery flames,” “passion”, and so on, denoting a different grade of love) toward the greatness of the blessed Ein Sof.

והיא כלות הנפש, כדכתיב: נכספה וגם כלתה נפשי וגו׳, וכתיב: צמאה נפשי לאלקים וגו׳, וכתיב צמאה לך נפשי וגו׳

This is what is meant by the term kalot hanefesh (“a consuming passion of the soul”), as it is written:3 “My soul longs [for You]; indeed, it faints…,” and4 “My soul thirsts for G-d …,” and again,5 “My soul thirsts for You.”

So intense can one’s love become that the soul risks being consumed in the fiery flames of its love of G-d, and totally leaving the body. In fact, were one not to forestall this danger, and contain this great love, he would indeed expire. But he restrains himself so that his soul will remain clothed in his body — the only condition in which it is possible for him to fulfill his G-d-given mission.

והצמאון הוא מיסוד האש שבנפש האלקית

This loving thirst is derived from the element of Fire in the divine soul.

וכמו שכתבו הטבעיים, וכן הוא בעץ חיים, שיסוד האש הוא בלב

As students of natural science affirm, and so it is in Etz Chayim, the element of Fire is in the heart,

ומקור המים והליחות מהמוח

while the source of [the element of] Water and moisture is in the brain,

וכמו שכתוב בעץ חיים שער נ׳, שהיא בחינת חכמה שנקרא מים שבנפש האלקית

As explained in Etz Chayim, Portal 50, [the source of the element of Water] is the level of Chochmah which is called “the water of the divine soul.”

Inasmuch as the heart is the seat of the emotions — of warmth — we say that it is the abode of the element of Fire. In contrast, the brain — being the seat of “cold” intellect, calm and measured intelligence — is the source of the element of Water. One can readily observe this by comparing the demeanor of an emotional person to that of an intellectual.

So, too, with the intellect and emotions of the divine soul: the heat and passion of one’s love of G-d is expressed in the heart, ultimately leading him to expire in kalot hanefesh. The mind, however, remains cool. This capacity of the intellect for calm appraisal of a situation leads it to comprehend that G-d’s intent is that the soul remain clothed in the body so that it will be able to fulfill the Torah and its commandments. This realization cools the fiery ardor of the heart and thus prevents the soul from actually expiring in kalot hanefesh.

The Alter Rebbe’s discussion of the birth of middot from the intellect has thus far been centered on two emotions: love and fear of G-d. What of the others?

ושאר המדות כולן הן ענפי היראה והאהבה ותולדותיהן, כמו שכתוב במקום אחר

The rest of the remaining five middot are all offshoots and derivatives of fear and love (and obviously they, too, are born of Chochmah and Binah), as is explained elsewhere.

All the above explains why Chochmah and Binah are called the “father” and “mother” of the middot, for it is through the contemplation exercised by Chochmah and Binah that the middot are born. Chochmah is called the “father”. Just as the drop of semen which derives from the father’s brain comprises, in concentrated and concealed form, all the organs of the child’s body, similarly the seminal point of Chochmah contains, in a concealed manner, all the details of an idea, as explained above. And just as it is the mother who reveals the child’s organs from their concealed state, and brings them to a state of completion, similarly, Binah reveals, expands and elucidates the concept in all its details.

But what of Daat, the third of the intellectual faculties? Daat too, as explained earlier, is a “mother” and source of middot. What does it contribute to their birth? This issue is now addressed.

והדעת הוא מלשון: והאדם ידע את חוה, והוא לשון התקשרות והתחברות

Daat, whose etymology may be found in the verse,6 “And Adam knew (ידע) Eve,” implies attachment and union.

שמקשר דעתו בקשר אמיץ וחזק מאד, ויתקע מחשבתו בחוזק, בגדולת אין סוף ברוך הוא, ואינו מסיח דעתו

(As applied to Daat of the divine soul, this means) binding one’s mind with a very firm, strong bond and firmly fixing one’s thought on the greatness of the blessed Ein Sof, without diverting his mind from it (i.e., the subject matter conceived in Chochmah and developed in Binah is absorbed in the mind by concentration, Daat.)

כי אף מי שהוא חכם ונבון בגדולת אין סוף ברוך הוא, הנה אם לא יקשר דעתו ויתקע מחשבתו בחוזק ובהתמדה

For even one who is wise (by utilizing his faculty of Chochmah) and understanding (by exercising his faculty of Binah) in the greatness of the blessed Ein Sof, yet, unless he applies his Daat and fixes his thought firmly and diligently on his understanding of G-d’s greatness,

לא יוליד בנפשו יראה ואהבה אמיתית, כי אם דמיונות שוא

he will not produce in his soul true fear and love, but only vain fancies.

He will only imagine that he fears G-d and loves Him. True fear and love are attained only by way of Daat.

ועל כן הדעת הוא קיום המדות וחיותן

Thus, Daat provides the substance and vitality of the middot (and is therefore termed a “mother” of the middot, another parent side by side with Chochmah and Binah).

והוא כולל חסד וגבורה, פירוש: אהבה וענפיה ויראה וענפיה

It comprises Chesed and Gevurah; that is to say, love with those other middot that are its offshoots, and fear with its offshoots.

——— ● ———

FOOTNOTES

1.  Zohar III, 225a.

2.  Zohar I, 11b.

3.  Tehillim 84:3.

4.  Ibid. 42:3.

5.  Ibid. 63:2.

6.  Bereishit 4:1.

---

Rambam - Daily Mitzvah - Sefer Hamitzvos:

N235

Negative Commandment 235 (Digest)

Lending with Interest

"You shall not give him your money for interest, nor may you give him your food for increase"—Leviticus 25:37.

It is forbidden to issue a loan – whether money or any other item – to a fellow Jew if it involves charge of interest.

The 235th prohibition is that we are forbidden from lending money with interest.

The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "Your money do not make him pay interest (neshech) for, and do not make him pay interest (marbis) for your food."

These two prohibitive statements come together for added emphasis; that one who lends with interest is doubly guilty. They are not two separate ideas, since neshech is the same as marbis and marbis is the same as neshech.

Our Sages said in tractate Bava Metzia:2 "You will never find neshech without marbis or marbis without neshech. Why did the verse distinguish between them? To cause the transgressor to be doubly guilty." They also said: "By Torah law, neshech and marbis are identical." They also said: "The verse, 'Your money do not make him pay interest (neshech) for, and do not make him pay interest (marbis) for your food,' should be read, 'Your money do not make him pay neshech and marbis for,' and 'do not make him pay neshech and marbis for your food.' "3 Therefore, anyone who lends money or food with interest is doubly guilty, in addition to the other prohibitions which add to the seriousness of the lender's act. The same prohibition is repeated in other words:4 "Do not take neshech or marbis from him." It is explained in tractate Bava Metzia that this prohibition also applies to the lender. However, all these prohibitions are "extra,"5 as we explained in the Ninth Introductory Principle, since they all forbid the same act — prohibiting the lender from lending with interest.

The details of this mitzvah are explained in the 5th chapter of tractate Bava Metzia.

Rabbi Berel Bell is a well-known educator, author and lecturer. He and his family reside in Montreal, Canada.

From "Sefer Hamitzvot in English," published by Sichos in English.

FOOTNOTES

1.  Lev. 25:37.

2.  60b.

3.  In the first half of the verse, the word for interest (neshech) is written at the end; in the second half of the verse, the word for interest (marbis) is written at the beginning. The Gemara learns that the proximity of the two words enables them to be read together.

4.  Lev. 25:36.

5.  I.e. they do not count as separate mitzvos in the count of 613. The Rambam needs to say this because the literal translation of the phrase over al shnei lavin (translated here as "doubly guilty") is, "transgresses two prohibitions," which could be misinterpreted as meaning two prohibitions among the 613.

---

Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day: Metamme'ey Mishkav uMoshav Chapter 3

Chapter 3

Halacha 1

A person who has intimate relations with a nidah is impure like she is. He is one of the primary sources of impurity according to Scriptural Law. He imparts impurity to keilim by touching them and imparts impurity to people through carrying, touching, and moving, and he imparts impurity to the surface on which he lies or rides like a nidah does.

Halacha 2

The status of the impurity imparted by a man who was intimate with a nidah to a surface on which one lies or rides is not the same as that imparted by a nidah to a surface on which one lies or rides. For a surface on which one lies or rides that was stepped on by a nidah is a primary source of ritual impurity. In contrast, a surface on which one lies or rides that was stepped on by a man who was intimate with a nidah is a derivative of ritual impurity like keilim that he touched which do not impart impurity to other people or to other keilim, only to foods and liquids.

Why is the impurity that he imparts of a lesser status than the impurity that she imparts? Because with regard to a man who was intimate with a nidah, Leviticus 15:24 states: "Her nidah impurity will be imparted to him and he will be impure for seven days" and continues: "Any surface on which he lies shall be impure." Now, since it is stated: "Her nidah impurity will be imparted to him," would it not be obvious that he imparts impurity to a surface on which one lies? Why then was it stated? According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught that the Torah removed it from the severe category of impurity in which it imparts impurity to people and keilim and placed it in a lesser category in which a surface on which he lies is a derivative and does not impart impurity to people and keilim, only to foods and liquids like other derivatives of impurity.

Halacha 3

A man contracts the impurity of one who is intimate with a nidah or a zavah when he is intimate with such a woman or if he is intimate with a woman who is watching one day because of a day of impurity, or a woman after childbirth, whether the two engaged in vaginal or anal intercourse, whether he inserted only the corona or inserted the entire male organ, and whether it was an adult male who was intimate with a minor or a male minor who was intimate with an adult woman.

When does the above apply? When the male involved is at least nine years old and the woman involved at least three years old. If, however, either is younger than this, the male does not contract the impurity of one who has relations with a nidah, only that of one who touches a woman in the nidah state. His impurity is thus considered a derivative; he is not a primary source. Similarly, one who sodomizes a zav is considered as one who touches a zav. Also, the same laws that apply to one who touches a zav apply to a woman who is intimate with such a person.

Halacha 4

All of the following - nidah, a zavah, a woman who is watching one day because of a day of impurity, or a woman after childbirth even if she did not experience uterine bleeding - contract impurity retroactively for a twenty-four hour period or until the last vaginal inspection the woman made. This is referred to as the twenty-four period of a nidah.

What is implied? A woman who did not have a fixed time when she would menstruate was pure. She made a vaginal inspection in the morning and found that she was pure. At noon, she made another vaginal inspection and discovered blood. Accordingly, any ritually pure entities that she touched between the first inspection and the second inspection are impure retroactively. Similarly, if she made a vaginal inspection one day and found herself pure and made another inspection two or three days afterwards and discovered uterine bleeding, all of the articles she touched within twenty-four hours before the inspection during which she discovered the bleeding are considered as impure retroactively.

A checking cloth used after intimacy is considered as a vaginal inspection, but one used before intimacy is not, because she does not make a thorough inspection with it.

Halacha 5

A woman who has a fixed time when she menstruates and discovers uterine bleeding at that time is impure only from that time onward. She is not impure retroactively. If the fixed time when she menstruates arrives and she did not inspect herself and then inspected herself after the passage of several days and discovered uterine bleeding, she is considered as impure retroactively and is assumed to be a nidah from the fixed time that she usually menstruates. This is the impurity associated with the fixed time for menstruation referred to universally.

If the woman discovered that she was pure when she inspected herself after her fixed time for menstruation, she is pure.

Halacha 6

Whenever a woman has a fixed time during which she menstruates, she will also experience physical symptoms at the onset of menstruation, e.g., she will yawn, sneeze, feel heaviness and strain at the opening to her stomach and lower body, become overcome by trembling, or feel that her head and limbs are heavy, or the like.

There are women whose pattern is to experience bleeding immediately after one of these physical symptoms begins. And there are other women who will wait, and continue experiencing these symptoms for an hour or two and experience bleeding only at the end of the expected time. When a woman's pattern is to experience bleeding at the beginning of the expected time, any pure articles she touches during the expected time are impure. If her pattern is to experience bleeding at the end of the expected time, any pure articles she touches during the expected time are pure. She is only concerned about the articles she touched from the time she is accustomed to experience bleeding until she actually discovers bleeding.

Halacha 7

When a woman discovers a bloodstain, she is retroactively impure until the time she made an inspection. Similarly, a garment on which a stain was discovered is retroactively impure.

Until when? Until such a time concerning which the woman says: "I checked this garment and it did not have a bloodstain." Even if she washed the garment, but did not inspect it, it is impure retroactively from before she washed it until the time when it was inspected. Even if a moist stain was found, she is considered impure retroactively until the time she made an inspection. The rationale is that there is reason to say that it was there previously and now water fell upon it and caused it to become moist.

Halacha 8

A bloodstain discovered by any of the women who are impure only from the time they discover uterine bleeding onward is equivalent to the discovery of uterine bleeding and does not cause her to contract impurity retroactively.

Any of the women who contract impurity retroactively, whether they discovered uterine bleeding or a bloodstain, also impart impurity retroactively to surfaces upon which one lies or rides, causing them to impart impurity to a person or to garments. Similarly, their saliva and urine impart impurity retroactively. They even impart impurity retroactively to an earthenware container that is sealed closed.

They do not, however, impart the severe impurity associated with intimacy with a nidah to a man who is intimate with them. He is considered only as if he touched them. Whenever a woman discovers a bloodstain, a man who is intimate with her after she discovered the stain is considered impure as one who was intimate with a nidah.

Halacha 9

When a fetus sticks out his hand from the womb of a pregnant woman, his mother contracts the impurity of a woman who gave birth.

The impurity of a woman whose fetus sticks out its hand, the impurity imposed retroactively for 24 hours or until the previous inspection that was mentioned, the impurity associated with the fixed time when a woman usually menstruates, and the ritual impurity associated with bloodstains are all Rabbinic decrees and were instituted because of a doubt. Therefore terumah and sacrificial foods are not burnt because of them. Instead, the ruling concerning them is held in abeyance. Similarly, the ruling concerning ordinary foods that were treated with the sanctity associated with sacrificial foods that contracted impurity from one of these sources is held in abeyance. Nevertheless, ordinary food that is treated with the sanctity associated with terumah and ordinary food from which challah has not yet been separated do not contract impurity from any of these sources, for they are Rabbinic decrees.

Thus one can conclude that: all of these women mentioned previously in this halachah, an object on which one lies or rides to which they imparted impurity, their saliva, their urine, one who is intimate with a woman who discovered a bloodstain after the bloodstain was discovered, one who was intimate with a woman after the fetus stuck out a limb and then returned it, are all primary sources of impurity according to Rabbinic decree.

---

Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day: Malveh veLoveh Chapter 16, Malveh veLoveh Chapter 17, Malveh veLoveh Chapter 18

Chapter 16

Halacha 1

The debt is the responsibility of the borrower until he pays the lender or the lender's agent. If the lender said: "Throw the money owed to me and become freed of responsibility," the borrower threw it to him, and it became lost or destroyed by fire before it reaches the lender, the borrower is not responsible.

The following rules apply if the lender told him: "Throw the money owed to me in a manner governed by the laws of a bill of divorce." If the money was closer to the borrower, it is still his responsibility. If it was closer to the lender, the borrower is no longer responsible. If it is half and half, and it is lost or stolen from there, the borrower is required to pay half of the debt.

Halacha 2

When Reuven owes Shimon a maneh, gives the maneh to Levi and tells him: "Give this maneh that I owe Shimon to him," Reuven may not retract. Nevertheless, he is held responsible for the maneh until it reaches Shimon.?

If Levi returned the maneh to Reuven, they are both responsible for it until Shimon receives full payment for the debt owed him.

Halacha 3

A transfer of a debt is rescinded in the following situation. Reuven owed Shimon a maneh. Shimon told Reuven: "Take the maneh that you owe me and give it to Levi." Since the three were standing together and Levi agreed, the transfer would ordinarily be binding]. Nevertheless, if it is discovered that Reuven is poor and does not have the resources to pay, Levi can ask Shimon for payment of the debt, for he deceived him.

If Levi knew ' that Reuven was poor at that time or Reuven was rich at that time and became impoverished afterwards, Levi cannot demand payment from Shimon, for he accepted the transfer.

If Levi argues that Reuven was poor at the time and Shimon deceived him, and Shimon maintains that he was wealthy and later became impoverished, it appears to me that Shimon must bring proof of his claim. Only then is he freed of responsibility from the debt he owes Levi. This is no different from an instance where he has a receipt in his hand, and we tell him: "Prove the authenticity of your receipt, and then you will be freed of responsibility."

Halacha 4

We already explained the following concept in the laws of business transactions. These laws apply when Reuven was not owed anything by Shimon, but did owe a maneh to Levi. If he told Levi to collect the debt from Shimon - even if he made that statement in the presence of the three of them -it is not binding. If Shimon does not desire to pay Levi, he need not. If, however, he does pay him, he may collect the money from Reuven, since he paid him because of his instructions.

Similarly, if Levi desires to retract and say: "I do not desire to collect the debt from Shimon," he may collect the debt from Reuven. This applies even if he collected a portion of the debt from Shimon; he may collect the remainder from Reuven.

Halacha 5

The following laws apply with regard to a store-keeper who would give a house-owner anything he desires on credit, postponing payment until the entire amount reaches a substantial sum, at which time he would pay him.

The employer says: "Give my workers a sela..." or "... my creditor the maneh that I owe him and I will repay you." Afterwards, the storekeeper said: "I gave the money you instructed me to give," and the worker or the creditor says: "I did not receive it." The worker or the creditor must take an oath; he may then collect the debt owed him from the employer. Similarly, the store-keeper may take an oath and collect what he claims from the employer, for he told him to pay that money.

The worker must take the oath in the presence of the storekeeper, and the storekeeper must do so in the presence of the worker or the creditor, so that they will be embarrassed by each other. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

This oath is a Rabbinical ordinance, administered while the person holds a sacred article, because both claimants are coming to collect money. Therefore, if the storekeeper dies, the creditor may collect the debt without taking an oath. Similarly, if the worker or the creditor dies, the storekeeper may collect the claim he makes without taking an oath. The rationale is that in such a situation the employer is not losing anything and is making payment only once.

Halacha 6

When the store-keeper says: "You told me to give this person a maneh," or "You commanded me and told me, 'If so-and-so comes, give him,'" and the employer claims: "I did not tell you," the employer must take a sh'vuat hesset to support his claim. He is then freed of responsibility. The store-keeper should then lodge a suit against the person he claims to have paid.

Similarly, if a storekeeper tells an employer with whom he has a credit arrangement: "It is written in my account book that you owe me a maneh" and the employer says: "I don't know," the employer must take a sh'vuat hesset that he does not know. He is then freed of responsibility, as is the law with regard to any situation where one person lodges a claim against another. There is no Rabbinical ordinance governing such a situation.

Halacha 7

When Reuven produces a promissory note that states that Shimon owes a debt to Levi, and claims that Shimon gave it to him by signing a deed acknowledging the transfer and giving it to him, but that the deed of transfer was lost, or he claims that Levi transferred the promissory note to him via the acquisition of land, he may collect the debt from Shimon. The rationale is that Reuven is in possession of the promissory note.

If Shimon claims that he paid Levi and demands that an oath be taken, Levi must take an oath to Shimon. Afterwards, Reuven may collect the debt. If Levi admits that Shimon paid him, Levi must pay Reuven. If Levi claims that he neither sold nor gave the promissory note to Reuven, Levi is required to take a sh'vuat hesset and is then freed of responsibility.

Halacha 8

When a promissory note is in the hands of a third party, and he produces it in a court of law and says: "It has been paid," his word is accepted. This applies even if the authenticity of the note has been verified. The rationale is that if he had desired, he could have burned it or torn it.

Similarly, if the third party died, and a note is found in his possession stating that the promissory note entrusted to him has been paid, we consider it paid. This applies even though the note stating the debt was paid is not signed by witnesses.

When, by contrast, a note is found in the creditor's possession that a particular promissory note has been paid, even if the note stating that the debt was paid is in the creditor's handwriting, it is considered to be merely facetious.

Halacha 9

If witnesses signed the note discovered in the creditor's possession, when their signatures have been verified, the note is considered paid. If their signatures have not been verified, the witnesses who signed the receipt should be interrogated. If they do not know of the matter or if they are not present to be asked, the receipt is ignored, because it was found in the possession of the lender or his heirs.

Halacha 10

If the promissory note mentioned in the note that was discovered was found among the promissory notes belonging to the lender that have been paid, we assume that it was paid, even if the note that was found was not signed by witnesses.

Similarly, if it is written on the promissory note itself - whether on its front or back, or even on only a portion of it - that this promissory note or a portion of it was paid, we follow those statements. This applies even though witnesses did not sign the statement, and the promissory note is in the possession of the lender. For if the promissory note had not been paid, he would not have written on the note itself.

Halacha 11

When a person finds a promissory note among his other legal documents and he does not know its status, it should remain in his possession until Eliyahu comes.

Halacha 12

When a person tells his sons: "One of the promissory notes among my promissory notes has been paid and I don't know which one it is," all of the promissory notes are considered paid. If there are two promissory notes from one person, the greater one is considered paid and the lesser one is considered unpaid.

If a person tells a colleague: "One of your promissory notes in my possession has been paid," the greater one is considered to be paid and the lesser one is considered to be unpaid. If he tells him: "The debt you owe me has been paid," all of the promissory notes he has against him are considered paid.

Chapter 17

Halacha 1

The following laws apply when a lender dies and his heir comes and demands payment from a borrower, because of the promissory note for which he is liable. If the borrower claims: "I paid your father," and the heir says: "I don't know whether you did or not," we tell the borrower: "Arise and pay him."

If the borrower demands: "Take an oath for me," the heir should take an oath, while holding a sacred object, that his father did not instruct him via another person that the debt was paid, that he did not tell him this verbally, and that he did not find a note saying that this promissory note was paid among his father's legal documents. After taking this oath, he may collect the debt.

Halacha 2

If the borrower died after the lender died, and the lender's heir comes and demands payment from the borrower's heir, he may not collect payment unless he takes an oath. We tell him: "Take an oath that 'My father did not instruct me...,' 'My father did not tell me...,' 'I did not find a note saying that this promissory note was paid among my father's legal documents.'"

Even if the heir was a baby lying in a cradle when his father died, he must take this oath and collect. If the lender made a statement immediately before his death that this promissory note has not been paid, the lender's heir need not take an oath before exacting payment. This applies even if he is collecting payment] from the heir.

Halacha 3

If, however, the borrower died first and then the lender died, the lender's heirs may not collect anything from the borrower's heirs. The rationale is that when the borrower died, the lender became obligated to take an oath before collecting, as we have explained in the previous halachah. He has already died, and a person does not bequeath an oath to his sons. For they are unable to take an oath that their father was not paid anything.

Nevertheless, if a judge transgressed and required the lender's heirs to take an oath and enabled them to collect their debt, the money that they collected should not be expropriated from their possession. Therefore, a promissory note that is used as the basis for a claim by the heirs of a lender who seek to collect from the heirs of a borrower when the borrower died first, should not be torn, nor should it be used to expropriate money.

It should not be used to expropriate money, because a person does not bequeath an oath to his sons, as explained. It should not, however, be torn, lest there be a judge who will expropriate money because of it.

Halacha 4

In the situation described above, even if the debt was secured by a guarantor, the lender's heirs should not expropriate the debt from the guarantor. The rationale is that if they are told to collect the debt from the guarantor, the guarantor will go and seek payment from the borrower's heirs.

Halacha 5

Extrapolation is not made from this law to a similar instance. Instead, when a person who impairs the legal power of a promissory note then dies -although he is not entitled to collect the debt unless he takes an oath - his children may take an oath that their father did not instruct them..., their father did not tell them..., they did not find a note saying that this promissory note was paid in its entirety among his father's legal documents. They may then collect the remainder of the sum stated in the promissory note from the lender or from his heirs.

Halacha 6

When a lender's heir comes to collect payment of a promissory note from the borrower's heirs and the latter say: "Our father told us: 'I did not borrow the money mentioned in this debt,'" the lender's heirs may collect the debt without taking an oath. The rationale is that whenever a person says "I did not borrow," it is as if he says: "I did not pay."

Similarly, when the lender himself comes to collect payment from the heirs of a borrower, and they say: "Our father told us: 'I did not borrow the money mentioned in this debt,'" the lender may collect the debt without taking an oath. This applies even if in the promissory note the lender stated that he would accept the borrower's word whenever he claims to have paid the debt. For in this instance as well, we follow the rationale that whenever a person says "I did not borrow," it is as if he says: "I did not pay."

Halacha 7

The following laws apply when the lender's heir comes and demands payment from a borrower on the basis of a promissory note that contains a stipulation that the borrower's word will be accepted, whenever the borrower says: "I paid the debt." He is required to take a sh'vuat hesset that he paid this debt and is freed of liability. This applies even if the stipulation does not state: "Your word will be accepted against a claim issued by my heirs." The rationale is that the very basis of the promissory note depends on this stipulation.

If the stipulation states that the borrower's word would be accepted without an oath, he is not required to take an oath, even to the lender's heirs.

Halacha 8

The following laws apply when the lender's heir is below majority, he possesses a promissory noted owed to his father, but a receipt for this note was produced after the father's death. We do not rip up the promissory note, nor do we allow payment to be expropriated on its basis until the heir reaches majority. The rationale is that it is possible that the receipt is a forgery. That possibility is reinforced by the fact that the borrower did not produce it during the lender's lifetime.

Halacha 9

When a person produces a promissory note against a colleague, stating that it was composed in Babylonia, he collects the debt in the coinage of Babylonia. If the promissory note was written in Eretz Yisrael, he should collect the debt in the coinage of Eretz Yisrael. This is not the case with regard to a ketubah

The following rules apply when the promissory note did not state the place where it was composed. If the lender produced it in Babylonia, he should collect the debt in the coinage of Babylonia. If he produced it in Eretz Yisrael, he should collect the debt in the coinage of Eretz Yisrael. If the lender sought to collect the debt in the coinage of the place where he produced the promissory note, and the borrower protested, claiming that he is obligated to pay in a coinage that is worth less than the local coinage, the lender should support his claim with an oath. He may then collect the debt. If the promissory note states that money is owed without any more specifics, the lender may collect only what the borrower agrees to pay.

From these laws, we can derive the following principles: A legal document that does not mention the place where it was composed is acceptable for all matters. Similarly, a legal document that is not dated is acceptable, even though it is testimony that cannot be nullified through hazamah. The rationale is that in financial laws, we are not stringent and do not subject the witnesses to precise cross-examination and interrogation, as will be explained. This leniency was adopted so as not to prevent loans from being granted. For this reason, post-dated promissory notes are acceptable, although the testimony of the witnesses who signed cannot be nullified through hazamah as will be explained in the appropriate place.

Chapter 18

Halacha 1

When a person lends money to a colleague without any stipulations, all of the borrower's property is on lien and bound to the debt. Therefore, when the lender comes to collect his debt, he should demand payment from the debtor first. If the debtor does not have money, but is in possession of either landed or movable property, he may collect the debt from them with the borrower's consent. If the borrower did not give the property willingly, the lender should have the property expropriated by the court.

If the property in the borrower's possession was not equal in value to the amount stated in the promissory note, the lender may expropriate the debt from all the property that was in the borrower's possession, even though it is now sold or given as presents to others. The rationale is that since the borrower sold or gave away the property after it was subjugated to the lien of this debt, he may expropriate the property from the possession of purchasers or the recipients of the presents. This is called being toreif.

To what does the above apply? To landed property in the borrower's possession at the time of the loan. Property that the borrower acquired after the loan was given, by contrast, is not automatically on lien to the creditor, and he may not expropriate it from purchasers. If, however, the lender established the stipulation that all the property that the borrower will acquire afterwards will be on lien for him to collect the debt from it, property that the borrower acquired after taking the loan and subsequently sold or gave away may be expropriated by a creditor.

Halacha 2

The above statements apply only to landed property. Movable property that has been sold, by contrast, is not on lien to a debt. Even property in the borrower's possession at the time of the loan may not be expropriated by his creditor.

If the debtor transferred a lien to all his movable property by virtue of the lien on landed property so that the creditor can expropriate everything, he may expropriate that movable property. This applies only when he writes in the promissory note: "I have transferred to you a lien on my movable property by virtue of the lien on my landed property. This is not an asmachta, nor is this a standard form of a legal document."

Similarly, he may write: "All of the property that I will purchase in the future, whether landed property or movable property, is on lien to you so that you can expropriate payment from it, and the lien on my movable property is transferred to you by virtue of the lien on my landed property, so that you can expropriate payment from them. This is not an asmachta, nor is this a standard form of a legal document." In such an instance, the creditor may expropriate even the movable property that the borrower purchased after he borrowed the money. The rationale is that any stipulation made concerning a financial transaction is binding.

Halacha 3

The following laws apply when a person designates a field of his as an ipotiki for a creditor for a debt, or for a woman for her ketubah - i.e., he composed a legal document stating that they should collect payment from that source - and a river flooded the field. The creditor may expropriate other property as payment for the debt. If, however, it was stipulated that he should not derive payment from any place other than this, he should not expropriate other property.

Similarly, if a person borrowed money and explicitly stipulated that his property is not on lien to the debt, the creditor may never collect this debt from property that has been sold to others.

Halacha 4

When a person designates a field of his as an ipotiki for a creditor for a debt, or for a woman for her ketubah and then sells it, the sale is binding. If when the creditor comes to collect his debt, he does not find any property that has not been sold, he may expropriate the field that had been designated from the person who purchased it.

When does the above apply? When the debtor sold the field for a limited amount of time. If, however, he desired to sell it forever, the sale is not binding.

Halacha 5

When a person designates a servant as an ipotiki, a creditor can expropriate the servant in payment of the debt even if he was sold to another person. ' The rationale is that the matter will be publicized. If he designates his cow as an ipotiki, a creditor may not expropriate the cow. The same ruling applies with regard to other movable property, for the matter will not be publicized.

Halacha 6

When a master designates his servant as an ipotiki and then frees him, he obtains his freedom. This applies even if he wrote in the promissory note: "You will not receive payment from any source but this."

Similar rules apply if he consecrates the servant. The rationale is that [the prohibition against leaven, freeing a servant and consecration remove the lien from an article.

The creditor may collect his debt from the debtor. If he does not have the means to pay him, he must compose a promissory note acknowledging his debt, and with that promissory note he can expropriate property that was sold by the debtor after the date of this second promissory note.

Why is he obligated to pay the debt? Because he caused his colleague's money to be lost. And whenever a person causes a colleague a loss, he must make financial restitution, as explained in the appropriate place.

We also compel the servant's second master to free him as well. This is a measure enacted for the correction of society, lest the creditor encounter the servant in the marketplace at a later time and say: "You are my slave."

Halacha 7

When a person consecrates his property, the creditor cannot expropriate the property from the Temple treasury, for the consecration of property lifts the lien from it.

When the property is redeemed from the Temple treasury, we estimate how much a person would desire to give for this field, so that the creditor will be paid his due, or the woman the money due her by virtue of her ketubah. Therefore, when the field is redeemed and becomes unconsecrated property in the possession of the purchaser, the creditor can come and expropriate his debt from it, or the woman can take it as payment for the money due her by virtue of her ketubah, as we have explained in Hilchot Arachin.

Halacha 8

When a creditor comes to expropriate a field from the purchaser, if the purchaser has money in his possession, he may eliminate the creditor's claim by paying him the money for which he is expropriating the field. The purchaser then demands repayment from the seller. If, however, the debtor had designated the field as an ipotiki, the purchaser may not eliminate the creditor's claim by paying him.

Halacha 9

The purchaser is also given the upper hand in the following situation: Reuven owed Shimon 200 zuz. Reuven owned two fields. He sold one to Levi for a maneh, and then sold him the other one for a second maneh. Shimon expropriated one for a maneh and then sought to expropriate the other for the second maneh that was owed him. Levi brought 200 zuz in coin and told Shimon: "If you desire to consider the field that you already expropriated as payment for the entire 200 zuz that you are owed, that is acceptable. If not, here are the 200 zuz of the debt; rescind your claim." Levi is given the upper hand.

If Shimon accepted Levi's proposition and kept the one field, Levi cannot demand payment from Reuven for more than one maneti, despite the fact that Shimon accepted it as compensation for 200 zuz.

Halacha 10

The creditor, by contrast, is given the upper hand in the following situation. Reuven owed Shimon 200 zuz. Reuven died and left one field that was worth 100 zuz. Shimon came and expropriated it. The orphans gave Shimon 100 zuz worth from the movable property that their father left, and thus removed Shimon from it. Shimon may, however, return and expropriate it for the remainder of his debt. The rationale is that by giving him the 100 zuz, they performed a mitzvah, for it is a mitzvah for heirs to pay their father's debt.

If the heirs told Shimon: "This 100 is for the field you expropriated," he cannot come back and expropriate it again for the remainder of the money owed him.

---

Hayom Yom

 Sunday, 28 Kislev 5774 / 1 December 2013

Monday   Kislev 28, Fourth Day of Chanuka   5703

Torah lessons:   Chumash: Mikeitz, Sheini with Rashi.

Tehillim: 135-139.

Tanya: For when the intellect (p. 11)...with its offshoots (p. 11).

It was customary for the Tzemach Tzedek to have a sort of farbrengen on one of the evenings of Chanuka with his family, including his daughters-in-law. This was called "latkes evening." This was also the practice of the Alter Rebbe and the Mitteler Rebbe. Among the stories the Rebbes told at this meal were some which were widely talked about every Chanuka, though they had been discussed the year before.

My father would give Chanuka-gelt on the evening of the fourth or fifth light.

---

Daily Thought:

The Power of Light

We all know the power of darkness—it is in the news every day. A thousand times over is the power of light.

A busy person stopping to do an act of kindness, a small child reaching up to kiss the mezuzah on the door of her room, a flickering candle for Shabbat or Chanukah—each of these are as bursts of light in the nighttime sky.

True, they rarely appear in the daily news. But the darkness of yesterday’s news will pass like the shadows of clouds on a windy day. Light endures forever, accumulating with every flash, until no room is left for darkness to hide.

-------